Sunday, February 27, 2011

He did rather badly on his promise

     "I am nowhere near a 'fundamentalist'"
     Can you give an example of what a fundamentalist is (in your mind) that you are not?

     My article already proved that you cannot grasp the logic fail of "false dilemma".
     No, that is a false claim on your part. You have made a promise to stop playing games where you "revoke my commenting privileges." Either you keep that promise, and I am wrong, or you break that promise, and I am right. It really is that simple. Now, I will grant that you have made incompatible claims. But that's not my fault. You promised before not to delete responsive comments. And that proved to be a lie.

     There is no need to project your tendency to ridicule on anyone else. Ultimately, you say you don't like the term "fundamentalist" because it "sounds bad" in modern society. Well, I can't control what "sounds bad." But I will stand by my assessment that you are, in fact, a fundamentalist.

     Those were some of the comments which I made and Norman promised to let through; but he reneged. Yes, yes, I know; he changed his mind. But the point of a promise is that you don't get to change your mind. It is a commitment. (I was working on saving some other comments; but the computer froze.)

Thursday, February 24, 2011

Norman has made a promise.

     "I wanted to be fair and let your comments through."
     Personally, I don't believe that. But I will go on evidence. If you delete any of my comments over the next several days, then it will prove that I am right. On the other hand, if you let them stand. I will have been shown mistaken and I will admit it on my very own blog. Remember, that is your promise, to post all my comments. Fail that, make some excuse like "I revoked your commenting privileges," and you show yourself a liar.

     It's very simple. Norman has promised to let my comments through. I think he will renege. But I'll put it to the test. I am willing to admit the possibility of error.

Fundamentalist christians do not understand humor

     Telling something to do something hazardous and potentially deadly and saying it is his "job" is not funny, is not a joke, and is not acceptable. Rhomphaia did that to me. Eventually, she pretended to apologize by saying it was a funny joke and that I should get the humor. That is what is affectionately known as a notpology. Now, she says I can't forgive her. Well, if I ever think she is sincere, then I'll be able to forgive her. But, while I think she would do it again in a heartbeat, I can't.
     Now, in the process of her making her notpologies, she said that she was trying to illustrate how ridiculous it was for me to tell "god" how to do his job. She failed utterly. However, I would like people to think about something. Is it really unreasonable to give suggestions for how someone might more successfully achieve a claimed aim? If given a useful suggestion to assist in accomplishing my tasks, I am normally appreciative. If given a well-meaning but harmful suggestion, I normally take it at its intent but explain why it won't work. And have I made any suggestions that are so unrelated to asserted goals as downing a box of laxatives would be to data entry?
     The christian god supposedly wants us to know he exists. But he hides himself. Even according to their "holy book," every time he showed up, people believed in him. It would appear that actually showing up is a reasonable suggestion, or that christians are incorrect as to their god's desires.
     At any rate, fundamentalist christians will say all sorts of harmful, hateful, mean-spirited things to and about outsiders. And they will never criticize each other for it. And when they are caught out, they will call it "humor." And they will make that excuse for each other. That particular segment of christianity attracts the nadir of human morality.

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

My response to Norman:


     I do understand the difference between dishonesty and disagreement. When you say such things as "living in mommy's basement" and the various other lies you tell about me, you are being dishonest. I called you out on your dishonesty and you banned me for it.

     It fits this post. Naturally, he will be dishonest and delete the comment at his end.

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Why I believe the christian god is not real

     There was a time when I could easily have been brought to believe in the supposed reality of the christian god. He would only have had to show up. Had a spiritual being manifested himself in my presence, I would not have been inclined to ask questions. That’s no longer true today. I have become more suspicious and would want to check against the possibility of an imposter. Also, I have become convinced that the christian god in particular is not real.
     Face-to-face communication is always the most persuasive. If you want to reach someone, you do it face-to-face unless there is some compelling reason why you cannot do so. For example, I type this in advance because I need to compose my thoughts. But the more indirect a communication is, the less believable it is. A being who could supposedly speak the world into existence could certainly take some time to sit down with each person individually and give any message that he wished. But he has never sat down with me. It’s not even a "no second chances" concept. There was never a first chance. And the claims made by proselytizing christians don’t even pass the smell test. They will claim that the bible is "god's personal letter to you." As a point of fact, if you give the same letter to thousands of people, it is not a personal letter, it is a form letter.
     And what is the reason this god doesn't show up individually? I have asked before if he is just too busy these days. Interestingly, that would be an acceptable justification -- if incompatible with the other claims made for this being. But I get excuses like "he doesn't want to force people to believe in him" and "he showed up thousands of years ago; that was the opportunity." These are not persuasive to me. At best, it suggests a god who is playing games. But it's more likely that he never showed up to anybody. The writing claiming that he did is fictional. Bluntly put, if the biblical god were real, there would be no need for the bible.

Saturday, February 05, 2011

Some christian say that biblical slavery was like employment

     Well, in a way it was like employment. Think of the mine workers before unions. Now, of course, there were still some differences. A mine worker who ran off only had to face the prospect of starvation and succumbing to the elements. A slave in biblical times would be brought back and beaten nearly to death. But a common thread was that the slaves and the workers were treated as expendable commodities who had little or no hope to improve their situation.
     And that's also why I oppose conservatism. Oh, I don't agree with everything proposed by the liberals. But conservatism wants to restore things to the pre-union conditions. It's no secret that they want to break up unions. And there are conditions in which unions have gotten away from their proper purpose. But I don't want to see the working class again reduced to working 14-hour days, 6 days a week, starving and dying from sheer exhaustion before age 35 -- assuming the unsafe working conditions don't kill them first.