Cathedral To Demand Sony Apology

[DjDan]

oh come on, I've just been through this with Mr Sausages. It's quite clear what he said, and he has well acknowledged that. Stop trying to drag this out and change his words to try and make it look like I'm a "bit dim" as if to fit into your pathetic equation ---> 'he who believes in God must be a bit dim'.

have to say, love the little "as in" bit. 'Yes, he really said ....... but what he really meant was ..........' LOL

 

The questions still good and valid to the discussion no matter how you want to dance around it: What non-religious organisation has ever made a similar complaint?

 

I agree. The question is good and valid.... now that it has been changed.

 

and have you really, really seen the nonsense I believe? I doubt you'd have a clue.

 

I have seen the nonsense you believe, a bunch of very flakey tosh about someone discovering a set of golden plates. As religions go, the mormon one isn't even an interesting story. If you're going to make shit up like that, might as well make it funny like the scientologist stuff.

 

well you do humour me. "As religions go, the mormon one isn't even an interesting story" as religions go... how many others have a more interesting story than that??? Anyway.. i wouldn't expect much more from people who know so little.

[Mr. Sausages]

oh come on, I've just been through this with Mr Sausages. It's quite clear what he said, and he has well acknowledged that. Stop trying to drag this out and change his words to try and make it look like I'm a "bit dim" as if to fit into your pathetic equation ---> 'he who believes in God must be a bit dim'.

have to say, love the little "as in" bit. 'Yes, he really said ....... but what he really meant was ..........' LOL

 

The questions still good and valid to the discussion no matter how you want to dance around it: What non-religious organisation has ever made a similar complaint?

 

I agree. The question is good and valid.... now that it has been changed.

Yeah, I made the mistake of crediting you with enough intelligence to understand the context of the question in relation to the previous posts in the thread. Thankfully, everyone else seems to have managed it.

 

Little hint: Read between the lines if you don't want to look stupid.

 

You might want to try it when you read the bible, too (or whatever scripture your leaders have brainwashed you with).

 

Unless you're autistic, in which case I apologise.

[Pat Ayres]

Surely your view of the church as being 'one church' with only one deity means it is your church, just cos it's getting away from you don't change horses now.

 

surely you are misrepresenting me here?

 

I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints. This is an issue to do with the Church of England.

 

That's a different church.

That's not my church.

 

So, Mormons aren't christians?

[DjDan]

 

I agree. The question is good and valid.... now that it has been changed.

Yeah, I made the mistake of crediting you with enough intelligence to understand the context of the question in relation to the previous posts in the thread. Thankfully, everyone else seems to have managed it.

 

 

you made the mistake of not simply saying "sorry dj_dan, what i meant to say was - when has some non-religious organisation made such a complaint" - and I would have responded something like "alright mate. nevermind then". Whole discussion over.

 

you're [continued] mistake is that you couldn't simply accept that you phrased your question wrongly, and immediately tried to make out i was stupid for not guessing what you had meant to say (actually... you're still trying to play that card).

 

It's not at all suprising that you have other people jumping onto your side of a non-argument... but it doesn't matter how many people call the colour blue - red! it's still blue.

 

what i love about this forum is how many people will diss me and my postings simply because i'm religious (religious people are stupid, brainwashed fools of course!). What i love more, is when these same people try to pick at something i've said and go on and on about how dumb i was to say such a thing - when yet, i was right in what I said (see this thread for a good example!). Then, being unable to accept that (after being shown quite clearly)... well, the debate turns into something like this one!

 

At least when I am wrong about something.. I have the decency to accept that and apologise where applicable. A nice principle a few on this forum could learn.

[DjDan]

Surely your view of the church as being 'one church' with only one deity means it is your church, just cos it's getting away from you don't change horses now.

 

surely you are misrepresenting me here?

 

I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints. This is an issue to do with the Church of England.

 

That's a different church.

That's not my church.

 

So, Mormons aren't christians?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

is that what I said?

[Mr. Sausages]

You're astonishingly dumb.

[Pat Ayres]

Unlike you I see one church. The differences between you all about "my god is better than your god" are ridiculous. You believe in the same mythical being, surely you would support each other in times of conflict? Or am I wrong?

[Slim]

I agree. The question is good and valid.... now that it has been changed.

 

So are you going to answer it, or just relish in your smugness over the original questions ambiguity?

 

well you do humour me. "As religions go, the mormon one isn't even an interesting story" as religions go... how many others have a more interesting story than that??? Anyway.. i wouldn't expect much more from people who know so little.

 

Are you hard of reading or thinking? I said, the scientology stuffs far more interesting, they have an alien called xeno, far more intresting than a Mr Smith!

 

I know little? What, the LDS church isn't based on a fairly dull and very far fetched story about golden plates?

[DjDan]

You're astonishingly dumb.

 

cheers.

[DjDan]

Unlike you I see one church. The differences between you all about "my god is better than your god" are ridiculous. You believe in the same mythical being, surely you would support each other in times of conflict? Or am I wrong?

 

 

oh i see.... so you're assuming i must be part of the Church of England because based on your understanding of Christianity, and the thousands and thousands of churches/denominations... you only "see one church".

 

that explains that then.

[DjDan]

I agree. The question is good and valid.... now that it has been changed.

 

So are you going to answer it, or just relish in your smugness over the original questions ambiguity?

 

 

sounds to me like an admission that i was right?

 

well you do humour me. "As religions go, the mormon one isn't even an interesting story" as religions go... how many others have a more interesting story than that??? Anyway.. i wouldn't expect much more from people who know so little.

 

Are you hard of reading or thinking? I said, the scientology stuffs far more interesting, they have an alien called xeno, far more intresting than a Mr Smith!

 

yes... you named one other religion - yet you said "as religions go" - which surely means more than one?

 

I know little? What, the LDS church isn't based on a fairly dull and very far fetched story about golden plates?

 

the 'gold plates' is one fact about the church yes..... but in comparrison to everything else that makes up the church and what it stands for.... yes, that is very little!!!

[Slim]

sounds to me like an admission that i was right?

 

I dont give a toss about the hair splitting, I'd just like an answer to the question.

 

yes... you named one other religion - yet you said "as religions go" - which surely means more than one?

 

My god, how can someone so pedantic believe the bollocks in the book of mormon?

 

the 'gold plates' is one fact about the church yes..... but in comparrison to everything else that makes up the church and what it stands for.... yes, that is very little!!!

 

It's the difference between your church and the others, so that's what I'm picking up on. I actually know plenty about the LDS, I've visited the church many times, and I've no idea why you assume I know nothing about something who's teachings are so public.

[feelslikeitshould]

Dan, you should go and live in America, where you religion was born, and live in blissful ignorance with the God-fearing simpleton majority. Go on, they'd welcome you with open arms!!

 

You can visit places like this, how much fun and education can you handle in one go!? w00t! Particular favourites of mine are the AIDs causing gays and the famines caused by sin, oh when will these starving Africans learn?

 

And for those of you who live in the real world, this is what we're missing, kind of explains the whole 're-electing Dubya' incident....I feel sorry for the small percentage of reasonable Americans.

[DjDan]

Slim, if you knew a great deal about my church as you suppose, you'd at least credit it to be "interesting". That's my point here. To say it's not even "interesting" really does suggest you know very little.

[Mr. Sausages]

I agree. The question is good and valid.... now that it has been changed.

 

So are you going to answer it, or just relish in your smugness over the original questions ambiguity?

 

 

sounds to me like an admission that i was right?

 

It's an admission, that I've already made, that you took the question completely out of context (your previous post referred to businesses and individuals, which led to my question let's not forget) and are ignoring the issue that the thread was created to discuss.

 

That point of semantics is obviously far more important to you than the actual issue. This is one of the problems with religious people. As soon as they're asked to substantiate their arguments they try to turn the debate onto irrelevant semantics, and convince themselves that everybody who dares to question them is being unreasonable due to not being enlightened.