My views on objective morality

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Yes, that was Benny, not myself! I don't think Benny deserves mod action for that, but I don't want that comment mis-attributed to myself, and I believe that was so implied by Luckie. I did make a comment in the past which CL got upset about when I attempted to play the devil's advocate in regard to the attitudes of clergy men, but I would not say anything that crass to her, regardless of how I feel on friends of hers here who have made her status rather offensively privileged.

Okay I see a lot of activity along these lines since yesterday, so let me set the record straight for those of you who haven't bothered to, you know, actually read what I said about CL and her appearance.

I never said anything bad about CL's appearance, nor about her choice of avatar.  I said that people in this thread are treating her differently than other theists, and that this different treatment isn't due to the quality of her thoughts or logic-- since I don't see that there IS much quality to her thoughts or logic.  I said people are treating her differently because of who they think she is, and scolded THOSE people for being shallow: shame on them for letting feelings supercede thought.  I guarantee if I said the same shit about Harris or other theists here, nobody would even be talking about this shit.  The fact is that CL has presented nothing but wishy-thinking, puppy-dogs and rainbows, and absolutely no coherent philosophical argument in favor of objective morality.

This is what I do, and will continue to do, everytime a theist enters the "Philosophy" section with wishy-thinking, and I don't much care how nice people think that particular theist is, since that's irrelevant to the doing of philosophy.  I mean, look at the outrageously offensive shit Rhythm has said to me and vice versa, and we were at least attempting to put together logical ideas-- where was the talk of mod action then?  There was none.  So from whence does this double standard come that a theist can invade my precious Philosophy section spewing wishy-thinking with very little attempt to support it with. . . ya know. . . IDEAS and LOGIC and EVIDENCE and stuff?

That's true, you didn't in fact call the actuality of her femininity into question at all, and that accusation almost got accepted de facto! I wouldn't have said anything about her "jugs", but I do agree with you that there really is a problem when one person is protected so fiercely by her friends that she is immune to being questioned on her own words. It's almost understandable because it's very easy to like such a good-natured person who appears to be so innocent, and probably is, but in a community which values honest and logical discourse, everybody must stand or fall on what they say. Nymphadora in particular is doing her no real favors.