Monday, February 20, 2006

Comments, setting a lower level for stupidity, and "Jinx McHue."

You think I would have learned by now that, whenever I get involved in a discussion with the commenter once known as "Jinx McHue" (now going under the name "Jason"), it's going to end badly, with Jinx displaying such an appalling ignorance of simple Christian theology and scholarship, I finally have to just ban him from commenting.

(As an aside, note how I'm very careful to say that Jinx knows absolutely fuck-all about Christian scholarship, which generally involves having a clue about the history of the religion, its origins and so on. Jinx is certainly an expert at Christian apologetics, which represents the sort of thing you hear from Sunday morning TV preachers and should in no way be confused with actual scholarship.)

Back here, Jinx was howling with laughter over the suggestion that Genesis having two conflicting creation stories was, as I put it, "well known." When I pointed out that a simple Google search on that notion came back with over two million hits, his reaction was, well, what does that prove? And it's at that point where you know that any further discussion is pointless so I'm going to take some friends' advice and, once again, just delete any further comments from Jinx on this blog.

Jinx will, of course, claim victory and accuse me of censorship. Not at all -- anyone who wants to continue reading his ignorant swill is welcome to visit his blog here, where one is certain to find the latest in wretchedly dishonest Christian-based rubbish. I would never dream of trying to keep Jinx from publishing whatever asinine religious nonsense his little heart desires. But I reserve the right to decide that what he's posting here is just too stupid to waste any more time on.

To paraphrase a well-known saying, trying to educate Jinx is like trying to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of time, and it annoys the pig.


grog said...

Actually, the funny bit (to me) is that when you actually present him with a bit of the very scripture he claims to be so inerrant, he shuts up.

Like most neo-Christians (aka Theo-Cons), he's dutifully memorized whatever crap he hears at Church - or reads on the AgapePress website - and then vomits it up wherever he goes, without really understanding any of it.

Ferdzy said...

You give him far too much credit. An apologetic, according to my dictionary, is "a reasoned defence, esp. of Christianity."

Nothing reasoned in his defence; he's just squalling as far as I can see.

Anonymous said...

This article makes interesting reading on Christian religion south of the border.

Only 40 percent of Americans can name more than four of the Ten Commandments, and a scant half can cite any of the four authors of the Gospels. Twelve percent believe Joan of Arc was Noah’s wife. This failure to recall the specifics of our Christian heritage may be further evidence of our nation’s educational decline, but it probably doesn’t matter all that much in spiritual or political terms. Here is a statistic that does matter: Three quarters of Americans believe the Bible teaches that “God helps those who help themselves.” That is, three out of four Americans believe that this uber-American idea, a notion at the core of our current individualist politics and culture, which was in fact uttered by Ben Franklin, actually appears in Holy Scripture. The thing is, not only is Franklin’s wisdom not biblical; it’s counter-biblical.


Anonymous said...

Thank you, CC.
Perhaps now he'll get on with his duties at the REAL Jesusland. For the benefit of us sinners, of course.
And it'll be quieter here on the Eastern front.

Alison said...

Hey Jinx - pop quiz!
How many different official versions of the Ten Commandments are there? Three? Five?

Oh that's right - you're not allowed in to answer now.

Famousringo said...

Aw. I was finding him terribly amusing.

Is it cruel to take joy in the antics of the retarded?

CC said...

The problem with Jinx (and, yes, I know he goes by the name "Jason" these days but he'll always be "Jinx" on this site) is that he's not amusing so much as painfully tedious.

His standard M.O. is to say something incredibly moronic, get called on it, then immediately redefine the terminology to get off the hook, move those darned goalposts or just change the subject entirely.

On more than one occasion, I've explicitly challenged him to back up some statement he's made, or retract it if he's been shown to be clearly wrong. It's never happened.

As an analogy, dealing with Jinx is like dealing with Bill Strong. It's pretty much the same level of pompous, breathtaking ignorance and dishonesty either way.

jeff said...

Chalk another left winger up to censorship. What else is new...

GoodGrief said...

Jeff, there is a difference between censorship, and swatting a mosquito. You can still read Jinx at his own blog, just not here, and thank goodness for that. He really did not exhibit any intelligence, just a desire to roil the waters and stir up controversy. Boring in the extreme, and I for one am quite happy about CC's decision.

CC said...

I wouldn't be too hard on Jeff, as he's being perfectly predictable. The recipe for being a wanker (or defending one, for that matter):

1) Find a forum on which most people disagree completely with everything you say.

2) Make a total ass of yourself.

3) Eventually, piss off everyone to the extent that you're banned.

4) Holler "censorship" and wrap yourself in the mantle of martyrdom.

Of course, Jeff will never have a harsh word for the folks over at Free Republic, who delete entire threads and ban posters who simply disagree with the common view.