[Tim responds to the following comment:
"Hey - Sorry I pissed you off enough for you to unfriend me. Wasn't my intention to troll you or just antagonize you. I was under the mistaken belief that our back and forth was engaging, enjoyable on some level for both of us. I'd begun to believe that an odd friendship was even forming. I was surprised and disappointed when I realized you'd dropped me. Mostly I feel misunderstood I think. Also I'll miss participating in the lively discussions that occurred often on your wall. When I disagreed, I tried to do so agreeably. Anyway, best of luck with seminary, marriage, and life. While I can only speak to two of those, I'm sure all three are challenging. Ryan"]
You concede zero points. There's no point in discussing with you. I can't get you to admit that feminism is behind no-fault divorce. I can't get you to admit that Christians can't support homosexuality. These are basic, obvious things.
I also don't talk math with people who won't concede 2 + 2.
29 comments
Have you ever given any thought to the idea that you are either:
1. Not very convincing; or
2. your ideas are full of shit?
As a mathematician I am offended.
As a rational thinker I am horrified.
The idea that Christians can't support homosexuality is like saying 1=0.
I concede your other point, but I look at it in a different light, considering it a social good rather than a social evil.
Once again, as a citizen of the FSTDT community, I facepalm.
The point in a discussion is not to make people concede or admit that you are right, but to exchange diffferent ideas.
Feminism might be one factor behind no-fault divorce, but it's not the only one. There ARE Christians who support homosexuality, so you're wrong there. They might be obvious to you, but they're not to everyone.
You want Ryan to concede that 2 + 2 = pinapple, I'd say.
There are Christians who support homosexuals.
You don't talk math with people who won't concede 2 + 2.
So Tim admits defeat yet again. His claiming abilities must have lost their charm or he has come up against a commenter who, if not an atheist, certainly has some of atheism's natural protective aura about him.
Of course, it could be that Tim is not able anymore to tilt effectively at reality or can't form a coherent defense against sanity. Oh well! Yawn! What a shame!
I've had this argument with my brother several times before.
Before no-fault divorce you had to drag someone through the mud to be separated and there was no way to prevent a manipulative spouse from mucking about in your finances or legal dealings. Discovering they only married you for money wasn't a valid reason for divorce. Stumbling onto irreconcilable differences in how to raise childrien i.e. religion, education, carrers paths, etc. was not acceptable grounds: there had to be abuse or neglect that could be dumped solely at one person's feet ruining their reputation in the process. Alimony was automatic beforehand, now it has to be specifically sought justified in court. Men are eligible to recieve it if they were the ones financially dependant on their wives which didn't really happen before.
So: You can protect your money easier without endangering your reputation in the process. Two good points I would think a stereotypical MRA would appreciate. You can get yourself and your kids out of a relationship that goes south before it turns physically abusive without fearing severe legal and financial retaliation, two more good points anyone else should be able to appreciate especially if they fear that kind of manipulation - again like a stereotypical MRA.
So in your mind 2 + 2 = 0 fucks to give. Typical.
There's plenty of Christians that took a step back from Dueteronomy and figured that if God really did make everything then he made homosexuals too and not as something for people to beat on.
I can't get you to admit that feminism is behind no-fault divorce.
If feminism is behind it, how come NOW is opposed to (unilateral) no-fault?
But there are millions of Christians who do support homosexuality, and who am I to say that they're wrong? By the way, if you were less of an asshole, you might keep more friends and be more of a Christian.
@nazani, loads of males --- few if any of them deserving the title of "men" --- complain about no-fault divorce. it's a telltale sign they're sleazebags no woman willingly remains married to, and are bitter about it.
Tim has hundreds of Facebook friends (no really, he does, look him up), but I doubt he has many actual friends. I don't think he's really very happy.
"These are basic, obvious things."
To arrogant, Neo-Reformed windbags like you, perhaps.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
