Rules of Patheos: Midgley appears to violate TOS 10x

[_Lemmie]

It’s also worth noting that Peterson started describing gemli as a “meat unit“ and an “it” not in a comment, but in the body of a blog entry, posted Nov 22, 2018.

I’ve regularly asked this particular meat-unit exactly which element of the scientific method theists are obliged to mock or reject. I’ve routinely sought to know precisely which accomplishment of science this particular carbon-based life form imagines that I’m compelled to disdain or to disavow.



But it never answers.


https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... y-lad.html

[_Lemmie]

Hmm. Kiwi seems to have a memory problem.

Kiwi57 Fred Kratz • 16 minutes ago

That's because you haven't seen me attempt to dehumanize those I despise. At all.

You are clearly projecting when you make that accusation.

"Sheeple" is a label used by your crowd, as they attempt to dehumanize those they despise.

Um....

Kiwi57, January 2020:

...the denizens of the Sty grunted, oinked, brayed, hooted and screeched....

http://disq.us/p/26u35fj

[discussed here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=52916&start=21 ]

Kiwi57, at his dehumanizing best.

[_Lemmie]

Kiwi is cracking me up.

Fred Kratz Kiwi57 • an hour ago

So you've never referred to those you clearly despise as "swine"?



——-
Kiwi57 Fred Kratz • 44 minutes ago

No.

I've used the word "swine" to refer to those who feel comfortable at a certain rather revolting internet location, correctly described as "the sty." But that is only because a sty is an enclosure for swine. A sty would be incomplete without some swine to live in it.

http://disq.us/p/29z6mgr

So kiwi has NEVER used “dehumanizing” language. Except, of course, when discussing the humans whom he defines as inhabiting a sty. Because sties have to have swine. Hence, the humans at the place HE defines as a sty MUST be swine. And therefore he can call them swine. Because they are. What logic. Will kiwi ever grow out of this post-toddler fantastical-lying phase?

Peterson hustles in to rescue the flailing kiwi:

Fred Kratz Kiwi57 • 26 minutes ago

Well, it's a good thing you never dehumanize others then even though, if one searches your droppings, they're liable to find language that is clearly dehumanizing. And you do it while hiding your identity. You're a class act.


—-
Kiwi57 Fred Kratz • 15 minutes ago

And in our next instalment, Fred will tell us how bad it is to judge people.

But in the meantime, what are your thoughts on Dan's blog post? You know, the ostensible topic to which all of our comments are supposed to relate? Do you agree that humans are nothing more than sentient goo?


—-
Fred Kratz Kiwi57 • 5 minutes ago

You really, really should re-read the stuff you've written including attacking people while offering exactly zero to the topic at hand.

I've been reading your comments for years and I have no problem judging you for them just as you regularly judge and dehumanize others while hiding your identity.


—-
DanielPeterson Mod Fred Kratz • 4 minutes ago

FK, do you have anything to say about scientific reductionism? You appear to be in favor of it. Is that correct? Please advise.

[_Gadianton]

The Proprietor of SeN has a new post wherewith much righteousness of the self declares:

And when I have been subsequently confronted with opportunities to look at pornography or not pay my tithing, or compromise on others of God’s commandments, this lesson that I learned has been very important. The lesson is it really is easier to keep the commandments 100 percent of the time than it is 98 percent of the time.

That might hold true as the Proprietor and his gang battle the temptations of pornography and withholding tithes. But when it comes to the commandment, "Thou shalt love they neighbor as thy self", Peterson, Kiwi57, and Lou Midgley clearly find it easier to keep this commandment 2% of the time, rather than either 98% or 100% of the time.

[_Philo Sofee]

The Proprietor of SeN has a new post wherewith much righteousness of the self declares:

And when I have been subsequently confronted with opportunities to look at pornography or not pay my tithing, or compromise on others of God’s commandments, this lesson that I learned has been very important. The lesson is it really is easier to keep the commandments 100 percent of the time than it is 98 percent of the time.

That might hold true as the Proprietor and his gang battle the temptations of pornography and withholding tithes. But when it comes to the commandment, "Thou shalt love they neighbor as thy self", Peterson, Kiwi57, and Lou Midgley clearly find it easier to keep this commandment 2% of the time, rather than either 98% or 100% of the time.

OUCH! That has just got to hurt!

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

In response to this kind and equitable statement by Moksha: “I would prefer a simple world, where those who could do the most good are not also seeking to inflict harm on others. It would be great if they could just embrace the golden rule and only do what they would like for themselves.”

Lyin’ Li’l Lou Midgley snaps with this odd diatribe:

“You posted the following remark above: "Why did Romney join in? Did Kavanaugh ply him with some **shudder** beer?"
I assume that Moksha considers that remark really either funny or Moksha is again sneering at faithful Latter-day Saints. Either way, Moksha should try to think before posting. If Moksha actually has something that he happened to take seriously, would Moksha like some jerk to be constantly mocking and sneering at it? If not, then Moksha might consider ceasing to constantly mock others, should he not? Or perhaps Moksha should just admit to himself and to us that he is a bloody hypocrite.“

The keeviler elf missed the obvious joke about Kavanaugh liking to drink beer.

Sigh...

- Doc

[_Dr Exiled]

The Midge is so at the ready to attack, in the name of religion of all things. He would contact a family member's Stake President/Bishop if that family member wanted to publish something unorthodox in Sunstone or Dialogue. The guy would rat out his own mother if she came out against the most holy LGT.

[_Gadianton]

Ah, thanks Lemmie, now I see why you posted a link to that explanation I gave a while back. The proprietor has recently defended his dehumanizing language (actually, it was Midgley's, and he's putting himself into the line of fire as he often does), and among other things says, "They seemed unaware that the term was his." (the term 'meat wad')

As I documented long ago, the term "meat unit" came from DCP himself, not Gemli. Gemli may have gone with the flow but he did not invent the term. The proprietor can find my link above, and if he can find an earlier reference then great, otherwise it's just an empty claim like pretty much everything else he writes.

Hey, "Christians" did the same thing Gemli is doing, right? Wear the insult as a badge of honor? It's a pretty common tactic, and the Mopologists shouldn't read so much into it. "Derrr, Gemli gone done and said it again, boss!"

[_Lemmie]

Dr. Shades Kiwi57 • 4 hours ago • edited

[kiwi] “That's because you haven't seen me attempt to dehumanize those I despise. At all. . . I've used the word "swine" to refer to those who feel comfortable at a certain rather revolting internet location, correctly described as "the sty." “

I'm impressed! Not even George Orwell himself could've come up with a more egregious example of "Doublethink."


——
Kiwi57 Dr. Shades • 3 hours ago • edited

Not as impressed as I am. Not even Jerald Tanner could have come up with a more brazen example of ellipsis abuse.

Prodigious as your talents for deceit are, the shamelessness of your effrontery is what makes your efforts truly stand out.

http://disq.us/p/29zatdz

Speaking of the shamelessness of effrontery....

Kiwi57, January 2020:

...the denizens of the Sty grunted, oinked, brayed, hooted and screeched....

http://disq.us/p/26u35fj

[discussed here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=52916&start=21 ]

Kiwi the Shameless needs to brush up on his memory skills. Dr. Shades’ use of ellipsis captured his “DoubleThink” perfectly.

[_Gadianton]

The Proprietor also quotes:

Human life and suffering was . . . of no consequence to him. He never visited a field-hospital, nor the homeless after bomb-raids. He saw no massacres, went near no concentration camp, viewed no compound of starving prisoners-of-war. His enemies were in his eyes like vermin to be stamped out. But his profound contempt for human existence extended to his own people. Decisions costing the lives of tens of thousands of his soldiers were made . . . without consideration for any human plight. [Ian Kershaw, Hitler: 1936-1945: Nemesis (New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 2000), 500-501.]

The proprietor comments on the quote:

This is a distasteful but not entirely unreasonable consequence of viewing humans as “meat wads” on a par with monkeys, cockroaches, and “piles of sentient goo” — a view that is emphatically not mine.

If the Proprietor knew how to read, he'd see that the quote has nothing to do with reductionism. The quote said that Hitler reigned from an ivory tower with no real-world connection to the horrors his efforts inflicted on others. Similar in kind if differing in degree would be complaints from stuffy white professors that disgruntled blacks should be serving in soup kitchens rather than rioting.

And speaking of Gemli's quips about sentient goo "getting over itself", Gemli's observations aren't so different from Hugh Nibley's. Nibley looked for ways to bring humility to the a great ego that he believed mankind had been saddled with. Nibley quoted from the Apocalypse of Abraham, where Abraham observed the inner workings of stars and exclaimed that "truly mankind is nothing" when compared to the greatness of the heavens. Gemli is just inverting the framework that has been forced upon him by the Proprietor and making a similar point.