Reply to thread

If these conclusions have no logical infirmities -- then why the hell not? Take note that I am not a bit interested in your word play -- only what logically follows from a logical argument.

You, on the other hand, has taken the ridiculous position that existence is based on scientific evidence. So, when you declare I love you to your wife, children and friends, you weren't actually stating love but a twisted form of tit-for-tat ultimately ending in some form of materially quantifiable gain for you.

That is so endearing.

I have proven the existence of god from ontology -- hence a logical truth. How I worship god is entirely my own business. Neither the proof of god's existence, nor my religion has anything to do with science or scientific evidence.

Just because you do not wish to pray has also nothing to do with ontology or your self-declared agnosticism.

Well maybe not "Klingons" because that's an alien made up by humans to sell a story. Wait!

No I take that back... it actually is the exact same thing.[/COLOR]

You say klingons are incontingent, infinite and necessary?

You see, your semantic nonsense has nothing to do with logic.

LMAO

So you lied?

As I recall, you believe that it could be anything or nothing.

Poor ignorant agnostic. You cannot even claim what you believe in without confessing the lie you know is underneath all your bravado.

How silly of me. Of course you can't be embarassed. What one is ignorant of, one cannot possibly feel shame of as well.

Although you might want to cut-down on the use of fairy. You might inadvertantly set mare off.

[/QUOTE]