Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Ricky Gervais on religion
82 views
Skip to first unread message
Mentalguy2k8
Nov 17, 2012, 12:55:57 PM11/17/12
to
*"The dictionary definition of God is "a supernatural creator and overseer
of the universe." Included in this definition are all deities, goddesses and
supernatural beings. Since the beginning of recorded history, which is
defined by the invention of writing by the Sumerians around 6,000 years ago,
historians have cataloged over 3700 supernatural beings, of which 2870 can
be considered deities.
"Next time someone tells me they believe in God, I'll say "Oh which one?
Zeus? Hades? Jupiter? Mars? Odin? Thor? Krishna? Vishnu? Ra?." If they say
"Just God. I only believe in the one God," I'll point out that they are
nearly as atheistic as me. I don't believe in 2,870 gods, and they don't
believe in 2,869."
*"Why don't I believe in God? No, no no, why do YOU believe in God? Surely
the burden of proof is on the believer. You started all this. If I came up
to you and said, "Why don't you believe I can fly?" You'd say, "Why would
I?" I'd reply, "Because it's a matter of faith." If I then said, "Prove I
can't fly. Prove I can't fly see, see, you can't prove it can you?" You'd
probably either walk away, call security or throw me out of the window and
shout, ''F-ing fly then you lunatic." "
Ricky Gervais: Why I'm an Atheist
Why don't you believe in God? I get that question all the time. I always try
to give a sensitive, reasoned answer. This is usually awkward, time
consuming and pointless. People who believe in God don't need proof of his
existence, and they certainly don't want evidence to the contrary. They are
happy with their belief. They even say things like "it's true to me" and "it's
faith." I still give my logical answer because I feel that not being honest
would be patronizing and impolite. It is ironic therefore that "I don't
believe in God because there is absolutely no scientific evidence for his
existence and from what I've heard the very definition is a logical
impossibility in this known universe," comes across as both patronizing and
impolite.
Arrogance is another accusation. Which seems particularly unfair. Science
seeks the truth. And it does not discriminate. For better or worse it finds
things out. Science is humble. It knows what it knows and it knows what it
doesn't know. It bases its conclusions and beliefs on hard evidence --
evidence that is constantly updated and upgraded. It doesn't get offended
when new facts come along. It embraces the body of knowledge. It doesn't
hold on to medieval practices because they are tradition. If it did, you
wouldn't get a shot of penicillin, you'd pop a leach down your trousers and
pray. Whatever you "believe," this is not as effective as medicine. Again
you can say, "It works for me," but so do placebos. My point being, I'm
saying God doesn't exist. I'm not saying faith doesn't exist. I know faith
exists. I see it all the time. But believing in something doesn't make it
true. Hoping that something is true doesn't make it true. The existence of
God is not subjective. He either exists or he doesn't. It's not a matter of
opinion. You can have your own opinions. But you can't have your own facts.
Why don't I believe in God? No, no no, why do YOU believe in God? Surely the
burden of proof is on the believer. You started all this. If I came up to
you and said, "Why don't you believe I can fly?" You'd say, "Why would I?" I'd
reply, "Because it's a matter of faith." If I then said, "Prove I can't fly.
Prove I can't fly see, see, you can't prove it can you?" You'd probably
either walk away, call security or throw me out of the window and shout, ''F-ing
fly then you lunatic."
This, is of course a spirituality issue, religion is a different matter. As
an atheist, I see nothing "wrong" in believing in a god. I don't think there
is a god, but belief in him does no harm. If it helps you in any way, then
that's fine with me. It's when belief starts infringing on other people's
rights when it worries me. I would never deny your right to believe in a
god. I would just rather you didn't kill people who believe in a different
god, say. Or stone someone to death because your rulebook says their
sexuality is immoral. It's strange that anyone who believes that an
all-powerful all-knowing, omniscient power responsible for everything that
happens, would also want to judge and punish people for what they are. From
what I can gather, pretty much the worst type of person you can be is an
atheist. The first four commandments hammer this point home. There is a god,
I'm him, no one else is, you're not as good and don't forget it. (Don't
murder anyone, doesn't get a mention till number 6.)
When confronted with anyone who holds my lack of religious faith in such
contempt, I say, "It's the way God made me."
But what are atheists really being accused of?
The dictionary definition of God is "a supernatural creator and overseer of
the universe." Included in this definition are all deities, goddesses and
supernatural beings. Since the beginning of recorded history, which is
defined by the invention of writing by the Sumerians around 6,000 years ago,
historians have cataloged over 3700 supernatural beings, of which 2870 can
be considered deities.
So next time someone tells me they believe in God, I'll say "Oh which one?
Zeus? Hades? Jupiter? Mars? Odin? Thor? Krishna? Vishnu? Ra?." If they say
"Just God. I only believe in the one God," I'll point out that they are
nearly as atheistic as me. I don't believe in 2,870 gods, and they don't
believe in 2,869.
I used to believe in God. The Christian one that is.
I loved Jesus. He was my hero. More than pop stars. More than footballers.
More than God. God was by definition omnipotent and perfect. Jesus was a
man. He had to work at it. He had temptation but defeated sin. He had
integrity and courage. But He was my hero because He was kind. And He was
kind to everyone. He didn't bow to peer pressure or tyranny or cruelty. He
didn't care who you were. He loved you. What a guy. I wanted to be just like
Him.
One day when I was about 8 years old, I was drawing the crucifixion as part
of my Bible studies homework. I loved art too. And nature. I loved how God
made all the animals. They were also perfect. Unconditionally beautiful. It
was an amazing world.
I lived in a very poor, working-class estate in an urban sprawl called
Reading, about 40 miles west of London. My father was a laborer and my
mother was a housewife. I was never ashamed of poverty. It was almost noble.
Also, everyone I knew was in the same situation, and I had everything I
needed. School was free. My clothes were cheap and always clean and ironed.
And mum was always cooking. She was cooking the day I was drawing on the
cross.
I was sitting at the kitchen table when my brother came home. He was 11
years older than me, so he would have been 19. He was as smart as anyone I
knew, but he was too cheeky. He would answer back and get into trouble. I
was a good boy. I went to church and believed in God -- what a relief for a
working-class mother. You see, growing up where I did, mums didn't hope as
high as their kids growing up to be doctors; they just hoped their kids didn't
go to jail. So bring them up believing in God and they'll be good and law
abiding. It's a perfect system. Well, nearly. 75 percent of Americans are
God--fearing Christians; 75 percent of prisoners are God--fearing
Christians. 10 percent of Americans are atheists; 0.2 percent of prisoners
are atheists.
But anyway, there I was happily drawing my hero when my big brother Bob
asked, "Why do you believe in God?" Just a simple question. But my mum
panicked. "Bob," she said in a tone that I knew meant, "Shut up." Why was
that a bad thing to ask? If there was a God and my faith was strong it didn't
matter what people said.
Oh.hang on. There is no God. He knows it, and she knows it deep down. It was
as simple as that. I started thinking about it and asking more questions,
and within an hour, I was an atheist.
Wow. No God. If mum had lied to me about God, had she also lied to me about
Santa? Yes, of course, but who cares? The gifts kept coming. And so did the
gifts of my new found atheism. The gifts of truth, science, nature. The real
beauty of this world. I learned of evolution -- a theory so simple that only
England's greatest genius could have come up with it. Evolution of plants,
animals and us -- with imagination, free will, love, humor. I no longer
needed a reason for my existence, just a reason to live. And imagination,
free will, love, humor, fun, music, sports, beer and pizza are all good
enough reasons for living.
But living an honest life -- for that you need the truth. That's the other
thing I learned that day, that the truth, however shocking or uncomfortable,
in the end leads to liberation and dignity.
So what does the question "Why don't you believe in God?" really mean. I
think when someone asks that they are really questioning their own belief.
In a way they are asking "what makes you so special? "How come you weren't
brainwashed with the rest of us?" "How dare you say I'm a fool and I'm not
going to heaven, f- you!" Let's be honest, if one person believed in God he
would be considered pretty strange. But because it's a very popular view it's
accepted. And why is it such a popular view? That's obvious. It's an
attractive proposition. Believe in me and live forever. Again if it was just
a case of spirituality this would be fine.
"Do unto others." is a good rule of thumb. I live by that. Forgiveness is
probably the greatest virtue there is. But that's exactly what it is -- a
virtue. Not just a Christian virtue. No one owns being good. I'm good. I
just don't believe I'll be rewarded for it in heaven. My reward is here and
now. It's knowing that I try to do the right thing. That I lived a good
life. And that's where spirituality really lost its way. When it became a
stick to beat people with. "Do this or you'll burn in hell."
"You won't burn in hell. But be nice anyway."
of the universe." Included in this definition are all deities, goddesses and
supernatural beings. Since the beginning of recorded history, which is
defined by the invention of writing by the Sumerians around 6,000 years ago,
historians have cataloged over 3700 supernatural beings, of which 2870 can
be considered deities.
"Next time someone tells me they believe in God, I'll say "Oh which one?
Zeus? Hades? Jupiter? Mars? Odin? Thor? Krishna? Vishnu? Ra?." If they say
"Just God. I only believe in the one God," I'll point out that they are
nearly as atheistic as me. I don't believe in 2,870 gods, and they don't
believe in 2,869."
*"Why don't I believe in God? No, no no, why do YOU believe in God? Surely
the burden of proof is on the believer. You started all this. If I came up
to you and said, "Why don't you believe I can fly?" You'd say, "Why would
I?" I'd reply, "Because it's a matter of faith." If I then said, "Prove I
can't fly. Prove I can't fly see, see, you can't prove it can you?" You'd
probably either walk away, call security or throw me out of the window and
shout, ''F-ing fly then you lunatic." "
Ricky Gervais: Why I'm an Atheist
Why don't you believe in God? I get that question all the time. I always try
to give a sensitive, reasoned answer. This is usually awkward, time
consuming and pointless. People who believe in God don't need proof of his
existence, and they certainly don't want evidence to the contrary. They are
happy with their belief. They even say things like "it's true to me" and "it's
faith." I still give my logical answer because I feel that not being honest
would be patronizing and impolite. It is ironic therefore that "I don't
believe in God because there is absolutely no scientific evidence for his
existence and from what I've heard the very definition is a logical
impossibility in this known universe," comes across as both patronizing and
impolite.
Arrogance is another accusation. Which seems particularly unfair. Science
seeks the truth. And it does not discriminate. For better or worse it finds
things out. Science is humble. It knows what it knows and it knows what it
doesn't know. It bases its conclusions and beliefs on hard evidence --
evidence that is constantly updated and upgraded. It doesn't get offended
when new facts come along. It embraces the body of knowledge. It doesn't
hold on to medieval practices because they are tradition. If it did, you
wouldn't get a shot of penicillin, you'd pop a leach down your trousers and
pray. Whatever you "believe," this is not as effective as medicine. Again
you can say, "It works for me," but so do placebos. My point being, I'm
saying God doesn't exist. I'm not saying faith doesn't exist. I know faith
exists. I see it all the time. But believing in something doesn't make it
true. Hoping that something is true doesn't make it true. The existence of
God is not subjective. He either exists or he doesn't. It's not a matter of
opinion. You can have your own opinions. But you can't have your own facts.
Why don't I believe in God? No, no no, why do YOU believe in God? Surely the
burden of proof is on the believer. You started all this. If I came up to
you and said, "Why don't you believe I can fly?" You'd say, "Why would I?" I'd
reply, "Because it's a matter of faith." If I then said, "Prove I can't fly.
Prove I can't fly see, see, you can't prove it can you?" You'd probably
either walk away, call security or throw me out of the window and shout, ''F-ing
fly then you lunatic."
This, is of course a spirituality issue, religion is a different matter. As
an atheist, I see nothing "wrong" in believing in a god. I don't think there
is a god, but belief in him does no harm. If it helps you in any way, then
that's fine with me. It's when belief starts infringing on other people's
rights when it worries me. I would never deny your right to believe in a
god. I would just rather you didn't kill people who believe in a different
god, say. Or stone someone to death because your rulebook says their
sexuality is immoral. It's strange that anyone who believes that an
all-powerful all-knowing, omniscient power responsible for everything that
happens, would also want to judge and punish people for what they are. From
what I can gather, pretty much the worst type of person you can be is an
atheist. The first four commandments hammer this point home. There is a god,
I'm him, no one else is, you're not as good and don't forget it. (Don't
murder anyone, doesn't get a mention till number 6.)
When confronted with anyone who holds my lack of religious faith in such
contempt, I say, "It's the way God made me."
But what are atheists really being accused of?
The dictionary definition of God is "a supernatural creator and overseer of
the universe." Included in this definition are all deities, goddesses and
supernatural beings. Since the beginning of recorded history, which is
defined by the invention of writing by the Sumerians around 6,000 years ago,
historians have cataloged over 3700 supernatural beings, of which 2870 can
be considered deities.
So next time someone tells me they believe in God, I'll say "Oh which one?
Zeus? Hades? Jupiter? Mars? Odin? Thor? Krishna? Vishnu? Ra?." If they say
"Just God. I only believe in the one God," I'll point out that they are
nearly as atheistic as me. I don't believe in 2,870 gods, and they don't
believe in 2,869.
I used to believe in God. The Christian one that is.
I loved Jesus. He was my hero. More than pop stars. More than footballers.
More than God. God was by definition omnipotent and perfect. Jesus was a
man. He had to work at it. He had temptation but defeated sin. He had
integrity and courage. But He was my hero because He was kind. And He was
kind to everyone. He didn't bow to peer pressure or tyranny or cruelty. He
didn't care who you were. He loved you. What a guy. I wanted to be just like
Him.
One day when I was about 8 years old, I was drawing the crucifixion as part
of my Bible studies homework. I loved art too. And nature. I loved how God
made all the animals. They were also perfect. Unconditionally beautiful. It
was an amazing world.
I lived in a very poor, working-class estate in an urban sprawl called
Reading, about 40 miles west of London. My father was a laborer and my
mother was a housewife. I was never ashamed of poverty. It was almost noble.
Also, everyone I knew was in the same situation, and I had everything I
needed. School was free. My clothes were cheap and always clean and ironed.
And mum was always cooking. She was cooking the day I was drawing on the
cross.
I was sitting at the kitchen table when my brother came home. He was 11
years older than me, so he would have been 19. He was as smart as anyone I
knew, but he was too cheeky. He would answer back and get into trouble. I
was a good boy. I went to church and believed in God -- what a relief for a
working-class mother. You see, growing up where I did, mums didn't hope as
high as their kids growing up to be doctors; they just hoped their kids didn't
go to jail. So bring them up believing in God and they'll be good and law
abiding. It's a perfect system. Well, nearly. 75 percent of Americans are
God--fearing Christians; 75 percent of prisoners are God--fearing
Christians. 10 percent of Americans are atheists; 0.2 percent of prisoners
are atheists.
But anyway, there I was happily drawing my hero when my big brother Bob
asked, "Why do you believe in God?" Just a simple question. But my mum
panicked. "Bob," she said in a tone that I knew meant, "Shut up." Why was
that a bad thing to ask? If there was a God and my faith was strong it didn't
matter what people said.
Oh.hang on. There is no God. He knows it, and she knows it deep down. It was
as simple as that. I started thinking about it and asking more questions,
and within an hour, I was an atheist.
Wow. No God. If mum had lied to me about God, had she also lied to me about
Santa? Yes, of course, but who cares? The gifts kept coming. And so did the
gifts of my new found atheism. The gifts of truth, science, nature. The real
beauty of this world. I learned of evolution -- a theory so simple that only
England's greatest genius could have come up with it. Evolution of plants,
animals and us -- with imagination, free will, love, humor. I no longer
needed a reason for my existence, just a reason to live. And imagination,
free will, love, humor, fun, music, sports, beer and pizza are all good
enough reasons for living.
But living an honest life -- for that you need the truth. That's the other
thing I learned that day, that the truth, however shocking or uncomfortable,
in the end leads to liberation and dignity.
So what does the question "Why don't you believe in God?" really mean. I
think when someone asks that they are really questioning their own belief.
In a way they are asking "what makes you so special? "How come you weren't
brainwashed with the rest of us?" "How dare you say I'm a fool and I'm not
going to heaven, f- you!" Let's be honest, if one person believed in God he
would be considered pretty strange. But because it's a very popular view it's
accepted. And why is it such a popular view? That's obvious. It's an
attractive proposition. Believe in me and live forever. Again if it was just
a case of spirituality this would be fine.
"Do unto others." is a good rule of thumb. I live by that. Forgiveness is
probably the greatest virtue there is. But that's exactly what it is -- a
virtue. Not just a Christian virtue. No one owns being good. I'm good. I
just don't believe I'll be rewarded for it in heaven. My reward is here and
now. It's knowing that I try to do the right thing. That I lived a good
life. And that's where spirituality really lost its way. When it became a
stick to beat people with. "Do this or you'll burn in hell."
"You won't burn in hell. But be nice anyway."
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 17, 2012, 1:03:12 PM11/17/12
to
It happens that Mentalguy2k8 formulated :
Must be true if a talentless comediam said it.
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 17, 2012, 1:03:53 PM11/17/12
to
Pakistan Cricket Scam spewed this twaddle:
>> and beliefs on hard evidence -ￜ- evidence that is constantly
>> Americans are God-ￜ-fearing Christians; 75 percent of prisoners are
>> God-ￜ-fearing Christians. 10 percent of Americans are atheists; 0.2
>> exactly what it is -ￜ- a virtue. Not just a Christian virtue. No
>> God-ￜ-fearing Christians. 10 percent of Americans are atheists; 0.2
>> one owns being good. I'm good. I just don't believe I'll be
>> rewarded for it in heaven. My reward is here and now. It's knowing
>> that I try to do the right thing. That I lived a good life. And
>> that's where spirituality really lost its way. When it became a
>> stick to beat people with. "Do this or you'll burn in hell."
>>
>> "You won't burn in hell. But be nice anyway."
>
> Must be true if a talentless comediam said it.
*comedian [sic]
>> rewarded for it in heaven. My reward is here and now. It's knowing
>> that I try to do the right thing. That I lived a good life. And
>> that's where spirituality really lost its way. When it became a
>> stick to beat people with. "Do this or you'll burn in hell."
>>
>> "You won't burn in hell. But be nice anyway."
>
> Must be true if a talentless comediam said it.
Mentalguy2k8
Nov 17, 2012, 1:07:24 PM11/17/12
to
"Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
news:k88jh4$th6$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>> "You won't burn in hell. But be nice anyway."
>
>
> Must be true if a talentless comediam said it.
Still, it's much easier to disregard it because of the author than to
challenge the points made. I understand.
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 17, 2012, 1:21:20 PM11/17/12
to
Mentalguy2k8 submitted this idea :
Still not allowed *MY* opinion am I?
Mentalguy2k8
Nov 17, 2012, 1:30:53 PM11/17/12
to
"Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
article is worthless because you claim that the author is a "talentless
comedian" then expect to have it challenged.
If you want to take one or more points from the article and challenge them
in your own words, go right ahead.
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 17, 2012, 1:36:57 PM11/17/12
to
Mentalguy2k8 submitted this idea :
> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
> news:k88kj4$4fd$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Mentalguy2k8 submitted this idea :
>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>> news:k88jh4$th6$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "You won't burn in hell. But be nice anyway."
>>>>
>>>> Must be true if a talentless comediam said it.
>>>
>>> You didn't read any of it, did you?
>>>
>>> Still, it's much easier to disregard it because of the author than
>>> to challenge the points made. I understand.
>>
>> Still not allowed *MY* opinion am I?
>
> Of course, you've been posting it all day. But if your opinion is
> that an article is worthless because you claim that the author is a
> "talentless comedian" then expect to have it challenged.
>
> If you want to take one or more points from the article and challenge
> them in your own words, go right ahead.
I'm not prepared to debate the musings of a "comedian" who resorts to
> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
> news:k88kj4$4fd$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Mentalguy2k8 submitted this idea :
>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>> news:k88jh4$th6$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "You won't burn in hell. But be nice anyway."
>>>>
>>>> Must be true if a talentless comediam said it.
>>>
>>> You didn't read any of it, did you?
>>>
>>> Still, it's much easier to disregard it because of the author than
>>> to challenge the points made. I understand.
>>
>> Still not allowed *MY* opinion am I?
>
> Of course, you've been posting it all day. But if your opinion is
> that an article is worthless because you claim that the author is a
> "talentless comedian" then expect to have it challenged.
>
> If you want to take one or more points from the article and challenge
> them in your own words, go right ahead.
calling people mongs on Twatter.
HAND
Mentalguy2k8
Nov 17, 2012, 1:42:48 PM11/17/12
to
"Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 17, 2012, 1:48:33 PM11/17/12
to
Mentalguy2k8 brought next idea :
he has to offer on the subject? *MY* choice.
I am allowed a choice aren't I?
> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
> news:k88lgd$9u0$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Mentalguy2k8 submitted this idea :
>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>> news:k88kj4$4fd$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> Mentalguy2k8 submitted this idea :
>>>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>>>> news:k88jh4$th6$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
> news:k88lgd$9u0$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Mentalguy2k8 submitted this idea :
>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>> news:k88kj4$4fd$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> Mentalguy2k8 submitted this idea :
>>>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>>>> news:k88jh4$th6$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Must be true if a talentless comediam said it.
>>>>>
>>>>> You didn't read any of it, did you?
>>>>>
>>>>> Still, it's much easier to disregard it because of the author
>>>>> than to challenge the points made. I understand.
>>>>
>>>> Still not allowed *MY* opinion am I?
>>>
>>> Of course, you've been posting it all day. But if your opinion is
>>> that an article is worthless because you claim that the author is
>>> a "talentless comedian" then expect to have it challenged.
>>>
>>> If you want to take one or more points from the article and
>>> challenge them in your own words, go right ahead.
>>
>> I'm not prepared to debate the musings of a "comedian" who resorts
>> to calling people mongs on Twatter.
>
> Which only makes the pit of hypocrisy you've dug for yourself,
> deeper.
Why, because I think the guy is an idiot and I don't respect anything
>>>>>
>>>>> You didn't read any of it, did you?
>>>>>
>>>>> Still, it's much easier to disregard it because of the author
>>>>> than to challenge the points made. I understand.
>>>>
>>>> Still not allowed *MY* opinion am I?
>>>
>>> Of course, you've been posting it all day. But if your opinion is
>>> that an article is worthless because you claim that the author is
>>> a "talentless comedian" then expect to have it challenged.
>>>
>>> If you want to take one or more points from the article and
>>> challenge them in your own words, go right ahead.
>>
>> I'm not prepared to debate the musings of a "comedian" who resorts
>> to calling people mongs on Twatter.
>
> Which only makes the pit of hypocrisy you've dug for yourself,
> deeper.
he has to offer on the subject? *MY* choice.
I am allowed a choice aren't I?
Mentalguy2k8
Nov 17, 2012, 1:50:29 PM11/17/12
to
"Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 17, 2012, 8:56:05 PM11/17/12
to
Mentalguy2k8 brought next idea :
> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
> news:k88m65$e03$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Mentalguy2k8 brought next idea :
>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>> news:k88lgd$9u0$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> Mentalguy2k8 submitted this idea :
>>>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>>>> news:k88kj4$4fd$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> Mentalguy2k8 submitted this idea :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
> news:k88m65$e03$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Mentalguy2k8 brought next idea :
>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>> news:k88lgd$9u0$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> Mentalguy2k8 submitted this idea :
>>>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>>>> news:k88kj4$4fd$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> Mentalguy2k8 submitted this idea :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Still not allowed *MY* opinion am I?
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course, you've been posting it all day. But if your opinion
>>>>> is that an article is worthless because you claim that the
>>>>> author is a "talentless comedian" then expect to have it
>>>>> challenged.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you want to take one or more points from the article and
>>>>> challenge them in your own words, go right ahead.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not prepared to debate the musings of a "comedian" who
>>>> resorts to calling people mongs on Twatter.
>>>
>>> Which only makes the pit of hypocrisy you've dug for yourself,
>>> deeper.
>>
>> Why, because I think the guy is an idiot and I don't respect
>> anything he has to offer on the subject? *MY* choice.
>>
>> I am allowed a choice aren't I?
>
> Yes, it's your choice to be a complete hypocrite.
Why don't we study the theological assertions of George Formby for
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course, you've been posting it all day. But if your opinion
>>>>> is that an article is worthless because you claim that the
>>>>> author is a "talentless comedian" then expect to have it
>>>>> challenged.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you want to take one or more points from the article and
>>>>> challenge them in your own words, go right ahead.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not prepared to debate the musings of a "comedian" who
>>>> resorts to calling people mongs on Twatter.
>>>
>>> Which only makes the pit of hypocrisy you've dug for yourself,
>>> deeper.
>>
>> Why, because I think the guy is an idiot and I don't respect
>> anything he has to offer on the subject? *MY* choice.
>>
>> I am allowed a choice aren't I?
>
> Yes, it's your choice to be a complete hypocrite.
instance, would it be relevant to the discussion?
He was a much better comedian than that prick...
Mentalguy2k8
Nov 19, 2012, 5:32:19 AM11/19/12
to
"Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
> Why don't we study the theological assertions of George Formby for
> instance, would it be relevant to the discussion?
>
> He was a much better comedian than that prick...
*any* author on the subject. Hypocrite.
Chuck Spears
Nov 19, 2012, 8:19:40 AM11/19/12
to
"Mentalguy2k8" wrote in message news:k88jp1$usk$1...@dont-email.me...
that something is, is a bit silly. If he said that he had seen absolutely no
evidence that any sort of god existed, that would make a bit more sense. As
for scientific proof, up until 400 years ago, science believed that the
entire universe was made up of only 4 elements.
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 21, 2012, 1:16:11 PM11/21/12
to
Mentalguy2k8 explained :
What is the point of challenging a bigot?
Mentalguy2k8
Nov 21, 2012, 1:22:25 PM11/21/12
to
"Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
challenged about it and made to understand what it means to some people.
Just out of interest, how come you still reply to Scoopex's posts?
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 21, 2012, 1:28:44 PM11/21/12
to
with learning difficulties. Brilliant.
>
> Just out of interest, how come you still reply to Scoopex's posts?
Mentalguy2k8
Nov 21, 2012, 1:41:02 PM11/21/12
to
"Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
No biggie, just getting things straight in my own head.
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 21, 2012, 1:58:51 PM11/21/12
to
Mentalguy2k8 laid this down on his screen :
It was a dig at johnty, nothing to do with scoopex.
Anything else of my business you want to know, just ask.
Anything else of my business you want to know, just ask.
Mentalguy2k8
Nov 21, 2012, 2:02:35 PM11/21/12
to
"Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 21, 2012, 2:20:26 PM11/21/12
to
Mentalguy2k8 formulated the question :
Gervais then that's my prerogative and has nothing to do with you.
I hope that's clear enough for you.
> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
> news:k8j89g$i18$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Mentalguy2k8 laid this down on his screen :
>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>> news:k8j6h1$6q5$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> Mentalguy2k8 wrote on 11/21/2012 :
>>>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>>>> news:k8j5pg$24b$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> Mentalguy2k8 explained :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
> news:k8j89g$i18$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Mentalguy2k8 laid this down on his screen :
>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>> news:k8j6h1$6q5$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> Mentalguy2k8 wrote on 11/21/2012 :
>>>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>>>> news:k8j5pg$24b$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> Mentalguy2k8 explained :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is the point of challenging a bigot?
>>>>>
>>>>> To change their attitudes? Gervais hasn't used the word "mong"
>>>>> since he was challenged about it and made to understand what it
>>>>> means to some people.
>>>>
>>>> Instead he made a "comedy" called Derek, taking the piss out of
>>>> someone with learning difficulties. Brilliant.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Just out of interest, how come you still reply to Scoopex's
>>>>> posts?
>>>>
>>>> You mean like one post in 5 years? LOL
>>>
>>> I thought you refused to spend any time on people who use the word
>>> "mong". No biggie, just getting things straight in my own head.
>>
>> It was a dig at johnty, nothing to do with scoopex.
>>
>> Anything else of my business you want to know, just ask.
>
> Not really, but thanks. I think I've learned all I need to.
Yes, I choose who I reply to and not you. If I choose not to comment on
>>>>>
>>>>> To change their attitudes? Gervais hasn't used the word "mong"
>>>>> since he was challenged about it and made to understand what it
>>>>> means to some people.
>>>>
>>>> Instead he made a "comedy" called Derek, taking the piss out of
>>>> someone with learning difficulties. Brilliant.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Just out of interest, how come you still reply to Scoopex's
>>>>> posts?
>>>>
>>>> You mean like one post in 5 years? LOL
>>>
>>> I thought you refused to spend any time on people who use the word
>>> "mong". No biggie, just getting things straight in my own head.
>>
>> It was a dig at johnty, nothing to do with scoopex.
>>
>> Anything else of my business you want to know, just ask.
>
> Not really, but thanks. I think I've learned all I need to.
Gervais then that's my prerogative and has nothing to do with you.
I hope that's clear enough for you.
Mentalguy2k8
Nov 21, 2012, 2:28:21 PM11/21/12
to
"Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>>
>>> Anything else of my business you want to know, just ask.
>>
>> Not really, but thanks. I think I've learned all I need to.
>
>
> Yes, I choose who I reply to and not you. If I choose not to comment on
> Gervais then that's my prerogative and has nothing to do with you.
We now have a precedent for ignoring any or all arguments that we're not
equipped to counter.
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 21, 2012, 2:29:47 PM11/21/12
to
Mentalguy2k8 pretended :
Bullshit. It's not my argument.
Mentalguy2k8
Nov 21, 2012, 2:33:24 PM11/21/12
to
"Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
otherwise.
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 21, 2012, 2:53:59 PM11/21/12
to
Mentalguy2k8 presented the following explanation :
Ricky Gervais is a global megastar with 3.5 million followers on
Twitter and like scoopex, prefers to take the piss out of mentally and
physically handicapped people. I dislike Gervais and take anything he
says as contemptible.
So, because I indirectly made a dig at johnty through a scoopex reply
(1 in 5 years), I am a hypocrite because I won't reply to Gervais's
bullshit but will scoopex's?
LOL
You're seriously having a laugh mate.
That's
Twitter and like scoopex, prefers to take the piss out of mentally and
physically handicapped people. I dislike Gervais and take anything he
says as contemptible.
So, because I indirectly made a dig at johnty through a scoopex reply
(1 in 5 years), I am a hypocrite because I won't reply to Gervais's
bullshit but will scoopex's?
LOL
You're seriously having a laugh mate.
That's
Mentalguy2k8
Nov 21, 2012, 2:57:32 PM11/21/12
to
"Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 21, 2012, 3:15:15 PM11/21/12
to
Mentalguy2k8 has brought this to us :
correcting you. Is that allowed?
> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
> news:k8jbgs$86r$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Mentalguy2k8 presented the following explanation :
>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>> news:k8ja3g$to2$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> Mentalguy2k8 pretended :
>>>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>>>> news:k8j9hv$qad$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
> news:k8jbgs$86r$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Mentalguy2k8 presented the following explanation :
>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>> news:k8ja3g$to2$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> Mentalguy2k8 pretended :
>>>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>>>> news:k8j9hv$qad$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I choose who I reply to and not you. If I choose not to
>>>>>> comment on Gervais then that's my prerogative and has nothing
>>>>>> to do with you.
>>>>>
>>>>> No problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> We now have a precedent for ignoring any or all arguments that
>>>>> we're not equipped to counter.
>>>>
>>>> Bullshit. It's not my argument.
>>>
>>> A dozen replies in this thread alone on the subject tends to
>>> suggest otherwise.
>>
>> Ricky Gervais is a global megastar with 3.5 million followers on
>> Twitter and like scoopex, prefers to take the piss out of mentally
>> and physically handicapped people. I dislike Gervais and take
>> anything he says as contemptible.
>>
>> So, because I indirectly made a dig at johnty through a scoopex
>> reply (1 in 5 years), I am a hypocrite because I won't reply to
>> Gervais's bullshit but will scoopex's?
>
> Calm down dear, what's done is done.
You seem to be the one trying to take issue with it, not me. I'm just
>>>>>> comment on Gervais then that's my prerogative and has nothing
>>>>>> to do with you.
>>>>>
>>>>> No problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> We now have a precedent for ignoring any or all arguments that
>>>>> we're not equipped to counter.
>>>>
>>>> Bullshit. It's not my argument.
>>>
>>> A dozen replies in this thread alone on the subject tends to
>>> suggest otherwise.
>>
>> Ricky Gervais is a global megastar with 3.5 million followers on
>> Twitter and like scoopex, prefers to take the piss out of mentally
>> and physically handicapped people. I dislike Gervais and take
>> anything he says as contemptible.
>>
>> So, because I indirectly made a dig at johnty through a scoopex
>> reply (1 in 5 years), I am a hypocrite because I won't reply to
>> Gervais's bullshit but will scoopex's?
>
> Calm down dear, what's done is done.
correcting you. Is that allowed?
Mentalguy2k8
Nov 21, 2012, 3:18:52 PM11/21/12
to
"Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 21, 2012, 3:29:29 PM11/21/12
to
Mentalguy2k8 expressed precisely :
Absorb.
> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
> news:k8jcoo$hdr$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Mentalguy2k8 has brought this to us :
>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>> news:k8jbgs$86r$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> Mentalguy2k8 presented the following explanation :
>>>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>>>> news:k8ja3g$to2$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> Mentalguy2k8 pretended :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
> news:k8jcoo$hdr$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Mentalguy2k8 has brought this to us :
>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>> news:k8jbgs$86r$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> Mentalguy2k8 presented the following explanation :
>>>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>>>> news:k8ja3g$to2$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> Mentalguy2k8 pretended :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bullshit. It's not my argument.
>>>>>
>>>>> A dozen replies in this thread alone on the subject tends to
>>>>> suggest otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> Ricky Gervais is a global megastar with 3.5 million followers on
>>>> Twitter and like scoopex, prefers to take the piss out of
>>>> mentally and physically handicapped people. I dislike Gervais and
>>>> take anything he says as contemptible.
>>>>
>>>> So, because I indirectly made a dig at johnty through a scoopex
>>>> reply (1 in 5 years), I am a hypocrite because I won't reply to
>>>> Gervais's bullshit but will scoopex's?
>>>
>>> Calm down dear, what's done is done.
>>
>> You seem to be the one trying to take issue with it, not me. I'm
>> just correcting you. Is that allowed?
>
> Sshhh, it's over now.
Feeling embarrassed now? I understand.
>>>>>
>>>>> A dozen replies in this thread alone on the subject tends to
>>>>> suggest otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> Ricky Gervais is a global megastar with 3.5 million followers on
>>>> Twitter and like scoopex, prefers to take the piss out of
>>>> mentally and physically handicapped people. I dislike Gervais and
>>>> take anything he says as contemptible.
>>>>
>>>> So, because I indirectly made a dig at johnty through a scoopex
>>>> reply (1 in 5 years), I am a hypocrite because I won't reply to
>>>> Gervais's bullshit but will scoopex's?
>>>
>>> Calm down dear, what's done is done.
>>
>> You seem to be the one trying to take issue with it, not me. I'm
>> just correcting you. Is that allowed?
>
> Sshhh, it's over now.
Absorb.
Mentalguy2k8
Nov 21, 2012, 3:37:46 PM11/21/12
to
"Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
Pakistan Cricket Scam
Nov 21, 2012, 5:53:51 PM11/21/12
to
After serious thinking Mentalguy2k8 wrote :
HTH
> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
> news:k8jdje$mmk$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Mentalguy2k8 expressed precisely :
>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>> news:k8jcoo$hdr$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> Mentalguy2k8 has brought this to us :
>>>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>>>> news:k8jbgs$86r$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> Mentalguy2k8 presented the following explanation :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
> news:k8jdje$mmk$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Mentalguy2k8 expressed precisely :
>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>> news:k8jcoo$hdr$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> Mentalguy2k8 has brought this to us :
>>>>> "Pakistan Cricket Scam" <P...@SIBU.HQ> wrote in message
>>>>> news:k8jbgs$86r$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> Mentalguy2k8 presented the following explanation :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ricky Gervais is a global megastar with 3.5 million followers
>>>>>> on Twitter and like scoopex, prefers to take the piss out of
>>>>>> mentally and physically handicapped people. I dislike Gervais
>>>>>> and take anything he says as contemptible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, because I indirectly made a dig at johnty through a scoopex
>>>>>> reply (1 in 5 years), I am a hypocrite because I won't reply to
>>>>>> Gervais's bullshit but will scoopex's?
>>>>>
>>>>> Calm down dear, what's done is done.
>>>>
>>>> You seem to be the one trying to take issue with it, not me. I'm
>>>> just correcting you. Is that allowed?
>>>
>>> Sshhh, it's over now.
>>
>> Feeling embarrassed now? I understand.
>
> And so you should. Hypocrite.
You act like a petulant little girl.
>>>>>> on Twitter and like scoopex, prefers to take the piss out of
>>>>>> mentally and physically handicapped people. I dislike Gervais
>>>>>> and take anything he says as contemptible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, because I indirectly made a dig at johnty through a scoopex
>>>>>> reply (1 in 5 years), I am a hypocrite because I won't reply to
>>>>>> Gervais's bullshit but will scoopex's?
>>>>>
>>>>> Calm down dear, what's done is done.
>>>>
>>>> You seem to be the one trying to take issue with it, not me. I'm
>>>> just correcting you. Is that allowed?
>>>
>>> Sshhh, it's over now.
>>
>> Feeling embarrassed now? I understand.
>
> And so you should. Hypocrite.
HTH
0 new messages