Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Religion

Voltaire2

(15,119 posts)

24. er, no, the paragraph you posted in your op is clearly talking about people in the environmental

Reply to guillaumeb (Reply #23)

Tue Apr 30, 2019, 05:29 PM

Apr 2019

movement. That is not disputable, at least not honestly disputable. You asserted a further restriction "seeking the divine". Please provide some evidence to support that assertion.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

43 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Wild Church founder Victoria Loorz finds resurrection on Easter and Earth Day [View all] guillaumeb Apr 2019 OP

Oh, boy...stretching credulity in search of being meaningful. MineralMan Apr 2019 #1

Expanding our understanding. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #2

"but if you prefer limitations" trotsky Apr 2019 #3

And is this a snide attack? guillaumeb Apr 2019 #6

#1, there you go again with "eye for an eye" justice. So Christian of you. trotsky Apr 2019 #13

Was your response a snide attack, or an open attack? guillaumeb Apr 2019 #15

This is about your attack, g. trotsky Apr 2019 #16

No, it started with your attempt to misframe. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #18

No, it didn't. trotsky Apr 2019 #20

Oh, really? MineralMan Apr 2019 #4

The excerpted paragraph appears to claim that your environmentalism will fail without jesus. Voltaire2 Apr 2019 #5

She is obviously speaking of those, and to those, guillaumeb Apr 2019 #7

No it isn't obvious at all that she was referring Voltaire2 Apr 2019 #8

Only those seeking the divine would feel the lack. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #9

She explicitly claims that people without Voltaire2 Apr 2019 #10

What she said was: guillaumeb Apr 2019 #11

The set is people in the environmental movement. Voltaire2 Apr 2019 #12

The word "people" means many things. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #14

Perhaps instead of dismissing what others are trying to tell you, you should listen instead. trotsky Apr 2019 #17

When others attempt to insert a meaning into a statement, guillaumeb Apr 2019 #19

Listen. trotsky Apr 2019 #21

Please provide any evidence at all that Victoria Loorz meant to restrict Voltaire2 Apr 2019 #22

You made an assertion. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #23

er, no, the paragraph you posted in your op is clearly talking about people in the environmental Voltaire2 Apr 2019 #24

You made an assertion based on what you claim is her intent. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #25

Much like when people say "everybody" and you object marylandblue Apr 2019 #26

No, when it is a small number it seems obvious to mention it. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #27

Thereby selectively claiming something is an idiom when it suits your purpose marylandblue Apr 2019 #28

An entire subthread devoted to diversion. guillaumeb May 2019 #34

"OK for me, not for thee." trotsky May 2019 #29

It's the Gott mit uns effect, perhaps. MineralMan May 2019 #30

Indeed. trotsky May 2019 #31

Non-believers are fair game for everyone, it seems. MineralMan May 2019 #32

Among Chinese authoritarians as well? guillaumeb May 2019 #35

here is the phrase in question Voltaire2 May 2019 #33

This is evidence of your own interpretation of her use of an idiom. guillaumeb May 2019 #36

Please provide your evidence Voltaire2 May 2019 #37

Reread my response. guillaumeb May 2019 #38

please provide the evidence that supports your interpretation. Voltaire2 May 2019 #39

There is none for your own. guillaumeb May 2019 #40

actually there is and I posted it. Voltaire2 May 2019 #41

No, you posted your own idiosyncratic interpretation guillaumeb May 2019 #42

Ok let's try this one more time. Voltaire2 May 2019 #43