Buerste wrote:
"Hawke" wrote in message
...
Buerste wrote:
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
snip
I rarely joke without letting you know that I'm joking. This is not a
joke. If you have some evidence to support what you're saying, let's
hear it.

One would think that violent anti-theists, if they were the "fastest
growing group" of the non-religious, would be noticeable among a group
that's grown in numbers by 20,000,000 people over the last 18 years.

--
Ed Huntress

As usual you are trying the "Ed Twist" of what I said. Let me quote.

-"You are completely leaving out antitheists. They take the view that
theism
-is dangerous and destructive. Their hatred of religion is proactive,
often
-organized, often violent and craving power. THIS is the fastest growing
-group of non-religious and in many ways can be considered a "religion".
-Think of them as radical secularists bordering on fanatical terrorists.

And somehow you extracted this:

"One would think that violent anti-theists, if they were the "fastest
growing
group" of the non-religious"

Now, your manipulations confuse me. Do you want to discuss the growth of
"antitheists" or "violent antitheists"? I know you would prefer to
change the meaning of my post, as usual, but... Either that or I'm a
****ty communicator, or you're a ****ty reader. Take your pick.

I'm going with you're a ****ty communicator.



Hawke

I freely admit that. I have never pretended to be intelligent or a
wordsmith. I'm blessed by occasionally being mechanically clever or lucky
and sometimes think clearly. I never have the arrogant, liberal pretence
that everything I think, do or say is dripping with wisdom.

You're also mistaken thinking that pretense is something confined to
liberals. I can cite you scads of republicans just like that. It makes
no sense to make accusations about one party when the facts show the
other is just as guilty. All that shows is a personal bias.

Hawke