plekhanov Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Does Dawkins use Xmas and Xian? I doubt it because he's still a traditionalist who believes that a grounding in the stories of the Bible should still be taught in schools in order for us to maintain a cultural continuity and an understanding of our cultural history. There's a lot of cultural references you won't understand if you don't have a basic grounding in the Bible stories. The whole premise of your argument is flawed seeing as has already been pointed out numerous times by numerous people abbreviating Christ to X is really rather traditional Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyhippy Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Xmas is just lazy imo.-- Oh, the irony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagel Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 The whole premise of your argument is flawed seeing as has already been pointed out numerous times by numerous people abbreviating Christ to X is really rather traditional I don't have an argument. I have a question and I'll repeat it. Does Dawkins use Xmas and Xian? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyhippy Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Indeed, hence my decision to air the subject. I find that typing Christian is more accurate, and generates more hostility than a widely used abbreviation from ancient times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyhippy Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Behave. I was meaning, rather than assume something is inferred in a statement, ask the OP; then accept their interpretation, rather than lay into people with wild accusations. Seeing as we're on about linguistic stuff, you mean 'implied', not 'inferred'. One is transitive; the other intransitive. The two verbs do not mean the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plekhanov Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 I don't have an argument. I have a question and I'll repeat it. Does Dawkins use Xmas and Xian? You did have an argument and that which was that Dawkins wouldn't use the X contraction "because he's still a traditionalist" which was as I pointed out a fatally flawed argument as the X contraction is itself traditional. How are any of us supposed to know how Dawkins writes in informal situations anyway? Also why is what Dawkins does supposed to be of any relevance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyhippy Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 I am not a Christian, but I do not like the contraction, even if it is the same as used in Xmas. I think it is because when used by the Dawks it gives the impression they are being derogatory. If you're not a Christian, why would it worry you? What about my extrapolation? I don't mean that to be offensive, just a description of what I believe organised religion to be. Why should a widely used abbreviation be offensive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairyloon Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Why should a widely used abbreviation be offensive? One like "Wog" you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyhippy Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 One like "Wog" you mean? Not at all. That term was used exclusively as a derogatory term. 'Xian' was never meant as such. You knew that though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plekhanov Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 One like "Wog" you mean? Both the words 'wog' might be an abbreviation are themselves widely regarded as offensive so that's hardly a good choice Just because some contractions are viewed as offensive that doesn't mean all contractions are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.