[leighton]I have to ask considering their iTunes account hasn’t been updated since their conversation with us. I’m sure Dr. Mike has distanced himself from the show as best he can, but does it still exist? This is a question which doesn’t really keep me up at night or even cross my mind until I randomly receive an email from Kirk Hastings with his signing the show in his title(Is he to be the new Dr. Mike?).
You all will have to forgive me my absence. My new place doesn’t have Internet yet so coming to the website and answering emails is a bit of a difficulty for me, but when Charley called me this morning about this inanity, I made an effort.
What you will see below is a polite email request to take down my postings……And then a particularly long email exchange wherein Kirk does his best to throw dust in the eyes of his readers by tossing up excuses as to why they lost the debate. You know, the one thing I can’t quite put my finger on is why that email exchange was attached to the request. Did he just accidentally properly format it, type out his request, send it to me, and is going to realize the mistake and send another request about my not ever, ever posting up his “well-laid” list of excuses? There couldn’t possibly be an ulterior motive to his request…he’s a Christian. They don’t hide their lights under a bush.
Well, it’s a good thing he has morality on his side otherwise I might have had to sit him down and explain to him there’s no need to attempt to manipulate my atheistic and Neanderthal brain, all you have to do is ask. Oops, hold on for a second. I have to answer to my basic instincts and scratch my balls.
There’s nothing like a shorn and suntanned scrotum to make a man really feel like a man in those morning breezes. Makes you feel like bursting into song and dance just like in The Sound of Music…
Scrotum, scrotum, you’re just a bag of skin.
Scrotum, scrotum, you keep my testes in.
Wriggly, squiggly, and covered with hair,
What would you do if it wasn’t there?
Second verse, same as the first, sorta.
Scrotum, scrotum, we all love you.
Scrotum, scrotum, you imprison that special goo.
Warm and cuddly and ready in spite,
Of that Christian girl we regretted last night…
Almost forgot I was here to do something. Oh yeah, here’s Kirk at his finest in an email exchange dated at more than a month ago with Kirk complaining about getting swamped with emails from our site…from more than a fucking month ago:
On Tuesday, April 19, 2011,
Leighton,
I respectfully suggest you take down your comments about our last “debate” from your website, because, frankly, I’m getting tired of answering simple-minded e-mails from your followers like the one below …
(P.S.: Thanks for teaching me how to respond to lunatics like yourself — it’s been a real learning experience for me. I learn quickly!)
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 10:41 PM
Subject: A brief note from an Irreligiosophy listener
Just got done reading over the exchange posted over at the Irreligiosophy blog, and I just wanted to say a few things, given with how much interest I listened to the debate posts as they were uploaded to my iPod.
Leighton’s a dick. I admit that freely. He’s an acerbic, sarcastic, abusive, vulgar character. I have no idea if he’s like that in “real life,” but the impression that I get, seeing as I’ve noticed it being switched on and off, is that it’s a character choice. I listen to Irreligiosophy as an atheist version of the Howard Stern Show. They’re trying to be funny, shocking, and provide entertainment.
I’m here to tell you, though, that you are wrong about such things driving people further away from atheism. I would never have deconverted if I hadn’t tuned into these atheist shows like Irreligiosophy, Reasonable Doubts and the Atheist Experience to hear arguments and positions that made infinitely more sense than every religious apologetic I’d ever seen.
Now, for your part, you eventually show your colors in the email exchange when you drop the civil demeanor and reveal the true bigotry that is necessitated by your beliefs: that every atheist must be evil, hate-filled, and dedicating to dragging souls into damnation. Thank you for finally being honest.
You’re wrong, of course–I’ve never been happier or more at peace since I realized that there is no god worth worrying about in this universe. Just today, in Japan, we witnessed how we live on an uncaring planet that is emphatically NOT well-designed to sustain life, and that sometimes there is much suffering for no reason.
And that is a comforting thought, “for no reason.” There is a favorite quote of mine from a TV show a few years back: “I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn’t it be so much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe.” We also must care for one another, because there is no invisible sky-father to bring succor to the dead and the dying, but that is another subject.
As far as the apologetics go, concering Jesus’ conflicting lineage and the nonsensical Easter morning narratives, it’s the same backflips of logic I’ve seen from apologists for years. One takes it as read that the passages must be true, and one fixes one’s facts around the policy. It fails with me for one simple reason: you are suggesting that the omnipotent, omniscient creator, in order to convey The Most Important Information In The Universe, chose to use copies of copies of translations of copies from anonymous authors’ anecdotal accounts, with no originals, replete with even apparent contradictions?
The fact that there even needs to exist a “discipline” such as apologetics is proof positive to me that the subject matter is at best corrupted and at worst outright fiction. (Guess which is more likely.) The vehicle of revelation from God Almighty ought to carry the same weight and power as standing in front of him, not this pile of contradictions and forgeries.
Thank you for your kind attention.
Sir (name withheld),
You know, I don’t believe we did very well in the debate with Chuck and Leighton either; I personally thought the whole show was a total fiasco, and I agree with Leighton (one of the few times I agree with him!) that it was a “2 1/2-hour waste of time” in the end. But not because I think Chuck and Leighton have better intellectual arguments, or because our facts can’t stand up to theirs. I don’t know whether Leighton is the same in real life as he is on his podcasts or not, but in the end it really doesn’t matter. They “won” the debate because Leighton in particular specializes in being as nasty as he possibly can, using rotten attitudes, sarcasm, ridicule, put downs, and name-calling against his opponents, and having no respect whatsoever for whomever he is debating with, or what they might believe (or why they believe it). He is not afraid to treat other people like dirt in order to be able to say afterward “See? These people are idiots, and we won the debate!”, when all he really did was vocally “beat us up” in a way that we refused to answer in kind. That’s not winning a debate; that’s bullying people. We had perfectly rational answers for every single question he brought up, but he refused to allow us to calmly present those arguments because he insisted on constantly going off onto one irrelevant tangent after another so that we couldn’t keep up with him, constantly accusing us of things that weren’t true (like that we believe in rape!), and presenting a bunch of ridiculous arguments for trivialities like “there is no evidence whatsoever for the Gospel of Mark being named after him as the writer” (when most serious scholars today, even non-Christian ones, freely accept that as probably being true!). And so what if Mark might be named after the wrong writer? The document itself doesn’t directly tell us who wrote it. And if it is traditionally named after the wrong writer, does that automatically make everything in it of no historical account whatsoever? Why was that “argument” even important to the topic at hand anyway (whether God exists or not)? Or the verse about rape in the Old Testament? Leighton completely overwhelmed us with nastiness and constant put downs so that a calm, rational debate about facts and information was in the end impossible. According to him, everything he says is automatically “right”, and everything we say is automatically “wrong”, no matter what is said. That’s not rational debate; that’s street brawling. And in the end it doesn’t prove anything.
Incidentally, when people like Leighton act like a jackass and treat other people like crap, how come that’s being “reasonable” and “rational”, but when I tell him the truth about his rotten attitude I’m being a bigot? Isn’t that using kind of a double standard? He’s allowed to “defend” himself by any means possible, but I’m not allowed to honestly respond or I’m a “bigot”? That’s very convenient for Leighton (and all other atheists), isn’t it? No matter how we respond, we’re wrong!
And do you really seriously think Leighton gives a hang about you or any of the other people that write into Irreligiosophy? He’s not there to help you live a better life and to “understand truth”, pal. He’s there to make himself feel “superior” by beating other people up and throwing his nasty attitudes around. He’s a psychopath, and he gets his personal jollies by making other people miserable and trying to kid himself in the process that he’s somehow “smarter” and “better” than everyone else. An unfortunate fact of life, but that’s the way some people are. Yet God has promised that He will deal with such people, and in the end they will reap what they sow, and they will get exactly what they deserve. I sincerely believe that.
The information I submitted about Jesus’s lineages in the Gospels is accepted as perfectly reasonable by many Biblical scholars and archaeologists who understand the society that Jesus lived in, a society very different from the United States in the 21st century. You can’t always apply modern literary standards to things that were written 2000 years ago and halfway across the world in a totally different society. (Of course, you can if you’re biased and narrow-minded like Leighton is, and it happens to suit your personal opinion!) You can say it’s all bunk if you want, but that’s just your personal opinion, and it isn’t seen the same way by many historical experts and scholars who know exactly how first century people in the mideast thought and wrote and traced genealogies. The same goes for the New Testament passages about Jesus’s resurrection. You don’t have to accept them if you don’t want to, but most serious historians and scholars (even many non-Christian ones!) will disagree with you. They agree that the Gospel accounts hold up quite well to modern historical scrutiny — including the parts about the resurrection.
The fact that there is a discipline called “Theology” and another called “Apologetics” means there’s something there to argue and talk about. If there wasn’t, neither field would exist, and the thousands of books written about them over the centuries wouldn’t exist either. We specifically need the science of Apologetics to deal with people like you, and Chuck, and Leighton!
And if atheism is true, then why are there so many books nowadays attempting to defend it? And why are there so many books like “Why Evolution Is True” by Jerry Coyne, if evolution is in fact true? According to your logic, we shouldn’t need this kind of stuff either!
There are many reasons why what is happening in Japan is happening right now. The Bible makes it perfectly clear that we are living in a “fallen” world where such things as suffering and pain and natural disasters happen; it does not ignore that fact. In fact, Jesus Himself suffered as much or more than most of the people in Japan are right now! Such events do not “disprove” God. They only prove that life is complicated, that it can be hard, and that God is not a celestial “Santa Claus” that always gives us complete comfort and ease and everything we might selfishly want in life. He is in control; we are not. The Bible makes all those facts perfectly plain; it does not gloss over them like some religions do (that claim that suffering, pain and death are all “illusions” and are not “real”).
I assume you are still relatively young, and in fairly good health. When you get older and are facing disease, disability, and eventual death, I hope you can still be at “perfect peace” with the fact that you are going to deteriorate physically, and then cease to exist and be gone forever. And that nothing you do, say or think in the meantime during your life has any meaning whatsoever!
If you can do that (without constantly being drunk or under the influence of mind-numbing drugs), then you are a lot better than most other people are.
Kirk Hastings
Evidence4Faith
58 Responses to “Does the E4F show still exist?”
The E4F people really seem to live in their own reality if that’s their example of a ‘lunatic’.
And on the fuckteenth day, the Prophet Leighton gave to his followers the Holy Hymn, “Scrotum, Scrotum.”
“The fact that there is a discipline called “Theology” and another called “Apologetics” means there’s something there to argue and talk about. If there wasn’t, neither field would exist, and the thousands of books written about them over the centuries wouldn’t exist either. We specifically need the science of Apologetics to deal with people like you, and Chuck, and Leighton!
And if atheism is true, then why are there so many books nowadays attempting to defend it? And why are there so many books like “Why Evolution Is True” by Jerry Coyne, if evolution is in fact true? According to your logic, we shouldn’t need this kind of stuff either!”
Is it just me or do these two paragraphs seem to be going off into wildly different directions? Christian apologetics show that Christianity is true, while atheist ‘apologetics’ are a sign of weakness…
the lady doth protest too much
i think that someone named kirk has a crush on leighton…
Fuck me dead
Fantastic.
Whoever sent the original email to Kirk you just won a medal, make yourself known! To get that sort of pathetic crying to mommy email back is what I call a win.
“I assume you are still relatively young, and in fairly good health. When you get older and are facing disease, disability, and eventual death, I hope you can still be at “perfect peace” with the fact that you are going to deteriorate physically, and then cease to exist and be gone forever. And that nothing you do, say or think in the meantime during your life has any meaning whatsoever!”
As a young person who is disabled from a chronic illness and facing death, I take offense to this. I don’t need some false, ridiculous notion of a “heaven” to make myself feel better. In fact, my atheistic beliefs help me to be grateful for the few things I have and to really live life to the fullest when I can (instead of sitting there, moping and looking forward to a “better life”). Knowing there is nothing else makes me find pleasure and happiness in the little things – being able to walk or when I have “good days” health wise.
Abrahamic religions make you blind to the little things here that can make you happy because you are so focused on the NEXT life.
And as someone who has worked as a therapist in several hospitals (cancer floors, trauma units, long term care, er, etc), I can attest that religious folks tend to be more upset about their impending death than atheists (was I good enough? What if i sin last minute? I’m not feeling grateful enough to god for what I have; I’m a horrible person! what did I do to deserve this?! etc” as opposed to those who just enjoy the small time left with their friends and families.
Kirk – go fuck yourself
The whining about us being mean to them is also misplaced. I sent this email to Keith on 1/1/11, two months before we debated the second time:
From: Charles Morrison
Date: Saturday, January 1, 2011
Subject: Debate
To: Keith Kendrex
Well, I have to say I am very disappointed (but not surprised) that you took it upon yourselves to have a follow-up “debate analysis” without us present to challenge your claims. Given that bit of disingenuousness, if you guys keep your word and still choose to come on the show, the gloves will be off. If you make any ridiculous claims (such as, say, “life violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics”) we’ll be sure not to smooth over the comment with one of our own (“so we both agree that given life, complexity is not a problem for the 2nd Law”), but call it what it is — ridiculous.
That having been said, you guys should have the upper hand, right? You’ll be on our show but the turf will be yours: evidence for faith, specifically the Christian faith, which is the entire purpose of your radio show. Bring on your fulfilled prophecies, your evidence for the resurrection, your Gospels, your Tacitus and Suetonius and Josephus and Pliny, your Paul and your Peter. Should be a breeze for you to handle us nonbelievers.
Chuck
Truly, truly pathetic.
I like how Kirk calls Leighton a psychopath, but Leighton almost never gets butthurt when we poke fun at him. As opposed to Kirk, who the minute he gets some heat, begins leveling accusations of Leighton being some bullying misanthrope in league with Satan himself.
They have put up 3 episodes since the 2nd debate. None of them mention the debate. They are all on logic lessons, which makes me laugh. For some reason they aren’t numbered and appear at the bottom of their website list and in iTunes.
The fact that there is a discipline called “Astrology” and another called “Homeopathy” means there’s something there to argue and talk about.
Kirk’s standards for what constitutes “complex-minded” are remarkably high, if that’s what he calls simple-minded, especially given the arguments he presented during the debates and the E4F analysis. I like how he repeatedly resorts to the authority of some nebulous cloud of scholars who think history supports his theology. Which ones, Kirk? And have you ever dealt with the opposing arguments? To what extent do non-Christian scholars agree that the resurrection account holds up to historical scrutiny? His comparison of apologetics to evolution and atheism are also absurd and ignores the central feature of the argument presented to him. Simple-minded indeed.
I think Kirk is just a little cranky ’cause of the massive headache that comes from the cognitive dissonance he must experience any time he has to try to think. What an ass.
“The information I submitted about Jesus’s lineages in the Gospels is accepted as perfectly reasonable by many Biblical scholars and archaeologists who understand the society that Jesus lived in…”
If they understand it so well, why can’t any of them agree on why there are two different lineages? There are tons of silly-ass explanations, none of which explain how primitive societies managed to track geneologies back through scores of generations, while someone in this day and age can’t trace their lineage back more than three or four generations before things get murky.
I don’t know if he is truly getting “swamped” with emails, because I see a sample size of … one.
That was my email–I really have nothing much to add other than, Thanks, David =)
Interesting thing, though–they weren’t even honest enough to forward an accurate version of the conversation–I went to point out my favorite quote, and it’s not even there!
“And do you really seriously think Leighton gives a hang about you or any of the other people that write into Irreligiosophy? He has directly told us that he doesn’t.”
To which I want to say…he doesn’t listen to the show much, does he? I mean, sheeeiiit, we had an entire month of “Fuck You Fans.” Getthafuckouttahere!
I just spent 4 hours tonight typing an email to Kirk. It was my third one to him. I sent one weeks ago, after the second debate, and heard back from Kirk yesterday. I replied back and he responded today. Then I wrote tonight’s. I had no idea he’s been so busy with other Irreligiosophites. I hope he emails back. I’m enjoying our conversation. I’m not the emailer quoted by Leighton, to be clear. So there’s at least two talking with Kirk.
I suggested that if he wants to call those under the power of Chuck and Leighton brainwashed, that “Irreligiosophy Syndrome” is way too lame, and that “Irreligiosophitis” would be more appropriate. I’m down with it, I don’t know about anyone else.
Oops, actually that was the fourth I’ve sent him.
I thought this looked familiar: “You know, I don’t believe we did very well in the debate with Chuck and Leighton either; I personally thought the whole show was a total fiasco…” I think that whole section went out to everyone who wrote him. I got that ad hominem about Leighton as well as a more specific reply.
Well…
I guess we all know how Kirk feels about Leighton. I don’t think I have ever been disliked that much by anyone. Good job, Leighton… I think…
And if it is traditionally named after the wrong writer, does that automatically make everything in it of no historical account whatsoever? Why was that “argument” even important to the topic at hand anyway (whether God exists or not)?
Uhhh … that wasn’t the topic at hand, Kirk. The topic at hand was, “Given the existence of God, what evidence do you have that Christianity is true?”
No wonder he was so quiet during the debate. He was debating the wrong topic.
This is the mind of Kirk we’re talking about here. He probably can’t make the distinction between Christianity and theism/deism in general because he’s so convinced he’s right.
Leighton and Chuck are just mad because they can’t get past the evidence and they can’t get past the proof.
Can do, Moggie. Have someone tell me when you are dead.
Hilarious.
Am I the first one to point out the total assness of the Japan comments or does everyone just take that for granted, being Kirk an all?
It’s okay, j-dog, you see God is in control, which absolves him of all moral responsibility because
Oooh– that exchange was pure win!
Kirk, sweetie, you didn’t lose because Leighton is a psychopath– you lost because there is no God, silly– not even the 3-in-1-Jesus-zombie-god you imagine yourself saved for believing in! All the apologetics in the world can’t make invisible beings real.
I’ve enjoyed the entire E4F adventure! Chuck and Leighton you’ve been awesome! (Leighton, put your balls up to the screen and I’ll give them a good scratching!)
I assume you are still relatively young, and in fairly good health. When you get older and are facing disease, disability, and eventual death, I hope you can still be at “perfect peace” with the fact that you are going to deteriorate physically, and then cease to exist and be gone forever. And that nothing you do, say or think in the meantime during your life has any meaning whatsoever!
If you can do that (without constantly being drunk or under the influence of mind-numbing drugs), then you are a lot better than most other people are.
Somebody can’t face their mortality.
Lucy said: “Somebody can’t face their mortality.”
I agree, Lucy
I find his statements ironic considering his later comment: “God is not a celestial “Santa Claus” that always gives us complete comfort and ease and everything we might selfishly want in life.”
I guess what he really means is that god is not a TERRESTRIAL Santa Claus– but after you die, he IS, indeed, a CELESTIAL Santa Claus (provided you believed the right unbelievable story to win a pass to “Happily Ever After” land.)
I also thought his passage of Jesus suffering being worse than other suffering was lame… lots of people suffer for years before dying slow, agonizing deaths of terrible diseases– oftentimes, very young. And how can you can compare a parents’ loss of a child in Japan to a day-and-a-half on a cross followed by a fake death and then eternal bliss and judgment of mankind? Wouldn’t any parent pick that option over the loss of a child in an earthquake/tsunami?
“And if atheism is true, then why are there so many books nowadays attempting to defend it? And why are there so many books like “Why Evolution Is True” by Jerry Coyne, if evolution is in fact true? According to your logic, we shouldn’t need this kind of stuff either!”
Un…fucking…believable.
Kirk…by your logic…if CHRISTIANITY is true, WHY IS THERE A FUCKING BIBLE?!
That whole exchange was pretty funny, but man, that part made my head hurt.
Derrick, that was an excellent email. Too bad the response was not of equal quality, reasoning, coherent structure and dependent on arguments rather than ad hominem attacks.
I’m supposed to be boarding the plane back home now. I shouldn’t have read this exchange, as it will take all of my mental fortitude to stop me from spouting profanities all the way to the gate.
I got another email from Kirk last night. That was quick. I wonder how fast Kirk types. I admit I’m a slow-ass. He doesn’t seem happy about things (you know it’s bad when you get hit with waves of unprovoked ad hominem), and I wish I had time to respond to him now, but it will have to wait till after work…
Look, it’s very simple. If Wikipedia says the Gospels are 99.5% ‘pure’ (i.e., unchanged from the original story) then it must be true.
Kirk, we heard the show – we already know that you consider rape to be a “triviality”. What surprises me is that you are shameless enough to keep repeating your opinion amongst civilized people.
In bibtard speak, no one suffers as much as the zombie prince Jeebus. It is axiomatic, if you show someone who has suffered a great deal more than Jeebus, the bibtard will often throw in, ‘but the zombie prince experienced complete separation from Sanata AFTER being in and knowing Santa’s presence (just forget Jeebus is supposed to BE Santa)’; which of course leads to even more shit eating grins and a crayon shortage.
The feild of apologetics might as well be called
Lying for Idiots.
@Leighton: Maybe the reason your brain wandered off and treated us to the scrotum “hymn” is because your subconscious knows that you have Kirk by the balls.
Attaching that long email was probably Kirk’s subconsious way of admitting as much. (Wasn’t there a call by a certain Neanderthal for Irreligiosophites to harrass and harangue the E4F guys?) This is obviously his attempt at a mercy call.
@Leighton: Oh…one more thing…Get your fucking Internet up, ass-chaps.
@Leighton: Wait…wait…WAIT! You’re scratching your balls and thinking about bursting into song like the Sound of Music…?
When’s your coming out party?
“They “won” the debate because Leighton in particular specializes in being as nasty as he possibly can, using rotten attitudes, sarcasm, ridicule, put downs, and name-calling…”
Honestly, the fact that Kirk can re-imagine that debate like that is further evidence that Christians are used to opponents who tie one hand behind their backs when debating them. They take advantage of debaters who let countless idiotic assertions go unchallenged in the interest of not offending them or their fellows.
I’ll have to listen again but I sure don’t remember Leighton nor Chuck being anything like that.
Waaa.
In Kirk’s idiot mind, hearing contrary argumentation with no holds barred is equal to Satanly persecution and bullying.
God: Allows millions to suffer in Japan. Perfectly okay, he’s God after all nyuk nyuk
Leighton: HE SAYS BAD WORDS, HE IS TEH DEVIL LOLZORS
Wait, “Dr Mike” from E4F is distancing himself from the show? What happened? Is there some behind the scenes drama I’m missing? I went to the E4F website, and a Dr Mike is still listed. Did you guys destroy them so hard in debate that you tore the partnership asunder?
Some of us are casual listeners and we can’t keep track of everything that went down because we’re busy getting so laid so often.
Dr. Mike took a sabbatical from the show after our first debate with them back in December because he was “busy.” I have no idea if he’s returned since I haven’t listened to the show since the second debate, but Mr. Kirk Hastings was pinch-hitting for him in the meantime.
“And if atheism is true, then why are there so many books nowadays attempting to defend it? And why are there so many books like “Why Evolution Is True” by Jerry Coyne, if evolution is in fact true? According to your logic, we shouldn’t need this kind of stuff either!”
What I’d like to see Kirk explain is just what exactly books like Jerry Coyne’s “Why Evolution is True” have to do with atheism? Being an atheist does not imply that a person accepts evo;utionary theory, it implies that they do not believe in a god or gods. Moreover, acceptance of evolutionary theory has absolutely fuck all to do with whether or not that person believes in god, as proven by the fact that the vast majority of the worlds christian population accept the theory. (Of course I’m sure the response to that fact would be “they aren’t True Christians[TM].)
“I assume you are still relatively young, and in fairly good health. When you get older and are facing disease, disability, and eventual death, I hope you can still be at “perfect peace” with the fact that you are going to deteriorate physically, and then cease to exist and be gone forever.”
I was in an accident that left me crippled, in constant pain, and has most likely shortened my lifespan dramatically, and yet I am perfectly capable of accepting my own impend death because no matter what I do, or what god you would have me pray to, it will still happen. Death is a fact of life that no belief will ever change. I came to terms with my own mortality a long time ago and I didn’t need any magic man to do so. It’s also worth noting, lest I be accused of “being angry at god” over my misfortunes, I was an atheist long before I was crippled.
” And that nothing you do, say or think in the meantime during your life has any meaning whatsoever”
I’m sorry but nobody else, least of all a religious apologist with a vested interest in belittle nonbelievers, gets to decide what I find meaning in or what meaning others find in my words or actions.My children and grandcildren can find meaning in my words and deeds long after I’m dead and gone, as can other friends family, Generations to come could find meaning in my words or writing just as I have found meaning in the works of Cicero and Thoreau, Plato and Shakespere, or Tolkien and Ptolemy. Meaning is both subjective and individual, and as such it cannot be dictated or dismissed.
E4F just put out a new episode, called “Detecting Propaganda,” wherein they flat-out admit that their show is just that. No fucking joke.
Then, of course, they try to justify it by saying that their propaganda is good propaganda because they’re being honest. Idiots.
Forward this to Kirk from me:
http://imagemacros.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/butthurt_report_form.jpg?w=576&h=720
Well, each email I get from Kirk is more whiny and immature than the last. He seems to be trying to get to the point where Chuck and Leighton’s utter contempt for them is fully justified. At this point I could fill out the butthurt report form on his behalf.
At this point I suspect he’s just copy/pasting the same spite into every email he receives, it doesn’t seem to have bearing to much that I say directly.
Well, each email I get from Kirk is more whiny and immature than the last. He seems to be trying to get to the point where Chuck and Leighton’s utter contempt for them is fully justified. At this point I could fill out the butthurt report form on his behalf.
At this point I suspect he’s just copy/pasting the same spite into every email he receives, it doesn’t seem to have bearing too much on what I actually say.
I would like to say “using ‘psychopath’ as an insult, even in the context of being mad at someone who knew scripture better than you, is perpetuating the myths and social ostracising of people with psychiatric diseases, who are vulnerable and are in need of a lot of care and support. Very christian of you. Congratulations”
5 bucks he will only notice the “congratulations” bit.
fuck is this? TEXT??? I can’t listen to text, what is wrong with you?
It’s the Kindle version