SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the how-many-wrongs-does-it-take-to-make-a-right dept.
Common Dreams reports
In a much-hailed, if modestly problematic, act of righteous revenge, [on Thursday August 4,] an African-American inmate allegedly sucker-punched [...] Dylann Roof--an act that sparked much online praise for the "vigilante hero", a fundraiser for donations to his commissary account, and, finally, the posting of his $100,000 bond by a supporter.
Roof is in protective custody at the Charleston County Detention Center for killing nine African-American churchgoers in South Carolina in 2015. He was in the shower when Dwayne Stafford, a 26-year-old inmate reportedly doing time for either weed violations or strong arm burglary, allegedly got out of his cell, reached Roof, and landed a couple of punches to his face. The sheriff said Roof was attacked "for no reason", which many would argue was less than accurate.
Roof suffered only minor injuries, and his lawyer declined to press charges.
[...] The next day, 18 months after he'd originally been arrested, an anonymous supporter posted [Stafford's] bond, and on Friday he was reportedly freed.
I find that heavy.com typically has the facts quickly on violent crimes.
Previous: [Racially-Motivated Mass Murder in] Charleston, SC
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday August 10 2016, @08:56PM
Aaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahaha! Oh lordy let me catch my breath! Runaway, please, please, think before you link things like this. That entire article is predicated on a false premise: the idea that somehow the null hypothesis is an unduly privileged position.
If you've been paying attention at all you should know I've spent nearly a decade doing counter-apologetics, STARTING with Cornelius van Til's mind-bending presuppositionalist arguments. That is like learning to swim by bathing in BBQ sauce and jumping in the Amazon during piranha season, or learning Linux by beginning with Gentoo...which I ALSO did.
Incidentally, despite being from a Catholic group, that article comes dangerously close in spirit if not in form to presuppositionalism itself. It at least isn't outright accusing the infidel (which is ALL non-Christians here, not just atheists) of beginning the search hostile to their conclusion. This is unmitigated, ballsy bullshit. The rest of it a long series of small philosophical turds coated in chocolate; a wheedling, whiny, mock-conciliatory complaint that if those mean ol' infidels would just TRY a worldview which incorporated this conclusion they'd come to that conclusion. Naturally; it's really asking them to take it as axiomatic.
This is also committing one of the most common and dishonest bait-and-switches in the apologetic world; that is, arguing for an essentially Deist/generic-theist concept of God, and smuggling Yahweh the Genocidal Maniac in when it thinks no one is looking. There may be a God, and I think there is...but I also know that by the very definition of God Abrahamic theists use, the egomaniacal demon they worship is not and cannot be God.
I am amazed this piece of dreck was allowed to be published. Any sophomore philosophy undergrad ought to be able to shred it and fling it around like so much ticker tape.
Come back when you have an actual argument. I'm not insulted by this but only because you clearly are not competent to argue this and just posted the first thing that seemed like a good argument to you. May as well be angry at a little kid throwing a tantrum...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...