We should start a poll and invite CaptainPlanet420 and BillO'Reilly back. I liked them much more than choggie, so I think it's fair. I'll make the poll.

Is there any sign that cp420 and billo are interested in returning? As far as I know, they haven't been repeatedly creating shadow accounts since their banning. Then again, they're not as easy to pick out as choggie.

I still think I'd vote against either of them. BillO has a chance, but fuck 420.

I would have no problem letting cpn and billo for that matter return on another user, if they did behave. If they didn't, the ban is not far behind again.

My only worry is that if we allow some riff-raff back in, then other riff-raff might get the same idea. *cough* BillO! *cough*

Now, I for one, value anyone's and everyone's right to speak their opinion. It helps generate debate and no one should ever be silenced. But as long as it's done constructively and with thought. It seemed to me (and others), that both of these offenders trolled half the time, cruising the Sift boulevards, looking for attention...regardless of whether it was good or bad attention. If they've matured and can be decent members of the community again, then by all means. But if they can't go a week without getting their panties in a twist, then I say keep the lock on the gate.

^Well, then I still think you say the same thing: If everybody acted as they should according to the bible, then everybody would be perfect and everything would be nice. Your assumption, which I assume is because BillO does the same, is flawed, because it really doesn't say that.

I agree that laws, moral codes etc. can always only be guidelines - no one is perfect, we're all flawed to some degree, so no matter what we believe we will always break some rules.

That's all well and good, except it really doesn't try to persuade people to be nice to each other. Sure, there are parts about that, but there are parts about stoning, slaves and a lot of retarded shit too. A Christian is someone who follows the Christian bible, not who follows some of it - otherwise you're just making it up as you go along and then you're not really Christan, but, well, for lack of a better word, neo-christian or pseudo-christian.

>> ^dannym3141:
>> ^videosiftbannedme:
BillO's argument stated at 1:50, is that if everyone followed the teachings of Jesus, that everyone would love one another, and it would by idyllic. Ergo, that insinuates that most crime is done by Athiests and non-Christians. But 76% of the U.S. follows Christianity or some derivative. So he's trying to state that most of the crime is committed by the remaining 24%? He's a fucking moron.

I'm not a Christian, i'm just relatively intelligent and i like to think i can see arguments from different angles.
You've made a schoolboy error in reasoning here. People who commit crime MAY claim to adhere to christian values, but they clearly don't by dint of comitting a crime. So take every single one of the 76% who claim to be christians, and if they are not peace loving, turn the other cheek, live and let live, etc. then they are NOT christians.
I mean i get what he's trying to say. The bible tries to persuade people to be nice to each other.. - well, it didn't and needed heavy editing, but for now let's just say it encourages living in harmony - .. and if everyone - literally every single person on the earth - lived by those standards, then the world would be peaceful and cooperative and a wonderful sight to behold for people who want peace. People who want enlightenment, however, perhaps not.
But it's like communism - it'd work if everyone was perfect, right? In fact, we wouldn't need much government, law, police, armed forces, locks on our doors or ANYTHING if everyone was perfect.
And like i always say - i don't NEED the bible to persuade me to treat others how i want to be treated, to be generous and kind and caring, to try and make a better world. I can do that on my own because I WANT TO.
That is such a devastating argument to high and mighty christians who tell me that their code teaches them to be angelic in nature and to not live in sin. I tell them so does mine, and not only did i come up with it all by myself, but i don't need the promise of a reward in the afterlife to do it AND KEEP DOING IT.

>> ^videosiftbannedme:
BillO's argument stated at 1:50, is that if everyone followed the teachings of Jesus, that everyone would love one another, and it would by idyllic. Ergo, that insinuates that most crime is done by Athiests and non-Christians. But 76% of the U.S. follows Christianity or some derivative. So he's trying to state that most of the crime is committed by the remaining 24%? He's a fucking moron.


I'm not a Christian, i'm just relatively intelligent and i like to think i can see arguments from different angles.

You've made a schoolboy error in reasoning here. People who commit crime MAY claim to adhere to christian values, but they clearly don't by dint of comitting a crime. So take every single one of the 76% who claim to be christians, and if they are not peace loving, turn the other cheek, live and let live, etc. then they are NOT christians.

I mean i get what he's trying to say. The bible tries to persuade people to be nice to each other.. - well, it didn't and needed heavy editing, but for now let's just say it encourages living in harmony - .. and if everyone - literally every single person on the earth - lived by those standards, then the world would be peaceful and cooperative and a wonderful sight to behold for people who want peace. People who want enlightenment, however, perhaps not.

But it's like communism - it'd work if everyone was perfect, right? In fact, we wouldn't need much government, law, police, armed forces, locks on our doors or ANYTHING if everyone was perfect.

And like i always say - i don't NEED the bible to persuade me to treat others how i want to be treated, to be generous and kind and caring, to try and make a better world. I can do that on my own because I WANT TO.

That is such a devastating argument to high and mighty christians who tell me that their code teaches them to be angelic in nature and to not live in sin. I tell them so does mine, and not only did i come up with it all by myself, but i don't need the promise of a reward in the afterlife to do it AND KEEP DOING IT.

Please observe that my opinions of christianity are not here stated. The bible does not necessarily try to teach people to be nice to each other. This is only a "benefit of the doubt" example.

Lol Dawkins actually got slightly pissed off , I think dawkins could answer back better in this situation. as a viewer if you were not educated you could perceive billo as being correct , obviously all his arguments are tired and often / easily disproven , / logically flawed.

I definatly think dawkins could have more eloquently argued with him , mind you dawkins was probably tired and could not be bothered to engage in conversation with sum one so utterly retarded, and at least he got to plug his book.

I took screenshots of Dawkins' reactions to BillO, at 1:49 when he said that Jesus provides a moral framework for humanity while science does not, and at 4:12 when he uses the term "fascism" in a sense with which even Mussolini wouldn't agree.

HILARIOUS!

BillO's argument stated at 1:50, is that if everyone followed the teachings of Jesus, that everyone would love one another, and it would by idyllic. Ergo, that insinuates that most crime is done by Athiests and non-Christians. But 76% of the U.S. follows Christianity or some derivative. So he's trying to state that most of the crime is committed by the remaining 24%? He's a fucking moron.

BillO: I don't know all the answers, so there must be a God and we should teach that in science classes.

Dawkins: Science isn't about belief; it's about evidence.

BillO: You're a fascist.

she's certainly not as un-biased as many would have you believe, but imagine if the other news channel conducted interviews like this.

well, nevermind, i like making fun of BillO.

Why is it that whenever a media personality asks a question about a critical report he/she just did and then says "you tell me", i want to fucking punch them in the face so hard every single time.
It's usually Billo, but it's always equally infuriating for it's suggestive expected response, which if you fail to provide, makes you a bad person.

BillO: "I didn't say Obama was socialist!"

BillO's previous sentence: "They don't like his socialistic..."

Sounds to me like you were just about to tell us about how Obama's "socialistic" policies, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.

If you're going to be a hypocrite, try not to do so within consecutive sentences.

How many times is he going to say White Wing, or is it all the racism in this video?

Ugh... Billo is sick.