brvheart 1,755 Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 It's not a logical fallacy to call someone a punk, in fact, it's pretty nice compared to calling someone a fucking idiot. Link to post Share on other sites
brvheart 1,755 Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 yeah, I don't really believe you. That's something Lurbz would do.Also, what's a condensing personal insult? 5 insults in 1?What other reason would I have? I'm apparently directly attacking, for no reason, a person that I myself, and most people in this thread are actively defending. Link to post Share on other sites
Spademan 94 Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 It's not a logical fallacy to call someone a punk, in fact, it's pretty nice compared to calling someone a fucking idiot.Wow. Notice the "What is actually happening".You're right, it isn't a "logical fallacy", it is a "stupid uneducated opinion".This post nicely resolves why the "fucking idiot" comes into play. Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 What other reason would I have? I'm apparently directly attacking, for no reason, a person that I myself, and most people in this thread are actively defending.see now I did it to you. See how it feels.I feel like your "defense" of Fowler is overstated btw. Link to post Share on other sites
Roll the Bones 74 Posted May 25, 2011 Author Share Posted May 25, 2011 What other reason would I have? I'm apparently directly attacking, for no reason, a person that I myself, and most people in this thread are actively defending.I believe people are calling you out for the comment because it seemed to be more of a slip, or an expression of your true feelings than simply a planned comment. That lead us to believe you actually thought he was in the wrong for his actions or led to your initial true feelings about the kid for doing it. I mean, Spades calls everyone a ****ing idiot so that is different. It's definately not a little "slip" on his part. (haha) Link to post Share on other sites
brvheart 1,755 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 see now I did it to you. See how it feels.Dammit. Link to post Share on other sites
brvheart 1,755 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 I believe people are calling you out for the comment because it seemed to be more of a slip, or an expression of your true feelings than simply a planned comment. That lead us to believe you actually thought he was in the wrong for his actions or led to your initial true feelings about the kid for doing it. I mean, Spades calls everyone a ****ing idiot so that is different. It's definately not a little "slip" on his part. (haha)That's fine, but I absolutely put it in there not once, but twice for effect. It can't really be a slip if I did it twice. Link to post Share on other sites
brvheart 1,755 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Wow. Notice the "What is actually happening".You're right, it isn't a "logical fallacy", it is a "stupid uneducated opinion".This post nicely resolves why the "fucking idiot" comes into play.Well, in my defense, I only read the first box before responding, as I assumed it was just going to be same-old-same-old personal insults. Until this post of yours, I didn't realize how specific that cartoon related to our discussion here. Did you make that yourself? It's almost too specific. Link to post Share on other sites
Spademan 94 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Well, in my defense, I only read the first box before responding,That's not really a defense. I mean, first of all it's incredibly lazy, if true. Second, really? Reading half of something while mixing it up with me of all people? The most vicious, virulent asshole on these boards? The ragin' cajun* two-megaton logic bomb? Fail.as I assumed it was just going to be same-old-same-old personal insults.Your concern is noted.Until this post of yours, I didn't realize how specific that cartoon related to our discussion here. Did you make that yourself? It's almost too specific.No. It an old ANONYMOUS thing. So, maybe.*I am in no way cajun. As far as I know. Link to post Share on other sites
brvheart 1,755 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 That's not really a defense. I mean, first of all it's incredibly lazy, if true. Second, really? Reading half of something while mixing it up with me of all people? The most vicious, virulent asshole on these boards? The ragin' cajun* two-megaton logic bomb? Fail.Naw, I like you too much to care about a silly thing like looking stupid.No. It an old ANONYMOUS thing. So, maybe.haha Link to post Share on other sites
LongLiveYorke 38 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 My two cents:- The government has the obligation to enforce the rights of any person upon their request without questioning their motives for doing so. I have a right to a public education that doesn't attempt to indoctrinate me to a particular religion (this right comes from a combination of the constitution and legal precedence). I'm not sure that anyone has disagreed with this point itt.- Our society is informally based around the idea of protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority. So, it is not a valid argument to say that by living in a population of mostly christian people, a person is forced to accept certain rights being removed. (Of course, this person does have to accept any social implications of living in a christian town, such as everyone going to church and talking about god in coffee shops and blah blah, but not in a public school). (Yeah, I haven't really lived in too many christian towns, but I assume they just sit in coffee shops and talk about god a lot).- Moving away from any legal side of things, the individual in question, if he believes in his agnosticism, is doing the right thing. Reciting prayer before public functions isn't a minor thing, even though it may only last moments. Public prayer repeatedly enforces an acceptance of religion, especially among the young. It makes it appear as something that "everyone thinks" and therefore makes it something that many young people would refuse to question. The problem with religions is that so many of them make so little sense when viewed in a vacuum, and only by having them being weaved into society do they become something that people view with flawed standards of skepticism.- Spade is a bit of an a-hole, even if people like HBlask made horrific arguments in this thread.- BHeart isn't a bad guy.- SJ should try to argue sometime instead of "arguing by mega-arguing," which is what I call what he usually does. Or not, it's hist style. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 I long for the day when religion (like masturbation) is legally restricted to one's own home.It's crap like this that makes me want to start a religion where, instead of prayer, practitioners insert a finger into their ass. The hardcore Rectumologists can sniff or taste said finger to signify the ending of the prayer. Link to post Share on other sites
Roll the Bones 74 Posted May 26, 2011 Author Share Posted May 26, 2011 Excellent article at alternethttp://www.alternet.org/belief/151086/high...eatened/?page=1Interview with Damon and his brotherhttp://friendlyatheist.com/2011/05/26/an-i...rother-jerrett/We are Jessica Ahlquist, Damon Fowler, and Harrison Hopkins: Three students fighting prayers in school. AUA answer questions on Reddit. Lots of good, bad and funny stuff.http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/hjd7...r_and_harrison/Total scholarship fund around $16,500 Link to post Share on other sites
Skeleton Jelly 2 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 - SJ should try to argue sometime instead of "arguing by mega-arguing," which is what I call what he usually does. Or not, it's hist style.I don't know what "mega-arguing" is or "hist style." Although hist style might just be a typo. Link to post Share on other sites
vbnautilus 48 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 I don't know what "mega-arguing" is or "hist style." Although hist style might just be a typo.I think he meant meta-arguing. Arguing about the argument. Link to post Share on other sites
Skeleton Jelly 2 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 I think he meant meta-arguing. Arguing about the argument.Oh, huh, I should've figured that out. I'm going to claim the "hist style" through me off. Two typos, Yorke?? What the hell, man? What. The. Hell. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Oh, huh, I should've figured that out. I'm going to claim the "hist style" through me off. Two typos, Yorke?? What the hell, man? What. The. Hell.Shouldn't that be 'threw'? Link to post Share on other sites
Skeleton Jelly 2 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Oh fuck me. Link to post Share on other sites
LongLiveYorke 38 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 I don't know what "mega-arguing" is or "hist style." Although hist style might just be a typo.I rather enjoyed these typos. Actually, the second one probably came because a plotting program that I was using when writing has something called "HistStyle," which describes how a histogram should be drawn. Meh. Link to post Share on other sites
LongLiveYorke 38 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Oh fuck me.Ha! Sweet vengeance! Link to post Share on other sites
brvheart 1,755 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Oh, huh, I should've figured that out. I'm going to claim the "hist style" through me off. Two typos, Yorke?? What the hell, man? What. The. Hell. Now you've taken it to a whole new level. Arguing about the argument of arguing about the argument. Link to post Share on other sites
Skeleton Jelly 2 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Arguing about the argument of only arguing about the argument.No I'm not. Link to post Share on other sites
brvheart 1,755 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 No I'm not.Man, you're really argumentative today. Link to post Share on other sites
LongLiveYorke 38 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Man, you're really argumentative today.Some would call it a Mega-Argument. Link to post Share on other sites
Spademan 94 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 - Spade is a bit of an a-hole with me of all people? The most vicious, virulent asshole on these boards? The ragin' cajun* two-megaton logic bomb? a bit of an a-hole The most vicious, virulent asshole on these boards? The ragin' cajun* a bit The most vicious, virulentI really have to step up my game.Also: Your concern is noted. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now