(June 28, 2015 at 7:44 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(June 27, 2015 at 8:52 pm)Jenny A Wrote: The problem you have with understanding atheism is understanding what it isn't.  I don't care what other atheists think about rape, except to the extent that I would prefer that no one be in favor of rape.  Harris is not my ideal, nor my spokesman.   The fact that the religious regularly appeal to authority doesn't mean the rest of us do.

Beyond that, Harris didn't condone rape, and if you think he did, you aren't really thinking.  If you prefer to have your shin broken to having your kneecap broken are you expressing a fondness for broken knees?

I understand, Jenny. I read how Dawkins got into hot water over tweets to this effect.

My point was simply to illustrate that just as "Atheists Condone Rape" is a silly accusation, the idea that God condones rape is even more stupid.

Except that your gawd not only condones it, the bitch codified it.

(June 28, 2015 at 10:29 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote: Now, PT, don't go putting words into his mouth.

If only we could get Randy to return the favor.

(June 28, 2015 at 7:44 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: ...the idea that God condones rape is even more stupid.

Let's revue some facts. The Bible, best selling book of all time, was authored or inspired by God. No? The Bible clearly depicts this God character ordering rape. Yet you say God condoning rape is stupid.

Let me guess Randy, God told the vanquishers to keep virgin girls because of their superior knitting skills.

(June 28, 2015 at 10:56 pm)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote: You just love to hoard quotes to spin twist and misrepresent in a lame attempt to make others look bad don't you.

I would pity you if your actions weren't as reprehensible as they are sad.

You can't accuse me of misrepresentation when I provided a link to every single post. Feel free to go back and read them in the proper context if you wish.

If you still feel that I "twisted and misrepresented" any ones words, then provide the evidence, otherwise as Esquilax so eloquently put it "your wild, baseless assertions don't mean anything to me."

(June 28, 2015 at 7:52 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(June 28, 2015 at 3:55 am)Neimenovic Wrote: So....

You expected us to point out the fallacy you made and notice how you dishonestly quote mined Sam Harris and posted it anyway?

Great plan. 12/11 for effort, and a big F for being a disingenuous asshole.

By the way, I'm keeping my fucking promise Randy.

'Ethnic profiling is the only reasonable security measure that has been thwarted in the war on terrorism.' Ann Coulter's 'Mineta's Bataan Death March,' 2/28/02

Randy, and all xtians are blatant racists. One of them said it, that means they all believe it.

Racist.

OF COURSE I WAS MAKING A POINT.

Does anyone in their right minds think Sam Harris actually condones rape?

My post illustrated the absurdity of all those saying similar things about God.

Whoa. I never expected anyone to miss that...I need to lower my estimation of the group and quick.

Do you ever get tired of your flawed comparisons? They don't make sense to the rest of the world.

You mean saying that this thing that can't be shown to exist, who allegedly inspired a book that tells raped women they have to marry their rapist and be continually raped condones rape is the same as saying that a fully existent person whose existence can be easily demonstrated condones rape when that person hasn't said anything to indicate it.

Brilliant. I see your side now.

And are you implying Sam Harris is our version of a god? Because, no.

(June 28, 2015 at 10:29 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote: Now, PT, don't go putting words into his mouth.

I know, I know, I should wait until he's consulted the Bible to determine his stance on the matter before I comment on his views.

(June 28, 2015 at 11:49 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: If you still feel that I "twisted and misrepresented" any ones words, then provide the evidence, otherwise as Esquilax so eloquently put it "your wild, baseless assertions don't mean anything to me."

I already did that: you asserted I'd never provided a bible verse I said I had, when I had in fact done so in that thread. Even if you don't agree with the way I took that verse, you at least have to admit that I did provide the verse within the context of my own position. You disagreeing with me doesn't just make my entire argument vanish from existence, it just means you don't find it convincing.

That's not surprising; you've proven yourself notoriously hard to convince with reasoned argument and justified evidence, where it conflicts with what you want to be true.

(June 29, 2015 at 11:08 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(June 28, 2015 at 11:49 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: If you still feel that I "twisted and misrepresented" any ones words, then provide the evidence, otherwise as Esquilax so eloquently put it "your wild, baseless assertions don't mean anything to me."

I already did that: you asserted I'd never provided a bible verse I said I had, when I had in fact done so in that thread. Even if you don't agree with the way I took that verse, you at least have to admit that I did provide the verse within the context of my own position. You disagreeing with me doesn't just make my entire argument vanish from existence, it just means you don't find it convincing.

That's not surprising; you've proven yourself notoriously hard to convince with reasoned argument and justified evidence, where it conflicts with what you want to be true.

When did you provide a passage that states "slaves" can be beaten? Your exact quote..

(March 4, 2014 at 9:04 am)Esquilax Wrote: And I still have the passage that says they can be beaten, you unbelievable moron.

Or are you moving the goal posts.

Post the scripture again if you'd be so kind, so everyone can see.

(June 29, 2015 at 12:27 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Or are you moving the goal posts.

Post the scripture again if you'd be so kind, so everyone can see.

I posted the scripture in the thread, and in fact I linked back to that exact post yesterday, in response to your initial claim. Like I said, whether you agree with my interpretation of the verse or not- and you christians are oh so into interpreting scriptures- claiming that I simply didn't post it is nothing more than a lie.

In fact, even within the first thread, you'd said I'd yet to post that verse, days after I'd originally posted it.