Lessons for haredawg.
Do not feel compelled to click on my ad above. – BUM
All right. For those of you who haven’t stopped by my diary in a bit, there has been a bit of a back and forth between haredawg and I.
Here’s a recap of just some of the fun! Enjoy 🙂
It started when I left a note that said:
"These well-studied ministers make proclamations like "Jesus was born of a virgin."
I call those claims bullshit."
All hell broke lose from there.
"If you’re going to denigrate folks for their choices you damn well better make sure you’ve made good ones yourself. It’s not mandatory, but it keeps you from being a hypocrite." – haredawg
Hey! I agree with something haredawg said!
"I don’t care much whether you denigrate a church, in fact I would probably help. But your attacks are on people…" – haredawg
"I’m not against criticism of religion, I’m against attacks against individuals who practice religion." – haredawg
People people people. I’m not attacking people; the focus of my diary has always been on questioning and attacking unjustified beliefs.
When he posted those comments, I challenged haredawg with:
"Do your best then, haredawg. In every exchange we’ve had to far I’ve talked about beliefs/claims and whether they’re justified/unjustified.
I say many religious beliefs are unjustified.
You should have no problem with that statement if you have no problem criticizing religion.
Please quote me where you find me attacking an individual and not a belief — this shouldn’t be too hard after all, it is the basis of your criticism of me."
Here’s haredawg’s example of my attacking an individual and not a belief:
"’I’m arguing against Christians! That’s in the title of my entry! [A Thinking BUM]’ — That’s insisting you’re arguing against members of a religion, not the religion itself or even the ideology." – haredawg
Yes! Haredawg actually thinks the quote, "I’m arguing against Christians" is an example of a personal attack!
If I wrote, "I’m arguing against haredawg" he would think that I am "personally attacking" him!
Personal attacks are INSULTS directed at a person — not factual statements made about whether or not people are having an argument.
It doesn’t even matter that the wording I used was to respond with parallel structure to the challenge "If there isn’t a God or any other deity, then what are you arguing against?" — I should have said, "I’m not arguing against God, I’m arguing with Christians!" If you don’t think that I meant arguing WITH Christians, the second half of the quote confirms it — "That’s in the title of my entry!" — What was the title of that entry? "How to publicly argue with a Christian."
So personal attacks are a big problem for haredawg.
"I feel compelled to deal with one of the nutbags in my notes…" – haredawg
Ooo… here’s a lesson! THIS is what is called a "personal attack". See how there’s an insult directed at a person (me in this case)?
Ouch, what was that top quote again about being hypocritical?
I write: “Let’s just look at the difficulty that homosexuals have in this society in attaining equal rights.
A large portion of believers in the US believe that homosexuality is a sin.
They oppose gay marriage for explicitly religious reasons.
This specific religious belief regarding homosexuality is unjustified and causes undue grief to millions of people.”
—– CAN’T SAY THIS!!! NOT ALLOWED!!! People’s unjustified beliefs are being criticized!
But why not, since haredawg’s "…not against criticism of religion…"
I asked him, "Please state how I should criticize the unjustified religious belief that homosexuality is sin…
Me saying, ‘the belief that homosexuality is a sin is unjustified,’ is apparently too damaging to say because INDIVIDUALS believe that homosexuality is a sin…
How could I possibly word criticism of the unjustified religious belief: ‘homosexuality is a sin’?"
"I take this answer to mean, no, haredawg, I don’t see the difference but look at the poor mistreated gays." – haredawg
Which is a weird way to "take it", because it seems like a clear request.
If haredawg says I’m allowed to criticize the institutional ideology that homosexuality is a sin, but not the actual belief that homosexuality as a sin, I wanted to know how such an statement could possibly be phrased.
I want to know what kind of linguistic gymnastics I’m required to go through before my criticism of the belief that homosexuality is a sin is allowed by haredawg.
I wasn’t asking haredawg to argue anything about homosexuality. I was asking, clearly, "how could I possibly word criticism" — how I could word the criticism.
How could I word criticism of the belief that homosexuality is a sin? Or am I allowed to criticize the belief at all? What kinds of beliefs am I allowed to criticize? Mistaken geography ideas? Evolution? Whether the moon is made from cheese?
"So, we have Christians who do beneficial acts, Christians who do detrimental acts, gay Christians…Should they all get the same level of ATB’s rancor and bile? If not how will he every figure out who to rail against and who to praise?" – haredawg
Really? Who to rail against? Who to praise?
I criticized the BELIEF that homosexuality was a sin. I asked haredawg how to word the criticism of the belief. The belief.
What is getting the "rancor and bile" of my criticism?
This should be an easy lesson: The belief. Always the belief.
"As so not near and dear to my heart as arguing theism is, censorship and fascism are. Near and dear. I mean being against them. How’s that for clumsy? Let’s try this, Shits I do not give about the rants of OD atheists, many shits I give about censorship and thought policing." – haredawg
Censorship? Thought policing?
Now we’re getting somewhere!
Am I allowed to THINK that someone else holds an unjustified belief?
If I’m allowed to think it — am I allowed to WRITE it?
It’s not that I’m allowed to say that the belief is unjustified, but that I’m mistaken — because haredawg would then argue that I’m mistaken. He’d say something like: "No no, this is a justified belief." He NEVER argues THAT. He ALWAYS argues that I’m not allowed to SAY it.
The ONLY one trying to censor anyone here is haredawg.
Personally, I want to know if you think homosexuality is a sin. I want to know if you think Jesus was born of a virgin. I think you’re mistaken. I don’t want you do refrain from saying it, from arguing it. I think people with these kinds of unjustified beliefs should be confronted and not ignored.
I’ve never told another ODer to not say what they think. To not argue what they think.
I’ve argued that many things that they think are incorrect, wrong, unjustified, mistaken. But I don’t try to silence them.
Haredawg had his way, my thoughts and words would be silenced.
"It’s even worse to have intolerant beliefs that you insist on justifying, at least unjustified beliefs are easy to dismiss. Granted, I don’t think you’re justified, I think I’ve made that clear, but you do." -haredawg
So, he challenges my unjustified beliefs…
This whole debate began with me challenging unjustified beliefs.
Haredawg criticized me for doing so.
He subsequently challenges me for having an unjustified belief.
And he’s against censorship and thought police.
Lesson # whatever: how to be exactly hypocritical.
"By the last I mean you attack the faith because it’s the faith, without regard to what it means to the individual. You realize that some folks use prayer to get over trauma, like rape, murder of a loved one, chronic pain, things like that? If you offered something to replace the prayer, the faith, something that’d operate in place of it to assuage just a bit of the brokenness, I would have never "challenged" you in thefirst place." – haredawg
What if my unjustified challenges and beliefs is what gives ME hope? You have just tried to take away the thing that gives me solace and comfort in this mean world — to think that I can make a difference in the delusions of others is my belief and my purpose.
And now I have this void of purpose in life, and I don’t even have religious faith to fall back on. How cruel.
Interesting edit. You promised me an entry on neo nazi’s and one on why bother arguing with theists at all, among several other things missing from this. Like that I found it really unreasonable to have to dig throgh your diary for instances of your behaviour and stated as much. You might find it reasonable, or you could have denied the allegations, or added in here. But it’s your thing, do it man
Warning Comment
Also I answered a lot of your “questions” I don’t believe in sin so I don’t know whether homosexuality is one. If you believe in sin then I defer to your judgement on the matter. If you don’t and you know I don’t, It’s a dirty hands question. I’ll state it again so it’ll make your next haredawg lessons; I don’t believe in sin so I couldn’t tell you whether something is or isn’t.
Warning Comment
“I don’t believe in sin so I couldn’t tell you whether something is or isn’t.” Baffling. Maybe if I use a symbol?? “How can I word criticism that ‘belief in X is unjustified?'” The response, “well I don’t believe X” is not a logical response. I think the responses boil down to something like one of the following two. A. “You’d have to say , ‘the institutional belief X is unjustifed. Individuals with belief X, you are safe, because belief X is justified for you, as individuals.'” or B. “You are never allowed to criticize a belief as unjustified. There is no way to word this kind criticism in an acceptable way.” I suspect you might say something like B — you like to censor what I say and think. But, you keep insisting that something like A is possible… Answer A just looks silly because I really can’t figure out how to word criticism of the institutional belief without criticizing the belief itself — or a belief that individuals hold. I doubt that it’s possible, which is why I’m asking you to phrase it for me.
Warning Comment
“Like that I found it really unreasonable to have to dig throgh your diary for instances of your behaviour and stated as much.” Imagine if I wrote in my diary: “haredawg lies frequently in his diary.” I would suspect that, unless you agreed with the statement, you would ask me for an example. Now imagine that I said, in response, “I find it really unreasonable to have to dig through your diaryfor instances of your lying behavior.”
Warning Comment
Remember when I siad Discriminating against creed is like discriimininating against race, just transpose the words in what these guys write? I’m arguning agains thte Black! I’m arguing against The Ciniese! I’m arguing against the gays! (Another protected minority) Y’all had said, go ahead and do that. I did , That’s the deal with I’m arguing against the Christians! People, discrimination
Warning Comment
against people for their creed. You don’t have to agree, have not agreed, but it’s not really arbitrary. Argue all day long, a statement as inoocent as you believe I’m arguing with christians, IS bigotry (another point I made left out of this Lesson) AA accused me of dancing all around your “points”. When I’m direct you go, no, that’s not it at all.
Warning Comment
You ask if homosexuality is a sin, I don’t believe in sins. So this is my fault in logic, not yours for asking the wrong question. I believe there is discrimination against gays for their beliefs, I know what discrimination is, can see it and hear it. Don’t know what a sin is. You discriminate against an entire creed and throw sins back at me, then say I must follow your rules vis a vis sin.
Warning Comment
Nobody except a chirstian has ever come close to suggesting that. Or thrown bible verses at me when I doubt the existence of sin. WTF?
Warning Comment
Tell me in your estimation how exactly I am to measure a sin and I’ll tell you in your estimation whether or not you believe homosexuality is a sin.
Warning Comment
Which of these statements is bigoted? 1. the scientific belief that the moon is made of cheese is unjustified. 2. the religious belief that Jesus was born of a virgin is unjustified. 3. the geographical belief that New York City and Rome are the same place is unjustified. 4. the racist belief that pygmy race is superior to all other races is unjustified. 5. the political belief that prohibition solved a lot of problems is unjustified. 6. the mathematical belief that 2+2 = 5 is unjustified. Are all of these examples of bigoted statements? Am I allowed to EVER criticize an unjustified belief?
Warning Comment
To An Atheist. I have almost three thousand entries in my diary, hell yes I think it’s unreasonable to dig through them. You can call me a liar if you want, I sure won’t dig thruogh my own entires to prove otherwise. Like your little buddy I probably won’t take it very gracefully, but, out of curiousity, are my actions and reactions the standard by which you conduct your own?
Warning Comment
None of those examples, just as substitute Homosexuality is a sin with X, rely on the premise of sin. Is sin an unjustified belief? If it is you’re asking if Homosexulaity is an unjustified belief, ho welse could it be a sin? You have to justify sin first for the statement to make any sense. Moon and cheese and virgin birth are more red herrings, like the gay red herring.
Warning Comment
You continue to throw red herrings, your buddy, AA under “we” accuses me of red herrings. I’m still, and always, accusing you of critizing individuals who subscribe to a creed. One more time, in this country we protect asgainst discrimination based on race, creed and color, 2+2=5 doesn’t; I’m arguing against Blacks! I’m arguing against Chine! I’m arguing against Christians! does.
Warning Comment
“I’m still, and always, accusing you of critizing individuals who subscribe to a creed.” I know this is what you’re accusing me to doing. And I’m still only criticizing the creed. So I’m allowed to make all 6 statements, right??
Warning Comment
“I’m arguing against Christians!” — When I clearly meant that I’m arguing with PEOPLE, not something imaginary like supernatural Gods. How is this clear? Because as you quoted me, I immediately followed that statement with THAT’S THE TITLE OF MY ENTRY.
Warning Comment
Entry for you. I’m tired of this. So, those ads I don’t have to click? Are you getting paid sponsers? Please take that at face value, it’s not a slam or a complaint, I was just wondering, I remembering reading about that sort of thing a while back, wondered how it worked.
Warning Comment
Sometimes my dogs will grab a rope and push it into my leg. In your mind the question is whether this is justified, in my mind it’s Do I feel like playing silly pitbull games? 2+2=5 is a silly pitbull game. Not playing. You cliam religious “unjustified beliefs” cause great harm in the world. What sort of great harm does 2+2= 5 cause? Silly pit bull games.
Warning Comment
haredawg, I am an equal opportunity debater. I will criticize any creed or belief that I feel is wrong or unjustified. So there.
Warning Comment
“Have you challenged a pedophile? If your answers are yes to the former and no to the latter, I submit that as a good indication of discrimination.” That’s not discrimination. We all have limited amounts of time and must choose what we want to devote that time to. Besides, other atheists including AUUB have done quite a bit pointing out and criticizing the way the Catholic Church,
Warning Comment
(an atheist) Sorry, don’t have the word limit you do. I’ll continue to question what you choose to debate and what you don’t.
Warning Comment
“What sort of great harm does 2+2= 5 cause?” The statement is justified or unjustified independent of its ability to do harm. Good thing that I’m only claiming that it’s unjustified! Come on haredawg, you’re the one playing the thought police here, answer the question. Am I allowed to make all 6 statements?? If only a few, which numbers are allowed??
Warning Comment