"I think we're seeing the definition of stupidity, where you keep doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result" - who does that remind anyone of.
Why is it that these guys ignore spirituality, i mean if it wasn't a part of human nature, why would we cling to it or even develop shamanism at the beginning of our history as sentient beings?
Ironically enough, these people have become more dogmatic in their belief to disprove God than any priest, imam, or rabbi in the history of human existence.
I also find it very irrational that atheists, who are supposed to just simply not care about religion at all, since they believe it's practiced by people who are deluding themselves, are spending more time pouring over the Bible than the vast majority of Christians.
Yeah, all the believers are bad and intolerants, we must relocate them on death camps and teaching the Absolute Truth (sarcasm). My God, you are equally fundamentalist and fanatical as the Taliban.
While I can't really agree with your mention of how Christianity, as I am one, and I don't feel as if religion in itself if a mental disorder and you put it out to be.
I do agree however, that it's really horrid how more and more people are willing to hack and abuse laws to silence views they don't agree with.
Yea, saying I'm diluted does offend, but you are entitled to that opinion, and I know there's parts of the bible that state to not do what they are trying to. I just suck at citing. >.>;
Yes indeed. The sooner religion is erradicated, and reasonable Atheist leaders like Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot can be given power the sooner the world will be a more enlightened place!
You say "Christian" as if there is something wrong with it. If that is the case then my point is made for me - intolerance of people who believe differently than you. Stalinesque ideas all the way.
I would like to point out that Mental Illness stigma comes from theism more specifically, the book of Mark in the New Testament 1-20 in it the bible talks about a man cutting himself with stones. If you read carefully you can pick up that the book of Mark is talking about schizophrenia which leads me to this point. I don't believe that an athiest would perpetuate an attitude about Mental Illness that was created by theists. "thinkers" would move away from that thought.
Sheesh!! Dude...this is over the top. Treating melsbasketcase like this is about as justified as drop kicking a kitten into a piranha tank just to teach it a lesson for scratching at you.
I really hate how atheists have such a disgstingly huge superiority complex and feign intelligence with a large vocabulary. If uniform religion is such a parasite and cancer on the world, why have athiest dictars killed over 130 million people in the past century? Does Stalin ring a bell? I guess thats what happens when you fight one form of thinking with intolerance.
It also seems kind of ironic that the "biggest atheists" seem to have a bigger bible belt than the average GOP voter, haha.
where did you get 130 million from?stalin was responible for about 20 million so where does the rest come from?religion is just a govenment tool to keep people in line.also,how meany deaths do you think religion is responsible for?
Talk about a grandiose disorder, what's your real last name there? I hear it's not Sapient. You have no knowledge. She should take you to court for using her image on your video and trying to diagnose her. No education in your videos. Your a jerk.
Use your own definitions, live by them. You just spout the same shit time and time again and you get nowhere each time. Intermingled in this is some citing of a bullshit court case and some fucking psychologist that no one cares about. You fail.
Oh, and citing "Wikipedia" as a reference really means you're grasping at straws. Don't tell me to "go look it up"... fuck you. I'm not going to do your work for you. If you have a point, make it. If not, shut the fuck up.
You fail wretchedly not only at fighting fundies (with fundamentalism), but also, since you're such an Internet Tough Guy, I think I'll say something that will most definitely offend you. For the lulz of course.
Jesus loves you. ;D Go play with your "powerful friends" now.
"She in turn accused us of twisting her words, which is not what we did..." Protip: If the person who WROTE the definition tells you you're doin' it wrong...then YER DOIN' IT WRONG!!!!
Wow, thanks for giving everyone evidence that atheists are hypocrites. And you are not just slightly hypocritical, you are the text book definition. You and your whole retarded group.
I hope you'll be glad to know that in one year from now, nobody will ever remember who you are or what your group is. Hell, 5 minutes form now I'll forget I even called you out. Good job being a stupid dick, and have a nice life wasting it like this.
if you want to believe in something (or in this case, NOT believe) do that...
but for the love of FUCK, dont shove it down other peoples throat, please?
this isnt a criticism, this isnt against you, I just have enough bullshit being thrown at me from theists (of all religions) and atheists also, ok? K.....One day people will realise that theres more to life than bitching on youtube....I hope...
First, I'd like to thank you for bringing me a good laugh.
Your organization and it's acts have probably prompted more atheists to religion out of sheer embarrassment of being associated with you than it has theists to atheism. It should come as no surprise that other organizations and people do not want to be associated with you. I'm sure you hate nothing more than to see someone pushing religion on another. Ever stop to think, "well, maybe that works both ways?"
Such Delusions of Grandeur... "we have powerful friends"... Listen, Brian, you want people like me locked up. If you think I'm frightened of you, I'm not, anymore than I'm frightened of people who threaten to kill me IRL around this neighborhood.
...not that I support Brian or his followers in any way but...why are you getting death threats? Don't tell me you're involved in any Westboro bullshit church insanity now.
Uh, no... you made a pretty dumb assumption. I live in a neighborhood that has a high crime rate. It wasn't all that long ago I was the victim of a robbery. They caught the guy and he thinks he can intimidate me. Make sense now?
Melinda is responsible for her actions. Brian's video clip was short enough to be fair use, but his counterclaim would have failed, because Melinda made her claim in good faith thinking that he was violating copyright, without realizing all the fine details of copyright. (Details which even Brianiac has gotten wrong and been corrected by ppl in comments.)
I wasn't being sarcastic when I wrote: "I'm pretty sure you agree that there are some valid problems people have that psychiatry attempts to solve." So no strawman there.
Your silence re: stigma is effectively an answer to my main question though.
LOL, yeah, I wanted you to provide an appeal to authority instead of evidence. It should be reasonable to expect evidence or give evidence without it always being seen as an appeal to authority.
The thing that really eats at my craw is that I had hopes after RRS got victoriously reinstated on YT that RRS would become a noteworthy force. Instead, you stupidly took on melsbasketcase to feud with and made yourself and everyone associated with you look like idiots. If that were not bad enough, you are trying to make the absurd case that anyone who has religious faith is mentally ill. You are making RRS into a laughingstock. What an ignominious waste of opportunity.
You should forget about taking any kind of legal action against Mels because she should not be held responsible for her actions. You are just showing us how psychiatry can be used as a weapon to discredit people. All psychiatry is good for is to torture people and abuse human rights.
You think that coherence or psychosis may come and go, but the other symptoms are permanent? Again, that's the kind of thing someone would say if their understanding came from reading part of the DSM or other textbooks, not from experience with real people. But you believe the diagnoses are subjective anyway, so pointless for you to argue about it.
I am an agnostic atheist. I respect the work that you're trying to do overall, but you are never going to validate the atheist position by making atheists look like fanatical anti-religious assholes. Reason is a tool to serve our needs and desires, and little more than that... be careful how you use it, or in what you use it for... "When you stare into the abyss, the abyss also stares into you."
From my understanding, Mels thinks that your use of her footage doesn't fall under "Fair Use," in they way you exploit her handicaps in an attempt to validate your worn out "claim" that theism is a mental disorder. This is not a cut-and-dry legal case.
It would be possible to successfully argue that your use constituted placing her in a false light (a tort action), defamation (false statement of fact intended to damage reputation - a tort action), or intentional infliction of emotional distress (yet another tort). Any of these claims, if successful, would pierce whatever "fair use" status you may have otherwise enjoyed.
When I was a kid I believed in Santa Claus, but I wouldn't consider myself delusional during those years. That type of belief is learned, just like religion, and not manifested in a person's mind like a true delusion.
oh and if you're going to threaten someone at least how to spell their name in the description retard. I dont give a shit how poweful you think you are. Learn to spell.
Yep, we knew Pearl Harbor was going to happen and let it happen all fools that say differently are wrong. We let Pearl Harbor happen because our people were against the war. This is why tv is obsolete.
I have been a supporter of the Rational response squad, precisely because it has been rational. Fighting this little fish--melsbasketcase--is not worth the effort.
No, you don't, because your analogy is ridiculous. Sin is a question go absolutes, whereas clinical levels of distress, anxiety, delusion, etc, are a question of degree. It's about how it affects/effects them and their lives. And the DSM referencing biological basis on Some things doesn't mean it refers it to all. Are you slow or just willingly illogical?
... (cont'd) Whether or not we can agree on terminology for mental illness or proper treatment, I would have thought you could tear yourself away from hating psychiatry for a moment, just long enough to tell RRS that using mental illness stigma for rhetorical purposes to diss people he disagrees with is about as rational as the Soviet Union locking up dissidents in mental hospitals. I guess you've been trying to get that across, but it doesn't show through much.
jeywolf, through your comments here and on Brian's forum, you seem more concerned about denying psychiatry than you are about this obvious instance of a person using the stigma of mental illness to smear people they disagree with. I'm pretty sure you agree that there are some valid problems people have that psychiatry attempts to solve.
YT doesn't make it easy to complain about violations of code of conduct. Apparently the main way they prefer to be contacted is by users flagging videos. They list no email contact, and don't seem too worried about anything other than copyrt violations.
"csmisery, those were all weak ad hominem technique so they don't count."
As for RRSresponds this thread is NOTHING but argumentum ad hominem, ad captandum par nauseam, ad astra per alia porci. I find one or two borderline but for the most part the theme is, to paraphrase, if you were smarter you would understand.
After the door has been opened to using ad hominems, then I can't always resist stooping to that level. Why bother after that point? It's not like a reasonable or logical debate is likely after Brian breaks out the insults. Might as well skip the pretext of logic and fight dirty.
Yes, but I'm saying, not necessarily. I'll agree that most psychiatric treatment is abusive and wrong, but cross-referencing of extensive case studies have made for fairly solid profiling. What this information is used for is a different story altogether.
Oh, oh, akumakhan, but we can't trust that "cross-referencing of extensive case studies have made for fairly solid profiling" because pharmaceuticals make profit, and they have a motive to skew all their studies! (I'm being sarcastic. I'm with you, but this is the kind of response you're likely to get from jeywolf. We're all buying in to the "religion" of psychiatry when we believe those studies.)
I have removed the reposted RRS video that was featured on my Utube site (that your organization requested be reposted, as stated on your RRS website.) I unsubed from your acct and I've deleted sev of your videos from my favs. Due to the videos and comments you have recently made, I find that I am no longer able to offer my support to your organization.
No particular treatment inevitably follows a diagnosis. To claim such is similar to the creationists who suggest that a belief in Darwinism naturally leads to murderous eugenics programs.
What a fuckhead you've turned to Sapient. Talking about suing some girl because she'll DMCA you. Obviously she's not a lawyer and doesn't understand things pretty well, so the likely outcome is a judge will throw away your frivolous lawsuit. Seriously, do you think this is the best way to spend your resources?
I'm not saying her DMCA you is right, but there is a process designed to know if what has been done is right or not. Also, you've degraded yourself into a wannabe gang banger talking about having all these powerful people behind you. Get over your own grandiose delusion.
Hmmm. Which do you think has been more unkind to homosexuals, Christianity or psychiatry? The difference is that psychiatry will at least use observation and revise its position. I agree that the treatment of psychiatric disorders has a long way yet to go, but I think RRS makes an excellent case for the legitimacy of the use of the word "delusion" describing religious minds.
You may have or may not have been in the legal right to use Mel in that way. But, doing it made YOU disgusting and despicable! You should have had more sense.
RRS had just started to gain a modicum of respect. He just blew it all by acting stupidly when acting stupidly was not in any way needed to make the point he was arguing.
This was a totally wasted opportunity. His bad judgement set the RRS back incalculably. He has grabbed defeat from the jaws of victory and made the RRS a laughing stock.
That, was was worded weirdly. Here. Some psychologists, though usually it is mostly usually psychiatrists, claim that mental disorder has biological basis. You're clearly clueless about the two fields if you believe that psychology is based upon biological roots.
Your pseudo-philosophic defnition doesn't hold any water, but you should already know that. Doesn't tangibly measure? Sure, I suppose that empirical evidence from controlled testing amounts to nothing. Get educated.
JS, if you'd like to join in this separate topic, I have a few videos titled "Common Fallacies of Psychiatry Deniers". Jeywolf made a video response and has been trying to tell me why they were all or mostly wrong.
Why is it that atheists and theists seem to have more drama on YouTube than any queen I've ever known?...at least gay people don't bully people because we've suffered enough of it. There is nothing rational about this drama at all especially when half of YouTube is snickering at it (btw-RRS you're coming out as the vitriolic ass to the bystanders).
...And what are you, the voice of the entire YouTube community? Where did you dig up this remarkable consensus information? RRS comes off as a "vitriolic ass" to the bystanders for not standing back to allow their videos to be taken down?
"at least gay people don't bully people because we've suffered enough of it." I guess you're saying you're gay? How would like if you were constantly attacked by heteros trying to stop you from claiming that gays can lead a healthy moral existence? Would you fight back like a "vitriolic ass", or would you shut up to appease these imaginary "snickering bystanders" of yours?
akumakhan: a sockpuppet is not going to drag me into this drama. That said, my final statement is the DSM once classified homosexuality as a disorder and I take issue with using the DSM so recklessly. RRS has long lost all sense of decency, so I decline to give them or their sockpuppets, the diginty of any further response.
jrsnyderjr: Nobody's "dragging" you into anything. Nobody solicited you for a comment, yet to reply is beneath your dignity? There is nothing "reckless" about using the DSM for diagnostics, imperfect though it may be. (You also failed to explain where you got your YouTube consensus info.)
I am an atheist and I think you have an initial point but you come off as really self-righteous about this and mean-spirited toward anyone that doesn't agree with you. It really weakens the argument.
Learn logic. Mean spirits and self righteousness do absolutely nothing to the validity of the argument. If you think so, then you've been exposed as a poor thinker (atheist or theist).
I'm talking about perception not logic. Your argument may hold true but if you come off as an asshole, nobody will give a shit. Learn social responsibility and P.R. if you're trying to convince people of your cause/argument. This combative attitude does nothing to make you look intelligent.
I think you could have expressed your ideas quite well without using clips from Mel. I think you should remove the video as a simple courtesy to her. Just because you CAN do something does not mean that it is always a good idea to do it. This is one such example. In no way will that keep you from expressing the ideas you are trying to put forward.
Who knows, if Mels had pm'ed Brian and let him know that using a clip from her vid upset her and asked that he remove the clip instead of threatening to lodge a false DMCA maybe we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Youtubers commonly use other peoples vids including Mels
Who knows, if Brian had asked permission to repeat a clip of her vid, she might have agreed. If he had asked this before calling her delusional and invoking all the stereotypes you'd expect from an ignoramus.
I understand as her mate you take any supposed slight against her more deeply then you would take a similar supposed slight against yourself, I really do understand that but I also see that Mels and friends have blown a 30 second unedited clip into so much more then it is. Does Mels always ask before she uses content from other users?
That's your decision RRS didn't ask you to but I image anyone who was following the drama has probably already seen it. Melsbasket another question is part of the reason you are so angry with the RRS the abuse you suffered from others on youtube? Could you perhaps be over reacting and taking what is IMO an honest debate as an attack?
You think she made it private so that nobody would see her husbands repetitve hypocrisy? Or do you think it's because her husband made 30 comments on it criticizing her fair use and whining that she never asked permission?
I do not use ohter people's vids. You are wrong and wrong and wrong. I have the Rabidape video up with permission to everyone. I have put the RRS audio video on private.
Melsbasketcase have you ever used anyone else's material, video, voices in the past including the vids you removed when making a vid without asking? Would you be so angry if the RRS was making the claim but not using your unedited clip? Didn't you make a vid about religion and mental illness earlier this year? I am not trying to fight with you just asking.
I appreciate you being honest about that I really do. I know you have no idea what kind of person I am or if I am someone to give a second thought about but honestly I don't think RRS in anyway meant to insult you with the vid Brian made.
We didn't mean to insult her in any way more than we would insult any theist. In fact I had a lot of respect for her research attempts (even though it was wiki). A real prick could've have been a total ass about how she acts on cam. I took the high road, and because the delusions run so deep in the deid-mels household they tricked themselves into a false reality.
"I took the high road, and because the delusions run so deep in the deid-mels household they tricked themselves into a false reality."
Please explain specifically what delusions you have observed in Melinda or me. She has admitted having delusions before (the real, clinically diagnosed kind, not armchair Freuds diagnosing her on YouTube), but what behavior have you seen that you could reasonably classify as delusional?
"...delusions run so deep in the deid-mels household..." This is the clearest example so far of how you apply psychiatric terms as an insult to people who disagree with you. What have I done that you diagnose as delusional? Even your theism=delusion charge doesn't apply because I'm an atheist and Melinda isn't sure what to call herself right now. Disagreeing with you persistently does not constitute "delusion." It is massively multiplayerly common behavior on the internets.
"A real prick could've have been a total ass about how she acts on cam. I took the high road..." Anyone who has read your comments can see that you only took the high road for more 12 or 24 hours before you started talking about Melinda's facial tics. I guess that would make you a "real prick" and a "total ass," by your own diagnosis.
"In fact I had a lot of respect for her research attempts (even though it was wiki)"
"I took the high road, and because the delusions run so deep in the deid-mels household they tricked themselves into a false reality"
a) You used WIKI in this video to site A. Munro. Ad hominem tu quoque! And without the proper citation, and truncating "features" (of a delusional disorder)
b) Objection was defended with accusations of stupidity.
Had mels told me before a few comments and no vid responses were posted I would have in fact gladly taken it down. Mels delusions prevented her from seeing that she would be stifling conversation, and was more concerned with herself and how she appeared. Yet her appearance was no different, in fact it made her look better than all of her other material.
"Mels delusions prevented her from seeing that she would be stifling conversation..."
Because you don't have the editing skills to say the same damn things without redundantly replaying her clip? Yours was posted as a video response, so presumably anyone watching yours would have seen hers, or know that you were responding to hers. Stop being disingenuous about how it would have "stifled" your important words to edit that bit out.
I think I asked this somewhere else, Brian, but maybe I haven't read your reply. You keep talking about Melinda's delusions, as if she is currently symptomatic. Are you saying she's delusional because she's theist? Because she's not. Or are you seeing some behavior, in the handful of videos she made lately, that shows she is now delusional? Does the fact of a person disagreeing with you qualify them as being delusional?
"Just because you CAN do something does not mean that it is always a good idea to do it."--and this is the crux of it, I think. For all of their "booksmarts", Brian and Kelly did not show a hell of a lot of actual intelligence or maturity. Cross-Reference: Oppositional Defiant Disorder.
Melinda has been spiralling into a bad hole of disagreeing with you. You enjoyed her views in the past because they did not yet conflict with yours. I don't believe for a nanosecond that you feel bad. This is the kind of disingenuous shit I see all the time from ppl using mental illness as an insult in some debate, then turning around and saying, "I'm sincerely concerned. You need to get some help so you can agree with me that Bush is the best prez evar."
Her point is that religion is not the same as delusion. For those of us who have had mental illness and actual delusions, it is insulting to have people try to claim that religion is the same as what happens with mental illness. It is not the same...and this is why the APA would never put religion in the DSM.
If NAMI or the DSM agreed with your claims, it would only give you another appeal to authority. It wouldn't necessary make your claims true. Reasonable people should still question what NAMI or the DSM claim, just like they questioned and eventually overturned the consensus belief about homosexuality in the past.
Theism is not, and that is also not Brian's point in the end. In the end, his point is that the theism of individuals does reach clinically delusional levels without the statistically rare or culturally unexpected qualifer being applied. It Is mental disorder and it Is delusion.
The above statement is another chance for anyone who lied and stated that JSresponds "pwned" us to now admit you were wrong. Go ahead... dishonest shitbags.
You didn't show her in a flattering light. You should just not pick on Mel. It isn't nice. You should also not lump Mel in with a bunch of right wing christians, because mel is not like those people. She didn't even do anything, she was just mad.
Jesus Christ, there is no way to show mel in a flattering light. Any twitch or odd expression she gives shows up every few seconds. It is you who is making fun of her by saying she was painted in a negative light. We simply used the part of importance, there are odd twitches every few seconds. Damn you assholes for making me debunk you as you force me to speak the truth which is: Mel looks bad all by herself, she doesn't need my help.
You are the one who is an asshole. I wasn't talking about any twitches or how she literally appeared physically in the video for your information. And it is your opinion that Mel looks bad, not mine!
Dude, that's just really rude. Do you speak this way to people you know? Do you come up to anyone who is a little eccentric and tell them they're ugly? Boo!
Fuck you Brian. You make retarded "art house" videos where your face is half in and half out or the light is deemed and the camera is between your crotch like the viewer on youtube is giving you head. Like you're some kind of goddamn creative personality. You're supposed to be selling your bullshit, half-assed ideas, not your personality you narcissistic prick.
"Mel looks bad all by herself, she doesn't need my help."
So what you are telling us is you elected to use Mel's footage because you believed she looked bad enough to prove your point? And you wonder why there is some moral objection?
you are sooooo boring buddyyyy lol xxx dee uk xxx
slinkyminnxy 7 months ago
Wow, a world ruled by atheists doesn't really seem that different :|
Darkfoxle 11 months ago
"I think we're seeing the definition of stupidity, where you keep doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result" - who does that remind anyone of.
extremepietbh 1 year ago
Atheist here.
These guys are a everything they claim to hate.
Just look at the indicators of delusion that start scrolling at 1:12.
They are many of these things, and the irony is lost on them.
darkkarma 1 year ago
Why is it that these guys ignore spirituality, i mean if it wasn't a part of human nature, why would we cling to it or even develop shamanism at the beginning of our history as sentient beings?
notmack 2 years ago
Buddhism rocks. It helped me a lot in life.
PancakeRecipes 2 years ago
I support the video response by thequantumflux (and heatherlynblu).
xxxild 3 years ago
Ironically enough, these people have become more dogmatic in their belief to disprove God than any priest, imam, or rabbi in the history of human existence.
I also find it very irrational that atheists, who are supposed to just simply not care about religion at all, since they believe it's practiced by people who are deluding themselves, are spending more time pouring over the Bible than the vast majority of Christians.
AugustusRomanorum 3 years ago 4
People who think differently must be mad? We've heard it before .:/
NotedStrangePerson 3 years ago
Yeah, all the believers are bad and intolerants, we must relocate them on death camps and teaching the Absolute Truth (sarcasm). My God, you are equally fundamentalist and fanatical as the Taliban.
Herr12 3 years ago 3
While I can't really agree with your mention of how Christianity, as I am one, and I don't feel as if religion in itself if a mental disorder and you put it out to be.
I do agree however, that it's really horrid how more and more people are willing to hack and abuse laws to silence views they don't agree with.
Yea, saying I'm diluted does offend, but you are entitled to that opinion, and I know there's parts of the bible that state to not do what they are trying to. I just suck at citing. >.>;
Firestorm2900 3 years ago
everything about this is so full of irony there's almost no space for all the bullshit
trollcatt 3 years ago
Keep up the good work rational response squad, don't let them stop you.
firesdeal1 3 years ago
Yes indeed. The sooner religion is erradicated, and reasonable Atheist leaders like Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot can be given power the sooner the world will be a more enlightened place!
Gorzakk 3 years ago 2
wow religon sympathiser are we? Christian?
firesdeal1 3 years ago
You say "Christian" as if there is something wrong with it. If that is the case then my point is made for me - intolerance of people who believe differently than you. Stalinesque ideas all the way.
Gorzakk 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
There is something wrong about being a christian, its that it is stupid. :)
firesdeal1 3 years ago
Mr Sapient,
I would like to point out that Mental Illness stigma comes from theism more specifically, the book of Mark in the New Testament 1-20 in it the bible talks about a man cutting himself with stones. If you read carefully you can pick up that the book of Mark is talking about schizophrenia which leads me to this point. I don't believe that an athiest would perpetuate an attitude about Mental Illness that was created by theists. "thinkers" would move away from that thought.
acousticfreeze 3 years ago
Because Atheism isn't a belief itself.
Wait...
blahmaen 3 years ago 2
ok mr know it all
yeshua121 3 years ago
Sheesh!! Dude...this is over the top. Treating melsbasketcase like this is about as justified as drop kicking a kitten into a piranha tank just to teach it a lesson for scratching at you.
Geodge 3 years ago
Tits or GTFO
PuppySandwiches 3 years ago
Oh, and for anyone wondering: Dictar wasn't a typo. :]
xAfroDuckx 4 years ago
I really hate how atheists have such a disgstingly huge superiority complex and feign intelligence with a large vocabulary. If uniform religion is such a parasite and cancer on the world, why have athiest dictars killed over 130 million people in the past century? Does Stalin ring a bell? I guess thats what happens when you fight one form of thinking with intolerance.
It also seems kind of ironic that the "biggest atheists" seem to have a bigger bible belt than the average GOP voter, haha.
xAfroDuckx 4 years ago
where did you get 130 million from?stalin was responible for about 20 million so where does the rest come from?religion is just a govenment tool to keep people in line.also,how meany deaths do you think religion is responsible for?
fatpants2000 4 years ago
It's only a very few Youtube Atheists that are like as you mentioned. Plus mosts theists that are like this.
anonymousrenegade666 3 years ago
religion is a paracite.muslims,jews,cristians,all religion is a crutch for weak-minded retards.
fatpants2000 4 years ago
Talk about a grandiose disorder, what's your real last name there? I hear it's not Sapient. You have no knowledge. She should take you to court for using her image on your video and trying to diagnose her. No education in your videos. Your a jerk.
lxndrtmmy 4 years ago
Use your own definitions, live by them. You just spout the same shit time and time again and you get nowhere each time. Intermingled in this is some citing of a bullshit court case and some fucking psychologist that no one cares about. You fail.
steviez33 4 years ago
Oh, and citing "Wikipedia" as a reference really means you're grasping at straws. Don't tell me to "go look it up"... fuck you. I'm not going to do your work for you. If you have a point, make it. If not, shut the fuck up.
steviez33 4 years ago
You're probably going to get assassinated at some point.
sosogood 4 years ago
You fail wretchedly not only at fighting fundies (with fundamentalism), but also, since you're such an Internet Tough Guy, I think I'll say something that will most definitely offend you. For the lulz of course.
Jesus loves you. ;D Go play with your "powerful friends" now.
Scorpiochess 4 years ago 4
I think Satan loves him more.
anonymousrenegade666 3 years ago
"She in turn accused us of twisting her words, which is not what we did..." Protip: If the person who WROTE the definition tells you you're doin' it wrong...then YER DOIN' IT WRONG!!!!
NightmareNewman 4 years ago
If there's nothing I like more than religious nuts, it's anti-religious nuts.
Is there any possible way you could smother yourselves in nougat and chocolate so that I can eat your nutty goodness?
entradaporfavor 4 years ago 2
WAH WAH I DON'T LIKE RELIGION WAH WAH
Someone needs a waaaaaaaaaambulance.
banopr 4 years ago
Wow, thanks for giving everyone evidence that atheists are hypocrites. And you are not just slightly hypocritical, you are the text book definition. You and your whole retarded group.
I hope you'll be glad to know that in one year from now, nobody will ever remember who you are or what your group is. Hell, 5 minutes form now I'll forget I even called you out. Good job being a stupid dick, and have a nice life wasting it like this.
mattblack04 4 years ago 3
I respect atheists. But you're fucking retarded.
YourCartoonHero 4 years ago 7
if you want to believe in something (or in this case, NOT believe) do that...
but for the love of FUCK, dont shove it down other peoples throat, please?
this isnt a criticism, this isnt against you, I just have enough bullshit being thrown at me from theists (of all religions) and atheists also, ok? K.....One day people will realise that theres more to life than bitching on youtube....I hope...
Cassiefur 4 years ago
Damn well said there!
Gorzakk 3 years ago
I'm an atheist and I think you're annoying as fuck.
YouTube activists are all retarded. Kill yourself.
RandomChris 4 years ago 9
First, I'd like to thank you for bringing me a good laugh.
Your organization and it's acts have probably prompted more atheists to religion out of sheer embarrassment of being associated with you than it has theists to atheism. It should come as no surprise that other organizations and people do not want to be associated with you. I'm sure you hate nothing more than to see someone pushing religion on another. Ever stop to think, "well, maybe that works both ways?"
dcsk8erkid 4 years ago
Such Delusions of Grandeur... "we have powerful friends"... Listen, Brian, you want people like me locked up. If you think I'm frightened of you, I'm not, anymore than I'm frightened of people who threaten to kill me IRL around this neighborhood.
Get over yourself.
waltherchemnitz 4 years ago
...not that I support Brian or his followers in any way but...why are you getting death threats? Don't tell me you're involved in any Westboro bullshit church insanity now.
NightmareNewman 4 years ago
Uh, no... you made a pretty dumb assumption. I live in a neighborhood that has a high crime rate. It wasn't all that long ago I was the victim of a robbery. They caught the guy and he thinks he can intimidate me. Make sense now?
waltherchemnitz 4 years ago
I believe members of the RSS suffer from monothematic delusions:
A monothematic delusion is a delusional state that only concerns one particular topic.
A bias of the belief formation cognitive process is required to solidify and maintain the delusion.
You are at the extreme end - becoming the thing you claim to fight against - delusional.
Journey247 4 years ago 3
haha. nice projecting there!
bdmjintx 4 years ago
Brian seriously get a life outside yt
chaotheist has owned your ass and you have become a fucking joke
noman953 4 years ago 4
Brian you really have the wrong Idea bud.
Iguess I very delusional yet again you dont see me acting like most people putting you or rrs down do you? nope
butch281972 4 years ago
Yeah, jumping off a cliff after someone is pretty much equivalent to responding in kind to their insults.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
80 percent of the world is theistic? Wow that seems high.
binsk 4 years ago
religiousadherents DOT com has it as high as 85%
RRSresponds 4 years ago
RRS, that figure is a bit padded - including "religions" who are indeed
a-theistic (no god belief) - such as Jainism, Buddhism, some forms of Hinduism, etc.
Then there are those who call themselves Christian, who are not - such as you were.
Calling a person retarded or stupid DOES NOT make you smart - you have a serious god complex which you need to deal with.
Journey247 4 years ago 2
you have no right to say who really was christian, and who wasn't. that doesn't change what they used to believe.
and no, calling someone stupid doesn't make you smart. but who said that it did?
bdmjintx 4 years ago
Melinda is responsible for her actions. Brian's video clip was short enough to be fair use, but his counterclaim would have failed, because Melinda made her claim in good faith thinking that he was violating copyright, without realizing all the fine details of copyright. (Details which even Brianiac has gotten wrong and been corrected by ppl in comments.)
deidzoeb 4 years ago
I wasn't being sarcastic when I wrote: "I'm pretty sure you agree that there are some valid problems people have that psychiatry attempts to solve." So no strawman there.
Your silence re: stigma is effectively an answer to my main question though.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
LOL, yeah, I wanted you to provide an appeal to authority instead of evidence. It should be reasonable to expect evidence or give evidence without it always being seen as an appeal to authority.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
The thing that really eats at my craw is that I had hopes after RRS got victoriously reinstated on YT that RRS would become a noteworthy force. Instead, you stupidly took on melsbasketcase to feud with and made yourself and everyone associated with you look like idiots. If that were not bad enough, you are trying to make the absurd case that anyone who has religious faith is mentally ill. You are making RRS into a laughingstock. What an ignominious waste of opportunity.
SSanf 4 years ago 2
Very good point.
doobiesmk 4 years ago
Brian, you're a douchebag.
doobiesmk 4 years ago
You should forget about taking any kind of legal action against Mels because she should not be held responsible for her actions. You are just showing us how psychiatry can be used as a weapon to discredit people. All psychiatry is good for is to torture people and abuse human rights.
robrobbins 4 years ago 2
You think that coherence or psychosis may come and go, but the other symptoms are permanent? Again, that's the kind of thing someone would say if their understanding came from reading part of the DSM or other textbooks, not from experience with real people. But you believe the diagnoses are subjective anyway, so pointless for you to argue about it.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
Where is the form? They give contact info for DMCA claims, but other than that it sounds like they want videos reported only through flagging them.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
My question wasn't to put down your argument, but to point out that you're clearly thinking irrationally. The qustion is why.
JSResponds 4 years ago
I am an agnostic atheist. I respect the work that you're trying to do overall, but you are never going to validate the atheist position by making atheists look like fanatical anti-religious assholes. Reason is a tool to serve our needs and desires, and little more than that... be careful how you use it, or in what you use it for... "When you stare into the abyss, the abyss also stares into you."
NeoPrometheus73 4 years ago 4
And, "Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster."
doobiesmk 4 years ago
From my understanding, Mels thinks that your use of her footage doesn't fall under "Fair Use," in they way you exploit her handicaps in an attempt to validate your worn out "claim" that theism is a mental disorder. This is not a cut-and-dry legal case.
NeoPrometheus73 4 years ago
It would be possible to successfully argue that your use constituted placing her in a false light (a tort action), defamation (false statement of fact intended to damage reputation - a tort action), or intentional infliction of emotional distress (yet another tort). Any of these claims, if successful, would pierce whatever "fair use" status you may have otherwise enjoyed.
NeoPrometheus73 4 years ago 2
When I was a kid I believed in Santa Claus, but I wouldn't consider myself delusional during those years. That type of belief is learned, just like religion, and not manifested in a person's mind like a true delusion.
Kromatix 4 years ago
oh and if you're going to threaten someone at least how to spell their name in the description retard. I dont give a shit how poweful you think you are. Learn to spell.
TheYakkie 4 years ago 2
Her name is Mel. Not Mes or whatever shit you typed in. You fucking rejects piss me off.
TheYakkie 4 years ago
of course you need a re: channel low life's usually do so they can spam more bullshit.
TheYakkie 4 years ago
You are a low life for bullying Mel.
You sir, are the lowest of lifeforms on YouTube.
TheYakkie 4 years ago 3
Yep, we knew Pearl Harbor was going to happen and let it happen all fools that say differently are wrong. We let Pearl Harbor happen because our people were against the war. This is why tv is obsolete.
J1Goro 4 years ago
Go fuck yourself Brian. Unlike you, melsbasketcase is a good person. Not a manipulative piece of shit like you.
martialdrake 4 years ago 3
This is not a fight you should bother with.
Melsbasketcase is NOT the CSE. Just let her be.
I have been a supporter of the Rational response squad, precisely because it has been rational. Fighting this little fish--melsbasketcase--is not worth the effort.
dfarmer1584 4 years ago
somthing is gonna happen to you
trustandbelieve 4 years ago
Something is going to happen to all of us eventually, here's hoping whatever happens to all of us is all good.
Ender1zero1 4 years ago
No, you don't, because your analogy is ridiculous. Sin is a question go absolutes, whereas clinical levels of distress, anxiety, delusion, etc, are a question of degree. It's about how it affects/effects them and their lives. And the DSM referencing biological basis on Some things doesn't mean it refers it to all. Are you slow or just willingly illogical?
JSResponds 4 years ago
I agree, youtube needs to show more backbone about this. It's a problem.
Beyond that, I think you live in denial. You make demeaning, dishonest, and hypocritical statements and expect better from those you attack.
TheGiantRobot 4 years ago
... (cont'd) Whether or not we can agree on terminology for mental illness or proper treatment, I would have thought you could tear yourself away from hating psychiatry for a moment, just long enough to tell RRS that using mental illness stigma for rhetorical purposes to diss people he disagrees with is about as rational as the Soviet Union locking up dissidents in mental hospitals. I guess you've been trying to get that across, but it doesn't show through much.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
jeywolf, through your comments here and on Brian's forum, you seem more concerned about denying psychiatry than you are about this obvious instance of a person using the stigma of mental illness to smear people they disagree with. I'm pretty sure you agree that there are some valid problems people have that psychiatry attempts to solve.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
"I don't think there's any legitimate use of psychiatry since I see it as a religion itself, and a harmful one at that."
Does that mean you see Peter Breggin as practicing the religion of psychiatry, since he still calls himself a psychiatrist?
deidzoeb 4 years ago
YT doesn't make it easy to complain about violations of code of conduct. Apparently the main way they prefer to be contacted is by users flagging videos. They list no email contact, and don't seem too worried about anything other than copyrt violations.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
"csmisery, those were all weak ad hominem technique so they don't count."
As for RRSresponds this thread is NOTHING but argumentum ad hominem, ad captandum par nauseam, ad astra per alia porci. I find one or two borderline but for the most part the theme is, to paraphrase, if you were smarter you would understand.
csemisery 4 years ago
After the door has been opened to using ad hominems, then I can't always resist stooping to that level. Why bother after that point? It's not like a reasonable or logical debate is likely after Brian breaks out the insults. Might as well skip the pretext of logic and fight dirty.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
Jeywolf, here's something else you & Brian missed from the DSM: "Furthermore, people with schizophrenia are not perpetually incoherent or psychotic."
You apparently haven't met enough schizophrenics either, if you think you can get a fully rounded understanding just by reading the DSM.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
"I said treatment follows diagnosis"
Yes, but I'm saying, not necessarily. I'll agree that most psychiatric treatment is abusive and wrong, but cross-referencing of extensive case studies have made for fairly solid profiling. What this information is used for is a different story altogether.
akumakhan 4 years ago
Oh, oh, akumakhan, but we can't trust that "cross-referencing of extensive case studies have made for fairly solid profiling" because pharmaceuticals make profit, and they have a motive to skew all their studies! (I'm being sarcastic. I'm with you, but this is the kind of response you're likely to get from jeywolf. We're all buying in to the "religion" of psychiatry when we believe those studies.)
deidzoeb 4 years ago
Pardon me. I apparently misinterpreted.
akumakhan 4 years ago
I have removed the reposted RRS video that was featured on my Utube site (that your organization requested be reposted, as stated on your RRS website.) I unsubed from your acct and I've deleted sev of your videos from my favs. Due to the videos and comments you have recently made, I find that I am no longer able to offer my support to your organization.
phenixwryter 4 years ago 5
If I could give you ten thumbs upses, I would.
doobiesmk 4 years ago
"The treatment follows a diagnosis."
No particular treatment inevitably follows a diagnosis. To claim such is similar to the creationists who suggest that a belief in Darwinism naturally leads to murderous eugenics programs.
akumakhan 4 years ago
What a fuckhead you've turned to Sapient. Talking about suing some girl because she'll DMCA you. Obviously she's not a lawyer and doesn't understand things pretty well, so the likely outcome is a judge will throw away your frivolous lawsuit. Seriously, do you think this is the best way to spend your resources?
TheBlindWatchmaker 4 years ago 6
I'm not saying her DMCA you is right, but there is a process designed to know if what has been done is right or not. Also, you've degraded yourself into a wannabe gang banger talking about having all these powerful people behind you. Get over your own grandiose delusion.
TheBlindWatchmaker 4 years ago 7
Gooood point!
doobiesmk 4 years ago
Hmmm. Which do you think has been more unkind to homosexuals, Christianity or psychiatry? The difference is that psychiatry will at least use observation and revise its position. I agree that the treatment of psychiatric disorders has a long way yet to go, but I think RRS makes an excellent case for the legitimacy of the use of the word "delusion" describing religious minds.
akumakhan 4 years ago
I think they would blame the treatment, not the diagnosis.
akumakhan 4 years ago
love the delusion definition. it describes many religious peoples (especially the over zealous ones) perfectly.
bdmjintx 4 years ago
You're a dick. I agree with fakesagan and chaotheist. You have no spine.
PoodleFury 4 years ago 8
You may have or may not have been in the legal right to use Mel in that way. But, doing it made YOU disgusting and despicable! You should have had more sense.
SSanf 4 years ago
Well, the issue here is the legal right. Whether it disgusts YOU or not is entirely irrelevant.
akumakhan 4 years ago
RRS had just started to gain a modicum of respect. He just blew it all by acting stupidly when acting stupidly was not in any way needed to make the point he was arguing.
SSanf 4 years ago 2
This was a totally wasted opportunity. His bad judgement set the RRS back incalculably. He has grabbed defeat from the jaws of victory and made the RRS a laughing stock.
What a darned shame.
SSanf 4 years ago 4
That, was was worded weirdly. Here. Some psychologists, though usually it is mostly usually psychiatrists, claim that mental disorder has biological basis. You're clearly clueless about the two fields if you believe that psychology is based upon biological roots.
JSResponds 4 years ago
Hahahahahaha. No. Some psychologists, usually psychiatrists, claim that it had a biological basis. You're clearly clueless about the two fields.
JSResponds 4 years ago
Your pseudo-philosophic defnition doesn't hold any water, but you should already know that. Doesn't tangibly measure? Sure, I suppose that empirical evidence from controlled testing amounts to nothing. Get educated.
JSResponds 4 years ago
JS, if you'd like to join in this separate topic, I have a few videos titled "Common Fallacies of Psychiatry Deniers". Jeywolf made a video response and has been trying to tell me why they were all or mostly wrong.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
I saw that you had those videos, but I don't have time to address them now. I'll visit them later.
JSResponds 4 years ago
Thanks, JSResponds. Whenever you get a chance to watch or comment, I'd love to see more.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
Why is it that atheists and theists seem to have more drama on YouTube than any queen I've ever known?...at least gay people don't bully people because we've suffered enough of it. There is nothing rational about this drama at all especially when half of YouTube is snickering at it (btw-RRS you're coming out as the vitriolic ass to the bystanders).
jrsnyderjr 4 years ago 3
...And what are you, the voice of the entire YouTube community? Where did you dig up this remarkable consensus information? RRS comes off as a "vitriolic ass" to the bystanders for not standing back to allow their videos to be taken down?
akumakhan 4 years ago
"at least gay people don't bully people because we've suffered enough of it." I guess you're saying you're gay? How would like if you were constantly attacked by heteros trying to stop you from claiming that gays can lead a healthy moral existence? Would you fight back like a "vitriolic ass", or would you shut up to appease these imaginary "snickering bystanders" of yours?
akumakhan 4 years ago
akumakhan: a sockpuppet is not going to drag me into this drama. That said, my final statement is the DSM once classified homosexuality as a disorder and I take issue with using the DSM so recklessly. RRS has long lost all sense of decency, so I decline to give them or their sockpuppets, the diginty of any further response.
jrsnyderjr 4 years ago
jrsnyderjr: Nobody's "dragging" you into anything. Nobody solicited you for a comment, yet to reply is beneath your dignity? There is nothing "reckless" about using the DSM for diagnostics, imperfect though it may be. (You also failed to explain where you got your YouTube consensus info.)
akumakhan 4 years ago
That truly isn't the case. I'll be making a video, probably later today, in which I will make an attempt at outlining the position.
JSResponds 4 years ago
*in response to what you said about Mel "twitch"ing*
l
l
v
kublakhan1816 4 years ago 3
The hole just gets deeper and deeper.
lirpa69 4 years ago
I am an atheist and I think you have an initial point but you come off as really self-righteous about this and mean-spirited toward anyone that doesn't agree with you. It really weakens the argument.
memnoker 4 years ago 8
Learn logic. Mean spirits and self righteousness do absolutely nothing to the validity of the argument. If you think so, then you've been exposed as a poor thinker (atheist or theist).
RRSresponds 4 years ago
"Mean spirits and self righteousness do absolutely nothing to the validity of the argument."
That's so true
"At least I don't have my head lodged in my ass, and am married to a woman who has an obsession with another man"
"You are a bigot!"
"I think I should right to NAMI about you."
"Once you understand our position you find it to be extremely valid"
"If that's what you think I said, I shall explain no further as you aren't intelligent enough to get it."
Stay rational ;)
csemisery 4 years ago 2
I'm talking about perception not logic. Your argument may hold true but if you come off as an asshole, nobody will give a shit. Learn social responsibility and P.R. if you're trying to convince people of your cause/argument. This combative attitude does nothing to make you look intelligent.
memnoker 4 years ago 3
fruitcake
Yagottabeshittingme 4 years ago
Sorry guys, I'm not spamming, I'm just verbose.
deidzoeb 4 years ago 2
It's enough already.
RRSresponds 4 years ago
I think you could have expressed your ideas quite well without using clips from Mel. I think you should remove the video as a simple courtesy to her. Just because you CAN do something does not mean that it is always a good idea to do it. This is one such example. In no way will that keep you from expressing the ideas you are trying to put forward.
SSanf 4 years ago
Who knows, if Mels had pm'ed Brian and let him know that using a clip from her vid upset her and asked that he remove the clip instead of threatening to lodge a false DMCA maybe we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Youtubers commonly use other peoples vids including Mels
Ender1zero1 4 years ago
Who knows, if Brian had asked permission to repeat a clip of her vid, she might have agreed. If he had asked this before calling her delusional and invoking all the stereotypes you'd expect from an ignoramus.
deidzoeb 4 years ago 2
I understand as her mate you take any supposed slight against her more deeply then you would take a similar supposed slight against yourself, I really do understand that but I also see that Mels and friends have blown a 30 second unedited clip into so much more then it is. Does Mels always ask before she uses content from other users?
Ender1zero1 4 years ago
I have put the video where I use RRS audio on private.
melsbasketcase 4 years ago 4
That's your decision RRS didn't ask you to but I image anyone who was following the drama has probably already seen it. Melsbasket another question is part of the reason you are so angry with the RRS the abuse you suffered from others on youtube? Could you perhaps be over reacting and taking what is IMO an honest debate as an attack?
Ender1zero1 4 years ago
You think she made it private so that nobody would see her husbands repetitve hypocrisy? Or do you think it's because her husband made 30 comments on it criticizing her fair use and whining that she never asked permission?
RRSresponds 4 years ago
I love you too, Brian.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
Wow. Just wow. You should put it back up.
RRSresponds 4 years ago
They are doing more harm to her than good. Mels friends aren't very good friends, they try, they're just not good at it. C for effort guys.
RRSresponds 4 years ago
This reminds me, I need to go ask the post office if it is ok to put a stamp on a letter. I know it's legal, but I should double check just in case.
RRSresponds 4 years ago
I do not use ohter people's vids. You are wrong and wrong and wrong. I have the Rabidape video up with permission to everyone. I have put the RRS audio video on private.
melsbasketcase 4 years ago 3
Melsbasketcase have you ever used anyone else's material, video, voices in the past including the vids you removed when making a vid without asking? Would you be so angry if the RRS was making the claim but not using your unedited clip? Didn't you make a vid about religion and mental illness earlier this year? I am not trying to fight with you just asking.
Ender1zero1 4 years ago
yes, i have.
melsbasketcase 4 years ago 3
I appreciate you being honest about that I really do. I know you have no idea what kind of person I am or if I am someone to give a second thought about but honestly I don't think RRS in anyway meant to insult you with the vid Brian made.
Ender1zero1 4 years ago
We didn't mean to insult her in any way more than we would insult any theist. In fact I had a lot of respect for her research attempts (even though it was wiki). A real prick could've have been a total ass about how she acts on cam. I took the high road, and because the delusions run so deep in the deid-mels household they tricked themselves into a false reality.
RRSresponds 4 years ago
"I took the high road, and because the delusions run so deep in the deid-mels household they tricked themselves into a false reality."
Please explain specifically what delusions you have observed in Melinda or me. She has admitted having delusions before (the real, clinically diagnosed kind, not armchair Freuds diagnosing her on YouTube), but what behavior have you seen that you could reasonably classify as delusional?
deidzoeb 4 years ago
"...delusions run so deep in the deid-mels household..." This is the clearest example so far of how you apply psychiatric terms as an insult to people who disagree with you. What have I done that you diagnose as delusional? Even your theism=delusion charge doesn't apply because I'm an atheist and Melinda isn't sure what to call herself right now. Disagreeing with you persistently does not constitute "delusion." It is massively multiplayerly common behavior on the internets.
deidzoeb 4 years ago 2
"A real prick could've have been a total ass about how she acts on cam. I took the high road..." Anyone who has read your comments can see that you only took the high road for more 12 or 24 hours before you started talking about Melinda's facial tics. I guess that would make you a "real prick" and a "total ass," by your own diagnosis.
deidzoeb 4 years ago 3
"In fact I had a lot of respect for her research attempts (even though it was wiki)"
"I took the high road, and because the delusions run so deep in the deid-mels household they tricked themselves into a false reality"
a) You used WIKI in this video to site A. Munro. Ad hominem tu quoque! And without the proper citation, and truncating "features" (of a delusional disorder)
b) Objection was defended with accusations of stupidity.
With all due respect, double foofoo on you.
Stay rational ;)
csemisery 4 years ago 2
csemisery: Brian needs to *achieve* rationality before he can *stay rational*.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
Had mels told me before a few comments and no vid responses were posted I would have in fact gladly taken it down. Mels delusions prevented her from seeing that she would be stifling conversation, and was more concerned with herself and how she appeared. Yet her appearance was no different, in fact it made her look better than all of her other material.
RRSresponds 4 years ago
"A real prick could've have been a total ass about how she acts on cam."
If you weren't a real prick, you wouldn't be mentioning it or her appearance (which is due to medication) now!
BTW, Mel we all think you are beautiful inside and out!
SSanf 4 years ago 3
"Mels delusions prevented her from seeing that she would be stifling conversation..."
Because you don't have the editing skills to say the same damn things without redundantly replaying her clip? Yours was posted as a video response, so presumably anyone watching yours would have seen hers, or know that you were responding to hers. Stop being disingenuous about how it would have "stifled" your important words to edit that bit out.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
I think I asked this somewhere else, Brian, but maybe I haven't read your reply. You keep talking about Melinda's delusions, as if she is currently symptomatic. Are you saying she's delusional because she's theist? Because she's not. Or are you seeing some behavior, in the handful of videos she made lately, that shows she is now delusional? Does the fact of a person disagreeing with you qualify them as being delusional?
deidzoeb 4 years ago
"Just because you CAN do something does not mean that it is always a good idea to do it."--and this is the crux of it, I think. For all of their "booksmarts", Brian and Kelly did not show a hell of a lot of actual intelligence or maturity. Cross-Reference: Oppositional Defiant Disorder.
doobiesmk 4 years ago 2
Glad to see you're standing up,just sorry Mel had to get into it. I always like her videos.
figmenttt 4 years ago
What I had seen of her before I had always enjoyed her views, I see her spiraling into a bad hole here and feel bad.
RRSresponds 4 years ago
Melinda has been spiralling into a bad hole of disagreeing with you. You enjoyed her views in the past because they did not yet conflict with yours. I don't believe for a nanosecond that you feel bad. This is the kind of disingenuous shit I see all the time from ppl using mental illness as an insult in some debate, then turning around and saying, "I'm sincerely concerned. You need to get some help so you can agree with me that Bush is the best prez evar."
deidzoeb 4 years ago 5
You are a wanker. Free Rabid Ape!
calvin8hobbs 4 years ago 2
Her point is that religion is not the same as delusion. For those of us who have had mental illness and actual delusions, it is insulting to have people try to claim that religion is the same as what happens with mental illness. It is not the same...and this is why the APA would never put religion in the DSM.
ichbinkeinberliner 4 years ago 6
How much you want to bet? And can we will the bet to our descendants if it doesn't happen in our lifetime?
I guarantee an expansion of delusional disorders to include more religious people by DSM-7, I think there's a shot for 6 as well.
RRSresponds 4 years ago
If NAMI or the DSM agreed with your claims, it would only give you another appeal to authority. It wouldn't necessary make your claims true. Reasonable people should still question what NAMI or the DSM claim, just like they questioned and eventually overturned the consensus belief about homosexuality in the past.
deidzoeb 4 years ago 4
Theism is not, and that is also not Brian's point in the end. In the end, his point is that the theism of individuals does reach clinically delusional levels without the statistically rare or culturally unexpected qualifer being applied. It Is mental disorder and it Is delusion.
JSResponds 4 years ago
The above statement is another chance for anyone who lied and stated that JSresponds "pwned" us to now admit you were wrong. Go ahead... dishonest shitbags.
RRSresponds 4 years ago
Wow, Brian, you're even disingenuous about what constitutes a lie.
deidzoeb 4 years ago
You didn't show her in a flattering light. You should just not pick on Mel. It isn't nice. You should also not lump Mel in with a bunch of right wing christians, because mel is not like those people. She didn't even do anything, she was just mad.
ichbinkeinberliner 4 years ago 7
Jesus Christ, there is no way to show mel in a flattering light. Any twitch or odd expression she gives shows up every few seconds. It is you who is making fun of her by saying she was painted in a negative light. We simply used the part of importance, there are odd twitches every few seconds. Damn you assholes for making me debunk you as you force me to speak the truth which is: Mel looks bad all by herself, she doesn't need my help.
RRSresponds 4 years ago
You are the one who is an asshole. I wasn't talking about any twitches or how she literally appeared physically in the video for your information. And it is your opinion that Mel looks bad, not mine!
ichbinkeinberliner 4 years ago 9
Dude, that's just really rude. Do you speak this way to people you know? Do you come up to anyone who is a little eccentric and tell them they're ugly? Boo!
ozjthomas 4 years ago 8
Fuck you Brian. You make retarded "art house" videos where your face is half in and half out or the light is deemed and the camera is between your crotch like the viewer on youtube is giving you head. Like you're some kind of goddamn creative personality. You're supposed to be selling your bullshit, half-assed ideas, not your personality you narcissistic prick.
kublakhan1816 4 years ago 2
"Mel looks bad all by herself, she doesn't need my help."
So what you are telling us is you elected to use Mel's footage because you believed she looked bad enough to prove your point? And you wonder why there is some moral objection?