JCC Arena The Theist/Atheist Thunderdome™

^ Actual doctrine.

 

Astronomy's Sole Anarchist, defend your geocentricism

 

C'mon, son... you know it's just going to go like this:

 

There's faith, and then there's utter, willful and inexcusable ignorance in the face of proven facts. Son, you keep making a fool of yourself in front of us by taking such an inane stance. Even your god would facepalm himself hard in light of that.

 

Okay, now I'm convinced that Anarchist is just messing with us. The alternative is too depressing.

 

No....please no....

 

the greatest geniuses of history were often considered insane in their own time. kind of

 

that is one of his fave chestnuts

 

you realize, like, the lifespan of these dudes was like 35 if they were lucky, right?

but yeah jubilees were awesome. the economic anthropologist david graeber actually advocates them as the only way to fix the current economic system without abandoning it entirely

yes scripture is a stumbling block to change, but it doesnt prevent it. religions change no matter what. the fact is the kind of christianity Anakin Solo Revanchist adheres to is, from a cultural perspective, unlike any that has existed in the history of christianity. the calvinistic elements, the emphasis on inviduals getting "saved", (which is quintessentially American in its emphasis on faux-individuality)... if anything the early cult of The Way established by the apostles was (by the bible's own account) highly collectivist in nature, not so organic in its unity as the modern evangelical church is. but this is a consequence of evangelical christianity growing out of early forms of protestantism and growing up alongside american capitalism.

change is the human condition, (incidentally, this is hardly a suprising fact about evolved beings in an evolving universe). ive always liked the explanation that religion generally represents the most static, ossification-prone aspects of culture and language represents the most volatile (rapidly evolving) aspect. but even tho religion changes slowest, it still inevitably must change as its context (both social and physical) changes around it

 

WEll Wocky it's an hour long and I've only had time to get through half so far.

But see, I know Hitchens distinguishes between Muslims and Islamists; you don't. You in fact know nothing of Hitchens and have hitched your wagon to the uncomfortable "political correctness" of the hand-wringing soft, wet left brigade.

Since the comments refer to Islamists and not all adherents of the Islamic faith, and since Hitchens remarks elsewhere provide a broad framework outlining his views on the matter - I'm confident your man, who says "Moslem", is in fact wrong and stupid. You're making a claim, you need to prove it.

If I can find the speech online, you can too. You just have to not be lazy, which in these kinds of debates is a problem for you.

 

To be clear, then, you have a link you just don't want to share?

If you say I am misunderstanding, and that there is more complete information available, give it to me. I'm asking you for it. Literally all you have to do is copy and paste a link to move the discussion forward. What possible logic is there in not doing so? If you believe that the facts support your view, then why hesitate to bring them into the open where you can be justified?

 

It seems to be a problem for a lot of the "argument from ignorance" folks, Ender Sai.

 

Like Nicolas Cage?!

 

Stop trolling.

a) I clearly indicated I was half-way through the speech.
b) Why is it you can't find the link? I'll provide it but basically I'm just going to view you as unbridled in your laziness.
c) Should I also find other articles in which Mr Hitchens railed against the forces of Islamism? Since you are incapable of the kind of modest research that sustains the minimum effort undergraduate in first year? **** it. Why not.

Speech:

http://www.city-journal.org/html/17_1_urbanities-steyn.html

"Two things, in my experience, disable many liberals at the onset of this conversation. First, they cannot shake their subliminal identification of the Muslim religion with the wretched of the earth: the black- and brown-skinned denizens of what we once called the “Third World.” You can see this identification in the way that the Palestinians (about 20 percent of whom were Christian until their numbers began to decline) have become an “Islamic” cause and in the amazing ignorance that most leftists display about India, a multiethnic secular democracy under attack from al-Qaida and its surrogates long before the United States was. And you can see it, too, in the stupid neologism “Islamophobia,” which aims to promote criticism of Islam to the gallery of special offenses associated with racism."


In the article I linked two or three pages ago, which you no doubt didn't read and cannot possibly be expected to go find (so here it is, lazy man: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2007/07/godfearing_people.html), made a valid point. I heap a metric tonne of **** on the consensual fantasy you and other Christians engage in my believing in a bearded Jewish zombie wizard, who is also his dad, actually existing much less having powers. Seriously. It's ridiculous and weak, but I digress. How precisely do you see Christians reacting? To their credit, the main offenders - Skywalkernumbers, ManateeSo-soSecularist and Moviefan2.4.0 - don't respond with threats, denigration or even suggestions of your capricious jerk of a god will torture me for all eternity in his personal dungeon (for the mere act of not bowing and scraping before him!).

Now imagine I make the same comments in a forum where Muslims may read it. Based on the response to cartoons in a Danish - which at last glance, was not a caliphate state - newspaper, I'd say we could expect riots, violence, death threats, firebombings and persistent intimidation.

We're not suggestion this is the ordinary reaction of Muslims, but the undercurrent of Islamism is unlike any other challenge our secular, liberal democratic traditions has faced and instead of rallying behind the universalism of liberalism, we are prepared to dodge the debate and accommodate barbarism for fear someone might suggest our motivation is not ideological but racial. Nevermind that most of these clashes come from Arabs but the world's most populous nation, Indonesia, is neither Arab nor as contentious as the Arab states; liberal hand-wringing does not allow for fact nor nuance.

Sorry, I happen to quite like aspects of Islam and I think on a comparison between the Holy Babble and the Qu'ran, purely on prose, the Qu'ran wins hands down. But I don't want subjugation of gays and women, the teaching of dogma that is stultifying to youth, or even genital mutilation to be permissible among a subset of any given migrant population. Our traditions are worth fighting for and perversely worth emigrating for yet we're not prepared to defend them?

 

Ender Sai, it's far past time you stuff your high handed and arrogant attitude down the nearest well. You're ****ing me off. STOP IT.

 

Um, I'm pretty sure you're compelled to forgive me.

 

when did you become an ardent defender of muslims?

 

Oh for Zeus's sake. It's the internet. People say silly things. Nobody has an agenda against you. Calm down.

 

North Kor-er, I mean, SkywalkerNumbers is threatening people again. We all better do what she says.

 

Okay, somebody got pissed off. Time to close this thunderdome down. As a tribute to tom , this thread is now for posting pictures of lettuce.

 

Actually, brah, I suspect it was my caustic dismissal of religion as a delusional fantasy for weak people.

 

What? Get out of here harps. This thread is doing fine and I need Lazy Wocky to come back having watch 4mins of the video and decided he's an expert.

Again.

 

well that's just your opinion and you can stuff your opinion DOWN A WELL!