Total posts: 2,869
Posted in:
Sure, I'm always into hearing beginner/intermediate players working on material. I took the song writing course at Berkley, highly recommended.
Lol, I've been playing since I was 14, would you like to share something you've played with all your hard work at Berkley? I'd love to see and hear it...I'm not a beginner, not even close and that's why I probably didn't want to share the song at first. It actually was a simple jingle.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
That's interesting, I've never been a real Neil Young fan but yeah good ear. Only you should be able to recognize my uniqueness since in FACT I did not rip anyone off, never even heard the song. Perhaps you would like my more rock driven music.
Created:
Posted in:
Never heard it but I'll check it out. The chords I was using are very usable.....knockin on heavens door....ect ect….G/D/C...it's a simple progression.
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Posted in:
Post your favorite Gospel tunes here!
Wow lol, here's an old Gospel jingle I found recently that I wrote years ago I did for a quick video, someone posted it on FB. I've written many songs and recorded many tracks but this is one of only two videos I have currently, I may have some on Myspace too. Anyways not that much to it, and not that detailed perhaps I'll post some new stuff and more involved guitar playing. I'm more of a guitar slinger and rocker but just for fun I thought I post it for anyone interested in Gospel tunes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
However, baiting others is also not acceptable behavior.
Lol, then that is something you and your boy will have to correct.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
Sorry, but no gods or God has ever been shown to exist. There is no Good News or Truth that has been shown to exist other than in books of myth and superstition.
You like to use word play, God/gods have surely been "shown" to exist through many, many years of observation and corresponding sources. Your word play is "shown", because now you can play and pretend from which source is legit in "showing" that gods exist. It's a dirty play, you know darn well that testimonial evidence and theistic knowledge have been more than shown to exist, there isn't even a close runner up of any topic of discussion that's been more shown to exist. What you wish to do, is claim only one limited source of knowledge (science) and use that foul play to support your ignorant claim, however science (the study of the NATURAL world) is incompetent to "show" anything outside the "physical" world to exist and so the claim is inferior and immature. But nice try, "books of myth and superstition" is your opinion not a fact.
Show me God and I'll reconsider.
All knowledge is at your finger tips. All observation comes through participation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
Where was I not calm? if you guys have nothing to add to the topic you're trolls.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
Mopac, I must say I respect you for asking questions on this topic, it is VERY refreshing to see that here rather than the usual faith based denials. Keep at it and you'll do very well! Kudos!
If you're attempting to target Theists why is this in the science forum?
If you wish to argue this against creation then you will have to show how evolution is not compatible with the PROCESS of creating things. That is precisely what creation means, it's a process.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
This video presents an excellent case on why Jews do not believe in JesusSummary
- The Messiah will be purely human - not God;
- Jesus did not fulfill the Messianic requirements;
- Jesus did not fulfill any of the Messianic prophecies;
- Jesus led people away from the Torah instead of towards it; and
- The concept of the Trinity is completely foreign to Judaism.
You'll have to ask Virtuoso troll. Lol, bye bye.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
That wasn't an argument, try again. Offer something or go play with Ethan.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Jesus didn't even need any scriptures proclaiming or supporting that He was the Messiah, it's obvious in His example, legacy and the accuracy of His spirituality that He indeed fulfilled the role of a Messiah.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
I haven't examined your link yet, I'll reply to your summary.....
Let's pretend the Jews have no reason to believe Jesus is/was the Messiah, but do they need to reject the example and teachings of Jesus of the Gospels, why would they not believe or support any spiritual principle Jesus taught? IMO Jesus resurfaced the face of the Jews religious beliefs single-handedly, and appropriately allowing for much more truth and freedom. Next question (perhaps to Jews), who was that "Messiah" the Jews believe in and whom will fill those shoes besides Jesus? Lol I mean it's pretty obvious Jesus was the promised DELIVERER, that's what Messiah means. The name of Jesus is hardly anything to not recognize as a Messiah.
The Messiah will be purely human - not God;
Jesus' body WAS purely human, however His soul and message was that of God's own. Jesus actually hardly ever went around proclaiming He was God, rather always spoke of the Father, and when He was questioned He said Him and the Father were one, that's true if you understand unity on a spiritual level.
Jesus did not fulfill the Messianic requirements;
Really lol? you mean He may not have fulfilled a few misconceptions?
Jesus did not fulfill any of the Messianic prophecies;
Ouch, that's entirely not true and if it were, we wouldn't have anything to consider in this topic. Jesus would have never been acclaimed Messiah.
Jesus led people away from the Torah instead of towards it; and
Deliverer not supporter.
The concept of the Trinity is completely foreign to Judaism.
Not that the concept of the Trinity is not Christian doctrine, but can you show where Jesus uses that term? if Jesus did not use that term perhaps He meant something different....however, the so-called Trinity also lies in the understanding of unity. Unity binds things together as one unit and one purpose.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Accusing me of being
That's your favorite pastime.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Only creationists believe that animals/birds just poofed into existence
Lie much? it's the atheists that deny the Creator in the process of things (which is absurd), not creationists. Nice try though Disgusting.
Created:
BTW in my answer, I was using "agnostic" as a neutral position not one that was chosen..... duh.
Agnostic-
"a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God."
Babies ARE NOT atheists, that is a chosen proposition. But how can you possibly know the intuition of any given child or baby? intuition does not need to be expounded on or reflected it on, it just understands.
Intuition-
"the ability to understand something immediately, without the need for conscious reasoning."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
Anyone who says they know what God is... are a bald faced liar.
Yet you know exactly what God is through your direct experience. God can be nothing else but what you portray as consciousness on a mini scale, your first hand experience mimics that which is "God" by nature. Sweet dreams precious little atheist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
It makes more sense to me than a finite route. In part bc i can also answer the infinite regress problem from my metaphysical belief's point of view. Bc metaphysically i also believe intelligence/consciousness is infinite and that answers why there is no infinite regress problem plus other things about life.
Please be a little more specific about how an infinite cosmos solves the infinite regress problem. Is it simply turtles all the way down?
Not infinite cosmos, rather infinite consciousness/intelligence. This is as far back to the wall reality goes, it stops at the wall of conscious awareness just like your own observation point. In Theistic terms awareness (spirit, God whatever you wish to label it) is an eternal, infinite reality out of which all creation and life arose and which all will return. It solves infinite regression because you cannot go any further than consciousness, it was and always will be, there is no regression from the conscious state nothing came before it, nothing created it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Do not be confused, I would live forever and absolutely demolish any who would stand in the way of my progression in becoming God.
Well that's the spirit lol, only you are what you are, you don't have to demolish anyone only learn to transcend that which is an obstacle of your progression. You are an individualization of the All in a dualistic environment as with everyone else, becoming that which first projected you is to surrender that which is not God, that which hinders such a progression.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
Should I wait while you attempt to understand what I wrote or will the universe end before that ever happens? I have idea what you're rambling about. Learn to use the English language, please.
Lol, I'll wait here while you materialize that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
My consciousness will end when my brain dies or is damaged beyond all repair via trauma.
And so will energy and electricity end when some machinery or object dies. Not. Nice assertion though.
Your fantasies of higher realms and what you claim to know are all delusions in your head. Everyone knows this except you. That's why your posts are always referred to as delusional. The rest is just incoherent gibberish.
Everyone? could you produce a list please? thanks. Not my fantasies, but nice try old man.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
I've even observed you to copy/paste definitions from Dictionaries in your posts and then immediately turn around and ignore them for your own personal made up definition of the same word. The meaning of consciousnesses has been and continues to be a perfect example of that. You completely ignore the definition in order to make up your own definition
Lol, I'll wait here while you materialize that.
As we can see yet again, you're very confused and have no idea what a Dictionary is used. It's a book of reference.
That's what was said.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
Living forever would be totally awesome.
Buckle up boy, you're going to find that out when your consciousness leaves the physical body....too bad you were always unwilling to accept those who knew such things, you only had mockery and insults yet you wished it to be true. Sad really, it is true and you think it's absurd. It's okay in all honesty, you will find out one way or the other, the only problem is you will not know what's going on and where you are going, you only mocked those that understood the truth and never desired to learn, therefore you will be clueless. You won't get to traverse the higher realms, you will have to reincarnate til you actually get it, and stop with the cherades.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
The Dictionary is a reference book, do you not understand that?
Do you? do you know what reference means?
It is your claims that are empty.
No, it is the dictionaries claims that are empty. Yet it's a REFERENCE book lol. You are quite a character aren't you? Are "reference books" empty Goldy?
Reference-
the action of mentioning or alluding to something.
the use of a source of information in order to ascertain something.
NOTHIN and empty, eh? lol
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
That sounds like it might be almost, but perhaps not quite a strawman.Let's see if Goldtop agrees with your paraphrasing of his ideological position.
Not a straw man at all actually....That's pretty much it brother, I doubt he will stray outside it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Can you not observe someone making a decision?
Someone making a decision is a conscious activity.
Can scientists not monitor brain activity?
Scientists can monitor the brains activity because there's activity going on in a conscious brain lol, that's irrelevant. The brain is nothing more than a conductor and restrictor to the flow of consciousness, it does not create it.
I can use an electrical meter/tester to detect electrical current but that has nothing to do with the electrical source, where the current comes from only the current form and flow. I can monitor all forms of electrical surge in any given object or machinery, none of which is produced by the object or machinery, same thing with conscious activity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Please explain how anyone is supposed to detect free will, you know, empirically.
He doesn't know what is non-empirical and prob never will. He's a pure materialist/atheist and anything outside that he's dumb-founded, nothing registers, religious topics go straight over his blank head. Logic and common sense alone don't exist and do not resonate in his one-dimensional brain. His whole foundation is built on an illusion thinking and believing only that which was produced by some scientist is somehow truth lol. Then he mocks others for believing in what those who's expertise transcends those little boundaries. How hilarious, he clings to one illusion and refuses to believe anything outside that. That is the epitome of these kind of folks in a religious debate/discussion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Let me know if you have any questions about that. It's pretty straight forward and simple.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
By "life" I mean in the physical, biological sense. Not some wishy washy disembodied consciousness sense.
That's the difference between materialism and Theism. It's not wishy washy and you can collaborate it with your own experience. Life is conscious, awareness and so is the first Source out of all which is living comes from. Embodiments are what they are, they do not create consciousness.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
The alternative to abiogenisis is to say that life always existed, forever. Even creation ex nihilo is a form of abiogenisis.
Not so.."Life has always existed" is the Theistic position (awareness being an eternal substance), that life came from a conscious Source not a dead, material mind-less source so no, creation never came from an ex-nihilo at all rather a conscious, intelligent Source because life is in fact conscious and aware. One theory is superior to the other in that in the Theistic arena creation comes from a conscious Source not from abiogenesis, the opposite is obviously that conscious awareness was constructed from a non-conscious source (abiogenesis), materialism. Theists collectively believe that life never comes from non-life, but that all life has originated and purposed from a conscious reality (living)...AKA God. Nothing came from the inanimate is a superior view.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Paul
Can you explain what you mean when you use the word spiritual? Do your spiritual beliefs include the Bible?
I'm only gonna come on here once in a while now that the trolls have taken over, I'll check and see if anyone has legit questions and if I believe they are serious in asking what they desire to have an answer for. While I believe you have your mind made up from observing your content and posts I'll go ahead and answer your question. There will be two ding dongs that harass my posts but pay no attention as I will not be engaging them.
When I use the word spiritual I mean that which is perceived outside the physical experience, that which transcends the material senses of the human body alone.
I believe the Bible has spiritual truths within it but it's not ALL accurate, there are some misconceptions, more so in the interpretations and doctrines by religious sects. There is nothing in the Gospels that contradicts the reality of the spiritual arena IMO because Jesus seems to understand it quite well, however there are many things in the Bible (OT as well as NT) that are not to be taken literally. Because of this fundamentalism there are all kinds of problems with those that do not accept a spiritual reality because to them some things are absurd. It's actually okay to believe some things are absurd because they are, not everything submitted by religion is correct. Spirituality serves to enhance the individual and if that is not happening something is wrong. It could be many things but the point is to get you, as an individual involved and observing truth. You also have to be willing to examine knowledge and spiritual truths that may not be conforming to your own opinions and worldview.
If you respond to my post with content and or questions you will receive an answer, if you just ignore what I wrote and pretend I did not give a direct answer I will not be back, I'm logging in just for you.....your play.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
You can back up with facts on the claim a person is deluded if that person first laid out a string of false information that they claim is true.
If that's the case it's unnecessary to even say it, even if it were true. I'm not talking about rational justification obviously, I'm talking about the epidemic in forums where everyone feels like the other person is deluded and delusional, it's just out of control and has no real validity anymore in debates. And even if it's obvious it still doesn't need to be used as an accusation. It's rude.
That goes to argumentation though, and this is a debate site where we all just pretend everyone has verifiable information at all times and all venues./sarcasm
Everyone believes the other person is deluded, it's irrelevant anymore.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
What you want is "Deluded," to be treated as "Nazi." This seems unlikely.
That's a little extreme dude. I'm just saying we should raise the bar and do away with judging the other person as deluded or delusional without regard for why they believe what they believe, it seems to me to be a subjective opinion about the other person and it makes more mature discussions more difficult than they need be. It's an insult to people's intelligence, for many people I know who have spent a great amount of time and rationale to form their beliefs.
Often times more than not the person thinks the other is deluded/delusional simply because they may not share the same beliefs, for them it's absurd. But it's just an opinion and serves no real purpose. If someone is deluded it should be easy enough for everyone to see in argument without someone having to make a point in insulting the other. I think we should make this place easy for newcomers to feel like they can join and speak their minds freely and politely no matter what side they are on. But maybe I'm a dreamer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I can't help but think you are accusing me of calling someone deluded. I say this because of an offense you took when I stated something that was not intended to be an accusation against anyone.
Nope sorry, you just happen to be one of those who does this, or insinuates it. I've been in this game for a decade, I have been called everything and every insult under the sun and it's really irrelevant I'm just calling for better discourse in this forum. This topic was not brought about by anyone calling me deluded. As I mentioned in the OP this is something I've noticed everywhere in forums and it's just ignorant and meant to insult the other person. I watch others call their opponents deluded and or delusional all the time and it's mostly used to undermine the other person and it's a waste of a response TBH, many times it is used without justification and more of an assumption and a lazy way of getting off having to argue content. I think it would encourage more straight forward debate to do away with it and only trolls do it anyways. DDO would be a perfect example of it getting out of hand and all sides think the other person is deluded altogether so why bring it to discussions? you think they're deluded and delusional and they think you are lol. It's immature.
The first misunderstanding was when you seemed to me to be offended at the idea that there is a hell.
Lol is that supposed to be a joke? my foundation is Christianity and been around this crap all my life I've thought about the idea of hell probably more than you have. I'm not offended by YOUR comment, I'm offended because it's a misconception and it makes others feel like they want no part of God, that's a real shame.
Created:
Posted in:
Another concept the post wouldn't allow for I think is useful...
The Universal Mind-
"is a concept that tries to address the underlying essence of all being and becoming in the universe. It includes the being and becoming that occurred in the universe prior to the arising of the concept of "Mind", a term that more appropriately refers to the organic, human, aspect of universal consciousness. It addresses inorganic being and becoming and the interactions that occur in that process without specific reference to the physical and chemical laws that try to describe those interactions. Those interactions have occurred, do occur, and continue to occur. Universal consciousness is the source, ground, basis, that underlies those interactions and the awareness and knowledge they imply."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Such a juicy topic SECULAR! you want some Theistic material/beliefs?
In a nutshell I'll provide a couple links/descriptions so it doesn't seem like I'm just making crap up, spirituality has been around a long time so I don't claim to know anything new. I'm not strapped to any one set of ideas or religious doctrines either, I allow for all sources and forms of truth, and I evaluate them accordingly. These descriptions/beliefs below are pretty accurate.
Spiritism-
"is a spiritualistic philosophy, science, and religion ; it proposed the study of "the nature, origin, and destiny of spirits, and their relation with the corporeal world".
"Spiritism postulates that humans are essentially immortal spirits that temporarily inhabit physical bodies for several necessary incarnations to attain moral and intellectual improvement. It also asserts that spirits, through passive or active mediumship, may have beneficent or malevolent influence on the physical world.."
What Jesus taught was more than some religious doctrines and a handful of impressive/unbelievable feats of miraculous events. Underlying the Gospel testimonies are a fabric of spiritual principles, illustrations, parables, examples, lessons and teachings that support the personal growth of the soul. This does not include every denomination or religious sect and what they believe.
Christianity-
"the religion based on the person and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, or its beliefs and practices."
Vardankar-
"is the most direct path back to God via personal experience in the pure positive God Worlds through out-of-body Tuza (Soul) Travel. It is not a religion, metaphysical system, or philosophy but does lead to the most profound and complete personal experience with God. Self Realization is not the understanding of one’s mind, emotions, or lower self but the experience of our true eternal God self Soul upon entering consciously the Soul plane or 5 th plane, which is beyond opposites, beyond the worlds of duality, and beyond matter, energy, time, space, and the mind and emotions of man."
"There are three purposes to VARDANKAR:
1. Self Realization
2. God Realization
3. Becoming a conscious co-worker with God"
This conception of the first Source is accurate. This is what it is and why we exist period. Everything in creation comes out of one Reality, including all individual souls.
Brahman-
"it is the material, efficient, formal and final cause of all that exists.[2][4][5] It is the pervasive, genderless, infinite, eternal truth and bliss which does not change, yet is the cause of all changes.[1][6][7] Brahman as a metaphysical concept is the single binding unity behind diversity in all that exists in the universe
is discussed in Hindu texts with the concept of Atman (Soul, Self)"
PanENtheism-
"Panentheism, also known as Monistic Monotheism, is a belief system which posits that the divine – whether as a single God, number of gods, or other form of "cosmic animating force" – interpenetrates every part of the universe and extends, timelessly (and, presumably, spacelessly) beyond it."
(meaning "all-in-God", from the Ancient Greek πᾶν pân, "all", ἐν en, "in" and Θεός Theós, "God")[1] is the belief that the divine pervades and interpenetrates every part of the universe and also extends beyond time and space. "
"In panentheism, God is viewed as the soul of the universe, the universal spirit present everywhere, which at the same time "transcends" all things created."
"While pantheism asserts that "all is God", panentheism claims that God is greater than the universe. Some versions of panentheism suggest that the universe is nothing more than the manifestation of God. In addition, some forms indicate that the universe is contained within God."...….
BOTH are correct however....the universe is a manifestation of God as well all the universe is contained within God, and all the multi-worlds as well. There is nothing outside the Boss or what some refer to as "Brahman" or any of the other descriptions.
Buddhism-
"All Buddhist traditions share the goal of overcoming suffering and the cycle of death & rebirth, either by the attainment of Nirvana or through the path of Buddhahood."
Samsara
Saṃsāra means "wandering" or "world", with the connotation of cyclic, circuitous change.[85][86] It refers to the theory of rebirth and "cyclicality of all life, matter, existence", a fundamental assumption of Buddhism, as with all major Indian religions.[86][87] Samsara in Buddhism is considered to be dukkha, unsatisfactory and painful,[88] perpetuated by desire and avidya (ignorance), and the resulting karma."
Karma-
"the endless cycle of suffering and rebirth for each being. Good, skilful deeds (Pali: "kusala") and bad, unskilful deeds (Pāli: "akusala") produce "seeds" in the unconscious receptacle (ālaya) that mature later either in this life or in a subsequent rebirth.[118][119] The existence of karma is a core belief in Buddhism, as with all major Indian religions, it implies neither fatalism nor that everything that happens to a person is caused by karma.
A central aspect of Buddhist theory of karma is that intent (cetanā) matters and is essential to bring about a consequence or phala "fruit" or vipāka "result".[121][note 16] However, good or bad karma accumulates even if there is no physical action, and just having ill or good thoughts create karmic seeds; thus, actions of body, speech or mind all lead to karmic seeds."
WHY? do I believe any of the above? my answers would include direct, personal experience/observation, cross referencing with a variety of sources and applying spiritual practices/principles. I evaluate claims according to what I observe about reality and what makes sense.. Probably the same reasons why you believe what you believe only some things are acquired.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nathaniel_B
He has always been portrayed as a white male, so it has come to my mind since I was 9 years old. What was Jesus's (If he actually existed) true skin color? Was he truly a white male in the middle east? Or was he black?
Why does Jesus have to be white OR black? no, Jesus was not your average Ken doll with blue eyes obviously, probably didn't look white or black but right in between.
So are Christians worshipping a white man?
I would say Christians aren't worshipping a white man but a spiritual Master hopefully. Physical bodies are just temporary vehicles anyways the skin is irrelevant to the soul and to spiritual truth, Jesus was what He was in the flesh it really doesn't matter. It shouldn't be about white or black TBH. And an artists rendering of Jesus doesn't represent what all Christians "worship" or believe. I've seen more than just white renderings of Jesus so it's actually not true that all pictures of Jesus look like white males. Many do, but not all.
Let's pretend Jesus did in fact have light brown hair and light colored eyes, does that offend you?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
"I believe your spiritual belief is deluded bc it is not founded on anything that can be objectively proven, and furthermore has zero evidence." That is a proper objection to your belief.
No it's not it's an opinion. First one needs to ask what they're spiritual beliefs are founded on, and what is objective.....before anyone claims "deluded" correct?? What you stated above was an opinion, because I have yet to see the answer of who it was you are objecting to. Tell me I'm wrong...how many times has trash like this gotten in the way of what could have been a productive discussion?
Where have you ever known me to hide from an answer or explanation?
And... no, i don't see you hide which is why i am stunned right now you want to censor someone instead of putting them in their place.
Lol, then there is no reason to suggest I'm trying to hide. That's not even a question. Why would you even think that? If I called you deluded I would feel that would be very insulting to you, and I would never do that. Rather I would explain my positions.
Created:
Posted in:
Declaring the other person deluded is a subjective opinion, it's not facts or substantiated evidence/proof. Not in the way people use the term in forums, it's an escape route.
Created:
Posted in:
Guys, if we're in a discussion/debate and my reply to your argument or response is that "you're deluded" (or even insinuate it) that means that I believe that whatever you're saying is not true or crazy without me providing justification for it, it's an automatic tap-out, it's not an argument. That means I'm no longer engaged in debate/argument, but declared an unsubstantiated opinion. Again, I've never heard this used in discussions where it's a productive effort or term used. It's usually used as a means to say the other person is believing in nonsense without providing reason for the claim. It would be a nice way of me saying you all are nuts without the threat of being banned. That is weak.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Calling another deluded is another way, or the best way, to say they have been deceived or have a misleading belief.
That's an opinion and not an argument.
It is a very appropriate word for the religion forum.
Lol, yeah if you're a troll that likes to avoid clean debate. Sorry that's weak.
If the other person decides not to back up why he thinks others are deluded, then he has no argument or position
That was my point all along, that's not being sensitive. That's adding value to the forum.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
You have to defend yourself not censor and hide.
I'd like to see you provide an example of where I "hide". Where have you ever known me to hide from an answer or explanation?
There is nothing to defend or argue when someone says you are just deluded, they believe there is nothing to argue/debate and it's not an argument at all, it's an insult. Sorry but that's just weak, once again you seem to endorse that in certain instances it's okay to insult people. You can go back to DDO for that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
I'm saying the use of the term as an accusation of the other in debate is unproductive in general, when is it not insulting? This is not a call out to any individual, but a topic of consideration. Maybe it should be avoided to stimulate better conversations and debating topics.
Created: