I CANT STAND THESE RELIGIOUS IDIOTS!

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/article755931.ece

AAAAAIIIIGGGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

― Mr Jones (Mr Jones), Sunday, 11 June 2006 05:35 (nineteen years ago)

please don't blame god for all those assholes trying to hide behind him.

― nicky lo-fi (nicky lo-fi), Sunday, 11 June 2006 06:08 (nineteen years ago)

can i blame him for not doing anything about them?

― oops (Oops), Sunday, 11 June 2006 06:30 (nineteen years ago)

Ah but you see, thats god's sneaky trick! He makes man bla bla then says "here - have reason" and then he can sit back and shrug and say "don't look at me - I didn't do it!"

― Trayce (trayce), Sunday, 11 June 2006 06:40 (nineteen years ago)

He'll only take credit for the good stuff, all the bad stuff is put in our path to test our faith, like children starving to death, Rwandan massacres, MS and the holocaust. Cause that's our fault for being sinners......or something.

― dr lulu (dr lulu), Sunday, 11 June 2006 06:42 (nineteen years ago)

Look on the bright side!

If the religious fanatics are the vast majority avoiding it, they'll be the ones dying of cancer. Hohoho!

― ALLAH FROG (Mingus Dew), Sunday, 11 June 2006 06:51 (nineteen years ago)

the right-wing fanatics/idiots/wackos...

― nicky lo-fi (nicky lo-fi), Sunday, 11 June 2006 06:58 (nineteen years ago)

...not that I would want anybody to die of cancer, but for all the shit that's gone down while Bush is in office, he looks none the worse for wear.

― nicky lo-fi (nicky lo-fi), Sunday, 11 June 2006 07:08 (nineteen years ago)

Merck and Glaxo have been in discussions with Christian conservative groups in America to assuage their concerns.

Who thought that was even a good idea? In Europe these groups would not be able to get a meeting.

― suzy (suzy), Sunday, 11 June 2006 07:12 (nineteen years ago)

christian conservative groups own most of the shares. they run most everything in the US.

― nicky lo-fi (nicky lo-fi), Sunday, 11 June 2006 07:15 (nineteen years ago)

I meant "christian" convervative groups.

Alright, I'll quit now. I'm starting to feel like don quixote over here.

― nicky lo-fi (nicky lo-fi), Sunday, 11 June 2006 07:19 (nineteen years ago)

..not that I would want anybody to die of cancer,

why not? they clearly don't have a problem with women dying of cancer.

― GOD PUNCH TO HAWKWIND (yournullfame), Sunday, 11 June 2006 08:08 (nineteen years ago)

so, you know, FUCK EM.

― GOD PUNCH TO HAWKWIND (yournullfame), Sunday, 11 June 2006 08:09 (nineteen years ago)

Original sin to thread innit.

Nicky, I know why you might feel that assertion is true, but then this matter would be about a company having to answer to a proportion of its shareholders at an AGM and not to lobbyists on the outside. Christian conservative groups run only what the majority allow them to, so STEP UP. Pharma companies are by no means the good guys in this either, because "resistance" in the marketplace can only drive up the price of the drugs in the long run.

I would love to take them on using something I have that they don't: a moral advantage not based in scripture. Fundies are terribly confused when they lose their footing there. When I was four I was the first child ANYWHERE to be treated for cancer using chemo, radiation and surgery (ouch). It would be really satisfying to call them blasphemers in public, too (as anyone who invokes their deity to assure compliance, especially from women, must surely be trying to adapt the idea of "god's will" to suit his ego or agenda).

― suzy (suzy), Sunday, 11 June 2006 08:12 (nineteen years ago)

Your null fame OTM. What on earth are they going to do when there's a chance of an AIDS vaccine?

― Crimea River (Mark C), Sunday, 11 June 2006 08:34 (nineteen years ago)

Well, at least Catholics are weighing up the idea of the condom being permissible for them in the case of HIV stoppage, so...we'll see. And if we don't like the rhetoric it ain't difficult to find religious men who've spread HIV secretly while castigating others ;-).

― suzy (suzy), Sunday, 11 June 2006 08:45 (nineteen years ago)

Suzy, the calling-out-"blasphemers" (my quotes, I don't believe in god) idea is brilliant, but you know how it is over here: Your reasoning is one or two steps too complicated for general consumption.

― Rickey Wright (Rrrickey), Monday, 12 June 2006 07:25 (nineteen years ago)

Rickey, if enough people accuse them of blasphemy - which is an believer/agnostic-friendly approach, because you don't have to deny a Something to do it - they'll have to address the issue eventually. A good idea (or a brilliant one, even) has to start somewhere.

All I'm saying is that an argument I've been using since I was about 16 has the content and style to stop a certain kind of rhetorical, controlling godbotherer for whom God is not about faith but about compliance. The idea is so uncomplicated that it can be delivered in a short, unambiguous sentence, so maybe you should try it before writing yourself and the rest of America off as being either lazy or a bit stupid?

― suzy (suzy), Monday, 12 June 2006 08:12 (nineteen years ago)

No, you're totally right. I'm sorry to sound defeatist or snobby; I'm really not.

― Rickey Wright (Rrrickey), Monday, 12 June 2006 21:15 (nineteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.