Porn for Bibles

If you must!

Moderators: happywaffle, arclight

Postby bradisntclever » February 18th, 2011, 4:28 pm

Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell wrote:it's my old internet forum moderator days rearing their ugly head. off topic discussion makes my eye twitch. :p


Perhaps this is the reason why I suddenly need glasses. Either way, carry on.
User avatar
bradisntclever
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1747
Joined: February 27th, 2007, 2:25 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Postby Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell » February 18th, 2011, 4:41 pm

after reading Dream of a Thousand Cats from Neil Gaiman's Sandman, i treat all cats with kindness and loving respect... :P
Sweetness Prevails.

-the Reverend
User avatar
Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell
 
Posts: 4215
Joined: March 17th, 2006, 6:50 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Postby mpbrockman » February 18th, 2011, 6:26 pm

arthursimone wrote:Porn for Bibles


Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell wrote:it's my old internet forum moderator days rearing their ugly head. off topic discussion makes my eye twitch. :p


Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell wrote:after reading Dream of a Thousand Cats from Neil Gaiman's Sandman...


Trying... to... reconcile...
"He who is not a misanthrope at age forty can never have loved mankind" -Nicolas de Chamfort
www.perfectlyreasonabledreams.com
http://www.facebook.com/mpbrockman
User avatar
mpbrockman
 
Posts: 2734
Joined: April 12th, 2007, 6:26 pm
Location: ATX

Postby Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell » February 18th, 2011, 6:58 pm

mpbrockman wrote:
arthursimone wrote:Porn for Bibles


Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell wrote:it's my old internet forum moderator days rearing their ugly head. off topic discussion makes my eye twitch. :p


Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell wrote:after reading Dream of a Thousand Cats from Neil Gaiman's Sandman...


Trying... to... reconcile...


it was more in response to Kathy's last post about her cat...but Sandman is kind of like my Bible. so it could work. ;)
Sweetness Prevails.

-the Reverend
User avatar
Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell
 
Posts: 4215
Joined: March 17th, 2006, 6:50 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Postby Spots » February 18th, 2011, 8:28 pm

say I scare people off, that's counterproductive. In many cases my thoughts and opinions on evolution/atheism/et al. follow a certain logic that I sometimes take for granted, imagining others will drop their bags & come along.

I will say I've done my best to be cordial to every individual. I may speak out against a concept here or there but when someone defends that concept I like to think I've listened and even learned a thing or two

KathyRose wrote:
Spots wrote:Granted, I've been an outspoken dick and nobody has said anything.


I must say, I've been surprised, myself. You might recall, under a movie thread (a movie thread, of all things!) how brutally my personal character was attacked for having what I thought was an amiable and intelligent discussion with you, over whether or not "Get Low" had a protagonist. WTF?


Not that I'm touchy about it, but I did feel that my character had been attacked in that thread also. I believe Dustin only replied bluntly after you dismissed me as a whippersnapper etc.

It gave me a sort of "damned if I do, damned if I don't" kind of feeling is all.

Dustin claimed he was responding to an overall tendency as I recall.

KathyRose wrote:Anyway . . . thought I'd mention that it isn't only Man who has Free Will. She knows that she's not allowed to jump onto kitchen counters, bathroom vanities or dining tables.


That's extra-genetic information & her sense of right from wrong depends on you being around to enforce it, doesn't it?
User avatar
Spots
 
Posts: 1442
Joined: September 1st, 2009, 1:08 am
Location: New Orleans

Postby KathyRose » February 18th, 2011, 9:39 pm

Spots wrote:Not that I'm touchy about it, but I did feel that my character had been attacked in that thread also. I believe Dustin only replied bluntly after you dismissed me as a whippersnapper

Then let me personally apologize to you. I thought the word "whippersnapper" was silly enough to be taken in jest, as intended. It's something an old curmudgeonly person might say.

Spots wrote:
KathyRose wrote:Anyway . . . thought I'd mention that it isn't only Man who has Free Will. She knows that she's not allowed to jump onto kitchen counters, bathroom vanities or dining tables.

That's extra-genetic information & her sense of right from wrong depends on you being around to enforce it, doesn't it?

No, I don't think so. It's learned behavior & voluntary. I have every reason to believe that she behaves when I'm gone (no evidence of tampering with anything or cat hair left behind). And it's not like she fears punishment. The only "enforcement" that has ever been administered is a disapproving voice and gently removing her.
What is to give light must endure burning. - Viktor Frankl
User avatar
KathyRose
 
Posts: 803
Joined: February 22nd, 2008, 5:12 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Postby Spots » February 19th, 2011, 4:02 am

Kathy it's all water under the bridge. :)

Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell wrote:well, i have no official authority so it's not like you HAVE to do it. more a helpful suggestion to increase participation in other threads as well. ;)

Jordan, I seem to be stuck on this. A crucial clarification. "Porn For Bibles." From what I've gathered from your context (and your participation in this thread) I can talk about any one of these 3 words:

"Porn" as in pornographic imagery.
"For" as in exchanges & transactions.
"Bibles" as in the book, and thereby the subject of Christianity

If I speak directly about these subjects you would happily join along in the conversation. But as soon as the conversation gears toward nonbelievers or evolution, you feel I am going "off-topic?"

In a thread titled "Porn For Bibles"? Has the world gone mad? In which alternate universe does "Porn For Bibles" not indirectly infer EVOLUTION? Porn For Bibles is a cause geared towards evolutionists.

I am baffled by the feelings of absurdity I am feeling right now. So I'm moving on. Ultimately this conversation became lackadaisical once we lost common interest. And what derailed us? Someone poking their head in and saying, "Where's the porn?"

I will admit my part in the overall neglect. I referred to Justin as "Dustin" twice.
User avatar
Spots
 
Posts: 1442
Joined: September 1st, 2009, 1:08 am
Location: New Orleans

Postby Spots » February 19th, 2011, 4:31 am

As I exit I will attempt modesty the only way I know how.

By quoting myself:

Spots wrote:There's a double standard here. Seemingly the goal is to convince. But logic dictates that both parties, the speaker & the listener, be actively engaged for convincing to take place.

You can expound millions of passages of sound logic but someone who is emotionally turned off won't follow any of it. You cannot successfully convince with logic while defying the logical steps of convincing.
User avatar
Spots
 
Posts: 1442
Joined: September 1st, 2009, 1:08 am
Location: New Orleans

Postby dirty baby » February 19th, 2011, 9:41 am

Spots wrote:Ultimately this conversation became lackadaisical once we lost common interest.
And what derailed us? Someone poking their head in and saying, "Where's the porn?"

[curtsey]
User avatar
dirty baby
 
Posts: 200
Joined: September 10th, 2008, 9:13 pm

Postby KathyRose » February 19th, 2011, 4:50 pm

. . . tit!
What is to give light must endure burning. - Viktor Frankl
User avatar
KathyRose
 
Posts: 803
Joined: February 22nd, 2008, 5:12 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Postby Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell » February 21st, 2011, 12:10 pm

Spots wrote:
Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell wrote:well, i have no official authority so it's not like you HAVE to do it. more a helpful suggestion to increase participation in other threads as well. ;)

Jordan, I seem to be stuck on this. A crucial clarification. "Porn For Bibles." From what I've gathered from your context (and your participation in this thread) I can talk about any one of these 3 words:

"Porn" as in pornographic imagery.
"For" as in exchanges & transactions.
"Bibles" as in the book, and thereby the subject of Christianity

If I speak directly about these subjects you would happily join along in the conversation. But as soon as the conversation gears toward nonbelievers or evolution, you feel I am going "off-topic?"

In a thread titled "Porn For Bibles"? Has the world gone mad? In which alternate universe does "Porn For Bibles" not indirectly infer EVOLUTION? Porn For Bibles is a cause geared towards evolutionists.

I am baffled by the feelings of absurdity I am feeling right now. So I'm moving on. Ultimately this conversation became lackadaisical once we lost common interest. And what derailed us? Someone poking their head in and saying, "Where's the porn?"

I will admit my part in the overall neglect. I referred to Justin as "Dustin" twice.


um...settle down, dude. all i was doing was pointing out that there was, in fact, a discussion thread about evolution. and then i dropped it. it's really not worth making a big deal out of. :P
Sweetness Prevails.

-the Reverend
User avatar
Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell
 
Posts: 4215
Joined: March 17th, 2006, 6:50 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Postby Spots » February 21st, 2011, 12:47 pm

Put the shoe on the other foot. If I made a thread that said "Christianity, Piss-tianity" you would feel uneasy if I referred your serious musings there.

Especially if I was acting passive aggressive & remarking that it made more sense to discuss the serious topic there. We easily dismiss those subjects we do not feel so passionate about.

I'm happy right now. Sorry I turned this into a principles thing. But a word in the subject line doesn't make a thread "about" evolution.
Last edited by Spots on February 21st, 2011, 1:00 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Spots
 
Posts: 1442
Joined: September 1st, 2009, 1:08 am
Location: New Orleans

Postby Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell » February 21st, 2011, 12:58 pm

Spots wrote:Put the shoe on the other foot. If I made a thread that said "Christianity, Piss-tianity" you would feel uneasy if I referred your serious musings there.


trust me, if there were such a thread i'd already be plenty active in it. ;)

Spots wrote:Especially if I was acting passive aggressive & remarking that it made more sense to discuss the serious topic there. We easily dismiss those subjects we do not feel so passionate about.


so your real point of contention is the NAME of the thread? okay, i misunderstood that. i wasn't trying to be passive aggressive or dismissive, i was honestly trying to be helpful and see if we could get that thread going again because, title aside, it was actually a pretty serious and insightful discussion with some wonderfully salient points from someone who is actually in that field of study (Christina De Roos). sorry if it came across as anything other. and this is a topic i DO feel very passionate about...being called a heretic in high school for supporting evolution kind of endeared me to it. ;)

Spots wrote:I'm happy right now. Sorry I turned this into a principles thing. But a word in the subject line doesn't make a thread "about" evolution.


no, but the discussion within certainly does. give it a read if you haven't already. i think you'd enjoy some of it if you can look past the tongue in cheek title (which are pretty frequent, this being an improv message board and all. lol!).
Sweetness Prevails.

-the Reverend
User avatar
Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell
 
Posts: 4215
Joined: March 17th, 2006, 6:50 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Postby Spots » February 21st, 2011, 1:10 pm

Well the last page has Calvin & Hobbes and a reference to X-Men. Those are the only real posts within the last 4 years. But yes, there is some juicy stuff on the bottom of the first page (from 2007).

I wouldn't possibly connect with those commenters by simply responding directly under them. The forums I tend to visit discourage dredging up old threads. Typically nobody rejoins the conversation from quite the same place they left off... if they join the conversation at all.

Besides a thread should have a unique spin on things. A point of inspiration. When I'm told there is "The Evolution Thread" it's difficult to respect since the subject of evolution has millions of cross references.

You have to follow the momentum. The existing dialog. At least in my experience of inspiring internet discussions.
Last edited by Spots on February 21st, 2011, 1:17 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Spots
 
Posts: 1442
Joined: September 1st, 2009, 1:08 am
Location: New Orleans

Postby Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell » February 21st, 2011, 1:17 pm

Spots wrote:Well the last page has Calvin & Hobbes and a reference to X-Men. Those are the only real posts within the last 4 years. But yes, there is some juicy stuff on the bottom of the first page (from 2007).

I wouldn't possibly connect with those commenters by simply responding directly under them. The forums I tend to visit discourage dredging up old threads. Typically nobody rejoins the conversation from quite the same place they left off... if they join the conversation at all.

Besides a thread should have a unique spin on things. A point of inspiration. When I'm told there is "The Evolution Thread" it's difficult to respect since the subject of evolution has millions of cross references.

You have to follow the momentum. The existing dialog. At least in my experience of inspiring internet discussions.


which is why i was more than happy to drop the subject when it was clear no one was interested in taking the conversation there. and why i didn't understand why you were seemingly so agitated about it...and since talking about talking about things just leads to semantic loops and makes me dizzy, let us embrace the wisdom of the prophet Bob Dylan and most likely you go your way and i'll go mine. ;)
Sweetness Prevails.

-the Reverend
User avatar
Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell
 
Posts: 4215
Joined: March 17th, 2006, 6:50 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Previous

Return to Politics and Religion and Stuff Like That

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron