cont.

It is not what you say that matters because most of what you do say is irrelevant to the discussion. It is why you say it - why you are utterly obsessed with the subject. Every post is full of bitterness and resentment. As I have said before you often tell us about your Christian background and how you have 'reformed'. You might have changed your mind but you have not changed your heart. I think you carry around a great deal of resentment about your time as a Christian and your opposition to same-sex marriage is really just a way of trying to hit back at those who forced you to behave like a Christian when you were younger.

Many have had to suffer as a result of being forced to behave that way but they have gotten over it. They have accepted it, left behind their resentment and moved on to do worthwhile things with their lives. You don't seem to have been able to do that and the level of bitterness that you exhibit in these forums is a sad thing to see.

The problem is that most of us come here to discuss issues which are important to us but you come here in order to try and solve the demons of your past. This is an abuse of the forums and the people who come here for the right reasons. All of us want to keep these forums on track but I think many a poster is afraid to offer their thoughts because of your aggression. You need to hurt people pure and simple and you are not satisfied until you do.

You do not like me psycho-analysing you but I am going to continue doing it whether you like it or not. I am going to expose every neurotic example of behaviour that I see from you until you act like a human being and stop using us and the issue of same-sex marriage to try and alleviate your bitterness.

DreamOn:

"You can imagine then with how it is with some members of the public? In some cases, they are blissfully ignorant of what is involved in formal decision making processes and the rules of logic and reasoned debate are unfamiliar concepts to them.

Still, I accept that everyone needs to be heard and that new ideas can come from interesting quarters. However, as to how much weight is given to any contribution is a matter to be measured by peers on its merits."

What is wrong with blissful ignorance? Perhaps they are just not interested enough to want to find out. Maybe some people simply do not care about things like same-sex marriage. Are you saying that because they seem not to care that they are incapable of understanding and have no capacity to debate or have low IQ's? There are probably thousands of subjects in the world which you know absolutely nothing about. Could we make the same assumptions about you?

It is a very arrogant attitude to have when you make generalised judgments about people based on their disinterest in one or more subjects. It smacks of insecurity when you seem to need to make it about 'us and them' and automatically assume you are in the superior position.

phanto,

I knew it wouldn’t take long for you to start with the amateur psychology again. And still you cannot appreciate the fallaciousness of the ad hominmen. How about you try addressing my arguments for once?

Fat chance, eh?

<<Your reply to Is Mise shows how truly obsessed you are.>>

Or that I have a cheeky streak. Or that I enjoy conversing with others. But, no. True to form, you had to present the most unflattering possibility as the only possibility.

<<The fact that you have gone to all that trouble to look up bible references…>>

What makes you think I had to look them all up? It couldn't have been too much effort given that I responded in less than an hour.

<<…just for the sake of making a sarcastic put down of a person who did nothing more than offer an opinion...>>

Oh, that’s rich. You’re quite selective and one-eyed when it comes to defending others from put downs now, aren’t you?

<<This is never about same-sex marriage for you. No one would go to the lengths that you do to drag up references.>>

You assume this is a big effort for me.

<<You are not fighting for equality - you are fighting against people.>>

Yes, I bet it feels like that to you. It’s quite normal for those experiencing cognitive dissonance to feel attacked.

<<If the opinion polls are so correct then it is hardly worth the bother...>>

I’ve already addressed a similar claim of yours before: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=18439#327498

<<Same-sex marriage is not an academic debate.>>

It is for so long as there are academic reasons for and/or against it.

<<You do not like me psycho-analysing you but I am going to continue doing it whether you like it or not.>>

That’s fine with me. I enjoy discrediting it. Moreover, that you and others continue to demonstrate the fact that you need to ignore my arguments and instead make the debate about me, only vindicates my position.

Look, clearly you’re angry or frustrated. That's fine, though. It’s a perfectly understandable response to cognitive dissonance.

Thankyou for your kind words O sung wu. We may agree on some and disagree on others however you are always logical and polite (unlike myself at times).

As for tipping me over the edge I actually find that a little amusing. I would have severe character defects to allow someone as Christophobic to go anywhere near close to having that kind of power. AJ hides behind a false cloak of intellectualism but really is one of the most irrational posters on the forum. I think it was Phanto who said this was not about marriage for aj. He knows he is totally bereft of any moral base to draw from and hence deliberately misrepresents Christs teachings. People who reject Christ's teachings have far more credibility than sly hateful people who actually know the truth and yet deliberately mis represent it.

"How about you try addressing my arguments for once?"

Your aggressive behaviour here is much more relevant than your arguments.

"Or that I have a cheeky streak. Or that I enjoy conversing with others"

Well there would be no need to defend those things would there?

"What makes you think I had to look them all up? It couldn't have been too much effort given that I responded in less than an hour."

So you do admit to making some effort and you also need to tell us that you are so smart that you might have not needed to look them up. Why do you feel the need to tell us?

"You’re quite selective and one-eyed when it comes to defending others from put downs now, aren’t you?"

Yes, what is wrong with that? I am only interested in exposing your neuroses at the moment.

"You assume this is a big effort for me."

Yes I should have known. I sometimes forget how brilliant you truly are despite your constant reminders. No need to defend yourself or was your main purpose to remind us of you brilliance?

"It’s quite normal for those experiencing cognitive dissonance to feel attacked."

What have my feelings to do with anything? I am talking about you behaviour. There is no need to change the subject unless you feel guilty. If you have done nothing wrong then there is no need to defend yourself at all.

"you need to ignore my arguments and instead make the debate about me"

No I think we give your arguments the amount of attention they are worth but that doesn't mean we can't also talk about your behaviour. Do you have a problem with that? I mean you haven't done anything wrong have you?

"Look, clearly you’re angry or frustrated. That's fine, though. It’s a perfectly understandable response to cognitive dissonance."

Well that doesn't matter you shouldn't concern yourself about me. That is just changing the subject again and you would not need to do that unless the present issue about your behaviour is making you a little uncomfortable.

“Aggressive”? That’s cute, phanto.

<<Your aggressive behaviour here is much more relevant than your arguments.>>

I am not the topic of this thread, but I’d imagine it would feel that way to you when you have no arguments left. That is, after all, why ad hominem arguments occur.

<<Well there would be no need to defend those things would there?>>

There is when someone makes offensive accusations.

<<So you do admit to making some effort…>>

I would have to have. Posts don’t type themselves.

<<...and you also need to tell us that you are so smart that you might have not needed to look them up.>>

Or that they were already accessible in the one spot. Again, always with the most unflattering interpretation.

<<Yes, what is wrong with [defending people selectively]?>>

It demonstrates an insincerity.

<<I sometimes forget how brilliant you truly are despite your constant reminders.>>

Or I could just be very fluent on this topic now after having debated it for so long. Once again, always with the most unflattering interpretation.

<<What have my feelings to do with anything?>>

They explain your false accusations.

<<I am talking about you behaviour.>>

“Keep responses on topic.” (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/rules.asp)

<<There is no need to change the subject unless you feel guilty.>>

Um, you’re the one who has changed the subject.

<<If you have done nothing wrong then there is no need to defend yourself at all.>>

Addressed multiple times already:
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=7136#218946
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=18217#323735
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=7363#227249

<<No I think we give your arguments the amount of attention they are worth…>>

Oh? Where did that happened?

<<…but that doesn't mean we can't also talk about your behaviour.>>

Also? You haven’t addressed my arguments yet.

<<Do you have a problem with that? I mean you haven't done anything wrong have you?>>

Like I said before, no problem at all. Ad hominems only help vindicate my position.

<<That is just changing the subject again…>>

Erm, you, o sung wu, and runner are the only ones who have changed the subject. Best you get back on topic before Graham rightfully starts issuing warnings about abuse and off-topic responses.