Fetus fetishist and intellectual cripple SUZANNE defines the boundaries of the discussion:
Natural Law is contingent on some of these notions:
* God exists and created the universe. He created human beings to happy [sic] in union with him.
Similarly, I would now like to demonstrate that all Blogging Tories are morons. Let us first assume, for the sake of argument, that all Blogging Tories are morons. The rest of the proof kind of follows from that in an obvious way.
OOOO! OOO!! OOOO!!!!
Finally the attention she so richly deserves! It's nice to know our crazies are getting some respect!
Of course, the Blogging Tories are demonstrably morons--you don't need to assume that axiom.
Assuming an axiom implies that it's true but can't be proven easily. BT's show their 'moroniness' almost every time they post. Therein lies the proof.
However, no one can demonstrate that God exists or that he created the universe.
'Cause that demonstration would be a proof.
And a proof is what we've all been waiting for (but that would deny faith, or something like that).
Completely not like the dyslexic insomniac agnostic--stays up all night wondering if there's a dog
CC - if you and your fellow progressives feel up to it, I'm suggesting a little, well, challenge..
Go ahead, prove that us knuckle-dragging cons truly are the self-interested greedheads many suggest and that Progressives really can make a difference..
Good God... Okay. Let me assume for a second that she's right (*choke*) and that God exists, created the universe and created humans to be happy in union with him.
But... none of what she's saying necessarily falls out from that. I mean, take the bit on conscience, and knowing which actions are evil. She just assumes that we innately know what is good and what is evil, through God. But someone surely has to teach us what God has said. And it's not like the Bible does a great job of that (Shrimp is apparently the same abomination as homosexuality - why do the nutjobs always miss that?)
Good lord... why am I even arguing this. She's nuttier than an almond roll. None of her logic is logical, none of her reasoning sound.
I have issues, clearly. :)
Actually, I just really really hate bad logic. Even if one accepts her premise as true (and, actually, I do to a certain extent, but not in the spirit she intended), none of the conclusions are valid.
GAH! Clearly, I am awake way too early!
She's nuttier than an almond roll.
Which explains why I can't read her blog - I'm allergic to nuts.
I caught myself over there trying to fix her, but it didn't work. Then I decided to do something useful with my time instead.
Blob Blogging Wingnut engages in tautological and ideological word salad.
Other forms of logic are beyond her abilities.
Seems we have a lot of people here who talk a good game, but, who, perhaps don't really want to step up to the plate..
Oi vay iz mir!
I'm a frickin' high school drop out and I can rip great steaming chunks out of her 'arguments'.
There's ten minutes of my life I won't get back. :(
roblaw, I have been donating money to United Way and other community and international support organizations all my working life, as well as volunteering time most of my life thanks to the example set by my 'working poor' parents - most certainly not conservatives by your criteria.
I have nothing to prove to you on that score, regardless of your so-called study.
..deBeauxOs.. I commend your willingness to get off the keyboard to help out others.. that's my only point.. the "study" and my blog isn't intended to seriously make a point, beyond asking us all to think of others for a moment..
Lighten up. And point for team red.
Feliz Navidad, Shalom..
"perhaps don't really want to step up to the plate.."
then again, maybe some of us just couldn't give a fuck about your "challenge"
why you want to be an apologist for the likes of allcaps is beyond me....
We're talking about philosophy here. If you want to pimp your pathetic "challenge," do it on your own fucking blog.
P.S. Oh, and you have a lot of nerve coming into a den of progressive, leftist moonbats and daring us to measure up to the altruism and compassion of today's Right. Really, roblaw, that takes a fuck of a lot of nerve, don't you think?
Now piss off.
I left a nice long rebuttal over there, dissecting her arguement. I had to spread it across two comments. Now, shall we see how long it stays up?
I have the text...if it disappears, it becomes a blog post at my place.
Shall we start a pool?
What CC said -- now go fuck off and hijack someone else's blog.
P.S. Unlike the attention whores on the "Right", the majority of the progressive, leftist moonbats I know (including myself) give money every month to charity with no "look at me! look ate me!" shrieks.
You know ... 'cause that's just the way we're made and not because we're looking to "score points".
Thanks for playing -- you fail.
SUZANNE is "not even wrong" as the saying goes...
(Mike desperately tries to put the thread back on topic...."
Ok - Lulu and CC, no biggie - best to you and yours in the coming New Year - regardless of politics from, well, an obviously moronic blogging tory. Whether you like it or not, we're actually all in this together.. the sooner everyone gets that, the better off we'll be.
And that roblaw, is the problem.
I know from personal experience that many on the Right don't regard people like me as being part of the 'together'.
Thanks to your beloved Mike Harris I got to be homeless on a February night.
You'll forgive me if I doubt the inclusiveness of your side of the political equation?
"the sooner everyone gets that, the better off we'll be."
the choir thanks you for the sermon, vicar. now, if you'd just turn to your right a bit....
Post a Comment