Jim

Simon Paynton wrote:
You’ve defined Evil as something that only living things can display in their behaviour, but that doesn’t need living things to exist.  Yes it needs living things, no it doesn’t need living things. At least, you’ve allowed that definition to stand.

This is a pretty poor interpretation of Unseen’s total response to your que…

[Read more]

Unseen wrote:
I assume I don’t have to list all the things done in the past, considered right and proper at the time, that we consider Evil today.

Indeed. Unseen has pointed out something we overlooked. Not only is “evil” conceptually questionable (all over the place really), but what actions in particular are considered obviously evil (or s…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:

Simon Paynton wrote:
So Unseen, your point seems to be that any human choice is imaginary, and therefore, any human behaviour based on choice has no meaning.

Umm…no. Nothing is imaginary once properly understood and categorized. Of course, we make choices. Confronted with chocolate or vanilla, we choose one or the other. The q…

[Read more]

That’s the slimy underhanded manipulative swamp of religious recruitment. I hope she gained some kind of lesson from it. I could not be more thankful this kind of garbage rarely happens here.

It’s pretty hard for me to find any example in developed western democratic country where atheists lure people by offering a service that helps them with a…[Read more]

No Jake I don’t think that if a term becomes bothersome it should be dispensed with. You’re making a bad slippery slope argument there. Evil is a term that is so saturated with religious baggage, cultural baggage and covers such a broad range of extremely different behavioural patterns that it is really best to the flames. Good luck finding more…[Read more]

David Boots wrote:
My view is that this conviction should serve as a warning that your liberty to voice an opinion is threatened and has been for some time. Either people wake up soon to this or we will all have to submit to religious oppression and in our lifetime.
As I’ve said before. The United States has a very unique and quite extreme a…[Read more]

jakelafort wrote:
Evil on other hand describes deliberate harm and intentional cruelty to a shocking degree.

Unfortunately it is not that simple. Unseen is right in two ways. First, Evil is a terribly terribly vague term and it does not objectively describe a certain kind of human behaviour but instead many overlapping patterns of human…[Read more]

_Robert_ wrote:
Davis, you certainly have Putin’s number. I would think after 100’s of years of asshole leadership, Russians would have had enough. I really don’t understand why they put up with it.

Totally. First they had the mongol invasion. Then most Russians suffered the misery of serfdom for centuries. Then a violent revolution. Then a viole…[Read more]

Regardless of the motivations for dropping those bombs, or how low all three leaders (Trump, May, Macron) and achievement-less they are right now…I consider it a next gain if (IF!) some chemical weapons factory was blown up. If it were against a terrorist target…I would be worried. But Assad’s is a cold calculating target who won’t respond by…[Read more]

@David

You won’t get any argument from me that the hate-laws in the UK and to a lesser extent in France are applied too broadly in some extraordinary cases. The Count Dankula one for example is a pretty difficult case to explain either way. However, hate-speech, extreme harassment, intimidation and threats exploded during the Brexit debate and…[Read more]

@Simon

Says someone who has never suffered systematic verbal prejudice or systematic verbal attack on a daily basis because of skin colour or sexuality. Simon…it’s deplorable to consider all of this as simply provocation from both sides. When a Jewish person walks down the street and people shout “fuck off money grubbing Jew” there are no two…[Read more]

f words hurt feelings or myth made sensitivities then the more appropriate response to that hurt would be self assessment. Or counselling.

If you are talking about ideas, ideologies and religious principles….yes. If we are talking about harassment, verbal attack and verbal prejudice/discrimination for skin colour, sexuality or happening to…[Read more]