Why Does Louis Midgley Attack Others' Religious Beliefs?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
Doctor Scratch
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
Posts: 8025
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am

Re: Why Does Louis Midgley Attack Others' Religious Beliefs?

Post by Doctor Scratch »

Look at how Midgley spends his sabbath day:
Louis Midgley wrote:Ten hours and Moksha has not been able to send one of his disgusting zingers in reply to my comment. When Moksha tried to play gemli, with a radical contrast between science and religion, he spouted rubbish, again. gemli is never nasty, snide, rude, sarcastic. All the "regulars"--that is, faithful Latter-day Saints, who post on sic et non know this. But the "irregulars"--that is, those who have come to sic et non to blast away at the faith of Latter-day Saints, with what Moksha calls zingers, should go back to their disgusting home board, and do their thing there.
A day of worship; the blessings of Christ; and a very public, screaming rant about a pseudonymous blog commentator.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: Why Does Louis Midgley Attack Others' Religious Beliefs?

Post by Lemmie »

Doctor Scratch wrote:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 9:17 pm
Look at how Midgley spends his sabbath day:
Louis Midgley wrote:Ten hours and Moksha has not been able to send one of his disgusting zingers in reply to my comment. When Moksha tried to play gemli, with a radical contrast between science and religion, he spouted rubbish, again.

gemli is never nasty, snide, rude, sarcastic.

All the "regulars"--that is, faithful Latter-day Saints, who post on sic et non know this. But the "irregulars"--that is, those who have come to sic et non to blast away at the faith of Latter-day Saints, with what Moksha calls zingers, should go back to their disgusting home board, and do their thing there.
A day of worship; the blessings of Christ; and a very public, screaming rant about a pseudonymous blog commentator.
Midgley has certainly changed his mind about gemli!

Last year:

Louis Midgley -> Fred Kratz 16 hours ago

I have made a decision not to respond to those who come to Dan's blog merely to pick a fight or, from the perspective of their world, thrash the faith of Latter-day Saints.

I think that they need to be answered once or twice or even perhaps ten times. Sorry, FK, I will no longer respond. I should explain that I have made a list of those to whom I will no longer respond.

This list begins with gemli...

User avatar
Gadianton
Hermit
Posts: 9948
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: Why Does Louis Midgley Attack Others' Religious Beliefs?

Post by Gadianton »

Midgley wrote:I have made a decision not to respond to those who come to Dan's blog merely to pick a fight
Huh. So that means he's made a decision not to respond to himself or Kiwi57?
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.

LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.

User avatar
Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 3610
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:48 pm

Re: Why Does Louis Midgley Attack Others' Religious Beliefs?

Post by Dr Exiled »

Midge, we all know you love to mix it up and would explode if you couldn't on a regular basis. This is why you berated Moksha with your latest comment at your protected home. You want a reaction from either our beloved penguin friend or anyone so you can then launch yet another attack. Why don't you come over here for a bit? Hopefully Dr. Shades will fix the problems with potential new posters and we can all have some fun over here.
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen 

User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 21650
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am

Re: Why Does Louis Midgley Attack Others' Religious Beliefs?

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

File this one away under the Hitchen’s ‘Religion Poisons Everything’ file:

“Louis Midgley > TimErnst

One response is to act as if nothing is taking place. Another is to insist that a community of faith must keep up with the changing times by adopting the latest fads and fashions. Sort of like urging everyone to get Sunstoned as rapidly as possible so that they no longer feel vulnerable to mockery by those surging backwards from their presumably primitive, embarrassing faith. So the question always is "will the center hold?" Or will we be like the bloody Protestants who have managed to craft for themselves all kinds of factions/parties with their own appeal by the most recent popular preachers.”

The “bloody Protestants?” Get “Sunstoned?”

What a Lounatic.

- Doc

User avatar
Doctor Scratch
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
Posts: 8025
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am

Re: Why Does Louis Midgley Attack Others' Religious Beliefs?

Post by Doctor Scratch »

Dr. Peterson recently had some remarkably flippant things to say about other people's faith traditions. Just take a look at some of these jabs:
Daniel C. Peterson wrote:You may have heard the old joke about what you get when you cross an atheist with . . . umm, let’s say, a Jehovah’s Witness: Somebody who goes door to door for no apparent reason.
Dang! Those Jehovah's Witnesses sure are mindless numbskulls! But he goes on to explain how various religious traditions would suddenly be "free" if belief of God was eliminated:
Daniel C. Peterson wrote:Catholic priests could abandon their vows of chastity. Monks could forsake their vows of poverty and their chanting and, instead, participate in rave parties, follow the Kardashians, and subscribe to Cigar Aficionado. Once-Orthodox Jews could enjoy bacon bits in their salads.
Dr. Peterson's "worldliness" is clearly signified via his familiarity with Cigar Aficianado. I bet that he and his fellow Mopologists actually acquired a copy of it and read it and passed it around as if they were teenage boys flipping through the pages of Penthouse. ("Oh my heck! Just look at that Macanudo! Can you imagine what it would be like to hold that Opus X between your fingers??")

And what would Latter-day Saints do? He tells us (and, of course, a hat tip is due to Dean Robbers):
Latter-day Saints, specifically, would get an extra day each week, ten percent of their gross income back, tea, coffee, wine, beer, brandy, cigarettes, and release from an increasingly unfashionable and always demanding sexual ethic. No more impossible demands like loving your neighbor as you love yourself, turning the other cheek, losing your life in order to save it, and being perfect like your Father in Heaven.
Cigarettes? Okay: that's a new one. I guess that once you've "crossed over" into cigars, that cigarettes are just the next lilypad on the pond? And you really have to enjoy the fact that he characterizes "loving your neighbor as you love yourself" as an "impossible demand." LOL! The proof is in the pudding, as they say.

And this is just hilarious:
DCP wrote:And, if atheism is true, whatever good things it confers (no time-consuming church responsibilities! no boring Sunday meetings! no guilt after getting drunk or spending quality time with pornographic videos! cocktail parties!) come at the high price of living in a universe that is entirely indifferent, one that could, in fact, easily be described as hostile except that it is completely unconscious and lacks any purposes or intentions at all.
I'm reminded of that old incident where he was publicly humiliated after getting caught ogling a "Hot Booty Shaking" video featuring the lovely Ms. Jennifer Lopez. Here's a philosophical question for you: Would atheism be worth it for Dr. Peterson if he got to have guilt-free sex with Jennifer Lopez? I mean: it is easy to dismiss this as just "fantasy." But what if this was a real proposition? Imagine Robert Johnson at the proverbial crossroads, and the Devil offers him a deal: give me your soul, and you will become immortal through your guitar. Let's face it: we all know how badly Dr. Peterson wants to be immortal. The secular world just won't offer that to him, and so he's had to go with Plan B.
Last edited by Doctor Scratch on Sat Sep 26, 2020 10:28 pm, edited 6 times in total.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14

User avatar
Doctor Scratch
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
Posts: 8025
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am

Re: Why Does Louis Midgley Attack Others' Religious Beliefs?

Post by Doctor Scratch »

Dup.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14

Post Reply