Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Ding Dong the Ding Dong's dead
Ding Dong the Ding Dong's dead
#1
Jerry Falwell is dead. He shall spew hate no more. He is a stiff. Bereft of life, he decomposes.
While there are days that I feel like an eminent sociopath towards Falwell, Robertson, Hinn, Haggard and their loathsome ilk; they are still humans, and their life; any life; is precious. This is the one chance we have and no one gets out alive.
Having said that; we should celebrate his life and the end of it with his own words. To truly appreciate the width, breadth and depth of his completely fucked up take on life, the universe and everything. From his support of apartheid to his repeated attacks on the rights of homosexuals, women, teletubbies, and anyone not agreeing with his bilious biblical bullshite.
Heeerrres Jerrrry!
Quote:
Christians, like slaves and soldiers, ask no questions
AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals
The idea that religion and politics don't mix was invented by the Devil to keep Christians from running their own country
If you're not a born-again Christian, you're a failure as a human being
Homosexuality is Satan's diabolical attack upon the family that will not only have a corrupting influence upon our next generation, but it will also bring down the wrath of God upon America
[homosexuals are] brute beasts...part of a vile and satanic system [that] will be utterly annihilated, and there will be a celebration in heaven
(re: 9/11 attacks) "...throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools, the abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked and when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad...I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way, all of them who try to secularize America...I point the thing in their face and say you helped this happen."
I hope I live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won't have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be!
I listen to feminists and all these radical gals - most of them are failures. They've blown it. Some of them have been married, but they married some Casper Milquetoast who asked permission to go to the bathroom. These women just need a man in the house. That's all they need. Most of the feminists need a man to tell them what time of day it is and to lead them home. And they blew it and they're mad at all men. Feminists hate men. They're sexist. They hate men - that's their problem.
It is God's planet - and he's taking care of it. And I don't believe that anything we do will raise or lower the temperature one point.
Jerry has not joined to choir invisible. He does not rest in peace. He has not gone to a better place (unless morgues were his thing). He has not met his maker. He is dead; but the foul detrius of his lifes work decorates the sidewalk like so many fragrant dog turds (cough Liberty University Science Program Cough).
Shayne
By the way, check out Jerry Falwells God by Roy Zimmerman.
richarddawkins.net/articl...-Zimmerman
Reply
Re: Ding Dong the Ding Dong's dead
#2
As a former born-again type, now a polytheistic agnostic, I can only say, "amen".

-- Bob
---------
The Internet Is For Norns.
Reply
Re: Ding Dong the Ding Dong's dead
#3
You know Rev? The least you could have done is waited til
the man was in the ground before you started wizzing on his
grave. I didn't like him either but at least I know enough
to hold my tongue on the matter til he is buried out of
respect for those that did care about him. The fact that
you didn't kinda makes me wonder if you have any
compassion, courtesy or class at all.
I only hope that when you die that people treat
your passing better than you did his....
Reply
A moderate proposal
#4
I may be many things, but I try and avoid being a hypocrite; sometimes I even succeed. I rallied against Falwell in life, I am not going to leave off for a few days just because he died. Should I display insincere courtesy through my silence? Should I condescend with jam-dripping false sincerity to respecting him in death as I never did in life? Should I ignore his repeated attacks on homosexuals, women, teletubbies and science? His support of apartheid? His fucking eyesore of false education Liberty University? There is no class in staying silent in this.
Courtesy? Why would anyone who knew and cared about him be sad? According to their tortured doctrine he is seated by his god in his heaven. Of course those who knew him; his friends, his family, and anyone who followed his career likely knew exactly what a grasping fucking hypocrite he was. According to his own scripture - like the laden camel threading its humps through the eye of the needle, the chance of him getting into his own imaginary heaven is pretty much nil. This is a man who went to bed every night secure in the knowledge that he had gotten away with lying and theft, and woke every morning, refreshed and ready to set forth on the same path again.
Remember that Falwell is the same fucker who directly after the attack of 9/11, came out with his fatuous claim about the burden of cause being laid on abortionists, feminists, gays and lesbians. Well before the dust of the dead settled to the ground. His apologies were profuse. They were not sincere his only regret was that his message of fucking hate did not fall on a fertile field and grow.
As to when I die? I shall be beyond such concerns. Dead. I will not know. All that is me save the relics I create, the memories I leave behind in others and the genetic detritus of my offspring will be gone. My body is already signed and donated for organ donation and scientific research and it is my wish, that given a few moments of preparation prior to my demise, I will be allowed to swallow several capsule prizes from vending machines so that when the anatomy class gets around to cutting up my cold, dead, flesh, they can announce that Hey! This one has prizes!
There may not be life after death, but there is the potential for serving mankind, and time permitting, amusement value. That Fidhoohki is compassion. That Fidhooki is courtesy, to assist in the pursuit and dissemination of human knowledge; and given that it is anatomy; it is also class.
So, to sum up,
Get stuffed.
Shayne
Reply
Re: A moderate proposal
#5
Quote:
My body is already signed and donated for organ donation and scientific research and it is my wish, that given a few moments of preparation prior to my demise, I will be allowed to swallow several capsule prizes from vending machines so that when the anatomy class gets around to cutting up my cold, dead, flesh, they can announce that Hey! This one has prizes!
[Image: applause.gif]---
Mr. Fnord
http://fnord.sandwich.net/
http://www.jihad.net/
Mr. Fnord interdimensional man of mystery

FenWiki - Your One-Stop Shop for Fenspace Information

"I. Drink. Your. NERDRAGE!"
Reply
Re: A moderate proposal
#6
Quote:
so that when the anatomy class gets around to cutting up my cold, dead, flesh, they can announce that Hey! This one has prizes!
(to the tune of the old "Cracker Jack" jingle)
"Candy-coated corpses,
Peanuts and a prize!
That's what you get in Reverend Dark!"
That said, Fidoohki, I must agree with Shayne. Falwell possibly did more than any other one single individual to turn American politics into the set of armed camps it is today (which is not to say it hadn't ever been armed camps before, just that he encouraged the current distribution of conflicts to benefit his own agenda). He is one of the major reasons I paused in my born-again beliefs, re-examined my faith, and decided what it was I really believed in -- and his particular version of Christianity, which seemed so often in conflict with the princples taught by Christ, wasn't it.
While as an agnostic, I still hold on to the distant, probably vain hope of an afterlife where Shayne does not, I am still of the opinion that the only people to whom an immediate post-mortem period of respect matters are the living -- and in this case, any period of "respect" would only serve to reinforce the false legitimacy he and his followers tried to give the political credo that was the payload hidden behind the wrapper of religion. I will not legitimize the man's agenda by hypocritically pretending that it is improper to criticize him simply because he died.
Sure I'm speaking ill of the dead. But then, the dead don't care -- when was the last time you saw one complain?

-- Bob
---------
The Internet Is For Norns.
Reply
Re: A moderate proposal
#7
I don't _do_ respect to fuckheads.
Fuck you, Falwell, burn in your own hell, shitstain.Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979
Reply
Re: A moderate proposal
#8
So you are saying that because you didn't agree with him
on any level it's okay for you to say this now? Bullshit.
To dance around and praise his death is low. Now I admit
after thinking about it you should acknowledge his faults and
they were many. Still to do this level is ignorant, insensitvie
and outright crude. Quite frankly I am beginning to wonder if
you are just an anti religious racist and an textbook example
of what I used to beleive all athiests were.

The fact that you have no remorse at all just makes it
worse.
And in response to your last comment.
Shove it twice as far.. sideways.
Reply
Re: A moderate proposal
#9
As I said in another post I am not saying you shouldn't
point out his faults but enthusiasm that is shown is
wrong period. I'm sorry but I was raised better than to
disrespect people in mourning even if I did disagree with
them.
Reply
The Yeast of your worries
#10
No. I have always taken a vocal disrespect of Falwell and his loathsome ilk, and I will not hold off doing so just because he has died. That is a consistency that you fail to grasp. To fall silent for a brief period as a mark of respect would be hypocrisy. As I opened the original post with I am sorry he has died as I am sorry when all people die; as their one chance to experience life is now over. That does not mean that I consider him any less of a grasping arsehole; nor does it mean that somehow his going Norwegian Blue on us suddenly raises him to a position of respect; even a temporary one.
What is an anti-religious racist? Oh wait, I know, it is an insult born out of ignorance. You do not possess the education, erudition or logical process to actually craft an argument or rational response, so you merely string together loaded words a veritable Tourettes syndrome of the keyboard in hope that taken as a whole, they will have an effect. which is both amusing and deeply saddening.
You are in fact wrong. It just shows you as ignorant which is simply a lack of knowledge on your part. Racism denotes race. It does not denote social structures such as religion. The phrase you are seeking is anti-religious; or if you are of a particular sect you could use blasphemer, heretic, kuffar (or kafir the spelling varies), or just plain old unbeliever. It would not be accurate I am quite interested in religion; and has been demonstrated, can speak on the subject with some expertise.
Atheists, whether textbook, or to sink to your level, colouring book, are open to new theories. Unfortunately for the faithful we also ask for proof. Demonstrative proof. If you believe in your god or faith, you must put up or shut up. If you make a claim, you cannot merely appeal to an invisible, extra-dimensional, higher authority; it will not, as the prostitute said to the judge, stand up in court.
I am sure that you think you were raised better, but you also think there is an imaginary sky faerie, so your opinion in matters of thought is highly suspect. Perhaps in matters of being raised you should return to a warm, moist, place your essential yeasts need a little more maturity. Bring a book. Books help.
Shayne
Reply
Re: The Yeast of your worries
#11
So you are saying that because you didn't agree with him
on any level it's okay for you to say this now? Bullshit.
Nope, I'm saying that Falwell is dead, this is a reason for happiness and good cheer. An evil man has passed from this world.
_YOU_ are saying that it's not OK for me to say that.
Quote:
To dance around and praise his death is low. Now I admit after thinking about it you should acknowledge his faults and they were many. Still to do this level is ignorant, insensitvie and outright crude. Quite frankly I am beginning to wonder if you are just an

And to which I rebut with the following Falwell quote.
Quote:
"I do not believe the homosexual community deserves minority status. One's misbehavior does not qualify him or her for minority status. Blacks, Hispanics, women, etc., are God-ordained minorities who do indeed deserve minority status."
I'd have 'danced around and praised his death' before it happened, if I'd known it was coming. The man is a boil on the ass of society which is organized religion.
Quote:
anti religious racist and an textbook example
of what I used to beleive all athiests were.
Could be, could be. Falwell was a hate-mongering, filth-spewing asshole. I'm a hate-mongering filth-spewing asshole, but I don't advocate hatred against people based on what they are, but on what they do to others...
hmmm.
I can't tell you what to think or feel about me. I could horse out the old saw that 'some of my best friends are religious', but there wouldn't be any point to it. I hate Fall-Well because he's set back logical thought and scientific government by leaps and bounds with his immoral, stupid, and hate-filled words.

Quote:
The fact that you have no remorse at all just makes it worse.
I will be happy to state for the record that Jerry Falwell was a rabid dog, and should have been put down before now. My only regret is that he didn't die sooner.
Quote:
And in response to your last comment.
Shove it twice as far.. sideways.
Very christian of you.
Actually, it is. Consider the amount of gays stoned by 'god-fearing' christians.
Consider the amount of christians killed due to their religion. Keep your considerations restricted to the last 50 years or so.
Hmmm.
VERY christian of you. Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979
Reply
Re: The Yeast of your worries
#12
www.theregister.co.uk/200...kerfuffle/

is that some LOL?
I think it is!Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979
Reply
Re: The Yeast of your worries
#13
Quote:
No. I have always taken a vocal disrespect of Falwell and his loathsome ilk, and I will not hold off doing so just because he has died. That is a consistency that you fail to grasp. To fall silent for a brief period as a mark of respect would be hypocrisy. As I opened the original post with I am sorry he has died as I am sorry when all people die; as their one chance to experience life is now over. That does not mean that I consider him any less of a grasping arsehole; nor does it mean that somehow his going Norwegian Blue on us suddenly raises him to a position of respect; even a temporary one.

Well it didn't sound like it. The sarcasm hid it well I think.

Quote:
You are in fact wrong. It just shows you as ignorant which is simply a lack of knowledge on your part. Racism denotes race. It does not denote social structures such as religion. The phrase you are seeking is anti-religious; or if you are of a particular sect you could use blasphemer, heretic, kuffar (or kafir the spelling varies), or just plain old unbeliever. It would not be accurate I am quite interested in religion; and has been demonstrated, can speak on the subject with some expertise.

You missed a word that might work... try Bigot.
Quote:
Atheists, whether textbook, or to sink to your level, colouring book, are open to new theories. Unfortunately for the faithful we also ask for proof. Demonstrative proof. If you believe in your god or faith, you must put up or shut up. If you make a claim, you cannot merely appeal to an invisible, extra-dimensional, higher authority; it will not, as the prostitute said to the judge, stand up in court.
I am sure that you think you were raised better, but you also think there is an imaginary sky faerie, so your opinion in matters of thought is highly suspect.

Is it? You just used thirty words to say I'm delusional for
believing in god. What's a matter? Did I hit a nerve or did
I hit the nail on the head? There's an old proverb among
mechanics called KISS. It means:
'Keep it simple stupid.'
Try it sometime. It might prevent those that don't have the
benifit of a college education from thinking you are an
arrogant asshole.
Reply
Re: The Yeast of your worries
#14
You know, this thread really makes me appreciate assembly language.
-Morgan, o.O
Reply
Re: The Yeast of your worries
#15
Quote:
You missed a word that might work... try Bigot.

WOAH THERE!
not gonna play this card here, champ, not on my watch.
If you want to call someone a bigot, call them a bigot.
Don't call a man an
Quote:
anti religious racist and an textbook example
of what I used to beleive all athiests were.
And _claim_ that you called someone a bigot.
From M-W.com, on 'Racist'
Quote:
Main Entry: racism
Pronunciation: 'rA-"si-z&m also -"shi-
Function: noun
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
From M-W.com, on 'Bigot'
Quote:
Main Entry: bigot
Pronunciation: 'bi-g&t
Function: noun
Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

Wanna try that again, this time in English?
Or you wanna just play the 'abused christian' card again?Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979
Reply
Re: The Yeast of your worries
#16
Webster's dictionary and thesaurus 1997 edition
Big-ot= n. A person who is fanatically devoted to one
group, religion, political view, or race.
Though I wonder if zealot would fit better.
Racist is the same as bigot to me. Someone who feels they
are superior in all things to another based solely on
one facet. Be it race, sexual orientation, belief, ethinic
origin, hair color, size, whatever...
However, Racist was not the word that should have been
used and I apologize to Rev Dark for calling him that, bigot
still seems to fit though.
Reply
Re: The Yeast of your worries
#17
Quote:
www.theregister.co.uk/200...kerfuffle/
is that some LOL?
I think it is!
That reminds me of the "Obligatory Civil Disobedience" page I put up on my website back when the "Communications Decency Act" was enacted. I put on it what I typified as a text featuring blatant obscene material -- non-consensual parent-child incest involving alcohol use -- and dared authorities to take me on.
The text? Genesis 19:30-36:
Quote:
30 Lot and his two daughters left Zoar and settled in the mountains, for he was afraid to stay in Zoar. He and his two daughters lived in a cave. 31 One day the older daughter said to the younger, "Our father is old, and there is no man around here to lie with us, as is the custom all over the earth. 32 Let's get our father to drink wine and then lie with him and preserve our family line through our father."
33 That night they got their father to drink wine, and the older daughter went in and lay with him. He was not aware of it when she lay down or when she got up.
34 The next day the older daughter said to the younger, "Last night I lay with my father. Let's get him to drink wine again tonight, and you go in and lie with him so we can preserve our family line through our father." 35 So they got their father to drink wine that night also, and the younger daughter went and lay with him. Again he was not aware of it when she lay down or when she got up.
36 So both of Lot's daughters became pregnant by their father.
(New International Version)
Strangely, no one ever tried to prosecute me for this material, which clearly violated the terms of the Communications Decency Act and the various laws that followed it and tried to do the same thing.

-- Bob
---------
The Internet Is For Norns.
Reply
Keeping It Simple (For) Stupid
#18
Fidhooki, I suppose that name calling is easier for you than thinking. Racist, bigot, or whatever other inappropriate term you want to whip out of your unsophisticated vocabulary and wave around. You will have trouble making it stick though. Atheism, as I took pains to explain to you is the absence of belief. It is not subject to fundamentalism. You may challenge it at any time with rational argument and evidence. If you can prove god, you have triumphed and atheism will melt away. Atheism is not a bigoted belief, as it supports no position, only asks that a particular belief be proven. You cannot be an atheist zealot as explained above, as empirically proving the existence of god will trump atheism.
Belief without evidence is a delusion; and while that delusion may make you happy or bring you comfort, or offer you the illusion of protection against the death; it is still a delusion. Just because it is comforting; it does not make it true.
Quote:
Is it? You just used thirty words to say I'm delusional for
believing in god. What's a matter? Did I hit a nerve or did
I hit the nail on the head? There's an old proverb among
mechanics called KISS. It means:
'Keep it simple stupid.'
Try it sometime. It might prevent those that don't have the
benifit of a college education from thinking you are an
arrogant asshole.
No, you did not hit a nerve, you would be hard pressed to hit the broad side of a barn with an idiom. By the way, engineers are proponents of the KISS principle; most mechanics are on the hour, so prefer complexity.
I used thirty words to rebut your insinuation as to your moral standing being somehow higher, to reaffirm an atheist position on the requirement for proof; threw in a pun about raising in the form of yeast, and an admonition about rubbing your mind up against a book to widen it. Four distinct points in thirty words. That is efficiency.
By the way, I do not possess a university education, I am an admitted autodidact. Constantly rubbing my mind up against new subjects and thoughts in order to broaden it; Science, the arts, religion, history, politics and even poetry.
Perhaps I do sound like an arrogant asshole; but if it is true (and it is not) I am an arrogant asshole who can string together an argument, writing clearly with a dramatic flair, humour and a sense of amazement and irony.
Whats your excuse?
Reply
Re: Keeping It Simple (For) Stupid
#19
Rev to be pedantic Atheism doesn't nessecarilly mean someone who will accept proof to change their convictions, coneivably an Atheist could be a stounch non believer who ignores all evidence. Atheist just believe there is no god for whatever reason and the group is a real mixed bag. Just as christians includes everything from russian ortodox, to protestant with the catholics added in for the extra spicy kick. Generalizing over a group of people that diverse is going to be inaccurate.
What you are descirbing seems closer to an Agnostic Atheist, someone who isn't sure if there is a god but believes there is none.
That said the main point of argument on wether it's appropriate or not to rejoice in the death of an induvidual, I would have to say yes.
Reasining as follows:
1) Might makes Right: Bob is the administrator and he okayed it. These are his forums.
2) Location, Location, Location: People from all over the world come here, and what is polite, and acceptable, varies a great deal depending on where you are. So we need to have some sort of common yardstick we can use. See (1)
3) Respect must be earned: Rev Dark made some interesting points regarding the way he talks about Farwell and it is consistent. There should be no change in this just beause the person died.
I find Rev's arguments for why it's ok to treat the dead with such disrespect highly compelling. Personally I am uncomfortable with it because of the behaviors ingrained on me at a young age, but see above.
Sorry for butting in, you can now go back to your regularly scheduled shouting match.
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."
Reply
Re: Keeping It Simple (For) Stupid
#20
Quote:
Perhaps I do sound like an arrogant asshole; but if it is true (and it is not)

correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe I am the arrogant asshole being referred to - I'm ruder, meaner, and less, hrmm.. "together" with my arguments than you are, Rev.Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979
Reply
Here we go again...
#21
(Alas, the files I need for the next part of the assmebly language project will not be forthcoming for a while...)
Okay. I'm not sure actually *revelling* in someone's death is really an appropriate thing, even if they're an enemy you've killed with your own hands.
But I'm not sure Rev Dark could really be said to be doing that. Mostly his original post seems to boil down to thinking the world will be a better place without Falwell in it. And we all seem to agree that he was a lunatic, though at least one thing he's said kind of brings up an interesting theological logic puzzle...
On the other hand, I'm also not sure why the idea of a " post-mortem period of respect" has everyone so upset. Particularly I fail to see the need for implying that Fidoohki is feebleminded and delusional, or for bringing religous beliefs into what's really an issue of social courtesy. After some of these, I don't think Rev Dark has any room to be calling Fidoohki on name calling... especially when Fidoohki had previously acknowledged and apologized for using "racist" inappropriately.
Now, since religion has been dragged into this...
Rev, I'm not sure whether to think you're an atheist or not. The whole "want evidence" idea does seem more similar to agnosticism. The dictionary definitions of atheist are a bit vague about whether they would include any of that. Of course, most times when I've heard the term agnostic used, it refers to someone who *does* believe that some sort of deity exists, just that they don't claim to know it's nature. Connotations make everything more difficult...
On the other hand, much of what you write sounds as though you believe the absence of proof of the existance of a god as being equivalent to proof that none exist. I don't really consider that a reasonable assumption, as one would expect an inactive or subtle god to produce the same amount of evidence as a nonexistant one - ie, no evidence at all.
-Morgan, overuses elipses...
"So, you're walking around wearing a skirt and no underwear... but *I* am the pervert?"
Reply
Re: Keeping It Simple (For) Stupid
#22
Y'know Rev, if the man's not worth your time, then why are you spending so much time and effort not letting him get the last word in?
There's such a thing as giving a man enough rope to hang himself and then just letting him go and do it.
-Logan
-----------------
"Wake up! Time for SCIENCE!"
-Adam Savage
-----------------
Reply
Various replies
#23
Catty/Morgan, Atheism runs from seven levels as a measure of belief; from one - strong theism; to seven no god at all. I fall into category six in that there simply is not evidence for the existence of gods. That includes be the various festive variations of the god of Abraham (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), the Norse, Greek or various asian pantheons. Most people do not believe in other gods, only their own. Now conceivably an atheist could be such a staunch non-believer that they ignore all the evidence however until there is evidence this remains purely speculative.
No, I am not an agnostic. Agnostic, a term coined by Huxley, states that god is unknown or unknowable. That is a cop out. A god, even a subtle one, is subject to the same rules of scientific investigation that any other phenomenon is. Especially a god/gods such as that of the Abraham or the Greeks, who insists of dicking around with the world; through virgin births and miracles (Christianity) or magical flying horses (Islam); or Zeus (Greek) schtupping anything with a pulse.
Absence of proof is not proof of absence or more correctly absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It doesnt work that way. Without evidence you could claim anything, from celestial tea pots to the invisible pink unicorn, to the god that moves in subtle, breathtakingly inefficient ways.
Morgan, I did not call Fidhooki on name calling I called him on name calling without knowing what the words he was using meant. If you are going to insult someone, it behooves you out of respect for the art, to be accurate and precise. That is why I use delusional. You could be delusional by thinking that you are Anne of Cleves. You could be delusional in believing in a particular god for which there is no evidence. The only difference is that in the second instance you have reinforcement from people who share your particular delusion. It is lonely delusion, thinking you are Anne of Cleves uncomfortable clothes, bad accent and an unending stream of who wants a little head jokes. The other delusion is more comforting; but it being comforting does not make it true. Belief without evidence is still a delusion.
Kokuten/Bob: Sorry to be late in responding to you on that link I read it as well and had a good chuckle over it. There is a conditioning to give religious belief a pass that you would not let any other belief and opinion get away with it. The Old Testament and New Testament contain much that it horrific, ignorant, intolerant and barbaric. The same can be said for the Koran (pick a spelling) with the prophet taking and enjoying a very young bride.
Why should religious belief be held in this special protection or respect? Especially when it is being used the challenge secular law and science. Why should you feel free to challenge the views of a monetarist on economy, but feel guilt at challenging the views of Mormon on Mormonism?
It is, as the punter might say, bollocks. Challenge religious belief as you would challenge any other assertion.
Shayne
Reply
This is getting way of topic, but...
#24
Rev, I agree with most of your points, but I think there is a disconnect at two points: 1) What is a god, and 2) Scientist vs Mathematician.
1) While I agree with you that the major faiths are all wrong, there is a high likelyhood of there being a 'god' as I would consider it. Any type II civilization or higher forinstance would fill what I think would qualify one for godhood, just by being substantially more powerfull than the human race. Much like the greek gods where essentially just ridicullisly powerfull humans (if Nanoha was real I'd essentially consider her a goddess, along with the TSAB, because they are that much more powerfull then us, juat like the greek gods vs the greeks.). Add to that that we are probably very likely to live in a simulation, and I would consider any of the beings running the simulations to be gods, since they created the universe we live in.
2) You view things from the viewpoint of a scientist, following the scientific method and requiering proof. Even though I am called a computer scientist my training is closer to that of a mathematician, rellying on logic and math to awnswer questions. That makes arguments like: www.simulation-argument.c...ation.html
very compelling to me, as they are based on those two things rather than observable phenomena. The science viewpoint is very usefull (just look at all the things it allows us to build) but it is not the only one. There are a couple of other mathematical arguments that god is likely, though there are none that result in the Judean-Christian god afaik.
Edit: I suppose I should qulify that I belive in conclusion 3, since I don't think we are about to go extinct, and I belive that there would be many reasons to run a simulation (Sociology research anyone? What about marketing research?)
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."
Reply
Re: Keeping It Simple (For) Stupid
#25
Quote:
correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe I am the arrogant asshole being referred to - I'm ruder, meaner, and less, hrmm.. "together" with my arguments than you are, Rev.
No I was refering to Rev dark. You I understand and
accept. I know where your emotions are coming from and
you have every right to them. I just object to the way
they are expressed. Look at it this way. What has
Falwell's wife and children ever done to you? Given
his views do you think they could have done anything
to change his?
Look at it like this. What if you fell in love with someone
who turned out to be a mass serial killer. Should society
blame you for their crimes just because you loved them?
Of course not. This example assumes you had nothing to
do with it of course.
The point is you can still say what you felt without resorting
to the loathing you feel at times like these. "Ding Dong the ding dong's dead"? Come on...
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)