Bob Debates Author Gregory Flood, Round 2 Pt 2

[Jefferson]

Bob Debates Author Gregory Flood, Round 2 Pt 2

This is the show from Thursday August 2nd, 2007.

BEST QUOTE OF THE SHOW:

Apathy...is a form of hatred.

SUMMARY:

* Gregory Flood: the author of The Liar's Prayer, is back for more! Bob and Gregory discuss homosexuality, abortion, and the Bible in Part 2 of Round 2.

* More to follow: at a later date. The full unedited version of this debate will be available here on KGOV.com soon!

Today's Resource: Please see our BEL videos at our KGOV store or call us for our catalog at 800-8Enyart!

 

[SUTG]

Apathy is a form of hatred.

Hwwhhhat? How does this work?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

http://kgov.com/bel_56kbps/20070802Apathy...is a form of hatred.

More BEL blatherskite. Style over substance. That it works for so many is a testament to the nature of BEL's sycophantic audience.

Apathy is indifference. As soon as you move from indifference to overt action you are no longer apathetic. You have done so because of what your motivations were at the moment you do so. Apathy has been displaced. You are then something else, but certainly not apathetic.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Hwwhhhat? How does this work?

If I see you killing yourself, and I am apathetic towards you and let you kill yourself, clearly I don't like you very much.

That's pretty obvious isn't it?

 

[Mystery]

"He who spares his rod hates his son, But he who loves him disciplines him diligently."

 

[Lighthouse]

Apathy is not love, and since so many of you like to say hatred is the opposite of love, what does that make apathy?

 

[Stripe]

More BEL blatherskite. Style over substance. That it works for so many is a testament to the nature of BEL's sycophantic audience. Apathy is indifference. As soon as you move from indifference to overt action you are no longer apathetic. You have done so because of what your motivations were at the moment you do so. Apathy has been displaced. You are then something else, but certainly not apathetic.

I've searched, but it seems this is AMR's original work....

 

[SUTG]

If I see you killing yourself, and I am apathetic towards you and let you kill yourself, clearly I don't like you very much.

That's pretty obvious isn't it?

Well, if you are apathetic towards me, then it follows that you don't like me. It does not follow, however, that you dislike me or feel negatively towards me. As a matter of fact, if you were apathetic towards me, it would be contradictory to say that you disliked me.

To feel apathy towards something or someone means that you really don't have any strong feelings about it, positive or negative.

 

[Cracked]

Bob is a good debater - he should try to debate some folks that might be a little more competition though (haven't been too impressed by his opponents).

He should debate Katherine Jefferts Schori or Richard Dawkins - those would definately be worth tuning in to.

 

[Servo]

Bob is a good debater - he should try to debate some folks that might be a little more competition though (haven't been to impressed by his opponents).

He should debate Katherine Jefferts Schori or Richard Dawkins - those would definately be worth tuning in to.

Do you know any WORTHY opponents or have contact info? PM me and I may be able to get them on the show.

 

[SUTG]

Bob is a good debater - he should try to debate some folks that might be a little more competition though (haven't been too impressed by his opponents).

He should debate Katherine Jefferts Schori or Richard Dawkins - those would definately be worth tuning in to.

I agree, his opponents have been rather lame.

I'm not sure who Katherine Jefferts Schori is, but Richard Dawkins would never bother with Enyart.

 

[Jefferson]

I agree, his opponents have been rather lame.

I'm not sure who Katherine Jefferts Schori is, but Richard Dawkins would never bother with Enyart.

Wise choice. Dawkins' reputation would be shattered.

 

[Jefferson]

I agree, his opponents have been rather lame.

I'm not sure who Katherine Jefferts Schori is, but Richard Dawkins would never bother with Enyart.

If Dawkins is too cowardly to debate Enyart, how is that a poor reflection on Enyart?

 

[Stripe]

Wise choice. Dawkins' reputation would be shattered.

Dawkins isn't a very good debater.

 

[SUTG]

If Dawkins is too cowardly to debate Enyart, how is that a poor reflection on Enyart?

I don't agree with your premise that Dawkins is too cowardly to debate Enyart.

If he were too cowardly to debate Enyart, that would be a poor reflection on Dawkins, not on Enyart.

Dawkins has no reason to debate Enyart. He probably does not even know who he is. What would they have to debate about?

 

[Jefferson]

What would they have to debate about?

The existence of God.

 

[SUTG]

The existence of God.

Ah... that might be interesting but, again, it is doubtful that Dawkins would accept the debate. It isn't a case of 'chickening out', but just the fact that Dawkins probably gets lots of offers. Why would he bother with someone like Enyart?

 

[Lighthouse]

Ah... that might be interesting but, again, it is doubtful that Dawkins would accept the debate. It isn't a case of 'chickening out', but just the fact that Dawkins probably gets lots of offers. Why would he bother with someone like Enyart?

No. He's afraid, because he saw how Bob tore apart Zakath.

 

[SUTG]

No. He's afraid, because he saw how Bob tore apart Zakath.

I'm sure he was watching closely in between his duties at Oxford.

 

[Stripe]

There's a radio show where Dawkins gets torn apart by an Irish christian. That was brilliant listening even only for the accent.

Wish I could find it again...