Originally Posted by GarfieldJL
In all honesty SkinWalker, you routinely are guilty of it whenever religion enters the topic you go on an attack to bash people whom are religious and then you act surprised that people like myself are offended.
Quite the contrary. I'm very open to revising my conclusions regarding religion. The religious need only demonstrate where my conclusions are incorrect and why. If their arguments are rational and sound, what choice would I have but
to revise. This attitude is hardly consistent with having a preconceived conclusion. Furthermore, I was once a believer in the Christian god and religious superstition. In the face of rational thought and evidence, I've revised my conclusion to now take the position of an agnostic-atheist.
But, please. Cite the place I've demonstrated a preconceived conclusion to which I'm only willing to see that data which are supportive. The closest thing you might
be able to come to is my assertion that Cheney's office and Libby in particular was responsible for the treasonous act of revealing the identity of an intelligence asset. For this, I admit to being trusting of the Justice system in place but I'm willing to revise should evidence sufficient enough to sway that
system the other way be presented. I defer to the legal system and the special prosecutor, who are experts in the field. I'm not.