Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by GoFish:
Okay, I've seen some threads that were a little "borderline" in taste or degenerated into tastelessness. I understand how some of them could be deleted. However, there was a very entertaining, popular, educational and even tasteful thread called "Evolution" that has disappeared.

Why?


GF,

I'll bet you a $20 that a guy named Bill Gray was directly or indirectly responsible.

e
Personally, I think it is high time for a thread entitled "Are you rapture ready?" myself.
Or maybe "Did Adam Mark I have a navel?"

However, B.G. is now on a rant against the Archbishop of Canterbury, claiming he wants to institute sharia in England...

I greatly miss the camp value of the "Evolution" thread immensely. It is almost the theatrical equivalent of a drag queen making it to the Top Ten of American Idol!
quote:
Originally posted by Kool-Aid:
Just so you all know (since it isn't posted anywhere) you can't have a username that is almost the name of a real person, reminds someone of a real person, is the same as an imaginary person that the someone worships, or anything else that might make the someone send endless PM's to the mods.


There are (or should be) exceptions to that rule.

A gentleman named "Ken Ham" signed in and created some stupendously wonderful satire of the "real" Ken Ham. The real Ken Ham is wildly ridiculed (or worshiped depending on your bent) all over the internet. This thread was no exception.

That thread was the equivalent of a Saturday Night Live sketch where any idiot knows it's not the real "George Bush" on the stage. It's what we call "entertainment."

The iron-fisted way in which the moderator deleted this thread (presumably because one Loud Mouth got offended) is inexcusable.
The guy at the corner convenience store is secure in his privacy. No one could come here under his name and say scurrilous things. He is a private citizen.

But Ken Ham is a very public figure, and in a free discussion, is subject to the ridicule he deserves, even if that means by satire or lampoonery.

If "Ken Ham"s posts were so offensive, then why weren't they removed, and the rest of the thread continued?

DF
Deep,

My guess is that the thread was deleted because a particular poster became insecure with the fact that he obviously couldn't hold his own in a debate. Consequently, a mod got tired of receiving phone calls and/or PMs about it from said poster and reacted out of frustration.

Then again, perhaps the mod who deleted the ENTIRE THREAD (one primarily featuring reasonable academic debate) simply fell out of touch with logic after being over-exposed to the fundy frame of "mind"?

Or maybe it was deleted in preparation for the Ides of March?

Regardless, I'm quite certain there is no rational explanation for that action.

e
I personally believe in creationism instead of evolution, so I didn't read the replies on that thread.

I do, however, believe that each and every person should be allowed to discuss and even debate any form of belief.

I hope the Mods can answer this one, because I think it is very important for us to know about FUTURE discussions/debates.
And now my "Creationism- Stupid and Dangerous" thread is gone.

It would be laughable if not for the serious issue of cowardly censorship. Is this forum scared of humorous lampooning of idiocy?

Does the TD think its readership is sufficiently weak-minded that it cannot handle controversy? Will this entire forum deteriorate to a junior high school slambook in which we discuss who's cute and popular?

This is a serious issue. I have enjoyed this forum for a year or so, but the cowardly actions of somebody to censor controversy makes the whole thing dull to the point of uselessness.

Maybe I should not have expected more of the TD, but I did.

DF
DF, that bothers ME too!!!

You have one side of the Topic, people like me have the other side of the Topic.

And I truly believe in shutting the debate/discussions down is unhealthy for this forum.

There is NOTHING wrong with debating about what we believe in or what we do not believe in!!!

I saw NOTHING on that post that constituted deletion, just debating, and debating is VERY HEALTHY.

Besides, over the years I have been on forums, I have learned a LOT of things from people who had opposite opinions from me. I welcome other's opinions.

Shutting people up only makes BOTH sides of the Topic angry.

That's sad.
My reply on your "dangerous and stupid" Post wasn't bad at all. I told you how I believed, and told you that I respected others for their belief systems.

I did NOT take offense at what you said, or even the title of your post, I just replied to it.

I hope you got to read my reply before it was deleted. UGH!!!

Now I am thinking of evolution, evolution from being adults back to children. Ya know?
The burning question is, Deep Fat, are you Rapture Ready™? I have some comic books to send you by noted theologian and believer in witchcraft inculcated by Dungeon and Dragons Jack Chick. But free is probably not good for God's Chosen Economic System™, laisser-faire anarcho-capitalism, so I shall sell you some DVDs, Mp3s, and even VHS tapes if Satan's technology hasn't got ahold of you yet.
Hi Deep,

You say, "And now my 'Creationism - Stupid and Dangerous' thread is gone."

Although I had only visited that discussion once and had not posted in it, I had not noticed it missing. I agree with Kindred that such discussions should not be deleted -- and should be allowed to run its course.

But, one thing to think about. In a discussion, be it a debate or whatever -- maybe you and Fish should consider other adjectives to use when referring to others and/or their beliefs, rather than adjectives such as "stupid" -- "liar" -- "ignorant" -- etc. There are ways to tell a person you disagree with him/her without calling them stupid, ignorant, liar, etc. Could it be that your new discussion was removed, which I sincerely regret, because you called the belief of creationism stupid?

Folks have wondered why the Evolution discussion was removed. There, again, I enjoyed the discussion. But, don't you think it was because a new member decided to use a real person's name -- and post comments he/she attributed to that real person? That, Deep, is libelous defamation. We can have serious, and sometimes not so serious, discussions using our own name, as I do, or using a pseudonym as most do -- without defaming another person not even involved in the discussion by using their real name.

I know how that feels; for a few months back a person did that to me. This person took my name, with a small variation, and started posting comments that I would never say or write. That is not very cool. It is one thing to post a comment saying Bill Gray is a jerk -- which has been done often. But, it is quite another to post comments, allude that they are from Bill Gray, and write incorrect statements.

In that respect, I can see why the moderator would remove these false posting on Evolution -- but, not why the mod would remove the whole discussion. But, again, maybe it was because, when this misled person began posting comments supposedly written by another -- you jumped in and supported this miscarriage with your supporting comments.

Long story short -- let's have good dialogues, let's debate one another, let's agree or disagree -- but let's keep it on an adult level. If we all stop using derogatory adjectives -- and just agree to disagree -- we can have interesting discussions without the mods having to step in.

That also applies to using another's real name -- or the name of the Lord and God that most of us worship and respect -- in a derogatory manner or as a phony Forum ID. In other words, you continue to call me Bill, I will continue to call you Deep -- and let's take the gloves off; but, in a civil manner.

Just my thoughts.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill Gray
billdory@pacbell.net

Alabama bred,
California fed,
Blessed by God to be a Christian American!
Bill,

Was it you who repeatedly sent PMs and/or made phone calls to the mods regarding that Evolution thread?

It surely wasn't Mr. Ham, as he had no time to visit the TD forums - regardless of what was being said. Simply put, he didn't give a rat's rear about the place. You, on the other hand, appear to get all worked up about it. Perhaps you should contact him about the biblical teachings he consulted to bring him calm and peace in the face of satire. (After all, you clearly know his number. In fact, you published that personal information in a public post on this forum - a clear violation of the Terms of Membership.)

Secondly, do you even recognize satire? Satire does NOT mean that something is "supposedly written by another." Let me be direct. Have you ever seen political or celebrity impersonators on television? Did you actually think that person was the actual politician or celebrity? If not, then why would you assume that your fellow forum readers here are not as intellectually astute as yourself? While you might not have enjoyed the humor everyone else did, you would be a fool to think that that person was the real Mr. Ham. However, you seem to lack faith in the intelligence of the other readers here to discern the quite obvious difference. That's rather surprising considering the abundance of "faith" you claim to have.

Quit pandering to and patronizing others in such a way as to suggest you are better or smarter than anyone else here. You might not be intellectually-endowed enough to realize that you're not, but everyone else here is quite aware of the reality of the situation.

e
quote:
Could it be that your new discussion was removed, which I sincerely regret, because you called the belief of creationism stupid?

I certainly hope not, Bill, because that would reduce this forum to the intellectual level of laying sod. I have my doubts, however.

Now about using Ken Ham's name, albeit altered. So what? He's a public figure, and as such has no right nor expectation of privacy in the arena of the discussion of evolution. Whoever used a name close to his (it was not me, I assure you) did not insinuate that he was a loathesome character. He was not accused of anything, other than a ridiculous view of natural history, which is fair game.

Let's just say that the moderator found that offensive. Why not delete the postings, rather than the entire thread? Referring to the quote above, is it possible the mod has an axe to grind with respect to the discussion of Creationism? If that is the case, let us forego all future discussions of any gravity whatever and stick to kittens and knitting, if knitting is not too controversial.

What the he11 use is a forum on which controversial, strongly-held beliefs cannot be discussed, argued, and debated? My god, how dull as dishwater would that be, and what a waste of time.

Regarding "kenn hamm" again, that was funny. It's a lampoon of a guy with a fervent point of view. It was a send-up, a goof. I like to think I have a sense of humor, although I'll admit I'm not in a humorous mood at the moment. My "Creationism--Stupid and Dangerous" thread started with two quite funny, yet pithy, videos regarding Creationism. Apparently, they were a bit raw for the sensibilities of the forum censors. Is this what we've come to here, Hall Monitors protecting you and I from the sharp edges of adulthood?

Bob help us all, if that is what this place has become.

I appreciate your willingness to engage in open debate, but I refuse to stop using satire, irony, lampoonery, and ridicule to make my points. The dry, dusty refutation of bogosity by the exchange of factual evidence is only part of the free exercise of the debating arts. Yes, I realize that by using humor I am often fighting with the unarmed. Sorry. I'm not going to stop. Their tough bananas.

In fundy Islam, wives not only can be beaten, not only should they be beaten, but they must be beaten. Preferably with sticks. Shall I respect this barbarism because it is religion? Not only will I not respect this tenet of Islam, but I will do that which gives them the biggest of rashes; I will ridicule and belittle them for it. They deserve my disrespect and more, and they should be ready for it.

It's the same with Creationism. Should I argue against it seriously? It's not a serious argument; it's an absurd fabrication that deserves to be hit with every missile in my arsenal. Know that I have lots of laser-guided, GPS JDAM warheads ready for it, too. If that gets my threads deleted, I will start new ones until they kick me out of here.

Censorship is cowardice, it always has been. I wear others' censorship as a badge of honor, knowing I have crushed their feeble arguments or challenged their comfortable dogma.

As a side note, let me repeat e's question: Did you complain to the mods about "kenn hamm"? I will trust to your honesty in your reply.

DF
Last edited by DeepFat
I think that instead of pointing fingers at Bill, perhaps you should all take a look at yourselves.

Whoever had that thread deleted was clearly looking out for your spiritual safety. Try and open your eyes a little. What this imposter "Kenn Ham" brought was evil, despicable, and yes, dangerous. It was a form of humor, and God does not like it.

If you'll open your Bible to Genesis 6:13, God says... well, I'll tell you, it isn't funny. Turn to Job 2:4. Again, dry and serious. What we see here is a clear indication that God not only lacks a sense of humor, he actually hates humor and wants man to have no part of it.

Throughout the Bible, God has reserved laughter for those whose enemies have been smitten, or whose bellies are full. Laughter is for ridicule or holy gratitute. It is not to be used as a response to satire, which is quite possibly the Devil's work.

God bless us all, everyone.
Hi Deep,

You say, "I appreciate your willingness to engage in open debate, but I refuse to stop using satire, irony, lampoonery, and ridicule to make my points."

Deep, my Friend, if those are the only tools you have -- then, God bless you. I guess you just have to use whatever skills you have. Pity, for they do detract from good discussions.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bil
Hi Deep,

You say, "It's the same with Creationism. Should I argue against it seriously? It's not a serious argument; it's an absurd fabrication that deserves to be hit with every missile in my arsenal."

If you cannot respect another's belief; does that give you a right to ridicule it? You might not believe it; you might even adamantly disagree with it -- but, does that give you the right to call that person or his/her belief "stupid?"

You say, ". . .it's an absurd fabrication that deserves to be hit with every missile in my arsenal."

Yet, you always use Chinese firecrackers!

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill
Bill,

Address your own thought:

If you cannot respect another's belief; [sic] does that give you a right to ridicule it have it censored? You might not believe it; you might even adamantly disagree with it -- but, does that give you the right to call that person or his/her belief "stupid?" have it censored?
quote:
Originally posted by DeepFat:
quote:
If you cannot respect another's belief; does that give you a right to ridicule it?


What gives me the right to ridicule Creationism is that it is ridiculous.

DF

Hi Deep,

As I said before, use whatever tools or skills God gave you, no matter how limited.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill
This is the NYT-TD forum. They can delete whatever they want, when they want, for reasons they deem sufficient.

I'm sure the local moderator has some discretion. Obviously he felt the need to exercise it. It is his job.

We can agree or disagree.

Do I agree? I didn't see all of the material so I can't say one way or the other, but I will say that he, or she, should only delete certain posts. To do a hatchet job on the entire thread which had some quality non-offensive material isn't fair. Unwarranted caving in or pandering is weak. Of course that is my humble opinion.
Hi Miamizsun and all,

I agree that when some posts become offensive those posts should be deleted -- without deleting the entire discussion.

But, maybe it is just easier for the moderators to delete the entire discussion; rather than have to wade through the whole discussion looking for offensive posts. Maybe if folks use the "Report This Post" button it would make the mods job easier and they would not do the complete hatchet job.

I, too, enjoyed the Evolution discussion and was sad to see it deleted entirely.

On the other hand, maybe this can be a wake-up call for us. If we work at not being offensive in our posts -- to anyone -- there would be no reason to delete any posts.

I know that some will say this will take the fun out of the Forum. But, isn't the purpose of the Forum that we have a place for civilized dialogues, where we can ALL share our views on life, love, religion, and politics -- without having to wait for the shoe to fall?

One thing I have always liked about this Forum is that we do have many intelligent folks -- many points of view -- and good debates between differing points of view. The one thing that has made me uncomfortable is when someone has to resort to names like "stupid" -- "ignorant" -- "liar" -- and such. I can say you are wrong, or that I disagree with you -- without calling you stupid, liar, etc.

Of course no posts have been deleted for such name calling. But, you have to admit that the Forum would be more productive, and more pleasant, if we can eliminate the name calling -- have our heated debates -- and still be Forum Friends.

Just my thoughts.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill Gray
billdory@pacbell.net

Alabama bred,
California fed,
Blessed by God to be a Christian American!

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Snoopy_Running
Mr. Bill,

I'm sure you would like the ridiculous theory of Creationism to be treated with respect. Sorry, it does not deserve respect.

Civilized dialog? Sure, bring it on. Show us the scientific proof for Creationism. We'd all like to see it.

No one has to "resort" to words like idiocy, stupid, liar. Those are perfectly good words in the English language to describe Creationists.

Creationism is a lie. A deliberate lie, fostered by cowards who cannot stand that the biblical account of creation does not stand to our species' best knowledge of how we came to be. It is a poor reflection on biblical fundamentalists, and unnecessarily so.

Do you expect me to stand silently and accept this? If you think that I will respect this point of view for whatever reason, think again. Never will I. I have no respect for lies.

So, I'm sorry if accurate words offend you. You have no right to be free of offense. I'm sorry if the truth offends you. You'll just have to be offended.

I don't come here to deliberately offend. I'm generally a pretty light-hearted guy, but I am invested with a solid sense of reality, and Creationism abrades me in the worst way. It is a disservice to the uneducated and weak-minded, and an insult to hundreds of years of human progress and intelligence.

I will never back down.

And I will use whatever language is necessary.

DF
Unlike some, I give intellectual credit to the readers and contributors of this forum.

They are not Happy Happy Joy Joy grinning idiots who swallow the anachronistic fables of our species' youth as literal truth.

If plain language is called for to strip away the Creationist veils of delusion that surround the world's development, then plain language you will see.

DF

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×