Coreece

Lol, come to think of it my Grandfather and his brothers were the only ones in the family to have cadillacs back then, and we all grew up just down the street from the Cadillac plant.

And BTW, who doesn't like watermelon, bbq ribs, or fried chicken. Right, and while I have a rather broad sense of humor, I never really understood those jokes. Later in life I found that it wasn't really about liking the food, it was just that they were black. Not even in the 80s? Back then across the river from Windsor, if you had a Caddy, you was pimp - but in a good way.

At least that's an actual difference. I remember growing up and hearing jokes about how blacks like Cadillacs, watermelon and BBQ ribs. . .

We have the Price is Right going on in the back ground right now. . . .and I think I used that sound in reply to a post a long while back - not sure what the post was about. Probably someone bashing religion or something like that, lol.

That's if you survive until the next harvest, and how are you going to protect your crops from the savages, with a strawman? And, and, and if farming can't survive a trade war in a flourishing 20 Trillion dollar economy, then I doubt it would survive the apocalypse.

I made it to the 38 second mark.

Yikes, you ain't kidding. I don't know whether to laugh or cry, but the comments are kinda funny, especially the ones about Michigan. I mean I know we like the f-word up here and all, but damn we usually don't emphasize it like that - jeeze.

Cool. We're agreed that I don't lose if Trump loses the election, right? (Not that I think he will). Ya, I was thinking that too. But also, what exactly is the bet? Does he just have to make a move for no term limit, or does he actually have to succeed in achieving it? Does it count if he remains if office because of some extraordinary circumstance? And how do you define "making a move?" Can he just joke about it at a rally to pump up the crowd, or does it have to be more serious and official, like in a twitter post? - lol.

Everyone, quiet in the peanut gallery! Call the APA, call Sweden, update you DSMs, Nigel has found that which has eluded scientists for decades - that it's the inability to take personal responsibility that causes mental illness and has discovered it's prevalence throughout the entire god-deluded religious community! Get ready folks because we're about to pathologize 6 Billion people worldwide! Nevermind the pragmatic limitations! Nevermind that religious beliefs tend to form under normal cognitive functioning and produces positive social cohesiveness whereas traditional delusions manifest under cognitive dysfunction and are typically idiosyncratic and stigmatizing. Nevermind that bio-cultural scientists are trying to develop a "comprehensive and nuanced theory of belief formation and malformation that situates religious belief and delusions in a multidimensional doxastic landscape that illuminates the connections and differences between the two." It's hereby warranted that all religious people be committed, starting in the US and then working toward the east beginning with Russia. Suspend their voting privileges, confiscate their guns, send a memo to the NICS, and admit their children to re-education camps to reverse the brain damage with which they've been afflicted by the hands of these sick people. China has graciously offered their facilities to accommodate any overflow until we have an efficient infrastructure in place. Get ready for progress, get ready for change, get ready for a revolution for the time has come to rid the world of this disease once and for all! But seriously dude, are you for real with that argument, because I don't know if it's just that you haven't really looked into this subject and that's the best you've got, or if Wendy is right and you people are just fucking with me.

So begins the strawman argument. The feelings are not of necessity numinous, having strong religious and spiritual quality, by simply your say so. Again, this is not simply my say so. I am not making this stuff up. I mean I just learned that word numinous from an article about atheists that expressed having numinous feeling brought about by nature. Everything I've been saying is based on numerous articles and scientific studies, not Nigel's aunt Nelly and some fake article about Iceland - and there is plenty of info out there for anybody interested. Here are some tags: # Human Faith Predisposition - # Atheist Churches - # Praying Atheist And just for your amusement:

Let me spell it out for you. Making personal attacks or nasty comments and then digging yourself out by saying ‘I was only joking’ is what the bible verse I quoted refers to. You only believe that because that's what your dad told you to keep your siblings from calling each other names. But you're not a child anymore and can clearly reads that it refers to trying to pass off deceit or trickery as being only a joke. But even if we use your interpretation, it's exactly what you did here by making the nasty comments about religious people being mentally ill and then trying to trick us with your fake article and admitting that you were just joking. Are you going to own that or just blame it on Aunt Nelly? And btw, you never answered my question which was really the point I was trying to get at. There are a growing number of Atheists starting to go to Atheists Churches, some even pray regularly and have nominous feeling brought about by nature or distress. Do you think they are mentally ill as well, or is it just those that you don't like?

Except your own and that of others that share a similar world view to yours. Ya, it figures you'd think that suggesting some atheists are suppressing numinous emotions based on their own admission is clearly bigoted, and that Nigel suggesting that religious people are mentally ill based on the musings of his aunt Nelly, (or whatever her name is) is imagined bigotry. (along with all the other clearly bigoted shit he's said over the last several months that I was responding to.)

I don't think all of that is an accurate representation of what he said. Actually it's a very accurate paraphrase of what he said - practically verbatim, but feel free to split hairs if you want. Right, and Christians viewing people who don't share the same religion (or any religion) as without humanity has resulted in its fair share of atrocities too. See that's your problem, you continue to go out of your way to be offended by your own imagined bigotry of others, the same thing you're trying to accuse me of. I never said that they were without humanity, and tho I admitted that I can see how you could've been offended by the phasing, I subsequently clarified what I was talking about. But even before that clarification, you should've already known what I was talking about because I outlined it in the first post that you selectively quoted. I mean seriously dude, you went out of your way to be offended the second time because I reiterated your sentiment of not having those numinous, supernatural emotions to suppress in the first place. And even if you did suppress those feelings or other emotions, how is that equal to being without humanity? I mean the ability to suppress positive or negative emotions is probably one of the most important aspects of what actually makes us human.

Most of the bigoted criticism that I've attacked lately comes from Nigel that thinks religion is just a crutch for people of faith that can't possibly fathom a scary and chaotic world in which they just end up "fucking up people's heads." To him they are mentally ill and can't possibly instill values because they lie to their children. He says many are just reformed drug addicts and alcoholics that are now just hooked on the drug of religion. One of the troubling things for me is that that last part especially has historically been viewed as a fundamental principle of not only communism but soviet atheists and their militant institutions - and we all know how that turned out - so excuse me if I take exception with that. Nobody here would tolerate such bigoted statements if it were against any other protected class, yet not only haven't you spoken out against such bigotry, you've practically defended him through it all, and now you want to take me to task for something that I've already admitted and subsequently clarified? I mean damn dude, I think Turtle was actually right about you. Well excuse me for taking him at his word, after all weren't you both lamenting about insulting people and then saying it was just a joke in the solstice thread? I mean Nigel even went out of his way to dig up actual Bible quotes as a rebuke, and then he comes in here and does the exact same thing that he was complaining about there? And I didn't even make a big deal out of it and press the issue like you would've. I just subtly reminded him of his hypocrisy. And you can talk about unsubstantiated claims all you want, but at least my opinion is based on real articles and studies about the human predisposition toward faith - and there is a lot more where that came from. What do you guys have, some anecdote from Nigel's aunt and a fake article about Iceland?

Sorry, I forgot that the maximum number of characters needed to express oneself efficiently in this exceedingly complicated digital landscape was upgraded to 280 characters several years ago. Unfortunately tho, it does leave room for for more error. Proverbs 10:19 (English Stand Version) - When words are many, transgression is not lacking, but whoever restrains his lips is prudent. Proverbs 10:19 (Easy to Read Version) - A person who talks too much gets into trouble. A wise person learns to be quiet. (. . .and yes, I still have yet to grasp that bit of wisdom.)

I think It goes back to the comment I made to yobnoc about getting caught up in that vicious cycle of insults and contempt. It seems like it's finally run it's course, so hopefully we can all move beyond that. Dude, you in a thread about whether or not religion is a form of mental illness, where the big coup de grâce is a link to a fake article, lol. Looks like you're making a late run for that 2020 Irony Award, eh? A couple homosexual thoughts here and there never hurt anyone, but if they're persistently a source of nagging inner contention in your life and you're out there bashing the hell out of homosexuality, you may wanna get some help dealing with that. . .

There is a difference between having a spooky or unexpected feeling and then shrugging it off later, and repressing your humanity. For example, many people get really freaked out after watching a horror film. They may go so far as to not go into a dark room, or refuse to be alone in a house. Now later if they shrug that off as ridiculous, are they repressing their humanity too? Ok, I can see that perspective, but as I've mentioned earlier, more and more atheists aren't just shrugging it off. They're starting to attend atheist churches and embracing those nominous feelings even if they don't understand them. Some even admitted to praying regularly even if they don't know who they're praying to. Also, in your example it was the horror film that prompted those "spooky" feelings that they later shrugged off. What prompts these nominous feelings? Is it perhaps reading or hearing about the beliefs of others or is it something inherently within us, or perhaps even beyond us and the natural world?

Ok, so you think I simply lack humanity altogether. Well you were the one that said you didn't have any of those spiritual thoughts or numinous feelings whether involuntary or not, so there was nothing to suppress. And no, I don't think all of those things together equals the sum of our humanity. In the article we were talking about several years ago, there was an atheist that said he was thinking of his mother shortly after she died and he felt this breeze come through the window and jingle the wind chimes or something like that - he immediately starting thinking as if it was a sign from his mother that everything was ok. He explained how his mind just went there, to some type of spiritual realm and it freaked him out. He said something like "whoa, where did THAT come from? That's ridiculous, I'm an atheist." So if this guy (and other atheists) admit that they dismiss these kinds of feelings, some more regularly than others, why is it double down bigoted to think that yes, some atheists repress that area of humanity in their lives?

More than there? What does that mean? I always thought that something is either there or it isn't. Is this a four-dimensional concept like a tesseract? Where is this 4th dimension to find such evidence - it sounds complex, would we be able to experience it, to understand it? (sorry, I just couldn't help myself)

The rest of it isn't particularly interesting. The bit I quoted to you is. Aren't you going to get onto your own case about the bigotry you just displayed? Now that you've pressed me to think about it a bit more, I remember awhile back that you expressed how you just don't have any of those thoughts/feelings/emotions/desires that I've outlined earlier, so essentially from your perspective there's just nothing to repress. I have no reason not to take you at your word - so given that, ya, I can see how my comment could be offensive and even bigoted if I strongly maintained that ALL atheists are just repressing inherent human emotions. Overall I think it's great that some atheists are starting to explore that side of their humanity, so I should probably ease up a bit and be more encouraging, even accommodating if necessary. By that logic, the Black Panthers were really just white supremacists at heart. No, it's just that we're tired of living in a supposedly secular constitutional republic and standing silent while the state blatantly places one religion on a pedestal. I can understand why many people feel that way, but atheism isn't required to defend the separation of Church and State and speak out against discrimination. I'm referring more to comments from vocal atheists about how religious people are delusional, relatively dumber and mentally ill. Some just "can't wait for religion to die," while others see it only as a crutch that "just fucks people's heads up." . . .and to a certain extent I can understand those comments as well, if I'm being honest. The problem is that someone gets offended, so they say something offensive back and then we get into this vicious cycle - and at some point we're just gonna have to stop it if we're ever going to have a chance at, dare I say "peaceful coexistence/cohabitation."

The whole misogyny thing with Palin was more of an after thought. It didn't even cross my mind until Jakee asked who could've beaten Obama. And tho misogyny still could've played a role in Palin's case (albeit to a much lesser extent than in Hillary's case) I think your point above was the main reason McCain loss. It demonstrated a lack of leadership and exposed the possible vulnerability of being grossly manipulated by whoever convinced him that choosing her would be a good idea.

I get that that's the perception and how it can be rather provoking and get people riled up - and that given my posting history, people are automatically going to assume that I'm just angry at any level of aggression. But in many cases, I think it's just your perception - and it's usually perceived more when I use the fuck word. And if that's the case, then there are a lot of angry people here: Speakers Corner - Use of the word Fucking Speakers Corner - Use of the word fuck And when you start reading all of those, you probably start laughing if you're anything like me - I mean it's hilarious. And that's how I feel many times when I'm posting even though I'm being serious, or even legitimately angry. And even tho I may use a level of force/aggression above that in the post I'm replying to (and yes, sometimes even excessive force as well) I really don't think it's all that uncommon here. It's just that your bias amplifies my perceived anger moreso than it does Yobnoc's or JoeWeber's because you tend to agree with it.

I think you need to give yourself a bigotry time out. And if you continue on with that quote, I talk about the growing number of Atheist Churches and reports about how Atheists pray and have other involuntary thoughts of the supernatural while experiencing nature or distress. I mean don't you think that that gives rise to the possibility that perhaps Atheists are just repressed "theists," especially vocal atheists that attack religion more aggressively - similar to the link between homophobia and repressed homosexuality?

Nigel and Normiss clearly hate religion. I sincerely doubt that they'd consider that an insult. Well that's what we're talking about. Nigel and Normiss brought it up. It's certainly a possibility. What I found interesting tho is that Jerry took it so personally for whatever reason. Ya, that's basically what Nigel and Normiss were asking. Get a clue, dude.