things that ENRAGE you

[imbetter]

Mine are:

My older brother
My younger brother
Several students in my school
My teacher
My piano teacher
My previous piano teacher
Piantisimo

[musik_man]

People who don't use their turn signals
People who use their turn signals when they are already halfway in the other lane
Pancakes
Passive-aggressive people
People who walk by when you're playing piano and start jamming random keys

That's all for now

[pianistimo]

why do i enrage you.  what have i done to you?  what about people who bash others for expressing a viewpoint that doesn't agree with theirs.  in america we have freedom of speech and freedom of religion.  that is what enrages you.  that people have a right to express a different opinion.

you are immature.

for one thing - i am only one small voice among many dissenters of my viewpoint.  why would i be such a challenge to anyone?  is it because you think what i say has merit?  and, you don't want to believe it.  otherwise - don't let it bother you.  it's like saying field mice control the world.

ps i think secretly you like to be angry.  why else the name:  imbetterthanyou?

[jpianoflorida]

why do i enrage you.  what have i done to you?  what about people who bash others for expressing a viewpoint that doesn't agree with theirs.  in america we have freedom of speech and freedom of religion.  that is what enrages you.  that people have a right to express a different opinion.

you are immature.

for one thing - i am only one small voice among many dissenters of my viewpoint.  why would i be such a challenge to anyone?  is it because you think what i say has merit?  and, you don't want to believe it.  otherwise - don't let it bother you.  it's like saying field mice control the world.

ps i think secretly you like to be angry.  why else the name:  imbetterthanyou?

AMEN AMEN AMEN      I TOTALLY AGREE.  yes, what is it with your name "i'm better than you"    that right off makes me not really take you seriously.

[emmdoubleew]

why do i enrage you.  what have i done to you?  what about people who bash others for expressing a viewpoint that doesn't agree with theirs.  in america we have freedom of speech and freedom of religion.  that is what enrages you.  that people have a right to express a different opinion.

You mean like the opinion that you are annoying and incite anger?   

Nothing personal, I was just pointing out hypocrisy.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Quote from: pianistimo on December 17, 2006, 01:13:42 AM

he [Richard Dawkins] is a nazi in disguise.  he doesn't love anyone who doesn't hold his views.

Quote from: pianistimo on December 17, 2006, 11:07:25 PM
yes - homosexuality is evil

And, yes, you have freedom of speech to say such things. I don't agree with your views, but you have a right to your opinion. However, if you are going publicly express such thoughts, don't complain if or when someone says they are enraged by you.


 

[imbetter]

Quote from: pianistimo on December 17, 2006, 01:13:42 AM

he [Richard Dawkins] is a nazi in disguise.  he doesn't love anyone who doesn't hold his views.

Quote from: pianistimo on December 17, 2006, 11:07:25 PM
yes - homosexuality is evil

And, yes, you have freedom of speech to say such things. I don't agree with your views, but you have a right to your opinion. However, if you are going publicly express such thoughts, don't complain if or when someone says they are enraged by you.


 

Thats EXACTLY why she enrages me.

[pianistimo]

richard dawkins has said many provoking things about christianity.  that is not against one person - it is against many people who believe in God and also God himself.  but, i do not judge richard dawkins as evil - perse - but, misinformed.  he is too full of himself to consider the possiblity that he's human.

for provoking - i do not start threads on other people.  name one thread that i have started to make another person feel or look bad.  i have not.  you have!

if you want to fight about it - come over here.  and, i'll give you some ice-cream and tell you that you have to grow up and learn that many people in the world do not share the same views - and that maybe - just maybe - i may be in the minority in public places.  do you realize how many freedoms americans have given up over religion.  it used to be that if you wanted to say a prayer (or congresspeople wanted to say a prayer) before making an important decision - it was something you had a right to do.  now - all these things are not rights under the UNITED NATIONS humanitarian guise.  we are trying to 'fit in.'

this is a world governing organization.  they are eliminating God.  how powerful is that?  they think they are eliminating God.  we'll see if God gets eliminated.  in the meantime - eat some crackers and think happy thoughts.

[pianistimo]

ps - i do not ask other people intimate questions on what they believe about sexual orientation.  and yet - people ask me blatant questions and want yes or no answers.  that is like interrogating people.

[Bob]

Pyscho parents
Parents that don't support their children or shouldn't have children -- unfit parents
The millionth time a student asks a question and that question is exactly what I answered the sentence before
Unsupportive school environments
Being dulled by the grind of daily life
Not being being quick enough to think to defend myself when someone verbally attacks me

[steve_m]

4

[debussy symbolism]

Greetings.

I don't think that you Pianistimo should at all be angry or upset at him. After all, he was referring to "Piantisimo," and given your forum profile, that doesn't seem to be you.

[musik_man]

Why is it that 90% of the threads on this forum turn into discussions about Pianistimo?

I know she bugs alot of people, but what bugs me is the dozen forumers who follow her around and engage in constant fruitless arguments.  If she bugs you, ignore her (not that hard.)

[Floristan]

Why is it that 90% of the threads on this forum turn into discussions about Pianistimo?

I know she bugs alot of people, but what bugs me is the dozen forumers who follow her around and engage in constant fruitless arguments. If she bugs you, ignore her (not that hard.)

Here, Here!

[prometheus]

richard dawkins has said many provoking things about christianity.

He did. And he backs them up with arguments. People that critizice christianity aren't nazi's or people that don't love anyone but people with similar views.

It could be true, the latter part, but all of us; we don't know Richard Dawkins personally so when one makes such a statement everyone instinctively knows it is not based on facts or reason. But on emotion.

but, i do not judge richard dawkins as evil - perse - but, misinformed.  he is too full of himself to consider the possiblity that he's human.

He was voted the most influential intellectual in Britain by Prospect magazine in 2004.

Surely Dawkins has easily read more books than both of us together. Surely he has argued about this subject with much more people than both of us together. Surely he has no religion that blocks him out from the truth like many religious people have.


As for 'IamBetterThanYou', yes his message and his name are provoking. He sounds like an 'enraged teenager'. Just let him.

[pianowolfi]

It enrages me when somebody constantly claims that i am better in piano playing than him/her and I don't agree. 

[ronde_des_sylphes]

richard dawkins has said many provoking things about christianity.  that is not against one person - it is against many people who believe in God and also God himself.  but, i do not judge richard dawkins as evil - perse - but, misinformed.  he is too full of himself to consider the possiblity that he's human.

!!!

[ronde_des_sylphes]

ps - i do not ask other people intimate questions on what they believe about sexual orientation.  and yet - people ask me blatant questions and want yes or no answers.  that is like interrogating people.

Suddenly become very coy about flaunting your views? I can't understand why.. as I said before, everyone is entitled to hold views, and if you choose to believe that homosexuality is evil, that is your opinion and you're entitled to it.

[counterpoint]

what enrages me:

1. if religious beliefs are used to offend and threaten others

2. if religious beliefs are taken as the "only real truth", as in "everyone will be killed, who doesn't believes what I believe"

3. George W. Bush (because of 1. and 2.), I suspect him to write in this forum under the name "pianistimo"

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Anyways. things that enrage me..

The relentless hypocrisies of the government I live under (I don't expect governments to behave well, but this particular one has truly "excelled" itself, if that's the right term).

Vacuous music masquerading as high art (and being promoted as such).

Bigotry.

I'm sure I can think of more, but in some cases it's a fine line as to whether something enrages me or makes me laugh because it's so pathetic.

[jpianoflorida]

Why is it that 90% of the threads on this forum turn into discussions about Pianistimo?

I know she bugs alot of people, but what bugs me is the dozen forumers who follow her around and engage in constant fruitless arguments.  If she bugs you, ignore her (not that hard.)

I wonder that all the time!    I think they just like having someone to pick on.  Reminds them of their days in school.   This time they can be the bully because no one else is around to know what they are really like?  Yeah. that's it!  You'll find these same people contantly complaining all the time about religion on the forum and how it doesn't belong here, etc, then they purposely bring it up all the time.   If you look around it's rare that a Christian brings up a religious topic.   It's normally started by someone who want to argue religion.  Or they start a post KNOWING it will enrage anyone who follows religion.

[pianistimo]

what i disagree with prometheus - and possibly a few others on - is the idea that free will does not belong to us.  physicists often 'fire the opening salvo against free will.'  now, i'm not saying richard dawkins has this intent - but he is involved in politics through the back door.  christians understand this and are wary of losing their political rights.  why would science make the claim it has the only right to be in a position of world power?  by scientific reason alone?  what about inalienable rights given to us by God himself?

here's my position:

evolutionary psychologists seek to root personal qualities such as altruism and agression to darwinian mechanisms of random mutation and natural selection.  'we are survival machines -- robot vehicles blindly programmed to preserve the 'selfish-gene' -is what Richard Dawkins writes.  now, if this is true - and also what Susan Blackmore writes - (a psychologist) that we have memes in our brains that we 'catch' from one another like viruses - and memes are the mental equivalent of genes that fashion ideas and replicate in the manner of genes....this takes away all responsibility that humans have toward each other, free will, and religious tolerance.  what is to stop an oversimplification of this that might lead to criminal activity, ethnic conflicts, and even genocide?  all in the name of RATION.  rational!

scientific assult on free-will would be less alarming if we had legal and ethical laws in place to keep it from winding out of  control.  but, do we?  the United Nations effectively kicked God out of many national declarations - as with africa.  getting rid of the words 'a nation under the Almighty God...'  or something like that - and replaced it with more 'humanistic' words.  why do they fear God?  if some of the population is happy with the words God - then why can't they leave it at that.  at least God has some legal and ethical laws (even if they aren't always bound up in the system) that counter balance and weigh any that would take away human rights and freedoms.

in 2002, the book 'The Illusion of Conscious Will' was published (written by Harvard university psychologist Daniel Wegner)  -- this is teaching things that lead to the concept that even time does not exist.  this is poppycock - to use the old english expression.  imo, this is ***.  if i took a class like that - i'd stand up and say - remember the declaration of independence.  these people had BRAINS.  and, yet compared to england and the oppression of one church or the other - the UNITED NATION might end up being the most oppressive of all.  i say 'give me liberty or give me death.'

[prometheus]

Science has no political agenda. Some scientists probably have. And it will influence what they are going to work on. But it will not influence the outcome.

Again you make an attack on the UN. The UN has no power whatsoever.

[counterpoint]

what i disagree with prometheus - and possibly a few others on - is the idea that free will does not belong to us. 

If we didn't have a free will, all discussions about right and wrong would be meaningless. I absolutely believe in free will and moral/amoral behaviour, here I support pianistimo fully.
The only problem I see, is to think that only religious people do have morality. That's not true. There are atheist people, who have high moral standards and religious people, which talk about morality, but have no practical morality at all.

It is not a question of believing in god or not, but of the sensibility to the feelings and rights of people, who are different from oneself.

[prometheus]

What are you reasons to support 'free will'? And what does that mean? That you can make a desicion free from past experiences, upbringing, advice and input others give you, etc?

As for religion. If god is all-knowing then she already knows what you are going to do in all future events.
So then you can't have free will.

[jpianoflorida]

What are you reasons to support 'free will'? And what does that mean? That you can make a desicion free from past experiences, upbringing, advice and input others give you, etc?

As for religion. If god is all-knowing then she already knows what you are going to do in all future events.
So then you can't have free will.

Do you sometimes know what decision your children will make? But you don't stop them from making that decision?   Do they still have free will?        yes, because you let them still make that decision.     God already knows what decision we are going to make but he doesn't stop us-that's what free will is.

[prometheus]

I don't have children.

Yes, sometimes you can predict what someone will do. But you will never know for sure. And you will not be able to predict everything your child does.


No, the knowledge of something that is all-knowing is very different. Such a god knows exactly what you are going to do, when, how, why, where, etc. And god will know every neuron in your brain firing before it happens.

If God is truely all-knowing she created a deterministic world. Something that is already refuted by quantum theory.

[counterpoint]

As for religion. If god is all-knowing then she already knows what you are going to do in all future events.
So then you can't have free will.

That's a question of what "all-knowing" does mean. If there is a free will, future cannot be predicted. If all was predetermined, life, moral and religion wouldn't make any sense.

[pianistimo]

i think there are several paradigms.  one is God's sphere (which christians willingly put themselves under).  we want the visible outcome.  we want the Holy Spirit to guide us - therefore - God can easily predict that we want to do his will.  but, God never forces His will on us (unless prophets, etc. that were chosen from birth to preach the gospel).  he allows us to choose.  even some prophets - such as jonah - ran away and didn't want to preach redemption to ninevah (which, btw, repented as a whole city and many were added to the 'book of life').

the people who are atheists- may WELL be more moral!  but, will it do them any good without 'love.'  love is not a selfish - gene.  love is patient and kind, etc. but it also encompasses the idea that we are not first.  God is.  our brother is second.  we can wait.

so- in the sense of paradigms.  we have a paradigm on earth.  everyone can live their life as they choose.  some choose life.  some choose death.  they don't know they are choosing this.  they may think that life ends at death - and therefore they won't be ressurrected.  but, in a sense - the larger paradigm is that life does have a planned ending.  thereby - overruling the plans of satan for evil.  each 'god' has it's own plan.  satan's is for evil.  the True God - is for righteousness.  what is it?  science doesn't have any idea of good or evil.  that is God's domain.

so if evil won in the end - God is powerless.  He must remain the victor over death.  death is sin.  sin is breaking law.  law is not the end - but love is the end - because Christ overcame sin and death by being the only one to perfectly keep the law.  so - say you have a law abiding athiest - but doesn't accept christ - and a christian who is somewhat sinful - but keeps repenting.  maybe 70 times 7!  who is the ultimate victor?  the one who accepts Christ's sacrifice!

that is the perspective of christians who want to be part of the 'design' for our future.  they accept that the outcome is known.  there are 'winners' in this life that might be 'losers' in the next.

ps the bible says 'all have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God.'  that means there is no positively righteous person - no matter how good they appear.  sin can be in the mind.  only God knows.  so if he says - noone is righteous - than everyone needs to be forgiven at some time or other.

[prometheus]

Counterpoint, I agree. But it is one of the many paradoxes of christianity. Now try to bend your mind around the trinity...


The genes that code for love and altruism are also selfish. If love makes us more fit then the gene that codes for love will be passed on.

That's the whole idea behind 'the selfish gene'. Genes are selfish, people don't have to be. If a gene codes you to do things that make other people with the same gene more fit then it doesn't matter if you reproduce to pass on that gene yourself. You are already working to make sure that gene gets passed on.

[pianistimo]

do you realize that only 100 years ago - people were hanged on gallows.  i'm not saying this means you are wrong - i'm saying noone believed that murderers and adulterers and whatever else - were anything but criminals.  they couldn't say 'oh, i had a selfish - gene come to the fore - and i murdered for some gold.' 

i visited some gallows in california - and when i saw the - it made me think that if i ever lived back then - i would not be stealing gold.  the selfish gene was driven right out of me.

if we truly realized (as Christ did) how our actions influence and sometimes hurt others - we would also be driven by love instead of fear.  what promotes fear?  doing wrong.

[wishful thinker]

Mine are:

My older brother
My younger brother
Several students in my school
My teacher
My piano teacher
My previous piano teacher
Piantisimo

Wow, is there anybody that you do like?

[prometheus]

i visited some gallows in california - and when i saw the - it made me think that if i ever lived back then - i would not be stealing gold.  the selfish gene was driven right out of me.

Research has already indicated that the severity of punishments has no effect on the sort of crimes you talk about. Do you really thing that those people that we hung back in those days read the book of law to know what punishment was on what crime?

[cmg]

I wonder that all the time!    I think they just like having someone to pick on.  Reminds them of their days in school.   This time they can be the bully because no one else is around to know what they are really like?  Yeah. that's it!  You'll find these same people contantly complaining all the time about religion on the forum and how it doesn't belong here, etc, then they purposely bring it up all the time.   If you look around it's rare that a Christian brings up a religious topic.   It's normally started by someone who want to argue religion.  Or they start a post KNOWING it will enrage anyone who follows religion.

Ah, a series of glittering generalities, if ever I saw one!

If you've noticed, people tend to challenge pianistimo becuase her arguments are not backed by that little thing known as "evidence."  You know, that silly stuff that keeps the court systems of our various countries running relatively smoothly and provides the theoretical framework to design the computers we are rabbiting about on right this moment?  Science?  You know?

We religioius dissenters have only asked for proof (evidence) of Christian claims.  When we push you up against the wall with an argument -- such as scandalously calling homosexuals "evil" -- you provide no evidence except that "it is written" in Your Book.  Then, we counter with:  "who wrote Your Book?"  And you reply, without evidence, "God did."  When we object to that because you can't provide any evidence for it, you say, "well, it's a matter of faith and Grace, and there is no real proof.  We just KNOW."

And, we counter, well, fine, but don't call this an intellectual debate.  

And one final word on some Christians terming homosexuals "evil."  In NYC, where I live, such a statement made about any group of people -- Afro-Americans, Hispanics, Jews, etc, --  would be considered a criminal offense and subject to our Hate Laws.  Why?  Becuase you have no evidence to make such a claim, except the opinion of a Book written by an entity you can't prove has actually written it.

It's that logical and that simple.

And pianistimo, whom we truly love, frequently bypasses logic in this area.  Other times, her aruments, gleaned from Google, are incomprehensible to us and we ask clarification, which we rarely get.  Hence, our cirucular debates that go on and on.

Good day.

 

[pianistimo]

where do NYC laws come from.  this country was founded on the laws that came directly from the bible.  i bet you didn't know that.

[cmg]

where do NYC laws come from.  this country was founded on the laws that came directly from the bible.  i bet you didn't know that.

Don't be coy with me.  Only a slight portion of laws derive from the Bible.  But, if you choose to set yourself up, here goes:  If the Bible preaches "love thy neighbor," "turn the other cheek," and "thou shall not Kill," then, where do you get off calling others "evil" and yearning for the Day of Revelation when all who haven't "accepted Christ" will burn in hell?

Fare thee well.

[pianistimo]

coy?  i'm being truthful. 

as for the second part - don't you feel the pain and sufferring of the world right now.  all the earth (even the environment) is yearning for a better world.  even the animals are sufferring.  are you saying you like the way it is?

NYC is the center of many crime scenes.  the most recent heinous one was the woman who was simply exiting a bar alone and was most brutally murdered.  she had also just graduated as a criminal investigator or something like that - and so of course, a criminal would want to do her in. 

when you read how much pain is inflicted upon innocent people who are trying to make the world a better place...it looks like evil wins.  but, evil will not win in the end.  if you love the world the way it is- you love evil.

now, christians don't long for the judgement in terms of people dying (a second death) - because burning in hell forever isn't in the bible.  the second death is.  evil will be no more.  but, christians do not judge the world.  God does.

[prometheus]

Even the laws in NYC that match with some of the laws of the bible don‘t actually 'come' from the bible.

Murder and theft are universally recognised to be 'wrong'. That explains why they are in there. Because they are human laws, not divine laws.

Every society has them.

What about the law of not eating something that lives in water?

[pianistimo]

?what law is that?  fish with fins and scales are not 'unclean meat.'

prometheus, the proof that the bible is truthful comes from our studies in archeology.  the sites, times, and people were real.  as real as it gets.  where do names of places come from?  i suppose they always existed, right?  why the exact names - ie the one i mentioned about christ living in (nazareth) - do you realize that earlier that name was naboith - a site where arabs settled when ishmael departed and went east.  do you realize the name east of the middle  - or middle east - means east of issac.  east - he went east of his brother.  this is in the bible - where it mentions ishmael settling east...

also, there are many artifacts found in the red sea that indicate an army (egyptian) was buried there.  but, is this on the front page of the news?  no.  people don't hear archeological finds.  they bury it.  they don't give equal sides to the story.

if murder and theft were a human law - then sudan's genocide wouldn't have happened.  cambodia's either.  for that matter, the holocaust, wwI, wwII, and now possibly wwIII.  all over nuclear capabilities.  we don't want iran enriching uranium.  who will stop them.  if nobody does - we have the 'king of the south ' pushing against the 'king of the north' (european nations).  that is prophecied in the bible in daniel.

[prometheus]

?what law is that?  fish is not an 'unclean meat.'

Leviticus 11:10
And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you.

prometheus, the proof that the bible is truthful comes from our studies in archeology.

Sheesh, I didn't even suggest that the bible isn't truthful. And haven't we laughed enough at the logic in your argument? Honestly, don't you amuse yourself with such a comment? And haven't we refuted it many times already? I already had to requote myself because you never responded to my refutation of the silly and stupid reasoning you display here.

[pianistimo]

any that DO NOT HAVE FINS AND SCALES.  that means everything else.  shellfish that scavenge are scavengers.  pigs are scavengers.  they eat garbage.  but this is not a sin that is = to death.  it just isn't healthy.  God gave dietary laws so people wouldn't get trichnosis - or other worms - and diseases from garbaged food.  mercury.  etc.

i think you change your opinions.  that is good that you are open to debate and all - and i am too.  if i find a place where i think i'm being illogical - i go and find evidence.  you have not refuted my evidence.  therefore - it is logical.  even if it was refuted - it doesn't make it illogical. that is what debate is.  you would not engage me -if i was an easy target for you.

the bible will always be a source if dismay for people who do not want to be told 'what to do.'  if you do it 'your way'  who's stopping you?  certainly not me.  but if i preach the gospel - then you know that there is an end to the ways of man - and the beginning of  a new government that will be set up on this earth.  'the government shall be upon his shoulders.'  and , all the kingdoms of the earth will submit to Him (Jesus Christ).  that was enraging to the romans.  why should it be surprising to christians today that it makes others angry? 

[prometheus]

So you do not eat Clams, oysters, crabs, lobsters, and shrimp?

Are chickens scavengers?

[pianistimo]

they are not scavengers as eagles and hawks.  no - they do not typically like dead meat.  they will occasionally pick at things that are dead - but typically they do not eat it voraciously.  they prefer corn.  also, they are not mentioned among 'unclean' birds.  the owl, the stork, the comorant. - who wants to eat those anyways?  do you want to eat owl meat?  i have no idea what it tastes like - but that would destroy our night predators that eat mice, snakes, rabbits.

my dietary habits are based on what the bible says - but i do not think my salvation depends upon what i eat.  paul - or one of the new testament saints - wrote that 'everything is clean' in terms of freedom from the 'law' of sin and death.  and , yet in gratefulness to the freedoms that i now have - i wish to observe the laws that God set in motion (like the laws of physics) that allow for maximum health.  i mean - if God said it - it had a purpose.  why would God say something meaningless?

that is my personal reasoning.  but, if others eat something else - i don't immediately think 'oh, they're not christian.'  that is the LAST thing that i think.  i don't even really think about it.  also, when one of my grandmother's came for thanksgiving many years ago - she told me she was craving shrimp cocktail.  i said, 'let's go get some right now - and i took her to the place that i thought would have the freshest and least decrepid shrimp.'  she munched away and though i didn't really want to eat it - i tasted a bite.  because i knew she might be offended.  not eating it all the time - made me want to puke - but i had a straight face and said, 'mmm.'  (she didn't know i spit it out in the napkin when she wasn't looking).

[thalbergmad]

for one thing - i am only one small voice

I would hardly call your voice on here small.

Not with your average 10 posts per day.

[jpianoflorida]

I would hardly call your voice on here small.

Not with your average 10 posts per day.

hey Thal   I was thinking of buying a tambourine, what should I get?   ok, sorry.  I just wanted to add some humour today. 

[shoenberg3]

Things that enrage me?

elevateme and franzliszt2

[jspash]

when i'm walking down the sidewalk and people "jump" out in front of me from stores. then they get mad at me when i step on their shoes 

[lagin]

For the record, piantissimo, you don't enrage anyone.  You aren't responsible for how other people choose to feel about what you say or do.  That's their problem.  For example, I could choose to be enraged at people ganging up on you, (which by the way, really does annoy me), but I have learned (or am learning) to let people be people.  There have been a few forum members on here who use profanity every second sentence.  That probably annoys me equally as much as Christianity annoys them, but I choose to let it go, and not be mad that they don't see things the way that I see them. 

I think it's silly, too, that if you are an "annoying" minority, you are the problem.  Since when did majority = right.  For example, the majority of people voted for Bush.  Does that make it right?  (P.S. I have NO idea about the pros and cons of Bush.  To be honest, I trully don't even know who our prime minister is because I don't follow politics at all.  That was just a random example).  The majority of people don't play piano in their spare time (I mean in the world in general), does that make them wrong?

My mom always told me that if something is really irking me it's either because 1. It's hit a nerve, or 2. I'm guilty of the same thing, and we always most readily condemn others for the faults we ourselves have. 

So in your case, I'd say, it's both.  If I was always saying that Santa Claus was real people would be, "Wierdo.  Freak.  Just ignore her."  Because everyone (with exception of little kids) knows that there is not a man with flying reigndeer who pops down chimneys.  There is not truth in my statement, so no nerves are hit.  So if nerves are being hit with your statements, then what are we saying?  Shame on you for speaking truth that might make me feel guilty?    And if it's option number 2., then maybe they should stop promoting their ideas (one being for example, that you are annoying), before they start bashing you for promoting yours. 

So anyways, I like you.

[pianistimo]

i like you, too!  actually, i don't mind a little debate.  i feel sorta wierdly refreshed.  but, not because of bothering people.  it just 'gets it out.'  sometimes i feel driven to say what i say without planning it.  other times i do research a topic and idea and really try to stay focused.  i accept what other people say - that occasionally i go off topic.  yes.  i could be slightly schizo.  but, if lagin, and pianowelsh and jpianoflorida can put up with me - then it's ok.  i'm not representative of the entire world of christians.

when i sit down and never know exactly where my brain will take me.  it's sort of a joy ride with the bible.  i never get depressed when i read it.  it is full of enlightening ways to bring peace to the world.  for one thing - you realize that Christ sufferred all things (everything) that we suffer.  so, it makes you feel like you are understood - when you pray for help.  it might even be help thinking straight.

i'm serious.  sometimes i do pray for that! 

also, i gain insight and help with reason from all the pianoforumers.  i think that everyone contributes in a good way - even if they are very passionate about what they say.  it doesn't bother me if someone is arguing the other side completely - because it helps me put into words what i really think.  of course, going too far is pages and pages that noone will read - or they see it and jump over it.  yes.  i understand that.

perhaps i am too out of it to get enraged.  i really don't get enraged about normal things.  i do, however, hate it when someone puts a soda in the freezer and forgets it.  i suppose spilling things on the carpet for the 100th time is sorta hard on me, too.  occasionally i will say - 'i'm not picking up one more spill.  you all have to do it yourselves.'

[thalbergmad]

it's sort of a joy ride with the bible. 

Yeh, all that killing, great.