National Blasphemy Day

Things that don't belong anywhere else. (Check first).

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Maseiken
The Candylawyer
Posts: 2827
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:13 am UTC

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Maseiken » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:34 pm UTC

Horwood, I'll be honest, I didn't read most of your posts. Maybe they were amazing. It's possible that those posts could have been the fundamental building blocks of a new, enlightened world.

Regardless, you're being rude to Moo. You have no more basis for your beliefs than she does, you just might talk for a longer time before reaching absolutely no conclusion, and that's fine, that's valid. All faiths can be accepted in the hallowed halls of the Internet. You seem to have faith in your own empirical knowledge and deduction ( as well as Induction, obviously) and that of Atheists as a whole (If this judgment is in error, I apologise) She has faith in a specific or nonspecific deity, possibly both, I'm not sure.

So yeah, difference of opinion, clashes of bile-ridden condescension and disagreements over fundamental issues. No doubt if we analysed this conflict in full, we would learn much about the both of you, and humanity itself.

But... You're being rude to Moo.

I like Moo.

Most of the Fora likes Moo.

She's nice.
"GRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOWR!!!!"
(Translation: "Objection!")

Maseiken had the ball at the top of the key...

sje46
Posts: 4730
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:41 am UTC
Location: New Hampshire

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby sje46 » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:35 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:(Incidentally, I do agree about your second point, that you can understand our rejection. After all, I reject your god and all the others for the same reason you reject all the others. We're both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do.)

I believe in the same amount of gods as Moo, but that's only because Thor's too awesome not to exist.
General_Norris: Taking pride in your nation is taking pride in the division of humanity.
Pirate.Bondage: Let's get married. Right now.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm UTC

Maseiken wrote:But... You're being rude to Moo.

I like Moo.

Most of the Fora likes Moo.

She's nice.

Most of us are usually nice, actually.

The difference being that most of us are also rather okay with a touch of rudeness now and again. And some of us don't dismiss one another's arguments simply because in addition to being otherwise pretty reasonable there happens to be some condescension here and there.
Last edited by gmalivuk on Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:38 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Will
There are about a million things I can do from behind
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:12 pm UTC
Location: St. Heraldwulf's Stone
Contact:

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Will » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm UTC

Duh, we already know Thor exists: http://stargate.wikia.com/wiki/Asgard
Meaux_Pas: Is it fucking Taint Sunday or something?
liza: Screw y'all, I'm going to the moon

User avatar
Maseiken
The Candylawyer
Posts: 2827
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:13 am UTC

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Maseiken » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:41 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
Maseiken wrote:But... You're being rude to Moo.

I like Moo.

Most of the Fora likes Moo.

She's nice.

Most of us are usually nice, actually.

The difference being that most of us are also rather okay with a touch of rudeness now and again. And some of us don't dismiss one another's arguments simply because in addition to being otherwise pretty reasonable there happens to be some condescension here and there.

Oh I didn't discount his arguments, I just didn't read them.
"GRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOWR!!!!"
(Translation: "Objection!")

Maseiken had the ball at the top of the key...

User avatar
Horwood Beer-Master
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Kentishman living in North Staffordshire

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Horwood Beer-Master » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:45 pm UTC

Moo wrote:...My "sorry for you" statement had nothing to do with me being a Christian talking to a non-Christian...

And yet it seems to be the kind of thing that (in the particular context you used it) gets said by Christians more often then not.

Moo wrote:...just as a human being who doesn't go out of their way to be rude...

I'm not going 'out of my way' at all. The rudeness you perceive is entirely due to the fact that your religion is the subject of debate. Trust me, I've had far more intense debates on the subject of Socialism vs. Libertarianism which haven't ended up with me being accused of 'rudeness' for insulting people's free-market worship.

Oh, and in terms of direct personal insults (as opposed to insulting beliefs) I think you'll find you're the one topping the scoreboard right now.

Moo wrote:...expects the worst from everyone to someone to someone who seems to...

You've still not explained this 'expects the worst' thing to me at all.

Moo wrote:...You can hang that label on everything I say though if you want...

What label?

Moo wrote:...I certainly don't owe you constructing an argument...

You don't owe me anything, but if you're going to put your views out there, you kinda owe it to yourself to back them up with some kind of substance.

Moo wrote:... I am participating in a discussion; not an argument...

Your not doing either such thing if you can't construct valid points.

Moo wrote:...I'm glad that we agree we have nothing more to say to each other...

I still reserve the right to say what I like when I like to who I like. But I have nothing more to say unless you do.

Moo wrote:...so respond if you want but don't feel obliged to. I certainly won't again.

Do what you like.
Also available on rationalia.

Image

User avatar
schmiggen
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 12:15 am UTC
Location: location, location

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby schmiggen » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:46 pm UTC

Maseiken wrote:Oh I didn't discount his arguments, I just didn't read them.


You effectively said they didn't matter and said regardless of what was in them, he was being rude. In fact, the content of his posts largely addressed why he thought he wasn't being rude, so yes, you did discount his arguments.

I'm amazed by how much people can "know" about things without having done much inspection, and worse while being aware that they could have carried out that inspection.
Kabann wrote:Aw hell, as far as I'm concerned the world started in late 1967. Everything else is just semantics and busy-work.

User avatar
Maseiken
The Candylawyer
Posts: 2827
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:13 am UTC

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Maseiken » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:49 pm UTC

schmiggen wrote:
Maseiken wrote:Oh I didn't discount his arguments, I just didn't read them.


You effectively said they didn't matter and said regardless of what was in them, he was being rude. In fact, the content of his posts largely addressed why he thought he wasn't being rude, so yes, you did discount his arguments.

I'm amazed by how much people can know about things without having done much inspection, and worse while being aware that they could have carried out that inspection.

No I read those arguments, and I disagreed with them. Since this isn't SB I acted from that standpoint without supporting evidence and arrived at my own conclusion and statement.
"GRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOWR!!!!"
(Translation: "Objection!")

Maseiken had the ball at the top of the key...

User avatar
Will
There are about a million things I can do from behind
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:12 pm UTC
Location: St. Heraldwulf's Stone
Contact:

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Will » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:54 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
Moo wrote:
setzer777 wrote:Do you also think that a believer will never understand rejection of whatever it is they believe?
No I don't think that.

And that's where the accusation of convenience comes in. It's also where the sense of arrogance crops up for the other side of this argument. You shield yourself with the claim that we'll never understand your point of view, while at the same time asserting that you can understand ours just fine.

Which is pretty fucking convenient.

And in addition to being incredibly condescending*, it's also quite presumptive. Some of us have spent time on both sides of the religiousness spectrum, so Moo's assertion that we couldn't possibly understand her point of view is...just plain wrong.

*condescension being something I would consider quite rude, while we're on that topic.
Meaux_Pas: Is it fucking Taint Sunday or something?
liza: Screw y'all, I'm going to the moon

User avatar
Maseiken
The Candylawyer
Posts: 2827
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:13 am UTC

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Maseiken » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:57 pm UTC

Will wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:
Moo wrote:
setzer777 wrote:Do you also think that a believer will never understand rejection of whatever it is they believe?
No I don't think that.

And that's where the accusation of convenience comes in. It's also where the sense of arrogance crops up for the other side of this argument. You shield yourself with the claim that we'll never understand your point of view, while at the same time asserting that you can understand ours just fine.

Which is pretty fucking convenient.

And in addition to being incredibly condescending*, it's also quite presumptive. Some of us have spent time on both sides of the religiousness spectrum, so Moo's assertion that we couldn't possibly understand her point of view is...just plain wrong.

*condescension being something I would consider quite rude, while we're on that topic.

There are far, far more than two sides in the religiousness Spectrum.

The fact that you call it a spectrum indicates that you should have taken this into account.
"GRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOWR!!!!"
(Translation: "Objection!")

Maseiken had the ball at the top of the key...

User avatar
Horwood Beer-Master
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Kentishman living in North Staffordshire

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Horwood Beer-Master » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:03 pm UTC

Maseiken wrote:...Regardless, you're being rude to Moo...

No, I'm not. She is claiming I'm being rude, that's her interpretation. I see nothing in anything I've said to back-up that interpretation.

Maseiken wrote:…You have no more basis for your beliefs than she does...

In your opinion I have no more basis for my beliefs than she does. In my opinion I do. Please don't state your opinion like it's some kind of empirical fact.

Maseiken wrote:…All faiths can be accepted in the hallowed halls of the Internet...

As I've already said, I accept everyone's right to their faith. But that doesn't mean I have to accept the contents of those faiths or show deference or respect towards them.

Maseiken wrote:…You seem to have faith in your own empirical knowledge and deduction ( as well as Induction, obviously)...

You're welcome to call that faith if you like, I personally wouldn't.

Maseiken wrote:…But... You're being rude to Moo...

Not I'm not. Direct maybe, rude no.

Maseiken wrote:...I like Moo.

Most of the Fora likes Moo.

She's nice.

If you like Moo, I'm happy for you. If most of the Fora likes Moo, I'm happy for them. Hey maybe I'd have liked Moo if she hadn't thrown all the crap at me that she did, but the fact is However Nice you may think she is, she wasn't nice to me.


Anyway, I must leave this thread for now - I have food shopping to do.
Also available on rationalia.

Image

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Belial » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:04 pm UTC

Maseiken wrote:There are far, far more than two sides in the religiousness Spectrum.

The fact that you call it a spectrum indicates that you should have taken this into account.


Umm. Most spectrums have two sides. They just, you know, have a spectrum stretched between them.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Izawwlgood » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:05 pm UTC

Didn't, like two weeks ago, someone mention the absurdity of gay pride parades, and someone else mention that the world was basically a constant straight pride parade?
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
Jessica
Jessica, you're a ...
Posts: 8337
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:57 pm UTC
Location: Soviet Canuckistan

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Jessica » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:06 pm UTC

Yes. It's happened a lot. Relevance?
doogly wrote:On a scale of Mr Rogers to Fascism, how mean do you think we're being?
Belial wrote:My goal is to be the best brain infection any of you have ever had.

User avatar
Will
There are about a million things I can do from behind
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:12 pm UTC
Location: St. Heraldwulf's Stone
Contact:

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Will » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:06 pm UTC

Maseiken wrote:There are far, far more than two sides in the religiousness Spectrum.

The fact that you call it a spectrum indicates that you should have taken this into account.

Way to totally and completely ignore my point that it's possible to change where you stand on that spectrum. Which is what Moo should have taken into account.
Meaux_Pas: Is it fucking Taint Sunday or something?
liza: Screw y'all, I'm going to the moon

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby podbaydoor » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:07 pm UTC

So, this thread is pretty much turning into a huge, fat example of a Tone Argument (Moo, Maseiken, I'm looking at you). Please stop.
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

User avatar
Maseiken
The Candylawyer
Posts: 2827
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:13 am UTC

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Maseiken » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:07 pm UTC

Belial wrote:
Maseiken wrote:There are far, far more than two sides in the religiousness Spectrum.

The fact that you call it a spectrum indicates that you should have taken this into account.


Umm. Most spectrums have two sides. They just, you know, have a spectrum stretched between them.

Bleah, I suppose. In that case it's not a spectrum.

It's more like a.... a... thingie.
"GRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOWR!!!!"
(Translation: "Objection!")

Maseiken had the ball at the top of the key...

User avatar
setzer777
Good questions sometimes get stupid answers
Posts: 2762
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 9:24 am UTC

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby setzer777 » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:10 pm UTC

Maseiken wrote:
Belial wrote:
Maseiken wrote:There are far, far more than two sides in the religiousness Spectrum.

The fact that you call it a spectrum indicates that you should have taken this into account.


Umm. Most spectrums have two sides. They just, you know, have a spectrum stretched between them.

Bleah, I suppose. In that case it's not a spectrum.

It's more like a.... a... thingie.


Just to jump on the semantic pedantry train:

Perhaps it would be most appropriate to say that it is a spectrum with two poles?
Meaux_Pas wrote:We're here to go above and beyond.

Too infinity
of being an arsehole

User avatar
Maseiken
The Candylawyer
Posts: 2827
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:13 am UTC

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Maseiken » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:11 pm UTC

*Shrug*


Hey, is it alright if I claim this entire thead as evidence for my argument that the name "National Blasphemy Day" would cause unnecessary conflict?

YOU ALL SAW IT!
"GRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOWR!!!!"
(Translation: "Objection!")

Maseiken had the ball at the top of the key...

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:33 pm UTC

Horwood Beer-Master wrote:
Moo wrote:...My "sorry for you" statement had nothing to do with me being a Christian talking to a non-Christian...

And yet it seems to be the kind of thing that (in the particular context you used it) gets said by Christians more often then not.

And incidentally it's the sort of thing that, if said by an atheist (in the sense of "I feel sorry for how stupid you are" instead of "I feel sorry for how mean you are"), typically gets huge cries of being unnecessarily rude and aggressive and condescending and such.

I think this is one of those cases where I don't much care what the author's intent was: it was said by a Christian to a non-Christian, in a context (religious discussion) where preachy Christians say condescending shit like that all the time. Therefore, it's natural to interpret it as even more patronizing than it is in every other context. (Because, let's face it, it's nigh impossible to say, "I'm sorry for you," and have it not be incredibly condescending.)
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Rakysh
Posts: 1276
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:39 pm UTC

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Rakysh » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:37 pm UTC

Sooo... that was pretty heavy.

I've thought about it a bit, and I think I'm fine with it, actually. Dancing on burning images of any deity or whatevs seems a little unnecessary (I should say I respect peoples right to this, but I will think rather less of them if they do), but blasphemy can be a force for good, as previously discussed (for given values of blasphemy). I think overdoing it makes theists feel oppressed, which is not the end goal at all. I'm also more likely to disagree with someone who seems more intent on offending me than discussing with me. Basically, blasphemy: good for changing taboos, not so good for changing minds. Imo.

Calling something national blasphemy day... it does start from the standpoint that atheism is correct, but then Easter starts from the standpoint Christianity is true, and I've never questioned the rightness (morally, not factually) of celebrating Easter. . I was a little surprised, but I have to admit I didn't read the website, just heard the name. I jumped to a conclusion, which was bad. I assumed it was all "Hey, guys, look at us! We're pissing off theists!" but obviously it clearly isn't. It's awful I even thought that really. NBD will certainly get peoples attention, but Maseiken has a point- it hasn't done a great deal to foster understanding ITT.

I agree theists and Christians in particular can sound incredibly condescending; it's something (we should) be trying to work on.

I'm not especially sure why I'm making this post. Ah well, opinion away.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:40 pm UTC

Rakysh wrote:blasphemy: good for changing taboos, not so good for changing minds.

But taboos have to change first, before the kind of open discussion capable of changing minds is even possible.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Moo
Oh man! I'm going to be so rebellious! I'm gonna...
Posts: 6438
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:15 pm UTC
Location: Beyond the goblin city
Contact:

Re: National Blasphemy Day

Postby Moo » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:45 pm UTC

I was being a little purposefully condescending because the guy's rudeness was getting on my nerves. Nothing to do with being a Christian, little bit to do with being a bitch.

But you know what, go right ahead and interpret everything I say as being coming solely from being a Christian. Because that's totally ok. I mean we go "that guy's so sexuality promiscious, it must be because he's gay; they're all like that AMIRITE" all the time and that's fine too right? O no wait because it's in the context of a thread about religion it's ok to not see me as a person with multiple facets but just a some Christian parody of a real person.
Proverbs 9:7-8 wrote:Anyone who rebukes a mocker will get an insult in return. Anyone who corrects the wicked will get hurt. So don't bother correcting mockers; they will only hate you.
Hawknc wrote:FFT: I didn't realise Proverbs 9:7-8 was the first recorded instance of "haters gonna hate"

Rakysh
Posts: 1276
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:39 pm UTC

Re: National Blasphemy Day

Postby Rakysh » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:48 pm UTC

I'm not contesting that. (at gmals post)
Spoiler:
This is only relevant, of course if your end goal is changing minds- which is evangelism. I dislike evangelism. I'm not sure if I recognise a right to evangelism. Not recognising it would mean I'm a hypocrite (not cos of the evangelism thing, cos of proselytising about other things) and that I'm endorsing a right to small mindedness. Recognising it means I accept I may have to defend my beliefs every step I take and that scares me, a little. I think beliefs should be challenged, but anyone should have the right to say "Ok, I'm not enjoying this debate, I'm not getting anything out of it, please can we stop" and be listened to. These are conflicting wants. It is most hard and confusing.


Spoilered for being incredibly wanky. Vocalising this stuff helps me, feel free to ignore it.

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: National Blasphemy Day

Postby podbaydoor » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:58 pm UTC

Moo wrote:I was being a little purposefully condescending because the guy's rudeness was getting on my nerves. Nothing to do with being a Christian, little bit to do with being a bitch.

But you know what, go right ahead and interpret everything I say as being coming solely from being a Christian. Because that's totally ok. I mean we go "that guy's so sexuality promiscious, it must be because he's gay; they're all like that AMIRITE" all the time and that's fine too right? O no wait because it's in the context of a thread about religion it's ok to not see me as a person with multiple facets but just a some Christian parody of a real person.


I actually do understand where you're coming from, because I used to be a Christian. I bought into it whole-heartedly. I can even "switch on" my old self and start thinking like a Christian again because it's such a familiar mindset. I just happen to think my old self was wrong. Do I think you're a Christian parody? No. But sometimes we all share traits with the respective parodies of our demographic groups.
Last edited by podbaydoor on Thu Oct 01, 2009 6:34 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

User avatar
Jessica
Jessica, you're a ...
Posts: 8337
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:57 pm UTC
Location: Soviet Canuckistan

Re: National Blasphemy Day

Postby Jessica » Thu Oct 01, 2009 5:06 pm UTC

The day was yesterday. Can it be over now?
doogly wrote:On a scale of Mr Rogers to Fascism, how mean do you think we're being?
Belial wrote:My goal is to be the best brain infection any of you have ever had.

User avatar
Will
There are about a million things I can do from behind
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:12 pm UTC
Location: St. Heraldwulf's Stone
Contact:

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Will » Thu Oct 01, 2009 5:32 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
Rakysh wrote:blasphemy: good for changing taboos, not so good for changing minds.

But taboos have to change first, before the kind of open discussion capable of changing minds is even possible.

Incidentally, I'd like to point out that this is why the day was created in the first place--specifically, in response to Muslims' getting up in arms over an irreverent depiction of Mohammed in a political cartoon. The point is that religion should not be any more shielded from criticism, parody, or open discussion than anything else.
Meaux_Pas: Is it fucking Taint Sunday or something?
liza: Screw y'all, I'm going to the moon

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26519
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: National Blasphemy Day

Postby SecondTalon » Thu Oct 01, 2009 6:25 pm UTC

Jessica wrote:The day was yesterday. Can it be over now?
Discussions don't have on-off switches.]
Jessica wrote:
Izawwlgood wrote:Didn't, like two weeks ago, someone mention the absurdity of gay pride parades, and someone else mention that the world was basically a constant straight pride parade?
Yes. It's happened a lot. Relevance?
That in the US at least, every day is Religion Day, default assumption of Christianity but a growing acceptance of personal faiths, Islam, Buddhism and so on - but that everyone has a faith of some description. So the comparison in US society could be as such - that there exist people who reject the whole notion and are perfectly happy, well-adjusted folks and it might be nice to have a day where such folk can say "We're here, we don't really have a faith and like it that way but thanks for asking!"

They just lack the catchy sayings.

"Pizza's here? Thank Chemical Chance!"
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: National Blasphemy Day

Postby podbaydoor » Thu Oct 01, 2009 6:27 pm UTC

"Cosmic Coincidence on a pogo stick!"
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26519
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: National Blasphemy Day

Postby SecondTalon » Thu Oct 01, 2009 6:27 pm UTC

Cosmic H Coincidence?
"what's the H stand for?"
Harold.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
Giant Speck
Bouncy Sex Marshmallow
Posts: 3819
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 12:30 pm UTC
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Re: National Blasphemy Day

Postby Giant Speck » Thu Oct 01, 2009 6:30 pm UTC

SecondTalon wrote:Cosmic H Coincidence?
"what's the H stand for?"
Harold.

Weird Harolds = best breakfast dish EVER.
"Did I say recently that I love Giant Speck? Because I love Giant Speck. He is the best." - Weeks
BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE BOUNCE

User avatar
bigdave
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 7:15 pm UTC

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby bigdave » Thu Oct 01, 2009 6:42 pm UTC

JESUS CHRIST! I think I love you Horwood Beer-Master. :wink:

gmalivuk wrote: After all, I reject your god and all the others for the same reason you reject all the others. We're both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do.)


That has to be one of the best quotes I've ever read.


Maseiken wrote:But... You're being rude to Moo.

I like Moo.

Most of the Fora likes Moo.

She's nice.


Please don't bring the MDF in here. I've already had that happen once before. :lol:

On topic, I gave up talking to theists about religion a long time ago. Complete waste of oxygen in my experience. Therefore the only blaspheming going on would be if they overheard me say something. In which case I'd revert to the Horwood Principle.
Wikipedia - Making 'know-it-alls' of people on the Internet since 2001.

Is it coincidence that most people of a certain religion just so happen to be born into families of the same religion??....Maybe they are just 'lucky'.

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26519
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: National Blasphemy Day

Postby SecondTalon » Thu Oct 01, 2009 6:45 pm UTC

"It's a waste of time to talk to X, because they don't pay attention anyway. Besides, they don't know how it is to be Y."
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

Rakysh
Posts: 1276
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:39 pm UTC

Re: National Blasphemy Day

Postby Rakysh » Thu Oct 01, 2009 6:51 pm UTC

Isn't that what Moo was being chewed out for saying earlier?

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: National Blasphemy Day

Postby podbaydoor » Thu Oct 01, 2009 6:54 pm UTC

...I think that was his point.
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

Rakysh
Posts: 1276
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:39 pm UTC

Re: National Blasphemy Day

Postby Rakysh » Thu Oct 01, 2009 7:00 pm UTC

Ah, OK. I thought he might just be telling us the Horwood Principle, cos 30 seconds of solid googling and wikipediaing got me nowhere. Anyway, I think there are polite ways of saying "I think your belief system is fundamentally flawed". And I think just because you can't think of one immediately, it doesn't mean you should say "fuck it" and be as rude as you like.

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: National Blasphemy Day

Postby podbaydoor » Thu Oct 01, 2009 7:05 pm UTC

Of course there are polite ways of saying it. It just becomes a loaded issue when people start demanding that you are only allowed the polite ways, with "politeness" being dictated according to their definitions.
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

Rakysh
Posts: 1276
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:39 pm UTC

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby Rakysh » Thu Oct 01, 2009 7:08 pm UTC

Horwood Beer-Master wrote:I feel this quote by Dan Dennett seems relevant to the discussion here,
Daniel C. Dennett wrote:There is no polite way to say, ‘With all due respect, sir, have you considered the possibility that you have blighted your whole life with a fantasy and are polluting the minds of defenceless children with dangerous nonsense?’ There is no polite way in saying it. But what if it's true?

This is what I was refuting. I believe Gmal may have agreed with him at some point.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: National Blasphemy Day

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Oct 01, 2009 8:41 pm UTC

Jessica wrote:The day was yesterday. Can it be over now?

The discussion? No.

But happily, you can choose not to keep reading it any time you want!

bigdave wrote:
gmalivuk wrote: After all, I reject your god and all the others for the same reason you reject all the others. We're both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do.)

That has to be one of the best quotes I've ever read.

In the interest of full disclosure, I didn't make it up.
Stephen Roberts wrote:I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.


Rakysh wrote:I think there are polite ways of saying "I think your belief system is fundamentally flawed". And I think just because you can't think of one immediately, it doesn't mean you should say "fuck it" and be as rude as you like.

The contention is that, for several billion religious people, even indirectly implying that their belief system is fundamentally flawed is immediately understood as rude or disrespectful or otherwise impolite. There are some beliefs that simply cannot be expressed in a polite way, so you either express them impolitely, or you're forced to remain silent.

It's my understanding that, broadly, Blasphemy Day is about refusing to remain silent.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: National Blasphemy Day (NSF Various Religions)

Postby podbaydoor » Thu Oct 01, 2009 9:04 pm UTC

smw543 wrote:No Adams quote? :(

This is for you, smw543:
Douglas Adams wrote:I don’t accept the currently fashionable assertion that any view is automatically as worthy of respect as any equal and opposite view. My view is that the moon is made of rock. If someone says to me “Well, you haven’t been there, have you? You haven’t seen it for yourself, so my view that it is made of Norwegian Beaver Cheese is equally valid” - then I can’t even be bothered to argue. There is such a thing as the burden of proof, and in the case of god, as in the case of the composition of the moon, this has shifted radically. God used to be the best explanation we’d got, and we’ve now got vastly better ones. God is no longer an explanation of anything, but has instead become something that would itself need an insurmountable amount of explaining. So I don’t think that being convinced that there is no god is as irrational or arrogant a point of view as belief that there is. I don’t think the matter calls for even-handedness at all.
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests