I'm not so much against people being theist as I am people brainwashing others into being theist. People aren't born that way.

(February 3, 2016 at 5:42 am)Mancunian Wrote: Popcorn anyone?

Popcorn's ass. We're serving Buffalo wings with ranch dressing, onion rings, and cold seltzer.

(February 3, 2016 at 4:06 am)Excited Penguin Wrote:

(February 3, 2016 at 4:02 am)Rhythm Wrote: Anti-religious.  Or, if you prefer, an anti-religionist, lol.  MTL

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antireligion

If she would rather identify as anti-religious, but not as antitheist, that would mean she's opposed to religion only to the extent that it doesn't involve belief in deities.

*sigh* noooooooooooooooooo.......

(February 3, 2016 at 5:43 am)robvalue Wrote: I'm not so much against people being theist as I am people brainwashing others into being theist.

(bold, mine)

That's what I'm calling "Religion".

(February 3, 2016 at 5:37 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(February 3, 2016 at 5:32 am)Excited Penguin Wrote: I use the reply button and then quote what I want to reply to. I rarely ever use the quote button, and only when I wish to quote multiple posts at once.
I'm not exactly sure what you're objecting to here(or why).

I'm not objecting to anything, as anyone who can read the English language is able to see.

I was pointing out an obvious change in your posting pattern. Also, if you use the "Reply" button to one of my posts, it alerts me once you've posted. By using the "Hide" tags, you're circumventing that alert, either consciously or because you're not bright enough to understand how the software works.

Why did you see that as an "objection"? What does that say about you, that you see it as such?

You are objecting to the fact that I'm circumventing the alert, as far as I can tell. Without an objection, your post wouldn't serve its purpose, given how it is structured - as an attack.

Here's why. You said this.

Quote:This has the added benefit, from his standpoint, of not presenting an alert on the quoted person's page, so that they might not know they have an answer from him.

If you'll still argue that this isn't an objection, then let's go ahead and read this:

Quote:ETA: ninja'ed by Evie

And then this:

Quote:I think Extremely Petty is panicking because he's having an inflated fake high self-esteem attack. He is undoubtedly worried his insecurities will leak through.

If you'll still be claiming you weren't objecting, fuck you and your bullshit attitude. What else is there to say?

Quote:By using the "Hide" tags, you're circumventing that alert, either consciously or because you're not bright enough to understand how the software works.

Because I'm not bright enough to understand how the software works? Seriously?

How is one supposed to simply understand how the software works in this instance, without being told about it?

---

I was replying as such, so as to make my longer posts more accessible. Instead of seeing blocks of text someone else wrote contained in yet someone else's reply when scrolling down a page, one is saved a ton of scrolling by the hide feature, included by a considerate poster. 

I'll at least include some non-hidden quoted posts in my replies from now on, so as to alert the person involved whenever necessary. Thank you for pointing this out.

@ MTL

Same.

I was ninja'd by a penguin. Got better things to do than read his post now though.

In fairness people may not be born theists, but their becoming theists probably doesn't have anything to do with "brainwashing".  Indoctrination...sure, but indoctrination relies on having hooks in the person ..it's an issue of exploiting them.   You're not really washing anything, just building associations between existing impetus and a target exhibition of behavior or belief.

This is how you can be made to believe, made to kill...and ofc, made to kill for your belief.

(February 3, 2016 at 5:45 am)MTL Wrote:

(February 3, 2016 at 5:43 am)robvalue Wrote: I'm not so much against people being theist as I am people brainwashing others into being theist.

(bold, mine)

That's what I'm calling "Religion".

Sure, you can make up your own definitions of words. You can do that.

Or, you can use the definitions we already have. The word you're looking for here is proselytization. Don't let illiteracy and laziness make you think you're a linguist. You're not.

Yeah, by brainwashing I just mean indoctrination. I picked a bad word for it, now you point that out. I hadn't thought about that before, brainwashing sounds more like wiping out what someone already believes so you can replace it. I'm just talking about indoctrinating children instead of letting them think for themselves about it. It clearly works wonders. If the indoctrination was based around Santa Claus instead, and Jesus was explained to be a "magic story for children" once people reached a certain age, we'd be surrounded by adults believing in Santa.

Hehehe, yeah, brainwashing is witchcraft, from back in the day when people were worried about the "cult menace" that -wasn't- sweeping the land.  Christers were sweating bullets about their kids getting "brainwashed".

(I'd contend that a world of santaists would be -at least- no worse than a world of judeo-christians...and probably a whole hell of alot better   )