What IS good, and how do we determine it?

[Esquilax]

Really?
You're the last person that should be getting all indignant, especially after (falsely) accusing me of trying to justify rape...
http://atheistforums.org/thread-31826-po...#pid890429

Well, we already know you're a fool, so I don't need to do too much work on this one, especially since the context of the thread you quoted shows the lie in your assertion; how could I be accusing you of attempting to justify rape if the specific claim I'd made was that it was your position that no rape occurred? To what sensible mind would the idea that you were thinking you were discussing rape at all, given that, even occur?

Oh wait: sensible. That's the problem.

Now, of course, I also went back and found the quotes where you specifically said what I'd accused you of saying- not the strawman of convenience you're still trying to characterize it as now- after you'd asserted that you'd never said that, and I even backtracked when it turned out I was wrong; the content of the argument was the same, and thus still fallacious, but you were talking about slavery instead of rape... which is yet another nail in the coffin of this dishonest notion you're trying to portray that I was accusing you of attempting to justify or condone rape, within the context of your own position.

Of course, being the infantile conman you are, you took this immediate admission of wrongness when I double checked, made on my own with no prompting from you or anyone else, as me being caught in a "bald faced lie," because apparently nobody can be mistaken in your world, but the extent of your mental inadequacy is well known across the entirety of the board, so I don't need to remind everyone there.

Edited to add: Incidentally, if one were to look at the bottom of the page Huggy linked to, you'll see him calling me a liar and asserting that he never made the argument I'd characterized him as making. If one were to then go to the first post of page 32 of that same thread, you'll see me linking to three separate usages of that exact argument by him, over three different topics. The fact that Huggy is misrepresenting a prior thread for his own gain shouldn't be surprising, but I'll leave it for you all to decide if it's dishonesty or sheer idiocy that motivates it here.