Bryan Cox, Freewind, Voiceofreason trolling in wrong place [Trollville]
Offline These are posts moved from comment moderation panel from this thread, where the poster was exposed as a sockpuppet of an active account(odd). They are reposted here only because we feel bad for him that he is an adult crybaby.
(FROM MOD: Bryan, you asked what you were doing wrong? Here is your most recent post with the bullshit at the end and the beggining removed, and the actual issue at hand in the middle. I can keep doing this if your preferred method is to keep breaking the board rules by not logging in to your account. In your case your strawmen arguments and other loaded questions are being removed to save the community time. Should you want to make a fool of yourself, just follow the rules like you have been asked to... LOG IN TO YOUR ACCOUNT. We've posted your edited comments so you can have the discussion. You were also posting off topic in Kelly's blog, now you are in the right area, it's called trollville.)
Kelly, I'm assuming that you've read existentialist philosophy. Do you disagree with it? I've always wanted an atheist to tell me how they deal, rationally, with "good" and "bad". What defines them? As a fellow atheist, why should I agree? Is there an atheist out there that is honest enough with themselves to admit that there truly is no "good" or "bad"? When they attempt to make people of religion feel "bad", they are only appealing to religious ideals in doing so? I honestly think there is a sort of cognitive dissonance going on within hardened athiests. They enjoy criticizing others but forget to analyze their own beliefs in depth. Whaddya think?
--Bryan
Here's yet one more question for you. Atheists often talk of their morals coming from what is "good for the society". First, I'm not sure how they determine exactly what is "good". Can you tell me? Second, how can they say such a thing when they hold a small, minority view that goes against what the majority feel is "good"? It seems that if they were doing things for the "good" of the society they wouldn't be the vocal minority against the majority, they would instead fit in and do what everyone else is doing so as to fit in and not rock the boat. Otherwise, they cause turmoil and anger (as can be seen from the many of the comments from majority theists on the board and especially the banner up top. I don't see this as "good for the society" and I don't think the majority of our society sees it as such either. I think atheists are extremely confused about "right" and "wrong". They tend to pick and choose whatever suits their personal passions and then borrow concepts of "right" and "wrong", "good" and "bad" from the various ancient religions that permeate all societies in some form or fashion.
Look...I don't think you're bad people (regardless of how you view me), but I do think that you may not examine the problems of your own belief systems as much as you criticize the belief systems of others. We're all humans. We're all flawed. And so are all our beliefs about the world. None of us has a corner on "truth", only "faith", "hope", and "belief".
--Bryan
(FROM MOD: now do yourself a favor... stop bitching about how our site works, and deal with the issues. Stop whining that we remove any comment for disagreeing yet in the thread you are in we can all see that "The Saint" has his posts going straight through. Maybe if you followed the directions instead of being a whiny bitch, you too would have your rhetoric heard. Here is your fresh chance.
Mods, you are free to edit any loaded question he asks, any strawman, and any false accusation or libel, simply make a note that you edited his immaturity)
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
- Login to post comments
MORE FROM VOICE OF REASON/Bryan Cox/Freewind IN THE WRONG THREAD UNEDITED!... (my responses in orange)
Sapient wrote:So, will you take their advice and allow my "angry" and "bitter" posts through?
What does it really matter that you've posted partial emails without the parts that actually expose your lies about what happened? I double dog dare ya to post the entire messages and not edit out free speech.[that's essentially a threat] After all, you've insulted me about as much as you can without allowing me any response! [his responses are in this thread] Heh! All I did was call you guys hacks (which you are). Can you not handle minor criticism (much less than what you've dished out to me already, which is pretty jerky to say the least) such that you have to edit all my posts?[Notice tons of criticism in the thread listed above, also his first few posts went through including one which he tried to appear to be an atheist. Furthermore only the above two posts were edited, some bullshit at the end and the beggining was removed, everything you see remains in tact] What free speech do you beleive in? [The first ammendment, however this site is private property] What "free thought" do you believe in? Answer: You don't. [Strawman] You only believe in what you want to believe in and to heck with everything else. That's called being close-minded.
All you can seem to do is whine about me supposedly "breaking rules".[This is a dishonest logical absolute, we can do much more than whine about you breaking rules, we can also remind you that you are either too stupid or too dishonest to function in society] Whatever. Anyone can interpret their rules such that those who "belong" never get edited while those who don't "belong" are somehow always breaking the rules.[Again see thread aboce, to see many people breaking the rules, (almost all theists, yet they're allowed to stay] It's real convenient for you, isn't it, to point to the rules that you don't even follow yourself and condemn me by them. It's called hypocrisy, and you guys are double good at it.[I'd rather be a hypocrite than a dishonest moron like yourself.]
As I told you in another post, that you obviously didn't read,[Actually I've read every word you've posted on this site] I forgot my password long ago. I only visited this blog because of the unsolicited email I got from you.[Request a new password, and that email address will receive it, ya know, like a competent person would] I don't really care to log back in[THEN LEAVE] and you don't seem to want to post my full and unedited comments[I don't want you here at all, but that's beside the point] (as if they're laden with "threats" HAH! and "bad words" or something...what idiocy amongst the mods).[Daring us to post your drivel telling us by not doing so we aren't freethinkers is essentially a threat] So, I guess we're at an impasse.
Just thought I'd let you know that I'm quite open to tearing down your atheism,[Notice you don't do that at all here, just a bunch of whining, nothing on the issue, just whining about us not letting you break our rules] but I seems you're not in the least bit interested as Irrational Responders. So, go ahead and be dishonest with everyone about the full contents of my comments, and go ahead and condemn free speech (which it is obvious you don't truly believe in), and go ahead and condemn "free thought" (because you don't seem to want to allow me to think freely about atheism and its undesirable consequences).[Go fuck yourself, scumbag]
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Here's the only email we got from him, unedited...
"most destructive blow dealt to Christians" Hah! Kelly's blog is mostly ad hominem and vitriol. There is no real argumentation, only emotional rhetoric spewed at targets she has chosen. By the way, she (or whomever is moderating) should really post my comments rather than deleting them. I deal a pretty devastating blow to atheism and atheists don't like it. That's why I've been banned from one site and why you won't post my comments even though there is nothing worse in them than what is spewed on IrrationalResponders toward people of religion. Well, every belief system has their blind adherents and irrational, emotional, close-minded participants. Atheism is no different, especially the brand of atheism espoused by IR... Go ahead and post my comments to her blog if you haven't deleted them. Are you scared because you realize that when people take such a deep look at atheism they will reject it in favor of religion? How open of you...what freethought that is!Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
I HAD TO MOVE BRYAN'S POST TO THIS THREAD AS HE'S BEEN WARNED AND REFUSES TO FOLLOW THE RULES BUT INSISTS ON BEING TREATED LIKE AN ADULT... Here is the post that led him to act like a child this time.
HERE IS HIS RETARDATION...
Sapient wrote:Again, for the umpteenth time, I didn't and still don't care to log back in, so your blathering about getting my password is totally useless. Since I consider my account worthless and since it has been over half a year (or somewhere thereabouts) since I last posted, I don't see any problem with posting anonymously to a blog that allows anonymous posters (even though you've decided to pull my full real name from your records[It's part of your email to us and your email address], which is pretty lame and not particularly nice when I was posting anonymously[you have no authority to talk about being nice, considering you are a huge dickface], but what the heck...). The whole sockpuppet thing is absurd, especially the claim that I've "gone by more than one name on this website"...come on?! Heh... What idiocy... Let's see, Bryan is my name and I've used it, but not as a registered name (only signed with it when you started rejecting my posts). Riverwind is the only name I used long ago in the forums. I gave them up because the people here are more close minded than those at Internet Infidels (where I posted for nearly a decade), if that's even possible. So, that leaves "TheVoiceOfReason" which was what I used to sign my posts to the blog anonymously, not a "sockpuppet", just an anonymous post (which to any normal person would not be a big deal...sockpuppets are a problem only because they create extra accounts in a forum). Now if you could comprehend these things and stop the spin, you would feel completely embarrassed, but let's see if you're capable of that.
Quote:My apologies for picking a common name on an atheist website....but if you'll notice, "voiceofreason" and "TheVoiceOfReason" are not exactly the same name. Only those with good reading skills and discernment may recognize the difference.
Besides that, you could have looked at the IP address, couldn't you[NO, Our site doesn't work like that], instead of accusing me of pretending to be an atheist. Spin away spinmeister. You're making yourself look incredibly petty.
Quote:How open and nice of you not to allow me to publicly expose your pettiness. I hope you will allow it on your blog, especially since you posted about me in this blog it would be reasonable to most people (even atheists) allow me to respond to all your inaccuracies with respect to me.
Quote:Lack of reading skills again, eh?
Quote:Woohoo, now we're getting somewhere.
You are correct, and that is what makes you such a poor advocate for atheists who normally use reason over emotion and intelligence over vulgarness.
No, it is fine, really. LOL I'm sure some would be down, but it would make many more people very happy.
Quote:There you go again. I have lied about nothing because I have nothing to lie about. Your rhetoric falls flat in the face of truth. How petty can you be by falsely accusing someone of being a liar, especially when your petties has already been exposed?
Quote:And once again, I'll say how convenient for you to talk about me in your blog and not allow me to respond in your blog. Way to go on the whole "free speech" and "free thought" thing. You've pretty much trashed any reputation you thought you may have had on those issues.
Here is a description of Irrational Responders, the atheist supremacists: Brian (Sapient, indeed...LOL) who is merely the ringleader and a bitter rhetorician full of empty vulgar put downs. Kelly (probably the only one with half a brain on this website) who is wasting a moderate talent in philosophy to spew sophism and hatred toward those of religion, ignoring the majority that give of themselves more to charities than most atheists will ever dream of, if they even dream of such a thing which is doubtful. And then there's Rook who is a pseudo-intellectual and pseudo-historian who greatly inflates his own knowledge and consistently overstates his views, using the rogue, minority views of "the Copenhagen school'! as if they represented the majority of scholars. Is this website merely a hoax to make atheists look bad? Because if it is, then rock on because you are accomplishing your jobs.
" alt="
" />L
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient