Comments

  1. Hedgehog says

    Just wanted to say that I wanted to give Ashley (they lady who’s mother had recently died) a hug. I understand what she means, but I don’t feel sad that my parents are not looking over me, they are always in me, in my genes (and in any offspring I have), in social ways – the things they taught me and the values they gave me.

    A much greater legacy, I think.

    I’ll take that.

  2. magistramarla says

    Bravo to the Canadians for this little film and bravo to you, PZ for participating.
    I was always a questioner as a teen and when I first read about Secular Humanism in high school, it made sense to me. However, I remained a “lip-service” xtian.

    In the past ten years, when I was teaching Latin, I was reading more and more about the origins and similarities of many religions in the ancient world. It became more and more clear that christianity had borrowed from so many other religions, including the religion of the Greeks, Mithraism and the cult of Isis in Egypt. I came to realize that it was just another way for men to try to explain what they could not understand.

    This realization, along with the worsening bad behavior of the fundamentalists by whom I was surrounded, pushed me over into complete non-belief.

  3. Midnight Rambler says

    How can you be “not raised religious”, but go to Bible camp and Bible school?

  4. Aquaria says

    How can you be “not raised religious”, but go to Bible camp and Bible school?

    I’ve known parents who do that sort of thing so the kids can have exposure to religion(s) so that the kids can have a firm basis for making up their own minds. Sometimes, the kids aren’t raised overtly religious, but the parents have the misguided idea that their kids could benefit from VBS or whatever. Or they do it because the kid insists on going, to be with friends. Or maybe they just want the kids out of their hair for a little while–or to have them occupied while they’re doing other things.

    My one stint at VBS was the summer when my highly secular grandparents were having to spend a lot of time shuffling between doctors, labs and hospitals; my grandfather was eventually diagnosed with terminal leukemia. Being as poor as they were, paying for a babysitter wasn’t an option, but there was the VBS, where we could hang out with adult supervision for very little money for an entire morning while they took care of all that.

    The preacher man, I suppose to his credit, forgave me for biting him when I was four or five years old, and let me sign up. Of course, by third grade, I’d outgrown being a biter.

    Sort of.

  5. BCskeptic says

    I too recently lost my mother (to essentially old age), so can sort of relate to what the one woman said in the video.

    The funeral was quite heavily religious, except that virtually no one except for my elderly father was religious(it was that way for him and because that’s what she would’ve wanted), and my daughters (teens, raised stanchly religious by my X). The minister sure did use the opportunity to crack the whip and pound in all that god stuff. Water off a duck’s back…

    Once the grieving was over, I have not had this sense of wanting her to be “watching over me” etc. I take more comfort in the fact that her genes are in me and others, and that the molecules she was made of are dispersed across the earth (~10e9 particles per sq cm, one colleague recently calculated), and will be recycled into all manner of living and non-living things. As are we all; we are all recycled material…made of parts of virtually every living and non-living thing that ever existed all the way back to the big bang.

    And, what does she feel now? Exactly what she felt when the star(s) went supernova that gave rise to our heavy elements, the earth was forming, the 150 million years the dinosaurs ruled the planet, the K/T event that killed them, and when King Henry VIII was riding his horse.

    Nice video…maybe one day my daughters will be “open” to such a thing. For now, they are thoroughly “in religion”, and seem to relish in it.

  6. magistramarla says

    I understand what Aquaria is talking about. My grandson did first grade in a religious school, simply to keep him out of the tough, gang-controlled public school (yes, gangs in elementary schools – that’s the Texas education system!).

    He’s 12 now, and in a decent public school. He’s told us that he remembers that school and recalls sitting there while being preached at and thinking “That isn’t right, and they shouldn’t be telling little kids how to think.”

    We’re very proud of him for being able to think for himself and very pleased to know that he was doing so at the age of 6. My husband says that it’s a case of “know your enemy”.

  7. cag says

    Nice video…maybe one day my daughters will be “open” to such a thing. For now, they are thoroughly “in religion”, and seem to relish in it.

    Yes, religion pickles the mind.

  8. WhiteHatLurker says

    How can you be “not raised religious”, but go to Bible camp and Bible school?

    Attracted to someone who was going there anyway. I went to an art class in Grade 1 because of that, and learned how to draw cylinders.

  9. M Groesbeck says

    I’m with the first guy — “I don’t know” isn’t a failing. It’s the first step on the road (however long it may turn out to be — which is another “I don’t know”) towards “…so now we know. We think.” And the latter is about as much certainty as we can hope for, but it would never have come about without the initial “I don’t know.”

  10. jerry says

    LOL! PZ Myers preaching “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”?

    Does that include kicking students in the balls for their beliefs, oh pious one? Do you spew the most vulgar insults because you secretly wish to be insulted in the most vile manner? Or does this mean that once you’ve introduced your enemies to your “steel-toed boots” you will be nice to them as they writhe on the ground in agony?

    I can’t decide which of your two faces I want to vomit all over right now – “brass knuckles” PZ or “I just want to give the world a big hug” PZ.

  11. heliobates says

    Does that include kicking students in the balls for their beliefs, oh pious one?

    That doesn’t happen. Not even metaphorically. His students’ beliefs don’t belong in a science classroom.

    Or does this mean that once you’ve introduced your enemies to your “steel-toed boots” you will be nice to them as they writhe on the ground in agony

    Yes, because criticizing someone’s beliefs is exactly like violently assaulting them.

    Fainting couch in the tool aisle, stat!

  12. heliobates says

    His students’ beliefs don’t belong in a science classroom.

    Well, that got mangled in the edit.

    Here’s an idea: look up PZ on ratemyprofessor.com.

    If this ball-kicking was occurring, even metaphorically, might some anonymous, bruised victim trundle on over there and tell the world about this big ol’ meanie atheist?

    So frickin’ telling that “the other side” continually equates strongly-voiced opinions with violence.

  13. jerry says

    That doesn’t happen. Not even metaphorically. His students’ beliefs don’t belong in a science classroom.

    Tell me, which of PZ’s two faces is always decrying “right-wing hate speech” and which of PZ’s two faces gleefully spouts hateful violent rhetoric based simply upon a persons beliefs?

    Yes, because criticizing someone’s beliefs is exactly like violently assaulting them.

    No, it’s because PZ says “Do unto others…” with one of his 2 faces, and spews hateful insults with the other of his two faces. Of course PZ isn’t advocating violence. He’s just doing unto others what he constantly complains about THEM doing.

    If you don’t understand the difference between “criticizing someone’s beliefs” and PZ’s hateful, spiteful, raging ad-hominem insults then you are simply a blind accolyte worshipping at the temple of the Janus of Atheism.

  14. JohnnieCanuck says

    That sick to your stomach feeling you claim to have? Just a symptom of your religious beliefs disagreeing with reality.

    Projecting… Typical religious behaviour. First your violent fantasies and then your stomach contents.

  15. heliobates says

    which of PZ’s two faces gleefully spouts hateful violent rhetoric based simply upon a persons beliefs?

    [citation needed] Emphasis mine.

    No, it’s because PZ says “Do unto others…” with one of his 2 faces, and spews hateful insults with the other of his two faces.

    [citation needed]

    If you don’t understand the difference between “criticizing someone’s beliefs” and PZ’s hateful, spiteful, raging ad-hominem insults then you are simply a blind accolyte worshipping at the temple of the Janus of Atheism.

    …and we’ll have false dichotomies for $500, Alex.

    It’s early jerry, but you just might be a gift that keeps on giving.

  16. cyberCMDR says

    I’ve often found that the insults a person uses tells a lot about the person delivering them. Someone who calls others “fags” is often unsure of their own manhood; same goes for “stupid”, etc. The religious decry PZ’s arguments as violence, but Xtians are the ones making death threats over the Ground Zero cross lawsuit, or other cases where atheists have made their views known in public. An atheist, on the other hand, may try to argue you to death, but that’s about it. They don’t have that sense of certainty that “God is on their side” and that any act to defend the faith is “God’s will”. That logic, the logic behind suicide bombers, gay bashers and Republikkkan candidates comes from living in the alternate reality that religion provides. Religion is not the opiate of the masses, it is their hallucinogen.

  17. BCskeptic says

    @jerry #13.

    I totally understand the turmoil that you feel towards PZ’s hurling insults at cheerished beliefs, and people associated with those beliefs. That feeling is simply human nature. I’ve felt it…it is not pleasant.

    Understand though, that PZ makes no threats of violence (unlike the plethora of threats he gets all the time), and is attacking crazy ideas, which, quite frankly deserve to be attacked. Of course, people spout those ideas, and since they are the ones attached to them, get attacked by association.

    His approach is simply how science is done; when someone gets up and makes unsupported or outright bogus claims, those claims are subject to criticism, and the crazier the claim, the harsher the criticism. It is just the way it is done in the search for truth.

    IMHO, PZ is really “doing unto others…”. If he were to make unsubstantiated claims on his blog, we’d be the first jump on and be critical, and he would expect nothing less. There’d be a tossle of ideas, probably some impassioned/heated words, and at some point, if he were convinced (through that debate), that he was in error, he’d admit the mistake.

    When’s the last time some high-profile religionist got up and said, “you know, you’re right, it doesn’t make sense, and is just a bunch of crazy superstition. I’m going to get a different job.” Or, a creationist like Behe, say, “right, I finally get it, it’s a myth, boy was I blinded by my brainwashing as a child. I can’t do this shit anymore.”

    No. Never happens.

    That’s why PZ (and most commenters on this blog I bet) pulls no punches in criticizing bad ideas, and religion in particular.

  18. Aquaria says

    which of PZ’s two faces gleefully spouts hateful violent rhetoric based simply upon a persons beliefs?

    What hateful rhetoric? Calling your delusion a delusion? Yeah, that’s as violent as kicking you with a pair of steel-toed boots–if you’re a delusions gobshite, like you apparently are.

    Tell you what, cupcake: Lying is as bad as kicking someone with a pair of steel toed boots. And you’re a fucking liar of epic propotions. That makes you the jack-booted thug, not us.

    Fuck off you delusional shit stain.

  19. NMcC says

    Christ! Ol’ Jerry is taking that cats versus squid thing a bit far, isn’t he?

  20. says

    I went to the premier of this video. Knowing all the people in the video but having no idea what they were up to all these months (they kept it super secret) I have to say that I am impressed.

    To answer a question above quickly on being raised secular but attending a bible camp I have really only one answer to that. In rural Manitoba as a child you either do chores or hang out with your friends. When your friends are all at bible camp then that is where you go. The church is literally the center of the social scene.

    Bravo to my friends. Well done :).

  21. Musca domestica says

    About non-religious bible-campers – maybe they are like Finnish christians. They get baptized, confirmed, married and hold their burial in the church, and that’s pretty much the extent of their religious behaviour. Except for the church tax. I was raised atheist, but wanted to go to the confirmation camp with my friends. My mum said I could go, if I would get confirmed too. So I didn’t.

  22. teawithbertrand says

    @24

    That video was truly heartbreaking. Fundie horror stories don’t usually shock me anymore, but this is a new high in low. Thanks for posting. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: There are many reasons why I am not religious, but shit like this is why I couldn’t be religious if I tried.

  23. jerry says

    Aquaria said:

    What hateful rhetoric? Calling your delusion a delusion?

    Oh, come on Aquaria. We’re talking about the guy who shrieked like a woman when Sarah Palin “targeted” congressional districts on a campaign poster. Oh yeah, that was “right wing hate speech” but when PZ blurts out:

    I say, screw the polite words and careful rhetoric. It’s time for scientists to break out the steel-toed boots and brass knuckles, and get out there and hammer on the lunatics and idiots.

    that’s ok.

    Give me a break you naive little girl. PZ is as two faced as they come and you seem silly when you try to apologize for him.

  24. Musca domestica says

    @ #29
    Maybe, just maybe (no, that’s not really what I mean) the target audience of PZ’s declaration is expected to read that kind of rhetoric the way it was meant – the brass-knuckles and steel-toed boots meaning ‘unembellished words’ and ‘more unembellished words’. As in ‘stop the apologetics’. But maybe he should have added a clarification to readers like you (and maybe he even did, I can’t remember the post you are quoting). Ms. Palin definitely should have added a clarification on what ‘2nd amendment solution’ she meant, as her followers aren’t exactly rocket surgeons.

  25. cyberCMDR says

    Jerry,
    And you are extrapolating from that data point that PZ responds to religious nonsense the same way? Palin put cross hairs, not surveyor’s symbols, over congressional districts her group “targeted”. Her favorite mantra was “Reload!” Then after the Arizona shooting she insisted that none of her rhetoric could possibly be construed as inciting violence. The loudest Christians seem to be the ones you need to worry about the most, because violence can be an acceptable option if you are “doing God’s will.”

  26. HNS_Lasagna says

    Jerry,
    I’m still a little lost about how PZ has two faces.
    Is it anything like the catholic church saying do unto others and turn the other cheek and live in christs’ image, and then raping little children or saying they are above government law and that there really wasnt much they could do about the scandals in the church?
    If anything it would seem PZ is toughening up on the stupidity running rampant in our country, but that doesn’t mean he’s taking an entirely different view or showing his other face.

    I wonder… if we kicked a few rapists priests in the balls, whether it might be helpful to the safety of children in our community.

  27. Alex, Tyrant of Skepsis says

    We’re talking about the guy who shrieked like a woman […]
    naive little girl

    Haha, jerry.
    Ok, whatever advance credibility you had here, you just whole-heartedly threw it out of the window. Why should anyone bother discussing with idiots who think “woman” is an insult, and call women girls to belittle them? Pathetic.

  28. heliobates says

    We’re talking about the guy who shrieked like a woman… Give me a break you naive little girl.

    Well, that didn’t take long.

  29. Canadian says

    Jerry,

    Your stupid comments have already lost all credibility. Here’s why:
    – Your opinions are unsupported by facts.
    – You are using little girl and woman as an insult. That gives us a clue as to what type of person you are in real life.
    – You are making it seem like Palin’s acts were inconsequential when they really were not. Do you watch the news?

    If you want to convince anybody of anything, start backing your comments up and stop trolling.

  30. Terri says

    Following the video on YouTube is a news story about an atheist billboard in Ohio. They sent the political reporter to cover the story, which seems odd. What is remarkably stupid, however, is the comments made by the female anchor. Why would people who don’t believe in anything want to get together? And when it was explained by the political reporter that atheists would like to see other atheists in elected office, she gave the condescending “oh” remark.

    They sent the political reporter because they want to frame the atheists as having an agenda beyond wanting to be accepted as who they are. It is the only way they understand their world- a driven agenda- and therefore must explain everyone’s motivations this way.

  31. Alex, Tyrant of Skepsis says

    Well, Jerry, it’s in discussions with less rigid emphasis on politeness that some things about commenters become most obvious. There have been many discussions here about the use of gendered insults for example, and quite a few commenters who had used words like cunt or bitch in heated discussions have after some reconsideration announced that they would abstain from using them while happily retaining their overall belligerent tone. Do you see the difference? Nobody is perfect, and your phrasing above has reveiled that you at least have a somewhat naive view on gender roles. In combination with your mindless shouting about PZ Myers’ terrorist tendencies, not much introspective reflection on your side is to be expected…

  32. heliobates says

    Hmmm. Let’s see….who was it that said “screw the polite words and careful rhetoric”?

    Okay, just so we’re clear: you’re angry because PZ has apparently contradicted himself by espousing gentility, but (and this is the part that really sets you off) occasionally engaging in [allegedly] hateful speech? So you’ll counter this by showing up on his blog and engaging in hateful speech yourself, just to show him? [yes, jerry, misogyny is hateful speech]

    Because you want to take a strong stand against “violent speech” and hypocricy by being a violent hypocrite?

    This is sandwich-board-and-end-times-ranting confused. You need a better standard than “tu quoque” if you expect anyone to rally to your cause.

  33. says

    Jerry doesn’t seem to get that PZ expects his readers not to take every comment he makes literally. Compare that to say a lot of Palin fans, who are the kind of people who take the words of a certain book very literally(except when they don’t, of course), and hence may have trouble differentiating heated rhetoric from actual instructions on how to behave.

  34. Canadian says

    Jerry, I think your careful reply deserves one as well.

    ***Wrong. It was a direct quote. Now it is you who does not have the facts straight.***

    A direct quote… and? Who said PZ wanted people who said he was saying stupid things to go easy on him? I have never seen PZ ask people to go easy on him.

    ***Hmmm. Let’s see….who was it that said “screw the polite words and careful rhetoric”?***

    Why is that relevant? I am sure PZ wouldn’t mind if people went on the attack if they thought he was saying something stupid. Interesting how you assume that he wants people to be gentle with him.

    ***Yes, and once again you do not have your facts straight. The Arizona shooter wasn’t a Tea Partier – he was an atheist. Who knows- he might even have read PZ’s comment on an atheist blog and taken his violent, hateful rhetoric to heart.***

    I don’t give a flying fuck what he was or what he didn’t believe. He acted in a way that seemed to be encouraged by that special Palin rending of the congressional map… not by the words of PZ. In fact, you have nothing to show that PZ had anything to do with this and are just pulling things out of your ass.

    This is why I agree with PZ: fuck gentle words, we need to tell people they are being stupid when we believe it to be so.

    ***Is that how it is at freethoughtblogs? If you dissent from the herdthink you must be a troll?***

    No, you’re veering off topic.

    Insulting people by calling them women and little girls is, in my opinion, unacceptable. I am not afraid to tell you that you’re trolling when you act like a troll. By doing this, I am following my own conscience and not the herd.

    If you want to insult me, try to make your comments more à propos.

  35. Canadian says

    tim gueguen: Not only is PZ writing for a different type of people, the only things I’ve ever seen as a result of reading PZ are:
    – Thinking and making a written argument that you disagree.
    – Screwing up polls (hardly a violent act)
    – Spreading the word that people may want to think before making stupid sexist comments.

    If we lived in a world where the worst thing that happens is a stern letter stating why one disagrees with a position or a nonviolent verbal argument, this world would be so goddamn good.

  36. HNS_Lasagna says

    @ Canadian-nicely said

    @ Jerry- when you start using your brain, you’ll realize how fucking stupid your rebuttals are. If you would stop and think about what you’re saying and the facts in front of you then you’ll realize PZ isn’t condoning violence. Now I have only been reading this blog for about a month, but everything I see is actually to the contrary- he wants peaceful discussion. Literal hyperbole and physical violence are completely different things… i.e calling you an idiot is literal (and, not by this blogs standards, out of line) actually kicking you in the balls is physical violence and obviously is wrong. I think this is the point you are failing to grasp. There’s a big difference, and that difference is what makes one OK, and the other VERY wrong.

  37. Alan says

    Hi PZ,

    Nice video. But your comment at the very end, including the WTF look on your face, was priceless.

    Thanks,

    Alan

  38. Mr. Fire says

    You are using little girl and woman as an insult. That gives us a clue as to what type of person you are in real life.

    Hmmm. Let’s see….who was it that said “screw the polite words and careful rhetoric”?

    False equivalence.

    “Screw the polite words” does not equate to “let’s use misogynistic slurs”.

    It’s not hard to think up insults that don’t put down some oppressed segment of society, you worthless shit-for-brains.

  39. starblind says

    this was really boring … in some part was like: Hello my name is “Bob” and I am alcoholic. Oh I mean atheist … wrong line sorry.

    Idea is good and all but…..make it amusing, intriguing.

    P.S. Awesome mustache PZ.

  40. uncle frogy says

    It seems to me that what makes “people” like jerry so upset and draws them out regularly is showing non believers in an honest way and not trying to paint them as raving Stalinist paranoids. Non believers are just like everyone else not the bogyman of the preachers. it is what angers them so much about the various billboards. I would not seek out a “conversation” with our visitor in person, at least not one where we were at arms length away from each other I suspect rage is just under the surface.

    Jerry you do not want a conversation with anyone that thinks different at all. If you did why would you come here all puffed up with so much indignation and heated rhetoric?
    All you really want is an argument with personal insults a plenty something to give your pointless life meaning.
    well, this is not the “lazey daiz” beer bar down the street there are grown ups here that have not stopped thinking and questioning everything including what they think and why.
    so be careful or you will get your head handed to you.

    uncle frogy

  41. Qwerty says

    Jerry, you’ve made your point. You think PZ is two-faced. Now, be a good kid and go play in the street.

  42. HNS_Lasagna says

    jerry says:
    15 August 2011 at 11:36 pm He’s just doing unto others what he constantly complains about THEM doing.

    let me see if I can follow this train-wreck of logic
    So If PZ isn’t advocating violence… and (according to you) he “IS doing what he constantly complains about others doing”… and what he complains about others doing is… advocating violent defense of their beliefs… then wouldn’t you be saying that the two-faced nature of PZ is that he advocates violence, even though you said he doesn’t advocate violence.

    jerry says:
    15 August 2011 at 11:36 pm
    “Of course PZ isn’t advocating violence.”

    Either I’m really confused (not likely, but ok it’s possible I have been up all night staring into a microscope) or you’re making a contradictory argument (ding ding ding!)
    I’m sure this is just a really stupid mistake on your part. No need to apologize, as qwerty has suggested I would much prefer it if you went and played in the street.

  43. says

    Jerry:

    You never say a word when PZ calls women “crazy” “wackaloons”, “witches”, or “idiots” yet you shriek hysterically when I call someone a “little girl”.

    Oh, go cry yourself a river somewhere else. PZ does not use female to mean “lesser being” or as an insult, which you have done. People (this would include women, cupcake) can be crazy. They can be wackaloons. They can be idiots. They can be bigots. You’re a prime example of the last two, Jerry. Last time I looked, crazy, wackaloon and idiot aren’t gendered.

    First, you use “scream like a woman” as in insult. Think about that, you fucking moron. Then it’s “little girl”. Think about that one too, you idiot. Then it’s “hysterical shrieking” – yeah, we haven’t heard that one before, oh no. :eyeroll:

    You’re slinging one misogynistic slur after another and can’t stop crying about being called on it. There’s a place you’d be welcomed, Jerry. It’s called erv and it’s on Sciblogs. You’ll find all your slimy cohorts there, ready to welcome you into the slimepit. Your misogyny is not welcome here, you flaming asspimple.

  44. says

    1)PZ withdrew that image when it became obvious that people were interpreting it in a “suggestive” way

    2) Insulting a woman != using “woman” as an insult. The former is rude, the latter is misogyny

  45. says

    @Alan: The Bible quotation (Genesis 34:24, in case anyone is interested) wasn’t in the original cut, but we threw it in on the second go ’round because we thought that it ended the piece on the right note. Glad you liked it! PZ was even kind enough to sign my Bible after the interview.

  46. heliobates says

    let me see if I can follow this train-wreck of logic

    I know it’s a really bad idea to gawk at a wreck, still it’s just so irresistibly human. I mean, yeah, I’m stopping traffic, but I just have. to. know. how someone managed to wrap a car around the top of a light standard.

    And then there’s jerry, who’s taken some personal slight (and there’s way more going on than “PZ said a baaad thing!”) and floored it, reaching maybe 185 mph before hitting the gates of Pharyngula. From his first post, I’ve had to slow down and ask “Dude! What. the. fuck.”?

    When the implosion comes, it’s going to be the stuff of highlight reels.

  47. broboxley OT says

    Jerry, do you have a point to make? All I see is frothing about nothing at all in particular
    You claim that PZ is two faced, that may be most humans are but at least he is somewhat consistent and not all over the map as you are

    “Screw the polite words” does not equate to “let’s use misogynistic slurs”.
    Correct. It justifies it.

    not here, especially not here. You are encouraged to use misogynistic slurs in many places on the web, places I’m sure you will be welcomed. Please save them for elsewhere. Otherwise enjoy your rants, slurs false equivalences and mopery as much as you want. I will enjoy laughing at you

  48. says

    jerry:

    “Screw the polite words” does not equate to “let’s use misogynistic slurs”.

    Correct. It justifies it.

    Really? In what way? Telling you to fuck off while handing you a porcupine carcass is not polite. It in no way justifies misogyny or other language based on oppressed groups. I’m failing to see how misogyny follows from being merely impolite.

    I’d be really happy to hear the logic for your conclusion, though, Sweet Pea.

  49. says

    @Jerry: So that fact that PZ recognised that people were misinterpreting his intentions and consequently may have been offended is “two faced”?

    This is what PZ said:

    When I got back from a busy day in Oslo to see the wild interpretations people were making, then I saw how easily it was being twisted into something sexual, so I got rid of it.

    Jerry, you’re an intellectually dishonest know-nothing.

  50. says

    Problem with you blind acolytes is that you never bother to wonder why the guy who you follow thinks that any woman would want to be treated like that. Despicable.

    that there is some serious confusion. again: insulting a woman != misogyny; he’d have to attack her for being a woman, or attack her femaleness. Neither of which he’s done.

    Seriously, if you don’t know what certain concepts mean, don’t try to apply them.

  51. uncle frogy says

    jerry I have very little interest in talking shit with you it would just be helping you to “get off”
    go have another drink you aint half drunk yet!

    uncle frogy

  52. HNS_Lasagna says

    wait… HA I get it now.
    Conclusion 1: you’re calling PZ 2 faced because he has a picture (which he took down) of Bachmann eating a large corn dog captioned with an insinuative statement (that could be construed as sexist), and yet he doesn’t like it when people are sexist.
    Conclusion 2: so you use “woman” and “little-girl” and “shrieking voice” as insults (sexist), then rant about how PZ is two faced.
    maybe your inane blabbering is making me go batshit stupid and thats why I didn’t see it sooner, but wouldn’t that make you 2-faced AND a hypocrite?
    tell me again why the hell I’m even bothering to respond to your inane and irrelevant drivel… oh yeah because showing you how much of a fucking IDIOT you are makes me LAUGH!

  53. Anteprepro says

    Jerry sez: “Problem with you blind acolytes is that you never bother to wonder why the guy who you follow thinks that any woman would want to be treated like that. Despicable.”

    So politicians and public figures should be exempt from mockery and criticism, no matter what their agenda, ideas, or actions, simply because they are women? But it’s perfectly okay to attempt to mock men by comparing them to women. Riiiight. Keep on digging there. It’s amazing that you still insist on calling PZ two-faced and “hateful” when in all your desperation, you are just proving that you are the most two-faced, bile-spewing person here at the moment. In addition to being a moron.

    Do you get a prize at GOP headquarters or the Vatican for getting the most Hypocrite Points in a month? And do you get bonus points for accruing them when accusing others of hypocrisy? Because I honestly think that that would explain a lot if it were the case.

  54. HNS_Lasagna says

    Anteprepro- its amusing we both posted a similar argument at the same time lol, that just goes to show how obviously right we both are :)

  55. says

    You never say a word when PZ calls women “crazy” “wackaloons”, “witches”, or “idiots” yet you shriek hysterically when I call someone a “little girl”.

    Because using gender to represent inferiority is degrading to an entire gender and false. What’s so hard to understand about that?

  56. says

    Does that sound like “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”? Do you think women enjoy being objectified the way PZ did? Or maybe you guys are just so entrenched in militant atheism that you justify PZ’s misogyny by the fact that he was only showing a sexually suggestive photo of a “republican theocrat” and that makes it ok.

    jerry, jerry, jerry.

    So, if PZ’s intent was to show that Bachmann was able to unhinge her jaw in a very reptilian way, which merely goes along with her cold, reptilian stare, he’s somehow misogynist?

    It might’ve been a bad judgement call, Babycakes, but it certainly wasn’t misogynistic. He was belittling Bachmann because she is an evil reptilian invader bent on enslaving humanity, not because she’s female.

    There really is a difference, Sweet Pea.

  57. starblind says

    Dear people and jerry… Winning an internet argument is like winning the special olympics, Even is you win you’re still retarded. whatever you say to this guy he will twist words like that funny mirrors and miss the point, so whats the point.

    point

  58. says

    Or maybe you guys are just so entrenched in militant atheism that you justify PZ’s misogyny by the fact that he was only showing a sexually suggestive photo of a “republican theocrat” and that makes it ok.

    it doesn’t make it ok. PZ fucked up. PZ also, unlike many people, acknowledged that he fucked up and corrected his mistake.

    In a society where everyone is sexist because that’s the acculturation we get, making few mistakes, and then acknowledging them and correcting them when pointed out, is exactly what we should expect from people. sainthood? not so much.

  59. says

    Instead of desperately trying to apologize for PZ’s misogyny, simply try this experiment:

    Show that photo with PZ’s commentary to any woman. Any woman at all. Your mom. Your sister. Your wife. Any woman at all.

    Ask them if they think it looks suggestive. They will all say “Yes”.

    Ask them if they find it offensive. They will all say “Yes”.

    Then ask them if they believe PZ when he says “My morality is based on “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”.

    They will all say PZ is just a two faced misogynist creep.

    translation: there are no (feminist) women on pharyngula

  60. Anteprepro says

    HNS-Lasagna: Perhaps. Or perhaps it means “ECHO CHAMBER!”. The Pharyngula Horde Borg! The Hive Mind! A hundred trolls can’t be wrong, after all. And definitely not wrong in such an obvious and common fashion that different people could criticize it in the same way independent of one another. It’s a conspiracy!

    And Jerry: What part of “He later realized that it was suggestive and removed the photo” don’t you fucking understand? Why don’t you fucking realize that there is nothing in PZ’s post that indicates that he was presenting it as a sexually suggestive photo? You noted yourself that the jab he took at her was comparing her to a snake, and wasn’t about lolphallus. And as has been painstakingly presented you, time and time again: insulting an individual woman for qualities unrelated to her being a woman =/= misogyny. Suggesting that being a woman or various feminine traits or female specific body parts are significant insults, however, IS. You are guilty of the latter. You are a fuckwit of the highest magnitude to shrug that off and harp on about the former being something of world-shaking significance. Grow a fucking brain.

  61. HNS_Lasagna says

    @ starblind- its kind of like a psychological case study for me at times. I just stare at jerrys response and go… really, theres no way a rational person wouldn’t just apologize and leave at this point, they have to realize how stupid they look…. then… nope! I’m not let down, yet another stupid response from jerry trying to defend his position. it’s funny, he just ignores comments when he’s been bested and makes another stupid comment for someone to prove him wrong on.
    @nigel- a wonderful explanation of the differences between the 2, but I’d bet jerry will come back with some irrelevant point as a counter arguement. Go ahead jerry, don’t let me down, I still have a little faith in humanity that you can rob me of.

  62. heliobates says

    Winning an internet argument is like winning the special olympics, Even is you win you’re still retarded.

    [facepalm] Don’t do the able-ist thing here, please.

    Does that sound like “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”?

    Nothing that PZ or anyone else who posts on Pharyngula justifies this level of mental derangement. I don’t mean “mental illness”, rather your behaviour here has all the hallmarks of someone with a personal grudge, who’s not bringing an argument but grinding an axe.

    First it was PZ’s students who were being harmed. Next, his call for stronger rhetoric is the same as the relentless violent subtext of the Christian Dominionists. And now suddenly you’re taking up the feminist cause. PZ will be personally responsible for Global Warming by 8:00 tonight, if you have your way.

    Seriously, if anyone is shrieking, it’s you.

    People aren’t disagreeing with you because they’re mindless followers/acolytes/brainwashed, they’re largely disagreeing with you because you can’t make a coherent point. And you insist on making your incoherent points in a misogynistic and assholic fashion.

  63. Mr. Fire says

    Where did I claim they were “equivalent”?

    It is the most obvious inference to be made from your reply. If “screw the polite words” does not bear equivalence to misogynistic slurs, then it doesn’t even have internal consistency as a counterpoint.

    “Screw the polite words” does not equate to “let’s use misogynistic slurs”.

    Correct. It justifies it.

    No, that does not remotely follow.

    You never say a word when PZ calls women “crazy” “wackaloons”, “witches”, or “idiots” yet you shriek hysterically when I call someone a “little girl”.

    Assuming as I must that you have jumped tracks and are now taking an individual comment as representative of a whole group: 3 of those insults are quite non-gendered and are therefore useless examples. “Witch” is more troublesome, but you will be hard-pressed to find an example in which both (i) PZ has used the term in a manner that emphasizes the femininity of the term as a negative component, and (ii) the commentariat has not called him out on it.

  64. says

    here’s a simple breakdown of the Bachmann-picture situation:

    was posting the picture sexist? yes; “sexism”, ultimately, is measured by effects, and posting a picture like that has sexist effects.

    was posting the picture misogynist? well, that depends on your definition of “misogyny”. I generally use the word to refer to prejudice against women. In that sense, it might have been subconsciously misogynist; seeing as we’re raised and acculturated in a sexist, misogynist culture, we all have subconscious misogyny we need to do battle with.

    was removing it “two faced”? of course not. It’s merely the right thing to do when realizing one has fucked up.

    does this incident make PZ a misogynist and/or a sexist? no. Not in any meaningful sense of that word, since he’s trying to eliminate his subconscious biases and corrects whenever they pop up. Making a mistake itself is not yet enough to proclaim someone to be sexist. Doubling down would have; repeatedly making the same mistake, indicating a refusal to learn would have. I see no evidence for such behavior.

    Therefore: PZ is not a misogynist, he just fucked up and inadvertently did something sexist, and when he realized that he corrected himself.

  65. says

    translation: there are no (feminist) women on pharyngula

    But wait, we are also all man-hating women . . . I’m so confuse as to what trolls think we are.

  66. Quodlibet says

    private communucation to jerry

    Metaphor
    met·a·phor
    noun /ˈmetəˌfôr/  /-fər/ 
    metaphors, plural

    1. A figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable
    “Jerry, be careful or you will get your head handed to you.” –uncle frogy

    2. A thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, esp. something abstract
    “It’s early jerry, but you just might be a gift that keeps on giving.” –heliobates

    /end private communication to jerry

  67. Anteprepro says

    Starblind, congratulations on making Jerry right for the first time in this thread. Jokes about the mentally disabled are the not the best way to express your beliefs that the internet is not, in fact, serious business outside of the reaches of /b/, where such casual disregard for human decency is part of the dress code. Those who comment at Pharyngula, however, tend to frown upon knee-jerk bigotry, etc.

    Oh, and Jerry: I am not naive, I have been paying fucking attention to Myers posts. That photo, if it was in fact intended to be simultaneously mocking and suggestive, would be out of character given every other post I’ve seen in the last 5 years. Myers has been criticized for being TOO feminist, for fucks’ sake. And you remain an unapologetic hypocrite, I see, in your continued failure to address the fact that you attempted to insult Myers by calling him a woman. Fuck off.

  68. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    Hi Jerry! Feminist atheist checking in here.

    Let’s hear what an actual feminist atheist has to say about the “corndog photo”.

    I thought that the so-called corndog photo was replusive and really pretty funny. But, then again, all of Michelle Bachmann’s photos are repulsive and pretty funny.

    What the fuck is your point, exactly? PZ made a mistake, fixed his mistake and that makes him a bad person somehow?

    Jesus Christ, trolls like you make me wish that Barb would come back. She was at least entertaining in her dumbfuckery.

  69. 'Tis Himself, pour encourager les autres says

    But wait, we are also all man-hating women . . . I’m so confuse as to what trolls think we are.

    Of course we’re all man-hating women. The trolls have spoken. We’re also all 12 year old, obese, virgin, uneducated engineers who live in our mothers’ basements.

  70. Ing says

    Let’s hear what an actual feminist atheist has to say about the “corndog photo”.

    Corndog was probably most likely due to general background sexist radiation so probably technically wrong in the Pharyngula environment which tries to be a safe zone. But it’s of the kind I normally slide for comedy and the like so I couldn’t get too personally worked up over it. Nor did I see any reason to actually argue against those arguing for it.

    And considering I’ve argued something that could be construed to be “Males SHOULD have a general background level of shame for their gender” I think I qualify well as insane feminist.

  71. says

    Let’s hear what an actual feminist atheist has to say about the “corndog photo”.

    Feminist atheist here (didja notice my avatar, eh?) You can read what I had to say in the right thread, idiot:

    Aauggh, you should warn a person, PZ! Yikes.* Am I the only one who is more than a bit creeped out by the avid interest on the man’s face?

    *That part had to do with my serious dislike of ‘county fair’ foodstuffs, which most definitely includes monstrous corndogs. :ick: You might note I didn’t say jack shit about the woman.

  72. Ing says

    PHARYNGULA CHOOSE YOUR OWN ADVENTURE

    “HELLO [PZ MYERS]. YOU FIND YOURSELF IN A DEEP DARK INTERNET BLOG FOREST! YOU HAVE IN YOUR INVENTORY [1X][BACHMAN CORNDOG PHOTO] WHICH PEOPLE ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT WHAT DO YOU DO?
    ]
    ]
    ]
    ]]A) REMOVE PHOTO FROM INVENTORY
    ]]B) IGNORE COMPLAINTS AND LEAVE PHOTO
    ]]C) LEAVE PHOTO AND ACKNOWLEDGE COMPLAINTS

  73. Ing says

    Is there not a single person at this blog with enough free will to speak the obvious? That PZ Myers is full of crap when he says his morality is based upon “Doing unto others as you would have them do unto you”?

    What action would you have accepted as a moral action in regards to posting the photo that would not be hypocritical to you?

  74. says

    jerry #93:

    So it’s ok to call a woman a witch as long as that woman is Michele Bachmann.

    Where in the fuck did you get that from?

  75. says

    Wow, this place is a regular He-Man-Woman-Haters club.

    yup; acknowledging that everybody is a little bit sexist/misogynist and nobody is perfect, and accepting their willingness to correct such fuckups, is totally women-hating. Using femaleness as an insult, as jerry did? of course not

    *rolleyes*

    Is there not a single person at this blog with enough free will to speak the obvious?

    point of interest: free will is as mythical as gods.

  76. Ing says

    Where in the fuck did you get that from?

    New England Journal of Shit I Made Up: Volume 15; Aug 2011. Pg 120-122

  77. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    Jerry,

    Wow, this place is a regular He-Man-Woman-Haters club.

    Was that a piss poor attempt at sarcasm?

    Usually we’re accused of castrating men and giving women special treatment. Now I’m just as confused as GH.

  78. says

    That PZ Myers is full of crap when he says his morality is based upon “Doing unto others as you would have them do unto you”?

    :I want comic sans back!: I’d like to know where this sermon of PZ’s is at, where he thunders at us the laws and rules of morality, ’cause all these years, I’ve missed the damn thing. Is someone slipping up on getting all the various agendii* out again?

    *yeah, yeah, I know. It’s just that we have so many. Okay, I have the atheist dogma out, but I’m not seeing the morality ground rules anywhere…

  79. Tethys says

    Jerry

    In the midwest, photos of politician X at a state fair taking a bite of a corn dog is a very common thing. Its an attempt to show that they are just like everybody else.
    Perry eating fair food

    But have you ever noticed that nobody starts making sexually suggestive jokes when the candidate is male?

    I would also like you to explain your “militant atheists” comment. Are you claiming that atheists are organizing militias?

  80. says

    I’m actually really curious what jerry etc. expect PZ or the posters here to do? invent a time-machine and undo the posting of the picture?

    sure it would have been better and more conductive to a non-sexist space if that post had never existed. it was a fuckup, based on the fact that the joke PZ wanted to make was a subcultural one (Midwestern fair food) while the joke everyone perceived was a super-cultural one (sexual objectification of women). But one that post existed, the only right thing to do was to delete it, apologize, and never do it again.

  81. Ing says

    That PZ Myers is full of crap when he says his morality is based upon “Doing unto others as you would have them do unto you”

    I kind of doubt PZ even if he went by the Golden Rule exclusively would use the piss poor wording Jesus gave of it.

    Syntax wise it’s a horrible phrasing

    “Do unto others as they would have you do unto them as they do unto you” would be a better phrasing.

  82. Ing says

    Do you really believe that? PZ saw nothing suggestive at all in that photo? That he only took it down because “other people” were interpreting it suggestively?

    I actually don’t care as it’s STILL admitting a mistake and correcting.

    Yet you will believe PZ Myers and endlessly make excuses for him.

    Seriously folks, this is straight-up-Warren-Jeffs-cult mentality around here. Weird.

    Ok don’t take offense as I’m asking seriously. Are you high?

  83. says

    Of course we’re all man-hating women. The trolls have spoken. We’re also all 12 year old, obese, virgin, uneducated engineers who live in our mothers’ basements.

    And we have zits. Don’t forget the zits.

  84. says

    this is straight-up-Warren-Jeffs-cult mentality around here

    lying isn’t going to help your case.

    I will point out that you’re also lying about Melissa claiming that PZ does it “continually”. Did you click on the link on the word “continually”? It was about the MRA brigade invading a thread here, not about something PZ did.

  85. Tethys says

    Damn, scratch the “never make sexually suggestive comments about men” comment.

    I just had to read the awful comments. Now needing eye bleach.

  86. Ing says

    I’m trying to find a non-ablest way to use a conventional colloquialism so bare with me here and provide criticism if need be

    @Jerry

    You are talking in a manner which, If you were saying this aloud in person when we were on the same public bus, I would want to change seats.

  87. says

    Looking at the post in question, PZ acknowledged the implications of the photo and the complaints pertaining to. He proceeded to fix it. That is better than the misogynists that the blog is used to. Your complaint is unfounded, jerry.

  88. says

    in fact, the post on the “continually” link criticizes Dawkins and his defenders, not PZ and the Pharyngula Horde. So, the “continually” refers to what’s going on in the atheist movement as a whole, not to PZ specifically. And you won’t find many posters here who will disagree with the assessment that there’s a fuckload of sexism in the atheist movement as a whole.

  89. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    Jerry,

    Not by the feminists that I linked to. They say he does it “continually”.

    Okaaaaaay. Why don’t you do your own research instead of relying on a third party, Jerry? (You sound kind of pathetic.) I’ve been reading this blog for over 2 years now and I can’t recall PZ acting like a misogymist asshole, but how about you post some links and prove me wrong?

  90. starblind says

    Anteprepro and Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe I wrote rude joke take it as a joke nothing more or less. black humor.
    Usually i think that in conflict you can find the truth but Im staying pessimistic this time…

  91. Ing says

    Lol! No, he admitted that his readers made the mistake. As for the Pious Professor Golden Rule, he never realized that some people might think that there was something remotely suggestive about that photo. Since his readers couldn’t be trusted to interpret the photo properly he was forced to remove it.

    That’s not admitting a mistake, my friend. It’s covering up for one.

    Ol’ Two-Face strikes again.

    I’ll light the Batsignal.

    nteprepro and Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe I wrote rude joke take it as a joke nothing more or less. black humor.
    Usually i think that in conflict you can find the truth but Im staying pessimistic this time…

    Ummm….Your hover craft is full of eels?

  92. Rey Fox says

    Seriously folks, this is straight-up-Warren-Jeffs-cult mentality around here.

    You got it in the reverse direction. All I’m gleaning from your comments is that you’re a knee-jerk PZ hater*. You know, there are other things on the internet to see.

    * Hell, maybe this is Jinx McHue in disguise or any of the other desperate PZ groupies.

  93. says

    Okaaaaaay. Why don’t you do your own research instead of relying on a third party, Jerry?

    the thing is: the third party in question isn’t saying that PZ is being continually sexist, either. Jerry is twisting Melissa’s (from shakesville) words.

    Anteprepro and Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe I wrote rude joke take it as a joke nothing more or less. black humor.

    an ableist joke is still ableist. Knock it the fuck off.

  94. Ing says

    Lol! No, he admitted that his readers made the mistake. As for the Pious Professor Golden Rule, he never realized that some people might think that there was something remotely suggestive about that photo. Since his readers couldn’t be trusted to interpret the photo properly he was forced to remove it.

    “I didn’t think it was sexist, others correct me so I take it down.”

    I’m not seeing the “It was never sexist shut up and deal”…which would actually be more in line with keeping it UP.

    What is the right answer here Jerry?

  95. Rey Fox says

    Of course we’re all man-hating women. The trolls have spoken. We’re also all 12 year old, obese, virgin, uneducated engineers who live in our mothers’ basements.

    But we still get out of the basement every now and then for depravity, right?

  96. says

    Oh, look! A straw atheist!

    Listen, cupcake, when you excoriate someone for something they don’t do, you have already lost the argument. And don’t pretend to be an educated person if you think that ad hominem is an insult. What is an ad hominem insult, anyway? Is it possible to insult someone without it being about them?

    An ad hominem argument is a logical fallacy with the form “<some random insult>; therefore, you’re wrong.” Example: you have bad table manners; therefore, you’re wrong about this mathematical theorem. It invokes the irrelevant.

    Thanks for playing. Come back when you’ve learned something.

    Are all those nasty things Jesus said about people ad hominem insults that prove he was wrong?

  97. says

    Jerry,
    Read the stuff you post before you link it as evidence. Not only did that fail to show PZ is misogynist, to fail to disprove my assumption that you’re a jackass.

  98. Tethys says

    Starblind

    Rude jokes are fine. Mental disabilities are not funny, nor is the word you used.

    Please expand your vocabulary.

  99. Ing says

    Maybe Jerry is actually looking for PZ Meyers. I hear that guy is a real prick.

  100. Mr. Fire says

    So it’s ok to call a woman a witch as long as that woman is Michele Bachmann.

    What with your disturbing penchant for burning strawmen – as demonstrated above – I am very tempted to call you a warlock.

  101. Qwerty says

    Well, at least these Canadians weren’t from Premise Media, but Jerry might have worked for them before they went bankrupt.

  102. HNS_Lasagne says

    is there any chance that thie jerry is actually someone PZ has blocked from the blog before… I mean could it be that crazy dennis markuze character?

  103. Tethys says

    Ing

    PZ talks about the golden rule in the video for this post.

    Thanks for ‘Your hovercraft..” I needed a good laugh. :)

  104. says

    They say he does it “continually”.

    No, they don’t, Cupcake. You might want to brush up on Reading 101, Reading Comprehension for Dummies, then Reading Comprehension 101 and The Basics of Link Clicking on the Internet. You might not look the compleat asshole once you’re done with all that.

    HNS_Lasagne:

    I mean could it be that crazy dennis markuze character?

    Nah, then it would be all goats on fire! and death threats.

  105. starblind says

    Tethys
    I know racist, sexist, cripple, homophobic, political , redneck jokes. So do all of them have to go ? so from what I laugh ? I did not offend any person so I stay by my word and still think internet argument is pointless and instead of proven wrong I get to be insulted, its not good arguing when you attack the opponent, but not this point.

  106. says

    “Jerry” is the known spammer, troll, and idiot formerly known as “chunkdz”. He is banned and his posts have been deleted.

    It’s annoying: I’m not even home yet — I just got off the plane and am on the 4 hour shuttle ride home — and I have to clean up the trash.

  107. says

    I know racist, sexist, cripple, homophobic, political , redneck jokes. So do all of them have to go ?

    yes

    so from what I laugh ?

    are you seriously suggesting that the only humor you’re capable of is humor at the expense of oppressed minorities? How sad and pathetic.

    I did not offend any person

    yes, you did.

    so I stay by my word and still think internet argument is pointless and instead of proven wrong I get to be insulted, its not good arguing when you attack the opponent, but not this point.

    no one is arguing your point with you; no one cares. What we do care about is the oppressive, bigoted language you’re using. if you can’t make your point without such language, simply shut the fuck up until you can.

  108. Muse says

    starblind

    I know racist, sexist, cripple, homophobic, political , redneck jokes. So do all of them have to go ? so from what I laugh ? I did not offend any person

    Yes.

    I’m a person. I was offended. Next?

  109. says

    Starblind:

    I know racist, sexist, cripple, homophobic, political , redneck jokes.

    So what?

    So do all of them have to go ?

    They do if you want to post here.

    so from what I laugh ?

    Oh, how about laughing at things which are actually funny, rather than getting your jollies over things which demean people and perpetuate bigotry and sexism?

    I did not offend any person so I stay by my word

    Yes, you did so offend people, several of them told you as much and told you to knock it the fuck off, idiot. You offended me, and you’re doing it still. If you want to stick to your assholery, leave or be prepared to be told you’re an idiot by a whole lot of people.

    and still think internet argument is pointless and instead of proven wrong I get to be insulted, its not good arguing when you attack the opponent, but not this point.

    If it’s pointless to argue on the net, why in the fuck are you doing it? Shut up then and go away.

    You obviously don’t know how things are done here. We do argue and we don’t give a shit about cupcakes who want to tell us it’s pointless. It isn’t pointless at all – a lot of people come around and a great many people learn a lot. We know, because they bother to stop by and tell us so.

  110. says

    so from what I laugh ?

    Dude, if you can’t make a joke without denigrating something intrinsic about a group of people, then I suggest you do more studying. And why do you add “politics” in the list? Mocking a political position is not the same as mocking someone’s handicap, race, gender, sexuality etc.

  111. starblind says

    If it’s pointless to argue on the net, why in the fuck are you doing it? Shut up then and go away.

    ok

  112. Muse says

    starblind

    ok I would change politics to fat jokes.

    Oh that makes it all fucking better… except not really at all you flaming rectal milliner.

  113. heliobates says

    “Jerry” is the known spammer, troll, and idiot formerly known as “chunkdz”.

    So I was right about the deranged part, then?

  114. Nerd of Redhead says

    ok I would change politics to fat jokes.

    Check my Gravatar, and rethink that.

    *checks steel-toed shoes*

  115. Kol says

    Dammit Jerry! Here I was all comfortable thinking that PZ was a good substitute for the crap I left behind. Now you’ve convinced me that people are dipshits regardless of education or supernatural ability.

    Thank you for helping me realize that candidates for the Presidency of The United States should be scrutinized from all angles without prejudice.

    I’ll apply that mode of thinking to all aspects of life up to and including the concept of a supreme being.

    I’ll enjoy teaching my kids the skeptical enlightenment you’ve given me today.

    Awesome stuff.

  116. Tethys says

    Starblind

    Check any thread on Pharyngula for excellent examples of words you can use to insult somebody without ALSO insulting entire groups of people.

    Muse provided an perfect example at #138.

  117. Carlie says

    so from what I laugh ?

    Look up Eddie Izzard. Notice that he manages to be fall-over-funny without putting anyone down. There are many comedians like him as well, who don’t get laughs by kicking people in the face (not many, but they are out there).

  118. Kol says

    @Tethys

    As it turns out, simply saying that gods are fictional tends to insult the largest group of people on the planet.

    Groups require identifying names.

    I get confused when I can define a group based on observation but am not allowed to give the group a label for fear of being stereotypical.

  119. Tethys says

    Kol

    Provide a piece of concrete evidence for a god.
    Any god will do, I am not fussy.

  120. Kol says

    @Tethys

    I can’t. I suppose that’s why one can label me as an “Atheist”.

    It won’t even hurt my feelings.

  121. Randide, ou l'Optimisme says

    As it turns out, simply saying that gods are fictional tends to insult the largest group of people on the planet.

    Actually, only if you are using idiot logic.

    Jews, Hindus, Atheists, Pastafarians, Muslims (ect) all agree that the Christian god is total bullshit.

    Jews, Hindus, Atheists, Pastafarians, Christians (ect) all agree that the Muslim god is total bullshit.

    Christians, Hindus, Atheists, Pastafarians, Muslims (ect) all agree that the Hebrew god is total bullshit.

    Jews, Christians, Atheists, Pastafarians, Muslims (ect) all agree that the Hindu gods are total bullshit.

    We Atheists seem to be in the majority. So do you have any proof to support your minority hypothesis?

  122. broboxley OT says

    starblind, you could insult juggalos they have thick skins. Of course you do so at your own risk

  123. Tethys says

    Kol

    Your point is that you must be allowed to use hate speech?

    Go ahead, I’ll go make popcorn.

  124. Randide, ou l'Optimisme says

    broboxley OT, eh I’ll just throw them a bar magnet, a metal washer and a nickel. That ought to hold them for a while.

  125. says

    As it turns out, simply saying that gods are fictional tends to insult the largest group of people on the planet.

    Um, nope, you’d be wrong. Very, very wrong. If what you posit were the case, all the religions of the world would have to be one. There are over 38,000 flavours of christianity, for pity’s sake. Each and every one of them thinks they are the True Christians™ and all the rest are deluded assholes. This doesn’t even begin to cover all the other flavours of religious belief.

    Religious people do most of the insulting and giving of offense to other religious people. That and a whole lot more – think of all the religious-based wars throughout history. Not that it’s stopped as of yet.

  126. Kol says

    On topic, I’d like to mention that an elderly family member and I have been having long conversations regarding topics regularly discussed here and opposing sites.

    I enjoy the laughter of freedom I hear when my elderly conversation mate releases the fears imposed upon them for decades.

    “If there is no doubt in you, you’ve chosen to be blind” – Elderly Person

  127. says

    As it turns out, simply saying that gods are fictional tends to insult the largest group of people on the planet.

    1. Religious people say that about themselves all the time.
    2. Religion is not like race or gender or any of those things.

  128. Randide, ou l'Optimisme says

    Broboxley is our resident Juggalo. :D

    Yeah, I know. If he gets pissed, I may splurge and give him a horseshoe magnet and a box of paperclips.

    I suppose that’s why one can label me as an “Atheist”.

    @Tethys
    May I call you “Religious”?

    What in the world is up with the scare quotes? It’s like when you called yourself an atheist up there, you were making sure that God knew you were doing it with your fingers crossed behind your back. Hey, guys, I’m an “Atheist” too. *WINK*

  129. says

    Religion is not like race or gender or any of those things.

    Key point and one Kolcake is refusing to grok.

    and, it should be noted, there’s also a difference between attacking ideas and attacking people, and between making an attack up the power-gradient of a society, and making an attack down the power-gradient. I do have problems with attacking the members of minority religions; but that’s not the same as attacking the ideas of those religions, or attacking those who try to establish a religion over all of us.

  130. Kol says

    I have no problem, whatsoever, in distinguishing myself as an “Atheist”.

    By doing so, however, my view of Reality tends to insult the believers of the supernatural.

    At some point, I decided that I was no longer willing to participate in a generations-old cartoon.

  131. JenniferA says

    The Golden Rule! Oh, goody! Whoever invented that piece of bumper sticker crap didn’t bother to try out a range of real life examples to see if “Do unto others …” really was such a good idea. In addition to all the warm fuzzy examples, it can also mean, “I shall beat the shit out of others as I would have others beat the shit out of me.” I was surprised that PZ quoted it approvingly.

  132. says

    Jadehawk:

    I do have problems with attacking the members of minority religions

    I do too, however, as you say, I have no problem attacking the ideas and actions promoted by religions. One of the things which bothers me the most is just how much regular people, who basically worry and care about the same things as everyone else end up so brainwashed and deluded by religious thinking that they are willing to do actual harm to others.

  133. says

    I do have problems with attacking the members of minority religions; but that’s not the same as attacking the ideas of those religions, or attacking those who try to establish a religion over all of us.

    I was thinking that, but couldn’t find a way to articulate it succinctly.

  134. says

    Kol:

    I have no problem, whatsoever, in distinguishing myself as an “Atheist”.

    Oh yes you do, Cupcake. We’ve seen people like you here before, people who just love them some scare quotes. The fact that you’re using them shows you to be a liar.

    Who the hell was it that we had frothing all over before the blog move, who kept using the scare quotes?

  135. broboxley OT says

    I may splurge and give him a horseshoe magnet and a box of paperclips.

    Goody, I can hang paperclips in some trolls, get some nice copper strand, wrap the horseshoe at 50 to the inch and pass some current thru it and watch the flay

    Im easy to amuse

  136. Kol says

    @Tethys

    Sure.

    My point is that none of us should be on the defensive when the restrictions of language apply to our mindsets and accurately convey our demographic.

    No.

    What I mean to say is that religious people are scary-funny.

    That’s how I feel.

    Is that “hate speech”?

  137. Randide, ou l'Optimisme says

    Im easy to amuse

    Aww, now wait a minute. That sounds like way too much fun for you to do without me helping or at least watching. I’ll get the stuff.

  138. Tethys says

    Kol

    So what is your point in asking if you may call me “religious”?

    Or pointing out that people get offended when you say you don’t believe in their god?

    Or addressing me personally in the first place?

  139. says

    Thetys, it seems Kol is confused about the difference between insulting someone by disagreeing with their ideas, annd insulting groups of people by using slurs that label these groups as “less-than”. Kol is under the delusion we are against offending people, for some reason

  140. says

    Tethys:

    Or pointing out that people get offended when you say you don’t believe in their god?

    I have to wonder about this. Jadehawk & I are in ND, you’re in MN and we’re all surrounded by religious people. Everyone in Almont is some flavour of christian, with the exception of us. We don’t go to church and everyone knows we’re atheists. We get along just fine with everyone. No offense, no hassle. :shrugs:

  141. Randide, ou l'Optimisme says

    I don’t presume to speak for anyone else, but you can call me whatever the hell you want. Your words, opinions and “thoughts” are meaningless around here.

  142. says

    Kol:

    May I call you religious?

    What, exactly, would the point be? Are you attempting to ask if someone would be offended if called religious?

    Why do you put scare quotes around atheist and none around religious?

    Why are refusing to answer any of the substantial posts directed at you?

  143. Tethys says

    Kol

    I repeat. What is your point in asking?
    Please look up obtuse in the dictionary before answering, and check the rules for commenting here while your at it.

  144. Kol says

    Just testing out my newly learned syntax requirements.

    I can do this!

    I’m also coming up with new labels.

  145. Tethys says

    Caine

    Its cool. I’m just trying to be extra accurate to avoid any miscommunication.

    Live and let live was the general opinion when I grew up there, even among the devout.

  146. Kol says

    Indeed.

    It seems to me as though “Religious” and “Atheist” tend to be diametrically opposed.

    Now, it sucks that the quotation marks somehow imply something unintended. I certainly didn’t mean to “scare” or “insult” anyone.

    My submission to fantasy is gone.

    I suppose that’s all there is for me to say at this time.

  147. says

    Tethys:

    Live and let live was the general opinion when I grew up there, even among the devout.

    Yeah, that’s been my experience here as well, which is why I used us as counter-examples. As long as no one is giving me a hard time or proselytizing at me, etc., I don’t have a problem with them and they don’t have a problem with me.

    I have gotten into long conversations regarding god belief and how it affects attitudes on gay marriage or abortion and such, and I’m happy to say I’ve helped some people re-consider.

    That’s why I wonder about Kol making the flat statement about offending believers left and right, because to me, that means someone is slinging slurs around, rather than simply stating they are an atheist.

  148. Tethys says

    Kol

    Did you know a religion can also be atheist?

    Belief/non-belief comes in many flavors. I am not against religion per se. I am against those who want to force their religious beliefs on society at large.

    Are you going to answer my questions?

  149. Kol says

    I’m offended when reality is handed to someone and they refuse to even look at it.

    Yes, I will continue to label groups. Not because I have to but because it’s just too goddam obvious.

    I started commenting because “Jerry” was a dipshit.

    Pulled up some honest stuff and got schooled about usage of punctuation in an internet comment section.

    I reiterate.

    It is, in my opinion, OK to convince the deluded masses that Reality is better than contrived delusion.

  150. Tethys says

    Kol

    Asking a stranger about their religious beliefs is rude, but I think you have realized that judging by your refusal to answer.

    Welcome to Pharyngula. Its all about rational thought. Poor arguments, unsupported statements of fact, and shoddy reasoning are not tolerated here any more than gendered insults are.

    Here is an example of what you can expect if you make poor arguments. Note the way that insult is used without resorting to demeaning behavior. Hopefully this will help you learn the difference between labeling a group and insulting a group.
    Glenn Beck has a very silly poll

  151. Kol says

    I gave up the Holy Ghost and now I have to adhere to the rules of Pharyngula?

    I may actually have to talk this one up.

    If you didn’t get me the first time, atheists are in the minority. At least, we feel that way.

    I’ll never return to that spooky shit.

    I will continue to think of superstitious morons to be just that.

  152. cyberCMDR says

    @Kol: You’re right, atheists are in the minority.

    Most people can’t think, most of the remainder won’t think, the small fraction who do think mostly can’t do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion — in the long run these are the only people who count.
    Robert Heinlein – Time Enough For Love

  153. Nakarti says

    I think you should change “Godless liberal” to “Raging Atheist” in your blog’s subtitle.