Bill O'Reilly blames secularists for decline of morality in America

COCT · 28th May 2004, 11:59 AM

On Wednesday night, Bill O'Reilly said secularists are to blame for the decline of America's morality. He based his rant on recent Gallup poll results. But he deliberately distorted the poll results to make his point. He'd have a hard time saying this one wasn't spin...

I've written an article about it at http://www.churchofcriticalthinking....ops_here_.html

COCT

Charlie Monoxide · 28th May 2004, 12:13 PM

I too feel proud to be part of the group dragging he morals of this country down. BTW What the hell are the "morals of this country"?

In my universe, anyone I have met who has shown critical thinking and often times a rejection of religeon, has been a very "moralistic" person. They never tried to kill me or curse my mother, therefore, they're number 1 in my books.

Of all the racists I've known, it seems 100% considered themselves christians. One racists in particular even asked me (verbatim) "where do you get your morals?" To me racism is an immoral philosophy.

I enjoyed the Oreilly review. He is a "way too easy" target to be critical of. He's just some fluff on TV. I try not to notice him when channel surfing.

Charlie (thank jeebus it's Friday) Monoxide

PS I identified the racists when they used the famous N word, or just stated sincerely that they disliked certain groups (ie those damn Jews running Hollywood).

Tony · 28th May 2004, 12:20 PM

Great article!!

daenku32 · 28th May 2004, 12:52 PM

"and violent video games gross billions more for corporations."

My VERY conservative and VERY religiously upright work comrades are avid players of the violent video games. And most of the games they play were pirated.

pgwenthold · 28th May 2004, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by COCT
On Wednesday night, Bill O'Reilly said secularists are to blame for the decline of America's morality. He based his rant on recent Gallup poll results. But he deliberately distorted the poll results to make his point. He'd have a hard time saying this one wasn't spin...

I've written an article about it at http://www.churchofcriticalthinking....ops_here_.html

COCT

The best part of it all is that you have only addressed the initial part OReilly's claims, and that there was a whole rant of totally unsupported spewage that can be challenged as well. Basically, it was a piece of a faulty premise supported by blatent assertion.

IOW, even if the gallop polls said what he said they did, there was no reason to believe his conclusion.

COCT · 28th May 2004, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pgwenthold

The best part of it all is that you have only addressed the initial part OReilly's claims, and that there was a whole rant of totally unsupported spewage that can be challenged as well. Basically, it was a piece of a faulty premise supported by blatent assertion.

As I watched it, the "unsupported spewage" is what really jumped out at me, and that's what I thought I really was going to end up writing about. But when I sat down to write, I thought, "Gee, I should look at that Gallup Poll and see what it really says." That made it easy. Once I realized I chould show his conclusion was blatantly wrong, the rest became secondary.

daenku32 · 28th May 2004, 01:54 PM

Well it's not freaking wonder..

The religious right, including O'Reilly considers Huns and Visigoths and the entire Dark Ages to be a "Secular" period:

http://www.oreillyfactor.com/story/0...6331%2C00.html

Quote:

O'REILLY: OK. OK. Ms. Jacoby, you just made a tremendously erroneous statement that I want to rebut, and then you can rebut me.

Religion has been a civilizing force in this world. Do you remember the Dark Ages (search) when everything broke down and the Roman Empire (search) went out of business and the Huns (search) and Visigoths (search) took over?

Well, order was only restored when the Catholic Church began to keep records and began to build up a structure.

Now madam, if you're going to tell me it was better under the Huns and the Visigoths then than it was under a structural church I mean, come on.

corplinx · 28th May 2004, 01:55 PM

Jimmy Swaggart
Robert Tilton
Jim Baker
Just about every Catholic Priest

and its the athiests who are are morally corrupting the US

Tmy · 28th May 2004, 01:58 PM

In my view its teh Jesus freaks trying to take over. THe seculars just jump up to stop them.

Plus as the US becomes more diverse you have to be more secular. You cant account for every belief. In the old days religion/state mixing was just fine. So long as it was Christian!!

Ladewig · 28th May 2004, 11:59 PM

LADEWIG: OK. OK. Mr. O'Reilly, you just made a tremendously erroneous statement that I want to rebut, and then you can rebut me.

Religion has NOT been a civilizing force in this world. Do you remember the 1500's and 1600's when the Roman Catholic Church took over and people were imprisoned or executed for scientific thought?

Well, civilization advanced only when humanists and deists started the Age of Enlightenment. Medicine leapt forward once RC law preventing the disection of corpses was removed. Civil rights formed as people realized that God does not choose who is to be king.

Now sir, if you're going to tell me it was better under the divine right of rule (with the church's support) than it was under consitutional governments I mean, come on.

Dorian Gray · 29th May 2004, 12:55 AM

DORIAN GRAY: Not to mention, Mr. O'Reilly, you're a Catholic, aren't you? Are you telling me that Catholicism is the saving grace of humanity, or are you secretly hiding your ankle-grabbing altarboy past behind attacks on secularism?

Also, if you're against secularism, why do you end every show with secular spiel rather than something like 'God bless the Factor'?

Abdul Alhazred · 29th May 2004, 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tmy
In my view its teh Jesus freaks trying to take over. THe seculars just jump up to stop them.

It's not one or the other. You have two contending sides each with a power base. And I'm not talking primarily about Dem vs Rep or liberal vs conservative.

This is a distinct, though overlapping struggle.

You will find that in addition to the religious right, there is also a religious left. That claims such things as that homosexuality is a gift from God. Though gay myself, I say phooey!

Quote:

Plus as the US becomes more diverse you have to be more secular. You cant account for every belief. In the old days religion/state mixing was just fine. So long as it was Christian!!

Up to a point this is true. Freedom of speech covers more in the USA than elsewhere, but does not cover death threats. There may be a similar limit to freedom of religion.

Abdul Alhazred · 29th May 2004, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Charlie Monoxide
I too feel proud to be part of the group dragging he morals of this country down. BTW What the hell are the "morals of this country"?

I have an answer to that question, though it won't be the same as O'Reilly's.

It is the "invisible hand". Everybody pulling in a different direction, and the vector sum of same are the "morals of this country", for good or ill.

Abdul Alhazred · 29th May 2004, 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by daenku32
"and violent video games gross billions more for corporations."

My VERY conservative and VERY religiously upright work comrades are avid players of the violent video games. And most of the games they play were pirated.

Do they play Nethack? Given away free, so no copyright issues, but stealing the boss's time and bandwidth is another moral issue.

I am a chaotic elfin ranger.

My elfin dagger is named Sting.

I have just eaten a floating eye corpse, which conveys the telepathy intrinsic. Now I must find an uncursed blindfold or a potion of blindness or something.

My initial dog was named Spot. A falling rock killed him. I have tamed a pony who I have named Slepnir. Now I am looking for a saddle so I can ride him.

My name is Rumsdelf.

I have just slain a Liberal in the Throne Room. What will happen to me if I eat the corpse? Will it convey the liberalism intrinsic? I've run out of food, so this is an important question.

Right wing enough for you?

Abdul Alhazred · 29th May 2004, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by corplinx
Jimmy Swaggart
Robert Tilton
Jim Baker
Just about every Catholic Priest

and its the athiests who are are morally corrupting the US

Note spelling: Jim Baker was W's daddy's Secretary of State. You mean Jim Bakker.

Well I've heard of all those, but it seems to me that Swaggart and Tilton are beneath the radar for most Americans. And most Americans heard of Bakker only when he got in trouble and went to prison.

But maybe that's just because I'm a navel gazing northeasterner that I think that. But that's how I recall it.

I know of Swaggart and Tilton because of "anti" websites, not major media.

On the other hand, the Catholic thing is big and getting bigger.

Yahweh · 29th May 2004, 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tony
Great article!!

So great it needs to be said twice!

Abdul Alhazred · 29th May 2004, 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Yahweh

So great it needs to be said twice!

Hey Yahweh! You're a self-existent being. THE self-existent being according to some. This must give you a unique perspective.

What do you think of:

Bill O'Reilly?
Sean Hannity?

Bob Grant?
Barry Farber?
Joe Pyne?
Alam Burke?
Les Craine?

Rush Limbaugh (the big one)?

If you're not New York area, you probably don't know Bob Grant, though he has occasionally gone national.

You're nowhere near old enough to remember Joe Pyne, Alan Burke, Barry Farber, or Les Craine.

Limbaugh didn't invent conservative talk radio, he was the first to become a millionaire doing it.

Ed · 29th May 2004, 04:04 AM

O'Reilly is an entertainer. His job is to generate audiences which in turn generate ad revenues for his parent company. He found his schtick. It works. To act shocked that O "spins" is really naive.

zenith-nadir · 29th May 2004, 04:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ed
O'Reilly is an entertainer. His job is to generate audiences which in turn generate ad revenues for his parent company. He found his schtick. It works. To act shocked that O "spins" is really naive.

So true. No entertainment, no ratings. No ratings, no sponsors. No sponsors, no show for Bill...

COCT · 29th May 2004, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ed
O'Reilly is an entertainer. His job is to generate audiences which in turn generate ad revenues for his parent company. He found his schtick. It works. To act shocked that O "spins" is really naive.

The problem isn't that O'Reilly is an entertainer. Hell, I find him somewhat entertaining myself. It's a bigger problem than that. The problem is that much of his audience does fall under the "naive" category, and trust what O'Reilly says. I see no disclaimer on his program that says, "For Entertainment Purposes Only." He's promoted as being fair and balanced, and there are millions who believe that.

When the naive go to the voting booth, their votes count just as much as yours.

Quote:

Great article!!

So great it needs to be said twice!

Thanks!

COCT

Ed · 29th May 2004, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
So true. No entertainment, no ratings. No ratings, no sponsors. No sponsors, no show for Bill...

Which is why getting all upset over Bill or Sean or Al or Rush is the same as seriously hating a "bad guy" in wrestling or seriously disliking a sporting team. It is all manipulation and pretty pathetic.

zenith-nadir · 29th May 2004, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by COCT
The problem isn't that O'Reilly is an entertainer. Hell, I find him somewhat entertaining myself. It's a bigger problem than that. The problem is that much of his audience does fall under the "naive" category, and trust what O'Reilly says. I see no disclaimer on his program that says, "For Entertainment Purposes Only." He's promoted as being fair and balanced, and there are millions who believe that.

The sole purpose of 98% of all news organizations is to make money not inform the public. Many people do not realize this. Dan Rather, an entertainer who can read like dear old dad off a teleprompter, Rush Limbaugh, an entertainer who's audience enjoys his firey brand of rhetoric, the talking heads at CNN, more teleprompter reading robots chosen for thier timeslot based on demographic appeal.

O'Reilly is no different, the fact that he chose to work at Fox News...well, 'nuff said about no spin zone...BBC, Reuters, UPI, AP, all media businesses. What's rule number one in any business? To make a profit not inform the public out of some higher calling.

varwoche · 29th May 2004, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ed
Which is why getting all upset over Bill or Sean or Al or Rush is the same as seriously hating a "bad guy" in wrestling or seriously disliking a sporting team. It is all manipulation and pretty pathetic.

True, except I'm not sure that people decide how to vote based on fake wrestling, which makes the disinfotainment even more pathetic.

Abdul Alhazred · 29th May 2004, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by varwoche
True, except I'm not sure that people decide how to vote based on fake wrestling, which makes the disinfotainment even more pathetic.

Thank you. Adding word to personal lexicon.

Ed · 29th May 2004, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by varwoche

True, except I'm not sure that people decide how to vote based on fake wrestling, which makes the disinfotainment even more pathetic.

(cough) Jesse Ventura (cough, wheeze)

varwoche · 29th May 2004, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ed

(cough) Jesse Ventura (cough, wheeze)

At least I anticipated that I was going to be a straight man!

Ed · 29th May 2004, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by varwoche

At least I anticipated that I was going to be a straight man!

(rim shot) We'll be here all week ladies and germs.

Next up: Jews: Yes or No, a fair and balanced discussion

Cleon · 29th May 2004, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ed

Next up: Jews: Yes or No, a fair and balanced discussion

I'm actually a big fan of Jews, being one myself.

Skeptic · 30th May 2004, 06:14 AM

"and violent video games gross billions more for corporations."

Yeah, that's the reason! I mean, remember all those violent video games Hitler used to play? And Stalin was really big on slash-and-gore movies, wasn't he? But the answer is, of course, forced prayer in schools.

Agammamon · 1st June 2004, 09:28 AM

As a died-in-the-wool secularist I can only respond to O'Reilly with a

DARN SKIPPY!

Right of Consent baby, right of consent all the way.

I hope I live to see the day when marriage as a secular institution is destroyed, extreme body modification is viable, and cats are living with dogs.

Agammamon · 1st June 2004, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skeptic
"and violent video games gross billions more for corporations."

Yeah, that's the reason! I mean, remember all those violent video games Hitler used to play? And Stalin was really big on slash-and-gore movies, wasn't he? But the answer is, of course, forced prayer in schools.

I heard Pol-Pot loved playing Myst.

Abdul Alhazred · 1st June 2004, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skeptic
Yeah, that's the reason! I mean, remember all those violent video games Hitler used to play?

Kriegspiel

OK, not a video game.

Charlie Monoxide · 1st June 2004, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ed

(rim shot) We'll be here all week ladies and germs.

Next up: Jews: Yes or No, a fair and balanced discussion

I too like jews. I try to drink at least 2 or 3 servings every day.

Charlie (orange jews, grape jews, and sometime apple jews) Monoxide

zultr · 1st June 2004, 12:03 PM

One thing that really annoys me about these kind of polls is the wording of the questions. What are they really trying to find out? They're asking for opinions on morality, not conducting any research into objectively measuring morality - I'm not even sure what morality means in the context of the question. So people are just guessing how moral they think the country is, something that has little to do with how moral the country is. Also, the media is ubiquitous today, reporting every mugging of every little old lady in the country to all the markets. Didn't reporting of murder increase something like 700% in a time when the murder rate dropped 30%? So something as remote from reality as people's opinions on morality can also be influenced by innaccurate reporting. The poll is useless. What does that say about O'Reilly's interpretation of it?

Marc · 1st June 2004, 12:05 PM

Like how he went from blaming the code of silence that let the crimes at Abu Grhaib happen, to talking about the decline of the Catholic Church being harming america.

Hmm... non-secular organization, that "used to set a moral tone that was taken seriously by society in general"... which engaged in exactly the same type of code of silence he was berrating just before.

Skeptic · 1st June 2004, 01:03 PM

Hmm... non-secular organization, that "used to set a moral tone that was taken seriously by society in general"...

...like, for instance, the inquisition, or the witch hunters, or...

ceo_esq · 1st June 2004, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by corplinx
Just about every Catholic Priest

and its the athiests who are are morally corrupting the US

Just about every Catholic priest? What's that supposed to mean?

daenku32 · 3rd June 2004, 02:39 PM

More of O'Reilly rhetoric against ACLU etc..
Considering that he doesn't allow any level of rhetoric from left-leaning guests on his show, he certainly is not afraid to spew claims without chance for a rebuttal!!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,121644,00.html

" Judge Hamilton and the ACLU are part of the anti-Christian cabal in America "

"Judeo-Christian philosophy requires judgments about right and wrong in personal behavior. The secularists deplore that. They want an open society where anything goes"

"fascist organizations like the ACLU are imposing their secular will"

Ladewig · 3rd June 2004, 03:58 PM

Quote:

"fascist organizations like the ACLU are imposing their secular will"

Except when they are defending the free speech of Christian students.
ACLU

Quote:

After ACLU Intervention on Behalf of Christian Valedictorian, Michigan High School Agrees to Stop Censoring Religious Yearbook Entries

May 11, 2004
DETROIT – The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan today announced an out-of-court settlement between the Utica Community School District and a local student over the censorship of her 2001 yearbook entry.__The student’s entry had been deleted from the yearbook because it contained a passage from the Bible.
[more]

Pinhead.

CapelDodger · 3rd June 2004, 04:45 PM

from Ladewig:

Quote:

Religion has NOT been a civilizing force in this world. Do you remember the 1500's and 1600's when the Roman Catholic Church took over and people were imprisoned or executed for scientific thought?

There's no need to go back that far. Consider the combined impact of the dying (Catholic) Hapsburg Empire and the allied Vatican on South Italy. It's commonly accepted these days that South Italy and Sicily are backward, poverty-sticken and undeveloped, but that wasn't the case before the late 18thCE/early 19thCE depradations of the religious against progressive forces (when Revolutionary France wasn't impeding them). Look into the behaviour of the Vatican towards Jews after the French were beaten back and Papa returned to Rome (Unholy War by David I. Kertzer is a must-read to understand the Holocaust). Now we have fundies pushing creationism in the States, fundies pushing jihad and "Islamic Science" in Asia and fundies claiming their god's pre-eminence in Palestine. Fundies in India have been pushed back a little recently, but they seem to making advances in Japan. Fortunately, fundie Chinese are just Chinese. No wonder they're the superpower-in-waiting.

from zenith-nadir:

Quote:

BBC, Reuters, UPI, AP, all media businesses. What's rule number one in any business? To make a profit not inform the public out of some higher calling.

Not the BBC. Aka PBS.

28th May 2004, 11:59 AM	#1
COCT Scholar Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 110	Bill O'Reilly blames secularists for decline of morality in America On Wednesday night, Bill O'Reilly said secularists are to blame for the decline of America's morality. He based his rant on recent Gallup poll results. But he deliberately distorted the poll results to make his point. He'd have a hard time saying this one wasn't spin... I've written an article about it at http://www.churchofcriticalthinking....ops_here_.html COCT
COCT Scholar Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 110	__________________ <a href="http://www.churchofcriticalthinking.com">The Church of Critical Thinking</a> - Your Suspicion is Our Mission

28th May 2004, 12:13 PM	#2
Charlie Monoxide Wag Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: London, Ontario Posts: 2,761	I too feel proud to be part of the group dragging he morals of this country down. BTW What the hell are the "morals of this country"? In my universe, anyone I have met who has shown critical thinking and often times a rejection of religeon, has been a very "moralistic" person. They never tried to kill me or curse my mother, therefore, they're number 1 in my books. Of all the racists I've known, it seems 100% considered themselves christians. One racists in particular even asked me (verbatim) "where do you get your morals?" To me racism is an immoral philosophy. I enjoyed the Oreilly review. He is a "way too easy" target to be critical of. He's just some fluff on TV. I try not to notice him when channel surfing. Charlie (thank jeebus it's Friday) Monoxide PS I identified the racists when they used the famous N word, or just stated sincerely that they disliked certain groups (ie those damn Jews running Hollywood).
	__________________ Major General Wag of JREF

28th May 2004, 12:20 PM	#3
Tony Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Texas Posts: 13,768	Great article!!
	__________________ It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company. - Mark Twain

28th May 2004, 01:00 PM	#5
pgwenthold Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 12,074	Re: Bill O'Reilly blames secularists for decline of morality in America Quote: Originally posted by COCT On Wednesday night, Bill O'Reilly said secularists are to blame for the decline of America's morality. He based his rant on recent Gallup poll results. But he deliberately distorted the poll results to make his point. He'd have a hard time saying this one wasn't spin... I've written an article about it at http://www.churchofcriticalthinking....ops_here_.html COCT The best part of it all is that you have only addressed the initial part OReilly's claims, and that there was a whole rant of totally unsupported spewage that can be challenged as well. Basically, it was a piece of a faulty premise supported by blatent assertion. IOW, even if the gallop polls said what he said they did, there was no reason to believe his conclusion.
	__________________ "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)

28th May 2004, 01:42 PM	#6
COCT Scholar Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 110	Re: Re: Bill O'Reilly blames secularists for decline of morality in America Quote: Originally posted by pgwenthold The best part of it all is that you have only addressed the initial part OReilly's claims, and that there was a whole rant of totally unsupported spewage that can be challenged as well. Basically, it was a piece of a faulty premise supported by blatent assertion. As I watched it, the "unsupported spewage" is what really jumped out at me, and that's what I thought I really was going to end up writing about. But when I sat down to write, I thought, "Gee, I should look at that Gallup Poll and see what it really says." That made it easy. Once I realized I chould show his conclusion was blatantly wrong, the rest became secondary.
COCT Scholar Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 110	__________________ <a href="http://www.churchofcriticalthinking.com">The Church of Critical Thinking</a> - Your Suspicion is Our Mission

28th May 2004, 12:52 PM	#4
daenku32 Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 1,982	"and violent video games gross billions more for corporations." My VERY conservative and VERY religiously upright work comrades are avid players of the violent video games. And most of the games they play were pirated.

28th May 2004, 01:54 PM	#7
daenku32 Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 1,982	Well it's not freaking wonder.. The religious right, including O'Reilly considers Huns and Visigoths and the entire Dark Ages to be a "Secular" period: http://www.oreillyfactor.com/story/0...6331%2C00.html Quote: O'REILLY: OK. OK. Ms. Jacoby, you just made a tremendously erroneous statement that I want to rebut, and then you can rebut me. Religion has been a civilizing force in this world. Do you remember the Dark Ages (search) when everything broke down and the Roman Empire (search) went out of business and the Huns (search) and Visigoths (search) took over? Well, order was only restored when the Catholic Church began to keep records and began to build up a structure. Now madam, if you're going to tell me it was better under the Huns and the Visigoths then than it was under a structural church I mean, come on.

28th May 2004, 01:55 PM	#8
corplinx JREF Kid Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,944	Jimmy Swaggart Robert Tilton Jim Baker Just about every Catholic Priest and its the athiests who are are morally corrupting the US
corplinx JREF Kid Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,944	__________________ In the tradition of "Stop Silvia!" Stop Hal Bidlack: http://skepticalcommunity.com/forums...hp?f=1&t=28671

28th May 2004, 01:58 PM	#9
Tmy Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Republic of Massachusetts Posts: 6,489	In my view its teh Jesus freaks trying to take over. THe seculars just jump up to stop them. Plus as the US becomes more diverse you have to be more secular. You cant account for every belief. In the old days religion/state mixing was just fine. So long as it was Christian!!
	__________________ "Common sense is something that skeptics can and should do without." -shanek

28th May 2004, 11:59 PM	#10
Ladewig Hipster alien Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: not measurable Posts: 16,827	LADEWIG: OK. OK. Mr. O'Reilly, you just made a tremendously erroneous statement that I want to rebut, and then you can rebut me. Religion has NOT been a civilizing force in this world. Do you remember the 1500's and 1600's when the Roman Catholic Church took over and people were imprisoned or executed for scientific thought? Well, civilization advanced only when humanists and deists started the Age of Enlightenment. Medicine leapt forward once RC law preventing the disection of corpses was removed. Civil rights formed as people realized that God does not choose who is to be king. Now sir, if you're going to tell me it was better under the divine right of rule (with the church's support) than it was under consitutional governments I mean, come on.
	__________________ Is the JREF message board training wheels for people who hope to one day troll other message boards? It is not that hard to get us to believe you. We are not the major leagues or even the minor leagues. We are Pee-Wee baseball. If you love striking out 10-year-olds, then you'll love trolling our board.

29th May 2004, 12:55 AM	#11
Dorian Gray Hypocrisy Detector Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Dayton, Ohio Posts: 20,196	DORIAN GRAY: Not to mention, Mr. O'Reilly, you're a Catholic, aren't you? Are you telling me that Catholicism is the saving grace of humanity, or are you secretly hiding your ankle-grabbing altarboy past behind attacks on secularism? Also, if you're against secularism, why do you end every show with secular spiel rather than something like 'God bless the Factor'?

29th May 2004, 01:04 AM	#12
Abdul Alhazred Yes, that one. Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Chicago Posts: 5,476	Quote: Originally posted by Tmy In my view its teh Jesus freaks trying to take over. THe seculars just jump up to stop them. It's not one or the other. You have two contending sides each with a power base. And I'm not talking primarily about Dem vs Rep or liberal vs conservative. This is a distinct, though overlapping struggle. You will find that in addition to the religious right, there is also a religious left. That claims such things as that homosexuality is a gift from God. Though gay myself, I say phooey! Quote: Plus as the US becomes more diverse you have to be more secular. You cant account for every belief. In the old days religion/state mixing was just fine. So long as it was Christian!! Up to a point this is true. Freedom of speech covers more in the USA than elsewhere, but does not cover death threats. There may be a similar limit to freedom of religion.
	__________________ The lack of a rational explanation is not evidence for an irrational explanation.

29th May 2004, 01:07 AM	#13
Abdul Alhazred Yes, that one. Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Chicago Posts: 5,476	Quote: Originally posted by Charlie Monoxide I too feel proud to be part of the group dragging he morals of this country down. BTW What the hell are the "morals of this country"? I have an answer to that question, though it won't be the same as O'Reilly's. It is the "invisible hand". Everybody pulling in a different direction, and the vector sum of same are the "morals of this country", for good or ill.
	__________________ The lack of a rational explanation is not evidence for an irrational explanation.

29th May 2004, 01:15 AM	#14
Abdul Alhazred Yes, that one. Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Chicago Posts: 5,476	Quote: Originally posted by daenku32 "and violent video games gross billions more for corporations." My VERY conservative and VERY religiously upright work comrades are avid players of the violent video games. And most of the games they play were pirated. Do they play Nethack? Given away free, so no copyright issues, but stealing the boss's time and bandwidth is another moral issue. I am a chaotic elfin ranger. My elfin dagger is named Sting. I have just eaten a floating eye corpse, which conveys the telepathy intrinsic. Now I must find an uncursed blindfold or a potion of blindness or something. My initial dog was named Spot. A falling rock killed him. I have tamed a pony who I have named Slepnir. Now I am looking for a saddle so I can ride him. My name is Rumsdelf. I have just slain a Liberal in the Throne Room. What will happen to me if I eat the corpse? Will it convey the liberalism intrinsic? I've run out of food, so this is an important question. Right wing enough for you?
	__________________ The lack of a rational explanation is not evidence for an irrational explanation.

29th May 2004, 01:41 AM	#15
Abdul Alhazred Yes, that one. Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Chicago Posts: 5,476	Quote: Originally posted by corplinx Jimmy Swaggart Robert Tilton Jim Baker Just about every Catholic Priest and its the athiests who are are morally corrupting the US Note spelling: Jim Baker was W's daddy's Secretary of State. You mean Jim Bakker. Well I've heard of all those, but it seems to me that Swaggart and Tilton are beneath the radar for most Americans. And most Americans heard of Bakker only when he got in trouble and went to prison. But maybe that's just because I'm a navel gazing northeasterner that I think that. But that's how I recall it. I know of Swaggart and Tilton because of "anti" websites, not major media. On the other hand, the Catholic thing is big and getting bigger.
	__________________ The lack of a rational explanation is not evidence for an irrational explanation.

29th May 2004, 01:42 AM	#16
Yahweh Ayay ashay ayay Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 9,029	Quote: Originally posted by Tony Great article!! So great it needs to be said twice!
Yahweh Ayay ashay ayay Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 9,029

29th May 2004, 02:34 AM	#17
Abdul Alhazred Yes, that one. Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Chicago Posts: 5,476	Quote: Originally posted by Yahweh So great it needs to be said twice! Hey Yahweh! You're a self-existent being. THE self-existent being according to some. This must give you a unique perspective. What do you think of: Bill O'Reilly? Sean Hannity? Bob Grant? Barry Farber? Joe Pyne? Alam Burke? Les Craine? Rush Limbaugh (the big one)? If you're not New York area, you probably don't know Bob Grant, though he has occasionally gone national. You're nowhere near old enough to remember Joe Pyne, Alan Burke, Barry Farber, or Les Craine. Limbaugh didn't invent conservative talk radio, he was the first to become a millionaire doing it.
	__________________ The lack of a rational explanation is not evidence for an irrational explanation.

29th May 2004, 04:04 AM	#18
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	O'Reilly is an entertainer. His job is to generate audiences which in turn generate ad revenues for his parent company. He found his schtick. It works. To act shocked that O "spins" is really naive.
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	__________________ "The history of science is the record of dead religions" Phrases And Philosophies For The Use Of The Young Oscar Wilde (1854-1900) Our Guarentee: One obscure (or not) Python reference per day.

29th May 2004, 04:39 AM	#19
zenith-nadir Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 4,500	Quote: Originally posted by Ed O'Reilly is an entertainer. His job is to generate audiences which in turn generate ad revenues for his parent company. He found his schtick. It works. To act shocked that O "spins" is really naive. So true. No entertainment, no ratings. No ratings, no sponsors. No sponsors, no show for Bill...
	__________________ The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled. -- Plutarch

29th May 2004, 07:12 AM	#20
COCT Scholar Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 110	Quote: Originally posted by Ed O'Reilly is an entertainer. His job is to generate audiences which in turn generate ad revenues for his parent company. He found his schtick. It works. To act shocked that O "spins" is really naive. The problem isn't that O'Reilly is an entertainer. Hell, I find him somewhat entertaining myself. It's a bigger problem than that. The problem is that much of his audience does fall under the "naive" category, and trust what O'Reilly says. I see no disclaimer on his program that says, "For Entertainment Purposes Only." He's promoted as being fair and balanced, and there are millions who believe that. When the naive go to the voting booth, their votes count just as much as yours. Quote: Quote: Great article!! So great it needs to be said twice! Thanks! COCT
COCT Scholar Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 110	__________________ <a href="http://www.churchofcriticalthinking.com">The Church of Critical Thinking</a> - Your Suspicion is Our Mission

29th May 2004, 07:14 AM	#21
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	Quote: Originally posted by zenith-nadir So true. No entertainment, no ratings. No ratings, no sponsors. No sponsors, no show for Bill... Which is why getting all upset over Bill or Sean or Al or Rush is the same as seriously hating a "bad guy" in wrestling or seriously disliking a sporting team. It is all manipulation and pretty pathetic.
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	__________________ "The history of science is the record of dead religions" Phrases And Philosophies For The Use Of The Young Oscar Wilde (1854-1900) Our Guarentee: One obscure (or not) Python reference per day.

29th May 2004, 07:35 AM	#22
zenith-nadir Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 4,500	Quote: Originally posted by COCT The problem isn't that O'Reilly is an entertainer. Hell, I find him somewhat entertaining myself. It's a bigger problem than that. The problem is that much of his audience does fall under the "naive" category, and trust what O'Reilly says. I see no disclaimer on his program that says, "For Entertainment Purposes Only." He's promoted as being fair and balanced, and there are millions who believe that. The sole purpose of 98% of all news organizations is to make money not inform the public. Many people do not realize this. Dan Rather, an entertainer who can read like dear old dad off a teleprompter, Rush Limbaugh, an entertainer who's audience enjoys his firey brand of rhetoric, the talking heads at CNN, more teleprompter reading robots chosen for thier timeslot based on demographic appeal. O'Reilly is no different, the fact that he chose to work at Fox News...well, 'nuff said about no spin zone...BBC, Reuters, UPI, AP, all media businesses. What's rule number one in any business? To make a profit not inform the public out of some higher calling.
	__________________ The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled. -- Plutarch

29th May 2004, 08:16 AM	#23
varwoche Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Puget Sound Posts: 7,234	Quote: Originally posted by Ed Which is why getting all upset over Bill or Sean or Al or Rush is the same as seriously hating a "bad guy" in wrestling or seriously disliking a sporting team. It is all manipulation and pretty pathetic. True, except I'm not sure that people decide how to vote based on fake wrestling, which makes the disinfotainment even more pathetic.
	__________________ To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot (and/or Fat Jack)

29th May 2004, 08:41 AM	#24
Abdul Alhazred Yes, that one. Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Chicago Posts: 5,476	Quote: Originally posted by varwoche True, except I'm not sure that people decide how to vote based on fake wrestling, which makes the disinfotainment even more pathetic. Thank you. Adding word to personal lexicon.
	__________________ The lack of a rational explanation is not evidence for an irrational explanation.

29th May 2004, 09:04 AM	#25
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	Quote: Originally posted by varwoche True, except I'm not sure that people decide how to vote based on fake wrestling, which makes the disinfotainment even more pathetic. (cough) Jesse Ventura (cough, wheeze)
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	__________________ "The history of science is the record of dead religions" Phrases And Philosophies For The Use Of The Young Oscar Wilde (1854-1900) Our Guarentee: One obscure (or not) Python reference per day.

29th May 2004, 09:17 AM	#26
varwoche Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Puget Sound Posts: 7,234	Quote: Originally posted by Ed (cough) Jesse Ventura (cough, wheeze) At least I anticipated that I was going to be a straight man!
	__________________ To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot (and/or Fat Jack)

29th May 2004, 07:33 PM	#27
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	Quote: Originally posted by varwoche At least I anticipated that I was going to be a straight man! (rim shot) We'll be here all week ladies and germs. Next up: Jews: Yes or No, a fair and balanced discussion
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	__________________ "The history of science is the record of dead religions" Phrases And Philosophies For The Use Of The Young Oscar Wilde (1854-1900) Our Guarentee: One obscure (or not) Python reference per day.

29th May 2004, 07:39 PM	#28
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,536	Quote: Originally posted by Ed Next up: Jews: Yes or No, a fair and balanced discussion I'm actually a big fan of Jews, being one myself.
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

30th May 2004, 06:14 AM	#29
Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Behind the chessboard Posts: 18,361	"and violent video games gross billions more for corporations." Yeah, that's the reason! I mean, remember all those violent video games Hitler used to play? And Stalin was really big on slash-and-gore movies, wasn't he? But the answer is, of course, forced prayer in schools.

1st June 2004, 09:28 AM	#30
Agammamon Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 1,385	As a died-in-the-wool secularist I can only respond to O'Reilly with a DARN SKIPPY! Right of Consent baby, right of consent all the way. I hope I live to see the day when marriage as a secular institution is destroyed, extreme body modification is viable, and cats are living with dogs.
	__________________ It will be a great day when the US Air Force has all the bombs it needs and the NEA has to hold a bake sale in order to pay its lobbyists.

1st June 2004, 09:34 AM	#31
Agammamon Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 1,385	Quote: Originally posted by Skeptic "and violent video games gross billions more for corporations." Yeah, that's the reason! I mean, remember all those violent video games Hitler used to play? And Stalin was really big on slash-and-gore movies, wasn't he? But the answer is, of course, forced prayer in schools. I heard Pol-Pot loved playing Myst.
	__________________ It will be a great day when the US Air Force has all the bombs it needs and the NEA has to hold a bake sale in order to pay its lobbyists.

1st June 2004, 09:43 AM	#32
Abdul Alhazred Yes, that one. Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Chicago Posts: 5,476	Quote: Originally posted by Skeptic Yeah, that's the reason! I mean, remember all those violent video games Hitler used to play? Kriegspiel OK, not a video game.
	__________________ The lack of a rational explanation is not evidence for an irrational explanation.

1st June 2004, 09:59 AM	#33
Charlie Monoxide Wag Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: London, Ontario Posts: 2,761	Quote: Originally posted by Ed (rim shot) We'll be here all week ladies and germs. Next up: Jews: Yes or No, a fair and balanced discussion I too like jews. I try to drink at least 2 or 3 servings every day. Charlie (orange jews, grape jews, and sometime apple jews) Monoxide
	__________________ Major General Wag of JREF

1st June 2004, 12:03 PM	#34
zultr Thinker Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 149	One thing that really annoys me about these kind of polls is the wording of the questions. What are they really trying to find out? They're asking for opinions on morality, not conducting any research into objectively measuring morality - I'm not even sure what morality means in the context of the question. So people are just guessing how moral they think the country is, something that has little to do with how moral the country is. Also, the media is ubiquitous today, reporting every mugging of every little old lady in the country to all the markets. Didn't reporting of murder increase something like 700% in a time when the murder rate dropped 30%? So something as remote from reality as people's opinions on morality can also be influenced by innaccurate reporting. The poll is useless. What does that say about O'Reilly's interpretation of it?
zultr Thinker Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 149

1st June 2004, 12:05 PM	#35
Marc Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 1,165	Like how he went from blaming the code of silence that let the crimes at Abu Grhaib happen, to talking about the decline of the Catholic Church being harming america. Hmm... non-secular organization, that "used to set a moral tone that was taken seriously by society in general"... which engaged in exactly the same type of code of silence he was berrating just before.
Marc Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 1,165	__________________ So many cults, not enough comets. A child of 5 could understand this! Quick, someone fetch a child of 5! "Scientology is evil; its techniques are evil; its practice is a serious threat to the community, medically, morally, and socially; and its adherents are sadly deluded and often mentally ill... (Scientology is) the world's largest organization of unqualified persons engaged in the practice of dangerous techniques which masquerade as mental therapy." Justice Anderson, Supreme Court of Victoria, Australia