I bet I can sum it up in a couple of sentences without having read it.
Two people have an argument about religion on the internet.
Both people have unalterable beliefs in opposition to each other.

The 'debate' unfolds with a tedious inevitabiliy and nobody ends up winning since the whole thing is unprovable either way.
( WormuIus, Fri 10 Jul 2009, 11:28, 3 replies, latest was 17 years ago)

And someone compares someone else to Hitler.
QOTWats is my new favourite btw.
( Noeli overtheshoulderboulderholderthingstraplatchboobs, Fri 10 Jul 2009, 11:29, Reply)

Lies of the Weak
is mine.
( WormuIus, Fri 10 Jul 2009, 11:34, Reply)

Let's talk about other retarded arguments that people can have online.
Let's have a Labour -v- Conservatives argument.
( WormuIus, Fri 10 Jul 2009, 11:34, Reply)

Or your Wormulus vs /talk one.

( Noeli overtheshoulderboulderholderthingstraplatchboobs, Fri 10 Jul 2009, 11:35, Reply)

I think it's evolved into Wicca -v- Wormulus

( WormuIus, Fri 10 Jul 2009, 11:43, Reply)

Ooo really?
Links please
(Bazongaloid, Fri 10 Jul 2009, 11:47, Reply)

It's not a debate as such
Try reading it before you judge it. Usually the best policy, IMHO
( chart cat has an itch, Fri 10 Jul 2009, 11:48, Reply)