If thou gazest long into the Pit, the Pit will also gaze into thee

John Greg wrote:Gumby at http://www.slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... 58#p102758, brafuckingvo! Excellent. Truly one of your best yet. So glad you returned to share your wit and wisdom.

Well, I really offer only small doses of wit and almost no wisdom, but thanks!

AndrewV69 wrote:
Quite simply I was and still am pro-choice.

One day many years ago before I got married, my girlfriend at the time informed me that she thought she was pregnant.

I recoiled when she said she wanted an abortion. Nonetheless I offered to pay my share of the costs. Fortunately it turned out she was not preggers, but we broke up shortly after that because among other things I could not get over the fact that she would have aborted my child.

I am still pro-choice. I was just shaken out of a certain complacency (and really quite astonished at my visceral reaction) and I think I have some measure of understanding at where the pro-life crowd are coming from nowadays as a result.

One thing to talk the talk, quite another to walk it.

YMMV

Existential anxiety.

I have tried really hard to put myself in the pro-life position, to think about the HORRORS of non-existence, and to project all of my feelings onto a zygote and pretend that its just a cute widdle baby...but I failed miserably!

Since we are on the subject, here is *another* thing for you to bookmark:

http://www.tmt.missouri.edu/

Terror Management Theory

The basic gist of the theory is that humans are motivated to quell the potential for terror inherent in the human awareness of vulnerability and mortality by investing in cultural belief systems (or worldviews) that imbue life with meaning, and the individuals who subscribe to them with significance (or self-esteem)

There is also a documentary on the subject:

"Flight from Death"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365215/

---------------

In a nutshell, religion, opposition to abortion etc, all find their roots in this existential fear of non-existence, of life having no meaning at all.

welch wrote:

rayshul wrote:Hm. Reading back a bit on the discussion on paying for kids. I'm definitely against the idea of someone who is essentially a sperm donor being forced to pay for a child, or having any forced legal obligation there. I'm lucky as a woman I have more control of reproduction so that's unlikely to happen to me but if I was a man and someone attempted to do that to me, I'd exit the country and never return. I pay taxes so my government should be able to support children and single-parent families without forcing people to pay for children they don't want. It's worrying that it happens.

If you want to have sex and not have kids and are completely unwilling to pay for them should accidents happen, why should I have to pay for your fuckup? Or the rest of the taxpayers! It's great when a safety net exists, but I'd you seriously think living in a government orphanage or foster care system is some kind of good thing, you're either completely ignorant or willfully blind. Those things are last chances to keep people from starving, and even then, they barely function as that.

If you cannot or will not accept responsibility for your actions, don't take those actions. Also, at least in the US? Skipping the country won't do dick.

But... I should have to pay for the fuck-ups of someone else! That's a great thing. As a society we pay for each other's fuck ups and individual choices. I pay for people who speed on the highway and crash. I pay for people who are criminals going to jail. I pay for people who pick up terrible illnesses while travelling in mad locations and I pay for people who smoke in bed and accidentally set their house on fire. This is why it's so wonderful living in a country with a strong social system! I pay 33% of my wage each year (which adds up to a pretty average wage) and for that I want at base good services and infrastructure for everyone. I'm not particularly idealistic - but this what I expect from my government at a minimum. We are each other's insurance policy. That's how a country *works* for its people.

I'm sure we aren't talking about a government orphanage - we're talking about support for single mothers who have chosen to have a pregnancy while the father has declined to financially support them. If you think government orphanages and the foster care system are the problems though, then we should focus on improving these to a good standard.

I know we're not there yet, everywhere, but that's where we should be.

welch wrote:

I have my own vested interest in this issue anyway - the twins I'm currently pregnant with are the result of a private donation. We have signed basic legal papers to make clear that the donor will absolutely *not* have any financial obligation, but I do know that sometimes this shit can go to court and even these pre-agreements won't help (particularly in other countries). For couples with infertility issues, it's incredibly important that people are allowed to make the choice to be a parent or not and that financial obligations are worked out early. I think it's a considerable risk to any couples looking at private donation if donors are not fully reassured that they can be a donor without the risk, later down the track, of getting caught up in a financial problem.

There is inequality in reproduction between the genders, and that's not going to change. But I think you can make it as fair as possible legally.

There is a world of difference between your situation, wherein everyone hashes out the details going in, both understanding and accepting their respective responsibilities and the whiny MGTOW/MRA shit of "I didn't want the kid, let the taxpayers have them"

No there isn't. If I go nuts later down the track and decide the donor is going to be financially responsible - I could actually have a case in virtually any other country (and potentially in this one). It isn't safe for private donors.

Wow, so David Silverman just remembered he's been an ardent feminist his whole life too huh? Amazing how that retroactive time machine shit works.

another lurker wrote:There is also a documentary on the subject:

"Flight from Death"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365215/

---------------

In a nutshell, religion, opposition to abortion etc, all find their roots in this existential fear of non-existence, of life having no meaning at all.

Here I am in the middle of a four year psychology and counselling course which is costing me more money than I can afford and all I apparently have to do to successfully psychoanalyse a given individual is watch a film.

Cheers AL - owe you one.

Gregy wrote: Steerspedant said:

And if she's made a claim that isn't true then that looks like lying. Hard to see how anyone could think that that is acceptable. And even making such a statement without providing proof hardly seems acceptable - like yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. Considering the ramifications of the claim it seems important to know which.

All of which is, to some degree, true. However, the primary weakness in your ongoing and remarkably stuffy and inflexible pedantry is that you are clearly assuming, and arguing for, the dishonest implication.

So, one can only imply an implication - which is what rayshul did, but one can’t state an implication - which is what I did? Looks kind of weaselly to me.

But it looks to me like you’re conflating a statement of fact and a statement of implication. I have most definitely not stated that she’s lying, only stated that that is a possibility; I’ve quite clearly said “potential bluff”. And “if that is in fact a bluff”.

Gregy wrote:You, no more than any of us, know whether or not what she said is true, but you are poisoning the well by implying, with prejudice, that she is lying. Knock it off. Grow up.

This is true: I don’t know that she is lying. But putting one’s head in the sand and refusing to admit that that is a possibility isn’t helping matters. She has let the cat out of the bag and I figure she has an obligation to either prove it or retract it. And maybe she did in that recent “Chill Girls” podcast.

Dave2 wrote:

another lurker wrote:There is also a documentary on the subject:

"Flight from Death"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365215/

---------------

In a nutshell, religion, opposition to abortion etc, all find their roots in this existential fear of non-existence, of life having no meaning at all.

Here I am in the middle of a four year psychology and counselling course which is costing me more money than I can afford and all I apparently have to do to successfully psychoanalyse a given individual is watch a film.

Cheers AL - owe you one.

Wow, way to read way more into my comment than was intended.

FFS.

Calm the fuck down.

It's an interesting subject, and those of us who are interested in it are allowed to talk about it...aren't we?

I was by no means presenting the theory and the film as a definitive fucking guide on the subject, just saying 'hey, watch this, there are some interesting ideas.'

another lurker wrote: There is also a documentary on the subject:

"Flight from Death"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365215/

---------------

In a nutshell, religion, opposition to abortion etc, all find their roots in this existential fear of non-existence, of life having no meaning at all.

Oooh, this has been in my Netflix queue for months. I need to watch it!

Gumby wrote:

another lurker wrote: There is also a documentary on the subject:

"Flight from Death"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365215/

---------------

In a nutshell, religion, opposition to abortion etc, all find their roots in this existential fear of non-existence, of life having no meaning at all.

Oooh, this has been in my Netflix queue for months. I need to watch it!

Yeah well, you'll be pissing all over Dave2's psychology degree if you do!

another lurker wrote:

Gumby wrote:

another lurker wrote: There is also a documentary on the subject:

"Flight from Death"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365215/

---------------

In a nutshell, religion, opposition to abortion etc, all find their roots in this existential fear of non-existence, of life having no meaning at all.

Oooh, this has been in my Netflix queue for months. I need to watch it!

Yeah well, you'll be pissing all over Dave2's psychology degree if you do!

As if I care :D

This whole two-day shitfest argument is boring as fuck. I feel like I accidentally entered a completely different forum.

I'm not an MRA FYI - far from it. :/ I acknowledge this area is really fraught with different problems and it's not one with an easy answer. I've certainly had an unwanted pregnancy before and I would have been hugely distressed if I hadn't had the power to make a decision about it, especially at that young age, so yes, I do have biases there and I admit them.



When people talk about new superpowers I'm actually more interested in new supercultures - will western values, for example, remain the norm come the revolution... ^_^

Gumby wrote:Wow, so David Silverman just remembered he's been an ardent feminist his whole life too huh? Amazing how that retroactive time machine shit works.

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

"I don't have a problem with the word cunt. Cunt-cunt-cunt-cunt. I've felt this way my whole life. Feminism is because of atheism. Cunt."

Gumby wrote:Wow, so David Silverman just remembered he's been an ardent feminist his whole life too huh? Amazing how that retroactive time machine shit works.

While facing a legal battle over a woman who claims discrimination.

These are the best punchlines. I don't even give a shit who's in the right there.

Gumby wrote:

another lurker wrote:

Gumby wrote:

another lurker wrote: There is also a documentary on the subject:

"Flight from Death"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365215/

---------------

In a nutshell, religion, opposition to abortion etc, all find their roots in this existential fear of non-existence, of life having no meaning at all.

Oooh, this has been in my Netflix queue for months. I need to watch it!

Yeah well, you'll be pissing all over Dave2's psychology degree if you do!

As if I care :D

This whole two-day shitfest argument is boring as fuck. I feel like I accidentally entered a completely different forum.

Gumby, it could be far, far worse.

I could be re-posting this original Gumby photoshop:

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 0bd792.jpg

Walter Ego wrote:Here's a video I made today for anyone who's interesting in watching. Viewing is of course optional.

Pro-tip: don't talk about peeing in the sink (and how bad it smells) when you make videos advertising your attempt to sell stuff at your estate sale.

Hope it works out for you and you get some scratch. Glad that your family is coming together to help you like that. Good luck.

another lurker wrote:Wow, way to read way more into my comment than was intended.

FFS.

Calm the fuck down.

More dimestore analysis.

Dave2 wrote:

another lurker wrote:Wow, way to read way more into my comment than was intended.

FFS.

Calm the fuck down.

More dimestore analysis.

:roll:

Parody Accountant wrote:

Steersman wrote:

cunt wrote: <snip>
You really don't understand poker do you? Here's a hint: if you make a bluff and don't get called on it - you win.

I said I didn’t.

But for EBW to be making that accusation and then not delivering on it – even if she has the goods – is still going to leave a bad taste; many will quite reasonably think that she was in fact bluffing. Maybe an acceptable policy in a game of cards; not so much elsewhere.

But I’ll agree that poker may not be the best analogy – at least for most versions of the game – as the hand in poker can end without anyone else knowing what cards were really held. Seemingly not applicable in EBW's case.

I'm sure if she isn't bluffing, but doesn't deliver, she's not wanting to publicize private information. Though she is probably legally entitled to do so, she may feel ethically entitled to do so only if her claim is denied by the offending parties.

That is a plausible argument, that one of the possibilities is that she’s having some qualms about releasing that information in all its glory. Although one might suggest that it is a little late to be feeling that after having let the cat out of the bag.

However, one might ask how we could put some numbers on those possibilities: has the goods (60%?); doesn’t have them (10%?); has qualms (60% + 20%?); waiting for an opportune time to spring the information (60% + 30%?)?

Not an easy thing to assess those types of probabilities as they aren’t easily quantifiable. But, considering that the credibility of that Skeptic Women petition hinges on that – at least to some extent – I would say there is some justification if not urgency to take a stab at doing so. Particularly since many people are likely to be making a subjective – and possibly erroneous – “calculation” of that regardless of what the truth might be.

Waiting for EBW is like waiting to open a Christmas present. :(

Skep tickle wrote:

codelette wrote:...Going back to a commentary about both men and women being responsible for pregnancy after consensual sex. Yes, it is that simple. You fuck from someone of the opposite sex there's a big chance of pregnancy resulting from the exchange of fluids. So, if you want to 100% sure that you don't want to deal with pregnancy: don't have sex. This discussion's being around men; but it also applies to women.

I'll give that to the MGTOW separatists; at least they acknowledge that one of the consequences of heterosexual sex is a possible pregnancy and that's they want to avoid it.

Admitting to a pet peeve here: talk about sex and pregnancy as if "sex" and "reproduction" are each limited to penis-in-vagina intercourse between 2 fertile people. Obviously that's a practical shortcut; it's how reproduction almost always happens and that's what sex often is...but even so, pet peeve activated, I've been gritting my teeth through the pregnancy discussion, also recognizing that it gets pedantic if I join the conversation and keep pointing that out.

So, codelette, thanks from me for including "opposite sex" and "heterosexual sex" in your comment above.

There's oral sex, mutual masturbation, foot jobs, jerking each other off, titty fucking, and anal to name just a few. If the extent of your ideas regarding sex is just plain old, stick it in her hooha, wiggle a bit then roll over and go to sleep, you've obviously not been using the Internet as Al Gore (PBUH) intended.

I'll go fuck off now.

I think that EBW is indeed telling the truth about having proof for the coup d'eta. Notice how Watson, Zvan and Hensley have keep quiet about that tidbit. They are WAY too quiet. Melody even said on her FB that the whole replacement thing wasn't her idea. Lemme see if I can find that comment.

AndrewV69 wrote:
Gets tedious after awhile.

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/ ... 32wvyv.jpg

rayshul wrote:Waiting for EBW is like waiting to open a Christmas present. :(

I would comment but I've been instructed by the powers that be not mention u-know-who. I did talk about her with Reap last December in the podcast linked in my sig, however.

W.E.
(Still on probation)

AndrewV69 wrote:
One day many years ago before I got married, my girlfriend at the time informed me that she thought she was pregnant.

I recoiled when she said she wanted an abortion. Nonetheless I offered to pay my share of the costs. Fortunately it turned out she was not preggers, but we broke up shortly after that because among other things I could not get over the fact that she would have aborted my child.

Doesn't sound like there was much discussion, which is all any party to pregnancy can reasonably expect.

In fact, it sounds like she wanted an abortion, you immediately caved, paid for it, but then had a passive-aggressive tsunami (poor you!) not because she didn't want a child, but because she didn't think little squiggly Andrew hitting her egg was the best thing to happen since God ear-fucked Mary.

Just an observation based on your initial report. You can explain further, but I care fuck all about revisionism.

Mykeru wrote:

AndrewV69 wrote:
One day many years ago before I got married, my girlfriend at the time informed me that she thought she was pregnant.

I recoiled when she said she wanted an abortion. Nonetheless I offered to pay my share of the costs. Fortunately it turned out she was not preggers, but we broke up shortly after that because among other things I could not get over the fact that she would have aborted my child.

Doesn't sound like there was much discussion, which is all any party to pregnancy can reasonably expect.

In fact, it sounds like she wanted an abortion, you immediately caved, paid for it, but then had a passive-aggressive tsunami (poor you!) not because she didn't want a child, but because she didn't think little squiggly Andrew hitting her egg was the best thing to happen since God ear-fucked Mary.

Just an observation based on your initial report. You can explain further, but I care fuck all about revisionism.

More dimestore analysis. :naughty:

another lurker wrote:
Gumby, it could be far, far worse.

I could be re-posting this original Gumby photoshop:

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 0bd792.jpg

Fuck sending Justin to conferences, we need to have a fundraiser to buy him some less revealing clothes.

*shudder*

welch wrote:

Steersman wrote: <snip>
Although I suppose one might quibble over the connotations of getting Lindsay fired versus “wanting to replace Lindsay with Watson or Hensley”. Or it might be quite significant.

You really have no concept of fun. The fun is letting your opponent, so sure you don't have the other two aces, over extend themselves, maybe even talking a bunch of shit first.

http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/5141/zmq.png

h:t/ bhoytony

However, I find it generally useful to separate business and pleasure – except where there’s some natural overlap. And in this case my impression is that the former outweighs the latter – and by a substantial margin. While it might be fun to see or entertain the idea of “them” in damage-control mode scurrying around like ants in pile you’ve just poked, the costs to the credibility of various people from the spread of “mis-information” would seem to be of more importance.

codelette wrote:I think that EBW is indeed telling the truth about having proof for the coup d'eta. Notice how Watson, Zvan and Hensley have keep quiet about that tidbit. They are WAY too quiet. Melody even said on her FB that the whole replacement thing wasn't her idea. Lemme see if I can find that comment.

You might take a look at this. And this.

But this at least from the former looks rather short of an effort to actually get Lindsay fired:

Amanda Marcotte @AmandaMarcotte
I spoke to several dozen people last night, and every one had the same point: they cannot support CFI if @RALindsay stays as leader.

Although on the premise of “where there’s smoke there’s fire”, one might conjecture that those “several dozen people” would have had plans afoot to hatch something more. The extent of which is, of course, moot.

Walter Ego wrote:

rayshul wrote:Waiting for EBW is like waiting to open a Christmas present. :(

I would comment but I've been instructed by the powers that be not mention u-know-who. I did talk about her with Reap last December in the podcast linked in my sig, however.

W.E.
(Still on probation)

Jesus wept, I'm beginning to agree with the "creepy" description.

bhoytony wrote:

Walter Ego wrote:

rayshul wrote:Waiting for EBW is like waiting to open a Christmas present. :(

I would comment but I've been instructed by the powers that be not mention u-know-who. I did talk about her with Reap last December in the podcast linked in my sig, however.

W.E.
(Still on probation)

Jesus wept, I'm beginning to agree with the "creepy" description.

You would think his sitting in a pantload of his own shit would take his mind off Ellenbeth Wachs. And you'd be wrong.

Looks like Lindsay has a few more words about WIS 2.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/e ... k_at_wis2/

Benson says Lindsay's latest is enough to try and end the "war." Time for the FTBullies to claim victory?

Whig wrote:Looks like Lindsay has a few more words about WIS 2.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/e ... k_at_wis2/

FAIL

bhoytony wrote:

Walter Ego wrote:

rayshul wrote:Waiting for EBW is like waiting to open a Christmas present. :(

I would comment but I've been instructed by the powers that be not mention u-know-who. I did talk about her with Reap last December in the podcast linked in my sig, however.

W.E.
(Still on probation)

Jesus wept, I'm beginning to agree with the "creepy" description.

Have you ever been grossly mischaracterized, slandered, or accused, wrongly, of something of something you didn’t do? I have been tagged, on no evidence whatsoever, as a mentally ill stalker and it’s pissing me off.

Have you ever had to defend yourself against false accusations?

If you find me creepy, put me on ignore, it won’t hurt my feelings a bit.

I patched up my differences with EBW last year and there is no reason I shouldn’t talk about her if I want to. So fuck you buddy.

I think it's a win for CFI. FTB is sort of forced to accept the apology since they want to counter the claim that no apology would be good enough-- and CFI saves a bunch of money by not having to fund skepticon.

Whig wrote:Looks like Lindsay has a few more words about WIS 2.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/e ... k_at_wis2/

Cut and dry and no comments allowed. Smart move!

Mykeru wrote:

bhoytony wrote:

Walter Ego wrote:

rayshul wrote:Waiting for EBW is like waiting to open a Christmas present. :(

I would comment but I've been instructed by the powers that be not mention u-know-who. I did talk about her with Reap last December in the podcast linked in my sig, however.

W.E.
(Still on probation)

Jesus wept, I'm beginning to agree with the "creepy" description.

You would think his sitting in a pantload of his own shit would take his mind off Ellenbeth Wachs. And you'd be wrong.

I resemble that. EB and I are getting married in September so watch your lip, buddy. She likes my pantload. It's my best quality.

Mykeru wrote:

AndrewV69 wrote:
One day many years ago before I got married, my girlfriend at the time informed me that she thought she was pregnant.

I recoiled when she said she wanted an abortion. Nonetheless I offered to pay my share of the costs. Fortunately it turned out she was not preggers, but we broke up shortly after that because among other things I could not get over the fact that she would have aborted my child.

Doesn't sound like there was much discussion, which is all any party to pregnancy can reasonably expect.

In fact, it sounds like she wanted an abortion, you immediately caved, paid for it, but then had a passive-aggressive tsunami (poor you!) not because she didn't want a child, but because she didn't think little squiggly Andrew hitting her egg was the best thing to happen since God ear-fucked Mary.

Just an observation based on your initial report. You can explain further, but I care fuck all about revisionism.

Huh? What is there to revise? It was exactly what it was.

It was the discontinuity between my assumptions and my primitive (for want of a better word) reaction to the reality that really stood out to me.

The moral of the story (to my mind anyway) is that it is easy to talk the talk. Walking it can be a bitch. Not to mention that sometimes you (or I in this case) really sometimes have no clue how you are actually going to react when the chips are down.

bhoytony wrote:

Walter Ego wrote:

rayshul wrote:Waiting for EBW is like waiting to open a Christmas present. :(

I would comment but I've been instructed by the powers that be not mention u-know-who. I did talk about her with Reap last December in the podcast linked in my sig, however.

W.E.
(Still on probation)

Jesus wept, I'm beginning to agree with the "creepy" description.

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

And we're walking... we're walking...

rayshul wrote:

Whig wrote:Looks like Lindsay has a few more words about WIS 2.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/e ... k_at_wis2/

FAIL

Smart move I'd day. Any further attacks on him will be seen as petulant and it is reasonable to apologise to anyone who was 'made to feel unwelcome' and that it drew criticism. Ultimately he has a responsibility to CFI and while Hensley does not give a jot about them he has to.

Walter Ego wrote:If you find me creepy, put me on ignore, it won’t hurt my feelings a bit.

Done, and I doubt I'm the only one.

Jack wrote:

rayshul wrote:

Whig wrote:Looks like Lindsay has a few more words about WIS 2.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/e ... k_at_wis2/

FAIL

Smart move I'd day. Any further attacks on him will be seen as petulant and it is reasonable to apologise to anyone who was 'made to feel unwelcome' and that it drew criticism. Ultimately he has a responsibility to CFI and while Hensley does not give a jot about them he has to.

As I'm sure will be pointed out by the baboons, he didn't admit that what he said was wrong, he just apologized for the people who took offense:

I am sorry that I caused offense with my talk. I am also sorry I made some people feel unwelcome as a result of my talk. From the letters sent to me and the board, I have a better understanding of the objections to the talk.

I am also sorry that my talk and my actions subjected my colleagues and the organization to which I am devoted to criticism.

It does set a bad precedent, in a way - if they get complaints from psychics, are they going to have to apologize? We're talking about people on the same level as the SJWs after all, although I think most psychics aren't as dishonest.

bhoytony wrote:

Walter Ego wrote:

rayshul wrote:Waiting for EBW is like waiting to open a Christmas present. :(

I would comment but I've been instructed by the powers that be not mention u-know-who. I did talk about her with Reap last December in the podcast linked in my sig, however.

W.E.
(Still on probation)

Jesus wept, I'm beginning to agree with the "creepy" description.

http://i.imgur.com/pj70PEL.png

And we're walking... we're walking...

(Now with fewer spelling errors!)

Badger3k wrote:

Jack wrote:

rayshul wrote:

Whig wrote:Looks like Lindsay has a few more words about WIS 2.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/e ... k_at_wis2/

FAIL

Smart move I'd day. Any further attacks on him will be seen as petulant and it is reasonable to apologise to anyone who was 'made to feel unwelcome' and that it drew criticism. Ultimately he has a responsibility to CFI and while Hensley does not give a jot about them he has to.

As I'm sure will be pointed out by the baboons, he didn't admit that what he said was wrong, he just apologized for the people who took offense:

I am sorry that I caused offense with my talk. I am also sorry I made some people feel unwelcome as a result of my talk. From the letters sent to me and the board, I have a better understanding of the objections to the talk.

I am also sorry that my talk and my actions subjected my colleagues and the organization to which I am devoted to criticism.

It does set a bad precedent, in a way - if they get complaints from psychics, are they going to have to apologize? We're talking about people on the same level as the SJWs after all, although I think most psychics aren't as dishonest.

I can't wait for the religious groups to take advantage of this.

Reap joins Karla Porter and I on Brave Hero Radio tonight at 8PM Eastern!

Listen live, join the live chat, consider calling, and check back -- immediately following the live broadcast -- for the archived show!

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/bravehero/ ... reap-paden

katamari Damassi wrote:

Gumby wrote:

Mykeru wrote:OKay everyone: Lighten up:

25 Funniest Five-Second Films Ever

Some of those were actually quite funny. "Gettin' Laid" was a howler.

Don't you know that every time you laugh at a rape joke, somewhere a feminist is triggered?

If I'm going out, I'm going out blazin'

Walter Ego wrote: I have been tagged, on no evidence whatsoever, as a mentally ill stalker and it’s pissing me off.

Yes, I can see that is totally wide of the mark, how could anybody think that?

Parody Accountant wrote:

Walter Ego wrote:Here's a video I made today for anyone who's interesting in watching. Viewing is of course optional.

Pro-tip: don't talk about peeing in the sink (and how bad it smells) when you make videos advertising your attempt to sell stuff at your estate sale.

Hope it works out for you and you get some scratch. Glad that your family is coming together to help you like that. Good luck.

Thanks. Actually, my bedroom with all the smelly unwashed sheets smells worse than the bathroom where I pee in the sink. Sorry for those unfair things I said to you earlier.

AndrewV69 wrote:[
Huh? What is there to revise? It was exactly what it was.

[youtube]0tJGk4ofc18[/youtube]

bhoytony wrote:

Tribble wrote:

Karmakin wrote:

LurkerPerson wrote:Sex is the theater of the poor type of thing, and really this forum needs an edit button

You get one when you register.

Mine never works.

You need enter the code to enable it. Just ask for one in the secret back channel.

If he's using Windows he can just delete system 32 and not only will his edit button work but his computer will run MUCH faster.

Walter Ego wrote:

Parody Accountant wrote:

Walter Ego wrote:Here's a video I made today for anyone who's interesting in watching. Viewing is of course optional.

Pro-tip: don't talk about peeing in the sink (and how bad it smells) when you make videos advertising your attempt to sell stuff at your estate sale.

Hope it works out for you and you get some scratch. Glad that your family is coming together to help you like that. Good luck.

Thanks. Actually, my bedroom with all the smelly unwashed sheets smells worse than the bathroom where I pee in the sink. Sorry for those unfair things I said to you earlier.

Just remember to polish up anything you try to sell.

http://theeveningharold.files.wordpress ... t-turd.jpg

Tony Parsehole wrote:

bhoytony wrote:

Tribble wrote:

Karmakin wrote:

LurkerPerson wrote:Sex is the theater of the poor type of thing, and really this forum needs an edit button

You get one when you register.

Mine never works.

You need enter the code to enable it. Just ask for one in the secret back channel.

If he's using Windows he can just delete system 32 and not only will his edit button work but his computer will run MUCH faster.

All bullshit aside trying to confuse the guests, the edit button is indispensable. People posting again and again as a guest and then complaining about not being able to edit like a registered user is just getting on my nerves.

rayshul wrote:
I can't wait for the religious groups to take advantage of this.

Ophelia commented on her post. It was a lot of words for her! The entirety of her post:

With some further remarks on his talk at WiS2.
It’s not a warm document. I wouldn’t call it friendly. But…it might make conversation possible.

I am sorry that I caused offense with my talk. I am also sorry I made some people feel unwelcome as a result of my talk. From the letters sent to me and the board, I have a better understanding of the objections to the talk.
I am also sorry that my talk and my actions subjected my colleagues and the organization to which I am devoted to criticism.
Please accept my apologies.

Ok it’s downright stiff. But it still might make conversation possible. I think that would be better than permanent war.

Now, she wants to talk? Or is it only when it might affect the money she makes speaking and/or writing for them? :think:

Badger3k wrote:

rayshul wrote:
I can't wait for the religious groups to take advantage of this.

Ophelia commented on her post. It was a lot of words for her! The entirety of her post:

With some further remarks on his talk at WiS2.
It’s not a warm document. I wouldn’t call it friendly. But…it might make conversation possible.

I am sorry that I caused offense with my talk. I am also sorry I made some people feel unwelcome as a result of my talk. From the letters sent to me and the board, I have a better understanding of the objections to the talk.
I am also sorry that my talk and my actions subjected my colleagues and the organization to which I am devoted to criticism.
Please accept my apologies.

Ok it’s downright stiff. But it still might make conversation possible. I think that would be better than permanent war.

Now, she wants to talk? Or is it only when it might affect the money she makes speaking and/or writing for them? :think:

Hey, give her a break. When was the last time you think she saw anything stiff?

Jack wrote:

rayshul wrote:

Whig wrote:Looks like Lindsay has a few more words about WIS 2.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/e ... k_at_wis2/

FAIL

Smart move I'd day. Any further attacks on him will be seen as petulant and it is reasonable to apologise to anyone who was 'made to feel unwelcome' and that it drew criticism. Ultimately he has a responsibility to CFI and while Hensley does not give a jot about them he has to.

Ophelia is already editing comments that seem favorable towards Lindsay's post. Nothing Lindsay does, short of groveling at the feet of the biggest diva cups amongst them and licking their toes, will begin to satisfy them. They're convinced they're running the show, or should be in a "just world," and they'll twist the narrative accordingly. I think it takes a massive sense of entitlement and a lot of free time to manage agitprop of that type.

rayshul wrote:

Whig wrote:Looks like Lindsay has a few more words about WIS 2.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/e ... k_at_wis2/

FAIL

Yep ... that's enough for FtB to claim that he has become contrite enough to now grovel at their feet for full forgiveness

Oh and Oaphy appears to already be doing so

Badger3k wrote:

Jack wrote:

rayshul wrote:

Whig wrote:Looks like Lindsay has a few more words about WIS 2.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/e ... k_at_wis2/

FAIL

Smart move I'd day. Any further attacks on him will be seen as petulant and it is reasonable to apologise to anyone who was 'made to feel unwelcome' and that it drew criticism. Ultimately he has a responsibility to CFI and while Hensley does not give a jot about them he has to.

As I'm sure will be pointed out by the baboons, he didn't admit that what he said was wrong, he just apologized for the people who took offense:

I am sorry that I caused offense with my talk. I am also sorry I made some people feel unwelcome as a result of my talk. From the letters sent to me and the board, I have a better understanding of the objections to the talk.

I am also sorry that my talk and my actions subjected my colleagues and the organization to which I am devoted to criticism.

It does set a bad precedent, in a way - if they get complaints from psychics, are they going to have to apologize? We're talking about people on the same level as the SJWs after all, although I think most psychics aren't as dishonest.

Well it may set a precedent but I think that can be largely ignored as people such as psychics are not part of the A/S movement.

One thing that brings up though is the fact that most SJW versions of their conference policies would prohibit them from criticising any religion or belief system at all if only one person complains about it. They shoot themselves in the foot by demanding such policies which would also prohibit them from speaking. Once any religious group gets wise to this they will happily plant someone to ensure that happens. I expect those SJW's to give a full apology too.

Mykeru wrote:

AndrewV69 wrote:[
Huh? What is there to revise? It was exactly what it was.

0tJGk4ofc18

LOL. OK I take that as sarcasm.

To me "her body her choice" meant exactly that. She made her decision and my input as far as I was concerned was surplus to requirements at that point. This is what body autonomy means to me. What was there to discuss?

Explain it to me.

justinvacula wrote:Reap joins Karla Porter and I on Brave Hero Radio tonight at 8PM Eastern!

Listen live, join the live chat, consider calling, and check back -- immediately following the live broadcast -- for the archived show!

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/bravehero/ ... reap-paden

... and nothing whatsoever was learned.