The tolerant atheist

@Setanta,

Quote:

there were web logs in 1797?

I figure it would take someone with either an extremely low IQ or no integrity to read or pretend that was intended. Probably a typo (intending 1997). But that wouldn't fit with your agenda, now, would it?

1 Reply

This is from the Wikipedia article about Duffel Blog:

Quote:

The Duffel Blog is an American military news satire organization featuring satirical articles reporting on US military news. It is often described as "the military version of The Onion." It was founded in March 2012 by Marine veteran Paul Szoldra, originally as a way to drive web traffic to his website CollegeVeteran.com. It eventually branched out and became its own entertainment website. The site enjoys a large following among civilians, veterans, and servicemen alike. The blog has more than 150,000 fans on Facebook and about 10,000 Twitter followers.

Among their spoof articles are one that suggested a speech by the Commanding General of Fort Benning resulted in a deadly riot, and another that said uncounted military absentee ballots would have resulted in Mitt Romney winning the 2012 US Presidential Election.
In November 2012, the site launched an online petition to the White House to lift the services’ bans on hands in pockets. Yet another, about Guantanamo detainees getting GI Bill benefits, resulted in a formal inquiry by U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell. The website counts Marine General James Mattis, the subject of several DuffleBlog posts, as a fan.

So one perforce assumes that either lameman is stupid, or that he thinks the people who read these threads are stupid. I suspect both statements are true.

1 Reply

@layman,

I figure that either you had never read the About page before you posted that bullsh*t, or that you think people here are so stupid they wouldn't check up on your bullsh*t.

0 Replies

I checked just to be sure. There is absolutely nothing in lameman's post to suggest that the story he posted is satire. Typical holy roller performance . . .

1 Reply

@fresco,

Quote:

In my role as an educator

If some fool paid you for doing that, you owe them a refund.

Quote:

Maybe they don't do English comprehension in 3rd grade

You're saying that you didn't make it to 3rd grade, that it, Fresky? If you could read you might have addressed what I said, rather than haul out that Acme Straw Man kit you got for Halloween. Even then you butchered the job.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

I eventually branched out and became its own entertainment website

I was entertained, what's the problem? Oh, you WEREN"T, obviously. Figures.

1 Reply

@layman,

The problem is, as you well know (you're not as bright as you make yourself out to be, but you're bright enough to know this) that you were attempting to pass that off as truth rather than satire. But i've know for a long time that holy roller's and the truth are estranged.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Quote:

...you were attempting to pass that off as truth rather than satire

You have no idea what I was "attempting" to do. It is quite clear, from your own statements, however, that you took it seriously (but thought there was incomplete "reporting"):

Quote:

We are to believe, i take it, that no one in his platoon was a christian before the lieutenant made his unfortunate remarks.

"Unfortunate" remarks, eh?

0 Replies

I see, so you think i can't know what you intended, but that you can know what i intended or understood. That's why you deserve to be called lameman.

You told one lie by posting that article as though it were truth, then you told another (that 1997 BS) in an attempt to perpetuate your first lie. I only responded because the bogus headline caught my eye, otherwise, i don't waste my time on your bullshit. I'll go back to that mode.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

I listened to your tune--not bad.

And I also appreciate the declaration of love for me which you conveyed by posting it.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

there were web logs in 1797? According to the Online Etymological dictionary, the term duffelbag first appears in print in 1917...

Wow! After noting that there was no internet in 1797, you THEN consulted an etymological dictionary! That REALLY nailed it down. It couldn't have been online since 1797, just aint no denyin it now. Excellent investigation! Like I said:

Quote:

I figure it would take someone with either an extremely low IQ or no integrity to read or pretend that was intended.

0 Replies

@fresco,

Quote:

Despotic atheistic states can be just as 'pernicious' as authoritarian theocracies.

Exactly. So what kind of education are atheists in a position to provide to the religious? Whatever it is, it's not about how to run a humane society.

1 Reply

That's disingenuous. Are states which happen to be despotic and atheistic despotic because they are atheistic? I think there can be no doubt that a despotic theocracy is despotic because it is a theocracy.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

That's disingenuous

Bingo. Dictionary makes it clear, eh?

Quote:

dis·in·gen·u·ous; synonyms: insincere, dishonest, untruthful, false, deceitful, duplicitous, lying, mendacious; hypocritical

He done got your number, Tuna, ya lyin scumbag, ya.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

I checked just to be sure. There is absolutely nothing in lameman's post to suggest that the story he posted is satire.

Nothing? You must have missed this, eh?:

Quote:

"The lieutenant thinks that Dawkins is like the patron saint of atheists. That guy is more like the patron saint of condescending assholes."

Any mention of Dawkins tells you it's satire. That guy is only good for satirical reference (see, e.g., "The Simpsons"). He's the personification of clown.

0 Replies

@Tuna,

Well if you force me into an answer, I might suggest that If we attempt to define ' state education' as the duty of a multicultural state in 'disseminating ideas for the common good' then it follows that all references to 'God' and religious practices should be removed from all public ceremonies and offices, including taking oaths and removing texts like 'in God we trust'. If we start with such a premise, then the very act of revision underscores what some atheists consider a more rational approach to social discourse, beyond that of 'tolerance' or the platitude of 'mutual respect'. But pragmatically, it is the debate of proposals such as that which is lacking, rather than the viability of its implementation.

2 Replies

@fresco,

Quote:

it follows that all references to 'God' and religious practices should be removed from all public ceremonies and offices, including taking oaths and removing texts like 'in God we trust'

That's your answer to what "state education" should be!?

Your penchant for focusing on trivial banalities and attempting to elevate them to a status of supreme importance has never been more evident, Fresky. Have you no sense proportion whatsoever? I mean, like, could ya get just a little more petty, ya figure. Would that be possible?

1 Reply

@layman,

I suggest you go fight with somebody like you with nothing else to do.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

That's disingenuous. Are states which happen to be despotic and atheistic despotic because they are atheistic?

I don't think metaphysics has much to do with it. Russia had an absolute monarch at the beginning of the 20th Century. Breshnev's role in the Soviet government was similar to the role played by a traditional Czar. We could speculate about why some societies abhor tyranny and some don't.

The point was that atheism is not a cure for social ills. That seemed to be what fresco was suggesting.

Quote:

I think there can be no doubt that a despotic theocracy is despotic because it is a theocracy.

I would doubt it. 'To the common people, religion is true. To the wise, it is false. To rulers, it is useful.'

1 Reply

@fresco,

Quote:

Well if you force me into an answer, I might suggest that If we attempt to define ' state education' as the duty of a multicultural state in 'disseminating ideas for the common good' then it follows that all references to 'God' and religious practices should be removed from all public ceremonies and offices, including taking oaths and removing texts like 'in God we trust'. If we start with such a premise, then the very act of revision underscores what some atheists consider a more rational approach to social discourse, beyond that of 'tolerance' or the platitude of 'mutual respect'. But pragmatically, it is the debate of proposals such as that which is lacking, rather than the viability of its implementation.

This appears to be completely irrelevant to the topic we were discussing.

3 Replies

The tolerant atheist

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know