Today in Christian Persecution

Yesterday, Hemant wrote about a student group that came up with a brilliant way to advertise themselves while getting others to think about the flaws of Christian apologetics. They studied up on an apologist who was coming to their school and turned all the bad arguments and logical fallacies into a bingo card, which they then handed out to people entering the talk. It made it easier to focus on the bad arguments instead of their good delivery, and the back of the card provided information on the student group itself. As I said: brilliant.

So I tweeted the article. Then this happened. (The Storify is here if the embed doesn’t work for you.)

My position is that “combat” is a standard word for what is done in situations like these, regardless of the source of bad arguments and information. Raven Madd’s position, as near as I can tell, is that the contextualized general should be made to stand in for the universal. I wonder where that goes on a bad-argument bingo card?

Today in Christian Persecution
The Orbit is still fighting a SLAPP suit! Help defend freedom of speech, click here to find out more and donate!

13 thoughts on “Today in Christian Persecution

  1. 2

    The Bingo card IS brilliant! It’s up front, clearly showing people the gimmicks and getting them to think about what they’re hearing. It shows that the group who distributed them (and others like it) have put thought into their positions rather than knee-jerking to a speaker they don’t agree with.

    Raven Madd… not so much.

  2. 4

    Poetic language has a long and honored history. It compresses complex ideas into a few words and makes the whole more easily remembered. Many weasel words – that is, words with multiple meanings – are excellent examples of poetic language. Puns and other plays on words (which I think need rescuing from their bad rep) can have an unfortunate tendency to pack too much information in, some of it unintended. Saying that a group of protesters are combating the speaker is parallel to but less extreme than “militant atheist.”

    A science paper should keep the poetic language low. Complaining about using “combat” as a synonym to “oppose” in a blog post about a protest is taking it too far.

  3. Jon

    How about interpreting the complain as being to centered on the need to engage? The original tweet does presume that engagement is necessary.

    It is not necessary to verbally beat the crap out of every person who pontificates about things that are ridiculous.

    Incidentally, I think it would have been hilarious if ppl in the audience shouted out ‘Bingo!’ when they covered a line on the card. 🙂

  4. 8

    Raven Madd switched words. Combat (noun) as in war is not the same word as to combat (verb) as in to counter. They aren’t even pronounced the same way. You could just as easily throw a fit about someone “combatting” dry skin with cold cream. It doesn’t mean they went to war with their own epidermis.

    Raven Madd’s objection is a perfect example of just how disingenuous religious apologists have become.

  5. 10

    My dictionary app has “oppose vigorously” as a definition of the verb combat. Personally, I think the best way to fight Christians is by using lions.

  6. 12

    That’s a broad brush you are using. I don’t think l all religious people spread misinformation. You would combat MLK speeches?

    i always find it odd that some people think an atheist won’t view religious information as incorrect. of course, maybe not all religious people spread misinformation, but the ones that do are the ones that are giving talks that are related to the subject, which was kind of implied.

    (that’s another odd fantasy these people have, whether they be anti-atheist or fatheist. that someone who happens to be a christian could be lecturing on an unrelated topic, and suddenly the atheists will come and cause their religion to be a contention for no reason)

    now, as for mlk, i have indeed seen some mistaken quotes from him. for instance:

    “Science investigates; religion interprets. Science gives man knowledge, which is power; religion gives man wisdom, which is control. Science deals mainly with facts; religion deals mainly with values. The two are not rivals.”

    ― Martin Luther King Jr.

    which incorrectly gives religion a role for stuff that is much better done with reasoning and philosophy.

  7. Jon

    ‘i always find it odd that some people think an atheist won’t view religious information as incorrect. ‘

    Perhaps you meant ‘misinformation’; but, it’s not so odd a thing really. Because some ‘religious’ information *is* correct. It is too much a simplification to separate out all correct information out as being not-religious and all religious information as being incorrect. Things would be much easier if we could, but ome things are common. By example, cell phones are used by crooks and non-crooks. There are no good and bad cell phones.

    ‘… reasoning and philosophy.’

    Same goes for these. They can be poorly employed by anyone. Broad brushes are broad 🙂 We all do it.

Comments are closed.