Hotels Replacing Bibles With "Intimacy Kits"

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 18:20:42 -0500, Brian wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 12:46:17 +1030, Michael Gray
wrote:


I agree.
Perhaps you should read one before spouting off on another tangent.

It's interesting how bitter and nasty militant atheists seem to be.

What a strange, illogical, response. Or lack of.

--Regards, Curly
================================================== ===========================
http://tinyurl.com/nrqzw
================================================== ===========================

I agree.
Perhaps you should read one before spouting off on another tangent.

It's interesting how bitter and nasty militant atheists seem to be.

What a strange, illogical, response. Or lack of.

Of course. Only religious people can be militant zealots. Athiests are
completely immune to such disturbances!

Phlip wrote in message
...
I agree.
Perhaps you should read one before spouting off on another tangent.

It's interesting how bitter and nasty militant atheists seem to be.

What a strange, illogical, response. Or lack of.

Of course. Only religious people can be militant zealots. Athiests are
completely immune to such disturbances!

Nobody is perfect, an athiest can be a total ****, same as anyone else. But
it does become rather boring when a rather mild mannered response to a piece
of irrelevancy gets characterised as bitter and nasty militant athiesm.

But what is likely to recieve a 'bitter and nasty militant athiest' response
is the continual cross-posting of religious nonsense into alt.athiesm,
which, I think you will agree, is probably the intent when doing so. That
such 'bitter and nasty militant athiest' response are actually quite rare
reflects a damn sight better on atheists than on the deity-inspired
cross-posters.

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 18:46:01 -0800, Phlip wrote:

I agree.
Perhaps you should read one before spouting off on another tangent.

It's interesting how bitter and nasty militant atheists seem to be.

What a strange, illogical, response. Or lack of.

Of course. Only religious people can be militant zealots. Athiests are
completely immune to such disturbances!

More illogic, proving my point.

--Regards, Curly
================================================== ===========================
http://tinyurl.com/nrqzw
================================================== ===========================

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 18:20:42 -0500, Brian
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 12:46:17 +1030, Michael Gray
wrote:


I agree.
Perhaps you should read one before spouting off on another tangent.

It's interesting how bitter and nasty militant atheists seem to be.

Another base canard from the blatant liar.
I expect that you would have remarked apon how "angry" & "nasty" Rosa
Parks was for refusin' to move to the back of the bus?

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 18:46:01 -0800, "Phlip" wrote:

I agree.
Perhaps you should read one before spouting off on another tangent.

It's interesting how bitter and nasty militant atheists seem to be.

What a strange, illogical, response. Or lack of.

Of course. Only religious people can be militant zealots. Athiests are
completely immune to such disturbances!

Another nasty and thoroughly childish response from a theist.
And several logical fallacies at that:
* The straw man
* The false dichotomy

When your irrational faith, and your sheer nastiness against reality
is confronted, you mental midgets come with all lies blazing, don't
you?

And you seem to fail to appreciate just how infantile your arguments
actually are.

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 20:40:01 -0800, Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 18:46:01 -0800, Phlip wrote:

I agree.
Perhaps you should read one before spouting off on another tangent.

It's interesting how bitter and nasty militant atheists seem to be.

What a strange, illogical, response. Or lack of.

Of course. Only religious people can be militant zealots. Athiests are
completely immune to such disturbances!

More illogic, proving my point.

It is astounding just how illogical their mind-virus renders them.

Michael Gray wrote:

Of course. Only religious people can be militant zealots. Athiests are
completely immune to such disturbances!

Another nasty and thoroughly childish response from a theist.

If I claimed to not be a theist, you would start ranting about your _belief_
that I am...

It's all about them beliefs, huh? (-;

Michael Gray wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 18:20:42 -0500, Brian
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 12:46:17 +1030, Michael Gray
wrote:


I agree.
Perhaps you should read one before spouting off on another tangent.
It's interesting how bitter and nasty militant atheists seem to be.

Another base canard from the blatant liar.
I expect that you would have remarked apon how "angry" & "nasty" Rosa
Parks was for refusin' to move to the back of the bus?

But... but here in this post you are defending me, but in the other post, using
essentially the same rhetoric, you were _attacking_ me!

Maybe you just like attacking!

On Dec 5, 6:20 pm, Brian wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 12:46:17 +1030, Michael Gray

wrote:
I agree.
Perhaps you should read one before spouting off on another tangent.

It's interesting how bitter and nasty militant atheists seem to be.

(Yawn)

PDW