Why Perry Can't Win

[JoeB131]

An atheist who makes the claim that God does not exist indeed has to offer sufficient evidence for the claim. You, and no one else ever on this forum, has offered sufficient evidence.

Fact is fact, but that you think that you, an atheist, can pass clear comments on a candidate because of religion or lack of it simply informs us that you are not logical on the subject.

Tis what tis.

I'm perfectly logical on the subject, man.

You are making a claim which is extraordinary. That isn't how science works. Science, you have to provide proof of something.

There are a whole lot of Gods you don't believe in. YOu don't believe in Zeus or Odin or Osiris or Krishna. Can you offer evidence that they don't exist? I just believe in one less God than you do.

 

[Toro]

"If God dwells inside us like some people say, I sure hope He likes enchiladas, because that's what He's getting"

- The Great 20th century philosopher, Jack Handey.

 

[NGSamson]

Guy, you keep avoiding the point... and I'm not sure why.

I put down a perfectly reasonable challenge. If you believe the Bible is true, and God is Good, then you think drowning every baby in the world is a perfectly acceptable action.

Nothing "intellectual" about it, it's a simple philosophical question.

And I asked myself this question at an early age. Eventually, despite browbeating by religious bullies, I came to several conclusions.

1) The Bible story is a myth.
2) No God that drowns babies is worthy of my worship.
3) Religions love these kinds of stories because they invoke fear. Like most bullies, they operate on fear and fear alone.
4) For a host of scientific reasons, the Noah story is impossible.

Now, I'm a realist, I know that human fear of death is going to make it very hard for us as a species to outgrow religion. We desperately want to believe that there is something beyond death.

BUt wanting isn't knowing, and no one has every provided tangible proof that there is.

So rather than treating religion with the awe and respect that I should treat race, I treat it on face value. If you hold stupid, illogical beliefs, I have every right to make an evaluation of your character and judgement based on that.

Perry's religiousity scares me a bit, but he doesn't think he's wearing magic underpants like Romney does and he doesn't listen to a pastor who screams "God Damn America" at the top of his lungs. So there is that.

Maybe some day we'll get to a point where we have to have a "least crazy" primary.

You are just stupid. You are only have your point of view. Go on about the drowning babies, I guess that's all you have, but your ignorance is glaring in the fact that all the drowned babies. You are not looking for an explanation, only an opportunity for a clever response. And so far, the ones you have given are all stupid and point to your ignorance. You are just a poor little man who gets beat up daily in life so you have to go on message boards and scream "drowning Babies". I pity you. You are nothing more then a Starbucks intellectual. Now run along back to World Of Warcraft. Miltor the destroyer is looking for his little buddy.

 

[NGSamson]

An atheist who makes the claim that God does not exist indeed has to offer sufficient evidence for the claim. You, and no one else ever on this forum, has offered sufficient evidence.

Fact is fact, but that you think that you, an atheist, can pass clear comments on a candidate because of religion or lack of it simply informs us that you are not logical on the subject.

Tis what tis.

You have to give him time to google it up. He cant do anything but throw bombs in a thread about why Perry cant win. thats why he can only say "drowning babies" and nothing else. He is to much of a coward to post it in the religious/ethics forum ware it belongs. The boy is nothing more then a Starbucks intellectual that tend to comment on religion here.

 

[JoeB131]

[
You are just stupid. You are only have your point of view. Go on about the drowning babies, I guess that's all you have, but your ignorance is glaring in the fact that all the drowned babies. You are not looking for an explanation, only an opportunity for a clever response. And so far, the ones you have given are all stupid and point to your ignorance. You are just a poor little man who gets beat up daily in life so you have to go on message boards and scream "drowning Babies". I pity you. You are nothing more then a Starbucks intellectual. Now run along back to World Of Warcraft. Miltor the destroyer is looking for his little buddy.

I always notice when they lose an argument, they resort to wild speculations about what my personal life must be like. Sorry, man, I'm nearly 50 and never played WoW in my life. I also don't drink Starbucks Coffee.

I wish that God's bad behavior in the bible was limited to the Flood. Sadly, he was just getting warmed up.

There was also-

(Genesis 19) Burning every baby in Sodom and Gomorrah. (Why, those were SODOMITE babies. They could start throwing a killer Oscar party or something.) Of course, God did make a point of saving Lot, who went on to have drunken sex with his daughters after having offered them up for gang rape. (Mind you, the bible calls Lot "Righteous".)

(Exodus 11 ) Kills every first born child in Egypt. Down to the children of the slaves and peasents.

(Judges 11) Lets Jephthah offer his daughter as a burned sacrifice (which usually involved butchering the victim before burning) because he made a foolish Oath. That'll teach him not to make foolish oaths.

(2 Samuel 12) - Kills the infant child of David and Bathsheba for David's sin.

(2 Samuel 24:1, 1 Chronicles 21:1) God kills 70,000 Israelites because David took a census. Samuel says God ordered the census, but Chronicles said Satan did.

(2 Kings 2 )- My personal favorite. A group of children on the road to Bethel mock the Prophet Elisha's bald head. God sends two "She bears" that proceeded to maul 42 of them to death. God's not just a hair club president, he's also a client!

Now I attribute these kinds of stories to a bronze age people who were frequently at the mercy of nature and tried to find explanations for the horror we understand and can counter today. But they attributed these things to God and God hasn't sent out his press agents to counter the accusations...

 

[JoeB131]

You have to give him time to google it up. He cant do anything but throw bombs in a thread about why Perry cant win. thats why he can only say "drowning babies" and nothing else. He is to much of a coward to post it in the religious/ethics forum ware it belongs. The boy is nothing more then a Starbucks intellectual that tend to comment on religion here.

Actually, i started a whole thread on the whole drowning babies thing in Religion/Ethics, but since you guys decided to turn this forum into one on faith, so be it.

(You do know the difference between "ware" and "Where", don't you?)

 

[NGSamson]

[
You are just stupid. You are only have your point of view. Go on about the drowning babies, I guess that's all you have, but your ignorance is glaring in the fact that all the drowned babies. You are not looking for an explanation, only an opportunity for a clever response. And so far, the ones you have given are all stupid and point to your ignorance. You are just a poor little man who gets beat up daily in life so you have to go on message boards and scream "drowning Babies". I pity you. You are nothing more then a Starbucks intellectual. Now run along back to World Of Warcraft. Miltor the destroyer is looking for his little buddy.

I always notice when they lose an argument, they resort to wild speculations about what my personal life must be like. Sorry, man, I'm nearly 50 and never played WoW in my life. I also don't drink Starbucks Coffee.

I wish that God's bad behavior in the bible was limited to the Flood. Sadly, he was just getting warmed up.

There was also-

(Genesis 19) Burning every baby in Sodom and Gomorrah. (Why, those were SODOMITE babies. They could start throwing a killer Oscar party or something.) Of course, God did make a point of saving Lot, who went on to have drunken sex with his daughters after having offered them up for gang rape. (Mind you, the bible calls Lot "Righteous".)

(Exodus 11 ) Kills every first born child in Egypt. Down to the children of the slaves and peasents.

(Judges 11) Lets Jephthah offer his daughter as a burned sacrifice (which usually involved butchering the victim before burning) because he made a foolish Oath. That'll teach him not to make foolish oaths.

(2 Samuel 12) - Kills the infant child of David and Bathsheba for David's sin.

(2 Samuel 24:1, 1 Chronicles 21:1) God kills 70,000 Israelites because David took a census. Samuel says God ordered the census, but Chronicles said Satan did.

(2 Kings 2 )- My personal favorite. A group of children on the road to Bethel mock the Prophet Elisha's bald head. God sends two "She bears" that proceeded to maul 42 of them to death. God's not just a hair club president, he's also a client!

Now I attribute these kinds of stories to a bronze age people who were frequently at the mercy of nature and tried to find explanations for the horror we understand and can counter today. But they attributed these things to God and God hasn't sent out his press agents to counter the accusations...

Google foo, and cut and pasted chapter and verse leaving parts out to make your self look smart. Like the conversation with Abraham on the way to Sodom, and why he did what he did. You also neglect the fact that most of the time thees incedents were used to tell a bigger story. Go have another Late if mommy will let you and run along now little Joe. Post it in religion/ethics so you and the other pseudo intellectuals can have a rep circle jerk.

 

[NGSamson]

You have to give him time to google it up. He cant do anything but throw bombs in a thread about why Perry cant win. thats why he can only say "drowning babies" and nothing else. He is to much of a coward to post it in the religious/ethics forum ware it belongs. The boy is nothing more then a Starbucks intellectual that tend to comment on religion here.

Actually, i started a whole thread on the whole drowning babies thing in Religion/Ethics, but since you guys decided to turn this forum into one on faith, so be it.

(You do know the difference between "ware" and "Where", don't you?)

Now you are not telling the truth. And you go to spelling ? want to go back and spell check all your post ? I did some already for you. You most probably didn't come out so good and thats why you did it here little joe. I will be sure to point out any further improper use of punctuation and syntax in your future post now that I know it matters to you.

 

[JoeB131]

If I bothered to google, I could list a whole bunch. I could list a whole bunch from memory.

I'm sorry, guy, is there actually stuff in the bible that makes ANY of these horrible stories sound better.

Let's look at the Abraham thing. God and Abraham Haggle about whether God will spare Sodom or not. And Abe gets God down to ten righteous men. But then God doesn't even go looking for 10 righteous guys, he just goes to save the daughter pimping, incest committing Lot, who was a swell guy despite offering his daughters up for Gang Rape.

"Um, Wait. This is the guy we are saving?"

And poor Mrs. Lot, she just got turned into salt for looking back?

Frankly, there was no excuse for what God did in Genesis 19. He killed a whole city because they were gay.

So we can get you up to at least TWO stories where God acts horribly, and you can't provide a rationalization for his actions.

 

[JoeB131]

You have to give him time to google it up. He cant do anything but throw bombs in a thread about why Perry cant win. thats why he can only say "drowning babies" and nothing else. He is to much of a coward to post it in the religious/ethics forum ware it belongs. The boy is nothing more then a Starbucks intellectual that tend to comment on religion here.

Actually, i started a whole thread on the whole drowning babies thing in Religion/Ethics, but since you guys decided to turn this forum into one on faith, so be it.

(You do know the difference between "ware" and "Where", don't you?)

Now you are not telling the truth. And you go to spelling ? want to go back and spell check all your post ? I did some already for you. You most probably didn't come out so good and thats why you did it here little joe. I will be sure to point out any further improper use of punctuation and syntax in your future post now that I know it matters to you.

I earn money from my writing, so I don't worry about it..

But, man, are you over sensitive or what, dude? Like most bible thumpers, you find that you aren't as versed in your big book of bronze age fairy tales as you like to claim, and get all upset when people point out the parts you've probably never read.

Oh, here's the thread where I discussed the whole Flood issue... If you want to move there, I'd be happy to do it.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/179331-when-i-started-becoming-an-agnostic.html

 

[NGSamson]

Here are a few in this thread.

Ideology,Spelled that wrong

yardwork, You meant yard work.

Superdelegates, You meant Super delegates

disasterous, You meant disastrous.

 

[NGSamson]

Actually, i started a whole thread on the whole drowning babies thing in Religion/Ethics, but since you guys decided to turn this forum into one on faith, so be it.

(You do know the difference between "ware" and "Where", don't you?)

Now you are not telling the truth. And you go to spelling ? want to go back and spell check all your post ? I did some already for you. You most probably didn't come out so good and thats why you did it here little joe. I will be sure to point out any further improper use of punctuation and syntax in your future post now that I know it matters to you.

I earn money from my writing, so I don't worry about it..

But, man, are you over sensitive or what, dude? Like most bible thumpers, you find that you aren't as versed in your big book of bronze age fairy tales as you like to claim, and get all upset when people point out the parts you've probably never read.

Oh, here's the thread where I discussed the whole Flood issue... If you want to move there, I'd be happy to do it.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/179331-when-i-started-becoming-an-agnostic.html

With spelling like that ? Sure you do, and you also had the world figured out at age 11. Next you will say your IQ is 175 and you have a 13 inch pecker.

 

[JoeB131]

Here are a few in this thread.

Ideology,Spelled that wrong

yardwork, You meant yard work.

Superdelegates, You meant Super delegates

disasterous, You meant disastrous.

Wow, you really are a small thing, aren't you.

Besides that fact that two of those spellings are probably correct, um, seriously, guy, do you really want me to go back through your posts and find all your errors? I mean it would provide an interesting distraction from your INABILITY to refute my point you worship a baby-drowning psychopath.

(You realize I'm baiting you at this point, and I'm actually starting to feel bad about it, right?)

 

[JoeB131]

With spelling like that ? Sure you do, and you also had the world figured out at age 11. Next you will say your IQ is 175 and you have a 13 inch pecker.

Yes, I do. I make about 2-3 thousand a year writing resumes on the side for people. (On top of my regular job as a buyer).

And never said I had the world figured out when I was 11. I don't have the world figured out now. Anyone who says he does is just being arrogant.

I just recognized sociopathic bullshit when I was 11. At least that poor woman was a frustrated lesbian who spent a whole life of religious self-loathing. I'm not sure what your excuse is.

Oh, are you ever going to get around to telling me why it was okay for God to drown babies?

 

[NGSamson]

Here are a few in this thread.

Ideology,Spelled that wrong

yardwork, You meant yard work.

Superdelegates, You meant Super delegates

disasterous, You meant disastrous.

Wow, you really are a small thing, aren't you.

Besides that fact that two of those spellings are probably correct, um, seriously, guy, do you really want me to go back through your posts and find all your errors? I mean it would provide an interesting distraction from your INABILITY to refute my point you worship a baby-drowning psychopath.

(You realize I'm baiting you at this point, and I'm actually starting to feel bad about it, right?)

Im not ashamed of them, but a writer would be. No writer who makes money at it would misspell that much shit and not correct it. Professional writers are fanatical about using spell check. No, you are like another twerp on thees boards. You are the type who sits at a table at Starbucks pecking at a lap top with a copy of some obscure authors book sitting there so passersby can see, wearing your Rachel Madaw glasses and looking like you have it all figured out. Then you go to my spelling, and when it is pointed out that any post you made in just about all of your threads have miss spellings you try and save face by saying that you are baiting me ? Sorry little buddy, you look stupid. Now run along and spell check all your post so you dont look like such an ass when you correct some one on theirs.

 

[JoeB131]

Im not ashamed of them, but a writer would be. No writer who makes money at it would misspell that much shit and not correct it. Professional writers are fanatical about using spell check. No, you are like another twerp on thees boards. You are the type who sits at a table at Starbucks pecking at a lap top with a copy of some obscure authors book sitting there so passersby can see, wearing your Rachel Madaw glasses and looking like you have it all figured out. Then you go to my spelling, and when it is pointed out that any post you made in just about all of your threads have miss spellings you try and save face by saying that you are baiting me ? Sorry little buddy, you look stupid. Now run along and spell check all your post so you dont look like such an ass when you correct some one on theirs.

I spend the time when it's IMPORTANT. I don't go back and proofread everything on a freakin' message board, especially when dealing with a funditarded homeskooler who didn't learn "contractions".

Hey, I might diss the nuns, but they did make the whole contraction thing pretty clear.

Just to be extra helpful, I bolded all your errors... and man, you made a lot of them.

Dude, I am having WAAAAAAY to much fun at your expense right now.

 

[NGSamson]

Im not ashamed of them, but a writer would be. No writer who makes money at it would misspell that much shit and not correct it. Professional writers are fanatical about using spell check. No, you are like another twerp on thees boards. You are the type who sits at a table at Starbucks pecking at a lap top with a copy of some obscure authors book sitting there so passersby can see, wearing your Rachel Madaw glasses and looking like you have it all figured out. Then you go to my spelling, and when it is pointed out that any post you made in just about all of your threads have miss spellings you try and save face by saying that you are baiting me ? Sorry little buddy, you look stupid. Now run along and spell check all your post so you dont look like such an ass when you correct some one on theirs.

I spend the time when it's IMPORTANT. I don't go back and proofread everything on a freakin' message board, especially when dealing with a funditarded homeskooler who didn't learn "contractions".

Hey, I might diss the nuns, but they did make the whole contraction thing pretty clear.

Just to be extra helpful, I bolded all your errors... and man, you made a lot of them.

Dude, I am having WAAAAAAY to much fun at your expense right now.

Good. It will give you a break from surfing all that porn. You still dont get it though, You have just as many and more. There is also the fact that you were unable to win on your point about Perry, Then you took it to religion, proved the fact that you are nothing more then a cut and paste type guy, went to my spelling as if I give a fuck about it, only have it shown that you are just as bad, and on top of that you try and say you are a professional writer, and get outed as a liar . Glad I can help out. You went three different directions and got lost in each one. Anyhow, I'm sick of this one now. See you later.

 

[JoeB131]

Good. It will give you a break from surfing all that porn. You still dont get it though, You have just as many and more. There is also the fact that you were unable to win on your point about Perry, Then you took it to religion, proved the fact that you are nothing more then a cut and paste type guy, went to my spelling as if I give a fuck about it, only have it shown that you are just as bad, and on top of that you try and say you are a professional writer, and get outed as a liar . Glad I can help out. You went three different directions and got lost in each one. Anyhow, I'm sick of this one now. See you later.

Guy, didn't say I was a professional writer, and if you had been paying the least bit of attention (which you aren't) you'd see that I largely support Perry even though I think he's a religious idiot.

I support Perry because I dislike Mormons more than I dislike Evangelicals. I suppose either one would do a reasonably good job of undoing some of the damage Obama has done, but I think Perry would do a better job because he's more of a proven leader.

As far as "winning my point", the only argument I have is with Jake the Mormon who somewhere learned that contradiction constitutes an argument.

But as long as you guys are going to get angry that I don't accept your bronze age superstitions, I'll be happy to point out the silliness of them...

(Still noted. You have yet to tell me why God drowning babies was a good thing.)

 

[NGSamson]

Good. It will give you a break from surfing all that porn. You still dont get it though, You have just as many and more. There is also the fact that you were unable to win on your point about Perry, Then you took it to religion, proved the fact that you are nothing more then a cut and paste type guy, went to my spelling as if I give a fuck about it, only have it shown that you are just as bad, and on top of that you try and say you are a professional writer, and get outed as a liar . Glad I can help out. You went three different directions and got lost in each one. Anyhow, I'm sick of this one now. See you later.

Guy, didn't say I was a professional writer, and if you had been paying the least bit of attention (which you aren't) you'd see that I largely support Perry even though I think he's a religious idiot.

I support Perry because I dislike Mormons more than I dislike Evangelicals. I suppose either one would do a reasonably good job of undoing some of the damage Obama has done, but I think Perry would do a better job because he's more of a proven leader.

As far as "winning my point", the only argument I have is with Jake the Mormon who somewhere learned that contradiction constitutes an argument.

But as long as you guys are going to get angry that I don't accept your bronze age superstitions, I'll be happy to point out the silliness of them...

(Still noted. You have yet to tell me why God drowning babies was a good thing.)

I will give you a hint, but you will have to do your own digging. Its around the part ware (just kidding) where they know they have to build a big boat. As to the candidates, I hate them all. I am down to deciding what I can live with. Theology is not part on my decision process.

 

[MikeK]

[...]

So like I said, I liked Perry when I lived in Texas. I think Obama sucks. But for reasons beyond the recognizable, Perry would almost definitely lose a general election. A lot of people will "just have a bad feeling" about him and not even be sure why. Remember, most people don't research candidates, couldn't tell you if the 2nd amendment has to do with guns or ice cream, and vote based on the impressions they get from 30 second sound bites. It won't be hard for the Dems to gather sound bites that make Perry seem like a virtual clone of W.

I hope you're right.

While my first choices were Kucinich and Gravel I voted for Obama because the alternative was McCain. But while I am thoroughly disappointed with Obama's timid performance thus far I would vote for him again if Perry is nominated -- even though I know beyond any doubt Obama is bought and paid for by Wall Street.

As I said I hope you're right but I'm not as confident as you are that he couldn't win. What Perry will have going for him is a lot of racists, myopic neo-Conservatives, cowboy-boot fetishists and brainwashed, low I.Q. right-wingers. What Obama has going against him are a hell of a lot of disappointed former supporters, blacks included, who won't vote for Perry but just won't vote at all, which could bring Perry home by default.

Maybe between now and then Nader will jump in. And considering that the public just might be tired of the parade of phony, corrupt sonsabitches they've been watching since 1980 it could be his time has come.

And maybe the DNC might draft Eliot Spitzer, but that's too much to hope for.