|
|
Post by Aj_June on Sept 5, 2018 13:55:58 GMT
You can stop addressing my points if you please and that would not be surprising to me. I’m not interested in your points at all. YOU responded to MY point by ignoring my actual point and equivocating over terminology. The point I was making is that Ben Shapiro is crazy (and all theists who believe in something based on faith are similarly crazy). Pick whatever terminology that you prefer (retarded, delusional, insane, etc). But the term is unimportant to my point, especially when I explained what I meant. Now YOU can stop addressing MY point if you please, and it looks like you’ve already done that, so there’s really nothing else to say. Here is your original point that I addressed in my first post.
That is your statement in which you called another poster mentally retarded and all other devoutly religious people as mentally retarded. I have addressed your post and not some fictional post. You can claim some more that I am not addressing your points. But that's not true as anyone can see I addressed your points. To remind you once again, the term mentally retarded has a definition and people do not become that just by being religious or devoutly religious. It is not just my personal opinion but opinion held by psychologists and experts.
|
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Sept 5, 2018 14:10:45 GMT
I’m not interested in your points at all. YOU responded to MY point by ignoring my actual point and equivocating over terminology. The point I was making is that Ben Shapiro is crazy (and all theists who believe in something based on faith are similarly crazy). Pick whatever terminology that you prefer (retarded, delusional, insane, etc). But the term is unimportant to my point, especially when I explained what I meant. Now YOU can stop addressing MY point if you please, and it looks like you’ve already done that, so there’s really nothing else to say. Here is your original point that I addressed in my first post.
That is your statement in which you called another poster mentally retarded and all other devoutly religious people as mentally retarded. I have addressed your post and not some fictional post. You can claim some more that I am not addressing your points. But that's not true as anyone can see I addressed your points. To remind you once again, the term mentally retarded has a definition and people do not become that just by being religious or devoutly religious. It is not just my personal opinion but opinion held by psychologists and experts.
Okay, and to remind you (for the final time), it is a product of mental deficiency for someone to default to faith as a means of discerning any kind of truth. That applies to every theist (including those on this board). If you want to argue that point any further, I invite you to do so now. If you want to argue semantics then we’re done. |
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Sept 5, 2018 14:17:40 GMT
Here is your original point that I addressed in my first post.
That is your statement in which you called another poster mentally retarded and all other devoutly religious people as mentally retarded. I have addressed your post and not some fictional post. You can claim some more that I am not addressing your points. But that's not true as anyone can see I addressed your points. To remind you once again, the term mentally retarded has a definition and people do not become that just by being religious or devoutly religious. It is not just my personal opinion but opinion held by psychologists and experts.
Okay, and to remind you (for the final time), it is a product of mental deficiency for someone to default to faith as a means of discerning any kind of truth. That applies to every theist (including those on this board). If you want to argue that point any further, I invite you to do so now. If you want to argue semantics then we’re done. Nice to see you actually not addressing your own points when proven incorrect and asking to start another discussion of your choice.
Your claim -> You are a religious person (and therefore also mentally retarded, as are all devoutly faithful in my judgment).
Definition of mental retardation
: subaverage intellectual ability equivalent to or less than an IQ of 70 that is accompanied by significant deficits in abilities (as in communication or self-care) necessary for independent daily functioning, is usually present from birth or infancy, and is manifested especially by delayed or abnormal development, by learning difficulties, and by problems in social adjustment.
Sure the religious people fulfil the definition of mental retardation. 
|
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Sept 5, 2018 14:21:25 GMT
Okay, and to remind you (for the final time), it is a product of mental deficiency for someone to default to faith as a means of discerning any kind of truth. That applies to every theist (including those on this board). If you want to argue that point any further, I invite you to do so now. If you want to argue semantics then we’re done. Nice to see you actually not addressing your own points ... Goodbye  |
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Sept 5, 2018 14:23:12 GMT
Nice to see you actually not addressing your own points ... Goodbye Yeah ok. Bye bye to the person who categorises people as mentally retarded on his whims.  |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 5, 2018 14:25:38 GMT
Lol at Bryce thinking the majority of the planet is mentally retarded.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Sept 5, 2018 14:26:42 GMT
Lol at Bryce thinking the majority of the planet is mentally retarded. Imagine the cost of running health services in such a world. Especially the lack of required medical professionals. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Sept 5, 2018 14:28:14 GMT
Lol at Bryce thinking the majority of the planet is mentally retarded. I don’t know why you think that’s “funny”. I actually find it quite sad and depressing. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Sept 5, 2018 14:32:21 GMT
Mentally stable people!
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 5, 2018 14:36:02 GMT
Lol at Bryce thinking the majority of the planet is mentally retarded. I don’t know why you think that’s “funny”. I actually find it quite sad and depressing. why? It doesn’t affect reality beyond realizing Bryce is a goober. I suppose I could pity him but it seems like a waste of perfectly good pity. Bryce is like Trump in that his delusions tell him everyone else is delusional. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Sept 5, 2018 14:42:14 GMT
I don’t know why you think that’s “funny”. I actually find it quite sad and depressing. why? It doesn’t affect reality beyond realizing Bryce is a goober. Well, you either want me to provide an answer for why I think any sane person should find it sad that so many people have faith, OR you want to engage in ad hominem. Talking about me in the third person is not a conversation that would compel me to indulge you. What’s your pleasure “Christian”? |
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Sept 5, 2018 14:58:30 GMT
I can’t be the only one to have noticed how considerably Bryce’s manners, etiquette and respect has dropped since abandoning Christianity and adopting atheism?
Take the state of his contribution to this thread for prime example.
|
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Sept 5, 2018 17:26:39 GMT
I can’t be the only one to have noticed how considerably Bryce’s manners, etiquette and respect has dropped since abandoning Christianity and adopting atheism? Take the state of his contribution to this thread for prime example. That might be an interesting analysis to undertake for someone who self identifies as a Christian AND who actually possessed manners and respect for other people in the first place. So, I think we should wait until such a person comes along who can make that argument, and perhaps they can give their perspective on it. Clearly that someone is not you (who spends most of your time here insulting and denigrating other people in support of Christianity). |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Sept 5, 2018 17:27:02 GMT
why? It doesn’t affect reality beyond realizing Bryce is a goober. Well, you either want me to provide an answer for why I think any sane person should find it sad that so many people have faith, OR you want to engage in ad hominem. Talking about me in the third person is not a conversation that would compel me to indulge you. What’s your pleasure “Christian”? Yeah, that's what I thought! |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Sept 5, 2018 18:43:54 GMT
You called him mentally retarded, don't start making distinctions between when and where when your comment backfires on you. It didn’t backfire on me, and I made no such distinctions. You ATTEMPTED to force a distinction by telling me you thought he was “clever”, as if that disproves his level of stupidity. People can be clever AND stupid at the same time; a fact that you don’t seem to object too. The fact that some stupid people are clever is irrelevant if they are still also stupid! Do you really want me to count a how many fallacious arguments you just made here? You literally just appealed to “your friend” as some kind of authority for establishing what is true. DonIneven need to go further than that? You also suggested that academic achievement and career is a reflection of wisdom. Here’s a news flash...it isn’t! Whether I agree with Ben Shapiro on anything or not isn’t relevant. Wisdom is reflected by whether or not you can make a valued judgment based on what you know to be true, not how much knowledge you have. And ANYONE who is clever (and privileged) can have a “career”. If George W Bush can ascend to the Presidency of the United States, then having the highest “cognitive function” is probably not a requirement for having a career! You, you are 'my friend' in that comment. I suggest you read it again.
Speaking of fallacious, who ever brought up wisdom? You said he was mentally retarded, this is blatantly not true. He is a Harvard graduate, he graduated school 2 years early.
Lets be clear, you think he is an abhorrent person because you disagree with his opinion, that does not make him mentally retarded.
|
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Sept 5, 2018 19:10:00 GMT
It didn’t backfire on me, and I made no such distinctions. You ATTEMPTED to force a distinction by telling me you thought he was “clever”, as if that disproves his level of stupidity. People can be clever AND stupid at the same time; a fact that you don’t seem to object too. The fact that some stupid people are clever is irrelevant if they are still also stupid! Do you really want me to count a how many fallacious arguments you just made here? You literally just appealed to “your friend” as some kind of authority for establishing what is true. DonIneven need to go further than that? You also suggested that academic achievement and career is a reflection of wisdom. Here’s a news flash...it isn’t! Whether I agree with Ben Shapiro on anything or not isn’t relevant. Wisdom is reflected by whether or not you can make a valued judgment based on what you know to be true, not how much knowledge you have. And ANYONE who is clever (and privileged) can have a “career”. If George W Bush can ascend to the Presidency of the United States, then having the highest “cognitive function” is probably not a requirement for having a career! You, you are 'my friend' in that comment. I suggest you read it again. Okay, well maybe you should re-write it so that instead of a paragraph that is one, long run on sentence with irregular punctuation, it’s actually a bit more coherent. Did you or did you not suggest that someone was intelligent based on their academic success?  I don’t think that his academic success invalidates my position at all. He is in fact an idiot IF he believes the things that he claims to believe. This is irrespective of where/when he graduated. That is a straw man argument. I never said he was an abhorrent person at all. I said he was dumb! I don’t abhor dumb people; even if they annoy me. I tend to pity them. |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Sept 5, 2018 19:27:24 GMT
You, you are 'my friend' in that comment. I suggest you read it again. Okay, well maybe you should re-write it so that instead of a paragraph that is one, long run on sentence with irregular punctuation, it’s actually a bit more coherent. Did you or did you not suggest that someone was intelligent based on their academic success? I don’t think that his academic success invalidates my position at all. He is in fact an idiot IF he believes the things that he claims to believe. This is irrespective of where/when he graduated. That is a straw man argument. I never said he was an abhorrent person at all. I said he was dumb! I don’t abhor dumb people; even if they annoy me. I tend to pity them. No, you said he was mentally retarded, that is flagrantly not the case, what you should have said is that you think he is stupid for holding the opinions that he holds.
|
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Sept 5, 2018 19:44:00 GMT
Okay, well maybe you should re-write it so that instead of a paragraph that is one, long run on sentence with irregular punctuation, it’s actually a bit more coherent. Did you or did you not suggest that someone was intelligent based on their academic success? I don’t think that his academic success invalidates my position at all. He is in fact an idiot IF he believes the things that he claims to believe. This is irrespective of where/when he graduated. That is a straw man argument. I never said he was an abhorrent person at all. I said he was dumb! I don’t abhor dumb people; even if they annoy me. I tend to pity them. No, you said he was mentally retarded, that is flagrantly not the case, what you should have said is that you think he is stupid for holding the opinions that he holds. I did say that. I also thoroughly explained what I meant when I said he was retarded. So what are you still arguing with me for?  |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Sept 5, 2018 20:24:36 GMT
My question to Jews, practising or not, is why do they still mutilate baby boy penises without consent? It is after all a religious practice as an offering to God to ensure they get to heaven... Circumcision is reversible. Typical tool response Arlon. It needent be reversed-and at what cost and not the way it ought to be-if it wasn't performed in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Sept 5, 2018 20:34:41 GMT
Circumcision is reversible. Typical tool response Arlon. It needent be reversed-and at what cost and not the way it ought to be-if it wasn't performed in the first place. Did that motherfucker really just say circumcision was “reversible”? I have him on ignore, so I don’t get gems like that unless someone quotes him. But that’s among his richest comments yet! |
|
