Comments by prettygoodformonkeys

51. Oystein Elgaroy - the Christian defender who became an Atheist

Comment #195194 by prettygoodformonkeys on June 17, 2008 at 9:26 pm

tank

Let your thoughts go wherever they want to, and you will get some clues as to who you really are, and what you want to do, and be.

Don't worry; there is no one peeking through the ceiling to see if you are good enough, or are praising *him* enough - there's just us!

It's great, there's nothing like it!

52. Oystein Elgaroy - the Christian defender who became an Atheist

Comment #195030 by prettygoodformonkeys on June 17, 2008 at 3:10 pm

Suddenly I was free to use my energy on better things than defending self-contradictory religious dogmas and justify that I still called myself "Christian".

I hope he likes using his energy to dismantle these dogmas. We can sure use him.

53. Rapture site sends unbelievers their last chance ... via email

Comment #194920 by prettygoodformonkeys on June 17, 2008 at 12:05 pm

'raptureletters.com' does this for free.

I have been registered for a year or so, and have registered a few friends as a favor, and tell them so.

Then we have a great laugh.

54. Unlike Others, U.S. Defends Freedom to Offend in Speech

Comment #192363 by prettygoodformonkeys on June 12, 2008 at 9:45 pm

peacebeuponme:

That speech should be part of the school curriculum and then prettygoodformonkeys wouldn't say such silly things.

PGFM

"The Holocaust happened. Inciting people to believe other than the historical truth is illegal because it incites people to act on lies"

It is illegal in Canada, I never said it was right. The second part of my post just shows the hypocrisy of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.

What part of "embarrassed about this law" was confusing?

Fuck.

55. Unlike Others, U.S. Defends Freedom to Offend in Speech

Comment #192145 by prettygoodformonkeys on June 12, 2008 at 1:43 pm

The commission's statement said:

"By portraying Muslims as all sharing the same negative characteristics, including being a threat to 'the West,' this explicit expression of Islamophobia further perpetuates and promotes prejudice toward Muslims and others."

The Koran said:

Kill disbelievers wherever you find them. If they attack you, then kill them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. (But if they desist in their unbelief, then don't kill them.) 2:191-2

Give us victory over the disbelieving folk. 3:147

Fight the disbelievers and hypocrites. Be harsh with them. They are all going to hell anyway. 9:73

"He maketh none to share in His government." Democracy is heresy. Allah shares his government with no one. 18:26

And much, much more.

*ahem*
Fuck Islam.

56. Unlike Others, U.S. Defends Freedom to Offend in Speech

Comment #192120 by prettygoodformonkeys on June 12, 2008 at 1:20 pm

A little embarrassed about this Canadian law.

It is a crime to deny the Holocaust in Canada, Germany and France

The Holocaust happened. Inciting people to believe other than the historical truth is illegal because it incites people to act on lies.

In the same vein:

The Koran actually exists, and it says the infidel must be killed. Inciting people to prosecute those who just report what it says should be illegal as well.

57. Holiday in Hellmouth

Comment #190043 by prettygoodformonkeys on June 8, 2008 at 9:22 am

thewhitepearl:

" Well Heather what do you have to say about the fact that one time I layed my hands on a man and prayed for him and his leg grew in my hand. Literally grew in my hand INCHES because I plead the blood of jesus christ and invoked the holy spirit..What do you have to say about that?"

I had the same experience once with an angel, except it was me invoking the name of jesus......

PGFM (music lover / bastard / c)

58. Stupid flies live longer: study

Comment #189088 by prettygoodformonkeys on June 5, 2008 at 11:44 am

This sheds some light on why the fundies are out-reproducing us..........

59. Darwin still causing waves after 150 years

Comment #188833 by prettygoodformonkeys on June 4, 2008 at 6:03 pm

It takes a long time to soak in, because it changes the person who's reading it. Sometimes who you've changed into has to read it again.

Just read everything you can get your hands on, and don't look for a quick fix.

It took 4.5 billion years, after all.

60. Opponents of Evolution Adopting a New Strategy

Comment #188832 by prettygoodformonkeys on June 4, 2008 at 5:58 pm

Quine:

Strengths: Explains the diversity of life.

Weaknesses: You have to be able to think to "get" it. (Easier if you can also read.)

Excellent!

61. Louisiana's latest creationism bill moves to House floor

Comment #186533 by prettygoodformonkeys on May 30, 2008 at 2:11 pm

The universe was created last Thursday, complete with fossils, written records, and memories.

Prove me wrong, or teach it in your classrooms.

62. UC Berkeley is going to court over Evolution website

Comment #180930 by prettygoodformonkeys on May 16, 2008 at 6:39 am

Teratornis:

Very succinct as usual. Frustrating to see testable predictions tested in common law instead of common sense (logic in this case).

Hope they get Judge John E. Jones III, and the laws can start catching up.

63. Scientists Know Better Than You--Even When They're Wrong

Comment #178346 by prettygoodformonkeys on May 11, 2008 at 9:32 am

Here we have an expert in the study of expertise, saying there are limits to expertise. Last one talking, please turn the light off.

I like the idea of an additional academic layer that studies the historical and sociological reasons for the changes Theology has gone through; a sort of "Study OF Theology", much like Comparative Religion.

Study the Hell out of them, show that they have just reacted to social changes and scientific discoveries in the creation of their skycastles, and never had anything to begin with. Sort of like studying the emperor's clothes until you see they're not there.

64. The detail in the Devil

Comment #176599 by prettygoodformonkeys on May 7, 2008 at 6:05 pm

Windweaver:

Thank you!

65. The detail in the Devil

Comment #176052 by prettygoodformonkeys on May 6, 2008 at 12:56 pm

The once properly spelled word "daemon" has evolved through usage into "demon" (I am told these things by my wife, who likes to correct my corrections, thinking she roots for the underdog. Though in this case it is the under-underdog). "I thought you liked Evolution", she says.

I haven't read that spelling for, well, it seems like aeons.

66. Dumb and Dumber: A discussion between Ben Stein and Glenn Beck

Comment #175650 by prettygoodformonkeys on May 5, 2008 at 7:30 pm

Dumber than a bag of unusually stupid hammers.

67. Pat Condell: Anthology DVD available now!

Comment #174113 by prettygoodformonkeys on May 1, 2008 at 4:41 pm

"If you can't say anything nice then don't say anything at all."

I prefer:

"If you can't say anything nice.....
well, come over here, dearie, and sit beside me!"

68. Religion a figment of human imagination

Comment #171511 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 28, 2008 at 2:28 pm

God, Satan...
put both those bitches on a leash.

69. Science leads to killing people

Comment #171015 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 28, 2008 at 8:37 am

I agree that Stein's a dangerous idiot.

Just one petty typo to point out - under the picture of the 'girl next door' it says:

"No more cheap Tshits?"

Just saying.

70. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169862 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 27, 2008 at 2:12 am

(edited)

71. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169765 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 26, 2008 at 5:58 pm

Bonzai:

I don't even see a problem in saying "this is so gay". I wouldn't think most people who say that are raving homophobes, it's just an expression.

This doesn't work; I would never say this to a gay friend. We all hate PC, but people need to feel safe. I thought my friend would love SouthPark's "Big Gay Al" sketch because he is so funny, but even mentioning it brought up all the confusing history for him, and he was open enough to say so. I never made the mistake again. There is a huge problem when you are gay: you think normal people hate you intrinsically, at a sexual identity level, in your formative years.

(PS: AllanW - I don't hate you)

72. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169762 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 26, 2008 at 5:46 pm

PGFM:

For or against the decision to allow the t-shirt?

lostpoet:

You're not reading my posts. Obviously AGAINST the t-shirt!!

Obviously you're not reading the questions (despite - or because of? - the two exclams).

73. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169756 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 26, 2008 at 5:36 pm

'AllanW - explain "dissonance", and I'll try to answer your many questions. Otherwise, no.'

Please yourself.

It would please me to not be questioned by people who won't answer them.

Teratornis: best laugh of the day - thank you!

74. Soldier Sues Army, Saying His Atheism Led to Threats

Comment #169700 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 26, 2008 at 3:43 pm

peacebeuponme:

All this talk of what the "founding fathers" wanted. Makes for stirring rhetoric, but not really relevant. What should matter is what the Americans who are alive today want.

Well, they wanted Bush in the White House for two terms. They seem to want a theocratic state. That OK? I mean, as long as they have the numbers?

75. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169661 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 26, 2008 at 1:42 pm

lostpoet:

If you don't like the sub-topic AllanW and I chose to discuss, say so without resorting to the dismissive "psychobabble" term.

The term is entirely appropriate. A sub-topic should be directly related to the topic, but a side-topic is a diversion, and this is my view.

For or against the decision to allow the t-shirt? I missed that part, so it seems you are equating this main topic with all the other comments etc. that adolescents have to put up with in public school, hence the 'psychobabble' comment.

If you think the T-shirt should be allowed, then you should be able to take the comment 'psychobabble', or should I put it on a shirt?

76. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169656 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 26, 2008 at 1:33 pm

AllanW - explain "dissonance", and I'll try to answer your many questions. Otherwise, no.

BTW: I didn't say it was more serious than racism, etc. (where is it you think I did - quote me please) I said it was more serious than being called "skinny"; "red-haired"; common bullying for wearing the wrong clothes, etc. I was pretty clear about this by referencing Steve Zara, and by not saying what you say I said.

77. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169646 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 26, 2008 at 1:24 pm

Sargeist:

Well I'm glad I didn't post my physical address.

BTW: I was bullied too, skinny, was baby-faced. Got by by making people laugh and growing a bit of armor, but it still stays with me as anger. But I know people I went to school with who were gay (not out) who suffered much worse. Later on I found a kinship with alternative thinkers (misfits) and discovered a lot of common ground, to the point that I now count a disproportionate number of gay people as my friends. It's called "gay-friendly" and news in the community travels fast. It's rare for them to meet people they trust, because of the reaction you describe to being singled out.

That said, I would never hang out with them in the city (they don't know this) because full-grown people, even established professionals, are beaten to death for being gay, and on the 'liberated' west coast of North America. This is not a fear of skinny people, or red-haired people, or people whose legs are too long.

I live in Brutish Columbia.

78. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169637 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 26, 2008 at 12:49 pm

AllanW:

BTW 'they', 'forbidden', 'helplessly', 'these people'; may just be careless phrasing but if not your dissonance is showing.

Pardon me? Explain.

Care to point out where anyone here is not defending same-sex attraction or the fact that we as humans are part of the animal kingdom?

The point is that allowing adolescent gay-bashing is much more serious than the navel-gazing, middle class angst you and PBUM seem to be equating it (and racism, after reading Steve's posts) with. You make some good points within that area, but it diminishes the importance of the problem to lump it in with, for instance, "being skinny".

79. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169582 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 26, 2008 at 10:56 am

lostpoet, AllanW -

Not being gay gives us the luxury of producing psychobabble about it. Left-handed? Ginger-haired? Being a girl? Please.

This is a forbidden sexual identity that they come by honestly and helplessly, and school is an adolescent hormonal stew that is under our responsibility.

We should at least stand up, and very clearly and unambiguously so, for the basics. I know these people, they live in fear and rightly so - you can still be killed for this in many places in Canada and the US.

A cursory study of biology shows us that same-sex attraction is normal behavior in many other species as well. Not defending it looks to me like we still don't accept

*shouts: "Fuck!"*

that we are animals.

80. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169544 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 26, 2008 at 9:10 am

I'm with Steve on this.

This is a "day of action" to raise awareness for the inclusion of people who can't help being different, and who have a history of being beaten, burned, and killed for it to this day.

Christianity responded with a "day of Truth", where the reaction is "Don't be Gay because God says so". Truth. Not opinion. Not awareness. And not in their church.

This occurs in the hormone-charged furnace of a (religion-free) Public School where societal attitudes towards sex are forged. They are forged at home and in the street as well, but here they are underlined and endorsed. This isn't a freedom of speech issue; the issue is that we have come to expect far too little from our public institutions, and assume these battles can only be fought by special interest groups on the basis of: "who is the majority?"

We have already won these battles (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, separation of church and state), but the wedge is being driven on all fronts by these superstitionists. I don't care how many of them there are.

81. Evolution fray attracts top scientist

Comment #162200 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 16, 2008 at 10:14 am

I don't recall who it was that said:

"If you promise not to pray in my school,
I promise not to think in your church."

82. Richard Dawkins' secular army must be stopped. God is behind some of our greatest art

Comment #160448 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 14, 2008 at 5:41 am

This is not a straw man, this is a turd.

83. Inadequate, private and late apology with grotesquely inadequate excuse

Comment #160143 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 13, 2008 at 5:49 pm

BFKate:

Ideally she is hired to represent the views of the majority of her constituents.

I am trying to picture the oath a public officer might take if he/she were
discharging his/her duties properly as you describe it.

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the majority of my constituents against all enemies, foreign and domestic (that includes you, minorities); that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter for the betterment of the majority of my constituents: So help me God."

Feel safe?

- Cletis Heehaw

84. Inadequate, private and late apology with grotesquely inadequate excuse

Comment #160093 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 13, 2008 at 4:03 pm

I just lost my whole comment in cyberspace, so I am doing this old-school memo style.

Now We're entering the world of what does meaning mean.
Good; you were paying a bit of attention to what I said. But why repeat it?

Ideally she is hired to represent the views of the majority of her constituents.
No. Ideally in a Democracy, she follows the law, some of which give everyone a voice.

Which, if the statistics about the proportion of the population describing themselves as religious are anything to go by, she was doing a pretty good job of.
Bullshit. Her capacity was to make sure the laws are followed, not spout her own views.

The last thing I would trust is a politicians opinion when they are running for office. They have a habit of saying what they think the electorate want to hear.
You have parroted a self-evident truth that gives no weight to anything you have said.

As for somehow losing her right to a personal opinion, I don't agree.
You expect far too little from your democratic process.

Forgive my naivety but what's not a conversation?
The formal hearing situation she was in, for one.

85. Inadequate, private and late apology with grotesquely inadequate excuse

Comment #159887 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 13, 2008 at 10:51 am

BFKate

"A question for you, is a person stripped of the right to speak their mind just because they are elected to public office?"

In their elected capacity, yes. It was a HEARING, she was a REPRESENTATIVE; she was supposed to listen, and represent. Represent everybody, not her own views. This is your response to my..

Her authority to be there at all was on loan from all of the people, atheists included. She could resign, cross the table, and say whatever she likes

...?

WTF?

Question for you (since we have apparently entered the excruciating world of "what does 'meaning' mean"): whose views is a Representative hired by the people to represent?

We all know they make their own views known when they campaign for the job, but that is so we can decide if they are the best candidate to represent ALL OF US. The People obviously fucked up this time, is my point.

(It looks like the capitalised words are shouting, but I assure you I am not. I just can't make italics or bold without studying the guidelines.)

86. Inadequate, private and late apology with grotesquely inadequate excuse

Comment #159880 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 13, 2008 at 10:10 am

Bonzai:

Get a grip.

On the context? What part of

State Representative Monique Davis is apologizing a week after she blasted an atheist activist during a hearing

don't you understand? This is not a conversation.

cc: BFKate

87. Inadequate, private and late apology with grotesquely inadequate excuse

Comment #159819 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 13, 2008 at 7:48 am

BFKate:

Good morning!

As has been pointed out already rep. Davis was speaking without the authority to remove Mr Sherman.

Her authority to be there at all was on loan from all of the people, atheists included. She could resign, cross the table, and say whatever she likes.

(Est. above, 119. Comment #159403 by Dr Benway on April 12, 2008 at 5:55 am)

88. Inadequate, private and late apology with grotesquely inadequate excuse

Comment #159401 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 12, 2008 at 5:19 am

BFKate:

I don't think it is ridiculous to talk about witch hunts, witch hunts are popular among the easily offended. Impotent or otherwise

Let's talk about witch hunts then. For fuck's sake, if ejecting someone from a public process isn't a witch hunt, then what is?

Flaccid logic; you should write papers for ID.

89. Inadequate, private and late apology with grotesquely inadequate excuse

Comment #159400 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 12, 2008 at 5:14 am

BFKate:

As for her opinions making her unfit for office, I completely disagree. It's her performance in office that you should make this judgment on not her opinions.

How can you continue, in this thread, to maintain that her abuse and attempted ejection (while performing her duties of office) of someone from a public process - just because he is an atheist - is merely an expression of opinion, and should just be sprayed with a lemon-scented odor-masking agent like, oh let's use, Free Speech?

Fucking ridiculous.

Re-read everything Diacanu and Benway said.
Then, please, stop shitting on this page.

90. Upside-down church sculpture on hit list

Comment #155163 by prettygoodformonkeys on April 4, 2008 at 7:59 am

The secret to rooting out evil is to turn the churches upside down?

Hard to argue with that.

91. Vote on freedom of expression marks the end of Universal Human Rights

Comment #152993 by prettygoodformonkeys on March 31, 2008 at 8:08 pm

"required to report on abuse...."

Let them report on 'abuse', and have it evaluated. People are still involved, it isn't over; let them make each individual case and let it try and make sense. let them defend Sharia, and genital mutilation, and time after time people will shine a light on it.

Each case has to make sense; we just have to make sure they are public and accountable for their decisions. Things change back, too.

Meanwhile: I, too, am depressed.

92. In His Name We Pray, Ramen

Comment #152334 by prettygoodformonkeys on March 30, 2008 at 5:59 pm

47. Comment #152135 by robotaholic:

This is my favorite sentiment. I know how hard it is; I was under it for 50 years.

Nice work.

93. In His Name We Pray, Ramen

Comment #152128 by prettygoodformonkeys on March 30, 2008 at 8:00 am

This may bear repeating:

Verily, I say unto you that it shall come to pass that when the Antipasto has reigned for 1,000 years, and mankind has simmered in its own juices for all that time, then will the Cheeses return to earth "trailing clouds of Glorious Sauce", adorned by Precious Raymond, and attended by a host of exceedingly heavenly condiments, and He will judge us all, finding us either Al Dente or not Al Dente.

And it shall come to pass that the most succulent of us shall drift skyward, along with one-half of every chair, each after its own kind, and they shall be guided by the two angels, Fusilli and Linguini, to gaze finally upon the noodly countenance of the FSM.

It has been said of old that "No man can serve two pastas", and yet, lo, I say unto you that side salads shall be served, with Caesar dressing rendered unto those salads that are Caesars, and Romano spears of Brochetti shall cause the tomato sauce to flow from their sides.

Those not chosen shall be simmered much longer, and must sit on the remaining half-chairs, with their Left Behinds. And there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth from the discomfort thereof.

Anyone who adds a word to this, or takes away a word, shall be in danger of the Judgement: sent off without supper.

94. Fossil find could be Europe's first humans

Comment #151096 by prettygoodformonkeys on March 28, 2008 at 6:41 am

babrock: you haven't noticed that Picard is basically bald? That's devotion! Granted, Picard would have to eat burgers and drink beer to complete the picture, but then I haven't seen him for years.

To me, the similarity here is in the 'intense acting' look they both have.

You can see it more easily in Harrison Ford and Andy Garcia, because that is their only 'acting face', but they are not bald, nor, probably, model builders.

95. Fossil find could be Europe's first humans

Comment #150956 by prettygoodformonkeys on March 27, 2008 at 7:22 pm

I'm sorry to continue on the "looks like" thread, but it really does look like Jean-Luc Picard.

Which lends weight to the "impregnation by intelligent aliens" theory, denied by ID.

Jean-luc, Jean-luc.

You old ape-fucker, you.

96. Saudi Arabia Leader Calls for Interfaith Dialogue

Comment #150733 by prettygoodformonkeys on March 27, 2008 at 10:35 am

They (Shinto, Xtians, Hindus, etc) won't even notice that they're not monotheistic, they'll just join the cry: "Let's get the evil atheists!", and no one else will notice either.

Their backs are to the wall, nothing to lose except the precious ideals of "perfect good" and "perfect evil".
Don't underestimate anyone like that.

97. The Great Tantra Challenge

Comment #144786 by prettygoodformonkeys on March 16, 2008 at 6:19 pm

Wee Flea's brain is PVC Type 7; not recyclable.

98. The Great Tantra Challenge

Comment #144783 by prettygoodformonkeys on March 16, 2008 at 6:12 pm

I fucking love religion!!!

99. Bishop accuses gays of 'conspiracy' against the Catholic Church

Comment #143547 by prettygoodformonkeys on March 14, 2008 at 7:42 am

"These groups are defending their position, I am defending mine"

When you're roaming the male-only semenary (sic) in your gowns, late in the evening, what is your favorite position?

100. Richard Dawkins' US Tour begins this week

Comment #138794 by prettygoodformonkeys on March 4, 2008 at 7:34 pm

Dr joneZ

that has its own discussion:
http://richarddawkins.net/article,2333,Hebrew-University-researcher-Moses-was-tripping-at-Mount-Sinai,Haaretz

Better:
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/rock_bottom_loser_entertaining