Page 11 of 12

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2021 2:13 pm
by henry quirk
Why are you focusing on rape in particular?

As I say up-thread, it cuts to the root of things. Rape, slavery, murder, these are unambiguous...it's difficult to dance around them. Each is wrong or not-wrong. There's no middle ground or gray area to hide away in.


I don't even know what you are getting at?

Yeah, you do. Morality is real or it's a fiction. If real, then we can legitimately say rape is wrong. If fiction then then best we can do is, as I say, make appeals to some hackneyed sentimentality that itself is just glands and electrochemicals and brain states.


What does it matter what I think?

I find when folks have their backs against the wall they dissemble like this to get themselves off the hook ...they don't like where the conversation is goin', it weighs against them, they don't want to consider the possibility they're wrong.

Me: I think you're better than that, Veg.

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2021 7:16 pm
by vegetariantaxidermy
henry quirk wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 2:13 pm Why are you focusing on rape in particular?

As I say up-thread, it cuts to the root of things. Rape, slavery, murder, these are unambiguous...it's difficult to dance around them. Each is wrong or not-wrong. There's no middle ground or gray area to hide away in.


I don't even know what you are getting at?

Yeah, you do. Morality is real or it's a fiction. If real, then we can legitimately say rape is wrong. If fiction then then best we can do is, as I say, make appeals to some hackneyed sentimentality that itself is just glands and electrochemicals and brain states.


What does it matter what I think?

I find when folks have their backs against the wall they dissemble like this to get themselves off the hook ...they don't like where the conversation is goin', it weighs against them, they don't want to consider the possibility they're wrong.

Me: I think you're better than that, Veg.
Morality isn't real. It's meaningless. It's simply a vague, all-encompassing, abstract way of describing what we as individuals think of as 'good behaviour'. We have many words that describe decent human bevaviour far more effectively.
Do you think it's 'immoral' to have sex outside marriage? Plenty do. What does that have to do with compassion and decency? Plenty of people think that it's 'immoral' for men to have sex with each other. What does that have to do with 'morality'? Isn't it strange that the only time the word seems to come up is from religious nuts talking about things that have absolutely nothing to do with anything except what they think their sky daddy is telling them to 'think'. 'Treat others as you would like to be treated' seems to cover most eventualities . As most people wouldn't wish to be slaughtered by military thugs then it would go a long way to solving the problem of wars.

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2021 10:36 pm
by henry quirk
Morality isn't real. It's meaningless.

The rape isn't wrong.

The best you can say is: I don't like it!.

-----

sex outside marriage
men...hav(ing) sex with each other


Speakin' as a deist and natural rights libertarian: what free wills choose for themselves is on them...some of what they choose may be whacky but it ain't a moral issue; some of they choose can lead to issues of morality (the one-night stand isn't, in itself, a moral issue...that which happens to the baby that might result from the one-night stand, is).

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2021 10:40 pm
by vegetariantaxidermy
henry quirk wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 10:36 pm Morality isn't real. It's meaningless.

The rape isn't wrong.

The best you can say is: I don't like it!.

-----

sex outside marriage
men...hav(ing) sex with each other


Speakin' as a deist and natural rights libertarian: what free wills choose for themselves is on them...some of what they choose may be whacky but it ain't a moral issue; some of they choose can lead to issues of morality (the one-night stand isn't, in itself, a moral issue...that which happens to the baby that might result from the one-night stand, is).
I knew it wouldn't take you long....

I don't care what fancy name you give it, you are still a religious nut.

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2021 10:52 pm
by henry quirk
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 10:40 pm
henry quirk wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 10:36 pm Morality isn't real. It's meaningless.

The rape isn't wrong.

The best you can say is: I don't like it!.

-----

sex outside marriage
men...hav(ing) sex with each other


Speakin' as a deist and natural rights libertarian: what free wills choose for themselves is on them...some of what they choose may be whacky but it ain't a moral issue; some of they choose can lead to issues of morality (the one-night stand isn't, in itself, a moral issue...that which happens to the baby that might result from the one-night stand, is).
I knew it wouldn't take you long....

I don't care what fancy name you give it, you are still a religious nut.
Yep...proud to be.

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2021 11:15 pm
by vegetariantaxidermy
henry quirk wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 10:52 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 10:40 pm
henry quirk wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 10:36 pm Morality isn't real. It's meaningless.

The rape isn't wrong.

The best you can say is: I don't like it!.

-----

sex outside marriage
men...hav(ing) sex with each other


Speakin' as a deist and natural rights libertarian: what free wills choose for themselves is on them...some of what they choose may be whacky but it ain't a moral issue; some of they choose can lead to issues of morality (the one-night stand isn't, in itself, a moral issue...that which happens to the baby that might result from the one-night stand, is).
I knew it wouldn't take you long....

I don't care what fancy name you give it, you are still a religious nut.
Yep...proud to be.
And a delusional hypocrite.

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2021 11:21 pm
by henry quirk
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 11:15 pm
henry quirk wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 10:52 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 10:40 pm

I knew it wouldn't take you long....

I don't care what fancy name you give it, you are still a religious nut.
Yep...proud to be.
And a delusional hypocrite.
Evidence, please.

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Sat May 01, 2021 12:46 am
by vegetariantaxidermy
Work it out for yourself. I'm not your mother.

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Sat May 01, 2021 12:50 am
by henry quirk
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 12:46 am Work it out for yourself. I'm not your mother.
In other words: you got nuthin'...as usual.

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Sat May 01, 2021 2:02 am
by vegetariantaxidermy
'Think' what you like. I'm done with banging my head against a brick wall.

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Sat May 01, 2021 10:52 pm
by henry quirk
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 2:02 am 'Think' what you like. I'm done with banging my head against a brick wall.
No stamina... 👎

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Sat May 01, 2021 11:58 pm
by Immanuel Can
henry quirk wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 10:52 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 2:02 am 'Think' what you like. I'm done with banging my head against a brick wall.
No stamina... 👎
It just means, "You keep proving me wrong, but I don't wanna to be proved wrong."

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Sun May 02, 2021 12:23 am
by henry quirk
Immanuel Can wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 11:58 pm
henry quirk wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 10:52 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 2:02 am 'Think' what you like. I'm done with banging my head against a brick wall.
No stamina... 👎
It just means, "You keep proving me wrong, but I don't wanna to be proved wrong."
Yeah.

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Sun May 02, 2021 1:15 am
by vegetariantaxidermy
Immanuel Can wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 11:58 pm
henry quirk wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 10:52 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 2:02 am 'Think' what you like. I'm done with banging my head against a brick wall.
No stamina... 👎
It just means, "You keep proving me wrong, but I don't wanna to be proved wrong."
Wrong about what, you pathetic, sycophantic little wanker?

Re: A Dawkins No-No

Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2021 12:59 pm
by Oakley
Well, Dawkins is a (insert your favorite snotty characterization here) but doing anything based on what happens on Twitter is (insert your favorite snotty characterization here).