Church of England defends prayer tweet for Richard Dawkins after stroke. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Thlis;49740169]Imagine being so moronic that you think two minors involved in statutory rape is equivalent to brutal gang rape.[/QUOTE] two questions: by what universal metric is either one made worse? and if the victim were unconscious during a gang rape and so offered less resistance, would that make it more or less severe?

[QUOTE=Cone;49740525]two questions: by what universal metric is either one made worse? and if the victim were unconscious during a gang rape and so offered less resistance, would that make it more or less severe?[/QUOTE] So you think two 15 year olds having sex with consent(doesn't make it not statutory) is the same as a woman being brutally attacked by a group of people? Dude, stop and think for a second

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49740544]So you think two 15 year olds having sex with consent(doesn't make it not statutory) is the same as a woman being brutally attacked by a group of people? Dude, stop and think for a second[/QUOTE] i said i had two questions and i asked them, don't put words in my mouth

[QUOTE=Cone;49740525]two questions: by what universal metric is either one made worse? and if the victim were unconscious during a gang rape and so offered less resistance, would that make it more or less severe?[/QUOTE] There is no universal metric for what constitutes as good/bad food however generally there are parameters that most people agree with. In the case of rape it is pretty evident how violent gang rape is worse than two minors involved in statutory rape in terms of psychological/physical harm generally speaking. Personally regarding the second I feel that depends on a lot of variables, however my point is not "This set of rules dictates which is worse" my point is there are circumstances which can be worse than others and we should discuss it.

[QUOTE=Cone;49740555]i said i had two questions and i asked them, don't put words in my mouth[/QUOTE] Don't create mobile goal posts with intentionally skewed, bullshit scenarios. If Hitler were allowed to eat puppies and given an arsenal of nuclear weaponry, would that be better than Trump getting the presidential nomination?

[QUOTE=Thlis;49740169] Imagine being so moronic that you think two minors involved in statutory rape is equivalent to brutal gang rape.[/QUOTE] That's not the case with Dawkins. Obviously there is a difference between statutory rape and gang rape. One is considered rape due to laws regarding age of consent, not because someone was physically forced into sex. A gang rape would be straight up forcing someone to unwillingly have sex with you. Dawkins was comparing date rape to being raped by a stranger. Essentially being raped by someone you know isn't as bad as being raped by someone you don't.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;49740698]That's not the case with Dawkins. Obviously there is a difference between statutory rape and gang rape. One is considered rape due to laws regarding age of consent, not because someone was physically forced into sex. A gang rape would be straight up forcing someone to unwillingly have sex with you. Dawkins was comparing date rape to being raped by a stranger. Essentially being raped by someone you know isn't as bad as being raped by someone you don't.[/QUOTE] would you mind quoting him directly?

[QUOTE=Thlis;49740602]circumstances which can be worse than others and we should discuss it.[/QUOTE] Discuss it for what purpose? "You guys know that being raped by two people is worse than being raped by one?" No shit, but whats the point in that statement? That something horrible can always get progressively horrible?

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;49740698]Dawkins was comparing date rape to being raped by a stranger. Essentially being raped by someone you know isn't as bad as being raped by someone you don't.[/QUOTE] Either you are mistaken or you are a knowing liar. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/6BLufBi.png[/IMG] It was not comparing being raped by someone you know being better than a stranger. It was that violent rape is worse than "non violent" rape. [QUOTE=BusterBluth;49740737]"Date rape is bad. Stranger rape at knifepoint is worse. If you think that's an endorsement of date rape, go away and learn how to think." [url]https://twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/494012678432894976[/url][/QUOTE] Ok so you are either a knowing liar or illiterate.

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;49740719]would you mind quoting him directly?[/QUOTE] "Date rape is bad. Stranger rape at knifepoint is worse. If you think that's an endorsement of date rape, go away and learn how to think." [url]https://twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/494012678432894976[/url]

[QUOTE=Mingebox;49738715]And then there was that time he said being raised Catholic is worse than being molested as a kid.[/QUOTE] ya he is the most outspoken athiest out there, and in his defense, he was making these statements in a much more religious time, but he does have a tendency to be pretentious and he's kind of where athiests get that intolerant reputation

[QUOTE=Thlis;49740734]Either you are mistaken or you are a knowing liar. [img]http://i.imgur.com/6BLufBi.png[/img] It was not comparing being raped by someone you know being better than a stranger. It was that violent rape is worse than "non violent" rape.[/QUOTE] No need to call me a lair. I wasn't purposely leaving out the knife part. The point still stands. What is the point in comparing to awful things to one another? [editline]14th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Thlis;49740734] Ok so you are either a knowing liar or illiterate.[/QUOTE] Whoaaho

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;49740740]No need to call me a lair. I wasn't purposely leaving out the knife part. The point still stands. [/QUOTE] No it doesn't. You left out arguably the most crucial point of his statement, I would argue willingly since you had the source so quickly at hand. You then subsequently shoved an entirely different argument into the mouth of the person you disagreed with and purported that as his own unedited argument. You never had a point to begin with, your entire "point" was based on your own strawman. The reason why I am angry about this is that it is, willing or unwilling, revisionism of a person's words in order to damn that person.

Literally "Being drugged and raped is bad for you but being raped at knife point is worse" I don't see the reason to distinguish between what kind of rape is worse.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;49740762]Literally "Being drugged and raped is bad for you but being raped at knife point is worse" I don't see the reason to distinguish between what kind of rape is worse.[/QUOTE] Consider the previous argument. By this definition of all rape being equivalent, a minor convicted of statutory rape is as bad as a knife-point rapist.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;49740762]Literally "Being drugged and raped is bad for you but being raped at knife point is worse" I don't see the reason to distinguish between what kind of rape is worse.[/QUOTE] Just because you don't like discussing morality, or don't see the point of discussing morality, doesn't mean that discussing morality is wrong. If he's an asshole, then moral philosophers must be the axis powers reborn.

[QUOTE=Laputa;49740477]He said that based on account that the psychological effect of rape was smaller compared to the perpetual guilt and shame as a result of an extreme catholic upbringing, not to directly compare rape and religious upbringing, but to demonstrate what an upbringing like that can do on a person's perspective.[/QUOTE] I'd imagine that if he were to raise children with a fiery hatred for religion that would also do a lot to skew their perspective of the world.

How fucking self centered do you have to be to judge someone simply for discussing a topic you aren't interested in?

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;49740781]Just because you don't like discussing morality, or don't see the point of discussing morality, doesn't mean that discussing morality is wrong. If he's an asshole, then moral philosophers must be the axis powers reborn.[/QUOTE] its the "go away and learn how to think" part that makes him a dick, not the "this rape is worse than this rape" part

[QUOTE=Sableye;49740787]its the "go away and learn how to think" part that makes him a dick, not the "this rape is worse than this rape" part[/QUOTE] If you think he's advocating date rape, then you [I]do[/I] need to go away and learn how to think.

[QUOTE=Thlis;49740777]Consider the previous argument. By this definition of all rape being equivalent, a minor convicted of statutory rape is as bad as a knife-point rapist.[/QUOTE] There certainly is a difference between what is considered a rape due to age laws, which involve consent and a physically forced rape. Which goes against what I just said so I do kind of see your point. [editline]14th February 2016[/editline] Actually looking at the context in which Dawkins said it, its not what I thought it was. I was wrong. I didn't research it properly, my bad.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;49740815]There certainly is a difference between what is considered a rape due to age laws, which involve consent and a physically forced rape. Which goes against what I just said so I do kind of see your point. [editline]14th February 2016[/editline] Actually looking at the context in which Dawkins said it, its not what I thought it was. I was wrong. I didn't research it properly, my bad.[/QUOTE] I get the feeling that a lot of the negative sentiment towards Dawkins comes from "well I heard that other people are mad at him so he must be an asshole". I mean he's not a saint but he's hardly a jerk. He's just an opinionated old professor.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;49740815]There certainly is a difference between what is considered a rape due to age laws, which involve consent and a physically forced rape. Which goes against what I just said so I do kind of see your point. [editline]14th February 2016[/editline] Actually looking at the context in which Dawkins said it, its not what I thought it was. I was wrong. I didn't research it properly, my bad.[/QUOTE] I am sorry for being crass earlier, It's just that there is a growing clickbait trend to cut down what people say, hyperbolize it, and subsequently change it's message while attributing it to the same person.

[QUOTE=Thlis;49740882]I am sorry for being crass earlier, It's just that there is a growing clickbait trend to cut down what people say, hyperbolize it, and subsequently change it's message while attributing it to the same person.[/QUOTE] It's especially bad for anyone who wants to engage in complex moral discussions. "Is torture really worse than collateral damage" gets turned into "X endorses torture". "At what point should we be willing to perform a nuclear first strike" turns into "X wants to nuke the middle east". It's maddening how many people fall for this sensationalist garbage.

Also, as someone who is actually disabled themselves, I'd just like to say that, yes. Not aborting a fetus that you know has a disability is not great. Right now, that's just a fetus, as far as anyone can tell it doesn't have a consciousness, it doesn't feel shit. That's why abortions are generally considered okay. But in ten, twenty years, that person who grows from that fetus, they're going to have to deal with that disability. Their entire life is going to be magnitudes harder because of it, and you've basically inflicted that on them. You could have avoided it, but you chose not to. As far as I'm concerned, that's immoral.

I kind of agree with him on that first tweet, on the second I'm not sure one kind is worse than the other. He was being an arsehole about it, but I think that's probably in response to an internet outrage we're missing. I get where he's coming from, saying x is worse than y is not an endorsement of y and people have treated me that way and it probably has happened to a lot of people. Maybe I'd have been a little less controversial about it, like sonic boom is worse than sonic 06 and that's not an endorsement of sonic 06. Still, controversial opinions or not, it sucks the dude had a stroke, and my heart goes out to him and his family.

[QUOTE=elowin;49741316]Also, as someone who is actually disabled themselves, I'd just like to say that, yes. Not aborting a fetus that you know has a disability is not great. Right now, that's just a fetus, as far as anyone can tell it doesn't have a consciousness, it doesn't feel shit. That's why abortions are generally considered okay. But in ten, twenty years, that person who grows from that fetus, they're going to have to deal with that disability. Their entire life is going to be magnitudes harder because of it, and you've basically inflicted that on them. You could have avoided it, but you chose not to. As far as I'm concerned, that's immoral.[/QUOTE] Do you wish to have been aborted? In all seriousness, hypothetically, if you could would you prevent your own birth?

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;49741960]Do you wish to have been aborted? In all seriousness, hypothetically, if you could would you prevent your own birth?[/QUOTE] Yes to the former. I wouldn't have had anything against being aborted when I was a fetus, because I was a fetus. I wasn't conscious, I didn't have feelings, I wouldn't even know it happened. And years down the line, there would be one less disabled person suffering out there. As for the latter, I have no clue. The implications of time travel on morality are just fucking weird, even if we hypothetically invent time travel it's probably best not to use it.

[QUOTE=MIPS;49737550]The branch he represents is overly paranoid everyone is out to get them.[/QUOTE] The people who post memes of his quotes might be, but Dawkins himself is a reasonable fellow. He's pragmatic and can come off as harsh for sure, but speaking as a biologist it makes sense. I would highly recommend reading about his book [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene"]The Selfish Gene[/URL].

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;49740901]It's especially bad for anyone who wants to engage in complex moral discussions. "Is torture really worse than collateral damage" gets turned into "X endorses torture". "At what point should we be willing to perform a nuclear first strike" turns into "X wants to nuke the middle east". It's maddening how many people fall for this sensationalist garbage.[/QUOTE] To play Devil's avocado, This might more be a problem with trying to discuss complex moral discussions on the platform of twitter, rather than in a lecture hall.