Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Poet who wrote (9429)	4/17/2002 3:55:26 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

It's simple: You asked to drop the conversation about any stepping-over-the-line that you might have done wrt religion, then continue to bring it up yourself. Thank you for the response. I certainly never would have gotten the reference otherwise. Don't you think you're just a wee bit over the top here? I thought we were past that extended colloquy where you insisted that I was contemptuous. I had nearly forgotten it. It seemed to me that you had accepted normalized relations between us. apparently not. Now this? Jewel asked me for my view on the meanings of moral, righteous, and legal, I responded. What does that have to do with my "itch?" Later I was advising TP on how to avoid food fights. How is that bringing up that old issue? Would the parameters I suggested to him have been accurate had I left out the part about religious topics? Am I not allowed to use the words, religious or religion, without it being an extension of that colloquy? I recall that you were claiming to have asked me to discontinue the discussion even as you kept bringing it up. Perhaps we just have different ideas about what is a continuation of that colloquy and what isn't so let me be clear. Everything I say isn't about you, you, you.