https://youtu.be/w_2SwU79I-E
Never get tired of propagandizing, do you?
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on January 21, 2018, 06:29:00 AM
Never get tired of propagandizing, do you?
This happens to be an atheist forum, where the participants are mainly atheist.
The post is about atheism.
Where do you see propaganda here? What is wrong with you?
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on January 21, 2018, 06:29:00 AM
Never get tired of propagandizing, do you?
Didn't watch the video did you? It was a talk about the concept of atheism, contrast with agnosticism and how the first is structures on not believing or following something as opposed to just about any other practice.
I know the go to response to PR is believing that he's posting a propaganda piece, but might wanna check what he's posted first before assuming that.
As for the video itself, does create some interesting debate. To me the idea of agnosticism is like a middle ground leading from belief to not believing in a religious practice, but one thats not really sustainable in the long run, anyone who's ever said their agnostic almost always goes back to religion or onto atheism.
what this guy seemed to be going for is his attempt to normalize the term atheism to the point that it doesn't need to be a label. Its an interesting idea and one I'd support, but i don't see it being realistic, since atheism is a minority today, and unless society were to become a society that long abandoned belief of all kinds as the majority, then I don't see the term atheism being just the norm in society anytime soon. And I'm fine with that, sooner feel like a bit of an outcast to peoples mass irrational beliefs right now, then being part of the herd.
Quote from: Munch on January 21, 2018, 08:10:15 AM
what this guy seemed to be going for is his attempt to normalize the term atheism to the point that it doesn't need to be a label. Its an interesting idea and one I'd support, but i don't see it being realistic, since atheism is a minority today, and unless society were to become a society that long abandoned belief of all kinds as the majority, then I don't see the term atheism being just the norm in society anytime soon. And I'm fine with that, sooner feel like a bit of an outcast to peoples mass irrational beliefs right now, then being part of the herd.
I like the notion. I would like it if atheists owned up for the reason we would feel less alone. We are definitely a minority. How big or small, I don't know, because people don't all own up, and as per the title of the thread and in my case, I didn't even know what I was for much of my life. I didn't take the time to consider that I was an atheist, because it has become a loaded term on par with Communist, Asshole, or Serial Axe Murderer. Across the pond may be different.
Having said that, I've recently taken stock, and was surprised to realize that the vast majority of my atheists friends never identified themselves as atheist, nor did I even know about their lack of belief in gods for most of the time I knew them. And who would blame them for not identifying? Unlike me being unable to identify what I was, I suspect most of my atheist friends, simply don't want to announce it publicly.
Atheists are like gays 50 years ago. There are consequences for identifying yourself, but atheists are much slower to take on the challenge of coming out of the closet in large numbers to demand a rightful place in society. I don't know why. I can't even think of a theory to explain why. Because we are the most hated minority in society? I dunno. You can't get much more hated than gays 50 years ago. But I have been told that we are the most hated minority, at least in numbers from poll questions, so yeah we are hated statistically, although probably with a less visceral response than gays.
Traditional religious folk, think that heresy, irreligion, agnosticism and atheism leads to crop failure, weather or other natural disaster or livestock being barren. I kid you not. Given that false belief, it is unfortunately expected that ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLvGnro4Cgw
Those crazy Village People ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkTV2--PcDI
No wonder Feminists are triggered ;-)
Here in Europe atheism or secularism is almost the norm. Even religious people are mostly secular.
Christianity is mostly Christian by name only, the churches are almost empty.
The Pope is a Marxist politician rather a Catholic leader of the flock. He is advocating Islamic immigration to Europe, ignoring the persecution of Christians in the Middle East and Islamic dominated countries.
Some more "propaganda".
The book discussed in the video:
Fighting god by David Silverman (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fighting-God-Atheist-Manifesto-Religious-ebook/dp/B00XHIGV7S/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1516546192&sr=8-1&keywords=kindle+fighting+god)
Synopsis:
QuoteFighting God is a firebrand manifesto from one of the most recognizable faces of atheism. In his book, Silverman-a walking, talking atheist billboard known for his appearances on Fox News-discusses the effectiveness, ethics and impact of the in-your-face-atheist who refuses to be silent.
Silverman argues that religion is more than just wrong: it is malevolent and does not deserve our respect. It is our duty to be outspoken and do what we can to bring religion down. Examining the mentality, methods and issues facing the firebrand atheist, Silverman presents an overwhelming argument for firebrand atheism and reveals:
- All religion is cafeteria religion and almost all agnostics are atheists.
- American society grants religion a privileged status, despite the intentions of the Founding Fathers.
- Christian politicians have adversely (and un-Constitutionally) affected our society with regard to science, health, women's rights, and gay rights.
- The notion of "atheist Jews" is a lie forced on us by religion.
- It is not "Islamophobia" to observe dangerous teachings and disproportionate violence in Islam.
- Atheists are slowly but surely winning the battle.
Fighting God is a provocative, unapologetic book that takes religion to task and will give inspiration to non-believers and serve as the ultimate answer to apologists.
Quote from: Munch on January 21, 2018, 08:10:15 AM
Didn't watch the video did you? It was a talk about the concept of atheism, contrast with agnosticism and how the first is structures on not believing or following something as opposed to just about any other practice.
I know the go to response to PR is believing that he's posting a propaganda piece, but might wanna check what he's posted first before assuming that.
As for the video itself, does create some interesting debate. To me the idea of agnosticism is like a middle ground leading from belief to not believing in a religious practice, but one thats not really sustainable in the long run, anyone who's ever said their agnostic almost always goes back to religion or onto atheism.
what this guy seemed to be going for is his attempt to normalize the term atheism to the point that it doesn't need to be a label. Its an interesting idea and one I'd support, but i don't see it being realistic, since atheism is a minority today, and unless society were to become a society that long abandoned belief of all kinds as the majority, then I don't see the term atheism being just the norm in society anytime soon. And I'm fine with that, sooner feel like a bit of an outcast to peoples mass irrational beliefs right now, then being part of the herd.
I know his agenda. If that wasn't propaganda he didn't understand it.
Quote from: pr126 on January 21, 2018, 09:45:36 AM
Here in Europe atheism or secularism is almost the norm. Even religious people are mostly secular.
Christianity is mostly Christian by name only, the churches are almost empty.
I haven't been in a church for 10 years, and the time before that was even 15 years earlier. One, a Catholic Church was jam packed. The last one being fundamentalist one off with no particular affiliation, had a small attendance sitting on two or three rows of folding chairs. Religion is important here and small independent churches spring up because a group of "Christians" will cherry pick the tenets of Christianity they like and form a church. This may have cut into some of the bigger denominations.
I think the most telling aspect of the importance here for me personally is the large group of coworkers I have worked with from fundamentalist religions that have beliefs that can be incredibly whacky, and vary from mildly evangelical to in your face belligerent; and vary from outwardly tolerant to extremely judgmental and vindictive, and they vote mostly Republican. Their numbers are large, and in the work place, I feel surrounded and sometimes overwhelmed by them. This is not a manufactured threat to atheism, IMO.
Most liberals/(often identified as Democrats) are personally religious, but not fundamentalist to the same degree. They are also more accepting to secular ideas. There are always exceptions of course.
I think you'll find that the poorer people are the more religious they will be.
Better off people need less god in their lives.
Gawdzilla Sama wrote:QuoteI know his agenda. If that wasn't propaganda he didn't understand it.
And I know your agenda. Quite obvious.
(http://resources.uknowkids.com/Portals/176530/images/troll%20face.jpeg?width=328&height=300&name=troll%20face.jpeg)
Quote from: pr126 on January 21, 2018, 10:34:39 AM
I think you'll find that the poorer people are the more religious they will be.
Better off people need less god in their lives.
That may be, but certainly not a hard and fast correlation in the US. Most of my life I have associated with the lower middle class. For the purposes of this post, I will identify them as "religious". I did have occasion to become associated with the dirt poor down and out segment of society for an extended period. For the most part, fundamentalism and illogical notions dominated that group. Whether that group was entirely representative of the dirt poor, I can't say.
Quote from: pr126 on January 21, 2018, 09:45:36 AM
Here in Europe atheism or secularism is almost the norm. Even religious people are mostly secular.
Christianity is mostly Christian by name only, the churches are almost empty.
The Pope is a Marxist politician rather a Catholic leader of the flock. He is advocating Islamic immigration to Europe, ignoring the persecution of Christians in the Middle East and Islamic dominated countries.
That is what Jefferson expected for the future of the US ... except freedom of religion led to more religion. The thought was that religion was only being sustained by "establishment". And perhaps in Europe being irreligious is one way to oppose the authorities, the kings, queens, popes.
Quote from: pr126 on January 21, 2018, 10:34:39 AM
I think you'll find that the poorer people are the more religious they will be.
Better off people need less god in their lives.
They have the ever popular god, Satan ... aka power, money and fame. This has been an issue for 5000 years now. Thank god we have no gods but Pharaoh, eh Ramses?
Quote from: pr126 on January 21, 2018, 10:34:39 AM
I think you'll find that the poorer people are the more religious they will be.
Better off people need less god in their lives.
The poor are religious because they think they need God. The rich are religious because they can control the poor via "God's will." The middle class is religious because their parents were religious, and their parents parents were religious.
Quote from: SGOS on January 21, 2018, 10:44:49 AM
That may be, but certainly not a hard and fast correlation in the US. Most of my life I have associated with the lower middle class. For the purposes of this post, I will identify them as "religious". I did have occasion to become associated with the dirt poor down and out segment of society for an extended period. For the most part, fundamentalism and illogical notions dominated that group. Whether that group was entirely representative of the dirt poor, I can't say.
The more extreme the conditions, the more extreme the ideation. For poor and ultra-rich alike. The ultra-rich sophisticate thinks that reality is a Matrix, and they have the power to reboot the computer (like Moriarty manifested in holodeck of Star Trek Next Generation, Enterprise). Plato was like one of those wealthy folks who didn't have to make pottery or statues for a living. Socrates too, his dad was a decent fellow, was a stone mason.
Islamaphobia is prejudicial. There are the anti-religious, not just atheist or secular or agnostic. And for them, Islam is enemy #1. I get that. But "phobia" implies a medical condition. I don't necessarily think anyone here, even pr126, is phobic. Strongly-anti isn't phobia. I just think that, in his location, pr126 underestimates the Hindus (a lot of them in Britain) and the Christians (head of state is head of church). Just because the Queen hasn't been chopping heads, doesn't mean she can't. Prince Charles is strongly Arab-philic. He wants to be Lawrence of Arabia.
I firmly believe that all gods and religions are Man’s creations.
At first out of fear of the unknown and later for control and profit.
Quote from: pr126 on January 21, 2018, 11:59:44 AM
I firmly believe that all gods and religions are Man’s creations.
At first out of fear of the unknown and later for control and profit.
But why are you opposed to fear, control or profit? Those are perfectly good things. I have a fear of disease, so I diet and take my meds. I have control over my personal affairs, I don't need a Queen, Pope or commissar telling me what to do. And I am not against profit. That would be ... worship of failure.
Quote from: Baruch on January 21, 2018, 12:01:33 PM
But why are you opposed to fear, control or profit? Those are perfectly good things. I have a fear of disease, so I diet and take my meds. I have control over my personal affairs, I don't need a Queen, Pope or commissar telling me what to do. And I am not against profit. That would be ... worship of failure.
I think you are kind of missing his point. I hope that's not why you turn to religion.
Islam is a supremacist ideology and does not tolerate examination or criticism.
Islamophobia is a nonsensical made up word invented purely to stop all discussions about it.
Islam as an ideology cannot stand up to any scrutiny. It’s scriptures are their worst enemy.
Quote from: pr126 on January 21, 2018, 12:04:49 PM
Islam is a supremacist ideology and does not tolerate examination or criticism.
Islamophobia is a nonsensical made up word invented purely to stop all discussions about it.
Islam as an ideology cannot stand up to any scrutiny. It’s scriptures are their worst enemy.
I half agree with you. Muslims are not open to criticism, and have been known to resort to violence when their prophet has been insulted. Christians aren't much more receptive of criticism, but they at least usually reserve their anger to ignorant Facebook posts. Both religions have disgusting teachings in their holy texts, which neither one wants to own up to. Islamophobia, however, is not about shutting down criticisms of the religion. It's used to describe people who discriminate against the people who follow that religion, simply because they are or even just look Islamic. The Christian Right has an irrational fear of the Middle-Eastern people, considering they are much more similar than they are different.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYV7KWQ-fY4
On the topic of the OP, I'm not gonna lie. Without Munch's synopsis of the video, I wouldn't have even clicked on it. But I just finished watching the video, and I do find it interesting. Some of you might remember when I first joined this site. I had just recently abandoned my beliefs and was struggling to figure out exactly what I was. I didn't want to use the word "atheist" because I wasn't certain of my position yet, and I still had some ideas from my life as a Christian that took a while to shake off. I didn't know what the word "atheism" meant. I had been raised to think that they were people who were absolutely certain that God doesn't exist, to the point where they would ignore evidence to the contrary. Now that I have a proper understanding of the word, I'm perfectly willing to accept the label, and I find it very frustrating when I have to repeatedly explain to theists that their understanding of the word is wrong. I agree with the points made in the video.
Quote from: Blackleaf on January 21, 2018, 01:19:21 PM
It's used to describe people who discriminate against the people who follow that religion, simply because they are or even just look Islamic.
There's no such thing as 'looking' islamic if we're talking about just people, separate from garments and adornments. And nobody hates muslims because of what they wear.
If one is prejudiced against middle-eastern people on the basis that they are of a middle-eastern ethnicity; that's racism - not islamophobia.
What islamophobia actually is is prejudice against muslims on the basis that they are muslims. But I get it - you're trying to shoehorn race into it because you're a regressive.
Quote from: SGOS on January 21, 2018, 12:03:31 PM
I think you are kind of missing his point. I hope that's not why you turn to religion.
Don't know where you are coming from, in context of what I was saying to pr126. Would you like to expand?
Quote from: pr126 on January 21, 2018, 12:04:49 PM
Islam is a supremacist ideology and does not tolerate examination or criticism.
Islamophobia is a nonsensical made up word invented purely to stop all discussions about it.
Islam as an ideology cannot stand up to any scrutiny. It’s scriptures are their worst enemy.
PC is political, not religious. But if you can't separate politics from religion (and many people can't) then it is a problem. But I think everyone here separates religion from politics. I understand you opposed Islamism as a political ideology. I see no problem with opposing that. I oppose opposition to "truth, justice and the American way" ... and I wear a cape and my BVDs on the outside ;-))
Again, the phobia is practicing medicine without a license. I can see that people are bigoted toward gays or Muslims, because they are gay or Muslims, not because of the politics of it. But labeling your opponents as "crazy" is a Soviet technique not worthy of use after 1991. But the Soviet system is coming back on-line, not only in China and Russia, but in the US ... for thought crime.
Islam is a totalitarian political ideology with a thin veneer of religiosity.
The state (politics) and religion are inseparable in Muslim dominated countries.
See Islamic Republic of Iran for example.
“When religion and politics travel in the same cart, the riders believe nothing can stand in their way. â€
― Frank Herbert, Dune
Quote from: pr126 on January 21, 2018, 02:14:55 PM
Islam is a totalitarian political ideology with a thin veneer of religiosity.
The state (politics) and religion are inseparable in Muslim dominated countries.
See Islamic Republic of Iran for example.
“When religion and politics travel in the same cart, the riders believe nothing can stand in their way. â€
― Frank Herbert, Dune
Exactly (quote from Dune) ... and so? It works.
Potentially, Islamism is just as dangerous as the Marxist inspired shit we all came to love from 1917 - 1991. But it is controlled opposition ... GCHQ and NSA control it ... except when they don't! Charlie Wilson's War continues to give back. Helping the Soviet Union fail was a plus, but can we stop now?
Iran is a regional power, same as Turkey. Turkey this morning resumed their jihad against the Kurds. They are also involved in Qatar and Sudan. Just trying to rebuild the nasty Ottoman Empire. I would take Mexico and Venezuela as neighbors any day, over Iran and Turkey. Poor Russia (to misquote a Mexican saying) too close to Islam, and too far from the Equator.
Quote from: Gilgamesh on January 21, 2018, 01:48:54 PM
There's no such thing as 'looking' islamic if we're talking about just people, separate from garments and adornments. And nobody hates muslims because of what they wear.
If one is prejudiced against middle-eastern people on the basis that they are of a middle-eastern ethnicity; that's racism - not islamophobia.
What islamophobia actually is is prejudice against muslims on the basis that they are muslims. But I get it - you're trying to shoehorn race into it because you're a regressive.
its true, I don't hate people for what they wear (unless its a t-shirt with a swastika on it), but seeing women here in the uk wandering around with full headscarfs overing themselves up, it makes me angry at the thought of these women being manipulated and pressured since they were children to dress that way, and in my country, men and women are considered equals, not lesser beings like in the middle east.
Actually I stand corrected, I don't hate the people wearing that crap, I hate the ones who forced them into wearing it for years, who manipulated them into thinking its normal somehow.
Quote from: Munch on January 21, 2018, 02:32:38 PM
its true, I don't hate people for what they wear (unless its a t-shirt with a swastika on it), but seeing women here in the uk wandering around with full headscarfs overing themselves up, it makes me angry at the thought of these women being manipulated and pressured since they were children to dress that way, and in my country, men and women are considered equals, not lesser beings like in the middle east.
You imported the wrong guest workers (low wage slaves). You needed to import more Jamaicans, man! Well maybe not, this week they have an outbreak of public violence there ... too much ganja, or not enough?
Baruch wrote:QuotePotentially, Islamism is just as dangerous as the Marxist inspired shit we all came to love from 1917 - 1991.
Why the "ism"?
It is Islam. No "ism" or "ist" is necessary.
Like when people saying "radical" Islam. Islam is radical. There is no moderate Islam. One Book. One Islam.
Quote from: pr126 on January 21, 2018, 02:37:55 PM
Baruch wrote:Why the "ism"?
It is Islam. No "ism" or "ist" is necessary.
Like when people saying "radical" Islam. Islam is radical. There is no moderate Islam. One Book. One Islam.
Yes, but don't group people all the time, sometimes treat them as responsible individuals (snicker).
There has never yet been separation of Islam and State ... though I am hopeful, it can happen in the West. But even for Christians, it took a few centuries.
Even with the Cold War, and Russia trying to control all Leftism everywhere, they failed a lot, particularly in China. Mao knew, even in the 1930s, that Stalin would throw the Chinese Communist Party under the bus, if it suited them. Remember Lin Biao and Liu Shaoqi?
Quote from: Gilgamesh on January 21, 2018, 01:48:54 PM
There's no such thing as 'looking' islamic if we're talking about just people, separate from garments and adornments. And nobody hates muslims because of what they wear.
If one is prejudiced against middle-eastern people on the basis that they are of a middle-eastern ethnicity; that's racism - not islamophobia.
What islamophobia actually is is prejudice against muslims on the basis that they are muslims. But I get it - you're trying to shoehorn race into it because you're a regressive.
You know full well that when a brown skinned man with short black curly hair shows up, everybody assumes he is Islamic. It may be a fallacious assumption, given that Muslims come in all colors, and that just being brown doesn't make one automatically Muslim, but it's an assumption nonetheless. When it comes to Islam, people have a clear picture in their mind when they think of its believers.
Quote from: pr126 on January 21, 2018, 02:37:55 PM
Baruch wrote:Why the "ism"?
It is Islam. No "ism" or "ist" is necessary.
Like when people saying "radical" Islam. Islam is radical. There is no moderate Islam. One Book. One Islam.
By that logic, there are no moderate Christians either. They all read the same book, right? So that means they must all be okay with mass genocide, bashing babies heads in with rocks, keeping prisoners of war as slaves and "wives" (AKA sex slaves), etc. Hell, Christians and Muslims even share the same first few books in their holy texts.
Quote from: SGOS on January 21, 2018, 08:55:12 AM
I like the notion. I would like it if atheists owned up for the reason we would feel less alone. We are definitely a minority. How big or small, I don't know, because people don't all own up, and as per the title of the thread and in my case, I didn't even know what I was for much of my life. I didn't take the time to consider that I was an atheist, because it has become a loaded term on par with Communist, Asshole, or Serial Axe Murderer. Across the pond may be different.
Having said that, I've recently taken stock, and was surprised to realize that the vast majority of my atheists friends never identified themselves as atheist, nor did I even know about their lack of belief in gods for most of the time I knew them. And who would blame them for not identifying? Unlike me being unable to identify what I was, I suspect most of my atheist friends, simply don't want to announce it publicly.
Atheists are like gays 50 years ago. There are consequences for identifying yourself, but atheists are much slower to take on the challenge of coming out of the closet in large numbers to demand a rightful place in society. I don't know why. I can't even think of a theory to explain why. Because we are the most hated minority in society? I dunno. You can't get much more hated than gays 50 years ago. But I have been told that we are the most hated minority, at least in numbers from poll questions, so yeah we are hated statistically, although probably with a less visceral response than gays.
Alex O'Connor is essentially advocating that non-believers enter the fray of identity politics, uniting under the label "atheist" to raise consciousness and social awareness of non-believers as a marginalized group. It is the same strategy used by the LGBT community. I'm an "out" atheist but I really am much more interested in promoting secularism than atheism. I don't really care to dismantle people's religious beliefs, people like David Silverman can deal with that can of worms (Tide goes in... Tide goes out). I'm more concerned about things like political donations being anonymously funneled through tax-exempt religious organizations that endorse and support candidates who will use government to promote their religious values. There are many religious people who support living in a secular society and I think atheists should keep in mind we have that in common.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on January 21, 2018, 06:29:00 AM
Never get tired of propagandizing, do you?
Relax, buddy. This was actually a decent post by pr... for once
Quote from: GSOgymrat on January 21, 2018, 04:07:36 PM
There are many religious people who support living in a secular society and I think atheists should keep in mind we have that in common.
I realize this and have gratitude for it.
Quote from: SGOS on January 21, 2018, 12:03:31 PM
I think you are kind of missing his point.
Missing points seems to be Baruch's modus operandi. He's had enough practice to be very good at it.
Quote from: Blackleaf on January 21, 2018, 01:19:21 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYV7KWQ-fY4
Well, at first I thought it was like the Hatfields and the McCoys, but then it was like
(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/873/411/ff3.gif)
Quote from: Gilgamesh on January 21, 2018, 01:48:54 PM
And nobody hates muslims because of what they wear.
well, some people really hate their swimwear:
(https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/nintchdbpict000267845111.jpg?w=960)
France’s burkini ban exposes the hypocrisy of its secularist state (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/24/france-burkini-ban-secularist-equality-muslim)
Quote from: Blackleaf on January 21, 2018, 03:22:25 PM
You know full well that when a brown skinned man with short black curly hair shows up, everybody assumes he is Islamic. It may be a fallacious assumption, given that Muslims come in all colors, and that just being brown doesn't make one automatically Muslim, but it's an assumption nonetheless. When it comes to Islam, people have a clear picture in their mind when they think of its believers.
Maybe in some neighborhoods. In my neighborhood I would assume they are Baptist. Also judging from pictures of Arabs, they aren't very black .. swarthy perhaps. Our Egyptian Arabic teacher ... she is from Cairo, and she has the nicest medium brown complexion and lone medium curly hair ... and she is Christian. Not that there is anything wrong with being sub-Saharan African. And of course, to those Aryan types ... if you aren't blond and blue eyed, then you are African ;-( Also the majority of Muslims are in Indonesia and India ... they are Asian, not ME nor African.
Quote from: Unbeliever on January 21, 2018, 05:38:48 PM
Missing points seems to be Baruch's modus operandi. He's had enough practice to be very good at it.
Nihilism - there is no point. Now what was your point? Oh, ad hominem.
On France vs Burkini ... they want you to be French, as understood by sophisticated Parisiennes. So laicity is defined in those terms also. But you only need to know two French words ... Merde non!
(http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-the-point-is-there-ain-t-no-point-cormac-mccarthy-35-5-0502.jpg)
Old men are all washed up ... by the undertaker. Got funeral?
Quote from: pr126 on January 21, 2018, 07:58:23 AM
This happens to be an atheist forum, where the participants are mainly atheist.
The post is about atheism.
Where do you see propaganda here? What is wrong with you?
If this was an African-American site where the participants were mostly African American and you questioned them, do you think you would have the slightest chance of not being banned on your first post?
Think about that.
Quote from: Cavebear on January 24, 2018, 07:10:37 AM
If this was an African-American site where the participants were mostly African American and you questioned them, do you think you would have the slightest chance of not being banned on your first post?
Think about that.
You would ban everyone, except your cats ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on January 24, 2018, 07:33:10 AM
You would ban everyone, except your cats ;-)
Missed the point entirely (or ignored it), as usual in favor of the quick jibe.
You think you are safe from questions because "God is on your side" and you must be right. HE isn't there. Your beliefs are derived from superstitious crap.
Quote from: Cavebear on January 24, 2018, 07:10:37 AM
If this was an African-American site where the participants were mostly African American and you questioned them, do you think you would have the slightest chance of not being banned on your first post?
Think about that.
What point are you making? That these hypothetical african americans are retarded? That you want all atheists to be as retarded as your hypothetical african americans? That banning someone makes one right; that is; that 'might makes right'?
Quote from: Cavebear on January 24, 2018, 01:02:46 PM
Missed the point entirely (or ignored it), as usual in favor of the quick jibe.
You think you are safe from questions because "God is on your side" and you must be right. HE isn't there. Your beliefs are derived from superstitious crap.
You are no Jordan Peterson ... so practice your medicine off the back of a wagon with the Circus geek.
Yes, by all means ... if that is what you meant originally, go to an African-American forum and say "Black Is Ugly". But I don't recommend it.
Yes, might does make right, if you are the DMV clerk from Hell. Take a number, and get to the end of the line, citizen!
Quote from: Gilgamesh on January 24, 2018, 01:11:07 PM
What point are you making? That these hypothetical african americans are retarded? That you want all atheists to be as retarded as your hypothetical african americans? That banning someone makes one right; that is; that 'might makes right'?
A bit angry, are we? My point was that using SOME examples for the same purpose in an argument, replacing them with others, produces a whole different reaction. And it shouldn't.
Your reaction sort of proves my point. I suppose no one will quite understand this and I will get a whole of grief about a logical point.
Maybe I can clarify. We are all humans out of Africa (well we came from somewhere, right?) and we aren't any different from each other mentally. or physically. Got it?
Quote from: Cavebear on January 24, 2018, 01:43:30 PM
My point was that using SOME examples for the same purpose in an argument, replacing them with others, produces a whole different reaction. And it shouldn't.
I don't know what it is that you're trying to convey. Your syntax is nonsensical.
Quote from: Gilgamesh on January 24, 2018, 02:04:02 PM
I don't know what it is that you're trying to convey. Your syntax is nonsensical.
Wow, I've been accused of a lot of things in my life, but not often nonsensical syntax. Would you point out the specific errors you noticed please?
Quote from: Gilgamesh on January 24, 2018, 02:04:02 PM
I don't know what it is that you're trying to convey. Your syntax is nonsensical.
Stereotypes.
Quote from: Cavebear on January 24, 2018, 01:43:30 PM
A bit angry, are we? My point was that using SOME examples for the same purpose in an argument, replacing them with others, produces a whole different reaction. And it shouldn't.
Your reaction sort of proves my point. I suppose no one will quite understand this and I will get a whole of grief about a logical point.
Maybe I can clarify. We are all humans out of Africa (well we came from somewhere, right?) and we aren't any different from each other mentally. or physically. Got it?
Good, I hope all the murderers in my town move in with you (regardless of their skin color) because we are all equal.
Quote from: Baruch on January 24, 2018, 08:16:21 PM
Good, I hope all the murderers in my town move in with you (regardless of their skin color) because we are all equal.
Do you wish to claim that not all people are equal?
Quote from: Cavebear on January 27, 2018, 01:57:11 AM
Do you wish to claim that not all people are equal?
Everyone's a serial killer, jeffrey dahmer killed all those people and desolved their bodies, I sprayed on some anti bacterial cleaner on my sink and killed all those germs, its all the same thing
Quote from: Munch on January 27, 2018, 04:59:39 AM
Everyone's a serial killer, jeffrey dahmer killed all those people and desolved their bodies, I sprayed on some anti bacterial cleaner on my sink and killed all those germs, its all the same thing
Oh, Munch, not everyone is a serial killer. I've only killed a few myself and not serially. Long gaps betweem. Harder to catch that way... BWA Ha HA...
Wait, are you saying you don't clean your bathroom that often? :S
Quote from: Munch on January 27, 2018, 07:10:05 AM
Wait, are you saying you don't clean your bathroom that often? :S
The bathtub is the easiest thing to clean. Ceramic tiles and emaneled tub, you know. The mats went into the washing machine, and Oh I probably shouldn't have put the squirrels into the compost bin. But they will decompose among the kitchen waste, right?
Quote from: Cavebear on January 27, 2018, 07:59:48 AM
The bathtub is the easiest thing to clean. Ceramic tiles and emaneled tub, you know. The mats went into the washing machine, and Oh I probably shouldn't have put the squirrels into the compost bin. But they will decompose among the kitchen waste, right?
(https://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/animaniacs/images/e/eb/Slappysquirrel.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20130309140344)
Quote from: Cavebear on January 27, 2018, 01:57:11 AM
Do you wish to claim that not all people are equal?
Nobody is equal, not even to their former selves. Equality is French Revolution. Got Robespierre?
Quote from: Munch on January 27, 2018, 04:59:39 AM
Everyone's a serial killer, jeffrey dahmer killed all those people and desolved their bodies, I sprayed on some anti bacterial cleaner on my sink and killed all those germs, its all the same thing
To The Hague with you! And why does that city have a definite article?
Quote from: Baruch on January 27, 2018, 10:17:26 AM
To The Hague with you! And why does that city have a definite article?
To give "The Donald" something to steal?
Quote from: Baruch on January 27, 2018, 10:16:14 AM
Nobody is equal, not even to their former selves. Equality is French Revolution. Got Robespierre?
Equalitee, Fraternitee, Death By Mobs.
And I'm half French... Eek.