[andi*pandi]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Secular populations are in much greater danger of disappearing because they often don't have hard coded beliefs and have low population growth rates, whereas with the religious it's the opposite.

The Quiverfull movement will rule after Armageddon. Unless they get beamed to the heavens. I forget.

[The Final Dakar]

I missed this edit as well.

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Secular populations are in much greater danger of disappearing because they often don't have hard coded beliefs and have low population growth rates, whereas with the religious it's the opposite.

You don't think the size of the secular population has increased since 200 years ago (at least concerning this country)?

Here's the thing, your point is true and the conclusion is logical, but if you dig a little deeper you realize where religion dominated people's lives in the past it's been much more sidelined in the present. That undermines it's power.

I'd also add that there are many of people in this country who claim themselves to be religious whose status you would disagree with. If a country becomes dominated by a group of self-claimed religious that neither practice nor observe its tenets with any strong resolve, is it truly religious?

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

My reasons for pondering religious education are less indoctrination to JEESUS and more learning parables, history, the golden rule, the stories of the bible. My kid is curious. I think encouraging him in his interests (robots, karate, science, violin, god) is good.

I think this is why my parents sent me to Catholic school. Not for the religion, but for the morality and knowledge.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

The Quiverfull movement will rule after Armageddon. Unless they get beamed to the heavens. I forget.

[Big Mac]

I'm sorry if I got things mixed up gender wise andi. I was a little confused based on how you presented your situation in your previous post.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

My reasons for pondering religious education are less indoctrination to JEESUS and more learning parables, history, the golden rule, the stories of the bible. My kid is curious. I think encouraging him in his interests (robots, karate, science, violin, god) is good.

Your kid is also really smart, because when you think about it Jeesus is probably awesome at karate, science, playing the violin, and making awesome robots.

[CreepDogg]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Your kid is also really smart, because when you think about it Jeesus is probably awesome at karate, science, playing the violin, and making awesome robots.

Jesus might be awesome at science, but JEESUS is totally against it. Not good at it at all.

[Captain Obvious]

religion isn't going anywhere because that lower 2/3rds of the Bell Curve that represents the distribution of human intelligence needs it. They thrive on it. They turn to it to numb their minds and free themselves of the realities of the world. It is no different now than it was thousands of years ago. People would see something they did not comprehend or experience a natural disaster and they'd turn to whatever pagan god was in vogue at the moment and they'd pray their little minds off in the futile hope it would intervene in their favor.

That pretend god didn't then and today's pretend g-d won't now. It just makes people feel better to believe that its possible. And so religion is here to stay in spite of how far the breadth of scientific knowledge has come.

And BM is correct that it can't be bred out of humanity. Intelligence has a very real component that relies on heredity. And its a fact that the more intelligent you are in today's world the fewer offspring you likely have. If it seems that people have become less religious today its because consumerism has become a religion onto itself. That part I am fine with.

The greatest upshot in my opinion is that if you understand the realities of religion and how faith plays a role in the lives of the devout but you don't buy into the nonsense then people are very malleable to you. Religion makes people very easy to control. Its easy to accomplish a lot by manipulating people's blind allegiance to their g-d because its clear that they aren't going to be too analytical about it.

[Laminar]

Been watching too much Book of Eli?

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

That pretend god didn't then and today's pretend g-d won't now.

way to go Captain!

[Wiskedjak]

It's really going to depend on how devout each of you are in your respective beliefs. A true Athiest and a true Catholic would have a very difficult time together. But, since you're already together, I suspect your beliefs aren't that strong.

I was born Protestant and my wife Morman. But, neither of us were anywhere near devout and today we're pretty much atheist. The only challenges are our parents, who are each so closed minded that they cant be in the same room together and often try to pressure us to be more religious (in opposite directions, of course).

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

I was born Protestant and my wife Mormon. But, neither of us were anywhere near devout and today we're pretty much atheist. The only challenges are our parents, who are each so closed minded that they cant be in the same room together and often try to pressure us to be more religious (in opposite directions, of course).

Did her parents disown her? My family comes from a small town in NE Arizona. (St Johns) My cousin married a Mormon girl and her family quickly disowned her. A friend at work is living with a former JW. Her entire extended family has "disfellowshipped" her. They have not spoken or seen each other in years, not even to see their granddaughter.

[Waragainstsleep]

Thats one of the things I dislike most about religion. The ones who cut people off from all their friends and families when they stop believing. This is the behaviour of a cult. Nothing short of an outrageously cruel control mechanism.

I agree that the power of religion will continue to dwindle. Many many people who list themselves as religious, don't go to church or pray, they are just used to referring to themselves as being a member of a certain faith. There are certainly plenty of catholics who have relaxed their personal views on birth control.
The world is becoming a smaller and smaller place and the more we all intermingle and intermarry, the more we realise that the various different religions are all just different fairytales to fill the gaps in our collective knowledge and that one is no better or worse than the other as far as most things are concerned.

As for inter-religious relationships, it will vary from couple to couple. Personally I would struggle to respect someone who was very very devout, but I'm fairly understanding and devout faith is only ever the result of brainwashing and indoctrination and this can often be reduced over time.
I could not tolerate a partner who believed anything that was demonstrably ridiculous like creationism or ID at all, but thats me.

If both parties are happy to live and let live regarding belief and conversion, then there is only ever going to be one sticking point, which is how you raise your children. A true believer would never tolerate their kids being raised any other way as this would mean their offspring going to hell or its equivalent. I on the other hand would prefer my children were not force-fed nonsense and indoctrinated into any religion. I might put up with it while they were young, but I would constantly undermine any religious teaching they received and deliberately so. I would have to insist they be allowed to make their own minds up when I was satisfied they were smart enough to do so.

People often enter into relationships knowing they will never really go anywhere, so its not surprising that unlikely couples exist. To the OP: its probably worth asking your GF her opinion on raising children. If you can't stand the idea of having your kids be catholic, then you might be wasting your time trying to make things work at all.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by hadocon 

Hey gang!

I was telling a friend about my GF today who I am considering moving in with. The issue here is that I am atheist and she is hella Roman Catholic.

Sounds like bad joss from the get go. Once you start making hard choices about things together, you kinda want to be on the same page. Also, you want to be able to share your spiritual self with your significant other. Even agnostics have spiritual selves, I'd bet, or something that looks like one at least.

Being together is all about shared values and shared activities and feelings. Starting up a serious, shack up relationship based on such a big divide is probably not such a good idea.

[Captain Obvious]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Been watching too much Book of Eli?

I had to google your reference to even know what you are talking about and I don't care enough to read the synopsis to figure out how it pertains to this conversations

Originally Posted by finboy 

Also, you want to be able to share your spiritual self with your significant other. Even agnostics have spiritual selves
.

If you have a daughter someone like me is going to end up breaking her in two because you pumped her full of this nonsense. Your children are going to be so ill prepared for the world that its probably best you just keep them away from the rest of the general urban populace.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Did her parents disown her? My family comes from a small town in NE Arizona. (St Johns) My cousin married a Mormon girl and her family quickly disowned her. A friend at work is living with a former JW. Her entire extended family has "disfellowshipped" her. They have not spoken or seen each other in years, not even to see their granddaughter.

Nope. From what I understand, the Canadian branches of the Morman church tend to be less extreme in that regard (though, there are exceptions). However, we do get church members showing up at our door every few months trying to pressure her to come back ... I keep telling them that she doesn't live here, which confuses them immensely.

My Protestant parents did threaten to disown me.

[hart]

Seems like the more immediate problem for the OP is birth control, the issue of co-habitation and pre-marital sex. Addressing that seems to come way before the theoretical kiddies

It's hard to think about how you're going to raise The Kids when you're just starting out. But it does become an issue if you end up having those kids. Kids are going to ask questions from the get-go and if you're not able to answer them without prevarication and hemming and hawing they're going to see right through you. Do you say "Your mommy is a Catholic and I think it's a pile of bull." or "Go ask your mother." or what? When one parent isn't participating in the other's faith it is a statement. While I don't believe that parents have to present a monolithic united front on issues like this you do have to have a respectful, long-term way to address this central disagreement.

Unfortunately, this kind of thing doesn't go away. Lots of people gloss over it for the sake of the relationship then it comes back to bite them. I've learned from grim experience that potential issues have to be hammered out up front or you'll be seriously sorry in the end. And this doesn't mean one partner goes along with the other partner just to keep the peace.

I'm not saying it can't work but that it has to be addressed.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

A true Athiest and a true Catholic would have a very difficult time together.

But could a True Scotsman marry a lying Cretan?

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

But could a True Scotsman marry a lying Cretan?

As long as they weren't hiding the Whisky.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

If you have a daughter someone like me is going to end up breaking her in two because you pumped her full of this nonsense. Your children are going to be so ill prepared for the world that its probably best you just keep them away from the rest of the general urban populace.

That's what I told your Mom, but she didn't listen.

To the OP:
The alternative is to just pick up a slamhound and forget about what SHE thinks is important. After all, if you're agnostic what difference does everyone else's superstition make to YOU. It's all about YOU, anyway, right?

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by finboy 

To the OP:
The alternative is to just pick up a slamhound and forget about what SHE thinks is important. After all, if you're agnostic what difference does everyone else's superstition make to YOU. It's all about YOU, anyway, right?

I'm sorry, how does being agnostic mean you have to be selfish? What a ridiculous thing to say.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by finboy 

After all, if you're agnostic what difference does everyone else's superstition make to YOU. It's all about YOU, anyway, right?

I think you're confusing agnosticism with capitalism.

[Captain Obvious]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

I'm sorry, how does being agnostic mean you have to be selfish? What a ridiculous thing to say.

lol

You're expecting someone who believes that they have an eternal soul that travels to heaven if you're a good boy to make an argument based on logic?

Ha ha ha

[Waragainstsleep]

No, of course not. Just baiting him to dig the hole a bit deeper before I bury him in it.

[Davine]

I can't deal with anyone that belives in religion. It's just like dear god they believe in an invisible creator of all, what other immature things do they belive in? Unicorns? Leprechauns? True love?

[turtle777]

Wow, typical PWL. Thread hijacked by the usual religion haters.

-t

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

religion isn't going anywhere because that lower 2/3rds of the Bell Curve that represents the distribution of human intelligence needs it. They thrive on it. They turn to it to numb their minds and free themselves of the realities of the world.

Well, not everyone can be in the upper third like you.

I hope that one day I can shed my religious believes to become like you, and thrive on the things you do: jerking off to religious bashing

-t

[Big Mac]

Absolutely right on turtle. It's amazing to me that atheists can be so cocksure that there's no such thing as the divine, souls or judgment in the afterlife. I can admit the possibility (however remote) exists that I'm wrong in believing in such things, but atheists appear not to be similarly capable of admitting the corresponding opposite possibility (however remote). I don't see how it's possible that anyone can hold to such a doctrinaire point of view of absolute atheism, but atheists around here and elsewhere not only do, they're terrifically arrogant in doing so as well (witness Captain Oblivious).

To bring the point back to the subject of this thread, if you as an atheist hold as much contempt for religion as Captain does (according to his most recent post saying that religious people are incapable of rational thought or debate), I really think you're doing a considerable disservice to a potential spouse if you aren't honest about your level of disdain for religious people. I wonder if Captain in all his arrogance would style himself the intellectual superior to the likes of Isaac Newton or (the vast majority if not all of) the American founding fathers who were religious to varying extents.

Edit for those who need everything spelled out explicitly: To religious people involved with atheists, I really think you're also doing a considerable disservice to a potential spouse if you aren't honest about your level of disdain for atheists. It wasn't as important to me to make the converse point, but of course my standard goes both ways.

[Chongo]

I don't know how many calls I have heard to in the last year since I began listening to EWTN/Immaculate Heart Radio that start out "but he promised to raise our children in the faith, but when it came time to baptize our child/send them to a parochial school/CCD classes"

Here's a call to Patrick Madrid of "Open Line" on Catholics dating non-Catholics. In this case He's Catholic and the ex girlfriend is Presbyterian.

http://patrickmadrid.com/wp-content/...girlfriend.mp3

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Absolutely right on turtle. It's amazing to me that atheists can be so cocksure that there's no such thing as the divine, souls or judgment in the afterlife. I can admit the possibility (however remote) exists that I'm wrong in believing in such things, but atheists appear not to be similarly capable of admitting the corresponding opposite possibility (however remote). I don't see how it's possible that anyone can hold to such a doctrinaire point of view of absolute atheism, but atheists around here and elsewhere not only do, they're terrifically arrogant in doing so as well (witness Captain Oblivious).

I'm surprised that your arms are capable of holding up a brush as broad as the one with which you're painting.

Also, LOL at the 3rd-grade level re-spelling.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by davine 

i can't deal with anyone that belives in religion. It's just like dear god they believe in an invisible creator of all, what other immature things do they belive in? Unicorns? Leprechauns? True love?

wow dood you totally are winning this thread.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

I'm sorry, how does being agnostic mean you have to be selfish? What a ridiculous thing to say.

Nope, not at all. He could believe in anything and it would still be an act of selfishness to assert that her beliefs are "no big deal."

It clearly has nothing to do with his belief system, except for the part where her goals and beliefs don't matter as much as his.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

I'm surprised that your arms are capable of holding up a brush as broad as the one with which you're painting.

I think I very fairly portrayed what I've seen in this thread and didn't broad brush anything. You're welcome to make a specific claim to support your broad assertion against me, but if not I'll just assume you're spouting hot air because of your longstanding vendetta against me.

Also, LOL at the 3rd-grade level re-spelling.

Glad you were amused, although I doubt many 3rd-graders would know that term.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Davine 

I can't deal with anyone that belives in religion. It's just like dear god they believe in an invisible creator of all, what other immature things do they belive in? Unicorns? Leprechauns? True love?

Oh, I get it, that's some bitterness. Did God hurt you and take away your sweetie?

[brassplayersrock²]

No, he just loved his country so much, that he asked for donations for it, but instead found out that people think of his homeland as a shthole; and that's why he's so bitter.

[besson3c]

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Well, not everyone can be in the upper third like you.

I hope that one day I can shed my religious believes to become like you, and thrive on the things you do: jerking off to religious bashing

-t

I've always wondered about Captain Obnoxious, he's so bitter and angry. Maybe some day someone can make a movie about how, when he was a child, they took away his sled and he evolved into a hateful monstrosity who has no capacity for empathy or compassion.

[ort888]

Well, he is a lawyer... right?

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I've always wondered about Captain Obnoxious, he's so bitter and angry. Maybe some day someone can make a movie about how, when he was a child, they took away his sled and he evolved into a hateful monstrosity who has no capacity for empathy or compassion.

You know that "Rosebud" was real-life William Randolph Hearst's nickname for his wife's clitoris, right?

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Absolutely right on turtle. It's amazing to me that atheists can be so cocksure that there's no such thing as the divine, souls or judgment in the afterlife. I can admit the possibility (however remote) exists that I'm wrong in believing in such things, but atheists appear not to be similarly capable of admitting the corresponding opposite possibility (however remote). I don't see how it's possible that anyone can hold to such a doctrinaire point of view of absolute atheism, but atheists around here and elsewhere not only do, they're terrifically arrogant in doing so as well (witness Captain Oblivious).

To bring the point back to the subject of this thread, if you as an atheist hold as much contempt for religion as Captain does (according to his most recent post saying that religious people are incapable of rational thought or debate), I really think you're doing a considerable disservice to a potential spouse if you aren't honest about your level of disdain for religious people. I wonder if Captain in all his arrogance would style himself the intellectual superior to the likes of Isaac Newton or (the vast majority if not all of) the American founding fathers who were religious to varying extents.

We know it amazes you, and thats a big part of why we both berate and lament your inabilities to debate rationally. We may seem cocksure and arrogant at times, but thats because we are following where the evidence points us. We can back up our beliefs or lack thereof with evidence or lack thereof and logic. And no matter how many times we tell religious people that we will change our world views in a heartbeat when the evidence logically tells us we should, you always choose to ignore that fact and make the comments like you did above about us being cocksure and arrogant. That arrogance comes from us perpetually winning these debates, and religious people simply failing to realise that we have won them. Happens every time.

And do you really believe that religious people aren't arrogant? Some of the christian opinions I have seen regarding other faiths are just as dismissive as atheists are. And the same holds true for most other faiths. Buddhists seem a bit more easy going to be fair. To wheel out another ancient point, nobody ever killed anyone in the name of a lack of god.

Newton and the founding fathers were raised to be religious and were brainwashed just like the rest of you. If Newton were alive today, I am confident he would be an atheist. The same is probably true for many of the founding fathers and other famous historical figures. Like it or not there is a correlation between intelligence and atheism.

I'm not going to speak for any other specific atheists, but most of us are perfectly happy for people to believe in a god which doesn't involve denying big chunks of scientific evidence that disagree with the bible or other book of choice. Did God create the 'heavens and the Earth' in 6 (Earth) days? No. Did he set off the big bang? I don't know, therefore he could have. Believe in that if you like.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by finboy 

Nope, not at all. He could believe in anything and it would still be an act of selfishness to assert that her beliefs are "no big deal."

It clearly has nothing to do with his belief system, except for the part where her goals and beliefs don't matter as much as his.

And his beliefs will matter as much to her as her own?

Here is an interesting thing about religious people. Those who truly, genuinely believe in their religion behave very differently to the majority who merely claim to believe in it.

If you believe your faith will get your soul in to heaven, you should have no fear of death whatsoever;
If you truly believe that your faith and only your faith is the true path to heaven or enlightenment or whatever, then you are stuck either disregarding everyone who doesn't share your beliefs as worthless or a lost cause. Alternatively you should be so upset that several billion people who were at least born innocent are going to go to hell that you would never get out of bed in the morning. Pity suicide is a sin right?

In case you haven't noticed, this kind of belief is rightly labelled as extremism and leads to suicide bombings and numerous other atrocities.

Even most religious people are quick to condemn extremism but if you believe in your religious text of choice then following it wholeheartedly is the only logical course of action open to you. Picking and choosing which bits you like and which bits you don't, reinterpreting parts of it to serve what suits you is really no different to all the new age garbage cobbled together from anything which sounds ancient or mystical and is really designed by someone smarter than you to get you to pay over the odds for dreamcatchers, Feng Shui consultants and crystals with 'healing properties'.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Absolutely right on turtle. It's amazing to me that atheists can be so cocksure that there's no such thing as the divine, souls or judgment in the afterlife. I can admit the possibility (however remote) exists that I'm wrong in believing in such things, but atheists appear not to be similarly capable of admitting the corresponding opposite possibility (however remote). I don't see how it's possible that anyone can hold to such a doctrinaire point of view of absolute atheism, but atheists around here and elsewhere not only do, they're terrifically arrogant in doing so as well (witness Captain Oblivious).

Would you say that *all* followers in your religion are equally able to admit the possibility that they're wrong in believing in such things, or are they so cocksure that there *is* a divine, souls and judgment in the afterlife?

As has already been pointed out, you're painting with a really broad brush here. Speaking only for myself, you might consider me to be one of these "cocksure atheists", but I can only say that I am as yet unconvinced in the matter. Having not seen any evidence of a divine, souls or judgment in the afterlife, I can't say that I believe in such things. When I seen evidence to the contrary, I am more than willing to reevaluate my position.

And, just like that, your position is rendered false (it's quite interesting ... you're like the flip-side of Captain Obvious). Some atheists are going to be cocksure about their beliefs, while some are going to be willing to admit that there's the possibility (however remote) that they're wrong. Just as there's going to be religious followers who hold to a doctrinaire point of view of absolute belief in a divine and are unable to admit even a remote possibility that they're wrong.

To bring the point back to the subject of this thread, if you as an atheist hold as much contempt for religion as Captain does (according to his most recent post saying that religious people are incapable of rational thought or debate), I really think you're doing a considerable disservice to a potential spouse if you aren't honest about your level of disdain for religious people. I wonder if Captain in all his arrogance would style himself the intellectual superior to the likes of Isaac Newton or (the vast majority if not all of) the American founding fathers who were religious to varying extents.

I agree completely. If you're strongly opposed to a system of belief (such as Atheism or Christianity), then you're being dishonest if you're pursuing a long-term relationship with someone who follows one of those beliefs. Which is exactly what I said earlier in this thread.

[OreoCookie]

It's kind of funny that this matter causes serious debate. Germany, unlike many other European countries) has always had regions where there were either more Catholics or Protestants -- and regions where you have both. Back in my grandparents' time, it used to be a big deal if a Protestant and a Catholic got married, but nowadays, it's no issue at all. The same applies for people who aren't religious at all or atheists. It only comes up when people actually get married or want to have their kids baptized, although even then, it's not that big of a deal.

The issue here can be rephrased in such a way that it has no connection to the religious motivation: there are two people who love each other, but have a fundamentally different opinion on several important issues. Of course, the issues are due to differences in spiritual belief, but they could as well be whether or not to move abroad or to the other coast to take the once-in-a-lifetime job.

It's a question how far each side is willing to compromise. Unfortunately, in my experience, positions that are due to religious dogmas are seldomly open for negotiation.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Absolutely right on turtle. It's amazing to me that atheists can be so cocksure that there's no such thing as the divine, souls or judgment in the afterlife.

That sounds rather what you think atheists think than what most of them actually think. The typical claim is `it's very unlikely God (in the Abrahamic sense) exists/there is an afterlife.'

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

To bring the point back to the subject of this thread, if you as an atheist hold as much contempt for religion as Captain does (according to his most recent post saying that religious people are incapable of rational thought or debate), I really think you're doing a considerable disservice to a potential spouse if you aren't honest about your level of disdain for religious people.

I think respect goes both ways, it's not just whether or not an atheist respects someone who is a theist, it's also the other way around. It's indicative to me that you just view this as a one-way street. In fact, both have to make an effort to meet in the middle.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I think respect goes both ways, it's not just whether or not an atheist respects someone who is a theist, it's also the other way around. It's indicative to me that you just view this as a one-way street. In fact, both have to make an effort to meet in the middle.

I have not seen Big Mac belittling or making fun of Atheists the way they do with people that believe in some form of religion.

-t

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

I have not seen Big Mac belittling or making fun of Atheists the way they do with people that believe in some form of religion.

-t

You mean "the way [some of them] do with people that believe in some form of religion." Right?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

I have not seen Big Mac belittling or making fun of Atheists the way they do with people that believe in some form of religion.

I think you've misunderstood that post: I wasn't referring to his claim that in his opinion, atheists are belittling people who are religious, but rather that he merely viewed the situation from the position of the religious person. To me that's an indication he has problems putting himself in the other person's shoes (in this case, an atheist), that he thinks it's a problem of the atheists to be respectful of the opinion of religious people. I think it's a two-way street.

If I were to make a claim that Big Mac `belittles or makes fun of atheists,' I would make a concrete claim with quote.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

It's a question how far each side is willing to compromise. Unfortunately, in my experience, positions that are due to religious dogmas are seldomly open for negotiation.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

I'm not going to speak for any other specific atheists, but most of us are perfectly happy for people to believe in a god which doesn't involve denying big chunks of scientific evidence that disagree with the bible or other book of choice. Did God create the 'heavens and the Earth' in 6 (Earth) days? No. Did he set off the big bang? I don't know, therefore he could have. Believe in that if you like.

It's funny, you claim that Big Mac is arrogant, yet this paragraph that I have quoted is probably one of the more arrogant posts on this board and completely renegs everything you've said before it.

[The Final Dakar]

Wait, Big Mac has the time to post in this thread?

...and here I thought he had suspended our discussion because he was busy.