Atheists who believe in moral truth must be nihilists.

[_Mister Scratch]

I'm not sure I quite understand you here, ALitD. Are you saying that you have ascribed mental health issues to your online opponents in the past?

I am saying that confirmed knowledge of a posters mental health issues has, in the past, helped explain their behavior, including strange reading comprehension. I can think of one poster on the first page of this board that meets that criteria,

Wow, another dig! And yet more evidence that gossip is rank in Mopologetic circles.

My past experience colored my reading.

Yes. That was precisely my point.

I'm not "insisting" on anything, my friend. I am merely relying on your own words and posts.

So you are, like, insisting. You are insisting that my misreading shows that I harbor prejudices I - having access to my mind - do not.

Perhaps you are unaware of your own prejudices. Tell me, do you know Wade Englund?

You're telling me why I accidentally (which you put in quotes to imply that it really wasn't an accident, thus continuing the attack on my character) added the word mental. I'm telling you that you are wrong.

I am wrong based on what? There are two possibilities, so far as I can tell, ALitD: You were trying to insult GIMR, or you came in assuming that many of the posters on this forum are/were "mentally ill." If it is the latter, when then that is still quite an ugly assumption, imho. It would be rather like a poster showing up on MAD and proclaiming "accidentally" that all LDS are "brainwashed."

no small problem to apologize. What say ye?

I already noted the second I caught the mistake that I was quite wrong. I'm sorry.

Well done.

Now you can get around to dealing with my other question: What is your MAD screenname?

[_A Light in the Darkness]

That's not what Quentin is arguing for.

As I pointed out in my opening post, Quentin thinks his argument can be used as a general argument against God. I differ here. To Smith, both Godless universes and those with God have the same problem. I think this is mistaken due to God's nature. However, I wish to avoid that secondary discussion and focus on his main argument. Refuse to address it if you will, but that's the topic at hand.

[_A Light in the Darkness]

Now you can get around to dealing with my other question: What is your MAD screenname?

Why must I have one? What does it matter? What does this have to do with the topic of this thread? The goal here seems to be to shift everything to an attack on my motives and character rather than address the argument; to discredit me through negative associations: Are you or have you ever been a MAD sympathizer?

[_Runtu]

Now you can get around to dealing with my other question: What is your MAD screenname?

Why must I have one? What does it matter? What does this have to do with the topic of this thread? The goal here seems to be to shift everything to an attack on my motives and character rather than address the argument; to discredit me through negative associations: Are you or have you ever been a MAD sympathizer?

We've all been MAD sympathizers. I'm just curious, myself.

[_Mister Scratch]

Now you can get around to dealing with my other question: What is your MAD screenname?

Why must I have one? What does it matter? What does this have to do with the topic of this thread? The goal here seems to be to shift everything to an attack on my motives and character rather than address the argument; to discredit me through negative associations: Are you or have you ever been a MAD sympathizer?

So, are you saying that you have never posted on MAD? Please, ALitD: what is you MAD screenname? Or are you worried that telling us will reveal things about your posting habits that you'd prefer we didn't know?

[_Sam Harris]

Now you can get around to dealing with my other question: What is your MAD screenname?

Why must I have one? What does it matter? What does this have to do with the topic of this thread? The goal here seems to be to shift everything to an attack on my motives and character rather than address the argument; to discredit me through negative associations: Are you or have you ever been a MAD sympathizer?

ROFL, you did just that, attack people's motives before there ever was an argument. You sought to discredit before you even made your argument.

It has been asked if you have one, because your behavior is so like the people who frequent the MAD board. And your defensiveness over whether or not you frequent MAD is telling. If you did not, you'd simply say so.

[_A Light in the Darkness]

ROFL, you did just that, attack people's motives before there ever was an argument. You sought to discredit before you even made your argument.

No I didn't. Even if you fault me for being overly aggressive, you are still wrong here. I think the problem here is that you just have terrible reading comprehension skills.

[_Runtu]

ROFL, you did just that, attack people's motives before there ever was an argument. You sought to discredit before you even made your argument.

No I didn't. Even if you fault me for being overly aggressive, you are still wrong here. I think the problem here is that you just have terrible reading comprehension skills.

Maybe you should try to be less aggressive, which might make it easier to understand you. Just saying.

[_Sam Harris]

ROFL, you did just that, attack people's motives before there ever was an argument. You sought to discredit before you even made your argument.

No I didn't. Even if you fault me for being overly aggressive, you are still wrong here. I think the problem here is that you just have terrible reading comprehension skills.

More ad hominem. It's getting redundant.

[_The Dude]

I'm on Schryver suspension? I have no idea what that means.

Anyway, I didn't accuse you, Will -- if anything I complemented the person who started this thread. That was a mistake and I take it back.

I don't think it's YH8 or Log. It's a topic either of them would like to start, but they both have a different style. Of course YH8 would engage in mind reading, and Log's posts would be as short as possible in order to protect himself from revealing a logical weakness. ALITD has no such restraint.

It's a mystery that is far more interesting than ALITD's ill-conceived attack on atheism.

One more thing: I love your sig line Will!