Atheism

@Intrepid,

I don't find it understandable. Not that I saw it mind you but I've got the drift and can work it out from there. The lowest form of satire because the target is the easiest. The great big, fat sitting duck. And it can't answer back with satire of its own about the motives behind the pathetic exhibition because they wouldn't be able to handle it and would scurry for their bolt-holes with Ignore written on the slammed door.

It's just low class. Not even original, and pathetic by the side of the Marquis de Sade's technique in the same line of work.

It's only understandable if standards relating to what one responds to positively have reached those depths normally associated with football hooligans and darts players in pubs near a steel works whose evening meals are being kept warm for them for when they decide to go home.

I am astounded that anyone gave it headroom. It must have been the bait looking so succulent and so easy to pot. There's a number of such things littered along this thread and waverers should know what sort of company they will be keeping if they choose to be persuaded by them. And they have been searched for when personal resources have been found wanting. A search in places where the anticipated result will be found. A bit like Yellow Pages. Or an argot.

2 Replies

@spendius,

spendi, Your "drift" is so far out at sea, that there is nothing to save you from it.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

Not that I saw it mind you but I've got the drift and can work it out from there.

Without all the facts, Spendi, a person with a distinct bias can work out nothing except the continuation of that bias.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

You may want to pay close attention to FA because he seems to be able to express reality more frequently than most of us can at times!

Are you implying that I don't pay close attention to those posts I'm responding to rl? You can only arrive at projecting that on to me because you don't always treat the posts of others with respect. Which is your affair of course. But don't go making any slippery assumptions about me doing it. I don't.

The rest of your sentence is gibberish from a neurological ethics point of view. Every person expresses their own reality. Even mentally disabled people. fa expresses his reality no better and no worse than anybody else expresses their's. So it's gibberish from a common sense point of view as well.

It doesn't actually mean anything and talk like that is the definition of gibberish. Just look at the qualifiers. I think there's seven. I depends how they are counted. "At times" was the best though.

You're a snob. I would laugh such a statement to scorn if it was said to me in the pub and see the reaction of fa to my doing so. It's as if you think that your idea of reality is that of everybody else and your way of expressing it, whatever it is, is likewise shared by us all.

You lot are all like that. You keep talking about reality and never saying what it is you mean.

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

Without all the facts, Spendi, a person with a distinct bias can work out nothing except the continuation of that bias.

Agreed, but I know all the relevant facts about an amateur video like that from information on this thread. An atheist posts a video which has been trawled for about a spoof performance, which, it seems, took in the poster of it, (it made him feel sick) and featuring a Christian welcoming the earthquake in Japan. What other facts have you in mind? The particular mode of expression that one person uses in saying things we have all heard many times before. That's not a relevant fact. It's an incident. The rest of the supposed 9, 0r 7 billion inhabitants of the earth were doing something else at the time she made the video in her little room.

The idea being that Christians welcome the disaster which is a lie.

At your prompting I watched it. It taught me nothing I didn't already know. Tell me what it should have taught me that I missed.

2 Replies

@spendius,

I'm flattered that I have so much influence, Spendi. My comment was only a comment on the obvious.

0 Replies

@Intrepid,

Intrepid wrote:

failures art wrote:

MontereyJack wrote:
Please tell me this is a joke in incredibly poor taste.

It was a joke. The girl came forward and explained. People took it seriously, but it was a part of a fake church (ran by atheists) that make media that is a parody of evangelical media. For some reason, this got taken to be the the real thing.

A
R
T

'

That makes it clear now. And, somewhat understandable.

That was reprehensible.

1 Reply

@failures art,

Thanks.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Well ed--it is the real thing. i.e. that it was a part of a fake church (ran by atheists) that make media that is a parody of evangelical media.

Obviously the fake church is short of funds. And it's a very tame version of the parodies I have seen in the same genre. One can't even be sure that the camera is propped at the right angle by one or two or three paperback books.

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendi wrote:

Quote:

The idea being that Christians welcome the disaster which is a lie.

I wouldn't represent myself as a spokesman for a religion if I were you kind sir.
There were plenty of Christians that welcomed the Aids epidemic as a form of winnowing out homos from our population.
In the same manner I look askance at those non-Christians who welcome the shame brought to the church by priestly pedophilia.
It never pays to gloat over the misfortune of others.

2 Replies

@panzade,

I think you are confusing Christians with people who claim to be Christians. No Christian would have welcomed the earthquake or the epidemic you mentioned. And I have not seen any do so on A2K or in my social circles.

I have however seen many atheists gloating over evil priests who might well have been faking being Christians. In fact they go on about it at great length at every opportunity provided for them to do so by Media

2 Replies

@spendius,

spendi wrote:

Quote:

..many atheists gloating over evil priests

Numerically speaking, there are so few atheists in the US and UK that the lot on A2K would make up a healthy percentage of the total.
Do you really see them wagging fingers through the media?

2 Replies

@spendius,

spendi, Who are the "real" christians? Do you know?

1 Reply

@panzade,

Here, let's repeat this . . .

Quote:

It never pays to gloat over the misfortune of others.

0 Replies

spendi says:

Quote:

No Christian would have welcomed the earthquake or the epidemic you mentioned. And I have not seen any do so on A2K or in my social circles.

Jerry Falwell, at one point the mega-popular fundamentalist evangelist, was very quick to self-righteously declare, publicly, on nationwide television,that Hurrican Katrina was god's punishment for New Orlean's loose and sinful ways. I'm not so sure that that's very different.

1 Reply

@panzade,

Quote:

Do you really see them wagging fingers through the media?

Yes--at one point I thought Dawkins might be voted TV Personality of the Year and if you read the evolution threads you will, thanks to me, see which giant media corporations own most of the "local" newspapers wande quotes very regularly.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

spendi, Who are the "real" christians? Do you know?

No I don't. I can't read people's minds. But no Christian would welcome the Japanese earthquake or the epidemic referred to. I do know that.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
spendi, Who are the "real" christians? Do you know?

No I don't. I can't read people's minds. But no Christian would welcome the Japanese earthquake or the epidemic referred to. I do know that.

Spendius. Spokesperson for the True Scotsmen. They exist.

A
R
T

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

Jerry Falwell, at one point the mega-popular fundamentalist evangelist, was very quick to self-righteously declare, publicly, on nationwide television,that Hurrican Katrina was god's punishment for New Orlean's loose and sinful ways.

In a properly run society I think the men in white coats would have been called in to usher him into the comfort zone. But I suppose he gets his living by making outrageous remarks.

But there is a difference between that and welcoming the earthquake gleefully. The latter discredits free speech a few degrees more than the former.

0 Replies

@panzade,

Quote:

..many atheists gloating over evil priests

I don't waste my time on Spendi any more but if he said this he's making up facts. How unusual. We don't gloat about kiddy fiddler priests. We are however:
-Appalled
-Concerned about the victims
-Distraught that organised religion has had this problem for at lest two millennia without addressing it

But then again I imagine that's exactly how christians feel. This has nothing to do with theism/atheism and everything to do about warped organisational structures/cultures and the preservation of power.

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know