stlstrike3 wrote:I'm not a hyprocrite. I'm just the one with the more evidence-based, which usually means correct, point of view. Arrogant? Perhaps.
Of course you're a hypocrite. And, yes, you're also arrogant, but that's not a critical flaw.
Quote:I used to be one of the religious right. My tone/personality was the same then. But then I woke up and used the other side of my brain.
I used to be a disbeliever. Then
I woke up.
I guess we're both examples of the fallacy of Wilso's proposition.
Quote:And I have absolutely no delusions that I'm not offending others. ...
Yet your entire premise seems to be taking issue with those who offend you. How is it again you contend you are not a hypocrite?
Quote:... And my issue with the other side is not that they offend me, but that their rationale behind their actions cannot be backed up by anything that would survive the litmus test of reason. And that we can't accept that crap as a society.
That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If your entire issue was merely that you disagree with their rationale, there is very little reason for you to be vocal at all. Just disagree with the "other side," and quietly believe in the superiority of your logical approach. You don't do that because you are offended by their actions and beliefs. And so you make it your cause to offend them with
your actions and beliefs. And that's why you are a hypocrite.
The problem with
your position is it suffers from a complete lack of faith ... that which you perceive as a character flaw in me. And yet I submit it is the reverse that is the flawed position. And the crux of the matter is always going to be the logic v. faith dichotomy, and you are not going to convince me of the superiority of your views on the matter.