|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
 Posted - 02/08/2006 : 06:42:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
quote:
Bill, when you find some statistics to back up your befuddled claims, let me know. As predicted, you refuse to provide evidence to any of your previous claims and are off on some new tangent.
Forget it, Dude. I've asked for reference a couple of times and none has been forthcoming, nor, if he holds true to form, will there be.
Bill is using, or trying to use, a variation on the "Gish Gallop" style of debate: confound the opponent with a tangled blizzard claims, facts, query, straw men, non sequiter, and so forth. The following question is a classic example:
quote:
But in a materialistic universe the question always remains, who gets to establish the standard and why do they (however they are) get to establish the standard?
Looking back, this turkey has been repeated, in various forms, ad nauseum throughout Bill's discourse, even though it has been addressed several times by several prople. It's amusing, albeit becoming increasingly tedious -- sort'a like watching one of those toy water-drinking birds that seem to have some sort of mysterious life as they dip their beaks into a glass (I used to know how those worked, but have forgotten).
Uh, Bill, social structures are not "Who." Social structures are "What." And yet again: social structures are that which decides the moral codes of the individuals within them, whether all of those individuals like it or not.
Either that, or God done it. Did God done it, Bill? If so, yeesh! What a fuckup! 
Uh, Bill, social structures are not "Who." Social structures are "What." And yet again: social structures are that which decides the moral codes of the individuals within them, whether all of those individuals like it or not.
(bill) So in Nov. 2004 when many states overwhelmingly voted down the same sex marriage and voted for the definition of marriage as one man one women you recognized this as the moral standard being confirmed by the social structure for what they want their society to be structured like in their state, right?
Look, IMO here is the state of homosex in the US. The general pop. is to the point where they realize that with the ACLU and others at play today that what ever goes on behind closed doors when people are in the privacy of their own home can not be stopped. So the general public stomached all the gay pride parades with S&M dudes running around tossing rubbers into the crowd. They handled gay day at Disney world with dignity and class. They kept their mouth shut when Rosie O was saying 20% of the pop. is gay so get over it America. However, when the gays started to demand that they could get married the general public finally arose and said enough... You can do what you will in your own bedroom that is up to you. But when you start trying to change the basic structure of our society for the last 200 years plus, which was one man and one women who raise up children then the American public draws the line. And it was drawn in bold with a super majority. Even the pacific coast states voted it down. I admit, that stunned me. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
 |
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2006 : 06:46:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
Posted by marfknox:
Any action is rational if the reason stated by the doer doesn't contradict with the doer's stated worldview. For example, is it rational or irrational to smoke ciggarettes? Well, it is irrational if the smoker holds that their health is more valuable than the high they get off the ciggarettes. But if the smoker honestly believes that the high is worth the potential health damage, it is rational to smoke. In the case of both the Nazi and Rwanda genocides, as well as the Greek infanticide, from the racist worldview of the perpetrators, their actions were perfectly consistant. Even if their beliefs about reality were wrong (obviously the Nazis overall plan failed, and was thus, flawed), they couldn't have known beforehand that they were wrong.
Yes, they could have. There is a very simple test. Some call it the "golden rule". It has been around for a very very long time.
Its a damn shame that most people don't live by it.
quote:
Bill wrote: Funny, no lack of wars on planet earth of late. We got plenty of genocide to go around. Lot's of rape. Murder is of no short these days. Gov's cheat their people all the time. Man inflicts pain and suffering on his fellow man every day in every country in mass. Hitler, Stallon, pal pot, Rowanda, Bosnia, Cambodia, Colombine. We just came out of the bloodiest century this world has ever seen. We have the constant and growing threat of nuclear arms in the hands of many nations and on the black market for who knows to buy. The killings fields of Iraq, the 1000's of deaths in the Iraq war. Our planet has wars all over all the time. Insurance co. refuse to pay and let people die. etc... etc... etc... etc... I could go on and on. Only a complete moron would argue that our sense of societal morality is somehow progressing.
Bill, when you find some statistics to back up your befuddled claims, let me know. As predicted, you refuse to provide evidence to any of your previous claims and are off on some new tangent.
I hate to break it to you, but in industrialized western countries there is less crime (per capita) today than there was 20 years ago. This has been an ongoing trend for the last century or so, with variations and a noticible spike from the mid-1970s to mid-1980s. The trend is currently moving down for crime rates. Are there crimes commited? Sure. Probably always will be. Despite the impression that the 24hour news cycle gives, with their endless coverage of a few horrible crimes, you and your children are basically as safe as anyone has ever been in this country, and far safer than you were in 1980.
http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/dataonline/Search/Crime/State/statebystaterun.cfm?stateid=52
quote:
We just came out of the bloodiest century this world has ever seen.
Where are your statistics to support that claim? What evidence? I know it is futile to ask you for evidence, but call me stubborn. As long as you keep making wild-ass claims like that, and providing no evidentiary basis for your claims, the kindest response you will recieve here is to be laughed at.
Bill,
I hate to break it to you, but in industrialized western countries there is less crime (per capita) today than there was 20 years ago. This has been an ongoing trend for the last century or so, with variations and a noticeable spike from the mid-1970s to mid-1980s. The trend is currently moving down for crime rates. Are there crimes committed? Sure. Probably always will be. Despite the impression that the 24hour news cycle gives, with their endless coverage of a few horrible crimes, you and your children are basically as safe as anyone has ever been in this country, and far safer than you were in 1980.
(bill) Crap! Look, statistics rise and fall for a number of reason. Statistics can reflect many different outcomes depending on who compiles them and how. I was born and raised in average town USA pop. 300,000. Over the last 30 years the murder rate goes up and it goes down and then it goes back up... If fluctuates between a max and min influenced by many factors. If the summer is very warm then crime usually spikes. If the winter temps are below average then crime will usually drop.
Let's use the public schools as an objective standard. A cycling buddy of mine is a public school teacher. (Phs Ed) 30 years ago when he began his career the HS where he teaches had zero police on the school grounds during school hours and activities for a student pop. around 2000. The students at that time respected and understood authority. If you told them to sit down and shut up then they sat down and shut up. In the 1980's the first police officer was assigned to the school in response to the number of beat downs, drugs and weapons being found on the students and in their lockers. In the 1990's metal detectors where added to the main entrances which all students had to pass through in the mornings. One cop ended up being a drop in the bucket for student pop of 2000. 2006 and they now have 3 police officers on grounds during school and after school hours for the same student pop of 2000. Let's not forget that the 1990's produced the trench coat Mafia kids who were programmed by the video games mortal combat and doom. It became fashionable and hip to bring guns to school and kill as many of your class mates and teachers as you could. The clever ones just sat outside while a buddy pulled the fire alarm waiting for the turkey shoot to begin. Funny, 30 years I don't remember killing fellow students and teachers for sport being all that fashionable. Look dude, the public schools are a barometer of the public culture. These are the future rulers and stabilizers of our society. A sobering thought? Yes...
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2006 : 06:57:05 [Permalink]
|
Id rather have them than you. So I can assume that you act like every fundie nutcase that ever did something insane, like shooting from a tower or blowing up federal buildings? Your logic is so bad, 78 Vulcans have died from the stress alone.
|
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2006 : 06:58:04 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Originally spewed forth from the festering hate-hole of Bill scott
(bill) I hate no one so your judgement is incorrect.
Your actions here indicate differently.
quote:
You are assuming that justice needs to be done here.
(bill) Your assuming it doesn't.
Based on studies, I can pretty well say that no, it doesn't.
quote:
How quickly you abandon your morals in order to bash others. Not judging you, of course, I'm just saying.
(bill) Bash others? As much bashing that goes on by the SFN faithful I am surprised (well maybe not) how fast you guys start your whining. You guys bash everyone and anyone who does not agree with the SFN party line and then whine and cry about hurt feelings if someone else questions the morality of one of your sacred cows. I mean if I attacked someone personally by name then ok maybe. But for the SFN faithful to get all bent about someone calling homo sex immoral is really rather humorous considering the endless amounts of bashing the SFN crew does on a daily basis. Come on....
I'm not bent about you calling it immoral. I'm calling it hatred when you spew unsubstantiated bullshit concerning
1) Homosexuals commit more statutory rape than heterosexuals when FBI crime reports clearly show you to be wrong
2) You immediately leap to extremes and in order to futher demonize homosexuals, you portray them as drug abusers
3) You forward that the homosexual community is the major source of new AIDS cases in spite of data which clearly proves that assertion wrong
4) You claim that homosexuals are very promiscuous, yet have not shown the studies which prove your point and you have been asked for them twice
That, Bill, is hatred in action.
quote:
As marriage is a contract between consenting adults and animals cannot legally give consent or execute contracts, the only possibility is polygamy.
(bill) Homo sex was illegal but that did not stop changing the law. I am sure the farmers horse could give one stomp of his hoof for yes and two for no. Come on dude the morals of society are changing and evolving. They have evolved to the point where homo sex is now legal. And they will keep evolving until farmer Brown and trigger can consummate their love without shame. Come on dude, come out of the dark ages all ready. That morality has evolved as well.
And adult homosexuals were judged to be unable to give consent.... when?
Really, this is such an absurd claim that, somehow, all reason concerning animals ability to give consent or enter into contracts will be somehow overturned is just indicative of the extremes you must travel to to justify your "end of morality" rant. When have any non-human species ever been considered a legal person?
quote:
Since there is no contract which has the intimation of permanency that marriage enta |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2006 : 07:01:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
Bill wrote: Mark: I've also been pretty deeply involved in the gay rights movement in Columbus, OH in the past, as well as on two campuses,
(bill) Why aren't you involved in the nambla rights movment? Or the farmers for fun parade? They need protection as well.
For one, my name isn't Mark. See my profile. For another, you already asked this exact question and I answered it in my post previous to this post. Pay attention.
That one is a quote of mine. To distinguish your posting from Bill's, I used the name Mark. Bill is good for that kind of ambiguity in replying. I should have used Marf. Sorry. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2006 : 07:07:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by nescafe
quote:
And without an objective standard all is relative.
This does not seem to bother most of the people on this forum, though. Perhaps they recognize that relativity does not mean that there is no way of establishing some sort of intersubjective standard, and measuring according to that?
But in a materialistic universe the question always remains, who gets to establish the standard and why do they (however they are) get to establish the standard?
No one person gets to. It is a societal consensus.
This has been explained to you no fewer than three times, why is it such a difficult concept for you to understand?
Or are you working up to one of those "morality flows from a supreme being" assertions? |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2006 : 07:13:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
Id rather have them than you. So I can assume that you act like every fundie nutcase that ever did something insane, like shooting from a tower or blowing up federal buildings? Your logic is so bad, 78 Vulcans have died from the stress alone.
(bill) So in Nov. 2004 when many states overwhelmingly voted down the same sex marriage and voted for the definition of marriage as one man one women you recognized this as the moral standard being confirmed by the social structure for what they want their society to be structured like in their state, right?
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2006 : 07:15:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by nescafe
quote:
And without an objective standard all is relative.
This does not seem to bother most of the people on this forum, though. Perhaps they recognize that relativity does not mean that there is no way of establishing some sort of intersubjective standard, and measuring according to that?
But in a materialistic universe the question always remains, who gets to establish the standard and why do they (however they are) get to establish the standard?
No one person gets to. It is a societal consensus.
This has been explained to you no fewer than three times, why is it such a difficult concept for you to understand?
Or are you working up to one of those "morality flows from a supreme being" assertions?
No one person gets to. It is a societal consensus
(bill) So in Nov. 2004 when many states overwhelmingly voted down the same sex marriage and voted for the definition of marriage as one man one women you recognized this as the moral standard being confirmed by the social structure for what they want their society to be structured like in their state, right?
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2006 : 07:18:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
Posted by marfknox:
Any action is rational if the reason stated by the doer doesn't contradict with the doer's stated worldview. For example, is it rational or irrational to smoke ciggarettes? Well, it is irrational if the smoker holds that their health is more valuable than the high they get off the ciggarettes. But if the smoker honestly believes that the high is worth the potential health damage, it is rational to smoke. In the case of both the Nazi and Rwanda genocides, as well as the Greek infanticide, from the racist worldview of the perpetrators, their actions were perfectly consistant. Even if their beliefs about reality were wrong (obviously the Nazis overall plan failed, and was thus, flawed), they couldn't have known beforehand that they were wrong.
Yes, they could have. There is a very simple test. Some call it the "golden rule". It has been around for a very very long time.
Its a damn shame that most people don't live by it.
But the society was working within long held predispositions against Jews. The suggestion for the destruction of the Jewish faith (and "lesser" races in general) had been started in the region well before the 1500's. The Catholic church had a long history for calling for the expulsion and destruction of Jews. Societies do not apply the "golden rule" to races they deem "sub-human". It's a common ploy by racist organizations and governments to justify genocide.
Since they can focus the will of the people behind them by giving them a target for their hatred, it is rational for them to seek the destruction of the race they find objectionable. It is based on flawed premises, but the people were not likely to know differently as the concepts that the "lesser" race were somehow "sub-human" had been ingrained into society for centuries.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2006 : 07:23:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by nescafe
quote:
And without an objective standard all is relative.
This does not seem to bother most of the people on this forum, though. Perhaps they recognize that relativity does not mean that there is no way of establishing some sort of intersubjective standard, and measuring according to that?
But in a materialistic universe the question always remains, who gets to establish the standard and why do they (however they are) get to establish the standard?
No one person gets to. It is a societal consensus.
This has been explained to you no fewer than three times, why is it such a difficult concept for you to understand?
Or are you working up to one of those "morality flows from a supreme being" assertions?
No one person gets to. It is a societal consensus.
(bill) So in Nov. 2004 when many states overwhelmingly voted down the same sex marriage and voted for the definition of marriage as one man one women you recognized this as the moral standard being confirmed by the social structure for what they want their society to be structured like in their state, right?
Look, IMO here is the state of homosex in the US. The general pop. is to the point where they realize that with the ACLU and others at play today that what ever goes on behind closed doors when people are in the privacy of their own home can not be stopped. So the general public stomached all the gay pride parades with S&M dudes running around tossing rubbers into the crowd. They handled gay day at Disney world with dignity and class. They kept their mouth shut when Rosie O was saying 20% of the pop. is gay so get over it America. However, when the gays started to demand that they could get married the general public finally arose and said enough... You can do what you will in your own bedroom that is up to you. But when you start trying to change the basic structure of our society for the last 200 years plus, which was one man and one women who raise up children then the American public draws the line. And it was drawn in bold with a super majority. Even the pacific coast states voted it down. I admit, that stunned me. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2006 : 07:36:51 [Permalink]
|
I've had a sneaking urge to do an haiku for days....
In any discourse,
Always know whereof you speak.
Alas, he does not.
There. I feel much better, now....... 
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2006 : 07:46:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
I've had a sneaking urge to do an haiku for days....
In any discourse,
Always know whereof you speak.
Alas, he does not.
There. I feel much better, now.......
(bill) So in Nov. 2004 when many states overwhelmingly voted down the same sex marriage and voted for the definition of marriage as one man one women you recognized this as the moral standard being confirmed by the social structure for what they want their society to be structured like in their state, right? Yes or no... |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2006 : 07:57:56 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by nescafe
quote:
And without an objective standard all is relative.
This does not seem to bother most of the people on this forum, though. Perhaps they recognize that relativity does not mean that there is no way of establishing some sort of intersubjective standard, and measuring according to that?
But in a materialistic universe the question always remains, who gets to establish the standard and why do they (however they are) get to establish the standard?
No one person gets to. It is a societal consensus.
This has been explained to you no fewer than three times, why is it such a difficult concept for you to understand?
Or are you working up to one of those "morality flows from a supreme being" assertions?
No one person gets to. It is a societal consensus
(bill) So in Nov. 2004 when many states overwhelmingly voted down the same sex marriage and voted for the definition of marriage as one man one women you recognized this as the moral standard being confirmed by the social structure for what they want their society to be structured like in their state, right?
They are still beholden to the Constitution, Bill. Some states want to make Christianity the state religion. Some have even written it into their state Constitutions. They were still beholden to the 14th amendment and those provisions within their state Constitutions were invalidated.
Article VI, Bill. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Amendment 14, Bill. Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
What part of this is so damn hard for you to understand?
Also, your contention that many states voted on a same sex marriage ban bill is demonstratably wrong. 13 states had it. Mostly Bible belt states and very conservative red states. (LA, MO, OK, UT, GA, KY, MS, AR, MI, MT, ND, OH, and OR) They passed by 70% average margins.
And while were at it, I'll provide something that you have not. A source for data on percentages for homosexual males can be found in the US National Health and Social Life Survey (NHSLS, Laumann, et al.) which pegs the percentage at 2.8%.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
| Edited by - Valiant Dancer on 02/08/2006 08:02:12 |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2006 : 08:01:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Also, your contention that many states voted on a same sex marriage ban bill is demonstratably wrong. 13 states had it. Mostly Bible belt states and very conservative red states. (LA, MO, OK, UT, GA, KY, MS, AR, MI, MT, ND, OH, and OR) They passed by 70% average margins.
Alabama is not one of them?!?!! I must be living in the End Times!  |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2006 : 08:05:58 [Permalink]
|
quote:
(bill) So in Nov. 2004 when many states overwhelmingly voted down the same sex marriage and voted for the definition of marriage as one man one women you recognized this as the moral standard being confirmed by the social structure for what they want their society to be structured like in their state, right? Yes or no...
Sure. So what?
And yet again, you make my point for me. Society, not the individual but the collective, is defining morality. And, as I recall, a state or two did the opposit; MA, for example. And OR has an assisted suicide law. Again, so what?
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
