I thought that what I just did was testify

[oursin]

No guilt-tripping, please.

Comments

[noveldevice.livejournal.com]

Word.

(I don't preface everything I write with a scathing denouncement of the many flipping morons who also happen to be pagan, or female, or white, or Kansan. O noes!)

[oursin.livejournal.com]

When I do a feminism post, I don't include an obligatory paragraph dissociating myself from all the various feminisms with which I do not concur, either (and it could get long and tedious!).

In the immortal words of Monty Python

[wordweaverlynn.livejournal.com]

I don't include an obligatory paragraph dissociating myself from all the various feminisms with which I do not concur, either (and it could get long and tedious!).

Or hilarious.

Reg: Listen. The only people we hate more than the Romans are the fucking Judean People's Front.
Stan: Yeah, the Judean People's Front.
Reg: Yeah. Splitters.
Stan: And the Popular Front of Judea.
Reg: Yeah. Splitters.
Stan: And the People's Front of Judea.
Reg: Yea... what?
Stan: The People's Front of Judea. Splitters.
Reg: We're the People's Front of Judea!
Stan: Oh. I thought we were the Popular Front.
Reg: People's Front!
Francis: Whatever happened to the Popular Front, Reg?
Reg: He's over there. [points to a lone man]
Reg, Stan, Francis, Judith: SPLITTER!

[legionseagle.livejournal.com]

I came across a lovely phrase on either Making Light or Boing Boing (I doubt it's their coinage, just where I stumbled on it). The phrase is "concern troll". You just scored one.

Ask the stupid bugger whether, if he substitutes "Falwell" or "Robertson" for Dawkins in that sentence, isn't it equally valid. And if he agrees to that, why isn't he as guilty of you for not combating their wickedness (which, specifically, the Lord commanded Christians should do)

[pigeonhed.livejournal.com]

Not to get into an argument, I'm not here to troll, but I do condemn the fundamentalist bigots too.

[legionseagle.livejournal.com]

May I ask where? I'm not, you understand, asking you whether you do or do not do so in your daily life, but does your blog stand up to the standard you are seeking to hold oursin to, namely, does it display a pattern of visible codslapping of Christian fundamentalist bigots, spread back over a period of years or months? Links would be appreciated, thanks.

[livinglaurel.livejournal.com]

....wow, that was rude.

[kindkit.livejournal.com]

Because if nice atheists don't go around saying that Richard Dawkins is the moral equivalent of Fred Phelps, Ian Paisley, the Ayatollah Khomeini, etc., then the terrorists win it proves that atheism is EVIL God kills a puppy random people will feel entitled to lecture them.

[ironed_orchid]

This.

[callunav.livejournal.com]

I have seen, so many times, this...thing...where we have

1. Someone writes well and keeps a blog or journal in which they write about issues cogently.

And then, reasonably, we have

2. Because this is someone who has things to say and says them well, and probably for lots of other reasons, many people read this blog or journal, and contribute to there being lively, intelligent, interesting, sometimes conflicting but generally civil discussions in the comments, which leads to more people reading, etc..

And then somehow we arrive at

3. Someone - generally someone who has not conspicuously added value to the discussions for any length of time, but not always - demonstrates an inability to distinguish between a blog or journal with these attributes and a public utility.

I am perpetually dumbstruck by the people who vigorously and with fervent belief in their own rightness demand that such bloggers/journallers address something, in the way which they think it should be addressed - or else blame them for not doing so.

I do mean dumbstruck. Of course, I'm also pissed off, outraged, exasperated, and contemptuous. But there is a strong element, even after all these years of seeing it in action, of sheer incredulity on my part. I do not get it. If there's something that needs saying, they can go say it! More power to them! But how your popularity (or misia's, or Making Light (http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/)'s, or any of the others') is supposed to give you an obligation os any such kind...

GAH.

I'm sorry. I'd like to say something coherent, but I think "GAH" is really all I've got.

That and--

I'm so glad I'm not particularly popular. Cowardly, but true.

[oursin.livejournal.com]

I was mostly completely beswoggled by the notion that anyone beyond my relatively small (in intahwebs blogging terms) readership (who presumably have a fair idea of my opinions already) would ever see what I wrote anyway.

(Realise I don't have a Boggled Hedgehog is Boggled icon, which I sometimes really, really, need)

[clanwilliam.livejournal.com]

Check your inbox. It's a very basic one, but hey...

[thera-flu.livejournal.com]

My partner is plowing through The Ancestor's Tale right now, and while she thinks it needn't be as dense as he's made it, she finds the scholarship to be top notch. It's a really amazing exploration of evolutionary ideas, and if the snippets she's relaying are any indication, there's just a ton to chew on--even if one might not agree with all of it. Luckily I haven't read any interviews with Dawkins, so I'll just keep on that track.

I'm surprised Pullman's name hasn't entered this fray. But that's just the Miltonist in me...

[thera-flu.livejournal.com]

Ack. That was meant to be a new thread.

[em-h.livejournal.com]

You know, I separate myself from obnoxious Christian when the context demands it, and probably in very much the way you separate yourself from Dawkins and co in that post. Should both of us be spending *all* our time on LJ critiquing distressing representatives of our respective belief systems? It doesn't strike me as the best use of time.

Also, I feel that calling Dawkins "evil" grants him a significance and importance that he in no way deserves.

I'm not in any position to judge whether the claim that mouthy atheists are being more mouthy than mouthy Christians in Britain right now is to any degree true (the fact that it comes from Julie Burchill raises doubt), but if there's any truth in it, it's probably pretty thoroughly transitory.