Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)

Comments by Peacebeuponme


551. New Atheists Are Not Great

Comment #145802 by Peacebeuponme on March 18, 2008 at 6:44 am

fides_et_ratio

chirstianitytoady.com
That sounds an awful lot like a McGrath site...

(With apologies to The Reverend, who got there before me.)

552. Fleabytes

Comment #145797 by Peacebeuponme on March 18, 2008 at 6:40 am

Annabanana. Why? I'll tell you why: ever heard of the word "deterrence"? Setting an example?
For those mad few for whom burning in the everlasting fires of hell, just isn't quite going to stop them.

553. Ban anti-Catholic books in schools, says bishop

Comment #145795 by Peacebeuponme on March 18, 2008 at 6:37 am

scottishgeologist

If you made a film of this, you'd probably face prosecution
I would love to see a film made with a scene such as that, just to see the catholic church get all excited and call for a ban.

554. Fleabytes

Comment #145775 by Peacebeuponme on March 18, 2008 at 6:09 am

Refuting David's lies is necessary
Does anybody know how many theist sites Richard has been on and spent an inordinate amount of time disagreeing with a review of TGD?

Seems to me that David should learn to do what other authors do and learn to take the rough with the smooth (Such as it is) when it comes to criticism.

555. In Britain, creationist theory is evolving

Comment #145720 by Peacebeuponme on March 18, 2008 at 3:29 am

Pathfinder

And once and for all SHUT UP about my spelling!
If you can't be serious just piss off. Its funny for 10 minutes, but then it becomes really boring.

556. In Britain, creationist theory is evolving

Comment #145710 by Peacebeuponme on March 18, 2008 at 3:05 am

Pathfinder - it must be a pain having to force yourself to misspell like that. Have a proper conversation, you might like it.

557. Two More Fleas

Comment #145693 by Peacebeuponme on March 18, 2008 at 2:37 am

Not that we need to respons any more, but this tickled me from Wooter

If I want to open a hotel for guests, First I will build it up, design it, place all the necessary equipment and servants, then, I will invite the guests. God created this hotel like earth
His inane-analogy generator is truly astounding, you have to give him that.

If I ever needed another reason not to stay at BestWooter Hotels then this was it. Apparently Wooter sees no problem with God including Box Jellyfish, Malaria, E Coli, Brown Recluse Spiders, Hepatitis, Golden Poison Frogs and Black Mambas in his 'hotel'.

558. Fleabytes

Comment #145368 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 2:11 pm

annabanana - no point thinking about it. Either Pathfinder is thick, or a bored net user taking the piss. Best not to engage.

559. Fleabytes

Comment #145323 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 1:33 pm

Atom bomb's and depravity and faggotism and lessbianism and comunism. The legacy of ATHEIST'S. Thank's, guys.
We can now cease talking to this idiot, guys and girls.

560. Fleabytes

Comment #145310 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 1:21 pm

epeeist - Pathfinder may have Wooterism. We've not found a cure yet, so our thoughts should be with him.

561. Fleabytes

Comment #145294 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 1:09 pm

pathfinder

Mr peace: of course I wrote this all by myself- what do you think I am, some sort of randomly selected imbecile?
No, but the rose-tinted impression you have of clearthinker's non-posts and the comments about Dawkins Worship are familiar rubbish.

As Irate_Atheist says, some theists are fucktards.

562. Fleabytes

Comment #145273 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 12:49 pm

Pathfinder

This is an extremely well maintained website with a great deal to recommend it, for the Godless. However, I feel no one is really dealing with Clearthinkers excellent point's.
As Epeeist has said to posters before: did you write that all by yourself?

563. New Atheists Are Not Great

Comment #145270 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 12:43 pm

al-rawandi

Do you wann get kicked in the balls, or punched.
I could probably use a good punching.

564. New Atheists Are Not Great

Comment #145257 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 12:25 pm

annabanana

As much as I dislike the manipulations and misrepresentations of science by D'Souza, I much prefer him to David Robertson, methinks.
There's not much to choose between them.

565. In Britain, creationist theory is evolving

Comment #145042 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 7:53 am

reason-first

Not only does it not explain anything, it confuses and misleads the people who fall for it.
Sadly that seems to be the express purpose of the creationist buffoons who use the term.

566. Full house captivated by atheist Dawkins' take on religion

Comment #145032 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 7:38 am

post-secular Ph.D

give my children a reality that goes beyond the microscope and embraces their hearts and souls and teaches them to embrace others and not one that focuses merely on fleshly matter
Science goes beyond a simple notion of "fleshly matter" in ways the bible authors could not possible have imagined. You have a curious notion of what it means to enquire and learn about the world through evidence-based reasoning.

Ask any atheist with children on this site about the values they try to teach their children. I would suggest compassion, love respect are pretty high on the list. So, your "reality that goes beyond the microscope" is something that they would definitely recognise. This is not exclusive to and should not lead to Christianity or any sky-fairy worship.

567. Bishop accuses gays of 'conspiracy' against the Catholic Church

Comment #145017 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 7:16 am

Al-rawandi - I agree. What's even worse is the false compassion from the people who read the books. Who actually want to buy a book so that they can read about someone elses misfortune and feel sad. It was like when Diana died: it seems like peope just want to feel grief for the sake of it. Its seems fucked up to me.

568. Bishop accuses gays of 'conspiracy' against the Catholic Church

Comment #145000 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 6:53 am

al-rawandi

I find it revolting that anyone would try to corner the market on suffering. There is plenty to go around.
Slightly off-topic, but I was dismayed to see a section for "Tragic Life Stories" in a local branch of W H Smiths recently. I do wonder about people sometimes.

569. Bishop accuses gays of 'conspiracy' against the Catholic Church

Comment #144949 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 4:47 am

Bonzai

I'm not saying you shouldn't have a bash if you want to. People are free to do whatever they choose and good luck to them. I was just saying that I think for most its pretty clear on which side they fall. As you say, some are not like that, but I was just making a general case.

(Why to they put the back-page button next to the back-space button?! just lost another post.)

570. Bishop accuses gays of 'conspiracy' against the Catholic Church

Comment #144942 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 4:38 am

Steve

Indeed. The focus on homosexuality is a little odd.
A homosexual relationship no more ruins the family than the vow of celibacy that catholic priests have to take.

571. Bishop accuses gays of 'conspiracy' against the Catholic Church

Comment #144939 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 4:32 am

Bonzai

I think that is not even the issue. So what if it is changeable? It doesn't follow that anyone should change.
If it isn't the issue then what is the explanation for the Churches stance? If we are not likely to chance then I fail to see how homosexuality could ever be an "attack" on the family
I wish more straight people would "experiment", we believe in science don't we?
Whilst there are those who might be unsure, or might like either sex equally, I think most people pretty much know where they stand. There is no need to experiment when the difference in reaction between meeting a male and a female is so stark.

572. In Britain, creationist theory is evolving

Comment #144933 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 4:13 am

fides_et_ratio

Students are more likely to learn when they fully engage with a subject, and it sounds like they are starting to engage more
bur are they really engaging or just refusing to listen because of the rubbish their parents have told them?

573. Bishop accuses gays of 'conspiracy' against the Catholic Church

Comment #144929 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 4:04 am

Steve - we were just waiting for the Government to bring in civil partnerships before making the switch.

574. Bishop accuses gays of 'conspiracy' against the Catholic Church

Comment #144920 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 3:54 am

Steve - of course, but persecution is persecution, no matter which group is on the wrong end. What Jews went through during the war was truly horrible and we should never forget that. There is still anti-semitism (particularly in the middle east) and that needs to stop. I just don't like this impression I get from some that somehow Jewish people have it the worst out of any oppressed group.

575. Bishop accuses gays of 'conspiracy' against the Catholic Church

Comment #144915 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 3:44 am

Anything which attacks the sanctity of marriage and the family will be opposed by the church,"
I love these kinds of comment. How do gay people "attack" the family exactly. Steve, Cartomancer, have you been going around threatening couples with children again?!

576. Bishop accuses gays of 'conspiracy' against the Catholic Church

Comment #144914 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 3:39 am

Steve Zara

Sorry, but I think not.
I have to agree. There was a time when slave ships threw lines of shackled slaves overboard when they needed to lose cargo.

Jews are only alone in the way they carry on about it and spotting percived anti-semitism wherever they go.

577. In Britain, creationist theory is evolving

Comment #144911 by Peacebeuponme on March 17, 2008 at 3:33 am

More underhand theist nonsense from Monty White this time. Ken Ham is not "tearing evolution to pieces". He also jumps from denying evolution to spirituality as though they are the only alternatives and equates secularism to consumerism and hedonism. As nickthelight says : Wanker.

They should teach creationism in schools. Just get a biologist to spend half and hour pulling it apart scientifically and be done with it.

578. Fleabytes

Comment #142329 by Peacebeuponme on March 12, 2008 at 10:36 am

al

Anyhow, this is off topic
Apologies. I've lost track of the topics covered on this thread...

579. Fleabytes

Comment #142328 by Peacebeuponme on March 12, 2008 at 10:35 am

al

Wasn't trying to point fingers at you, and not attributing that statement to you. Various people here have made that kind of comment though (if not those exact words).

I was just saying I found your debates with Keith interesting. I learnt a lot. I hope that comes across a positive on your part (whether or not I finally agree with you on the issue).

580. Fleabytes

Comment #142324 by Peacebeuponme on March 12, 2008 at 10:24 am

Keith - your posts are some of the most refreshing and sensible (not to mention amusing) ones I read here. I can only find myself nodding in appreciation at most of the content(incidently, that's why i bought and enjoyed God is not great. Hitchens is a delight to read, even though it didn't make me ponder my position on anything).

As for Iraq, that's exactly where I am. I watched a few of your ding-dongs with al-rawandi and others from the sidelines with a lot of interest. It is truly an area where the correct position seems to be elusive, or non-existent. I was happy to see you defend against the knee-jerk "Hitchens is a hearless neo-con" line as well.

You do seem to show up a little bit of cabbie mentality in some areas though (I can imagine the audience of "The Big Questions" nodding furiously to some bits armed with their tabloid sensationalist view of the world). Comments such as these:

why would a little girl's parents give her a man's middle name? And why do Americans and some Brits nowadays give their children surnames as christian names?
and
Looking round at the teenagers that hang around on the streets of my town, most of them are holding a can of beer.
Are kind of pet hates of mine. What's wrong with giving kids any name they so choose? Who defines 'boys' and 'girls' names anyway. When people are called Leaf or Demi there seems little to help you decide. I know two Finnish people called Jukka-Pekka and Piia-Tuulia? Would you be able to guess their sex from that? I'm disappointed that France has a rather draconian system effectively requiring all names to be Government approved.

As for teenagers drinking, I did a bit of street drinking when I was younger, but it was not a daily occurrence and caused little harm. I'd be interested to see the proportion of teenagers who actually do this regularly? I think the data would belie the accepted wisdom that all teenagers are drinking, causing trouble, crime is soaring, you can't leave your front door open any more etc etc.

I'm just picking up on little things in your post and this may all appear trivial to readers here, but these things interest me, so what the hell.

Finally, I am a Cardiff boy (well, from Cwmbran which is near enough). Premiership is but a dream to us, though a good cup run has given me something to cheer about.

581. Fleabytes

Comment #142189 by Peacebeuponme on March 12, 2008 at 6:12 am

Keith

life is usually interesting enough without artificial stimulants.
The 1st division is interesting enough without watching the premiership.

Without deeming either the "on drugs/alcohol" experience or the "sober" experience as superior, Surely it is good to experience both? Everything in moderation and all that. I agree that a friend who cannot enjoy an evening without stimulants can be pretty boring, but there is a time and a place for everything.

I certainly don't want the pope or christians telling me what I can or can't do.

btw - what did you miss? usual theist nonsense, plus maybe a few Iraw discussion that could have used your particular skills.

582. Fleabytes

Comment #142001 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 2:38 pm

keith - nice to see you are still about.

583. Seven new deadly sins: are you guilty?

Comment #141999 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 2:36 pm

Teratornis. Agree that the manner of death is little comfort to the victim. I get annoyed when families of victims of newsworthy events are deemed more worthy of concern or compensation.

I also shouldn't have used the word 'moral'. My point was that we shouldn't necessarily hand-wring about some of the death in the world. There is only so much we could or should do.

584. Seven new deadly sins: are you guilty?

Comment #141989 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 2:11 pm

Teratornis - that was a marvellous post. Absolutely wonderful.

585. Seven new deadly sins: are you guilty?

Comment #141983 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 1:55 pm

Teratornis. I appreciate much of what you have written and totally agree with you about the speed limits.

However, there is a moral difference between intentional and indirect/accidental harm. We should not be duty bound to do what we can to help others (though I like that most try to). The individual has to accept they are responsible for their survival and do what they can do.

(That sounds a bit like Scooter!)

I'm all for raising awareness, charity and laws that do what they can to assist the vulnerable and indeed all of us. But we have to be careful how far we go with restricting freedoms.

586. Seven new deadly sins: are you guilty?

Comment #141953 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 1:06 pm

hungarianelephant

MPhil - I agree with you and didn't intend to suggest that you held those views. Just to try to point out the consequences of a sensible principle becoming an article of faith (as this one has, IMO).
That was where I was coming from.

Where you draw the line on abortion is somewhere I'm open to suggestion - I can't see a clear answer, whether you say at the point of a 'functional nervous system' or when consciousness is developed (whenever that is). I'd listen to anybody on this, except those who use rules in a magic book.

587. Seven new deadly sins: are you guilty?

Comment #141906 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 11:03 am

MPhil

I doubt you would want a society where the people do not value human life.
Yes, this was in my head when I wrote that last one. It depends what you mean when you say it. If society is all about designing a way of living together in the best way possible, then in some sense 'valuing human life' would seem to be an intrinsic part of that. However, we should not confuse this meaning with the religious sense of human life being 'sacred'. The key thing is that we all get the best deal we can, not that other people value our life (more than any other rights we may want).

EDIT: I think the quickest way of saying this is that there is a disctinction between 'people' and 'human life'.

588. Fleabytes

Comment #141892 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 10:28 am

Tyler_Durden

Peace, when you get to 21 - STOP!! :-)
So that's why the croupier was giving me looks. And I thought it was becasue she fancied me...

589. Seven new deadly sins: are you guilty?

Comment #141888 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 10:24 am

MPhil

I think the motivation can be, is often and possibly should be both.
I happen to think that 'respect for human life' gets in the way of this particular issue. We attempt to design a social structure that enables us all to get along as best we can, whilst also maximising achievement of our personal wishes. If I wanted to kill myself, I don't want anybody respecting my life and preventing me from doing so.

590. Fleabytes

Comment #141884 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 10:16 am

MPhil

yes - but in the roulette-case, there's the fact that the larger the number of trial runs - the more the "Red/Green" distribution will average out. Categorizing coincidence as an intentional act when there is no evidence of an agent however seems to be a different matter - an entirely different quality of ignorance.
Arguments over probability aside, I was trying to demonstrate the power our emotions can have over us. We are pattern-seekers. We seek agency in events occuring around us.

Its irrational to think it must be red now as it has been black 5 times, just as its irrational to ask "why" when a bad thing happens. We know this, but we still do it. I still find it really hard to shake off the feeling that "I knew that was going to happen" even though I recognise it for what it is.

Theists like fides_et_ratio are unfortunate that they cannot separate the evolved emotion from the reality.

Tyler_Durden
Blackjack, on the other hand, different matter :)
Unfortunately my bank balance tells me that my pattern-seeking abilities are not too great here either!

591. Seven new deadly sins: are you guilty?

Comment #141867 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 10:00 am

MPhil - I agree with that post. Restricting the freedom to decide when you die is not something I feel the state should be doing and of course people should receive counselling first (by the way, this is not because of any 'respect for life' but purely as a compassionate means of support and also to ensure family pressure has not been brought to bear).

592. Fleabytes

Comment #141841 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 9:32 am

MPhil

I'm making it sound more complicated than it is - but when you get down to it - isn't this an extremely basic insight?
Yes, but the emotion can be very powerful.

Play a bit of roulette. When you check out the form and see there have been 5 blacks in a row its easy to think "it must be red next". The feeling of "I knew that was going to happen" or "This always happens to me" is hard to shake even though its illogical.

593. Fleabytes

Comment #141833 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 9:20 am

fides_et_ratio

It's irrational for a recovering alcoholic not to pray.
Not sure whether this was in response to me, but I did ask whether you had found any irrational statements by non-theists here. I would be surprised if an atheist made a staement like "A recovering alcoholic should not pray". That would be like saying "A retired post office employee should not wear odd socks". Both statements being irrelevent and worthless.

In any case, can you explain why it would be irrational not to pray if you are a recovering alcoholic?
At their core thay are both a search for the truth
Does this mean all catholic teachings are up for investigation and revision?

594. Seven new deadly sins: are you guilty?

Comment #141825 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 9:01 am

Steve

What happens if you are extremely gloomy but also very lustful?
I think your goths call is fair. Whole albums by Marilyn Manson seem to bre devoted to those two mind states.

595. Seven new deadly sins: are you guilty?

Comment #141822 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 8:58 am

MPhil

I suspect on a standard IQ-test, he would score above 130, probably even approaching 140, possibly higher
I don't want to start everybody waving IQ scores around. Ratzinger would probably be classed as intelligent by any reasonable method, but I think the religious compartment of his brain reduces his intelligence down to average.

596. Seven new deadly sins: are you guilty?

Comment #141786 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 7:52 am

I got the 5th level. What has Logicel been getting up to!

Level Who are sent there? Score
Purgatory Repenting Believers Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo Virtuous Non-Believers Very Low
Level 2 Lustful Very High
Level 3 Gluttonous Moderate
Level 4 Prodigal and Avaricious Moderate
Level 5 Wrathful and Gloomy Extreme
Level 6 - The City of Dis Heretics Extreme
Level 7 Violent Very High
Level 8- the Malebolge Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers Very High
Level 9 - Cocytus Treacherous High

597. Fleabytes

Comment #141772 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 7:22 am

fides_et_ratio

I'm motivated by misrepresentations of my Faith, and by the irrationality of some who claim reason as their standard.
Do you have any examples? In all seriousness, if there are arguments (especially from me) that are indeed irrational, then these need to be addressed and I would be interested in improving my position.

598. Seven new deadly sins: are you guilty?

Comment #141756 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 7:01 am

MPhil

Make no mistake, Ratzinger is highly educated, very well read and a very good thinker. Sadly, this almost brilliant mind was first hijacked by religion when he was a child and then hardened in its self-imposed delusion when the '68-revolution got to the universities when he was trying to hold lectures there. They went out of their way to cause trouble - interrupting lectures by physical force and so on... and this was one decisive factor in driving Ratzinger into very conservative catholicism. He used to be far more liberal before then.
I didn't make that comment lightly. There are plenty of theists like Alister McGrath or Francis Collins who are clearly highly intelligent. This Ratzinger fellow may well be able to hold his own intellectually. However, one has to question his intelligence when he consistently makes stupid statements. Since he has put on the tall white hat some of the things he has come out with have been scientifically absurd, politically thoughtless and morally distasteful. This does not tally with any measure of intelligence as I see it.

Its sad as you say though, that it seems clear that some massive potential has been wasted by the religious cancer that has affected him.

599. Fleabytes

Comment #141751 by Peacebeuponme on March 11, 2008 at 6:51 am

I see Clearthinker has returned with more tired srguments concerning morality and design. Here's a good one

Yes I am. I am totally amazed at the Universe. So much so that I cannot conceive of it as being self-existent, or having come from no where and nothing. Therefore I worship its Creator.
Interesting non-sequitur there. Though I love and respect my parents (well only one actually, but that's by the by) I don't feel the need to worship them just because they created me.

How curious of the theist to see things this way.

600. Seven new deadly sins: are you guilty?

Comment #141349 by Peacebeuponme on March 10, 2008 at 9:38 am

The Pope also complained that an increasing number of people in the secularised West were "making do without God".

He said that hedonism and consumerism had even invaded "the bosom of the Church itself, deeply undermining the Christian faith from within, and undermining the lifestyle and daily behaviour of believers".
Is "making do" a euphemism for "flourishing" or "exponentially advancing"?

I'd also like to know how he makes God the only alternative to hedonism.

This pope is not even above average intelligence I don't think.

More Pages: Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 | Next