Theophobia

[MacCruiskeen]

Now show precisely where in the OP, or in the any of early pages of this thread, C_w "attribut[ed] qualities to posters here" of any kind whatsoever.

You cannot tell me that there isn't a prejudice, especially noticeable here on this board...against people who are spiritual.

I would tend to call that an attribution of qualities to posters here. A wonderfully vague accusation which must be taken on faith.

barracuda, you're surely not trying to argue that she's wrong, considering all the evidence provided by this very thread? The responses to her here at this Boys' Club have been dumb, abusive, smug, bullying, and at times nothing short of vile.

What's more: that post of C_w's you so desperately cite is not from this thread at all, least of all from the OP or from an early page, but (jesus christ almighty) from page 28 of another thread entirely.

[Canadian_watcher]

-------------
I've considered not posting this response at all, in light of Mac's latest contributions. But heck, I worked so hard on it, so here it is:
-------------

*sigh*

I wish someone else would chime in here, but I can't expect people to be online every minute ... anyway.. here we go:

Exhibit A

Agree. People of the christian faith have proven themselves to be dangerous and untrustworthy. Realistically, they can't even be trusted to follow the precepts of their own religion, and their political naiveté has allowed them to be manipulated to embrace the most hateful aspects of modern American life, including war and prejudice. Christians have a long way to go to show that they can be trusted ever again to think for themselves.

There are many reason to fear and avoid ignorance.

Exhibit B

It is the faithful that are frightened of the dark and want their hand held by a benevolent god or goddess. It is the faithful that are frightened of living a life that has a terminal point for their egos.

Exhibit C

From a recent interview between Noam Chomsky and Rabbi Michael Lerner (the whole thing is worth reading):

...


ML: But it’s not just issues of epistemology. because there we could have a good debate; it’s that there is a climate or a culture in the Left and the liberal arenas that simply assumes that anybody who would have a religious position must be intellectually underdeveloped or psychologically stuck, needing a father figure or scared of the unknown, or some other psychologically reductive analysis. ...
...

But it’s not just issues of epistemology. It’s that there is a climate or a culture on the Left that rightly observes that many who would have a religious position are intellectually underdeveloped or psychologically stuck, needing a father figure or scared of the unknown.

There. Fixed.

Exhibit D

Exhibit E

And while we can never decide for each other, we can do this groovy thing known as swapping evidence (however this is typically where dialogue with faith-based thunkers ends).

Exhibit F

Faith - its a lobotomy.

And finally, Exhibit G.

Exhibit G
Consists of the pervasiveness of the following:
- asking me the same quiz questions over and over, namely "define your faith, dammit!"
- hiding your intolerance of my views behind claims that they are really just intolerance of 'vagueness' (wtf?)
- refusing to separate Christian right-wing groups from FAITH, even after I tried fifty times to separate the two
- refusing to answer direct questions that could have moved the discussion along
- dog-piling
- deliberating misrepresenting my points, such as
---------- "that's a shame" turning in to "that is shameful"
---------- claiming that I've been dismissive or intolerant of people who do not have faith based on their lack of faith
---------- pretending that my objection to insult is just my 'lack of sense of humour.'

Now, having said all of this, I want it noted that this is for *you* - those of you who asked for me to undertake this endeavour. I certainly don't feel 'woe is me' about any of it. Big whoop-de-doo if you want to act this way. On the whole though, I don't have any respect for any of it - the behaviour outlined above, that is. And it has ZERO to do with your lack of faith. It has to do with your childish refusal to discuss this like adults.

[barracuda]

barracuda, you're surely not trying to argue that she's wrong, considering all the evidence provided by this very thread? The responses to her here at this Boys' Club have been dumb, abusive, smug, bullying, and at times nothing short of vile.

Yes, I think she's entirely wrong. Again, disagreeing with her does not constitute de facto prejudice. You have to expect some dog-piling when confronted with blanket, sweeping accusations. No one should be required to accept a denigration of their personal beliefs as somehow less whole. She doesn't, why should they?

[Canadian_watcher]

^ 'cuda woulda shoulda. (I like it, I'm keeping it)

perhaps you'd like to explain away the comments I so lovingly taped together above. How are they not irrational, angry, prejudiced, and wrong-headed?

substitute ANY other group into the quotes above and you'll see it.

[American Dream]

-------------


Exhibit D

Oh, come on! There is much to be critiqued in certain areas of (apolitical) "New Age" thought. It doesn't prove that one is against all "New Age" spiritualities to do so.

Much less against all "faith" or all religion...

[Canadian_watcher]

No one should be required to accept a denigration of their personal beliefs as somehow less whole. She doesn't, why should they?

except who? there's got to be an exception there because you're requiring me to accept that very thing by not stopping it and in fact participating in it.

[Canadian_watcher]

-------------


Exhibit D

Oh, come on! There is much to be critiqued in certain areas of (apolitical) "New Age" thought. It doesn't prove that one is against all "New Age" spiritualities to do so.

Much less against all "faith" or all religion...

Oh come on! There is much to be critiqued in certain areas of (apolitical) "homosexual" thought. It doesn't prove that one is against all "Homosexual" proclivities to do so.

[MacCruiskeen]

barracuda, you're surely not trying to argue that she's wrong, considering all the evidence provided by this very thread? The responses to her here at this Boys' Club have been dumb, abusive, smug, bullying, and at times nothing short of vile.

Yes, I think she's entirely wrong. Again, disagreeing with her does not constitute de facto prejudice. You have to expect some dog-piling when confronted with blanket, sweeping accusations. No one should be required to accept a denigration of their personal beliefs as somehow less whole. She doesn't, why should they?

Ballsachingly obviously, that was not and is not the point. You are spreading smokescreens, though not very successfully. And an apology from you is surely in order after your blatant attempt to smuggle in a comment from page 28 of another thread entirely in response to my clear and unambiguous request for a comment from the OP or the early pages of this thread that would support your assertion. Because your pseudoresponse was not just intellectually dishonest, it was a deliberate and sneaky waste of other people's time and energy. Which functions perfectly well as a summary of the cackling Boys' Club's conduct on this disgraceful and depressing thread.

[brainpanhandler]

Now show precisely where in the OP, or in the any of early pages of this thread, C_w "attribut[ed] qualities to posters here" of any kind whatsoever.

You cannot tell me that there isn't a prejudice, especially noticeable here on this board...against people who are spiritual.

I would tend to call that an attribution of qualities to posters here. A wonderfully vague accusation which must be taken on faith.

There's that to be sure and that is largely the essence of it, but let's also throw this in:

For those of you embittered, angry people who cannot possibly separate out the Christian Fundamentalists in the US from other people of faith - have it your way.

I mean really Mac, I don't think cw is actually addressing nonparticipating lurkers. Do you?

Bullies ganging together, insisting on how nice they are...

I said nothing about nice. I said nuanced and open minded. Nice is a welcome bonus that admittedly this thread could use more of. The world could use more plain niceness. Fine.

I'd be interested in a thread which dicusses the ways in which our personalities are different on a message board such as this compared to the real world. I think it's not unlike when we get in our cars, lock the doors and suddenly become assholes. We are not entirely ourselves here and even if we were we're only seeing each other through a knothole in the fence for god's sake. I'm not gonna start that thread.

Meanwhile, what constitutes misogyny?

It's your thread. Manup.

I was not unmindful of the gender bias in that word, but since cw seems to believe that giving people a taste of their own medicine is an edifying tactic I thought I'd give her a taste of a taste of her own medicine.

But you're right. No need to consider any other evidence. I'm a misogynist shadow on the wall of your cave. Carry on.

[Canadian_watcher]

To be fair, I did say this in this thread:

I do see that there is a prejudice, and that some otherwise perfectly open-minded, forward thinking, out-of-the-box type people (the best kind of people, IMO) are blinded by a bias they don't see that they have.

In light of any assertion by anyone that 'that stuff doesn't exist at RI' (meaning that a prejudice against people of faith doesn't exist at RI) I am forced to counter by saying that it does. I've felt it, seen it, read it, experienced it. I am not really offended by it nor do I feel oppressed by it, rather I think it is a shame. It is a crying shame.

but ummm... it's true. I've submitted the evidence, so does that count as some slight against my character?

anyway, I've about had it.

The Boyz Club Rulez!

Jeff, you really oughta bring these dogs to heel.

[norton ash]

And the shitty defense of a bad premise ends with a retreat into victimhood and hollering for mom and dad. Nice.

Maybe those who criticize the whole village shouldn't complain about dogpiles.

[American Dream]

And the shitty defense of a bad premise ends with a retreat into victimhood and hollering for mom and dad.

Not to mention gender-baiting...

[MacCruiskeen]

Spare us your foolish accusations and your halfwittedly "suggestive" ellipses, AD. Neither you nor any of the Bully-Boys here has a leg to stand on. QED. The thread speaks for itself.

[brainpanhandler]

You asked me the to do the following:

Now show precisely where in the OP, or in the any of early pages of this thread, C_w "attribut[ed] qualities to posters here" of any kind whatsoever.

And I provided this:

For those of you embittered, angry people who cannot possibly separate out the Christian Fundamentalists in the US from other people of faith - have it your way.

Now do you or don't you believe cw was addressing nonparticipating readers/lurkers?

edit:
And yes I understand you stipulated "early pages of this thread", but I fail to see why that matters at all, unless you want to argue that cw has been harassed into becoming irrational and throwing accusations around that she can't substantiate.

[Stephen Morgan]

I wish someone else would chime in here, but I can't expect people to be online every minute ... anyway.. here we go:

Some of us have other threads in which to be told to fuck off and die.

-------------


Exhibit D

Oh, come on! There is much to be critiqued in certain areas of (apolitical) "New Age" thought. It doesn't prove that one is against all "New Age" spiritualities to do so.

Much less against all "faith" or all religion...

Oh come on! There is much to be critiqued in certain areas of (apolitical) "homosexual" thought. It doesn't prove that one is against all "Homosexual" proclivities to do so.

I like that cartoon. Comic strip. Along with identity politics it's all the "Goody goody, lah-di-dah-di, namby hoity wishy pamby toity washy, dah-di-la-di, know-it-all, public school, stiff upper lip, stiff upper house master, prim and proper, Rule Brittannia" (to quote) bullshit that has replaced the honest money-based concerns of previous eras. Political and union action for higher wages, for example. I'm much more concerned as to whether people have a washing machine than whether their chakras are out of allignment.

Because that's what Jesus told me to be.