Show that there is *religiously* motivated violence

spidergoat said:
They actually allowed you on an airplane?
Click to expand...

Gladly let Me on the plane . I sexually verbally stimulated the flight attendants before I got on . It was something to see . Special privileges . The little Asian beauty came over to Me and offered Me an extra sandwich . No one else except the other 2 guys in my row after I refused or said no thanks . They said " You can get us an extra sandwich . So she did . The whisper of sweet nothings in your ear takes on a whole new definition fellas . It has to be the oppression of woman by church doctrine that makes this so . Woman wanting wanting to come out and play, but suppressed by church dogma of woman can't do that . It is bad .

AS far as mind raping nuns . They were willing . I did not force them to squirm on them selves . They liked it too. They were some mighty big smiles at the end of Mass that day .
Now I found something to be strange . One of the nuns went in with the Father when he changed close . I am not a Catholic so I don't know what transpired in the back room . I am guessing she took off his robe . Is that formality that someone take off the Fathers robe after Mass ?

The thing about hypnosis is you have to believe what you say . You have to say it with conviction like there is no shadow of doubt . If there is doubt the subject will challenge you and be free of any suggestions . Like people that can't be hypnotized . They got there wall up of you will not hypnosis me and chances are they are right . Willing subjects are the easiest to hypnosis . They subordinate to the idea of you hypnotizing them. Now with the whisper and strong conviction in what you say even the most hardens of non believers are subject to the suggestions . It acts just like the God Language they live by just by being human conditioned . The suggestion falls out of the sky so to speak , or they think they came up with the idea on there own . Not knowing they influenced by there surroundings . Is this wrong of Me to exploit ? Is it a mind fuck? Do we mind fuck each other every day all day just by communicating . I think so . That is what lead Me to this point in the first place . It was all the people that mind fuck me in to being there subordinate . Waking up to the fact they were doing it to me was my real crime . Now that I have the higher ground on the issue and have learned to fuck back and make them happy campers when I do does that make Me the bad guy . Na I say . I am gentle still . That is the only reason it has any affect . They like being stimulated I say . Like rubbing a dogs belly
 
Me-Ki-Gal said:
Gladly let Me on the plane . I sexually verbally stimulated the flight attendants before I got on . It was something to see . Special privileges . The little Asian beauty came over to Me and offered Me an extra sandwich . No one else except the other 2 guys in my row after I refused or said no thanks . They said " You can get us an extra sandwich . So she did . The whisper of sweet nothings in your ear takes on a whole new definition fellas . It has to be the oppression of woman by church doctrine that makes this so . Woman wanting wanting to come out and play, but suppressed by church dogma of woman can't do that . It is bad .

AS far as mind raping nuns . They were willing . I did not force them to squirm on them selves . They liked it too. They were some mighty big smiles at the end of Mass that day .
Now I found something to be strange . One of the nuns went in with the Father when he changed close . I am not a Catholic so I don't know what transpired in the back room . I am guessing she took off his robe . Is that formality that someone take off the Fathers robe after Mass ?

The thing about hypnosis is you have to believe what you say . You have to say it with conviction like there is no shadow of doubt . If there is doubt the subject will challenge you and be free of any suggestions . Like people that can't be hypnotized . They got there wall up of you will not hypnosis me and chances are they are right . Willing subjects are the easiest to hypnosis . They subordinate to the idea of you hypnotizing them. Now with the whisper and strong conviction in what you say even the most hardens of non believers are subject to the suggestions . It acts just like the God Language they live by just by being human conditioned . The suggestion falls out of the sky so to speak , or they think they came up with the idea on there own . Not knowing they influenced by there surroundings . Is this wrong of Me to exploit ? Is it a mind fuck? Do we mind fuck each other every day all day just by communicating . I think so . That is what lead Me to this point in the first place . It was all the people that mind fuck me in to being there subordinate . Waking up to the fact they were doing it to me was my real crime . Now that I have the higher ground on the issue and have learned to fuck back and make them happy campers when I do does that make Me the bad guy . Na I say . I am gentle still . That is the only reason it has any affect . They like being stimulated I say . Like rubbing a dogs belly
Click to expand...

Can you suggest some books or videos to actually learn about and practice this kind of hypnosis?
 
Me-Ki-Gal:

Your latest posts seem to have no relevance to the thread topic.

Also, please review the site rules on sexual content.
 
James R said:
Me-Ki-Gal:

Your latest posts seem to have no relevance to the thread topic.

Also, please review the site rules on sexual content.
Click to expand...

Ermm.. I think he's either high or out of his mind.

I'm with Spidergoat. I'm surprised they actually let him on a plane.
 
spidergoat said:
Don't you think science can play a part in determining if these tales are real?
Click to expand...

No, but that may be just becuase of how I define a fairytale, which is to say something already determined not to be real.

For example, you might argue that science should investigate the characteristics of an undiscovered species of bear which can speak english, sleeps in a human style bed and has highly specific requirements for the consistancy of it's porridge.

In response I would argue that science is unable to deal with that because there is is no supporting evidence with which to work, and no reason to think that such a creature exists. Science might be able to shed some light on the history or psychology of the fairytale, but that's about it. Perhaps you define fairytales differently, so maybe that doesn't apply to your definition of fairytales.
 
dafug?

Bells said:
I reported your post because I found it personally and professionally insulting and was tantamount to defamation. I am sure that James will have read the exchange in full and not just the reported text. I have not discussed this with him or with anyone else, nor in the back room, as I am sure they wil attest if you ask them. My dealings with you on this matter is as a member who feels you are attacking something I hold fundamentally dear and have spent years and years on this forum fighting against, not to mention the better part of my adult life fighting against.
Click to expand...

Not to dig up an old issue, but I was reading this exchange again and I noticed that I never actually asked for clarification on this ages back: sorry, what it is I'm attacking that you've supposedly held fundamentally dear?

And as I showed, I provided links to show your level of obsession about all things Muslims on this forum, including your stance on the so called 'Ground Zero Mosque'.
Click to expand...

Also objecting to the ad hominem accusation of 'obsession' here, and "all things Muslims". Just sayin'. Any proof of this? A retraction would be fine.
 
GeoffP said:
Not to dig up an old issue, but I was reading this exchange again and I noticed that I never actually asked for clarification on this ages back: sorry, what it is I'm attacking that you've supposedly held fundamentally dear?



Also objecting to the ad hominem accusation of 'obsession' here, and "all things Muslims". Just sayin'. Any proof of this? A retraction would be fine.
Click to expand...
Are you bored and spoiling for a fight? Needing attention from me for some weird reason because I have ignored you for months?

If you want to take it up with Admin that you want me to retract something I would have probably said months ago, since the last time I exchanged any real words with you was months ago, you are free to do so.. and good luck with that venture (I'd also suggest you provide them with a link so that they can view the whole exchange - I personally don't even remember what you are talking about even being in this thread, is it?).

And could you leave me alone please? Because this is a tad strange that you pop up, out of the blue, after months of silence from me to you, and demand I retract something from months ago because you are now suddenly offended by it. Either you need to find something better to occupy your time or you need to get out more - because the fact that you are going back and reading our old fights is weird.. So yes, leave me alone please. Respect my right to not have to converse with you unless it is absolutely necessary (ie, when I am doing some moderation that could involve you). Because I do not want to have to speak to you ever again, unless it is absolutely necessary. I believe I made that quite clear a few months ago, which was the last time we actually communicated anything. In other words, stop trying to flame and/or bait me. Okay?

Thank ye kindly.
 
Last edited:
Uh...what?

Bells said:
Are you bored and spoiling for a fight? Needing attention from me for some weird reason because I have ignored you for months?
Click to expand...

?? It's called "WTF...Setting the record straight, chief."

If you want to take it up with Admin that you want me to retract something I would have probably said months ago, since the last time I exchanged any real words with you was months ago, you are free to do so.. and good luck with that venture (I'd also suggest you provide them with a link so that they can view the whole exchange - I personally don't even remember what you are talking about even being in this thread, is it?).
Click to expand...

Well, I was hoping for a fair exchange, and I'm not going to bother going through the admins.

And could you leave me alone please? Because this is a tad strange that you pop up, out of the blue, after months of silence from me to you, and demand I retract something from months ago because you are now suddenly offended by it. Either you need to find something better to occupy your time or you need to get out more - because the fact that you are going back and reading our old fights is weird.. So yes, leave me alone please. Respect my right to not have to converse with you unless it is absolutely necessary (ie, when I am doing some moderation that could involve you). Because I do not want to have to speak to you ever again, unless it is absolutely necessary. I believe I made that quite clear a few months ago, which was the last time we actually communicated anything. In other words, stop trying to flame and/or bait me. Okay?

Thank ye kindly.
Click to expand...

It's neither that, nor anything else at all you cited. I'm happy for your overarching right to privacy and I even support it, but fair's fair. Nonetheless, I expect you'll let this issue hang, and thus, so be it.
 
GeoffP said:
?? It's called "WTF...Setting the record straight, chief."



Well, I was hoping for a fair exchange, and I'm not going to bother going through the admins.



It's neither that, nor anything else at all you cited. I'm happy for your overarching right to privacy and I even support it, but fair's fair. Nonetheless, I expect you'll let this issue hang, and thus, so be it.
Click to expand...

On this issue, a fair exchange would be for you to go to the Admin GeoffP. This issue was settled in December when we were both made to apologise to each other and retract or face a ban. Or have you forgotten James' demand back then? Why you are going back and reading over our argument way back then, I do not know, nor do I really think I want to know. I have not spoken to you since then. I have had you on ignore for about two months and removed you from my ignore list when you appeared to respect the fact that I did not want to speak to you. Until now.

I do have a right to privacy and I also have a right to not have to retract or explain something that was so many months ago, which had been settled so many months ago, I couldn't even remember what thread it was in. I also have the right to not have to go back over this stupidity after it was settled in December. We are in April now Geoff and if you can't move on so many months later, then maybe you need to find a new hobby.

And I can assure you, had you been any other member, I would have issued you with an infraction for flaming, baiting and trolling. The only reason I have not is because it would give the appearance of a conflict of interest, since you know, this is about a huge brawl you and I had in December and which had been settled in December.

I have referred this to my colleagues and my superiors. Not because I enjoy running to the admin, but because frankly, I don't know what your deal is here and why you are going back over this months later and bringing it up again when it had already been settled. Whether they act on it is up to them. I have made it clear to you and to them that I really don't want to have anything to do with you at all. I don't want to read your posts, I don't want to have to speak to you and I also do not want to have to be made to rehash something from December, which had been settled in December, and now made to explain everything to you again and retract again. If you weren't happy with the first apology and retraction back then, take it up with James. Not with me.

I repeat GeoffP. I do not want to speak to you, have to read your posts and be made to respond to you. I do not want to have anything to do with you at all. I do not know how I can make that any clearer to you. If my not speaking to you and ignoring you for four months is not a clear enough indication to you, then I don't really know what is. However here you are going back through our fight back in December and demanding my attention to it and here I am having to cater to.. this.. I don't even know what this is, Geoff, as the only words I could use to describe this would amount to you feeling bored and demanding my attention, which frankly is a tad nauseating to me. While you may be demanding a "fair exchange", I made myself clear months ago, through these months and now. I do not want to have any kind of exchange with you. So go away and leave me alone. Are we clear now?
 
Already told you: I figured I'd get no fair response out of it. I walked, you're still on it. I don't know if it springs from some awakened desire for a fight, and I don't care. Your apology didn't cover this, and I didn't notice it, which is why I was pissed off. Go ahead and issue an infraction for flaming if you want; but you won't, because you know perfectly well it's not anything of the kind.

I could not possibly care less about your interpretations of my comment - "cater", "demanding my attention", and the other bouts of narcissism stand out - because I know better than to assign them any reason or weight. If you don't want to talk to me - and I assure you, I prefer to avoid your contact also - then you may walk free, conscience clean. Bon voyage.
 
Hmm. What is the justification for stoning to death girls who break social taboos in many muslim lands? What is the justification for bombing abortion clinics?
 
BWE1 said:
Hmm. What is the justification for stoning to death girls who break social taboos in many muslim lands? What is the justification for bombing abortion clinics?
Click to expand...

What is the justification for maintaining an economic system that grossly exploits people and natural resources?
 
I will try to make it an more direct question. Why do they stone girls to death for premarital sex or for being raped? Not why culturally, but where do they point to to justify it? Is it the secular legal code which demands the punishment and defines the crime? Is it just a thing that people do in some parts of the world? Or do people say that it is justified because the holy word of whoever says that that is what they must do?

Because, if God is angry, that's bad. Right? Take it up with God. He made the rules. Right?

Not saying that killing is likely if someone doesn't think someone else needs killing anyway. I agree that religion should be tolerated. But religious justification for forcing an individual will on another is not something you've never encountered.

A few hundred years ago it was serious doings all over the world. Now it is mostly confined to the most economically exploited and depressed areas of the world. But not entirely. Google some variation of "kill liberals" and you will see an awful lot of language which references the God business. They might be mad for some other reason, but religion tells them where to point the finger when it comes time to figure out who to blame.
 
BWE1 said:
I will try to make it an more direct question. Why do they stone girls to death for premarital sex or for being raped? Not why culturally, but where do they point to to justify it? Is it the secular legal code which demands the punishment and defines the crime? Is it just a thing that people do in some parts of the world? Or do people say that it is justified because the holy word of whoever says that that is what they must do?

Because, if God is angry, that's bad. Right? Take it up with God. He made the rules. Right?

Not saying that killing is likely if someone doesn't think someone else needs killing anyway. I agree that religion should be tolerated. But religious justification for forcing an individual will on another is not something you've never encountered.

A few hundred years ago it was serious doings all over the world. Now it is mostly confined to the most economically exploited and depressed areas of the world. But not entirely. Google some variation of "kill liberals" and you will see an awful lot of language which references the God business. They might be mad for some other reason, but religion tells them where to point the finger when it comes time to figure out who to blame.
Click to expand...

This has been discussed in this thread already, several times over.
 
BWE1 said:
I will try to make it an more direct question. Why do they stone girls to death for premarital sex or for being raped? Not why culturally, but where do they point to to justify it? Is it the secular legal code which demands the punishment and defines the crime? Is it just a thing that people do in some parts of the world? Or do people say that it is justified because the holy word of whoever says that that is what they must do?

Because, if God is angry, that's bad. Right? Take it up with God. He made the rules. Right?

Not saying that killing is likely if someone doesn't think someone else needs killing anyway. I agree that religion should be tolerated. But religious justification for forcing an individual will on another is not something you've never encountered.

A few hundred years ago it was serious doings all over the world. Now it is mostly confined to the most economically exploited and depressed areas of the world. But not entirely. Google some variation of "kill liberals" and you will see an awful lot of language which references the God business. They might be mad for some other reason, but religion tells them where to point the finger when it comes time to figure out who to blame.
Click to expand...
I guess the problem with this argument is that religion also forces individuals to refrain from such acts ... even from within the same branches of theism. For instance you can find early colonial christian arguments for slavery ... and you find that the successors who abolish these ideas are also early colonial christians.

IOW its not as simple as people doing whatever god instructs ... its about people having a host of social/cultural/economic/political reasons for doing something and appealing to the highest social authority (regardless whether it happens to be religious or some atheist spin on communism or eugenics) to justify it.

And its also not as simple as suggesting that it is inherently wrong to impose one's ideas on others (since even that suggestion fails by its own standard)

Whether such actions are representative of "actual" religion, communism, eugenics or whatever is a slightly different point of discussion.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top