In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#2401

As the topic here recently turned to fetishes then it must be appropriate to post this:

[youtube][/youtube]

Though it is interesting in it's own right.

#2402

On the "nerd porn virtue signalling" topic, this seems relevant:

[youtube][/youtube]

#2403

Really? wrote:
What beautiful art Danielle endorses!

So much MTF transgenderism does seem to come down to internalising ambient man-hate, doesn't it?

#2404

Really? wrote:
deLurch wrote:
ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:It was buy one get one free, to be fair.
Red dress, $46.
http://www.torrid.com/product/ponte-hig ... id=dresses
deLurch, you and I have been on the Pit long enough together that I think it's fair to consider you a friend. I got to thinking about how they can make dresses for $46, buy one, get one free. Do you think that they use exploitative labor?

Now, Torrid has a very strict code of conduct prohibiting discrimination against genderfluid dragonkin...

http://www.torrid.com/torrid/customer-s ... orrid.html

But I'm not seeing much about where their clothes are made and by whom...

They have a very tepid vendor code of conduct...

https://www.torrid.com/torrid/customer- ... glish.html

And by gosh, it looks like Torrid is a subsidiary of another corporation: Hot Topic:

Torrid is an American women's retail chain formerly owned by Hot Topic. While it is still under the same parent umbrella as Hot Topic, in 2015 the company branched off to become Torrid, LLC. The store offers plus-size clothing and accessories for women and teenage girls sizes 10- 30. Torrid began operations in April 2001.[1] The first location opened in the Brea Mall in Brea, California. As of 2016, Torrid has over 400 stores in operation across 36 states in the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrid_(c ... _retailer)

Now, Torrid might dispute that they're a "women's" retail chain, seeing as how anyone of any gender can wear their tents, but I'm not reassured. Were Danielle's dresses made by 8-year-old children who already have arthritis? There's no way to know.

[youtube][/youtube]

#2405

I guess Siouxsie and the Banshees wouldn't be too popular with today's Regressive set

[youtube][/youtube]

#2406

Lovely

#2407

Brive1987 wrote:Lovely

Yeah, how dare people take children to an amusement park designed for children. Don't they know that childless thirty-somethings need their Safe Space there?

#2408

Brive1987 wrote:Lovely

Obviously her current beau feels the same way.

#2409

http://www.dailywire.com/news/18918/exc ... frank-camp

Interesting Islamic conversation there - talks about the idea that Islam is not really salvageable because of it's rules. Kirb what do you think?

#2410

Brive1987 wrote:Lovely

https://www.dulcolax.com/static_resourc ... ftener.png

;)

#2411

rayshul wrote:http://www.dailywire.com/news/18918/exc ... frank-camp

Interesting Islamic conversation there - talks about the idea that Islam is not really salvageable because of it's rules. Kirb what do you think?

I will be triggered if he replies to you before addressing Lakemba.

Grab a number missy.

#2412

Brive1987 wrote:Lovely

https://imgoat.com/uploads/369853df76/33013.jpg

#2413

Brive1987 wrote:Lovely

http://imgur.com/v7EDd1o.jpg.jpg

#2414

rayshul wrote:http://www.dailywire.com/news/18918/exc ... frank-camp

Interesting Islamic conversation there - talks about the idea that Islam is not really salvageable because of it's rules. Kirb what do you think?

I agree with most of what he says. He's right that there's no "radical" Islam, only literalist Islam, which is to say Islam unless you're being creative (which is forbidden by Islam itself). I also very much agree that when Obama said that the Islamic State wasn't islam it was probably the stupidest thing he said, an attempt to court the support of Salafi allies which only looked like weakness.

And of course the fact that "westerners" have lived their lives sheltered by a protective coat of secularism, and so see religions as positive or at worst as bothersome annoyances, not as the only source of order and punishment.

I also agree that Islam, as an idea, is rotten to its core and it requires titanic flies of fancy to be turned into something more humane.

What I don't get is his conversion to Christianity. I find the concepts of Christianity as absurd as those of Islam, and I see countless traces of the dangers within it.

To me Christianity is a caged tiger: good to look at when you're safely outside the bars of its cage, but still not a cuddly pet.

Anyway the aim of society should be to assimilate muslims, to make them part of a melting pot, to make them become secular, just like most Jews did in the US. Of course this is easier to do if they're not coming in droves, if they're highly educated, relatively affluent, and if the Muslim identity politics are treated like the idiocy that they are.

The absolutely worst choice of the "western" left, which is secular and ostensibly progressive, is to excuse the flaws of Islam, to celebrate its regressiveness (gushing for hijabs, saying that Islam is "feminist", supporting Muslim apologists like Sarsour or Aslan, etc.)

Regressive leftists are betraying their own ideals in order to appease to Islam. They're a disgrace and a liability to real progressives, and they're doing it just to be self-righteously smug.

#2415

TheMudbrooker wrote:I'm a bit behind, but I didn't realize they'd done extensive nuclear testing in Scotland
Start at 3:30ish.
[youtube][youtube]

Dude, there are housing estates near me where the residents share a more twisted version of "the Innsmouth look" although I doubt radiation is the culprit. No, it's a stubborn refusal to evolve and (I suspect) inter-breeding with rats that is entirely to blame.

Oh, and just to prove we're as progressive as our Yank cousins, meet the Scottish Danielle...

[youtube][/youtube]

If anything, at least he seems to have a sense of humour...

#2416

Ape+lust wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:Lovely

http://imgur.com/v7EDd1o.jpg.jpg

That typography brings joy to my heart. :clap:

#2417

paddybrown wrote:
Really? wrote:
What beautiful art Danielle endorses!

So much MTF transgenderism does seem to come down to internalising ambient man-hate, doesn't it?

Men are trash but transwomen are 100% made from recycled materials.

#2418

http://imgur.com/fZE9UMS.jpg

#2419

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:That typography brings joy to my heart. :clap:

It should. It's authentic Madison Ave copy. I only added the text inside the balloon :D

#2420

Kirbmarc wrote: What I don't get is his conversion to Christianity. I find the concepts of Christianity as absurd as those of Islam, and I see countless traces of the dangers within it.

It makes sense in some ways. For one, atheist ex-Muslims don't have a good track record of making friends. Swapping to Jesus at least gives you a substitute community. For two, if the reason you left Islam was because of it being incompatible with liberal values, then while doctrine-wise Christianity isn't much better, it's pretty easy to find a church that reflects your values moreso than genuine scriptural literalism.

I have a hunch that if Judaism weren't so cloistered, we might see more conversions in that direction. It would definitely be a bigger political statement for ex-Muslims.

#2421

Kirbmarc wrote:
rayshul wrote:http://www.dailywire.com/news/18918/exc ... frank-camp

Interesting Islamic conversation there - talks about the idea that Islam is not really salvageable because of it's rules. Kirb what do you think?
I agree with most of what he says. He's right that there's no "radical" Islam, only literalist Islam, which is to say Islam unless you're being creative (which is forbidden by Islam itself). I also very much agree that when Obama said that the Islamic State wasn't islam it was probably the stupidest thing he said, an attempt to court the support of Salafi allies which only looked like weakness.

And of course the fact that "westerners" have lived their lives sheltered by a protective coat of secularism, and so see religions as positive or at worst as bothersome annoyances, not as the only source of order and punishment.

I also agree that Islam, as an idea, is rotten to its core and it requires titanic flies of fancy to be turned into something more humane.

What I don't get is his conversion to Christianity. I find the concepts of Christianity as absurd as those of Islam, and I see countless traces of the dangers within it.

To me Christianity is a caged tiger: good to look at when you're safely outside the bars of its cage, but still not a cuddly pet.

Anyway the aim of society should be to assimilate muslims, to make them part of a melting pot, to make them become secular, just like most Jews did in the US. Of course this is easier to do if they're not coming in droves, if they're highly educated, relatively affluent, and if the Muslim identity politics are treated like the idiocy that they are.

The absolutely worst choice of the "western" left, which is secular and ostensibly progressive, is to excuse the flaws of Islam, to celebrate its regressiveness (gushing for hijabs, saying that Islam is "feminist", supporting Muslim apologists like Sarsour or Aslan, etc.)

Regressive leftists are betraying their own ideals in order to appease to Islam. They're a disgrace and a liability to real progressives, and they're doing it just to be self-righteously smug.

That's it. I'm out.

#2422

'Meternich' says the number of genders is infinite, and the TransCrazies start stumbling over the internal contradictions of their dogma:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/transparen ... 3433590981

Oh, and some troll with an nautical-themed nym drops in to talk about sperm and ova.

#2423

Kirbmarc wrote: Yeah, how dare people take children to an amusement park designed for children. Don't they know that childless thirty-somethings need their Safe Space there?

To be somewhat fair to Becky (and I just retched a little) very young children probably aren't having the most fun being carted around in the summer heat. But for families (which often include older children) for whom a trip to Disneyland is a big deal, it can be hard to find someone who can babysit for multiple days in a row. And to be fair to Becky's critics, I don't think she has even a smidgen of concern for the tots so much as she's simply resentful of other people as a rule, crying children not excepted.

#2424

She is delusional - going through life thinking that she is a stand-up comedian. But with none of the talent to back it up.

#2425

Sunder wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote: Yeah, how dare people take children to an amusement park designed for children. Don't they know that childless thirty-somethings need their Safe Space there?
To be somewhat fair to Becky (and I just retched a little) very young children probably aren't having the most fun being carted around in the summer heat. But for families (which often include older children) for whom a trip to Disneyland is a big deal, it can be hard to find someone who can babysit for multiple days in a row. And to be fair to Becky's critics, I don't think she has even a smidgen of concern for the tots so much as she's simply resentful of other people as a rule, crying children not excepted.

I find it weird that she went there as an adult with her adult boyfriend and no kids. It looks like a case of arrested development.

https://pmcdeadline2.files.wordpress.co ... ment-2.jpg

#2426

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:'Meternich' says the number of genders is infinite, and the TransCrazies start stumbling over the internal contradictions of their dogma:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/transparen ... 3433590981

Oh, and some troll with an nautical-themed nym drops in to talk about sperm and ova.

And when Steersbot isn't busy oaring about, he's whoring about

#2427

Brive1987 wrote:The Lakemba Mosque is the largest here in Sydney and services the Lebanese community.

They have a series of short well produced pamphlets on Islam - including one on women.

http://www.lma.org.au/wp-content/upload ... lam_AW.pdf

The central thrust appears to be:

+ Mohammad brought relief to women freeing them from their horrible (8 century) lives.
+ Islam is better than Christianity because it doesn't teach that women delivered original sin
+ Women have full rights - to marry, inherit, contract etc
+ The only difference is that men get all the shit jobs

This appears to be blatant BS. Or have I missed something?

1) Mohammed brought so much relief to women by killing their husbands and forcibly marrying them, or by marrying them when they were six and then having sex with them when they were nine, by marrying them and spending their money, enslaving them and distributing them between his followers, etc. Other people at his times weren't much better than him, but this doesn't mean he was better than them.

2) No, islam only teaches that women are naturally submitted to men like men and women are naturally submitted to Allah. No biggie.

3) They have less right than men. They can't marry without their fathers' or tutors' approval, they inherit less than their male siblings, they have to require male permission (not necessary their husbands') to sign contracts, etc.

4) Men get the shit jobs outside of the house, women however get the shit jobs inside the house, and they better not leave it without permission, especially if they're not dressed in the "right" way, otherwise they can be whipped.

#2428

Ape+lust wrote:http://imgur.com/fZE9UMS.jpg

This is .... disturbing.

#2429

It's the wurst!

#2430

People make too much of the whole "Eve at the fruit first so it's her fault" bullshit. I mean she and her hubby were both supposed to be childlike idiots with no concept of right and wrong, and she was tricked to boot. Not to mention Judaism and Christianity both make a bigger deal about "the sins of the father" than the mother. So acting as if that one story is somehow the root of all misogyny. It's not.

It's also exasperating how often people conflate what religion actually does, which is treat women like children, with misogyny. They're not the same thing and you're never going to solve the problem if you don't even understand it. Society doesn't restrict the freedom of children because it hates them.

#2431

So stop acting as if*

#2432

Sunder wrote:People make too much of the whole "Eve at the fruit first so it's her fault" bullshit. I mean she and her hubby were both supposed to be childlike idiots with no concept of right and wrong, and she was tricked to boot. Not to mention Judaism and Christianity both make a bigger deal about "the sins of the father" than the mother. So acting as if that one story is somehow the root of all misogyny. It's not.

It's also exasperating how often people conflate what religion actually does, which is treat women like children, with misogyny. They're not the same thing and you're never going to solve the problem if you don't even understand it. Society doesn't restrict the freedom of children because it hates them.

Uhm, I think treating adult women like children is "benevolent misogyny", even when feminists do it ("Safe Space! Responsibility is a MRA Code Word!"). Just like treating adult people of a certain ethnicity like children is "benevolent racism", even when the SocJus does it ("Poor POCs don't have to enact the labor of explaining racism to white! We Mighty White Allies can do it in their stead!").

Also religion is also misoginistic when it claims that "immodest" women are evil temptresses and servants of Satan.

#2433

MarcusAu wrote:It's the wurst!

I'm German, I'm used to wurst in any shape and size. ;)

Must be Watson.

#2434

While misogyny can be used to mean just regular old prejudice, including benevolent prejudice, in practice it's always used to just mean hatred of women by feminists. Benevolent sexism is barely on their radar at all, and definitely not when we're talking about pre-Enlightenment cultures. The narrative is unambiguous. Religion oppresses women because it HATES them. Hates their guts. And for the most part it doesn't. Fucking hell the reality is already bad enough, and virtually nobody today thinks women should be treated that way anymore. But feminism has to embellish it, to make bad seem worse. And I think caving on this point just cedes power to their overarching narrative of All Men oppressing All Women out of hate.

#2435

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:'Meternich' says the number of genders is infinite, and the TransCrazies start stumbling over the internal contradictions of their dogma:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/transparen ... 3433590981

I have to quote that here, it's too masterful :lol:

Meternich Pat LafordGreen • 18 hours ago

The # of genders in existence is infinite - biological sex exists on a spectrum after all ( it is not binary as bigots insist, the # of biological sexes is infinite) and anyone who disagrees with this is a Nazi (and should be punched, in the face).

When an entire pre-teen classroom comes out as non-binary, we need to ACCEPT them and not accuse them of being trans trenders. Trans trenderism is absolutely not a thing and anyone who would suggest so is a hateful bigot who is seeking to literally murder the non-binary, since misgendering IS murder. Misgendering leads to suicide 41% of the time.

We need to keep repeating this so that we can stop the genocide, which is why I am so happy that Canada, my country, has made it a crime to deliberately misgender someone. One of our senators even pointed out that it was genocide to the bigoted and hateful alt-right Jordan B Peterson.

#2436

So misgendering is suicide and suicide is murder.

And even in the 59% of cases where suicide does not occur it is still murder.

I think I must not be following some of the connections there.

#2437

Sunder wrote:People make too much of the whole "Eve at the fruit first so it's her fault" bullshit. I mean she and her hubby were both supposed to be childlike idiots with no concept of right and wrong, and she was tricked to boot. Not to mention Judaism and Christianity both make a bigger deal about "the sins of the father" than the mother. So acting as if that one story is somehow the root of all misogyny. It's not.

Most modern Christians don't give a rat's pluchy hiney for what Eve did or didn't, because they don't take the Bible literally, a concept unfathomable for Muslims.

#2438

On the contrary, there are plenty of muslims don't take the bible literally.

#2439

MarcusAu wrote:So misgendering is suicide and suicide is murder.

And even in the 59% of cases where suicide does not occur it is still murder.

I think I must not be following some of the connections there.

Schizophreniacs often hear voices in their head, sometimes commanding them to do weird or even harmful things. People in society don't recognise or confirm these multiple personalities and their actions. This is sheer bigotry and people reacting so are literally worse than Hitler.

About 60% of all males with schizophrenia try suicide at least once in their life, some 10-20% with success. We must stop this genocide by punching all haters in the face!

(I won't try to post it there, I'm not ready for a ban yet)

#2440

MarcusAu wrote:She is delusional - going through life thinking that she is a stand-up comedian. But with none of the talent to back it up.

She also has trouble standing up.

https://i1.wp.com/www.frukmagazine.com/ ... =604%2C603

#2441

Sunder wrote:While misogyny can be used to mean just regular old prejudice, including benevolent prejudice, in practice it's always used to just mean hatred of women by feminists. Benevolent sexism is barely on their radar at all, and definitely not when we're talking about pre-Enlightenment cultures. The narrative is unambiguous. Religion oppresses women because it HATES them. Hates their guts. And for the most part it doesn't. Fucking hell the reality is already bad enough, and virtually nobody today thinks women should be treated that way anymore. But feminism has to embellish it, to make bad seem worse. And I think caving on this point just cedes power to their overarching narrative of All Men oppressing All Women out of hate.

Very few people (serial killers, serial rapists, serial wife beaters) blindly women. Biologically speaking hate for women makes absolutely no sense. Pre-Enlightenment cultures rarely hated women, they simply considered them only "good" for reproduction and entertainment, just like slaves were only good for labor and entertainment.

In general pre-Enlightenment cultures had a list of roles which people had to respect: free men who aren't nobles or priests fight as cannon fodder and produce food, nobles only fight as officers/raiders and get others to plow their fields and tend to their cattle while priests only due their priestly duties while others plow their fields and tend to their cattle, slaves are people defeated in battle who now belong to thoe who captured them (usually the nobles), free women are married to their husbands and do their spousal duties while slave women are objects to be used however one wants. Life sucked for everyone but a few people (usually nobles and priests, and maybe some rich merchants).

There was no "hate" for women who knew how to keep their place. Slave women were simply property. Free women had a list of duties as spouses, and were supposed to get married as soon as possible, have kids, tend to their houses (if they weren't noblewomen) and obey to their husbands. But men were also supposed to protect their women, make sure that other men didn't "defile" them (which was a way to curb the number of illegitimate births) and spare them from fighting.

There was no sense of individual or equal rights. If a noble or a priest was pissed at a free man who wasn't a noble they could get rid of them easily, while free men had to grin and bear it every time a noble or a priest wanted something from them. Nobles and priest squabbled between each other. Slaves were just slaves.

Women-hating was confined to the women who "didn't know their place": the ones who flirted with other men, the ones who weren't good wives or housekeepers, the ones who were too independent-minded.

It wasn't All Men oppressing All Women, it was High Status Men oppressing everyone else, and High Status Women enjoying the perks of their High Status, but being usually a step below their husbands. For example in early islam legitimate wives are a step below their husbands, but far above "slave girls", and Good Wives who were crafty and clever enough could become important figures if they were careful to fulfill their duties (especially if their families had a high status). "Immodest" Women were filthy whores.

Islam is obsessed with virginity and with finding ways to make sure that you're raising your own children. Avoiding cuckoldry is the main reason why women are supposed to wear "modest" clothes, not to talk with men other than their husbands, to stay with other women isolated from the men, not to leave the house unless they're under strict surveillance, etc.

Basically in a world without paternity tests keeping the women under the watchful eyes of their husbands was the best insurance against cheating, which avoided the dreaded idea of raising someone else's child, especially the child of a non-muslim. There was also a widespread concern about non-muslims "stealing" Good Muslim Girls and polluting the Purity of Islam.

The rule of islam for women are all about that: men don't get pregnant, women do, so men can fuck around, get women pregnant and raise their children either as slaves or as muslims, all while they have wives to get pregnant too, while Good Muslim Women have to have sex ONLY with their husbands. Non-muslim women are trash, if you capture them they're your slaves, your playthings, do whatever you want with them.

Early muslims were raiders/merchants/mobsters. Old Mo was the chief raider/mob boss. Islam is all about getting others to submit and accept the authority of the Caliph (who is the Caliph is a contentious matter). "Good" non-muslims, who accept the superiority of islam and aren't "uppity", get to save their skins, have their wives and daughters unmolested, and carry on with their affairs as long as they pay their taxes to the Caliph. After all being too rough with those who regularly pay their taxes and accept your authority is bad for business.

"Bad" non-muslims, who don't want to submit to islam or pay their taxes or who don't live under the Caliphate, are enemies to crush, and their wives and daughters are for muslims to take as slave girls.

Of course this true only of "people of the book" (Christians and Jews) and only in times of peace. Also Jews suck and are untrustworthy jerks, while Christians are morons who think that three equals to one, but as long as they STAY in their PLACE you can tolerate their foul stench like a good, compassionate muslim should do. "Pagans" never get this kind of compassionate treatment and are supposed to be asked to convert, and if they refuse to be enslaved or killed.

"Good" muslims are those who are pious, have pious women, respect the authority of the Caliph and take pride in being muslims, so Naturally Superior to the rest of the world. "Good" muslim women are inferior to their husbands since they're "fragile women", but vastly superior to non-muslims nonetheless. They can feel justly proud that they're not filthy kaffir whores, and receive praise for being Modest and Respectful.

"Bad" muslims are heretics and need to be put down as soon as possible. Also apostates are filth, offer them a single opportunity to clarify their misunderstanding, if they don't immediately crawl on their feet, kill them.

Islam is all about creating new muslims (through impregnation or conversion), forcing non-muslims to submit, killing pagans, in-group morality and out-group hostility, and one day taking over the entire world. Muslim women of course have the job to churn out new muslims and to take care of their husbands and their homes, while non-muslim women are trash, but muslim prejudices against women are a bit more complex than just "hating women".

#2442

feathers wrote:
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:'Meternich' says the number of genders is infinite, and the TransCrazies start stumbling over the internal contradictions of their dogma:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/transparen ... 3433590981
I have to quote that here, it's too masterful :lol:

Meternich Pat LafordGreen • 18 hours ago

The # of genders in existence is infinite - biological sex exists on a spectrum after all ( it is not binary as bigots insist, the # of biological sexes is infinite) and anyone who disagrees with this is a Nazi (and should be punched, in the face).

When an entire pre-teen classroom comes out as non-binary, we need to ACCEPT them and not accuse them of being trans trenders. Trans trenderism is absolutely not a thing and anyone who would suggest so is a hateful bigot who is seeking to literally murder the non-binary, since misgendering IS murder. Misgendering leads to suicide 41% of the time.

We need to keep repeating this so that we can stop the genocide, which is why I am so happy that Canada, my country, has made it a crime to deliberately misgender someone. One of our senators even pointed out that it was genocide to the bigoted and hateful alt-right Jordan B Peterson.

And that dumbass who answered that genders are indeed finite cause there are only a finite number of people. That would be true if there were only a FINITE number of genders available. How transphobic of him. Not only is there an infinite number of genders overall, but there is an infinite number of genders PER PERSON, since Gender is fluid, and I can change as often as I want. An infinite number of genders PER PERSON ! Mathematically, it makes sense. Infinity raised to the power of seven and one half billion people...and counting !!!

#2443

Eskarina wrote:
Ape+lust wrote:http://imgur.com/fZE9UMS.jpg
This is .... disturbing.

If Twatson and her cuck ever decide to visit HTown (You know, to tell us all what homophobes we are, never mind that we had a Lesbian mayor for six years), I think I could find room for them in my double wide.

And after we walked over to Lakewood Church to tell Joel Osteen how awesome he is, we can pile in my pickup truck, and drive on out to New Braunfels for the Wurstfest: https://wurstfest.com/

#2444

Hell, maybe we could even pick up a few cases of Wurstfest Beer (Brewed by Shiner)

il_340x270.1032218372_lvrx.jpg: (21.19 KiB) Downloaded 134 times

#2445

At least we know Dan Arel had an erection that day.

#2446

It was the best of times, it was the wurst of times:

[youtube][/youtube]

Obviously a Male Cis Monkey. Punch that Nazi Monkey in the face

#2447

Meternich Pat LafordGreen • 18 hours ago

The # of genders in existence is infinite - biological sex exists on a spectrum after all ( it is not binary as bigots insist, the # of biological sexes is infinite) and anyone who disagrees with this is a Nazi (and should be punched, in the face).

<snip>

Whichever of you is Meternich, DM me if you're ever in Brooklyn and the first round is on me :clap:

#2448

I just received an email from CFI, who is apparently throwing their hat into the ring over the recent Dawkins de-platforming:

" Dear Friends,

By now, you've probably heard the stunning news that my friend and colleague on the board of CFI, Professor Richard Dawkins, has been summarily de-platformed by KPFA, a radio station in Berkeley, California. KPFA not only canceled a standing engagement to have Richard speak on his new book, Science in the Soul: Selected Writings of a Passionate Rationalist, but did so without contacting him first, or giving him the opportunity to respond to their unfounded allegations.

Instead, KPFA, which by the way had hosted Richard in 2015, contacted the ticket holders, unjustly contending that this respected evolutionary biologist had engaged in "abusive speech" against Islam. It is not abusive to criticize a religion's tenets and ideas. Prof. Dawkins is a responsible and insightful critic of all religions, including Islam, Christianity, and other faiths.

Richard, in his inimitable way, responded thoughtfully in an email to KPFA:"

(insert Dawkbro's letter to aforementioned de-platformers)

"As you can see, Richard is a kind man, even in the face of unfounded criticism. However, kindness cannot deter us from fighting as hard as we can against this severely troubling action by KPFA. Who will be unfairly painted with bigotry next?

It is through questioning and unfettered debate that humanity has made the advancements we value.

KPFA's stance is like the justification nations use to defend their blasphemy laws. Yet, as we know, blasphemy laws around the world serve two basic purposes: to insulate bad ideas and backward ideologies as well as persecute nonbelievers or a minority faith. Here at CFI, we have spent more than forty years fighting blasphemy laws while promoting the core values of reason and science. When we criticize religion, we don't criticize nonviolent religious people. We also don't criticize religious people who don't try to forcibly impose their views on others. The victims of religious dogma are often people of that same faith, and we unfailingly champion their equal rights.

Now it's time for all of us to stand up for Richard Dawkins. Please join me in supporting CFI and its important work, which, as you probably know, now includes the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science.

Please donate today, to send a message to all who want to stifle the free exchange of ideas. I will lead the way with a considerable matching donation, so your gift will go twice as far.

Click here to donate right now, and I will match your gift up to a total of $100,000. Together, we will stand up to the bullies who want to silence one of the world's greatest science educators and one of its most sensible defenders of a reality-based worldview.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Eddie Tabash

Eddie Tabash
Board Chair, Center for Inquiry

P.S. Your donation is fully tax-deductible. Please give today, and I will match your donation"

#2449

Steersman, you know Meternich isn't for real, right?

#2450

Easy J wrote:I just received an email from CFI, who is apparently throwing their hat into the ring over the recent Dawkins de-platforming:

snip

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Eddie Tabash

Eddie Tabash
Board Chair, Center for Inquiry

P.S. Your donation is fully tax-deductible. Please give today, and I will match your donation"

Never let an opportunity go to waste, I guess. Maybe they're still paying off Melody Hensley's severance.

#2451

jet_lagg wrote:Steersman, you know Meternich isn't for real, right?

[youtube][/youtube]

#2452

Easy J wrote:Please donate today, to send a message to all who want to stifle the free exchange of ideas. I will lead the way with a considerable matching donation, so your gift will go twice as far.

Click here to donate right now, and I will match your gift up to a total of $100,000. Together, we will stand up to the bullies who want to silence one of the world's greatest science educators and one of its most sensible defenders of a reality-based worldview.

How exactly does donating to CFI send a message to KFPA? CFI did not outline any course of action they will take upon receiving the money. Is KFPA even going to know?

I suspect we would get more bang for our buck in sending a message by emailing our displeasure personally to KFPA.

#2453

On the old old subject of recording videos while driving, it turns out the hispanic girl's live stream & killing of her sister is real (as in not a fake publicity stunt). I'll pass on linking to the video of the accident itself. I am sure you can find it if you really want to see the gore.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obdulia-san ... agram-dad/

#2454

jet_lagg wrote:Steersman, you know Meternich isn't for real, right?

Kind of looks that way, although if that's the case then I have to commend "them" for being rather "subbtle" about it. And for being a useful foil for that nefarious "troll" OaringAbout ... ;-)

But the handle "Meternich" might give some justification for your argument as I recollect, from high school social studies, that "Metternich" was something of a weathervane when it came to European politics.

#2455

Kirbmarc wrote:
jet_lagg wrote:Steersman, you know Meternich isn't for real, right?
[.youtube][/youtube]

??? :think:

Poe's law is an adage of Internet culture stating that, without a clear indicator of the author's intent, it is impossible to create a parody of extreme views so obviously exaggerated that it cannot be mistaken by some readers or viewers as a sincere expression of the parodied views.

You really think that "TransParent Expedition" would allow "Meternich's" comments to stand if he really thought Meternich was "jerking his chain"? Maybe he does so simply because they're so consistent, "of a piece", with his own views, and with those of many if not most transactivists?

Guest_936d3dec · #2456

If CFI's business model is going to be the victimization game, they should get themselves a Patreon like all the other social justice warriors.

Both patreon com/centerforinquiry and patreon com/cfi are available

Click here to donate right now, and I will match your gift up to a total of $100,000.

This cannot mean what it says. Say 10 Pitters donated $100,000 each. Tabash is going to donate $1,000,000? And if 100 Pitters....?

Guest_936d3dec · #2457

On the old old subject of recording videos while driving, it turns out the hispanic girl's live stream & killing of her sister is real

In Washington State it just became illegal to drink water and drive. Basically anything more trivial than tapping a mounted phone is now illegal, including eating and drinking in a car.

seattletimes com/seattle-news/transportation/distracted-driving-law-in-full-effect-for-monday-morning-commute/

Luckily for vloggers though, recording video from a mounted device is probably still legal. One tap to pull up the app. One tap each to start and pause and stop recording.

Drivers may still turn on apps that require “minimal use of a finger,” including navigation maps, Bluetooth calling and voice-activated software — whether built into the dashboard, or through a smartphone in a dash-mounted cradle.

Non-electronic distractions, such as eating, grooming, or a pet on the lap, are secondary offenses. Scofflaws can be fined an extra $99 for those, when police see them commit another traffic offense

Presumably vlogging might be ticketed if a cop can see you are vlogging but only if you are already committing a primary offense like speeding, weaving or misgendering.

#2458

Guest_936d3dec wrote:In Washington State it just became illegal to drink water and drive. Basically anything more trivial than tapping a mounted phone is now illegal, including eating and drinking in a car.

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-new ... g-commute/

Eating can be more complex depending on the nature of the food.

I wonder what the statistics are on drink and food related accidents. One major downside is the alertness of truck drivers if they cannot enjoy some coffee, peanuts & beef jerky while driving. I assume people on their daily commute can just suck it up.

#2459

deLurch wrote:On the old old subject of recording videos while driving, it turns out the hispanic girl's live stream & killing of her sister is real (as in not a fake publicity stunt). I'll pass on linking to the video of the accident itself. I am sure you can find it if you really want to see the gore.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obdulia-san ... agram-dad/

Holy shit. I looked up the original video. The driver spent 1:15 with no hands on the wheel or eyes on the road.

Crazy video. The driver's an insane narcissist. She was arrested for DUI, so my guess that she was drunk was correct.

#2460

Really? wrote:Holy shit. I looked up the original video. The driver spent 1:15 with no hands on the wheel or eyes on the road.
Crazy video. The driver's an insane narcissist. She was arrested for DUI, so my guess that she was drunk was correct.

OK. There is value in watching. I'll link it. ***NSFL***