User talk:An American Nihilist/Archive1

Incest

Genetics isn't the only issue with incest, the other, and I think more important problem is that it usually occurs as child abuse, or abuse by an older sibling, something that the article completely forgets to mention. -- Nx / talk 05:40, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

That's a good point -- really, all I was trying to say is that incest isn't limited to people who will have kids. It'd be interesting to see statistics on incestuous abuse. Fallacy (talk) 06:43, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, according to wikipedia, the most common form is abuse by an older sibling, while father-daughter is the most commonly reported one. Anyway, I think consensual adult incest is probably a very small minority, and since it's illegal in most places I doubt you'll find any meaningful statistics about it.

Anyway, the problem with your edit is that it reads like father-daughter incest is okay as long as they use birth control. But it's also the article's shortcoming that it doesn't distinguish between consensual adult incest and child abuse. -- Nx / talk 07:00, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

The article probably just suffers from lack of attention. Maybe I could try to add more to it later, although I'm by far not an expert on incest. Fallacy (talk) 07:10, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

That, and it can't decide if it wants to be serious or a bad joke. -- Nx / talk 07:21, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

“”I'm... an expert on incest.

—User:Fallacy

Yay, my first quote-mine! Fallacy (talk) 16:49, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Meme for Fun

See File:Capture_75bb2323f215a989f7f114479eab01d69a0c71f0.png for the source of the meme. Blue (pester) 04:02, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Damn, memes. There's a reason why I hate those. Fallacy (talk) 04:17, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

PROTIP

Don't remove WIGOs. B♭maj7 (talk) Anachronistically anachronistic 23:11, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

But it's so bad. :( Fallacy (talk) 23:39, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but the ID numbers mess up and it really pisses off the database that stores them. ^pathetic 23:43, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Fallacy (talk) 23:44, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

TV Tropes

I know it was mentioned ages ago, but I can't remember if it was actually implemented, about adding a shortcut to link to TV Tropes articles, similar to how the cp: and wp: prefixes work. I may have been canned on account of the fact we'd never get our users back once they had clicked. ^pathetic 08:47, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

And also because TVTropes is where stories go to die. It's basically Encyclopedia Dramatica, with breatheless fanboy/girlisms in place of desperate trollishness. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 09:21, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Well jeeze, kind of cynical there, Misanthrope. I mean, yeah, there's a lot of stupid anime-fandom shit there, but there's also a lot of cool stuff. Kind of like this site, hmm? Fallacy (talk) 15:30, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but I blame TVTropes for rearing an entire generation of terrible fanfiction writers. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 03:55, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

My recently created article concerning secular nations being more peaceful is not a parody. Please do not delete it.

Please do not delete my article, for it is not a parody, and I never intended it to be a parody. The information that I've provided for that article is accurate. Nashhinton (talk) 03:37, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

It's still poorly written though, and could do with a massive rewrite. F_ucker^{talk to me :D} 03:43, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Don't explain the joke

Give people at least some credit for not being idiots. They can get the joke without seeing it explained in excruciating detail. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 01:00, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Yep. F_ucker^{talk to me :D} 01:01, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

anti=theism

i'm surprized. I've never met an actual anti theist in my life. I just don't see why you would care what other people think, or try to convince them if they don't want to be convinced. I care that god is on our money, in our judge's halls, and in our schools... but i don't give a shit if my mother in law goes to temple every day or my father finds comfort in a sky daddy. it doesn't change my life at all. And oddly, since most athesits are pretty rational, i figured that is how most would feel. YOu really want to tear down the church structure, even as it gives millions of people some sense of identity?--GodotSome would use a tautology to describe it ("The way things are done around here is the wa 02:13, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I want to see theism gone, just as I want to see racism gone. That doesn't mean I harass people or anything like that -- in fact, I'm as pretty non-confrontational as you can get.

The church structure that gives millions of people some sense of social identity should be replaced. F_ucker^{talk to me :D} 02:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

So like a sudden "conversion" of all theists to atheism? Sam ^Tally-ho! 02:26, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

No. F_ucker^{talk to me :D} 02:47, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, how would you go about ending theism then (presuming you could)? Sam ^Tally-ho! 02:50, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Largely doing the same things atheists are doing now -- countering religious privilege, producing solid arguments, showing how absurd and stupid religion is, showing that atheists are good people that are no different than anyone else, etc. But the best thing to do would be to counter irrationality in general. F_ucker^{talk to me :D} 02:55, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

why do you care what they belive, i'll ask again? I'm with you on caring what they teach in schools; what they print on public money; if they are given public funds - but why do you think that an individual's belife in a god is a bad thing? especially when it can't be proven one way or the other.GodotSome would use a tautology to describe it ("The way things are done around here is the wa 03:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I care what people believe because thoughts lead to actions. Religiosity is usually a symptom of general irrational thought, and irrational thinking never leads to anything good. Aren't you concerned that the majority of our population believes that faith is a virtue?

And the whole 'it can't be proven either way' statement is just stupid. No, it can't be 'proven', but the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of their not being a non-deistic god. F_litzer^{talk to me :D} 03:56, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Actually, no, it isn't "just stupid". It's very logical and realistic to say that there are huge areas of the world we do not understand, and it is fully reasonable that a god could be in any or all of them. But that's not really the point. When millions of people believe, they find strength, comfort and community in that belief. they generally do no harm to anyone for holding their beliefs, scientific or not. I would no more tell someone not to read their horoscope then tell them not to pray at night. Neither harms me, neither harms them. It does not bother me in the least that "faith is a virtue" for so many. It bothers me that people think atheists are somehow "out to get them" and "out to remove god from their world" and it bothers me that we sometimes have a tenuous grasp on separation of church and state, but if the only people giving aide to homeless people are church run orgs, (and if we monitor carefully what they say at their help centers) i have no problem with teh govt helping them out.

The idea that you work from is no different to me than the one fundamentalist christians work from "they are evil, and must be destroyed". why? Show me even one thing that is "bad" in a religion, that is mostly universal to religions. Most religions and the religious don't hate gays; most don't hate women; most don't want to control education; most don't want to get rid of science or say evo is wrong. There is violence associated with religion but no more or less so than with politics, language, or just the "they are not like us" human tribal mentality. Religions have been responsible for some of the greatest discoveries in knowledge, and some of the worst moments of destroying knowledge. Wanting to destroy gods or religions is just as backassed as an Islamic terrorist wanting to destroy jews. GodotSome would use a tautology to describe it ("The way things are done around here is the wa 04:40, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I am "antitheistic" in that this is my fundamental belief: ceteris paribus, the atheistic option is preferable to the theistic option. I would sooner give to a secular charity than to a religious charity if they both delivered the same results. I would sooner vote for an atheist than a religious candidate, if they each were equally capable in all other ways. Usually, however, position in this spectrum defines other aspects of something, and things don't get to be equal. I do believe, firmly, that a society totally free of active theism (in which theists do not presuppose their own absolute correctness) is the ultimately optimal society. When we are ready for it, religion ought to be consigned to the history books. Naturally. I suppose that makes me a "passive antitheist." Blue (pester) 05:18, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm skeptical that religion can ever be eliminated. And even if it can, that the void won't be immediately filled by various other nonsensical belief systems. I don't know what that makes me. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 06:27, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I can't imagine religion ever going away, but I'm sure it'll evolve greatly in the future (except maybe in certain corners of America). It's an establishment that's been ingrained too firmly in mankind. Sam ^Tally-ho! 06:40, 21 November 2011 (UTC)