And left a comment on the last post I made, regarding his comments on the Smurfs.
Here is what he posted:
I'm not really interested in debating about The Smurfs, particularly since I linked to a book that details the Occult references in The Smurfs, including Gargamel's use of a Pentagram to cast spells at the direction of a talking magic book.
"Like Lambs to the Slaughter." has been out of print for a while, largely because it discusses the occult ties found in may cartoons of the the 80's and 90's, most of which are no longer popular. Used copied however are easy to get.
Give the book a read. While my hope is that it will educate you, I suspect it will do more than further enrage you against Christians.
I posted this on the comments section of his blog:
So you read about this in a book? Well, if it's in a book, it MUST be true then, right?
I remain convinced that you will only cite sources that already match your own views. This is what makes you closed minded. And yes, Like Lambs to the Slaughter did piss me off about Christians. The book was appropriately titled for Christians, though, as it further reinforces the notion that most Christians will believe anything so long as another brother or sister has made reference to it. Since when did the Bible actively promote checking your brain at the door and not questioning truth being offered?
God gave us all brains. We should be using them. Especially when it comes to making serious allegations against someone or something based on what you have heard, not what you have investigated on your own.
Thanks for checking out my blog, Alexander. I hope we can continue to further debate.
Like Lambs to the Slaughter is a typical hysteria inducing read about how modern culture and entertainment are loaded with Satanic and anti-Christian messages. While some of what was written about is true, the majority of the book bases itself on innuendo and the author's interpretation of what he has seen. And of course, if the author sees Gargamel casting spells from a pentagram, then everyone else should see it as well. It's along the same lines as Why Knock Rock by Dan and Steve Peters and the Satan Seller by Mike Warnke. Of course, Mike Warnke was shown to be a fraud in his testimony, and Dan and Steve Peters, while right on in proving there was sin in the music industry (everyone knew that anyway - we didn't need the Peters brothers to state the obvious!) they went a little overboard in their determination to censor and burn music.
Mike Warnke is probably the best example in proving how ignorant Christians can be. It took a little investigating by Cornerstone magazine to show he was a charlatan, that he lied about his past, gave dates for events in his past that changed constantly... He managed to pull this off for over 20 years, scored millions of dollars for his Satan hunting type school, was featured on Oprah back in the day, produced more than seven (I think) comedy albums (which, admittedly, are VERY funny!) The fact that Mr. Warnke got away with his lies as long as he did only reinforces that most Christians are like sheep, and Alexander is one of them. Citing a book no longer in print, that gives no photo evidence to justify the charge is hardly going to convince anyone that it is true. At least the Peters brothers showed photos of the Satanic imagery from album sleeves, and quoted magazine referenced interviews on the artists they were featuring.
Anyway, so I posted that little bit on his blog, and then I realized, wait a minute! He only talked about the Smurfs? What about the other questions I asked? What about the Harry Potter accusation he made? What about the questions I asked in my previous posts?
He ignored them, didnt he?
Are you running, Alexander? Come on, have some courage and reply to my specific questions in one big post.
I can even email the questions to you, in case you can't figure out how to scroll down the page to see them. Let me know.
Anticornswalled
Distorted View Daily and Cornswalled Is A Moron Proudly Presents...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Well said.
Well, I’ve just finished reading all the posts here, and I’ve also checked out the troll’s blog. So now I’d just like to throw in my two cents. First I want to say that I find it really funny that the root of this religious banter is the DV podcast (which I love). I also want to say that it is great to finally hear the voice of a religious moderate (all too often silent).
Foster vs Cornswalled seems to be a moderate Christian vs. a fundamentalist Christian (extremist). I believe that people must embrace rationalism, not faith--or they will never overcome their differences.
I can’t imagine anyone taking Cornswalled seriously. But…
“Tell a devout Christian his wife is cheating on him, or that frozen yoghurt can make a man invisible, and he is likely to require as much evidence as anybody else, and to be persuaded only to the extent that you give it. Tell him that the book he keeps by his bed was written by an invisible deity who will punish him with fire for eternity if he fails to accept its every incredible claim, and he seems to require no evidence whatsoever.”
If we simply require in our everyday discourse that people's convictions really scale with the available evidence. We ought to be able to demand intellectual honesty right across the board, and ignore the prevailing taboos and political correctness which seem to prevent us from openly criticizing religion.
Religious fundamentalism seems to be an untouchable subject to criticize, but should not be out of bounds. We don’t need to make laws, or lock people up for believing the unbelievable. We don’t pass laws against stupidity and we don’t lock people up for being stupid, but we don’t respect stupidity and we don’t respect strong claims to certainty on little or not evidence, or even piles of bad evidence. When you put your foot in your mouth there should be no burden for others to respect you for it.
We have a great double standard in our discourse. We demand evidence in argument in every area of our lives, we stigmatize stupidity when it counts. We do not allow people who have floridly irrational beliefs coupled to great feelings of certainty to hold positions of great responsibility in our society unless these beliefs are about God. We really do not respect stupidity, but we respect and accept religious stupidity. If you're certain that Elvis is alive, by merely articulating that fact, you have disqualified yourself from any intelligent conversation or position of responsibility in our society. But if you are certain that Jesus is coming back in your lifetime, not only can you hold elected office, in fact you could not hold elected office if you openly did not believe that idea. And that double standard is something we are paying a very high price for.
Political correctness and the fear of racism have made many reluctant to oppose the extremists in there midst. This does not bode well for the future of civilization. We can no longer afford the luxury of political correctness. When religion causes violence, its root claims must be challenged.
We are being held hostage by totally unacceptable religious sensitivities, we need to speak candidly about that. We must make it clear that we are not going to tolerate this kind of divisive medieval mythology and we can not accommodate it in a global civil society.
I’ll stop rambling now!
He uses God to justify his behavior - at the end of the say Mr Cornswalled is a sad old man who is desperate to be heard
cornswalled is spineless, he can dish it out but not take criticism and i dont want to sound like an ass but the name "Warnke" seems like an anagram for a different word.
i doubt cornswalled will reply to your comments.
Well, if he won't reply to any comment I make here, I still plan on keeping a log of his ridiculous rants and rebuttals against them.
If he doesn't reply, it'll on reinforce my argument that he will only debate when he knows he can win.
Anticornswalled
That was a nice deflection. I mention the book "Like Lambs to the Slaughter" and you bring up books by completely different authors and attack THEM.
Your mention of my lack of photographs and the fact that the book is out of print are both valid criticisms, and if you find my use of the Smurfs as an example to be unwarranted, then please read the original post as if the Smurfs are not mentioned.
Post a Comment