Sam Harris's Intolerance

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I can always tell you're upset when you mention your opponent's name 100 times.

If you can calm down, we may continue.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Yes, I know that is an ad hominem; it was not meant to be an argument, but rather information as to why further discussion was not forthcoming.

Good day.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

SwissGambit had not decided at that time whether or not to continue the discussion SwissGambit was having. SwissGambit was somewhat disturbed by SwissGambit's opponent's behavior, so SwissGambit decided to take his opponent's temperature so that SwissGambit would know if SwissGambit's opponent had gone flying off into crazy/psycho land, or returned to earth/rationality.

SwissGambit now has his answer. 😕

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Rwingett is always right. And I will say that SwissGambit is both a cad and a bounder.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Yet despite being well aware, you chose to compare rape to 'being preached at'.
It seems to me that you deliberately chose to mis-characterize what Sam Harris had said.

Sometimes I am not sure that some men can understand how much rape
and the common threats of rape can adversely affect women's lives.
I probably do not understand it. But this does not excuse you.

Almost every woman would prefer to submit to rape. But it seems like
an 'apples-and-oranges' comparison. While being raped is not as bad as
being stoned to death, being raped is *much more common* than being
stoned to death.
How common is being preached at?
I don't think it is easy to add up all the suffering experienced by women world wide and assign it to a cause, but it cannot be denied that religion is a fairly major cause of such suffering - including some of the rape cases and some of the protection of rapists.

(I assume you know that a high proportion of South African women have been raped.)
Yes I know this, and in this case I believe religion has little or nothing to do with it. Culture however is a large part of it, and certain cultural 'values' can be as bad as religion - and are often perpetuated by religion.

I'm not acquainted with any woman who's more afraid of being stoned to death than she's afraid of rape.
Well that just tells us that you don't live in an overly religious country.

It's true that a small minority of religious traditions today still approve of
the practice of stoning a woman to death, which I regard as barbarous.
But I don't know how fair it would be to blame *all religion today* for
what a *small minority* of religious believers do.
Stats please. How 'small' is this minority?

Let's consider an apparently related question: Would the world be better if
1) rape's illegal everywhere and religions are legal everywhere or
2) rape's legal everywhere and religions are illegal everywhere?
Now that depends on what you mean by religion being legal. Are you talking about the imposition of Sharia law?

I don't know (I have not asked) which kind of world Sam Harris prefers.
Well maybe you shouldn't bad mouth people when you don't know what they think?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

"Types of Conditional IF Statements: The Koine Greek used syntax to express Four completely different concepts. Unfortunately, each concept was translated "if" in the King James Version of the Bible.

The 4 types of Conditional IF Clauses are summarized:

1st Class: If - and it is true -
[ei - 1st class conditional if]

2nd Class: "If and I recognize it is NOT true"

3rd Class: "if - maybe you will, maybe you won't -
[ean + subjunctive mood - 3rd Class Conditional IF]
[the type most English speakers would recognize for "if"]

4th Class: "If it is true, I wish it were, but it is not"

http://syndein.com/Greek_If.htm

The post that was quoted here has been removed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoning

But note that you said: "a small minority of religious traditions". You did not refer to political practice. The religious tradition upheld by most Muslims would include stoning - and I think you would find that most Muslims do in fact support the practice.

Not at all, and I'm at loss to comprehend how Twhitehead could have
drawn that from what I wrote.
I didn't draw it from what you wrote, hence the question for clarification. What I drew from what you wrote, didn't make sense in context, so I asked for clarification.

The rest of your post is simply not worth addressing.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
SwissGambit had not decided at that time whether or not to continue the discussion SwissGambit was having. SwissGambit was somewhat disturbed by SwissGambit's opponent's behavior, so SwissGambit decided to take his opponent's temperature so that SwissGambit would know if SwissGambit's opponent had gone flying off into crazy/psycho land, or returned to earth/rationality.

SwissGambit now has his answer. 😕

SwissGambit now has his answer. 😕
SwissGambit now has SwissGambit's answer.

FTFY.

Originally posted by rwingett
Rwingett is always right. And I will say that SwissGambit is both a cad and a bounder.

Perhaps, but truly the underlying question of this thread is: does he enjoy raping babies?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]SwissGambit now has his answer. 😕
SwissGambit now has SwissGambit's answer.

FTFY.[/b]

Dammit! 😀