If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   NY state court says that 9/11 Cross may be allowed in the memorial's museum. Naturally, some people have a problem with this   (cnn.com) divider line 299
    More: Obvious, World Trade Center Cross, Judges' Rules, World Trade Center, A New York, American Atheists, Franciscans, museums  
•       •       •

6059 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Mar 2013 at 5:36 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



299 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-30 09:37:06 PM  

jso2897: Ah, so now you are going to start telling people they are dumb because they don't agree with you? Somebody takes himself a little too seriously, methinks.


No - just this particular guy.  I can be goofy about it and joke.  He's taking it way too seriously and I'm having a spot of fun calling him out on his idiocy.  It's an amusing diversion on a slow Saturday night.

Not much different than what you're doing, methinks.  Just with a different target.
 
2013-03-30 09:37:09 PM  
Well, atheists - best get busy gutting the Metropolitan Museum of Art, if you'd like to be consistent. The place is crammed with religious imagery all in your face and shiat.
 
2013-03-30 09:41:20 PM  

Amos Quito: hell on Earth.


Having to jump from a skyscraper just to have one last breath of freedom, knowing they will win.
 
2013-03-30 09:41:47 PM  

jso2897: To me, the fact that it made people feel better would be more important than somebody's narrative that they choose to call "history" - but then, I care about how more about  people being happy than I do about being "right".



If it made people feel better at the time, then it would have a valid historical significance. But as of today there is no known evidence that such an object existed, therefore including one would be invented history for no other purpose than to pander to emotions at the cost of destroying history.
 
2013-03-30 09:44:43 PM  

ronaprhys: jso2897: Ah, so now you are going to start telling people they are dumb because they don't agree with you? Somebody takes himself a little too seriously, methinks.

No - just this particular guy.  I can be goofy about it and joke.  He's taking it way too seriously and I'm having a spot of fun calling him out on his idiocy.  It's an amusing diversion on a slow Saturday night.

Not much different than what you're doing, methinks.  Just with a different target.


I don't think anyone here is an idiot, and I'm not calling anybody out. And maybe I don't know what I am talking about, but I think that the whole point of both museums like this, and religious symbols, is to give people some kind of comfort.
Let's say, for example, that some Muslim kid lost their dad in one of the towers, and seeing a Crescent in that museum would make him feel better.  If it was up to me, I'd do what made him feel better.
That's  a real thing, to me. I'd put all the symbols up, if it helped somebody.
Which, in turn, is why people like "American Atheists" don't speak for me, heathen though I be.
I've been told I'm a really crappy atheist, though. I don't fail to believe in God hard enough, apparently.
 
2013-03-30 09:46:08 PM  

the ha ha guy: therefore including one would be invented history for no other purpose than to pander to emotions at the cost of destroying history.


You say that like it's a bad thing.
 
2013-03-30 09:48:11 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Amos Quito: FTA: "September 11 "affected all Americans, not just Christians," Silverman continued. "We will not sit and let the 500 atheists who died on 9/11 go unnoticed."


How does Silverman know how many atheists died on 9/11?

Were they registered atheists?

Did someone reject the atheist gravestone?



17. "And he [Jesus] beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?

18. "Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder."

Luke 20:17-18 KJV


Apropos?

;-)
 
2013-03-30 09:49:34 PM  

jso2897: I don't think anyone here is an idiot, and I'm not calling anybody out. And maybe I don't know what I am talking about, but I think that the whole point of both museums like this, and religious symbols, is to give people some kind of comfort.
Let's say, for example, that some Muslim kid lost their dad in one of the towers, and seeing a Crescent in that museum would make him feel better.  If it was up to me, I'd do what made him feel better.
That's  a real thing, to me. I'd put all the symbols up, if it helped somebody.
Which, in turn, is why people like "American Atheists" don't speak for me, heathen though I be.
I've been told I'm a really crappy atheist, though. I don't fail to believe in God hard enough, apparently.


True - you're not calling anyone an idiot.  You are, however, messing with folks to amuse yourself.  Which is similar to the game I'm playing.  The difference here is one of tactics, more than anything.  jcoolio has put himself out there and is basically being a dick for no good reason whatsoever.  I called him on it, pointed out the flaws in his nonsense, etc.  Willful ignorance, under whatever guise, should be called out for what it is.
 
2013-03-30 09:51:43 PM  

ecmoRandomNumbers: violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.

The problem with pastafarianism is that it doesn't have its own city. No Mecca, Jerusalem, Vatican, or Salt Lake City. You have to have a city if you want to be a legitimate religion.


Farkers, the gauntlet has been thrown down.  The city most associated with noodley culture must be designated as the holy city of Pastafarianism.  Nominations?
 
2013-03-30 09:51:46 PM  

jso2897: the ha ha guy: therefore including one would be invented history for no other purpose than to pander to emotions at the cost of destroying history.

You say that like it's a bad thing.



"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" ~ George Santayana
 
2013-03-30 09:51:48 PM  

Gulper Eel: Well, atheists - best get busy gutting the Metropolitan Museum of Art, if you'd like to be consistent. The place is crammed with religious imagery all in your face and shiat.


The Metropolitan Museum of Art is a private entity. The 9/11 Memorial and Museum is a public one.
 
2013-03-30 09:54:56 PM  

Mugato: Jesus Christ, atheists can be assholes.


Let's stick a 9-11 crescent and star in there (plenty of Muslims died in the attacks) and see who the assholes are.

For the record, I don't care about any of it. None of it means anything. People will continue to kill each other, and shriek about their rights, and the other guys are assholes, until there are no more people.

None of it ever means anything. They thought it meant something when they tore Hippolyta apart with their bare hands in the name of god. It didn't.

It never does.
 
2013-03-30 09:55:24 PM  

advex101: ecmoRandomNumbers: violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.

The problem with pastafarianism is that it doesn't have its own city. No Mecca, Jerusalem, Vatican, or Salt Lake City. You have to have a city if you want to be a legitimate religion.

Farkers, the gauntlet has been thrown down.  The city most associated with noodley culture must be designated as the holy city of Pastafarianism.  Nominations?


Noodly culture?  Roma?  Firenze?
 
2013-03-30 09:56:04 PM  

jaytkay: Gulper Eel: Well, atheists - best get busy gutting the Metropolitan Museum of Art, if you'd like to be consistent. The place is crammed with religious imagery all in your face and shiat.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art is a private entity. The 9/11 Memorial and Museum is a public one.


Just substitute the National Gallery of Art, as an easy one. It's really not hard to get his point.
 
2013-03-30 09:58:59 PM  

ronaprhys: jso2897: I don't think anyone here is an idiot, and I'm not calling anybody out. And maybe I don't know what I am talking about, but I think that the whole point of both museums like this, and religious symbols, is to give people some kind of comfort.
Let's say, for example, that some Muslim kid lost their dad in one of the towers, and seeing a Crescent in that museum would make him feel better.  If it was up to me, I'd do what made him feel better.
That's  a real thing, to me. I'd put all the symbols up, if it helped somebody.
Which, in turn, is why people like "American Atheists" don't speak for me, heathen though I be.
I've been told I'm a really crappy atheist, though. I don't fail to believe in God hard enough, apparently.

True - you're not calling anyone an idiot.  You are, however, messing with folks to amuse yourself.  Which is similar to the game I'm playing.  The difference here is one of tactics, more than anything.  jcoolio has put himself out there and is basically being a dick for no good reason whatsoever.  I called him on it, pointed out the flaws in his nonsense, etc.  Willful ignorance, under whatever guise, should be called out for what it is.


Hey - maybe being a dick gives him hope, and comfort. Anyway, I'm not "messing with" anybody - I just get tired of mean people wanting to deprive others of things that make them feel better because it conflicts with their version of the "truth". The term "historical accuracy" is an oxymoron, and holding it up as a value that trumps anybody's happiness is something I don't agree with. I apply this to self-styled atheists who want to piss on religious folks happiness, and I apply it to religious folk who would do the same.
"History" is a toothless old dotard sitting around the campfire telling tales to the children, and his story changes with every telling. People being happy matters more than the "accuracy" of his mumbled narrative, in my value system.
 
2013-03-30 10:00:37 PM  

the ha ha guy: jso2897: the ha ha guy: therefore including one would be invented history for no other purpose than to pander to emotions at the cost of destroying history.

You say that like it's a bad thing.


"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" ~ George Santayana


In my observation, so are those who can.
 
2013-03-30 10:08:36 PM  

YoOjo: /agnostic, because atheism is too much like having a belief.


I'm agnostic for a different reason, (since the concept of "having a belief" isn't inherently bad in and of itself).

However I completely agree with the sentiment.  Anyone who acts or does, or actively avoids acting or doing, based on their theological stance (either positive or negative) has belief.  This is self-evident and inherently obvious.
 
2013-03-30 10:09:31 PM  

jso2897: The term "historical accuracy" is an oxymoron, and holding it up as a value that trumps anybody's happiness is something I don't agree with.



Should the Holocaust museums be redecorated and the stories revised to make the museums a place of joy? After all, if they stay as-is, their "accuracy" in telling the story of 12+ million people murdered would stifle my right to be happy during my visit to the museum.
 
2013-03-30 10:11:11 PM  

jso2897: ronaprhys: jso2897: I don't think anyone here is an idiot, and I'm not calling anybody out. And maybe I don't know what I am talking about, but I think that the whole point of both museums like this, and religious symbols, is to give people some kind of comfort.
Let's say, for example, that some Muslim kid lost their dad in one of the towers, and seeing a Crescent in that museum would make him feel better.  If it was up to me, I'd do what made him feel better.
That's  a real thing, to me. I'd put all the symbols up, if it helped somebody.
Which, in turn, is why people like "American Atheists" don't speak for me, heathen though I be.
I've been told I'm a really crappy atheist, though. I don't fail to believe in God hard enough, apparently.

True - you're not calling anyone an idiot.  You are, however, messing with folks to amuse yourself.  Which is similar to the game I'm playing.  The difference here is one of tactics, more than anything.  jcoolio has put himself out there and is basically being a dick for no good reason whatsoever.  I called him on it, pointed out the flaws in his nonsense, etc.  Willful ignorance, under whatever guise, should be called out for what it is.

Hey - maybe being a dick gives him hope, and comfort. Anyway, I'm not "messing with" anybuody - I just get tired of mean people wanting to deprive others of things that make them feel better because it conflicts with their version of the "truth". The term "historical accuracy" is an oxymoron, and holding it up as a value that trumps anybody's happiness is something I don't agree with. I apply this to self-styled atheists who want to piss on religious folks happiness, and I apply it to religious folk who would do the same.
"History" is a toothless old dotard sitting around the campfire telling tales to the children, and his story changes with every telling. People being happy matters more than the "accuracy" of his mumbled narrative, in my value system.


I dunno.  Historical accuracy is an ideal to shoot for.  I think that you're referring more to the interpretation of historical facts more than anything.  As folks have noted here, and in many other places, one is entitled to one's opinion, just not their own facts.

As for whether or not an accurate representation of historical events and facts offends someone, to me, that's irrelevant.  Just because facts may offend someone is no good reason to hide them, or mix them up with other things to help comfort others.  To me, it's not much different than science.  Based on the best available information, science will hold a thing as true.  If, however, additional facts come along and change that - science changes and adapts to incorporate those facts.  It doesn't matter than certain professors and other academia don't want to be proven wrong.
 
2013-03-30 10:13:32 PM  

thisisyourbrainonFark: theotherles: REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?

F*CK YES!

Where was your God over the last century when over a hundred million people were murdered by various so-called governments?
]

Sweet deities on pogosticks (or emptiness on a pogostick) that image is more frightening than Newt Gingrich reenacting Lemon Party with Dick Cheney
 
2013-03-30 10:17:03 PM  
Good god, as an atheist, this crap pisses me off.
 
2013-03-30 10:19:28 PM  

WI241TH: "We are confident that we will eventually win this case and that cross will be removed, or atheists will be allowed to have our own symbol in there," he said.

Why wasn't this the main goal in the first place?  It's an historical artifact and I have no problem with it being displayed in the museum so long as they're not denying all other symbols.


Like...maybe...this symbol?

//3====D  0:<
 
2013-03-30 10:21:48 PM  

ecmoRandomNumbers: violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.

The problem with pastafarianism is that it doesn't have its own city. No Mecca, Jerusalem, Vatican, or Salt Lake City. You have to have a city if you want to be a legitimate religion.


Who needs a city when you have the entire island of Sicily?
 
2013-03-30 10:29:46 PM  

AAlumni: Good god, as an atheist, this crap pisses me off.



Apparently Silverman and his American Atheists Association are to atheists as LaPierre and his National Rifle Association are to gun owners:


A MAJOR PAIN IN THE ASS.

Of course I don't own any atheists, and I don't believe in guns, so I can't be absolutely sure...
 
2013-03-30 10:30:35 PM  

ModernLuddite: God:

Did not prevent the attacks, resulting deaths, and resulting war(s), and deaths.

Did make his symbol appear in the rubble.


...I don't recall seeing a crescent in the rubble.
 
2013-03-30 10:30:56 PM  

Gulper Eel: Well, atheists - best get busy gutting the Metropolitan Museum of Art, if you'd like to be consistent. The place is crammed with religious imagery all in your face and shiat.


Does the Metropolitan Museum of Art receive government funding for religious exhibits?  If so, then yes, someone should call bullshiat.
 
2013-03-30 10:32:51 PM  
What's the big deal? Museums are full of religious artifacts.
 
2013-03-30 10:37:58 PM  

REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?


In Heaven, of course. He got there after teaching mankind the sort of lessons we would need to avoid such tragedies. Of course, most don't listen, despite the fact that said teachings are applicable to a good number of life situations, whether you're Christian or not.
 
2013-03-30 10:40:44 PM  

the ha ha guy: jso2897: The term "historical accuracy" is an oxymoron, and holding it up as a value that trumps anybody's happiness is something I don't agree with.


Should the Holocaust museums be redecorated and the stories revised to make the museums a place of joy? After all, if they stay as-is, their "accuracy" in telling the story of 12+ million people murdered would stifle my right to be happy during my visit to the museum.

i18.photobucket.com
Would it make ya feel better, little goil, if they'd been shoved outta windows?
 
2013-03-30 10:41:28 PM  

wiredroach: load-bearing structures perpendicular to the force of gravity is the strongest and most efficient method of construction.


Excuse me, sir, but you have a call from "geodesic dome."
 
2013-03-30 10:44:13 PM  

MontanaDave: wiredroach: load-bearing structures perpendicular to the force of gravity is the strongest and most efficient method of construction.

Excuse me, sir, but you have a call from "geodesic dome."


And you, sir, have a phone call from Lexington Steele, who is currently holding up the world with his member right now.
 
2013-03-30 10:48:34 PM  

jaytkay: The Metropolitan Museum of Art is a private entity.


Irrelevant. The City of New York owns the land and facilities and pitches in a big chunk of its operating budget. They receive all kinds of other taxpayer subsidies as well.

The only difference is that American Atheists can raise money whargarbling about the 9/11 cross, but if they were THAT offended by a cross...they would, if they were consistent, completely lose their shiat at the Met. There's Christian stuff, Islamic art, Jewish art, Greek and Roman art with gods all over the place, African religious imagery...chrissakes, the museum even has a temple built inside it. It's temple dedicated to Isis and Osiris, but still.

Maybe if they averted their eyes until they got to the cafeteria.
 
2013-03-30 10:49:54 PM  

Man On Pink Corner: Gulper Eel: Well, atheists - best get busy gutting the Metropolitan Museum of Art, if you'd like to be consistent. The place is crammed with religious imagery all in your face and shiat.

Does the Metropolitan Museum of Art receive government funding for religious exhibits?  If so, then yes, someone should call bullshiat.


i18.photobucket.com
Like this, you mean?
 
2013-03-30 10:50:59 PM  
Federal Judge Deborah Batts of the Southern District of New York ruled Thursday that display of the beams is permissible because they bear historical importance.

Child molestation has been an important historically to the Catholic church too.
 
2013-03-30 10:51:49 PM  

jso2897: Would it make ya feel better, little goil, if they'd been shoved outta windows?


In case you've forgotten, YOU were the one arguing that historical accuracy should be ignored in favor of making people happy. I'm only trying to determine how much history you're willing to destroy to achieve happiness.
 
2013-03-30 10:52:38 PM  

Gulper Eel: jaytkay: The Metropolitan Museum of Art is a private entity.

Irrelevant. The City of New York owns the land and facilities and pitches in a big chunk of its operating budget. They receive all kinds of other taxpayer subsidies as well.

The only difference is that American Atheists can raise money whargarbling about the 9/11 cross, but if they were THAT offended by a cross...they would, if they were consistent, completely lose their shiat at the Met. There's Christian stuff, Islamic art, Jewish art, Greek and Roman art with gods all over the place, African religious imagery...chrissakes, the museum even has a temple built inside it. It's temple dedicated to Isis and Osiris, but still.

Maybe if they averted their eyes until they got to the cafeteria.


"American Atheists" speak for atheists like Fred Phelps speaks for Christians. People who take the attitude that they are "typical atheists" are as intellectually honest as people who refer to Phelps as a "typical Christian".
 
2013-03-30 10:53:49 PM  

Summer Glau's Love Slave: 3000+ people dead and a cross gets jabbed on top of the rubble?

God's just trolling us at this point.

/3000+ folks escaping certain death would have been a REAL miracle.
//Just sayin'


Like they did in the first WTC bombing in 1993?

/well, that wasn't a miracle, that was just stoopid terrorists
//seems they weren't that stupid though... maybe you were just too ungrateful
 
2013-03-30 10:54:19 PM  
Dear Believers,

                        Don't group me in with asshole atheists, and I will (mostly) remember not to automatically group you in with Believer asshats.

   xoxo,
           Lady Indica

PS: It's a good deal, there's a lot more asshat believers, just because there are more believers overall. ;)
 
2013-03-30 10:56:49 PM  
I really enjoyed that, I think I'm going to have to create an alt.

Thanks!
 
2013-03-30 10:57:56 PM  

the ha ha guy: jso2897: Would it make ya feel better, little goil, if they'd been shoved outta windows?

In case you've forgotten, YOU were the one arguing that historical accuracy should be ignored in favor of making people happy. I'm only trying to determine how much history you're willing to destroy to achieve happiness.


None. History can be neither created nor destroyed. It isn't a real thing - it's a story people tell.
Human suffering, hope, joy - to me those are real things. Please don't be upset with me for not thinking what you think is important isn't - it's not like I have a choice in the matter. Just write it off as some guy being wrong on the Internet, and shine it on - I'm not important, and what I think shouldn't matter to you.
 
2013-03-30 10:59:19 PM  

halfof33: Anti-theist zealots.


Just ignore them - like all us cool heathens do.
 
2013-03-30 10:59:59 PM  

jso2897: the ha ha guy: jso2897: the ha ha guy: therefore including one would be invented history for no other purpose than to pander to emotions at the cost of destroying history.

You say that like it's a bad thing.


"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" ~ George Santayana

In my observation, so are those who can.


That's because they don't learn from it.  Churchill paraphrased Santayana to make that point.
 
2013-03-30 11:01:58 PM  

jso2897: "History" is a toothless old dotard sitting around the campfire telling tales to the children, and his story changes with every telling.



Isn't that how religion starts?

History: Someone once said "try being nice to one another for a change".
First retelling: A magician who could turn water into wine once said "try being nice to one another for a change".
Second retelling: A powerful magician who could bring people back from the dead once said that if you obey his rules you'll get to live forever in his magic happy fun land.
Third retelling: A powerful magician who died, came back from the dead, and flew away, once said that if you get other people to obey his rules you'll get to live forever in his sky palace in the clouds.
[...]
Medieval retelling: God said that if you help us torture heretics you'll get to live forever in heaven.
 
2013-03-30 11:05:22 PM  

Gulper Eel: jaytkay: The Metropolitan Museum of Art is a private entity.

Irrelevant. The City of New York owns the land and facilities and pitches in a big chunk of its operating budget. They receive all kinds of other taxpayer subsidies as well.

The only difference is that American Atheists can raise money whargarbling about the 9/11 cross, but if they were THAT offended by a cross...they would, if they were consistent, completely lose their shiat at the Met. There's Christian stuff, Islamic art, Jewish art, Greek and Roman art with gods all over the place, African religious imagery...chrissakes, the museum even has a temple built inside it. It's temple dedicated to Isis and Osiris, but still.

Maybe if they averted their eyes until they got to the cafeteria.


And that's just the Met.

Wait until they find out about the Survivors' Talmud... printed by none other than the US Government.

/as a Christian, I feel like I'm having Judaism shoved down my throat...
//wait, no I don't.
 
2013-03-30 11:06:39 PM  

the ha ha guy: jso2897: "History" is a toothless old dotard sitting around the campfire telling tales to the children, and his story changes with every telling.


Isn't that how religion starts?

History: Someone once said "try being nice to one another for a change".
First retelling: A magician who could turn water into wine once said "try being nice to one another for a change".
Second retelling: A powerful magician who could bring people back from the dead once said that if you obey his rules you'll get to live forever in his magic happy fun land.
Third retelling: A powerful magician who died, came back from the dead, and flew away, once said that if you get other people to obey his rules you'll get to live forever in his sky palace in the clouds.
[...]
Medieval retelling: God said that if you help us torture heretics you'll get to live forever in heaven.


Yep. That's how "history" starts, too. That's why I don't believe in either one, and wouldn't deny anyone anything that makes them happy on the basis of either one.
See? We're in total agreement.
 
2013-03-30 11:09:29 PM  

ReverendJynxed: eraser8: Mugato: Jesus Christ, atheists can be assholes.

Any person can be an asshole.

Christians can be assholes.

Muslims can be assholes.

Hindus can be assholes.

Drinkers can be assholes.

Teetotalers can be assholes.

Men can be assholes.

Women can be assholes.

Hell, you don't even need to be human to be an asshole.  I know some ducks who are complete (metaphorical) jackasses.

Yeah, we won't even get started on geese. Those bastards wrote the book.


I'll add chickens to the mix. They read to book the geese wrote.
 
2013-03-30 11:09:45 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: jso2897: the ha ha guy: jso2897: the ha ha guy: therefore including one would be invented history for no other purpose than to pander to emotions at the cost of destroying history.

You say that like it's a bad thing.


"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" ~ George Santayana

In my observation, so are those who can.

That's because they don't learn from it.  Churchill paraphrased Santayana to make that point.


Precisely my point.
Of course, Churchill was also paraphrasing him when he said "I've got a black magic woman, and she's trying to make a demon out of me."
 
2013-03-30 11:12:17 PM  

jso2897: the ha ha guy: jso2897: Would it make ya feel better, little goil, if they'd been shoved outta windows?

In case you've forgotten, YOU were the one arguing that historical accuracy should be ignored in favor of making people happy. I'm only trying to determine how much history you're willing to destroy to achieve happiness.

None. History can be neither created nor destroyed. It isn't a real thing - it's a story people tell.
Human suffering, hope, joy - to me those are real things. Please don't be upset with me for not thinking what you think is important isn't - it's not like I have a choice in the matter. Just write it off as some guy being wrong on the Internet, and shine it on - I'm not important, and what I think shouldn't matter to you.



And I'm just another wrong guy on the internet who has nothing better to do on a Saturday night, so why do you care that I'm passing the time on Fark instead of watching TV or sitting on the toilet?

But in response to your post, altering proven historical facts to push a "happiness" agenda is no different than altering proven scientific facts to push a religious agenda.

If you want a version of reality that fits with your ideal but is backed up with zero facts, there are literally hundreds of sources for it. But don't try claiming that your ideal reality should be the default one.
 
2013-03-30 11:17:50 PM  
Is this a government sponsored venture? Kinda had to tell from the web site.
 
2013-03-30 11:23:22 PM  

jso2897: Yep. That's how "history" starts, too. That's why I don't believe in either one, and wouldn't deny anyone anything that makes them happy on the basis of either one.
See? We're in total agreement.



What I want is to see factual accounts backed by physical evidence without interference from myths or false evidence.

What you want to see is myths and false evidence added to the official story just to make a terrible tragedy seem happier than it really was.

Since your desire inherently excludes my desire, we are not in agreement.
 
Displayed 50 of 299 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report