501. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169767 by Bonzai on April 26, 2008 at 6:03 pm

Cartomancer

I still think that ignoring the association of "gay" with "frivolous", "feeble" or "lame" is a mistake.

I understand your point. Not to disagree with you, I just want to add that sometimes gay people go out of their ways to project those images, perhaps to make a point, I don't know. I know this gay guy who has a very exaggerated lisp, we all assume that is just the way he speaks and never pay too much attention to it. But one time he got angry when someone spilled his coffee or something , he went on a verbal fight and there was not a trace of his usual way of speech, He sounded like, well, a normal guy.

I often see very closeted gays describing themselves as "straight acting". I wonder how "real" gays should act.

502. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169761 by Bonzai on April 26, 2008 at 5:46 pm

MaxD

In highschool one of my best friends was a loud complainy gay guy. We were having the kind of fake argument all friends do and I said, "Shut up faggot" in the way I did with all my other guy friends at the time. He knew what I meant but I immediately apologized. But it wasn't until that moment that I realized how terribly out of line it was. I stopped saying things like "that is gay," or calling people the names I've mentioned almost overnite. I can't recall using them again in high school, and certainly not after.

I see no problem if you were best friends and knew that those were fake arguments. Being friends means you can get away with jokes that would be normally considered bad taste. My friends tell Asian jokes and gay jokes to taunt me all the time. I don't have the slightest problems.

I don't even see a problem in saying "this is so gay". I wouldn't think most people who say that are raving homophobes, it's just an expression.

503. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169758 by Bonzai on April 26, 2008 at 5:38 pm

MaxD

. But say it is a choice then the arguement could be made that society needn't accept it or be asked to grant partnerships any special dispensations or recognitions. It is after all person X's choice to forego traditionally accepted marriage so it isn't societies fault that they don't get traditional marriage benefit. Whether it is or isn't determined presents political problems.

Well I don't see how that follows. Mixed race marriage used not to be recognized. In Canada, as recent as the 1950's a white woman was committed to a mental institution for trying to marry her Chinese boyfriend. So how did mixed race marriage become acceptable? It is obviously a choice to marry someone of a different race.

504. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169751 by Bonzai on April 26, 2008 at 5:27 pm

Your last point about searching for "things to blame, or some excuses, for who we are," seems strange to me. What is the harm in trying to understand the underlying causes for behavior in humans? "Some excuses for who we are?"

There is no harm in that. But that shouldn't be cited as the primary reason for acceptance of homosexuality (EDIT: also there is no solid science to say that homosexuality is entirely "born", even though it may be for some homosexuals, IMO human sexuality is more varied and diverse than you can glean from birds, say)

I have made some editing to clarify my point, Sorry for the changing post, I wonder why there is no previewing feature here anymore.

505. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169747 by Bonzai on April 26, 2008 at 5:13 pm

Teratonis

Doesn't everyone?

Maybe you do, No wonder you are counting on Moore's law to bring down the cost of virtual reality dating.

506. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169746 by Bonzai on April 26, 2008 at 5:08 pm

MaxD

This gives some illusion that this is a choice to those who oppose homosexuality

I have long been arguing that whether sexuality is "choice" or "born" should not be an issue at all except for the scientists. People shouldn't be subjected to abuse and harassment because of who they want to have relationship or sex with, period.

For those who hate homosexuals, even if it is proven beyond doubt that it is genetic, they can still make the case that it is a genetic disease, a birth defect, or as someone here said earlier, a "dysfunction".

Perhaps I am too logical about this, but to my mind using biological determinism as the primary argument for gay rights rubs me the wrong way, it comes across to me as a kind of pathetic "blame the genes" apologetic. I don't like to be painted as some kind of genetic victim, even though the victimhood is only implied. I don't think we would go very far if we still think that we have to find something to blame, or some excuses, for who we are.

So what if it is a choice? We don't care whether people choose to like sweet or born with a sweet tooth, do we? Speaking of which I am not into cakes so no baking recipe to contribute.

507. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169738 by Bonzai on April 26, 2008 at 4:44 pm

how do you think the homophobia question should be addressed?

That depends on the context of course. I agree with Cartomancer earlier that in a school context the issue of freedom of expression shouldn't arise because students have no unconditional freedom of expression. The school can have any policy it chooses as long as it is even handed and reasonable.

508. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169734 by Bonzai on April 26, 2008 at 4:39 pm

Coylus beats me to it. I was about to say he got into this whole side issue on conservatives v.s liberals as a way to avoid answering the flood question.

509. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169730 by Bonzai on April 26, 2008 at 4:34 pm

MaxD

Shoule someone be allowed to make a case for exterminating people whose ring and middle fingers are the same length (a sure sign they are werewolves)? I think they should. Because I think people carrying out the actions are the ones responsible.

There is problem with that reasoning, Counseling others to commit crime is a crime in itself. Would you say Gobbels should have been off the hook because he was merely churning out propaganda? The Priests in Ruwanda who incited their congregations to go on murderous rampage are convicted of war crime even though they never pulled the trigger themselves. Do you think they should be let go?

510. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169722 by Bonzai on April 26, 2008 at 4:26 pm

It seems to me we have a homeopathic god - diluted by reason and observation to the point where he is no longer there.

Not a bad evolution, to go from a hemorrhoidic,--pain in the arse,--God to a homeopathic one,

511. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169342 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 7:36 pm

P.S. There is a Chinese film out about the Mohists called "Mo gong." I have not seen it.

It is on the internet, though no English subtitles.

512. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169325 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 7:11 pm

A fruit cake?

513. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169314 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 6:53 pm

Lil

P.S. My paper is on Spinoza and Zhu Xi, when I'm done I could email it to you so that you see why I'm not completely down on the man.

Thanks, but probably Zhu Xi is not my top priority now.

However, as a suggestion for your next project in Chinese philosophy, I would be really interested in knowing more about Mo Tze. He lived around 400BC IIRC but is not very well known because of the consolidation of two schools after the Spring Autumn period,-- the Confucian and the Legalist, though the Legalist philosophy was largely absorbed in clandestine into the running of the bureaucracy, especially the penal system rather than remaining front and center like Confucianism.

In addition to being a philosopher,Mo Tze was a logician, an engineer and a martial artist. He advocated universal brotherhood , as oppose to the hierarchical way of Conficus. He had a doctrine called "jin ai" meaning "love without discriminations" and was severely criticized by Menicus,--a disciple of Confucius',-- who said that humans by nature discriminate and show favouritism towards relatives and families and only animals would love without discrimination. You can see how revolutionary and subversive his thought was, even by today's standard and how it would naturally be suppressed by the rulers.

514. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169306 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 6:36 pm

Sorry, I edited the post again, Since I can't preview it it can be very frustrating,

515. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169297 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 6:21 pm

Lil

One correction: "You have to also understand he was a politician." He was in the civil service, but quit. He spent the rest of his life as an educator: writing, teaching, setting up schools, and resuscitating the a very famous academy, the name of which I cannot remember. He actually believed that scholars in his time should withdraw from politics and pursue a more contemplative life

Did your source mention the Literary Inquisition and the power struggles behind different factions in the government? IIRC he was either forced out or quited knowing that he couldn't hang on anymore.

A "contemplative life" was also an euphemism of talking abstractions which wouldn't lend you into troubles, as the Ming Dynasty was one period when the literary Inquisition was most severe, Misspoke a word could had your whole extended clan exterminated and government officials were in an especially precarious position,

From what I recall, Zhu Xi was against the trend of withdrawal into abstraction. So you figure this out: If he spoke against power,--as the traditional Confucian scholar was supposed to do, that would have gotten him into big troubles, but he was against divorcing from practical concerns, so what was the option left? He spoke for power, that was what I gather anyway.

516. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169293 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 6:09 pm

Lil

hank you for being honest. I do care what he wrote, but that's because its my job.

I understand your concerns,.

You are speaking as a philosophy scholar, which is very commendable, But I am interested in Chinese history, so my focus has always been on how ideas manifested themselves in a given historical setting rather than in the abstract.

I think especially in Chinese history, there is always a very big gap between ideas on paper and in practice, partly because literacy was rare and it was used as a weapon by a small cabal against their subjects. Very often what non Chinese consider "Chinese culture" is only the sophisticated culture of a very tiny elite, which has absolutely no bearing of the lives on 99% of Chinese people.

Another factor to consider is the way the traditional scholastic class manipulated language and this has become a part of Chinese political culture that baffles many foreign scholars.

To give you an idea of what I mean, I have read some western scholarly work about contemporary Chinese history, specifically about the Mao period. These are written by historians, but not literary scholars. I had the strangest feeling after I read these works. They are very well documented and they cite a lot of archive works, I would say they are much more rigorous comparing to similar books written in Chinese, yet somehow there is something not right, the whole picture was not something I can recognize from knowing people who actually lived the period and reading first hand books and magazines from the time (I could find them in old book store even though I was born much later)

What is missing, I think, in those scholarly work, is a nuanced understanding of Chinese political culture, which renders their interpretations of their data to be quite off, even though they do a much more impressive job in collecting and cataloging their data than Chinese historians typically do, For example, they would tend to take internal communications and conversation record quite literally, not knowing that Chinese leaders always talk in euphemism, even with each other. So they would be quite mistaken to view these communications as "plain talk" as you would with say, unclassified U.S. records.

This kind of double speak went back a long time and might have reached its peak at the time of Zhu Xi (Ming Dynasty) because of the "literary inquisition".

517. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169286 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 5:18 pm

Lil,

That was a typo, I corrected it. I don't know exactly what source I can tell you because I am Chinese, I read bits and pieces from all kinds of history books as I grow up and they are all Chinese sources, Not all of my sources are history or philosophy works, there are a fair bit of works by contemporary literary authors of the "May fourth" period such as Lu Xun as well,

Perhaps you can look into books about Confucianism around Song and Ming dynasties, they called those systems under the name "Li-Xue".


I gather that you are not really Chinese, but just using a Chinese handle, am I right?

Edit: have edited.

Edit

." The puritan analogy doesn't make sense at all, since his ethical thought was revolutionary, not fundamentalist crackpot shit.

As I said he was a hypocrite. He talked the big talk meanwhile was whoring around and raped some prostitutes. You have to also understand he was a politician, what looked good on paper might not jive with reality. Whatever he wrote, Neo Conficianism "in action" was pretty repressive, almost Taliban like for women, another saying coming out from post Zhu Xi Confucianism was "For a woman ignorance is a virtue."

Classical, scholastic Chinese is very difficult to read so no, I haven't read his writing in original except for excerpts and commentaries here and there, you have to be a classic scholars to be able to read them. All my sources are secondary.

518. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169281 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 5:13 pm

Remanant and TTID are two nut cakes.

519. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169274 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 4:59 pm

Apparently you know nothing about moral philosophy. Have you read the Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle? Kant's Critique of Practical Reason or Zhu Xi's Daquan?

Zhu Xi was a known hypocrite and an arsehole, he was some what like the Confucian version of a Puritan. The status of women in China took a nose dive because of him. A perverted chastity cult developed as a result of his brand of "neo Confucianism" (neo con?). they had a slogan that roughly translated as " Losing your chastity is worse than starving to death.." Young widows, even in their teens or twenties, were forced to remain celibate for their rest of their lives. While Zhu Xi didn't invent foot binding, but the general ethos of his women hating philosophy certainly helped to spread and consolidate the practice.

520. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169255 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 4:45 pm

Ten commands came out of that. Most of those commands related to not ogling your neighbor's missus or her ass. :

So TrueID is going to hell in a hand basket, he said he had seen Al's mother naked. How Christian, go figure.

521. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169250 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 4:40 pm

Lil_Xunzian, a good way to argue that morality can't come from divine command (passed on through the bible) is to bring out Euthyphro...

Or just the fact that God never communicated his "divine commands" to us in a sufficently unambiguous way. They are all interpreted by men who claim to have God's email address, and these men disagree with each other, sometimes violently even within the same religion. So in practice we have to define morality through other means anyway.

522. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169244 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 4:37 pm

You don't need to read all these philosophers to understand you don't need the Bible for morality. Reading the Bible would be enough to show that beyond all doubts.

523. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169234 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 4:28 pm

As predicted, Remnant cuts and runs again.

I wonder why he is here at all, just makes some inane posts, quotes a whole bunch of Bible, makes some pointless, patronizing insults, makes a few threats about us "eventually having to "face the Truth" when it is too late..", but never really engages in any conversation, never answers a single question.

Is this the kind of "intellectuals" they have to offer? I won't even get into TTID.

Is that what they want to teach in biology classrooms if given equal time?

524. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169223 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 4:18 pm

Remnant

Cake is the universe
Baker is the creator of the cake

Is it just me who finds that remarkably similar to Wooter's style?

The universe is not like a cake so your analogy fails. No competent science teacher would make such an idiotic analogy, so give it up. It is an "insult to intelligence" rather than "intelligent design".

Instead of coming up with inane analogies which presuppose your conclusion why don't you actually answer just one question honestly? The flood question would be a nice start.

You people keep asking for "equal time" for creationism and ID but what the hell are you going to say even if given equal time?

C'mon, now you have the whole podium, SHOW US SOME POSITIVE CONTENT OF YOUR PROGRAM, MAN!

P.S Actually I bet you plagiarized/cut and paste the baker and cake thing from some creationist source but nevermind.

525. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169190 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 3:40 pm

Remnant,

Do you think it was appropriate for TruthID to talk about other people's naked mothers? Is this the kind of "animal like" behavour that you would want to shield your children from? Would you allow your children to go to a Church with someone like TruthID?

Just wondering.

526. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169181 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 3:33 pm

TruthID Comment #169151 ,

Nice try quote mining George Wald.

Read it in context

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/part4-2.html

--------------

Hey all,

I tried to go to talkorigins, but omitted the "s" in the end and typed "talkorigin" by mistake, a screen opened with "Jesus saves". Now with the deliberate quoting Wald out of context I have found two examples of "lying for Jesus" within just a few key strokes.

These people are telling us they have superior morality. Sheesh.

527. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169150 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 3:13 pm

TheTruthID: 5keptics ID question?

Good luck. This one cannot even string a coherent sentence together, he would rather talk about your mother instead. Next to him Remnant looks like an intellectual.

528. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169138 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 2:57 pm

I must say the worst troll award goes to The TruthID.

Remnant, you lost.

Now I want to hear your comments about your brother in faith's behaviour here. Would you rank it as "animal like"?

529. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169122 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 2:52 pm

The TruthID

Al-rawandi,

Wrong again. I've seen your mother naked also.

So according to Jesus you should rip your eyes out in order to enter heaven.

Remnant, am I right?

530. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169104 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 2:45 pm

Just as I think Remnant is the worst of theists we have got (actually maybe a toss up with wooter) We have The TruthID. Is this the kind of people they send these days?

At least the Rev. Robertson can string a coherent sentence together.

531. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169085 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 2:38 pm

riandouglas

Don't think there is much of the "tender" sort in there however. Probably a bit rough for most, though Remnant seems to like it - closet (or not so closet) S&M fetish?

Damn right, the whole Yahweh worship is one big S&M fantasy. The "love" of God as explained by Remnant is the kind of an abusive boyfriend. Then to top it all, God decided to have a little bit of fun being the bottom and role played a guy who got a taste of full Mel Gibbson actions.

The whole thing is deranged.

532. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169055 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 2:28 pm

I think The TruthID's post to Elli (#4471)is offensive, I just flagged it.

Is this kind of hooligan behaviour representative of Christians? Yeah I know, since Jesus paid for their sins they think they should act like arseholes to make it worthwile.

533. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169008 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 2:08 pm

For example, people can be secular, atheistic and yet still vote for conservatives and republicans.

Exactly, Remnant should look up scooterynyc.

He is just trying to avoid the flood question by digressing.

534. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169000 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 2:02 pm

riandouglas

I said before, it's an irrational fear of the way Diacanu, Al, Rev Dark, irate and others (apologies if I missed anyone) wield profanity.
That, or he's afraid they'll catch "the gay" off your good self and Steve (again, apologies if I missed anyone)

As Diancanu so insightfully pointed out, if he is not afraid to show his children the X rated material in the Bible, which is full of gratuitous sex and violence, what is a little bit off hand swearing and man to man love (I never talk about my non existent sex life, maybe steve did. :)P)

If he thinks his kids are so easily corruptible, that is an indication of lack of faith, either for his children or God, or perhaps he thinks God would use the opportunity to test them and they would fail?

Having said that, I am sure we would put on our best behaviour for juniors. We are a reasonable lot.

535. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168988 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 1:53 pm

Remnant,

Stop digressing into the irrelevant.

ANSWER THE FLOOD QUESTION PLEASE!

536. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168979 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 1:47 pm

Al

TRUTH FEARS NO DEBATE

Exactly, I wonder why Remnant doesn't tell his children about this site and his debate with us here. Maybe he doesn't have enough faith in them, or in God, or both?

537. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168790 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 11:01 am

I know you are, but what am I?

I thought this was a zen riddle.

538. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168778 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 10:48 am

Diacanu,

The Bible should be triple X rated.

539. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168774 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 10:47 am

I know Remnant would not tell his/her children about this site. So much about allowing them to read anything and make up their own minds.

540. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168753 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 10:32 am

Check the numbers, studies have shown that religious people give far more to charity than secular people. I have been on many a mission trips and worked in many food lines helping the less fortunate and have yet to run into an atheist group.

Of course, giving money to Churches would be counted automatically as "charity" and it is tax deductible too,

Mission trips are just excuses for proselytizing, basically exploiting a valuable cause for PR.The evangelicals are the worst in that regard. The Catholics, at least to their credits don't require homeless people to listen to Jesus before they feed them.

541. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168737 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 10:24 am

Remnant

How about telling your children about this site and letting them participate in the discussions to make up their own minds.

Do you accept the challenge?

542. Humans nearly wiped out 70,000 years ago, study says

Comment #168731 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 10:18 am

Vaal,

In several thousand years the Morlocks will be living in the deserts with their camels or underground living in fear of their small despotic desert God. The rest of us will be colonising the galaxy, with the occasional foray back to Earth as an anthropological exercise to see how our our superstitious cousins are getting on.

Well except for one little wrinkle, the Morlocks are evolutionary favoured because they have vastly more children. Stupidity is a selected trait, maybe it is us who are going the way of the Dodo.

Jesus said the dumb shalt inherit the earth long before Darwin.

543. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168722 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 10:09 am

Oh, fuck Al, that doesn't look like Duff man at all, except for the cap.

544. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168717 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 10:06 am

Steve

Certainly conversations regarding science.

Well science is not intuitive to most people and knowledge in scientific facts doesn't necessarily tell you a person's overall world view if he is not intimately involve in science.

With people like Remnant I am more interested in dissecting their moral view because it is intuitive and informs their views on other things as well, including science.

If someone has the view that good and bad is defined by the arbitrary edicts of deities, that the place of humanity is on its kneels, disobeying is the cardinal sin and independent thinking is a temptation from Satan, then you can't reason with him on most topics, let alone science.

545. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168701 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 9:49 am

mesomodel

The example you gave from the God Delusion doesn't apply here. At least that's my take.

I agree. People capable of compartmentalize would have to have at least a little bit of independent thinking ability. No one, in my experience, that can compartmentalize would buy into Biblical morality in the way Remnant does. When someone tells you that humans are all unworthy because we have "sinned" in some unspecific way,--or the apple, --that it is our moral duty to obey God and accept "salvation" from God's own judgment but "God owes us nothing", this person has a slave mind. He is too primitive to even compartmentalize.

546. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168689 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 9:37 am

Steve,

You asked

What gives supernatural dictators the right to decide the right to life? That's what I want to know.

He answered that already earlier

First of all, you are comparing the action of a divine God to human atheists. God as our Creator is supreme and owes us nothing. We are blessed that He even created us and gave us His beautiful creation.

So much for "love", it is not even a minimally responsible attitude for someone who has brought sentient lives into this world to think that he is entitled to destroy or torture them because "he owes them nothing".It is fine that God treats us like toys or livestocks, we in turn owe him no loyalty, but spare us the melodrama about his "infinite" love.

I wonder whether people who agree with the logic that "I bring you into the world so I owe you nothing" should be allowed to be parents.

547. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168660 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 9:12 am

Remnant

Since you claim to be so open minded about your children's education, I challenge you to tell your children about this site where they can find a lot of educational material. I would also ask you to tell them about your presence here so they can see how old dad debates the atheists and draw their own conclusions.

Would you accept the challenge?

548. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168580 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 8:09 am

Rem,

I still can't see what "love" you're babbling about. If we haven't been condemned and convicted for "sin" that we don't even know we have committed we wouldn't need to have Jesus going through the Mel Gibbson routine of "salvation". Now we are being threaten forever burning if we don't accept this "gift" from the very monster who convicted us in the first place. Are we supposed to be thankful? For what?

549. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168564 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 7:53 am

There are two issues.

1) Remnant has absolutely zero, zilch evidence that his Bible is anything but the written psychosis of a beaten, fearful and ignorant tribal people.

2) There is absolutely no reason to worship such an arsehole of a God even if he exists.

He is a brutal, immoral, petty and boastful fucktard just like his followers. Our only "sin", for which we are supposed to feel forever worthless and have to beg for forgiveness, is that our remote ancestor had supposedly taken a bite of the tree of good and evil. Why was that such an unforgivable transgression? Because, according to "God's words", our eyes were opened with a bite of the fruit and we acquired the potential to become god like, thus challenging God's monopoly. What kind of "love" is that if not a master and slave S&M relationship? "God" got upset because we may actually use our brains and become "like them",--interesting that the plural was used...

Would Remnant kick his children out of the house for fear that one day they may be more knowledgeable and smarter than him?

550. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168527 by Bonzai on April 25, 2008 at 7:26 am

Al,

You forget: When being shown to be an ignoranus, resort to the threat that you will face the "ultimate truth" one day .