Get TheBlaze

User Profile: The Third Archon

The Third Archon

Member Since: November 02, 2010

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • [-2] August 16, 2014 at 7:53pm

    Well Rick, I guess well see.

    PS–I’m pretty sure someone flagged my last comment because it happened to include the heinously racist name of this white supremacist governor’s ranch. In which case, first LOL, and second–THANK YOU for proving my whole point; now if ONLY Gov. Perry would share your sentiments and change the name too. HILARIOUS that my secondhand relation of the name got censored when conservatives are TOTALLY fine with this racist owning the ACTUAL property that bears that name unchanged. XD

    Responses (2) +
  • August 16, 2014 at 7:44pm

    “I don’t understand this “real” women and “real” men business.”
    Agreed–I mean, I UNDERSTAND it; it’s CLASSIC poisoning the well. But it’s patently absurd to me. Then again, I’ve never been one to hesitate to throw the absurd back into the face of the person floating it.

    ” If I have to explain the difference to men between street harassment and a compliment”
    THANK YOU.

    “Men should hold doors because it’s polite”
    Right!? For ANYONE–which is MY policy (assuming I see you, and you’re not so far away that it would just be awkward).

    ““Hey hottie…nice ass!!” isn’t a compliment. But it surely does send a very clear message about YOU. We’re clear on that, right guys?”
    Again, RIGHT!?

  • [4] August 16, 2014 at 7:38pm

    These ISIS ***** are REALLY starting to piss me off. As awful as the situation is, I may be finally warming up to the idea of re-invading Iraq to send these fascist scumbags back to their beloved god.

  • [-2] August 16, 2014 at 3:23pm

    What a woman wants, what a woman needs?

    Is it giving them time to breathe…?

    XD

  • [1] August 16, 2014 at 3:15pm

    Yeah, he really put his foot in his mouth with that one.

  • August 16, 2014 at 3:13pm

    LOL.

    Although to be fair to Glenn Beck (god, NEVER thought I’d type or say THAT), I’m not sure him or his staff are necessarily personally involved in the censorship process (at least in all cases)–I think some amount of it might be user-generated based upon some “report comment” flag threshold. Other sites work like that, so that’s why I’m inferring–but I’m not sure, and I’m also not sure if the specifics on how that process works are available (not really cared enough to look).

  • August 16, 2014 at 2:54pm

    When they’re wanted, or when they’re born, whichever comes first–obviously once they’re born they’re no longer (a) internal or (b) taking bodily resources from another. As for the former, once they’re wanted, they are tautologically not “unwanted.” Pretty obvious stuff.

  • August 16, 2014 at 2:51pm

    @Th30
    It’s your counterpoint that you think is worth something–do your own work.

    Though I’ll save you the trouble by pointing out:
    (A) The number of Christians (or even just the subset of those that are conservative) is not anywhere equal to the number of atheists, so you’re comparing apples and oranges.
    (B) At best, if you adjusted the numbers to take account for the vast numerical difference and still found more such institutions were founded by conservative Christians, you’d have proved that if you were to select a conservative Christian at random they would be statistically more likely to found one of these institutions than someone not in that group–you wouldn’t have proven either (1) they wouldn’t have done that regardless, because of some alternate cause, like their personal character, or (2) that that has anything to do with the religion, or it being true, inherently.
    (C) The fact of the religious identity of the founders really has nothing to do with the function and/or effectiveness of those institutions (because there ARE such institutions, regardless of the number, founded by non-conservative Christians–as well as those employed by such institutions to do their work, who presumably aren’t UNIVERSALLY conservative Christians), unless you prove such a causal link, which I don’t see and don’t think you can.
    (D) And finally you’d have to prove the institutions are equivalently useful or better when founded by conservative Christians.

  • August 16, 2014 at 2:38pm

    @Axe
    Having the option to abort any particular fetus is not the same as wanting to, or advocating that one should, exercise that option in each and every case–duh. Yes, I DO believe women are entitled to decide which fetuses, if any, they will allow to come to term in their bodies and bring into the world–that’s not even CLOSE to the wild categorical suggestion of the OP that ANYONE is advocating “to abort any and all fetuses.”

    As for the tired old argument that sex = consent to pregnancy, that’s more than a bit of a stretch when, even WITHOUT contraception, you’re more likely NOT to conceive a child from any given instance of intercourse than to conceive (except for the short window of greatest fertility). By your twisted logic, innocent bystanders in warzone aren’t innocent at all and deserve to be killed because, hey, they KNEW it was a warzone (in fact, taking your logic to its logical conclusion would destroy the very concept of victimhood).

    My second bullet was not about punishment, I don’t know where you got THAT at all–it was about extending a modicum of the same concern and compassion for the welfare fetuses you conservatives bang on about to other, REAL, people, which you don’t.

    It’s only a “murdered child” in the warped mind of people who think that unthinking clumps of nearly (and early enough actually) microscopic cells are equally, if not more, important to actually extant sentient beings.

  • [-2] August 16, 2014 at 2:09pm

    Well I was just talking about Catholicism, but I wouldn’t mind seeing all religions bite the dust since you asked.

  • August 16, 2014 at 2:08pm

    “I mean he’s accepting the reality of abortion…”
    LOL–no he’s not. He’s advocating the same stale prohibitionist categorical response pro-lifers have always been advocating.

    Being judged is a fact of life–I don’t mind, and I CERTAINLY don’t feel any way about it coming from people whose judgment doesn’t deserve a moment of anyone’s time or concern.

    “It’s not enough for you that abortion is fully legal and a decision absolute of the woman.”
    LOL–I guess you don’t follow the law very closely (or know many people who have sought abortions recently and candidly shared their experiences with you) if that’s what you think.

    “You want it celebrated.”
    Not really–I just want it to not be stigmatized, and for people to stop acting like its some great moral failure, LET ALONE the the most urgent moral issue of our time.

    “You don’t want to feel bad about having one.”
    Well you got me there–I certainly DON’T think anyone should feel bad, or be gratuitously shamed, for something that is their personal choice and not a moral issue.

    “There is a reason it feels wrong.”
    First, I don’t know how you think you know how it feels for everyone who gets it–I imagine it varies from individual to individual. Second, OF COURSE there’s a lot of negative emotions attached–there’s a bunch of ******** running around telling women they SHOULD feel terrible for getting an abortion! That’s a pretty simple causal relationship.

  • August 16, 2014 at 1:58pm

    @Nigel
    On the contrary, the violence seems to be deescalating in Ferguson and the police have been at least modestly more transparent–they’ve released the name of the officer alleged to be responsible, and that means the independent investigation and justice process can actually get started. Pointing out conservative hypocrisy (something I noticed no one bothered to contest) = hating conservatives now–that’s cute.

  • August 16, 2014 at 12:29pm

    The various Asian religions, namely Hinduism at least (and I believe Buddhism as well) predate Christianity, and pretty much every other major/widely known religion on Earth, by thousands of years–if that matters for anything (which it mostly doesn’t except for historical and anthropological purposes).

  • [-2] August 16, 2014 at 11:12am

    “Once again, we are talking about the difference between a hand out and a hand up.”
    A false dichotomy if there ever was one–that difference being whether or not a conservative approves of the “help.”

    “So no, Time, subsidized tampons wouldn’t do women “a world of good.” But the businesses they start making and selling their own just might.”
    The only thing you’ve proven is that there is more than one way to collectively solve a problem–not a single example you’ve given was of someone who just spontaneously solved the problem on their own. ALL of those individuals had to come into contact with information at the very least–and probably some resources (or have some resources to begin with) too. It’s also hard to know EXACTLY what worked and why from thousands of miles away through second and third hand accounts.

  • [-2] August 16, 2014 at 11:05am

    “Her argument is typical of the leftist mindset – they recognize a problem, a perfectly legitimate problem, and insist that the government is the solution.”
    Well no–she insisted collective action is the solution. The government is just one means of achieving that–one rather unavailable ineffective means, thanks to conservatives stellar and thorough job of rendering said government completely dysfunctional and corrupt through their values and policy choices.

  • [1] August 15, 2014 at 11:47pm

    I also wonder why there are still Catholics.

  • [4] August 15, 2014 at 11:38pm

    Dawkins didn’t say violent and nonviolent theists were equivalent–he said the latter enables the former by legitimizing the system of belief that motivates their violent acts.

  • [3] August 15, 2014 at 11:37pm

    Most of the atheists I meet are more concerned with those claiming to be the followers of god(s) than any god(s) they purport to follow.

  • [2] August 15, 2014 at 11:36pm

    I’ll give Dawkins this–he sure knows how to strike a chord with the theists! XD

  • [3] August 15, 2014 at 11:22pm

    Why would the British special forces have a problem with Dawkins?

    Responses (1) +
123 To page: Go