Comments by decius

701. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253454 by decius on September 24, 2008 at 12:55 pm

Comment #253452 by Don_Quix

Even more so, every gamete should be regarded as such.
Therefore, each time you masturbate, you engage in an holocaust.

702. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #253443 by decius on September 24, 2008 at 12:42 pm

Comment #253436 by DarwinsPitbull

Could you please learn to use blockquotes?

Wow, so you would be perfectly fine with killing a baby even if the woman is 8 1/2 months pregnant? Its takes a special kind of person to think like that.

Loaded question - unstated major premise - guilt by association.

Could you please learn to discuss in a rational manner?

703. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252690 by decius on September 23, 2008 at 2:13 pm

Steve,

speaking of travels and viaduct. I then watched the movie with John Candy that you recommended. It was very funny, thank you.

704. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252683 by decius on September 23, 2008 at 2:05 pm

Comment #252676 by Steve Zara

I understand.

The problem is that AtheistJon's comments were directed at homosexuals.
As if you would start to express disgust and/or prejudice at the engineer that built the viaduct, or at engineers in general, rather than simply avoiding the viaduct as you did.

705. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252678 by decius on September 23, 2008 at 1:58 pm

Comment #252673 by AtheistJon

Well, I saw the movie.

BTW Kinsey's scale goes from 0 to 6.

It doesn't change the sense of what I meant. As a strong heterosexual myself, I think I understand where you're coming from, but not your conclusions.

For instance, your remark about homosexuals and trains is pure prejudice.

706. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252669 by decius on September 23, 2008 at 1:34 pm

Steve

Thanks for the clarification, I hadn't follow your past discussion with AJ.

Jon,

I will drop the accusation of homophobia here, even though I am far from being convinced by your argument. Let's just say that, being myself a 0 on your scale, I still don't understand the urge of expressing disgust at someone who has different tastes, as you did in the comments that BPUM brought up. Contrary to your statements, you must be very insecure about your own sexuality, if a bunch of happy parading people "disgust" you with the thought of what they may do in their privacy.

Also, there are perverts on both sides, molesting others on trains is not a prerogative of gay people.

707. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252470 by decius on September 23, 2008 at 5:54 am

Titania

Thank you. I am quite far from the scene of the shooting, but that's of little consolation, given the tragic outcome.

708. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252468 by decius on September 23, 2008 at 5:48 am

AtheistJon

I never called you contemptible. I am the one who used that word to describe your homophobic views, therefore I think you are referring to me.

That's not an ad hominem. I stand by my statement that homophobic views are objectively contemptible, whoever embraces them, because they blindly target a heterogeneous group without distinction, and are akin to racism. It is true that they are often the result of environmental and cultural backwardness and they tend to evaporate when homophobes do get to know homosexuals in person, but that's no excuse, just an explanation.

I would be glad to hear from you why I should not freely express these sentiments.

709. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252232 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 4:30 pm

Comment #252229 by Titania

Yeah, I was also flabbergasted by the homophobic comments that PBUM pulled out. I had no idea that he holds such contemptible views.

710. Ancient underwater reef found in SA's Flinders Ranges

Comment #252228 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 4:13 pm

Comment #252160 by T4Baxter

I hope this helps American atheists to get of their arse's and vote obama.

What, an ancient reef? I seriously doubt it.

711. Look Who's Irrational Now

Comment #252217 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 3:45 pm

Comment #252173 by jamesstephenbrown

And thanks for your reply.

You obviously assume that, for me to point to a consistency in someone's worldview, I must therefore share that worldview. This says a lot about your own perspective... and suggests that you may be on the wrong site.

It seems that you missed the smiley in my previous post, I was just kidding regarding that part.

More seriously, I didn't start from any such assumption, but from what appeared to me like a contradiction in your reasoning, specifically where you brought up the role of evidence in forming one's belief, a detail that you took in no account while dealing with Maher's dismissal of western medicine. You will agree that it could easily be misinterpreted for a poor grasp over the difference among the various flavours of scepticism.

It is clearly not the case, and I apologise for the misunderstanding.

712. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252200 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 3:18 pm

AtheistJon

Well, you have to realize that the media (especially here in Europe) rarely cover the Republican candidates. So, I will admit the following: I haven't seen her interview, I haven't seen much of her.

I did see her RNC speech and I was impressed by the following well stated ideas:

Well, that was prepared by speech-writers.
On another thread, here, there is a video where she speaks to her congregation in her own words.
There is really no charitable way to describe her performance and I invite you to see it for yourself.

713. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252105 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 2:05 pm

Fanusi

Check these comments by RD. 1 and 2.

- Deleted edited and reposted

714. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252081 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 1:50 pm

Comment #252076 by Fanusi Khiyal

Sure thing. We all could use some self-discipline.

Richard has more than once vented his frustration at thread derailing, and we owe it to him in the first place.

If I addressed you specifically, it's because you clearly have a special commitment and interest to the Islamic-threat topic, and on this site there is no lack of space devoted to that.
Also, this thread derailed when you brought it up, if I am not mistaken.

715. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252070 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 1:40 pm

Comment #252062 by Fanusi Khiyal

Sorry to be pedantic, but this thread is about Palin's competence or lack thereof and no one else's.

Iranian nukes are not even tangential to it.

716. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252065 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 1:36 pm

Comment #252060 by Sciros

I have nothing in principle with OT discussions. In this case, though, we are experiencing too many threads degenerating into a one-issue argument that is bound to elicit acrimony. There is really no need to have it everywhere.

717. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252058 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 1:28 pm

Fanusi

Please, I am formally asking you to confine the Islam topic to the relevant threads.

You know perfectly well that you are bound to elicit responses, you owe to the majority of us not to derail all threads with a single isssue.

I shall be very grateful if you could extend this simple courtesy.

718. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252053 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 1:22 pm

Comment #252048 by AtheistJon

I can see that cheap shots tend to come always from the same persons, whatever their political colour.
Therefore it's rather pointless to blame a group for the behaviour of a few individuals.

719. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252050 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 1:20 pm

Comment #252042 by Steve Zara

LOL, good point. I'll give to you that you master the art of dramatic stage exit like the Bard himself.

720. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252040 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 1:09 pm

Comment #252027 by AtheistJon

I agree about the cheap shots, but honestly I haven't seen many, here. While I can't speak for the whole leftist component, I do my best at trying and avoid them.

Also, I didn't really mean to engage in ad homs, just to make a marginal point in guise of personal suggestion that you are free to overlook. There is a component of normal human interaction, even during rationale debate, when you debate the same people over a long time - I see no problem with that.

721. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252031 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 12:58 pm

Steve

I totally agree with Comment #252008 by Peacebeuponme.

Take a second to read it.

722. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252026 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 12:55 pm

Comment #252018 by Laurie Fraser

there are other much more pressing threats as well - climate change heads the list, obviously,

I agree. I shall henceforth summon Teratornis.

723. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252019 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 12:47 pm

Comment #252003 by hawt4dawk

....Decius wondering about his disgust at the rich.

Good post, just a minor quibble: I didn't mean to express disgust at the rich, as I clarified later in the thread - my problem is with extreme inequality, only.

724. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252011 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 12:41 pm

Comment #251999 by AtheistJon

and only left wing Palin haters should be allowed to post here.

I think you are a reasonable and nice fellow, but when you use this black-and-white rhetoric and partake in demagoguery a la Fox News, you really do a disservice to yourself.

Harris has written an articulate piece where he lays out an objective critique of Palin. Those who agree with him have, for the most part, posted reasonable comments which by no mean imply hate, nor did they exceed the boundaries of normal discourse and political commentary.

In case you missed it, earlier in this thread you shall find my reply to your comment of yesterday night.

Cheers

725. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251997 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 12:18 pm

Comment #251981 by Steve Zara

However, continuing to post on a site gives tactic support to such views unless they are robustly rejected by others...I don't know what the solution is, but ignoring him is not going to work.

Not necessarily. Anyone can see that Fanusi is a single-issue poster and that his ideas are impervious to revision.
Debate is useless when it becomes apparent that the two sides cannot be reconciled. After years of this back-and-forth, agreeing to disagree seems to be the obvious solution.
In fact, continuously challenging Fanusi just seems to encourage him to post endless repetitions.

726. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251979 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 12:01 pm

H4D,

welcome back.

No, I am not Sarah Palin. If I had to perform a drag act, I would pick Madame Curie or Valeria Messalina.

727. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251973 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 11:55 am

I don't really have the right to act as a topic-nazi, having being guilty of derailing threads more than once.

However, the islamic threat issue is omnipresent on this site. I'd suggest that we confine it to the relevant threads, before it suffocate all other conversations allowing its depressing contents to affect the general mood in a negative way.

It seems to me a fair and reasonable request.

728. Ancient underwater reef found in SA's Flinders Ranges

Comment #251929 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 10:52 am

Comment #251917 by Steve Zara

Indeed.

The original hypothesis postulating global thick glaciation (Hard Snowball) has already fallen out of favour even among many of its original proponents, though.
The re-formulation assumes the presence of thin tropical sea ice - I think the discovery that you mentioned is compatible with this interpretation.

Personally, I've never been very convinced by the hypothesis. The alleged layer of ice seems to retreat and thin out at every new discovery.

A sort of Ice of the Gaps. :)

729. Ancient underwater reef found in SA's Flinders Ranges

Comment #251914 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 10:20 am

Interesting, even though the article is written with great incompetence.

The events described took place in the Precambrian, or more properly, during the Neoproterozoic era.

There is an ongoing heated debate about the true extension of the glaciations mentioned in the article, which took place during the Neoproterozoic's geologic period known as the Cryogenian. This discovery should settle the controversy and establish whether the famous Snowball Earth hypothesis has any merit.

730. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251891 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 9:49 am

Comment #251887 by Steve Zara

I suspect that for all his many faults, Robertson supports the idea of general human rights and civilization.

His beliefs are chequered.

731. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251741 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 2:44 am

Comment #251673 by robotaholic

I try to be objective, and it is obvious that Sam Harris is smearing Palin because he doesn't at all mention when Obama makes the same mistakes. For example, he states that "Palin has spent her entire adult life immersed in this apocalyptic hysteria

None of this makes anything of what Harris said a lie or propaganda.

And no, you are not being objective.

732. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251740 by decius on September 22, 2008 at 2:42 am

AtheistJohn

Yes, it's Post-Modernism.

We both live in Finland. :)

I resent European snobs and liberal American elitists who think that all of those politically opposed to them, especially American Republicans are automatically "disgusting", or somehow automatically Christian idiots with an inability to act "civilized".

I apologise for the lack of clarity. I have no problem with people for their political affiliations, indeed many of my friends are conservatives. I tend to avoid the company of overly religious and superstitious people, though - you could probably file that under intellectual elitism, I suppose.

My remark was directed at types of society where economical disparities are extreme, and I don't resent wealth per se. I think universal medical care and a degree of social welfare are indeed a cornerstone of civilisation, and I base this judgement both on humanistic and utilitarian considerations.

I agree with most of your snapshot of Europe and Finland.
I am sure that you realise that high taxes are necessary to provide all those services. Undoubtedly, a lot of tax money is wasted, but rather that than leaving the poor and the sick to fend for themselves.
This brings enormous benefits to the society at large: just compare prison population rates between Finland and the US for the most obvious one.

733. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251613 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 6:11 pm

Comment #251596 by AtheistJon

So, decius, are you an advocate of the wonderful successful and enlightened socialist democracies and leftist parties of Europe?

Well, I am not really an advocate of the leftist parties of Europe. In fact I am very critical of party systems as they are, because they tend to favour cronyism and impede meritocracy, thus stagnating progress.
While I am politically to the left of the spectrum, I also deeply dissent with some recent intellectual downfalls of the European left and its fascination with PoMo and emasculated multiculturalism.

Nevertheless, I currently live in a Scandinavian social-democracy after many years spent under various political systems during extensive travelling and permanence abroad. That gave me the opportunity to compare the standard of living of many countries. Those systems include a couple of right-wing dictatorships and several communist ones.

I don't have a recipe for the US, but the impression I gathered there is that far too many people live in abject poverty and unassisted, while a tiny minority is filthy rich. I find that disgusting and contrary to the very concept of civilisation. Even though I am personally in no need of social assistance, I would never swap places, as a matter of principle.

734. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251594 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 5:32 pm

Comment #251588 by DarwinsPitbull

The first three points represent a slight moderation with regard to unbridled neo-liberism and to marginal details of foreign policy. By no means they erode or overturn American doctrine within a socialist framework.

Of course we can't forget the biggest marx philosophy of wealth redistribution. That is Obama's economic corner stone.

ROTFL

735. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251581 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 5:02 pm

Comment #251576 by DarwinsPitbull

You made the claim, you have the burden to show these alleged similarities, if you want to convince anyone.

From a European perspective, and by all standards of fair political analysis, you have two right-wing candidates whose programmes do not even come close to a social-democratic model, left alone a marxist one. Not just in this election, but historically, the US don't have a major left-wing party.

736. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251570 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 4:48 pm

Comment #251565 by DarwinsPitbull

You wouldn't know a marxist if he bit you, and please, spare us this absurd Mccarthyistic rhetoric.

737. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251557 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 4:04 pm

Comment #251556 by Enlightenme..

I have never been a big fan of Shermer's, although I am involved with the sceptical movement. However, do you remember why he was indirectly criticised?

738. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251545 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 3:32 pm

Comment #251539 by robotaholic

This 'piece' is full of lies, propaganda, and smears.

Please, indicate them.

739. Look Who's Irrational Now

Comment #251536 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 3:09 pm

Comment #251527 by jamesstephenbrown

The person who wrote this article needs to try and understand what a belief and a non-belief are. Bill Maher, NOT- believing in western medicine is a NON-belief, it is a sign that he is skeptical about western medicine, and is completely in line with being skeptical about other things like God.

Sorry, but this statement is an epistemological and semantic mess.

Not believing in western medicine equals denying science and evidence-based research, while there is nothing scientific about a belief in the supernatural.

Scepticism toward the supernatural is part of Scientific Scepticism and/or Philosophical Scepticism.

That is unless you are an epistemological sceptic (aka a fucking post-modernist), in which case you are entitled to your wrong statement, but you find yourself in the wrong site. :)

740. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251523 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 2:45 pm

Comment #251521 by ggab7768

Do you have the 7th? Also, a couple of his overtures are pretty good, namely Egmont and Coriolanus.

741. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251516 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 2:37 pm

Comment #251505 by Enlightenme..

It probably arrived with the vegetables.

Why do you have to kill it? Make it climb on a piece of paper, if you don't want to touch it, and put it outside.

742. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251511 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 2:32 pm

Comment #251501 by Sargeist

I used to listen to punk rock and heavy metal in the late seventies and early eighties, then got fed up with the whole edifice pretty soon.
A while ago, out of curiosity, I checked what was new on the scene, and I found it uninspired and even more boring than what came earlier. Well, according to my personal taste, at any rate.

743. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251497 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 2:23 pm

Comment #251494 by Sargeist

Their album "Satanic Black Devotion" is particularly good

Thanks, I'd rather listen to a chainsaw accompanying a sledge-hammer, they are less repetitive. :)

744. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251482 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 2:03 pm

Comment #251478 by ggab7768

Of course it is not the only bad thing, given that we are speaking generally of a variety of substances, each with its unique characteristics.
Still, it is when people get addicted in a bad way to some personality-altering drugs, that they may pose a problem to society.

Yet, this discussion started in a very simplistic way with silly blanket statements, so there is no real need to get into detail until we have cleared up the crudest misconceptions.

745. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251473 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 1:48 pm

Comment #251471 by Titania

Sorry, it appears that I made a Freudian slip.

746. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251470 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 1:44 pm

Comment #251467 by ggab7768

That list is much longer than the list of people who do bad things on drugs.

I appreciate that yours is a joke, yet it is untrue.
It is a very small minority of drug users who fall into toxicomania, and among those not all become criminals or do harm others.

747. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251464 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 1:37 pm

Comment #251453 by Sargeist

I expect I would be shown to be wrong.

Here is a short and incomplete list of people who used drugs recreationally and to stimulate their creativity. Much of their work was done under the influence.

# Alexander Dumas, Author - "The Three Musketeers"
# Arthur Rimbaud.
# Balzac Honore de.
# Carl Sagan
# Charles Beaudelaire, Author.
# Dr Francis Crick. Nobel Prize winner.
# Francois Rabelais
# Friedrich Nietzsche, Used it as a medicine.
# George Washington
# Gerard de Nerval French writer
# Graham Greene, Author.
# Henri Michaux poet and painter
# Hunter S. Thompson, Author
# Modigliani. Sculptor.
# Norman Mailer, Author.
# Oscar Wilde
# Pablo Picasso
# Pythagoras, Mathematician.
# Queen Victoria.
# Ram Dass, Philosopher.
# Richard Feynman, Nobel Prize Laureate physicist.
# Rudyard Kipling . Author.
# Salvador Dali, Artist.
# Samuel Beckett, Author.
# Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Author.
# Stephen King. Author, "Tommy Knockers".
# William Butler Yeats.
# William S. Burroughs, Author.
# William Shakespeare.

748. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251451 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 1:20 pm

Actually two, Fanusi.
They are concise, informative and brief.

They are both available on rd.net, here and here.

EDIT - We are talking about a variety of deep issues, just listen to Eddie's take on this.

749. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251446 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 1:13 pm

Comment #251441 by Fanusi Khiyal

Not full-fledged theocracy, but theocratic interpretations of the constitution whenever a case is brought before the SC.
And this, over time and cumulatively, will lead to theocracy.

I think you should watch again the Tabash lecture.

750. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251442 by decius on September 21, 2008 at 1:10 pm

Comment #251440 by Titania