Death (Warning- Long Post)
- Thread starter Y.A.G Si Ye Nots
- Start date
Absolutely, you're the ass. There is a HUGE difference between me saying that civilian Hummers are "redneck" and jabbing at you over you using teen mom as your validation for a celebrity lifestyle and you retaliating by insulting my wife. That's why I dropped it and moved on. You can call me a redneck all you want. You can mock my Christian faith and I'm not going to lose a wink of sleep. However, insulting my wife, not quite an equivalent response. By the way, my wife has a PhD in Mechanical Engineering and was already working for an international company when I met her. She has immediate family in the US already who could've easily petitioned her. She has spent half of her life in the US and UK. She didn't need me for a green card...but you already know that.
You can be selfish and thankful at the same time. I've already said that I'm confident of where my dad is now. I'm 100% thankful that he's no longer suffering the way he was the last several years of his life. However, if it's selfish to still miss him...I'll take your "hypocritical" tag with no hesitation. My life certainly will not be validated by your opinion.
That would make sense if the OP believed in heaven or some sort of euphoric afterlife. Knowing that he doesn't have those beliefs makes your comment not make sense, but then again, you've never made it a habit for your posts to contain any sense.
Not only was it far more than just those two things, but my comment wasn't an insult to your beneficiary, but rather, to you.
"I'm going to promote and attribute to somebody a claim they never made, then I'm going to ignore the mountain of evidence that refutes my stance on that issue and only focus on one small aspect of it."
Not everyone is as dumb as you are on here, so only the worthless poster will believe it.
Jesus, learn to read before you continue wasting my time.
I didn't call you a hypocrite for being selfish and missing a loved one. I called you a hypocrite for claiming I was at fault for taking personal jabs considering you were the one who introduced that multiple times in this discussion before I took part.
Really, at which point did I call you a hypocrite where you would think it was based on you missing a loved one? You're the king of straw men. Since you want to lie and claim things I never said, here is where I called you out for being hypocritical:
"Here's yet another example of the hypocrisy of the Christian right. You're the one who took repeated jabs in that thread first. Only after watching you do it - including one you had previously failed attempting on Facebook - did I take a jab back about your green-card-chasing-wife."
How anyone of even average intelligence could interpret that to calling you a hypocrite for missing a loved one is beyond my ability to pretend to be stupid.
Why would a 9.8 marry a 6? And the only reason that I have had .2 points deducted is because my crank is 2" too long, and it causes most girls excruciating pain . . . regardless of what year in high school they are in.
Sounds like an insult directed toward my wife. Sounds an awful lot like you are insinuating that she is using me to get a Green Card. You're talking in circles.
Also, what else did I say other than comments about the redneck civilian Hummers and teen mom?
So your refute was to post three pictures of you with celebrities...75% of them featured you and teen mom. Why else would you choose to feature her in 75% of your rebuttal unless you were using her as your evidence of your relationship with celebrities?
My bad, I should have said "I'll take your hypocritical AND selfish tags without hesitation" as it was a general closing to my total response. But again, you knew that.
In the other thread I simply pointed out that civilian Hummers were just as redneck as Mustangs. You were the one that started the personal jabs by saying
That is a rich reply considering that I have traveled extensively inside the US and abroad. I'm sure that won't matter to you though. You have already made it clear that you believe that the rest of us are beneath you.
In reply, I'm sure you'll point out the other times I've poked at you about being a celebrity stalker and you'll claim "Hypocrite!" again. But before that, just remember, that your first plan of action on any thread here is to mock people for their religious beliefs. I'm guessing that most would agree that you generally start the "jabs" and that is also true in this case. Eh, what do I know? I've never been outside of "redneckville."
To be fair to Rifle, he's only lived a vast majority of his life in Upstate New York, Huntington, WV, Daytona Beach, FL, and Texas, and we all know there's no rednecks in any of those fine metropolis areas.
When were growing up when they said we are going downtown you knew that meant the fine metro area of Huntington. Nope, no rednecks there.
That is what I was insinuating. That isn't a jab at her, but rather, at jab at you in saying that is the only reason why she'd marry you.
Multiple comments about those, "falling off your game lately," the comment about not being able to do this all day "like you."
I posted four pictures, not three. Counting is hard . . . but then again, you can't do this all day because you have a
Of those four pictures, two of them contained celebrities other than Farrah. On top of that, there have been hundreds of others posted (which you clearly have seen) of other celebrities other than Farrah. So again, you're dismissing the mountain of evidence and trying to handpick a very small percentage to support your bogus point.
No, I didn't know that. You say a lot of foolish and incorrect things, so there is no way of knowing which of those you meant to say and which of those you didn't mean to say and simply forgot to type a bunch of words that would allow it to make sense.
Your recent excuse is that you meant to say "hypocritical and selfish tags," but again, the hypocritical tag is about something entirely different than the selfish tag and wasn't even regarding your justification of it (missing a loved one). Your excuse should have been "Oh, I meant to type 'selfish' instead of 'hypocritical,'" and then it would make sense.
Don't lie. You didn't "simply point out" that Hummers were just as redneck as Mustangs. Your main point was trying to tie that to me by claiming that I had previously had a Hummer.
Again, you aren't making any sense. You first said something along the lines of "Weren't you the one who used to drive a Hummer which is the epitome of rednecks." You then claimed that I was the one who started the jabs by saying that you had only lived in redneckville your entire life.
If you claim my comment about you having only lived in redneckville was a jab, then you must also accept that claiming (falsely) I had a Hummer which is the epitome of rednecks. If you claim that one is a jab, you must also accept that the other is a jab, in which case your claim that I was the one who started it is false. That's where the hypocritical tag came in, since you seem to still struggle with that.
Oh, Jesus. The Murox the Moron attempt has shown its face again.
Having spent a week in Myrtle Beach, eight hours at a few different places during a cruise excursion, 10 days in some small town in another country surrounded by fellow, identical Americans during a Christian mission doesn't negate you having lived in redneckville your entire life.
As you said, you're proud to have grown up and spent your entire life in West Virginia. I'm not sure why you'd try to defend against that now.
That's false. I lived in upstate NY, Huntington, Daytona, and Texas for a total of 16 years which isn't "vast majority of my life," but it also isn't even the majority of my life.
Further, let's look at the places you named:
Daytona is the 18th biggest DMA in the country ahead of places like Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Charlotte, St. Louis, Baltimore, Nashville, Kansas City, Indianapolis, Columbus, Cincinnati, etc.
Denton, Texas, where I was for exactly one year, has a population of about 140,000 people, also has an additional 38,000 students (meaning almost 180,000 people most of the year), and is 45 minutes from the fifth biggest DMA (Dallas) in the country,
Abilene, where I was for less than a year, has a population of 122,000 and an additional total of 15,000 college students, putting its population most of the year around 140,000.
Austin, where I've spent two years, is the 11th biggest city in the country ahead of cities like Detroit, Boston, Denver, San Francisco, etc.
Upstate NY, especially in the region I grew up, is an area all linked closely to each other. Cities like Rochester, Syracuse, Binghamton, Elmira-Corning, Ithaca etc. are all within about 75 minutes from each other (much closer in some of the cases) which pushes it towards the urban sprawl feel. Once you're outside the far city limit of one city, you have a short drive and are quickly on the outskirts of another city only to have that happen repeatedly.
DC, where I spent nearly a decade, is one of the biggest metro regions in the country.
12 years in Brooklyn is also a rare place for rednecks.
San Fran where I lived for two summers totaling about six months is also a major metropolitan area. Miami where I had a condo for many years resulting in me spending significant amounts of time is also a major metro.
As I have always said (reference the WWE threads), you can find rednecks all over the country. You can find a ton of rednecks in major cities. They just happen to be a small minority in those areas.
Having lived - not visited for a week or a cruise stop but actually lived - in a bunch of major cities, as well as having lived in a handful of well populated but average sized cities all across the country, provides just a tiny bit more insight than having lived in redneckville somebody's entire life and being surrounded only by rednecks.
Right, it isn't an attempt at making her seem insincere at all.
"Falling off your game lately?" Were your feelings hurt by that?
And "like you" is a fact." You live on this board. That is evidenced by you posting multiple 3,000 word essays on this board each day. I would love to see the post count for all of your accounts. I'm sure you have screenshots somewhere.
Oh goodnight. You absolutely know that I meant four pictures THREE of which featured teen mom. If you didn't realize that and you were truly "baffled" then maybe you're not as intelligent as I once thought. It's hilarious to see you try to win arguments or debates on here by just wearing people down with semantics
Simply pointing out the irony in someone, who wanted a civilian Hummer, calling a Mustang a redneck car. Very simply, I don't believe you're a redneck. I just think your logic around the Mustang being a redneck car is flawed. That was pointed out pretty clearly by me and I think everybody else on that thread.
And I don't mind being a redneck, but you insinuating that I'm a redneck is most definitely an attempt at an insult.
First, I haven't been to Myrtle Beach since I was approx 10 years old. I haven't been on a cruise since high school. I have spent significant time, not just 10 days, in four different countries other than the US. Only one of them included "fellow, identical Americans." I have been to many other countries in a way that fit that statement but that is not even being considered in this discussion. I have family and friends, which I often visit all over the country including Florida, West Virginia, Montana, California, Arizona, Massachusetts, Texas and Illinois (and others where I have spent less time). That is not even to mention the months worth of time I have spent in Monterrey, Mexico City and Guadalajara, Mexico.
So the question I'm pondering is, how much time do I have to spend outside of West Virginia so that you can't say that I've never been outside of "redneckville?" What do I have to do to gain an "idea or experience" to know stuff about non-redneck things?
Again, I don't mind being a redneck but when you call somebody a redneck it is most definitely an insult and a way for you to imply you are superior to all of the other people on this board.
Perfect example of someone "like you" that spends a lot of time on this board.
Honest question for everybody else? Did anybody actually read all of that? I'm 98% sure that rifle just keeps typing in hopes that people will get tired and give up so he can claim some sort of message board debate "victory."
Yags, you are getting old and I think Michigan is right. Mid life crisis. Drop in the T and libido. Going to be harder to get the younger chicks soon and your ball sack will look like a 90 year old goat sack because of gravity. IT happens to the best of us. You better start going after some MILF action.
Have you ever farted in front of a girl yet? That is true love.
Have you ever farted in front of a girl yet? That is true love.
Nope. If it's selfish for me to miss someone, it's selfish for you to miss someone. And it's obvious from your post you miss the young lady.
I've posted eight times in the previous four days. You've posted half that much in the last day. Be careful, you have that job to keep for your beneficiary, remember. It seems like you live on here.
It's not semantics. It's trying to figure out what the hell you're trying to argue considering you keep having to say you didn't mean what you actually typed. Earlier, you didn't mean "hypocrite," since the hypocrite part had nothing to do with what your excuse was. Then, after pointing that out to you, you claimed to have meant "hypocrite" along with something else which still didn't make sense.
Now, your claim is you meant four instead of three, which also makes your 75% claim false. Regardless of your inability to post what you actually claim you meant to say, it still is an absurd argument. The four pictures had three celebrities, yet you only wanted to focus on one of them to try and make your flawed jab. On top of that, based on your other previous attempts, you have access to seeing literally hundreds of other celebrities with me. You've conveniently left those out since it destroys your attempt.
And "Oh goodnight?" What the fvck does that even mean?
Nobody in this thread "pretty clearly" pointed out flawed logic on a Mustang being a redneck car. Overwhelmingly, it is a car driven and favored by rednecks just like every other American muscle car.
It doesn't mean there aren't exceptions. There are exceptions to the fact that most Volvos are driven by yuppies, most Corvettes are driven by middle-aged or older white guys, etc. Most Mustangs are driven by rednecks. Go to any moderately sized city in a redneck state. Then, do the same in a non-redneck state. There are far more Mustangs in the redneck city.
If you look at statistics on muscle cars - which a Mustang is - the five states with the most purchases are Texas, Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma, and Arizona. People in McLean, Virginia (highly wealthy, highly educated city miles from DC) aren't buying Mustangs (with the exception being expensive collector's items like the versions celebrities buy of these vehicles).
Downtown Washington, DC has many more people than downtown Tulsa, and I guarantee you'll see far more Mustangs in Tulsa than DC. Why? It's because Tulsa is far more of a redneck city and the Mustang is a far more popular car among rednecks. The same thing holds true for pickup trucks, and it has nothing to do with needing the trucks for work, but rather that they are just far more popular among rednecks.
You incorrectly pointing out that I drove a redneck car is no more of an insult than me claiming that you have lived only in redneckville. You made that first claim, made other jabs, and I responded. You can't think one is an insult but not the other. Regardless, you made other jabs first, so my response and you're crying about it makes you a hypocrite.
Sure you do. You have this job that you have to keep that prohibits you from posting on a message board, but you have plenty of time to "often visit" at least seven other states all over the country as well as spending months worth of time in multiple international locations.
1+1 = 8 in your world.
You should stop pondering things and spend more time learning how to read. I didn't say you've never been outside of redneckville, so stop with your repeated straw men. I said that you've never lived outside of redneckville. There is a huge difference.
A redneck doesn't equate to a bad person. I wouldn't want to be a redneck, but many people seem to take pride in being one. They don't find it as an insult to being described as a redneck.
No, that's not what is being discussed.
Theists believe that the deceased is going to a much better place. In that case, if they truly thought that, they would be ecstatic for the deceased. Sure, they can miss them, but their sadness is purely for selfish reasons in that case.
On the other hand, atheists lack a belief in an afterlife. Their sadness isn't just due to them missing somebody. It also is due to that person not being able to have any more life (on Earth or an afterlife), their children never being able to reunite with them, etc. It's not sadness all for personal, selfish reasons. It is sadness that the deceased got ripped off, which is exactly what I said was the most upsetting about my friend's passing.
Nope, you can be happy that the deceased no longer has any troubles (if they've made the proper preparations previous to death), and still miss them because of separation.
(if they've made the proper preparations previous to death)
Nope. If it's selfish for me to miss someone, it's selfish for you to miss someone.
Nope. If it's selfish for me to miss someone, it's selfish for you to miss someone.
Who or what ripped the deceased off?
And your sadness of missing them is a selfish feeling. If you truly believe that person is in a much better place, and if your sadness if due to you missing them, it is a selfish feeling.
That has nothing to do with this. As I said before you even entered this discussion with your illogical attempts, I am more bothered by the fact that she got ripped off, her daughter got ripped off, her husband got ripped off, etc. far more than me missing her. I only spoke to her once every other year or so. She wasn't a daily part of my life. The most upsetting part of it for me is what I just mentioned (and what I mentioned earlier in this thread).
For a theist who believes the deceased is going to heaven, sadness simply because you miss the deceased is selfish. If you truly care about that person, you would be happy knowing they are in a better place.
I believe I shared this story before, but it is a good analogy.
A few years ago, a father of a high school quarterback kept emailing me about his son. According to this father, the previous quarterback coach before me was recruiting his son after seeing him at a camp. The kid came to visit on an unofficial after I got hired (not invited by me, but requested by them that they wanted to come look at the school and meet me), and I gave him an hour of my time to show him the facilities and sit down and talk.
I didn't think the kid was good enough, and I wasn't actively recruiting him, but he still really wanted to come play for me. After being as polite as possible numerous times over a period of months, I told the father that I didn't plan on offering his son a scholarship, and that I thought it would be wise to commit to one of his other offers. He had a few other FCS offers, two of which were Ivy League schools. I highly urged his father to push him towards one of those two schools and made it a point to state that it would change his son's life and give him a very good chance of making a great life for himself after school.
The father wrote back that he wanted his son to go to one of those two schools, but his mother was vetoing the idea, because she wanted him to stay close to him. I was and still am bothered by the selfishness of that kid's mother. She was more concerned about missing her son for parts of four years of college instead of giving him the best chance at success in life.
Likewise, a theist being more sad than happy that a loved one (assuming another theist) has passed is simply being selfish, as the deceased is in a far better place.
No. It most certainly is not. Regardless of how many times you repeat yourself. Selfishness is concern with one's own welfare or advantage in disregard of others. If I'm happy that the deceased has gone to a better place while being sad that we've parted in life, those^^^words in bold prove that I'm not being selfish. There's actually a word for such blending of emotion, it's called bittersweet.
We don't participate in beastiality up my way. From what I've read, it's pretty limited to areas of the country surrounding the WV-KY border.
Uhh, yeah, exactly. We are discussing a theist being sad if another theist passes. That sadness is about the survivor missing the deceased. It is only related to the survivor's own welfare, as he is the one who is said and missing the deceased. We aren't discussing being sad FOR the survivor leaving Earth, but rather, BECAUSE the survivor left Earth.
It proves your self-interest of selfishness. You're happy for the deceased but are sad for yourself. You're not sad for any interest of the deceased but instead are sad that you miss the deceased - that's your own selfish interest.
Yes, and the "bitter" part about that pertains to the selfish part of missing the deceased. The "sweet" part about it is a happiness for the deceased being in a better position. You aren't sad FOR the deceased. You are sad for you. You aren't happy for you. You are happy for the deceased.
Uhh, no. Your entire argument falls apart when you use the full definition of "selfishness". Using your half definition, I'd be selfish if I made myself a steak sandwich when I'm hungry.
Selfishness is concern with one's own welfare or advantage in disregard of others.
You lose. Move on.
Stupid, you continue to make my argument for me. “In disregard of others” is exactly why your sadness is selfish. You’re still sad (selfishly) even though the deceased is in a much better place. Your sadness is disregarding that the other(s) is in a much better place. That’s the entire point, and you’re proving my own argument.
This is basic shit.
No, moron. I can be happy for the deceased (only if there's reason for me to believe they're in a better place) while I sorrow due to them not being alive in my life. It would be "disregard for others" if I had the power to bring my mother, for example, back from death and did so. That would be selfishness.
This isn’t even lingual gymnastics you’re attempting. It’s far worse than that.
You’re disregarding the deceased’s much better place in life by being sad, only due to the impact it has on you.
Your sadness is ONLY related to your own welfare while disregarding the fact (your belief) that the deceased is in a much better place.
It’s your exact definition of “selfishness.”
Wrong again. Your problem is you can't fathom the idea of being happy for the deceased because they've gone to a better place since you don't believe that place exists, and at the same time be sad because of being separated from that person. That you have that inability does not mean that I do.
That makes no sense. My personal belief has nothing to do with this hypothetical. In the hypothetical, we’ve already established that the subject and the deceased are both theists. My personal belief has nothing to do with it. I entirely understand people’s belief of a heavenly afterlife.
The fact that you’ve resorted to such a poor and illogical argument that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand is the biggest white flag you could find to raise.
Again, an argument absent of logic. I entirely understand somebody being both happy and sad after a death for the exact reasons you’d stated. It doesn’t change the fact that the sadness, if related to only missing the deceased as we have established is the case in this discussion, is entirely selfish. The sadness of missing the person disregards their better place in life.
two biggest arguers that argue just to argue going at it. not really even entertaining.
very well could set a record for length of thread/argument. neither is willing to give up the last word.
very well could set a record for length of thread/argument. neither is willing to give up the last word.
it's difficult to see an end to this debate...………...the two biggest arguers and morons going at it. all we need is Cuntry or Dtard to have a full on circle jerk.
It all makes sense. If you fall and scrape your elbows on a basketball court, you feel physical pain. You don't choose to feel pain, it's natural to feel the pain and feeling that pain has nothing to do with selfishness. Emotional pain can occur from the loss of a loved one, you don't choose to feel sorrow, it's just as natural as the physical pain when you get hurt. To be selfish you have to CHOOSE to be selfish. No one chooses to feel sorrow due to the loss of a loved one.
I just wanted the stupidity of this post to sit and marinate for a couple of days so we could all appreciate it.
Feeling physical pain is natural because we have nerves.
Feeling emotional pain is not natural, but rather, is learned/nurtured.
If whom you believe is your mother - the person who raised you - passes away, you feel sorrow. That is learned/nurtured. It may seem like the pain/sorrow comes naturally, but it doesn't. That person is a loved one which is learned/nurtured.
If you found out today that you had a different birth/natural mother than the person you thought it was your entire life, you would be confused. But you wouldn't be distraught/hurt/sorrow if you also found out that the birth/natural mom you just found out about dies tomorrow. If you were, it would make it natural, but it isn't.
Claiming that being hurt/feeling sorrow for the passing of a loved one is just as natural as feeling pain from a physical injury shows a huge ignorance to basic biology.
Not so. It's taken you that long to come up with a poor attempt at a rebuttal.
Not so again. Your inability to accept that emotions are separate from the physical body is your problem. If you accept that, you then have to admit that there's more to a human being than a physical body, and you can't do that. If I cut off your arm, you'll feel emotional loss long after the physical pain is gone. That loss is not something you learn. Neither is sorrow from the loss of a loved one something you learn.
