Last entry on haredawg’s arrogance.

I guess Haredawg hasn’t read all the parts of the bible that put women at the bottom of the value chain. And don’t forget how low the koran keeps them as well.

What about all those teenage girls who write about how they’re in love with their boyfriends? Just for a bit of variety, you could go and point out the flaws in their thinking and logic. Hey, I can give you some diary names.

That’s a wierd conclusion, all I did is ask a question pertaining directly to your little scenario, you’ve interpeted it as a value judgement. You’ve suggested you preach to both the joyous and oppressed (paraphrasing) and gave specific examples. I was just questioning the voracity of the statement.

Just as a reminder Do you tell both groups? (then you’d be like me). – Bum It’s a fair and straightforward question that you’re deeming arrogant. I’ll ask it simpler — On OD (the particular stump your giving your sermon from) have you “told” both groups?

You said that if I were talking to the oppressed people, that you would be behind my efforts – and then asked, how many oppressed people I had talked with. Clearly implying that the reason you have a problem with my efforts is that I am talking with people that aren’t oppressed in a way that YOU find significant.

That only certain groups would benefit from knowing the truth, and you determine which groups would benefit. That’s arrogant. I think that all people should be respected enough to know the truth – whether they are oppressed under a caste system, or they aren’t oppressed in any way.

Ive missed the context of what was said. But there innapropirate times and appropriate times to say anything.

i’ve been watching this bickering for a bit now. It’s interesting how two reasonably sane people can get so caught up in trying to prove the other wrong, when in the end it’s all puff and blow. bit of a shame really, I would have thought people with such intellect could at least see the futility of this petty squabble.

Here’s what I said; Tell you what, if you tell the next czar that comes to your diary that he has not been granted devine sovereignty I’ll back you a hundred percent. Same thing with a pharoh or hell a senator. How you construe that as talking to oppressed people is beyond me. I was illustrating the absurdity of your statement not agreeing with you that oppressed people need your light.

Regardless of how I may or may not feel on the exsistence of god, I find it patently absurd that political leader has been granted devine sovereignity. I still don’t get how you got that I agree with on one point in one situation and not on the same point in another situation.

My question had to do directly with your statement, that you talk to both groups and you still haven’t answered it. See the answer to that question speaks directly to your claim and I have serious doubts about your claim. It’s my considered opinion that neither group would benefit nor profit from your minstrations to equal and proportionate degrees.

And that’s the only opinion heretofore unstated. I haven’t opined on religiously oppressed groups at all, I’ve merely questioned that you can significantly claim that you have found such people abd proved their beliefs invalid.

Hell, I thought we had some common ground here. I thought that we could both agree that those in a repressive caste system were oppressed, and deserve to be told the truth. But that I don’t qualify that people need to be oppressed to be deserving of the truth – the very fact that they are human means they deserve that respect.

So to answer your question directly: are people who read my diary religiously oppressed people? My answer, it should be obvious, that they should be told the truth regardless of whether they are oppressed or not. As to whether they are oppressed? I would say yes, the vast majority of religious adherents who read my diary are religiously oppressed.

That answer is an opinion, you brought up czars and tryanny, I’ll repost the question that you wrote this entry around — in all your time on OD have you run into a person oppressed by a systematic religious tyranny enforcing a caste system? Yes or no would work.

But that I don’t qualify that people need to be oppressed to be deserving of the truth — bum That’s my orignal complaint and accusation of arogance, that you believe you know the truth and are in a position to teach it to the poor christbefuddled masses, oppressed or otherwise.

There are much wiser men than you or I that don’t know the truth. My opinion that someone seeking the truth should likely listen more than talk.

“That’s my orignal complaint and accusation of arogance, that you believe you know the truth and are in a position to teach it to the poor christbefuddled masses, oppressed or otherwise. haredawg” I’m well aware of your complaint. Whether or not the arguments used by theists of all types to justify their beliefs are valid can be demonstrated – which I do.

There’s no arrogance in that. Arguments are either valid or invalid. It isn’t based on what I determine (that’d be arrogant), but on what the rules of logic show – rules that everyone has access to.

“have you run into a person oppressed by a systematic religious tyranny enforcing a caste system?” I’ve talked with people that I’ve known to be living in a caste society (and they’ve complained about it), so a qualified yes? If that doesn’t count, then no, not that I know of.

It’s always fun to watch you guys spar. The notes are sometimes better than the entries… hope things are well, later.

“a person oppressed by a systematic religious tyranny enforcing a caste system?” Yes! Every woman living in the patriarchal confines of the Judaic/Christian God! Lets look to the Middle East and the women over there, I think we could find quite a few. (sarcastic)

ryn; Yeah, I saw that. I’m pretty sure we get each others point and don’t see any potential benefit in continuing this. Christ I’m not even going to point out to the woman above that in america women have fought my whole lifetime for rights to their bodies and in under four hundred characters she wants to subjugate their rights to philosophical choice.