• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Brain damaged children...

varwoche said:
Yes, I realize that. However, to recognize that a large percentage of the population is confused, to put it mildly, is to recognize reality, and is not neccesarily condescending.

My book is going to consist of "plain-spoken" facts, hold the incendiary rhetoric. In the meantime, I'm guessing that not many of the faithful you refer to are participating here on this skeptical forum.
Click to expand...

I have noted the many atheist conservatives who have to hang out at places like this to say what they think. Free speech doesn't seem to exist for them in their normal life.
 
Sorry, I see I was responding to something not necassarily of interest at this time by varwoche.

I didn't notice the time stamps either. Feel free to ignore.

RandFan
 
Cylinder said:
Actually it was thisPIPA poll that was used. Who do you think was more correct - Kerry or Bush voters?
Click to expand...
I've been meaning to get back to this. Unfortunately I took so long that this link is no longer valid.

Concerning the question if the administration attempted to manipulate public opinion by inferring a connection between Saddam and 911 (which seemed blatant to me) -- according to this July 2003 PIPA poll (pdf)...

Is it your impression the US has or has not found clear evidence in Iraq that Saddam Hussein was working closely with the Al Qaeda terrorist organization?

Believe evidence of close links to al-Qaeda found:

Full sample: 52%
Firm supporters of the war: 72%
Republicans: 68%
Republicans following Iraq news closely: 78%
Click to expand...
And here is public opinion (July 2003) as to whether the implication was made:
Question: Do you think the Bush administration did or did not imply that Iraq under Saddam Hussein was involved in the September 11th attacks?

Did imply: 71%
Did not imply: 25%
Click to expand...

And in this October 2004 poll (pdf):
Please select what you think is the best description of the relationship between the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein and the terrorist group al-Qaeda.

Iraq gave substantial support to al-Qaeda but was not involved in the September 11 attacks: 38%

Iraq was directly involved in carrying out the September 11 attacks: 14%

Views are highly polarized. Seventy-five percent of Bush supporters believe Iraq was providing significant support to al-Qaeda, including twenty percent who believe that Iraq was directly involved with 9/11. Only 30% of Kerry supporters concur
...
Overall a majority (57%) reject the idea that the US has found "clear evidence in Iraq that Saddam Hussein was working closely with the al-Qaeda terrorist organization." However, 63% of Bush supporters believe such evidence has been found, while 85% of Kerry supporter believe the opposite.
Click to expand...
Not counting my highly speculative tie-in with fundamentalist beliefs, Cylinder, it appears I did not reach rash conclusions. (I wish I could find your link though.)
 
bignickel said:
Before this election, I was considering moving. Out. Of America. Maybe Ireland.
Click to expand...

You don't like the religious right in America, so you were thinking of moving to a country where abortion is illegal, birth control is available only by prescription, and divorce is controversial. (I can't remember whether they legalized it a few years back, or not.) It seems to me that somebody needs a boost in his critical thinking skills.

What I find ironic is I started sending my kid to a religious school (Conservative Jewish) precisely because I think they will teach him critical thinking better than the public schools. When he gets out, I think he will be in a much better position to judge the truth or falsehood of the mythology they will teach him than if he were to attend public schools.

It isn't wise to confuse "capable of critical thinking" and "agrees with me". I would agree that Biblical literacy is something that can only be accepted by someone who hasn't bothered to find out anything about what he believes, but religion itself is not irrational. You can be a Christian, Jew, Hindu, or whatever, without being a simpleton.

Also, when it comes to politics, it's worth noting that the New Agers are solidly Democratic. The Republican Party does not have a monopoly on demonstrably false beliefs of its supporters.
 
varwoche said:
... become brain damaged adults (who, incidentally, vote).

I have a theory-in-process that by force feeding children The Big Lie -- literal beliefs in preposterous religious texts -- that a form of brain damage occurs. And that when a child's mind is warped this badly, that he/she is from then on incapable of discerning reality.
Click to expand...
That's retarded.
Lying inferences such as "Saddam is connected to 9/11" pale in comparison to The Big Lie. The damaged brain has no problem lapping up this little piece of Orwellian nonsense -- it's not even paranormal.
Click to expand...
Retarded wishful thinking.
The enemy is fundamentalism -- Islamic, Christian, or otherwise. And from this moment forward, I am on a counter-jihad. I am going to alert children to the brain damage being inflicted on them by their well intended, brain damaged parents.
Click to expand...
To review your message: People I don't agree with are brain-damaged; things I agree with are how people should think.

Yup, retarded.

Just for the record, I am atheist.
 
varwoche said:
And that when a child's mind is warped this badly, that he/she is from then on incapable of discerning reality.
Click to expand...
Interesting theory. How you do you explain people who were fundamentalist as a child and become atheists later in life? There are a quite few of those people on this very discussion board.
 
Earthborn said:
Interesting theory. How you do you explain people who were fundamentalist as a child and become atheists later in life? There are a quite few of those people on this very discussion board.
Click to expand...
I'm afraid I was on a post-election rant which I can't support and didn't explain that very well. Pardon me for that.

(That said, I tend to believe most of what I posted, though not in absolute terms.)
 
i think its- "don't trust anyone over 30" then i figure you can blame the up coming generation
 
i take great glee in baiting Christians and the 2Parties. the biggest problem not advertised is we're just one more christion (infidel) invader. what would you do if your backyard was the one getting shot up or blown topieces.
 
This song snippet comes to mind:

"I got brain damage from taking those drugs
brain damage from smokin' those rugs
all I got to show for my time is an empty head"

Wish I could remember where I heard it.
 
varwoche said:
... become brain damaged adults (who, incidentally, vote).

I have a theory-in-process that by force feeding children The Big Lie -- literal beliefs in preposterous religious texts -- that a form of brain damage occurs. And that when a child's mind is warped this badly, that he/she is from then on incapable of discerning reality.

Lying inferences such as "Saddam is connected to 9/11" pale in comparison to The Big Lie. The damaged brain has no problem lapping up this little piece of Orwellian nonsense -- it's not even paranormal.

The enemy is fundamentalism -- Islamic, Christian, or otherwise. And from this moment forward, I am on a counter-jihad. I am going to alert children to the brain damage being inflicted on them by their well intended, brain damaged parents.
Click to expand...

It has been shown that beliefs are set at very young age. Once set those beliefs require overwhelming and repeated input to change them. One the other had some of the most anti religious people went to one religious school or another.

It is better to be for something than against something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom