Comments on: beat

By: Gagan

Gagan — Tue, 15 Feb 2011 17:35:06 +0000

I am falling in love with the barmaid. Somebody help me.

By: Tom

Tom — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 13:28:03 +0000

Omnia vincit veritas – there is no dichotomy between truth and victory

By: Gangster99

Gangster99 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:07:12 +0000

Such an approach would entail different avenues of regional cooperation, including fulfilling immediate needs in terms of rec- onciliation initiatives, awareness building of the role of youth-serving NGOs, and nurturing existing national youth institutions and networks. ,

By: yelinna

yelinna — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 03:54:51 +0000

I love Barmaid!!

By: Han Fastolfe

Han Fastolfe — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:22:57 +0000

Mo’s remark that the purpose of having a debate is to win was, I believe, inspired by this little gem from Ibrahim Lawson, who’s debate with Philosopher Stephen Law has been appearing on Law’s blog for the last few months.

But letÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s not forget, the purpose of having an argument is to win; itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s only you rationalists who insist on the use of reason exclusively, and, like good catholics, have declared all other forms of argument heretical.

Read it here (if you have the stomach):
http://stephenlaw.blogspot.com/2008/02/ibrahim-lawson-responds-to-last-post.html

By: Mags from UK

Mags from UK — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 01:16:06 +0000

Debate has never been as good intentioned as Barmaid seems to say. First one side puts their case, then the other, then the floor is open for informed argument (we hope) after which the issue is voted on and a decision as to whose side wins is made. It means we may have to pretend to believe in something we don’t agree with… Hey ho, thats politics for you.

By: Kristian

Kristian — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:52:37 +0000

I do *like* barmaid’s comment in panel 3. It’s just not at all a common approach to debate. Certainly not in the semi-anonymous debates between believers and non-believers on the interweb.

By: Poor Richard

Poor Richard — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 16:00:12 +0000

Col. Leisure: I’ve never seen an atheian froth at the mouth. But we do clench our jaws a lot, trying to restrain ourselves.

By: Poor Richard

Poor Richard — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:30:49 +0000

rOOdbOOy: check out my response to you of March 6 — two or three strips back thataway. Bloody fun, I’m having; hope you are too.

Hey, I just got my printer working — I said a prayer, sacrificed a goat, and sent blessings to hp. But mainly I followed directions.

As PR says, “When all else fails, read the little paper there that came with that thing.”

By: Poor Richard

Poor Richard — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:22:31 +0000

Ayashi: I have an impression that religiious people, especially fundamentalists in all religions, don’t read anything. I have yet to meet a Christian literalist in the USA who seems to have read the Old Testament. They are perplexed when you mention god’s murderous habits and weird moral preferences. Don’t even mention that Adam and Eve and all their progeny get the death sentence simply for wanting to know a little bit of what daddy knows. And don’t get started on Revelation–that multi-orbed many-horned goat is going to be real trouble. When one of my funkie fundie friends says “God loves you,” it’s all I can do not to ask, “Where does it say that? Does he love me like he did Daniel?”

Watch out, kids!