You said weaksauce!

@JoeChick You use whatever words you like. If you think calling his thought process comical is less of an insult, making you less of a bigot than me, who am I to argue?

As for creationst intelligence; I know some of them are not dumb, which makes the damage done to them all the more clear to see.

@JoeChick Then whenever I say, "progress has been retarded", mothers had better cover their children's ears.

Also, it's good to know it IS acceptable to denigrate someone's mental state and now we're just hammering out the particulars of who gets to call who what for which transgressions.
Having established we can call anyone who believes something that conflicts with facts or mere opinions we hold to be true; deluded - let's try a few hypotheticals.

Do you know Seth Andrews? Former evangelical spokesperson. He managed to break his indoctrination very late in life and has since made many podcast and videos about belief. One of them is labeled 'Christianity made me talk like an idiot', in which he talks about how he was trained, programmed to think and speak a certain way where his deity was concerned. "What I said made no sense."

On the whole, Seth was not a stupid man as a believer, and he didn't get smarter when we got the god-glasses off. It simply made him capable of applying the same consistent logic to his beliefs, as he did to everything else.
The questions is, is he a bigot.
He is inadvertently calling the people who makes the arguments he used to make 'idiots'. He got out, but they are still trapped in their programming, using the arguments he used to preach, which he now labels as 'idiotic'. (Idiot, being an old term for intellectually disabled.)
Is he a bigot? If not; why not?

@JoeChick: if you cannot see the nuance between what Seth Andrews says and what you say then you are ignorant.

If you can actually see me saying that, I suggest you consult an optometrist. Soon.

JoeChick: Seth says like an idiot. He is not labeling himself an idiot but rather describing how he was acting. If you had said they were acting retarded that would be different than calling them a retard.
Evidence of this is the fact that child psychologists say you can tell a child they are acting stupid but not say they are stupid. The first is an evaluation of an action while the second is an evaluation of the person.

ok.
Still....
Describing someone - adult someones - as "acting like an idiot" for their entire lives, you'd expect that they actually crossed over to be idiots at some point. You know, the brain being connected to the behavior an' all.
Seems like a thin hair to split to me. Something trolls do to passive-aggressively insult people and then retreat behind, "hey, I just said you were acting like an X. I have done nothing wrong, stop acting like an X".
But, that's just my opinion.

JoeChick: Also the word retard as a verb is very differentvthan retard as a noun. You used it as noun in your original statement. As a noun it is a derogatory term. Another example is colored. It is derogatory in certain contexts.

You said retard was a bigoted term (anyone who believes different is delusional) and I used it in a context it was not. Looks like I'm not the only one who needs to be more specific.

JoeChick: Also even if Seth Andrews was saying he is an idiot and not describing his actions. He would be evaluating a single person not generalizing an entire group.

Hypothetically: The reason he would say he's an idiot is tied to an action performed by others.
If you drink and drive and then as you grow up realize just how stupid that was, does your condemnation of your own action extend no further than yourself?
People holding separate standards for themselves and others seems unlikely.

If you watch the clip he uses examples of what we - him and everybody like him - have been saying and asking the audience: What do we sound like? What do they sound like? What did I sound like?
Making the audience fill in the gaps is a good way to say something while not actually saying it. Quote-miners hate it; makes their work harder.

@JoeChick now if you had said I was using colloquial shorthand to describe their actions and not them as a person I would have accepted that. I would have pointed out that using those shorthand in text form is not a good idea in a public forum as it causes misunderstandings.
But instead you sought to defend your usage by engaging in 2 logical fallacies.
The first was an equivocation fallacy when you tried to use retard in a different context.
The second was tu quoque fallacy. Saying he did it too is not a valid defense.

Your assertion there has been an attempt at defense is another insult.
So far I have merely been curious by the fact I was called out for bigotry by someone who calls people deluded for not sharing his perspective - and that you have been arguing a straw-man.
Apparently it has stressed your brain into paranoia, seeing defenses and intellectual victories where there are none.

I might have ended this quicker if you hadn't referred to the long-term results of brainwashing as "comical". Clearly we disagree on what is and is not derision.
Personally I do not find it amusing. It is, in my opinion, alarming and quite angering; the injustice done to people, some of them very accomplished in their fields, that keeps them twisting themselves into knots because they are psychologically incapable of disobeying their programming.

When engineers with advanced degrees tries to convince you a 900 year old man built a wood box with rope and tar to carry the ancestors of every single living species on the planet for at least 40 days of apocalyptic storms, you are not supposed to smile. Engineers for god's sake.
The "genocide and incest" arc park they built in Kentucky - proving it is impossible - hasn't slowed them down.

I would say the same about any parenting strategy that produces intelligent adults incapable of evaluating what they heard as children objectively.
It doesn't matter how smart racists groomed by parents, community and teachers. are in general; there are still areas where their ability to reason has been retarded.
Regular people can tell because they hold all claims to the same standard of logic. It's what happens when you have not been brainwashed, or has succeeded in breaking free from it.
It doesn't make us smarter. It makes us logically consistent.

If you really find the damage done to Creationists to be comical, I recommend you find a racist and have him/her explain in detail why his/her race is superior. In some ways they are even more wrong than anyone.

But I digress. Time to wrap it up.
All people who identify as Creationists are not retarded, period. Obviously.

If you think this is a retraction caused by you shaming me or convincing me otherwise; feel free to tell yourself that.
In actual reality, you missed and misread a few things.
It's not entirely your fault. It has happened before; people under the impression I have for some reason wandered off topic. For example, on a thread about pets, specifically pets we had owned or currently owned - I made an offhand, positive comment about pets and another poster felt the need to inform me of the existence of pets that are not so good. As if I had seamlessly and spontaneously switched from talking about my pets to every pet in the universe.
As it happens, I had not.

The topic of this thread concerns Creationist arguments we have heard. As in, Creationists we have talked with or seen on a stage making their case, regarding evidence for their god.
Not, as it happens, all Creationists. You may notice I didn't specify all in my first post, either.
You might also notice I specified "when it comes to". Of course, to do that, you will have to read the ENTIRE sentence and not behave like a quote-miner, determined to be offended by things taken out of context.

You might even notice I didn't double down on "my" claim that all Creationists are retarded, period.
Instead, you might notice, I said "I know some of them are not dumb" to your first post; indicating I do NOT generalize the intelligence of their group.
While not a glowing review, it's honest, since I am unaware of the world-wide statistics for Creationist intelligence - I don't even feel qualified to determine how smart those I personally know are - I said what I think can be said about any group, (besides groups consisting entirely of people with the most severe mental disabilities or exceptional genius - it'd be weird to say about Nobel prize winners).

Lastly, if I was going to defend the use of the term, it would go along the lines of: Awful things should have equivalent words.

Do you think the people who saw at the genitalia of small children with dirty tools call it genital mutilation? Do you think the victims of that ghastly, scarring practice call themselves mutilated?
I don't know for sure. Given how humans are, I suspect they do not. It's probably called something nice like "corrected" or "cleansed". Their equivalence of "comical".
The first step of putting awful things out of your mind is to use soothing, non-provocative terms; metaphorically holding hands and pretending it's not really that bad.

Racists don't call themselves racist, "nationalist" or "purist" is so much more bland. "Alternative racial science", may catch on soon. Has a mollifying, legitimate ring to it.
The poor children sent to schools teaching that the Loch Ness monster does indeed exist and disproves the theory of evolution (google it) are not being deceived or brainwashed, it is called "education". When they graduate their ability to reason logically consistently will not have been retarded; they will simply be part of a large group of people who are "comical" on certain subjects.
Future versions of Congressman John Shimkus, a man who insists we shouldn't concerned about the planet being destroyed because God promised Noah it wouldn't happen again after the great flood.
I don't believe for a moment Shimkus is retarded, period. You don't rise to congress if you are. However, on this one, currently crucial, subject; I fear he has been deliberately stunted, to put it nicely.
(You can argue against climate change. Just don't use a compilation of stories about giants, curses, witches, and animals who talk and and behave like humans as a source of authority.)
Mike Pence, as you know, the vice president of the United States of America, sided with the movement behind the Wedge strategy, which came to a head in the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial. In which a conservative republican catholic judge reprimanded the Creationist lobbyists for their perjury, deception and reality denial, knowing the threats he'd receive for doing so.
He knew - like many believers, including the pope - there is a difference between having faith and a straight up crippling of reason.
That, is bloody terrifying. It's also overlooked and forgotten by most, if they even payed attention to it while it happened, probably because people used nice words. Creationist lobbyists tried to ruin our education system with material a conservative Catholic politely called bullshit on and we politely refer to that orchestrated madness a "dispute between two equally valid scientific theories".
I suppose you would call it "comical". A trivial laughing matter of no noteworthy consequences.

The machine behind the Wedge strategy is still running. Answers in Genesis, and Institute for Creation Research, are major players in the adult world. Propaganda factories, run by people putting out statements of faith like "all theories of origins or development which involve evolution in any form are false" or "By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record."
It's a declaration of war on (parts of) reality.
All to keep retarding our ability to apply logic consistently.

I don't say it to be a jerk. This was done to them - and many more who got out - without consent or consideration for their rights. Your right to swing your fist ends where other peoples faces begins. Harmful brainwashing should fall under the same rule, IMO. You can tell yourself whatever you want once you're an adult.
The only worse thing you can do to anyone besides robbing them of their life is to rob them of their mind.

No doubt you'll want to have the last word. A few more insults, surely. I won't be here to see it. I've heard quite enough. But don't let that stop you. Have fun.

Forgot to add this.

"The bible is true because the bible says that the bible is true"