1. Stop revisionist Christian nation House Resolution 888

Comment #113928 by goddogit on January 21, 2008 at 2:48 am

"My" cogressperson is W. Herger (CA), whose staff is probably just civil enough not to reply to my email on this with something along the lines, though they know not the reference to which they would be making, of a certain Mr. W. Allen, describing how, as he was engaged in method-acting exercises in preparation for the part of a character named "God" in a play, he told a man who had annoyed him to "Be fruitful & multiply," although "not in those words."

Mr. Herger is a man I have never met, but seems like the absolutely worst sort of Bush-"Republican" there could be, lacking even the the odd charms of Exterminator Delay or Mr. Wide-Stance.

To be a Republican at this late date is as sure a sign as a swastika, and surer than being a born-again Christian, that whatever a person's better points there is something ugly and un-human about even their most innocuous actions and beliefs.

2. A Christmas thunderbolt for the arch-enemy of religion

Comment #15348 by goddogit on December 30, 2006 at 3:22 pm

I hope I am not pointing out the too-obvious.

Threads that runs over about three pages seem to have a recurring feature: a puffed up theist (occasionally pretending otherwise) digging up everything and the kitchen sink to draw two or three reasonable people - evidently with as much spare time as the vain, the nutty, or, as in this thread with the interminably pretentious Binx B., the self-impressed - into fruitless and quickly very dull discussion until the offensive theist disappears, going elsewhere to repeat their gremlin routine (does anyone really thin Binx B. gives a shit about the discussion? Does anyone believe interesting insights will follow from his philosophical spaghetti? Might as well talk to an "honest" YEC).

In allowing us to see example of just how blindly dishonest religion's apologists can be, this serves a sort of purpose, especially to the newbies. It is very, very tiresome for those of us who have seen it hundreds of times, however.

May interesting discussion take place on what happens in our real lives, apart from the parlour game of lies that too often is philosophy and always is any supernatural religion

Oh, and farewell for a quite long time to this and all "comments" sections. I have a resolution to withhold my opinions as much as possible, and will only be offering experiences. Pray I may find the strength to do so.

3. The Courtier's Reply

Comment #14989 by goddogit on December 27, 2006 at 9:17 pm

For those not familiar with him, Robert O'Brian is a remarkable dull troll who attempts to derail threads through the sheer power of thickheaded meanness.
He is beneath the dignity of perhaps everyone who has ever typed a message into this forum, John Davidson included.

4. A Christmas thunderbolt for the arch-enemy of religion

Comment #14988 by goddogit on December 27, 2006 at 9:10 pm

Oh! The pain! Left in my own juices by one who writes like this (pretentious horseshit terminology has been capitalized for one, by one):

"INTELLECTUAL HUBRIS, the PRESUMPTION that ONE has VANQUISHED all of ONE's opponents by SHEER force of reason, should be a warning sign. I [Binx forgot the "one" evidently!] think this is a FAIR criticism of RD. His EGO CLOUDS his judgement. ONE might say that he has a MESSIAH COMPLEX, but that would be going too far --[Note that Binx SAYS it, then pretends to object to it!]--. Let's just say he would improve his arguments if he CONCEDED the strong points of his INTELLECTUAL opponents and FOCUSED more on the INTERNAL CONSISTANCY of his own arguments."

One might consider that such a subtle thinker as this might be one the flies dare not land upon. One might think Richard Dawkins would immediately contact one as insightful as Binx to edit his writings, that they might come up to the standards one wishes they would - One means, TGD pales in quality before this Times piece, one unbiased and objective [sic] observer, such as Binx, finds.

FSM! How many rounds of "Bullshit!" one could win with Binx speaking is an interesting question. One speaking in such a manner should, perhaps, use the word "intellectual" more often. One might even note that Binx is using the same tailors as a certain famous storybook King, one would!

Back to the pot!

5. A Christmas thunderbolt for the arch-enemy of religion

Comment #14975 by goddogit on December 27, 2006 at 5:06 pm

Boy Howdy! Binx B. really has us by the family jewels everyone! Get this! it's us who are the fundamentalists, or "adherents"!
THAT is one ORIGINAL THOUGHT!
There's even a rhetorical question in there! Man, am I red-faced and squirming in embarrassment!

Of course, B.B. doesn't point out exactly what "arguments" the insufferable Mr. Cornwall makes that deserve our respect. To anyone involved in the debate, they appear to be the same nonsense offered up in lieu of evidence for the last 5,000 years or so.

Mr. Binx, could you let us in on the "argument" or two in this Cornwallian drivel that you believe I should ponder? Let the rest of us in on it, unless your are just trolling of course.

6. 10 myths - and 10 truths - about atheism

Comment #14973 by goddogit on December 27, 2006 at 4:33 pm

Arguing with theists who have the least sense of honesty is great! (And I mean the LEAST sense: David R. is not one of them, but of the ilk of Xian who smilingly strikes up a random conversation on the street before inviting you to his church or blabbing on about the "holy spirit" just in order to log more "conversion points" in that RPG heaven his inflated image of his saccharine-saintly self plays 24/7 in. [puff! huff!] Long dang sentence, sorry!)

I find myself much in sympathy with the "deistic" and "pantheistic" crowd, and am rather annoyed at Dawkins slagging of those positions, although I have come to see what I think is his real point (though still not quite agree with it). I have no real quarrel with the many fine theist scientists out there - I simply don't understand how they compartmentalize belief in something as absurd as the Catholic Church or the Resurrection or the dietary restrictions of the Torah, Koran, etc. with their knowledge of their fields (BTW atheistic "cultural background" practice of such religions is entirely different in my view). I cannot understand, indeed object to, offering the nutcases, cranks, and merely dishonest with the respect that any sort of engagement implies.

"Pass them by, boys & girls! Pass them by!"

7. 10 myths - and 10 truths - about atheism

Comment #14965 by goddogit on December 27, 2006 at 2:04 pm

WHY are people here still throwing anything but offal to that David R. troll? Because he flatters you with his "thanks for the polite responses"? I mean, what is it?
He isn't funny. He provides no insight into any subject. His respect for truth is of a classic creationist type (yeah, he claims to have no objection to ToE, but his arguments for Xianity have the same "cute" style trough which shines only one clear communication "I, David R., cannot be wrong. And when I am, it isn't important.")
He occasionally claims to be tolerant towards others, even atheists, but would ANY of you want to live under a government composed of believers of his stripe?

I do wish you all would stop feeding the vain, pompous ass that goes by that name here.

8. Huw Edwards Interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #14905 by goddogit on December 26, 2006 at 3:37 pm

Dear Garry,

It looks to me that you yourself are engaged in the exact sort of behavior you accuse (nasty word!) Prof. Dawkins of.

You are "polishing your mirror." In public.

Why?

9. A Christmas thunderbolt for the arch-enemy of religion

Comment #14778 by goddogit on December 25, 2006 at 2:51 am

More proof that any God derived from the Bible, and especially the OT, is not simply rot, but ugly, vile rot.

Keep 'em coming, Mr. Cornwall and all you half-assed pretend believers! When Jimmy Carter dies, you will enable me to assume not even one real Christian worthy of respect - intellectually, morally, spiritually - lives any monger upon the planet Earth: just scumbag power-tripping Xians on one side and hollow-men/stuffed-men rationalising Cornwallists trying to impress themselves on the other.

10. What I found out about God

Comment #14610 by goddogit on December 23, 2006 at 4:32 pm

Another very "nice," smug man in the pay of a conservative rag farts into the windstorm.
******
I must note that I am beginning to lose interest in checking this site daily, since there is as endless a supply of these yellow-snow opinions as there are moose turds in a Canadian National Park. Can't they have a warning flag or something, like:

MORE OF THE SAME

unless the article is actually causing some real debate instead of providing "tomorrow's fish-and-chip papers."

11. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #14524 by goddogit on December 23, 2006 at 2:16 am

David R. will be back to darken the threads of this forum with EXTREMELY LONG, BORING, VAIN and yet NONSENSICAL XIAN DRIVEL soon enough, boys and girls!

The Rapture cannot come soon enough a certain kind of Xian, let me tell you, and David's sort of pompous blowhard is one type that I pray may be lifted bodily to some place very far from the pleasant, green Earth.

12. The problem with secularism

Comment #14471 by goddogit on December 22, 2006 at 3:08 pm

Fuuuuuny Stuuuuuff!

13. It is possible to respect the believers but not the belief

Comment #14470 by goddogit on December 22, 2006 at 3:06 pm

Always the "escape clause" for Christianity in Europe or America. I credit Christianity with NO special "wonderfulness" and find this man's charge about "atheists like Dawkins" to be, in the Japanese phrase, like "a raccoon dog enchanting horseshit to appear like sweet buns."
It was the rejection of Christianity by the secular-minded that distinguishes the best of the "Western Mind." Christianity has nothing special to claim otherwise - everywhere else religion has inspired (or at least financed, at worst merely limited) art and served to justify violence and repression just as well, or badly.

I frankly feel there is, despite his side shot at American Xians, some basic Islamophobia inside this article. Has anyone read more of this guy and noticed this, or can definitely refute it?

14. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #13595 by goddogit on December 18, 2006 at 3:51 pm

This silly debate over the factual basis for Biblical mythology is still going on??? And being used by the Xian faction as "proof" that a character as silly as Jehovah is therefore both real AND the "Supreme Being"?????
Some atheists really have too much time on their hands, debating with such obviously thick losers ( "Someone call me?", says Shaunyboy). Better to take up online RPGs or visit weird porn sites than to toy with (and therefore encourage) people like these twisted monotheistic lying Xians with serious, even potentially dangerous, mental conditions, however "socially functional" they may or may not be.

15. Atheist Chic

Comment #13518 by goddogit on December 18, 2006 at 4:23 am

I can't speak for other people, but all I have to do is strive to be an honest, hard-working-and-playing, compassionate human being trying to understand the joy that is a life with human consciousness.
I feel at the moment that these goals pretty much fills my hands.

However, none of this means I have to put up with wanton stupidity, much less baldfaced lying (though I am sure I can do better, and will), and this guy is another of the nearly limitless zombie armies who think they can shout down what they can no longer banish, imprison or kill.

16. Response to Richard Dawkins' Criticisms in The God Delusion

Comment #13416 by goddogit on December 17, 2006 at 2:43 pm

Crowedone: "I do agree that Richard Swinburne's logic is wrong but just dismissing it with a swear word is a useless post and makes us no better than Bible bashers."

I probably disagree with all of this statement, but am unclear what a "Bible Basher" is. Prof. Dawkins opens his book with that hilarious thumping of the main character of the OT, and certainly would accept the moniker of "bible basher". Indeed, the term sounds like a badge of honor, though there is no need to see Xian nonsense as particularly worse than many others (or religious nonsense worse than ethnic- or culture-based nonsense for that matter - e.g. "Don't mess with the U.S."). What exactly is your point?

(I rarely do this, and really, really do NOT mean it as a slight in this case, but the misspelling of ridiculous confused me for several seconds. Use that spell check and some errors will be avoided.)

17. The Grinch Delusion: An Atheist Can Believe in Christmas

Comment #13408 by goddogit on December 17, 2006 at 1:44 pm

Not exclusively, but I LOVE the baby Jesus legends. Far, far, far more than the Easter nonsense (terribly unoriginal re-workings that they are) or excruciatingly obsessively dull, predictable tale of the Crucifiction (only ONE good line, and w/o that line I would consider the very idea of any possible historical Jesus as an enlightened human being rot), the Nativity myths touch both my fancy and my heart due to my feelings that they express the human condition, that we must die, with that special touch we have no name for, as best I can explain it combines indifference with joy and compassion.
Xmas (I really have a feeble, completely childish glee in taking the "Christ" out of "Christmas") is a wonderful amalgam of tradition(s) of every sort, mixed with the oddest of popular silly crassness. There is a real Xmas Spirit in the air of the America I grew up in. But the "Birth of the Savior" touches me not, except as fiction, and the viciousness that Xians wield what is a holiday for all of us was one of my earliest discoveries that believing Christians were full of shit.

Merry Xmas!

18. Response to Richard Dawkins' Criticisms in The God Delusion

Comment #13278 by goddogit on December 16, 2006 at 4:49 pm

Swinburne posting a blank page would have been as informative and moving, and saved me time.

Who is he, anyway?

Did he at least get PAID for this?

19. The Blasphemy Challenge

Comment #13277 by goddogit on December 16, 2006 at 4:44 pm

After watching an hour-plus of these - and a few of the Xian "responses" to the entire idea (warning to those not social scientists gathering data: once you have heard one Xian response, you have heard them all) I believe this to be an unbelievably brilliant idea that promises almost entirely positive results.
Like TGD, there are some slight faults, quibbles to be made about strategy, etc., etc., but the overall effects will be brilliant.

Congratulations to the RRS!

20. The Blasphemy Challenge

Comment #13167 by goddogit on December 16, 2006 at 2:25 am

Hey, I happened to scan over David R's post (unusually brief, I must say, for someone so stupidly long-winded and enchanted by the sound of his own honking) and he DOESN'T APPROVE!!!!!

Hey! Bugs! Bugs Bunny! What's YOUR opinion of David?

"Nyaaah...[crunching-nibble] What a maroon!"

21. The Blasphemy Challenge

Comment #13163 by goddogit on December 16, 2006 at 2:18 am

Being "nice" only goes so far, and only is effective in a limited way with the basically rational and with the fence-sitters. More radical, absurd, and colorful efforts (and BTW I absolutely draw the line at instigating violence against any and all living beings to promote anything) have their place whether you like them or not.
Those who chose to hate and use the tactics of hatred and fear and applied ignorance - bullying, discrimination and lying - have to be confronted in various ways to allow them to SEE WHAT THEY ARE. They preen themselves before rose-colored vanities and like Cinderella's step-sisters are willing to mutilate themselves to pretend they are the dainties deserving of marrying the handsome prince, Jesus or whoever.

This is a wild and creative tactic. I approve.

22. An Exercise in Contempt

Comment #12551 by goddogit on December 12, 2006 at 2:43 pm

More self-righteous thundering from the inside of another teapot of a nobody, this one associated with something called "American Enterprise." This immediately reminds me of, and might actually be associated with, that citadel of rationalization, the purest distillation of that illegitimate, monstrous bastardization of Darwin's ideas called "social Darwinism" - the American Enterprise Institute)
I question why such drivelling is recycled here, unless it is having some actual impact on the debate (or culture war), since there is a currently endless market for this sort of paid hackery and, like Prof. Dawkins questions from fundamentalists everywhere, they raise no interesting points but merely remind us of the poison that religion can manufacture out of fear and pride.

At best, we see another guy willing to write what sells somewhere, and we need further examples of the truth of Mark Twain's "Corn-pone Philosophy" not at all.

23. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #12427 by goddogit on December 12, 2006 at 1:23 am

It also happens in a "debate" when an ass like yourself keeps putting their hands over their ears and yelling "I can't hear you!" while trotting out "challenges" (the fecking' EYE! Get the whole hog in here and claim 2LoT!) that you yourself could have found with the most minimal investigation (see Talk Origins, and perhaps a dozen more sites).

Whoops! Gotta run! (What an asshole!)

24. Richard Dawkins on The Late Late Show with Pat Kenny

Comment #12355 by goddogit on December 11, 2006 at 3:40 pm

Rather a bore, this thread, and one not boring due to the introduction of little wooden-heads with biblical quotations, but just as tiresome in its cutesy "humor."

I especially note the fusillade of silly posts from one "...hobby" character, who seems to have misunderstood John Cage's maxim, "I have nothing to say and I am saying it" rather badly. Do give your keyboard a rest, as it isn't a good idea to wank off so often!

25. The Atheist Delusion: a pisspoor presentation

Comment #11989 by goddogit on December 9, 2006 at 3:07 am

Machos,

I have no idea what you bothered to respond to, but I give you advance warning that you should engage David R. only if you wish an uninspiring target: he is as fine an example of the pompous ignorant Xian ass as can be found on a site that attracts them like ants to honey - better yet, like fireproofed moths to a flame.
It's a bore's paradise to him, and as a bore, and a long-winded one, he intends to take full advantage of it. Since he is uninterested in discussion, which implies an EXCHANGE and HONEST EVALUATION of ideas, and has no interest in learning anything, except that what he already know is right in exactly the way he knew it was, he is best described a parasitical dullard who takes the effort and energy of others, in that vampire-like fashion that defines many fundamentalists, but (in this disembodied medium, the Internet forum) risks nothing himself, and need give nothing but time he has no use for as he waits for his future: loss of consciousness followed by decomposition.
Anyone who dares, however politely, to disagree with his particular ilk on any Xian-monitored forum would find themselves after banned twenty posts, while these creepy "no-alls" realize they can say anything, however stupid or untrue (short of threats, spamming or the release of personal info) and bore us all silly even scanning past them.

"Pass them by, boys & girls! Pass them by!"

26. The Atheist Delusion: a pisspoor presentation

Comment #11963 by goddogit on December 8, 2006 at 3:52 pm

Sorry, the rantings I referred to are on the thread "No Delusion" thread.

27. The Atheist Delusion: a pisspoor presentation

Comment #11961 by goddogit on December 8, 2006 at 3:48 pm

Check the comment on the "Dawkins Delusion - same stupid title" thread and behold the wonder of Xians who are "honestly" this stupid, and honestly proud to be so!
The defenses of the "amazin' acc'racy o' Bi'le Proph'cy!" posts are especially disheartening (I do not really find determined stupidity, or envy clothed in "Xian love" for that matter, amusing in the least).
One of those lost, fear-filled mortals retorted to my venting of spleen there with words that belong in this parody, saying something like my comments about the silliness of his beliefs "only made his faith stronger."
Riiiight! The Bible's God hardened Pharaoh's heart, for reasons that still evade me, but nowhere near as hard the fossilized hearts and diseased brains of these sorts of fundamentalists.

28. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #11901 by goddogit on December 8, 2006 at 4:50 am

David, do you type in your comments here while facing a big mirror? Whew! This site really attracts the dullest of a very dull crowd of vain-for-absolutely-NO-reason, fiftieth-rate Xians!

By ALL MEANS keep it up, David! You probably help turn fifty people a day away from the error of monotheism (at least), since no one would ever want to be part of a religion identified with people like you, worshipper of a God as moving and real as some ugly dashboard-mounted, glow-in-the-dark Jesus that you are.

What shit your kind have made of the message of the fine, if perhaps imaginary, teacher called "Jesus the Christ."

29. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #11824 by goddogit on December 7, 2006 at 1:21 pm

Tom B. says: "I imagine that no matter what i say on here will be responded to with sarcasm from this "goddogit"
but id like to let him know that all his sarcasm is doing is fueling my faith and passion."

30. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #11786 by goddogit on December 7, 2006 at 11:05 am

BillySands, etal - Give it up! You can't even hope to score a point off'n a master knothead like this Shaunyboy here, you mere mortals! You must first admit that all the facts (that he finds germane at the time) support whatever his claim is (at the moment) while you are simply reading your hopes and fears into the data!
Shaunyboy examines the data fearlessly. He begins with the known and indisputable fact that God (and, amazingly, it is the God of the Bible and not that Allah or Vishnu guy, or space aliens, or the Celestial Teapot, or FSM!) did it! He then simply follows the paint-by-numbers evidence to reveal the falsity of current evolutionary theory, finishing in mere seconds due to the intellectual power of his painting technique - he uses a roller and doesn't worry about all those "other" colours the numbers indicate (its all the same to Jehovah, y'know.)

Shauntheboy, do you expect anyone who has bothered to read a basic biology textbook to take your self-serving horseshit seriously? Somehow, I don't think you do, not really. I think you flog this 100+-year old skeletonized horse out of a religious fever that IS like a sort of disease, that IS a mania.
You clearly fear being merely human, and especially being mortal. You fear the fact that "you" don't exist in any but the most transient way. Like a wave crossing a patch of open water or a sand dune moving across the desert, "you" are a reality of a moment, if even that.
There are reasons that some wonderful people state that they believe in something like "God" (though I do not any longer, and I consider the very concept so poisoned it has becoome entirely unusable by the most spititual among us) but the one you postulate, and that you are willing to bend the facts about - outright lie, really - is obviously an impossibility; nothing but an infantile bit of fantasy. You worship a very silly, always self-serving, incorrect, stupid, unpleasuable, fear-creating myth!
I do hope you will stop kidding yourself someday, but please do us the favor of pretending you can kid us! We are all still ignorant about many, many things, but not scared children.

31. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #11735 by goddogit on December 7, 2006 at 1:10 am

I will leave the classically disingenuous mass of Xians massing on this thread to their faux polite circle-jerk. Hide your shame in whatever darkness you like!
Happiness and peace do not exist in an individual who takes lies out of laziness and declares them to be truth. I will regain both in some measure when not engaging such dull idiots.
May your lives lead you to begin thinking, and thence to life as a real human being, instead of living, unfunny scarecrows.

[sigh]

Peace.

32. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #11701 by goddogit on December 6, 2006 at 3:37 pm

How very tiring, the "honest and sincere" Xian is! - their incredible vanity being combined with an incredibly ignorant, and lazy, desire to "know" without effort.
Everything must flatter spoiled Xian babies, like Tom and Ben, or they will become peevish and hold their breathe until you complement their stupidity! Maybe they will someday reach the mental age of four, and begin asking questions to adults who know the real answers to some, and inspire interest in learning the answers to the many they can only speculate upon.

How easy it is to understands Dawkins' "crankiness" when not on the podium, given the shallow, stubborn and endlessly repeated stupidity that he is sincerely asked again and again and again and again!

Your type of believer is frankly utterly dishonest, however "sincere," since you insist that your filthy sty of an imagination is a paradise all should admire and desire, and your mud pies of "evidence" are an ambrosia all should beg to savor.

At the simple, ordinary human level, your kind really do deserve to be despised, but I only have pity for you, and my contempt is for your illusions and the lies you are willing to use to maintain them (and any abuse of others that you may make based upon those illusions.)

33. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #11690 by goddogit on December 6, 2006 at 2:37 pm

Tom Bennett is ample enough reason for any reasonable. reasoning human being to decide that "God" - at least the Biblical God imagined by Tom B. - is perhaps the most absurd idea ever to have gained even modest popularity.
I would generously assume that Tom B. is a parody, but, to quote Howard in "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre" he "ain't a good enough actor for this kind of a trick."

Tom, you, more than anybody, needs to read the entire TGD and force your faith-encrusted brain to think while your eyes scan the words. Note that the title fits your bizarro world to the absolute "T"!

Oh, and I HAVE read the entire bible at different times in my life, and each time have been further bored by all but the most slender flashes of ancient poetry while ever more horrified at the nutty idea that it provides "moral" instruction.

In conclusion, you and your type are entirely free to believe in teapots or pasta or even Jehovah, but don't expect others not to call you when you spout lies and horseshit, which constitute 100% of what you wrote here. And I mean 100%.

34. Richard Dawkins: You Ask The Questions Special

Comment #11284 by goddogit on December 4, 2006 at 4:09 am

Grandmasters do this same sort of casual game, but at least the challengers have to pay a bit for the privilege. These folks should really have to fork over a donation to Dawkins' foundation if he has to bother tossing off these silly, dull, endlessly repeated questions, just due to the ignorance of the questioners.

35. A Modest Proposal for a Truce on Religion

Comment #11078 by goddogit on December 3, 2006 at 4:15 am

I'd get upset, but this guy is the classic ineffectual kind of cat box liner that the NYT uses to maintain its thickness, in both senses. His opinions are so trifling, yet so predictable in their method of pandering, he really should be a sportswriter.

36. The Dawkins Delusion

Comment #11010 by goddogit on December 2, 2006 at 3:54 pm

A lovely example of the mineral idiocy of the "thinking" Xian can be seen in evidence just above.

Gads, Phil! What a crock of indefensible nonsense, portrayed as thoughtful sympathy!
Why don't YOU read what you've written (#11009) and notice that 1) you are insufferably vain; and 2) you are plainly dishonest.
Since not a shred of modesty or humor is in evidence in your pompous prose, all I can say is I'm glad you aren't some in-law I'll have to deal with every family gathering, what a long-winded, self-important, silly bore you must be in person!

It's believers like you, whose "faith" is nothing but fear, practised ignorance, and native stupidity, that prove what "bad animals" we human beings have become right now.

37. John Safran vs. The Mormons

Comment #10881 by goddogit on November 29, 2006 at 3:19 pm

Standard 'mer'kin Xian ideas of "tolerance" are wonderfully displayed here. As usual, "tolerance" means everyone else tolerating them, while they slam doors, swing brooms, or pass ordinances to prevent others from exercising the same rights.
It's the same sort of "the rules are whatever lets me win" we see in the Bu--sh--/Faux News definition of "free speech" - they're free to speak and you are free to listen.

38. Let us test Darwin, teacher says

Comment #10371 by goddogit on November 28, 2006 at 1:12 am

Anyone can see what the typical "test" will be by going back to the procedures used to "test" for witchcraft: if Darwin passes the ordeal, he's guilty, but if he fails, we go on about our business.
Since even most of the dishonest shites demanding Creationism be the ONLY "theory" taught know that ToE represents the best evaluation of the data, attack and execution is the only outcome they really are willing to discuss.

39. Our Teapot, which art in heaven

Comment #10262 by goddogit on November 27, 2006 at 3:34 pm

My favorite part of this long bit of mental masturbation:

"For the umpteenth time," he wails, "natural selection is the very opposite of a chance process." For the umpteenth time, explain.

He forgot to add "Wait a moment, till I have my fingers in my ears and start shouting "I can't hear you!"

How transparently false the faith of such people, the "believers in belief", is to offer up old chestnuts with old chestnut sauce and a side of old chestnuts! It sort of like the Spam! menu in MP'sFC.

40. Revealed: rise of creationism in UK schools

Comment #10251 by goddogit on November 27, 2006 at 3:01 pm

Ah! If only we could safely tour the sort of mind, such as it is, that exists in someone as silly as Timelord, who is the type of creationist lacking the real excuses for his (I am sure) beliefs. Turn over a rock here, or a moldering thought there and we'd find many nasty, nasty things, but not a shred of humility, or awe (his sense of awe is the same as his sense of shame), much less any thoughts that could be considered, in the 'nice" sense of the word, "Christian."
Creationists are perfect examples of the totally convinced, and "the totally convinced and the totally stupid have to much in common for the resemblance to be accidental."

You are a crappy little, dried-up, vain mortal wasting a perfectly good and rather expensive human lifetime, "Timelord". Be sure to hide within whatever flock of believers will camouflage your meanness and fear.

41. Why Are Atheists So Angry? A Debate with Dennis Prager

Comment #9938 by goddogit on November 26, 2006 at 2:19 pm

Dear $9847 Dave,

Please breath deeply a few times and clear your mind, then attempt to view the issues that you have seen fit to comment upon once again.

I suggest that in your comment above, you are passing along the most hackneyed of all dishonest responses from the belief community, and it is as powerful in its logic as "up is really down" and "black is really white" in its persuasiveness.
Bother yourself to THINK FOR YOURSELF half a minute and you will notice a yawning void where prayers yield no echo at all.

42. Why Are Atheists So Angry? A Debate with Dennis Prager

Comment #9744 by goddogit on November 25, 2006 at 8:28 pm

The best arguments the theists had to throw up [!] were all done, at least in English, in the 19th Century, and very elegant and moving some of them are - as poetry and fiction they raised bumper harvests. Since then, as we can see most vividly in Mr. Prager's writings (but is very evident to the most casually unbiased observer even in the case of a decent Christian and scientist like Francis Collins) the believers have endlessly tilled the same never-fallowed soils with the same worn and ever-duller, jury-patched tools, and with ever diminishing returns.
Their assumptions and techniques look simply foolish in a world in which so much more is known about nature and humanity's place within it, as silly as the 19th Century's flat- and hollow-earthers. They have exhausted their ideas to such a degree that people like Dubya and Robertson are touted as "deeply religious" when plainly they are simply "spiritually" blind and morally bankrupt to anyone outside their flocks, and many uncomfortably within.
Belief, as abused by the typical theist, however educated, is now an unfunny joke whose punchline can be told before the theist finishes clearing his throat to tell it yet again. You can see it coming in that dull twitch of his mask-like happy smile, like the symptom of nervous illness to which it can so easily be compared, mastering his humanity in the interest of its own survival.
Clowns like Prager (someone who's shows are regional variations of 1984's "hates"), when they give the opposition the chance to speak at all, resort to the same evasive blathering that should have become unacceptable in the debate 50 years ago. If they simply repeated honest nonsense they could be no less persuasive, except to those chanting along with them, afraid to be seen as less enthusiastic than their neighbor.
How tiring! And how uselessly, if for some profitably, dishonest!

43. Leaders back faith in public life

Comment #9463 by goddogit on November 24, 2006 at 9:00 pm

I tolerate faith, even when I don't respect it. What I won't tolerate is bullshit served up as caviar.

44. How Predictable: Richard Dawkins Supports Eugenics

Comment #9462 by goddogit on November 24, 2006 at 8:57 pm

I would bet a month's salary that, if we pressed this guy about his claims, we would find a simple Animal Farm catch, with "some animals (including himself) have more equal 'moral worth' than others."

45. Reptiles of the Mind -- Giving Thanks for Rational Atheists

Comment #9358 by goddogit on November 24, 2006 at 3:01 pm

As Nelson says, " Whoa! Talk about your pieces of crap!"

Can someone near and dear to Mr. Eskow please give him a fookin' clue?

46. Public school teacher tells class: 'You belong in hell'

Comment #8871 by goddogit on November 22, 2006 at 3:37 pm

DBruce, no one has to "pile hate on this guy" to be "better" than him, since his words speak for themselves.
Evidently being upset about this rather vicious and indefensible abuse of authority equals "hate" to you.
Well, thanks for writing! But, well, what do YOU think should be done about such a teacher, involved in teaching his personal mythology as respected scientific fact? (MANY teachers, and in this country ALL of the abusers are "born-again" Xians, are doing this TODAY.) What should be done about teachers who condemn a student because of their philosophical or religious beliefs, or their ethnic background?

You would have done better to offer your own answers before trotting out this "cast the first stone" line. However admirable it is in itself (very), you've come across like a self-righteous hypocrite by posting as you have above (#32).
Please expand on your comment and offer solutions for the problem, rather than slinging mud in place of stones.

47. Atheism, not religion, is the real force behind the mass murders of history

Comment #8678 by goddogit on November 22, 2006 at 12:52 am

More from a paid whore (is a gentler word even needed?) of an organization which defends a definition of "Christianity" in EVERY way opposite to the teachings of Jesus Christ himself, and a definition of "democracy" that would see the permanent and brutally enforced rule of a class who have the gall to reject the implications Dawkins argues so well in TGD while advocating an economic system of the most extreme and selfish kind of "Social Darwinism," though their kind named it other things before, and likely call it something else now.

The program of this paid escort is the dullest and most servile kind of tripe: everything his masters do, will do, or have done is by definition "good," and everything bad is not merely bad but evil, and demonstrably the fault of his masters' enemies, or some instantly forgivable "accident."

Only the fact that such people are mortal allows me to feel the tiniest grain of pity for such wasted, evil-intended men. May they find the treasure of love and compassion they have buried so deeply in the cellars of their maddened, vain minds.

48. How Full Is Your Quiver?

Comment #8385 by goddogit on November 21, 2006 at 5:26 am

Do they believe vaccinations are evil? If not now, give them another five years before they find a Bible verse that they interpret that it is.
Natural selection doesn't take any notice of Xian truth. The Xian God's mercy, even if such a silly being existed, is notoriously thin, despite the hullabaloo these forks make about it.

49. Remember, Remember, the Fifth of November...

Comment #7959 by goddogit on November 20, 2006 at 2:31 am

"A plot full of treason! As we all have committed treason against the Will of God, but through Jesus we blah-blah-blah..."
"Right from the beginning, Adam and Eve, we have all been guilty of treason, but Jesus blah-blah-blah...!"

WTF DOESN'T remind this brain-dead shite about Jesus?

"This glass of orange juice I have here, the sacrifice of the fruit rendered lovingly to soothe my parched throat, which reminds me of how the blood of Jesus soothes the throats of all mankind. And it's Tuesday, the name of which comes to us from Thor, the Thunder God, which reminds me of Jesus who thundered at the moneylenders in the temple!"

When otherwise sensible people start defending the value of Christian belief, this clip should be played. No one NOT a fool would bother to continue the discussion, lest they be seen defending such embarrassing tripe.

50. The Big Question: Why are we here?

Comment #7952 by goddogit on November 20, 2006 at 2:18 am

Another very good show, but the flattering opening "We may be unique in the Universe!" I could really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really have done without.
As much as I prize life, mundanely beautiful (and safe) as my own is, a corner of my mind resonates with WSB's view, that humanity is a sort of mistake, an evolutionary dead-end. I certainly and vehemently do not want science to resume the particularly horrid, useless, and destructive idea of the "special uniqueness" of homo sapiens. That IS traditionally the job, or confidence trick, of Religion, and one I especially consider a prime reason to abolish it.
Richard doesn't believe this, I believe, and should note how tinny this proclamation sounds at the show's opening.