Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Ann Coulter (Is she hateful?)
foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 583 days)
Posts: 921
Joined: 12-26-2011


Message 46 of 274 (679015)
11-11-2012 10:13 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by DrJones*
11-11-2012 10:09 PM


DrJones writes:
How were you right? you claimed that Fordham banned Coulter from speaking there:
Because that is exactly what happened. You don't see that the republican club caving into pressure from the the President of Fordham is exactly equivalent to Fordham banning Coulter? It is no wonder you are liberal. This is how you distort reality.
Edited by foreveryoung, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by DrJones*, posted 11-11-2012 10:09 PM DrJones* has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by DrJones*, posted 11-11-2012 10:16 PM foreveryoung has not replied
 Message 51 by subbie, posted 11-11-2012 10:27 PM foreveryoung has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 47 of 274 (679016)
11-11-2012 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by foreveryoung
11-11-2012 10:08 PM


Lol
That is your example of ugly rhetoric.
Stop, you are embarrassing yourself.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by foreveryoung, posted 11-11-2012 10:08 PM foreveryoung has not replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


(2)
Message 48 of 274 (679018)
11-11-2012 10:16 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by foreveryoung
11-11-2012 10:13 PM


Because that is exactly what happened.
No that is not what happened, what happened is that her invitation was rescinded. Your claim that she was "banned" is a falsehood.

God separated the races and attempting to mix them is like attempting to mix water with diesel fuel.- Buzsaw Message 177
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by foreveryoung, posted 11-11-2012 10:13 PM foreveryoung has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 49 of 274 (679019)
11-11-2012 10:22 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Faith
11-11-2012 10:08 PM


Re: Coulter not banned
Too funny.
Evidence Faith, not assertions. You do know the difference don't you?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Faith, posted 11-11-2012 10:08 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Faith, posted 11-11-2012 11:05 PM jar has replied

  
foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 583 days)
Posts: 921
Joined: 12-26-2011


Message 50 of 274 (679020)
11-11-2012 10:25 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by crashfrog
11-11-2012 9:48 PM


crashfrog writes:
I think it was in Godless, maybe? Let me check. Yeah, Godless:
quote:They’re almost always biologiststhe science with the greatest preponderance of women.
Again - how is that a "reflection of the ugly rhetoric of the left" and not simply a reflection of Ann Coulter's own self-hating sexism?
Every single sentence of Coulter's is not a direct response to a single hateful quotation from a liberal. In this case the line in question is part of a bigger story, namely the whole book. I haven't read the book but my guess from knowing Coulter would be that she is mocking feminists. To be feminist is not equivalent to being female. Coulter despises modern feminism, especially the loudest proponents of it. But to counter your general point: Liberal Feminists have said some extremely hateful things about men, conservatives, fundamentalists and women who don't toe the party line. The book is a blast right back at them.
As for the quote itself: She seems to be saying the women predominate in the field of biology because that is where godless women get to poke the biggest stick in the eye of religious fundamentalists with the theory of evolution. If you mistakenly think she is saying that the study of biology is a worthless science because it is predominately composed of women, then you are gravely mistaken about Coulter.
Edited by foreveryoung, : No reason given.
Edited by foreveryoung, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by crashfrog, posted 11-11-2012 9:48 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by crashfrog, posted 11-11-2012 10:34 PM foreveryoung has not replied
 Message 58 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-11-2012 11:00 PM foreveryoung has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


(2)
Message 51 of 274 (679022)
11-11-2012 10:27 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by foreveryoung
11-11-2012 10:13 PM


foreveryoung writes:
You don't see that the republican club caving into pressure from the the President of Fordham is exactly equivalent to Fordham banning Coulter? It is no wonder you are liberal. This is how you distort reality.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by foreveryoung, posted 11-11-2012 10:13 PM foreveryoung has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Minnemooseus, posted 11-11-2012 10:46 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


(2)
Message 52 of 274 (679023)
11-11-2012 10:34 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by foreveryoung
11-11-2012 10:25 PM


Every single sentence of Coulter's is not a direct response to a single hateful quotation from a liberal.
Ok, but here's what you said:
quote:
I think Coulter is only showing these kind of people for exactly who they are.
"Only", as in "nothing but."
To be feminist is not equivalent to being female.
What does that have to do with female participation in the biological sciences?
But to counter your general point: Liberal Feminists have said some extremely hateful things about men, conservatives, fundamentalists and women who don't toe the party line. The book is a blast right back at them.
My "general point" is that Coulter, clearly, thinks women are too stupid to be real scientists and that therefore whatever scientific field they most participate in is, perforce, less of a science by their participation. Frankly I think that's kind of gross, particularly since my wife holds a PhD in a biological science, and was considered sufficiently qualified in her performance of same that she was commissioned by the United States Congress to the Army at the rank of captain.
But you're the one who's asserted that Ann Coulter has never said mum except that a liberal - or do you prefer "lie-beral" - said it first. So I'm asking you, how is her contention the reflection of anything said on the left, and not simply some ugly rhetoric of her own?
If you mistakenly think she is saying that the study of biology is a worthless science because it is predominately composed of women, then you are gravely mistaken about Coulter.
Or, unlike you I guess, I'm able to read. This is the same person who has asserted that the right to vote should be taken away from women because they're too stupid to use it. I guess you're supposed to add "except for her!" at the end of that yourself, because she never remembers to.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by foreveryoung, posted 11-11-2012 10:25 PM foreveryoung has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by subbie, posted 11-11-2012 10:36 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 53 of 274 (679024)
11-11-2012 10:36 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by crashfrog
11-11-2012 10:34 PM


Off topic, but this topic is crap anyway, so sue me.
Frankly I think that's kind of gross, particularly since my wife holds a PhD in a biological science, and was considered sufficiently qualified in her performance of same that she was commissioned by the United States Congress to the Army at the rank of captain.
Ok, that got my curiosity up. What does a biology doctor do while captaining in the army?

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by crashfrog, posted 11-11-2012 10:34 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by jar, posted 11-11-2012 10:45 PM subbie has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 54 of 274 (679025)
11-11-2012 10:45 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by subbie
11-11-2012 10:36 PM


Re: Off topic, but this topic is crap anyway, so sue me.
Well, until 1969 likely worked in building 470 at Ft. Detrick, Md.
After 1969 likely part of USAMRIID.
Edited by jar, : hit wrong key

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by subbie, posted 11-11-2012 10:36 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by subbie, posted 11-11-2012 10:47 PM jar has replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 55 of 274 (679026)
11-11-2012 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by subbie
11-11-2012 10:27 PM


"Is she hateful?", you say
From the topic title:
Is she hateful?
Happened to be at Freethought Blogs — today:
Yes to both questions.
Moose

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith
"Yesterday on Fox News, commentator Glenn Beck said that he believes President Obama is a racist. To be fair, every time you watch Glenn Beck, it does get a little easier to hate white people." - Conan O'Brien
"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by subbie, posted 11-11-2012 10:27 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(3)
Message 56 of 274 (679027)
11-11-2012 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by foreveryoung
11-11-2012 7:36 PM


To me, Coulter just responds to the ugly rhetoric of the left by exposing them and accurately calling them what they are.
And you are wrong, because what she actually does is lie about them. Or just wish them dead, as when she says ''My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building.'' When she said that, was she "exposing" the people who work at the New York Times Building? Was she "accurately calling them what they are"? Or just daydreaming about them being murdered by a right-wing terrorist?
Supplementary question: if that isn't hateful, what is?
Or when she says: "'If I'm going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot.'' Now, don't get me wrong, I don't like the man, there are plenty of things one could say about him, but she isn't. Where is she "exposing" him? Where is she "accurately calling him what he is"? She isn't, she's just daydreaming of a terrorist plot of which he will be one of the casualties.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by foreveryoung, posted 11-11-2012 7:36 PM foreveryoung has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 57 of 274 (679028)
11-11-2012 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by jar
11-11-2012 10:45 PM


Re: Off topic, but this topic is crap anyway, so sue me.
Since Crash wasn't born in 1969, and I'm guessing his wife is roughly the same age, I doubt your response was of much value. But thanks anyway, mate.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by jar, posted 11-11-2012 10:45 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by jar, posted 11-11-2012 11:02 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 58 of 274 (679029)
11-11-2012 11:00 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by foreveryoung
11-11-2012 10:25 PM


Coulter On Women
* If we took away women's right to vote, we'd never have to worry about another Democrat president. It's kind of a pipe dream, it's a personal fantasy of mine, but I don't think it's going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly.
* It would be a much better country if women did not vote. That is simply a fact.
* Women have no capacity to understand how money is earned. They have a lot of ideas on how to spend it.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by foreveryoung, posted 11-11-2012 10:25 PM foreveryoung has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 59 of 274 (679030)
11-11-2012 11:02 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by subbie
11-11-2012 10:47 PM


Re: Off topic, but this topic is crap anyway, so sue me.
Hit the post key instead of the preview key and had to add the post 1969 info.
After 1969 likely part of USAMRIID.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by subbie, posted 11-11-2012 10:47 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 60 of 274 (679031)
11-11-2012 11:05 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by jar
11-11-2012 10:22 PM


Re: Coulter not banned / Fordham / Jesuits
jar writes:
Too funny.
Evidence Faith, not assertions. You do know the difference don't you?
I have a feeling I could come up with all kinds of quotes from all kinds of reputable sources and that wouldn't count as evidence for you, so instead of going to the trouble, let me ask you,
What would you take as evidence that Rome has the intention of reinstating the Inquisition if they have the power to do so?
Would evidence that they HAVE reinstated it wherever they've had the power mean anything? Would evidence that they'd been torturing "heretics" in the dungeons of Rome up to the middle of the 19th century carry any weight? Would a picture do or would I have to produce the body of a victim? Which you would claim wasn't a victim anyway.
Just tell me what counts for you and I'll see if I can find it.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

He who surrenders the first page of his Bible surrenders all. --John William Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation, Sermon II.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by jar, posted 11-11-2012 10:22 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by jar, posted 11-11-2012 11:11 PM Faith has replied
 Message 62 by subbie, posted 11-11-2012 11:11 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 66 by Coyote, posted 11-11-2012 11:56 PM Faith has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024