Faith is Born from Fear

[Quantum Windbag]

I don't care what religion you are. I have friends who are of all faiths. You and I agree they are all swallowing a lie. That much we agree on.

As far as this new society that will emerge, that all depends. instead of scaring and lying to our kids on why they need to be good, we might lead by example. Not only do we teach our kids to help the less fortunate, our government too takes care of the less fortunate. What does that mean? That means the rich pay a little more in taxes to take care of the poor on things like foodstamps, welfare, unemployment benefits, free healtcare for the poor. Yes I said free. You righties think the poor like being poor because they get this shit? You are delusional and ignorant then.

This new society would not make women who don't want to have kids feel guilty about getting an abortion if they are not ready to have a baby. Nor would it stop women from getting late term abortions when their baby is going to be severely fucked up.

This new society won't prevent stem cell because of god(s).

This new society won't go to war for religion. It will get it that church and state need to be separate.

If Liberalism is a religion, conservatism is too. It combines the ignorance of religion with the greed of the rich and powerful. You being one of the ignorant ones, even if you don't believe in god. Either that or you are rich and greedy. Are you? How much do you make? Do you own a business or work for someone else? Just like to get your background.

Me? 43, house and car paid off, $400K in savings, but I'm just a worker bee. I remember the 90's when the middle class got their fair share. To be a middle class con means you feel comfortable where you are and don't care about society. Hell, I have even argued with broke ass cons from the red states. They're just fools. Who are you?

We will let gays have the same rights as straights.

What other things are you afraid of? If the society goes in those directions, isn't that kind of how it should be? For example, if we don't want 20 round clips sold, they should be outlawed and banned. Majority rules, right? Or do you think the rich should have a bigger say?

More fear based rantings, what a surprise.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I bet he points to our much more evolved brains. That's he big difference. Doesn't mean a creator exists let alone created us. Especially if they are going to claim this creator came and talked to our ancestors back in the most primitive and remote parts of the world and then vanished and is a jealous god who loves us but will send us to hell.

Or they believe in generic god. Generic god is much harder to pin down because they can't even define him. At least Christians and Muslims and Mormons and Jews have made up stories they claim are true. Stories of miracles and god(s) talking to them. Generic theists. They don't even have churches to go to. LOL

Damn, still arguing with the position I have never stated.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

“I’m sorry if my insensitivity towards your beliefs offends you. But guess what – your religious wars, jihads, crusades, inquisitions, censoring of free speech, brainwashing of children, forcing girls into underage marriages, female genital mutilation, stoning, pederasty, homophobia and rejection of science and reason offend me. So I guess we’re even.” – Anonymous

Tell me something, oh he who loves to argue with imaginary people, why don't you complain about the efforts of Democrats to reject science and reason, and want to restrict free speech?

 

[sealybobo]

“I’m sorry if my insensitivity towards your beliefs offends you. But guess what – your religious wars, jihads, crusades, inquisitions, censoring of free speech, brainwashing of children, forcing girls into underage marriages, female genital mutilation, stoning, pederasty, homophobia and rejection of science and reason offend me. So I guess we’re even.” – Anonymous

Tell me something, oh he who loves to argue with imaginary people, why don't you complain about the efforts of Democrats to reject science and reason, and want to restrict free speech?

I criticize everyone who believes as invisible man cares about them and built heaven for them because they are so special and if anyone like me doesn't believe the stories you tell me, this imaginary man has built hell for me. **** you. LOL.

Because being an atheist means you can't win an election. So yes there are many liars on the left and right who say they believe but don't really. If I were to run for politics I would say I'm a Greek Orthodox Christian. I was born into it. Would I admit I'm an atheist? No because the sheeple of America can't handle that.

 

[koshergrl]

Well that explains your ignorant commie propensity, I suppose.

 

[sealybobo]

Well that explains your ignorant commie propensity, I suppose.

Is that your dog? He's ugly.

 

[koshergrl]

I think you've already said mean things about Mylo. She'd bite you a new asshole if you say that to her face.

 

[sealybobo]

I think you've already said mean things about Mylo. She'd bite you a new asshole if you say that to her face.

No this was the first time ever making fun of your dog. Let her know I thought she was a boy. Nothing fem about her. LOL.

 

[koshergrl]

Oh maybe it was peeballs who said mean things about her.

She doesn't give a shit if you think she's a boy, trust me.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I criticize everyone who believes as invisible man cares about them and built heaven for them because they are so special and if anyone like me doesn't believe the stories you tell me, this imaginary man has built hell for me. **** you. LOL.

Because being an atheist means you can't win an election. So yes there are many liars on the left and right who say they believe but don't really. If I were to run for politics I would say I'm a Greek Orthodox Christian. I was born into it. Would I admit I'm an atheist? No because the sheeple of America can't handle that.

Can I assume that the answer to my question is no? And that you actually support Democrats who want to restrict speech and reject science and reason?

 

[Rikurzhen]

And I know plenty of Atheists and Liberals who believe Astrology is Scientific

Did you make this up yourself?

Or did you find it on one of your extreme rightwing Christian websites?

Either way you dare not provide the link because it will expose that you are not an atheist.

That's a GSS produced graph. You can go and produce it yourself. General Social Survey. Their database is web accessable. You choose the factors and out pops your graph. Or you can go read social science literature which looked at this issue.

 

[Derideo_Te]

And I know plenty of Atheists and Liberals who believe Astrology is Scientific

Did you make this up yourself?

Or did you find it on one of your extreme rightwing Christian websites?

Either way you dare not provide the link because it will expose that you are not an atheist.

That's a GSS produced graph. You can go and produce it yourself. General Social Survey. Their database is web accessable. You choose the factors and out pops your graph. Or you can go read social science literature which looked at this issue.

In other words it is nothing but the opinion of a single person who put together something to suit his partisan purposes. It has never even been peer reviewed let alone published. No wonder you were too ashamed to provide the source.

Your credibility is going negative.

 

[Rikurzhen]

He accused Pogo of "plagiarism" when it was nothing of the sort. Pogo had provided links to everything that he sourced.

Gather around folks and watch me put my head on the chopping block. Here you go, Missy, here's a nice sharp axe and my neck is bared. All you need to do to publicly humiliate me is to prove what you wrote above. Here is Pogo's plagiarized comment WITH ALL THE LINKS. Here is my comment where I provide the link to the Nazi website from she plagiarized her commentary. Here is a side by side comparison of "her" writing and the Nazi website writing:

Quoting [Pogo] form post #178

What the conservatives like to do instead of debunking their enemies' assumptions, which are also supported by mass-media, is to try to find a way to throw an accusation back at them, even a ridiculous accusation based on a specious argument and a flimsy premise. (I believe that this preference for responding with accusations, rather than truth and reason, derives from the fact that staying on the attack means not having to clarify one's own position on touchy matters. For somebody trying to win a popularity contest in the short term, rather than inform and educate for the long term, it makes perfect sense to try to keep one's own positions obscure.) The legend that Leon Trotsky coined the word racist offers a basis for that kind of rhetoric. It seems a silly argument, but they will say something like, If you use the word racist then you are a bad person like Communist mass-murderer Leon Trotsky, because he invented that word!​

Did Trotsky really invent that word? No, apparently not. The work in which Trotsky is supposed to have coined that word was written and published in Russian in 1930. I found several examples of the French form, raciste, preceding Trotsky's use of the word by far.​

I find pensée raciste (French for “racist thought”) and individualité raciste (“racist individuality”) in the volume of La Terro d’oc: revisto felibrenco e federalisto (a periodical championing the cultural and ethnic identity of people in southern France) for the year 1906.​

Je forme des voeux pour la réussité de vos projets, car je suis persuadé que, dans cette fédération des peuples de Langue d’Oc luttant pour leurs intérêts et l’émancipation de leur pensée raciste, le prestige de Toulouse trouvera son compte. (p. 101)​

("I express my best wishes for the success of your projects, because I am convinced that, in the federation of the peoples of Langue d’Oc fighting for their interests and the emancipation of their racist thought, the prestige of Toulouse will stand to gain.)​

Quoting the NAZI website:

What the conservatives like to do instead of debunking their enemies' assumptions, which are also supported by mass-media, is to try to find a way to throw an accusation back at them, even a ridiculous accusation based on a specious argument and a flimsy premise. (I believe that this preference for responding with accusations, rather than truth and reason, derives from the fact that staying on the attack means not having to clarify one's own position on touchy matters. For somebody trying to win a popularity contest in the short term, rather than inform and educate for the long term, it makes perfect sense to try to keep one's own positions obscure.) The legend that Leon Trotsky coined the word racist offers a basis for that kind of rhetoric. It seems a silly argument, but they will say something like, If you use the word racist then you are a bad person like Communist mass-murderer Leon Trotsky, because he invented that word!​

Did Trotsky really invent that word? No, apparently not. The work in which Trotsky is supposed to have coined that word was written and published in Russian in 1930. I found several examples of the French form, raciste, preceding Trotsky's use of the word by far.​

I find pensée raciste (French for “racist thought”) and individualité raciste (“racist individuality”) in the volume of La Terro d’oc: revisto felibrenco e federalisto (a periodical championing the cultural and ethnic identity of people in southern France) for the year 1906. Here the word racist was used without a hint of negativity:​

Je forme des voeux pour la réussité de vos projets, car je suis persuadé que, dans cette fédération des peuples de Langue d’Oc luttant pour leurs intérêts et l’émancipation de leur pensée raciste, le prestige de Toulouse trouvera son compte. (p. 101)

TRANSLATION: I express my best wishes for the success of your projects, because I am convinced that, in the federation of the peoples of Langue d’Oc fighting for their interests and the emancipation of their racist thought, the prestige of Toulouse will benefit.​

The differences between what you [Pogo] "wrote" and the NAZI text is that you've combined some paragraphs together and you've omitted the red texted word Translation. Otherwise what you claim as your own writing is what is found on this Nazi website.​

Here is my challenge to you, click on the links she provided in her first post and find the quoted text above. There are only 5 links and a cut/paste of any phrase you choose will work. You say I'm wrong about her plagiarism, then show everyone how wrong I am. Wouldn't that feel sweet, you'd finally have won one argument against me. Come on, think of the satisfaction you'd get from humiliating me in front of everyone.

 

[Rikurzhen]

And I know plenty of Atheists and Liberals who believe Astrology is Scientific

Did you make this up yourself?

Or did you find it on one of your extreme rightwing Christian websites?

Either way you dare not provide the link because it will expose that you are not an atheist.

That's a GSS produced graph. You can go and produce it yourself. General Social Survey. Their database is web accessable. You choose the factors and out pops your graph. Or you can go read social science literature which looked at this issue.

In other words it is nothing but the opinion of a single person who put together something to suit his partisan purposes. It has never even been peer reviewed let alone published. No wonder you were too ashamed to provide the source.

Your credibility is going negative.

You moron! The General Social Survey is run by the University of Michigan and it polls tens of thousands of people for their EXTENSIVE views on all sorts of subjects. The GSS database forms the basis for much of what we know in social science. This program has been running for decades.

You are one stupid ******* woman. I gave you the source, you can go and duplicate that very graph yourself.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Pogo already debunked your baseless allegations.

Do hyphenated-Americans contribute to racism Page 6 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

#180

So now you're an idiot.

Actually the links are to Google Books, where the originals may be read. That's not plagiarism; those are called "quotes". That's why the titles and authors are specified, and even linked. The translations are mine.

Might you have a point coming sometime soon or what?

That you are too dullwitted to comprehend that you are making an allegation that you cannot substantiate is not my problem.

Plenty of other posters saw that you were wrong in that thread. e.g.

Rik, I'm sorry but I believe you're fishing off the wrong pier.
At worst, Pogo created a form faux pas by not properly denoting the beginning & ending of cited work.

As I pointed out earlier your credibility has gone negative.

 

[Derideo_Te]

And I know plenty of Atheists and Liberals who believe Astrology is Scientific

Did you make this up yourself?

Or did you find it on one of your extreme rightwing Christian websites?

Either way you dare not provide the link because it will expose that you are not an atheist.

That's a GSS produced graph. You can go and produce it yourself. General Social Survey. Their database is web accessable. You choose the factors and out pops your graph. Or you can go read social science literature which looked at this issue.

In other words it is nothing but the opinion of a single person who put together something to suit his partisan purposes. It has never even been peer reviewed let alone published. No wonder you were too ashamed to provide the source.

Your credibility is going negative.

You moron! The General Social Survey is run by the University of Michigan and it polls tens of thousands of people for their EXTENSIVE views on all sorts of subjects. The GSS database forms the basis for much of what we know in social science. This program has been running for decades.

You are one stupid ******* woman. I gave you the source, you can go and duplicate that very graph yourself.

The data that is polled is not the issue, dullard. They fact that the results were compiled by a single person with a partisan agenda to reflect something that has never been peer reviewed or published is the issue.

Obviously you know nothing at all about how polling works and how the questions can influence the outcome and how the data can be skewed to suit the ends of the person compiling the data.

Without peer review or publication you might as well have pulled that out of your nether regions.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Pogo already debunked your baseless allegations.

Do hyphenated-Americans contribute to racism Page 6 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

#180

So now you're an idiot.

Actually the links are to Google Books, where the originals may be read. That's not plagiarism; those are called "quotes". That's why the titles and authors are specified, and even linked. The translations are mine.

Might you have a point coming sometime soon or what?

That you are too dullwitted to comprehend that you are making an allegation that you cannot substantiate is not my problem.

So you can't substantiate the accusation is what you're saying. Come one, click on her 4 links and find where she lifted the text. Those links to Google books only provide the French text, not the commentary.

You have the 5 links. C/P any text "she wrote" and see if you can find it in the links. You can find it on the Nazi website though and the Nazi website is NOT included in her 5 links.

 

[Rikurzhen]

And I know plenty of Atheists and Liberals who believe Astrology is Scientific

Did you make this up yourself?

Or did you find it on one of your extreme rightwing Christian websites?

Either way you dare not provide the link because it will expose that you are not an atheist.

That's a GSS produced graph. You can go and produce it yourself. General Social Survey. Their database is web accessable. You choose the factors and out pops your graph. Or you can go read social science literature which looked at this issue.

In other words it is nothing but the opinion of a single person who put together something to suit his partisan purposes. It has never even been peer reviewed let alone published. No wonder you were too ashamed to provide the source.

Your credibility is going negative.

You moron! The General Social Survey is run by the University of Michigan and it polls tens of thousands of people for their EXTENSIVE views on all sorts of subjects. The GSS database forms the basis for much of what we know in social science. This program has been running for decades.

You are one stupid ******* woman. I gave you the source, you can go and duplicate that very graph yourself.

The data that is polled is not the issue, dullard. They fact that the results were compiled by a single person with a partisan agenda to reflect something that has never been peer reviewed or published is the issue.

Obviously you know nothing at all about how polling works and how the questions can influence the outcome and how the data can be skewed to suit the ends of the person compiling the data.

Without peer review or publication you might as well have pulled that out of your nether regions.

You moron!. The General Social Survey is not one person with a partisan agenda, it's hundreds of people all working for the University of Michigan, social scientists, people who TEACH survey methods.

You slinging lingo around is like a monkey flinging his poo. A poll result doesn't go through peer review.

 

[Derideo_Te]

And I know plenty of Atheists and Liberals who believe Astrology is Scientific

Did you make this up yourself?

Or did you find it on one of your extreme rightwing Christian websites?

Either way you dare not provide the link because it will expose that you are not an atheist.

That's a GSS produced graph. You can go and produce it yourself. General Social Survey. Their database is web accessable. You choose the factors and out pops your graph. Or you can go read social science literature which looked at this issue.

In other words it is nothing but the opinion of a single person who put together something to suit his partisan purposes. It has never even been peer reviewed let alone published. No wonder you were too ashamed to provide the source.

Your credibility is going negative.

You moron! The General Social Survey is run by the University of Michigan and it polls tens of thousands of people for their EXTENSIVE views on all sorts of subjects. The GSS database forms the basis for much of what we know in social science. This program has been running for decades.

You are one stupid ******* woman. I gave you the source, you can go and duplicate that very graph yourself.

The data that is polled is not the issue, dullard. They fact that the results were compiled by a single person with a partisan agenda to reflect something that has never been peer reviewed or published is the issue.

Obviously you know nothing at all about how polling works and how the questions can influence the outcome and how the data can be skewed to suit the ends of the person compiling the data.

Without peer review or publication you might as well have pulled that out of your nether regions.

You moron!. The General Social Survey is not one person with a partisan agenda, it's hundreds of people all working for the University of Michigan, social scientists, people who TEACH survey methods.

You slinging lingo around is like a monkey flinging his poo. A poll result doesn't go through peer review.

BZZZT Wrong again!

You provided a link to the author of the unpublished, unreviewed paper.

Interesting to note that the #1 paper that was downloaded alongside that paper was another paper called "Conspiracy Theories".

These are little more than term papers prepared by students. Too bad your site doesn't show the marks these papers received. Wouldn't even surprise me to learn that you were the author of that bogus chart.

How is that negative credibility working out for you with your flame zone buddies? Something you all have in common?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Pogo already debunked your baseless allegations.

Do hyphenated-Americans contribute to racism Page 6 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

#180

So now you're an idiot.

Actually the links are to Google Books, where the originals may be read. That's not plagiarism; those are called "quotes". That's why the titles and authors are specified, and even linked. The translations are mine.

Might you have a point coming sometime soon or what?

That you are too dullwitted to comprehend that you are making an allegation that you cannot substantiate is not my problem.

So you can't substantiate the accusation is what you're saying. Come one, click on her 4 links and find where she lifted the text. Those links to Google books only provide the French text, not the commentary.

You have the 5 links. C/P any text "she wrote" and see if you can find it in the links. You can find it on the Nazi website though and the Nazi website is NOT included in her 5 links.

Pogo debunked your drivel to the satisfaction of posters who actually have credibility around here.

Throwing a hissyfit because you made a fool of yourself is not my problem.