Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What I see him saying is that trying to have a conversation with some individuals about some of the topics we discuss here, or about certain topics, is a waste of time.
I have acquaintances that I NEVER discuss politics with. Other topics are fine.
I have acquaintances that I NEVER discuss religion with. Other topics are fine.
What I see him saying is that trying to have a conversation with some individuals about some of the topics we discuss here, or about certain topics, is a waste of time.
I have acquaintances that I NEVER discuss politics with. Other topics are fine.
I have acquaintances that I NEVER discuss religion with. Other topics are fine.
I accepted the judgements he chose to make upon me. What is it that you are trying to defend?
I accepted the judgements he chose to make upon me. What is it that you are trying to defend?
Try to listen this time.
You said, "How many people do you define as a waste of time".
I said that I didn't think he was saying that certain people are a waste of time, but that discussing certain topics with some of them is a waste of time.
You said, "How many people do you define as a waste of time".
I said that I didn't think he was saying that certain people are a waste of time, but that discussing certain topics with some of them is a waste of time.
I'll move past your judgement of me not listening. I said; How many people do you define as a waste of time, because one of the posts I was responding to was written to someone else and gave the waste of time charge.
In your last sentence you changed the wording of your post from my first response to you. This is actually what you said; I don't see him saying that people are a waste of time. I see him saying that discussions with "certain people" are a waste of time. Why did you change the wording and meaning when you repeated what you claimed to have said?
I'll move past your judgement of me not listening. I said; How many people do you define as a waste of time, because one of the posts I was responding to was written to someone else and gave the waste of time charge.
In your last sentence you changed the wording of your post from my first response to you. This is actually what you said; I don't see him saying that people are a waste of time. I see him saying that discussions with "certain people" are a waste of time. Why did you change the wording and meaning when you repeated what you claimed to have said?
I didn't change any meaning. You're just looking for an argument.
This response by "LearnMe" is all complimentary on the front side and then stabbing on the back side.
I have accepted his end judgement. And he is not the final word over me.
You are more observant than most, but I wouldn't call it a "stab in the back." Seems you recognize my judgement with respect to what is a waste of time. Specifically arguing some things with some people that is a waste of time. A very common problem in this forum as a result of what I call my Cement Theory. I started a thread about this problem if you are interested to know more about my judgement along these lines...
Determining truth from lies is very different from determining who is a waste of time and who is not. That is not a very nice tone to interject in this discussion. Nobody wants to deal with a liar, not even those who we normally wouldn't associate with. However, clearly, this thread was started because the things people say can't be ignored by others and they have a need to analyze it. To what end? Most people already can determine if they believe the first thing that comes out of a person's mouth. Why pursue it any further? Because you think others shouldn't believe it?
This is going into that realm of "it is not always what you know but who you know (who you are)" the exact opposite of finding a process of determining if something is a truth or a lie. Really, for most things that people say, it is mostly determining if what they say is applicable to our lives or not.
Determining truth from lies is very different from determining who is a waste of time and who is not. That is not a very nice tone to interject in this discussion. Nobody wants to deal with a liar, not even those who we normally wouldn't associate with. However, clearly, this thread was started because the things people say can't be ignored by others and they have a need to analyze it. To what end? Most people already can determine if they believe the first thing that comes out of a person's mouth. Why pursue it any further? Because you think others shouldn't believe it?
This is going into that realm of "it is not always what you know but who you know (who you are)" the exact opposite of finding a process of determining if something is a truth or a lie. Really, for most things that people say, it is mostly determining if what they say is applicable to our lives or not.
You are right. I agree, but one thing spending time in this forum has taught me is just how sound my Cement Theory truly is. Even when it comes to distinguishing the truth from untruths, some people are so locked into what they WANT to believe, no contrary facts, reason or logic matters to them. This is largely what brings to mind this notion of wasting time. To what end do these discussions lead other than everyone continuing to believe what they believed beforehand regardless?
So rarely does anyone "move the needle" for anyone else, one really has to wonder about the time spent. Or perhaps simply recognize it's all just entertainment. Or so it tends to seem to me...
Your claims of lying and deceit are.... false and misleading when the very first sentence in the linked posting makes it clear that the assertion pertains to the United States, not the whole world. You then try to play it down, claiming that religion is not in decline world-wide. But it's hard to ignore the significant fact that, as the linked article notes, religion is fading in America, as it has done in most advanced Western democracies. Maybe you can tell us exactly where in the world religion is not fading. Islam? Is that a good thing?
Like I tried to explain in my prior comment...
Fohgetaboutit.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
