Most annoying theists

MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Most annoying theists

Which of the following types of theists that we regularly see on here is most annoying?

1. Dishonest - the ones who lie about what someone said or what they said or in some other way are less than honest

2. Bible Quoter - the ones who think quoting the Bible is a convincing argument

3. Stoyryteller - the ones who use Urban legends or other stories with no evidence they are true for their case

4. Nutcase - the ones who spout off things that make no sense or aare so irrational they make your head spin!

5. Blabbermouth - the ones who post about 5 pages of text to make a point they could have made in a few sentences.

6. Pot/Kettle - the ones who call us irrational because we don't accept their ridiculous "evidence" as such.

(or any other...)

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


Noor
Posts: 250
Joined: 2006-11-18
User is offlineOffline
Dishonest, definitely.

Dishonest, definitely.


Ophios
Ophios's picture
Posts: 909
Joined: 2006-09-19
User is offlineOffline
I hate the ones that go

I hate the ones that go around with the "You are blind" BS. and the ones with the myrter complex.

AImboden wrote:
I'm not going to PM my agreement just because one tucan has pms.


thingy
SuperfanGold Member
thingy's picture
Posts: 1022
Joined: 2007-02-07
User is offlineOffline
The pot/kettle are the ones

The pot/kettle are the ones who get to me the most.  In fact I've been pondering writing a blog/essay on the very subject of how the majority a significant proportion of the arguments from theists are hypocritical and the reverse of the words that come out of their mouths.

Organised religion is the ultimate form of blasphemy.
Censored and blacked out for internet access in ANZ!
AU: http://nocleanfeed.com/ | NZ: http://nzblackout.org/


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
Don't forget the hypocrites.

Don't forget the hypocrites. They live mostly secular, heretical lives, but have somehow "interpretted" their caveman texts to where they don't see any conflict. The book says something bad? It was SYMBOLIC, or WITHIN A CERTAIN CONTEXT.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Posts: 7580
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:

MattShizzle wrote:

Which of the following types of theists that we regularly see on here is most annoying?

1. Dishonest - the ones who lie about what someone said or what they said or in some other way are less than honest

2. Bible Quoter - the ones who think quoting the Bible is a convincing argument

3. Stoyryteller - the ones who use Urban legends or other stories with no evidence they are true for their case

4. Nutcase - the ones who spout off things that make no sense or aare so irrational they make your head spin!

5. Blabbermouth - the ones who post about 5 pages of text to make a point they could have made in a few sentences.

6. Pot/Kettle - the ones who call us irrational because we don't accept their ridiculous "evidence" as such.

(or any other...)

7. Willfully Ignorant: Has learned the facts over and over, yet chooses to ignore them because they don't fit the view they'd like to have.

8. Hypocrite: Virtually every offense they level at anyone else they are guilty of themselves.

9. Projector: Makes claims like "I can't be an atheist because it takes too much faith" because they want to ascribe their own poor thinking skills to others. In this case I've have never a theistic argument that isn't a projection of its flaws.

 

Lastly... no theist can avoid being either ignorant or dishonest (or both) when defending their god. I have yet to see it in 10 years of reading hundreds of thousands of posts from them online, the day has yet to come.

 

Please donate to one of these highly rated charities to help impede the GOP attack on America 2017-2019.

Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Special pleading. Theist: 

Special pleading.

Theist:  Χ implies my religion is true. 

Atheist:  Yet Χ can be applied to another (or all other) religion(s).

Theist:  But it's only true in the case of my religion.

 

To paraphrase James Randi:  "The others are impersonators.  I'm the real Santa Claus!"

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


rexlunae
rexlunae's picture
Posts: 378
Joined: 2007-01-07
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote: 7. Willfully

Sapient wrote:
7. Willfully Ignorant: Has learned the facts over and over, yet chooses to ignore them because they don't fit the view they'd like to have.

I think this is the only kind of theist that really bugs me. The rest, with enough time, patience, and education can ultimately be convinced. These are just a waste of time.

It's only the fairy tales they believe.


ImmaculateDeception
ImmaculateDeception's picture
Posts: 280
Joined: 2006-11-08
User is offlineOffline
  Anyone who says the

  Anyone who says the following:

"OH YEAH?!?!?! WELL HITLER WAS AN ATHEIST LOL!!11!"

*shudder* 

Jesus died for somebody's sins, but not mine


thingy
SuperfanGold Member
thingy's picture
Posts: 1022
Joined: 2007-02-07
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote:

zarathustra wrote:

Special pleading.

Theist: Χ implies my religion is true.

Atheist: Yet Χ can be applied to another (or all other) religion(s).

Theist: But it's only true in the case of my religion.

 

To paraphrase James Randi: "The others are impersonators. I'm the real Santa Claus!"

This, the hypocrit and the pot/kettle are one in the same, aren't they?  Just as

Sapient wrote:
7. Willfully Ignorant: Has learned the facts over and over, yet chooses to ignore them because they don't fit the view they'd like to have.

and

ImmaculateDeception wrote:

Anyone who says the following:

"OH YEAH?!?!?! WELL HITLER WAS AN ATHEIST LOL!!11!"

*shudder*

Are the same. 

 

Organised religion is the ultimate form of blasphemy.
Censored and blacked out for internet access in ANZ!
AU: http://nocleanfeed.com/ | NZ: http://nzblackout.org/


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
I think the hypocrites get

I think the hypocrites get under my skin more than the others. All the light and goodness and kindness toward their fellow man - and then they let loose with a flurry of really foul language at us. (These types really seem to like the word "fuck" for some reason.)

Second, the Willfully Ignorant simply because they WISH their beliefs were true. (These types really seem to like "La La La I can't hear you" a lot.)

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2843
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
The most annoying would be,

The most annoying would be, equally, every theist who stumbles onto our board to spread their mirthful wisdom with us. Every single one of them tends to be unable to grasp that they simply don't much at all about the topics they wish to debate. They all offer an ever flowing fountain of urban legends, irrational assumption and violent ignorance. I get evolutionary theory from high school students who are barely passing chemistry, I get lessons on moral philosophy from people who's sole training in philosophy was a freshmam Philosophy 101 class, I get lessons in metaphysics from some 54 year old  accountant who needs to convince himself that he's a scholar (despite the fact that he's not read more than 5 books since finishing his Associates degree in 1972), or else he'll have to face the fact that he really hasn't done a damn thing of significance in his life...

I've been debating theists for years, I've never seen one good argument, and I've probably only met a handful who were reasonable at all. On the other hand, I've met more of my share of angry, hateful, spiteful, arrogant, viciously dishonest types like Frank Walton or Paul Manata - people who have such self loathing that all they can do is attack people all day... their real goal isn't prostelyzing... in fact, their real goal is just ot spit out hatred at humanity, because the existence of the rest of humanity is a constant reminder to them of just how pathetic they are...

But, this said, this isn't just a problem in theological debate, you see the same thing in other subjective topics: politics, morality, etc, any field where a knowledge base is not required in order to form an opinion. The less a person knows, the louder they shout. There's a reason why it's often said that one should never discuss politics or religion at dinner - because it doesn't facts, or even brains, to assert an opinion in these fields, and a challenged unsubtantiated opinion leads to anger, and violence.... The less facts there are to decide an issue, the more violence becomes the mode of settling disputes.

 Go look at what people think a 'political discussion' is, whether on the internet, the radio, or television, and then actually look at a real political discussion (friday nights on PBS, for example). The difference is the difference between Britanny Spears and Mozart. Yet ask the average person for an expert on politics, and they'll tell you all about Rush Limbaugh.

The average person knows jack shit about all of these subjects. Period.  But for the average person to admit that, he'd have to admit that he doesn't really know much about the world, and that's just too painful to concede... so instead, he's gonna come here and just prove to you how much he does know...

It's one thing not to know something, but it's quite another to shout your ignorance at the top of your voice, as if it were substantiated fact. Yet most discourse is little more than two ignoramous revealing how little they learned in high school and undergrad...

The balance between humility and certainty is entirely off... and the more ignorant tend to be the least humble.

I recently barged into a discussion on stickam, where st. michael was asserting from his vast pool of ignorance on cosmology, a bunch of claims that no cosmologist on the planet holds to.... while his atheist interlocuter was hardly doing much better... claiming that ex nihilo creation is impossible, even as both Edward Tryon and Tim Ferris and Andre Vilikin have all demonstrated that nothing in physics is violated by ex nihilo accounts for our universe.

Both were trading high school level urban legends, completely oblivious to what an actual cosmologist had to say.

Now if I, as a psychologist who simply enjoys cosmology as a hobby, was able to break and and point out basic, fundamental errors on both sides of the debate, tell me: what would an actual physics major have to say? Or better, yet, would would Tim Ferris or Briane Greene or Martin Rees have said?

Most debate on the internet involves an assertion from ignorance, followed either by insults, or a purely confirmatory search for anything that appears to back you up - with total disregard for anything disconfirmatory. And then, somehow, it actually devolves from there...  

 

 

"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
thingy wrote: This, the

thingy wrote:

This, the hypocrit and the pot/kettle are one in the same, aren't they?  

The beast goes by many names. 

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote: MattShizzle

Sapient wrote:
MattShizzle wrote:

Which of the following types of theists that we regularly see on here is most annoying?

1. Dishonest - the ones who lie about what someone said or what they said or in some other way are less than honest

2. Bible Quoter - the ones who think quoting the Bible is a convincing argument

3. Stoyryteller - the ones who use Urban legends or other stories with no evidence they are true for their case

4. Nutcase - the ones who spout off things that make no sense or aare so irrational they make your head spin!

5. Blabbermouth - the ones who post about 5 pages of text to make a point they could have made in a few sentences.

6. Pot/Kettle - the ones who call us irrational because we don't accept their ridiculous "evidence" as such.

(or any other...)

7. Willfully Ignorant: Has learned the facts over and over, yet chooses to ignore them because they don't fit the view they'd like to have.

8. Hypocrite: Virtually every offense they level at anyone else they are guilty of themselves.

9. Projector: Makes claims like "I can't be an atheist because it takes too much faith" because they want to ascribe their own poor thinking skills to others. In this case I've have never a theistic argument that isn't a projection of its flaws.

 

Lastly... no theist can avoid being either ignorant or dishonest (or both) when defending their god. I have yet to see it in 10 years of reading hundreds of thousands of posts from them online, the day has yet to come.

 

Let's not forget:

10: Intellectual apologists: Tries to prove their religion using science, and concepts like Intelligent Design. Pretends to use logic while almost exclusively using fallacies. Once took a college course in philosophy, therefore, believes he/she can debate. Often so snooty that it is detrimental to their health (in more ways than one).

11: Crusader: Will use any and every argument to convert their mark. Relentless in their perseverance. 


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
BenfromCanada wrote: 11:

BenfromCanada wrote:

11: Crusader: Will use any and every argument to convert their mark. Relentless in their perseverance.

OOuuu yeah.  (Is there a word that would indicate even more relentless than "relentless"?) 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Copying the rules of the

Copying the rules of the Freethinker's forum here so everyone will see them as they read through the posts.

From this point forward the moderators will be destroying posts made by theists in the "Freethinking Anonymous" forum.  If you are a theist please be careful not to waste your time posting in this forum by looking at the top of the screen to determine which forum you are in when posting.  If you are an atheist and what theists to be able to weigh in on your topic, use "General Conversation" or "Atheist vs. Theist."
 
 Thanks,
 
RRS Mod Team

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
12. And then there are the

12. And then there are the theists who completely ignore your refutation of their argument and change the subject.

People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
AiiA wrote: 12. And then

AiiA wrote:
12. And then there are the theists who completely ignore your refutation of their argument and change the subject.

Can we call them "Shifters" or "Misdirectionists"? 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Susan wrote:

Susan wrote:
BenfromCanada wrote:

11: Crusader: Will use any and every argument to convert their mark. Relentless in their perseverance.

OOuuu yeah. (Is there a word that would indicate even more relentless than "relentless"?)

 

Feel free to pick one, m'lady. Smiling

http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/relentless

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

AiiA wrote:
12. And then there are the theists who completely ignore your refutation of their argument and change the subject.

Can we call them "Shifters" or "Misdirectionists"?

And/or "distracter" or the "fox hound trainer"

13. Relative to 12, it is the theist who avoids answering your specific questions because they know answering will trap them in a refutable position.

People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
What would be the name for

What would be the name for on that posts something we've seen like a billion times already? (ie Pascal's Wager, Ray Comfort shit, etc.)

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


Dabura13
Dabura13's picture
Posts: 76
Joined: 2007-02-07
User is offlineOffline
I'll just say all of the

I'll just say all of the above. XD It's a touch choice.


Rigor_OMortis
Rigor_OMortis's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2006-06-18
User is offlineOffline
Did you guys mention the

Did you guys mention the "presto-change-o" type? Miracle believer that is a living encyclopedia of when, how and where different "miracles" happened... And when proven that a miracle is actually a cheap trick, well, there's always more to choose from...

Inquisition - "The flames are all long gone, but the pain lingers on..."
http://rigoromortis.blogspot.com/


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote: What

MattShizzle wrote:
What would be the name for on that posts something we've seen like a billion times already? (ie Pascal's Wager, Ray Comfort shit, etc.)

I'd say "Intellectual Apologists". Just like those who think Occam's Razor disproves evolution. 


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote: Susan

jcgadfly wrote:
Susan wrote:
BenfromCanada wrote:

11: Crusader: Will use any and every argument to convert their mark. Relentless in their perseverance.

OOuuu yeah. (Is there a word that would indicate even more relentless than "relentless"?)

Feel free to pick one, m'lady. Smiling

http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/relentless

Thanks.  Here are a few of my favorites:

inexorable, inflexible, merciless, obdurate, ruthless, incessant, never-ending, intransigent 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Maragon
Maragon's picture
Posts: 351
Joined: 2007-04-01
User is offlineOffline
I hold a special hate for

I hold a special hate for creationists.

I feel genuine pity for most theists who I truly believe are wasting their lives on a crazy, cross-dressing sky god, but I can't muster up any feelings other than those of contempt for people who truly argue that evolution is 'just a theory' and 'has no evidence'.

 

I also loathe the theists who, instead of actually adding anything to a debate thread, show up armed with quotes and their 'personal experiences with jesus' and start witnessing to me.

Some of these people are truly so ignorant that they believe that some atheists have just 'not heard about jesus'. Obviously this is the only reason someone would choose not to believe in him.

 

>_< 


Noor
Posts: 250
Joined: 2006-11-18
User is offlineOffline
The blabbermouth ones like

The blabbermouth ones like agustine (and StMichael) tend to be annoying with their verbose posts, but the dishonest/willfully ignorant theists who lie and take things out of context to make things fit their view get me the most.


aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote: What

MattShizzle wrote:
What would be the name for on that posts something we've seen like a billion times already? (ie Pascal's Wager, Ray Comfort shit, etc.)
How about calling them the "ad nauseamists"

People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.


AbandonMyPeace
Posts: 324
Joined: 2007-03-15
User is offlineOffline
For me its the ones that

For me its the ones that try to educate me by referring to all there nonsense as "the truth." And if you disagree with them they ask you why you dont want to know "the truth". I guess its some sort of mind control tactic in the church. If you call it the truth so many times then I guess its just accepted as the truth.

 

(I really didnt want to use the term mind control. But I couldnt think of a better way to put it.) 


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Not only "truth", but

Not only "truth", but "Truth" (capitalized) and "Ultimate Truth" and "Natural Truth"

*sigh* 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


KSMB
Scientist
KSMB's picture
Posts: 702
Joined: 2006-08-03
User is offlineOffline
Susan wrote: Not only

Susan wrote:

Not only "truth", but "Truth" (capitalized) and "Ultimate Truth" and "Natural Truth"

*sigh*

I agree. What the hell is up with all the capitalization they do? Who are they trying to impress with their knowledge that there is a shift-button?


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
Susan wrote: Not only

Susan wrote:
Not only "truth", but "Truth" (capitalized) and "Ultimate Truth" and "Natural Truth"

That is why I never capitalize any of their meaningless words: jesus, god, heaven, hell, faith, truth, him... etc.  


Spewn
Posts: 98
Joined: 2007-01-30
User is offlineOffline
The worst type, IMO, is the

The worst type, IMO, is the "Self-proclaimed Sciencetician".   The people who try to say that evolution violates the laws of thermodynamics, etc.


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
KSMB wrote: Susan

KSMB wrote:
Susan wrote:

Not only "truth", but "Truth" (capitalized) and "Ultimate Truth" and "Natural Truth"

*sigh*

I agree. What the hell is up with all the capitalization they do? Who are they trying to impress with their knowledge that there is a shift-button?

Oh yeah, don't forget Moral Truth.  Tongue out

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Another very annoying

Another very annoying type:

 

Sophist - uses language tricks instead of rational arguments for their case.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Need another name: One who

Need another name: One who posts extremely irrational stuff and when it gets countered whines about being mistreated. And keeps repeating the same thing we already countered over and over.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


NinjaTux
NinjaTux's picture
Posts: 265
Joined: 2007-01-02
User is offlineOffline
Personally I hate the

Personally I hate the mentally incongruent ones (the ones that argue something, but refuse to accept the logical consequences of their statements)

 

My gf (Wishkah311) wanted to post on this topic, but couldn't because of her theist tag. I hope it's ok that I repost her response, I don't think anyone will mind. If you mind, just let me know and I'll edit it back out

[mod edit - theist comment removed. NinjaTux, just because it's your girlfriend and you are doing the typing, these are still theist posts and do not belong here.]

No Gods, Know Peace.


econgineer
econgineer's picture
Posts: 50
Joined: 2007-01-06
User is offlineOffline
I have 2 more to add

1.  Ones who fallacious arguments. No True Scotsman, Appeal to Authority (Einstein, C.S. Lewis, Newton), Ad Hominem Attacks ("Darwin was a racist" and "Kinsey was a pervert" were a couple I heard very recently) are the ones I see most frequently.

2.  And the ones I really dislike are the ones who use a force religion on a captive audience.  For example, I have an acquaintance who teaches Bible study in prison.  Well, if it prevents recidivism, that's great, but I don't think it does.  Training for anger management, life skills, G.E.D., addiction recovery would be far more useful than recruiting converts.  

    A more personal experience was when I was pledging a fraternity many years ago and we had to meet with each of the brothers.  We had no choice in the matter.  One of the brothers (a born again, reformed party animal) used that opportunity to force us pledges to attend a presentation by Josh McDowell.  Fortunately I was an atheist by that time and was immune. 

    Of course those who proselytize the young and try to get religion into schools or insist that the Ten Commandments be posted, fall into the second group.  

Responsibility: A detachable burden easily shifted to the shoulders of God, Fate, Fortune, Luck or one's neighbor. In the days of astrology it was customary to unload it upon a star. ~Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary, 1911


NinjaTux
NinjaTux's picture
Posts: 265
Joined: 2007-01-02
User is offlineOffline
I helped start a fraternity

I helped start a fraternity chapter and part of it was taking an oath about how there was some kind of creator, blah, blah, blah.  we had to take this oath just about everytime we met, and no one ever noticed that when we had to say this part i was silent.  One day, just before I left the college to attend another one, the advisor finally caught on and informed me that if I wanted to be initiated i would have to take the oath in full.  I refused and left the college entirely shortly there after.  the sad thing was that he never told any of the other brothers, so when it came time for them to get a charter they invited me and I had to decline. 

I found it funny how much like a religion fraternities are.  I enjoyed the experience, and made some really good friends.  I almost started an atheist fraternity at the next college but the student body was just too apathetic for that to fly. 

No Gods, Know Peace.


Ophios
Ophios's picture
Posts: 909
Joined: 2006-09-19
User is offlineOffline
BGH wrote: Susan

BGH wrote:

Susan wrote:
Not only "truth", but "Truth" (capitalized) and "Ultimate Truth" and "Natural Truth"

That is why I never capitalize any of their meaningless words: jesus, god, heaven, hell, faith, truth, him... etc.

I don't capitalize most of those words too. Just for a different reason.

I find it funny when someone mentions the truth in capital letters.

Becuase it goes from fact to a character in GTA: San Andreas.

I mean, would you trust this man?

 

AImboden wrote:
I'm not going to PM my agreement just because one tucan has pms.


Apokalipse
Apokalipse's picture
Posts: 210
Joined: 2006-08-27
User is offlineOffline
Susan wrote:

Susan wrote:
KSMB wrote:
Susan wrote:

Not only "truth", but "Truth" (capitalized) and "Ultimate Truth" and "Natural Truth"

*sigh*

I agree. What the hell is up with all the capitalization they do? Who are they trying to impress with their knowledge that there is a shift-button?

Oh yeah, don't forget Moral Truth. Tongue out

And don't forget the no true scotsman fallacy.

"I'm a True Christian™ and all others are satan worshippers!"


Largo
Largo's picture
Posts: 140
Joined: 2007-04-13
User is offlineOffline
BGH wrote: Susan

BGH wrote:

Susan wrote:
Not only "truth", but "Truth" (capitalized) and "Ultimate Truth" and "Natural Truth"

That is why I never capitalize any of their meaningless words: jesus, god, heaven, hell, faith, truth, him... etc.  

For me it depends entirely on context. If I am quoting directly from the bible, for example, I capitalize as it is in the text. Usually I don't capitalize "god" or "lord", but exceptions might occur. if I'm emphasizing a word like lord because the person to whom I am writing would see it that way, I might very well capitalize "your Lord" just to indicate sarcasm or scorn.


NinjaTux
NinjaTux's picture
Posts: 265
Joined: 2007-01-02
User is offlineOffline
Quote: [mod edit - theist

Quote:

[mod edit - theist comment removed. NinjaTux, just because it's your girlfriend and you are doing the typing, these are still theist posts and do not belong here.]

noted...don't tell me you never had any desire to test the rules.... 

No Gods, Know Peace.


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
I have a new one for the

I have a new one for the list:

The pseudo medical advisor, holistic, jesus energy, naturepathy, debate dodger, whining, crying, MARTAR.


NinjaTux
NinjaTux's picture
Posts: 265
Joined: 2007-01-02
User is offlineOffline
BGH wrote: I have a new

BGH wrote:

I have a new one for the list:

The pseudo medical advisor, holistic, jesus energy, naturepathy, debate dodger, whining, crying, MARTAR.

We had sugarless/sugarfree/aspartame whatever the hell her name was...but alas it was not to be. 

No Gods, Know Peace.


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
NinjaTux wrote: BGH

NinjaTux wrote:
BGH wrote:
I have a new one for the list:

The pseudo medical advisor, holistic, jesus energy, naturepathy, debate dodger, whining, crying, MARTAR.

We had sugarless/sugarfree/aspartame whatever the hell her name was...but alas it was not to be.

That is exactly who I was referring to... 


ShaunPhilly
High Level ModeratorSilver Member
ShaunPhilly's picture
Posts: 473
Joined: 2006-03-15
User is offlineOffline
Speaking of theists that

Speaking of theists that annoy me, did anyone else hear the Infidel Guy show last week with St. Michael?

Man, that guy doesn't change.

Shaun

I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
He was on the radio show?

He was on the radio show?


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
ShaunPhilly wrote: Speaking

ShaunPhilly wrote:
Speaking of theists that annoy me, did anyone else hear the Infidel Guy show last week with St. Michael?

Man, that guy doesn't change.

Shaun

I heard it, his arguments were more pitiful orally than in written form. Pretty funny. 


djneibarger
Superfan
djneibarger's picture
Posts: 564
Joined: 2007-04-13
User is offlineOffline
my music videos "godless

my music videos "godless america" and "this man" tend to inspire ridiculously hatefull comments from theists.

my favorites are ones that tell me that i'm unappreciative of jesus' sacrifice and that their going to pray for my soul because i'm surely going to hell, and then they end it with quoted scripture.

they don't seem to realize that if you pay attention to what i say in my songs, jesus' sacrifice is meaningless and hell is about as scary to me as an ant crawling on my leg. and scripture is just more ammunition for my "blasphemy". 

www.derekneibarger.com http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=djneibarger "all postures of submission and surrender should be part of our prehistory." -christopher hitchens


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
djneibarger wrote: my

djneibarger wrote:

my music videos "godless america" and "this man" tend to inspire ridiculously hatefull comments from theists.

my favorites are ones that tell me that i'm unappreciative of jesus' sacrifice and that their going to pray for my soul because i'm surely going to hell, and then they end it with quoted scripture.

they don't seem to realize that if you pay attention to what i say in my songs, jesus' sacrifice is meaningless and hell is about as scary to me as an ant crawling on my leg. and scripture is just more ammunition for my "blasphemy".

Hey, come on now. Ants crawling up one's leg can be scary, if they're fireants and get close to the fmaily jewels...not that I have personal experience here or whatever, just saying...