...Vericast.

[Hydra009]

Its your right to disagree with him. But it sounds to me like your opinion isn't worth much.  This so called catholictard is actually making sense. No one could say what he's saying, and say it the way he's saying it, structure it the way he's structuring it and also disclose his own rhetorical weaknesses if they never did actual sociological study and research.  All of that stuff is very technical sociological monologue. To ordinary people it probably just sounds like talking.  To someone who has a background in sociology it sounds like business talk that only Socios can identify when they hear it.  That was another thing that made him seem more credible than crazy to me.  Also the fact that he sounded pretty informed, beyond the references he was offering.

You're not who you say you are.  Either you're a nutjob who isn't terribly good at factchecking and really, really into Catholic-brand condom denialism (protip: agnostics don't usually endorse their brand of crazy and then "wonder how much more the catholics have right", that's a pretty big red flag right there that you're almost certainly a catholic pretending to be an agnostic) or you're the nutjob blogger himself pathetically trying to counter criticism by lathering praise on yourself.  Either way, it's pretty damning.

[TrueStory]

To ordinary people it probably just sounds like talking..

Da Fuq?  Well I thought he was talking from his mouth moving, sounds coming out that sounded like American English but what the hell do I know.

[mykcob4]

This reminds me of a story out of India and the Peace Corps. It is part of one of their training sessions about fully explaining themselves to the people that they are there to help.
A Peace Corp instructor was in a rural village in India. She was there to instruct people on using condoms. She explained how it helped prevent social diseases and how it prevented prenancy. She used what was was available to demonstrate how to put it on. She gathered the women of the village and put the condom on a broom handle. When she finished she put the broom handle in the corner of the hut where she was working. She had every woman put a condom on a broom that they brought to the demonstration. Weeks later the Peace Corp instructor visited the village and was shocked that most of the women were pregnant. She went to each of the pregnant women's huts, and sure enough there in the corner of each hut was a broom handle with a condom on it.

[macmania]

You're not who you say you are.  Either you're a nutjob who isn't terribly good at factchecking and really, really into Catholic-brand condom denialism (protip: agnostics don't usually endorse their brand of crazy and then "wonder how much more the catholics have right", that's a pretty big red flag right there that you're almost certainly a catholic pretending to be an agnostic) or you're the nutjob blogger himself pathetically trying to counter criticism by lathering praise on yourself.  Either way, it's pretty damning.

Fact checking, my ass.  You don't know shit, let alone enough to decide whether or not I'm "factchecking".  Learn to spell it before you use it dumbass.  
The best you've got is accusations that I'm not fact checking, and accusations that I'm some poser?  I AM agnostic, I AM really doing research, and you're really bad at constructing a counter thought.  You're an embarrassment to thinkers.  By the way there's no such thing as "AN agnostic", dumbass.

[Hijiri Byakuren]

You're not who you say you are.  Either you're a nutjob who isn't terribly good at factchecking and really, really into Catholic-brand condom denialism (protip: agnostics don't usually endorse their brand of crazy and then "wonder how much more the catholics have right", that's a pretty big red flag right there that you're almost certainly a catholic pretending to be an agnostic) or you're the nutjob blogger himself pathetically trying to counter criticism by lathering praise on yourself.  Either way, it's pretty damning.

Fact checking, my ass.  You don't know shit, let alone enough to decide whether or not I'm "factchecking".  Learn to spell it before you use it dumbass.  
The best you've got is accusations that I'm not fact checking, and accusations that I'm some poser?  I AM agnostic, I AM really doing research, and you're really bad at constructing a counter thought.  You're an embarrassment to thinkers.  By the way there's no such thing as "AN agnostic", dumbass.

Well, aren't you just full of hugs and kisses. :roll: Everything Hydra said about your post was valid, and your only response was to insult him. Like so many others before you, you refuse to engage in a proper discussion because you know any one of us could rip you a new asshole if you tried.

Put up or shut up. I'm not interested in hearing your excuses and insults, and I can guarantee no one else here is either.

[Plu]

There are plenty of arguments made against your position. Unless you intend to address those, I'd kindly ask you to shut up and go away.

[PickelledEggs]

You're not who you say you are.  Either you're a nutjob who isn't terribly good at factchecking and really, really into Catholic-brand condom denialism (protip: agnostics don't usually endorse their brand of crazy and then "wonder how much more the catholics have right", that's a pretty big red flag right there that you're almost certainly a catholic pretending to be an agnostic) or you're the nutjob blogger himself pathetically trying to counter criticism by lathering praise on yourself.  Either way, it's pretty damning.

Fact checking, my ass.  You don't know shit, let alone enough to decide whether or not I'm "factchecking".  Learn to spell it before you use it dumbass.  
The best you've got is accusations that I'm not fact checking, and accusations that I'm some poser?  I AM agnostic, I AM really doing research, and you're really bad at constructing a counter thought.  You're an embarrassment to thinkers.  By the way there's no such thing as "AN agnostic", dumbass.

sab and now this guy? what is with the prick-parade?

[SGOS]

Religion spends too much time on things that involve sex.

I was taking a trip with two other guys one time.  One was a fundamentalist.  I can't remember what the context was.  Maybe there was no context at all.  Unexpectedly, he said he loved his wife, but he never lusted after her.  He said, "Can you imagine someone lusting after his wife?"  This was in question format, but his inflection and intent clearly meant it as a statement of condemnation.

The other guy and I looked at each other for a second like we were trying to read each other for a reaction.  Then he shook his head and said, "I lust after my wife all the time."  We both laughed and nodded.  The fundamentalist got quiet and dropped the issue, but I don't think he was questioning his perspective.  He was most likely making a judgment about us, and congratulating himself on correctly pegging us as wretched sinners letting ourselves be influenced by the will of Satan.