« SkepDic weighs in | Main | Good »

July 15, 2005


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Yeah. “Blur the boundaries between good and evil and impair young readers' ability to distinguish between the two” my ass.

LOL. I laughed like a demon after I read this post, my irony metering device quickly shorted out at the start though, I will have to acquire a MUCH beefier model to keep up with this shit...

and dont forget that the bible teaches xenophobia, and makes genocide seem ok...

Speaking of literal interpretations of art, here's a funny article by Gene Weingarten about his visit to the National Gallery of Art:


At least he is joking. Or is he?

I love it.

Now, do you think the religious metaphorically challenged people will protest this winter's Chronciles of Narnia movie?
And if they do, how will they explain the christian faith of its author, C.S. Lewis?

"a catholic priest is hardly the best person to complain to about "subtle seductions" of children - they've been known to dabble themselves remember"

No, you are committing a logical fallacy here, known as the fallacy of composittion. Note the shift from singular - "a catholic priest" - to plural - "they've been known..".
If you still can't see it, replace "catholic priest" by "german" or "man" in the above.

On second thoughts, it might be the fallacy of aggregation. The idea is that assuming what is true for a group is also true for any memeber of the group is logically invalid, as is the converse.

Long off-topic ramble deleted by Skeptico.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search site