A Christian inflicts the worse possible insult (Surely Eternal Hellfire is as bad as it gets) without getting chided by his brethren. Debate can be done in a civil manner when the issue is taxes, or laws, or mathmatics. But religion exists entirely in the emotional plane and is not a quantifiable topic. (See War in Wiki; or your reference of choice for more information).
“Cunt” is degrogatory; inflamatory; gender polarized. But it ain’t terrorism, suicide bombs, or a WMD.
And while I agree that namecalling is frowned upon with good reason in a Great Debate- it pales in comparison to mass genocide, natural disasters, plagues, pilars of salt, fiery cleansing of Sodom and Gomorrah, “The Lord God is war” kind of thing that is espoused in the Holy Book. Bunch of prissy Christians take issue with a bad word and turn a blind eye to Old Testament terrorism.
Dear badchad , if I cross you- please call me a cunt instead of sending a plague of locusts, leprosy, killing my firstborn or some such.
Well, no, not exactly. He goes in to be as offensive as possible, so as to provoke a response that he can use to dismiss anyone who argues against him. It’s trolling, as he has more or less admitted - why he is allowed to get away with it in GD is beyond me.
It’s rather like debating white supremacy with someone who goes out of his way to call Martin Luther Kind a nigger.
Badchad is a great debater, his answers hit directly at the point, he doesnt pull any punches or avoid the topic. So far in everything Ive read about him I agree 100%, so that might cloud my judgement.
As for calling Jesus a cunt, well, that is rude and insulting, but I think sometimes necessary. “Cunt” is a hard word for most people to read or hear because of our society and all the baggage. Using it often will only serve to take away its severity.
Jodi, yes you…get OVER yourself. You got called a cunt. Its a small price to pay for freedom of speech, and you will not suffer any permanent damage(its actually up to you)
The alternative is hundreds of people getting killed because the pope quotes a 14th century emporer, or a danish cartoon pisses someone off, or well…I think you get the meaning. Oh, and I should add cuntcuntcunt. cunt.
I think it’s interesting that you would believe that being a complete forces people to “bring up their most devastating counter-attack,” rather than encouraging them to disengage. Certainly I know the effect it has on me, and it’s not to marshal my resources for a point-by-point rebuttal. I don’t debate with people who cannot be civil. Period. Not on the Boards, not IRL. To infer from a refusal to debate an inability to debate strikes me as tenuous and, in badchad’s case, self-serving. Like I said, I think he does it on purpose hoping that people will refuse to respond, and then when he’s the last man standing due to his own offensiveness, he can congratulate himself that he’s won. That’s a medal he can have, as far as I’m concerned. But the fact of his offensiveness can hardly be debated.
I agree that his behavior and people’s reactions do speak volumes; we obviously disagree as to what it speaks volumes about.
I think I spoke against FriarTed’s desire to see non-believers squirming at the foot of the Throne earlier in this thread, and I meant to do so in the originating discussions. If I was insufficiently vehement, let me add a little emphasis: It is unseemly, unchristlike, and crude to evince even an atom of joy at the notion of persons being cast into eternal hellfire. No God worthy of the name would sentence any of Her or His children to an infinitude of suffering for a finite amount of wrongdoing. If you feel glee at the prospect of any sinner, even Hitler, suffering such a fate, then you yourself are sinning, and you need to examine the mote in your own eye. Such statements do nothing but incite anger and disgust in others, and they are quite entitled to feel that way.
So? I feel quite certain that I could have a meaningful discussion with FriarTed or Revenant Threshold, both of whom I have substantial disagreements with on the subject, because neither is inclined to throw around inflammatory language for the sake of starting fires.
I am not contesting badchad’s position on the Bible. I believe many Christians are guilty of Bibliolatry, and I will not defend the many horrible accounts of murder, genocide, rape, and hatred in that book. I am criticizing badchad’s MANNERS.
Well, except that to call Jesus Christ a cunt can only be a matter of opinion, whereas calling Martin Luther King a nigger is a matter of fact. But I’ll go with my default behaviour of not calling anyone a nigger if that’s all right with everyone here.
I’m not a moderator, and I don’t play one in this forum.
When I enter a religious debate, and I see someone taking the side of the atheists calling Jesus a cunt, I tend to write that person off as someone who’s got a chip on thier shoulder and isn’t really interested in honest debate. They tend to be more interested in hearing their own voice cry out, “Religion is evil! Eeeeeeevil!”
badchad knows the Bible well, I admit that. But if his goal is to convince people of his position, he’s not going about it the right way, IMHO.
I get that some people don’t think spirited debate should take certain forms, but
there’s really no more horrible assertion you could make than that atheists will (or even may) suffer ever-lasting punishment for their lack of beliefs, or even that you know that atheists are any less moral or ethical than believers
the people condemning Badchad for indecorous debating form don’t think to chastise his adversaries for being far more offensive than he is. personally, I’d much rather be called a cunt than to be told that you are certain that I am inferior to you on the basis of a text whose authority it is I’m questioning. It’s a text of dubious authority that has caused much harm, and as a freethinking human I’m offended by its very existence. If you discuss religion wihtout making any a priori assumptions about Biblical or Christian claim to morality, I’ve got no problem treating you with perfect civility. But as soon as you pull out your big guns and aim them at me, civility goes out the window.
I’m all over myself, thanks. Being grossly insulted is not a small price to pay for freedom of speech. His right, your right, my right, anybody’s right to say whatever insulting, inflammatory, offensive bullshit we see fit does not come with a gold-plated guarantee that no one will be offended. See, the way free speech is, you get to say what you want, and then I get to do and say what I want in light of it. My personal standards for discourse do not include giving my time, effort, or attention to people who grossly insult me. Your mileage may vary, but who gives a shit? If you don’t like it, then you get over it. That’s free speech, baby.
What? The alternative to civilized discourse is violence? You must have just set some sort of land-speed record for construction of a straw man.
Oh, you naughty, naughty boy. If you’re lucky, mum will spank. :rolleyes:
Interesting point of view. I avoid debating with people who cannot form a clear position on what they are saying. Civility can vary depending on the nature of the debate, heck we are emotional creatures, but the gift of coherence is pretty much a requirement. I think badchad’s opinions are clearly stated and he debates in a classic, direct style, leaving little room for "interpretation.
Maybe then this belongs in IMHO rather than the Pit. Seems kinda lame to me to say what you seem to be saying, namely that Badchad seems to use a rhetoric that perhaps doesn’t help advance his arguments as optimally as they might deserve.
If they only way you know how to “debate” is to act like a troll, then it doesn’t say much for your skills. Most people can get their points across without being an offensive shithead.
I’m surprised badchad hasn’t been banned so far. Hell, at one point, I thought he WAS banned.
“Freedom of speech” doesn’t apply to a PRIVATELY owned message board, either. The rules in GD prohibit insults. And again, if you can’t get your point across without insults, then no, you’re not a “great debator”. You’re just a sad little troll.
Oh, and stop posting your stupid sig EVERY SINGLE POST, badchad!
I would be highly surprised if you were able to find an example on the Boards of when “his adversaries” have told him, or any of you, that you are inferior. And the behavior under discussion is his behavior on the Boards, in response to posters on the Boards.