Thursday, June 9, 2011

In the Meantime

I haven't posted in a while, but I hope to get back in the groove soon. In the meantime enjoy this promo for William Lane Craig's Great Britian tour, and plea for Richard Dawkins to friggin' man up.




HT Unbelievable

52 comments:

Onesimus said...

maybe the term "friggin" isn't a wise choice of words for general Christian communication. It has extreme, crude sexual application that may not be known by an American user.

from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/frigging+about

frig (frg)
v. frigged, frig·ging, frigs Vulgar Slang

v.tr.
1. To have sexual intercourse with.
2. To perform an act of masturbation on.
v.intr.
1. To have sexual intercourse.
2. To masturbate.

Tony-Allen said...

Perhaps a better term would be "froggin'."

bossmanham said...

In the context most Americans use words like this, or "darn," or "goodness," or the like, myself included, it is meant to emphasize what comes after that word. It's a "minced oath," a word used purposely instead of a profanity. So what one does in using said word is to purposely and mindfully say something instead of the profane word, which I think is to emphasize my position against the use of actual profanity. It's funny how language works sometimes.

Onesimus said...

But this isn't merely replacing an offensive word with non-offensive substitute.

This is a case of replacing one profanity with another. It is a lesser known term (to much of the world) that is as equally offensive (with a very similar meaning) as the other "F" word.

John said...

Oh Dawkins.. You FRIGGIN coward. Unbelievably arrogant to say that debating Craig wouldn't look good on your CV. Craig has debated a lot of people who are much more accomplished than you are. Come to think of it, it certainly might not look good on your CV, coz you'll get your ass whipped.

bossmanham said...

Oneismus,

The meaning of a word doesn't determine it's cuss-word-status. If that were the case, then we'd never be able to talk about someone having sex, since that means the same thing as a cuss word. Rather, the way a society and a lanuage looks at words as a whole determines their status. Our language has evolved such that there are certain words that are innapropriate, and there are other words that are acceptable to be used in place of those words. Again, it is interesting how language works.

exreformed said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
exreformed said...

Bossman, you are nothing more than a Bill Craig groupie. You are no different than a female rock star groupie that hangs out after shows wanting sex. Do you ever post about anyone or anything else? Craig has had his ass whipped so many times in a debate that it is not even funny anymore.

bossmanham said...

Well your mom is fat, so there. Nyah!

Ryan Anderson said...

It's amazing to me how Brennon will take advice and concede no points from anyone, regardless if he's wrong or if the person giving him friendly advice is a christian.

exreformed said...

As a mater of fact she is fat.

very well said Ryan, but what can you expect from a spoiled yuppie that has never lived on hard knox street.

Of course you have to take into consideration the mental illness he suffers from. Christianity is a mental illness.

John said...

@exreformed

"Christianity is a mental illness"

No it isn't. If you seriously thought it was, then I'm sorry, but you're dumb. Christianity isn't a belief that is a result of impaired cognitive functioning.

You're nothing more than a Dawkins groupie. When Dawkins says it won't look good on his CV to debate Craig, I'm guessing you believed him. That's because you'll believe anything he says.

exreformed said...

John

I was a right wing fundamentalist Christian evangelical for thirteen years you stupid twit.

men·tal ill·ness
any disease of the mind; the psychological state of someone who has emotional or behavioral problems serious enough to require psychiatric intervention.

There you have it, Christianity is a mind disease. Of course you wont admit it, your are sick and in denial.

You are also delusional

(plural de·lu·sions)
n
1. false belief: a persistent false belief held in the face of strong contradictory evidence, especially as a symptom of a psychiatric condition

Ana said...

The name calling in this thread is disappointing.

What's with the popular obsession with seeing a Craig-Dawkins debate? I really do think it's become an obsession at this point.

exreformed,

If calling a belief system/ philosophy/way of life a mental illness, and then citing the definition of mental illness is all it takes to "prove" the said belief is in fact, a mental illness, then we need only call veganism, patriotism, capitalism, and feminism, and atheism, a mental illness, paste the definition, and that establishes it as fact.

Onesimus said...

bossmanham said...
Oneismus,

The meaning of a word doesn't determine it's cuss-word-status.
_________

I never said it did.
It is the NATURE of the word "frigging" that is the issue.

It is exactly the same TYPE of word as the commonly avoided words that I assume you wouldn't consider
using on this site.

I suggest you do a little more research into the word before you try to justify it. If you note in the definitoion I posted in the first comment - the term VULGAR slang is noted for a reason within that definition.

Onesimus said...

Ana, when the thread is started with obscene language then should we be surprised when further unsavoury behaviour follows?

bossmanham said...

Onesimus, I laid out why I don't think that the nature of the word (whatever that is) relegates it to that status.

Onesimus said...

So you'd be equally willing to use the other "F" word - or the "C" Word on your blog?

They are merely describing sexual function or sexual anatomy.

But the clinching factor that destroys your argument is that you did not use the word according to its correct definition - you used it in an abusive context - much the same way that that F*** and C*** are usually used, as terms of abuse.

David said...

Onesimus,

Don't waste your time. BMH does not acknowledge error.

Everyone knows that "friggin" means "f**ckin". Man up, BMH. Saying "f**kin" or saying nothing.

It's ironic that BMH is telling Dawkins to "man up" while the BMH is using a "mincing" word instead of the actually using the work he wants us all to think of. How manly is mincing? Stop "mincing" or stop telling others to "man up".

(I would have no problem taking out the asterisks, but BMH says "no cussin'". Except for friggin").

John said...

@exreformed

"I was a right wing fundamentalist Christian evangelical for thirteen years you stupid twit. "

-- I don't give two turds.

"men·tal ill·ness
any disease of the mind; the psychological state of someone who has emotional or behavioral problems serious enough to require psychiatric intervention."

-- Yes, thanks for describing yourself. Not like anyone thought otherwise.

"There you have it, Christianity is a mind disease. Of course you wont admit it, your are sick and in denial. "

-- Riiight. And you were able to show that by giving the definition of 'mental illness'. You are a mind.

"You are also delusional

(plural de·lu·sions)
n
1. false belief: a persistent false belief held in the face of strong contradictory evidence, especially as a symptom of a psychiatric condition"

-- Lol. More definitions. And more of you thinking you're actually making an argument. I've been around and seen some real stupid things from warrior atheists. You'd be in my shortlist of stupidest atheist.

John said...

"Everyone knows that "friggin" means "f**ckin". Man up, BMH. Saying "f**kin" or saying nothing. "


-- One way to tell your opponent is desperate is if he pulls you on your semantics.

David said...

"One way to tell your opponent is desperate is if he pulls you on your semantics."

Do you think that Onesimus is BMH's "opponent", too?

Desperate? No. Amused by BMH's failure to take responsibility for for his choice of words? Yes. Again, everyone knows what friggin' means. It's a minor point, but what's really fascinating here is BMH's response.

John said...

@ David

"Do you think that Onesimus is BMH's "opponent", too? "

-- I think he is making a big deal about something so trivial. Who the hell cares what the word really means? What should matter is how it was meant to be used. You, on the other hand, are trying to capitalize on the issue because it's another opportunity for you to take some pot shots. Just can't let an opportunity go to waste, eh?


"Desperate? No. Amused by BMH's failure to take responsibility for for his choice of words? Yes."

-- Hilarious. Really? You really, really feel indignant about his using the word "friggin" or how he defended himself in using the word? You feel he's not being "responsible"? Listen to yourself. That's what makes you look desperate.


"Again, everyone knows what friggin' means. It's a minor point, but what's really fascinating here is BMH's response."

-- Yes it's a minor point. I don't see anything wrong with how he defended his use of the word. I do understand, however, why you want to make mountains out of molehills --you just can't let an opportunity like this go to waste, and that's why you reek of desperation.

David said...

"Who the hell cares what the word really means?"

Really? Who cares what words really mean? Really? It's come to this? And I'm the one who's supposed to be "desperate"?


"You, on the other hand, are trying to capitalize on the issue because it's another opportunity for you to take some pot shots."

Isn't taking "pot shots" what this post is about? We started with BMH taking pot shots at Dawkins. I'm just going with the flow. If BMH gets to take pot shots, why can't I take 'em, too?


"You really, really feel indignant about his using the word "friggin" or how he defended himself in using the word?"

Indignant? No. Again, I'm amused, not indignant. Again, you're missing my point.

BMH wants Dawkins to "man up". But he uses a mincing wimp word that is synonymous with f**kin'.

"Friggin'" is how one tries to look tough or cool by saying or writing f**kin' without actually saying or writing f**kin'. As Onesimus has pointed out, both word refer to the same act, so friggin is just the wimp's way of trying to look tough or cool without actually being tough or cool. It's the opposite of "manning up". As a vetern wimp myself, I know how this works.

All I'm trying to say that if BMH is going to demand that others man up, he should start by manning up himself. Take responsibility for the choice of words, or don't use a wimpy substitute words. Stop telling other to "man up" when you can't man up yourself. Say "f**kin" or say nothing.




"I do understand, however, why you want to make mountains out of molehills."

Actually, it's BMH who made this mountain out of a molehill by trying to weasel out of the situation with his weak "defense". You're right, how can I let this opportunity go to waste. It's just too funny, and too ironic, and I'm only human. I just can't resist the temptation to laugh.

John said...

Oh yeah, just so you guys know, the word "friggin" came from the word "freaking" which is a substitute for the F word.

So it IS "replacing an offensive word with a non-offensive substitute."

So BMH would, unfortunately, be getting the same responses from you people if he used the word 'fudge'. So gosh darn it!

David said...

"So it IS "replacing an offensive word with a non-offensive substitute."

Who decides what is "non-offensive"? As has been pointed out, "friggin" has an extreme sexual application.

David said...

And yes, if BMH had suggested that Dawkins should "fudgin' man up", it would have been just as funny.

John said...

@David

"Really? Who cares what words really mean? Really? It's come to this? And I'm the one who's supposed to be "desperate"? "

-- Nice try inflating what I said so it would seem like I didn't care what words meant. In this situation, the word "friggin" --which is a coined word anyway --doesn't matter. What matters is how it was meant to be used.

"Isn't taking "pot shots" what this post is about? We started with BMH taking pot shots at Dawkins. I'm just going with the flow. If BMH gets to take pot shots, why can't I take 'em, too? "

-- Nope. A pot shot is a chance shot, a criticism that is made without careful thought. Many people criticize Dawkins for avoiding debating Craig. And it seems even some of his atheist colleagues feel the same way. So, no, this isn't a pot shot. It's pointing out the obvious.

"Indignant? No. Again, I'm amused, not indignant. Again, you're missing my point. "

-- O.K. "amused" it is.

"'Friggin' is how one tries to look tough or cool by saying or writing f**kin' without actually saying or writing f**kin'."

-- Or it could simply be how someone wants to express an idea without being so vulgar. But I understand why you want people to see it the way you do. So you can justify how you've just tried to act so "tough and cool".

"As Onesimus has pointed out, both word refer to the same act, so friggin is just the wimp's way of trying to look tough or cool without actually being tough or cool."

-- I actually saw a movie on HBO a couple of years back starring the guy from 'Soul Plane', and interestingly, they kept saying the word "friggin". Obviously so it won't be censored. HBO, at least where I'm from, bleeps words of this sort. I guess the producers of the movie, according to your logic, are a bunch of "wimps". They obviously haven't done what they did to refrain from being vulgar. They are obviously a bunch of wimps who can't man up. Riiight.

"It's the opposite of "manning up". As a vetern wimp myself, I know how this works. "

-- Well, thanks for the admission. But trying to not be vulgar, doesn't mean you're a wimp.

"You're right, how can I let this opportunity go to waste. It's just too funny, and too ironic, and I'm only human. I just can't resist the temptation to laugh."

-- What's funny is your desperation. We'd be hearing the same claptrap from you if the word 'fudge' was used. In fact, I think, you'll be sticking around, waiting, for every single opportunity you can get to take some pot shots. And it just looks desperate, really.

John said...

@ David

"And yes, if BMH had suggested that Dawkins should "fudgin' man up", it would have been just as funny."

-- Yes it would. And you making a mountain out of that molehill would be funny too. Because then you would seem more desperate than you are now.

John said...

"Who decides what is "non-offensive"? As has been pointed out, "friggin" has an extreme sexual application "

-- I take it that whenever someone says the F word, you think they always refer to the "sexual application". How about other words? Anyway, goodluck conversing with people then.

David said...

"Or it could simply be how someone wants to express an idea without being so vulgar."

But obviously, some readers did, in fact, see this as "vulgar".

Part of irony here is that BMH chose to use a wimpy mincing word instead of "manning up", and yet, the word friggin' is still so close to f**ckin' as to remain offensive to many. We have a failure here on multiple levels.

Ok, I see that BMH can do no wrong. He has chosen not to man up. I shouldn't have wasted my time. So it goes.

John said...

"But obviously, some readers did, in fact, see this as "vulgar". "

-- Just as some readers --you for instance --might see the word "fudgin" as vulgar, because it has a "sexual application". Riight.

"Part of irony here is that BMH chose to use a wimpy mincing word instead of "manning up", and yet, the word friggin' is still so close to f**ckin' as to remain offensive to many. We have a failure here on multiple levels. "

-- You see irony, I see an attempt to avoid vulgarity. Yet you argue it's still vulgar, but want to say that it's a wimpy kind of vulgar --whatever that means. I think it's obvious your clutching at straws here to make good use of this opportunity to take pot shots --which is something I think reeks of desperation.

"Ok, I see that BMH can do no wrong. He has chosen not to man up. I shouldn't have wasted my time. So it goes."

-- I hope you're not leaving because I said I think you'll be staying around to do the desperate thing of waiting for more opportunities to take pot shots, since logical argumentation isn't your forte. Because that would make me feel guilty.

David said...

"Yet you argue it's still vulgar, but want to say that it's a wimpy kind of vulgar."

Just to clarify.

It was some of the Chritian readers who saw this as vulgar.

You see, BMH had two possible ways to man up.

He could listen to those in the Christian community who see the term "frickin'" as vulgar, he could take responsibility for his language and he could resolve to consider a change in his language out of respect for his Christian brothers and sisters.

Or.

He could simply say what he clearly meant to say. F**kin'. No mincing substitutes, no hiding behind wimpy (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) words. And if some are offended, so be it.

He chose neither course. His choice.

David said...

Meant to say..


...no hiding behind wimpy, vulgar to some, not offensive to others (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) words.

Clear enough?

bossmanham said...

One,

So you'd be equally willing to use the other "F" word - or the "C" Word on your blog?

Are you reading what I said? I don't use curse words. Minced oaths aren't curse words.

They are merely describing sexual function or sexual anatomy.

And we've already established that the definition of a word doesn't determine it's status as a curse word.
----
John has really said what needs to be said here. Kudos, my man.

bossmanham said...

It was some of the Chritian readers who saw this as vulgar.

I'm a little bemused that you'd think Christians will agree on every little thing.

He could simply say what he clearly meant to say. F**kin'

Funny, because I clearly meant to not say that word. What happened to you really really really really not wanting to jump to conclusions about me?

You just sound like you're pouting, and John has highlighted your ridiculous absurdity here.

David said...

"Funny, because I clearly meant to not say that word."

Ah, so it's the wimp route then.

"I'm a little bemused that you'd think Christians will agree on every little thing."

So, you've dismissed the concerned of some of your Christian brothers and sisters...on the grounds that Christians are not going to agree on "every little thing"?. Well, I guess it's up to them to decide if your use of vulgarities (in their eyes) is a little thing.

"John has highlighted your ridiculous absurdity here."

As I said, BMH is never wrong.

Onesimus said...

Bossmanham said:

Are you reading what I said? I don't use curse words. Minced oaths aren't curse words.


-----------

The word in question is NOT a “minced oath”. IT IS what you quaintly call a “cuss word”

Also the word “freaking” is not the origin of the word frigging. The two expressions are related in no way.

The word English word “frigging” has been around much longer than the American “freaking” and has a distinct, specific and graphic meaning which relates to the sexual stimulation of a woman with the use of a finger.

Personally I didn't want to get so specific. I previously thought the sanitised e-dictionary definition would have been sufficient to make the point.

But clearly not.

Ana said...

I think that the problem within this thread could be resolved by acknowledging that "friggin" was and is not a prudent word choice, and also acknowledging that it was rather counter-productive that the subject of the thread was centered around the use of that word, instead of the central aspect of the OP. (My personal feelings against there being too much of a fixation on seeing a Craig-Dawkins debate, doesn't change the fact that the effort should be to not lose focus the point of an OP).

Ana said...

*correction: to not lose focus of the point of an OP.

bossmanham said...

Onesimus,

If that's your argument, then it's fallacious. The past meanings or uses of a word don't determine their present usage. To say otherwise is to employ the etymological fallacy.

Ana,

I don't think I did anything out of line, so I won't admit to any wrongdoing.

I didn't make this about a different issue than the OP, two other commenters wanted to make me the issue, and it's just an intellectual weak attempt at ad hominem.

bossmanham said...

David,

So, you've dismissed the concerned of some of your Christian brothers and sisters...on the grounds that Christians are not going to agree on "every little thing"?

No, I've clearly dismissed it for precisely the reasons I've laid out. As usual, you conveniently ignore those and create your own silly dishonest narrative.

That's why I don't take you seriously.

Ana said...

"so I won't admit to any wrongdoing."

I don't think your word choice was wrong in an immoral sense, (your intention wasn't to use it in a sexual way)but I think words like that can scandalize fellow Christians and that that's what should be kept in mind.

"I didn't make this about a different issue than the OP, two other commenters wanted to make me the issue, and it's just an intellectual weak attempt at ad hominem."

The criticism of mine about this thread going on a tangent and not sticking to your OP, was in allusion to the other commenters.

Onesimus said...

Bossmanham said:
“The past meanings or uses of a word don't determine their present usage.”

Oh the flexibility of language in a relativist world.
Words mean what one wants them to mean and there’s no objective meaning to anything anymore.

I suppose the word “repentance” has changed in meaning too?

John said...

Onesimus says:

"Oh the flexibility of language in a relativist world.
Words mean what one wants them to mean and there’s no objective meaning to anything anymore."

-- Notice how you disingenuously stretch off from one place to the farthest end to make a point. Words don't "mean what one wants them to mean", and this is hardly what BMH intended to say.

There's practically nothing anyone can do about the continuous evolution of the meaning of words. When my nephew says that I'm the "sh*t", I'm apparently obliged to take that as a compliment in this day and age. That's just how it is. And that hardly means everyone who goes along is being relativistic or disbelieves in some "objective" meaning of things as you ridiculously want to put it.

"I suppose the word “repentance” has changed in meaning too?"

-- Really has absolutely nothing to do with anything that's been discussed.

Onesimus said...

John posted:
"I suppose the word “repentance” has changed in meaning too?"

-- Really has absolutely nothing to do with anything that's been discussed.
_________

It has EVERYTHING to do with what is being discussed, which is the unwillingness to admit being in the wrong and turning away from the wrong that was done.

Here I have pointed out the unwise usage of a word. I have tried to educate BMH about the meaning and origin of the word - but he rejects that advice and tries to excuse his use of the word. A mere confession of ignorance and a thank you for the advice may have been a better response than self-justification.


John also said:
"-- Notice how you disingenuously stretch off from one place to the farthest end to make a point. Words don't "mean what one wants them to mean","

____

Words don't mean what we want them to mean? Evolution of language?

Just because a word is given a use that is different to its defined meaning does not sanitise the use of the "vulgar slang".

It is clear that BMH did not use the word according to its dictionary definition - but then again, the use of other "cuss words" is rarely in accordance with their dictionary definition.

But does using them in a way divorced from their sexual definition make their usage acceptable in Christian converstaion?

Personally I think using them in the context of their sexual definition would be FAR more acceptable than using them gratuitously as (or in place of) a "cuss word".

Not many years ago it was rare to hear "four letter words" in public and it was found offensive when they were used publicly. BUt these days they are used with no restraint.

Is that an example of language "evolving"? Or is it due to society's moral slide?

And what does it say about the state of the church when those words are seen to be acceptable for use by Christians?

bossmanham said...

Oneismus,

I gave reasons as to why what I said was not "in the wrong." Yes, you've given reasons why you think it was wrong, and I showed those reasons to be fallacious. Instead of insisting that it's wrong in spite of what I've said, maybe deal with my reasoning. The onus is on you to show it is wrong to say what I said.

John said...

Onesimus said:

"Is that an example of language "evolving"? Or is it due to society's moral slide?

And what does it say about the state of the church when those words are seen to be acceptable for use by Christians?"

-- Oh no! What has the world come to?! Once Christians start using euphemisms for the F-word, we know society has gone slipity slide now!

(From American Heritage dictionary, and Online Free dictionary: [sanitized]

'Frigging'

ADJECTIVE:
Vulgar Slang
Used as an intensive.

Euphemism for Fu**ing )


First, notice the word 'euphemism'.

Then go back to your repeated diatribes above.

Then ask yourself, "what the Frig did I just frigging do that whole frigging thing for?"

If you're concerned about the church's "moral slide", perhaps its best to focus elsewhere, and avoid wasting time by tilting at windmills.

Onesimus said...

ONE AMERICAN dictionary says its a "euphemism" so that makes it all right. Forget about the actual origin, meaning and usage of the ENGLISH slang word throughout the rest of history.

A few Americans come along and adopt it as a "euphemism" when they don't have the guts to say what they really mean and that makes it all right?

I would question why a "euphemism" was needed in the first place?

Ignorance may have been an excuse at the beginning, but no longer.

Onesimus said...

THINKING GOD'S THOUGHTS?

Certainly not!

John said...

@Onesimus

"ONE AMERICAN dictionary says its a "euphemism" so that makes it all right. "

--Actually 3 English dictionaries say it's a EUPHEMISM for fu**ing. If you consider the World English Dictionary as an "American Dictionary" that is.

"Forget about the actual origin, meaning and usage of the ENGLISH slang word throughout the rest of history. "

-- Well, O.K. Let's not forget the "actual origin, meaning" of the word as you say. Let's use the word in how it was originally defined, which is:

'Origin:
1425–75; earlier, to move about restlessly, rub; late Middle English friggen to quiver'

Lol. Look at yourself, and laugh.

bossmanham said...

Oneismus,

Look, I am just as concerned about the moral apathy of the church as anyone, but I don't think this particular word is a part of that moral slide. Words do change their status. Look at what has happened to the word "gay." I am sad that the word has been co-opted as it has, but once the society at large has moved a word in a certain way, it's hard to stop it.

As it pertains to the word "friggin" or the like, it's something I think that is appropriate for casual conversation. I don't know that I'd use it in the pulpit, say, or in teaching a class or something (just like I wouldn't say "poop" in those environments). But this post's tone was casual and comedic to a point. Since I don't see a problem with the word, and as I and others have produced a fairly good reason to think it is not a cuss word, I won't admit that it is wrong to use.