IF YOU ARE LOOKING TO BAN ME...

Ross Dolan

Ross Dolan

Well-known member
Contributor
...DAMOCLES...just to it.

This is your site. You can do it without manufacturing a phony reason.

Doing it without manufacturing the phony reason would be a lot more ethical, more principled, and a hell of a lot less cowardly.

In the thread

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...-much-evil-in-the-world&p=2808005#post2808005

...you said something to which I replied. I replied using your exact words.

Now you seem to be trying to set me up for a banning by being off topic.

Grow the hell up.

In the meantime, if you are anxious to ban me...just do it. The phony manufacturing a reason is beneath you...or at least, it should be.
 
You are silly. Asking you to stay within the hypothetical in a conversation isn't "looking to ban you". What makes you so paranoid?
 
Damocles said:
You are silly. Asking you to stay within the hypothetical in a conversation isn't "looking to ban you". What makes you so paranoid?
Click to expand...

I am not paranoid...nor am I silly.

YOU went outside the hypothetical of the conversation...and I responded to YOUR diversion.

Then you started giving me a bunch of shit about staying within the confines...blah, blah, blah.

Get off it.

YOU said what you had to say...and I commented on it.

Stick with that...if you are obsessed with sticking to a line of conversation.
 
Frank Apisa said:
I am not paranoid...nor am I silly.

YOU went outside the hypothetical of the conversation...and I responded to YOUR diversion.

Then you started giving me a bunch of shit about staying within the confines...blah, blah, blah.

Get off it.

YOU said what you had to say...and I commented on it.

Stick with that...if you are obsessed with sticking to a line of conversation.
Click to expand...

I did not go outside the hypothetical. I was very clear in what I stated to you.

Anyway, all I was saying is that I was willing to continue the conversation within the premise, but if you wanted a different premise you should start a new thread and I would participate there. How is that "looking to ban you"? That is silly and paranoid.
 
Now, since you want to include what you called "Greater Evil" that you stated would not be considered evil under the original premise (the walk outside the hypothetical that I mentioned), please work with me to define what you see as evil.

If we are to participate in a new hypothetical which God are we talking about? What is considered evil? We need an agreed upon central point, a platform which we can discuss.

Which definition of evil would you like to use? I'll happily participate in a new hypothetical, but not one where it is just "What Frank thinks is evil is evil" because I do not know what you think is evil.
 
Damocles said:
I did not go outside the hypothetical. I was very clear in what I stated to you.
Click to expand...

A part of what you were saying dealt with "sin" and "evil."

I was making the point that sin and evil are not identical.

The "deviation" what not really a deviation at all...and almost infinitesimally small in comparison with the gross deviations that happen in threads HERE AND ALL OVER THE INTERNET...every day...every hour.

Anyway, all I was saying is that I was willing to continue the conversation within the premise, but if you wanted a different premise you should start a new thread and I would participate there. How is that "looking to ban you"? That is silly and paranoid.
Click to expand...

I AM NOT SILLY NOR AM I PARANOID.

I was in a thread where the owner of the site was giving me crap about staying on topic...when all I was doing was commenting on something the owner mentioned.

Even after I explained that I was merely commenting on what the owner said...the owner continued to give me crap...seeming to be egging me on for some reason.

It appeared to me that the owner was looking to get me to stray a bit further for some reason.

If I was wrong...I APOLOGIZE.

BUT...there is nothing wrong with my thinking it might be trolling me toward the end of banning me...and thinking that way is neither silly nor paranoid. It seems to me (from reading your comments in other discussions) that we are of very minds with regard to our political positions. It certainly is not beyond the realm of reason to suppose you might be doing such a thing.

If you are saying that is not what you were doing...I accept it. We can move on.

But to suppose that I would have to start a new thread to discuss my reaction to something YOU were saying...seems a out-of-line.
 
if Damo is the man I met all those years ago ( 2002 in the march to the Iraq war) he will not ban you

He used to be the best mod on the entire internets

Until he started marching with the republican lies

I still remember that sadness I felt when I came back to the site and he was pretending the Benghazi crap had validity


Damo

dude

Please get right with the facts again


you used to be one of the finest people I ever met on the internets
 
Damocles said:
Now, since you want to include what you called "Greater Evil" that you stated would not be considered evil under the original premise (the walk outside the hypothetical that I mentioned), please work with me to define what you see as evil.
Click to expand...

Okay, I will have that discussion.

BUT note that I did not use the expression "greater evil" that you say I did.

I did say that there is great evil (killing people who disagree with the will of our gods) that the god in question does not consider sin (in fact, considers an imperative)...while things that are "not truly evil" (jerking off) ARE considered sin by that god.

(I think all of that is appropriate for that other place.)


If we are to participate in a new hypothetical which God are we talking about? What is considered evil? We need an agreed upon central point, a platform which we can discuss.
Click to expand...

I certainly consider killing people who do not agree with the will of our gods...because they do not agree with that...TO BE EVIL.

Let's use that for the purposes of what you want to discuss.

Which definition of evil would you like to use? I'll happily participate in a new hypothetical, but not one where it is just "What Frank thinks is evil is evil" because I do not know what you think is evil.
Click to expand...

Let's use the example above.

AND note that it is NOT A SIN...according to the god we are talking about.
 
evince said:
if Damo is the man I met all those years ago ( 2002 in the march to the Iraq war) he will not ban you

He used to be the best mod on the entire internets

Until he started marching with the republican lies

I still remember that sadness I felt when I came back to the site and he was pretending the Benghazi crap had validity


Damo

dude

Please get right with the facts again


you used to be one of the finest people I ever met on the internets
Click to expand...

Thank you, Evince.

I will back off what I was saying. I appreciate your recommendation of Damo.
 
the man I met all those years ago I can say I loved as a friend


I still have a hard time believing he is still the same guy


Im hoping he is and that life just broke him down a little and that he will come back

Life can be pretty harsh at times


there are no guarantees that life will be good to you no matter how wonderful a person is and acts.

it can be sooo fucking unfair


we have to sometimes slog forward in a barrage of evil even though we have acted morally


hang in there all evil barrage sloggers


in your heart you know you have done all you can
 
Frank Apisa said:
Okay, I will have that discussion.

BUT note that I did not use the expression "greater evil" that you say I did.

I did say that there is great evil (killing people who disagree with the will of our gods) that the god in question does not consider sin (in fact, considers an imperative)...while things that are "not truly evil" (jerking off) ARE considered sin by that god.

(I think all of that is appropriate for that other place.)




I certainly consider killing people who do not agree with the will of our gods...because they do not agree with that...TO BE EVIL.

Let's use that for the purposes of what you want to discuss.



Let's use the example above.

AND note that it is NOT A SIN...according to the god we are talking about.
Click to expand...

I need to know under which definition you are calling it evil. Which central philosophy are you using? Basically and most importantly, what hypothetical am I to discuss? At this point all I know is that you think it is evil. Do you think Muslims think it is evil to stone an adultress, or is it holy? We need to go into too much of what you personally believe for this to be a central philosophy to attach a conversation. I would spend all my time asking what you think is evil before we could discuss it.
 
and the catholic church used to kill people too


evil is done in the name of religion all through mankinds history


its pretty much why I believe people should NOT ORGANIZE their religion



it hands power to evil people
 
Frank Apisa said:
Okay, I will have that discussion.

BUT note that I did not use the expression "greater evil" that you say I did.

I did say that there is great evil (killing people who disagree with the will of our gods) that the god in question does not consider sin (in fact, considers an imperative)...while things that are "not truly evil" (jerking off) ARE considered sin by that god.

(I think all of that is appropriate for that other place.)




I certainly consider killing people who do not agree with the will of our gods...because they do not agree with that...TO BE EVIL.

Let's use that for the purposes of what you want to discuss.



Let's use the example above.

AND note that it is NOT A SIN...according to the god we are talking about.
Click to expand...

Which people are we "killing" in your hypothetical? Let's begin there. Murderers? Just random people? Did this God order it? Why is it evil? Under the hypothetical it could not be if God willed it. If it is people killing people because they just think God wants it (like the Westboro idiots who think God hates gay people on steroids) then it is evil even by the original standard. It is the creation misbehaving.

I need to know what exact scenario we are discussing.
 
Damocles said:
I need to know under which definition you are calling it evil. Which central philosophy are you using? Basically and most importantly, what hypothetical am I to discuss? At this point all I know is that you think it is evil. Do you think Muslims think it is evil to stone an adultress, or is it holy? We need to go into too much of what you personally believe for this to be a central philosophy to attach a conversation. I would spend all my time asking what you think is evil before we could discuss it.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it would help if we discussed something else first, Damocles...in fact, two things:

One...why you did not acknowledge that you were wrong and I correct about the "greater evil" comment? Why there was no acknowledgement of an incorrect predicate to a question you asked of me.

Two...why you were calling me out on a deviation from topic...that at worst could be called a MINOR deviation. In fact, it really is NOT a deviation at all. The difference between "sin" and "evil" is essential to a discussion of "if Christianity is true" (what ever the hell that means), why is there so much evil in the world?

That is not straying from the topic...NOT NEARLY SO MUCH AS THIS DEVIATION WE ARE MAKING RIGHT HERE IN THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD.

Let's discuss those two items for a bit. Then we can get to a discussion of what "evil" is...or if "evil" even exists.
 
Frank Apisa said:
...DAMOCLES...just to it.

This is your site. You can do it without manufacturing a phony reason.

Doing it without manufacturing the phony reason would be a lot more ethical, more principled, and a hell of a lot less cowardly.

In the thread

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...-much-evil-in-the-world&p=2808005#post2808005

...you said something to which I replied. I replied using your exact words.

Now you seem to be trying to set me up for a banning by being off topic.

Grow the hell up.

In the meantime, if you are anxious to ban me...just do it. The phony manufacturing a reason is beneath you...or at least, it should be.
Click to expand...

Shut up, Francis.
 
Damocles said:
Which people are we "killing" in your hypothetical? Let's begin there. Murderers? Just random people? Did this God order it? Why is it evil? Under the hypothetical it could not be if God willed it. If it is people killing people because they just think God wants it (like the Westboro idiots who think God hates gay people on steroids) then it is evil even by the original standard. It is the creation misbehaving.

I need to know what exact scenario we are discussing.
Click to expand...

Now you know why he's on my ignore list. If this is what Frank considers debate then he is not even worthy of contempt.
 
Grugore said:
Now you know why he's on my ignore list. If this is what Frank considers debate then he is not even worthy of contempt.
Click to expand...

Fuck you, Grugore.

And don't give me that "ignore" shit...you don't have the character to truly ignore me. You are reading my words right now...and I am laughing in confidence that you are.
 
Maybe he's concerned about getting banned because you people ban those from the left for nothing.

It's stupid, childish and immature to ban someone for posting in the 'wrong' forum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top