On Thu, 22 May 2008 03:33:15 -0700 (PDT), SnowPhoenix
yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>Do you really think it's because I get my jollies out of pissing off
>C. Lee and posting bible scriptures here? I do that because he's
>acting like a spoiled child and doesn't deserve any better response
>from me.
Oh, the irony. The obsessed net.stalker shows his obsession.
As well as projecting himself.
You are still acting like the thoroughly dishonest, deliberately
nasty, pig-ignorant jerk you demonstrated very early.
>I know.. (LIAR).. got it Mr. Lee now get over it. Figure out I'm not
>paying attention to you..
If he is not paying any attention why does the obsessed net.stalker
keep adding gratuitous personal nastiness about a third part where it
is irrelevant to the discussion with somebody else entirely?
Just who the heck does this arrogantly nasty serial liar think he is?
Was it some other coward and liar also hiding behind the anonymous nym
"Phoenix" who ignored points he didn't want to hear in the original
responses he got, and fabricated things that weren't even said?
Who pretends this didn't make him the liar he showed he is??
Who ignored things like "when there is no reason to believe something
one doesn't"?
Who instead responded with that it was my "choice" when he knew
perfectly well it wasn't?
Because he knows he can't arbitrarily turn belief on or off himself.
One either believes or one doesn't.
Who pretended analogies to show him just how irrelevant his
foundational belief is to non-Christians, and what they are no
different to, were "insulting his faith"?
Like most Christians he has a mental block that prevents him
substituting something he himself doesn't believe, to see how his
original sounds to us.
We shouldn't have to make that substitution for him. And he certainly
shouldn't feign insult when we have to do it.
Who ignored several people telling you the obvious things all atheists
have in common?"
Who used the standard snidely nasty "you think you speak for all
atheists", as though he who has no idea what an atheist is, did?
When it is no different than"
"Christians believe in Jesus Christ"
"You think you speak for all Christians?"
In short, who started an inappropriate cross-post between
alt.messianic.yeshua,
alt.atheism,
alt.christnet.theology,
alt.messianic,
alt.christnet
and generally acting like an asshole?
Who then removed all but alt.atheism and acted liked an even bigger
asshole?
Who imagines HE gets to decide what is appropriate in an atheist
newsgroup and what isn't?
>Now Darrel, like you I'm a man of my word and until you show me
Like your word when you pretended you were here to learn but took
absolutely no notice of what you were told, instead fabricating things
people didn't say?
>otherwise.. I stick by that. I did say I would stop cross posting and
>the fact is, not one person from Christian forums posted that they
>were interested in keeping the debate outside of my dear friend Linda
>Lee.
And you. By your repeated stupidity and nastiness.
>What bothers me Darrel, is I really truly started this thread to try
>and get to know some people that don't really share my belief to have
>an honest discussion. I asked reasonable questions from my "theistic"
>perspective as is my right to do so. I even went out of my way to
>avoid scriptural references and you'll notice that if you're polite to
>me, you get a polite response -bible scriptures.. unless I think that
>it might just be something that you could find interesting.
Then why didn't you even try to have an honest discussion?
Was it polite to ignore or attack honest responses?
Was it polite to accuse people explain the things atheists all have in
common of "thinking they spoke for all atheists"?
>The Christians don't like me because I do remind them they are
>hypocrites and you guys (the ones calling me a liar every post) don't
>like me because I am a believer.
And that's another of your lies.
You're not liked because you are the arrogant, rude, ignorant,
dishonest, whining jerk you show in almost every post.
And before you lie again, I suggest you look at the earlier part of
this response where once again there are the examples you pretend have
never been given.
> I can deal with that because I don't
>have self esteem issues. I know who and what I am and I'm happy with
>that.
Bwaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahaha....
>I happen to agree with you Darrell but on the flip side of the coin.
>
>(LIAR - save you the time Mr. Lee, see how much I care?)
Once again the net.stalker shows his obsession.
[rest of this whining deleted]
This guy reminds me of a stereotype I had never come across before,
but heard about second hand:
The white liberal who was all mouth during the civil rights era, who
talked about the plight of the people he supported even to them
although he had no idea. Of course I'm not talking about those who
actually did something, those who joined the march and got beaten for
it, etc
