Former Aologiest for Gay Theology

Originally posted by FMF
No, you misunderstand. I am asking you about cases where THERE IS EVIDENCE ~ not "NO evidence" ~ that the violence happened? Does your moral compass allow you to condemn it?

Fine ill let you off this time but we should attempt to refrain from assuming anything about other people or their actions until we have the facts. Yes I can condemn violence.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Fine ill let you off this time but we should attempt to refrain from assuming anything about other people or their actions until we have the facts. Yes I can condemn violence.

Were you just being sarcastic for six thread pages?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
There is no room in Christianity for homosexual behaviour nor can it be reconciled with
scripture. Many early Christians were practising homosexuals and they gave up the
practice upon becoming Christians. Those whop are attempting to reconcile
homosexuality with Christianity are simply watering down the word of God and making it
lukewarm and insipid. Suzzianne and Zhalanzi are among that crowd.

there is room in christianity for everyone.

you would know that if you were a real christian

Originally posted by FMF
Were you just being sarcastic for six thread pages?

no i was refusing to answer questions that were unreasonable because they were based on assumptions and having no valid basis upon which to make an informed decision. I find your eagerness to induce someone to condemn another on the basis on scant information contemptible.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
there is room in christianity for everyone.

you would know that if you were a real christian

That strange my no-real-scotsman-o-meter just bust a fuse.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no i was refusing to answer questions that were unreasonable because they were based on assumptions and having no valid basis upon which to make an informed decision.

You were trolling.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no i was refusing to answer questions that were unreasonable because they were based on assumptions and having no valid basis upon which to make an informed decision.

Like this exchange from page 4?

FMF: Are you willing to just come out and say unequivocally that you condemn 'gay bashing' by [1] Christians, and by [2] redbadger, if he did indeed engage in it as he has claimed?

robbie carrobie: What is it about I make no moral judgements on anyone that you are having trouble with? which part of that statement are you failing to grasp, ill help you if you are in difficulty to the best of my ability.

FMF: So you refuse to condemn 'gay bashing'? That seems a bit odd, robbie. And are you claiming this is some kind of moral stance on your part.

robbie carrobie: I am making no moral judgements about anyone's behaviour, i thought i made that clear? What is odd is that you seem to be having difficulty accepting the fact.

[1] How could they possibly be described as "unreasonable" questions given that the topic was the condemnation of violence?

[2] Do you now stand by your answers to them?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
You were trolling.

Is that your perception?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
You were trolling.

I don't see how there's any humour in it though. Just pretending to not get the point, pretending not to have a moral objection to violence, just pretending that the mixture of sarcasm and Clan Forum style ad hominems is funny ~ or not being funny, or whatever? It seems peculiar. What does it achieve?

Originally posted by FMF
Like this exchange from page 4?

FMF: Are you willing to just come out and say unequivocally that you condemn 'gay bashing' by [1] Christians, and by [2] redbadger, if he did indeed engage in it as he has claimed?

robbie carrobie: What is it about I make no moral judgements on anyone that you are having trouble with? which part of that statement are you fai ...[text shortened]... hat the topic was the condemnation of violence?

[2] Do you now stand by your answers to them?

[1] How could they possibly be described as "unreasonable" questions given that the topic was the condemnation of violence?

because you are attempting to induce people to condemn others ion the basis of having scant evidence, a practice i find contemptible.

[2] Do you now stand by your answers to them?

yes i stand by my answers and i will make NO moral judgements on anyone here unless i have ample evidence. Its a practice that i would encourage all persons to take up because assumptions can be very dangerous.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
because you are attempting to induce people to condemn others ion the basis of having scant evidence, a practice i find contemptible.

No, you were being asked if you condemn violence against homosexuals for being homosexuals.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes i stand by my answers and i will make NO moral judgements on anyone here unless i have ample evidence. Its a practice that i would encourage all persons to take up because assumptions can be very dangerous.

No, you were being asked if you condemn 'gay bashing' when it occurs.

Originally posted by FMF
I don't see how there's any humour in it though. Just pretending to not get the point, pretending not to have a moral objection to violence, just pretending that the mixture of sarcasm and Clan Forum style ad hominems is funny ~ or not being funny, or whatever? It seems peculiar. What does it achieve?

it has demonstrated the folly of your approach in that you are willing to induce others to make moral judgments about others on the basis of little or scant knowledge, a practice that in itself is morally contemptible and that the true course of wisdom is to refrain from making moral judgements about people until we have some facts, thats what it has accomplished but you seem so pompously puffed up that it has zinged right over your head, perhaps if you were a little less assuming and more eager to understand anothers perspective prior to making judgements about them you may do better.

Originally posted by FMF
No, you were being asked if you condemn 'gay bashing' when it occurs.

I was being asked to make a moral judgement about someone else on the basis of little or scant knowledge, something that i will not be induced to do. i have No knowledge of what Badger did, no not a single iota and i find your willingness to induce others to make moral decisions on the basis of little or scant knowledge contemptible.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
it has demonstrated the folly of your approach in that you are willing to induce others to make moral judgments about others on the basis of little or scant knowledge, a practice that in itself is morally contemptible and that the true course of wisdom is to refrain from making moral judgements about people until we have some facts, that what it has ...[text shortened]... ager to understand anothers perspective prior to making judgements about them you may do better.

You were quite simply being asked if you condemned 'gay bashing' violence against homosexuals and NOT whether you were willing to condemn it "on the basis of little or scant knowledge".