tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post4923850833125825972..comments2024-03-27T01:58:17.583+13:00Comments on Tongue Tied 3: jonjayrayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13363092874281160320noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-23576923528767607912014-08-01T18:39:12.424+12:002014-08-01T18:39:12.424+12:00And yet it is the trolls of the left who keep brin...And yet it is the trolls of the left who keep bringing it up.<br /><br /><br />stinkynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-33300083891211118972014-08-01T16:41:01.336+12:002014-08-01T16:41:01.336+12:00Religion is obsessed with sex, or rather unhealth...Religion is obsessed with sex, or rather unhealthy sexual repression.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-21012433201393662132014-08-01T15:24:47.492+12:002014-08-01T15:24:47.492+12:00Sex is good. Religion is bad.Sex is good. Religion is bad.slinkynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-52214089514531293152014-08-01T11:09:52.804+12:002014-08-01T11:09:52.804+12:00It’s interesting that an anti-religious advocate w...It’s interesting that an anti-religious advocate would immediately grab for an offensive and deviate sexual example. It shows a lack of empathy, as well as maybe an immature desire to provoke. Why is it that so many anti-religious zealots are so primarily focused on sex?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-1938839575390093152014-08-01T04:44:09.435+12:002014-08-01T04:44:09.435+12:00"Then why is it in the bible? One would think...<i>"Then why is it in the bible? One would think that god wouldn't have inconsistencies in his word. I guess he is not as perfect as we think."</i><br /><br />That's <b>HILARIOUS!</b> Thanks for the laugh!Use the Name, Lukenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-67748467346851923232014-07-31T18:22:25.362+12:002014-07-31T18:22:25.362+12:00While I agree that throat cancer is generally wors...While I agree that throat cancer is generally worse than a sore throat and losing $10,000 is generally worse than losing $10 I'm not sure that the principle can be applied universally to say that one thing is always worse than something else.<br />For example, being raped by someone you know and trust may indeed be worse than being raped by a stranger because of that element of trust.<br />As Luke said, I'm not sure that being beaten to death is worse than being shot necessarily. A quick death is not necessarily better than a slow one if you have matters that you need to put in order before you die.<br />However, while you may disagree with his examples the point he made is usually not so controversial.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-33577127901601921352014-07-31T17:25:09.851+12:002014-07-31T17:25:09.851+12:00Um, troll, Martin Luther was never part of the bib...<br />Um, troll, Martin Luther was <i>never</i> part of the bible.<br /><br /><br />But at least you're good for lulz, doofus. Thx for making it obvious.<br />stinkynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-68835140720069703982014-07-31T15:03:35.060+12:002014-07-31T15:03:35.060+12:00"By itself, it does not fit what the Bible te..."By itself, it does not fit what the Bible teaches."<br /><br />Then why is it in the bible? One would think that god wouldn't have inconsistencies in his word. I guess he is not as perfect as we think.slinkynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-53710376317166823592014-07-31T11:04:08.131+12:002014-07-31T11:04:08.131+12:00The Darwin Delusion these evolutionists wackos are...The Darwin Delusion these evolutionists wackos are so far out in the middle of stupidland they dont know their way backGo Away Birdnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-44583754271620059372014-07-31T07:30:10.112+12:002014-07-31T07:30:10.112+12:00He's not trying to teach them logic. He's ...<br />He's not trying to teach them logic. He's trying to use his status as a teacher to manipulate them under the guise of logic.<br />stinkynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-58789083824024076732014-07-31T07:29:14.380+12:002014-07-31T07:29:14.380+12:00It was the "learn how to think" comment ...It was the "learn how to think" comment that offended them the most, I think.<br />Thinking is the last thing the perpetually-offended want to do.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-31239370192383286242014-07-31T06:46:33.106+12:002014-07-31T06:46:33.106+12:00Rather ironic that a "scientist" who use...Rather ironic that a "scientist" who uses circular logic and ad homenim attacks to support his "science" is trying to teach others logic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-80028328704206234662014-07-31T05:50:15.463+12:002014-07-31T05:50:15.463+12:00Luke, you cannot always hide behind the "ad h...Luke, you cannot always hide behind the "ad hominem" claim when it accurately describes what you do!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-10506726728374817032014-07-31T05:24:01.505+12:002014-07-31T05:24:01.505+12:00Same old, same old. Don't you have anything ot...Same old, same old. Don't you have anything other than the <i>ad hominem</i> fallacy, troll?<br /><br />In case it's escaped your notice (and I'm sure it has) a fallacy is the opposite of logical thinking.Use the Name, Lukenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-32145634524559996542014-07-31T04:53:34.267+12:002014-07-31T04:53:34.267+12:00Yeah I guess Lukey Boy here knows more about inter...Yeah I guess Lukey Boy here knows more about interpreting the Bible and the Christian religion than famous Christian figures such as Martin Luther. Like many theists, Luke questions the "context" of quotes what sound wrong to him, but accepts others at face value if they happen to coincide with his own prejudices.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-26015895227869467392014-07-31T03:16:42.845+12:002014-07-31T03:16:42.845+12:00A past experience shared publicly doesn't inva...<i>A past experience shared publicly doesn't invalidate a point because it is used as one of the examples.</i><br /><br />Wait, so you're claiming that Dawkins' statement, "that to condemn this 'mild touching up' as sexual abuse today would somehow be unfair," is <i>only</i> "sharing a past experience" and <i>not</i> a moral judgement?<br /><br />2:01, what is the context of that quote? (By itself, it does not fit what the Bible teaches.)Use the Name, Lukenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-66530575457470292402014-07-31T02:31:04.812+12:002014-07-31T02:31:04.812+12:00Martin Luther - “Reason is a whore, the greatest e...Martin Luther - “Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has; it never comes to the aid of spiritual things, but more frequently than not struggles against the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God.”Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-35928799227056743042014-07-31T02:05:23.175+12:002014-07-31T02:05:23.175+12:00Luke is hyper-religious (or even a Creationist?), ...Luke is hyper-religious (or even a Creationist?), so by definition he can't think logically. <br />Some theologists actually "think" reason is subversive to "faith".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-83517633265562620752014-07-31T01:50:25.331+12:002014-07-31T01:50:25.331+12:00Luke,
You just failed the logical thinking test t...Luke,<br /><br />You just failed the logical thinking test though. A past experience shared publicly doesn't invalidate a point because it is used as one of the examples.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32538379.post-76072737778332112382014-07-31T01:31:06.949+12:002014-07-31T01:31:06.949+12:00What's quoted in the article sounds like the s...What's quoted in the article sounds like the same kind of comparisons as "Would you rather be shot to death or beaten to death." Both are so far over the line (death!) that any other difference is inconsequential.<br /><br />It's very, very hard to take Mr. Dawkins' protest of "logical thinking" seriously when he was recently quoted actually <i>defending</i> "mild pedophilia":<br /><br /><i>In a recent interview with the Times magazine, Richard Dawkins attempted to defend what he called “mild pedophilia,” which, he says, he personally experienced as a young child and does not believe causes “lasting harm.”<br /><br />Dawkins went on to say that one of his former school masters “pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts,” and that to condemn this “mild touching up” as sexual abuse today would somehow be unfair.<br /><br />“I am very conscious that you can’t condemn people of an earlier era by the standards of ours. Just as we don’t look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism in the same way as we would condemn a modern person for racism, I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild pedophilia, and can’t find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today,” he said.<br /><br />Plus, he added, though his other classmates also experienced abuse at the hands of this teacher, “I don’t think he did any of us lasting harm.”</i><br /><br />— from <a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/09/10/richard_dawkins_defends_mild_pedophilia_says_it_does_not_cause_lasting_harm/" rel="nofollow">Salon</a>Use the Name, Lukenoreply@blogger.com