Bleeding from the Bunghole

[John Greg]

Elyse Anders says:

Ben Radford wants to make sure Shermer has lots of money to fight lyin' crazy bitches who don't appreciate good cock

Is she out of her fucking mind? That's what she gets out of this? WTF?!? I don't even....

[John Greg]

By the way, I am not ceepolk, but I sure wish I could say I was. What fun that would be if ceepolk did turn out to be a (the?) poe.

[Brive1987]

Atheism Doesn't have have to lead to anything of course, and you are not compelled to believe anything. I'm just saying to me it is logical if there is no god to look for value in humans because that is all we have, and that tends to lead to a general humanist perspective on life. I'm sure the spectrum ranges from all extremes though, from nihilists to rampant A plusers. Whatever floats your boat, as long as I have the freedom to mock, point and laugh.

[AndrewV69]

White on black is (like a website linked to here, can't remember which one) painful to read and horrible web design as well. The black smileys in the image - I can't make heads or tails of them.

Just my take.

That might have been me linking to Obsidian. I read his articles in my RSS feed otherwise I would go blind.

[LurkerPerson]

"Against the assault of laughter, nothing can stand", as per a pitter's sig quote of Mark Twain.

[rayshul]

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 8f7339.png

Surely the first response there should be calling the police.

[LurkerPerson]

The police would probably slut-shame her by asking deep, probing personal questions, like "WTF are you doing wandering naked and drunk on the streets" that could trigger the poor person into a quivering pile of self-loathing, or possibly rape her themselves. As well all know they are nothing more than a tool of Teh Patriarchy.

[Tony Parsehole]

Ha! Tweet tags worked for the same time. Thank you Tweet tag fairies.

You are fast becoming the most chucklesome person on this forum.

[AndrewV69]

@Steers,

OK you are a fucking machine. I just finished reading the follow comments from imnotandrei (Stephanie N.) and your responses.

Well done sir. You have a lot more patience than I do to say the least. Also, I find your prose easier to read that insufferable egomaniac Socrates (as portrayed by Plato any rate). If you are not sure if that was a compliment, I assure you it is (in a sort of back handed way at any rate).

[Gefan]

Ceepolk is no longer moderating at A+ ?

Hmmmm.....


EXTERIOR - DAY: CEEPOLK'S HOUSE

A ground floor window is open. Threadbare drapes stir gently in the breeze.

A enraged shriek from an unseen source within:

"You're banned!"

A cat comes flying through the window. The camera follows its graceful arc until it lands amongst a pack of other cats staring bemusedly back at the house.

Pause.

OFFSCREEN:

"You're banned!"

[AndrewV69]

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 8f7339.png

Surely the first response there should be calling the police.

But on who? The woman in the foreground or the guy in the background who looks to me as if he is peeing in his pants. Better arrest them both to be sure if you ask me.

[Tony Parsehole]

Ceepolk is no longer moderating at A+ ?

Hmmmm.....


EXTERIOR - DAY: CEEPOLK'S HOUSE

A ground floor window is open. Threadbare drapes stir gently in the breeze.

A enraged shriek from an unseen source within:

"You're banned!"

A cat comes flying through the window. The camera follows its graceful arc until it lands amongst a pack of other cats staring bemusedly back at the house.

Pause.

OFFSCREEN:

"You're banned!"

*proceeds to drink a litre of Jack Daniels, strip naked and wander around near cliff edges shouting "Come at me bro!" to any passing men.*

[LurkerPerson]

Good point, this does seem to assume that a male getting drunk then wandering naked through the streets has absolutely nothing to fear. I'd think indecent exposure charges for one, and probably being placed on the sex offender's registry. If you don't get 50 shades of blue beaten out of you first by bystanders for being a deranged creep sexually assaulting grandma with an open view of your frank n' beans.
What was that guy's name, the one who launched the whole Kony website thing, who was then found on a cocaine binge or something, naked on a street corner hammering the ground like a gorilla? He should get in contact with A+ with his story of shameful abuse by society. Can't a person simply wander the streets naked under the influence of drugs anymore?

[Steersman]

@Steers,

OK you are a fucking machine. I just finished reading the follow comments from imnotandrei (Stephanie N.) and your responses.

Well done sir. You have a lot more patience than I do to say the least. Also, I find your prose easier to read that insufferable egomaniac Socrates (as portrayed by Plato any rate). If you are not sure if that was a compliment, I assure you it is (in a sort of back handed way at any rate).

Thanks Andrew. Maybe my efforts to reduce the "verbiage" [ ;) ] are paying a few dividends.

But I assume you mean this comment of hers and this response of mine - the different time stamps on the different boards along with the time zones makes it a little difficult to be sure.

[Dave2]

There is something to "use by date" for both women and gay men, and maybe straight men, in that there is a short period of time when they can get by solely by their looks.

I doubt "solely" depending on what you mean by "get by" - though I take your point that looks are a significant asset in looking for a mate.

However, the context was that a woman in her late 20s (with a boyfriend) and a woman in her early 30s (with a boyfriend) were under some sort of "better get a move on" situation if they didn't want to become mad old cat lady spinsters or something.

And, besides a general feeling that it's anyone's right to become a mad old spinster (cats optional, I'm not fond of them personally) it's all just a bit ludicrous, I reckon.

[rayshul]

Atheism Doesn't have have to lead to anything of course, and you are not compelled to believe anything. I'm just saying to me it is logical if there is no god to look for value in humans because that is all we have, and that tends to lead to a general humanist perspective on life. I'm sure the spectrum ranges from all extremes though, from nihilists to rampant A plusers. Whatever floats your boat, as long as I have the freedom to mock, point and laugh.

I'll say what I've learned from watching this - that if there's one thing atheism DOESN'T lead to, it's scepticism. In fact atheism seems in no way a deterrent against crazy dogma and in fact seems to make people more susceptible to other strains of woo or extreme politics if they haven't already been taken over by religion. I'd go so far as to say that having organised religion may protect you against the wilder dogmas - when I look at the people who've adopted radfem thought, they are invariably atheists.

A decent chunk of atheists seem to naturally be inclined toward wanting to believe in something, whether it's a series of arbitrary rules or cultural/social mores, and want to force people to adopt their beliefs in the same way as a religion would.

I've learned from A+ that milder, moderate religion is probably a better option for some people.

[Linus]

Ceepolk is no longer moderating at A+ ?

Hmmmm.....


EXTERIOR - DAY: CEEPOLK'S HOUSE

A ground floor window is open. Threadbare drapes stir gently in the breeze.

A enraged shriek from an unseen source within:

"You're banned!"

A cat comes flying through the window. The camera follows its graceful arc until it lands amongst a pack of other cats staring bemusedly back at the house.

Pause.

OFFSCREEN:

"You're banned!"

[youtube]4D-456BT0A8[/youtube]

[Tony Parsehole]

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

Huh? Most of them are clearly Asian.

LOL!

[Linus]

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 8f7339.png

Um she's not wrong. "Should be able to" != "it's smart to"

[Za-zen]

Atheism Doesn't have have to lead to anything of course, and you are not compelled to believe anything. I'm just saying to me it is logical if there is no god to look for value in humans because that is all we have, and that tends to lead to a general humanist perspective on life. I'm sure the spectrum ranges from all extremes though, from nihilists to rampant A plusers. Whatever floats your boat, as long as I have the freedom to mock, point and laugh.

I'll say what I've learned from watching this - that if there's one thing atheism DOESN'T lead to, it's scepticism. In fact atheism seems in no way a deterrent against crazy dogma and in fact seems to make people more susceptible to other strains of woo or extreme politics if they haven't already been taken over by religion. I'd go so far as to say that having organised religion may protect you against the wilder dogmas - when I look at the people who've adopted radfem thought, they are invariably atheists.

A decent chunk of atheists seem to naturally be inclined toward wanting to believe in something, whether it's a series of arbitrary rules or cultural/social mores, and want to force people to adopt their beliefs in the same way as a religion would.

I've learned from A+ that milder, moderate religion is probably a better option for some people.

The absurd nature of the human condition. There must be an organising truth to this existence! My new ideology explains it! I have purpose again in my life, therefore my life is purposeful! I am purposeful! I am somebody!

[youtube]owx3ao42kwI[/youtube]

[Reap]

Here's an opinion about Dick Carrier's blab blab blabbing. -
http://atheiststoday.com/blogs/reapercussions/?p=304

In case you were interested

[rayshul]

There is something to "use by date" for both women and gay men, and maybe straight men, in that there is a short period of time when they can get by solely by their looks.

I doubt "solely" depending on what you mean by "get by" - though I take your point that looks are a significant asset in looking for a mate.

However, the context was that a woman in her late 20s (with a boyfriend) and a woman in her early 30s (with a boyfriend) were under some sort of "better get a move on" situation if they didn't want to become mad old cat lady spinsters or something.

And, besides a general feeling that it's anyone's right to become a mad old spinster (cats optional, I'm not fond of them personally) it's all just a bit ludicrous, I reckon.

When I heard the argument about use by date from a feminist it wasn't about getting a date but about getting "stuff", generally - better jobs, better treatment, all that kind of stuff. It's jealousy/envy that's not necessarily about sex or relationships but about perceived treatment. In some ways I can buy that argument - if only because it relies on very vague concepts and very vague definitions of stuff.

But I think that you get better treatment everywhere if you smile and project happiness. And it doesn't matter if you're sinfully ugly or beautiful as all fuck. And that might be just me being idealistic but that does seem to be what happens.

[TedDahlberg]

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 8f7339.png

Surely the first response there should be calling the police.

And isn't that post psycopath-shaming?

[Za-zen]

Here's an opinion about Dick Carrier's blab blab blabbing. -
http://atheiststoday.com/blogs/reapercussions/?p=304

In case you were interested

Dick is throwing smoke, or else like xxxtina fails to understand the central point. Rape is in fact a criminal charge. Rape has a specific legal definition, that definition varies dependent upon jurisdiction, because it is a fucking legal term.

Lets get this straight! Mr shermer has been accused of committing a criminal act, in this instance, rape, so it is not up to the intellectual pea shooter of carrier or myers or any of the rest of the fuckwit blogs to decide upon the burden of proof, or the level of evidence required to decide upon the probability of Shermer's guilt or innocence, you don't get to declare someone guilty of rape, you fucking morons.

[Kevin Solway]

Atheism leads to humanism

Not believing in the existence of a God leads to humanism? I don't see how.

[jmpea81]

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

Wouldn't that be some sort of racist cultural appropriation? Worse than Avatar and white rappers for sure? I'm confuzzled.

[deLurch]

MEN! Men jumping! Fighting! Shooting! Being police officers! Being suspects! Woman crying. Girls getting kidnapped. MEN GETTING SHIT DONE!

JESUS CHRIST, HOW DARE PEOPLE MAKE WORKS OF FICTION FOR A MALE AUDIENCE! FUCKING MISOGYNIST BASTARDS.

I sighed to my boyfriend yesterday

BTW I HAVE A BF XD XD XD XD

Yes. She has a boyfriend... How do you break up with a Watson and not get called a rapist or misogynist... She has his balls in a vice for a long time to come... Suddenly, walking into traffic sounds like a sane safe way out of the relationship...

[ianfc]

Guido is pretty good http://www.amusingplanet.com/2011/07/ha ... niele.html

http://lh3.ggpht.com/-gAAR1piaG8g/TimgJ ... imgmax=800

[Ape+lust]

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

[deLurch]

Is it necessary to be so condescending?

Sorry if I came off as being harsh towards you. That was not my intention.

How about a glass of wine to make it up to you?

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

[Hunt]

Just as a side note, two things that annoy the fuck out of me about Myers's writing habit is prefacing everything he thinks might be clever with "Wait..." And also his almost daily habit of framing things jocularly in terms of conquest or authority. "Now we're taking over..." "Now I'm really torturing my students into..." Either it's not really a joke and that's actually how he views himself, or it's a really, really tired writing tick that he need to just give a rest.

[Hunt]

I'll go out on a limb and bet my favorite cat that within two days Myers either makes a post that includes "Wait..." (with ellipsis) or an oblique reference to torturing his students.

[deLurch]

But, as I’ve argued before, I think that is part of the problem with “Atheism” itself – somewhat of a lack of vision. While “utopianism” has its flaws, I’m not sure that something like that isn’t necessary to combat religion, at least Christianity and Islam.

Atheism will never offer up much of anything. You will need to adopt an actual philosophy or religion to get more. Humanism? Free Thought (if that hasn't already been tarnished)?

[Ape+lust]

Just as a side note, two things that annoy the fuck out of me about Myers's writing habit is prefacing everything he thinks might be clever with "Wait..." And also his almost daily habit of framing things jocularly in terms of conquest or authority. "Now we're taking over..." "Now I'm really torturing my students into..." Either it's not really a joke and that's actually how he views himself, or it's a really, really tired writing tick that he need to just give a rest.

Oh, man. Or whenever he shows up in a stablemate's thread and it's "Wait... I thought you were pulling strings from your seekrit world domination headquarters..."

Then they'll bat it around for 3 or 4 posts, because it's just so funny every single time they do it. They're all such cautions.

[Brive1987]

Atheism leads to humanism

Not believing in the existence of a God leads to humanism? I don't see how.

Atheism doesnt entail humanism - just is very logically compatible.

Like I said you can be any sort of atheist you want, apathetic, nihilistic, SJW.

I find that if I want a personal world view and attendant ethical framework, and if I want something positive out of this physical experience then it has to come from my interactions with fellow humans.

Therefore I try to reject those Ideas that belittle the human experience. Hence I can sympathise with the goals of much of SJ - equality, my definition of justice etc.

I just think the models and ideologies of A+ and RadFem are completely inappropriate real world concepts. And most of the proponents are pompous gits. I tend to find myself between stools, I think PZ is dangerous and stupid, Ron Lindsay was professionally inept a) to get involved with WiS and b) once involved to act like he did and KPorter was wrong in principle to engage with Westboro. Most of A+ are cultists. Yep, I guess I find to be cranky about. :lol:

[Pitchguest]

Just as a side note, two things that annoy the fuck out of me about Myers's writing habit is prefacing everything he thinks might be clever with "Wait..." And also his almost daily habit of framing things jocularly in terms of conquest or authority. "Now we're taking over..." "Now I'm really torturing my students into..." Either it's not really a joke and that's actually how he views himself, or it's a really, really tired writing tick that he need to just give a rest.

Oh, man. Or whenever he shows up in a stablemate's thread and it's "Wait... I thought you were pulling strings from your seekrit world domination headquarters..."

Then they'll bat it around for 3 or 4 posts, because it's just so funny every single time they do it. They're all such cautions.

Or when they bring up that "freeze peach" meme. Edgy!

[Tulip Eater]

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

You know, he's been talking about being divorced from the skeptic community a long time now. And recently, even before Shermer, he's been talking about how shit the atheist community is (sometimes "part of", a lot of the time as a blanket statement).. I get the feeling this is the passive aggressive solution; "I can't quit, fire me!".

Of course the bonus is you get to paint yourself as a victim of the terrible atheist and skeptic communities in perpetuity.

[Liesmith]

I can't even keep up with all the towering monuments of What The Fuck that spring up at FTB anymore, I don't know how you folks here have such a high tolerance.

[Ape+lust]

Or when they bring up that "freeze peach" meme. Edgy!

Android humor. Like Data from Starch Wreck.

[Dave]

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 8f7339.png

Um she's not wrong. "Should be able to" != "it's smart to"

What bugs me about that quote is her expectation that others will care for her. Dont get me wrong, I go out of my way for others all the time: I stop to help people on the side of the street, Ive waded into fights between strangers to break them up, I spend a significant amount of time and money on charity. But thats my choice, not my duty. Take care of yourself, dont expect others to do it for you. The most she should expect from anyone is indifference, possibly a call to the authorities, who do have a duty to care for people. While I would prefer to live in a world where more people would do so, if someone goes out of their way to help her, thats a credit to them, not their obligation to her.

[Karmakin]

Hi everybody! I've been really busy over the last few days, switching jobs and all that (yay), so I haven't had too much time to chime in so I might be behind the curve here. But here's my take on the JT thing.

To the newbies here, way back when I was on the other side. Pre-A+. (A+ was a massive red flag/warning klaxon/sirens going off). When the whole harassment policy thing flared up, one of the things that came up was that JT was a very touchy-feely person. Something that would obviously violate a lot of reasonable, sensible anti-harassment policies. But the big players, his friends, made excuses for it.

What's clear in retrospect, is that it's not that the behavior is wrong. It's that the identity is wrong. Actually it's not so much in retrospect, as I made the argument at the time that a sensible anti-harassment policy needs to outlay the behaviors that it says are wrong and to enforce them fairly and equally across the board. A lot of push-back against that sensible idea. JT had the right tribal identity, so his behavior was acceptable.

Then, he was pushed a bit away from the tribe. So everything became fair game. What was previously acceptable suddenly became unacceptable.

Ethics based upon identity are not ethics at all.

It's the same thing with the Shermer thing. I don't think I'd agree with it (I'll be honest..don't have skin in the game myself as a non-drinker), but at the very least I would have a little bit of respect if the argument they are making is that alcohol is dangerous in social situations and that the common social script of drinking then having sex is something that should be changed. I wouldn't agree with it, but at least it's a fucking ethos. But all it is a tribal game where the "right" people can do everything they want to do and the "wrong" people need to walk on fucking eggshells all the time lest they hurt in any way shape or form the right people.

[Gumby]

Um she's not wrong. "Should be able to" != "it's smart to"

No, technically, from a pie-in-the-sky utopian perspective, she's not wrong. Hell, I want to live in a perfect world too. She gets mocked for it because she's incensed that this imaginary world does not exist right now, just because she wants it that way and lashes out angrily because it isn't that way (and likely never will be). She and the other loons at the A+ forum are great at demanding the way things should be, but they want the world to just magically change to their liking without them doing a damned thing. They'd rather just angrily sulk in their playpen and bitch, bitch, bitch how awful the world is and how if they were in charge by golly things would be perfect. They pretend they are the embodiment of the saying "be the change you want to see in this world", when in reality they just sit around and wail.

My pic was more of an indictment against the overall do-nothing angry toddler mentality of Ceepolk and A+ than it is an indictment of a simple wish for a better world.

[Pitchguest]

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 8f7339.png

Um she's not wrong. "Should be able to" != "it's smart to"

What bugs me about that quote is her expectation that others will care for her. Dont get me wrong, I go out of my way for others all the time: I stop to help people on the side of the street, Ive waded into fights between strangers to break them up, I spend a significant amount of time and money on charity. But thats my choice, not my duty. Take care of yourself, dont expect others to do it for you. The most she should expect from anyone is indifference, possibly a call to the authorities, who do have a duty to care for people. While I would prefer to live in a world where more people would do so, if someone goes out of their way to help her, thats a credit to them, not their obligation to her.

Yeah, well, what she's describing isn't just others caring for her; it's utopia. I should be able to walk to the beach and have a wank without anyone calling the fuzz on me for "improper exposure." The world just isn't that simple. To say "I should be able to ..." is all well and good, but that's all for naught if you don't apply the reality check.

[Pitchguest]

Um she's not wrong. "Should be able to" != "it's smart to"

No, technically, from a pie-in-the-sky utopian perspective, she's not wrong. Hell, I want to live in a perfect world too. She gets mocked for it because she's incensed that this imaginary world does not exist right now, just because she wants it that way and lashes out angrily because it isn't that way (and likely never will be). She and the other loons at the A+ forum are great at demanding the way things should be, but they want the world to just magically change to their liking without them doing a damned thing. They'd rather just angrily sulk in their playpen and bitch, bitch, bitch how awful the world is and how if they were in charge by golly things would be perfect. They pretend they are the embodiment of the saying "be the change you want to see in this world", when in reality they just sit around and wail.

My pic was more of an indictment against the overall do-nothing angry toddler mentality of Ceepolk and A+ than it is an indictment of a simple wish for a better world.

Ninjaed by Gumby. My sentiments exactly.

[Karmakin]

Um she's not wrong. "Should be able to" != "it's smart to"

No, technically, from a pie-in-the-sky utopian perspective, she's not wrong. Hell, I want to live in a perfect world too. She gets mocked for it because she's incensed that this imaginary world does not exist right now, just because she wants it that way and lashes out angrily because it isn't that way (and likely never will be). She and the other loons at the A+ forum are great at demanding the way things should be, but they want the world to just magically change to their liking without them doing a damned thing. They'd rather just angrily sulk in their playpen and bitch, bitch, bitch how awful the world is and how if they were in charge by golly things would be perfect. They pretend they are the embodiment of the saying "be the change you want to see in this world", when in reality they just sit around and wail.

My pic was more of an indictment against the overall do-nothing angry toddler mentality of Ceepolk and A+ than it is an indictment of a simple wish for a better world.

Or in short, there's no way that Ceepolk would ever treat others the way she wants to be treated. It's not about justice, it's about privilege-claiming.

[Gumby]

What bugs me about that quote is her expectation that others will care for her. Dont get me wrong, I go out of my way for others all the time: I stop to help people on the side of the street, Ive waded into fights between strangers to break them up, I spend a significant amount of time and money on charity. But thats my choice, not my duty. Take care of yourself, dont expect others to do it for you. The most she should expect from anyone is indifference, possibly a call to the authorities, who do have a duty to care for people. While I would prefer to live in a world where more people would do so, if someone goes out of their way to help her, thats a credit to them, not their obligation to her.

Your post reminds me of a gem from the illustrious Setar, who was absolutely furious that the government assistance he gets was not sufficient to fund a lot more staying at home playing video games and smoking weed. He was being serious. He, and Ceepolk, and ischemgeek, and many others on that forum have a sense of entitlement that is simply mind-bloggling.

They all want their perfect little world handed to them by someone else.

[Ape+lust]

You know, he's been talking about being divorced from the skeptic community a long time now. And recently, even before Shermer, he's been talking about how shit the atheist community is (sometimes "part of", a lot of the time as a blanket statement).. I get the feeling this is the passive aggressive solution; "I can't quit, fire me!".

Of course the bonus is you get to paint yourself as a victim of the terrible atheist and skeptic communities in perpetuity.

That's an interesting thought. Recently, he accused Pinker of "scientism." Of course, he defined it to mean that Pinker thought modes of exploration like philosophy were useless and never added to the store of knowledge. But still, for all the times he's howled and bristled at mere mention of the word, hearing him use it lifted my eyebrows over my head. Up next -- "other ways of knowing"? Contrarianism as an exit strategy?

[Brive1987]

Just as a side note, two things that annoy the fuck out of me about Myers's writing habit is prefacing everything he thinks might be clever with "Wait..." And also his almost daily habit of framing things jocularly in terms of conquest or authority. "Now we're taking over..." "Now I'm really torturing my students into..." Either it's not really a joke and that's actually how he views himself, or it's a really, really tired writing tick that he need to just give a rest.

Oh, man. Or whenever he shows up in a stablemate's thread and it's "Wait... I thought you were pulling strings from your seekrit world domination headquarters..."

Then they'll bat it around for 3 or 4 posts, because it's just so funny every single time they do it. They're all such cautions.

Or when they bring up that "freeze peach" meme. Edgy!

I can't figure out the purpose of the FtB commenting section. I see it as a Venus Fly trap luring victims in with the stench of rotten meat before the Caines and Sallys descend for their feed.

[Gumby]

Ceepolk's perfect world.

[youtube]PO8C4Q2RS3Q[/youtube]

[rayshul]

Her scenario is an intoxicated person who is exposing themselves in a public place. So they're committing a crime, and they're posing a danger to the public and themselves. I mean I get that y'all are like oh poor thing etc but... the reality? You call the police. Within reason you could probably try to make sure they don't hurt anyone else or at least keep them contained but... fuhkfhkhkhk.

[youtube]jIZUHT5hyTQ[/youtube]

FUCK THE LAW AM I RITE?!?!?!

Fucking A+, seriously, it's like they don't even have the basic understanding of how the world works.

[deLurch]

Rather than do a lot of typing I'll simply post this as my take on utopia.

[youtube]P7xB1Jubc6s[/youtube]

That was awesome! Do you allow it to be embedded and shared? That line was epic: “ultimately, the only thing that makes the world a better place is enough individuals striving to be better people”

Feel free to share, embed or even steal it, it ain't nailed down. :D

Which brings us back to this.

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 795998.jpg

[Cunt of Personality]

I can't even keep up with all the towering monuments of What The Fuck that spring up at FTB anymore, I don't know how you folks here have such a high tolerance.

What's not to love about it? You don't have to do anything. Just sit back and watch the parts falling off the clown car.

[Gumby]

Well, Jen's off the hook for this one. Here is proof positive that Jen McCreight did NOT steal Michael Shermer's bike.

Trigger warning: Jen McCreight.

[Kevin Solway]

Atheism doesnt entail humanism - just is very logically compatible.

Isn't humanism also compatible with belief in the existence of a God? It all depends what kind of God it is. If a God promotes humanism then theism would be compatible with humanism.

Therefore I try to reject those Ideas that belittle the human experience.

The fact that a person doesn't believe in the existence of a God doesn't tell us anything about whether or not they belittle human experience, or reality. The folks at Freethought blogs belittle reality, and human dignity, at least as much as the worst of theistic religion.

Hence I can sympathise with the goals of much of SJ

To the folks at Freethought blogs "social justice" means doing people harm by diagnosing them with mental illnesses, accusing them of rape, or getting them sacked from their job. Their "social justice" is in fact the mob justice of mindless mob.

professionally inept a) to get involved with WiS

I agree with you there. Trying to get those women involved in skepticism spells spells death for skepticism.

[deLurch]

Here's an opinion about Dick Carrier's blab blab blabbing. -
http://atheiststoday.com/blogs/reapercussions/?p=304
In case you were interested

Since Dick can’t get Penthouse to print him his posted this- Michael Shermer: Rapist or Sleaze? - See more at: http://atheiststoday.com/blogs/reapercu ... t28yc.dpuf

Double check that sentence Reap.

[Gefan]

Your post reminds me of a gem from the illustrious Setar, who was absolutely furious that the government assistance he gets was not sufficient to fund a lot more staying at home playing video games and smoking weed. He was being serious. He, and Ceepolk, and ischemgeek, and many others on that forum have a sense of entitlement that is simply mind-bloggling...

Wait a minute. Speaking of Setar...if Ceepolk's no longer moderating - who the hell is babysitting Setar?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_s7Gt2Vc23uU/T ... badkid.jpg

Holy shit! Run!

[Lsuoma]

Well, Jen's off the hook for this one. Here is proof positive that Jen McCreight did NOT steal Michael Shermer's bike.

Trigger warning: Jen McCreight.

Twenty-odd years old and never learned to ride a bike? WTF!!! Did daddy's fucking chauffeurs drive her everywhere?

[deLurch]

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 8f7339.png

Um she's not wrong. "Should be able to" != "it's smart to"

What bugs me about that quote is her expectation that others will care for her. Dont get me wrong, I go out of my way for others all the time: I stop to help people on the side of the street, Ive waded into fights between strangers to break them up, I spend a significant amount of time and money on charity. But thats my choice, not my duty. Take care of yourself, dont expect others to do it for you. The most she should expect from anyone is indifference, possibly a call to the authorities, who do have a duty to care for people. While I would prefer to live in a world where more people would do so, if someone goes out of their way to help her, thats a credit to them, not their obligation to her.

I generally stay the fuck away from crazy.

[Dave]

Her scenario is an intoxicated person who is exposing themselves in a public place. So they're committing a crime, and they're posing a danger to the public and themselves.

Technically two crimes, indecent exposure and public intoxication. Meh. She was talking about her utopia. In *my* utopia, I should be able to run down the street naked, covered in lime jello, alternately puffing on a spliff the size of a baby's arm and taking slugs of Jack from the bottle and it should matter only between me and my neighbor's real estate agent.

[Cunning Punt]

As mentioned in a recent comment here, I did respond to “imnotandrei” – a woman, presumably since she’s also posted there as “Stephanie N.” – by pointing out that “learning rhetoric” has hardly been the focus or motivation for my presence on the Net.

Although I had thought that I should have pointed out that games have a rather credible pedigree – interesting article here, although I’ve only skimmed it, on Game Theory – and of some use in a broad range of applications, particularly ethics and human behaviour. And statistics has its roots in games of chance.

It seemed that way from your response to “imnotandrei”. You said something about who do you learn from, those you best in debate, or something, I forget the exact words.

Especially when you argue about use of the word cunt or nigger. I've never seen you use those words yourself, so I don't know why it's been a favorite subject for you.

“Gendered” insults and splash damage has been and seems to be rather big in FftB/Skepchick/A+ circles which I figure was only self-serving dogma – they seem to be, or were, rather big on insults that supposedly hurt others, but any that supposedly are capable of hurting them are off the table. Which I found, and still find, rather hypocritical to say the least.

I agree. It's a way for them to shame their interlocutor, put them on the defensive, earn victim points, and divert from the thing being discussed. But that just makes the argument about gendered insults moot, because they're just using it, so I don't see the point in engaging that argument. Why not just call them out on their double standards?

So it was sort of a philosophical issue, a question of sauces, geese, and ganders. I generally don’t use them – sort of a “no first use” policy – as I don’t think they contribute much, if anything, to a conversation. However, if others wish to start down that road then I find hauling out the big guns, regardless of whether others think them sexist or racist – as I’ve had to do with Sally Strange and Stephanie Zvan among a few others – tends to impress on them that if they don’t wish to be insulted then they shouldn’t gratuitously insult other people. I generally don’t hand out gratuitous insults – they have to be bought and paid for first …. ;-)