I can't describe your posts to me as nice. But perhaps the printed words are hard to convey a nice attitude.
Looking back on both sides of our conversation, I can find instances where both of us were perhaps less than cordial.
Rather than point fingers and get into who said what and what was meant, let's agree that we got off on the wrong foot and start over.
But your signature looks to definitely not be inviting.
It is merely a statement, in no uncertain terms, of one of my guiding moral principles: "ignorance is the root of all evil" -- with several examples illustrating
why it is so.
You can see that, to such a person who believe in that, "ignorance is bliss" would not be received well in either a secular or religious context.
No. I've had pleasant conversations with atheists who clearly knew that I am a Christian.
And I have had pleasant conversations with Christians who clearly knew that I am an Agnostic... including many friends on these very forums.
Clearly the problem lies elsewhere.
What?.. talk about secular ways to stay calm? And yes, if I didn't identify as a Christian but a secular person giving secular advice I probably would have pointed out that you come across as angry.
I was referring more along the lines of "All that you have is sour grapes. How delightful to people that you know." which I took as a personal insult, and right after you chose to play the martyr card, claiming that it was your faith, and not your words, that were the source of the friction...
...but forgive me, I
did say that I didn't want to get into the whole "who said what" thing, as that rarely leads to any kind of productive discussion.
Anyway, back to business: You mentioned that there were some Democrats who were switching to R because of their support of Donald -- which
is true in scattered cases, but it doesn't take into account the far
larger number of Republicans who, due to either political disappointment or personal disgust, are turning
away from Donald.
In terms of defecting to the other side of the aisle, I'd think that Donald is operating at a net loss... don't you?
This latest stunt of his -- demanding his own name printed on the stimulus checks -- and now denying any knowledge of the change which he himself insisted on, is, relatively speaking, a minor issue illustrating one of his defining character flaws -- his ego.
Far more insidious and characteristic of megalomania (another one of his numerous unsavory personality traits) is his recently publicized threat to adjourn Congress so that he can operate utterly unchecked, but since 1. Another thread has already been started on that topic, and 2. He hasn't a snowball's chance in Hades of following through on it, we need not go into it here.
