 | | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tony Hedglen writes: <snip> I think you're misreading Larry here - although to be fair, Larry does seem to have an anti-christian bias. BUT! That's not what he's saying. He is saying that the club should not *AS A CLUB* (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
(...) looking for a non-Scientologist. Hmm... Dave! (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
(...) Can we dig into that a bit? What anti-christian bias? :-) Seriously. I'm not biased. At least I don't *think* I am. From this cite: (URL) selected the def I think applies: 2. Usage Problem. a. A preference or an inclination, especially one (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
(...) Sure. :) (...) Hmm. Bias is perhaps the wrong term for it - I've never seen you reacting to a christian in a neutral environment, so I can't accurately call it bias, I suppose. More after the definition... (...) Dictionary.com's definition (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
Warning, semantic slicing and dicing ahead. :-) (...) I would agree except to say that it should read "is not valid for me" or "I cannot accept it as valid within my framework". I acknowledge that others do find it valid. I judge *them* only on (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
(...) Hmm, OK. I'm not certain that the distinction is relevent most of the time unless you're actually in a debate about perceptions of reality, but I'll grant it to you anyway. :) (although taking this any farther is *really* splitting hairs) (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
