₦airaland Forum

Logicboy03: You are playing semantics. Another person wont see it as a threat.

A serious organisation would ask him the meaning of the comment rather than interpret an unclear statement

He just had an Ayatollist reaction. He is a closet muslim fundamentalist. That is probably the real reason for the existence of a separate Muslim Board in the first place.

The jack.ass bedwetter still has not addressed the simple question as to why the peaceful request of chrstians over the years for their own space has been ignored ad infinitum...

Alfa Seltzer: I am now convinced that Seun is held hostage somewhere. Someone please inform his family and the authorities.

Better still, the c.ock su.cking swine is actually the self same person as Maclatunji.

His explanations here are a complete disgrace to his person and the forum.

Seun: It's unfortunate that the removal of manmustwac has been upsetting to you folks. Clearly he was a beloved moderator. I apologize for my role in his removal. However, manmustwac knew exactly what was going to happen when he made that threat. He saw what happened to MsDarkSkin, Odunnu, & Cuddlemii. I think he deserves at least as much blame for his role in this situation. Moreso he hasn't asked me to reinstate him.

And the thousands of disgraceful actions of maclatunji do not deserve same?

P.itiful bedwetting, self hating little skunk.

You are a piece of trash.

I have lost all respect for you and this forum.

Expect my article in the papers soon.

Olodo.

Reyginus: Deep Sight, this is true.

SHARRAP! YES, I AM TAKING THIS PERSONALLY! THIS IS AT THE ROOT OF THE DISCRIMINATORY PROBLEMS OF THIS COUNTRY BORNE FROM FEAR. I DOUBT HIS BANNING ME WILL DENY ME AND MY FAMILY MY DAILY BREAD. AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED, HIS EXPLANATIONS FOR ARE ARE THAT OF A BED WETTING SICKENING LITTLE CHILD SCARED SH1TLESS OF HIS HEADMASTER AYATOLLAH MACLATUNJI.

The ban will soon follow, so peace out.

What a self-hating little f.ucker.

I have freaking contributed over 7000 posts to this forum - I have earned my RIGHT TO SPEAK.

jackbauersballs: For reals?

Your daftness is legendary...

[size=20pt]SHARRAP, YOU DELUDED PECUNIARY SLAVE OF A DELUDED AYATOLLAH TERRORIZED OWNER OF A SITE. COMPOUND F.OOL.[/size]

Seun: I understand the way you all are feeling. You feel as if the decision is pro-Islamist, but really it's not.

I have decided to appoint one or two born-again Christian moderators in this section to replace the atheist I removed.

This is just nonsense.

Please kindly show that you are not some nonsensical fluke by giving intelligible reasons for your decision and also show why a threat allows you to create space for one religion, whereas sensible begging for years, by another religion, for its own space, goes unattended.

I dont think it is a pro-islamist decision. I think it is a decision borne from your natural cowardice, your pathetic lack of manly stance, and the fact that you cannot see that you thereby encourage the behavior of threats.

Reyginus: Deep, I think before we embark on a venture as such we must make sure we've exhausted every means of reconciliation.
Let our actions be worth the crime committed.
Let's give him some time.

I am serious: if Seun will not offer a proper explanation - beyond the dictatorial puerile trash he put up there - I will proceed to write articles about this, and I will surely see them into the national dailies.

Seun: Javanian is right.

And this is as fo.olish and dictatorial a response I have ever seen. Taciturn and arrogant. I really admired your achievements with this site, but with this pitiful explanation, you are an intellectual, political and social disgrace.

Talk sense, little man.

LB, Reyginus -

Deep Sight: Aside from opening that thread to sign "Like" petitions, we should consider stronger action such as advising Christian organizations of the terrible discrimination against Christianity that is practiced by Nairaland, and perhaps go as far as ensuring that Christian businesses cease to patronize this site, and Christian organizations write articles in the newspapers about this open discrimination on Nairaland - Africa's largest forum - against Christians, on account of fear of Islamic violence.

A forum boasting a membership of over one million people, cannot and should not be run like a private fiefdom, not even when it is owned by one man.

Above are the stronger actions I recommended. I volunteer to write an article and see it placed in the Guardian and Thisday.

It is seriously topical and goes to the root of issues like Boko Haram.

Seun i see you viewing this thread, freaking man up and hand down an explanation and stop being so Obasanjo-esque.

^^^ CAPITAL NONSENSE.

The above post from MMW was made in this thread AFTER he had been removed.

As such, it could not be the reason for his removal.

Sharrap.

I recommend we commence the "stronger actions" I mentioned.

[quote author=Chris†Kid]My thread caused all this?...

[/quote]It merely lit the fuse of a keg of gun powder which has been sitting here for years.

I repeat: It is barbaric for the Admin to ignore peaceful christian pleas for a space of their won while giving in to violent muslim threats for a space of their own.

Shameful.

striktlymi: I meant the thread for complaints to the mods.



Agreed!



I know about fighting against the 'discipline' imposed on manmustwack but don't you think fighting against this "preferential treatment in favour of Islam" is a different matter?



I have to say that I understand Seun's preferences. We are not the once threatened. Let's cut him some slack here.



I agree! It is unacceptable!



The stronger actions might not be necessary if you ask me.

You are contradicting yourself. You say that the situation is unacceptable and then you say that the stronger actions are not necessary. What then is necessary - weaker actions? You have two major religions in this country. One religion issues a threat, and gets its own space on nairaland. The other religion begs and begs for YEARS - PEACEFULLY for its own space as well, and is eternally ignored.

What is that, if not an open encouragement to practice violence and to issue threats?

It is an endorsement of violence and threats as the only things that work.

striktlymi: Why not start with a post in the mod section asking people to click on the "like" button if they want MMC back. We might get enough members to sway Seun, just saying!

Mod section is only open to Mods.

We do the thread in the open religious section. The opening post states the case very clearly and concisely and sets it out as what it is: radical discriminatory preferential treatment in favor of Islam - which by this action, has been taken to an extreme.

I say it yet again: the mere existence of a separate muslim section on a public forum such as this is a huge anomaly, and in itself remains an eternal testament to the radical intolerance of Islam. It also remains a testament to the FEAR that islamic violence has instilled in people: no amount of peaceful clamoring over the years for a Christian section has produced any result: notwithstanding that it is only fair and only makes sense. But one single threat from a Jihadist, and you have an Islamic section, a holy and sacred land not to be touched by any one else. Its the height of discriminatory fear, in fact, in so doing, the owner of this site, Seun, is actually actively encouraging Islamic violence - because he is showing that it works - he is responding to it and kow-towing to it, submitting to its threats and demands, while ignoring the religion that begs peacefully for a similar space for itself.

Now after all this, you have a situation where an atheist mod disagrees with the actions of the muslim mod. The atheist mods comments are simply hidden, and then he is summarily removed as a mod. In all this, not a word of explanation is given by the muslim mod or the admin. Fear. The deepest reign of terror and fear.

This is unacceptable.

Aside from opening that thread to sign "Like" petitions, we should consider stronger action such as advising Christian organizations of the terrible discrimination against Christianity that is practiced by Nairaland, and perhaps go as far as ensuring that Christian businesses cease to patronize this site, and Christian organizations write articles in the newspapers about this open discrimination on Nairaland - Africa's largest forum - against Christians, on account of fear of Islamic violence.

A forum boasting a membership of over one million people, cannot and should not be run like a private fiefdom, not even when it is owned by one man.

manmustwac: Don't worry its not your fault. Just felt bad that RoyPcain can start a topic in the religion section & Christ Kid gets a ban for starting a similar topic in the muslim section. Mac just hides my two comments when i complained. I complained again in the mod section he ignored me.

This is just sad. Its unbelievable.

manmustwac: @post
I foundout yesterday afternoon. Something to do with a reply i made to your post about mac hiding my comments. I said something that i shouldnt have said.

Unless I hear an intelligible response from Seun, that is the absolute end of any respect I have for him.

@LB. . . LETS orchestrate a protest of some sort.

Logicboy03: First of all, I wake up early everyday because I am a winner. Secondly, cill and enjoy the public holiday. Thirdly, both of you are hypocrites becauseyou are both commenting early on NL. Lastly, who appointed you guys time lords of Nairaland?

Calm down, I was only explaining what she meant by her post. You seemed not to get it, when you went - "huh?"

Logicboy03: Huh?

She means, what a sad, strange twisted life you must be living to be hankering after such, taking careful notice of such, and opening a thread about such, at 5.32 a.m in the morning.

In short, get a life.

But onto your topic anyway: it appears his disagreement with the High Supreme Ayatollah Imam Mullah of the we-will-blast-ya-head-off-if-you-dont-agree-with-us religion, Maclatunji, has led to this.

Another blow for freedom of speech and thought, another victory for terrorism and intimidation.

REBUTTAL OF A2.

I see no substance to A2 and as such will not dwell on it.

Your argument centres on the reference to Christ as Lord.

Your own very post indicates that you understand the distinction between the way that the word "Lord" was used in the OT as opposed to how it was used in reference to Christ. The reference to Christ as Lord does not in any way render him God. It renders him the Lord Jesus Christ - and as far as this Lordship is concerned you may note that there are many traditions of references to Men, Judges, Kings, and such, as Lord. Christ as the son of God would thus be Lord as anointed and that in no way renders him God.

As I said, I see no substance in that post, and I will not dwell on it. However I will cull excerpts from an article talking about the use of the word Lord in the OT AND NT.

Here goes -

"The primary reason for the use of LORD in place of God's Hebrew name is to follow the tradition of the Israelites in not pronouncing or spelling out God's name. So, when God's Hebrew name "YHWH" is used in the Old Testament, English translations usually use "LORD" in all caps or small caps. Also, since ancient Hebrew did not use vowels in its written form, it is not entirely clear how God's name should be spelled or pronounced. It could be Yahweh, or Jehovah, or Yehowah, or something else.

As stated above, when "LORD" in all caps or small caps occurs in the Old Testament, it is a replacement for an occurrence of God's Hebrew name "YHWH," also known as the Tetragrammaton. This is fairly consistent throughout all the different English translations of the Bible. When "Lord" occurs in the Old Testament, referring to God, it is usually a rendering of "Adonai," a name/title of God that emphasizes His lordship. LORD/YHWH and Lord/Adonai are by far the two most consistent renderings throughout all the different English Bible translations.

In the Old Testament, when "God" is used, it is usually a rendering of the general Hebrew word for God, "Elohim." When "LORD GOD" or "Lord GOD" occurs, it is usually a rendering of a dual name for God "Adonai YHWH." The Hebrew term "YHWH Sabaoth" is usually rendered "Lord of Hosts." The Hebrew term "YHWH Shaddai" is usually rendered "LORD Almighty." The Old Testament uses many different names and titles to refer to God, to emphasize certain aspects of His person and attributes. This can result in confusion in translation, but in the original Hebrew, it was done entirely in an effort to glorify and magnify God's name.

The usage of "Lord" and "God" in the New Testament is much less complicated. Almost universally, "God" is a translation of "theos," the general Greek word for deity. Also almost universally, "Lord" is a translation of "kurios," the general Greek word for a master."

http://www.gotquestions.org/LORD-GOD-Lord-God.html

Its simple really.

This (the reference to Christ as Lord) is no evidence whatsoever for the Trinity, or the idea that Jesus is God.

I do not see anything in the rest of your post that requires a further rebuttal.

Mr anony: Hi Deep Sight, it has been some time now, still awaiting your response. At the rate we are currently moving, it'll take us a few years to finish this: that's 38 verses at 4 posts per verse at the rate of one post per week.

I can understand that my last post was a little out of the norm of this discourse so I'll make you an offer:

You can plead a "NO CONTEST"

A "No Contest" WILL NOT MEAN in any way that you are conceding or granting the points neither will it mean that you agree or disagree either in part or in total with the post.

The "No Contest" WILL ONLY MEAN THAT you have decided not respond to it at this time. This will allow us the opportunity to skip and move on to D2.

Also if you intend to engage it at some other time, I'll suggest you can put up a blank post titled "Rebuttal of A2" to which I will in turn open a blank post titled "Response to Rebuttal" and then you can open the "Response to Response" blank post, we can feel these in later as we move along.

Finally, because my last post was not the normal specific verse by verse treatment we have been using, we can allow for skipping in this special instance, however, this should be the only time either of us will skip posts in this manner. This is so that we don't make it a habit leaving empty posts strewn all over the thread. It is only done in this case so that we can move on quicker to D2

Does this work for you?

My deepest apologies: I have had a really harried last 2 weeks at work.

I prefer to address the post, notwithstanding the fact that it is, somewhat of an anomalous post.

I will do so presently.

Logicboy03:

The point I was making s that anything legal is a moral issue. The laws of the land reflect what the leaders of the society feel to be right.


You can talk nonsense all you like but that doesnt change the facts

Olodo.

Uyi Iredia: ^^^Liked. I do respect Dawkins and Dillahaunty,
one for his boldness one for articulate (though I'm no longer as impressed). I had this idea since
atheists were all about reason I should see ONLY
REASON, no inconsistency or fallacy in whatever
arguments they make. 3 years after, I can CONFIDENTLY state that atheists, at least can be
and do, display irrationality. This applies to deists
as well since I disagree with some of their
arguments, beliefs, or even where I agree, the
method of presenting it. Seeing logicboy, I was
like 'okay, lemme try to be as logical as possible
since he presumably is logical.' That was when I
first encountered him last year. Now . . . I know
him for logicboyism (professing to be reasonable
while being most unreasonable). Seriously, the
dude is gonna marry, have kids and wealth and
write a WILL as to what should be done to all
(including his corpse) after his demise (and his
own logicboyism, maybe his daughter will have
her version) expecting that his consent as enshrined in the WILL would be executed. Nothing prevents necrophilia from that except a thing which he doesn't want to 'fess up to. Good day.

End of!

Writing a will does not change the fact. An alive person can withdraw consent during sex. A dead man can not withdraw consent to a necrophiliac.

And why should a dead man want to or have to withdraw consent WHEN AS YOU CLAIM HE DOES NOT EXIST ANYMORE AND THE BODY IS AS DEAD AS A ROCK? ? ?

Only the living make decisions according to you, no? Decisions are only relevant for th living, no? So it only counts when a living man makes a decision. You cannot claim that the dead dont exist and then cry about their lack of capacity to give or withdraw consent and then use that in an argument about the rights of the non existent dead!

You are so d.umb, you do not even realize that your argument betrays a belief in the afterlife.

Sometimes I wonder why the emptiness of this fellow's head still surprises me.

The example of a will is open and shut- a living person making a decision on what is to be done with his private property when he dies. And this fellow counters that with the puerile and assinine shout about presidential palaces. I think he needs to be urgently hospitalized.

People donate theit organs through wills for medical research. What is Illegal or immoral about willing your dead body to be used for medical or psycological research on necrophilia.

Then he talks about capacity to withdraw consent. Yourr body is your property and it is as ridiculous to speak of your house withdrawing consent as it is to speak of your dead body doing so or lacking the capacity to do so. In fact the mofo does not realize that this comment of his betrays a belief in the afterlife.

It was a living person that made the decision as to what should be done with his property - his body - when he dies. That is just as valid as a Will is - because it is exactly the same: a living person making a decision on his property before he dies. Simple.

In fact, it is a normal practice for people to make wills donating their organs for scientific research or medical use when they die. Is it therefore wrong for a living person to donate his body for research on necrophilia when he dies?

Does the consent lapse at death? If it lapses at death, then all Wills also become void at death for the same reason.

Lets be sincere. It is actually very possible that the moniker 'vedaxcool' actually belongs to ayatolllah mullah maclatunji. And with that emerges a very scary image of an indoctrinated and psycopathic individual. Every effort should be made to ensure that this individual is apprehended before a bomb goes off.

plaetton: To fully comprehend and appreciate human sex differences, an understanding of the evolutionary, hormonal, and ecological conditions that underlie sex differences in other species is essential. In fact, a full understanding of human sex differences requires that we begin with a consideration of the evolution of se.xu.al reproduction itself. This is so because the grist of evolutionary selection is heritable individual differences and the ultimate source of this variability is se.x.ual reproduction.
In relation to asexual reproduction, sexual reproduction appears provide a number of benefits, including the elimination of harmful mutations , ecological adaptation , and the generation of a complex and varied immune system . In all of these cases, the result is greater variability, or individual differences, within sexua.lly reproducing species than within asexually reproducing species.

The early stages of human differentiation appear to be quite similar to the same biological processes in other mammals and the interaction of genes, hormones and body structures is fairly well understood. In the first weeks of life, a fetus has no anatomic or hormonal sex, and only a karyotype distinguishes male from female. Specific genes induce gonadal differences, which produce hormonal differences, which cause anatomic differences, leading to psychological and behavioral differences,

So basically single celled organisms mutated and evolved, eventually creating males and females. More genders could have been created, but since more that two would be problematic, male and female became dominant. Then over time those male and female organisms became more complex and evolved and mutated into various plants, mammals and reptiles.


Then sex purges the species of undesirable mutations.

What a laugh. Even you must be embarassed at this here. No wonder all the fear of addressing this all along.

Pathetic trash.

plaetton: To fully comprehend and appreciate human sex differences, an understanding of the evolutionary, hormonal, and ecological conditions that underlie sex differences in other species is essential. In fact, a full understanding of human sex differences requires that we begin with a consideration of the evolution of se.xu.al reproduction itself. This is so because the grist of evolutionary selection is heritable individual differences and the ultimate source of this variability is se.x.ual reproduction.
In relation to asexual reproduction, sexual reproduction appears provide a number of benefits, including the elimination of harmful mutations , ecological adaptation , and the generation of a complex and varied immune system . In all of these cases, the result is greater variability, or individual differences, within sexua.lly reproducing species than within asexually reproducing species.

The early stages of human differentiation appear to be quite similar to the same biological processes in other mammals and the interaction of genes, hormones and body structures is fairly well understood. In the first weeks of life, a fetus has no anatomic or hormonal sex, and only a karyotype distinguishes male from female. Specific genes induce gonadal differences, which produce hormonal differences, which cause anatomic differences, leading to psychological and behavioral differences,

So basically single celled organisms mutated and evolved, eventually creating males and females. More genders could have been created, but since more that two would be problematic, male and female became dominant. Then over time those male and female organisms became more complex and evolved and mutated into various plants, mammals and reptiles.


Then sex purges the species of undesirable mutations.

What a laugh. Even you must be embassed at this here. No wonder all the fear of addressing this all along.

Alfa Seltzer: Where do I start?

I guess I'll have to explain it to you like you are retarded. (If you are not, apologies and please see http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/02/13/0811205106.full.pdf+html which is a university study of evolution of unicellular volvox to multicellular ones of varying number of cells and different specialisations)

Firstly, you got it all wrong again. Evolution is not and has never been spontaneous. It is not a one time action but an ongoing process. A learning and adapting process that never ends.

Elementary.

To answer your questions, antelopes cannot divide themselves into two to evade lions but over a few million years, may develop new specialised cells or minute dna modification that may help them in their evasion of predators. It could be a heightened sense of smell, a better eyesight, an increase in speed of about 1km/hour extra, or something else altogether. If such happens, it is evolution.

Also note that not all members of a given specie evolve in the same way. From the study I linked, you can see that the green algae evolved differently. Some have only 4 cells while others have up to 64 cells with specialised functions and even those with similar number of cells may have them arranged differently in order to adapt to their particular environment. But they all come from the same ancestor.

You ask what interest does a unicellular organism have in the survival of its kind? Did I hear well? Even plants, which you already claim have no consciousness, are always fighting for the survival of their kind. You might as well ask what interest humans have at the survival of humankind. You stated that humans have the impetus but you didn't say why we do in particular and not other animals.

Your next question is what triggers the cell divisions. There are many factors. I have already given you one. But there may also be other unknown factors. Science is still studying these things and we are at an early stage of understanding. The complexity of life is such that sometimes things happen without any plausible explanation as to why. We observe things happening. If we can't explain why, it doesn't mean that the thing we observed didn't happen, does it?

You are right that this thread has turned into a laugh. But it is a laugh at the ignorance of theists who just assume an imaginary being because they are intellectually limited in explaining of things that surround them.

You still have not pointed at the impetus for splits. Not at all. You have only said that such splits occur, fine. I asked you why on earth such a split would occur at all. What drives this. Rushing out now, but I repeat the question: what inherent impetus does a unicellular organism have for the survival of its species, the propagation of its genes? What interest? What drive? From where? For what? What should cause it to engage in the act of reproduction at all?