The Battle Bar, Our Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy

I'm wondering, have you ever NOT used "religious" and "nut job" in the same sentence? It's a legitimate question, not rhetorical.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
I'm wondering, have you ever NOT used "religious" and "nut job" in the same sentence? It's a legitimate question, not rhetorical.

Well Gideon is religious and he isn't a nut job, so there is one. But for the most part I equate religious people with stupid ****s enamored with delusional bullshit that's destroying society.

But my hatred for religion isn't new.

So religion is somehow destroying society and secularism/atheism is better? How exactly does that make sense? And please elaborate. I also don't mean to start the whole "religion is ancient and anti progressive" rabble.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
So religion is somehow destroying society and secularism/atheism is better? How exactly does that make sense? And please elaborate.

No atheist ever suicide bombed anyone.

I imagine thats the thought process.

You're also debating religion as how it is practiced by stupid people, whereas the intelligent ones don't peddle it and realize religion and science are two different explanations for the same phenomena. I can also debate secularism/atheism as it is practiced by the incompetent moral relativists.

Originally posted by Nephthys
No atheist ever suicide bombed anyone.

I imagine thats the thought process.

Except no form of the Koran ever stated doing anything of the like. People choose to interpret how they choose to interpret. I imagine if I bring up the secularism of the former Soviet Union (my parents and grandparents' upbringing), someone is going to try and rationalize that it was a form of religion or anything BUT secularism.

"Isms are fine in the hands of rational people. But in the hand of irrational people, isms only lead to trouble."

Atheism is no more or less dangerous than religion--it's what the individual chooses to do with it that matters.

Thank you. Leave it to the Canadian to make sense. And I'll argue that if you think religious people are destroying society, the relativists are more successful at it.

Veneficus, you have a propensity for blaming things other than people when it suits you. Don't blame people, blame handguns. Don't blame people, blame religion.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Veneficus, you have a propensity for blaming things other than people when it suits you. Don't blame people, blame handguns. Don't blame people, blame religion.

Don't blame the children for being children, blame the balls.

Don't blame the criminal bastards, blame the people protecting themselves.

*sigh*

You know, we call it "common sense", but we only ever seem to use the phrase when it's never around. There's nothing 'common' about it.

Personal responsibility seems to be lacking in our current society.

This is the most self-indulgent circle jerk I've seen today, and that includes something like 30 minutes of [redacted] including a big bowl of applesauce!

Armchair philosophizing is fun, but do we need to have the same conversation again? If you want to be religious, could we talk about how evangelical voters have blurred the lines between the church and the campaign? Or literally anything but another 10? pages of DS and Vene taking potshots at one another using the same damn material?

You're getting boring

Notice how THIS time, I approached Veneficus in a civil tone. Now stop acting queer because it makes me belligerent.

That's because the phrase "common sense" doesn't mean "sense that is widely available". It means "something that a commoner can learn", and dates back to the time (whatever that is) where only wealthy nobles could get an education, while the average joe was an ignorant **** face.

Originally posted by Nephthys
No atheist ever suicide bombed anyone.

I imagine thats the thought process.

I'm of the opinion that outright atheists can be just as annoying as religious zealots but far less explodey. Did you ever get that game working?

DS, I may be on tomorrow night or Sunday. Love getting back home with friggin' class starting Monday.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
I'm of the opinion that outright atheists can be just as annoying as religious zealots but far less explodey. Did you ever get that game working?

DS, I may be on tomorrow night or Sunday. Love getting back home with friggin' class starting Monday.

No. I've recieved no reply from the seller on Amazon and no answer to the question I posted on Steam Support. Looking through their site they don't seem to care about games brought through online auction sites like Amazon and won't re-set the CD-key with a receit from there. So I really have no idea what to do.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
I'm of the opinion that outright atheists can be just as annoying as religious zealots but far less explodey. Did you ever get that game working?

DS, I may be on tomorrow night or Sunday. Love getting back home with friggin' class starting Monday.

Nice, I'm killing it with my HP, creating armor and stuff. Level 33, almost 8000hp.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Notice how THIS time, I approached Veneficus in a civil tone. Now stop acting queer because it makes me belligerent.

I've read these posts in various forms from you hundreds upon hundreds of times:

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
You're also debating religion as how it is practiced by stupid people, whereas the intelligent ones don't peddle it and realize religion and science are two different explanations for the same phenomena. I can also debate secularism/atheism as it is practiced by the incompetent moral relativists.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Thank you. Leave it to the Canadian to make sense. And I'll argue that if you think religious people are destroying society, the relativists are more successful at it.

And where your arguments are not inane (you've pointed out some serious failings of the mainstream understanding of moral relativism) they are irrelevant. Yes, it's true that the layperson has inherited a system of morality that is less than perfectly rigorous in the most extreme of circumstances. However, those extreme circumstances (e.g. genocides) are far enough removed from the social experience as to be irrelevant to the daily life of normal people. Pointing out that the mainstream consciousness has blindspots is not particularly revolutionary or profound in a country where the mainstream has turned a blind eye to everything from slavery to bootlegging.

I absolutely do not want to wade through another introductory philosophy course-worth of rumination on the source and nature of morality; we've already done that! Since you've expressed your beliefs already very clearly, why would you want to put the effort into elucidating them again?

Originally posted by Nephthys
No. I've recieved no reply from the seller on Amazon and no answer to the question I posted on Steam Support. Looking through their site they don't seem to care about games brought through online auction sites like Amazon and won't re-set the CD-key with a receit from there. So I really have no idea what to do.

So you got it from a private seller or retailer? That sounds horrible. Try Square Enix.

DS, you try PvP yet?

Originally posted by Zampanó
"Acting queer?" At you? I'm pretty sure that would involve some interaction with your genitalia, which is something no conscious being would knowingly consent to.

I've read these posts in various forms from you hundreds upon hundreds of times:

There are two important themes that you seem to want to discuss again:
[list][*]A distinction between the asshats of an ideology and its central tenants
-and-
[*]Your evaluation of the failings of moral relativism as intuited by the layperson[/list]

Here's the thing. Not only have we talked about both of these things, your arguments are almost exclusively inane or irrelevant. I say "inane" because where you make valid arguments about the distinction between the beliefs of a religion and the actions of its adherents, the topic is specifically regarding the real-world effects of such worldviews. You cannot respond to the charge "religion is ruining the world" with "religion only ruins the world in the hands of stupid people" because the actual real-world result of religion is that the world is being ruined. (I do not think there is a sufficient argument to lay blame at religion's feet exclusively, so please do not interpret this as an endorsement of Vene. Rather, it is a rejection of your line of thought and argumentative approach.) Put simply, if you accept that religion in the hands of stupid people helps to ruin the world, then it is a logically true thing to say that religion ruins the world. Period.

And where your arguments are not inane (you've pointed out some serious failings of the mainstream understanding of moral relativism) they are irrelevant. Yes, it's true that the layperson has inherited a system of morality that is less than perfectly rigorous in the most extreme of circumstances. However, those extreme circumstances (e.g. genocides) are far enough removed from the social experience as to be irrelevant to the daily life of normal people. Pointing out that the mainstream consciousness has blindspots is not particularly revolutionary or profound in a country where the mainstream has turned a blind eye to everything from slavery to bootlegging.

I absolutely do not want to wade through another introductory philosophy course-worth of rumination on the source and nature of morality; we've already done that! Since you've expressed your beliefs already very clearly, why would you want to put the effort into elucidating them again? [/B]

I'll sum this up with a thought that might refute your entire premise, and it might not. You're saying that I believe characteristic X in the hands of stupid people means that characteristic X is ruining the world. Let characteristic X be religion here. Why do most religious people of any religious denomination NOT commit atrocities? I would venture a guess of 99% as the number that refrain from any type of "religious incompetence". How exactly does your argument work in this regard?

DS, you try PvP yet?