Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: November 16, 2024, 11:25 am

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
A challenge to Statler Waldorf
#91
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
The turnip's second best argument is "yours is just as bad as mine, so mine is better than yours". His first is of course argument from sheer verbosity, offered in the spirit of "throw enough shit and some might stick".


Reply
#92
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
Girlysprite, you have thusfar ignored me, but hopefully, you will not ignore this post. You have made 6 posts, most of which have been telling people how to behave. You have yet to post an introduction thread, so no one knows jack shit about you. Please take a moment to introduce yourself here.
Reply
#93
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
sprite Wrote:Well, a starter would be that personal attacks are not used. They do not add any valid point to the discussion. When you feel the need to remark to a personal aspect of the poster, try to make clear that it is an opinion of yours and keep it mild.....

Bla

Sprite needs lessons in detecting sarcasm
Reply
#94
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
(May 6, 2011 at 3:11 pm)Shell B Wrote: Girlysprite, you have thusfar ignored me, but hopefully, you will not ignore this post. You have made 6 posts, most of which have been telling people how to behave. You have yet to post an introduction thread, so no one knows jack shit about you. Please take a moment to introduce yourself here.


Feel free to call upon me if you need help, boss.

Kind of like tag team wrestling!

Big Grin

Reply
#95
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
(May 5, 2011 at 11:15 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote:
waldor Wrote:Actually your argument doesn't logically floow...
It's "Flow", not "floow" you shiney little gem you.

You obviously missed the irony there. It was funny because he was calling people stupid and then couldn't spell. I was not calling anyone stupid (and I made a typo not a misspelling like he did), so your point is irrelevant. This is the kind of stuff I have come to expect from you though.
P.S. It is still Noah’s ARK not Noah’s ARC haha.
.





I actually already answered your stupid question. I said I do not know either way, nor do I care because it's a silly question.


(May 6, 2011 at 2:53 pm)Thor Wrote:
(May 5, 2011 at 7:34 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: They play off of emotionalism rather than logical thinking, which sadly can be very effective even though it should never be.

Unlike religious believers who NEVER appeal to emotions and ALWAYS use "logical thinking".

"You see... there was this guy who was born of a virgin. And the guy grew up and could walk on water.... and heal the sick with a touch of his hand.... and feed a thousand people with a basket of fish.... and he was executed by the Romans , but three days later he rose up from the dead!"

ROFLOL

Huh? The biblical narrative of Jesus' life is not emotionalism, it's narrative. Sure some religious people use emotionalism, and I call them on it as well. Pointing to bad behavior never justifies bad behavior though, I am sorry.
Reply
#96
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
Quote:Hi SW, you never did tell us if any professional anthropologists use Smarts "seven dimensions of religion" to define atheism as a religion.

Well,I can't say 'none ever'. However,I can say none of the professional anthropologists who taught the subject to me at university ever did,at least not in my hearing.




Quote: Girlysprite Wrote: reverendjeremiah, you really annoy me. Such strong language is needed and does not add to the merits of any discussion. .


Get over yourself. You don't get to tell people how express themselves.

Quote:You come across as a rather young person who has not practiced debating a lot (yet) in the way you type your posts

You come across as a patronising and sanctimonious twat. Primary school teacher?


Reply
#97
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
In all honesty, I am NOT a word nazi. I am really easy going on forums when it comes to words. You have to really fuck up bad for me to say something.

waldork Wrote:This is the kind of stuff I have come to expect from you though.

Thanks
Reply
#98
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
(May 4, 2011 at 3:31 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Interesting post TDOA, thanks for actually adding to the discussion. I think you kind of addressed the issue incorrectly though. Of course you can sit here and argue that the seven dimensions of religion do not apply to atheism, just as I have argued that they do. The point is that it is far easier to apply the seven dimensions to atheism than it is even established religions like Buddhism and Jainism. I could sit here and make a pretty good case that Christianity is not a religion because not all seven dimensions apply to it and the ones that do also apply to sports and Dragonball Z. The fact is that many courts are starting to lean towards classifying the new atheism as a religion and many of the dimensions of religion do apply to atheism.

That's a poor arguement for atheism being a religion and you know it and completely missing several of my key points.
The only reason you were able to apply the seven dimensions at all is because you broadened the "fits" of the dimensions so much that just about anything could potentially be a religion. Realistically, it would be the only way could could call atheism a religion but doing so is exceptionally dishonest.

The courts might be starting to treat atheists with the same rights as the religious folk in terms of religious allowances, but that doesn't make atheism a religion.
If today you can take a thing like evolution and make it a crime to teach in the public schools, tomorrow you can make it a crime to teach it in the private schools and next year you can make it a crime to teach it to the hustings or in the church. At the next session you may ban books and the newspapers...
Ignorance and fanaticism are ever busy and need feeding. Always feeding and gloating for more. Today it is the public school teachers; tomorrow the private. The next day the preachers and the lecturers, the magazines, the books, the newspapers. After a while, Your Honor, it is the setting of man against man and creed against creed until with flying banners and beating drums we are marching backward to the glorious ages of the sixteenth centry when bigots lighted fagots to burn the men who dared to bring any intelligence and enlightenment and culture to the human mind. ~Clarence Darrow, at the Scopes Monkey Trial, 1925

Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first. ~Ronald Reagan
Reply
#99
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf



Hello again G-Sprite,

Very interesting post. Forgive me if my response is not quite as long though, I just have a few points I'd like to toss out there.

First of all, I should have used the Wiki definition, I am not a fan of Wiki at all so I never even though to give it a try. I found your Apple comparison interesting but just wanted to point out that Apple does not address many of the issues in the Wiki definition like the origins of life, morals, and the purpose of life where atheism does try and address these issues (telling someone there is no purpose to life is still addressing the issue right?).

As for the requirement of "something bigger or higher" in religion, I would disagree a bit. Jainism is a religion but it only focuses on living things themselves, no real higher power. Confucianism and Taoism are both religions but they focus more on just how people should live, very little to do with the supernatural. This is why this is such a perplexing issue, because on paper atheism looks every bit as much of a religion as other world religions. I think the only thing that is unique about it is that its followers deny they are religious, but are they really the ones who make the final determination?




Not so much, I applied the dimensions the same exact way they are applied to other religions such as Islam, Christianity, Jainism, and Taoism. The fact of the matter is that atheism is easier to do this with than many other religions. If atheism is not a religion then why should it be granted religious freedoms? I do not get granted religious freedoms for watching football. Why is this? Probably because footballism is not a religion. I think you guys are just trying to have your cake and eat it too, be honest and admit you are a religion or stop trying to play the legal system.
Reply
RE: A challenge to Statler Waldorf
waldork Wrote:This is why this is such a perplexing issue, because on paper atheism looks every bit as much of a religion as other world religions. I think the only thing that is unique about it is that its followers deny they are religious, but are they really the ones who make the final determination?

Oh no, absolutely not. Waldork is the one who determines who is religious and who isnt. Lets look at your definition of Atheism..shall we?

Waldork's stupid ass signature Wrote:Atheism- The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason what so ever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs.

see, we atheists must all be religious because waldork thinks we are.

Just wondering..what "paper" about atheism made you think it was religious?

..not that I really give a shit about your fucked up opinions..you are dead wrong flat out ... but I am hoping I can get some entertainment out of you for the moment.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  a challenge All atheists There is inevitably a Creator. Logic says that suni_muslim 65 16983 November 28, 2017 at 5:02 pm
Last Post: Fidel_Castronaut
  A challenge for any Atheist who been here for a long time! Mystic 36 5762 January 11, 2017 at 8:16 pm
Last Post: comet
  A challenge! Mystic 87 11113 January 10, 2017 at 1:43 am
Last Post: Astonished
  A challenge! Mystic 3 1061 January 3, 2017 at 12:27 am
Last Post: Cyberman
  A Challenge to You All: Prove I'm not God FebruaryOfReason 40 7159 February 21, 2016 at 1:59 pm
Last Post: FebruaryOfReason
  Please help me with this personal challenge accidental creation 11 4078 April 28, 2014 at 4:16 am
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  A Challenge for the Atheist eeeeeee7 37 10722 January 11, 2014 at 1:44 am
Last Post: Bad Writer
  The Moral Challenge GodsRevolt 22 9517 November 5, 2013 at 8:13 am
Last Post: T.J.
  How we won the James Randi $1,000,000 Paranormal Challenge deltoidmachine 24 8895 August 22, 2013 at 12:04 pm
Last Post: gall
  Formal debate challenge - Taqiyya Mockingbird Jeffonthenet 11 7032 July 14, 2012 at 9:09 pm
Last Post: Shell B



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)