Replies to post #3066 on The Free Zone Board

[Meme]

Re: Neuro/eris: how you classify yourself

Eris, first let me apologize for not attending to your responses, but sometimes I'm too tired or just not in the mood to be terribly serious. Thus is tonight.

Neuro - How could I possibly pass up this chance?

Eris - Well, technically I'm an atheist leftist (and despise Republicans)

Neuro - Is there another definition for the word "despise" that I am unfamiliar with? Are Republicans not, by deviation, members of a political party?

Oh yes, Neuro, for once I wholeheartedly agree with you. Republicans are definitely deviants!!! Completely outside the norm, hands down, no questions asked, you hit the nail on the head. ROTFL

Perhaps your elusive word was derivation? Nah, we'll stick with yours.

Still giggling,

Meme

[eris23]

how you classify yourself

Since this part of the post was so way off point I felt it necessary to branch the thread to avoid the confusion. Besides,
I dislike threads whose posts become so long and rambling that it takes half the night just trying to figure out what the
other fool was trying to say. With that said:

1) You don't know my feelings on the origin and meaning of spirituality, so you are rash to call me foolish for them.

Nonsense. You said you were an atheist. Do you know what an atheist actually is?

Yes. It is a negating word. It does not establish what *is*, just what *isn't*. Do you know what linguistics actually is?

I do not believe in an external anthropomorphic deity though.

An atheist is more than that actually. An atheist denies the existence of God. Simply not believing isn't enough for a
true atheist.

Okay, I'll grant your terminology (it's a moot point). Anyway, the root 'theo' designates a ruling deity, and denial of that does not cancel out spirituality of any sort. Buddhism is essentially atheist - but they don't often use the word because of the connotations of modern usage.

You know, the religious right shares a mantra with you as well.

What "mantra" would that be?

That I can be 'foolish' for my personal beliefs (ostensibly because they differ from yours)

2) I never said I hate people for belonging to a particular political party.

A lie. Here's what you said verbatim:

Well, technically I'm an atheist leftist (and despise Republicans)

I love how you take out important parts of my replies to make me have to repeat things. I don't dislike anyone *for* that reason; it just usually turns out that people I find selfish and shallow end up being Republicans. Not my fault. Anyway, I also acknowledged that my usage of the word was probably too strong. You took out that part too - so you can continue to claim that I'm just here to be right all of hte time.

I am pro-choice and pro-social security; and pro-separation-of-church-and-state.

Your leftist credentials would cause one to assume this. You are right only on the church-and-state issue. The others
are moral and social failures.

I'm not sure what you are saying here. Talk about getting on a tangent though - we weren't discussing ideals of that sort. We were mostly discussing whether I am a communist (I think)

You just used the same word I used, right before you criticized me for it!

So, I see that you're beginning to understand satire after all. It comes in many forms, some more subtle than others.

I am starting to understand what you use for a sense of humour, yes. It means there's no telling what you mean, if you mean anything at all. But my retraction of my usage of the word 'despise' , although unaddressed, still stands. It's more correct to say, 'The people who I know who I learn to be Republicans usually end up being the same people who aggravate me. It's not 100%, but a definite trend.'