Ok, Christine, I'll play your game...I'm sure you will whine to Jill either way...
<<<Gee, I don't know, Michael, I talk to all sorts of people all the time, and I post a lot, and I can count on the fingers of one hand the people I have seriously and repeatedly argued with, where we did not ultimately resolve the disagreement, so I would say that seems about par for the course. I am certainly not in the habit of ridiculing people. That does bring up a question I have though. You keep mentioning other people. Are you attempting to get brownie points of some sort, or become more popular, by dragging other people into this? I think it is easier to solve conflicts if the focus remains on the two people who disagree. This really has nothing to do with anyone else.>>>
The way you resolve conflicts is by whining to the threadmistress and getting people booted off of SI. You probably hold the record for success in this area. So it has allot to do with arguing with you. If you dislike the way the argument is going you cry, and get people booted.
<<think it is very normal for people to form affinity groups, and also to have very different opinions about issues. I would hope that everyone would think for themselves, and not create such exclusive cliques that someone who disagrees with one member is attacked by the others in a knee-jerk reaction, but I cannot control the behavior of anyone else. I have fairly radical opinions, and have always encouraged controversy and open debate about ideas at the Feelings thread, and have never made any attempt to please everyone, so it is natural that there would be a variety of opinions about me. Are you saying that you are universally popular, liked and respected by everyone at SI?>>>
Except when they disagree with your points of view, then you whine and get them booted. Or get the threadmistress to make them not talk to you because they are mean. Oh, I appreciate free speech and believe in it, just don't talk about me, my idea's or to me!
Give me a break.
<<<Really? I have noticed plenty of mean-spirited venom, and plenty of attacks, all over SI, by all sorts of people. Sometimes it seems like a not very civilized place, and I think that is unfortunate. I do think you believe your discussions are reasonable, but I am certainly not the only person here who has tried to talk about an issue with you and run up against some sort of brick wall, because you do not really argue facts, or present your case logically, and then when you feel you may be losing, you get very defensive and start imagining that things have been said that really were not. Speaking of venom, then you tend to start name calling and make things up, and throw labels at people instead of calmly discussing the actual issue, point by logical point.>>>
I have never called you a name. That is a lye! And you know it. I have also never labelled you. It is you who have tried your best to label me. If someone were on this thread and constantly attacking Jews or blacks or Indians or woman with blonde hair the way that you attack Christians, I would probably feel compelled to defend them. I like the underdog, especially when the attacks are based on lies or inuendo.
<<<You first brought up the issue of hitting children up on this thread, and then discussed it at another thread. I guess I am wondering first whether you are saying that in a public place like this, where people can post anywhere, your posts in other places are not open to discussion? Secondly, my real feelings about you as a parent are that you are probably a good one, and I have told other people at SI exactly that. You are certainly actively involved with your children, spend a lot of time with them, and are concerned about children's issues in general. I have no doubt that you love your children very much.
But The issue of hitting your child with a belt is certainly relevant if you are going to make statements like this one, from a very recent post: "The parents of runaway teenagers are much more likely to have come from Godless pagan, non-christian homes than christian ones." Since domestic violence against women and children is a major cause of homelessness, and it is you who hit your child with a belt, not me, I don't see how you can conclude that the statement you made is accurate, or logical. It certainly unfairly maligns pagan and atheist parents.>>>
There is a major difference between a structured spanking of your child, and domestic violence. If you can't figure that out, I feel sorry for you. You may have a small point regarding my statement that christian children would be less likely to be homeless teenagers than other children. Fine, I take back that statement, I believe that teenagers would have an equal chance of becoming homeless whether they come from a christian or non-christian home. I do not believe, as you seem to believe, that they are somehow more likely to be homeless because their parents kicked them out due to homosexuality.
I bet if 60 minutes looked hard enough, they could find a Wicca religios family who kicked their teenager out because he or she had taken up religion or Christianity or whatever. They could probably even find a family which kicked their kids out because they have blond hair, blue eyes or whatever. It does NOTHING to the understanding of the teenage homeless problem. You seem to believe that show is a panacea of objectivity, so you deride christianity. It is not. And bigotry is bigotry...
I'm sure you know the old saying. "Figures don't lye, but lyers figure.
<<<I was not being spiteful, I was being logical, and I have no desire to be a victor in any kind of sick contest. It sounds like you may be labelling the discussion a sick contest because you have not been victorious. I do think children's issues are very important, and I believe strongly that children should never be spanked, and I feel that it is as appropriate for me to voice my beliefs as it is for you to voice yours.>>>
The only reason you brought up the subject of my corporal punishment toward my children is for spite. You tried to make the case that my children because they have been spanked are more likely to end up on the street. Just because you spank your children, doesn't mean they are more likely to end up as homeless teenagers. That is simply illogical, nonsense. Which you can show me NO data to support.
As I said before...There is a significant difference between spanking your children for discipline, and child abuse. So you can get off your high horse on that one.
<<<Well, that's where we get to you perceiving your role at the Feelings thread as some sort of crusader or avenger. You have Christian beliefs, and advocate hitting children, but I am certainly not following you all over SI presenting my dissenting opinion whenever you say something about your beliefs. Certainly, there is an argument to be made that Christianity has not been a totally positive political and historical force, and since we have freedom of speech here, I believe I am free to make that argument. But that is so different from saying that I am attacking individual Christians, when I have said so many positive things about Christians and have so many of them in my life, that I am getting tired of saying the same thing over and over again. >>>>
As I said before, I don't see myself as some sort of avenger for christianity. That's just silly nonsense. I simply believe that if a person such as yourself, attacks one segment of society and blames them wrongly for the worlds atrocities. It should be responded to.
I would feel the same way if you were attacking gays or Jews or blacks. Bigotry is wrong and deserves a voice of dissent. I'm not surprised by your reaction. Bigots usually are surprised to find someone who disagree's with them. The freedom of speech issue I have addressed before. But just in case you missed it, if you really believed in freedom of speech you would quit Whining to the threadmaster and let people post their disagreements. I have never asked Jill to prevent someone from posting on SI. Yet you seem to do it daily. You only believe in freedom of speech when it is convenient for you, and the person agrees with you. Otherwise they should just shut up or I'll cry like a baby to Jill to make them.
I don't have time for the rest of your nonsense. Except to say, that's just what it is.
Michael |
