Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)

Comments by epeeist


251. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #189295 by epeeist on June 6, 2008 at 1:26 am

Comment #189284 by Cartomancer

For a start, you've just gone back to the naturalistic fallacy you so decried a while ago. Is there any consistency to your position, or are you, as Al-Rwandi suggests, simply clutching at any straws in the jar for some shred of rational clothing with which to conceal your scabrous homophobic bigotry?
He raised the naturalistic fallacy when I claimed that there was a biological basis for homosexuality. It is something else he plainly has no idea about since I made no ethical claims based on the biology.

His single idea is to claim equivalence between homosexuality and one particular form of paraphilia, purely to back up his homophobia.

In species terms I think he would rank as a lesser spotted AS Marques.

252. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #189061 by epeeist on June 5, 2008 at 10:17 am

Comment #189042 by Fanusi Khiyal


You can read an article on that here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-432075/Multiculturalism-drives-young-Muslims-shun-British-values.html
You shot yourself in the foot with this one. The DM is so vile that irate_atheist won't even buy it for his cat to shit on.

253. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #189002 by epeeist on June 5, 2008 at 7:40 am

Not work friendly - http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/mediamonkey/zebra.html

I wonder whether Appleby would approve of bestiality this way around?

254. Ben Stein 1, Yoko Ono 0 in 'Expelled' copyright spat

Comment #188904 by epeeist on June 5, 2008 at 1:40 am

Comment #188902 by mordacious1

Sorry Brits, it is your country and your money but what is their use?
Besides generating tourism? Not an awful lot. They do bits for charity (The Prince's Trust for example), but not enough to justify their existence as far as I am concerned.

Unfortunately if we want to get rid of them then we have to put some constitutional change in place. We need to have a de jure president instead of the de facto one that we have now as prime minister. We need to complete the work on the House of Lords to turn it into a proper second chamber.

This would be the minimum. In my opinion we also need to decentralise more, we have one of the most centralised governmental systems in Europe and it has a heavy London bias. This would enable us to get rid of a whole stack of non-elected bodies that effectively decide and implement policy in the regions.

Finally, we need to get rid of the "first past the post" electoral system and replace it with a more proportionally based system.

255. Ben Stein 1, Yoko Ono 0 in 'Expelled' copyright spat

Comment #188901 by epeeist on June 5, 2008 at 1:11 am

Comment #188897 by Teratornis

Disclaimer: I am a citizen of country which rebelled against said Monarchy. No hard feelings, I trust.
Having got rid the arch loony Blair we have the prospect of arch loony Charles in the future. The quicker we turn the monarchy into a theme park in order to part you Americans from your hard earned dollars the better.
The only way to determine whose fallacy works out to be an error and whose works out to be a useful heuristic is probably just to try them both.
Popper's idea of piecewise social change comes to mind.
The open source movement seems to have demonstrated that copyrights are not essential for stimulating human creativity.
Untrue, the Free Software movement uses copyright to promote the sharing of software.

256. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188896 by epeeist on June 5, 2008 at 12:45 am

One from me then I don't intend to respond any more. We are just going around in circles.

  1. There is sufficient evidence to show that homosexuality has a biological basis
  2. Conversely there is evidence to show that zoosexuality, paedophilia, coprophilia and the like are psychological. They are all examples of paraphilia
  3. As such the attempt to associate homosexuality and paraphilia is therefore invalid
  4. Sexual congress between both heterosexuals and homosexuals is based on consent, anything not based on consent is rape and is not justified either ethically or legally
  5. It is not ethically justified to have sexual congress with a being that is reasonably sentient but cannot give consent, this would include children, humans with limited mental capacity or animals
  6. Disgust at homosexuality (or heterosexuality), unwillingness to associate with homosexuals (or black people) is a personal choice and while it may meet with disapprobation should not be forbidden
  7. However, the objectification of homosexuals, people of different races or genders and the attempt to circumscribe their activities without evidential support is morally (and legally) unacceptable
As I have said before, I think you are trying to justify your loathing (dislike is too weak a word) of homosexuality by attempting to tar it with the brush of a sexual disorder, your attempt has signally failed.

You are lucky that this is the only thing that has been dissected in detail. I find your misogyny and racism equally abhorrent.

257. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188680 by epeeist on June 4, 2008 at 11:31 am

Comment #188670 by al-rawandi

don't support inhumane methods of culling meat. In fact hunting, which the flagrant hypocrites here so foolishy decry, is actually a way of population control.
I would take a slightly more nuanced view.

I definitely supported the bill to get rid of hunting with dogs (note the plural). Dogs pulling down foxes, hare and deer I find abominable. A dog retrieving an animal that has been killed is different.

I also find the practice of shoots in this country where several hundred birds will be shot by a small number of "hunters" to be distasteful.

An individual hunter, killing for the pot I have no problems with at all.

258. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188675 by epeeist on June 4, 2008 at 11:24 am

Comment #188660 by annabanana

Epeeist responded specifically to your claim that it is necessary, and rightly corrected you, to say that it was not is.
It was a bad initial comment on my behalf changing Al's "is" to "was". It might have been better to say "could be".

However, it was a minor point. The major premise was that we now take a strong position on the treatment of animals than we used to do. This therefore undermines at least one of Appleby's points.

In other news - this year's Royal Academy includes a picture of a zebra having sex with a woman - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/7435987.stm

The snippet that I have posted doesn't say whether it is a male zebra or not.

259. Ben Stein 1, Yoko Ono 0 in 'Expelled' copyright spat

Comment #188655 by epeeist on June 4, 2008 at 10:44 am

Comment #188651 by hungarianelephant

Copyright law does not protect information. It protects the form of expression. At its most basic level, this means there's no copyright in an item of news, only in the way in which it is expressed.
I have mixed feelings about the "Intellectual Property" industry (note that I work in the IT industry and am a proponent of free software).

I have no problem with the original intention for copyrights and patents, i.e. "a limited period of time". However, that "limited period" seems to be getting ridiculously long.

The length of time isn't always apposite either. I can see the argument for a long period of protection on such things as drugs which take a long time to research and test. I can't see the validity of an equal protection time for software.

And a better system is required to prevent obvious patents being passed.

260. Discussion between Richard Dawkins and Paula Kirby

Comment #188590 by epeeist on June 4, 2008 at 8:24 am

Comment #186016 by ChristiansTogether

The other person would be (to represent the religious side of the question) David Robertson.
Ah, that scourge of atheist fundamentalists and their tenets. Also, newly self-outed creationist.

261. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188552 by epeeist on June 4, 2008 at 7:47 am

Comment #188538 by Appleby

You can't jump back and forth. Justifying homosexuality (mainly) through science but when it comes to bestiality saying it's now about ethics. Ridiculous.
There is sufficient scientific data to show that homosexuality has a biological basis (look at the behaviour of bononos or macaques for instance).

One might take an ethical position as to whether homosexuals should be celibate or not (or whether heterosexuals should be for that matter).

And as has been pointed out before, both heterosexual and homosexual sex is only considered to be ethical if it is consensual.

Non-consenual sex or sex with a sentient being who cannot give consent is ethically wrong.

As I noted first thing this morning what you are doing is the inverse of the "pathetic fallacy". You are trying to generate distaste for homosexuality by associating it with bestiality.

262. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188535 by epeeist on June 4, 2008 at 7:29 am

Comment #188524 by hungarianelephant


Then ethically, perhaps it can be argued that homosexuality should be outlawed. Wait... in many parts of the world it is! Maybe their ethics are different. But wait... yours is the correct one, right?
Ooh, moral relativism. How original.
The ennui is too great to allow me to track back, but in a previous response to a question of mine he claimed he "didn't want to get into whether there were objective moral values or not" (paraphrase rather than quotation).

263. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188499 by epeeist on June 4, 2008 at 6:54 am

Comment #188493 by Steve Zara

Dogs just love to run, however.
Until they can't any more. The treatment of greyhounds after this happens isn't pleasant.

264. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188496 by epeeist on June 4, 2008 at 6:52 am

Comment #188479 by al-rawandi

I mean no disrespect, but that vegetarian thing is nonsense IMHO.
Don't worry about the disrespect, this is an open argument after all.
The reason is that amino acids are different in plants than they are in meat, for a truly healthy and balanced diet one needs both plant amino acids as well as animal.
I do an amount of nutritional work with my pupils of course, but I wouldn't say I am anything of an expert. My understanding is that one can supplement a vegetarian diet to make up for the amino acids one cannot synthesise. More than happy to have more detail on this.

Having said that, it is a minor point. The major thing is that we have an increasing ethical awareness of the way we treat animals. Bringing it back to the general theme of this site, I suspect that this is partially due to the idea of common descent.

265. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188475 by epeeist on June 4, 2008 at 6:22 am

Comment #188468 by al-rawandi

Thus eating meat is a necessary part of the human diet.
A minor amendation, I would change is to was.

I don't know what it is like in the States but there is a growing population of vegetarians in the UK, and it seems to be increasing. While I know one or two people who are vegetarians because they simply don't like handling meat, the majority take an ethical stance towards killing and eating animals.

Which rather undermines Appleby's ideas on the "progress" of zoophilia over the next 100 years.

Note: Elder daughter would be vegan apart from the fact that you can't get non-leather shoes that wouldn't lower your position on the fashion ladder.

266. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188463 by epeeist on June 4, 2008 at 5:57 am

Comment #188462 by Appleby

You're assuming: sex with animals = cruelty.

This needs to be demonstrated scientifically. Now which animal would you like to start with?
It isn't a scientific question, it is an ethical one.

267. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188335 by epeeist on June 4, 2008 at 12:56 am

Comment #188291 by Cartomancer

I wonder, I really do, why you persist in equating homosexuality with zoophilia.
A sort of inverse of the pathetic fallacy would be my guess.

268. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188205 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 10:46 am

Comment #188198 by Bonzai

You can't be serious. IMO that is a horrible flick.
How about "La Cage aux Folles"?

269. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188189 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 10:21 am

Comment #188185 by annabanana

Erm, there is? Didn't get it. Maybe you're being sarcastic and you forgot your sarcasm tags.
Nah, just an ideal opportunity to wind Al up. Couldn't resist it.

270. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188173 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 9:51 am

Comment #188170 by al-rawandi


The men are at least, because they don't deal with women....

*ducks*
Annabanana - PM for you.

271. Ben Stein 1, Yoko Ono 0 in 'Expelled' copyright spat

Comment #188162 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 9:36 am

Comment #188155 by Dhamma

According to Wikipedia, the budget was $3.5 million. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expelled


Btw, if that's the total cost of the film, then why can't "we" make one as well? Not sure what the budget actually entails. Does it include things like publicity for instance, or distribution costs.

If it did cost $3.5 million and it took $7.6 million then how much would be left over to pay the film makers after the distributors and theatres took their cut?

At best it looks as though it might have broken even. I suspect they hope to make money on the DVD release.

272. Ben Stein 1, Yoko Ono 0 in 'Expelled' copyright spat

Comment #188156 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 9:30 am

Comment #188151 by davemei

Ermm....you could always...download it. =P
It would seem that nobody could even raise the effort to take a webcam of it and put the torrent on the "Pirate Bay".

273. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188154 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 9:28 am

Comment #188146 by Cartomancer

Far be it from me to dissuade you from that rather pleasing stereotype, but you clearly haven't been to the Love Bar on King Edward Street in Oxford on a tuesday night...
I used to work at UMIST in Manchester, not too far from here - http://www.whathappenedlastnight.net/manchester/areas/Gay Village

We once booked a visitor and his wife into the Rembrandt. He quite liked it, but couldn't quite work why people were looking at him rather than his wife...

274. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188135 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 8:55 am

Comment #188129 by Cartomancer

Actually, the main argument for allowing gay adoption is a gay rights argument.
Disagree. It is a children's rights issue. Children should have a right to be placed with a loving, nurturing family wherever possible. Whether the family is heterosexual or homosexual is secondary.

275. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188126 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 8:48 am

Comment #188119 by Appleby

What conditions have I imposed on others? I have merely posited thought experiments.


You don't remember this?

Comment #187150 by Appleby

I think homosexuals are better off living in communities of their own. They'll be more comfortable there.

276. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188116 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 8:36 am

Comment #188096 by Appleby

I only have a preference, like Comment #188055 by Peacebeuponme.
Preferences you are allowed. Opinions you are allowed. Distaste and revulsion you are allowed.

If you want to impose conditions on others then you are going to have provide rather more though.

277. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188091 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 8:02 am

Comment #188080 by Appleby

I'm not here to discuss objective morality, I'm afraid. It's a whole other can of worms I'd rather not digress into right now.
But this leaves you with a problem. How does one, for example, justify allowing or not allowing children to be fostered with particular types of carers unless one has an ethical basis for the decision?

278. Ben Stein 1, Yoko Ono 0 in 'Expelled' copyright spat

Comment #188081 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 7:52 am

How much would it have cost to put together the movie and distribute it. The takings so far are around $7.6 million (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=main&id=expelled.htm) would they have covered their costs with this?

279. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188079 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 7:49 am

Comment #188069 by Appleby

Well this is a loaded question too. If I think it's an objective moral wrong
Okay, let's make it simpler.

Do you think there is such a thing as objective morality?

280. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188065 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 7:33 am

Comment #188053 by Appleby

Actually I asked the question first (refer Comment #188020 by Appleby).


In this you said
I am simply trying to establish whether or not homosexuals view themselves (and consequently their rights) as somehow different from those who practice bestiality. If so, I would like to know what criteria they use and if these criteria have any basis in science, for one thing.
I can't speak for homosexuals, and anyway I think the question is loaded. One could easily replace "homosexual" with "heterosexual" in the first sentence.

You obviously have some kind of objection to bestiality, I was asking whether you think this is an objective moral wrong?

281. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188047 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 7:18 am

Comment #188045 by Appleby


As to justification - are you claiming that there is some objective moral value that forbids such an act?
Then what is our basis for not condoning it?
No, I asked the question. Answer mine first then we will see where it goes.

282. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188042 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 7:09 am

Comment #188033 by Appleby

Because I think we can all agree (homosexuals and heterosexuals alike) that bestiality should not be condoned. I'm curious if we can justify it, though.
I am not aware of anyone here who would condone bestiality.

As to justification - are you claiming that there is some objective moral value that forbids such an act?

283. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188031 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 7:02 am



So what do with think of this little hottie?

284. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188028 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 6:59 am

Comment #188020 by Appleby

I am simply trying to establish whether or not homosexuals view themselves (and consequently their rights) as somehow different from those who practice bestiality.
Homosexuality vs. bestiality is a lousy analogy for reasons that you have already been given.

Why don't you use something like adults who consent to sado-masochism, or white women having consensual sex with black men.

285. The Challenge of the New Creationism

Comment #188008 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 6:38 am

Comment #187998 by Podaar

Spoken like someone who's never been objectified.
It is tricky. Given the current paranoia in the UK lots of people would look askance at your picture. A pretty young girl might encourage paedophiles (or paediatricians, the kind of people who get uptight about this tend not to know the difference). I have enormous problems publicising the major competition I run because the participants are under-17.

Personally I value the contributions of people like White Pearl and Annabanana and Paula. I am happy that they feel able to publish their pictures on the site even though we have had at least one person who took this as licence. It would be depressing if they felt they had to use a generic cartoon or something similar.

In spite of all your knowledge, cleverness, wit and wisdom, epeeist, I'm only here to laugh at your avatar.
Go for it, just so long as your name isn't Appleby...

286. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187982 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 5:29 am

Comment #187980 by irate_atheist

Farewell and adieu to you, fair Spanish ladies.
It was on the good ship Venus...

287. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187981 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 5:27 am

Comment #187978 by Bonzai

Really? To me he came across as a bitter, hateful middle aged or old man(probably in his late 40's or up)
Well that shows that you shouldn't hypothesise before your data ;-)

I might amend my statement to say that he argued in a juvenile manner.

288. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187965 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 4:56 am

Comment #187922 by Appleby

And you should stick to fencing, if you're even any good at that.
Oh, I was never that good a fencer, but I am a bloody good coach. I have fencers who have qualified of English, Irish and British squads. I have had English, Irish and British champions and taken fencers to world championships three times and to European championships six times now. I also coach the British under-15 pentathlon champion (who at the age of 13 was 2nd in a recent under-17 European event).

Have a glance at http://www.flickr.com/photos/10983076@N08/sets/72157604114612772/ for some pictures.

Am I good - yes. Am I the best, in Britain no, that honour goes to a 60 year old Hungarian who coaches in Durham. In the world no, that title goes to an 86 year old Pole. I have trained with both of them.

289. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187944 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 4:29 am

Comment #187940 by Bonzai

The status quo.
This is not even an argument.
Well it is, it is an argumentum ad antiquitatem ;-)

290. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187941 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 4:26 am

Comment #187931 by Bonzai

So what is the technical difference between "condoning "bestiality and heterosexuals who have sex but plan not to have kids?
Or the difference between heterosexuality and bestiality or a black man having sex with a white woman?

291. The Challenge of the New Creationism

Comment #187921 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 3:55 am

Comment #187767 by thewhitepearl

I'm going to politely ignore the comments about my avatar
Why? If that is a picture of you then you are a beautiful woman and (to change the gender)

"Beautiful young men are always exciting," said the Dean.

(I wonder if Cartomancer can spot the quotation)

Ogling is unpleasant, but enjoyment of beauty certainly isn't.

292. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187917 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 3:21 am

Comment #187914 by AllanW

Everything you ever wanted to know about Appleby. In his own words ...

Well I almost got it right four days ago - http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2656,Storm-erupts-over-virginity-divorce,The-Australian,page3#186828

Missed the homophobia.

I have to wonder, how old is this guy? He actually comes across as very juvenile.

He also comes across as being clueless about the basic ideas behind science, presentation of empirical evidence and simple argumentation and logic.

293. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #187886 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 1:22 am

Comment #187885 by Quetzalcoatl

Wait a second.....there's no hyphen, but al-rawandi sounds quite similar to al-cohol....maybe he's a drunk as well!
Alkali - that's a fairly basic response from me.

294. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #187882 by epeeist on June 3, 2008 at 1:06 am

Comment #187417 by djspideyspinster


I believe it to be poor judgment on the part of Dawkins to not debate the likes of D'Souza or Dr. William Lane Craig (whom he also turned down). It communicates a lack of confidence, in my opinion, which is contrary to the good Professor's book, The God Delusion. If theists truly do believe "myths," and "fairy tales," why not take EVERY opportunity to expose this? Surely it would be an easy task for someone as "brilliant" as Dawkins, yes? I believe that Mr. Dawkins is beginning to understand why philosopher, Dr. Alvin Plantinga, when reviewing Dawkins' book wrote: "You might say that some of his forays into philosophy are at best sophomoric, but that would be unfair to sophomores; the fact is (grade inflation aside), many of his arguments would receive a failing grade in a sophomore philosophy class (http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/002/1.21.html). Indeed.

Hmmm, Dr. Platinga and Dr. Lane Craig, but Mr. Dawkins. We wouldn't be showing a slight bias here would we? You might want to look up his qualifications - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins

You want to know whether a message is true, but you advocate a debate with D'Souza? I note allbaster is proposing a debate with Vox Day as well. Neither of these two are known as proponents of truth.

And to be blunt, why does there need to be a debate on theology. Show that there is empirical evidence for your particular creator god first.

295. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187699 by epeeist on June 2, 2008 at 1:12 pm

Comment #187689 by Tezcatlipoca

Good Grief! Not the "think of the children" gambit...
To try and break this up a bit.

MPhil recommended Mackie's "Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong" and Rawls "A Theory of Justice". I haven't got through either of them yet (too many other books on the in the stack) but both of them deal with consequentialist and contractualist ethics. Perhaps this is something that might form the basis of looking at whether and where to foster children.

296. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187691 by epeeist on June 2, 2008 at 1:06 pm

Comment #187683 by Appleby

By all means, go ahead.
Well, I had to show you how to formulate a scientific hypothesis I seem to recall.

Now, you may be being subject to the pile on effect that sometimes happens on this site. But you are in this situation because you are trying to defend a position in which all you seem to have is personal opinion and prejudice.

297. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187680 by epeeist on June 2, 2008 at 12:59 pm

Comment #187659 by Appleby

You claim there are no differences whatsoever but in that *you're* committing a fallacy in trying to prove a negative.
One can prove a negative, have a glance at http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/theory.html

298. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187658 by epeeist on June 2, 2008 at 12:30 pm

Comment #187652 by Mitchell Gilks

As I mentioned, two women can have "real biological children" now. So that point is both inaccurate and moot because what is "normal" or "natural" is not necessarily good.
But he doesn't particularly like women either. He thinks they are inferior and refers to them as "girls".

299. Character Attacks: How to Properly Apply the Ad Hominem

Comment #187608 by epeeist on June 2, 2008 at 11:06 am

I can recommend Douglas Walton's "Informal Logic" which gives lots of good advice for argumentation.

300. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187389 by epeeist on June 2, 2008 at 4:58 am

Comment #187381 by Appleby

And if I have to explain to you why a society where men fuck exclusively women is better off than one where men fuck other men, cats, goats and dogs then you clearly have some twisted ideas.
Can you say "begging the question"?

More Pages: Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 | Next