Turns out Phil Robertson is a nutball after all

[EVT1]

I knew who they guy was and about the whole gay flap- but this is wingnut level stuff here:

www.rrstar.com/article/ZZ/20150325/NEWS/303259985/10471/ENTERTAINMENT

     The outspoken slaughterer of waterfowl imagined an interesting scenario while criticizing atheists at a Florida prayer event on Friday, reports Right Wing Watch.

     In his speech, Robertson hypothesized how an atheist father might react to watching his wife get decapitated and his daughters get raped and shot by intruders who broke into his home. He also threw in some extra details like having the fictional intruders cut off the man's penis and dangle it in front of the victim's face, all while saying that they didn't have to be judged for the crimes because the man is an atheist.

That sounds appropriate for a prayer event

[weltschmerz]

Holy crap!! He's weapons-grade, batshit crazy.

[Deleted]

Wait.... there are people that didn't already know this dude is nuts?

[Virgil Showlion]

He's technically correct on some aspects.

For example, I could commit all kinds of unspeakable crimes for the sadistic pleasure of it, and if I escaped worldly punishment, I need fear no judgment or reprisal in the atheist worldview.

More generally, if a sadist accepts the atheist worldview, there's no reason at all that (provided he thinks he can get away with it) he shouldn't derive as much satisfaction as he possibly can from the torment of other people.

[mmhmm]

Mar 25, 2015 19:42:42 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

He's technically correct on some aspects.

For example, I could commit all kinds of unspeakable crimes for the sadistic pleasure of it, and if I escaped worldly punishment, I need fear no judgment or reprisal in the atheist worldview.

More generally, if a sadist accepts the atheist worldview, there's no reason at all that (provided he thinks he can get away with it) he shouldn't derive as much satisfaction as he possibly can from the torment of other people.

BULL HOCKEY!

[Virgil Showlion]

Mar 25, 2015 19:49:45 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Mar 25, 2015 19:42:42 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

He's technically correct on some aspects.

For example, I could commit all kinds of unspeakable crimes for the sadistic pleasure of it, and if I escaped worldly punishment, I need fear no judgment or reprisal in the atheist worldview.

More generally, if a sadist accepts the atheist worldview, there's no reason at all that (provided he thinks he can get away with it) he shouldn't derive as much satisfaction as he possibly can from the torment of other people.

BULL HOCKEY!

Can you maybe articulate a bit?

[Deleted]

Mar 25, 2015 19:42:42 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

He's technically correct on some aspects.

For example, I could commit all kinds of unspeakable crimes for the sadistic pleasure of it, and if I escaped worldly punishment, I need fear no judgment or reprisal in the atheist worldview.

More generally, if a sadist accepts the atheist worldview, there's no reason at all that (provided he thinks he can get away with it) he shouldn't derive as much satisfaction as he possibly can from the torment of other people.

Or  he could accept Jesus as his savoir and also fear no reprisal.

[Virgil Showlion]

Mar 25, 2015 19:56:04 GMT -5 @hickle said:

Mar 25, 2015 19:42:42 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

He's technically correct on some aspects.

For example, I could commit all kinds of unspeakable crimes for the sadistic pleasure of it, and if I escaped worldly punishment, I need fear no judgment or reprisal in the atheist worldview.

More generally, if a sadist accepts the atheist worldview, there's no reason at all that (provided he thinks he can get away with it) he shouldn't derive as much satisfaction as he possibly can from the torment of other people.

Or  he could accept Jesus as his savoir and also fear no reprisal.

If he's correct in his assessment that this is all that's required to fear no reprisal, that's very true, and many Christians believe that.

It's not an issue we can discuss on this board.

[Deleted]

Mar 25, 2015 19:59:31 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Mar 25, 2015 19:56:04 GMT -5 @hickle said:

Or  he could accept Jesus as his savoir and also fear no reprisal.

If he's correct in his assessment that this is all that's required to fear no reprisal, that's very true, and many Christians believe that.

It's not an issue we can discuss on this board.

Okay

[EVT1]

Mar 25, 2015 19:42:42 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

He's technically correct on some aspects.

For example, I could commit all kinds of unspeakable crimes for the sadistic pleasure of it, and if I escaped worldly punishment, I need fear no judgment or reprisal in the atheist worldview.

More generally, if a sadist accepts the atheist worldview, there's no reason at all that (provided he thinks he can get away with it) he shouldn't derive as much satisfaction as he possibly can from the torment of other people.

Dude.......

What he said was the intruders- which may or may not believe in final judgment- were apparently aware the father in this brilliant scenario was an atheist- so they decided to go all medieval on him and his family and taunt him that there will be no judgment for them- because somehow the victim's lack of belief is controlling on whether there will be a final judgment- he's a nut!

So Virgil- if there was absolute proof there was no God- would you go out and commit unspeakable crimes since it doesn't really matter in the end?  Is the only thing keeping you from taking sadistic pleasure fear of eternal damnation? 

And a sadist by definition is going to derive pleasure from tormenting others- that's kind of their thing- they don't look for spiritual guidance.

[Deleted]

Mar 25, 2015 20:23:27 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Mar 25, 2015 19:42:42 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

He's technically correct on some aspects.

For example, I could commit all kinds of unspeakable crimes for the sadistic pleasure of it, and if I escaped worldly punishment, I need fear no judgment or reprisal in the atheist worldview.

More generally, if a sadist accepts the atheist worldview, there's no reason at all that (provided he thinks he can get away with it) he shouldn't derive as much satisfaction as he possibly can from the torment of other people.

Dude.......

What he said was the intruders- which may or may not believe in final judgment- were apparently aware the father in this brilliant scenario was an atheist- so they decided to go all medieval on him and his family and taunt him that there will be no judgment for them- because somehow the victim's lack of belief is controlling on whether there will be a final judgment- he's a nut!

So Virgil- if there was absolute proof there was no God- would you go out and commit unspeakable crimes since it doesn't really matter in the end?  Is the only thing keeping you from taking sadistic pleasure fear of eternal damnation? 

And a sadist by definition is going to derive pleasure from tormenting others- that's kind of their thing- they don't look for spiritual guidance.

Are you arguing that punishment is not a deterrent to some, maybe many?

[Opti]

Mar 25, 2015 19:42:42 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

He's technically correct on some aspects.

For example, I could commit all kinds of unspeakable crimes for the sadistic pleasure of it, and if I escaped worldly punishment, I need fear no judgment or reprisal in the atheist worldview.

More generally, if a sadist accepts the atheist worldview, there's no reason at all that (provided he thinks he can get away with it) he shouldn't derive as much satisfaction as he possibly can from the torment of other people.

Virgil, there is no unified atheist worldview. I think some people make crap up

about atheists.

The only accurate thing that can be said about atheists is the lack of belief in God(s).

That's it, nothing else. Most people believe in right and wrong. It just might not be

your version of it.

atheists.org/activism/resources/what-is-atheism

Phil created the shark and then jumped it. Kind of sick how he created this scenario.

[mmhmm]

Mar 25, 2015 19:51:25 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Mar 25, 2015 19:49:45 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

BULL HOCKEY!

Can you maybe articulate a bit?

I articulated all I care to articulate. Don't try to tell me what I think, or why I do what I do, or don't do what I don't do. I'm an atheist. Don't tell me about me. Got it? Good!

[EVT1]

Of course it isn't. If punishment was a deterrent there would be no crime.

The reason I don't invade my neighbor's home and chop his weenie off has nothing to do with religion or laws.

Depends on the person- some are scared of the law, some are scared of being Judged in the after life- some people don't care at all.

I was thinking about this the other day- after Utah brought back the firing squad- and that it fills the positions by volunteers from the police departments- and always have more than enough.  That was extremely disturbing to me.

I think anyone that would volunteer to murder someone in cold blood is a morally bankrupt individual- even though it is 'legal'.  

[Deleted]

I think he is trying to say that the Atheist doesn't get the comfort of knowing that God will punish the attackers. Why that leads to more and more violence... And the idea that it would be somehow easier for a believer...

[weltschmerz]

Mar 25, 2015 20:37:53 GMT -5 Opti said:

Mar 25, 2015 19:42:42 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

He's technically correct on some aspects.

For example, I could commit all kinds of unspeakable crimes for the sadistic pleasure of it, and if I escaped worldly punishment, I need fear no judgment or reprisal in the atheist worldview.

More generally, if a sadist accepts the atheist worldview, there's no reason at all that (provided he thinks he can get away with it) he shouldn't derive as much satisfaction as he possibly can from the torment of other people.

Virgil, there is no unified atheist worldview. I think some people make crap up

about atheists.

The only accurate thing that can be said about atheists is the lack of belief in God(s).

That's it, nothing else. Most people believe in right and wrong. It just might not be

your version of it.

atheists.org/activism/resources/what-is-atheism

Phil created the shark and then jumped it. Kind of sick how he created this scenario.

Did you watch CNN's Inside the World of Non-Believers? Quite the eye-opener. I knew things were bad, but not this bad. So many atheists still in the closet, lest they be disowned or shunned. I think having a child who is a murderer is better; family will still be there for them.

What truly fascinated me is how many ministers and pastors have become atheists. There is a support group for about 600 of them, and that's just the one group. I wonder how people would feel if their minister "came out" as a non-believer? It isn't pretty.

[mmhmm]

Many of us are motivated by a thing called empathy. To some others, it's a foreign concept. It is that empathy, however, that governs what we do, or do not do. I hope I'm not speaking out of turn in the presence of other atheists, but that's sure what motivates me!

[EVT1]

Mar 25, 2015 20:49:18 GMT -5 laterbloomer said:

I think he is trying to say that the Atheist doesn't get the comfort of knowing that God will punish the attackers. Why that leads to more and more violence... And the idea that it would be somehow easier for a believer...

That is exactly what he was saying- the poor poor man seeing his family destroyed in front of him is somehow worse off than a proper Christian in the same situation.

In that case why do you need to execute them if you catch them? Let God deal with them later- what's 50 years in prison v. eternity in hell   Why is the need to punish and extract that pound of flesh so important to them?

[Opti]

EVT, Phil seems to believe Atheists believe nothing is considered wrong or bad.

Wouldn’t it be something if this [sic] was something wrong with this? But you’re the one who says there is no God, there’s no right, there’s no wrong, so we’re just having fun.

www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/03/25/phil-robertson-draws-fire-for-graphic-illustration-about-the-rape-and-murder-of-an-atheist-family/

[EVT1]

Ahh- so right and wrong are only religious concepts.  Got it- he built a giant strawman.

What scares me are people that needed stone tablets to tell them not to murder or steal from their neighbors.

Added- that link is even worse- what he said is quite disturbing- WTF?  He looks like Manson and might be just as crazy- almost sounds like a person fantasy.

[weltschmerz]

All you really need is Hammurabi's Golden Rule. If you wouldn't want it done to you, then it's wrong.

Pretty simple. You don't need the supernatural to guide you or mete out the appropriate punishments.

[EVT1]

Mar 25, 2015 21:13:25 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

All you really need is Hammurabi's Golden Rule. If you wouldn't want it done to you, then it's wrong.

Pretty simple. You don't need the supernatural to guide you or mete out the appropriate punishments.

Also what our laws evolved from regardless of what Roy Moore thinks.

[Green Eyed Lady]

If you wouldn't want it done to you, then it's wrong.

I don't want anybody giving me a bikini wax.  Does that mean bikini waxes are wrong?

I don't want anybody giving me a massage.  Does that mean massages are wrong?

I think it's a bit deeper than that for most people.

Phil can go off on a tangent once in awhile....no question about it.  However, I don't think he's "nuts" anymore than I think EVT is nuts for going off on his tangents about gun-control....or Weltz going off a tangent about anything religious....or me going off on a tangent about abortion....or anybody else going off on tangents over what they are passionate about. Just because we don't agree with somebody doesn't mean they are crazy.

ETA:  I shouldn't have used the word "tangent".  It wasn't the word I was looking for and it has negative connotations I did not mean to give it.  I should have used something else...not sure what tho.

[Virgil Showlion]

Mar 25, 2015 20:23:27 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Mar 25, 2015 19:42:42 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

He's technically correct on some aspects.

For example, I could commit all kinds of unspeakable crimes for the sadistic pleasure of it, and if I escaped worldly punishment, I need fear no judgment or reprisal in the atheist worldview.

More generally, if a sadist accepts the atheist worldview, there's no reason at all that (provided he thinks he can get away with it) he shouldn't derive as much satisfaction as he possibly can from the torment of other people.

Dude.......

What he said was the intruders- which may or may not believe in final judgment- were apparently aware the father in this brilliant scenario was an atheist- so they decided to go all medieval on him and his family and taunt him that there will be no judgment for them- because somehow the victim's lack of belief is controlling on whether there will be a final judgment- he's a nut!

So Virgil- if there was absolute proof there was no God- would you go out and commit unspeakable crimes since it doesn't really matter in the end?  Is the only thing keeping you from taking sadistic pleasure fear of eternal damnation? 

And a sadist by definition is going to derive pleasure from tormenting others- that's kind of their thing- they don't look for spiritual guidance.

I read the article. The video won't play on my machine due to plugin issues.

To answer your question: If Mr. Robertson's argument is that a Christian is somehow bound only by the morality of the people he's interacting with, he's "off the reservation" so to speak. There's no conceivable merit to the argument.

I was addressing the comments in the article's summary.

[Virgil Showlion]

Mar 25, 2015 20:45:17 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Of course it isn't. If punishment was a deterrent there would be no crime.

A good opportunity to familiarize yourself with the Nirvana fallacy, of which this is a perfect example.

[weltschmerz]

Mar 25, 2015 21:55:10 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

If you wouldn't want it done to you, then it's wrong.

I don't want anybody giving me a bikini wax.  Does that mean bikini waxes are wrong?

I don't want anybody giving me a massage.  Does that mean massages are wrong?

I think it's a bit deeper than that for most people.

Phil can go off on a tangent once in awhile....no question about it.  However, I don't think he's "nuts" anymore than I think EVT is nuts for going off on his tangents about gun-control....or Weltz going off a tangent about anything religious....or me going off on a tangent about abortion....or anybody else going off on tangents over what they are passionate about. Just because we don't agree with somebody doesn't mean they are crazy.

ETA:  I shouldn't have used the word "tangent".  It wasn't the word I was looking for and it has negative connotations I did not mean to give it.  I should have used something else...not sure what tho.

Don't you think that's an extremely simplistic view? Yes, if someone gives you a bikini wax against your will, then yes, it's wrong. If you willingly go, then it isn't.

[Green Eyed Lady]

Of course it isn't. If punishment was a deterrent there would be no crime.

That's not true at all.   The majority of criminals don't think they will be caught so the thought of punishment doesn't even factor into their decision to commit the crime.

[Virgil Showlion]

Mar 25, 2015 20:56:38 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Many of us are motivated by a thing called empathy. To some others, it's a foreign concept. It is that empathy, however, that governs what we do, or do not do. I hope I'm not speaking out of turn in the presence of other atheists, but that's sure what motivates me!

Maybe I wasn't clear in my earlier post.

I'm positing that this individual is a sadist. Very specifically, he derives pleasure from the suffering of other human beings and is unconcerned with conventional morality or ethics. He may or may not lack the ability to empathize, but if he possesses it, it's insufficient to overcome the pleasure he derives from causing pain.

If you reread the post in that context, I think you'll get a better sense of what my argument was (is).

[Green Eyed Lady]

Mar 25, 2015 22:05:10 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Mar 25, 2015 21:55:10 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

I don't want anybody giving me a bikini wax.  Does that mean bikini waxes are wrong?

I don't want anybody giving me a massage.  Does that mean massages are wrong?

I think it's a bit deeper than that for most people.

Phil can go off on a tangent once in awhile....no question about it.  However, I don't think he's "nuts" anymore than I think EVT is nuts for going off on his tangents about gun-control....or Weltz going off a tangent about anything religious....or me going off on a tangent about abortion....or anybody else going off on tangents over what they are passionate about. Just because we don't agree with somebody doesn't mean they are crazy.

ETA:  I shouldn't have used the word "tangent".  It wasn't the word I was looking for and it has negative connotations I did not mean to give it.  I should have used something else...not sure what tho.

Don't you think that's an extremely simplistic view? Yes, if someone gives you a bikini wax against your will, then yes, it's wrong. If you willingly go, then it isn't.

You said nothing about "against your will" in your post.  That is why I said it goes a bit deeper than that.  If you meant to include "against your will", then we agree mostly.  And yes. I suppose my view on what is right and what is wrong (for me) is extremely simplistic.  I don't see that as a bad thing. 

[mmhmm]

Mar 25, 2015 22:07:05 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Mar 25, 2015 20:56:38 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Many of us are motivated by a thing called empathy. To some others, it's a foreign concept. It is that empathy, however, that governs what we do, or do not do. I hope I'm not speaking out of turn in the presence of other atheists, but that's sure what motivates me!

Maybe I wasn't clear in my earlier post.

I'm positing that this individual is a sadist. Very specifically, he derives pleasure from the suffering of other human beings and is unconcerned with conventional morality or ethics. He may or may not lack the ability to empathize, but if he possesses it, it's insufficient to overcome the pleasure he derives from causing pain.

If you reread the post in that context, I think you'll get a better sense of what my argument was (is).

I don't need to get a better sense of what your argument is. You need to get a better sense of what your arguments often mean to others who don't think as you think, Virgil. A sadist does not, by definition, possess empathy. Let's not get into some dumb semantics game here. You may believe in God. That's great. I'm happy for you because that belief is right for you. That doesn't mean that belief is right for everyone and that's a concept you don't seem to be able to grasp. A sadist will be a sadist with, or without God in the picture. God has absolutely nothing to do with sadism. Therefore, in future it would be much appreciated by many of us if you keep your feelings about atheism to yourself. I don't know how I can make that any more clear. I won't play word games, and I won't read excuses and take them as definitive answers. You're insulting others. I'd appreciate it if you stop insulting others.

/rant