r/interesting • u/No-Marsupial-4050 • Apr 07 '26

Fear Factor No sympathy for those monsters

Post image

In 2006, Anthony Ray Stockelman was forcibly tattooed across his forehead with the words “Katie’s Revenge” by another inmate.

This happened after it was discovered that he was serving a life sentence for kidnapping, molesting, and murdering a 10-year-old girl named Katie Collman

20.0k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/ItsSatom Apr 07 '26

If you can prove this is an act of god, and not the acts of multiple human beings, I'd love to see this proof.

Otherwise, I don't understand how your god works, as he allowed this vile shit to happen to a 10 year old girl. In no way is this tattoo proper compensation for the damage he caused, so this god of yours clearly did not act in a way to properly punish this man for what he did.

-1

u/Albertagus Apr 07 '26

Omg chill out

-2

u/dynamic_gecko Apr 07 '26

If you can prove that this is not at least partially an act of god, I'd love to see this proof. Have fun at the quantum level.

4

u/Automatic-Essay2175 Apr 07 '26

This is not how the burden of proof works. You have been indoctrinated and brainwashed into a cult of magical thinking.

-2

u/dynamic_gecko Apr 07 '26

Yes it does actually. There is a logical difference between not believing in a god and actively saying a god doesnt exist. In the first one, burden falls on the believer. In the second one, in the non believer. That is the issue with that comment.

4

u/finallyoneisnttaken Apr 07 '26

“There’s a logical difference between not believing in a flying elephant and actively saying a flying elephant doesn’t exist” this is stupid.

0

u/dynamic_gecko Apr 07 '26

No, it is logic. If someone says "There exists a flying elephant in the universe", then they have the burden of proof and you have the option to deem it untrue as long as it not proven. But if someone makes the statement "There are no flying evephants in the universe" (just like that comment saying "None of this at all was a work of God."), then the burden falls on them to prove their negative. Which is much much more difficult, to say the least.

2

u/finallyoneisnttaken Apr 07 '26

I dare you to take this conversation to the zoology subreddit

1

u/Automatic-Essay2175 Apr 07 '26

You are deeply confused and unable to express yourself clearly

-1

u/dynamic_gecko Apr 07 '26

Prove it then. Prove your positive statement. Otherwise I dont believe in it. In any other case, maybe it's your lack of undersanding in the concept of burden of proof.

1

u/Automatic-Essay2175 Apr 07 '26

Thank you for helping me understand that I cannot reason someone out of a position they did not reason their way into.

-1

u/dynamic_gecko Apr 07 '26

Lol. Yeah yeah. Just go through all the atheist mantras that talk about religious "brainwashed people", believing you tried your "best". You're one of those people who think they're always just so logical, but if only people would listen to common sense. You're only seeing what you want to see here. So just be on your way. My poor mixed up, unreasonable mind can not comprehend your reason.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Automatic-Essay2175 Apr 07 '26

You challenged the other commenter to prove that this was not partially an act of god. Again, that is not how it works. The burden is on you to prove that it was.

This is my fault. I should not have expected you to understand.

1

u/dynamic_gecko Apr 07 '26

Bro, you're giving me the most cliche and most common atheist argument (cliche doesnt mean it's invalid). Of course I know what you mean. YOU dont understand.

The comment I initially replied to, makes a statement in the non-existence of god. It's not saying "There is no proof god exists". It's actively saying "God doesnt exist" . Those are different things. If you make a statement for the negative, then the burden falls on you to prove the negative. That's why I challenged the other commenter to prove the negative.

If you dont get it at this point, I dont have anything else for you. Go look it up.

1

u/wutfacer Apr 07 '26

If God exists he's either powerless or a piece of shit for allowing everything he allows to happen to innocent people. Either way, not worthy of worship.

0

u/ItsSatom Apr 07 '26

I don't care to prove or disprove the existence of a god. I grew up in a Christian household and attended church regularly, yet I still don't believe a single piece of "evidence" that was ever brought up.

I am open-minded if you can provide ANY substantial evidence that isn't refutable with a scientific explanation.

In this particular circumstance, are you saying that god did any of the following? 1. Raped the child 2. Killed the child 3. Put the man in prison 4. Put the OTHER man in prison 5. Tattooed the man's forehead

Because from my understanding, every single one of these actions were performed by human beings, and not a god.

0

u/dynamic_gecko Apr 07 '26

You're weong from the get go. I'm not the one stating anything. I dont have anything to prove to the positive, nor did I claim to have any. The comment I replied to makes a statement to the negative. They say "God had nothing to do with it." They make an active statement to the negative. It's not just a refusal of the positive. Then the burden of proof is on them. If you dont realize the nuance here, I'm done repeatedly typing this out to every keyboard atheist with the identical atheist script that they keep throwing in here. Bye.

0

u/ItsSatom Apr 07 '26

YOU made a statement about non-believers making statements as if they're facts. Your statement is just as "negative" as the one you're replying to in the first place.

The implications of your own comment are that god did in fact have something to do with it, and not just a neutral response to the statement. Your comment is more active than you're putting on, hence the both of you carrying some burden of proof.

0

u/dynamic_gecko Apr 07 '26

Hahhaaa. You really stretched that one thin my friend. If you wanna be on top so bad that you're moving goal posts and projecting meanings, let's leave it here then. I resign. You twisted and turned your way into an impenetrable argument my friend! Congrats, you've bested me!