Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,248 Year: 5,505/9,624 Month: 530/323 Week: 27/143 Day: 17/10 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can a valid, supportable reason be offered for deconversion
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 31 of 566 (595527)
12-09-2010 6:56 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by purpledawn
12-09-2010 6:36 AM


Re: No Purpose
purpledawn writes:
People tend to leave a club when it no longer serves a purpose in their lives.
In my experience, people tend to leave a club due to "inconceivable flatulence" and "inappropriate use of the club mascot".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by purpledawn, posted 12-09-2010 6:36 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by purpledawn, posted 12-09-2010 9:52 AM Panda has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 34 of 566 (595551)
12-09-2010 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by purpledawn
12-09-2010 9:52 AM


Re: No Purpose
purpledawn writes:
You don't feel that a valid reason for deconversion is that the religion no longer serves a purpose for the individual or did you just feel the need to trivialize my comment?
You described religion as "a club".
That trivialises religion.
My reply was in a similar vein.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by purpledawn, posted 12-09-2010 9:52 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by purpledawn, posted 12-09-2010 12:57 PM Panda has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 39 of 566 (595562)
12-09-2010 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by dwise1
12-09-2010 10:20 AM


Re: No Purpose
dwise1 writes:
As for me, taking it in Panda's sense (I think), I have very little use for clubs because the music is both loud and lousy and they have forgotten the wisdom that it don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing. Besides, hardly anybody there knows how to dance (by which I mean partner dance).
I looked up the definition of club:
quote:
A group of people organized for a common purpose, especially a group that meets regularly: a garden club.
This pretty much matches the definition that I thought PD was using.
In my experience, when someone talks about clubs they tend to be talking about 'night clubs' (as you suggested), small 'hobby' clubs (e.g. book club) or sports clubs.
I would expect the religious people I work with not to be unhappy if I describing their religion a club.
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by dwise1, posted 12-09-2010 10:20 AM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by dwise1, posted 12-09-2010 11:03 AM Panda has seen this message but not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 46 of 566 (595629)
12-09-2010 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by purpledawn
12-09-2010 12:57 PM


Re: No Purpose
purpledawn writes:
So instead of addressing the position you decided to make a useless post.
No - I commented on what appeared to be a trivial post.
purpledawn writes:
It is better to make a clear point instead of assuming everyone sees things the same way you do.
I agree.
"Club" was a poor choice of word.
purpledawn writes:
By your definition religion can be considered a club. There are members and there are rules to follow to become a member. Those who don't conform aren't considered part of the club. They have a common purpose.
You start off with the definition I quoted. And then you rapidly abandon it by adding your own extra criteria.
Perhaps you should be discussing this with yourself as you seem very keen to put words in my mouth.
purpledawn writes:
I guess I don't consider clubs to be trivial. Maybe since your definition mentioned garden club, which is usually associated with women, you consider them to be trivial.
Why would I consider something is trivial simply because it is associated with women?
I assume you must be projecting.
purpledawn writes:
Do you feel that a valid reason for deconversion is that the religion no longer serves a purpose for the individual?
If a religion claims to serve a particular purpose and an adherent finds that it doesn't - then yes.
You seem disproportionately upset at having your point commented on.
Bad day at work?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by purpledawn, posted 12-09-2010 12:57 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by purpledawn, posted 12-10-2010 4:22 AM Panda has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 54 of 566 (595729)
12-10-2010 5:26 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by purpledawn
12-10-2010 4:22 AM


Re: No Purpose
purpledawn writes:
You've put more energy towards my choice of words than the point of my post.
And you have put more energy towards my reply than the point of the topic.
"Physician, heal thyself."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by purpledawn, posted 12-10-2010 4:22 AM purpledawn has seen this message but not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 55 of 566 (595732)
12-10-2010 7:13 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by purpledawn
12-10-2010 4:22 AM


Re: No Purpose
purpledawn writes:
I don't think a religion has to claim to serve any particular purpose to serve a purpose in an individual's life. It may serve a purpose other than what it claims.
Individuals usually have reasons for being part of a group. When those reasons change they tend to leave the group.
I think it all boils down to how you define "valid, supportable".
If anyone no longer wants to be part of a religion - surely the mere fact that they 'want' to leave makes it a valid reason to leave.
And if a reason is valid: it is supported. (The validity is the support.)
But maybe 'Supportable' has a bit more meat on it worth picking at.
I'll explain a little of the reasoning behind my previous answer:
quote:
If a religion claims to serve a particular purpose and an adherent finds that it doesn't - then [it is a valid reason]
If you became a catholic and then said "This religion does not give me enough chocolate - I am leaving" - then I would say that your reason for leaving is 'unsupported'. You would be abandoning your religion because of unreasonable expectations.
But if you became a Catholic and then said "I am recieving no spiritual support - I am leaving" - this would be a 'supported' reason.
Granted: this whole line of argument is semantic.
But I think that if you leave a religion solely because you want more from the religion that it ever promised to give, then I think it would be fair to say that your reason for leaving is unsupported.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by purpledawn, posted 12-10-2010 4:22 AM purpledawn has seen this message but not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 110 of 566 (596294)
12-14-2010 9:30 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by Dawn Bertot
12-14-2010 9:16 AM


Re: scriptural unity
Dawn Bertot writes:
Talking snake, talking donkey, yeah I can see it, if there is a good enough reason and mind to bring it about. What say ye?
Are you ever angry at your American schooling?
Do you feel that Mount Dora let you down?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-14-2010 9:16 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-14-2010 9:54 AM Panda has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 117 of 566 (596310)
12-14-2010 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 114 by Dawn Bertot
12-14-2010 9:54 AM


Re: scriptural unity
DB writes:
Your killing me man. "Amaterur night", are you serious?
Again I will tell you, quit with your grammatical ramblings and present the argument or arguments that should motivate one to deconvert
"Mid 1980s." Your killing me man. Im holding my stomach, bent over laughing. Sorry it will be a minute to complete and send this post. Oni, needs to use that stuff, it priceless
Watchout ICANT, we got a guy here that has been debating since the mid 80s. Crap, thats funny
Your claim to be religiously educated (Dawn: "Im an expert on all the theological classics") is completely undermined by the fact that English is your first language and yet you can barely read or write.
(You even mispelt 'amateur' when it was spelt correctly in what you were quoting.)
Why do you think you can understand "all the theological classics" when you cannot read or write to a level above first school?
Nothing you post has any worth as what goes into your head and what comes out again is completely corrupted by your lack of English comprehension skills.
Many old people, who can't read, go to college to learn.
You would not be embarrasing yourself to sign up for remedial reading courses.
But you are embarrassing yourself by posting such half-baked nonsense.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-14-2010 9:54 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-14-2010 4:58 PM Panda has not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 122 of 566 (596315)
12-14-2010 10:22 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by dwise1
12-14-2010 10:14 AM


Re: Please learn how to read, Dawn
dwise1 writes:
Oh yeah, you guessed it into existence. Rather than actually read what was written, you created your own imaginary version, detached from reality.
Dawn can't read anything even slightly complicated.
He has to guess.
He recognises a few words and then guesses which words join them up.
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by dwise1, posted 12-14-2010 10:14 AM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by dwise1, posted 12-14-2010 11:12 AM Panda has seen this message but not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 174 of 566 (596498)
12-15-2010 5:50 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by Dawn Bertot
12-15-2010 4:18 AM


Re: scriptural unity
As Dr. A. pointed out - and which you ignored by trying to change the subject:
Dawn Bertot, post #115 writes:
So do you have a reason why I should deconvert?
Dawn Bertot, post #138 writes:
Its not about me Moron
You obviously cannot read well.
Most of the time you don't even know what you have written.
Why should we think that you can read the bible when you can't read posts on a forum.
Many people have mentioned this before.
Your reading and writing is at a young child's level.
What is wrong with you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 4:18 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 12:27 PM Panda has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 195 of 566 (596543)
12-15-2010 1:55 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by Dawn Bertot
12-15-2010 12:27 PM


Re: scriptural unity
Dawn writes:
I noticed you have 300 and something posts to my 2200, do you think your tactics will work? Your a sad excuse at attempts to intimidate. If cavediver couldnt do it, you have no chance. He tried for several years
Do you think that makes sense?
Without trying I see 7 errors: 7 errors in 4 short sentences.
I have to add and remove words to get them to even begin to make sense.
Dawn writes:
Ill tell you and keep telling you, your wasting your time son
It appears that getting you to answer a question is a waste of time - but I am persistent.
Dawn writes:
perhaps you could actually present an argument to the topic of the thread. As of yet, I dont remember any attempt by yourself
Perhaps you could explain why your English is so abysmal?
You claim to be a scholar, but you can't read or write properly.
Why should anyone believe your claims at being educated when all you do is convey someone that failed at school?
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 12:27 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 202 of 566 (596557)
12-15-2010 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 201 by dwise1
12-15-2010 3:02 PM


Re: scriptural unity
I am liking Dawn's logic.
Panda's post count: 300+
Steven Hawking's post count: 0
God's post count: 0
Clearly I am more intelligent than God AND Prof. Hawking.
Edited by Panda, : He's a professor!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by dwise1, posted 12-15-2010 3:02 PM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by subbie, posted 12-15-2010 3:57 PM Panda has seen this message but not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 223 of 566 (596641)
12-16-2010 5:14 AM
Reply to: Message 221 by Dawn Bertot
12-16-2010 3:23 AM


Re: scriptural unity
arachnophilia writes:
Dawn Bertot writes:
I noticed you have 300 and something posts to my 2200, do you think your tactics will work? Your a sad excuse at attempts to intimidate.
please note my post count [8271], to the left.
Why have you not conceded all your arguements to arachnophilia?
He has posted over 3 times as many posts as you: he is over 3 times 'more correct' than you.
Or is your original post just stupid.
Or is it just another case of you not knowing what the hell you are writing.
Why should we think your claims of scholarship are anything other than a bare-faced lies?
And why do you keep using the word 'intimidate' when clearly you don't know what it means?
The cognitive dissonance causing you to repeatedly refuse to address your appallingly bad English must be very intense.
(I accept that the previous sentence is probably 'too advanced' for you.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-16-2010 3:23 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 282 of 566 (597055)
12-19-2010 10:15 AM
Reply to: Message 281 by Dr Adequate
12-19-2010 9:16 AM


Re: scriptural unity
Dawn writes:
You really should learn how to debate disingenuously DA. Oh yeah thats right, youve never actually done it, have you?
This makes a lot more sense with the extra word inserted.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-19-2010 9:16 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 314 of 566 (597313)
12-20-2010 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 310 by Dawn Bertot
12-20-2010 7:50 PM


Re: How to test Dawn Bertot's writings.
Dawn writes:
Son, I know you are trying to assist Jar in making sense out of what he is attempting, but there is no way, to extricate him from the worst from of contradiction he has involved himself in
Nearly a sentence.
Dawn writes:
By direct implication or outright assertion he is assuming the prophets were correct or accurate in their statements, of and about the the things the prophecied
This is close to being a sentence too.
A good try. D-
So, still no explanation of why we should believe you are an expert or a scholar when your reading and writing is so sub-normal?
Is cognitive dissonance forcing you to deny your lack of ability?
I expect that if you could acknowledge your failure at English you would have to question everything you think the bible says.
I guess it would make your whole life a failure if you learnt to read properly and then found out that your whole belief system was based on your faulty comprehension of the bible.
Maybe at your age you would rather die being wrong while thinking you are right.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 310 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-20-2010 7:50 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 316 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-20-2010 8:23 PM Panda has replied
 Message 317 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-20-2010 8:27 PM Panda has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024