Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book : nutjob, it's a public message board...not your backyard....get a grip.   Why are you here? -------------------------------------------- Curt Schilling Deadbeat Fraud Fool  
    Posted by bellhorn_[/QUOTE]

    To converse with my fellow Bruins fans about Bruins, and hockey related stuff, like we do just about everyday or so.

    Why do you sox fans only come in here when TT does something controversial?

    Because from what I can tell, thats the only reason your here, and you've thrown jabs at myself and NAS.

    You don't see many of us, if any at all in the Red Sox forum when Ortiz cries about his 14 million, or Bobby V throws one of his players under the bus do you?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxFanInIL. Show SoxFanInIL's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book:
    [QUOTE]Thank the hockey gods he's off the roster this year.   He has a right to speak his views.  We ALL do.   Heck, some people adamantly believe in Tooth Fairies.  Who am I to argue with them? TT has written his ticket out of the NHL.   That's hockey relevant.  After all the league's support for Brian Burke's son before and after his tragic death, these views will cost him.  Back to Finland, TT.  
    Posted by ipotnyc[/QUOTE]

    Y'know, I've never liked Thomas personally and I think his stuff re: the White House was selfish and acting like a bad teammate, and really disliked his causing the team distractions on FB and if he was still a Bruins goalie would be annoyed at this latest public post...

    but...

    Why would his views on traditional marriage, agreeing with Chick-Fil-A cause him to end up back in Finland?

    If someone was to say his taking a year off and his skills could erode and his age wouldnt help him play any better in 2014, I would understand that.  If someone said his nutty behavior would make teams reticent to trade for/sign him, I'd understand it.  If someone said his conservative beliefs would continue to make him a pariah in Liberal New England, I'd understand that.

    But I'm not understanding why this particular point about agreeing with a stand on traditional marriage would cause him to be shipped out of the NHL.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sportsnutty. Show Sportsnutty's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book : The founding fathers engineered a system that could, in principle, expand to include equal rights for those not granted social equality at the time. This is because it's inherently progressive (open to further manipulation via voting/free exchange of ideas via free speech) When you are talking about a "rebirth of scriptural adherence", you are talking about an increase in the veracity of the religious movement, an increase in prothletising, not an increase in a literal interpretation of the bible because that would be logically inconsistent for the following reason: The bible explicity endorses slavery. Therefore, a "religious" movement that contributes to freeing slaves is,  by definition , a departure from the social structure outlined in the bible itself. The same thing goes for women's rights. Sure, a religious person can do what most do and say, "You don't need to believe everything in the bible", but again, this is because of secular tools (such as science) have exposed many passages in ancient scripture to disbelief. It also brings up a much more obvious point: Why did God get his own book wrong when it comes to one of the easiest moral questions we've ever had to answer (Is it right to own people and trade them like farm equipment?) Also, when the typical religious person chooses to reject certain passages in the bible (such as those in exodus endorsing slavery), and cherry-pick the good parts like the golden rule, it blatantly shows that the true arbiter of morality exists in the brain, not in the book. As far as my intellectual stubborness: pot, meet kettle.
    Posted by Olsonic[/QUOTE]

    The argument  you make rests largely on repeating that the Bible "specifically endorses" slavery. It is a specious one. Its actual a common argument made by secular opponents (like yourself) of religion ie Christianity.
    To draw a correlation to the "American style" of slavery and the one being practiced in the Biblical era is highly unreasonable. And without going into great detail, the only way a Hebrew would come "to own" another person was if said person SOLD themselves into slavery due to economic disaster ie. being a debtor. I forget which passage it comes from, however, scripture quotes the conditions under which the INDENTURED SERVANT works to pay off their debts and then is free to leave WITH gifts from their owner to start their new life. The Bible does indeed recognize what was a common practice at the time not the racist practice of African slavery at all which you are trying to draw a moral equivalency to. To look at human events through a present day lens invites the inability to understand the past in its proper context, ie see the truth. You should clearly see that it is not such a stretch for the "Bible Thumpers" of the 1820's to reject African slavery.. even if they chose to forget scripture calling slave-trading a sin equal to murder.

    Ok, my pseudo-intellectual discourse is over.. I just want to watch some F-ing Bruins and have a beer! :-P
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxFanInIL. Show SoxFanInIL's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book :  -------------------------------------------- Curt Schilling Deadbeat Fraud Fool  
    Posted by bellhorn_[/QUOTE]

    I'd like to know how a supposed "Red Sox fan" who uses a key cog of the 2004 Champs as a screen name, still manages to use an ugly ridiculous slur in red about a player that, without him, the Sox never would have won that 2004 Championship?  And maybe not 2007 as well?

    Oh, I get it, much like your need to come in here to rip on Thomas after never being here before, you hate Thomas just like Schilling because they dare to be conservatives in Looney Liberal Land, correct?

    How about taking your liberal hate of Boston stars based solely on politics and go follow the Revolution?  That soccer stuff should be just leftie Euro enough for ya.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book : I'll pray for you Ols!
    Posted by nitemare-38[/QUOTE]

    Thanks nite :) If there is a wrathful god that plans on smiting me for my atheism, I'll need all the prayers I can get.
     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    Labels, what is a conservative or a liberal.  What is a liberatarian, many would disagree.  Stop, all TT did was to voiced his opinion.  Fine!  Is his political, economic and social commentary worth the analysis, NOPE!  He is a light weight on those issues. Does he have a right as an individual to voice his opionions, YUP.  As a former Bs goalie, I do not care what his opinions are on various issues.  I have more intelligent open minded friends, books of all views, and an independent mind to care of TT's views.  I like TT as a goalie for the Bs, he is no longer a Bs goalie, so I bid you farewell TT.  Run for office TT.  
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book : this is another one of Tiny Tim's rabid defenders......birds of a feather with tiny brains flock together. -------------------------------------------- Curt Schilling Deadbeat Fraud Fool  
    Posted by bellhorn_[/QUOTE]

    Now see, if you didnt just come in here when TT does this you'd know he was against TT long before the Cup run. To call him a Tiny Tim rabid defender is simply uneducated.

    So now you've called out NAS and SoxFan, so yes, I do get territorial. Come in here and talk hockey all you want, but if you think your going to come in here to just spill your political polution and go after fellow posters then yes, your going to get this treatment. Go back in the thread and look it up, I asked how long it was before the Red Sox posters start coming in...Now I'm wondering when your going to leave.

    Beat it.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book : The argument  you make rests largely on repeating that the Bible "specifically endorses" slavery. It is a specious one. Its actual a common argument made by secular opponents (like yourself) of religion ie Christianity. To draw a correlation to the "American style" of slavery and the one being practiced in the Biblical era is highly unreasonable. And without going into great detail, the only way a Hebrew would come "to own" another person was if said person SOLD themselves into slavery due to economic disaster ie. being a debtor. I forget which passage it comes from, however, scripture quotes the conditions under which the INDENTURED SERVANT works to pay off their debts and then is free to leave WITH gifts from their owner to start their new life. The Bible does indeed recognize what was a common practice at the time not the racist practice of African slavery at all which you are trying to draw a moral equivalency to. To look at human events through a present day lens invites the inability to understand the past in its proper context, ie see the truth.
    Posted by Sportsnutty[/QUOTE]

    It's interesting that you make this point, because regardless of whether you are right or not (and I don't know enough about history to judge the accuracy of your statements,.. it seems reasonable) this ultimately is why religious texts are so dangerous in the first place: everyone has their own interpretation of the texts, and the "truth", that is, the authors intention when writing the text, is often buried. This fact lead many of the slave-owners of the south to outspokenly endorse slavery as if it were mandated by God.

    It's ridiculously easy to open the book and use it's language to support an immoral position (with "it's language" being an obvious source of error given all the different translations). Why an omniscient, omnipotent author would ever write such an easily misunderstood text to serve as a guide for the future of mankind is a question for another time.

    But anyways, I don't know what position you are coming from. My guess is you either believe everything in the bible to be true, and somehow misunderstood by human readers, or you just have a beef with this specious argument and are sick of hearing it used in the public forum. 

    If your coming from position #2, let me know and I'll drop it and research your claims because it's pretty interesting.

    If your coming from position #1, The biblical endorsement or non-endorsement of slavery is still a non-sequitur when it comes to proving the veracity of any of it's truth claims. But anyways, there are plenty of other reasons to doubt this text was written by an omniscient deity that is supremely moral, and I would look at the treatment of children, the treatment of women, the genocide of the amalekites (and the furor of God @ Saul for not killing everyone), the widespread references to animal and human sacrifice, the immoral commandment for Abraham to kill his own son, the idea that non-christians deserve to suffer for eternity for not believing in God on insufficient evidence, I could go on and on.

    I would also expect that the genesis story would be "a bit" more nuanced than the story that motivates the masses to protest evolution in schools. Maybe it would reference the gene, or maybe it would be compatible with what we now know about the expansion of the universe, maybe it could reference the other hundreds of billions of other stars in our own galaxy and the hundreds of billions of other galaxies.  There is nothing in this book about the physical universe that could not have already by known by a 1st century farmer.

    So perhaps, the whole book is designed to make us doubt it (which it does an excellent job at doing) But there is no way to verify much of anything in the book, and given all of the other books out there that make conflicting claims to divine authorship...perhaps, just maybe, it is a work of human authorship.


     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book : Thanks nite :) If there is a wrathful god that plans on smiting me for my atheism, I'll need all the prayers I can get.
    Posted by Olsonic[/QUOTE]

    I say bring him on. I don't use the word "hate" much. It's a pretty strong word.
    Except....

    1. I HATE anything to do with religion.
    2. I HATE anything to do with politics.

    Two places you will never see me.

    1. Church
    2. Voting booth

    Church because if I want to see fiction, I'll go to the movies/
    Voting booth because if I want to contribute to some B.S I'll engage in a conversation with Null.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book : I say bring him on. I don't use the word "hate" much. It's a pretty strong word. Except.... 1. I HATE anything to do with religion. 2. I HATE anything to do with politics. Two places you will never see me. 1. Church 2. Voting booth Church because if I want to see fiction, I'll go to the movies/ Voting booth because if I want to contribute to some B.S I'll engage in a conversation with Null.
    Posted by kelvana33[/QUOTE]

    lol :)

    I actually read a chapter in "The Blank Slate" a few weeks ago that totally pacified my views on partisan politics. I'm much more sympathetic to "the other side" than I used to be. 

    If you are interested in the science of human nature and how our innate human psychology influences the polarized political debates , I strongly recommend the chapter "Hot Bottons: Politics" in the Blank Slate by Steven Pinker. Unfortunately for you, these debates have existed since the ancient greeks and aren't going away, but at least it made me understand each side a bit more and hate our hyper-partisan political scene a bit less.


     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book : he's a rabid TT as right wingnut defender.  Who cares what his views on his goaltending is/was.  I'll stick around until I get bored with Tiny Tim bashing, but I'll be back with more Timmy bashing next time the coward posts his Glenn Beckian drivel on Facebook again like a teenaged girl. -------------------------------------------- Curt Schilling Deadbeat Fraud Fool  
    Posted by bellhorn_[/QUOTE]

    Kelv is a good poster and I'm personally bothered that you're trolling him. Please stop and go away.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from watchtower. Show watchtower's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    The limits of one's reality are the limits of one's awareness. (D. Chopra)
     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book : shouldn't you be playing with Barbies or something? -------------------------------------------- Curt Schilling Deadbeat Fraud Fool  
    Posted by bellhorn_[/QUOTE]


    I'm a left winger, left is right and right is wrong.

    But Ols is right, Kelv is a good poster.  And way out of line bringing kids into it.

    I'm here to talk about hockey, there are plenty of outlets for the other stuff.

    If people really start paying attention to wrong headed goalies who don't honor their contracts and start watching politicians play hockey then we don't need the circus to come to town.



     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book : shouldn't you be playing with Barbies or something? -------------------------------------------- Curt Schilling Deadbeat Fraud Fool  
    Posted by bellhorn_[/QUOTE]
    You spent a full minute trying to think of a comeback and this is the best you've got? Now that's lame. Your wit is weaker than the quality of your posts. I know it's hard to believe but you somehow pull it off.
     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BSXIII. Show BSXIII's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    How many times has Bellhorn been 'Designated for Assignment'?  You hate Thomas and Schilling yet swing from that guys nuts.  Quite the talent evaluator you are.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book : yawn                      -------------------------------------------- Curt Schilling Deadbeat Fraud Fool  
    Posted by bellhorn_[/QUOTE]
    What's wrong? Cat got your brain?
     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book

    In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tim Thomas Had a one liner today on his face book : You spent a full minute trying to think of a comeback and this is the best you've got? Now that's lame. Your wit is weaker than the quality of your posts. I know it's hard to believe but you somehow pull it off.   -------------------------------------------- Curt Schilling Deadbeat Fraud Fool                       
    Posted by bellhorn_[/QUOTE]
    Oh, what a burn. You brought out the always popular, " I know you are but what am I" defense. Does it hurt when people laugh at you instead of with you?
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share