(December 31, 2013 at 12:59 pm)whateverist Wrote:(December 31, 2013 at 12:35 pm)houseofcantor Wrote: From what I read, Jacob issued a challenge and Rayaan answered it. Whatever happened in PM is between the communicators, and in this case it appears Jacob violated his own privacy.
I saw that too. I think there was a miscommunication about what was happening there. Jacob got more than he bargained for but in a sense only because he issued the 'dare'.
Still I think the critique about the privacy policy as stated and as practiced is still valid.
There's a "still?"
I like to think that the "atheist position" is a fluid one, where new evidence leads to new doctrine, but I'm not really seeing that here. What I do see is a member clutching at moral straws to add validity to his argument.