@MGabeJKing @Sacerdotus yes but his block list is really the problem in my opinion.
— ASH: NTB (@nontheisticbhvr) August 5, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
The only problem is the abuse atheists and others do on Twitter. Twitter is not supposed to be a bully's playground. It was not meant to be used to harass others. The list highlights the accounts I have come across who misuse Twitter and are constantly suspended.
@Sacerdotus Then why the list? Why are you reporting all of these people? Is it because you cannot defend YOUR position?
— Brett M Wilcox (@17bbomb) August 3, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
The people on this list abuse Twitter and are constantly suspended as is. It is no different than a Sex Offender's list which exists to warn others. I have no problem defending my position; hence, I have so many ways to be contacted and constantly invite atheists to debate on my blog.
@RosaRubicondior has anyone heard from @support re:@sacerdotus's witch hunt? Didn't know I was on his list until I saw your blog! Thanks! :)
— Skeptical Park (@skepticalpark) August 3, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
This is no witch hunt silly. This is a list warning others of these trolls so they will not fall victim to their stupidity. Eventually, as everyone blocks these trolls, the latter will get tired of harassing because there will be no one to bother. Hopefully, suspensions will also change their online behavior. Support does not concern itself with links in tweets, see this:
https://twitter.com/TelfordAtheist/status/364423025715716097
This list was created by @Sacerdotus and includes an admission of violating Twitter's ToS. I know I'm reporting him. http://t.co/0IMoS4CvkQ
— Matthew Chatterton (@957Chatterton) August 5, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
There is no violation in making a list warning others of trolls. Twitter invites all to report abusive behavior. I made it easier for all by providing a list of known abusers. Support does nothing regarding warning others, see this:
https://twitter.com/TelfordAtheist/status/364423025715716097
The irony behind @Sacerdotus block list? His list is going to connect with each other and our follower count grows.
— Mah Feels (@IkkoIkkiReborn) August 2, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
One may find new follows there, but those on the list will be reported and eventually suspended so following each other makes no sense. However, I do get blog hits which is not bad.
Interesting list by @sacerdotus that openly admits to violating @twitters ToS by filing false reports... @support http://t.co/646cNYBqsG
— Ryan Hoover (@ryanhoover) August 2, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
There is no violation in warning others using a third party site.
I was also on @sacerdotus's early draft block-list he wrote directly onto his erect, though badly deformed, penis. #Sharpie
— Phalacrocoracidae³ (@CommonCormorant) August 2, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
These kind of tweets is why you and others are on the list. There is no need to post these vulgar tweets. Why the obsession with my penis?
@twitter user @Sacerdotus using lists in Twitter to attempt to ban all secular humanists. Against tos for twitter. http://t.co/TUtYb9640g
— Maggie Priceless (@MaggiePriceless) August 1, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
Wrong, I am attempting to clean Twitter of abusers, not secular humanists. There are many secular humanists who I personally follow who do not act like teenage bullies. They are respectable intellectuals. Perhaps you should imitate them.
ok @twitter this is enough user @sacerdotus is now providing lists of users and asking people to mark us as spam: http://t.co/EufdfjWM47
— Dan Arel (@danarel) July 31, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
Again, there is no violation in warning others of known abusers. Twitter asks users to report abusive accounts.
. @Twitter This is a HUGE PROBLEM RT @Sacerdotus: Important Information Please Retweet: Twitter Block List http://t.co/Sbm4kdgMtL ”
— ASH: LogicBobomb (@LogicBobomb) July 31, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
The problem is the abuse that your friends exhibit without shame. I am just exposing them so others can report them before facing the abuse.
Scientists, doctors and various other academics are on this list, you sad little creature. @sacerdotus http://t.co/tXLnnpvR29
— Happy Go Lucky (@unclemiseryguts) July 31, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
There are no scientists, doctors or academics on this list. No one of that caliber would behave in such an undignified manner. To date, I have not met anyone with proper academic credentials who tweet under the banner of Atheism.
I love your block list @Sacerdotus! How very Christian of you to openly hate so many people! I bet god's satan has you on his naughty list!
— GodlessAndHappy (@GodlessAndHappy) July 31, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
Justice is one of the Cardinal Virtues that Catholicism teaches, so you are right! We cannot sit back as abusive people use Twitter to harass others. You may claim to be "godless," but you are not happy if you feel the need to hide behind a computer and harass others.
. @twitter http://t.co/ITGkW2G5aA please note @Sacerdotus's admission of FALSE flagging people who disagree with him. Violation of TOS?
— Assassin Grrrl (@AssassinGrl) July 31, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
There is no false flagging. Many of those listed have been suspended prior to being listed. This list exists to warn others of these abusers so as to not fall victim to them.
RT @UberFacts: Homosexual behavior has been witnessed in over 1,500 species - Homophobia has only been found in one." @Sacerdotus <Exhibit A
— TBR (@BibleReloaded) March 10, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
While there may be homosexual behavior witnessed in non-human animals, this does not mean they are homosexual. One cannot apply human attributes to non-human organisms. Animals respond to stimuli in nature by using instincts. These instincts are not governed by rational faculties as that of a human because they do not possess them. Moreover, claiming that homosexuality exists in other animals, so therefore it is a good is a naturalistic fallacy.
Also saw he's listed on anti-Abortion Pro-Life lists: Definitely #GOP @MaggiePriceless @twitter @Sacerdotus @Support @spam
— Politicolnews (@Politicolnews) August 1, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
This is interesting. I am glad to be listed on a list that highlights those who defend human life from conception to natural death.
There's Nothing About Abortion in the Bible So How Do Christians Justify Their Crusade Against Women? http://t.co/bYdiMhCGMz @Sacerdotus
— Esau Yakub (@MisterYakub) July 23, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
Actually there is. While abortion is not mentioned by name, the demand for respect for life is mentioned. Human life is always attributed as being created and planned by God. Defending human life is not a crusade against women. On the contrary, it is a defense of womanhood who have the gift of bringing new life to the world. Pregnancy is a unique attribute of the woman. Fighting against it is fighting against an important attribute that makes women special in the human race. It robs her of her womanhood. Abortion is the real crusade against woman.
. @MartinPribble @Sacerdotus Estimated 30% of pregnancies result in spontaneous abortion. One could argue god is an abortionist.
— Rah (@francosoup) July 10, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
While not all pregnancies are successful, this is not because of God. Original sin has damaged creation. Defects and what we call imperfections exist because of this. God created everything good, man ruined that by sinning. Moreover, women who are living a healthy lifestyle will have a better chance at a healthy pregnancy. Unfortunately, with today's diets, it is hard for women to have a healthy chance of a healthy pregnancy. Once again, man messes things up by altering food and providing diets that are unhealthy.
.@Sacerdotus your arguments against abortion use full term babies as examples for the termination of blastocysts. It's disingenuous.
— Martin S Pribble (@MartinPribble) July 10, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
What is disingenous is adhering to your ignorance on the fact that human life occurs in stages. No one is born fully developed. Not even a teenager is fully developed. Does that mean a teenager is not fully human and therefore not worthy of life? It would be absurd to think this. Whether blastocyst, fetus or teen age; a human being is a human being worthy of existing regardless of what stage of development he/she is currently in.
@Sacerdotus atheism is 100% not accepting things with mo evidence. Very rational.
— An Average Cat (@AnAverageCat) August 6, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
The problem here is that atheism has no evidence to support its ideas. It claims God is not possible or cannot exist but provides no evidence for this. All we get are sophism masquerading as reason.
“@Sacerdotus: #atheism is 10% rational and 90% speculative.” Speculative on what?
— Dan (@Atheist_Dan02) August 6, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
Atheism is speculative on God's existence and other issues pertaining to Faith.
@Sacerdotus I don't think you understand atheism. Atheism is, in most cases, a conclusion based on the facts.
— Joe's World. (@joesw0rld) August 6, 2013
Sacerdotus replies:
I understand atheism well for I was once an atheist. Atheism is based on arguing from ignorance and not facts. There is no evidence or facts that can lead to the conclusion that there is no God.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for reading and for your comment. All comments are subject to approval. They must be free of vulgarity, ad hominem and must be relevant to the blog posting subject matter.