Well let us rewind a few posts.

First you mention such a remark can only be produced from hatred.

That is incorrect. There was no hatred created on the message I gave about religion. It is an opinion.

Second you mention that I believe I have all the answers and am all intelligent.

That is a incorrect assumption. I never mentioned in any of my posts that I am all intelligent and have answers for everything. I do have opinions.

So yes I find the replies silly, but what it is worth I will leave you geniuses to further elaborate on the topic "religion and ignorance".

Have fun

Im not your damn translator.
That's your responsibility to follow along. I wont keep backing up.

Perhaps you should go gather a few more infatuated minions to back you up!

in the case of the OP...murder is not accurate IMO

The precise definition of murder varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Under the Common Law, or law made by courts, murder was the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. The term malice aforethought did not necessarily mean that the killer planned or premeditated on the killing, or that he or she felt malice toward the victim. Generally, malice aforethought referred to a level of intent or reck-lessness that separated murder from other killings and warranted stiffer punishment.

The definition of murder has evolved over several centuries. Under most modern statutes in the United States, murder comes in four varieties: (1) intentional murder; (2) a killing that resulted from the intent to do serious bodily injury; (3) a killing that resulted from a depraved heart or extreme recklessness; and (4) murder committed by an Accomplice during the commission of, attempt of, or flight from certain felonies

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/murder

again...when you post that to MY post....without being specific that it regards another post...then anyone with half a brain would think it was meant toward me.

THAT is the reason for the arguement...if you can't handle it...maybe you should be a little more clearer in your posts OR reply to the post you meant the comment for. not rocket science

Smiles probably came in here on your request. On your inability to follow along!

He wasnt in the conversation and only took up your defense without reading the thread!

Talk about looking silly!

oh...and I think I'm doing a fine job making my own point ty...don't need back up. But I can admit when I post to a wrong post...because I know people make mistakes

paranoid much???? geez...I don't think I've ever talked to him besides the forums

wtf...he wasn't defending me and, in fact, i was countering his post

Again Fanta assumes.

Yellowrose can answer on her own without anyones help.

logic would dictate the following order of this quote

first statement quoted:

""<----knows some people that aren't religious but are ignorant""

which got the following response:

""Such a statement can only originate through hatred.""

which raised the question:

""this is where you said it Fanta how does my statement originate from hatred????""

which was side stepped by:

What statement preceded that remark!



------------------------

if you were referring to the statement made before you should have quoted the statement made before

but hey

what do i know

Comprehension is key in a conversation rose.

Since you obviously lost that I will discontinue conversing with you!

You seem apt at twisting things beyond anyones comprehension!

Fanta is saying,
it is a parents right to kill their child if what necessary to save them goes against their religious beliefs.

See this is the problem. You use the wording "to kill their child."
Who said that? I didnt, and I would never assume there is a guaranteed cure for a child with a terminal illness.
The parents didnt give the child the illness did they? NO!
So who would assume that the parents are killing the child?


When religion creates ignorance...
The title of this thread assumes a certain level of conceit, a certainty of conscience morality, and an assumption of knowing the end results. (God like?)

Who are we to judge?

Edited by Fanta46 on Sun 05/17/09 10:23 AM
Quote | Reply
yellowrose10

Joined Tue 12/11/07
Posts: 18103
Sun 05/17/09 10:27 AMok....call me silly (I know you guys will any way ) but what makes a crime in most crimes is intent
Report Post | Quote | Reply
smiless

Joined Wed 09/26/07
Posts: 9268
Sun 05/17/09 10:27 AMOne thing I know for sure is that religion can produce ignorance.
Report Post | Quote | Reply
Fanta46

Joined Sat 11/11/06
Posts: 24671
Sun 05/17/09 10:29 AMQUOTE:

One thing I know for sure is that religion can produce ignorance.



And being free of religion makes you highly intelligent?
Quote | Reply
yellowrose10

Joined Tue 12/11/07
Posts: 18103
Sun 05/17/09 10:30 AM<----knows some people that aren't religious but are ignorant
Report Post | Quote | Reply
Fanta46

Joined Sat 11/11/06
Posts: 24671
Sun 05/17/09 10:34 AMQUOTE:

<----knows some people that aren't religious but are ignorant



Such a statement can only originate through hatred.
Edited by Fanta46 on Sun 05/17/09 10:34 AM
Quote


If your going to back up. Do it far enough to include the whole conversation!

Need I remind y'all to debate the topic and not the poster?

Y'all aren't that favored by moderation are you?

careful adj....or I'll be accused of running to you too

same goes to you. we are debating what YOU said

THIS is the statement I made

Out of context, biased, and without a care for comprehension!

Feel favored?

not sure how I am twisting when I quoted things. I was asking you how my comment was originated from hatred

well then if you want to use that approach

lets back up a bit




"""Such a statement can only originate through hatred."""

this could be construed as an inflammatory baiting response

so who is favored by whom

hardly...I asked you how my statement (that YOU quoted) was orginiated from hatred. plain and simple. if you are going to make a comment like that...of course I'm going to defend myself

the topic is about belief vs modern medicine