• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

While I Was Away...

arg-fallbackName="Sparhafoc"/>
back said:
I am stunned by the fact that atheist are "pro banning" people just because they have a different point of view.

Typical troll. People are pro banning you because you're a vicious lying cunt who gets off on fucking around with people. Now fuck off back down the sewer you oozed from.
 
arg-fallbackName="back"/>
Sparhafoc said:
back said:
I am stunned by the fact that atheist are "pro banning" people just because they have a different point of view.

Typical troll. People are pro banning you because you're a vicious lying cunt who gets off on fucking around with people. Now fuck off back down the sewer you oozed from.

however you are still unable to quote a single lie
 
arg-fallbackName="back"/>
psikhrangkur said:
back said:
well you shuould given that my original comment was a response to what Hack said,

Oh? It was a direct response to Hack? Not the innocent question about whether or not suicide is possible without free will?
You know, Leroy, if you're going to lie about your motivations, you should probably be careful about letting little hints like this drop.
fell free to call it sucide or not, the point is that what hack describes implies free will.............(which is somethign that Hack is not suppose to grant) I was simply showing the contradiction.

Your proof has already been contested by other users, and I frankly don't care either way. If I'm going to answer your question, I'm going to answer it with my own argument. If you're that concerned about relating all this back to Hack, then feel free to stop responding to me.
honety also implies free will BTW.

No, it doesn't. Honesty implies word and action that others can trust, which again doesn't necessitate free will.
is sucide, as described in the article written by Hack implies free will?

Haven't read the article, don't know Hack well enough to get the gist of how he sees the world, don't really care what it implies if it implies anything at all.
is it wrong to point out the fact that Hack has manifestly affirmed that he doesn't believe in free will?

In this context? Where Hack isn't making any argument about the nature of life in regards to whether or not free will is actually real? When you're responding directly to a blog post about struggling with depression and suicide? What the fuck do you think, Leroy?
in your opinion is it wrong (worthy of being banned) to point out the contradiction?

In my opinion, Leroy, your intent wasn't just to point out a contradiction. In my opinion, Leroy, nothing that people do is spontaneous. In my opinion, Leroy, you were banned for a list of stupid bullshit long enough that most of it is lost to time and the more regular posters can think of at least one example that the others cannot, all of which I could probably dig up if I tried. In my opinion, Leroy, even if we were to assume that you were banned unjustly, your reemergence with this new account is testament to your lack of respect for the rules of this forum, for its staff, and for its users. In my opinion, Leroy, I've already seen several instances of your attempts to get a dig in at other users here, such as your previous response to me suggesting that you're being banned because atheists can't handle contrary opinions. In my opinion, Leroy, you spend way too much time here dishonestly framing every situation so that you're somehow the victim of circumstance despite literally setting the events which lead to said circumstances in motion yourself. In my opinion, Leroy, you would be a better person if everyone else was right and you were just an honest to god troll.



Yes honesty implies free will, one is only considered honest if he had the choice to do something dishonest.

Thanks for sharing your opinion, but next time try to answer to my actual questions
 
arg-fallbackName="Dragan Glas"/>
Greetings,

Back, if you can only tell the truth, are you honest?

Kindest regards,

James
 
arg-fallbackName="back"/>
Dragan Glas said:
Greetings,

Back, if you can only tell the truth, are you honest?

Kindest regards,

James

You can always find a creative definition for honest that would exclude the necessity of will. But in most of the cases when you call someone honest or dishonest you imply that he had more than 1 option.

Have I done anything dishonest in the Forum? Why?
 
arg-fallbackName="Greg the Grouper"/>
back said:
You can always find a creative definition for honest that would exclude the necessity of will.

Creativity isn't at all necessary. You can't demonstrate that free will is necessary at any point.
back said:
Have I done anything dishonest in the Forum?

You literally just dodged Dragan Glas' question.
 
arg-fallbackName="Sparhafoc"/>
back said:
Have I done anything dishonest in the Forum?


It would be easier to list the things you've done which are honest. The trouble there would be if there's a minimum word count to posts.

To list the dishonest things you've done, the quickest way would be to show user's posts: LEROY.

Of course, the fact that you were banned and then came straight back again with your hand up a sock puppet's arse already establishes how honest you are.

back said:

No one can explain the roots of your dishonesty but you. Presumably, some event in your childhood has had a lasting impact on your ability to tell right from wrong or to judge your own behavior.
 
arg-fallbackName="Sparhafoc"/>
Bango Skank said:
back said:
Have I done anything dishonest in the Forum? Why?

Did you ever admit that you were dandan? I havent read all the messages regarding that matter.


When he got banned, he posted under the username dandan immediately after asking why he'd been banned - well, spinning the reason why he'd been banned, as is wholly typical of lying LEROY.
 
arg-fallbackName="Dragan Glas"/>
Greetings,
back said:
Dragan Glas said:
Greetings,

Back, if you can only tell the truth, are you honest?

Kindest regards,

James
You can always find a creative definition for honest that would exclude the necessity of will. But in most of the cases when you call someone honest or dishonest you imply that he had more than 1 option.

Have I done anything dishonest in the Forum? Why?
You are implying that one who can only tell the truth is cannot be described as honest.

What are they then?

Kindest regards,

James
 
arg-fallbackName="back"/>
Dragan Glas said:
You are implying that one who can only tell the truth is cannot be described as honest.

What are they then?

Kindest regards,

James

I would call them robots.

Honesty implies that you had the choice to lie but decided not to lie. Someone whose brain is being manipulated by a mad scientists to always tell the truth is not morally superior than the guy who is being manipulated to always say false things.
 
arg-fallbackName="Dragan Glas"/>
Greetings,
back said:
psikhrangkur said:
You literally just dodged Dragan Glas' question.

And that makes me a dishonest person? why?
If, as you claim, you have free will, then you have willfully chosen to evade my question, which - by your definition - makes you a dishonest person.

Kindest regards,

James
 
arg-fallbackName="australopithecus"/>
PSA:

Because Leroy aka Back aka DanDan couldn’t be bothered to wait 2 weeks for his ban to expire that ban will no longer expire.

Pay your respects as seems best to you.
 
arg-fallbackName="Sparhafoc"/>
The only feeling is one of guilt.

Such a recidivist asshat needs an outlet, and with this one denied to him, he'll just find some other fucker's carpet to shit on.
 
arg-fallbackName="Master_Ghost_Knight"/>
latest

Shame!
 
arg-fallbackName="he_who_is_nobody"/>
australopithecus said:
PSA:

Because Leroy aka Back aka DanDan couldn’t be bothered to wait 2 weeks for his ban to expire that ban will no longer expire.

Pay your respects as seems best to you.

Who?
 
Back
Top