Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I notice this "argument" doesn't actually cite an example, just claims that they exist. That makes it a little hard to see where you're coming from. "Be fruitful and multiply," maybe?
Your mockery falls a little flat when @popocatepetl has shown no signs of dodging this argument, or even of disliking it, seeing as you only just brought it up.
Nobody showed any sign of dodging the mockery of an argument he made when he randomly brought it up. And be serious; this whole chain was started by someone say, "Why don't we mock my opponents more?" Whelp, I guess we're mocking opponents now. Them's the grounds you wanted to live on.
The original question from @Goodguy: Why don't we challenge the magical beliefs of Christianity as much as we challenge the beliefs of social justice? Are we handling christians with kid gloves?
My argument: Most christians do not use potentially magical beliefs in the literal words of the Bible as a basis for policies. The group of (possibly only hypothetical) christians who do is tiny and politically impotent. When mainstream christians oppose abortion, their arguments don't depend irreducibly on a belief that Jesus turned water to wine.
(There is a group who say "We should do X because Jesus said we should, and Jesus is God made flesh" but the X they choose is highly selective, and I think we can dismiss this as a rhetorical flourish because they provide other arguments rather than letting "Jesus said so" stand alone.)
On the other hand, social justice activists advocate things directly and irreducibly based on their potentially magical beliefs, so it's worth interrogating those beliefs. If SJ had extraneous beliefs in magical pink elephants, it would be a fallacy to spend time harping on that rather than addressing their load-bearing questionable beliefs.
There's nothing here that's mocking.
As for "maximizing reproduction/fitness, which is obviously the One True Message from [my] belief system" — where did that come from? — I suspect you're getting me confused with someone else. I've said on a few occasions I oppose any attempt to alter humanity or change the current distribution of types of humans, or even to let natural molochian processes that improve fitness/efficiency continue.
Ah yes, my opponents don't actually believe things, and when they do, they're clearly crazy. Oh, by the way, my personal interpretation is the obvious thing that is implied by what they would believe if they actually believed things. Which is how we know they don't actually believe any of it at all. This is all right and good then. Carry on! Sorry I ever said anything!
I just told you to stop this low-effort slapfighting, and here you are again. This seems to be a pattern with you.
You get a two-day timeout this time.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link