What I find disappointing is people thinking they need to ridicule and belittle the posters on the opposing side in order to make their point, without any attempt to actually understand the opposing view. Such an attitude is driven by prejudice. It is where you have to make the opposition look stupid in order to prove your point. I sure hope you are not using such tactics or going down that path. A good argument does not require that you ridicule and belittle the opposition. What is closer to a good argument is one that actually gives the opposition more credit and shows why their thinking is wrong.
I do not like seeing expressions like "retards" (in its various forms), "defending the indefensible" and "these people are pathetic" because it is about making one group appear more intelligent and another appear stupid without actually any attempt at understanding of opposing views. It's a cheap argument and often seems quite "cowardly" in the way that the user of the argument tries to "win."
It is actually the attitude that these discussions are all about winning and losing that really disgusts me. It is not really about what benefits humanity, but about a game of winning and losing. If a discussion is all about "winning" or "losing" then it's not really a "discussion" at all. It's a pretend discussion.
It is not about winning or losing.
First.
People cherry pick something which has little or nothing to do with the idea laid out and they rip it apart from there as they are biased against anything of the like and a just seeking to ridicule it or take it down.
How is that a reasonable discussion?
Just go back through the thread and see the play by play.
I post an idea which then people who are biased seek to undermine by any means possible without even discussing in any way in the fashion which you indicate is reasonable.
I agree with you in your post that this is the way things should happen here, but they do not always go that way.
There are virulent and rabid religion-ists who are shills for their religions and will attack anyone who poses any idea that these religions are indeed a problem for humanity, or who even question the value or origins of these religions.
They have emotional investment and attachment to them and so will rally to defend them even if it means being rude and unreasonable.
When people fling mud at me I fling mud right back.
I am not obligated by my beliefs to turn the other cheek (even though I often do, but sometimes it is not going to happen that way).
I am not going to be kind to a rude, opinionated idiot and am not required to be.
Second, the comments you make just make you sound very pretentious .......
oh, those horrible barbaric philistines....the rude things they say
Yet this is obvious who those comments are directed towards, so you are just as rude.
Everyone wants to nitpick at some little flaw without really just discussing the idea.
Really, this is not university and these posts and threads are not a thesis or some polished piece of work.
Who the hell has the time....I sure don't, but I have ideas and seek discussion, instead I find pretentious ivory tower prognosticators who make any such interactions extremely difficult.
So why is that pray-tell?
Sure I question at peoples religions, they deserve to be questioned, this does not mean I deserve to be kicked for doing so.
It just reveals the true nature of the adherents to these ideologies.
One more thing....I am not pretending.
