New Post
Search
HelpRe: Of course
in reply to a message by astronomicon
I didn't take it personally. I didn't try to tell you to like it. I didn't preach to you. I wasn't angry. I stated a viewpoint. Why the hell are you so intolerant? "But hell the world would be boring if we all disagreed (sic) (you must have meant agreed)" my ass. You obviously can't tolerate anyone who disagrees with you.
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
Well, I guess we can both be rude, then
If you're going to continue being rude to me, I'll do likewise to you.
You are behaving really immaturely and I'm not interested in discussing this (which, incidentally, as I've pointed out, has very little do with you, if anything at all. If the UK were to keep or get rid of our monarchy, it would be our choice, not what pleases you the most) if you're going to continue being rude yet accusatory. It's just a bit pathetic.
Oh, and I'm not using labels, yet you are. Who the hell are you to call me 'intolerant'? Just... eugh. As I said, you won't listen, so why should I try to justify myself to you. I don't want to bother with you any more.
I just think you're talking out of your arse, love, that's all. Ta ta.
If you're going to continue being rude to me, I'll do likewise to you.
You are behaving really immaturely and I'm not interested in discussing this (which, incidentally, as I've pointed out, has very little do with you, if anything at all. If the UK were to keep or get rid of our monarchy, it would be our choice, not what pleases you the most) if you're going to continue being rude yet accusatory. It's just a bit pathetic.
Oh, and I'm not using labels, yet you are. Who the hell are you to call me 'intolerant'? Just... eugh. As I said, you won't listen, so why should I try to justify myself to you. I don't want to bother with you any more.
I just think you're talking out of your arse, love, that's all. Ta ta.
This message was edited 9/13/2014, 11:28 AM
1
I was not at all rude to you until you were to me. My initial response to you, in which I outlined why I support the monarchy, was not at all rude, but yours in response to it was.
You accused me of being angry, which I had not been when I made my initial response, but that must be a bad case of projection. Because it's evident that the subject of the monarchy makes you so angry that you can't have a civil discussion about it without resorting to insults and ridicule ("eyeballs rolling like a pinball machine" and "your logic sucks.")
No, what I think about the monarchy doesn't have a lot of weight because I'm not a Brit, but that's not as you pointed out. I pointed it out first in my initial response. And no, you can't tell me whom to vote for for President and you don't get to vote for President yourself and maybe you don't care, but guess what? There are a lot of people who aren't American who do care who the President of the USA is, and who do want Americans to understand how their country is perceived by the rest of the world. And if one of them wanted to present their viewpoint to me, whether it were you or someone else, while I might not agree, I would never treat them in the rude, sarcastic, angry, dismissive way that you have treated me, made all the worse by your failure to defend any stance you have taken.
Throughout this discussion, you have either failed to address my points entirely, or done so with a complete lack of logic ("polling and statistics are stupid because I said they are and polls are done this way because I say they are so that means your statistics don't mean anything nyeahhh") or with immature one-word answers. ("Whatever".) And you think I'm talking out my "arse"? And I'm immature? More projection and more irony.
Who am I to tell you you're intolerant? A person who's been a target of your intolerance. And you're not interested in having this discussion with me? Prove it, then. Quit posting your rude, sarcastic point-dodging responses. which are made obviously because you're a person who can't stand not having the last word, even when the last word is "Whatever."
You accused me of being angry, which I had not been when I made my initial response, but that must be a bad case of projection. Because it's evident that the subject of the monarchy makes you so angry that you can't have a civil discussion about it without resorting to insults and ridicule ("eyeballs rolling like a pinball machine" and "your logic sucks.")
No, what I think about the monarchy doesn't have a lot of weight because I'm not a Brit, but that's not as you pointed out. I pointed it out first in my initial response. And no, you can't tell me whom to vote for for President and you don't get to vote for President yourself and maybe you don't care, but guess what? There are a lot of people who aren't American who do care who the President of the USA is, and who do want Americans to understand how their country is perceived by the rest of the world. And if one of them wanted to present their viewpoint to me, whether it were you or someone else, while I might not agree, I would never treat them in the rude, sarcastic, angry, dismissive way that you have treated me, made all the worse by your failure to defend any stance you have taken.
Throughout this discussion, you have either failed to address my points entirely, or done so with a complete lack of logic ("polling and statistics are stupid because I said they are and polls are done this way because I say they are so that means your statistics don't mean anything nyeahhh") or with immature one-word answers. ("Whatever".) And you think I'm talking out my "arse"? And I'm immature? More projection and more irony.
Who am I to tell you you're intolerant? A person who's been a target of your intolerance. And you're not interested in having this discussion with me? Prove it, then. Quit posting your rude, sarcastic point-dodging responses. which are made obviously because you're a person who can't stand not having the last word, even when the last word is "Whatever."
1