Spirituality
10 Apr 17
11 Apr 17
Originally posted by SuzianneSonship is not "accepting and agreeing" with someone, he is presenting someone's ideas as his own.
But I wouldn't call espousing those ideas as "plagiarizing".
I mean, if you are a student of someone, then naturally you espouse the very same ideas. Plagiarism would be if he presented the text of some of their material here as his own. Just speaking 'off-the-cuff' in the same manner they would, with the same concepts, doesn't seem to rise to the equi ...[text shortened]... hat. Plagiarism is the wholesale lifting of another's work. This is why copyright laws exist.)
See the difference?
11 Apr 17
Originally posted by sonshipThe word "bothers" here is just you trying to put chalk on the end of your cue. I disagree with some things; I agree with some things. With some of the things I disagree with, I am motivated to get into conversations about them and scrutinize the convictions (and other kinds of intellectual behaviour) that are involved. People deal with me likewise, in their each and every way . Such is the nature of a debate and discussion message board.
It bothers you that people have convictions founded in the Christian faith - period.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by FMFFirst of all propoganda is not necessarily a dirty word.
If I start "preaching" on a debating board, with long long long copy pasted quotes from texts, endless monologues based closely on the writings of some ideologue or other, maybe seven or eight posts in a row, hacking out doctrine and dogma and sanctimonious cant, day after day, and showing little or no interest in beliefs that are different from mine, then perhaps you can try to characterize me as a "propagandist".
Secondly, there is a such a thing as propaganda which is true.
The derogatory definition would be
derogatory
information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.
But if Atheism is true, then to espouse your atheist ideas would be a non-derogatory propagandizing. And I think we all recognize that you're here doing that activity, albeit with question marks at the end of loaded questions.
The less derogatory definition would be -
the particular doctrines or principles propagated by an organization or movement.
See http://www.dictionary.com/browse/propaganda
Here's another definition which would fit your activity -
Propaganda
the organized dissemination of information, allegations, etc, to assist or damage the cause of a government, movement, etc
Go over some of the thread titles you put out to disseminate your ideas.
So you do your thing, I do mine.
11 Apr 17
Originally posted by sonshipNot me, I think the worst behaviour you demonstrate is not (albeit not all the time) accrediting the source of some of your threads. You have admitted as much these past few days in another thread.
If the behavior is so terribly amoral I would think anyone else should be able to concur (beforehand) with the examples twhitehead has ready to submit.
Who else noticed this "worst" moral behavior ?
Examples? Someone else besides twhitehead to anticipate his specimens ?
The thread "two views of human government" is sourced from somewhere other than your own mind.
11 Apr 17
Originally posted by josephwHe's not trying to beat you up, he's just disagreeing with you.
Frankly, I don't know what twhitehead is on about. Everyone, almost everyone, posting in this forum has said some kind of mean thing to someone else at one time or another.
twhitehead is just trying to beat me up because he doesn't like me. lol
Originally posted by sonshipYou have completely sidestepped the content and meaning of my response to you. What I said was, in effect, an observation on the way you make use of this message board. But you choose to ignore it.
First of all propoganda is not necessarily a dirty word.
Secondly, there is a such a thing as propaganda which is true.
11 Apr 17
Originally posted by FMFYou're just saying that because no one is paying any attention to you.
You have completely sidestepped the content and meaning of my response to you. What I said was, in effect, an observation on the way you make use of this message board. But you choose to ignore it.
Joking.
From now on I'm going to write the word "joking" when I'm joking.
Originally posted by divegeesterHave you been in sonship's mind again?
Not me, I think the worst behaviour you demonstrate is not (albeit not all the time) accrediting the source of some of your threads. You have admitted as much these past few days in another thread.
The thread "two views of human government" is sourced from somewhere other than your own mind.
Joking.
11 Apr 17
Originally posted by sonshipYou do it. Be my guest. How many of the threads have been attempts to start conversations with a bunch of people with different beliefs. And how many of my threads were merely vehicles for multiple-posts-in-a row propagating an ideology using extensive quotes or idea lifted wholesale from ideologues? You go over some of the thread titles I put out and make your case.
Go over some of the thread titles you put out to disseminate your ideas.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Some thread titles facilitating FMF's New Atheist soap boxing -
"Christian Trash Talk"
"Mother Teresa's sainthood "
Is Proselytizing sometimes morally unsound?
Divination
'Apocaholism'
The Followers of Christ sect, Idaho
Similar to Scientologists?
The Precariat and Religion
Christians threaten to convert to Islam
The Revelation of the Christian God figure
Snakes/Apples
Aren't most of these designed to put the Gospel of Christ in a bad light ?
No propagandizing agenda FMF ?
No soapbox for New Atheism ?
11 Apr 17
Originally posted by sonshipDid any of them succeed in starting conversations between people of different beliefs? Did any of them involve post after post of me regurgitating ideology using copy pastes and ideas drawn from a small number of writers? Which of those threads did I use as a vehicle for "preaching" or "teaching" the community? On which of them did I try to dismiss or suppress the voicing of dissent or different perspectives?
Some thread titles facilitating FMF's New Atheist soap boxing -
[b] "Christian Trash Talk"
"Mother Teresa's sainthood "
Is Proselytizing sometimes morally unsound?
Divination
'Apocaholism'
The Followers of Christ sect, Idaho
Similar to Scientologists?
3,000 years of Christ ...[text shortened]... o put the Gospel in a bad light ?
No propagandizing agenda FMF ?
No soapbox for New Atheism ?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by FMF
You have completely sidestepped the content and meaning of my response to you. What I said was, in effect, an observation on the way you make use of this message board. But you choose to ignore it.
You have completely sidestepped the content and meaning of my response to you. What I said was, in effect, an observation on the way you make use of this message board. But you choose to ignore it.
You had advice. You think I really should do thus and such.
Blog and don't come here and try to address thorny problems with the Bible in more than 25 words. We all want one or two liners to deal with these issues.
If you have more than a 25 word comeback - Ya preaching ideologies.
We all like little quicky chat like answers to deep questions and involved Spirituality issues.
11 Apr 17
Originally posted by sonshipI have never said "don't come here". My advice is that there are blogs and web sites for preaching, and there are message boards for conversations a.k.a. debate and discussion.
Blog and don't come here and try to address thorny problems with the Bible in more than 25 words. We all want one or two liners to deal with these issues.
If you have more than a 25 word comeback - Ya preaching ideologies.
We all like little quicky chat like answers to deep questions and involved Spirituality issues.
11 Apr 17
Originally posted by sonshipWhat is your complaint about this one Thread 167585? How was ot "propagandizing"? Did you listen to the material at the link?
Some thread titles facilitating FMF's New Atheist soap boxing -
3,000 years of Christianity in an hour