Disqus - Latest Comments for tastyrerun

Re: Certified Apostate

tastyrerun — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 09:36:06 -0000

I'm not going to ask you to "believe everything it says" but at least you'll be getting some actual science.

And no, carbon dating is not "being disputed", except by creationists. There are no scientists anywhere who dispute carbon dating but you can find people who will dispute anything for religious reasons. For example, there are Muslims who dispute the claim that the earth is round, insisting that it's flat. Do you honestly consider the spherical nature of the earth to be "disputed" because an Imam with a holy book says it's flat? Everything, and I do mean everything, is disputed if you are only willing to look hard enough to find the crazy person who disputes it but there is no scientific debate over radiometric dating methods.

Re: Therapy and Meditation

tastyrerun — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 09:29:48 -0000

I reached a point where I could no longer effectively deal with my emotions in regards to being shunned by my family. I was finding myself having imaginary conversations with my father on a daily basis, I had trouble getting close to the people who were actually in my daily life, and basically I was angry and sad a lot. I found a very good therapist and he helped me work through those issues. He helped me understand some things about myself that I could not have understood on my own. Additionally, he helped me come to terms with my situation and find peace. He did it by careful listening and insightful analysis of the things I was saying, for the most part. There was no magic to it. But, a really good listener and sharp analyst will help you hear for yourself what you are really saying when you say thing, help you resolve inconsistencies in your own thought patterns, and give you a different perspective from which to see yourself. For me it was extremely helpful.

Re: Certified Apostate

lucky widgets — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 00:56:27 -0000

hola again. ok i will find it but i cant guarrantee i will believe all it says. after all even carbon dating is now being disputed. but anyway dont have as much time as i had for a while. but still checking in when i can. actually dont even have time to sign on or check most emails. but i will buy the book and read it. and if ever i make mn i will drop in...;)

Re: Certified Apostate

tastyrerun — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:38:47 -0000

Tell ya what. Go read the book "Why Evolution is True" by Jerry Coyne and then come back to discuss it. As it stands, you seem to be remarkably misinformed on what evolution is, how it works, or what evidence supports it. I could try to explain it all to you, but why would I bother? Other people have already written these books.

To show how sincere I am, I will offer to buy you a copy of that book. Email me a mailing address. You can even stay anonymous. I will buy the book on Amazon and have it shipped to your house or office or any address you desire. If you wish to discuss evolution here on this site, I am afraid I must insist you find out what it is first because otherwise it's like having a discussion about music theory with somebody who has never played an instrument and just listens to the radio every now and then. Ain't gonna be much of a discussion.

Re: Is It Possible to Build Faith In a Creator? Um…

lucky widgets — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 02:23:13 -0000

i did not invent the bible timetable but rather try to find the correct interpretation of when. as for where, since you have not read all of the material i sent that is within the same pages as the flood info i sent to link, then you do not see what i am referring to. i agree that yes africa was the first, however if you look beneath the surface of the bible there was a first creation of man, followed by the creation of adam and eve in his image. and if you go back to the link i shared with you concerning the flood issue, you will see that the other pages within the same site agree with you as to the creation of man in africa as being the first.

as for the remaining timetable info, the bible book of job was written about book number two in the bible unlike i was previously taught. and you will also find this in those same pages with the link and the explanation as to why it has to be so. and the witnesses do not teach this either or at least did not when i was involved with them.

again the difference between us is that i agree with science and try to find the common denominator of science and god. and as the bible explicitly shows within the first few sentences... there was eons of time involved within those first few sentences. and if you were to look at the original language of the manuscripts along with the strong's concordance you will see this is posatively the case. one example, the bible says that it was a formless waste in the new world translation. in the original translation it says that it became a waste or was laid to waste, after it says in the beginning. this leaves an ungiven period of time. however it refers to a time when the earth was not a waste as it could not become a waste from non waste. if you read the link pages i sent in entirety you will see the correct translation of the scripture from the language it was written in. and yes if this is not the case then science has proved the bible to be a waste itself. but i dont believe this to be the case, but rather i believe it was simply mis-translated (temporarily).

Re: Is It Possible to Build Faith In a Creator? Um…

tastyrerun — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 10:48:22 -0000

It's hard to know how to respond to this...

You've apparently invented, completely from scratch, an entire new concept that doesn't exist in the Bible at all and then used it to give the Bible wiggle room to allow it to remain true in your head, while simultaneously missing my point entirely and providing no answer to what I asked.

I'll attempt to clarify by being more specific about why I say Adam and Eve never existed.

It's not a matter of years. It's a matter of genetics. Analysis of human DNA has shown conclusively that our species did not originate in the middle east, but in Africa. So, even if there were an ancestral home of mankind like Eden, the Bible would be wrong about it's location. Additionally, genetic evidence has clinched the case for share common descent with chimpanzees of a common ancestor. Have you ever heard of an endogenous retrovirus? Would you like to learn about why this is the absolute clinching piece of evidence against special creation of human beings?

You can invent all the methods of interpreting the Bible you want to try to give yourself all the years you need, you can't change the evidence that we didn't originate in the Middle East and we absolutely, conclusively, share a common ancestor with another species.

Re: The Long Dark Night of the Soul

tastyrerun — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 10:06:13 -0000

When I have Christmas with my family, it has nothing to do with venerating any Christian god-man or worshipping the sun. I couldn't care less what people in the past thought or did about it. For me, here, today, in my life, the middle of winter is a dark time. The days are short and the world outside seems dead. To have a reminder that spring will come, that green will return, that we will reach the shortest and darkest day and then the days will start to get longer and life will renew itself is a powerful experience. It has nothing to do with ancient pagans and everything to do with my family and their life here today. We take the time to remind each other that we live in a world with cycles of death and rebirth and growth, and in the middle of that we still have each other. What is wrong with using the natural cycles of the seasons to remind ourselves of the good things in life and to chase some of the gloom away? Why does it matter that long dead people who lived in entirely foreign circumstances used to kill their children in response to those same cycles? What kind of person can't separate their life today from the lives of long dead people in remote civilizations?

Should I not go to Wisconsin because Ed Gein and Jeffrey Dahmer lived there? Should I not own a box cutter because the WTC terrorists used them to hijack planes? At what point do we make everything about associations? What is wrong with deciding on our own meanings for ourselves and living our lives in the present? Who cares what ancient dead people did? This is about us, the living, today, now, and what we are living through, and if a family bonding ritual in the dead of winter makes that life better, then it's a good thing.

Re: The Long Dark Night of the Soul

tastyrerun — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 09:57:08 -0000

Have you ever attempted to root out all pagan influence from Christianity? You know what's weird? If you do that, you ultimately have no religion at all because the whole thing is pagan. Judaism is pagan, Christianity is pagan, the whole thing is. Jesus is a pagan mystery god, Judaism is pagan Canaanite religion, every Jew and Christian in the world believes in pagan teachings they are just too deluded and ignorant of the origins of their own religions to know it. You, Lucky, as a Bible believing Christian are a pagan venerating two pagan deities, but the sad part is that you just don't know it. You think you're different, but you're wrong. You're not. Christianity and Judaism grew from pagan roots.

Re: The Long Dark Night of the Soul

lucky widgets — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 03:02:24 -0000

actually i was referring to james' comment as to not understanding why your father is missing from these celebrations of historical filth and that you should feel comfortable filling in for him, if you so chose to. you should not ever feel uncomfortable visiting these relatives as your grandmother wrote you because she loves you and wants to know if you are ok and this is a good thing. and of course being an atheist as you claim- then celebrating xmas as he stated would of course be total hypocricy as the original celebration was from grotesque practicers of religion of a people who killed their own children and burned them in sacrifice to their god in exchange for the solstace of the sun to return and merely changed the meaning to another religion that you do not believe in either, so i was merely answering him concerning this.

i answered him (james) mainly because i cannot understand his view here. why does he make claims in here (blog) as he does about religion and then speak of celebrating these religious activities as it is clearly, TOTAL hypocracy.

as for visiting your grandmother, never ignore her as she could be gone tomorrow. she loves you, pick up the phone and call her. bring sid and esther to see her. if you choose to celebrate whatever with her, it is your prerogative. but be careful as now of course it would be totally hypocritical to celebrate religious holidays while claiming to NOT be a believer. but then life is full of choices. maybe atheists call xmas or christmas something different in order to celebrate this religiously historical celebration and feel ok about it, i dont know since christendom does why not athiests also? going with the flow is usually easiest.

Re: Is It Possible to Build Faith In a Creator? Um…

lucky widgets — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 02:02:43 -0000

yes as a matter of fact i can. you need to see that there is a six day creation of man. and of course although i feel i found the answer to time prophecy as it works two ways..."a day for a thousand years AND a thousand years for a day". this of course multiplies the time into eons of time. i am learning that it is entirely possible and plausible for heaven's timetable as one and earthys timetable as another. an example the 1260 days as witnesses teach as earth's time could have a parallel time of 14,999.76 years using heaven time. and of course this would or could explain the 150 days of water covering the earth could have a meaning of 6249.9 years, so what could this mean of heaven time and prophecy? nothing to you but i know it has a significance but only needs to be found. of course this would NOT have been in noah's time as it had to be at some time eons ago as all other time would be multiplied with the same heaven math. so logically it could be earth's time table of limit and god's timetable of total.

but anyway ryan i understand your reasonings for doubting or stopping believing but i firmly believe it will be uncovered as bible truth with different understanding.

Re: Is It Possible to Build Faith In a Creator? Um…

tastyrerun — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:38:05 -0000

That's cool, and they're right, if there was a flood at all, it wasn't global.

Of course, this is not why I'm not a Witness. The Flood was the first thing I found out they were wrong about, but certainly not enough to make me leave the Org. I just figured there would be New Light™ someday.

How about this instead? Adam and Eve didn't exist and there was no Garden of Eden or original sin. That's a much bigger deal. It means that the whole idea of redemption by sacrifice, the entire basic theory of Christianity, is meaningless. Can you come up with a way demonstrate that whole Garden of Eden thing?

Re: Is It Possible to Build Faith In a Creator? Um…

lucky widgets — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:29:09 -0000

have you read this?.... http://www.biblestudysite.com/answers13.htm#5 as i asked you to. will only take a few minutes and is not from the watchtower. and if correct will not the watchower change their beliefs if this proves to be so as they have in amny other things?

Re: Is It Possible to Build Faith In a Creator? Um…

tastyrerun — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 15:33:27 -0000

"please stop rebuking those who love you because of their beliefs"

Sigh...

I am not rebuking anybody by saying their beliefs are incorrect. This isn't a criticism of a person, it's a criticism of an idea. If somebody criticizes something I believe, it is not a personal criticism of me, it's about the idea, not the person.

I do not, and have not, made this personal .

When the Watchtower Society makes the claim that there was a global flood in the year 2370 BCE that wiped out the entire human race, they are making a verifiable or falsifiable claim. If I examine that claim and find that the evidence indicates that, no, there was no global flood in that year (or any other), I am not rebuking a person who believes in the flood, I'm disputing the factual basis for a claim. The individual believer is not my target. I mean no personal disrespect. I am simply stating that, whether you like it or not, there is overwhelming evidence that this claim is false. In my case, I find the evidence from ice core samples and bristlecone pine trees to be indisputable and conclusive, although there is literally no evidence of a global flood and tons of other evidence that specifically refutes the claim.

There are people I know and love who believe things that I know to be false. I don't care. They can believe the moon is made of bleu cheese if they like. It doesn't matter to me. The problem is that they not only insist on believing these things, but they cut me out of their lives and punish me because I can't believe them. They further consider it an attack or a rebuke if I say why I don't believe what they believe, even though I'm not talking about them, I'm talking about an idea.

Is it because these ideas are so hard to believe in that believers get so upset when somebody fails to believe or considers it a personal attack when somebody explains why they don't believe?

Re: Connections

tastyrerun — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 10:47:13 -0000

I sent you an email but I don't know if your address is real or not so I don't know if you got it.

Look, you can't judge my personal life based on a blog anymore than you can judge a film by looking at a few frames. My life is filled with friends and joy and family. I write about things as they occur to me. Sometimes I feel one way, sometimes another. I am not lonely or miserable. I don't argue with Witnesses. I'm happy, and fulfilled, and busy (socially and otherwise). You're going back in time, commenting on blog posts, trying to figure this all out, but this is not likely to get you very far in terms of understanding me or the life I live today.

I am happy you're reaching out. I'd like to reach out in return. My email address is my name: ryan@ryansutter.net. Drop me a line. You can stay anonymous if you like. You can tell me who you are and I won't tell a soul, if you like. You can ask me whatever you like. It's all good, but I am unlikely to go around and respond to every new comment on an old blog post. I'm not trying to be rude, but, like I said... I'm a busy guy. Can we correspond one on one? Maybe that would work better?

Re: The Long Dark Night of the Soul

tastyrerun — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 10:28:43 -0000

And, for the record, I don't challenge the beliefs of Witnesses in personal conversation. On the rare occasions that I talk to my dad, I ask him how things are with this Vietnamese congregation and in general and carefully avoid any conversation about religion. I don't challenge the things he says and neither do I promote atheism or Buddhism or humanism. Here, on my blog, it's my little record of my thoughts and feelings, my public statement. What I write here does not necessarily carry over into my interactions with co-workers or family members unless it's a conversation they wish to have. I don't bring the battle to them.

What drives me crazy is the fact that because I have made a publicly accessible statement of my beliefs and publicly challenged the beliefs of the Witnesses (something every single Witness does every single week), I am somehow the bad guy. People don't have to agree with each other in order to get along. I vehemently disagree with the beliefs of many people that I am near and dear to and it's not a problem. It only becomes a problem with Witnesses because they hold to the concept that people who disagree with you are dangerous.

Re: The Long Dark Night of the Soul

tastyrerun — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 10:13:01 -0000

"i am living proof that witnesses dont turn on you unless you turn on them first. i still see witnesses often but do not challenge their beliefs."

Witnesses go out, in an organized fashion, to attack and challenge the beliefs of every single other person on this planet. They train from childhood to argue with other Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, and atheists. They knock on peoples doors and write them letters and advertise, advertise, advertise their beliefs and, in the process, loudly, boldly and repeatedly tell other people that their beliefs are wrong, wrong, wrong. They proudly proclaim their beliefs in public, reading Watchtowers on the bus, and taking opportunities to witness whenever they arise. But, if a former member of their group has the audacity to express what they believe, they are an "apostate". If a former member challenges their beliefs in the same way they challenge the beliefs of everybody else, they get offended, or hurt. It is the most hypocritical behavior on earth. If you are going to make it your mission to criticize and overturn and intrude upon and attempt to convert everybody on earth to your belief system, you sure as hell have no right whatsoever to be upset when other people stand up for their own.

If I were to allow that it would be OK for a Witness to say whatever they want about what I believe but it would be inappropriate for me to do the reverse, then I would be, in essence, saying that what they have to say is of more worth than what I have to say. I would be indicating that they are in the right and I am in the wrong. My silence would tacitly validate their claim to having The Truth.

Well, I don't believe they have the truth. I don't believe they are correct. I believe they are wrong and I believe that their error is dangerous, that it occasionally kills people, and that it wastes a lot of amazing human potential on a load of false ideas. Human potential that would be better served doing something productive and useful in this world instead of obsessing over the contents of a book and trying to make it mean something for their lives when it wasn't written for them and was never intended to hold meaning for them.

Any Witness who thinks it's inappropriate for somebody like me to hold and defend my beliefs or to criticize the beliefs of the Watchtower Society is a hypocrite, plain and simple. If you are a Witness, you Witness to others, you attack their beliefs, you consider it a calling. Well, if you can dish it out, you better be able to take it or else shut up.

There is one and only one valid way to respond to criticism of your beliefs. You defend them with reason and evidence. If you can't do that, if all you can do is hypocritically complain that somebody has challenged your belief system and you don't think they should be allowed to do that, well...

And yes, this tone is angry because I am sick to death of being told that the only acceptable beliefs to express are those of the Watchtower Society and that they have a monopoly on criticism of the beliefs of others. Like I said, if the rest of us remain silent, we tacitly agree with them. And I don't.

Re: Nike/Converse Boycott

lucky widgets — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 04:46:01 -0000

cool, anyway i sincerely hope all goes well with you. sorry but even if you figure out who i am please keep it to yourself as i dont need the unecessary hassles from some people and i think you know what i mean as people in general are cruel. fyi i have been to your house to visit you a few times but you were not at home. and for me to do this is unique in the least as i only visit people i feel i can trust....:D

Re: Is It Possible to Build Faith In a Creator? Um…

lucky widgets — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 04:25:08 -0000

ok take care bro, and sorry but i still miss and love ya. hope to meet esther someday, you two seem happy and if there is no life after this then i guess you are man enough to make that decision. but please stop rebuking those who love you because of their beliefs. ok i will knock off the intellect stuff, but it is true, you always were a step above most of us in this catagory....:)

Re: Is It Possible to Build Faith In a Creator? Um…

tastyrerun — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:18:06 -0000

One more thing... would ya knock it off with all the talk about my intellect? Trust me, I'm just a guy, like any other guy, who likes football, and nachos, and video games, and stuff. You make it sound like I'm some sort of scholar or something. I'm just curious about things is all. All this intellect stuff's embarrassin'. ;-)

Re: Is It Possible to Build Faith In a Creator? Um…

tastyrerun — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:13:16 -0000

I don't think badly of you. And it doesn't bother me that you still believe. Whomever you are, I really wish you well and if you've got something that means something to you, that's awesome.

I take it you and I would disagree on a lot religiously, but I really couldn't care less about that. I am a humanist, a Buddhist, and an atheist. There won't be a lot of common ground. You consider the Bible to be the inspired word of God, I consider it to be a man-made book, so it carries no weight with me. Likewise, the evidences and experiences that have convinced me that the things I currently believe are true are too many and varied to relate in this forum and even if I related them, I wouldn't expect you to take my word for anything without doing research of your own. So, religion is pretty pointless ground for us to tread, ultimately. If you're happy, I'm happy. If you can accept that from my perspective I have absolutely no doubt that my current beliefs are true and based on evidence I can accept that from your perspective the reverse is true.

Re: Is It Possible to Build Faith In a Creator? Um…

lucky widgets — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:34:04 -0000

i never insulted you in any way and i deeply apologize if i came off as this. actually i felt the same way about you when i read this blog because i also read most of this online information and always came away with the same conclusion. that although i chose to go away from these people who were very loving as a majority, i still love them and only wish they would look at other knowledge that is present. i did. but interestingly enough i found that the more i looked, the more i found god to be real, only not exactly as i had believed. i read the anti-witness info out there. i read the anti-russel literature out there. i asked myself if i was in his situation when attacked by the courts, how would i answer the questions he was asked and wrote them down. my answers were almost exactly as he had answered.

but i only wrote here because i still love you as i always had. you were one of the only few people among the witnesses who still talked to me after a lot of slander. you got me all wrong. and i also was to the point of suicide many many times. but i am still here and hope you never choose this route. that would only be more pain for many within your family and friends who have not read what you have and quite frankly do not understand you as i do.

i only wrote from the aspect that you take a look at another scenario. if you saw me today you would hug me as before as i would you. we are still the same people we always were only our beliefs went different directions.

i began re-reading the bible from cover to cover. i came to the part of the festivals in the bible being celebrated and again began figuring time things and have reached a further conclusion that maybe the time prophecies were not taken far enough after my early disputed views of wondering why they wouldn't stop teaching all this time stuff. one simple example is taking the date of a festival being comanded to the israelites to order them to rest on a certain day. i applied the same bible math and surprising came to the date that the watchtower men were thrown into jail and wondered why they had never taught this in their time prophecies as they were "forced into the day of his rest". i looked for any other religion to see if it could apply to anybody else, and found none. so i looked further. i found many strikingly similar situations concerning jehovah's witnesses and nobody else. including the 8th king's rule as beginning about the time that the society signed on with the united nations as a partner and broke off the relationship a short period of time later. but many many things as this. so i personally will never condemn these people as you do for being wrong, because i am not so sure that they are wrong, but rather waiting for the revealing of the final things such as the recent gathering of the kings together within the UN before the cry for peace and security.

enough for now i have an appointment. i love you ryan, please dont think badly of me. the intention is all good. and as for the music thing, i only said that you always spoke more of the band things to me when inside the hall than god's things. sorry it was my personal observation and not necessarily fact as i was not the others who you spoke to. maybe i did the same until i noticed it hindered my association there and began avoiding the issue of music within the congregation.

Re: Nike/Converse Boycott

tastyrerun — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:09:03 -0000

A quick FYI, Lucky, I am not offended in any way by references to God, the Bible or religion. No need for apologies. I don't think the Bible is history, but that doesn't mean I have a problem with references to it. :-) Peace...

Re: Is It Possible to Build Faith In a Creator? Um…

tastyrerun — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:38:08 -0000

I'm not sure who you are but I am curious why you are here to insult me? Seems a bit uncalled for...

For the record, when I was a Witness I kept music, music and God, God. To say otherwise betrays a deep lack of understanding of both myself and the rest of my family and the role music played in our lives. Music was my bond to my brother. It was his first love and I followed him in it. It was never my God or his, it was our hobby and a way for us to communicate. Your suggestion that it usurped our faith is deeply misguided.

As for humility, well, a person can't protest that they're humble. I can only say that when I was a Witness I believed I was privy to The Truth about life, the universe and everything. I believed that I was a member of a special group that was chosen by the creator of the universe, and that I was in communion with him on some level. I felt special and I pitied the poor worldly people who didn't understand what they were missing. I was so happy to have that confidence and assuredness that there was a God and I knew his name and if I continued to follow his will, I would continue to be happy. Then I lost it. I learned that the beliefs I had were based on a denial of history, the tragic accident of reading myths and stories as if they were real. I had to tear myself down completely, and rebuild myself. It was hard, and painful, and nearly drove me to suicide. At no point was I thinking, "Hah hah hah, I'm so smart! I am so great!", I was thinking, "I can't believe this is happening to me. I can't believe what I'm learning but I can't deny it because it's the truth. I've been wrong and my life is over." To have persisted in being a Witness, deciding that my internal sense of faith was more reliable than external evidence would have been the ultimate in arrogance. To follow evidence wherever it lead and accept the conclusions once they became inescapable was humble. Reason is humble, faith is arrogant. Reason accepts things as they are and overturns faulty conclusions even when it hurts, faith decides how things are or how we want them to be, and tells us that we are special and unique and better at understanding than other people regardless of the evidence.

I didn't become who I am today because of character flaws, (although I'm sure I have character flaws like anybody else). I got here because of evidence. If you want to take issue with evidence, discuss evidence. If you want to insult me, please stop, I've been through a lot of that, and I'm tired.

Re: Nike/Converse Boycott

tastyrerun — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:25:18 -0000

I will willingly and freely admit that it boils down to the fact that I will personally never believe in or trust that individual. They may be sincere, I may be wrong, and if I am wrong, so be it. There is no way to know. I am simply saying I won't personally believe it and nothing Michael Vick can ever say or do can make me believe it.

The reason I feel that way is that I believe that there are fundamental concepts of empathy towards other beings that need to be wired into your brain at a very early age in order for a person to develop a conscience or moral sense. I am convinced that if these pathways aren't laid down in the developing mind, they are difficult or impossible to lay down later in life. A sociopath or psychopath is a person who never developed this empathy and is incapable of empathy for the suffering of another being or a person who enjoys that suffering. Torturing animals is a classic sign of a psychopath and nearly all serial killers began by doing exactly that. I am not Michael Vick, so I don't know what he really feels, but I his actions strongly indicate that his fundamental capacity for empathy (and therefore true remorse) is either non-existent or so weak as to be irrelevant. If he had a basic capacity for empathy, he would have been incapable of doing what he did in the first place. I consider the nature of his crime to be diagnostic of a person who is lacking the emotional underpinnings necessary for morality, conscience, remorse, or sincerity because that is what a sadist or psychopath lacks, and his actions appear to me to be those of a sadist or psychopath. So, I believe that whatever he is saying or doing right now is calculated, intentional, motivated by others telling him that this is what he must do. I don't believe he has the capacity to understand why what he did was wrong. Again, I do not claim to be correct here, only that there isn't anything I can think of that he could do to convince me otherwise.

I don't think Michael Vick should be in jail for the rest of his life, but I don't know what society should do with psychopaths. I know they shouldn't be glorified. Nobody would sign Jeffrey Dahmer or Charlie Manson to a shoe contract. I don't think that the fact that dogs were involved instead of humans makes Vick's crime any less heinous than Dahmers or Mansons. The enjoyment of torture, blood, cruelty, violence and suffering is the crime. The fact that our society doesn't grant the same protections to dogs as to humans changes the legal aspects of it but not the fundamental underlying problem. What do we do with people who lack empathy and enjoy killing and torturing? Sometimes we make them vice-president, sometimes we put them in jail, it all depends on where they channel their sadism. I only know that once I know that about a person, I want as much distance between myself and that person as possible.

Re: Nike/Converse Boycott

Chad — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:11:33 -0000

I appreciate your passion on the issue, but with all due respect, "I will never believe" is where you lose me. I personally think that statement can never be rationalized. Unchecked indignation is *always* the enemy of reason, regardless of how correct or seemingly justified your basis may be.

Warranted though your anger may be, asserting an unwillingness to consider anything that might change or even soften your emotions is a decision to not be rational.

I may be wrong. This is just how I see it, but I'm totally open to refutation.