It appears to be a major retraction of most of the arguements the Trolls here use.

All the more reason for trolls to use them, eh.

el: Abandoning kids into an environment of religious nutjob indoctrination doesn’t fill my heart with joy.

Buzz: Oh yeah, and all the children who would be brainwashed without much hope of ever seeing any alternative to their parents’ beliefs, that would be worse than a hit to tourism.

So now we are concerned about the children? Sounds a lot like arguments I hear from Christians who oppose homosexual adoption. But of course those arguments don’t work if they don’t support YOUR ideologies or beliefs, do they? So kids must NECESSARILY suffer if they are home-schooled, their parents are nut-jobs who will brainwash their offspring, and have no hope of ever thinking for themselves. And all of this must be true, because they don’t think like you. Okay, I’ll give you that if you admit that homosexual couples must NECESSARILY do the same. Let’s outlaw both. Let freedom ring.

jeff: My cousin, who’s an extreme born-again, home-schooled her 5 kids… I distinctly remember my cousin telling the first born when he was 4 or so, when he asked for a piece of candy, “No you cannot have a piece of candy.  Candy is bad… Do you want to burn in hell for having the bad candy?”

Or, you can send your kids to public school, where they will not be permitted to buy a carbonated beverage on campus, but can get free, confidential advice on how to obtain an abortion. I love picking my brother up from high school and watching him eat a freaking tofu bar because they took all the snickers out of the candy machines. Cavities bad, abortion good. hum.

Buzz: I would think that since there are so many of them that think the rest of society is so terrible, they really would all band together and live seperate from the rest of us.

I agree. I’ve tried that one on the militant heterophobes and nut-chopping lesbians, but they get real mad at me. First, we have to find out who “the rest of us” are, and then deport the leftovers. Let’s vote on it, maybe put it on the ballot next year. The losers get deported. I wonder who would find themselves in exile after that one…

Semper Fi

Ed - You’re a bizarre little shite, aren’t ya? Is any of this stuff intended to be serious or are you just having us on?

Tell you what, give us New England. All of us sane and rational people will move to New England and you crazed fuckers can have the rest of the country. Do whatever the hell you want, believe whatever fairy story you want, just leave us the hell out of it.

Within a generation you’ll all be back in the fucking stone age, cause everyone with a brain capable of advancing science and medicine will be with us.

Enjoy your inevitable collapse.

That was almost a substantive reply, even though a very selective one. And tame - can’t you try to be more amusing? If Les doesn’t get his share of laughs, we’ll have to ask you to leave.

So now we are concerned about the children?

Of course. We are always concerned about children and the parenting skills and intentions of their caregivers.

Sounds a lot like arguments I hear from Christians who oppose homosexual adoption.

They have actual arguments? I’m not asking you to tell us, because then they’d have to kill you.

But of course those arguments don’t work if they don’t support YOUR ideologies or beliefs, do they? So kids must NECESSARILY suffer if they are home-schooled, their parents are nut-jobs who will brainwash their offspring, and have no hope of ever thinking for themselves.

This thread is predicated on parents homeschooling children to prevent exposure to thought that contradicts their accepted religious dogma. In this case, the parents are indeed nutjobs who want to brainwash their offspring and it’s more probable, if by no means a certainty, that these kids will not learn to think for themselves.

It’s not a matter whether or not I personally agree with these parents (I don’t), but a matter of having a favorable opinion concerning the indoctrination of children to protect a fragile and incoherent belief system.

And all of this must be true, because they don’t think like you.

Aren’t you confusing premises with conclusions?

Ed: Let’s outlaw both. Let freedom ring.

Who said anything about outlawing what these fundie parents are wanting to do? I certainly didn’t. I just feel sorry for their kids.

Tell you what, give us New England. All of us sane and rational people will move to New England and you crazed fuckers can have the rest of the country.

What- no Porn?

Semper Fi

Tells us all we need to know. An defrocked USMC. People who end things with this seem to think that anyone else must be wrong on basis you don’t agree with him.  Not worth replying to this nut job- he won’t bother reading you properly.  You’ll just get poorly constructed arguments he’s copied off others.

An defrocked USMC.

Or a marine wannabe. Who gives a shit, though?

Or one of those soldiers for God like in the “Battlecry” rallies.

Oh Ed, how right you are!  Man, I have seen the light!  All those years of compassion and desire to see everyone free and happy, man those were a total waste!  Where do I sign up for your absolutely, 100% pure, total and complete real truth? 

Sorry everyone else, this is a total BS response, and I know responding to him is only gonna bring on fresh wounds, but I had to say something, and it had to be brief and pointless, or else I was gonna have to write a book here and cause massive, catastrophic thread drift.

but I had to say something, and it had to be brief and pointless

Why not exchange recipes? I can bake a mean sourdough rye bread. And another bread that makes the yeast die so happily that you may not pass a breathalizer test if you eat half a fresh loaf.

Sweet, I’d be interested.  However, I have a terrible history of not being able to bake so much as a cake from a mix, so I might not be able to reproduce your results elwed.

From this thread, on “children of the fundies” :

Sadie: Who said anything about outlawing what these fundie parents are wanting to do? I certainly didn’t. I just feel sorry for their kids.

From the “battlecry” thread, on the topic of premarital sex:

Sadie: By the way, what the hell is the deal with the fundies’ obsession with babies and children? It’s as though they can’t make any kind of point without pulling “the children� into it. Won’t somebody please think of the adults???

Seems to me that out-of-wedlock births, STD’s, and certainly abortion are greater threats to the health and well-being of children than home schooling. But “enlightened” people like screwing each other’s brains out and dodge responsibility for their actions, so to hell with the little bastards on that topic. But for heaven’s sake, lets all pop out a tit for the suffering masses of children who won’t be able to buy crack from a classmate since their parents decided to home school them. They need the theory of evolution more than a safe place to read, no doubt.

Also, I’m not going to restrict myself to syllogisms and truth tables if no one else is expected to. I see just about every major logical fallacy represented in the comments that preceded mine, and no one said jack about it. But because I have interrupted your little group-think sessions a bit, you expect me to play chess while everyone else plays checkers. No deal.

Hussar: “Semper Fi” Tells us all we need to know...People who end things with this seem to think that anyone else must be wrong on basis you don’t agree with him.

Okay, that sure follows the rules of logic. Don’t come to me with my supposed confusion over premises and conslusions if you’re going to let something like this get by without a comment.

You people would fit in very well in more churches than you think.

SEMPER FIDELIS

Ed, that is so profoud.  All I can say is:

Sweet, so you think that my old church, which was a die hard fundamentalist, the rapture could happen at anytime, everybody but us is wrong church would accept me back because I display a little intolerance for absoulte intolerance? 

Awesome, I’ll give you their phone number if you put in a good word for me, I think I forgot a pair of sunglasses there one time, and I’d really like them back, but i don’t want to get into an argument with anyone to do it.

However, I have a terrible history of not being able to bake so much as a cake from a mix, so I might not be able to reproduce your results

Unless you turn a loaf of bread to ash, the worst of what you bake yourself will be better than anything you can buy. Once you feel adventurous, try Challah and instead of braiding it, shape it into rolls with cheese and herbs inside.

I don’t have access to an oven in my current apartment, but I will be moving soon and buying an oven for that place, so I might just have to try some more baking.  I’ll definitely give it a try.

Ed: Seems to me that out-of-wedlock births, STD’s, and certainly abortion are greater threats to the health and well-being of children than home schooling.

STDs are certainly a “bad thing.” That’s why people should use protection when they have sex.  The case against out-of-wedlock birth is less clear-cut; as long as the parents are capable and loving, I fail to see how their marital state affects their children. And as far as abortion goes, I don’t consider fetuses children, so that example arises no sympathy in me.

But for heaven’s sake, lets all pop out a tit for the suffering masses of children who won’t be able to buy crack from a classmate since their parents decided to home school them.

You’re certainly one for hyperbole, aren’t you? I would hazard to guess that the vast majority of kids in public schools don’t become crackheads.

And I’d pop out a tit, but not for you, as you’re clearly not my type.

That’s why people should use protection when they have sex.

Here’s a topological problem. One guy, three prostitutes, two condoms. How does the guy get to bang all three prostitutes while keeping all four safe from STDs?

Elwed: How does the guy get to bang all three prostitutes while keeping all four safe from STDs?

I could answer that, but it would probably belong on a different website. 

Here’s a topological problem. One guy, three prostitutes, two condoms. How does the guy get to bang all three prostitutes while keeping all four safe from STDs?

Okay, I’ll bite. Let’s see. Condom one, first pros. Remove and set aside. Condom 2, 2nd pros. Leave on when done. turn 1st condom inside out and place over condom 2 for 3rd pros. Assuming he is clean and the risk comes from the three prostitutes, that should do it. If he’s contagious, though, pros 3 is out of luck.

Sadie, it figures that, of all people, the two of us would both end up posting on this topic at about the same time…

KPG, so close. You can’t assume he’s clean, though.

KPG: Sadie, it figures that, of all people, the two of us would both end up posting on this topic at about the same time…

It’s said that there’s predictability in unpredictability. 

Anyway, those other forums (or is that fora?) I mentioned just happen to be down at the moment, so it looks like I’ll have to post my explanation here. Hope you guys manage. 

1. The man wears a condom while banging prostitute #1. She’s riding him, while prostitute #2 sits on the man’s face and tells him that she loves him. Prostitute #3 is in the bathroom.
2. Once he’s finished, the guy doffs his condom and puts on another. He commences fucking prostitute #2.
3. Prostitute #3, however, has always had a preference for the fairer sex, so she is content to be fucked by prostitute #2, who is at this point adorned with a strap-on dildo. When questioned why prostitute #3 visited a man in the first place, she answered that she goes wherever her friends go.
4. Prostitute #1, meanwhile, is fellating the man.

I’m not sure it’s a good answer but it sure sounds like a good time......

I see just about every major logical fallacy represented in the comments that preceded mine, and no one said jack about it.

Well, that would be -your- responsibility, if you’re taking up the opposing perspective.  And you should rejoice in it, because this is a board where people are at least familiar with what a fallacy is.  If you’ve got what it takes, you could hand out a major spanking, and they’re actually smart enough to know that they’re getting spanked.

(although I have to admit, I’m not going to be putting any money on you)

I see just about every major logical fallacy

You do not, however, quote those fallacies, or give examples.  This, therefore, is an unsupported assertion, or argument by assertion.  But you already know that, because no one who throws around the word syllogism is unfamiliar with the basic principles of logic.  At least, not usually.

Seems to me . . . 

“seems to me” has never been a compelling argument.  ‘Seems’ is shorthand for ‘that’s what it looks like if you don’t focus on it too hard, think about it, or insist on measuring anything.’

Seems.  Pshaw.

But “enlightened� people like screwing each other’s brains out and dodge responsibility for their actions,

loaded language and ad hominem.  Lets be honest.  There’s some fairly ignorant, unenlightened and deeply religious people who also enjoy these oh-so-human activities.  In fact, statistically speaking, when it comes to fucking and dodging, the odds are that these activities are practiced even more often, in terms of raw numbers, by the ignorant/unenlightened and deeply religious.

lets all pop out a tit for the suffering masses of children who won’t be able to buy crack from a classmate since their parents decided to home school them. They need the theory of evolution more than a safe place to read, no doubt

I’m a product of that public school system.  I had classmates that would smoke out behind the portables, snort meth, and even bring the occasional gun to school.  I was also having sex while I was in high school.  Of course, I’m STD free (I knew how to purchase a rubber and put it on), and ABD in Lit, so I don’t buy the argument that the public school system is somehow going to transform all children into diseased crack whores.  You’re right though.  The safest place for children is at home.  In an ideal world, they’d never leave. never. ever. [cue TwilightZone theme]

I’m not saying that there aren’t people out there who homeschool because they really do want to make sure that their children get the best possible education.  Those people do exist, and they’re not nutjobs.  Public schools have many failings, as does any system that’s heavily centralized, standardized, and overly beauracratic.

But let’s be honest.  Most people don’t homeschool because they’re afraid their children will be exposed to drugs, and violence and stds. . .

Let’s be honest.  They’re afraid their children will be exposed to -IDEAS-.

Quite simply, they’re afraid of, well, people like me.  They realize that people like me are going to be their children’s classmates —classmates who are reading the Bible [yay!], along with Camus, and Kafka and William Burroughs[badbadbad]-- .  More than that, though, they realize that, ultimately, people like me are actually going to end up being TEACHERS.
[muaha haa ha ha haaaaa ha haa ha]

I don’t blame ‘em.  They should be worried.  I won’t do their children any physical harm.  But as a teacher, it is my job, quite literally, to change children’s minds.  Yes, I might damage a child’s monologic perspective.  I might introduce doubt or nuance.  Of course, I think those are -good- things, which a child is essentially robbed of when their parents attempt to insulate them from alternative schools of thought.

Putting your kids into a public school is a huge risk.  Your children might end up thinking a little bit, or even a lot, differently from you. 

So yes, I have a sympathetic nipple here for all those students who will never know the joy of being in my class, because their parents are, well, afraid.

Semper Fi

Why the sign off?  Are you concerned that we won’t treat you as well if we don’t know that you’re ex military? 

It’s OK.  You don’t have to explain.  I’ll just adopt my own sign-off, so that you’re not alone.  I’m willing to go out of my way to make guests comfortable.

Ex libris veritas; veritas vos liberabit

How does the guy get to bang all three prostitutes while keeping all four safe from STDs?

False premises.  Either none of them have STDs, in which case they’re all safe no matter what they do, or one or more have STDs, in which case “all four” cannot be kept safe, since one or more have an STD already.