An invitation to johnhp (not a callout)

[johnhp]

your perspective is what has gotten you bogged down on this subject. you don't get to set the rules or make declarations as to what is appropriate. Your peer, Vel has made that quite clear.

i am not sure why you think that just because one person finds a question inappropriate another cannot think it is appropriate.

I SURE AS HELL DID !

You need to distinguish between a response and a proper answer.

and if you think about it rationally, john, that is all that matters.

in terms of your private religious life, that is certainly all that matters.  You will find no disagreement from me on that.  However, in terms of formulating a proper response to the questions crass generalizations that communicate little about what you were asked are meaningless.

as stated, IT IS THE ESSENCE of my belief

The essence of your belief is a generalization?  That is odd.

I told you then, I tell you again, if you care to probe specifics, chronology, methods of celebrating my spirituality, or anything else on topic, I will be glad to oblige but only if you agree to equal terms.

Except that you claim to think it is appropriate to be asked about such things unilaterally.  However, you abandon that immediately when the question is put to you.

the reason I require this is because of your history of trying to glean information, but never giving any

No, the reason you REQUEST this is because you really believe it is an inappropriate and intrusive question to which you will not submit.  The proof of the pudding is in the eating Boffo.  If you think it is good enough for Vel to be asked specifics without any hint of a quid pro quo, then you should be willing to do the same thing yourself, Dr. Lecter.

examples:
we've been hanging around these political forums for over a decade, and you still refuse to admit to a politician that you have ever voted for, or even backing,all the while ragging the non democrat.

It is quite simply none of your business.  i have always been clear about that.  i vote for a socialist, if available, and vote for the one furthest to the left.  i have made no bones about that.  The policies are what concerns me.  Unlike you i am not concerned to look for a dear leader.  And i think electoral politics is a secondary issue for the long term political issues with which i am concerned.  All these years and you still do not understand that difference.  Not shocking but you, Boffo, have just not been paying attention.

I've asked you many times if you as a Catholic consider any and all participants in a abortion to be committing an immoral act.  never an answer.

i have no idea what you are talking about here.  i believe abortion to be immoral.  i am not sure what you think the mystery is there.

hell, you won't even type the words, I believe in God, but have the nerve to call my typing of them a meaningless platitude.

Why would i spend my time typing meaningless affirmations?

[Mornac]

i believe abortion to be immoral.

--Forget it Boffo. He ain't gonna answer that one.

[Boffo]

"i am not sure why you think that just because one person finds a question inappropriate another cannot think it is appropriate."  -john

you would have a point if it were one on one, as it sits it's 3 to one with the only two that really matter being the actual participants.  Lucy and Vel

"You need to distinguish between a response and a proper answer." -john

you need to realize that you don't get to make those rules just because you don't like the answer.

My answer was direct, to the point and honest

your answer was and still is non existent

"However, in terms of formulating a proper response to the questions crass generalizations that communicate little about what you were asked are meaningless."
and
"The essence of your belief is a generalization?  That is odd."

you don't get to define crass generalization and then assume your own definition in your very next response

You asked me about my religious beliefs, not for a manifesto of my beliefs.
the essence of my belief is that there is a God, a supreme being that created all.
you choosing to call that a meaningless platitude and now a generalization make me wonder if word games are more important to you than actually getting an answer

 I told you then and I tell you again, if you want to discuss the architecture, history, institutional persuasion, or anything else about them, the price of the ticket is for you to reciprocate .


"Except that you claim to think it is appropriate to be asked about such things unilaterally."

around and around we go.  Lucy asked Vel a simple and direct question in a proper forum, he answered
You asked a similar question, I answered, you don't like the answer, you ridicule it and demand more ...what can I say

"No, the reason you REQUEST this is because you really believe it is an inappropriate and intrusive question to which you will not submit.  The proof of the pudding is in the eating Boffo.  If you think it is good enough for Vel to be asked specifics without any hint of a quid pro quo, then you should be willing to do the same thing yourself, Dr. Lecter."

for umpteenth time, I did answer.  you still refuse to

"i believe abortion to be immoral."

good, is typing the words stating that the mother, doctor and all other facilitators of said act are guilty of committing immoral acts?

"Why would i spend my time typing meaningless affirmations?

the list grows, now saying that you believe in God is a meaningless platitude, a crass generalization and a meaningless affirmation....where do we go from here?  chant of a zealot? battle cry of a crusader?

would you accept the invitation if we were to both agree to never repeat or use the revelations in another discussion? happens here, stays here.

[Boffo]

Quote from: johnhp on Today at 11:09:08 AM
i believe abortion to be immoral.

"--Forget it Boffo. He ain't gonna answer that one."

I actually give him props for going that far out on a limb, here in the land of blue-choice 

[Mornac]

good, is typing the words stating that the mother, doctor and all other facilitators of said act are guilty of committing immoral acts?

--Not to mention legislators who make it legal and presidents who get sexually aroused just thinking about it.

I actually give him props for going that far out on a limb, here in the land of blue-choice 

--Yeah - as long as he doesn't have to hang the "immoral" label on a actual person.

[nraforlife]

If you're honestly interested in the specifics of johnhp's religious beliefs, and perhaps want to share your own with him, why would you need an audience?  It suggests ulterior motives.

As for your list of questions, most of them, individually, discussed honestly and in depth, could probably generate enough posts to fill up a thread, assuming that there was sufficient interest...and the answers, while perhaps helpful in establishing someone's degree of orthodoxy and compliance with the doctrines of a particular church or sect, are mostly irrelevant to the matter of whether (and how) one experiences a personal relationship with a supernatural Other.  Any God who is not more than the sum of some church's creed or catechism is a poor one.

dougie- STFU, you aren't a 'mod' here

[Case_Closed]

You need to distinguish between a response and a proper answer.

Nominating this one for Most Dumbass Comment for 2012 in advance.

[DougRich]

dougie- STFU, you aren't a 'mod' here

I'm not a Mod...so I don't get to voice an opinion?  

Before I was temporarily distracted by nra's well-thought-out suggestion, I was going to ask whether anyone else sees the irony in this, or any other, extended, back-and-forth, acrimonious thread which has as its ostensible topic the details and parameters of one's belief in God, the Author of love.

But since I'm not a Mod, I guess I'm not allowed to do that.

[vel]

I'm not a Mod...so I don't get to voice an opinion?  

Before I was temporarily distracted by nra's well-thought-out suggestion, I was going to ask whether anyone else sees the irony in this, or any other, extended, back-and-forth, acrimonious thread which has as its ostensible topic the details and parameters of one's belief in God, the Author of love.

But since I'm not a Mod, I guess I'm not allowed to do that.

Truelies is an idiot. If he's not the most universally reviled poster on the internet, then he's the runner up. He posts as though he has standing and credibility but everyone knows he is an empty bag.

In fact by your obviously facetious tone, I am not telling you anything you don't already know.

[Case_Closed]

If he's not the most universally reviled poster on the internet, then he's the runner up.

Sorry, bro.  I've been carrying that torch for years.

[Boffo]

hey Doug, john and I have exchanged less insults in this thread than any in documented history

if this keeps up, I will have to send him a Christmas card next year...it's a good thing that I have 11-1/2 months to talk him into reciprocating       

[johnhp]

Boffo

it is just this simeple.  You do not believe people should answer these kinds of questions unilateraly any more than i believe they should or you would have done so by now.

With regard to your so-called answers to previous questions, i think you precisely why they are inadequate.  You acknowledge that they are important to you but may communicate little or nothing to others.  For instance you believe in God as the creator of everything.  How would this distinguish you from bin Laden, for example, who believes the same thing?  It doesn't.  And that is why your answer was largely without any meaning in terms of communicating your beliefs to others.