1301. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #218132 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 10:43 pm

naah i doubt he even knows what these movies are. Ill just ask for all of them for christmas or something.. :)

1302. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #218120 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 10:29 pm

Well luckily they have Life of Brian on youtube so I get to watch it! (In 9 different parts but oh well..)

"but we have presents..gold, frankinscense(SP), myrrh"

"oooh well why didn't you say..hes over there"

1303. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #218115 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 10:25 pm

You guys are overwhelming me with quotes and links and smart ass comments tonight. Mucho Gracias!

Night night Rad.

1304. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #218108 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 10:20 pm

thanks brian! im watching the life of brian right now...but that one is noted as well.

1305. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #218094 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 10:10 pm

BM,

Come back tomorrow when we actually want to deal with lunatics. We're taking the night off thanks!

Now on to more important matters at hand,

This Monty Python business is hilarious. Heckfire, I'm hooked!

1306. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #218073 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 9:50 pm

hey you guys used heckfire! :)

hold on hold on. for some reason my internet card doesnt work that well in the area im in. so i have to wait for the video to load. geez dont ruin it for me.

[edit] There's a cardinal in a bomber hat. love it.

1307. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #218064 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 9:43 pm

You guys are cracking me up! Thanks Rad..i'm on my way to a clearer day.

1308. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #218055 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 9:36 pm

Thank You Brian!

I presume that 1203, 1205, and 1206 are quotes as well.

Looks like I have a planned movie day tomorrow. I'll make you guys beam with pride within the next couple of days.

1309. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #218038 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 9:27 pm

TWP, if you have not seen Life of Brian how are you going to tell the Judian Peoples Front from the Popular Front?

Idk? Idk what you are talking about. :(

Will one of you kind, fine gentlemen please make a list of the MP movies I need to see and in what order? I would very much appreciate it.

1310. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #218034 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 9:23 pm

How many Monty Python's are there? Oh geez I have a feeling I have a lot of catching up to do.

Chasing whales?

1311. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #218026 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 9:19 pm

Ta Ta For Now.

It took me awhile to figure that out. (Again I have to sadly admit)

I originally thought "talk to friday next". (Mainly because it was on a friday when I saw it)

1312. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #218023 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 9:13 pm

Ahh don't give me such a hard time. I am young and have been brought up in a religious household. Gimme a break.

I'll youtube it. You can find most anything on youtube.

TTFN Goldy!

1313. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #218011 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 8:59 pm

I haven't seen any of the Monty Python's I have to sadly admit!

1314. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #218004 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 8:51 pm

You are quite the poet, I've noticed Rad.

A fun little game to play. Rhyme what you have to say.

1315. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217986 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 8:17 pm

See you next week Laurie.

I hate seeing you go but I love watching you leave.

Or whatever.. :) Have a good weekend.

edited to make sense

1316. Historian predicts the end of 'science superpowers'

Comment #217984 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 8:13 pm

TWP ... Put that thang on safety so that you don't shoot yourself in the head!

awww safety's for suckers!

Christianapologetic,

Keep it up kid, keep it up.

1317. Red hot enlightenment led me to believe in one fewer god

Comment #217980 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 8:09 pm

I'd fly down to Australia for the drinking, er I mean atheist conference. (If you guys decided to do it)

If that's ok, seeing how I'm not an awesome aussie or anything.

The article was a refreshing change from the usual. Really enjoyed it.

Laurie, he made the WYD sound more exciting than you did I'm afraid.

1318. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217969 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 7:58 pm

Ahh I see. That is a problem....

See ya soon mordy, and thanks..

1319. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #217960 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 7:45 pm

Yes, yes Brian it would.

I am very interested to see his reply. I will be very disappointed if he fails to reply in the appropriate manner as requested. You see, you can only really dumb down an explanation, when you really understand it. And if he can't do that, I'm forced to believe that he himself doesn't understand it at all. That would cause me to believe he's just holding onto it because he feels it makes him appear smarter.

I'm waiting Booby. Please remember to dumb it down as much as possible.

1320. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #217953 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 7:35 pm

Thanks Brian,

I'm familar with it. But since Booby implied that he understands it better then everyone else, I thought he could, you know dumb it down. (Especially since I'm the blonde)

1321. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #217943 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 7:18 pm

Well Booby,

I missed the discussion can you explain it to me?

1322. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #217935 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 7:06 pm

But since he replied directly to my comments (713. Comment #216317 above), I thought it only polite to engage.

You're falling for his Booby Trap!

1323. Are the 'New Atheists' avoiding the 'real arguments'?

Comment #217930 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 7:00 pm

Never mind the etc, etc - there is no god, the gift is therefore empty.

touche'

1324. Are the 'New Atheists' avoiding the 'real arguments'?

Comment #217923 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 6:55 pm

Its Gods gift, and there are no exchanges

except our dignity, self and human respect, logic, rationality, etc..etc..

[edit]

Im really not trying to sound crazy you guys, Im just here to help you

You do and we don't need it.

1325. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217915 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 6:50 pm

SPS,

*chuckle*

Thanks.

1326. Are the 'New Atheists' avoiding the 'real arguments'?

Comment #217911 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 6:46 pm

LMFAO!

This one is waaaaaaay off his rocker

1327. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217901 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 6:36 pm

Carto,

What happened to those PRIVATE tension relief lessons?

:)

1328. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217898 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 6:34 pm

Civilized and perty in the same post, eh?

Indeed.

1329. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217886 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 6:24 pm

whitepearl, it would be hypocritical if they OBJECTED to the plight of muslim women for the sake of multiculturalism, but there's nothing ignoble or ironic about focusing on lesser issues which also need remedying.

We aren't just referring to muslim women. And I didn't say they were being hypocritical. Just lazy and turning their shoulders. And nobility? pfft. I understand what you are saying but the women here are already protected under the law. And I have heard a few times where feminist object to the way women in other cultures are treated. But it's left at that. Just an objection. The issues they are making a big fuss about are pointless. They're beating a dead horse. Is there even a feminist organisation here in the states that is trying to fix lets say, the issue with muslim women? Or are they allowing themselves to be stopped because of religious issues? I haven't heard of one trying to fight against that. Doesn't mean they don't exist, but I would think it would at least gain some attention. They're too liberal, they're media hungry, and they're spineless. (the lot of them..as a whole)

1330. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217875 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 6:15 pm

Pearl sweetheart, the men are trying to have a conversation...if your not going to fix us some drinks at least just sit there quietly and try to look pretty.

[throws you a bud and an ale]

I have been reading the posts. Puffing chest and showing feathers sounds more like you and al-rawandi.

Nice. Did you come up with that on your own or did you base that on the opinions of h4d and kkelly. He's not exactly someone you want to follow social cues from. Does anyone else feel this way? I'd like to know. This Joshie guy is new to me and I doubt he is as familiar to me as the rest of you.


Mordy,

I thought you were going to post as an undercover moniker? Glad the motherboard situation is cleared up. Have you been away all day as a result or just lurking about?

1331. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217859 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 5:58 pm

I don't understand why western feminists have any more of a duty to deal with the problems of women in other countries than the duty of western exterminators to deal with malaria carrying mosquitoes or tsetse flies in other countries before they kill the termites or cockroaches in western homes

Rad,

I'm disappointed in you. What do feminist stand for?

And what is left in the united states for them to raise hell about, that isn't already covered under the law?

There isn't such thing as "western feminists". I challenge you (like i did kkelly and h4d) to find me a feminist organisation that proclaims to say "we stand for the freedom and equality of all women...unless you are outside of the western world"

Or on that note..A F.O. that stands for freedom of just the western women?

There are feminists all over the world, so far I have never heard of one *claiming to limit themselves just in their particular geography.

edit for clarity.

1332. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217852 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 5:50 pm

Joshie,

You blockquoted something that I didn't say and then left out the rest of what I did.

Now I didn't say ALL lesbians are a result of sexual repression. I did however say that a lot of women I do know that were sexually repressed and frustrated became lesbian. This is true for the majority or repressed women that I know. I know this is not the case for all lesbians (or repressed women) and the comment about butch/lesbian/sluts was a smart ass one. It was made to sound as stupid as the comment preceding it. (although there was some truth in it) This is why it went unchallenged. The people that were taking place in the conversation knew the tone that it was meant for. Now I'm under the presumption that you didn't take the time to read all of the comments before or after, you prob just skimmed through, without taking in the full tone of the conversations. So basically all you wanted to do is puff your chest and show your feathers. This attempt is noted.

Continue reading.

Now, I don't know about you but I don't "bash theists" I do however bash the idiotic things they say and believe in.

There is a difference.

1333. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217830 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 5:25 pm

that a great many of these are indeed feminist issues exactly in the mould of those of the West forty years ago.

exactly a point that al and i were arguing earlier. however one person on the thread made a statement regarding how it wasn't the western feminists problem to deal with, and the other feminist apologist agreed. (it was something along the lines how western feminists are/should be only feminists for the western world)

sad huh?

1334. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217822 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 5:19 pm

Laurie,

On my end of the debate I was arguing why I don't see feminists in such a wonderful light. (That is modern feminists) Everything else just fell after.

It was pretty much anti-feminists vs. feminists (**cough**apologists **cough**)

1335. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217796 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 4:38 pm

Laurie,

We're arguing all different points regarding feminism. I think you would have to go back to the second page to get the full jist of it.

It's very complicated.

That includes the hot dog defilers, the gay bar men, the oyster grit, feminist rodents, and even talk show posers

Lol! Whoo Hoo that's a list I didn't make!

1336. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217791 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 4:29 pm

kkelly,

i'm going to have to insist that you stop putting words in some of our mouth's. You really need to be more careful about when you accuse someone of "saying" something when you really mean "imply".

Just because of that I can't read the rest of your argument, it's already based on a false premise.

I dropped my former feminism when I realised feminism wasn't about equal rights, but instead more rights to women.

Couldn't agree more with that statement. Nail into the coffin so to speak.

Apathy,

You just furthered the point of feminist groups being more of a hinderence to the women in the western or more enlightened countries, then a help.

1337. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217778 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 4:04 pm

if they can afford it and if they don't live in a place where there aren't considerable social pressures not to pursue legal recourse. If they're not too afraid they'll be killed if they pursue recourse and bruiser makes bail.

What places of social pressure is what I want to know? And as far as being able to afford it there are many shelters that provide assistance just for this very purpose. Some ran by feminist organisations, and others that aren't.

Now about the not getting paid enough ordeal, I'm not sure what states or organisations you are talking about but I am pretty sure every state has a clause protecting this right. And not every company is going to be the same way. Perhaps it's up to the woman personally? I think we are beyond the absolute need for feminist groups to step in. Especially when you have lawyers that fight that good fight. (discrimination in the workplace)

You aren't wrong in this kind of discimination but if that's the best you can come up with, it really isn't a good enough reason in support of feminist groups. I revert back to the original argument and that is these groups waste too much of their time on these causes in the US

1338. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217768 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 3:48 pm

307, but "tough shit" about male chauvinism in the workplace?! Luckily not eveybody is so dismissive of that.

Yes. Let me clarify my point; It's always going to exist. If women can't find a way to deal with it (i.e. report it or stand up for themselves) then tough shit.

His stance that they are hypocrites was illogical.

How so? You keep stating this but you aren't backing it up. He showed why he thought he was right but you haven't. Stop putting in your assertations over and over if you aren't going to back it up. This is why you are borderline trolling. We all know how you feel about Al, you don't need to keep reminding us.

How is he thought process illogical? And did he say they are hypocrites? I can't recall..

[edit for apathy]

When we talk about a lot of the alleged unreported sexism in workplaces - we hit upon the main problem with talking about unreported incidents

Right. And it is a problem I presume, but I don't feel sorry for the women that are victims of unreported sexism. Stand up for yourself for goodness sake. It's not like they don't have laws to protect them. Last time I checked this is another hot button that feminist organisation love to jump on. (Not that they need to but..) Is that a reasonable stance or am I being unreasonable on that too?

1339. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217747 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 3:22 pm

Women still make less than men for the same work, and have to deal with the added hindrance of male chauvinism in the workplace

Where? Whom? Are you sure these women are as qualified as the men they are up against? Or are they just using the feminist approach to back them up and bitch? Having to deal with male chauvinism? Tough shit. Men have to deal with women feminist bitchy ass attitudes. Door swings both ways. Both of the points that you mentioned can be illegal and justified.

Above all else, they don't need the assistance of feminist organisations to help them. It's called telling your boss (or another authority figure) or picking up the damn phone and hiring a lawyer.

ooo wow that's tough.

1340. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217742 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 3:16 pm

There. Last known post edited. (In case you can't tell)

1341. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217684 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 2:26 pm

Those of you accusing kkelly of being a troll, what do you think about The White Pearl and Al-Rawandi ganging up on him playground style?

Exactly what it is. Ganging up on a troll playground style.

What about the slightly bullying rhetorical style of Al-Rawandi?

Slightly bullying? hmmph. I can only justify that by pointing out that at least Al follows it up with an argument and valid point.

Should we bring up arguments and misunderstandings from other threads to defeat an argument we don't like?

Nope and we don't. If you take a careful look back on the thread you can see that the use of previous arguments and/or misunderstandings is after an argument is already defeated.

Isn't this just character assassination?

If that's what you want to call it. But if you call a whore a whore is the character assination your fault or hers? (That was just an example btw)

What does that tell you about his opponents in the argument?

Whatever you want.

You can't shore up weak arguments with crap like that and you can't just say that you just know feminist history when you demonstrate no pith or substance to your assertions about feminists.

And you can't accuse us of weak arguments without showing how our arguments are weak, crappy, and unknowledgeable. If you are going to say that you need to back it up. Any argument that we have put forth in response we at least show why we believe that said person is wrong. And usually follow it up with a point of our own.

then you knock aside my statistic

Wrong. What Al said was

Good statistics.

Al, you said you thought America was failing women and then you knock aside my statistic of 170,000 women severely battered (leaving out any of the women verbally and less severely abused) with the retort "what do feminists want to do make it more illegal?" And the white pearl says, "ooo touche"?

What Al did was accept your argument and then presented one of his own. No one argued that what you said was wrong. Did we?

It's not like battering and mistreatment of women is legal in america and kept behind closed doors. Feminists aren't swooping in to save the day. They may have had a hand in the past but that's the past. It's illegal in america and without the aid of feminists women would still be protected by the law. Yes feminist groups help women. Wonderful. They provide assistance to battered women. Bravo. Hardly worthy of a prize especially since non-feminist organisations also provide the same assistance. There are women in other cultures that don't have a law to shelter under. Perhaps it would be nice if they spent time raising the awareness about that and trying to help women in other cultures. But they don't. What they are doing is hiding behind the exact same statistics and arguments that you bring up. Why? Not sure why. Perhaps it's because they are scared, gutless, and apparently its an out of sight out of mind issue.

This is the argument that Al was making. Only he summed it up in a couple of sentences. It really didnt need explanation. It was a wonderful point and that is why I responded with "touche".

Are you just deadset on defending your thesis that feminists here are worthy of ridicule no matter what valid points anyone makes?

No. You made a valid argument, proved your point and we responded with our own arguments and our own points. You have yet, at the time I am writing this response, to come back at us with another argument. You aren't even refuting or trying to defeat any of our reasoning. Instead at this point you are attacking the way in which we argue and defeat yours. (or kkelly)

I'll assume that the question of "why would a gay man be "vaginaphobic" when feminists have done so much for him?"

It was a rhetorical question and I was being a bit of a smart ass. The whole point of the "vaginaphobic feminist" was to show that it was a little bit odd. I was trying to show that I didn't think kkelly really gave a rats ass about feminism. He was merely trying to argue for the sake of arguing. (trolling)

moreover I want to put forth the theory I've heard which is that sexual preference is set by a chemical hormonal "bath" of a fetus' brain.

Valid theory. All humans start off as women. And I hope you weren't bringing that up as some sort of defense for kkelly. Please don't think that I was being rude to kkelly just because of his sexual orientation. He is the self proclaimed vaginaphobe.

1342. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217614 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 1:11 pm

The problem is the way you present it and what you say. That's what the problem is. You have an issue with social cues.

We've been over this.

1343. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #217578 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 12:46 pm

His "popular" books do not count.

Pray tell, what books that he has published aren't popular?

1344. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #217568 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 12:42 pm

TGD is only good for propping up wobbly tables and the like.

Well that's your opinion Booby, but it would still answer and refute all of the arguments that Aberdeen regurgitated out of that ignorant mind of his. I noticed how you didn't deny that.

1345. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217558 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 12:34 pm

oh god, do shut up you vapid, thoughtless fool.

[silently points to avatar]

1346. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217551 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 12:30 pm

but their should be outcry from all not just women, not just feminist. Women shouldn't have to be the only ones who care about women.

True. But maybe some women don't care. Which is exactly what separates "women" from "feminists". A simple dictionary would do well here.

1347. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217545 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 12:25 pm

These men are prosecuted for their crimes if sufficient evidence exists. What would the feminists do, make it MORE illegal? The law is equitable in the US.

oooh touche

I objected to your negative characterization of western feminists who focus on western female inequities

Now, if you could only provide a link to a feminist organisation that claims they are a "western feminist organisation who focus on western female inequites".

Hmm didn't think so.

1348. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217536 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 12:20 pm

The rule is set up at the local government level, be that township, city, or county. Club owners object to the rules.

Once again, you dont have a full grasp on what you are talking about.

H4D,

Yes. We are aware of that. No one denied that feminist groups do practice some good. That wasn't the argument. The argument was how spineless they can be. Like I said they are more worried about what goes on in the US and simply ignore other (sometimes bigger) issues in the rest of the world.

why would a "vaginaphobic" gay man defend feminists? I'm sorry to say that this really indicates that you know very little of the history of the feminist movement in the United States and other western countries. Feminists took action on behalf of gays and lesbians long before it was even safe for them to take action on their own behalf. Feminism has long been at a junction between gay rights and human rights altogether

Wrong assumption. But now that you pointed it out, I'll rephrase the rhetorical question to this:

"Why would a gay man be such a vaginaphobic when it is apparent of the support they have shown gay and lesbians."?

And I wonder if the support had more to do with the lesbian side, not necessarily the gay man side. But we won't really ever know seeing how you can't seem to have one without the other.

You seem to be focusing on one part of the argument and not the big picture that we are arguing.

1349. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217518 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 12:03 pm

strippers are not allowed to stand within 3 feet, sometimes even 6, of the person to whom they are giving a lapdance

That rule is set up to protect the strippers by the strip club owners. I don't recall this stopping them from doing lap dances. I don't think you really know all the facts on that. And was prob the worst example you could come up with. I would go so far as to say that doesn't even apply.

And if you have a problem with my lesbianism argument, take it up with the lesbians I've talked to.

edit

1350. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217501 by thewhitepearl on July 24, 2008 at 11:52 am

Rkelly,

*chuckles*

He likes to argue. Most of these argues seem like they are ones that he has overheard, and not really researched. So he doesn't have a clue. His argument style is similar to kids in school arguing democrat vs republican based on what they have heard their parents say.