Too Much To Dream

Of course, that suggests a natural slogan for Smug-tolerance: "Have you hugged a Smug today?"

I prefer "Have you slugged a Smug today?"

Smugs. Yes, this is bang on! Perfect.

Don't forget "fugged" (used by James Jones to get by censors while trying to recreate GIs' language).

I suggest snapping up SmugBlog.

Hmmm. I wonder if I'd get in trouble for opening a hamburger restaurant called "Smugfugger's"?

I think you're onto something. Someone says 'I'm Bright', the auto response might be 'Ya mean smug, pal.'

Doesn't 'bright' smack of 'vegan'? There's such a holier-than-thou ring to it. 'I have the deepest faith in Atheism.' 'I have a Friend in Dawkins.' 'I'm a devotee of the High Priest of Smug, the Prophet Richard the Dim.'

Perhaps this bright thing won't light. But then again, lefties smugly call themselves 'progressives'.

When I visited the Bright website my basic thought was "Here's yet another attempt to collect names and addresses of likeminded individuals so that they can be hit up for donations later." Perhaps, in my old age, I'm too skeptical to be a bright.

So Dawkins has endorsed it, but I wonder if they really have the go-ahead from Randi and Dennett et al to use their names in this way. If not, they're off to a very poor start.

I think in addition to saying "oh, you're a Smug", we need to remind these folk that they are doing EXACTLY what they are so offended by people of other religious stripes doing - namely, "evangelizing" and injecting their own agendas into conversations.

feh. I don't like it when the Southern Baptists or Jehovah's Witnesses do it, why should I feel any better about an atheist or agnostic or humanist or igtheist or whatever doing it?

Joanne,

“Fug” was used by Norman Mailer in his novel, The Naked and the Dead, not in James Jones' books.

Now, don't get me started on Mailer, that wife-stabbing, murderer-loving, suicide-bomber-apologizing maroon. “Why Are We at War?” he asks. Because we were attacked, and we shall not let it happen again.

I like it! I like it!

They paint a pretty picture
Of a world that's gay and bright
But you just can't say "I love you"
To a street of city lights...

Sadly, this isn't the first time that Dawkins has shown himself to be smug and arrogant. When speaking on matters outside of his profession, he can be arrogantly opinionated on matters of which he knows very little. Too bad.

Now let's think of a word for vocal non-evangelistic agnostics who pretend that they're not advocating a form of extreme ideological relativism -- the precise sort of relativism that they reject when talking about any topic other than religion.

You got something to say to me, Raving? I've read your blog and I've encountered your opinions elsewhere. I think there is already a word for people like you: fanatic. I really don't think you'll like reading my blog, so I suggest you don't bother reading it.

Why on Earth did you think I was talking about YOU?

Before you get too cross, just remember (according to your own ideology) that all opinions are equal. So it would be “smug” (or intolerant) of you to assert that your opinion of me or my blog is actually TRUE.

Fanatic, evangelistic, intolerant, militant, etc.-- yes, I take actual moral positions on my blog and elsewhere, identify them with specificity, back them up with reasons, and explain why the contrary positions based on superstition or irrationality are wrong. You haven’t identified a single post, moral position or rationale of mine that you disagree with, or stated your reasons for disagreeing.

I guess you’re just a liberal -- you know, the sort of person who “accus[es] people who disagree with you of being a troll” (as you said on January 27) and then IP bans them.

XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX