patrick.net

I'll say it one more time Christian, Catholic and I am very sure even muslims. They are wonderful social organizations. One of the best ways to meet friends, aquaintences, people of similar ilk and interests. People that like the same sports teams. Good places in my experince to have a really good time. There is nothing quite like them. Even the local business establishments like them. They get together and go into those places. I have met some fine upstanding women there. Not to mention "soiled" women trying to repent and recover their respectability. Yes I was always there to help. Most people realize it or not go there for social reasons. Its the part they love most about it. The rest is way to confusing to me anyway.

ArtimusMaxtor says

I'll say it one more time Christian, Catholic and I am very sure even muslims.

You have heard of the grammatical structure we sometime call a "sentence" right?

ArtimusMaxtor says

One of the best ways to meet friends, aquaintences, people of similar ilk and interests.

You might not realize how difficult you are to read for people who are accustomed to sentences. I'm not trying to put you down, just suggesting you look in to it.

The best thing to do would be read more. Then when you write, read what you have written to see if it sounds right.

marcus says

ArtimusMaxtor says

I'll say it one more time Christian, Catholic and I am very sure even muslims.

You have heard of the grammatical structure we sometime call a "sentence" right?

ArtimusMaxtor says

One of the best ways to meet friends, aquaintences, people of similar ilk and interests.

You might not realize how difficult you are to read for people who are accustomed to sentences. I'm not trying to put you down, just suggesting you look in to it.

The best thing to do would be read more. Then when you write, read what you have written to see if it sounds right.

HAHAHAHAHAHA

?

marcus who has 2,797 comments said:

To Elliemae. I'm A Mathematics teacher, and I have a masters degree in Math not English, although my personality is such that even if English were my subject, I would still sometimes make those kinds of errors in emails or in a forum such as this. Feel free to judge me. It's an interesting alternative to understanding where I'm coming from.

Jun 6, 2010 8:17 AM Like Flag Mish Shedlock calls public workers parasites

Thanks for reading my. Comments that far back. to the beginning when I has that exchange with Elliemay.

But seriously, I wouldn't expect perfection, or criticize your writing if it didn't seem almost like a parody of someone who writes a lot of sentence fragments. The truth is I find it hard to read, hard to follow and I guarantee others feel the same. I was really just trying to give you some feedback and would have preferred to do it without hurting your feelings.

http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/cgi-shl/quiz.pl/fragments_add1.htm

Some of this random computer generated spam is almost poetry.

thunderlips11 says

Some of this random computer generated spam is almost poetry.

Homo Economicus. A Legendary Creature, like Bigfoot, claimed to exist by Pseudoscientists.

I think it's a Haiku.

KexDrobOrildNaliNib says

33132

wolf suckled co founder of

rachel aziani pool blowjob

19120

There used to be a time when people were waiting for computers to master human conversations so well that they would pass the Turing Test. Little did the scientists of the time know that the real solution was to dumb down human conversations so much that even the dribble above passes as possibly human.

Dan8267 says, "The only way to protect society from religious crazies is to take away the power of religion all together. Religion causes people to do bad things, and this incident along with countless others proves it."

Two statements, each more ignorant than the other. Lets address the first: religion is not so much an institution as a set of personally held beliefs that purport to guide ones life path. This means that it exists on a level that precedes any sort of politics or government intervention. To eliminate it is to eliminate those who hold such beliefs. Since that is what you advocate: congratulations! You most resemble chairman Mao! If given a choice you would kill millions to advance your ideology.
Second statement: also ridiculous. To assert that religion makes people do bad things is about as meaningful as to say that antibiotics make people die of allergic response. Yes, some people use religion as an excuse for violence, hatred, and bigotry, but some atheists use "religious injustices" as an excuse to act like assholes. Looking at the greater picture, religious people do a lot of good. The vast majority of people who give to charities or serve in them are of one faith or another. Percentage wise it isn't even close, with atheists being rather stingy and self interested in comparison to the much more giving religious crowd. Christians in particular tend to be very generous with their time and resources in assisting the poor and people in trouble.
How much did you give to charity last year? My wife and I average over $10,000 annually.

Quigley says

Two statements, each more ignorant than the other.

Why is it that whenever someone claims a someone else is ignorant on this site, the writer proves himself to be ignorant?

Quigley says

religion is not so much an institution as a set of personally held beliefs that purport to guide ones life path.

Bullshit. Philosophy is a set of personally held beliefs that purport to guide one's life. Religion is a hierarchical power structure based on superstition. The Catholic Church is most certainly a power structure, not a set of beliefs, which is why Catholics can argue with each other. The same is true for all religions.

Quigley says

This means that it exists on a level that precedes any sort of politics or government intervention.

More bullshit. Religion is entirely a political structure and it materially affects government and is often enforced by government, especially in theocracies like Middle Eastern states. There has never been a religion that hasn't tried to coerce people to behave in specific ways.

Quigley says

To eliminate it is to eliminate those who hold such beliefs. Since that is what you advocate: congratulations! You most resemble chairman Mao!

You are the biggest fucking idiot in the world. This has to be the mother of all Straw Man arguments. There isn't an empty chair big enough to stand beside you on stage as you rant your delusions to the world. To suggest that I believe that all religious people must be killed to end religion is just plain fucking retarded on a level I cannot even comprehend.

I'd explain to you why you're wrong, but if you actually believe that then you are so fucking bat-shit delusional that no explanation would enlighten you for you are willfully ignorant and happy to stay that way.

It's really impossible to have any respect for a person using such a blatant and disingenuous Straw Man argument. I could actually respect you if you disagreed with the positions I do advocate, but when you disagree with positions that no one outside your fantasyland mind advocates, I just have to consider you the village idiot.

Quigley says

To assert that religion makes people do bad things is about as meaningful as to say that antibiotics make people die of allergic response. Yes, some people use religion as an excuse for violence, hatred, and bigotry, but some atheists use "religious injustices" as an excuse to act like assholes.

When a person bombs an abortion clinic, he's doing it specifically because of his religion. When someone holds up a sign reading "God hates fags!", he's doing it not despite his religion but precisely because of it. The assholes who threaten the girl in this thread's article did so specifically because of their religion. When the terrorists flew planes into the World Trade Center, religion wasn't an excuse to act like assholes, it was the prime motivation. Name one atheist suicide bomber. Your statement is empirically false, and that's the worst kind of false.

Quigley says

Looking at the greater picture, religious people do a lot of good.

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
- Steven Weinberg

To suggest that religion is responsible for empathy, compassion, or generosity if utterly ridiculous. The Republican Party disproves that theory every day. Hell, countless other social species have all these traits without religion.

Quigley says

The vast majority of people who give to charities or serve in them are of one faith or another. Percentage wise it isn't even close, with atheists being rather stingy and self interested in comparison to the much more giving religious crowd. Christians in particular tend to be very generous with their time and resources in assisting the poor and people in trouble.
How much did you give to charity last year? My wife and I average over $10,000 annually.

Given all the other lies you stated, why would I trust an unverified brag? Not to mention, you and I probably have very different ideas of what constitutes a charity. I don't consider the American Family Association to be a charity, but I do consider the American Civil Liberties Union to be one. In any case, you sure don't let the facts get in they way of your rant.

Atheists do greatly give to charity. But far more important is the reason why. Atheists are more motivated by compassion than the faithful. In other words, the faithful give to charity as a way of buying into heaven, a way of bribing god. This is hardly an altruistic motive. Atheists, on the other hand, do not perceive they personally have anything to gain, but help out others anyway. We're way the fuck nobler than someone "doing good" because he thinks some cosmic cop is watching him. So get off your high horse. Your motives are less altruistic and selfless than ours, and your morality is merely a facade masking selfish motives.

Dan8267 says, "More bullshit. Religion is entirely a political structure and it materially affects government and is often enforced by government, especially in theocracies like Middle Eastern states. There has never been a religion that hasn't tried to coerce people to behave in specific ways."

Ignorance! This just shows me that for all your ranting, you have never truly looked into religion. Yes, certain nations have favored or even government enforced religions, but thankfully we do not live in one of those. A small example that refutes your second statement is Wiccan, whose followers beliefs include freedom of thought about their religion. Certainly the Wiccan faith is superstition according to your beliefs, but they hardly run around trying to force others to draw pentacles and pray to woodland spirits.

Dan says, "I'd explain to you why you're wrong, but if you actually believe that then you are so fucking bat-shit delusional that no explanation would enlighten you for you are willfully ignorant and happy to stay that way."

Translation: "I do not even understand the argument presented, let alone have a coherent argument to sustain my point." Calling someone who just handed you your rhetorical ass an "idiot" only proves that you have nothing of substance to say.

With a small exception where you disagreed on the nature of religion vs. philosophy, you offered no actual relevant arguments. Rather you went on and on about how I am wrong, so wrong that you can't be bothered to say exactly why I am wrong. That's a very suspect sort of reasoning, usually taken by people who are absolutely wrong and they know it.

To refute your first and only point: religions can be enforced and perpetuated by institutions, but the beliefs reside in the minds of the followers. That is why some Muslims storm embassies and some do not. They believe different things in their minds. Beliefs shape political opinions that the believers hold, which translates into government that will enforce the beliefs of a society. But as I said, the beliefs come first. Change a law and you may change behavior for a while. Change hearts and you change your entire nation.

Quigley says

as a set of personally held beliefs that purport to guide ones life path.

Suicide Bombers, Doctor Assassins, Inquisitors, etc. also have "personally held beliefs"

I think rabid political beliefs come from the same brain area as Religion.

Quigley says

The vast majority of people who give to charities or serve in them are of one faith or another. Percentage wise it isn't even close, with atheists being rather stingy and self interested in comparison to the much more giving religious crowd.

Giving per person or giving overall? Given the large quantities of believers, obviously they are going to win. Also, is funding Madrassahs and Evangelical Outreach charity? It seems to me Missionary work isn't really charity, it's more of a club membership drive.

Here's some food. Now let me tell you about the Greatest Story ever Told, about A Jewish Zombie Carpenter from the Iron Age. Or "Let me give you some food, so you can concentrate on learning Salafi/Wahabi law and Classical Arabic"

Ditto for Drug Rehab and other programs that come with accepting the Prophet/Son of God as a quid pro quo. Many religious groups separate poor families, the father from the children, even in the US. They do this in Eugene, Oregon, not just in the Third World.

When non-believers give aid it's out of genuine concern for humanity; when believers give aid it's about good works because an authority told them so (or to entice more believers).

However, I believe that per Capita, Norwegians are the most generous people on earth.
http://www.development-today.com/magazine/Frontpage/4871

Sweden comes in at Number 2.

Quigley says

Ignorance! This just shows me that for all your ranting, you have never truly looked into religion. Yes, certain nations have favored or even government enforced religions, but thankfully we do not live in one of those.

Quigley, you ignorant slut. When I say religion is a hierarchical power structure based on superstition it is because

1. Religions wield power over their disciples and most often the nations inhabited by their disciples.
2. Religions are hierarchies whether we're talking about the Catholic Church, Orthodox Jews, Islamic sects, or any other religious group.
3. The higher a cleric is in the religious hierarchy, the more power he has.

To deny this is obscenely stupid.

Quigley says

Certainly the Wiccan faith is superstition according to your beliefs, but they hardly run around trying to force others to draw pentacles and pray to woodland spirits.

The words faith and religion are not synonymous, dumb ass.

But you know who has gone around trying to force people to convert? Every fucking successful religion in human history including Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. And they all used torture, death, and rape as techniques for saving souls.

Quigley says

Translation: "I do not even understand the argument presented, let alone have a coherent argument to sustain my point." Calling someone who just handed you your rhetorical ass an "idiot" only proves that you have nothing of substance to say.

Wrong translation you you dirt-eating piece of slime, you scum-sucking pig, you son of a motherless goat. But hey, if you really want me to tear you a new asshole here, I'll gladly oblige.

Your original statement was that I, like Mao, am in favor of committing genocide because that's the only way to get rid of religion.

Yet, just this morning I stated unequivocally

Still, I think the Islamic world can be modernized without force. The Internet is a powerful tool for spreading information. If the Middle East had unrestricted Internet access -- at least unrestricted in some places -- then the culture will change.

in response to Raw's statement

It took criticism and force to bring the Christian world into the modern world.
Now the modern world refuses to use criticism and force to bring Islam into the modern world.
I feel it it is us who are being dragged into their medieval world.

Well, that completely disproves your bat-shit assertion that I want to commit genocide, which by the way is such a fucking stupid assertion that it needs not even be addressed. My posting history is full of examples where I promote reasoning, scientific education, and economic development as the means of combating religious bigotry and violence. So, yeah, I'm just like fucking Mao.

You know what, I'm amending Godwin's Law to include comparisons to Mao and other genocidal maniacs.

Your statements do show one important thing. The Christian right is so fucked up in the brain that they actually think they are "handing you your rhetorical ass" when they show what utter fools they are. Just like you think Romney stands a chance of winning now after coming out against half the country. Reality never gets through that bubble.

But hey, your so fucking winning it's amazing. You snort coke off of Charlie Sheen's balls.

It would be one thing if you actually made a good point and then bragged about it, but when you brag about an asinine argument that's been torn apart to a humiliating extent, you just show that the new Republican strategy -- and I know you are a Republican because no Democrat is this batshit crazy and delusional -- is to take utter failure and call it victory.

Can't control anger, troll too much of an ass...
http://www.youtube.com/embed/z4gN_yc_7ug

I want you off the fucking site you prick!

I ain’t the one strawmanning. Let’s get Shrek and put this back on and let’s go again. Seriously man, you and me, we’re fucking done professionally. Fucking ass.

Dan8267 says, "You are trashing my thread!"

No, your last post did that. Wow, I mean wow!! That was some totally insane ranting. I don't think I've ever seen such a glaring example of someone who is off his meds crazy as what you "wrote," and I'm putting that in quotes because I have respect for the written word, but crazy stuff like that shouldn't qualify. I know thunderlips usually agrees with you, but I bet he won't want to be associated with what you just wrote. His posts don't seem crazy, at least.

Sorry to wreck your thread, but honestly, it was offensive to begin with. You cherry-picked a news story, took a quote about nebulous unconfirmed death threats, and asserted that Christians are homicidal control freaks. I take issue with that. I defended my POV, vigorously. You flipped out and fell off the crazy tree, hitting every branch on the way down. If you can't have a reasonable discussion without resorting to name calling and swearing at anyone who disagrees with your POV, it WOULD be better if you took a break from the forum.
Good day, sir!

Quigley says

To eliminate it is to eliminate those who hold such beliefs. Since that is what you advocate: congratulations! You most resemble chairman Mao! If given a choice you would kill millions to advance your ideology.

Although obviously fallacious, this particular straw man argument is very common in religious circles. The reason people fall for it is because they hear it from a source their parents have told them to trust: their preachers. The reason the preachers say it is because fear works. If you frighten people with sermons of hellfire and brimstone, and get them to mistrust everyone else, then you can control them. When people become fearful, they retreat from the unknown to the familiar. They then donate to their church, not due to charitable compassion but out of fear, trying to appease the deity or deities whom they have questioned or defied. (Doubt is intrinsic to faith, even though fundamentalism denies it, and we are all of us sinners.) The church then becomes rich, thus "proving" the validity of its doctrine, QED.

Quigley says

No, your last post did that. Wow, I mean wow!! That was some totally insane ranting.

I would not take anything written in Hulk green too seriously.

leo707 says

Quigley says

No, your last post did that. Wow, I mean wow!! That was some totally insane ranting.

I would not take anything written in Hulk green too seriously.

The dumb ones never get the joke. Even when you go through the effort of making an obvious setup.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/qrvMTv_r8sA

How many times have we read something like that? Think about it. We are outraged of course. Because well its newspeople folks. The ones that bring us the stark truth every single day of the week.