"Socrates's" Secrets to Rhetorical Success

[KnightWhoSaysNi]

Most of us probably remember this gem from Talk.origin lore: :)

Mark Harpt's Secrets to Rhetorical Success (http://www.ediacara.org/harpt.html)

I think it's time to bestow the same and well deserved honour to "Socrates" (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8193) of TheologyWeb too. :D

1. When encountering atheistic evolutionists, repeatedly call them names like infudgel, bigoted materialist, or bigoted village atheist. Calling evolutionists names makes them feel discredited and shameful, making them want to become like you and accept Christianity.

2. When another Christian dares to criticize your YEC beliefs and your debating tactics, call him or her a 'compromiser' or a WFJ (Wimp for Jesus). Christians who disagree with me are obviously cowards.


Let's hear some more. :)

Jason

[Jimmy Higgins]

3. Rape the poster's integrity and academic or professional standing by claiming either he, himself, has a higher education in that field or that another YEC scientist has a higher degree in the field which therefore, on its own merit, means the opposing poster is wrong.

[RufusAtticus]

4. Attack the Christianity of others' wives, simply because it is imposible to call a Atheist a misotheist if they are married to a Christian.

This doesn't suprise me considering that "Socrates" anounced on TWeb that the Sermon on the Mount is only telling True Christians (TM) how to treat one another and the Bible makes it clear that they should be jerks to everyone else.

[Jimmy Higgins]

Originally posted by RufusAtticus
4. Attack the Christianity of others' wives, simply because it is imposible to call a Atheist a misotheist if they are married to a Christian. I really don't know what was worse, his comments dealing with you, or the moderator's insistence that both of you had blame, saying you brought it up. Nothing like blaming the victim.

[Roland98]

Don't forget using "infidel" as an insult. And criticizing the spelling/grammar etc. of posters as a way to dodge arguments.

[RufusAtticus]

Originally posted by Jimmy Higgins
I really don't know what was worse, his comments dealing with you, or the moderator's insistence that both of you had blame, saying you brought it up. Nothing like blaming the victim.

Not to mention the fact that DDW said that Socrates supported his accusation that my wife is a "Spong-like" Christian, and thus his inflamatory rhetoric wasn't against the rules. What was Socrates' "support?"

1. She married me.
2. She wasn't a creationist.

That was it! No mention at all on her beliefs about the nature of Christ, salvation, etc. Nothing at all that would actually link her to Spong, instead of the moderate Christian that she is. Quick show of hands. How many people here would think a Pentacostal/Methodist was a "spong-like" Christian?

[KnightWhoSaysNi]

5. When a creationist with a very honest reputation and strong credentials (e.g. Kurt Wise) criticizes other creationists, claim that he has "Humility Deficit Disorder." A creationist who criticizes his fellow creationists has too much pride to see things clearly.

6. Use titles like "Creation Commando" and use avatars with Arnold Schwarzenegger or a transformer robot in it. If you show that you're a dominant alpha male creationist, then maybe evolutionists will submit by fear to your will.

[Jimmy Higgins]

7. Use donation money given to your organization, to bribe the administrators of a web board so that you can be king of the board and be nominated Poster of the Month.

8. Use status as Poster of the Month for authority purposes in an argument.

[keyser_soze]

Try to add a non-humorous twist to a users name if you find that you can't debate the point on equal footing....and rupture your spleen with outrage when someone does the same to you(with moderator approval no less). Sarfarti is a jerk--world class category. I guess he always sought ignonimy...and seems to have found it.

[KnightWhoSaysNi]

10. When referencing, try as much as you can to post a link to an article from Answer in Genesis (http://www.answersingenesis.org). They are far smarter and have much more integrity than those evil materialist heathens who write in Science or Nature.

11. When quoting the evolutionist heathen you're responding to in a thread, always say that they're 'spluttering' when they attempt to criticize creationism. After all, when creationists can understand evolutionists' critiques, then they must be spluttering.

[Viti]

Originally posted by Jimmy Higgins
I really don't know what was worse, his comments dealing with you, or the moderator's insistence that both of you had blame, saying you brought it up. Nothing like blaming the victim. May I have a link to this discussion please?

[Duvenoy]

When losing a discussion, running away. Doing the same when getting his face figuritivly slapped for discourtesy (that was rather fun, actually, and the mods let me get away with it).

Calling others postings, however well said. "elephant hurl," whatever that means.

Theis unfortunate, little man is a pathetic example to represent any group, evolutionist, creationist, or whatever.

doov

[SynchroKnight]

13. One word..."whinging".

[Jayjay]

12A. When losing a debate (which happens a lot), try to discredit the opposition by calling them liars because "atheists have no rational basis for morality". This just might sidetrack the conversation.

12B. When the idiotic "atheists have no rational basis for morality" argument is utterly dismantled, don't make a sound. That way you can pretend as if it's a valid argument, and it can be reused again and again.

[RufusAtticus]

Originally posted by LadyShea
May I have a link to this discussion please?

It crossed multiple threads, but I went to the trouble of diggin them up.

3/20/2003: Here is where it all began. (http://theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=40527#post40527)

In response to Socrates calling me a "misotheistic bigot," I said "I bet you'd be too afraid to say such things if my Christian wife was in the room."

His response: "Why would I be? I would doubt the Christian character of any woman who flagrantly disobeyed the Apostle Paul's command against being unequally yoked to such a bigoted God-hater."

3/21: Then in another thread (http://theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=41208#post41208)

"But there IS positive proof of all the above -- the best sort -- reliable eye-witness testimony, and the fact that Christ affirmed it. You know, the One you claim your wife follows, but you don't, yet she married you anyway despite Paul's explicit injunctions against unequally yoking with an unbeliever."

3/23: Socrates bitching about my wife (http://theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=42851#post42851)

"I've found, even on this website, that professing Christian evolutionists are wrong on many other areas too, e.g. Biblical inerrancy, marrying non-Christians (as RA's "Christian" evolutionist wife did by RA's own admission!), mythologising clear statements by Christ, etc."

4/05: More Assualts (http://theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=54670#post54670)

"What RA means, we must take "tolerance" to such an absurd level that we must accept that all who call themselves "Christians" really are Christians. This is even when they deny both the historical and moral teaching of Christ and His Apostles, as RA's wife did by becoming unequally yoked to a bigoted unbeliever."

4/08: Me attempting to get socrates to support his inflammatory rhetoric or retract it (http://theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=59132#post59132)

4/09: His response. (http://theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=59984#post59984)

"My point is, your wife's theology is VERY much like Spong, because both have a low view of Scriptural teachings about history and morality!! Even if they disagree about some things, it doesn't change the fact that your wife is unrepentant about the issue in that thread. It was even like squeezing blood out of a stone to get you to admit that the issue in the thread applied to her, because of your pathetic evasions."

4/13: DDW circles the wagons (http://theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=65100#post65100)

4/28: DDW edited this post of mine, four weeks after it was made, chasticing me for bringing up my wife. (http://theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=49443#post49443)

Socrates bumped that last one because he was losing heavily in another thread and unsuccesfully tried to save face.

[Viti]

Thank you Rufus, I would have done the searches. I am sorry you had to go to so much trouble, but reading such a clear record all in one place is very impactful and I appreciate it. I know I shouldn't be shocked, but DAMN! The guy continues to attack your wife for months and hasn't been moderated at all??

I will be reading these more in depth...I hope this wasn't too hurtful to you or Wildy. The man is downright cowardly.

[RufusAtticus]

LadyShea,

I added a few more links.

[gcameron]

Originally posted by RufusAtticus
Not to mention the fact that DDW said that Socrates supported his accusation that my wife is a "Spong-like" Christian, and thus his inflamatory rhetoric wasn't against the rules. What was Socrates' "support?"

1. She married me.
2. She wasn't a creationist.

That was it! No mention at all on her beliefs about the nature of Christ, salvation, etc. Nothing at all that would actually link her to Spong, instead of the moderate Christian that she is. Quick show of hands. How many people here would think a Pentacostal/Methodist was a "spong-like" Christian?

I must say the Bishop has a wonderful name. I could say it all day.

Spong spong spong spong spong!

[Duvenoy]

Oh, how I wish he'd come here. I'd even pray a prayer, if I thought it would winkle him out from under Dee Dee's sheltering wing. It's only fair. After all, we went over there.

Sarfati has a serious anger problem and an ego the size of my old Peterbilt tractor. I am certainly glad that he doesn't represent most Christians.

As near as I can ascertain, he does no science of any sort beyond picking over the works of others to adapt to AiG dogma. This in spite of a doctorate in chemistry, and what a sad waste of an advanced education that is.

When referencing something, he almost always quotes AiG, but refers to Talk Orgines and indeed, our own happy, little hive, as, "Garbage sites."

O God, if you are indeed up there, awake and sober, please give him to us. Just for a couple of days -- we'll give him back, promise.

Please? Pretty please?

doov

[Clutch]

Why does anyone bother with so empty a vessel as Sarfocrates? Every post has "TROLL" stamped on it, and his evasions are so vicious and distracting that the usual motivation for troll-engaging -- to educate the lurkers -- is not plausibly served.

[Roland98]

Originally posted by Duvenoy
Oh, how I wish he'd come here. I'd even pray a prayer, if I thought it would winkle him out from under Dee Dee's sheltering wing. It's only fair. After all, we went over there.

Sarfati has a serious anger problem and an ego the size of my old Peterbilt tractor. I am certainly glad that he doesn't represent most Christians.

As near as I can ascertain, he does no science of any sort beyond picking over the works of others to adapt to AiG dogma. This in spite of a doctorate in chemistry, and what a sad waste of an advanced education that is.

When referencing something, he almost always quotes AiG, but refers to Talk Orgines and indeed, our own happy, little hive, as, "Garbage sites."

O God, if you are indeed up there, awake and sober, please give him to us. Just for a couple of days -- we'll give him back, promise.

Please? Pretty please?

doov

Love to see it, but know it would never happen. He knows he's outclassed over here, in more ways than one. Insults can only take you so far when you have absolutely nothjng of substance to actually discuss.

[Jimmy Higgins]

Originally posted by Roland98
Love to see it, but know it would never happen. He knows he's outclassed over here, in more ways than one. Insults can only take you so far when you have absolutely nothjng of substance to actually discuss. Aw heck, he was outclassed over there and you guys had your hands tied behind you back. Sarfati coming over here would just prove more of the same.

[Roland98]

Originally posted by Jimmy Higgins
Aw heck, he was outclassed over there and you guys had your hands tied behind you back. Sarfati coming over here would just prove more of the same.

Exactly--and here he doesn't have the peanut gallery to "impress" with his insults, or the mod cheerleaders on the sidelines. As much as I'd love to see him roasted over here, I know it'll never happen.

[Warcraft3]

Guys, is it really necessary to start an entire thread on the debating tactics of Socrates? (by the way I know I havent been posting much here lately...sorry about that...its hard to find the time to post both here and at TWEB...but I do plan on trying to post here more often) I mean, this is the third thread I have seen so far on TWEB and Im not sure if you are trying to accomplish something or just venting.

Im really just curious what you hope to accomplish with this thread. I mean...are you hoping that maybe Dee Dee or Socrates will read it and it will cause them to change or something? Or are you guys just venting? Im not looknig to get into a debate over it...Im just curious.

I have had good discussions with Socrates and I think he is a pretty good guy. Maybe his style of debating is a bit harsh....(and Rufus I definately did not agree with him on the issue with your wife) but I mean I doubt the guy has any hostile feelings towards anyone.

Socrates is not the only one at TWEB that uses debating tactics that are somewhat abrasive....plenty of other posters (Christians and non-christians) do it as well. But since Socrates posts alot his rhetoric just gets noticed more often.

And sometimes the rhetoric really is funny. I love sarcasm and a witty insult or a play on words always puts a smirk on my face. I dont mind a little bit o' flame, because I really dont take it personally.

So just have a thick skin and laugh these things off...or better yet try to "one up" someone at their own game.....use rhetoric yourself. Be sarcastic if someone is being sarcastic, be insulting if someone is being insulting, and be understanding if someone is being understanding.

We can take the issues seriously without taking ourselves too seriously.



Russ

[Duvenoy]

Originally posted by steadele
Guys, is it really necessary to start an entire thread on the debating tactics of Socrates? (by the way I know I havent been posting much here lately...sorry about that...its hard to find the time to post both here and at TWEB...but I do plan on trying to post here more often) I mean, this is the third thread I have seen so far on TWEB and Im not sure if you are trying to accomplish something or just venting.

Im really just curious what you hope to accomplish with this thread. I mean...are you hoping that maybe Dee Dee or Socrates will read it and it will cause them to change or something? Or are you guys just venting? Im not looknig to get into a debate over it...Im just curious.

I have had good discussions with Socrates and I think he is a pretty good guy. Maybe his style of debating is a bit harsh....(and Rufus I definately did not agree with him on the issue with your wife) but I mean I doubt the guy has any hostile feelings towards anyone.

Socrates is not the only one at TWEB that uses debating tactics that are somewhat abrasive....plenty of other posters (Christians and non-christians) do it as well. But since Socrates posts alot his rhetoric just gets noticed more often.

And sometimes the rhetoric really is funny. I love sarcasm and a witty insult or a play on words always puts a smirk on my face. I dont mind a little bit o' flame, because I really dont take it personally.

So just have a thick skin and laugh these things off...or better yet try to "one up" someone at their own game.....use rhetoric yourself. Be sarcastic if someone is being sarcastic, be insulting if someone is being insulting, and be understanding if someone is being understanding.

We can take the issues seriously without taking ourselves too seriously.



Russ

Russ, it's a little slow at the moment, is the only reason I can come up with.

Now, I am a simplle man. As such, I have simple pleasures. I just want to see great pools of figurative blood and chunks of shredded flesh on the E/C floor.

Hey, here's a famous Sarfatism we forgot: "Goo to you via the zoo." I thought that was kinda cute the first time I read it, but it got old, fast.

If he should amble on over here, I hope he brings friends.

doov

[KnightWhoSaysNi]

14. Make tasteless remarks (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=105269&highlight=gould+and+late#post105119) alluding to the belief that deceased infidels like Sagan and Gould are roasting in Hell. A little transcendental blackmail couldn't hurt to help motivate those dirty heathens to think like we do.

[RufusAtticus]

Originally posted by Duvenoy
As near as I can ascertain, he does no science of any sort beyond picking over the works of others to adapt to AiG dogma. This in spite of a doctorate in chemistry, and what a sad waste of an advanced education that is.

Actually according to Socrates words, Sarfati (himself) left science after he got his PhD and entered apologetics. In other words, he admits that he, Sarfati, is not a scientist.

[RufusAtticus]

Originally posted by steadele
Guys, is it really necessary to start an entire thread on the debating tactics of Socrates?

When he is one of the more famous names in creation "science," it is very relevant to point out the fact that his defense of the Bible rests in abrasive comments. Character apparantly counts alot for christians. That is why it amazes me why there is so much hero worship of him. The inability of that man to act professionally underscores the emptyness of his position.

Maybe its just me, but I expect self-professed Christians to show at least as good morals as this "god-hating" Atheist.

[Roland98]

Maybe its just me, but I expect self-professed Christians to show at least as good morals as this "god-hating" Atheist.

Personally, when they go as far as he does in criticizing the morals of others, I hold them up to an even higher standard. And he fails miserably.

[Jayjay]

Originally posted by steadele
Socrates is not the only one at TWEB that uses debating tactics that are somewhat abrasive....plenty of other posters (Christians and non-christians) do it as well. But since Socrates posts alot his rhetoric just gets noticed more often.
I disliked Sarfati's rhetorics even before I knew anything about Socrates or TWeb. His articles at AiG and True.Origins are just as vile as his postings at TW, and even though I can't quite put my finger on it, I really hate that kind of drivel. It's as if he's constantly trying to belittle his opponents instead of talking about the issue at hand (whatever that might be). As for others doing the same thing, well, at TWeb he's got a large fanbase trying very hard to emulate him, so in a way I consider Soc to be the instigator and the others mostly just a mob that follows him around.

So just have a thick skin and laugh these things off...or better yet try to "one up" someone at their own game.....use rhetoric yourself. Be sarcastic if someone is being sarcastic, be insulting if someone is being insulting, and be understanding if someone is being understanding.
I slightly disagree... answering insults with insults has a great potential of escalating into a flame war. This doesn't seem to bother Socrates in the slightest though, in fact I suspect that it's his deliberate goal to instigate flames in order to cover up how weak his facts are.

[RufusAtticus]

Originally posted by Jayjay
I slightly disagree... answering insults with insults has a great potential of escalating into a flame war. This doesn't seem to bother Socrates in the slightest though, in fact I suspect that it's his deliberate goal to instigate flames in order to cover up how weak his facts are.

Not to mention the fact that the powers at be on TW uses such events to censure Socrates' opponents. I've seen it happen on BaptistBoard and Christian Forums. A fundamentalist, conservative "Christian" purposely flames individuals with the intention of getting them to reply in kind. The mods then ban the flamee, but the other member isn't touched.

On TW this happens by the way of the mods appologizing for Socrates behavior by stating that in their opinion he supported his flames, thus no rule was broken by him. Right before I found better places to waste my time, I politely brought this double standard to DDW's attention and she refused to talk about it. From my experience on TW, the mods tell people flamed by Socrates to "suck it up" and people flamming Socrates to "cut it out."

[pangloss]

Originally posted by Jayjay



I slightly disagree... answering insults with insults has a great potential of escalating into a flame war. This doesn't seem to bother Socrates in the slightest though, in fact I suspect that it's his deliberate goal to instigate flames in order to cover up how weak his facts are.
Oh, hell yes.

And to make matters worse, he has his cadre of like-minded "moderators" who defend him at all costs and delete/suspend/insult/etc. those that dare even try to match his... "wit"...

[Duvenoy]

I so want him here where I can say it as it is and not wonder about being stabbed in the back by the mods.

I think that Tweb is afraid of losing a big name if they give him a well-deserved smackdown. And this is their problem; they'd rather have the name than the substance. Pity.

doov

[RufusAtticus]

Originally posted by Duvenoy
I so want him here where I can say it as it is and not wonder about being stabbed in the back by the mods.

I'd like to note that on IIDB we don't allow anyone to flame, no matter how infamous they are.

[Duvenoy]

I'm talking about facts. If you have them, there's no need to flame.

doov

[Clutch]

Originally posted by Duvenoy
I'm talking about facts. If you have them, there's no need to flame.

doov Well, yeah. But didn't you like the suggestion that you're infamous? ;)

[Warcraft3]

Originally posted by RufusAtticus
I'd like to note that on IIDB we don't allow anyone to flame, no matter how infamous they are.

Hmmm I dont know about that one........Ive seen some name calling/flaming done over here as well. In fact some people over here have responded to me with the same poor atitude that some people over at TWEB have.

Again.......you can take the actual debate seriously without taking yourself too seriously. So when people do stuff I dont like I either ignore it and just continue the discussion or I use a bit of sarcasm. But I dont get angry like this>>>:mad: or beat me head against the wall like this>>>:banghead: . I just laugh it off and make a face like this>>>:p .


:)


Russ

[Warcraft3]

Originally posted by Clutch
Well, yeah. But didn't you like the suggestion that you're infamous? ;)

Im infamous for never being wrong:p

[Dr.GH]

I got to admit that Sarfati can piss me off. But, it is also true that when I was "stuck" on a book chapter critical of Behe/Dembski ID creationism, I found motivation in the mindless arrogance of Sarfati, and his AiG cohort. Usually, just a few hours reading YEC bull shit could get me writing again. (Beer, and fishing could also do the trick).

A lot of creationist writers claim they were motivated by Richard Dawkins. I agree, his writing style makes me think that he is a prick. But Sarfati can be counted on to juice me up to write a strong rebuttal.

[RufusAtticus]

Originally posted by steadele
Hmmm I dont know about that one........Ive seen some name calling/flaming done over here as well. In fact some people over here have responded to me with the same poor atitude that some people over at TWEB have.

1) Our anti-flame policy only protects members of IIDB.

2) If you feel that we missed some imflamatory rhetoric directed at you (or anyone else), please don't hesitate to inform us, either by reporting the post or though pm.

[Warcraft3]

Originally posted by RufusAtticus
1) Our anti-flame policy only protects members of IIDB.

2) If you feel that we missed some imflamatory rhetoric directed at you (or anyone else), please don't hesitate to inform us, either by reporting the post or though pm.

I would never do that though since it really doesnt bother me....Ill either ignore it or have fun with the person and be sarcastic.

You should remember that I have a pretty thick skin Rufus, and dont really have a problem with anyone. Of course there are people I like more than others...but I wouldnt say I dislike anyone.

So my post wasnt a dig against II or TWEB or any moderators.....just saying that youll find people who flame on both sides of the atheist/theist fence. No big deal, really.......just people being people.


Russ

[RufusAtticus]

Originally posted by steadele
You should remember that I have a pretty thick skin Rufus, and dont really have a problem with anyone. Of course there are people I like more than others...but I wouldnt say I dislike anyone.

I can understand this. I know things often get heated in here. It just worries me that we might have dropped the ball and let things get out of hand when posters were addressing you. As a favor to me, will you PM me the threads in which you feel that you were flamed so I can review them. I want to see I and my colleges dropped to ball.

[Warcraft3]

Originally posted by RufusAtticus
I can understand this. I know things often get heated in here. It just worries me that we might have dropped the ball and let things get out of hand when posters were addressing you. As a favor to me, will you PM me the threads in which you feel that you were flamed so I can review them. I want to see I and my colleges dropped to ball.

LOL I could try to find them. If I remember them correctly it was the kind of general mockery that a Theist should expect anyway when posting on an Atheist site.

I dont remember them specifically though.....in fact I dont remember any specific comments by anyone either here or on TWEB. But Ill look though.



Russ

[Jimmy Higgins]

Originally posted by steadele
Again.......you can take the actual debate seriously without taking yourself too seriously. So when people do stuff I dont like I either ignore it and just continue the discussion or I use a bit of sarcasm.I've always felt that it is more important why someone does something, rather than what that person has done. Sarfati is purposely provoking people. He's the Rush Limbaugh of YECism. No content, but alot of hot air. He's doing it as a manner of both establishing control, exerting power, and impressing the lurkers. He isn't trying to add levity to the discussion. When someone repeatedly answers to someone's remarks as "spluttering" there is no respect in there words. Sarfati isn't respecting anyone that is an atheist. And this does matter in a debate, because you can't honestly debate someone without respect! I twisted my arms off trying to be nice, but once he saw the five pages out of 100+ pages of my webpage that were "anti-christian" he never ever gave me the time of day and repeatedly mocked my arguments, most of which he did because he couldn't answer them, just as he has done to the others here.

But worse yet, his constant "third-person" support of AIG is nothing less than fraud. AIG constantly begs for money. Their friends beg for money, like RATE who needs $100k for more testing on radiometric dating. People are being deluded into supporting a lost cause. People who really should either hold on to the money or give it to someplace that needs it, ie not a lab that has no real purpose, are giving it to a group of people who are performing experiments that are along the line of trying to get a squared-circle. This is repugnant, and his "third-person" supports is just fraud. It is very anti-christian indeed and thats the reason why I have much dislike for him as a person.

[Warcraft3]

Originally posted by Jimmy Higgins
[B]I've always felt that it is more important why someone does something, rather than what that person has done. Sarfati is purposely provoking people. He's the Rush Limbaugh of YECism. No content, but alot of hot air. He's doing it as a manner of both establishing control, exerting power, and impressing the lurkers. He isn't trying to add levity to the discussion. When someone repeatedly answers to someone's remarks as "spluttering" there is no respect in there words. Sarfati isn't respecting anyone that is an atheist. And this does matter in a debate, because you can't honestly debate someone without respect! I twisted my arms off trying to be nice, but once he saw the five pages out of 100+ pages of my webpage that were "anti-christian" he never ever gave me the time of day and repeatedly mocked my arguments, most of which he did because he couldn't answer them, just as he has done to the others here.
Okay as to the website...(I think you and I have discussed this before)...you have to remember that the crucifixion is something that is SACRED to myself and all other Christians. So, yeah, a picture like that can be offensive. Its like when I see someone burning the flag...I mean....... as a citizen and member of the military I have deep feelings when I see the flag, so when someone burns it I feel a little bothered by it.

Now I understand that you are not a Christian and see our beliefs as untrue and possibly silly. You and I could look at the arguments for/against Christianity and come to opposite conclusions.....so I understand that the cross is not important to you as a symbol. But to Christians it really is and it really does means something to us.

Now Im not trying to be some emotional, sentimental basket case here...but that is just the reality of the situation. The picture is interpreted by Christians as something that is meant to be offensive, while to non-Christians it might seem to be nothing more than some good natured poking fun.

So you have to look at it through our eyes and see what we see.

As for the other pages.....some of your prayer articles are funny and made me laugh, but some do seem a bit mean spirited and really arent very funny. Some are good humored sarcasm while others seem to be something else...something almost PERSONAL.

So that is my perspective on the thing...I realize you have a different view on the matter than I do, and that you truly believe in your position. But Im trying to get you to see what I see. Hopefully this short message has done that to some extent.


Russ

[Kevin Dorner]

Originally posted by Duvenoy
Hey, here's a famous Sarfatism we forgot: "Goo to you via the zoo."

Genesis: "Dust to us via a gust."

[Vorkosigan]

....something almost PERSONAL.

stead, I think Christians gloss over the fact that all over the world there are people whom Christianity in its various guises has harmed, sometimes badly. Of course it is personal. What do you expect? History happens to real people, and real freedoms are at stake. When a Christian terrorist blows up an abortion clinic, or Christians arrest people and charge them with using their genitals in ways they don't approve of, real individuals are hurt. When Christians attempt to use the government to coerce others into listening to their prayers or view their idols, real people suffer a loss of their freedom. There's real pain out there.

Vorkosigan

[HRG]

Originally posted by steadele
I would never do that though since it really doesnt bother me....Ill either ignore it or have fun with the person and be sarcastic.

You should remember that I have a pretty thick skin Rufus, and dont really have a problem with anyone. Of course there are people I like more than others...but I wouldnt say I dislike anyone.

So my post wasnt a dig against II or TWEB or any moderators.....just saying that youll find people who flame on both sides of the atheist/theist fence. No big deal, really.......just people being people.


Russ

True, but Socrates/Sarfati is in a class of his own. It's one of these dialectic jumps where quantity turns into quality.

And the extreme uneven-handedness of the moderators in dealing with Socrates compared in dealing with his opponents is quite unique as well.

Regards,
HRG.

[Jimmy Higgins]

Originally posted by Vorkosigan
stead, I think Christians gloss over the fact that all over the world there are people whom Christianity in its various guises has harmed, sometimes badly. Of course it is personal. What do you expect? History happens to real people, and real freedoms are at stake. When a Christian terrorist blows up an abortion clinic, or Christians arrest people and charge them with using their genitals in ways they don't approve of, real individuals are hurt. When Christians attempt to use the government to coerce others into listening to their prayers or view their idols, real people suffer a loss of their freedom. There's real pain out there. Very well put. Christians are bizarre like that. As long as your trademark is pro-god, you can almost get away with anything. I mean look at Bush. Chronic drug abuser, now he has god, so they idolize him. Take me, I've never used drugs, haven't started any wars, yet I don't have god, and I'm not an idol. Action speaks louder than words is a phrase that most conservative christians just entirely ignore.

[Silent Dave]

Jonathan Sarfati is the Kent Hovind of creation science.


I'll let you figure that one out yourselves. :D


Dave

[Vorkosigan]

SARFATI!
Sung to the tune of "TRAGEDY" by The Bee Gees

Hear him lie
just lost and lonely what a clown
wasting time
the man no one fears he's sliding down
spewing froth
like a rabid Hovind, spoiled Ham
not as good as Holding too
Holding too
Frothing spew....frothing spew

SAR-FA-TI!
When your brain is gone but he is droning on
It's SAR-FA-TI!
When you hear his lies, laugh til you cry
They're hard to bear
Insults so bad a third grader lobotimized
would roll his eyes
SAR-FA-TI!
Watch him lose control when you say "no soul"
It's SAR-FA-TI!
When the icons fly and you don't know why
hard to respect
The mods on their knees to him
they genuflect
but your brain is gone and he is droning on.

The world -- 6K!
Newton, Einstein, Darwin, Bohr all wrong
Burn them all!
Evos learning that they are doomed
Down they go
but he just can't do it all alone
he really needs a Holding too
Holding too
Frothing spew, frothing spew!

SAR-FA-TI!
When your mind is slush and the facts are mush
It's SAR-FA-TI!
Hear the moaning cries of his feeble lies
It's hard to credit
They can't see right through it
Complete bullshit
SAR-FA-TI!
Post on cruise control, still smack the asshole
It's SAR-FA-TI!
You shouldn't reply but you're so unwise
It's hard to believe
a mind so diseased

SAR-FA-TI (etc)