If you want to make fun of me, feel free. It doesn't bother me. I also have nothing to apologize for, since I said what I said for UPs benefit. I hope she took it to heart and thought twice about what she was doing.

I really do look like Jesus, at least the white guy version. That's not a bad acid trip, that is just reality. Obviously there is no comparison, and I'll be to be the first to admit that I am an unworthy servant. I honestly don't think I am better than anyone else, and I don't judge anyone here. I judge their behavior, sure, but not their person.

You can call me delusional all you want, and I will call you foolish and ignorant. Doesn't really get us anywhere. If you just want to be immature, I can't stop you. I don't think anything bad about you, in fact I pray for you at times but I always have trouble pronouncing your name. God bless.



>> ^Ryjkyj:
>> ^shinyblurry:
Again, reading comprehension? I didn't call her a harlot, I said she was acting like one. I don't think I am superior morally, as we are all sinners who deserve death and hell. However, God provides a superior morality, and if you aren't following that you are dead in your sins. I want to ask you, why do you always chase me around with this passive aggressive commentary? You cannot help but heap insults on me, but it is simply trite and immature from my POV. How about instead of nipping at my heels you actually engage me with some original thought. Do you have anything swimming around upstairs besides empty criticism?
>> ^Ryjkyj:
>> ^shinyblurry:
I didn't call her names, I criticized her behavior. Perhaps english is your second language. I was honestly trying to get her to see that she was stepping over a line she didn't want to cross. Perhaps that doesn't seem loving, but there was an ugly spirit at work there and it needed to be confronted. In the midst of all the drooling male carnality, I was the only one attempting to be self-righteous.
>> ^Ryjkyj:
>> ^shinyblurry:
I only called her a whore because I want to spread the love of Jesus Christ.

Oh, OK. Cool.


Calling someone a "harlot", while maybe a bit outdated, is exactly the same as calling them a whore.
There are many words that were once technical terms, that are now considered hurtful and mean-spirited. Words like: moron, retard, douche-bag, imbecile, idiot and yes, harlot, were once considered to carry no negative connotations at all. So using your example, there was a time long ago when a medical professional might have said something like: "Shinyblurry is a moronic retard who's personality resembles that of a bag containing the contents from a filthy harlot's freshly-washed vagina." But here in the twenty-first century, English doesn't have to be your first language for you to realize that when someone calls another person a harlot, they are trying to hurt their feelings and degrade them. Which in your case, was merely a function of trying to express your moral superiority.
And by the way: The word "English" is a proper noun, and should be capitalized.


Shiny, I tried engaging you when you first started commenting here. But you've proven time and again that you are completely incapable of "original thought". Your entire world-view is based on other people's interpretations of the bible, and a bad acid trip that convinced you that you looked like Jesus. I have some news for you: you're not Jesus. The only reason I leave comments on your posts anymore is to poke fun at your completely delusional view of the world. I was done attempting to engage you a long time ago.
You don't actually think that using a simile to insult someone makes the insult OK. You just think that there's someone out there dumb enough to care about your defense of your callous, insensitive comment that they might be swayed by your pathetic excuses. The irony is, if you weren't so insulting to everyone you condescend to, you might actually make the connections you're seeking.
I didn't leave a comment on your profile. I left a comment on Fusionaut's profile to make fun of you.

>> ^shinyblurry:

Again, reading comprehension? I didn't call her a harlot, I said she was acting like one. I don't think I am superior morally, as we are all sinners who deserve death and hell. However, God provides a superior morality, and if you aren't following that you are dead in your sins. I want to ask you, why do you always chase me around with this passive aggressive commentary? You cannot help but heap insults on me, but it is simply trite and immature from my POV. How about instead of nipping at my heels you actually engage me with some original thought. Do you have anything swimming around upstairs besides empty criticism?
>> ^Ryjkyj:
>> ^shinyblurry:
I didn't call her names, I criticized her behavior. Perhaps english is your second language. I was honestly trying to get her to see that she was stepping over a line she didn't want to cross. Perhaps that doesn't seem loving, but there was an ugly spirit at work there and it needed to be confronted. In the midst of all the drooling male carnality, I was the only one attempting to be self-righteous.
>> ^Ryjkyj:
>> ^shinyblurry:
I only called her a whore because I want to spread the love of Jesus Christ.

Oh, OK. Cool.


Calling someone a "harlot", while maybe a bit outdated, is exactly the same as calling them a whore.
There are many words that were once technical terms, that are now considered hurtful and mean-spirited. Words like: moron, retard, douche-bag, imbecile, idiot and yes, harlot, were once considered to carry no negative connotations at all. So using your example, there was a time long ago when a medical professional might have said something like: "Shinyblurry is a moronic retard who's personality resembles that of a bag containing the contents from a filthy harlot's freshly-washed vagina." But here in the twenty-first century, English doesn't have to be your first language for you to realize that when someone calls another person a harlot, they are trying to hurt their feelings and degrade them. Which in your case, was merely a function of trying to express your moral superiority.
And by the way: The word "English" is a proper noun, and should be capitalized.



Shiny, I tried engaging you when you first started commenting here. But you've proven time and again that you are completely incapable of "original thought". Your entire world-view is based on other people's interpretations of the bible, and a bad acid trip that convinced you that you looked like Jesus. I have some news for you: you're not Jesus. The only reason I leave comments on your posts anymore is to poke fun at your completely delusional view of the world. I was done attempting to engage you a long time ago.

You don't actually think that using a simile to insult someone makes the insult OK. You just think that there's someone out there dumb enough to care about your defense of your callous, insensitive comment that they might be swayed by your pathetic excuses. The irony is, if you weren't so insulting to everyone you condescend to, you might actually make the connections you're seeking.

I didn't leave a comment on your profile. I left a comment on Fusionaut's profile to make fun of you.

It's like a bad acid trip.

Shorter version: 147 is the practical maximum in snooker. There are some theoretically possibilities of getting a higher score
1. Your opponent makes a mistake (like putting balls in the wrong order or not hitting anything) will give you points. that of course requires your opponent actually plays some shots, and with people on this level, they usually end up earning points instead of losing them, which means no 147 can happen.

2. The referee makes a mistake: this happens even more rarely (such as putting the colored balls in the wrong place etc) theoretically, if the judge is on a really bad acid trip or blind or mental or something, this can give you nearly an infinite amount of points, but I've never seen anyone get any points like this on TV-matches.

Both these scenarios are very rare tho, and I dont even know if >147 has ever happened in televised games

>> ^Payback:
>> ^crillep:
Why is it that atheists preach more than anyone?
Spirituality is personal, so if you need to push your belief or nonbelief onto others than you are probably seeking confirmation for your own thoughts.

Oh fuck off. Atheists react to your type's bad-acid-trip religious mumbo-jumbo with facts and observations.
That isn't "preaching".


I call bullshit on your sir. As an atheist, I have to admit that the one thing that will keep me calling myself an agnostic in public, is the general attitude most atheist fervently display. I really disdain how most atheists will call Christians out describing their beliefs as "bat-shit crazy" or the like only to turn around and say "I hate when Christians try to force their beliefs on me".

My favorite part about most atheists by far has to be the fact that the vast majority of us do not have even the faintest TRUE understanding of how these "LAWS/FACTS" of science work. Even if we do have a good understanding on a few of them, it takes a rare individual to grasp the understanding of the majority. Therefor, almost all of us are still dealing with FAITH in regards to our reasoning for atheism.
Religion in any form is an act of faith.

Questioning ANYONE'S faith is dangerous and usually leads to anger and anger leads to the darkside. (sorry could not resist.) Lets just suppose for a moment that all of a sudden GOD descended from the sky. While most Christians would be happy enough in their affirmation, their would be a few that felt the need to make sure you knew just how wrong you have been. Your natural instinct would be anger towards this person. Not because your they were right, but because they felt the need to point out that you were wrong. That does not make you a bad person, it just makes you human. SOOOO now turn the table. EVERYDAY we are discovering some new and interesting scientific observation, that you and I see as an affirmation in the lack of divinity. Some will make sure to point these facts out to those that practice religion, trying to reassert just how wrong they are to believe in there god/gods.
So I beg to differ on your opinion that it is not preaching.

Just keep your thoughts on creation and existence to yourself, unless it is asked or it encroaches on your well being. If you choose not to, then you are truly no better then the nutbar zealots we love to point our fingers at.

>> ^crillep:
Why is it that atheists preach more than anyone?
Spirituality is personal, so if you need to push your belief or nonbelief onto others than you are probably seeking confirmation for your own thoughts.


Oh fuck off. Atheists react to your type's bad-acid-trip religious mumbo-jumbo with facts and observations.

That isn't "preaching".

I think john lennon has experience a bad acid trip before.