Search results

There is no proof that "they did not want to deal with it."* I never said there was. Another fabricated STRAWMAN by ART. There is no proof that they "ducked" the issue.* 5 sources stated that they DUCKED the issue, but you are simply confused because you INCORRECTLY ASSUMED the...

When some idiot finally brings a legit case on this issue to the SC, they'll rule on it. PS: You're a BIGOT for saying that. Just another example of how atheists are second class citizens in this society. peace axeman

What is so funny about your post is that you don't even realize that I agree with you :p If you had been paying attention you would have realized by now that my position has simply been that the court HAS NOT ADDRESSED THE ISSUE of church/state separation because the case never even made...

Once again you cherry pick your definition thus proving you think youre the sole authority on definition. That definition only describes STRONG ATHEISM, which is the very small MINORITY of the atheist population. But of course you dont know this, because you are so clueless about...

No counter argument has been made why they should ignore the technical flaws and proceed to the "core" issues. Thats because NO ONE HAS EVER EVEN ATTEMPTED TO MAKE THIS ARGUMENT. This is PURELY an ART fabrication. BUSTED! :D This is a BLATANT strawman you continually attempt to slip...

Go away poser.... this is a TRADING site...we all know you blew up and cant trade no more :p BWAAAAAA HAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!! LOOOHHH HOOOO HOOOOSEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRR :p peace axeman

MORE proof 777 hasnt a CLUE about atheism. WOW!!! I didnt know I PRACTICE atheism!! Gee....why dont you tell us what exactly it is we are practicing ART :D I dont see any little atheist bible sitting around with things to practice in it. Can you please list them for me? What DO...

LMAOOOOOOO.... here we go again. Just more PROOF that ART thinks he is the SOLE authority on definitions around the world! Who needs websters when you have ART, right?!?!? LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO :p For the million time, atheism, as in A followed THEISM, is the LACK of theistic...

When you can't beat the argument, try to beat the person. LMAOOOOOOOOOOOO.... Oh you mean like when you started calling people CULT MEMBERS??? GEEEZUUUZ not only are you wrong, you are a total HYPOCRITE!!! Your silly argument has already been squashed :p Go away ART...its already...

I have no issue with the court ruling. If he technically had no right to bring the case forward, that is perfectly fine. My issue is with the meaning of the words "dodged/sidestepped" that some people objected to. My assertion is that its perfectly fine to say DODGED, and that DOES NOT...

Blah blah blah.... Translation: ***ONLY MY MEANING OF THE WORDS ARE CORRECT*** *** I HAVE SPOKEN! I AM THE SOLE AUTHORITY! REALLY I AM! ***. Yes yes we know 777..... your are the SOLE authority on meaning. As I have stated before.... when the papers and the american atheists...

Thats true when you have someone like Optional777 who thinks he is the SOLE authority on the definition of every word on the planet, and further thinks he KNOWS exactly what newspaper writers MEANT when they wrote something as if he can read their minds :p Sorry 777, but there ARE...

It means what you read into it for you, and who knows what you are reading into a headline. AAaaaaaaahhhh Optional finally ADMITS the word can have several meanings! :D ME reading into the headline! Thats laughable!! Its CLEARLY YOU that is reading into the headline and implying some...

What newspapers??? Ummmm Pabst... I QUOTED them in a previous post on this thread, including the washington post and LA times and 2 others. I went to www.latimes.com, for example, and it was on their front page where I did a DIRECT copy and paste. :confused: Just checked...STILL the top...

So tell us then ART. **WHAT** did the 4 newspaper headlines MEAN by dodge/sidestep??? HMMMMMMM?????????? Come on boy... you can answer this one. Its not that tough, really :D peace axeman

Not quite Pabst. If you agree with 777, then you put yourself in a very difficult position. Those 4 newspaper headlines all used the words dodged and sidestepped. So this begs the question: Do all 4 of those newspapers believe that the word dodge/sidestep implies some kind of...

Dodge, sidestep....opinions only, not fact. Depends on the meaning of the word now doesn't it? When someone says that the supreme court dodged or sidestepped the core issue, it can very well mean that they simple failed to address the core issue, for whatever reason. The newspaper...

Exactly....and the fact that 4 newspapers used the words "dogded", and "sidestepped" in their headlines, provides more reasonable examples that the words can be, and WERE used, in benign ways. AGAIN....the FACTS are.... the supreme court did NOT address the core issue. End of story...

I see....youre only interested in little 777 semantic games. Totally predictable. If you want to assume that "ducked" means there is some grand conspiracy to avoid the issue by the justices, then be my guest. But there is no proof of this one way or the other. My position is that the...

Youve already been called out with your ALIAS coward, you blind? LOL! I already DEALT with the issue. Its a done deal. Its an objective fact and hard reality that the supreme court DID NOT RULE on the core issue. Read the newspaper clippings I just posted.... dodge dodge sidestep...