Joined: May 2006
|Quote (Louis @ Nov. 24 2011,22:48)|
1) Carlson, you don't read so good do you. I have repeatedly said *I* am sexist (etc). If there is a difference between us, then it is that I realise that I am sexist and you are working to ignore your own sexism (or whatever-ism). You repeatedly ignore this. You're in denial. Your posts scream it.
I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 1000, Louis. What is it? I mean you are such an expert on my thoughts and states of mind surely you must be clairvoyant.
| I can't answer it for you, but I can say that you continually argue against the people trying to challenge discriminatory status quos. Why do you do that?|
I don't Louis. What I argue against is people doing so in a counterproductive manner. And since I can already see the conclusion your fevered little mind is already jumping to, this is not a version of the "Don't be a dick" speech. I would more accurately describe it as the "Go ahead and be a dick, but ferchrissake understand that there are actually times when it is more appropriate to not be."
|You're right, I know nothing about your life. I don't need to.|
What I really appreciate about you, Louis, is your unfailing honesty. This one line is a monument to that honesty. Of course you don't need to know anything about me. You already decided from the git-go exactly what kind of person I am. Why waste any more precious time that could be better spent on the stoning.
| The problem I have is that your criticisms are FREE OF SUBSTANCE. Don't play silly games and claim your point is hidden and I'm being stupid, it's isn't, it's obvious and it's still substance free|
I am not playing a silly game. I am saying exactly what I mean. That you are more interested in venting your spleen than expending one single calorie in trying to understand isn't my problem. It's yours.
| You are criticising PZ's form not the substance of his claims (and throughout your posts you do it again and again). THAT'S the issue.|
And here is a perfect example of your willful efforts to misunderstand me. I have already agreed with you. Why do you keep coming back to this point like a broken record unless this is the core issue for you? I've disagreed with PZ. Thus, I must be shouted down.
|All your criticism is due to what you see as PZ sensationalising things for profit. I've said that it's tangential to the substance of the issue and all you do is repeat it.|
No Louis, it isn't the totality of my complaint. It never has been. First, I am not going to pretend to be able to read another persons mind and claim perfect knowledge of their intents. I'll cede that ground to you. I can only comment on how it looks to me. There are two points that I am trying to make. One of which you have partial, if incomplete, grasp of. The other, however, has yet to pierce that lump of bone and fecal matter that sits atop your shoulders.
First, I have no problem at all with PZ earning some dinero off of his semi-celebrity status. Perhaps his refusal of the apology is sincere. I have no way of knowing. But, when you are compensated based on your ability to keep both your supporters and detractors in a state of agitation, silly things like reconciliation and trying to win people over to your side could start to look like a drag on the old cash flow.
In the fight for equality, there comes a point where intractable absolutism is counterproductive. Just as Martin Luther King and those that succeed him will never wipe out racism, PZ ain't going to change the minds of the 150 million Christians that apparently hate him. I would have presumed that PZ would have welcomed the opportunity to demonstrate that atheists are jus' plain folk worthy of as much respect and equality as anyone else. How many people do you think were convinced of that by his petulant little foot stomp? Meh, don't answer that. If you can't change 150 million minds, why bother with one?
You said earlier:
| I am content for you to forgive GG and accept his apology (if you do), and for PZ not to. Neither are "right". However, one is more consistent with a stated principle of trying to achieve a more equitable, secular society and one is less consistent. |
So, reconciliation is less consistent with achieving equality? I'll bet to smug, sanctimonious pricks like you, Joe Lowery and James Hood were race traitors.
|Tell me Carlson, do you tire of your dishonesty or is it something fun?|
So, Louis, are you calling me a liar outright? Other than thinking you are full of shit, what was my lie, Louis? Or is this another one those times like when you kinda sorta tried to tag me with some label while maintaining plausible deniability?
|Just like every creationist moron the world has ever produced you are incapable of reading a simple document for comprehension and instead have to tweak it to make it say what you want by cutting out the inconvenient bits. Let's just say your tactics are not unfamiliar.|
Pot. Meet Kettle.
|He's asking for nothing more than equality with his comment about 150 million people. He's asking that the people who thoughtlessly contribute to a culture of discrimination (which demonstrably exists by the way) against atheists (not as a community per se but as individuals) to apologise. He's pointing out the inequality of the situation. He's not scapegoating this poor gelato bloke, he's using him as a teaching example (surely you're in favour of that...right?). |
All worthy goals (see what I did there, Louis?). All of that message stands on it's own merits. Nothing is added by refusing an apology. But, I am trying to suggest, something is lost.
|He's saying why should he, PZ, bear the burden of magnanimity? He's not the one doing the discriminating. What he is doing is illustrating the disparity in the situation here, the inequality. |
The was the beauty of passive resistance. It highlighted the inequality, not by aping the violence and vitriol, but by letting it stand on it's own.
For me, from an artistic perspective, this photo is the essence of the civil rights struggle. It isn't a bunch of librul agimatators mugging for the camera. It is highlighting how the system reacts to people walking down the wrong side of the street. It holds up a mirror, not a magnifying glass.
|5) Straw men? From me? Where? Find one.|
|People who whatever happens continually apologise for the wrongs of others and try to avoid confrontation.|
I've done neither. All I have done is challenge PZ's and your response as the wrong thing in the situation. But, that was apparently enough. Why won't you let my little flower bloom in your oh-so-big garden? (And, uh, I mean that in a strictly non-homo way*)
|I said you are issuing apologetics for a discriminatory status quo, and you continue to do so. This is not the same thing as apologising for GG's actions. Are you smart enough to grasp that? |
Yes, but apparently you aren't smart enough to read my literal words, no less interpret them. But, it finally seems clear now what your major maladjustment is. It is perfectly encapsulated in the old saw "When the only tool you have is a hammer, all of your problems look a lot like nails" My whole point is that while a hammer is certainly a valuable tool, it isn't in all contexts. How you manage to twist that into me saying that the only tool you are allowed is an overcooked noodle is beyond me.
|9) I'm done being nice to people who cannot do me the "nice" of actually engaging with what I am saying, and what they are criticising. You want manners? Fucking demonstrate them yourself.|
Wait,what? Are you suggesting my continued level of vitriol is not doing anything to get you to understand my point? Surely not!
|I've wasted time and effort on many lines. One I wrote earlier sums it all up:|
"You are consistently on the side of shutting people with legitimate complaints up, simply because you don't like how those complaints are expressed or over what specific incidents."
All the rest is gravy. Carlson, if you are not a bigot (and as I have said, you are probably no more a bigot on any specific thing than I am), you are an apologist for bigotry (and THIS is where we differ). Read the "Letter From a Birmingham Jail" and try to understand why this is the case. Forgive me if I severely doubt you lack both the inclination or capacity to do so.
Here is the thing, Louis. Even apart from the prolix, you come across as the mirror image of Kairosfocus. The willful ability to not understand what was laid in front of you. The complete rejection of subtlety. Vilification of those who question doctrine. The absolute, unwavering certainty of your own rightness and your opponents mental and moral degeneracy. The reliance on overblown language while getting a case of the vapors when the same comes back. And, the cherry on top of the crap sundae is your apparent desire, despite my insignificance, to have the last word. You are a thing of beauty, Louis. I couldn't have argued my case any better than you argued it for me.
And, unlike one of my favorite sockpuppets that tweeked KF but good, I have no interest in seeing how insistent you are to shout me down. My glorious work here is done.
* Are you going to make that evidence of my homophobia, Louis? Or do you acknowledge that buttsecks jokes are part of the stock and trade around here.
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it. We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)