m’s devotee: There are plenty of sources to find the bible online and I would like to see some supporting evidence for it. When you post it I will not dispute it, or say that it means something else, but I would really like to see these parts of the Bible. Edit3: (If you are talking about the Israelite conquest of Canaan I understand what you are talking about at least for genocide but “Romans”?) :end Edit3

Ah, I was mistaken; it wasn’t Romans. Still, it’s in the Bible, so you must adhere strictly to it.

Bible: Deuteronomy 7:1-2: “… the seven nations greater and mightier than thou; And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them.”

Joshua 6:21: “And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.

The first refers to the extermination (genocide), by the Israelites, of the Amorites, Girgashites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Jebusites and Hivites.

Joshua 10:40-41: “So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the springs, and all their kings: he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the LORD God of Israel commanded. And Joshua smote them from Kadesh-barnea even unto Gaza, and all the country of Goshen, even unto Gibeon.”

So God, according to the Bible, is cool with people just wiping out other races, then.

Thou shalt additionally be referred to various other books of Joshua. In one, he kills defenseless men! Hooray!

By this logic, we should be totally understanding of the viewpoints of the Islamic fundamentalists. Hey, THEIR religious book tells them it’s okay to kill us. Who are we to judge them?

Also, all these Christians who are talking about how things would be so brilliantly peaceful with everyone subscribing to their worldview: HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF SOMETHING CALLED THE INQUISITION? HOW ABOUT THE CRUSADES? SALEM WITCH TRIALS? I mean, WHERE the HELL have you people been GETTING your HISTORY?

And come on, if you can’t find instances of the Bible okaying things like incest and et cetera, you’re just not looking hard enough.

burglar ben: Jabberwock’s comments were, I thought, disrespectful, but if that’s the way he’s going to be, that’s the way he’s going to be.

Heh, look who’s all callin’ me “disrespectful”. Well, you know what? My religion says it’s fine for me to call you a douche. What do you think of that? It’s in the Book of Arrhak’Tur. I quote, Verse 7, chapter 9: “He who does not believeth what thou believeth may be referred to as douchebag, so long as it pleaseth thou.”

You’re not the only one who can play the “religion excuses my wild accusations and disrespectful/hurtful words” card. And I’ll bet if I looked hard enough, I could find justification for calling you a douchebag in your own Bible.

Jabberwock

More burglar ben, since the last one resulted in some comments. I feel like this “Forum Logs” thing is kind of a cop-out as far as content is concerned, so I’ll write something else for later tonight, or maybe sketch up a couple new cartoons.

burglar ben: Wow, I certainly got plenty of responses to my first post there. I’ll give you something else to quote here.

Outside of religious reasons and personal consciences (I hope you guys have them), there is really no “convincing” argument that says gay marriage is bad. However, religious reasons, though I’m quite sure you’ll beg to differ, were the reason this country was started. The Mayflower Compact was almost strictly about religion, and almost all of the people present at the Constitutional Convention were Christians. I’m sure they had no idea that anybody would even consider gay marriage, much less have it become a problem. Religious freedom or not, this country is (or should I say “was”) a Christian nation, and absurd conjectures such as taking “under God” out of the pledge were just the result of wrong-headed thinking.

And I’m going to say this about Afghanistan: Our work there was practically accomplished. Saddam Hussein has no more power over the Afghans, and he can’t do much hiding in a cave somewhere. And we did not go into Iraq solely for the oil. Saddam Hussein was a clear threat to the world, a malicious dictator, and had the capability to build WMDs and send Washington DC up in a mushroom cloud, while, if we had stayed in Afghanistan, we were spelunking and Osama was laughing.

One final statement before I leave and you get a chance to flame me: Both Kerry and Edwards claim that we shouldn’t have gone into Iraq because no WMDs were found. Offer proof that Hussein did not have any WMDs before we went into Iraq.

Kreshweed: Jabberwock, there is no point in arguing if you can’t be polite and respect other people’s views. It’s as simple as that, really. Your opinion doesn’t weigh more than anyone else’s.

It’s not about one opinion being of greater or lesser value than someone else’s. Let me make this somewhat simpler:

My grandfather is a racist. He’s always going off about “niggers this” and “niggers that” (forgive me for using the ‘n’ word, but I’m quoting). Now, you may say “well, your opinion that black people are NOT inferior has no more value than your grandfather’s opinion that they are”. I, however, say that his views are wrong because, well, they just are. Need I provide scientific proof that black people aren’t inferior?

Also, there’s a difference between opinion and fact. Where our boy ben, here, is spouting opinions about gay marriage breeding AIDS, most everyone else here is presenting factual information that no, gay marriage does not breed AIDS. One of the many, many reasons ben is wrong (and not just differing in opinion) is because people need not be married in order to have sex, and because very, very few gay marriages have even been accepted.

He claims that Saddam was the ruler of Afghanistan. Now, forgive me if I’m wrong, but I don’t recall Saddam Hussein ever being the leader of Afghanistan. You can investigate this on your own if you don’t believe me. In fact, feel free to do so; I’d love for you to prove me wrong on this. But again, I say he is wrong, and not just “differing in opinion”. My “opinion” that Saddam was the head of Iraq and not Afghanistan may not hold any more weight than his opinion that he did lead Afghanistan, but I don’t think it can really be proven wrong, whereas his can.

It’s not about differing opinions, it’s about fact and fiction.

Andrea: I’d say Jabberwock’s opinions weigh at least ten times as much as ben1488’s, because he’s not an insane, drooling religious extremist. In fact, ten times is too little.

irb(main):078:0> weight_of_jabbers_opinions/weight_of_bens_opinions
ZeroDivisionError: divided by 0

Kreshweed: “…ignorant, gay-hating, hate-spewing douche.”

Was talking about this, really. Even if you don’t agree with your grandfather, you would hardly launch an attack on his person, would you? I’m not saying you have to agree with people who don’t think like you, I’m saying you should respect their opinions.

On being right and wrong:

There is no universal law that states that being homosexual, heterosexual, republican or democrat is right or wrong. You say that you are right just because you are. That’s bad. No one is right, everyone has an opinion. What if homosexuality is a sin and gays will burn in hell? Exactly. There is no point in telling people they are wrong. You don’t know what wrong is, and neither does anyone else.

Saddam Hussein certainly wasn’t the ruler in Afganistan, that is a fact.

You’re judging me for judging others. “I will not tolerate intolerance!”

My religion tells me that I get to kill and eat an orphan on the third Sunday of every month. But hey, you can’t prove that God doesn’t want me to do this, so I’m no more wrong than anyone else!

A particular Islamic interpretation of their religious doctrine gave them the green light to fly some airplanes into some buildings because we are infidels. But hey, they’re entitled to their opinions, right? Who am I to tell them that they’re wrong?

Speaking of the Book of Romans and other fun supposedly anti-gay Biblical propoganda, did you know that it advocates burning hookers alive, torture of prisoners, executing brides who were not virgins, and genocide? Fun stuff! And you know, since you’re taking such a literal route with the Bible, benny boy, you can’t just accept the anti-gay part and say “well, God didn’t really mean that other stuff, or it was a bad interpretation”. No. You’re not going to get off that easily, pal. If you believe in anti-homosexual messages on account of the Bible, you also have to believe that genocide is acceptable. You can’t be conditional with the Bible! It’s God’s Word, isn’t it? The Absolute Truth, right?

And some people want me to respect this guy’s opinions. “I’m Burglar Ben! I take a very, very selective literal interpretation of the Bible and use it to suit my own needs! Look at me! I base all my arguments on it!”

You’re right, nobody knows what’s Absolutely Right and Absolutely Wrong. Nobody can ever know that. We only have Relatively Wrong and Relatively Right, and thus, for our immediate purposes, we can only operate using these two classifications and the area between. You can’t retreat to relativism to dismiss any kind of morality situation. “Well, we can never know what is Absolutely Right, so therefore everything is Potentially Absolutely Right.” Fuck that.

Plus, burglar ben’s the one doing most of the “I AM ABSOLUTELY RIGHT” crap. Because, y’know, he thinks “God said so”. I’m saying I’m right from a relative standpoint, because that’s all we really have to work with. He’s saying he’s Absolutely Right. Spot the difference! Elmo will help!

Kreshweed: Hate is the trademark of the bad debater. It adds nothing to the real debate and clouds your mind.

You know, just because Yoda says something, that doesn’t make it true.

Kreshweed: Not like, not agree – just accept that the other guy might be right after all. Add hate to the equation and you’ll really mess it all up. Plus, no one will take you seriously.

So we should all accept that maybe gay people deserve the constant fecal matter with which people seem to be barraging them? Or that Saddam was the leader of Afghanistan?

Who the hell wants to be taken seriously?

Sarachim is absolutely right: he deserves no more respect than he gives, which doesn’t seem to be a whole damn lot. Bashing gays with unfounded idiot gibbering doesn’t earn one many “respect points”, as far as I’m concerned. I’m sure I’m not the only one here who feels this way.

Kreshweed: I wasn’t talking about things that can be proved “wrong” and faulty by facts. I believe racism, political viewpoints and simple false knowledge all belong to this group. Sexuality and religious matters can’t be proved right or wrong.

Do you take classes in being completely arbitrary? Racism and sexism and gay-hating and classism all fall into the same category. Why is hatred of gays different from hatred of blacks? You are aware that there are books of the Bible that condone anti-Jew concepts, right? Does this make hatred of Jews different from hatred of blacks?

One can’t necessarily prove the Bible “wrong”, per se, but they CAN prove it “stupid” or “outmoded” or really batshit fucking insane. I can say “The entire world was created last Wednesday, and God implanted all these memories in our heads.” It can’t necessarily be proven wrong, no, but people are still within their rights to call it absolutely nutters, and really rather dumb.

Lighter: Observation: When several people with opposing views engage in a debate, the object is to win people over to your belief. However, around here, when that proves impossible, people simply cling tighter to their own beliefs and start throwing insults. Guys, don’t you think that you should persuade someone to change his wrong belief rather than ridiculing him for it?

Have you ever successfully converted a religious fanatic to your way of thinking? Aside from a six-week seminar and de-brainwashing, it’s a goal nearly impossible to obtain. The best one can hope for is to make that way of thinking unacceptable for future generations. Y’know, like I previously said, until the neo-conservatives are only supported in the deepest woods of Alabama.

Andrew Miller: I would like to point out as well that a report was released yesterday by US weapons inspectors pretty much stating that Hussein had destroyed most of his WMD stockpiles and manufacturing capacity by 1995. He kept up appearances that he may have some capacity as a deterent against Iran.

OUR WEAPONS INSPECTORS didn’t find weapons, ben. READ READ READ the news. You can set up a free account at the New York Times, if your parents will let you read it.

Yes, dammit, yes! Thank you!

Jabberwock

I’ve decided to make this a new feature on the site, since it’s an easy way to generate content. I’d probably end up bitching about the same stuff on here anyway, so it’s much easier to just copy and paste.

*Takes a rolled-up newspaper and smacks the living fuck out of burglar ben with it*

No. No. No. Bad. No. Bad. No. No. Bad.

Seriously, burglar ben, your stupidity is like Jedi Lightning to me. It has the same effect as whenever Bush/Cheney/whoever says anyhing along the lines of “let’s make the [tax cuts | Patriot Act] permanent!” Ouch.

Forgive me if I cover the same areas as some of the others, but I wanted to get in a few of my own punches on this jackass.

Dumbshit said: Eh, I didn’t like the fact that Edwards didn’t even answer a question hardly. He would just go on a blabber-speech and then use only the last 30 seconds or so of his response time actually answering the question.

Okay, Edwards didn’t do a fantastic job during the VP debates. Neither did Cheney.

Douchebag textually vomited: Bringing our troops back, as Kerry/Edwards support, would just put the Iraqis back into the hands of terror. Their upcoming democrary would crumble under the weight of added responsibility. The coalition, well, countries are going to send whatever troops they want to to help, and non-coalition countries, such as France, have already stated that they will not join even if Kerry is elected.

Okay, point one: when did Kerry say we were going to just pull the troops right out of Iraq? As I recall, he said he wanted to send MORE troops to Iraq to train the Iraqi people more quickly in order to get U.S. troops out sooner. Point two: I wouldn’t leap to the conclusion that there’ll be an “upcoming democracy”. Ever consider the possibility that they’ll vote in another dictator? Are we going to re-invade, then? “You can have democracy, but only if you vote for someone we approve of you voting for.” Back into the hands of terror, huh? I hope you don’t mean “terrorism”, like it seems you’re implying.

Idiot furiously slapped at his keyboard with his penis and produced the following: Taxes should stay the way they are, also, or even lower further for that matter. Not only are most people happy for tax relief, but the tax cuts help businesses create new jobs and expand with the extra money. It comes out for good in the long run.

Ah, a believer in the Supply-Side. Okay, genius, from where does the government obtain its money for spending? I know! Let’s fund the military with MAGIC! Let’s pay for things in PIXIE DUST!

Should we pay the soldiers in Iraq with handshakes from Dick Cheney and songs from John Ashcroft? Sounds like YOU don’t support our troops, burglar ben!

Taxes suck, but they’re a fact of life. If you want the government to be able to pay for the programs from which you and hundreds of millions of others benefit, there need to be taxes. It’s not like the government just takes your money and eats it with a nice honey glaze. That money pays for the war in Iraq, for which you seem to have such an obvious hardon. Most people are not, in fact, pleased as punch to have their taxes cut. They may save a hundred and fifty dollars in INCOME tax, but they’re still paying often MORE than that in PAYROLL taxes. The only people who really benefit from INCOME tax cuts are people who make a lot of money from capital gains and things–stuff one doesn’t have to work for. Then, the government is turning around and cutting social programs that benefit people in often the thousands-of-dollars range. Now, they’re talking about cutting Social Security benefits because they’re borrowing money from it to fund other programs because they don’t have enough money from the income taxes. So people are still paying the same amount of payroll taxes (which mostly go to Social Security), but they’ll be getting back less benefits so that rich fucks don’t have to pay as much in taxes on money they’ve made from just owning things. That’s FAIR, right, you fucking moron?

One of the stupidest people in the world had to stop breathing for a few minutes so that he had enough brain power to type: Oh, and the AIDS fund that Kerry wants to double? If gay marriage were banned, we would hardly have the AIDS problem in the United States, and we could focus our attention on other countries, such as in Africa. And not only does he want to allow gay marriage, he wants to give them benefits of being a couple. BtW, gay marriage is BAD. Enough said.

Dear sweet fuck, you misguided fool. Point one: Right. ‘Cause not accepting gay marriage has prevented gay people from having sex with each other for the last several thousand years. Have you ever actually MET a gay person? They’re not these uber-libidinous jerks who run around sticking their penises into every hole they can find. Point two: AIDS was the result of contact with some kind of monkey in Africa. Someone was bitten by a monkey, or ate one, that had the disease and, through the magic of zoonosis, it became a disease that people (a.k.a. ‘near-monkeys’) could spread among themselves. It is NOT strictly a homosexual disease. If it was, why wouldn’t you just say “fuck it, let them all kill themselves with AIDS and we wouldn’t have the problem anymore”? AIDS can be spread any number of ways. Any kind of blood contact, in fact. Point three: Want to know one of the reasons AIDS is so rampant in Africa? Because there’s this superstition that it can be cured by raping a virgin. So all these males are running around raping little girls and spreading it to them. Yeah, that’s gay, huh? That’s so fucking GAY to rape a little girl.

Do the world a favor, burglar ben: cut off all of your fingers and become a deaf-mute.

Jabberwock