by Sam Whiskey 469 Replies latest jw friends
-
“You missed the point for a third time!”
AndDontCallMeShirley,
How?
If you paid Warren Buffet to give you specific strategy for investing and Warren Buffet’s recommendation was to learn and recite the Lord’s Prayer as a strategy for investing—conveyed by reciting the Lord’s Prayer in response to your paid request—then on what basis would Warren Buffet owe you a refund?
Weren’t you paying Warren Buffett to give you Warren Buffet’s advice?
Marvin Shilmer
He knew exactly what he was doing, Marvin. It was a deception, pure and simple:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/5/crowd-stunned-after-valedictorian-rips-speech-reci/
A South Carolina valedictorian garnered wild applause after he ripped up his pre-approved speech and delivered the Lord’s prayer at his high school graduation on Saturday.
The act was apparently in protest of the Pickens County School District’s decision to no longer include prayer at graduation ceremonies, Christian News reported. Officials said the decision was made after the district was barraged with complaints by atheist groups.
Marvin, I'm not going to debate absurd statements with you.
Just when I think you can't possibly get more ridiculous, you post again and make me re-assess my prior thought.
Tell you what, Marvin. You go ahead and use the Lord's Prayer as an investment strategy, then come back here and tell everyone on JWN how that goes for you.
-
“He knew exactly what he was doing, Marvin.”
AndDontCallMeShirley,
I don’t disagree what that assertion.
Now, back to the question asked:
Which part of the video we both watched evidences the speaker lied or pulled a fast one?
Can you answer that question without transposing a preferential conclusion?
Marvin Shilmer
-
“Marvin, I'm not going to debate absurd statements with you.”
Then:
1. Stop making absurd statements, and
2. Start answering straightforward questions of what you assert.
Marvin Shilmer
Unlike you, Marvin, I take the video in context.
I did further research and based my prior comment on that research.
Tearing up the speech he agreed to deliver was an act of defiance, a physical act meant to send a clear message, namely, he was not going to deliver the speech as written. He knew what the school's policy was regarding a ban on prayers in speeches, and he pulled a massive deception by what he did.
I researched this to see if perhaps he had a photographic memory and didn't need the pages to refer to. Maybe he memorized it so well he could recite it verbatim. Research, based on the video clip, confirms he knew exactly what he was doing and did not deliver the speech he agreed to deliver.
It won't matter how many of your questions I answer, you'll just come up with some nonsense as a diversionary rebuttal.
I'm done with you, Marvin.
Have a great day.
>> Which part of the video we both watched evidences the speaker lied or pulled a fast one?
Marvin - you either have a reading or comprehension problem or both, I'll let you chose which you prefer.
The whole point of the video is that he "ripped up the preapproved speech and recited a prayer instead.
"The act was apparently in protest of the Pickens County School District’s decision to no longer include prayer at graduation ceremonies, Christian News reported. Officials said the decision was made after the district was barraged with complaints by atheist groups."
So, if it was pre-approved and he had said he was going to present it (which I don't need evidence for, it's obvious this would be the case), I think he was dishonest if his intention was not in fact to present it at all as the video is evidence of.
Not really a great surprise that Christians think it's OK to lie to achieve their aims and ram they religion down people's throats when it's not wanted. The same people who would be up in arms if an atheist or muslim were to do the exact same thing.
-
“I did further research and based my prior comment on that research.”
AndDontCallMeShirley,
That’s called moving the goalpost. You said your conclusions were not based on presupposition because of what you saw in the video we both watched.
Supposedly you couldn’t find evidence of lying or pulling a fast one from the video. Hence you now appeal to “further research”.
Okay.
So, which part of your “further research” evidences the speaker lied or pulled a fast one?
Can you answer that question without presupposing a preferential conclusion?
Marvin Shilmer
Then:
1. Stop making absurd statements, and
2. Start answering straightforward questions of what you assert.
Marvin - this is exactly the sort of crap I warned you about.
The point was made, you just refuse to read it and think you can then state it's not been answered.
I've limited your posts so perhaps in future you'll spend more of them on the topic and less trying to distract attention from your lack of argument and destroying the otherwise interesting discussion.
Although Marvin publicly disagrees with Watchtower, I'm sure he's in full agreement with WT's "theocratic war strategy" policy.
Euphemisms are a convenient way to avoid simply admitting this valedictorian lied.
Since he lied for Jesus and Christians, we will relabel the lie as a noble act and call it "braveness".
Simon- excellent points. Unfortunately they'll be lost on those suffering from myopic opinions.
