That would be Talkback with Bob Larson. I know because I used to work in a print shop where the employees had gospel radio playing during the whole day and his show came on at 4. I hated every minute of that show.
Larson had this whiny, sanctimonious tone of voice. He either staged his calls or only accepted calls from naive & ignorant Jerry Springer guest types. He claimed he got a letter from Satan, peppered with quotes from Milton and Dante, telling him to give up his crusade. He later got a call from somebody speaking in a rough voice, telling him his name was Legion. That was the last straw for me. I started yelling “How can you people BELIEVE THIS SHIT???” My coworkers just basically shrugged their shoulders.
To be fair, Larson may not have been lying. Writing Letters from Satan to lunatic preachers, or calling them claiming my name was Legion, sounds like just the sort of thing I would’ve loved to do in high school. I was well-known in my town for having been exorcised more than anyone else.
AHA! Daniel Withrow is Legion! I thought your voice sounded familiar. How’s Mrs. Legion and the kids?
According to the links tomndebb provided, Larson wanted a death metal band to print up more T-shirts calling for his death, so he could show more proof that Satan was stalking him. I have no doubt* Larson was passing off pranks like that off as the real thing to get more pity donations.
Unsurprisingly, there is still no cite for this.
And really, that is one of the reasons I have a problem with this thread. It is a thread designed to promote ignorance. By being so incredibly lax in the standards for which a religious person can be called a nutjob, this thread does cross a line.
It becomes a place to inaccurately bash religious people, with insufficient or nonexistant evidence, where one feels one can be reasonably sure of not being called on it, and feels sure that they will not have to see their own beliefs mocked in such a way.
Except that in this case, you did get called on it.
And rather than accepting this unobtrusive call, you exploded in anger and personal attacks.
Lib did you a service by not letting this thread continue on its original ignorance-breeding purpose.
Can anyone honestly tell me that saying that this quoted segment applies only to religious nutjobs is not biased?
If I started a thread about athiest nutjobs, and in the OP said “this thread is for those who try to set humanity back by their uneducated diatribe, ignorance mongering, and general hatred towards humankind”, I would expect to be called on it.
I would be dissapointed if I WASN’T called on it.
But I assume that if someone dared to say “you know, non athiests can also use uneducated diatribes, ignorance mongering, and human hatred” you would have attacked them mercilessly. Right?
Nightime, surprising as it may be, I’ll concede your point to a degree. I was looking at the title of the thread, at the intro to it, at the example given, and at the request for more examples. I paid insufficient attention to the definition of the award in question. It was poorly framed, and should have reiterated that the thread was talking about religious nutjobs. Its failure to do so can lead to the implication you’re talking about, even though I don’t think anyone honestly reached that implication or agrees with it. However, its lack of clarity may have led to problems.
Personally, I think the problems would have arisen even if it had been clearer. But you’re right to a degree: it was poorly phrased.
I agree that the problem would not be completely solved by greater clarity.
I’ll use the example I used in the other thread:
“This is the Ymedaca award, the opposite of the Academy award. It is for people who are extremely poor actors. Only jews can be nominated for this award.”
Might just be me but: Rob Sherman: has a point – think of the outcry if the song made the invocation “to cause me to believe you are God” to Vishnu.
Alan Millar: has a point – think of the outcry if the symbol was the pentagram
Dr. Robert Spitzer: possible nutjobbery suggesting that homosexuality might be “curable” by therapies, but is pale in comparison to creationist nutjobbery (see the OP for an example)
Daniel Dennett: has a point. You do know that more than one influential person has suggested that atheism is un-American (and more)? What are we atheists to do?
Will Osuna: has a point. In fucking spades he has a point. How could anyone suppose it fair to oblige another to attend a religious ceremony that they do not believe in?
Claude Vorilhon: nutjob extraordinaire. Now, I don’t subscribe to the position that atheism is a religion, but apparently this lunatic does, that makes him a religious nutjob.