tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post732269578911301148..comments2023-09-24T07:53:50.826-05:00Comments on The Atheist Experience™: Obama's first big screwupUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger62125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-89659987140648764832009-01-31T20:23:00.000-06:002009-01-31T20:23:00.000-06:00I think a quote from "The West Wing" would be apt:...I think a quote from "The West Wing" would be apt:<BR/><BR/><I>"... there aren't very many unnuanced moments in leading a country that's way too big for ten words. I'm the President of the United States, not the President of the people who agree with me. And by the way, if the left has a problem with that, they should vote for somebody else."</I><BR/><BR/>I've been on the receiving end of an administration that catered to half of the country before, and I didn't care for it. So long as my disappointments are balanced with my satisfactions I call it a win.<BR/><BR/>Oh, and I want an end to pointless wars and a balance on the Supreme court. Is that to much to ask?<BR/><BR/>- JackJack Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08416110713725623701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-25496082158364660502008-12-21T12:36:00.000-06:002008-12-21T12:36:00.000-06:00Give peace a chaaaaaanceeeGive peace a chaaaaaanceee-Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07423776253697799481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-84619459901575846002008-12-20T21:25:00.000-06:002008-12-20T21:25:00.000-06:00Shall I expect that, or was it rhetorical? It hasn...<I>Shall I expect that, or was it rhetorical? It hasn't taken place yet, so I am unsure what you mean.</I><BR/><BR/>Sorry for being unclear. No, I have nothing left in this thread for you. I just mentioned it as my passing observation, really, and hoped it might provide encouragement for you to, perhaps, address what I write and not drift off into inference so easily (though, now that I have explained this subtle intention openly, it likely comes of as condescending and not very persuasive).Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14168969281371246061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-42844134157960172722008-12-20T20:21:00.000-06:002008-12-20T20:21:00.000-06:00That sounds fine, DagoRed. One thing I need to req...That sounds fine, DagoRed. One thing I need to request clarification on:<BR/><BR/><I>I can only really pick a part your many mistakes</I><BR/><BR/>Shall I expect that, or was it rhetorical? It hasn't taken place yet, so I am unsure what you mean.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-55431661313070696802008-12-20T19:03:00.000-06:002008-12-20T19:03:00.000-06:00Rhology said: DagoRed, Martin at least attempted t...<I> Rhology said: DagoRed, Martin at least attempted to respond substantively. Were you planning to give it a go? </I><BR/><BR/>Yes, well Martin is much more the master of diplomacy than I, I have no doubt. I am fine with giving it a go, but you so badly missed the mark in your response to me, I can only really pick a part your many mistakes (and I do not mean to deride you here -- but much of your response was merely a diatribe rather than something someone placed effort behind). It seems hardly worth the effort at this point to continue this particular discussion. Rather I say lets forgive each other for our current body of 'sins', and simply remember how badly our first attempt at communicating went, and use the lesson to better our future efforts at communication with one another.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14168969281371246061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-66171623057981004492008-12-20T18:46:00.000-06:002008-12-20T18:46:00.000-06:00JK wrote: Again, just because I think an action is...<I>JK wrote: Again, just because I think an action is morally wrong does not mean I hate the people who commit that action.</I><BR/><BR/>You are correct. If such a belief remained strictly a belief, you can honestly absolve yourself of wrong doing here. The problem is when beliefs are used to back actions that affect people who do not share such beliefs. Such action subjects people to harm and, to repeat my earlier point, actions speak louder than words. You cannot simultaneously work to abjectly harm a group of people (which prop 8 does) and say you love them at the same time without sounding duplicitous or insane. So, when people like Rick Warren find it morally correct to impose their beliefs, through laws like Prop 8 in California, on people who do not share such beliefs, they cross a line of decency because their actions result in damage and harm. I am willing to accept your defense of Warren here, and agree that this damage may not truly be an act of 'hate' exactly, but however we wish to categorize such actions, one thing is for certain, Warren was acting immorally when he chose to support prop. 8.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14168969281371246061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-55104349059305426392008-12-20T11:24:00.000-06:002008-12-20T11:24:00.000-06:00JK: I don't think you hate people. I just think yo...JK: I don't think you hate people. I just think you may hold some ideas which have planted seeds of hate in people.<BR/><BR/>Because I don't know you very well I can't speak to any degree of accuracy specifically what those ideas are, so please feel free to tell me I'm wrong.-Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07423776253697799481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-34891673413146199752008-12-20T11:13:00.000-06:002008-12-20T11:13:00.000-06:00Tommy, thanks for being a good sport. I picked you...Tommy, thanks for being a good sport. I picked you to call insufferable and arrogant because of everyone in the thread, your comments were the most harmless.<BR/><BR/>If I had said Martin, or Ai Deng, I might have been taken seriously.<BR/><BR/>I'm glad that the thought that I may have been taking the piss, which I was, crossed your mind. I'm highly amused at your comment responses too =]<BR/><BR/>So yes, to get it all out of the way in clear language: I don't think you're insufferable, or arrogant, or a wad, not one jot or tiddle. I'm glad you took the joke well.<BR/><BR/>'But it's also quite rich for *atheists* to complain about someone being insufferable, arrogant, and things like that.' -Rhology.<BR/><BR/>There's a preconceived assumption there that atheists are insufferable and arrogant. I don't preconceive Christians to be fundamentalist and hateful. I was at a carol choir this afternoon, helping a friend take a video and singing along to Silent Night, Felis Navidad and O Come All Ye Faithful. The Christians I then had dinner with were nice people, especially the pastor, who I thought was a lovely man and whose response to learning I was an atheist was to attempt to engage me in conversation, not about the merits of christianity versus the pitfalls of atheism, but rather about our shared values: Community, friendship, love, human relations, etc. Me as a secular humanist and he as a Baptist could both get behind these ideals.<BR/><BR/>I'm not trying to affect some kind of moral superiority above Rhology (lest I prove his point, hey.) I just wanted to share a story about interfaith kindness and respect I experienced today.<BR/><BR/>As to why I don't address your arguments; it's cause I know Martin or others in this thread will do it, way more articulately than me. Diffusion of responsibility aside, if I have anything to add to the arguments, I'll do so-Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07423776253697799481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-86623986542289012322008-12-20T11:06:00.000-06:002008-12-20T11:06:00.000-06:00DagoRed,Again, just because I think an action is m...DagoRed,<BR/><BR/>Again, just because I think an action is morally wrong does not mean I hate the people who commit that action.<BR/><BR/>JKJ. K. Joneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02329537522697826005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-25988915130935387672008-12-20T11:05:00.000-06:002008-12-20T11:05:00.000-06:00I get what you're saying Cipher. What I meant was...I get what you're saying Cipher. What I meant was that his opinion has no power over us. I am not barred from living my life on my own terms because Rhology hates me or what I stand for.Tommykeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14751182125861177379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-31135765351543308742008-12-20T10:51:00.000-06:002008-12-20T10:51:00.000-06:00But if he wants to believe that we are going to bu...<I>But if he wants to believe that we are going to burn in hell when we die or that we have no basis for condemning child abuse because we are atheists, why the heck should any of us really care... He's just another guy with an opinion.</I><BR/><BR/>Tommy, I can't agree. Salvific exclusivism is a belief so obscene that it ought to be considered beneath the dignity of a human being to believe it. People like Rhology are perfectly comfortable with the idea of billions of their human sibling suffering unimaginably for all of eternity; as long as <I>they</I> can have the ontological security blanket for a few brief decades - that's all that matters to them. It is the absolute <I>height</I> of selfishness.<BR/><BR/>Whether or not we should bail out the auto industry - that's an opinion. Conservative evangelical Christianity isn't an opinion, it's a belief system - and, as such, it's an abomination.Jeff Eygeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11967707883565162538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-10995492245918034432008-12-20T09:26:00.000-06:002008-12-20T09:26:00.000-06:00-C, this means you.Hey, at least he didn't say you...<EM>-C, this means you.</EM><BR/><BR/>Hey, at least he didn't say you were arrogant and insufferable!<BR/><BR/>:-)Tommykeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14751182125861177379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-63015982786351045062008-12-20T08:34:00.000-06:002008-12-20T08:34:00.000-06:00Hey all,Look, it's not my intention to make you ma...Hey all,<BR/><BR/>Look, it's not my intention to make you mad, esp not thru snark. But it's also quite rich for *atheists* to complain about someone being insufferable, arrogant, and things like that. Why don't we get on with the actual argument? The way I see it, you could've been responding to my numerous arguments rather than complaining about what a mean guy I am. You're acting like weak Christians usually act when the village atheist comes around, and I see you mock that mindset all the time. -C, this means you.<BR/><BR/>Martin said:<BR/><I>common human behaviors like dishonesty, hypocrisy, denial and self-righteousness</I><BR/><BR/>And so how do you know these behaviors are taking place on Warren's side and not yours?<BR/><BR/><BR/><I>I'd rather have that kind of assumptive commitment than one that told me gay people were evil hellbound sinners </I><BR/><BR/>You have been challenged many, many times to provide any decent answer as to why said commitment would be morally preferable. The best you've yet done is to say "well, I prefer it that way", which is a tautology and doesn't even answer the question. So pardon me if I don't see any compelling reason to accept your assumption absent an argument as to why I should.<BR/><BR/><BR/><I>Not just according to me, but to pretty much the entire community of mental health professionals and the American Psychiatric Association.</I><BR/><BR/>1) They have not ALL fallen off the wagon. not even close.<BR/>2) Even if they all did, that falls totally within the range of the Christian worldview. EVeryone is a sinner and is tempted to do evil. Sometimes we do better than other times. B/c of your assumptions, you can't even accept the possibility that this is a hard thing, but it's worth doing. Sometimes things are worth fighting for. <BR/><BR/><BR/>DagoRed, Martin at least attempted to respond substantively. Were you planning to give it a go?Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-64600499118724618972008-12-20T00:26:00.000-06:002008-12-20T00:26:00.000-06:00In all fairness, I've been known for my share of i...In all fairness, I've been known for my share of incivility and snark too. Vide several past exchanges with Rho, Dan Marvin, and the legendary Yomin episode. I'd like to think, however, that I couch my sarcasm and taunts in the context of a well supported opinion. (Like Carlin often explained when people asked him why he used so much profanity in his standup: "It's the spice in my stew.") Rho just seems like he's in an especially pissy mood at the moment.Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17933545393470431585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-41619589136171886962008-12-19T23:24:00.000-06:002008-12-19T23:24:00.000-06:00Rhology makes me wonder if it has been so long sin...<EM>Rhology makes me wonder if it has been so long since I was a Christian that even a moderate amount of humility (or civility) has become passé among the faithful.</EM><BR/><BR/>The thing about Rhology is to just not take him so seriously. I have to admit I used to get pissed off at him, but I realized it's not worth it. It was wrong of me and I regret it.<BR/><BR/>Now, I just see him for what he is, an obviously bright guy who embraced the religious views that he has because something happened to him that made him believe that it was necessary in order to turn himself around. Does he come off as rude and arrogant? Yes, sometimes he does.<BR/><BR/>But if he wants to believe that we are going to burn in hell when we die or that we have no basis for condemning child abuse because we are atheists, why the heck should any of us really care? It doesn't stop us from going out there and living our lives according to the values we hold dear. He's just another guy with an opinion.Tommykeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14751182125861177379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-18599682809901147092008-12-19T22:43:00.000-06:002008-12-19T22:43:00.000-06:00-c,All very fine points, many of which also occurr...-c,<BR/><BR/>All very fine points, many of which also occurred to me. Rhology makes me wonder if it has been so long since I was a Christian that even a moderate amount of humility (or civility) has become passé among the faithful.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14168969281371246061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-39480334332068683162008-12-19T22:13:00.000-06:002008-12-19T22:13:00.000-06:00The "ex-gay" movement merely exploits people wrack...<EM>The "ex-gay" movement merely exploits people wracked with feelings of fear and guilt about discovering their homosexuality, and uses that to peddle religion.</EM><BR/><BR/>And I wonder if there is any data on which gays are more likely to buy into this stuff. Gays who are in stable, longterm relations, earn a decent income, have their own house and so forth, are probably going to be like "Cure me of what? How about curing all of those straight people in revolving door hetero marriages?"<BR/><BR/>And -C, I apologize in advance if you find the comments above to be arrogant and insufferable.Tommykeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14751182125861177379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-34498024117819066222008-12-19T21:53:00.000-06:002008-12-19T21:53:00.000-06:00I look at Rhology, then I look at everyone else in...<EM>I look at Rhology, then I look at everyone else in the thread (excluding Tommy, what a insufferable arrogant wad)</EM><BR/><BR/>'scuse me? My lone contribution to this thread until now has been:<BR/><BR/><EM>I think I would pay to see that! The first concert I ever saw was Judas Priest at Nassau Coliseum in 1986. Dokken opened for them and I remember people were firing bottlerockets at them. I can't imagine what they would do to poor Clay Aiken.</EM><BR/><BR/>Maybe it's just me, but those comments aren't exactly oozing arrogance, unless of course you are just being facetious.<BR/><BR/>If I rub you the wrong way, I'm certainly sorry about that. But hey, we can't please everybody, right?Tommykeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14751182125861177379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-2567990919254914022008-12-19T19:31:00.000-06:002008-12-19T19:31:00.000-06:00On a much less serious note:How about that Miley C...On a much less serious note:<BR/><BR/>How about that Miley Cyrus, hey.-Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07423776253697799481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-48553178502193297522008-12-19T19:30:00.000-06:002008-12-19T19:30:00.000-06:00I look at Rhology, then I look at everyone else in...I look at Rhology, then I look at everyone else in the thread (excluding Tommy, what a insufferable arrogant wad) and I see the superiority coming off in waves from him rather than others. <BR/><BR/>Even JK, who I have said I disagree with on various points, all the time, frames his commenture in a way that I find respectful. I disagree with him, so I think his commenture is also mistaken and misguided, but I don't call him a bigot or imply that he's an idiot through the use of language like 'nice cool super mutant powers you have there.'<BR/><BR/>I glean two things from the way you talk (type):<BR/><BR/>1. You have little to no interest in actually engaging in debate.<BR/>1.5. because you're convinced your position is right and won't back down for anything<BR/>2. You come off as way more condescending and stubborn than anyone else here.<BR/><BR/>If you were genuinely trying to make a point, you would back off from techniques like ad hom and attempt to examine your arguments for holes before repeating them. Constantly holding the mindset that you could be wrong, and retaining the criteria of 'wrongness' or 'rightness' as the available evidence from both sides is crucial to advancement of discussion. Two walls don't go anywhere.-Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07423776253697799481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-63385899532907787462008-12-19T16:23:00.000-06:002008-12-19T16:23:00.000-06:00Oh, so even though they might SAY they don't hate ...<I>Oh, so even though they might SAY they don't hate homosexuals, you know better. Apparently you can read minds. Pretty cool super mutant ability.</I><BR/><BR/>You don't need superpowers to understand common human behaviors like dishonesty, hypocrisy, denial and self-righteousness. Seeing as how commonplace they are. <BR/><BR/><I>Here you show your assumptive commitment to the idea that it's bogus.</I><BR/><BR/>Maybe, but I'd rather have that kind of assumptive commitment than one that told me gay people were evil hellbound sinners who needed my righteous intervention to save them from themselves.<BR/><BR/><I>Many people have been changed by stuff like that, but nnnnoooo, to you it just can't happen.</I><BR/><BR/>Not just according to me, but to pretty much the entire community of mental health professionals and the American Psychiatric Association. The "ex-gay" movement merely exploits people wracked with feelings of fear and guilt about discovering their homosexuality, and uses that to peddle religion. Pretty sleazy, really, especially as many of the folks leading the movement seem truly convinced that there's a "disease" there to "cure," and are sincerely deluded that they're doing what's right. That's what's really contemptible about the whole charade: it makes good people do bad things thinking they're doing good things. <BR/><BR/>Considering how <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex-gay#Former_ex-gays" REL="nofollow">frought with controversies</A> and the embarrassment of supposedly "cured" "ex-gays" (like John Paulk) very publicly falling off the wagon, it seems to me that the whole charade is about Christian wishful thinking and self-validation, more than anything else. Of course, perhaps your mutant superpowers of perception are better than mine on this regard.Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17933545393470431585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-8438974870832635712008-12-19T15:43:00.000-06:002008-12-19T15:43:00.000-06:00You have my answer. If you're going to act that w...You have my answer. If you're going to act that way, nice talking to you.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-32120075283391570142008-12-19T15:40:00.000-06:002008-12-19T15:40:00.000-06:00Rhology, If you care to try again -- and respond t...Rhology, <BR/><BR/>If you care to try again -- and respond to the words and ideas I expressed, rather than taunting me with your own slothful misguided inferences, I will reconsider engaging you further in this discussion. Otherwise, I do not wish to waste my time talking with someone who responds in such an insecure and childish manner, exemplified by you herein.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14168969281371246061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-70351098606252523332008-12-19T14:12:00.000-06:002008-12-19T14:12:00.000-06:00Oh, so even though they might SAY they don't hate ...Oh, so even though they might SAY they don't hate homosexuals, <B>you know better</B>. Apparently you can read minds. Pretty cool super mutant ability.<BR/><BR/><I>And just like you often hear racists say "some of my best friends are black!"</I><BR/><BR/>And some non-racists say that too. But thanks to your special mind-reading WonderTwin powers, you can get around that nuisance obstacle that afflicts everyone else.<BR/><BR/><BR/><I>the bogus "ex-gay" movement</I><BR/><BR/>Here you show your assumptive commitment to the idea that it's bogus. <A HREF="http://www.firststone.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=23&Itemid=140" REL="nofollow">Many people have been changed</A> by stuff like that, but nnnnoooo, to you <B>it just can't happen</B>. <BR/>I thought you were all about evidence here. Apparently not when it countermands your preconceived notions.<BR/><BR/><BR/>DagoRed said:<BR/><I>This is a case of actions speaking louder than words.</I><BR/><BR/>When I said "for other reasons", this is what I meant. Warren believes that homosexuality is a sinful *and destructive* lifestyle, and loves homosexuals enough to ask them to consider leaving the destructive lifestyle behind. And he's caught flak for it, but he still does it. Trying to help people in the face of being pushed back on is a sign of sacrificial love.<BR/><BR/><BR/><I>How can someone fight vehemently to take away a civil liberty</I><BR/><BR/>It's neither a civil liberty nor a right.<BR/>Besides, even if it were a civil liberty, the law is now changed, so I suppose your argument is gonna change, right? Now that the law is different, YOU'RE now in favor of violating civil liberties. <BR/><BR/><BR/><I>Provide a viable objective reason why same sex marriage is wrong </I><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://rhoblogy.blogspot.com/2008/10/super-rights.html" REL="nofollow">Done</A> and <A HREF="http://rhoblogy.blogspot.com/2008/10/super-duper-rights.html" REL="nofollow">done</A>.<BR/><BR/><BR/><I>Sometimes to disagree is synonymous with being a bigot.</I><BR/><BR/>You disagree with me. You are a bigot.<BR/><BR/>...<BR/><BR/>Now, how empty and worthless is this epithet?<BR/>Seriously, you should learn to save it for when it's really true. <BR/><BR/><BR/><I>Bigotry means intolerance, not critical analysis for a particular philosophical view.</I><BR/><BR/>You're being pretty intolerant of Warren's position. I guess you're a bigot.<BR/>Again, it's empty.<BR/><BR/><BR/><I>I suggest you learn a little bit more about what I think before lobbing the "B" bomb at me.</I><BR/><BR/>Hahahaha. Pot, kettle.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-28311608359032660122008-12-19T14:00:00.001-06:002008-12-19T14:00:00.001-06:00Hateful towards whom? Even when he explicitly says...<I>Hateful towards whom? Even when he explicitly says he DOESN'T hate homosexuals, he's hateful? </I><BR/><BR/>This is a case of actions speaking louder than words. How can someone fight vehemently to take away a civil liberty from an entire group of people, without a justifiable objective cause, without also implying a certain level of personal disdain, or bigotry, for that group? Provide a viable objective reason why same sex marriage is wrong while marriage between men and women remains correct and I will happily recant.<BR/><BR/><I>It couldn't just be that he disagrees with same sex marriage for other reasons besides hatred? </I> <BR/><BR/>Sometimes to disagree is synonymous with being a bigot. I am all ears -- how can someone "disagree" with allowing a group to retain their civil liberties, without being called a bigot?<BR/><BR/><I>You're quite a bigot yourself, my friend.</I> <BR/><BR/>Bigotry means intolerance, not critical analysis for a particular philosophical view. You mistakenly conflate my legitimate criticism of the Christian faith with your own (incorrect) inference that I am also intolerant of Christians themselves. I suggest you learn a little bit more about what I think before lobbing the "B" bomb at me.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14168969281371246061noreply@blogger.com