C.S. Lewis vs. Friedrich Nietzsche

Cypress said:
I think I would have just walked up to Chris Rock, refused to shake his hand, and just whispered in his ear that he was a complete fucking asshole for cracking that joke.

I don't see what is gained by bitch slapping him in a public forum among your professional colleagues and peers.
Click to expand...

Said more about Will Smith than Chris Rock!
Sticks and stones etc!
 
Sock Sockinski said:
That's your spin!That's what happens when you play the bait game,as you're doing calling him ,"Queer"!
Click to expand...

It's in this thread, dumbass.

This is where he came out after ranting about "Queers" all evening as exemplified below:
Jack said:
Ever notice Blacks call Niggers, Nigger?
Ever notice Homosexuals call Queers, Queer?
Ever notice Owl gleaming when she calls herself a Bitch?

It's kinda' like that. :)
Click to expand...

---
Jack said:
Yes. That would be the allure ... illiic sex. Legion is complaining about 'Sales'. I'm trying to toss in ideas.
Maybe Queer, Black, Under Age AND Transgender!?!
Click to expand...
Jack said:
Maybe Queer, Black, ... and 17 years and 10 months old?
Click to expand...
Jack said:
Maybe if the queer boyfriend was Black? Maybe that would increase interest? You know, Sales.
Click to expand...
Jack said:
It makes you wonder how many 'closeted' Queers there have been, doesn't it.
Click to expand...
Yes, it does, Jack.
 
BidenPresident said:
weird, as usual
Click to expand...

So you cannot refute my statement that you are exactly like me --> you routinely opinion on topics you have never read the original source material - aka, legislative acts, scientific theories, supreme court cases.

Because you are exactly like me and every other human being -- it is not physically possible to read everything ever published by humans, so you acquire much of your knowledge by reading summaries, reviews, and synopsis from journalists, experts, scholars.
 
Cypress said:
So you cannot refute my statement that you are exactly like me --> you routinely opinion on topics you have never read the original source material - aka, legislative acts, scientific theories, supreme court cases.

Because you are exactly like me and every other human being -- it is not physically possible to read everything ever published by humans, so you acquire much of your knowledge by reading summaries and synopsis from journalists, experts, scholars.
Click to expand...

If you read Plato and have something to say about it, then talking about Plato is justified.
But you read someone writing about Plato and refuse to say, here is what Author X said about Plato.

It is amazing you don't know the difference.
 
Jack said:
Cypress. I really have no interest in getting into this again with you because you seem like a dishonest Discussionist.

Cypress: "I don't think gay romantic relationships have ever been considered a universal, natural human desire --- like you do."
Cypress: "I think normal humans naturally tend to get drawn to things like freedom and truth. Because as Thomas Jefferson wrote, these natural truths are self evident."

Jack: Sadly, you're a lying sack of shit. I've never said that and you know that. 'Freedom and Truth' would be the concept of Homosexuals being treated as equal individuals and citizens. Something brought about by Logic & Reason of Modern People. NOT some 'religious-types' that have labeled Homosexuals as 'Abominations'. You can't explain this, so you dishonestly try and lie your way out of answering. This really shakes my view of you as attempting to actually be an intelligent person. These are tactics of FRAUDS.

Cypress: "I never said that religions, universally, had everything right two thousand years ago. I indicated that philosophers, theologians, intellectuals, and normal everyday humans have generally been on an arcing trajectory - at least since the Axial Age - towards a convergence on some kind of natural moral order.'
Jack: Yeah. I asked if this may have had anything to do with 'religion' deminishing and secular thought arising. Again, dodged the simple question.

Cypress: "That is the other part of the scientist in me: I am a skeptic and admit when I don't know what something means."
Jack: No. You've convinced me you are no 'scientist' or intellect with much interest in Knowledge. You're some guy with pre-determined religious-based philosophy that tries to surround and toss out as many philosophical names as possible as a way to 'prove' any point you try to make.

I have more respect for the Religious Quacks that are honest in their Beliefs than some Dishonest Person like YOU.
Click to expand...

You seem to be getting very angry just because I won't agree with you that gay sexual preference is a universal human desire or goal.
 
Cypress said:
So you cannot refute my statement that you are exactly like me --> you routinely opinion on topics you have never read the original source material - aka, legislative acts, scientific theories, supreme court cases.

Because you are exactly like me and every other human being -- it is not physically possible to read everything ever published by humans, so you acquire much of your knowledge by reading summaries, reviews, and synopsis from journalists, experts, scholars.
Click to expand...

Trolls and angry young women are never happy unless they want to be happy.

Sane people can be cheered up with friendship. Jus' sayin'.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Cypress is being nice. You know me, Jack the Queer, I'm not so nice. LOL

The only dishonest person in your discussion with Cypress is you; you set up your strawman bullshit and then get angry when people won't knock them down with you. WTF, Jack? Are you setting up to have another manic episode?

Sexuality is a Earth thing. For all we know other species bud off their kids or split in half. Only a manic moron would make a claim about the universality of homosexuality, Jack.
Click to expand...
I can sorta see gay marriage being indirectly rooted in a natural human affinity for equality.

But as you succinctly point out, personal sexual preference to my knowledge has never been considered a universal value, nor have any of the great moral philosophers of history invested much time deliberating marriage customs and contracts.
 
Cypress said:
I can sorta see gay marriage being indirectly rooted in a natural human affinity for equality.

But as you succinctly point out, personal sexual preference to my knowledge has never been considered a universal value, nor have any of the great moral philosophers of history invested much time deliberating marriage customs and contracts.
Click to expand...

People should be free to do as they please as long as they harm no one else in doing so.

Gays marrying, be it next door or in San Francisco have ZERO impact on my life.

OTOH, actively denying people rights, for whatever reason, reminds me of Pastor Martin Niemöller's famous "First they came for..."
 
Cypress said:
You seem to be getting very angry just because I won't agree with you that gay sexual preference is a universal human desire or goal.
Click to expand...

More like I am surprised and disappointed that someone that sounded interesting and curious about Life turned out to be a fraud.
If you are so deceptive and dishonest about this, I can only imagine your whole Internet persona is fraudulent.
 
Jack said:
More like I am surprised and disappointed that someone that sounded interesting and curious about Life turned out to be a fraud.

If you are so deceptive and dishonest about this,

I can only imagine your whole Internet persona is fraudulent.
Click to expand...

No, that sounds like rage, resentment, and anger, not "disappointment".

Do you always get this angry when someone does not accept the premise and basis of your question?
 
Cypress said:
No, that sounds like rage, resentment, and anger, not "disappointment".

Do you always get this angry when someone does not accept the premise and basis of your question?
Click to expand...

Do you see the comedy in a person posting about Ethics and Morals ... and then lying? :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top