The Ten Commandments are Garbage.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

It only proves what an impossible task it is. Hitchens' list is just as stupid as the original. Everything is 'inborn'. Serial killers can't help being serial killers. Psychopaths can't help being psychopaths. General arseholes like sculptor can't help it. Power doesn't change people. It just gives them the ability to put into practice what was there all along.

[attofishpi]

And what did you learn from this experience?

From this experience Chaz?

I've learned that my respect for you was misplaced, all gone now.

[attofishpi]

It was a stupid idea in the first place. The list would need to be infinitely long for the infinite number of horrible things that humans are capable of doing.

No it wouldn't Veg, look at the commandments of www.boonyism.com (on previous page) can you honestly think there needs to be an extra commandment?

And talk about fucked up priorities. God has made the most prominent ones about himself. 'Thou shalt not use my name as a swear word'. 'Thou shalt grovel to me at all times'.

Well, he did form from chaos and suffered more than any of us, so give the dude some respect.

'Thou shalt not masturbate to thoughts of someone else's property...I mean 'wife'...'

Quite right so! God can see into the 3rd-Eye, he doesn't want to see you wanking over your best mates wife! ..and then what might happen, mates turning on mates, nah, can't have that.

These are the most heinous things that Big Daddy could come up with??
Then there's the most ignored one of all: 'Thou shalt not kill'. What does that even mean? That everyone has to be vegetarian?

No, the original Hebrew was Thou shalt not MURDER.

And what about where Big Daddy was ordering everyone to kill their neighbour if they see him working on 'the sabbath', or to murder 'witches', or slaughter children who laugh at bearded (bald?) men? What a hypocrite.

I missed those ones, he must have be pissed when he came up with them, probably thought, let's see what the stupid fuckers think about this shite.

I mean really, where's the one about 'witches'!!?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

It was a stupid idea in the first place. The list would need to be infinitely long for the infinite number of horrible things that humans are capable of doing.

No it wouldn't Veg, look at the commandments of www.boonyism.com (on previous page) can you honestly think there needs to be an extra commandment?

And talk about fucked up priorities. God has made the most prominent ones about himself. 'Thou shalt not use my name as a swear word'. 'Thou shalt grovel to me at all times'.

Well, he did form from chaos and suffered more than any of us, so give the dude some respect.

'Thou shalt not masturbate to thoughts of someone else's property...I mean 'wife'...'

Quite right so! God can see into the 3rd-Eye, he doesn't want to see you wanking over your best mates wife! ..and then what might happen, mates turning on mates, nah, can't have that.

These are the most heinous things that Big Daddy could come up with??
Then there's the most ignored one of all: 'Thou shalt not kill'. What does that even mean? That everyone has to be vegetarian?

No, the original Hebrew was Thou shalt not MURDER.

And what about where Big Daddy was ordering everyone to kill their neighbour if they see him working on 'the sabbath', or to murder 'witches', or slaughter children who laugh at bearded (bald?) men? What a hypocrite.

I missed those ones, he must have be pissed when he came up with them, probably thought, let's see what the stupid fuckers think about this shite.

I mean really, where's the one about 'witches'!!?

Some crap about 'not suffering a witch to live'. It's in there somewhere.

[Sculptor]

Hitchen's alternative...

1
do not condemn people on the basis of
their ethnicity or their color number
2
do not ever even think of using
people as private property or as owned
or as slaves

3
despise those who use violence or the

threat of it in sexual relations

4 hide your face and weep if
you dare to harm a child number

5 do not condemn people for the inborn nature
why would God create so many homosexuals
only in order to torture and Destroy
them
6
be aware that you too are an animal and dependent on the web
of nature try and think and act
accordingly
7
don't imagine that you can
escape judgment if you rob people with a
false prospectus rather than with a
knife
8
turn off that
cell phone
you can have no idea how unimportant
your call is to us
9
denounce all jihadists and Crusaders for
what they are
Psychopathic criminals with ugly
delusions
and terrible sexual repressions number

10
be willing to dennounce any God or any
faith if any holy Commandments should
contradict any of the above
in short don't swallow your moral code in tablet form

Hitchen's antipathy toward religion (and Islam in particular) led him to support the disastrous U.S. military incursions into the Middle East. His notion that he can come up with better commandments than Moses or Jesus bespeaks a lack of humility.

Cheap ad hominem is not an argument.

Look at Hitchens' commandment number 5:

5 do not condemn people for the inborn nature
why would God create so many homosexuals only in order to torture and Destroy them

Suppose pedophilia is "inborn" (it's a sexual predilection just like homosexuality). Does Hitchens suggest we should avoid condemning pedophiles? Nobody (except bizarre jerks) objects to the predilection. Some object to the behavior. I agree with Hitchens that homosexuality should not be condemned (or contemned, for that matter). But other behaviors that are related to "inborn nature" -- pedophilia, violent murder, etc. -- should be.

Yes we should not condemn them, true. You cannot condemn anyone for the way god created them.
I fail to see your point here.
He does not say we cannot act against them for their ACTIONS.
Which is in fact what we do.
The trouble for condemning people for what they are makes it impossible for them to seek the help they need.
Maybe you should think more carefully??

HItchens' notion that Crusaders and Jihadists have "terrible sexual repressions" is mere trolling. Hitchens has written some good essays, but his anti-religious screeds make him look like a bigot.

You do not understand the word "trolling"
Since you have come out to condemn people's natural and unavoidable characteristics, I think that makes YOU the bigot.

[Sculptor]

And what did you learn from this experience?

From this experience Chaz?

I've learned that my respect for you was misplaced, all gone now.

We are done here.

[attofishpi]

And what did you learn from this experience?

From this experience Chaz?

I've learned that my respect for you was misplaced, all gone now.

We are done here.

Finally! We can get back to being twats to each other

[Alexiev]

Cheap ad hominem is not an argument.

Look at Hitchens' commandment number 5:

5 do not condemn people for the inborn nature
why would God create so many homosexuals only in order to torture and Destroy them

Suppose pedophilia is "inborn" (it's a sexual predilection just like homosexuality). Does Hitchens suggest we should avoid condemning pedophiles? Nobody (except bizarre jerks) objects to the predilection. Some object to the behavior. I agree with Hitchens that homosexuality should not be condemned (or contemned, for that matter). But other behaviors that are related to "inborn nature" -- pedophilia, violent murder, etc. -- should be.

Yes we should not condemn them, true. You cannot condemn anyone for the way god created them.
I fail to see your point here.
He does not say we cannot act against them for their ACTIONS.
Which is in fact what we do.
The trouble for condemning people for what they are makes it impossible for them to seek the help they need.
Maybe you should think more carefully??

HItchens' notion that Crusaders and Jihadists have "terrible sexual repressions" is mere trolling. Hitchens has written some good essays, but his anti-religious screeds make him look like a bigot.

You do not understand the word "trolling"
Since you have come out to condemn people's natural and unavoidable characteristics, I think that makes YOU the bigot.

If ad hominem is not an argument, neither is repeating the Latin names for logical fallacies. It is mere trite doggerel. You are the one who thinks that all human actions are "determined". Therefore (based on the above) you appear to suggest we cannot condemn anyone for anything.

Your literacy is such that it is almost impossible to guess what you mean. Take this sentence:

He does not say we cannot act against them for their ACTIONS.

Parsing all the negatives is like swimming upstream. Try as one might, one never seems to get anywhere.

Or this sentence:

Since you have come out to condemn people's natural and unavoidable characteristics, I think that makes YOU the bigot.

"Come out"? Perhaps when translated into English the sentence would be intelligible, although incorrect. Do you mean "Since you condemn people for their natural and unavoidable characteristics, you are a bigot." The "come out" is idiotic, the "I think" redundant. Of course we can only judge "characteristics" through behavior, and it is reasonable to condemn (or at least contemn) certain behaviors regardless of whether they are "natural and unavoidable." Some people are "naturally" evil. Is that you, Sculptor?

[Sculptor]

Cheap ad hominem is not an argument.

Look at Hitchens' commandment number 5:

Suppose pedophilia is "inborn" (it's a sexual predilection just like homosexuality). Does Hitchens suggest we should avoid condemning pedophiles? Nobody (except bizarre jerks) objects to the predilection. Some object to the behavior. I agree with Hitchens that homosexuality should not be condemned (or contemned, for that matter). But other behaviors that are related to "inborn nature" -- pedophilia, violent murder, etc. -- should be.

Yes we should not condemn them, true. You cannot condemn anyone for the way god created them.
I fail to see your point here.
He does not say we cannot act against them for their ACTIONS.
Which is in fact what we do.
The trouble for condemning people for what they are makes it impossible for them to seek the help they need.
Maybe you should think more carefully??

HItchens' notion that Crusaders and Jihadists have "terrible sexual repressions" is mere trolling. Hitchens has written some good essays, but his anti-religious screeds make him look like a bigot.

You do not understand the word "trolling"
Since you have come out to condemn people's natural and unavoidable characteristics, I think that makes YOU the bigot.

If ad hominem is not an argument, neither is repeating the Latin names for logical fallacies. It is mere trite doggerel. You are the one who thinks that all human actions are "determined". Therefore (based on the above) you appear to suggest we cannot condemn anyone for anything.

Your literacy is such that it is almost impossible to guess what you mean. Take this sentence:

He does not say we cannot act against them for their ACTIONS.

Parsing all the negatives is like swimming upstream. Try as one might, one never seems to get anywhere.

Or this sentence:

Since you have come out to condemn people's natural and unavoidable characteristics, I think that makes YOU the bigot.

"Come out"? Perhaps when translated into English the sentence would be intelligible, although incorrect. Do you mean "Since you condemn people for their natural and unavoidable characteristics, you are a bigot." The "come out" is idiotic, the "I think" redundant. Of course we can only judge "characteristics" through behavior, and it is reasonable to condemn (or at least contemn) certain behaviors regardless of whether they are "natural and unavoidable." Some people are "naturally" evil. Is that you, Sculptor?

Are you part of a tranche of morons that have come onto the Forum recently or did you crawl here all by yourself?
And is English a second langauge for you?

[Alexiev]

Are you part of a tranche of morons that have come onto the Forum recently or did you crawl here all by yourself?
And is English a second langauge for you?

"Her English is too good, he said, that clearly indicates that she is foreign.." -- Henry Higgins

If Higgins is correct, your illiteracy may demonstrate that English is your native tongue. Nobody could possibly accuse it of being "too good".

[attofishpi]

Are you part of a tranche of morons that have come onto the Forum recently or did you crawl here all by yourself?
And is English a second langauge for you?

"Her English is too good, he said, that clearly indicates that she is foreign.." -- Henry Higgins

If Higgins is correct, your illiteracy may demonstrate that English is your native tongue. Nobody could possibly accuse it of being "too good".

It used to make me laugh at my old job where we had an Indian call centre and I'd read in their fault report "I told the customer thrice..."

I've never seen thrice used by non-Indian speakers of English (at least in anything written recently) - we just don't seem to use that term anymore.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Are you part of a tranche of morons that have come onto the Forum recently or did you crawl here all by yourself?
And is English a second langauge for you?

"Her English is too good, he said, that clearly indicates that she is foreign.." -- Henry Higgins

If Higgins is correct, your illiteracy may demonstrate that English is your native tongue. Nobody could possibly accuse it of being "too good".

That would apply to spoken English. Only those who are truly confident in their native tongue can butcher it like the English do. Think all those faux cockney accents and that abomination that weird Essex females speak. No one 'really' speaks like that.

[attofishpi]

Are you part of a tranche of morons that have come onto the Forum recently or did you crawl here all by yourself?
And is English a second langauge for you?

"Her English is too good, he said, that clearly indicates that she is foreign.." -- Henry Higgins

If Higgins is correct, your illiteracy may demonstrate that English is your native tongue. Nobody could possibly accuse it of being "too good".

That would apply to spoken English. Only those who are truly confident in their native tongue can butcher it like the English do. Think all those faux cockney accents and that abomination that weird Essex females speak. No one 'really' speaks like that.

Actually they do...and there's a reason sex is in the county name. This delightful girl from Essex used to give me free beer at my local...alas, she's gone now.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

"Her English is too good, he said, that clearly indicates that she is foreign.." -- Henry Higgins

If Higgins is correct, your illiteracy may demonstrate that English is your native tongue. Nobody could possibly accuse it of being "too good".

That would apply to spoken English. Only those who are truly confident in their native tongue can butcher it like the English do. Think all those faux cockney accents and that abomination that weird Essex females speak. No one 'really' speaks like that.

Actually they do...and there's a reason sex is in the county name. This delightful girl from Essex used to give me free beer at my local...alas, she's gone now.

You haven't heard of the faux accentors? Of course there are genuine accents, but that's not what I'm talking about. Actually I find all the English accents hideous, apart from the neutral one. They just sound retarded. Which is odd, because I love the Welsh accent. Scottish is quite nice. Irish is lovely (but not Northern Irish). It only seems to be the English who take great pride in speaking as badly as they possibly can.

[attofishpi]

That would apply to spoken English. Only those who are truly confident in their native tongue can butcher it like the English do. Think all those faux cockney accents and that abomination that weird Essex females speak. No one 'really' speaks like that.

Actually they do...and there's a reason sex is in the county name. This delightful girl from Essex used to give me free beer at my local...alas, she's gone now.

You haven't heard of the faux accentors? Of course there are genuine accents, but that's not what I'm talking about. Actually I find all the English accents hideous, apart from the neutral one. They just sound retarded. Which is odd, because I love the Welsh accent. Scottish is quite nice. Irish is lovely (but not Northern Irish). It only seems to be the English who take great pride in speaking as badly as they possibly can.

We English have to try and sound dumb otherwise the less intelligent (other races) would be too scared to talk to us. We also need them to lower their guard so we can pinch their stuff (silly gits).

My favourite accent on the entire planet is Scouser!! ..my God, dunno what it is but when an attractive lass from Liverpool talks all I can think of is sex.

I like the Irish accent too, and ya the Belfast accent is dreadful.

ps. No, never heard of 'faux accentors'.