gemli's gems, bestowed on a Mormon blog

[_Lemmie]

To set the stage, a curmudgeonly type on a certain Mormon apologetic blog has taken to calling gemli an "it," obviously because the Spirit of charity drives him to such kind and seemly language. Gemli has always been impervious to such attacks, but lately I sense he is...playing with the Midge.

A mere lump of meat has no intention. It might as well be a rock or some sand. If gemli, who insists that it is a mere lump of meat, is "absolutely delightful in person," why is it posting rubbish about matters about which it is not interested in understanding?

Midgley is such a dear, is he not? In any case, the result is delightful, so I am starting this thread to capture some of these happy moments in mopologetics.

To start, gemli's response to the above:

I am a white and delightsome meat wad,

I could stop right there and my goal would be accomplished. Gemli does go on, however, making an interesting point:

...and have every intention of improving my fellow humans. Their beliefs affect me, as they affect all of us, and eliminating incorrect thinking is in my nature.

The uber hubris of some who think they'll exist forever is one of those things that ironically spoils the brief existence that is our reality.

The fun isn't over, as someone named Mary decides to help:

Your "white and delightsome" jab belies your assertion of no intent to insult.

Do you find it insulting? It was the title of one of Dan's columns.

Mary's gems are less gemlike, however.

I guess you think you're cute.

A toast to gemli! May he have a delightsome year of posting.

https://disqus.com/by/gemli/

[_Maksutov]

gemli is a God.

There, I said it.

[_Gadianton]

Thanks Lemmie, given the history of Gemli elsewhere, it's quite interesting to me that he's ended up as a regular at Sic et Non.

In terms of the social standing of the author among his community, and the relative social standing of that community in society, it would be difficult to find a greater ratio of:

outward respectability / occultic - pseudoscientific thinking

anywhere else. Because of this peculiar dynamic, he finds himself trapped in a world very different than anything his prior life experience and inclinations had taken him. He's a stranger in a strange land if there ever was one. thank you for bringing this to our attention.

[_Lemmie]

gemli is a God.

There, I said it.

and I agree.

[_Lemmie]

Thanks Lemmie, given the history of Gemli elsewhere, it's quite interesting to me that he's ended up as a regular at Sic et Non.

In terms of the social standing of the author among his community, and the relative social standing of that community in society, it would be difficult to find a greater ratio of:

outward respectability / occultic - pseudoscientific thinking

anywhere else. Because of this peculiar dynamic, he finds himself trapped in a world very different than anything his prior life experience and inclinations had taken him. He's a stranger in a strange land if there ever was one. thank you for bringing this to our attention.

You are quite welcome, although I believe I owe you a thank you as well, for first bringing gemli to my attention here!

[_Jersey Girl]

To set the stage, a curmudgeonly type on a certain Mormon apologetic blog has taken to calling gemli an "it," obviously because the Spirit of charity drives him to such kind and seemly language.

This ^^. And nothing but this.

Their invective-drenched spite betrays them repeatedly.

[_Lemmie]

...But if someone needs to believe in an invisible superbeing in order not to run amok and murder people, then I hope they continue to believe. It's cheaper than electroshock therapy and antipsychotic drugs. But for me, and for a lot of atheists that I know and have listened to, antisocial behavior is not on our agenda.

And we are grateful for that!

What brought this on? It's a little embarrassing to say...

And gemli has lost the game when he starts talking about how atheists can be kind, loving, generous, merciful, and hence virtuous human beings, since there is no science that addresses such questions.

Gemli's patience is not entirely unlimited. From the same thread:

Does this sort of scattered, irrational blather fly in your circle? It's the verbal equivalent of flapping one's hands while angrily spouting topical keywords in no particular order. It makes sweeping, unsubstantiated claims about what others know while demonstrating a serious lack of focus. It's like an illogic grenade that's supposed to scare away dangerous ideas that might damage one's worldview. There is no answer I could give to any of these questions that would get past the bluster bombs. How much more proof does one need that a position is indefensible when this kind of smokescreen is deployed to hide it?

He has a point.