An Atheist's "right to be angry" - Page 5

RSLancastr · 15th March 2013, 01:04 AM

For many years I thought that the word "Jew" was itself an epithet, as that was the only way I ever saw or heard it used, especially in films such as ones set in Nazi Germany, where the word was often preceded by "dirty", "filthy", "cheap" or "conniving" - where it was actually the adjective that was the insult, but it was said in such a way as to imply that the adjective was redundant.

I don't know that I even MET a Jew (SEE, my impulse was to self-edit that to "Jewish person"!) until I was an adult, when one Jew I befriended was annoyed by my use of the phrase "Jewish person" and let me know that the word "Jew" was not only just fine, but was the proper word to use!

Manopolus · 15th March 2013, 03:37 AM

Originally Posted by RSLancastr

Here is that magazine clipping:

http://i1322.photobucket.com/albums/...ps2bf4fa52.jpg

Totally irrelevant, but I love the way that the back side of the page is showing through the scan of that clipping... I keep trying to read what it says.

Recovering Agnostic · 15th March 2013, 03:48 AM

Originally Posted by RSLancastr

wop

derogatory for "Italian," 1912, Amer.Eng. slang, apparently from southern It. dialect guappo "dandy, dude, stud," a greeting among male Neapolitans, said to be from Sp. guapo "bold, dandy," which is from L. vappa "sour wine," also "worthless fellow;" related to vapidus (see vapid). Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper

Acronyms are popular explanations of etymology, but they're almost always a marker of folk etymology and myth. See also POSH, GOLF and so on. As a rule of thumb, if the word was in use before WWII, it won't be derived from an acronym at all.

Pup · 15th March 2013, 05:23 AM

Originally Posted by Manopolus

Totally irrelevant, but I love the way that the back side of the page is showing through the scan of that clipping... I keep trying to read what it says.

Looks like it's this magazine: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/march/

But the part on the back doesn't seem to be available without a subscription. It seems to be reader comments about previous articles. The part at the bottom reads something like: "Failing Holiness. The question raised in ??? Village Green Do American Christians need the message of grace...." which looks like a comment on this column in the December issue.

Seems to be the usual stuff--the brainwashed leading the brainwashed. From the December column: "Americans today are in desperate need of the disciplines of holiness. As a pastor, I know firsthand the morally chaotic, sadly devastated lives of those who thought it was possible to be good without God."

Delvo · 15th March 2013, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by RSLancastr

I recently told my Men's Bible Study group that Christians should NOT take offense to the term "Xmas". It is NOT, as some persnickety Christians will say, "crossing out Christ". It is using "X" to represent the word "Christ", or actually, "XRISTOS", the Latin word for "Christ"...

After I explained all of this, one of my classmates said "Well, I've always been told that it was "crossing out Christ", and we sghouldn't do it".

Originally Posted by Recovering Agnostic

Acronyms are popular explanations of etymology, but they're almost always a marker of folk etymology and myth... As a rule of thumb, if the word was in use before WWII, it won't be derived from an acronym at all.

The acronym in this case also isn't necessary for the explanation. It just makes it sound complicated and foreign and obscure. It would be more convincing to stick to the basics:

When we spell something with "ch" but pronounce it like a "k", it's practically always a replacement for a Greek original letter which looks like "x".
"X" is an abbreviation for "Xrist/Christ", just like "Ch" would be, and has been that way for ages.

Madalch · 15th March 2013, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by RSLancastr

For many years I thought that the word "Jew" was itself an epithet, as that was the only way I ever saw or heard it used, especially in films such as ones set in Nazi Germany, where the word was often preceded by "dirty", "filthy", "cheap" or "conniving" - where it was actually the adjective that was the insult, but it was said in such a way as to imply that the adjective was redundant.

I don't know that I even MET a Jew (SEE, my impulse was to self-edit that to "Jewish person"!) until I was an adult, when one Jew I befriended was annoyed by my use of the phrase "Jewish person" and let me know that the word "Jew" was not only just fine, but was the proper word to use!

I think the term "Jew" as a noun is fine, but using it as an adjective or verb is not.

TubbaBlubba · 15th March 2013, 12:38 PM

Originally Posted by Recovering Agnostic

Acronyms are popular explanations of etymology, but they're almost always a marker of folk etymology and myth. See also POSH, GOLF and so on. As a rule of thumb, if the word was in use before WWII, it won't be derived from an acronym at all.

Yeah, the only acronym-derived words I can think of are initially technical terms like laser, radar, etc.

Originally Posted by Madalch

I think the term "Jew" as a noun is fine, but using it as an adjective or verb is not.

Now you're just out to jew me.

pgwenthold · 15th March 2013, 01:17 PM

Originally Posted by TubbaBlubba

Yeah, the only acronym-derived words I can think of are initially technical terms like laser, radar, etc.

I have always figured that the "For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge" claim must be crap, since it doesn't account for the German version, which is not so different from the English

RSLancastr · 15th March 2013, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by TubbaBlubba

Yeah, the only acronym-derived words I can think of are initially technical terms like laser, radar, etc.

SCUBA would fit into that category, but what of NASA and NATO?

Brainache · 15th March 2013, 02:00 PM

Qantas

Madalch · 15th March 2013, 02:05 PM

Originally Posted by RSLancastr

SCUBA would fit into that category, but what of NASA and NATO?

But those are names, not really words. I can go scuba-diving, or shoot a laser at someone (or both if I'm James Bond), but I can't really NATO my way out of doing something.

RSLancastr · 15th March 2013, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by Madalch

But those are names, not really words.

This is evidently some strange usage of the word "word" with which I am not familiar...

devnull · 15th March 2013, 06:33 PM

Originally Posted by Brainache

Qantas

You havent lived until youve heard a Japanese person pronounce "Qantas"

RSLancastr · 16th March 2013, 06:51 AM

Fill in the blank:

Japanese person on an English-language forum: "You haven't lived until you've heard an American person pronounce "______".

xterra · 16th March 2013, 09:13 AM

Robert,

Not to derail the thread drift, but I am wondering if you have been continuing your discussions with Jim about the original topic of this thread. This is from your first post in this thread, in which you quoted your message to Jim:

Quote:

You said that Pastor Jeff (if that's who it was) had said to you that he felt that an Atheist, not believing in God, would have no right to be upset (I believe you said "no right to feel angst")* if someone had broken into his (the Atheist's) home and stolen his possessions.

You did not clarify just why this was, but I assumed you were going to say that without an external definition of Right and Wrong (which the Bible provides a Christian), an Atheist had no right nor cause to say that what the thief had done was Wrong.

*It can be argued whether 'angst' or 'anger' is the appropriate word. I think that Jim probably meant the latter.

You later described (post #37) a message from Jeff:

Quote:

[Jeff]] also said that Jim had left out an important part of what he had said in that discussion. I don't have the exact quote with me, but basically he wrote that he did not say that the Atheist would not have the right to be angry, but rather that the Atheist would not have right to be (I think he said) "morally outraged".

I have not re-read the entire thread, so this may be redundant, but have either of them indicated any understanding that this is a very narrow view of morality and of ethics?

xterra

RSLancastr · 16th March 2013, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by xterra

Robert,

*It can be argued whether 'angst' or 'anger' is the appropriate word. I think that Jim probably meant the latter.

Whatever he meant, I am quite certain that he said "angst".

Quote:

You later described (post #37) a message from Jeff:

I have not re-read the entire thread, so this may be redundant, but have either of them indicated any understanding that this is a very narrow view of morality and of ethics?

xterra

No, I have not.

I rarely get a chance to speak with Jim, and the one time I spoke with Jeff (it is in this thread), I could not remember what I wanted to ask him.

If I do speak or correspond with either of them about this, I will post of it here.

devnull · 18th March 2013, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by RSLancastr

Fill in the blank:

Japanese person on an English-language forum: "You haven't lived until you've heard an American person pronounce "______".

Well, I'm Australian, so my answer would be "what they believe counts as English"

Kahalachan · 19th March 2013, 07:20 PM

I would've liked to see you word the letter in accordance with their own feelings of morality. A Christian should not want to steal from an atheist because they themselves should feel it is wrong and any atheist's right to complain is irrelevant to their own conscience.

Is it moral to continue to imprison someone with Stockholm syndrome? They certainly aren't complaining. Just because the victim doesn't, can't, or has no right to object doesn't mean the action itself is any less wrong.

Pup · 20th March 2013, 06:16 AM

Originally Posted by Kahalachan

I would've liked to see you word the letter in accordance with their own feelings of morality. A Christian should not want to steal from an atheist because they themselves should feel it is wrong and any atheist's right to complain is irrelevant to their own conscience.

I suspect, don't know, that the answer would be: "Oh, we wouldn't actually do anything to an atheist, because we're good moral people. We just mean that an atheist wouldn't have a right to be angry if someone did."

Thus taking passive-aggressiveness to new heights, but nullifying that line of argument.

Brown · 16th May 2013, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by Brown

Actually, I didn't read it on-line. It was part of a CBS report aired after Ellis Island reopened (which sources on-line--GAAAACK!--say was in 1990). The report was by Charles Osgood, if I remember right. Now, having said that, and having visited Ellis Island, there's a lot of stuff on the Island that is anecdotal and not necessarily reliable as history. The fact that something is read on-island doesn't necessarily make it so.

On further reflection, I think I may be conflating reports. It is possible that the report was on ABC and the reporter was Joel Siegel.

George152 · 16th May 2013, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by Madalch

But those are names, not really words. I can go scuba-diving, or shoot a laser at someone (or both if I'm James Bond), but I can't really NATO my way out of doing something.

Aha but the UN can UN their way out of anything

SlackerBabbath · 17th May 2013, 01:27 AM

I just find it incredible that many Christians judge atheists to be immoral when the founder of their own religion apparently instructed his followers not to 'judge' others.

Gawdzilla · 17th May 2013, 03:48 AM

Originally Posted by SlackerBabbath

I just find it incredible that many Christians judge atheists to be immoral when the founder of their own religion apparently instructed his followers not to 'judge' others.

Oh, that's an easy one. The Bible is a total mash-up, you can find pro and con for just about anything between the covers. Jesus said not to judge, but Judgment Day is the finale of the religion. And King Solomon seemed to be doing nothing much else.

And, of course, Christians are inherently hypocritical.

CriticalSock · 17th May 2013, 07:12 AM

Originally Posted by RSLancastr

Fill in the blank:

Japanese person on an English-language forum: "You haven't lived until you've heard an American person pronounce "______".

English person on an English-language forum: "You haven't lived until you've heard an American person pronounce "Gloucestershire".

RSLancastr · 17th May 2013, 11:32 AM

...or Worcestershire, or Leicester, or...

Parsman · 17th May 2013, 01:30 PM

Or anyone from the English speaking world who doesn't come from Aberdeenshire "How do you pronounce Garioch or Footdee"

tsig · 17th May 2013, 04:06 PM

Originally Posted by SlackerBabbath

I just find it incredible that many Christians judge atheists to be immoral when the founder of their own religion apparently instructed his followers not to 'judge' others.

You're not supposed to judge unrighteously, righteous judgement is OK.\apologetic off

SlackerBabbath · Yesterday, 01:15 AM

Originally Posted by tsig

You're not supposed to judge unrighteously, righteous judgement is OK.\apologetic off

But surely just assuming that an atheist is immoral, just because he's an atheist, without actualy getting to know the atheist and finding out what the atheist's morality is like, that can't possibly be considered as righteous can it?

15th March 2013, 01:04 AM	#161
RSLancastr www.StopSylvia.com Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Salem, Oregon Posts: 15,526	For many years I thought that the word "Jew" was itself an epithet, as that was the only way I ever saw or heard it used, especially in films such as ones set in Nazi Germany, where the word was often preceded by "dirty", "filthy", "cheap" or "conniving" - where it was actually the adjective that was the insult, but it was said in such a way as to imply that the adjective was redundant. I don't know that I even MET a Jew (SEE, my impulse was to self-edit that to "Jewish person"!) until I was an adult, when one Jew I befriended was annoyed by my use of the phrase "Jewish person" and let me know that the word "Jew" was not only just fine, but was the proper word to use!
	__________________ Who is "Kaz?" Read about her at www.StopKaz.com. Curious about Sylvia Browne? Read about her at www.StopSylvia.com. Ever wonder "What's the Harm?" with psychics, alternative medicine, etc?

15th March 2013, 03:48 AM	#163
Recovering Agnostic Back Pew Heckler Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 365	Originally Posted by RSLancastr wop derogatory for "Italian," 1912, Amer.Eng. slang, apparently from southern It. dialect guappo "dandy, dude, stud," a greeting among male Neapolitans, said to be from Sp. guapo "bold, dandy," which is from L. vappa "sour wine," also "worthless fellow;" related to vapidus (see vapid). Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper Acronyms are popular explanations of etymology, but they're almost always a marker of folk etymology and myth. See also POSH, GOLF and so on. As a rule of thumb, if the word was in use before WWII, it won't be derived from an acronym at all.
	__________________ My glorified brain dump, ranting space and navel fluff collection The art and science of asking questions is the source of all knowledge - Thomas Berger

15th March 2013, 05:23 AM	#164
Pup Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 3,587	Originally Posted by Manopolus Totally irrelevant, but I love the way that the back side of the page is showing through the scan of that clipping... I keep trying to read what it says. Looks like it's this magazine: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/march/ But the part on the back doesn't seem to be available without a subscription. It seems to be reader comments about previous articles. The part at the bottom reads something like: "Failing Holiness. The question raised in ??? Village Green Do American Christians need the message of grace...." which looks like a comment on this column in the December issue. Seems to be the usual stuff--the brainwashed leading the brainwashed. From the December column: "Americans today are in desperate need of the disciplines of holiness. As a pastor, I know firsthand the morally chaotic, sadly devastated lives of those who thought it was possible to be good without God."
Pup Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 3,587

15th March 2013, 10:56 AM	#165
Delvo Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Posts: 3,874	Originally Posted by RSLancastr I recently told my Men's Bible Study group that Christians should NOT take offense to the term "Xmas". It is NOT, as some persnickety Christians will say, "crossing out Christ". It is using "X" to represent the word "Christ", or actually, "XRISTOS", the Latin word for "Christ"... After I explained all of this, one of my classmates said "Well, I've always been told that it was "crossing out Christ", and we sghouldn't do it". Originally Posted by Recovering Agnostic Acronyms are popular explanations of etymology, but they're almost always a marker of folk etymology and myth... As a rule of thumb, if the word was in use before WWII, it won't be derived from an acronym at all. The acronym in this case also isn't necessary for the explanation. It just makes it sound complicated and foreign and obscure. It would be more convincing to stick to the basics: When we spell something with "ch" but pronounce it like a "k", it's practically always a replacement for a Greek original letter which looks like "x". "X" is an abbreviation for "Xrist/Christ", just like "Ch" would be, and has been that way for ages.
	Last edited by Delvo; 15th March 2013 at 10:58 AM.

15th March 2013, 11:07 AM	#166
Madalch The Jester Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: The wet coast. Posts: 8,697	Originally Posted by RSLancastr For many years I thought that the word "Jew" was itself an epithet, as that was the only way I ever saw or heard it used, especially in films such as ones set in Nazi Germany, where the word was often preceded by "dirty", "filthy", "cheap" or "conniving" - where it was actually the adjective that was the insult, but it was said in such a way as to imply that the adjective was redundant. I don't know that I even MET a Jew (SEE, my impulse was to self-edit that to "Jewish person"!) until I was an adult, when one Jew I befriended was annoyed by my use of the phrase "Jewish person" and let me know that the word "Jew" was not only just fine, but was the proper word to use! I think the term "Jew" as a noun is fine, but using it as an adjective or verb is not.
	__________________ As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of resolving approaches zero. -Vaarsuvius It's a rum state of affairs when you feel like punching a jar of mayonnaise in the face. -Charlie Brooker

15th March 2013, 03:37 AM	#162
Manopolus Metaphorical Anomaly Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Linn, Kansas (a.k.a. Dead center of Nowhere) Posts: 3,023	Originally Posted by RSLancastr Here is that magazine clipping: http://i1322.photobucket.com/albums/...ps2bf4fa52.jpg Totally irrelevant, but I love the way that the back side of the page is showing through the scan of that clipping... I keep trying to read what it says.

15th March 2013, 12:38 PM	#167
TubbaBlubba Knave of the Dudes Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Communist Kingdom of Sweden Posts: 7,394	Originally Posted by Recovering Agnostic Acronyms are popular explanations of etymology, but they're almost always a marker of folk etymology and myth. See also POSH, GOLF and so on. As a rule of thumb, if the word was in use before WWII, it won't be derived from an acronym at all. Yeah, the only acronym-derived words I can think of are initially technical terms like laser, radar, etc. Originally Posted by Madalch I think the term "Jew" as a noun is fine, but using it as an adjective or verb is not. Now you're just out to jew me.
	__________________ Disagreement begets progress.

15th March 2013, 01:17 PM	#168
pgwenthold Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 12,066	Originally Posted by TubbaBlubba Yeah, the only acronym-derived words I can think of are initially technical terms like laser, radar, etc. I have always figured that the "For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge" claim must be crap, since it doesn't account for the German version, which is not so different from the English
	__________________ "Baseball is a philosophy. The primordial ooze that once ruled our world has been captured in perpetual motion. Baseball is the moment. Its ever changing patterns are hypnotizing yet invigorating. Baseball is an art form. Classic and at the same time...progressive. Baseball is pre-historic and post-modern. Baseball is here to stay." (Stolen from the side of a lava lamp box, and modified slightly)

15th March 2013, 01:58 PM	#169
RSLancastr www.StopSylvia.com Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Salem, Oregon Posts: 15,526	Originally Posted by TubbaBlubba Yeah, the only acronym-derived words I can think of are initially technical terms like laser, radar, etc. SCUBA would fit into that category, but what of NASA and NATO?
	__________________ Who is "Kaz?" Read about her at www.StopKaz.com. Curious about Sylvia Browne? Read about her at www.StopSylvia.com. Ever wonder "What's the Harm?" with psychics, alternative medicine, etc? Last edited by RSLancastr; 15th March 2013 at 02:00 PM.

15th March 2013, 02:00 PM	#170
Brainache Nasty Brutish and Tall Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Knob Hill. Posts: 9,086	Qantas
	__________________ Words cannot convey the vertiginous retching horror that enveloped me as I lost consciousness. - W. S. Burroughs Invert the prominent diaphragm!!!

15th March 2013, 02:05 PM	#171
Madalch The Jester Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: The wet coast. Posts: 8,697	Originally Posted by RSLancastr SCUBA would fit into that category, but what of NASA and NATO? But those are names, not really words. I can go scuba-diving, or shoot a laser at someone (or both if I'm James Bond), but I can't really NATO my way out of doing something.
	__________________ As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of resolving approaches zero. -Vaarsuvius It's a rum state of affairs when you feel like punching a jar of mayonnaise in the face. -Charlie Brooker

15th March 2013, 02:34 PM	#172
RSLancastr www.StopSylvia.com Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Salem, Oregon Posts: 15,526	Originally Posted by Madalch But those are names, not really words. This is evidently some strange usage of the word "word" with which I am not familiar...
	__________________ Who is "Kaz?" Read about her at www.StopKaz.com. Curious about Sylvia Browne? Read about her at www.StopSylvia.com. Ever wonder "What's the Harm?" with psychics, alternative medicine, etc?

15th March 2013, 06:33 PM	#173
devnull Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 4,532	Originally Posted by Brainache Qantas You havent lived until youve heard a Japanese person pronounce "Qantas"
	__________________ no, i don't think i need to read naturalistic literature more accurately, to be convinced its true. - Gibhor

16th March 2013, 06:51 AM	#174
RSLancastr www.StopSylvia.com Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Salem, Oregon Posts: 15,526	Fill in the blank: Japanese person on an English-language forum: "You haven't lived until you've heard an American person pronounce "______".
	__________________ Who is "Kaz?" Read about her at www.StopKaz.com. Curious about Sylvia Browne? Read about her at www.StopSylvia.com. Ever wonder "What's the Harm?" with psychics, alternative medicine, etc?

16th March 2013, 09:13 AM	#175
xterra Muse Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: On the outskirts of Nowhere; the middle was too crowded Posts: 619	Robert, Not to derail the thread drift, but I am wondering if you have been continuing your discussions with Jim about the original topic of this thread. This is from your first post in this thread, in which you quoted your message to Jim: Quote: You said that Pastor Jeff (if that's who it was) had said to you that he felt that an Atheist, not believing in God, would have no right to be upset (I believe you said "no right to feel angst")* if someone had broken into his (the Atheist's) home and stolen his possessions. You did not clarify just why this was, but I assumed you were going to say that without an external definition of Right and Wrong (which the Bible provides a Christian), an Atheist had no right nor cause to say that what the thief had done was Wrong. *It can be argued whether 'angst' or 'anger' is the appropriate word. I think that Jim probably meant the latter. You later described (post #37) a message from Jeff: Quote: [Jeff]] also said that Jim had left out an important part of what he had said in that discussion. I don't have the exact quote with me, but basically he wrote that he did not say that the Atheist would not have the right to be angry, but rather that the Atheist would not have right to be (I think he said) "morally outraged". I have not re-read the entire thread, so this may be redundant, but have either of them indicated any understanding that this is a very narrow view of morality and of ethics? xterra
	__________________ Over we go....

16th March 2013, 10:20 AM	#176
RSLancastr www.StopSylvia.com Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Salem, Oregon Posts: 15,526	Originally Posted by xterra Robert, It can be argued whether 'angst' or 'anger' is the appropriate word. I think that Jim probably meant the latter. Whatever he meant, I am quite certain that he said* "angst". Quote: You later described (post #37) a message from Jeff: I have not re-read the entire thread, so this may be redundant, but have either of them indicated any understanding that this is a very narrow view of morality and of ethics? xterra No, I have not. I rarely get a chance to speak with Jim, and the one time I spoke with Jeff (it is in this thread), I could not remember what I wanted to ask him. If I do speak or correspond with either of them about this, I will post of it here.
	__________________ Who is "Kaz?" Read about her at www.StopKaz.com. Curious about Sylvia Browne? Read about her at www.StopSylvia.com. Ever wonder "What's the Harm?" with psychics, alternative medicine, etc?

18th March 2013, 05:01 PM	#177
devnull Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 4,532	Re: An Atheist's "right to be angry" Originally Posted by RSLancastr Fill in the blank: Japanese person on an English-language forum: "You haven't lived until you've heard an American person pronounce "______". Well, I'm Australian, so my answer would be "what they believe counts as English"
	__________________ no, i don't think i need to read naturalistic literature more accurately, to be convinced its true. - Gibhor

19th March 2013, 07:20 PM	#178
Kahalachan Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 3,251	I would've liked to see you word the letter in accordance with their own feelings of morality. A Christian should not want to steal from an atheist because they themselves should feel it is wrong and any atheist's right to complain is irrelevant to their own conscience. Is it moral to continue to imprison someone with Stockholm syndrome? They certainly aren't complaining. Just because the victim doesn't, can't, or has no right to object doesn't mean the action itself is any less wrong.
Kahalachan Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 3,251	__________________ For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan

20th March 2013, 06:16 AM	#179
Pup Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 3,587	Originally Posted by Kahalachan I would've liked to see you word the letter in accordance with their own feelings of morality. A Christian should not want to steal from an atheist because they themselves should feel it is wrong and any atheist's right to complain is irrelevant to their own conscience. I suspect, don't know, that the answer would be: "Oh, we wouldn't actually do anything to an atheist, because we're good moral people. We just mean that an atheist wouldn't have a right to be angry if someone did." Thus taking passive-aggressiveness to new heights, but nullifying that line of argument.
Pup Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 3,587

16th May 2013, 01:40 PM	#180
Brown Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Twin Cities, Canada Posts: 12,145	Originally Posted by Brown Actually, I didn't read it on-line. It was part of a CBS report aired after Ellis Island reopened (which sources on-line--GAAAACK!--say was in 1990). The report was by Charles Osgood, if I remember right. Now, having said that, and having visited Ellis Island, there's a lot of stuff on the Island that is anecdotal and not necessarily reliable as history. The fact that something is read on-island doesn't necessarily make it so. On further reflection, I think I may be conflating reports. It is possible that the report was on ABC and the reporter was Joel Siegel.
	__________________ Klaatu: I'm impatient with stupidity. My people have learned to live without it. Mr. Harley: I'm afraid my people haven't. I am very sorry. I wish it were otherwise. -- The Day The Earth Stood Still, screenplay by Edmund H. North "Don't you get me wrong. I only want to know." -- Judas in Jesus Christ Superstar, lyrics by Tim Rice

16th May 2013, 01:46 PM	#181
George152 Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Hamilton New Zealand Posts: 2,041	Originally Posted by Madalch But those are names, not really words. I can go scuba-diving, or shoot a laser at someone (or both if I'm James Bond), but I can't really NATO my way out of doing something. Aha but the UN can UN their way out of anything
	__________________ Unemployment isn't working

17th May 2013, 01:27 AM	#182
SlackerBabbath Scholar Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 94	I just find it incredible that many Christians judge atheists to be immoral when the founder of their own religion apparently instructed his followers not to 'judge' others.
SlackerBabbath Scholar Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 94

17th May 2013, 03:48 AM	#183
Gawdzilla 121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri. Posts: 13,355	Originally Posted by SlackerBabbath I just find it incredible that many Christians judge atheists to be immoral when the founder of their own religion apparently instructed his followers not to 'judge' others. Oh, that's an easy one. The Bible is a total mash-up, you can find pro and con for just about anything between the covers. Jesus said not to judge, but Judgment Day is the finale of the religion. And King Solomon seemed to be doing nothing much else. And, of course, Christians are inherently hypocritical.
	__________________ World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources Hyperwar, WWII Military History Kido Butai did not transmit. 木戸舞台は、無線メッセージを送信しませんでした

17th May 2013, 07:12 AM	#184
CriticalSock Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: In a little costwold stone cottage. Posts: 1,993	Originally Posted by RSLancastr Fill in the blank: Japanese person on an English-language forum: "You haven't lived until you've heard an American person pronounce "______". English person on an English-language forum: "You haven't lived until you've heard an American person pronounce "Gloucestershire".

17th May 2013, 11:32 AM	#185
RSLancastr www.StopSylvia.com Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Salem, Oregon Posts: 15,526	...or Worcestershire, or Leicester, or...
	__________________ Who is "Kaz?" Read about her at www.StopKaz.com. Curious about Sylvia Browne? Read about her at www.StopSylvia.com. Ever wonder "What's the Harm?" with psychics, alternative medicine, etc?

17th May 2013, 01:30 PM	#186
Parsman Thinker Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 192	Or anyone from the English speaking world who doesn't come from Aberdeenshire "How do you pronounce Garioch or Footdee"
Parsman Thinker Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 192	__________________ I was not; I have been; I am not; I am content - Epicurus

17th May 2013, 04:06 PM	#187
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,645	Originally Posted by SlackerBabbath I just find it incredible that many Christians judge atheists to be immoral when the founder of their own religion apparently instructed his followers not to 'judge' others. You're not supposed to judge unrighteously, righteous judgement is OK.\apologetic off

Yesterday, 01:15 AM	#188
SlackerBabbath Scholar Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 94	Originally Posted by tsig You're not supposed to judge unrighteously, righteous judgement is OK.\apologetic off But surely just assuming that an atheist is immoral, just because he's an atheist, without actualy getting to know the atheist and finding out what the atheist's morality is like, that can't possibly be considered as righteous can it?
SlackerBabbath Scholar Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 94