Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: In Defense of “Asshole” Atheism [View all]rug
(82,333 posts)117. You can start with this exercise in prejudgment and inanity and wade through the rest.
With the above, Im not encompassing fence-sitters and liberal Christians. Such people arent really Abrahamic theists; they ignore the genocide, rape, chauvinism, and slavery, while only focusing on the happy lines. Cherry picking the nice parts doesnt really make you a true believer. In actuality, theyve created a new ideology distinct from the Biblical reality. They are Christian-ish. They can be reasoned with, because they never accepted the entire book to begin with.
I've done it once. I won't do it twice, not even for you. Sorry, ed.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
184 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Explain this: "While your attraction to anything with "asshole" in the title is understandable"
rug
Dec 2013
#4
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#20
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#24
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#29
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#37
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#44
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#54
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#57
I don't know that isolated, and, perhaps, depilatated, that I could even differentiate...
PassingFair
Dec 2013
#178
Can't really argue with you, but is like to know rug's reason for posting this.
cleanhippie
Dec 2013
#9
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#19
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#22
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#28
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#34
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#45
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#49
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#59
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#61
Or maybe you should discuss the topic of the post instead of the one who posted it.
longship
Dec 2013
#83
Well, no matter what one writes or says on the topic it's gonna piss somebody off.
longship
Dec 2013
#27
Did you have a point you wanted to make by posting "attraction to anything with asshole"?
rug
Dec 2013
#48
You can start with this exercise in prejudgment and inanity and wade through the rest.
rug
Dec 2013
#117
A part of the Bible. And one used by the South as part of its basis for slavery. (Cf. also "Ham").
Brettongarcia
Dec 2013
#133
"Oh please"? Is that a cogent argument? So far, you've answered no objections whatsoever
Brettongarcia
Dec 2013
#143
Still no answer to the objection say that Judeo-Christ supports killing innocent "sons" of Egyptians
Brettongarcia
Dec 2013
#149
It's classic, because its a durable objection to Christianity; one that hasn't been refuted
Brettongarcia
Dec 2013
#153
It remains "an objection" rather than established fact, only to "believers" who believe, over reason
Brettongarcia
Dec 2013
#156
The historical facts are clear: for centuries religious killings cited the Bible as authorization
Brettongarcia
Dec 2013
#167
So The Biblical Flood of Noah never happened? And was never asserted either? Or was somehow, Good?
Brettongarcia
Dec 2013
#92
So two problems with religion: it's not factually true. AND however, it says mass killings are good
Brettongarcia
Dec 2013
#94
Allegory per se, can be good. But what is THIS specific allegory saying? Is its message good?
Brettongarcia
Dec 2013
#96
He, and apparently you, should understand didactic literature before claiming anyone is
rug
Dec 2013
#110
The word "didactic" commonly has a negative meaning: excessive moralizing.
Brettongarcia
Dec 2013
#116
Your dictionary is too small. In Art say, "didactic" implies inevitably simplistic rule-making.
Brettongarcia
Dec 2013
#121
The full OED is probably still off line; too commercially valuable - and definitive
Brettongarcia
Dec 2013
#130
Thanks. I'll have to check the pricing and see if they have a single-use fee should the need arise.
rug
Dec 2013
#144
That's probably the "short" OED? The long OED definition should fill about a typed page or so
Brettongarcia
Dec 2013
#145
Well, the juvenile nature of this OP is certainly reflected in the conversation
cbayer
Dec 2013
#104
Outside of the rest of the thread, the OP is actually right, I mean...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2013
#106
Yes over the top reactions by anti-theists, and if you want, I can search for many...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2013
#173
does this mean we can start talking about "Protestantism minus the Christianity"?
MisterP
Dec 2013
#161