Ontological proof of idiocy

Evil Bender doesn’t even possess the tools to begin a discussion about morality:

The basis of morality in which I pronounce judgement is one of rational thought, Vox. I don’t need to desperately scream about how the world is opposed to my belief system in some misguided attempt at making myself feel morally superior.

It’s like trying to explain physics to a puppy. Anyone feel the urge to illuminate Evil Bender with regards to how rational thought can no more be the basis of morality than a hammer can be the basis for architecture? This is the same problem faced by those who believe in “science”, which can never tell one what to do, only how to do it.

It also never ceases to astound me how left-oriented individuals constantly mistake the assertion for the actual. You’ll have to show us that rational thought, EB, because the evidence for it thus far is certainly scanty. It would help if EB could start by rationally defining “good” and “evil” for our edification. As for the rest of his argument, it is similarly ludicrous. For example:

A solution for slavery starts by building a world where bigotry, intolerance, and hatred aren’t acceptable.

Considering that none of those three concepts has ever been one of the primary, secondary or tertiary motivations for institutional slavery in any historical culture,* and furthermore, such concepts have never been eliminated or even quantified, this is one of the most deeply silly statements to infest the blogosphere in the brief history of blogging.

If Evil Bender didn’t exist, I’m not sure he could be properly imagined in all his stupendous wonder.

*1. Personal enrichment. 2. Cheap labor. 3. Personal gratification. 4. Reducing military capacity. One rather doubts the Turks hated their Janissaries or that Julius Caesar cared much one way or another about 53,000 Auduatuci he enslaved in 57 BC.