Texas Shooter: "Church-goers are stupid"

nozzferrahhtoo

Erm my post was not off topic, in fact it contrived heavily to re-include you in the conversation by bringing it round to being back on topic. But offering an olive branch does not compel another to take it I guess.

The topic of the thread was pretty much set by the OPs line in the post "The media generally has no issue in linking Muslim terrorists to radical Islam however there appears to be a reticence to link this attack to radical atheism."

Understanding what atheism means and is, and what most people mean when they identify with the term is the first step to understanding why linking such an attack to atheism is a nonsense. It is not possible to come up with a coherent causal link between the two. The "best" attempt we have had so far was to point out that nothing about atheism STOPS such a person committing a murder.

But nothing about the contents of a guacamole recipe likely would either, but I do not see anyone linking the murder to that.

But further it is not the "media" making such links so much as the terrorists themselves when it comes to Islam. In the article "Why we hate you & why we fight you" they were abundantly clear about what their own links are between Islam and their terrorism is. Not just mere assertion of a link, but a well thought out and pretty well written (especially as English may have been the second language of the author(s)) explanation of their thinking on the matter.

MrPudding

Swanner wrote: »

Unfortunately I can't reply.

Seems it's fine for the regulars to post off topic but not ok for me so I need to bow out lest I upset anyone's sensitivities any further..

Then why don't you reply here:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=105245067&postcount=1207

smacl posted that so you would not get into trouble. Wasn't that nice of them?

MrP

The Bishop Basher

MrPudding wrote: »

Then why don't you reply here

Because it's still in A&A and having received a warning for something as innocuous as my post above, i fear that any more posts from me will just result in further warnings and bans..

Like this post for example which in itself is off topic.

In short, i don't know what I can say or not say. I've had 4 warnings in 10 years on boards and i don't wish to make it 5 so i'll stick to other fora where i don't tend to receive yellow cards for posting my views.

It all kinda proves the point i was making tbh but there ya go..

looksee

Swanner, you were told both here and in PM exactly why you were off topic. You were invited to continue discussing, so long as it doesn't involve your personal opinions on the value, fairness or members of this forum. If you have issues with any of these, bring them to the feedback thread here or the site feedback thread.

Your continued victim pose and complaining about injustice on this thread will lead to sanction for discussing mod action on thread. If you want to discuss, get on with it, if you want to leave then go.

robindch

Swanner wrote: »

In short, i don't know what I can say or not say. I've had 4 warnings in 10 years on boards and i don't wish to make it 5 so i'll stick to other fora where i don't tend to receive yellow cards for posting my views.

You can say what you like about ideas. You cannot say what you like about the people posting those ideas. Everybody else plays by these rules and, with practice, I'm sure you can too.

The Bishop Basher

robindch wrote: »

You can say what you like about ideas. You cannot say what you like about the people posting those ideas.

You don't set the rules for what I do or don't say.. I do.

And I never speak ill of individuals.

I spoke in general terms, as I always do, about this forum and not about any individual.

It seems to have hit a raw nerve however and I received a warning for stating my opinion and the opinion of many others.

We could have left it there but you had to pipe in with..

robindch wrote: »

Everybody else plays by these rules and, with practice, I'm sure you can too.

That's probably the most patronising post i've ever had thrown at me in my time on boards. I'm not surprised and i'm not going to bother responding other then to ask..

How is it that despite the fact that I've received a warning for posting off topic, mods keep posting at me, on the same thread, off topic

To be honest, all you've done is reinforce both my comments and the comments of many others who view this place as a no go area..

Feel free to wave your little cards about if it makes you feel better but I won't be posting here again anyway so whatever..

Now can Mods please stop baiting me back into this thread.

Thank you

robindch

Swanner wrote: »

To be honest, all you've done is reinforce both my comments and the comments of many others who view this place as a no go area.

And many people find it difficult to discuss ideas without discussing their feelings about the people who propose those ideas. You may well be one of those people though again, with practice, you'll find that you can avoid that tendency which usually devolves into a slagging match rather than a discussion. A+A is specifically for the latter.

Swanner wrote: »

I won't be posting here again [...]

May I take this opportunity to wish you the very best of luck in your endeavours elsewhere!

The Bishop Basher

robindch wrote: »

And many people find it difficult to discuss ideas without discussing their feelings about the people who propose those ideas. You may well be one of those people though again, with practice, you'll find that you can avoid that tendency which usually devolves into a slagging match rather than a discussion.

Please stop.

You're deliberately trying to bait me into an angry response by being incredibly patronising and condescending long after i've tried to walk away..

Not once did I attack an individual on this thread.. Not once..

The only person guilty of that right now is you.

I've noticed that you like to have the last word even when a thread has been closed and no-one else can reply.. That's your right as a mod i suppose..

But consistently baiting me here in the manner in which you're doing so is unbecoming of a mod..

I was warned for posting off topic yet both mods are now here posting off topic..

Look, have the last word by all means, but i'm asking you to please stop taking digs at me that have no basis in fact and if you are going to accuse me of the above, at least provide evidence from this thread that back up your accusations.

I'm willing to walk away.. how about you stop taking digs and do the same..

pilly

Swanner wrote:

To be honest, all you've done is reinforce both my comments and the comments of many others who view this place as a no go area..

Swanner wrote:

That's probably the most patronising post i've ever had thrown at me in my time on boards. I'm not surprised and i'm not going to bother responding other then to ask..

Totally agree.

pauldla

So A&A is a no-go area? People say bad things about us on other threads?

I think I'll be crying myself to sleep tonight. Well, I usually cry myself to sleep, but this time it'll be for something important.

MrPudding

pauldla wrote: »

So A&A is a no-go area? People say bad things about us on other threads?

I think I'll be crying myself to sleep tonight. Well, I usually cry myself to sleep, but this time it'll be for something important.

Do you cry yourself to sleep because there is a god shaped hole in your blood pumping organ?

MrP

pauldla

MrPudding wrote: »

pauldla wrote: »

So A&A is a no-go area? People say bad things about us on other threads?

I think I'll be crying myself to sleep tonight. Well, I usually cry myself to sleep, but this time it'll be for something important.

Do you cry yourself to sleep because there is a god shaped hole in your blood pumping organ?

MrP

Yes, do you have it too? I tried filling it by dating lingerie models and eating truffles but that didn’t work.

On second thoughts, I might try the lingerie model\truffles strategy once more. Maybe it’ll work this time. God loves a trier.

Peregrinus

Have you considered dating the truffles, and eating the lingerie models?

It may not solve your sleeping problems, but if you document your efforts on film you'll have the rough footage for a very successful cult movie.

pauldla

I’m not going into details P, there may be young or impressionable readers on this thread. Though I doubt it, as it seems nobody likes us (who’s going to take us to the Debs now?).

smacl

Peregrinus wrote: »

Have you considered dating the truffles, and eating the lingerie models?

It may not solve your sleeping problems, but if you document your efforts on film you'll have the rough footage for a very successful cult movie.

Much like Gore Vidal's attempt at Caligula that's a movie that, with the best intentions in the world, might just leave the rails.

gctest50

http://wncn.com/2017/11/16/2-accidentally-shot-at-church-during-church-shooting-discussion/.


Police say two people were accidentally shot at a church in Tellico Plains Thursday afternoon during a discussion about the recent church shooting in Texas.

smacl

gctest50 wrote: »

http://wncn.com/2017/11/16/2-accidentally-shot-at-church-during-church-shooting-discussion/.


Police say two people were accidentally shot at a church in Tellico Plains Thursday afternoon during a discussion about the recent church shooting in Texas.

Do they have a category of Darwin award for serious injury?

MrPudding

gctest50 wrote: »

http://wncn.com/2017/11/16/2-accidentally-shot-at-church-during-church-shooting-discussion/.


Police say two people were accidentally shot at a church in Tellico Plains Thursday afternoon during a discussion about the recent church shooting in Texas.

Fcuking idiots.

MrP

PopePalpatine

smacl wrote: »

Do they have a category of Darwin award for serious injury?

Only if the nominee is rendered incapable of having kids, and doesn't have any yet.

robindch

gctest50 wrote: »

Police say two people were accidentally shot at a church in Tellico Plains Thursday afternoon during a discussion about the recent church shooting in Texas.

Clearly more good shooters needed to take out the good shooters who show up to take out the bad shooters, but who aren't able.

Hotblack Desiato

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Only if the nominee is rendered incapable of having kids, and doesn't have any yet.

If their stupidity wipes out their offspring and precludes any future offspring then they still qualify.

MrPudding

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

If their stupidity wipes out their offspring and precludes any future offspring then they still qualify.

Having surviving kids does not preclude one from winning a Darwin Award. I was corrected on this before:

http://www.darwinawards.com/rules/rules.children.html

MrP

Hotblack Desiato

Bah. I thought the whole point was that one's faulty genes were removed from the pool by the act of spectacular stupidity, thus bettering the species ever so slightly.

MrPudding

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Bah. I thought the whole point was that one's faulty genes were removed from the pool by the act of spectacular stupidity, thus bettering the species ever so slightly.

Me too.

MrP

recedite

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Bah. I thought the whole point was that one's faulty genes were removed from the pool by the act of spectacular stupidity, thus bettering the species ever so slightly.

Pre-existing offspring are innocent until proven guilty (which they can do by winning their own Darwin Award)

Since children have a good chance of not carrying a particular parental gene, the presence of offspring will not disqualify the Explosive Stupidity man from winning a Darwin Award

recedite

robindch wrote: »

Clearly more good shooters needed to take out the good shooters who show up to take out the bad shooters, but who aren't able.

This particular guy shot himself in the hand, thus negating the need for a good shooter to neutralise him by doing exactly that.
So we can assume that he must have anticipated the intentions of further good shooters, and decided to beat them at their own game. Thereby establishing himself as the best shooter.

BTW has anybody suggested eating the dates and truffling the lingerie models?

Samaris

A man spoke up and said he carries his everywhere he goes. He pulled the gun out, emptied the magazine and chamber, and then started passing the gun around.

Why?

I mean, at least he had the sense to empty it first, even if he did manage to shoot himself and his unfortunate wife while reloading it, but why on earth would he feel the need to pass it around? It is not like everyone else there wasn't already aware of what a gun looks like.

Hotblack Desiato

We're clearly peering into the very shallow end of the gene pool here

recedite

Samaris wrote: »

Why?

I mean, at least he had the sense to empty it first, even if he did manage to shoot himself and his unfortunate wife while reloading it, but why on earth would he feel the need to pass it around?

Well, you know how it is; you're sitting there waiting for the soup to arrive. It seems to take ages, and nothing much is happening.
Its always nice to examine someone else's gun in such circumstances.

robindch

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

We're clearly peering into the very shallow end of the gene pool here

First time I read that, I missed the second 'r' in the sentence.