Periodic Table of Swearing

[sacha]

Yeah, because as everyone knows, death is the most likely outcome of drunken sex.

hahaha!

[Rystefn]

But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind” is something more than just “brain”, for examples.

I see no evidence whatsoever that "we all" accept anything of the sort. I'd wager a great deal of money that you'll find many people who reject the idea of mind-brain duality outright, and more than a few that reject the idea of free will as well. Try again.

[BarnOwl]

Quite relieved that the Mayan Apocalypse failed, according to Australia and New Zealand. I just joined a running club two weeks ago, and I'd hate to think that all those brutal workouts went to waste.

Just wait for the deluge of post-hocs and inevitable rescheduling to future dates. No pseudo-scientist and purveyor of nonsense will take the opportunity to learn from mistake. Here's a prediction you can count on.

Especially when there's money to be made by those purveyors of nonsense!

The joke for tonight's workout, at a nearby university track, was that it was the last run before the world ends. I decided to listen to a trippy Shpongle album during my run, for appropriate mystic electronica.

[decius]

But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind” is something more than just “brain”, for examples.

I see no evidence whatsoever that "we all" accept anything of the sort. I'd wager a great deal of money that you'll find many people who reject the idea of mind-brain duality outright, and more than a few that reject the idea of free will as well. Try again.

WTF is the loon on about? Reasonably argue my arse.

[Reap]

It is the only definition.

The modern view of karma, devoid of any spiritual exigencies, obviates the need for an acceptance of reincarnation in Judeochristian societies and attempts to portray karma as a universal psychological phenomenon which behaves predictably, like other physical forces such as gravity.

it is about cause and effect of morality, as if it is a law of the universe.

It seems to me you are not quite correct despite your declaration- Falun Gong differs from Buddhism in its definition of the term "karma," in that it is taken not as a process of award and punishment, but as an exclusively negative term.

I'll tell them you won't allow a differing definition, that always works. If it doesn't I'll try the "If I say so it must be true" approach. I would prefer not to squabble over something that is at least debatable unless you insist.

[sacha]

So, let me get this straight, Watson doesn't learn to drive until she's in her thirties (presumably because she was never sober enough to get behind the wheel) and McFreight rode a bike for the first time last year. What is wrong with these people? Then we have McFreight's dad, who is going to beat up the internet because they're making fun of his princess, but he couldn't even take the time to teach her to ride a friggin' bicycle. Man that's just weird.

Watson-driver's-license: I have a friend who only recently got her license (she's almost 30) due to a massive amount of fear and panic while being behind the wheel. I have others who never bothered to get one as they live in cities where it's almost impractical to have a car (traffic, parking fees, etc.). So, I can cut Becky some slack in this area.

Jenny-ain't-gotta-bike: Ok, that's just weird. What child doesn't ride a bike/tricycle/Big Wheel?

I didn't.

It isn't all that uncommon for children who grew up in a big metropolitan city to have no bicycle experience. I've met a lot of people from New York City who never learned to ride a bike. It's not like suburbia, or out in the countryside.
Where would you be safe on a bike as a kid? Certainly not in NYC traffic. I never felt as though I was missing something important. I could get anywhere I wanted, I either walked, took public transportation, or got a ride. It wasn't like it is now, where children aren't permitted to get on a bus alone.

Although Jenny is much younger, and would not have had the freedom to come and go the way I did. All of the people I've met who could not ride a bike, were my age or older, and Jenny is not a big city kid, so yeah, it's weird.

[JackRayner]

But, for instance, it seems to be some “Slyme Pit dogma”, an article of faith, that, as Phil is fond of quoting Hitchens on, “What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.” But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind” is something more than just “brain”, for examples.

Just so that I don't jump in before verifying: Did you just say that we all accept "free will" and that the "mind" is something more than just the brain?

[welch]

Hahaha, yes! You could always ask Greta Christina for some of that leftover money. I'm sure she'd be thrilled to pass it along! :lol:

Seriously, though, tell your guy to hang in there, Renee! And you, too. :handgestures-thumbupright:

:D Thanks!

Wonder if any of the FTBwats will take six seconds to be human and express any sympathy.


Lol. What AM I thinking. SP's don't deserve any consideration

[acathode]

Quite relieved that the Mayan Apocalypse failed, according to Australia and New Zealand. I just joined a running club two weeks ago, and I'd hate to think that all those brutal workouts went to waste.

Just wait for the deluge of post-hocs and inevitable rescheduling to future dates. No pseudo-scientist and purveyor of nonsense will take the opportunity to learn from mistake. Here's a prediction you can count on.

Hmmm, are there's actually any "real people" (ie. not a handful of already crazy nutters) who take the Mayan calender stuff seriously, so that woo-woo people actually can (could) make money out of it?

I've barely seen anything about it here in Sweden, except a few jokes about it on a few forums and a article or two about potential apocalypse scenarios (as a ironic homage).

[welch]

Indeed. This is now Ophelia's new excuse for people thinking she talks a load of shit - that her voice is too high-pitched.

Strange thing is, there are plenty of women I can listen to, some of which have high-pitched voices. Then again, they have actual talent, unlike Opheliar, whose recent posts have been a complete and total embarassment.

BAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry, but one of the jokes from Melissa and the AMB audience is how when I get going, I go soprano. I don't even know I'm doing it, but the more emphatic I get the higher the pitch goes.

Pitch = competence?

Here I always thought it was competence. Learn sumthin' new every day

[welch]

That I have seen on many occasions. Not whole towns, but establishments and even neighborhoods. I suppose a small enough town would make sense in that context, though.

Also, yeah, most soldiers will bang anything with a hole, it seemed like. It's like every weekend they just got out of prison or something.

Well I didn't literally mean the whole town, but enough of them.

In the late 70s I think, after a couple shootings, and the popular "clean up Biloxi, kill an airman" bumper stickers got too common place, the Keesler AFB commander closed e base. No one left except on official business, if you lived off base, your ass moved on base.

As this was before the return of the casinos, it eviscerated the local economy, and the locals got the point. You don't have to like the Air Force, but there are limits.

[Polterguest]

Amusing on Twitter:

Alex Gabriel is making up #toryfilms on Twitter. E.g:

Alex Gabriel ‏@AlexGabriel
The Talented Mr Ripley Is Nonetheless Made Redundant #toryfilms

Ophelia responds:

Ophelia Benson ‏@OpheliaBenson
@AlexGabriel You're good!

Gabriel thanks her:

Alex Gabriel ‏@AlexGabriel
@OpheliaBenson I thank you!

What would be the perfect next tweet from Gabriel? Yes, you guessed it!

Alex Gabriel ‏@AlexGabriel
Cunts. (It's not currently a film, but if anyone's planning a docudrama...) #toryfilms

[welch]

... Encouraging to see more than a few guests who have “de-lurked” and who have indicated that they had become disillusioned with the FfTB dogma ….

This is obviously because we are dogmatically undogmatic.

Fuck, we have multi page arguments over fucking packaged cookies. About all I think we agree in is that oolon's a stupid tit, and a good chunk of FTB thinks that

[ReneeHendricks]

Watson-driver's-license: I have a friend who only recently got her license (she's almost 30) due to a massive amount of fear and panic while being behind the wheel. I have others who never bothered to get one as they live in cities where it's almost impractical to have a car (traffic, parking fees, etc.). So, I can cut Becky some slack in this area.

Jenny-ain't-gotta-bike: Ok, that's just weird. What child doesn't ride a bike/tricycle/Big Wheel?

I didn't.

It isn't all that uncommon for children who grew up in a big metropolitan city to have no bicycle experience. I've met a lot of people from New York City who never learned to ride a bike. It's not like suburbia, or out in the countryside.
Where would you be safe on a bike as a kid? Certainly not in NYC traffic. I never felt as though I was missing something important. I could get anywhere I wanted, I either walked, took public transportation, or got a ride. It wasn't like it is now, where children aren't permitted to get on a bus alone.

Although Jenny is much younger, and would not have had the freedom to come and go the way I did. All of the people I've met who could not ride a bike, were my age or older, and Jenny is not a big city kid, so yeah, it's weird.

Ok, that makes sense. I need to remember that not everyone grew up in suburbia/country. I suspect that's not the case with Jenny but I could be wrong.

[welch]

Witch of the Week is Welch!!!
Not only is he being cyberstalked by Ms. Svan but pedoloon has chimed in and called him "welchy"!
One can only hope he can withstand the intellectual artillery aimed at him!

More like getting leg humped by a tea cup chihuahua.

[decius]

Quite relieved that the Mayan Apocalypse failed, according to Australia and New Zealand. I just joined a running club two weeks ago, and I'd hate to think that all those brutal workouts went to waste.

Just wait for the deluge of post-hocs and inevitable rescheduling to future dates. No pseudo-scientist and purveyor of nonsense will take the opportunity to learn from mistake. Here's a prediction you can count on.

Hmmm, are there's actually any "real people" (ie. not a handful of already crazy nutters) who take the Mayan calender stuff seriously, so that woo-woo people actually can (could) make money out of it?

I've barely seen anything about it here in Sweden, except a few jokes about it on a few forums and a article or two about potential apocalypse scenarios (as a ironic homage).

Oh yes, the French authorities had to take extreme measures in order to turn away the cream of the world's gullible from a favourite gathering spot. No recent figures as yet, but the village has been besieged by tens of thousands over the past year alone.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... llage.html

[Wild Zontargs]

But, for instance, it seems to be some “Slyme Pit dogma”, an article of faith, that, as Phil is fond of quoting Hitchens on, “What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.” But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind” is something more than just “brain”, for examples.

Just so that I don't jump in before verifying: Did you just say that we all accept "free will" and that the "mind" is something more than just the brain?

I'm prepared to serve as a counter-example if necessary.

[Rystefn]

Watson-driver's-license: I have a friend who only recently got her license (she's almost 30) due to a massive amount of fear and panic while being behind the wheel. I have others who never bothered to get one as they live in cities where it's almost impractical to have a car (traffic, parking fees, etc.). So, I can cut Becky some slack in this area.

Jenny-ain't-gotta-bike: Ok, that's just weird. What child doesn't ride a bike/tricycle/Big Wheel?

I didn't.

It isn't all that uncommon for children who grew up in a big metropolitan city to have no bicycle experience. I've met a lot of people from New York City who never learned to ride a bike. It's not like suburbia, or out in the countryside.
Where would you be safe on a bike as a kid? Certainly not in NYC traffic. I never felt as though I was missing something important. I could get anywhere I wanted, I either walked, took public transportation, or got a ride. It wasn't like it is now, where children aren't permitted to get on a bus alone.

Although Jenny is much younger, and would not have had the freedom to come and go the way I did. All of the people I've met who could not ride a bike, were my age or older, and Jenny is not a big city kid, so yeah, it's weird.

Ok, that makes sense. I need to remember that not everyone grew up in suburbia/country. I suspect that's not the case with Jenny but I could be wrong.

My understanding is that she grew up in Indiana. Do they have any cities there?

[Lsuoma]

Yeah, because as everyone knows, death is the most likely outcome of drunken sex.

hahaha!

Don't know why you're laughing: 100% of people who have drunken sex die eventually.

[welch]

A small point of disagreement, if I may.

I addressed this in one of my videos sometime back. When I was in the Army, there was always one implicit, though unbreakable rule.

Never leave a person behind.

The circumstances didn't matter. Whether it be the battlefield or going out on Friday night getting sloshed, you looked out for your friends and never left them behind.

If at some point they meet up with someone and want to split away from the group, a couple things come into play. The group assesses if you're too far gone to make that decision by yourself. If you are, then you aren't leaving. I don't care if a fist fight erupts because of it. You're not leaving.

If you are able to make that decision by yourself, then somebody from the group makes sure that all relevant information is obtained. Where does this person live? What is his/her phone number? When do you plan on being back? How will you get back? etc, etc...

Leaving a person behind to fend for themselves was a taboo one simply did not break. If you did, be prepared to be a pariah.

Now, I understand that casual social groups aren't like the bonds you have in the military, but if more people looked at it that way, then there would be much less of this going on.

Regardless of gender, you shouldn't be out by yourself, drinking yourself silly in unfamiliar places. And, you also shouldn't be doing said activities with "friends" you can't trust.

Never leave a person behind.

you shouldn't be out by yourself, drinking yourself silly in unfamiliar places.

first, going out drinking with friends, and letting one of those friends make an adult decision to hook up with with someone, is not like leaving someone behind in the military sense.

second, I take responsibility for my actions, I don't need or want a babysitter, because I don't get drunk, especially in a public place.
I don't have a problem with a situation where you are meeting someone alone for the first time, and give a friend the name of the person you are meeting, the address, and any other pertinent information, and tell them that if you don't call by a certain time, something is wrong.
but for fuck's sake stay sober, or stay in public.

third, I used to tend bar, for many years, in all different types of places. I've seen it all. I've also had to babysit numerous times.
It is a bloody nightmare, arguing with someone when they are drunk, or on drugs about what is in their best interest, or dealing with them being emotional, or trying to stop them from instigating a fight with someone, or trying to calm them down and talk them out of their paranoia or jealousy, or standing outside the door to the toilet making sure they don't pass out, or choke on their own vomit.

The only people who have an excuse for getting so drunk, they are ready to do things they would never do sober, are college age or younger, and in that case you better watch your friend's back, because it will probably be you who needs a nanny the next evening.

If you are an adult, and want to behave like a college kid in a bar, Hire a fucking chaperone.

Why should an adult have to deal with a petulant, spoiled child when they are there to enjoy themselves? It is incredibly narcissistic, self-absorbed, and childish to drink until you cannot be trusted to be in control of your decisions, because your friends will have your back.

and it's always the same people who need babysitting,
and they never learn, and they don't give a fuck because someone always rescues them.

I choose my friends wisely. We don't need mothering, and we don't need to be rescued from self-inflicted neurosis.

I got ordered to do it. In tech school in Biloxi. Well, all the guys (all - male squadron) from larger cities were. It seems that the kids from dogfucker Nebraska weren't real good at spotting the high quality drag queens of NOLA. So, when one of them went to NOLA, one of us did too. The commander paid for us, so that was awesome. Seemed they'd had a couple of suicide attempts due to culture shock.

Worked out too, at least on one of my trips.

"JOHN! JOHN!"
"Yes Allen? (Who was fucking plastered"
"I won't be coming back to the room, I gonna SCORE!"
"Fuckin' sweet man, which one?"
"The tall one by the bar, the blonde!"
"Um...dude. That's a guy."
" SHE IS NOT! SHE's too pretty!"
"Sigh, come on."
Walk over to bar, where aforementioned drag queen is hanging all over Allen as soon as he gets near enough.
"So settle a bet here...you're a big ol' drag queen, and a pretty damned talented one, aintcha?"
"Well yeah honey, of course, and thank you for the compliment!"
Strangled sounds start emanating from Allen, and he runs off to the bathroom.
"Wait, did he think I was..."
"Yup"
"OH NO, I'm so sorry, will he be okay?"
"Oh he'll be fine. He's from some antknuckle-sized town in Nebraska."
Much laughter. She paid for both our tabs, was a real fun camper when I went back got he bar after getting Allen back to the room. He made me promise I'd tell no one. That cost him some serious cash. Make me not tell an awesome story like that, that was just uncharitable.

[decius]

One in Ten Believe Mayan Prophecy is True (10%), Fear World Will End in 2012 (8%)

Tuesday, May 01, 2012
New York — One in seven (14%) global citizens agree ‘the world will come to an end during my lifetime,’ according to a new poll by global research company Ipsos on behalf of Reuters News. One in ten (10%) believe ‘the Mayan calendar, which some say ‘ends’ in 2012, marks the end of the world’ and another one in ten (8%) admit they ‘have been experiencing anxiety or fear because the world is going to end in 2012.’ The poll was conducted among 16,262 adults in 21 countries.

[KiwiInOz]

Yeah, because as everyone knows, death is the most likely outcome of drunken sex.

hahaha!

La Petite Mort?

[KiwiInOz]

... Encouraging to see more than a few guests who have “de-lurked” and who have indicated that they had become disillusioned with the FfTB dogma ….

This is obviously because we are dogmatically undogmatic.

Fuck, we have multi page arguments over fucking packaged cookies. About all I think we agree in is that oolon's a stupid tit, and a good chunk of FTB thinks that

Cookies? COOKIES? Fuck you Welch. They're biscuits.

[CommanderTuvok]

Opheliar is the gift that keeps on giving...

http://i.imgur.com/IQ9Nb.jpg

Realising that her post on Shermer reaks of embarassing bullshit and desperation, she attempts to backtrack a bit. Suddenly, she says Shermer is now REPORTING on the phenonemon, you know, as skeptics do! Ophelia then suggests that she "never meant to suggest he thinks its fine". Oh really, Ophelia? Because your article didn't make that clear, and in fact, just appeared to want to smear Shermer on the basis of the most tenuous connection you could think up.

Oh, and that bit about "noticing" what Shermer said is complete bullshit. You were CYBERSTALKING, Ophelia. You found something you thought you could point your finger at and shout "sexism", but instead, you have egg on your face. Further, the reasons you are itching to get Shermer is because he pwned you recently on his Skeptic site. If there is one thing the Baboons don't like, it is getting "called out". It happened to Rebecca Watson recently as well, and she also responded with an embarassing post about rape, which ended up with Queen Bee herself getting accusations of being a rapist!

Tis the season to be hilarious. Thanks, Ophelia. You really keep my lulz rate going. Bitch.

[Steersman]

Steersman said: "And when one volunteered she asked him if he would like to kiss her to which he acceded with some enthusiasm and after which she said, Congratulations; you’ve just kissed the lips that have sucked a thousand cocks."

What was the point of that, exactly?
[...]
Excuse my rant, but statements like that are so stupid. It's like that bullshit they taught us in sex-ed: "If you sleep with someone, you've slept with everyone that person has slept with!" No the fuck you haven't. So, so stupid....

Maybe I didn’t elaborate enough for you, but the context was, I thought, the implied condemnation of a woman who might have been “hit” a million times – which triggered the “thousand cocks” memory. Which gave me the lead-in to raise the question as to why prostitutes are generally so reviled – which Hollander was addressing, if somewhat obliquely, and which you underline with your comment about "bullshit sex-ed" – and why they are murdered so frequently and why, in the Benighted States of America, prostitution is illegal yet every yellow-pages book in the country has literally hundreds of advertisements for their services. Hypocrisy much?

You might also be interested in this recent article in The New Statesman on the topic.

Yes, I kinda missed that. So, to your point then:
….
I don't know that prostitutes being murdered frequently* is a direct** result of their essential-by-way-of-trade-promiscuity in this hypocritically puritanical society. A serial killer here and there wouldn't add that many to the numbers, I would think. [Open to being corrected.]

Sorry, should have provided a link and a quote earlier:

The homicide rate for female prostitutes was estimated to be 204 per 100,000,[2] which is considerably higher than that for the next riskiest occupations in the United States during a similar period (4 per 100,000 for female liquor store workers and 29 per 100,000 for male taxicab drivers).

As for who is doing the killing and what their motivations are, that seems to be quite a bit more difficult to determine than just the number of them. But the article indicates that they seem to be “favoured” by serial murderers, one of whom – Gary Ridgway, the Green River Killer – said in a documentary I remember seeing that he figured he was doing society a favour by killing them. Raises some interesting questions – some sticky wickets, actually – as to how much society is culpable in those crimes. And in cases like the D.C. Madam – Deborah Jeane Palfrey – who commited suicide rather than go to jail as a result of those “puritanical values that keep their trade illegal”.

… which makes them reluctant to seek law enforcement intervention, then I could swallow [that] without too much reflexive gagging. [Ah, ahhh. See what I did there? :D]

Practice. :-) Although the foregoing cases, and many more that are just as odious, are more than enough to make me gag or at least make me rather ill. It is maybe a relatively small demographic - 0.02% in America to .3% in London to 3% in Amsterdam according to this - but the grief due to societal values still seems not inconsiderable. I’m reminded of, although I don’t have the details handy at the moment, that just after the end of the second world war a whole bunch of the townspeople in places like Belsen and Auschwitz were marched through the concentration camps to show them what they had been part of or had in effect condoned.

[Punker]

http://i.imgur.com/j9wkf.png

[CommanderTuvok]

Great cartoon, although it has to be noted that Rebecca's hair is now blue.

She can't change the fact that she is a rapist, though.

[sacha]

It's just a word right now, Renee
Try to keep a clear head, and don't panic over the unknown.

So while (s)he may not talk about it a lot, it may not be a show of strength. (S)he may just genuinely not want to talk about it constantly, and get rather annoyed if it's all (s)he gets to talk about for the next few months... if (s)he doesn't want to talk about it, let him (her) not talk about it.

can someone please explain this to my mum?


can someone else explain to me why so many women are unable to comprehend this?

[ReneeHendricks]

It's just a word right now, Renee
Try to keep a clear head, and don't panic over the unknown.

So while (s)he may not talk about it a lot, it may not be a show of strength. (S)he may just genuinely not want to talk about it constantly, and get rather annoyed if it's all (s)he gets to talk about for the next few months... if (s)he doesn't want to talk about it, let him (her) not talk about it.

can someone please explain this to my mum?


can someone else explain to me why so many women are unable to comprehend this?

Trying very hard to do so, Sacha. And the very reason why I mentioned it here and nowhere else (meaning where my family frequent) is because I have a few relatives who do not understand that we *don't* want it to be a topic of discussion on a daily basis (the way my family members handle these things). Constantly asking every day how you're feeling, what's going on, what have the doctors said, have you done this, have you done that, on and on. So, we opting to keep this very, very local - me, him, my kids and that's it.

[sacha]

looks like my gal will finally be able to leave the hospital after the upcoming weekend.

great news!

I hope the upcoming weekend will be the last one I'll spend mostly at a hospital bed for some time.

I hope so too.

I'll mention your well wishes to MKG.

[Lsuoma]

FTFY

http://slymepit.com/staticimgs/j9wkf.png

[sacha]

Who needs feminism?

Not this man.

Good 'ol paternity fraud.

That's why I am an advocate for DNA tests. A woman asking "Don't you trust me?", or getting all "offended" is just a fucking red herring. I put much more stock on people's capacity to act like the animals that we are and to then to lie about it forever. You don't? Then, by all means, carry on being a chump and believing that people are all that they say they are...

the court knew he was not the father:

For 13 years, Hatley made payments to the state until learning, in 2000, that the boy might not be his biological son. A DNA test that year confirmed that there was no chance he was the father, according to court documents.

Hatley returned to court and was relieved of any future child support reimbursement but was ordered to pay more than $16,000 that he had owed the state before the ruling.

Latesha Bradley, an attorney who represented Hatley in that hearing, told CNN the argument for keeping Hatley liable for the back payments was that he had signed a consent agreement with the office of child support services. The court agreed that Hatley had to comply with the consent agreement for the period that he believed the boy was his son.

Court documents show that Hatley for the most part continued to make payments. He was jailed for six months in 2006 for falling behind on payments during a period of unemployment, but afterward he resumed making payments and continued to do so even after he lost another job in 2008 and became homeless, court records state.

Last year, he again became unable to maintain the payments and was once again jailed.

[JackRayner]

Sorry, should have provided a link and a quote earlier:

The homicide rate for female prostitutes was estimated to be 204 per 100,000,[2] which is considerably higher than that for the next riskiest occupations in the United States during a similar period (4 per 100,000 for female liquor store workers and 29 per 100,000 for male taxicab drivers).

As for who is doing the killing and what their motivations are, that seems to be quite a bit more difficult to determine than just the number of them. But the article indicates that they seem to be “favoured” by serial murderers, one of whom – Gary Ridgway, the Green River Killer – said in a documentary I remember seeing that he figured he was doing society a favour by killing them. Raises some interesting questions – some sticky wickets, actually – as to how much society is culpable in those crimes.

I’m reminded of, although I don’t have the details handy at the moment, that just after the end of the second world war a whole bunch of the townspeople in places like Belsen and Auschwitz were marched through the concentration camps to show them what they had been part of or had in effect condoned.

I don't condone crap, and I reject the idea that I have any responsibility for prostitution being kept illegal, or for some serial killer going after them because they've internalized whatever value system, or even just some automatic reaction, that causes them to see prostitutes as worthy of death. There are LOTS of laws in the books that I think are bullshit. How exactly am I supposed to show that I don't condone them? Break them? Shoot a lawmaker/law enforcer in the face, maybe? (It's easier to do with societal norms, but I'm not exactly always winning friends when I speak out against woo, homophobia, feminism, theism, "true love", PETA, the green movement, "bro code", many kinds of moral outrages sold as objective morality,and all sorts of other shit that I think is just straight up retarded. [lol, ableism.])

I do what I can. I spread awareness among the people that I know on things that I think are problematic and vote against shitty laws. Unless it is cause by my order or by my own hand, no one's death is on me.

[Ms. Ogynist]

All these years presenting SGU and globetrotting - turns out Rebecca Watson is a rapist.

Full marks for honesty, and all that - but from now on I have no other option than to refer her as Self Confessed Rapist, Rebecca Watson.

[JackRayner]

Who needs feminism?

Not this man.

Good 'ol paternity fraud.

That's why I am an advocate for DNA tests. A woman asking "Don't you trust me?", or getting all "offended" is just a fucking red herring. I put much more stock on people's capacity to act like the animals that we are and to then to lie about it forever. You don't? Then, by all means, carry on being a chump and believing that people are all that they say they are...

the court knew he was not the father:

For 13 years, Hatley made payments to the state until learning, in 2000, that the boy might not be his biological son. A DNA test that year confirmed that there was no chance he was the father, according to court documents.

Hatley returned to court and was relieved of any future child support reimbursement but was ordered to pay more than $16,000 that he had owed the state before the ruling.

Latesha Bradley, an attorney who represented Hatley in that hearing, told CNN the argument for keeping Hatley liable for the back payments was that he had signed a consent agreement with the office of child support services. The court agreed that Hatley had to comply with the consent agreement for the period that he believed the boy was his son.

Court documents show that Hatley for the most part continued to make payments. He was jailed for six months in 2006 for falling behind on payments during a period of unemployment, but afterward he resumed making payments and continued to do so even after he lost another job in 2008 and became homeless, court records state.

Last year, he again became unable to maintain the payments and was once again jailed.

I know. Call it retroactive parental fraud in this instance, then. :D

Hatley had to comply with the consent agreement for the period that he believed the boy was his son.

He could have never agreed to anything had he know it wasn't his son from the start, though I fully understand that DNA testing wasn't exactly widely available back then....

[sacha]

But, for instance, it seems to be some “Slyme Pit dogma”, an article of faith, that, as Phil is fond of quoting Hitchens on, “What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.” But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind” is something more than just “brain”, for examples.

Just so that I don't jump in before verifying: Did you just say that we all accept "free will" and that the "mind" is something more than just the brain?

I'm prepared to serve as a counter-example if necessary.

[youtube]9CqbO_5FKRc[/youtube]

[sacha]

Yeah, because as everyone knows, death is the most likely outcome of drunken sex.

hahaha!

La Petite Mort?

death by overdose from mainlining oxytocin due to orgasm is not the worst way to go.

[JackRayner]

Hatley had to comply with the consent agreement for the period that he believed the boy was his son.

He could would have never agreed to anything had he know known it wasn't his son from the start, though I fully understand that DNA testing wasn't exactly widely available back then....

I blame my quickly deteriorating grammar on my tiredness. Been up since 7 this morning after only a few hours of rest. [20 minutes to midnight here on the East Coast of the U.S.] Like, imagine staying in character for that many hours of the day. Now, replace "character" with "second language", and that's what we've got going on here.

I'm just stating that because I noticed some fuck ups in my response to Steersman, too, and I don't like them. Carry on. :cry:

[Reap]

If no one has done so already I would like to show my respect to Justin Vacula for the work he did today. It is a great example of someone who not only pecks away at his keyboard but actually steps away from that keyboard to engage in activism that has an effect on his community, all the people in it, (whether they have internet access or not) and reality. Despite being labeled by people who have no real knowledge of his character as a bad example of atheism and a generally unlikable fellow he did let it get him down. Justin proved today that those people can babble all they wish and claim petty hollow victories to their little black-hearted desire, it does not intimidate him. Justin Vacula will not allow those simplistic socially retarded miscreants lessen his ability to be effective while not being a bitch. When he sees a battle that needs to be fought he gladly rides to the frontline ready to do battle and win! Let those pathetic lurkers stay safe and sound in their homes as if nestled to their mothers bosom feeding on her teat. Children have no place in a real fight anyway. Leave that fight to people like Justin Vacula and screw you Stephanie Zvan.
Great work Justin

[sacha]

He could have never agreed to anything had he know it wasn't his son from the start

precisely. contract null and void, all payments should be reimbursed.

[sacha]

Hatley had to comply with the consent agreement for the period that he believed the boy was his son.

He could would have never agreed to anything had he know known it wasn't his son from the start, though I fully understand that DNA testing wasn't exactly widely available back then....

I blame my quickly deteriorating grammar on my tiredness. Been up since 7 this morning after only a few hours of rest. [20 minutes to midnight here on the East Coast of the U.S.] Like, imagine staying in character for that many hours of the day. Now, replace "character" with "second language", and that's what we've got going on here.

not to worry, I understood

[Steersman]

But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind” is something more than just “brain”, for examples.

I see no evidence whatsoever that "we all" accept anything of the sort. I'd wager a great deal of money that you'll find many people who reject the idea of mind-brain duality outright, and more than a few that reject the idea of free will as well. Try again.

Would you believe …?

Sorry – I should have been clearer; I wasn’t arguing that we all accept without proof, for example, the free-will hypothesis, only that we all accept different things without proof, more or less by necessity. However, somewhat in the nature of the beast, it seems that even the contrary hypothesis – that there is no free-will – is still something that many other people accept as an article of faith which still has no conclusive proof.

As for more prosaic examples, those might be a little harder to come by, although the fact that some 60% of Americans supposedly believe that “angels and demons are active in the world” might be a good start. However, my impression is still that many of our day-to-day beliefs could qualify as, in Einstein’s words, little more than “stubbornly persistent illusions” that we cling to with some tenacity yet without conclusive proof.

[Rystefn]

But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind” is something more than just “brain”, for examples.

I see no evidence whatsoever that "we all" accept anything of the sort. I'd wager a great deal of money that you'll find many people who reject the idea of mind-brain duality outright, and more than a few that reject the idea of free will as well. Try again.

Would you believe …?

Sorry – I should have been clearer; I wasn’t arguing that we all accept without proof, for example, the free-will hypothesis, only that we all accept different things without proof, more or less by necessity. However, somewhat in the nature of the beast, it seems that even the contrary hypothesis – that there is no free-will – is still something that many other people accept as an article of faith which still has no conclusive proof.

As for more prosaic examples, those might be a little harder to come by, although the fact that some 60% of Americans supposedly believe that “angels and demons are active in the world” might be a good start. However, my impression is still that many of our day-to-day beliefs could qualify as, in Einstein’s words, little more than “stubbornly persistent illusions” that we cling to with some tenacity yet without conclusive proof.

You're still wrong. Some of us look into those things and try to figure out if they're true, and some of us shrug our shoulders and say, "fuck it." Except for the angels thing. Pretty sure no one here buys into that nonsense. We dismissed it for lack of evidence, generally.

[KiwiInOz]

If no one has done so already I would like to show my respect to Justin Vacula for the work he did today. It is a great example of someone who not only pecks away at his keyboard but actually steps away from that keyboard to engage in activism that has an effect on his community, all the people in it, (whether they have internet access or not) and reality. Despite being labeled by people who have no real knowledge of his character as a bad example of atheism and a generally unlikable fellow he did let it get him down. Justin proved today that those people can babble all they wish and claim petty hollow victories to their little black-hearted desire, it does not intimidate him. Justin Vacula will not allow those simplistic socially retarded miscreants lessen his ability to be effective while not being a bitch. When he sees a battle that needs to be fought he gladly rides to the frontline ready to do battle and win! Let those pathetic lurkers stay safe and sound in their homes as if nestled to their mothers bosom feeding on her teat. Children have no place in a real fight anyway. Leave that fight to people like Justin Vacula and screw you Stephanie Zvan.
Great work Justin

Hear. Hear.

[KiwiInOz]

Yay. Two weeks of summer solstice holidays. Starting now.

[Steersman]

Sorry, should have provided a link and a quote earlier:

The homicide rate for female prostitutes was estimated to be 204 per 100,000,[2] which is considerably higher than that for the next riskiest occupations in the United States during a similar period (4 per 100,000 for female liquor store workers and 29 per 100,000 for male taxicab drivers).

As for who is doing the killing and what their motivations are, that seems to be quite a bit more difficult to determine than just the number of them. But the article indicates that they seem to be “favoured” by serial murderers, one of whom – Gary Ridgway, the Green River Killer – said in a documentary I remember seeing that he figured he was doing society a favour by killing them. Raises some interesting questions – some sticky wickets, actually – as to how much society is culpable in those crimes.

I’m reminded of, although I don’t have the details handy at the moment, that just after the end of the second world war a whole bunch of the townspeople in places like Belsen and Auschwitz were marched through the concentration camps to show them what they had been part of or had in effect condoned.

I don't condone crap, and I reject the idea that I have any responsibility for prostitution being kept illegal, or for some serial killer going after them because they've internalized whatever value system, or even just some automatic reaction, that causes them to see prostitutes as worthy of death. ….

I do what I can. I spread awareness among the people that I know on things that I think are problematic and vote against shitty laws. Unless it is cause by my order or by my own hand, no one's death is on me.

Sorry if you got the impression that I was holding you personally and solely responsible for those deaths as your rather draconian linked video would suggest. What I was trying to suggest with my somewhat rhetorical question “as to how much society is culpable in those crimes” was that we are all of us guilty or responsible to some extent for them – the same way we are all guilty for those deaths in Newtown and Aurora and Montreal. And for global warming and, apparently, for the deaths of some ten to twenty thousand kids every day.

How much any of us can do in any case is moot, but it seems that none of those problems can be solved until more of us take some responsibility for them which is, of course, easier said than done. But, as you suggest, raising people’s consciousness, their awareness, of the problems is a good start, although an important next step is to understand their nature and ramifications – riding madly off in all directions tends to be counterproductive. Along which line you might be interested in this video which suggests a broader shouldering of the blame and imposition of responsibility.

[sacha]

It is the only definition.

The modern view of karma, devoid of any spiritual exigencies, obviates the need for an acceptance of reincarnation in Judeochristian societies and attempts to portray karma as a universal psychological phenomenon which behaves predictably, like other physical forces such as gravity.

it is about cause and effect of morality, as if it is a law of the universe.

It seems to me you are not quite correct despite your declaration- Falun Gong differs from Buddhism in its definition of the term "karma," in that it is taken not as a process of award and punishment, but as an exclusively negative term.

I'll tell them you won't allow a differing definition, that always works. If it doesn't I'll try the "If I say so it must be true" approach. I would prefer not to squabble over something that is at least debatable unless you insist.

Falun Gong:

"A person has done bad things over his many lifetimes, and for people this results in misfortune, or for cultivators it's karmic obstacles, so there's birth, aging, sickness, and death. This is ordinary karma"

It's still cause and effect of morality as if it's a Newtonian law, the fact that they do not acknowledge "good" as being a part of it, is irrelevant.

I'll tell them you won't allow a differing definition, that always works... I would prefer not to squabble over something that is at least debatable unless you insist.

You mean like the word atheism? One can declare that it means anything they want it to mean, which does not change the fact that it is simply an absence of belief in gods.

I'm not arguing just to argue. It is an ancient Indian religious concept that I find to be insidious, because it blames the innocent (if not in this life, than in a past life).

Karma = cause and effect of morality as universal law.

I still have not seen any evidence to the contrary, although there are some who are changing the core concept to fit their definition.

I don't understand why a sceptic would want to associate something based in reality with an ancient concept of woo.
It simply gives the word credibility, even if the incorrect "western" translation was an accepted definition.

[KarlVonMox]

Good to see Justin Vacula get a mention at the friendly atheist for you know, actually engaging in some secular activism. That makes two pitters recently mentioned there, Abbie being the first. And no idiot comments from the FTB crowd this time either! Good job guys.

[sacha]

It seems to me you are not quite correct despite your declaration- Falun Gong differs from Buddhism in its definition of the term "karma," in that it is taken not as a process of award and punishment, but as an exclusively negative term.

one final Falun Gong description of the word, since that is what you chose to prove me incorrect:

This is a negative, black substance that accumulates in other dimensions lifetime after lifetime, by doing bad deeds and thinking bad thoughts. Falun Gong states that karma is the reason for suffering,

[Steersman]

Steersman said: But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind” is something more than just “brain”, for examples.

I see no evidence whatsoever that "we all" accept anything of the sort. I'd wager a great deal of money that you'll find many people who reject the idea of mind-brain duality outright, and more than a few that reject the idea of free will as well. Try again.

Would you believe …?

Sorry – I should have been clearer; I wasn’t arguing that we all accept without proof, for example, the free-will hypothesis, only that we all accept different things without proof, more or less by necessity. However, somewhat in the nature of the beast, it seems that even the contrary hypothesis – that there is no free-will – is still something that many other people accept as an article of faith which still has no conclusive proof.

As for more prosaic examples, those might be a little harder to come by, although the fact that some 60% of Americans supposedly believe that “angels and demons are active in the world” might be a good start. However, my impression is still that many of our day-to-day beliefs could qualify as, in Einstein’s words, little more than “stubbornly persistent illusions” that we cling to with some tenacity yet without conclusive proof.

You're still wrong. Some of us look into those things and try to figure out if they're true, and some of us shrug our shoulders and say, "fuck it." Except for the angels thing. Pretty sure no one here buys into that nonsense. We dismissed it for lack of evidence, generally.

Ok, you alone of all the people in the world have absolutely no beliefs whatsoever that you hold without proof. But you might want to consider this quote from Norbert Wiener, one of the progenitors of the science of cybernetics:

I have said that science is impossible without faith. By this I do not mean that the faith on which science depends is religious in nature or involves the acceptance of any of the dogmas of the ordinary religious creeds, yet without faith that nature is subject to law there can be no science. No amount of demonstration can ever prove that nature is subject to law. [The Human Use of Human Beings; pg 193]

Seems that one has to start from some assumptions, even in science, and assumptions are, by definition (4), those claims that one accepts without proof, i.e., on faith. And if in fact that argument is true then it makes any philosophies or systems of belief or action based on science equally suspect.

Further, you might want to take a look at the article on conventional wisdom which argues this:

Conventional wisdom is the body of ideas or explanations generally accepted as true by the public or by experts in a field. Such ideas or explanations, though widely held, are unexamined. Unqualified societal discourse preserves the status quo.

[Rystefn]

Ok, you alone of all the people in the world have absolutely no beliefs whatsoever that you hold without proof. But you might want to consider this quote from Norbert Wiener, one of the progenitors of the science of cybernetics:

I have said that science is impossible without faith. By this I do not mean that the faith on which science depends is religious in nature or involves the acceptance of any of the dogmas of the ordinary religious creeds, yet without faith that nature is subject to law there can be no science. No amount of demonstration can ever prove that nature is subject to law. [The Human Use of Human Beings; pg 193]

Seems that one has to start from some assumptions, even in science, and assumptions are, by definition (4), those claims that one accepts without proof, i.e., on faith. And if in fact that argument is true then it makes any philosophies or systems of belief or action based on science equally suspect.

A functional assumption is not the same as a belief. More to the point, we aren't talking about proof, we're talking about evidence, and the fact that science works is pretty strong evidence that it's founding assumption are, if not true, close e-fucking-nough.

Further, you might want to take a look at the article on conventional wisdom which argues this:

Conventional wisdom is the body of ideas or explanations generally accepted as true by the public or by experts in a field. Such ideas or explanations, though widely held, are unexamined. Unqualified societal discourse preserves the status quo.

That's nice. Do "we all" lean on conventional wisdom? No. We don't. Feel free to give it another try, though.

[Dick Strawkins]

I see Greta has turned up on Svans thread to add a contribution to the pyre.

Was there an earlier version of Welsh's blog post because I can't find the second, and most damaging quote that she seems to have found.

http://i.imgur.com/qzOMo.jpg

It can't be that she simply made it up herself and is lying through her teeth about Welsh saying that Watson is a "slut" who deserves "to be raped to death"?
Can it? :think:

[John Brown]

You mean like the word atheism? One can declare that it means anything they want it to mean, which does not change the fact that it is simply an absence of belief in gods.

I'm not arguing just to argue. It is an ancient Indian religious concept that I find to be insidious, because it blames the innocent (if not in this life, than in a past life).

Karma = cause and effect of morality as universal law.

I still have not seen any evidence to the contrary, although there are some who are changing the core concept to fit their definition.

I don't understand why a sceptic would want to associate something based in reality with an ancient concept of woo.
It simply gives the word credibility, even if the incorrect "western" translation was an accepted definition.

Because language can be fluid and sometimes it's easier to fit a word in which everyone will understand to represent a rather clunky concept?

Is there any other word or phrase you can think of that gets across the idea that what you do in life and how you treat people has a way of affecting how you are treated? What goes around, comes around?

It's like using the word purgatory to describe some event in your life where you had to wait a ridiculous amount of time to get or do something.

-"Hey, John, how's that proposal coming?"
-"It's in purgatory, you know, because Hell is other people."
-"Ah. That sucks, dude."

It's just a symbol to efficiently get a point across.

You could extricate the dictionary of any words that have anything to do with woo or religion, but the English language would be much poorer for it.

[Pitchguest]

Guess who still insists the Slymepit "doxxed" him?

Our good old pal, Brownian (or Anthony K as he's called now)

I’m so glad to read that Jay, because I feel the same way. Slymepit fuckers have lied about and doxxed me.

As far as I’m concerned, you ass-sucking fuckers get everything coming your way.

In response to this from Jay,

You may dislike what welch does, but his attack is logical: it’s called, disagreeing with your assumptions and refusing to play your game.

Whether it’s dems/repubs, evolution/creationist, atheist/religious, or now Atheism+/Atheists, it’s been shown over and over the two sides cannot have fair intellectual arguments on the net.

The instant one of you disemvowel, moderate, delete, alter, ban what others have to say, well, you deserve all the heap of shit people can heap on you.

And you make it worse, with the encouragement of your commenters to pile on.

And that’s long after you folks couldn’t even argue with intellectual honesty or acknowledge truthfully what others have to say or what their positions are.

So, your cries of victimhood are like what? What’s the metaphor Stephanie? Oh something like tears I drink from.

Brownian, Anthony, whatever, let me make this absolutely clear: NOBODY "DOXXED" YOU. Nobody! If someone should have that "honour" (and we know someone needs to be responsible), it would be yourself, you fucking dumb shit, for broadcasting your real name on EVERY SINGLE SOCIAL NETWORK YOU SUBSCRIBED TO!

You used the name "Brownian" on multiple occasions, so anyone would able to find it in seconds! Seconds! You literally would just have to make a Google search for "Brownian" and "Pharyngula". We have PROOF, you fucking idiot! Facebook, Twitter, ATHEIST FUCKING NEXUS! Linking back to Pharyngula, mentioning Pharyngula by name several times. You would have to be retarded to NOT make the connection.

Wait, I'm sorry. "Retarded" is one of the bad words you don't like. Let me rephrase: you would have to be RETARDED to not make the connection.

Same thing when Surly broadcasted her FULL ADRESS applied to her BUSINESS. Who does that? To prevent stalkers and unsavory types from finding me, I'll just paint a nice shining sponsored by Surlyramics TARGET on my back. That'll keep them at bay! Pardon if I won't hide the atomic facepalm I'm now exhibiting. Not such a good idea to channel the queen of hurt fee fees, now is it, Brownian, old buddy, old pal?

[John Brown]

Guess who still insists the Slymepit "doxxed" him?

Our good old pal, Brownian (or Anthony K as he's called now)

I’m so glad to read that Jay, because I feel the same way. Slymepit fuckers have lied about and doxxed me.

As far as I’m concerned, you ass-sucking fuckers get everything coming your way.

That kid doesn't have the sense evolution gave a sack of hammers.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

No end of the world in sight right now.

I'll report back after 11:21 GMT.

Hopefully...

[Skep tickle]

Renee, have just caught up over the last 6 pages, sorry to hear about this lymphoma scare, hopefully it's just a false alarm, indeed a needle biopsy typically does not provide enough info for diagnosis (the pathologists like to see the "architecture" of the lymph node, though these days flow cytometry can also provide useful info). There's a very wide range of behavior of lymphomas. The aggressive ones (high-grade) are scary & dangerous but can respond very well to treatment. The slow-growing ones (low-grade) can mosey along for years or even decades but (typically) can't be cured. I hope you can get more information soon, though the holiday may put a bit of a wrench into that.

[Pitchguest]

Going to bed now, insomnia sucks. Hopefully the world won't end until I've had a good six hours sleep, at least. Ta.

[Skep tickle]

Just so that I don't jump in before verifying: Did you just say that we all accept "free will" and that the "mind" is something more than just the brain?

I'm prepared to serve as a counter-example if necessary.

9CqbO_5FKRc

Yeah, but free will and mind-body dualism are pretty convincing illusions. YMMV, of course.

[comslave]

Quite relieved that the Mayan Apocalypse failed, according to Australia and New Zealand. I just joined a running club two weeks ago, and I'd hate to think that all those brutal workouts went to waste.

OH CRAP! IS there a way to delete emails AFTER you've sent them?