x
Click to expand

victoronefourtwo

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Date Signed Up:11/28/2011
Last Login:2/17/2015
Location:Michigan
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Thumbs: 8688 total,  9402 ,  714
Comment Thumbs: 4544 total,  4913 ,  369
Content Level Progress: 87% (87/100)
Level 186 Content: Anon Annihilator → Level 187 Content: Anon Annihilator
Comment Level Progress: 46% (46/100)
Level 243 Comments: Doinitrite → Level 244 Comments: Doinitrite
Subscribers:3
Content Views:282430
Total Comments Made:741
FJ Points:10561

latest user's comments

#607 - Stop trying to ******** your way out of this. They said…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/17/2015 on Atheism 0
User avatar #622 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
I'm curious as to how the polls were taken if they simply said they didn't believe in any traditional religion, like Catholicism or Judaism? I don't believe in any of the traditional religions, yet what I have is still a religion sits it has its set of beliefs. Did they just assume "none of the above" equated to "nonreligious"?
#600 - Google results can be personalized, but my results are not sin…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/17/2015 on Atheism 0
User avatar #602 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
Fine, I'll ignore the strawman, despite the fact that you were the one to bring all of this up, trying to use the two words interchangeably. I've been ignoring your polls because the first couple didn't actually say what you said they did. If you want further clarification, you can go back and reread the relevant comments. I'm not going to subject myself to further work if it's just going to prove to be irrelevant and needless. You can use the fact that I'm not going to suffer through a mountain of useless sources to somehow come to the conclusion that they're valid, but as I've said before...everyone has the right to be wrong.
#593 - Somebody doesn't know what a synonym is. If you search non…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/17/2015 on Atheism 0
User avatar #594 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
Actually, I google'd "nonreligious" on google to get that definition, and irreligious wasn't even on the page. They're not synonyms. Hell, the best the dictionary definition could give you as a comparison is that they're "related". Were they synonyms, "irreligious" would be on the list of synonyms...they're not.

Now, as for your sources, I believe the agreement was one? There you go.
#581 - You're scraping out of, no wait, you're not scraping out of an…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/17/2015 on Atheism 0
User avatar #584 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
Considering the fact you drastically switched the word we were using halfway through the discussion (since I said "nonreligious" as opposed to "irreligious") no I'm not going to find you your sources disproving your word. I will find one for mine
www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/nonreligious
which uses the word "lack" that can be used in a comparative sense, which fits the original comparison I used.

So, if you're willing to discuss what we were originally discussion, we can continue, or you can continue to waste your own time trying to get me to waste mine on the wrong subject.
#576 - Let me fix my last sentence. *Meaning that there are in f… 02/17/2015 on Atheism 0
#574 - Nah, I proved to you that the way I use it is the way everyone…  [+] (3 new replies) 02/17/2015 on Atheism 0
User avatar #578 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
My point still stands on your fixed sentence. can =/= does.
User avatar #577 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
You actually still haven't done that yet, you established that it CAN be used like that and then assumed that because you can use it like that, everyone else DOES use it like that to the point of the majority. And congratulations...you've also discovered the elusive "over exaggeration for the sake of emphasis". You now get to name it after yourself.

As for sources, half of linguistics is implied meaning. You don't write down each and every instance sarcasm is, and can be used. If you're honestly trying to make this a "my irrelevant sources are better than your no sources" then you're scraping the bottom of the barrel. I can just link you to google.
User avatar #576 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
Let me fix my last sentence.
*Meaning that there are in fact people who are irreligious, knowing that they mean they have no religion, but believe in a god.
#571 - The other comment hit the reply limit. Anyways, if yo…  [+] (13 new replies) 02/17/2015 on Atheism 0
User avatar #573 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
Congratulations...you've proven that a word I've already told you has a double meaning...has a double meaning. Deep stuff.
#607 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
Stop trying to bullshit your way out of this. They said exactly what I said they would.
92% believed in a God, 17.5% had no religious affiliation. People who answered Don't Know or Refused are below 1% so that doesn't change anything.

For the European poll, information is on page 382-383 for religious affiliation, and 381 for belief. 75% of people chose a religion, but only 51% of people believed in a God, and 26% chose belief in some sort of spirit or life force. And if you consider a spirit of life force as a God as well, then there's an extra 2% of people who believe in God without a religion. If not, then a whopping 24% or so of people have a religion without a God.
User avatar #622 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
I'm curious as to how the polls were taken if they simply said they didn't believe in any traditional religion, like Catholicism or Judaism? I don't believe in any of the traditional religions, yet what I have is still a religion sits it has its set of beliefs. Did they just assume "none of the above" equated to "nonreligious"?
#600 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
Google results can be personalized, but my results are not since I am neither signed in, and am also using VPNs which regularly change my IP, so these results are definitely not personalized. I also used google.co.uk and it was the same, so this is clearly your problem.

But, hey, you're still attacking a straw man at this point. Let's ignore the entire topic about definitions for nonreligious vs irreligious, and I will say I am wrong about whether or not they're synonyms. You are purposefully ignoring the meat of what I say. You have not said a single thing about the polls I offered as evidence.

Like I said "I used non-religious as a synonym, secondary to irreligious. These words weren't even used in the polling, I simply used them to simplify the actual options, and then you decide to go on a massive tangent.", their definitions are irrelevant to the main point since they were never used for the polling anyway, it was simply my own way of simplifying multiple options, and if that led to a mistake then so be it, it's ultimately irrelevant to the main point.
User avatar #602 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
Fine, I'll ignore the strawman, despite the fact that you were the one to bring all of this up, trying to use the two words interchangeably. I've been ignoring your polls because the first couple didn't actually say what you said they did. If you want further clarification, you can go back and reread the relevant comments. I'm not going to subject myself to further work if it's just going to prove to be irrelevant and needless. You can use the fact that I'm not going to suffer through a mountain of useless sources to somehow come to the conclusion that they're valid, but as I've said before...everyone has the right to be wrong.
User avatar #593 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
Somebody doesn't know what a synonym is.
If you search nonreligion or nonreligious on Google, the first result is irreligious. Since Google's website ranking system is based on what people are looking for, it means that people who search for nonreligion are looking for irreligion.

Look at my comment which lead to this #512, in which I say "In fact, a significant amount of Europeans, when responding to polls, label themselves irreligious, or non-religious." I used non-religious as a synonym, secondary to irreligious. These words weren't even used in the polling, I simply used them to simplify the actual options, and then you decide to go on a massive tangent.

These results are based on the Eurobarometer poll of 2010, This was the question:
Do you consider yourself to be…?
(SHOW CARD ‐ DO NOT READ OUT ‐ ONE ANSWER ONLY)
Catholic
Orthodox
Protestant
Other Christian
Jewish
Muslim
Sikh
Buddhist
Hindu
Atheist
Non believer/ Agnostic
Other (SPONTANEOUS)
DK

From this poll, only 75% of people chose any of the religions. Still from the same people polled, 79% also responded that they believed in a God. Here's the source if you want to see it yourself.
ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_341_en.pdf
User avatar #594 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
Actually, I google'd "nonreligious" on google to get that definition, and irreligious wasn't even on the page. They're not synonyms. Hell, the best the dictionary definition could give you as a comparison is that they're "related". Were they synonyms, "irreligious" would be on the list of synonyms...they're not.

Now, as for your sources, I believe the agreement was one? There you go.
User avatar #581 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
You're scraping out of, no wait, you're not scraping out of anything. There are literally billions of webpages out there, and millions of usages of the word irreligion/nonreligion, yet you have not given me a single piece of evidence that it is used like you do. You want to link me to google because you clearly can't find a single piece of evidence for it yourself.

But hey, it's clear that I'm the only one here who wants to offer any sources at all, so let me offer you some more evidence.
According to Gallup polls, 17.5% of Americans identified as had no religious affiliation in 2011.
www.gallup.com/poll/159785/rise-religious-nones-slows-2012.aspx#1
At the same time, 92% of Americans say that they believe in a God. www.gallup.com/poll/147887/americans-continue-believe-god.aspx

You do the math.
User avatar #584 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
Considering the fact you drastically switched the word we were using halfway through the discussion (since I said "nonreligious" as opposed to "irreligious") no I'm not going to find you your sources disproving your word. I will find one for mine
www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/nonreligious
which uses the word "lack" that can be used in a comparative sense, which fits the original comparison I used.

So, if you're willing to discuss what we were originally discussion, we can continue, or you can continue to waste your own time trying to get me to waste mine on the wrong subject.
User avatar #574 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
Nah, I proved to you that the way I use it is the way everyone uses it, and that the way you use it is the way that no one except apparently you and your buddies do.

Besides, and I quote " Lucky for me, literally no one uses it for the definition you do in the context you're using it for." Funny how literally no one uses it for my definition right?

You still have failed to find anywhere a source where people use it as you do. And, besides, at this point you're attacking a straw man since the point was that people do use it as I do, regardless if it was everyone or not. Meaning that there are in fact people who are irreligious, but believe in a god.
User avatar #578 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
My point still stands on your fixed sentence. can =/= does.
User avatar #577 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
You actually still haven't done that yet, you established that it CAN be used like that and then assumed that because you can use it like that, everyone else DOES use it like that to the point of the majority. And congratulations...you've also discovered the elusive "over exaggeration for the sake of emphasis". You now get to name it after yourself.

As for sources, half of linguistics is implied meaning. You don't write down each and every instance sarcasm is, and can be used. If you're honestly trying to make this a "my irrelevant sources are better than your no sources" then you're scraping the bottom of the barrel. I can just link you to google.
User avatar #576 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
Let me fix my last sentence.
*Meaning that there are in fact people who are irreligious, knowing that they mean they have no religion, but believe in a god.
#567 - Did I choose the definition that best fits my point? Not reall…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/17/2015 on Atheism 0
User avatar #569 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
What backing do you have that your definition is the one people actually use? Posting definitions is only backing for how people SHOULD use it, not how they DO use it. You're assuming that just because something should be a certain way, that that's how it is. I'm not pulling what I'm saying out of my ass, I'm pulling it from how it's actually used, from how I've heard it used, and how I've used it myself. Now this is the part where you make the asinine point that "How people use a word has no weight on how it's used."
#526 - "What they do require is a belief system, and since the p…  [+] (3 new replies) 02/17/2015 on Atheism 0
User avatar #537 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
Again, the difference being that you don't need to be a Nazi to be an anti-communist, but you do need to believe in something in order to be a theist, and thus be a part of a religion. And you really think "I believe in God" simply stops at the statement "I believe in God"? It's like saying "I believe in science." Science is the general term for the study where God is the general term for the deity. What about God do you believe in?

And nonreligious is an idiom. You've just chosen to use the definition that best fits your point. Lucky for me, literally no one uses it for the definition you do in the context you're using it for.
User avatar #567 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
Did I choose the definition that best fits my point? Not really. My definition is actually the one people actually use. You claim that with absolutely no backing. Go ahead and try to find a single source that uses irreligion, or nonreligion like you do. While you do that, here is half a dozen that use it as it is suppose to be used.

dictionary.reference.com/browse/irreligion
www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_by_country
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/irreligious
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irreligious
www.thefreedictionary.com/irreligious

In reality, "literally" no one uses it for the definition that you do. Well, apparently except for you in an effort to disagree.

And look in the news for their usage of the word irreligion or nonreligion
www.google.com/search?safe=off&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS517US517&espv=2&biw=1745&bih=890&tbm=nws&q=non-religion&oq=non-religion&gs_l=serp.3...2324.2324.0.2566.1.1.0.0.0.0.80.80.1.1.0.msedr...0...1c.1.61.serp..1.0.0.FpxMV-7XHiw
www.google.com/search?q=irreligion&safe=off&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS517US517&espv=2&biw=1745&bih=890&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ei=sZTiVKyFKqHdsAScnoDwCw&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAzgU

www.google.com/search?safe=off&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS517US517&espv=2&biw=1745&bih=890&tbm=nws&q=irreligion&oq=irreligion&gs_l=serp.3..0.31898.33648.0.33817.14.11.1.2.2.0.158.1085.4j6.10.0.msedr...0...1c.1.61.serp..2.12.1026.0.zy0ptdZowig

The common usage is that it is the antonym of religion, meaning the layman uses it to say that they have no religious affiliation. You're pulling what you say out of your butt.
User avatar #569 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
What backing do you have that your definition is the one people actually use? Posting definitions is only backing for how people SHOULD use it, not how they DO use it. You're assuming that just because something should be a certain way, that that's how it is. I'm not pulling what I'm saying out of my ass, I'm pulling it from how it's actually used, from how I've heard it used, and how I've used it myself. Now this is the part where you make the asinine point that "How people use a word has no weight on how it's used."
#512 - Notice how none of those definitions require the belief in a g…  [+] (21 new replies) 02/17/2015 on Atheism 0
User avatar #514 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
And you're misinterpreting when people say "nonreligious" that doesn't mean they don't have a belief system. It's relational to others of the same religion. A regular Christian is "nonreligious" compared to someone in the WBC, that is to say "less religious" than someone in the WBC. The regular Christian is still in a religion, just less religious of a religion, as they're less militant in those beliefs.
User avatar #526 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
"What they do require is a belief system, and since the popular opinion is that atheists don't have a belief system, they're nt a religion"
Yup that's what I've been saying.

"Meanwhile, belief in God requires a belief in something It's God, in case you missed it , which is a part of the definition of religion."
Ignoring the condescension you appear to be going towards, it's important to know that following part of a definition does not make the whole. It's only PART of the definition as you say, not what makes all of it. The Nazis Godwin's Law in effect believed in anti-communism, nationalism, and eugenics, but a person who believes in those things as well is not a Nazi since that is only a part of what makes the whole.

Look at your definition that you are using for religion. It is a SET of beliefs, every definition uses plural descriptors. Belief in a god is a singular thing, not what makes a religion.


Also, I'm not misinterpreting when people say nonreligious. dictionary.reference.com/browse/irreligion?s=t
Go ahead and ask any Christian if they follow that definition. It isn't something that can be measured in degrees like what you are doing, it is an exact line.
User avatar #537 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
Again, the difference being that you don't need to be a Nazi to be an anti-communist, but you do need to believe in something in order to be a theist, and thus be a part of a religion. And you really think "I believe in God" simply stops at the statement "I believe in God"? It's like saying "I believe in science." Science is the general term for the study where God is the general term for the deity. What about God do you believe in?

And nonreligious is an idiom. You've just chosen to use the definition that best fits your point. Lucky for me, literally no one uses it for the definition you do in the context you're using it for.
User avatar #567 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
Did I choose the definition that best fits my point? Not really. My definition is actually the one people actually use. You claim that with absolutely no backing. Go ahead and try to find a single source that uses irreligion, or nonreligion like you do. While you do that, here is half a dozen that use it as it is suppose to be used.

dictionary.reference.com/browse/irreligion
www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_by_country
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/irreligious
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irreligious
www.thefreedictionary.com/irreligious

In reality, "literally" no one uses it for the definition that you do. Well, apparently except for you in an effort to disagree.

And look in the news for their usage of the word irreligion or nonreligion
www.google.com/search?safe=off&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS517US517&espv=2&biw=1745&bih=890&tbm=nws&q=non-religion&oq=non-religion&gs_l=serp.3...2324.2324.0.2566.1.1.0.0.0.0.80.80.1.1.0.msedr...0...1c.1.61.serp..1.0.0.FpxMV-7XHiw
www.google.com/search?q=irreligion&safe=off&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS517US517&espv=2&biw=1745&bih=890&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ei=sZTiVKyFKqHdsAScnoDwCw&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAzgU

www.google.com/search?safe=off&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS517US517&espv=2&biw=1745&bih=890&tbm=nws&q=irreligion&oq=irreligion&gs_l=serp.3..0.31898.33648.0.33817.14.11.1.2.2.0.158.1085.4j6.10.0.msedr...0...1c.1.61.serp..2.12.1026.0.zy0ptdZowig

The common usage is that it is the antonym of religion, meaning the layman uses it to say that they have no religious affiliation. You're pulling what you say out of your butt.
User avatar #569 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
What backing do you have that your definition is the one people actually use? Posting definitions is only backing for how people SHOULD use it, not how they DO use it. You're assuming that just because something should be a certain way, that that's how it is. I'm not pulling what I'm saying out of my ass, I'm pulling it from how it's actually used, from how I've heard it used, and how I've used it myself. Now this is the part where you make the asinine point that "How people use a word has no weight on how it's used."
User avatar #516 - compared (02/17/2015) [-]
Thanks a lot for using a comparison, hope you are well.
User avatar #513 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
Nor have I said they did? What they do require is a belief system, and since the popular opinion is that atheists don't have a belief system, they're nt a religion. Meanwhile, belief in God requires a belief in something It's God, in case you missed it , which is a part of the definition of religion.
User avatar #571 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
The other comment hit the reply limit.

Anyways, if you bothered to actually look at my comment, you can easily see that I included the news as evidence of how it is used.

I'll repost it to make it easier for you.
And look in the news for their usage of the word irreligion or nonreligion
www.google.com/search?safe=off&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS517US517&espv=2&biw=1745&bih=890&tbm=nws&q=non-religion&oq=non-religion&gs_l=serp.3...2324.2324.0.2566.1.1.0.0.0.0.80.80.1.1.0.msedr...0...1c.1.61.serp..1.0.0.FpxMV-7XHiw
www.google.com/search?q=irreligion&safe=off&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS517US517&espv=2&biw=1745&bih=890&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ei=sZTiVKyFKqHdsAScnoDwCw&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAzgU
User avatar #573 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
Congratulations...you've proven that a word I've already told you has a double meaning...has a double meaning. Deep stuff.
#607 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
Stop trying to bullshit your way out of this. They said exactly what I said they would.
92% believed in a God, 17.5% had no religious affiliation. People who answered Don't Know or Refused are below 1% so that doesn't change anything.

For the European poll, information is on page 382-383 for religious affiliation, and 381 for belief. 75% of people chose a religion, but only 51% of people believed in a God, and 26% chose belief in some sort of spirit or life force. And if you consider a spirit of life force as a God as well, then there's an extra 2% of people who believe in God without a religion. If not, then a whopping 24% or so of people have a religion without a God.
User avatar #622 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
I'm curious as to how the polls were taken if they simply said they didn't believe in any traditional religion, like Catholicism or Judaism? I don't believe in any of the traditional religions, yet what I have is still a religion sits it has its set of beliefs. Did they just assume "none of the above" equated to "nonreligious"?
#600 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
Google results can be personalized, but my results are not since I am neither signed in, and am also using VPNs which regularly change my IP, so these results are definitely not personalized. I also used google.co.uk and it was the same, so this is clearly your problem.

But, hey, you're still attacking a straw man at this point. Let's ignore the entire topic about definitions for nonreligious vs irreligious, and I will say I am wrong about whether or not they're synonyms. You are purposefully ignoring the meat of what I say. You have not said a single thing about the polls I offered as evidence.

Like I said "I used non-religious as a synonym, secondary to irreligious. These words weren't even used in the polling, I simply used them to simplify the actual options, and then you decide to go on a massive tangent.", their definitions are irrelevant to the main point since they were never used for the polling anyway, it was simply my own way of simplifying multiple options, and if that led to a mistake then so be it, it's ultimately irrelevant to the main point.
User avatar #602 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
Fine, I'll ignore the strawman, despite the fact that you were the one to bring all of this up, trying to use the two words interchangeably. I've been ignoring your polls because the first couple didn't actually say what you said they did. If you want further clarification, you can go back and reread the relevant comments. I'm not going to subject myself to further work if it's just going to prove to be irrelevant and needless. You can use the fact that I'm not going to suffer through a mountain of useless sources to somehow come to the conclusion that they're valid, but as I've said before...everyone has the right to be wrong.
User avatar #593 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
Somebody doesn't know what a synonym is.
If you search nonreligion or nonreligious on Google, the first result is irreligious. Since Google's website ranking system is based on what people are looking for, it means that people who search for nonreligion are looking for irreligion.

Look at my comment which lead to this #512, in which I say "In fact, a significant amount of Europeans, when responding to polls, label themselves irreligious, or non-religious." I used non-religious as a synonym, secondary to irreligious. These words weren't even used in the polling, I simply used them to simplify the actual options, and then you decide to go on a massive tangent.

These results are based on the Eurobarometer poll of 2010, This was the question:
Do you consider yourself to be…?
(SHOW CARD ‐ DO NOT READ OUT ‐ ONE ANSWER ONLY)
Catholic
Orthodox
Protestant
Other Christian
Jewish
Muslim
Sikh
Buddhist
Hindu
Atheist
Non believer/ Agnostic
Other (SPONTANEOUS)
DK

From this poll, only 75% of people chose any of the religions. Still from the same people polled, 79% also responded that they believed in a God. Here's the source if you want to see it yourself.
ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_341_en.pdf
User avatar #594 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
Actually, I google'd "nonreligious" on google to get that definition, and irreligious wasn't even on the page. They're not synonyms. Hell, the best the dictionary definition could give you as a comparison is that they're "related". Were they synonyms, "irreligious" would be on the list of synonyms...they're not.

Now, as for your sources, I believe the agreement was one? There you go.
User avatar #581 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
You're scraping out of, no wait, you're not scraping out of anything. There are literally billions of webpages out there, and millions of usages of the word irreligion/nonreligion, yet you have not given me a single piece of evidence that it is used like you do. You want to link me to google because you clearly can't find a single piece of evidence for it yourself.

But hey, it's clear that I'm the only one here who wants to offer any sources at all, so let me offer you some more evidence.
According to Gallup polls, 17.5% of Americans identified as had no religious affiliation in 2011.
www.gallup.com/poll/159785/rise-religious-nones-slows-2012.aspx#1
At the same time, 92% of Americans say that they believe in a God. www.gallup.com/poll/147887/americans-continue-believe-god.aspx

You do the math.
User avatar #584 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
Considering the fact you drastically switched the word we were using halfway through the discussion (since I said "nonreligious" as opposed to "irreligious") no I'm not going to find you your sources disproving your word. I will find one for mine
www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/nonreligious
which uses the word "lack" that can be used in a comparative sense, which fits the original comparison I used.

So, if you're willing to discuss what we were originally discussion, we can continue, or you can continue to waste your own time trying to get me to waste mine on the wrong subject.
User avatar #574 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
Nah, I proved to you that the way I use it is the way everyone uses it, and that the way you use it is the way that no one except apparently you and your buddies do.

Besides, and I quote " Lucky for me, literally no one uses it for the definition you do in the context you're using it for." Funny how literally no one uses it for my definition right?

You still have failed to find anywhere a source where people use it as you do. And, besides, at this point you're attacking a straw man since the point was that people do use it as I do, regardless if it was everyone or not. Meaning that there are in fact people who are irreligious, but believe in a god.
User avatar #578 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
My point still stands on your fixed sentence. can =/= does.
User avatar #577 - lolollo (02/17/2015) [-]
You actually still haven't done that yet, you established that it CAN be used like that and then assumed that because you can use it like that, everyone else DOES use it like that to the point of the majority. And congratulations...you've also discovered the elusive "over exaggeration for the sake of emphasis". You now get to name it after yourself.

As for sources, half of linguistics is implied meaning. You don't write down each and every instance sarcasm is, and can be used. If you're honestly trying to make this a "my irrelevant sources are better than your no sources" then you're scraping the bottom of the barrel. I can just link you to google.
User avatar #576 - victoronefourtwo (02/17/2015) [-]
Let me fix my last sentence.
*Meaning that there are in fact people who are irreligious, knowing that they mean they have no religion, but believe in a god.

items

Total unique items point value: 69821 / Total items point value: 184854
[ 250 items Total ]
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#2 - avanger (08/16/2013) [-]
Thanks you're a good person
#1 - andrewl (04/07/2012) [-]
you're ******* awesome
 Friends (0)