Religion

nil desperandum

(654 posts)

8. I think you touch

Mon Feb 8, 2016, 12:36 PM

Feb 2016

on something that is true well beyond religion as well.

Many people ignore the character flaws or lies of those whose opinions or politics they share, all the while exposing the character flaws or lies of those with whom they share no opinions or politics and presume it's an acceptable way to proceed through life.

It's a reflection of our society as a whole, we love the reprobates on our side and we hate the reprobates on the other side. All the while telling ourselves that our liars are somehow better humans than those other liars.

It's quite entertaining to watch when taken as a societal whole because it's applicable across so many things beyond religious belief or lack thereof.

We are a nation of liars from top to bottom, we like to pretend otherwise but our own actions prove we are hardly the society we profess to be at dinner parties.

Just my $0.02 of course YMMV as it most certainly should.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

199 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Bad arguments are bad arguments [View all] cleanhippie Feb 2016 OP

"There is no god. The arguments for god are pathetic and silly." Iggo Feb 2016 #1

And the more they try to bolster them with, for example, 'progressive theology', mr blur Feb 2016 #2

Captain Beefheart for the win. Act_of_Reparation Feb 2016 #6

And yet so many see that as bigotry. cleanhippie Feb 2016 #3

They've been brought up to expect that we treat them like children. Iggo Feb 2016 #4

You appear to believe that exposing Dawkins, and others, is somehow a defense of religion. rug Feb 2016 #5

I think you touch nil desperandum Feb 2016 #8

I can't disagree with a word of what you wrote. rug Feb 2016 #9

Pretty much a bunch of bullshit. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #11

With a title like that there's no need to read further. rug Feb 2016 #12

Your evasion skills are improving. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #14

There's no evasion at all. Your chest-thumping posts are not worth the time. rug Feb 2016 #15

Doubling down. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #16

Wiping my shoe. rug Feb 2016 #17

Better luck on the next alert. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #20

C'mom, AC. You hurt someone's feefees. Show some compassion, will ya? cleanhippie Feb 2016 #21

Let me guess. Juror 3 sent it to you. rug Feb 2016 #22

Unknown. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #24

You left out a word. rug Feb 2016 #30

Did I? AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #31

Yes, you did, as you did in post 11, "Namaste, motherfucker." rug Feb 2016 #38

I said 'unknown to me'. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #41

No. You said "Unknown." rug Feb 2016 #42

"The person who sent it to me was completely unknown to me." AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #44

It's a complusion. cleanhippie Feb 2016 #19

your compulsion must be snarking behind someone else. rug Feb 2016 #23

Don't you have a 40 day radio silence compulsion coming up? AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #33

Why don't you clarify that? rug Feb 2016 #36

Same thing you did last year. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #37

I did lots of things last year. Why don't you clarify yourself. rug Feb 2016 #39

Very funny. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #40

For someone who likes to throw arond the word "motherfucker", you're curiously reticent. rug Feb 2016 #43

I already made my point. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #45

No, you didn't. rug Feb 2016 #46

Um, no. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #47

Um, bullshit. rug Feb 2016 #48

Apparently I am not the only one with issues around crude language. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #49

Saying what you wrote is "bullshit" is hardly addressing you as "motherfuucker". rug Feb 2016 #50

You seem confused. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #51

"seem" is such a weasl word. rug Feb 2016 #55

Well, I can't know for sure if you're being deceptive, rather than confused. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #62

Namaste . . . . rug Feb 2016 #64

Namaste. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #72

"seem" is such a weasl word. AlbertCat Feb 2016 #67

You hit the nail on the head here Lordquinton Feb 2016 #18

Bwah ha ha ha! trotsky Feb 2016 #7

The fundamental (no pun intended) difference is glossed over Lordquinton Feb 2016 #10

What do anti-theist bigots use as a screen? rug Feb 2016 #13

Calling the RCC a "pedophile institution" Leontius Feb 2016 #25

Because it is in fact a mask to religious bigotry. rug Feb 2016 #28

How is it not? You should go see spotlight. Warren Stupidity Feb 2016 #32

And that's the difference. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #35

I don't see public schools shuffling around teachers to new districts and hiding their past AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #34

He wasn't talking about public schools Lordquinton Feb 2016 #52

Thank you, I totally missed that. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #53

Yep, the mask slipped Lordquinton Feb 2016 #54

I'm sure you did miss it. Leontius Feb 2016 #65

That wasn't the original problem. The comment was about the organization HARBORING them, shuffling AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #71

My original comment was about the abuse not the coverup if you are confused about that Leontius Feb 2016 #76

You said "the RCC". Not 'some priests that abused children.'. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #78

We have no disagrement about the problem of the cover-up. Leontius Feb 2016 #80

It has the apperance of impropriety from multiple levels. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #82

Do you think that the purpose of the Church was to enable? Leontius Feb 2016 #83

For the purposes of this question AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #85

So your answer is yes they moved these priests with the express intent to allow them to Leontius Feb 2016 #86

For some levels of the org, yes, it has that appearance. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #87

Quit weaseling, just answer Leontius Feb 2016 #89

It's not weaseling to acknowledge I do not know for certain. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #133

Bullshit Leontius Feb 2016 #134

That's rich coming from you Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #136

Yes I do and you have shown nothing to refute anything I said. Leontius Feb 2016 #139

You realize everyone can still see post 25 right? AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #143

Do you deny that there are sexual predators among Leontius Feb 2016 #146

Has the teachers union hidden and moved and ENABLED said predators, like the RCC has? AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #147

That was never my argument and I'm sure that if you really want to find an answer to your Leontius Feb 2016 #151

You said, in post 25, "THE RCC", not 'abusive priests'. You compared the actions of individual teach AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #154

I said appearance. Because it does. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #141

Again with insinuation and innuendo. Leontius Feb 2016 #144

They were deliberate acts, and frankly its probably due to indifference to children which has been.. Humanist_Activist Feb 2016 #150

Thanks for a direct and honest answer something that others seem unable to do. Leontius Feb 2016 #156

You are remarkably inconsistent. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #157

The issue is that, because religious organizations perpetuate this, and religion is given a... Humanist_Activist Feb 2016 #161

I don't know what your interest in my balls is, but they have nothing to do with this conversation. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #152

What a complete coward. Leontius Feb 2016 #153

If you say so. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #155

Well you could learn a great deal from Humanist Activist Leontius Feb 2016 #159

If you look carefully, there is little difference between what HA and I said. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #160

I only mentioned them because it was part of my argument that the motives was indifference... Humanist_Activist Feb 2016 #166

Your presence is required in this thread about the vatican saying it doesn't have to report. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #73

I remember hearing something about "mandatory reporter" Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #75

Next we'll learn how the Teamsters Unions are the SAME THING as vatican Rat Lines evacuating AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #77

Because that's all in your imagination? truebrit71 Feb 2016 #56

Did you seriously just say that Teacher Unions shelter pedophiles? Lordquinton Feb 2016 #57

Reading comprehension a big problem for you is it? Leontius Feb 2016 #60

No, I comprehended exactly what you said. Lordquinton Feb 2016 #61

The problem is I didn't make that claim. Leontius Feb 2016 #63

The problem is you made that comparisson Lordquinton Feb 2016 #91

No you conflated my question on abuse into that comparison I'm not taking blame for your Leontius Feb 2016 #95

So not only do you make wild, slanderous accusations while refusing to back them up Lordquinton Feb 2016 #104

I'm quite sure this will be complained about in other groups on DU Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #105

And your misrepresentions of what I said are yours and your friends so I won't hold it Leontius Feb 2016 #106

Its the cover-up and enabling of pedophiles by the Church, by shuffling them to unknowing... Humanist_Activist Feb 2016 #149

Really? Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #58

My Mother is a teacher Lordquinton Feb 2016 #59

So you are saying there is no problem with educators abusing children? Leontius Feb 2016 #68

Hey, just double down on it. That's awesome. Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #70

The problem is I didn't do that. Leontius Feb 2016 #79

Here's the problem I have with what you said. Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #96

I have nothing to appologize for everything I posted was true and backed by studies on this problem. Leontius Feb 2016 #99

Bye, Felicia n/t Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #100

A well reasoned response Leontius Feb 2016 #102

Read above for my well reasoned response Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #103

Only problem with that is the Dept of Education study had almost the same percent of Leontius Feb 2016 #108

Go ahead and post those. Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #111

When I become god of the internet I'll accept the responsibility for the error of others Leontius Feb 2016 #115

You shouldn't adopt sexist internet poses. rug Feb 2016 #110

If you don't like the movie Friday Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #112

Ice Cube movies are well known for respecting women. rug Feb 2016 #116

No. It's not calling someone a bitch Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #128

That's the comon use now. rug Feb 2016 #129

Yeah, I'll take it from you Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #130

Yes you will. As necessary. rug Feb 2016 #131

Confirmation of your answer to me is on display here. Leontius Feb 2016 #113

There's all sorts of privilege on display as well. rug Feb 2016 #117

There certanly is Lordquinton Feb 2016 #122

Hio many of those are yours, "Lord"? rug Feb 2016 #124

How about you? Lordquinton Feb 2016 #138

You're evading. Again. rug Feb 2016 #172

We can dig into the archives and find out who's evading Lordquinton Feb 2016 #175

What's your privilege, "Lord"? rug Feb 2016 #176

Evading now? Lordquinton Feb 2016 #177

What's your privilege, "Lord"? rug Feb 2016 #178

You have a past due question "Rug" Lordquinton Feb 2016 #179

What is wrong with you, quinton? rug Feb 2016 #180

Nothing Lordquinton Feb 2016 #181

Lol!. Nope not a single thing at all. rug Feb 2016 #182

The question is still lingering "Rug" Lordquinton Feb 2016 #183

Yes there is: What's your privilege, "Lord"? rug Feb 2016 #184

Something else to look up while you're at it Lordquinton Feb 2016 #185

I've known that acronym for years. As has virtually every other member of this site. rug Feb 2016 #186

Do you now? Lordquinton Feb 2016 #187

What's your privilege, "Lord"? rug Feb 2016 #188

But you still can't answer the question Lordquinton Feb 2016 #189

Of course I can, quinton. Most anyone on this board can. rug Feb 2016 #190

So why don't you? Lordquinton Feb 2016 #191

I find your bizarre behavior fascinating. rug Feb 2016 #192

Any time you accuse someone of dodging a question Lordquinton Feb 2016 #193

What's your privilege, "Lord"? rug Feb 2016 #194

We as in the many people here who ask you questions you run away from Lordquinton Feb 2016 #195

What's your privilege "Lord"? rug Feb 2016 #196

Stop evading Lordquinton Feb 2016 #197

Listen, "Lord", you should count your blessings I'm wasting this amount of time with you at all. rug Feb 2016 #198

Deflection after deflection Lordquinton Feb 2016 #199

I think it's page five of the playbook Leontius Feb 2016 #123

Don't forget the use of this: rug Feb 2016 #125

That one mostly comes with a distinct smell though. Leontius Feb 2016 #127

You've got most of those for sure Lordquinton Feb 2016 #137

WTF are you rambling on about now? Leontius Feb 2016 #140

And you were accusing me of poor reading comprehension Lordquinton Feb 2016 #162

In case you missed it I supplied three sources Leontius Feb 2016 #164

I missed those links in this thread Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #173

Did the teachers union say it's not sure it has to report it? AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #74

Does the name Matthew Lang of Illinois ring any bells for you? Leontius Feb 2016 #84

As others have noted, you've drawn a false equivalence here. LiberalAndProud Feb 2016 #66

Because it's absurd. Teachers' "massive child sexual abuse problem"? Are you being serious? mr blur Feb 2016 #69

You don't think that a possible 4.5 million instances of abuse is massive. Leontius Feb 2016 #81

Link, please. nt Curmudgeoness Feb 2016 #88

You don't know how to do an internet search. Leontius Feb 2016 #90

Your claim Lordquinton Feb 2016 #92

I already did my search if you want the facts do yours. Leontius Feb 2016 #94

OK, just searched and found nothing Lordquinton Feb 2016 #107

This message was self-deleted by its author Leontius Feb 2016 #109

Nope. Curmudgeoness Feb 2016 #93

Enjoy your ignorance Leontius Feb 2016 #97

As a former teacher, Curmudgeoness Feb 2016 #98

Take it up with the AAUW it's their estimate not mine. Leontius Feb 2016 #101

I suspect your numbers are conjecture, or your "research" is suspect. LiberalAndProud Feb 2016 #114

I absolutely agree that the RCC has failed to address this problem correctly. Leontius Feb 2016 #118

I found the article. I read it. The article clearly states that a study has not been LiberalAndProud Feb 2016 #119

All three sources agree on the extent of the problem Leontius Feb 2016 #120

You really think this is somehow equivalent? LiberalAndProud Feb 2016 #121

That's the problem you all seem to have you can't grasp the concept Leontius Feb 2016 #126

The criticism is of the response as much as the abuse itself. LiberalAndProud Feb 2016 #132

No I don't think it is. Leontius Feb 2016 #135

Well there we are, I suppose. Because I do think it is. LiberalAndProud Feb 2016 #142

I'm making no excuses I'm just questioning the motive and honesty of some posters on the issue. Leontius Feb 2016 #148

And yet... AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #158

Why do you continue to make inaccurate statements about what I have said? Leontius Feb 2016 #163

Because I can still see post 25, wherein you specified "the RCC". AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #165

I also specified "child sexual abuse problem" too didn't I Leontius Feb 2016 #167

A not-clever example of sleight of hand. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #168

You are right there is some conflation going on here but it's by you not me. Leontius Feb 2016 #169

Except of course, post 25 stands, for all to see what you actually said. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #170

As does your inability to understand it after repeatedly being corrected and your Leontius Feb 2016 #171

Except it doesn't say what you're backpedaling to say. AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #174

He often does. What always amuses me Warpy Feb 2016 #26

That's so true. trotsky Feb 2016 #27

Which doesn't explain at all your squealing when Dawkins is critiqued, mostly by atheists. rug Feb 2016 #29

no one person DonCoquixote Feb 2016 #145