Respect

[American]

Most people here have no respect. Aren't we all born with the right to our own opinion? Most of you left wing extremist have ZERO respect for any view but your own. And yes, I'm talking about you Ace42 and ASSman. Neither one of you could have learned the lesson that you can't always get your way. You can't seem to grasp the concept that you have your opinion (no matter how you arrived at it) and others are allowed to disagree with you. Ever consider the probability that you may be wrong. I'm not saying that you are but there is a chance. Hell, there is a chance that we are all wrong. No matter what you are both going to continue to disrespect everyone that disagrees with you and ASSume that anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot. Trust me, other than a select few of brainless people, it only makes you look like an idiot. Just because someone doesn't agree with you does not make them a brainless moron, it means that they have done nothing more than you by forming their own opinion. And if you think that I am bothered in the least by your attacks you are wrong. I surround myself on a daily basis with people who have differing views in hopes I can find a common ground and teach something as well as learn something. You are only interested in yourselves. My advice to you; keep surrounding yourselves ONLY with people that will agree with you. That way you will not have to worry about learning anything new or becoming stronger people.

[D_Raay]

Duck American! It's coming....

[paulk]

Aren't we all born with the right to our own opinion?

Actually you aren't born with any rights. Just ask Ace42. " :D "

[Ace42]

You are born with rights, but it is not the act of being born that magically conveys them to you. If you were born alone in the Amazon basin, what "rights" would you be born with? Where are your god-given rights then?

[D_Raay]

More and more you are one of the few that makes sense around here Ace. The senseless killing has to stop.

[ASsman]

Where is Funkaloyd when I need him.

[racer5.0stang]

Everyone has God given rights. But depending on where you are born or live, determines if you can exercise them.

[Ace42]

Please don't quote the troll. Until you posted that, I didn't have to read his pontifications about how he "teaches" people around him. Presumably, the people around him very quickly form their own opinion about him being a stupid retrogressive moron, and learn from him just how ignorant middle America truly is.

[Jasonik]

I've been relatively nice to the opposing side. I don't believe getting a point across with hostility will ever work. It's obviously not working in Iraq.
Is it working in Amsterdam?
Just last week police removed a mural stating "Thou shall not kill" with an angel and the date of the murdered filmmakers death, because the muslim cleric of a nearby mosque found it 'offensive'.

[racer5.0stang]

Is it working in Amsterdam?
Just last week police removed a mural stating "Thou shall not kill" with an angel and the date of the murdered filmmakers death, because the muslim cleric of a nearby mosque found it 'offensive'.

What part of "Thou shall not kill" is offensive? \


Unless you want to kill....

[Qdrop]

Most people here have no respect. Aren't we all born with the right to our own opinion? Most of you left wing extremist have ZERO respect for any view but your own. And yes, I'm talking about you Ace42 and ASSman. Neither one of you could have learned the lesson that you can't always get your way. You can't seem to grasp the concept that you have your opinion (no matter how you arrived at it) and others are allowed to disagree with you. Ever consider the probability that you may be wrong. I'm not saying that you are but there is a chance. Hell, there is a chance that we are all wrong. No matter what you are both going to continue to disrespect everyone that disagrees with you and ASSume that anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot. Trust me, other than a select few of brainless people, it only makes you look like an idiot. Just because someone doesn't agree with you does not make them a brainless moron, it means that they have done nothing more than you by forming their own opinion. And if you think that I am bothered in the least by your attacks you are wrong. I surround myself on a daily basis with people who have differing views in hopes I can find a common ground and teach something as well as learn something. You are only interested in yourselves. My advice to you; keep surrounding yourselves ONLY with people that will agree with you. That way you will not have to worry about learning anything new or becoming stronger people.

very well put......and i totally agree.
(even if you are a republican.........kidding)


and it's very big of you to be accepting of differing opinion and to find common ground.

see, i have no problem debating with people on all subjects....no matter what thier viewpoints are.
sure, i get heated.....but i see it through as far as i can.
and don't go all pussy like Ace and Rhythm and block people,

not because i was hostile, but because they disagree with me and hate me for that.
such immaturity.
and they both seem so well read and intellectual.
they make liberals really look bad.

And American: you are so very right about Ace only surrounding himself with like minded individuals and not being accepting of other viewpoints.....he blocked both of us to do so.

[Jasonik]

racer5.0stang, we'll see how liberal appeasement solves the radical Islam problem in Amsterdam.

[Ace42]

What problem is this? That someone spouts off hateful and offensive material, and someone is offended and kills him? That strikes me as a strictly criminal matter, and as such, appeasement has nothing to do with it whatsoever.

If an asian murdered Nick Griffin, it would still be a crime, but it is not like I would say "see what a hateful religion it is, we must wipe out these people."

I'd be saying "well look what happens when someone tries to piss off other people."

If I went to pretty much any of the red states in the US and started mouthing off about how the US citizens are all scumbags who follow a corrupting ideology, which is why the whole world hates them, and they are a bunch of murdering redneck inbreds who care more about aborted fetuses than their own kids, *I'd* quite conceivably end up getting shot by a hick. At the very least, a poster here said he'd try to beat me up. And that is if I went at them on their home turf where they all feel secure and self-satisfied, let alone somewhere where they are victimised and descriminated against.

Considering the film-maker was saying that Moslems do not merit enterting into a discourse with, I fail to see what "appeasment" you are referring to. Since when has listening to the grievances of a minority been "appeasement".

Or was the end of segregation in the US "appeasement" for the work of the Black Panthers and other violent black youths?

[Jasonik]

So the filmaker was wrong to critique the living standards of women in the muslim world?

Which is more important;
allowing free speech, or limiting offensive speech?

[Ace42]

He did not "just critique living standards of women in the muslim world" - he sounded off loudly and ignorantly about a broad cultural situation.

With Allah's help I want to serve my brothers and sisters in Saudi Arabia. I want to collect money for Al Qaeda in the Al Tarweed mosque, and perpetrate attacks so I can get to paradise !

Mayor Cohen -peace be upon him- took the trouble after September 11th, you recall that time when we taught the Satan America a lesson, to come to our mosque .

How can anyone, Muslim or otherwise, not find that representation offensive and biggoted?

Seen Die Hard with a Vengeance? Where Bruce Willis goes down to Harlem with a sign on him saying "I hate Niggers" and Samuel L Jackson has to save him?

Theo Van Gogh was walking that line, and he didn't have a Samuel L Jackson to step in and tell the gunman to step the fuck down.

Am I saying it is right? No. Am I saying it as totally irresponsible to equate it with terrorism in any way shape or form? Certainly.

[Qdrop]

why does ACe use shitty movies to make a point?


why ask why.......

[American]

You are born with rights, but it is not the act of being born that magically conveys them to you. If you were born alone in the Amazon basin, what "rights" would you be born with? Where are your god-given rights then?
Is there some sort of opinion monster in the Amazon basin that will eat my freedom to form my opinion? I'm sure my opinions will be different such as, monkeys are good climbers or thank God there is no Ace42 around here! You make no sense sometimes Ace42.

[American]

(even if you are a republican.........kidding)


Thank you for your kind words, but I am not a republican. LOL

[Qdrop]

Thank you for your kind words, but I am not a republican. LOL

ahh.......even better.

i'll get off your jock now.....before someone starts mocking me.

[Whois]

Just for shits and giggles:

"To be a patriot, one had to say, and keep on saying, " Our country, right or wrong," and urge on the little war. Have you not perceived that that phrase is an insult to the nation."
- Mark Twain, Glances at History, 1906

[Qdrop]

i'm rather tired of people ranting on what a mistake this all was (true) and how it is being handled so poorly (also true)....

okay then, lefties.....or war haters in general...

tell me.....tell us ALL......

what should america do NOW??

not "how we fucked it up" or "what an ass bush is/was"....


what should america do now?


practical, pragmatic solutions....

ready?...GO!!!

[Jasonik]

You should commit suicide.
Welcome to my ignore list - Bushlover! Fuck off.

[/sarcasm]

[Qdrop]

You should commit suicide.
Welcome to my ignore list - Bushlover! Fuck off.

[/sarcasm]

nice.



not a bushlover, btw.



and what is it with people and their "ignore list" on here. they use it like a catch phrase in a schwarzenager movie...

[Jasonik]

The ignore list is like Prozac. It makes all the feelings of self doubt and confusion go away, like being in mommy's familiar and comforting arms.

[D_Raay]

I find this a little difficult too. I mean Sisko I can understand but American or any other coherent poster I can't. I mean this is the place for debate and constructive discussion is it not? It kind of gives the pussy efite moniker some weight. "I don't want to talk to you because you have an opposing viewpoint". Nonsense..... I wish the ignore function worked in the real world though, that would be nice.

[Ace42]

Jasonik, congratulations on being a complete self-satisfied mcfuck. The majority of people here use the ignore list on people who have been given the benefit of the doubt, and been proven to be unreasonable. Usually by arguing with black and white facts.

You might think it is close-minded to lable people who think the world is flat as morons, and not meriting attention. But TBH, you spend as much time dismissing people here as the next man. The only difference is, you seem to get a kick out of dissmissing people out of hand, and take every opportunity afforded to you to repeat it time and time again.

Putting people on ignore, and not having to deal with them again is a lot more mature than your constant (and often unfounded) disparaging.

If you honestly think it is unreasonable, after long tiring explanations; illustrations of logic; citations of indisputable fact; clarifications; definitions; redefinitions and refutations, to come to the conclusion that it is not worth your time arguing with a brick wall, then you may well have the patience of a saint.

Much more likely, I think you erroneously confuse being obstinately perseverant with being justified. By all means be persistantly ignorant, it is not to your credit.

[Qdrop]

^^ uh oh!......i think ACe's ignore list just got bigger!

smooth move, Jasonik.

[D_Raay]

I must have the patience of a saint then..

[Ace42]

That or you are naive. These people are not going to change their stance. Jesus could come down, start performing miracles, and they'd be saying "the liberal media is lying. It's all a trick of the editing."

"It's a trick, and illusion. You people are all being suckered. You liberals are so stupid, you want to believe it is Jesus so much you are blinded to the truth"

Then their redneck friends would call him unpatriotic, and nail him to a burning cross on a black person's lawn.

If they don't want to hear it, they won't hear it. Jesus says "All killing is wrong. Every US soldier who has shot a man is evil and going to hell" and they would say "yeah, but this loudmouth sexually harrassing talkshow host with a dildo up his ass has spoken out about that. He said that God (your father, Jesus, or should I say JUDAS!) wrote clearly in the bible that killing is fine, and has provided a tortured and highly flawed argument full of holes that PROVES it."

You really are wasting your time. But then, it is your time to waste. Just don't quote the trolls so I don't have to see their nonsense.

[Qdrop]

That or you are naive. These people are not going to change their stance. Jesus could come down, start performing miracles, and they'd be saying "the liberal media is lying. It's all a trick of the editing."

"It's a trick, and illusion. You people are all being suckered. You liberals are so stupid, you want to believe it is Jesus so much you are blinded to the truth"

Then their redneck friends would call him unpatriotic, and nail him to a burning cross on a black person's lawn.

If they don't want to hear it, they won't hear it. Jesus says "All killing is wrong. Every US soldier who has shot a man is evil and going to hell" and they would say "yeah, but this loudmouth sexually harrassing talkshow host with a dildo up his ass has spoken out about that. He said that God (your father, Jesus, or should I say JUDAS!) wrote clearly in the bible that killing is fine, and has provided a tortured and highly flawed argument full of holes that PROVES it."

You really are wasting your time. But then, it is your time to waste. Just don't quote the trolls so I don't have to see their nonsense.

well then it's a good thing that there is NO jesus.

2 hours ago, i at least thought ACe was smart.........i retract that after his last post.

i think he had a pre-existing hatred of america....long before the war. He's just using it to justify that hatred even more now.
all that intellect wasted on hate.

[American]

The majority of people here use the ignore list on people who have been given the benefit of the doubt, and been proven to be unreasonable.
That is strange. You aren't on my ignore list. (actually, no one is)

[Jasonik]

I DO get a kick out of rattling the cages of condescending high horse finger wagging liberals.

My ideology is not WHO I am. WHO I am is a provocateur who will continue to challenge assumptions, predelictions, and dogmatic ideology.

The problem with people everywhere is that their political ideology is too wrapped up in their perception of who they are to question it. Doubting one's ideals are like losing a part of oneself....VERY SCARY.

Ace42, just because I don't 'come around to your side' doesn't mean I don't respect or understand what you are saying. I think it would be good for you to seperate your identity from your ideology a bit, and allow yourself the freedom of looking at things not as an attack on your personal self, but as ideas with merits and faults clashing in the world, -the battleground of ideas.

I haven't put anyone on ignore, for the record. I'm not afraid of having my statements or supposed opinions challenged, dismissed, or ridiculed.

It does make me a bit sad to think that my personality may be a bit too acerbic for some though....ha ha, no it doesn't.

[Ace42]

WHO I am is a provocateur who will continue to challenge assumptions, predelictions, and dogmatic ideology.

One that does so by pushing forward assumptions, predelictions and dogmatic ideology. Very refreshing.

The problem with people everywhere is that their political ideology is too wrapped up in their perception of who they are to question it. Doubting one's ideals are like losing a part of oneself....VERY SCARY.

Yeah, because putting someone on an ignore list is always about not questioning your ideology, and nothing about not having the time for people who refuse to acknowledge clear objective fact.

I think it would be good for you to seperate your identity from your ideology a bit, and allow yourself the freedom of looking at things not as an attack on your personal self, but as ideas with merits and faults clashing in the world, -the battleground of ideas.

Calling black white, or up down, or the world flat has no merit outside of obscure philosophical considerations. And this is not a philosophy forum. If I wanted to question clear and demonstrable fact, I would not choose to do so by engaging in discourse with a bunch of backwards and ignorant boobs.

I'm not afraid of having my statements or supposed opinions challenged, dismissed, or ridiculed.

I am not afraid of it, however I hate to be drawn into reinventing the wheel every single post because stubborn ignorami refuse to accept certain indisputable facts.

[Qdrop]

i have never seen ACE post one undisputable fact.....

just opinions that he considered so.......


i have, however seen him call everyone he doesn't like "pigfuckers".
that really sticks with you.

[Jasonik]

One that does so by pushing forward assumptions, predelictions and dogmatic ideology. Very refreshing.
Yes, to consider alongside the ones commonly acceped here. If you think I'm trying to indoctrinate people, you're completely missing the point.
...people who refuse to acknowledge clear objective fact.
...refuse to accept certain indisputable facts.
What the pessimist said to the optimist; "It is a clear demonstrable fact; THE GLASS IS HALF EMPTY!"
And this is not a philosophy forum.
Because all political thought and theory descended from......oh thats right, PHILOSOPHY.

[Ace42]

People descended from homonids (to simplify, apes) - sorry creationists - doesn't mean we live in trees, or eat raw deer.

And there is clearly a difference between opinion (half full / half empty) which is subjective. And facts, which are not.

[Jasonik]

Rhetorical semantic hairsplitting is what you do best, bravo!

I don't see how our discussing John Stewart Mill is in any way discordant with the 'political discussion' moniker.

Conclusions and interpretations are subjective, yes. Conclusions and interpretations are also confused with the facts they refer to. The context of observation as well as individual bias effect this realm of opinion in myriad ways.

I have this sneaking suspicion that you're trying to score a magnificent rhetorical parting shot and i will dissappear or something. I do enjoy the sport of all this, but the winning is decided in what we take away from this, not in how much we bring.

[Cashew]

I have said it once American, I will say it again. I will not respect a bunch of homophobic xenophobic war mongers.

[Ace42]

Rhetorical semantic hairsplitting is what you do best, bravo!

This coming from the person who said

Because all political thought and theory descended from......oh thats right, PHILOSOPHY.

When I was making the point that this is not the place to debate the pros and cons of phenomenology.

Conclusions and interpretations are also confused with the facts they refer to. It is not the conclusions or interpretations I have a problem with. *Providing they are logical and in concordance with the facts* - and yet the trolls here consistantly argue against the facts, or draw conclusions that do not logically follow from the facts.

"It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts." - Sherlock Holmes.

And yet it is the trolls here, not I, who base their arguments of suposition or subjective opinion, not fact.

but the winning is decided in what we take away from this, not in how much we bring.

How very loaves and fishes.

[phinkasaurus]

Most people here have no respect. Aren't we all born with the right to our own opinion?

What happens when one's "opinion" involves hurting others who might have a different "opinion"? That is where I draw the line on this right you are empowering us all with.

In the current context, G-Dub's and America think that Iraq and Saddam posed such a grave threat to the U.S., that the enitre might of the U.S. military machine was brought down on Iraq. In the process, over 14,000 (http://www.iraqbodycount.net/) Iraqi civialians have been killed, and every reason or justification has been disproven. To me that is where one man's opinion needed to be checked.

And to the request for what the u.s. can do now:
Stop acting like they are the only nation in the world. Show some respect and embrace the role as most powerful wealthy nation as means of helping eveyone, not as a means of taking advantage of others. The current issue is that the neo-cons in power want to have power and wealth through engendering fear in the world. But, gained in that manner, power and influence is fleeting. The u.s. should instead try to be the most benevolent country in the world, see what happens then.

And if you retort with, "But the U.S. is!" or "But then we'd be slaughtered by the crazed terrorists" please check the foriegn policy track record of the u.s. over the last 200+ years, and then tell me we've been benevolent and nice. Tell Panama and Grenada and Vietnam and Korea and the Native Americans and Columbia and....

[ASsman]

over 14,000 Iraqi civialians have been killed
100,000 +

[phinkasaurus]

100,000 +

i was using this site: http://www.iraqbodycount.net
I heard the 100,000+ was unsubstantiated

but even 1 casulty for an unjust war of agression is too much.

[Ace42]

The 100,000 figure is considered to be likely. It was arrived at by a rigourous scientific investigation by The Lancet - the foremost medical journal in Europe, quite possibly the world. There are details on the BBC.

The figure would've been higher if they had not chosen to ignore Fallujah, which they considered to be an artificially high body-count area, and thus better left untouched.

[phinkasaurus]

The 100,000 figure is considered to be likely. It was arrived at by a rigourous scientific investigation by The Lancet - the foremost medical journal in Europe, quite possibly the world. There are details on the BBC.

The figure would've been higher if they had not chosen to ignore Fallujah, which they considered to be an artificially high body-count area, and thus better left untouched.

thanks for the information. here is a link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3962969.stm) to the BBC article

[ASsman]

Red Cross officials in Iraq are now estimating 800 Iraqi civilians have been killed during the siege on Fallujah. We go to Baghdad to speak with independent journalist Dahr Jamail who broke the story. [includes rush transcript] Independent journalist Dahr Jamail is reporting that Red Cross officials in Iraq are now estimating 800 Iraqi civilians have been killed during the siege on Fallujah. Jamail quotes an unnamed Red Cross official who insisted on remaining anonymous out of fear of US military reprisal. The US military has claimed that no civilians have been killed in the city even though the city of 300,000 has recently witnessed some of the most intense fighting of the Iraq war. The military has estimated 1200 fighters have been killed.

* Dahr Jamail, an independent journalist currently based in Baghdad. He is one of the only independent, unembedded journalists in Iraq right now. He publishes his reports on a blog called DahrJamailIraq.com.

(transcript here http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/17/1524239 )

Of course the Red Cross is in cahoots with the Red Crescent. Which are a bunch of terrorist loving sand niggers.

[yeahwho]

I DO get a kick out of rattling the cages of condescending high horse finger wagging liberals.

My ideology is not WHO I am. WHO I am is a provocateur who will continue to challenge assumptions, predelictions, and dogmatic ideology.

The problem with people everywhere is that their political ideology is too wrapped up in their perception of who they are to question it. Doubting one's ideals are like losing a part of oneself....VERY SCARY.

Ace42, just because I don't 'come around to your side' doesn't mean I don't respect or understand what you are saying. I think it would be good for you to seperate your identity from your ideology a bit, and allow yourself the freedom of looking at things not as an attack on your personal self, but as ideas with merits and faults clashing in the world, -the battleground of ideas.

I haven't put anyone on ignore, for the record. I'm not afraid of having my statements or supposed opinions challenged, dismissed, or ridiculed.

It does make me a bit sad to think that my personality may be a bit too acerbic for some though....ha ha, no it doesn't.

Once again Jasonik, the pot calling the kettle black.

The problem with people everywhere is that their political ideology is too wrapped up in their perception of who they are to question it. Doubting one's ideals are like losing a part of oneself....VERY SCARY.
To actually rise above the fray of the "condescending high horse finger wagging liberals" a post of this nature would never enter your mind. ha ha.

[infidel]

The military has estimated 1200 fighters have been killed.How the fuck does the military know which bodies are fighters and which are civilians?
For all we know the 1200 that they claim to have killed were all civilians.

[ASsman]

First they shoot them with paintballs, and then kill the people with paint on them.

[racer5.0stang]

People descended from homonids (to simplify, apes) - sorry creationists - doesn't mean we live in trees, or eat raw deer.

And there is clearly a difference between opinion (half full / half empty) which is subjective. And facts, which are not.

Genesis 1:26,27
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Funny, doesn't say anything a/b apes.

[Jasonik]

Oy!

[American]

What happens when one's "opinion" involves hurting others who might have a different "opinion"? That is where I draw the line on this right you are empowering us all with.[/OPINION]
We can have an opnion of hurting others, but we don't have the right to act on it.
[OPINION]
In the current context, G-Dub's and America think that Iraq and Saddam posed such a grave threat to the U.S., that the enitre might of the U.S. military machine was brought down on Iraq. In the process, over 14,000 (http://www.iraqbodycount.net/) Iraqi civialians have been killed, and every reason or justification has been disproven. To me that is where one man's opinion needed to be checked.
I assure you that there was more than one man involved in this. And it is not their opinion to blame, but rather their actions.


And to the request for what the u.s. can do now:
Stop acting like they are the only nation in the world. Show some respect and embrace the role as most powerful wealthy nation as means of helping eveyone, not as a means of taking advantage of others. The current issue is that the neo-cons in power want to have power and wealth through engendering fear in the world. But, gained in that manner, power and influence is fleeting. The u.s. should instead try to be the most benevolent country in the world, see what happens then.
Give me a break. Do you honestly think that the government is going to help the homeless in another country when they don't do it here? Or maybe we should have offered aid to Saddam. The same man that used to oil FOR FOOD program to pay terrorist. I've got an idea, lets just give them endless dollars to kill each other, or, I mean Isreal. That would sove everything right?

[American]

The 100,000 figure is considered to be likely. It was arrived at by a rigourous scientific investigation by The Lancet - the foremost medical journal in Europe, quite possibly the world. There are details on the BBC.

The figure would've been higher if they had not chosen to ignore Fallujah, which they considered to be an artificially high body-count area, and thus better left untouched.
Likely? Likely? You go around quoting this number as one of your "FACTS" and it is likely? ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!! It is LIKELY that Ace42 will believe the worse case of anything that goes along with his warped sense of right and wrong and facts and.......
I know your type. If there were 2 reports to come out with final death totals; one with 100 and one with 102, you would say that the 102 HAS to be correct. Or at least likely.

[phinkasaurus]

I assure you that there was more than one man involved in this. And it is not their opinion to blame, but rather their actions.
I agree, completely. I think several people had a hand in causing the U.S. to invade Iraq.


Do you honestly think that the government is going to help the homeless in another country when they don't do it here?
no, our government is out to profit, they do not want to help anyone.

Or maybe we should have offered aid to Saddam. The same man that used to oil FOR FOOD program to pay terrorist.
Is this sarcasm? cause oil for food is aid, and it was offered through the u.n., a body the u.s. used to respect (at least acted like it) but, yes, assiting the country, the people mind you, not Saddam, would have kept the people from hating the u.s. instead the u.s. bombs 2/3 of the country daily for 10 years and imposed sactions that were shown to be killing more children then Bathists.


I've got an idea, lets just give them endless dollars to kill each other, or, I mean Isreal. That would sove everything right?

where did isreal come into this? i didn't mention isreal? did anyone else mention isreal in this thread?

ironic you would sat that though. because the u.s. is giving endless money to a few things over there. one of them is a war in iraq (http://www.costofwar.org), and the other is the state of isreal.
so it seems the u.s. is giving "endless dollars" to destroy them, but either the u.s. or isreal does the destroying.

wasn't this thread about respect at one point? what kind of respect is shown in the action our gov't has taken? the u.s. invaded another nation [however repulsing the leader was to the u.s. {even though the united states bank rolled him in the 80's}} on reasons that have since proven mistakes at best, malicious intent at worst, and has anyone heard so much as an "we're sorry" from the admistration? no. not one show of taking responsibilty for a grave error on the part of the u.s., if for nothing else than the WMD/immentent threat falsitude.

simply put, that's like me coming to your house, saying I know you have a gun in there, and that you are planning at one time in the future to shoot me with it. Plus I am certain you have it,based on many many credible sources, not the least of which is because I sold you one last year. Then, after you say "no I don't have any gun" and our neighborhood association moves in to search for it, I then say nope, you do have it and I barge in and start shooting your family. After the smoke settles, I look and low and behold no gun is found. But you could have moved it, I scream, or maybe you were planning to buy more as soon as I left? but the truth of the moment is, there are no weapons and only 1000's of innocent deaths.

but saddam is gone, right?
so now 9/11 won't happen again, right?
oh wait, iraq didn't do that....

[American]

Is this sarcasm? cause oil for food is aid, and it was offered through the u.n., a body the u.s. used to respect (at least acted like it) but, yes, assiting the country, the people mind you, not Saddam, would have kept the people from hating the u.s. instead the u.s. bombs 2/3 of the country daily for 10 years and imposed sactions that were shown to be killing more children then Bathists.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20041117/wl_mideast_afp/un_iraq_politics_france_041117233709

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/cRosett/?id=110005904




where did isreal come into this? i didn't mention isreal? did anyone else mention isreal in this thread?
Half of the problems over there stem from a lack of respect for Israel. Palestine, Saddam, and the rest of the Middle Eastern thugs would love to do to Israel what we are doing to Iraq right now. That is most of the reason they want us to leave. They know that we protect Israel and they hate us for it. Should we not hate Israel because they are not Muslim? Should we move them all to Germany since they are mostly Jewish? (Sarcasm) Israel has everything to do with respect AND our Middle east policy.

[phinkasaurus]

Half of the problems over there stem from a lack of respect for Israel. Palestine, Saddam, and the rest of the Middle Eastern thugs would love to do to Israel what we are doing to Iraq right now. That is most of the reason they want us to leave. They know that we protect Israel and they hate us for it. Should we not hate Israel because they are not Muslim? Should we move them all to Germany since they are mostly Jewish? (Sarcasm) Israel has everything to do with respect AND our Middle east policy.

what is your position on this then? because when you refer to "what we are soing in Iraq" as something the Middle Eastern thugs would want to do to Isreal, it makes it seem like you agree we are fucknig Iraq up.
But as I think you don't, I'll addreess the funding question. Yes the Middle East and any other country that chooses to open it's eys will notice the U.S. totllly funds the state of isreal. and isreal, has done lots of questionable activities to the middle east, especailly palestine (these "thugs" were there first, by the way). so that might make a few middle east citizins a touch upset.
and i agree the isreal has a lot to do with our ME policy, and this is something the other countries also realize.

[Ace42]

Genesis 1:26,27

(...)
Funny, doesn't say anything a/b apes.

Or dinosaurs.

That's another good thing about Bush being gone, man, cos for the last 12 years with Reagan and Bush, we have had fundamentalist Christians in the White House. Fundamentalist Christians who believe the Bible is the exact word of God, including that wacky fire and brimstone Revelations ending, have had their finger on the fucking button for 12 years. [Eyes roll back in head] "Tell me when Lord, tell me when. Let me be your servant Lord." Fundamentalist Christianity - fascinating. These people actually believe that the bi.., er, the world is 12 thousand years old. Swear to God. What the..? Based on what? I asked them. "Well we looked at all the people in the Bible and we added 'em up all the way back to Adam and Eve, their ages - 12 thousand years." Well how fucking scientific, okay. I didn't know that you'd gone to so much trouble. That's good. You believe the world's 12 thousand years old? "That's right." Okay I got one word to ask you, a one word question, ready? "uh huh." Dinosaurs. You know the world's 12 thousand years old and dinosaurs existed, they existed in that time, you'd think it would have been mentioned in the fucking Bible at some point. "And lo Jesus and the disciples walked to Nazareth. But the trail was blocked by a giant brontosaurus... with a splinter in his paw. And O the disciples did run a shriekin': 'What a big fucking lizard, Lord!' But Jesus was unafraid and he took the splinter from the brontosaurus's paw and the big lizard became his friend. And Jesus sent him to Scotland where he lived in a loch for O so many years inviting thousands of American tourists to bring their fat fucking families and their fat dollar bills. And oh Scotland did praise the Lord. Thank you Lord, thank you Lord. Thank you Lord."

Get this, I actually asked one of these guys, OK, Dinosaurs fossils - how does that fit into you scheme of life? Let me sit down and strap in. He said, "Dinosaur fossils? God put those there to test our faith." Thank God I'm strapped in right now here man. I think God put you here to test my faith, Dude. You believe that? "uh huh." Does that trouble anyone here? The idea that God.. might be.. fuckin' with our heads? I have trouble sleeping with that knowledge. Some prankster God running around: "Hu hu ho. We will see who believes in me now, ha ha." [mimes God burying fossils] "I am God, I am a prankster." "I am killing Me." You know, You die and go to St. Peter... "Did you believe in dinosaurs?" "Well, yeah. There was fossils everywhere" Thuh [trapdoor opens] "Aaaaaaarhhh!" "You fuckin idiot." "Flying lizards, you're a moron. God was fuckin' with you!" "It seemed so plausible, ahhhh!" "Enjoy the lake of fire, fucker!"

You ever noticed how people who believe in creationism look really unevolved? Ya ever noticed that? Eyes real close together, eyebrow ridges, big furry hands and feet. "I believe God created me in one day" Yeah, looks liked He rushed it. They believe the bible is the exact word of God - Then they change the bible! Pretty presumptuous, hu huh? "I think what God meant to say..." I have never been that confident.

http://www.gavinsblog.com/revelations.htm

[Qdrop]

And if you retort with, "But the U.S. is!" or "But then we'd be slaughtered by the crazed terrorists" please check the foriegn policy track record of the u.s. over the last 200+ years, and then tell me we've been benevolent and nice. Tell Panama and Grenada and Vietnam and Korea and the Native Americans and Columbia and....

if you wanted to, you could find an equal amount of examples of charitable, benevolant aid as well......but why would you?, it doesn't fit into your preconcived notions- so they don't exist.

debating the morality and value of a country pursuing it's own interest at the cost of anothers is another very long debate in itself....

but i will say...it is to be expected.....that's nature......and that is unescapable.....
survival requires savageness.....

we've all heard the phrase "nature is red in tooth and claw".....

morality, after all, doesn't exist -- it's a man-made ideal. it exists only in our minds. (yet another debate unto itself).
nature doesn't follow morality....only evolutionary established behavior patterns that best suit social cooperation and survival.
why do humans always think they are ABOVE that?


quote:
"I know your type. If there were 2 reports to come out with final death totals; one with 100 and one with 102, you would say that the 102 HAS to be correct. Or at least likely."

exactly.
you can't brow beat bias out of anyone.......it's fruitless labor. save your breath.- and it goes both ways. we're all human.


jasonik and Ace (even though he can't read this): your debate too, has morphed into another E-penis debate- arguing sematntics and epistomology...and who can use bigger words....to the point that the original debate is lost.-- pure self indulgance.

All: please pay no attention to the creationist......it would be a shame if that hi-jacked this thread. no progress can be made. creationists are like stubborn rubber ducks: you can bang them over the head and sink them with science all day....but they just bob back up everytime, unwilling to learn.

faith is one of the greatest evils man has to deal with - nothing has killed in greater numbers.....

[ASsman]

This Thanksgiving I will thank the Native Americans. For all the cheap land! Suckas!

[phinkasaurus]

if you wanted to, you could find an equal amount of examples of charitable, benevolant aid as well......but why would you?, it doesn't fit into your preconcived notions- so they don't exist.

not true. the u.s. has done some good, I know this. i think though that the bad has far outweighed the good. the u.s is known through out the world for it's bad deeds, more so than the good ones. ans this is not from "jealousness" on the part of the world.


morality, after all, doesn't exist -- it's a man-made ideal. it exists only in our minds. (yet another debate unto itself).
nature doesn't follow morality....only evolutionary established behavior patterns that best suit social cooperation and survival.
why do humans always think they are ABOVE that?

for the same reason humans construct cars, clothes, and buildings; imagine the future, creat art, and celebrate the past; support the red cross, united way, and amnesty international. YES, we are animals which have evolved to this point by an interaction between environments and social behaviour. BUT, we are also the most advanced animal on this planet. SO we could use the "survival of the fittest" mantra all we want, but soon we have to think about the entire planets survival, not just our immediate neighbors. This falls into the "social cooperation and survival" part of you post.

[racer5.0stang]

Or dinosaurs.



http://www.gavinsblog.com/revelations.htm

Genesis 1:1,2
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

There is no time frame between verse one and verse 2.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Here he talks a/b the earth after some cataclysmic judgment, such as the fall of Lucifer.

Isaiah 14:12-14
12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High

This was the first sin, Pride.

Isaiah 14:9-11
9 Hell from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming: it stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations.
10 All they shall speak and say unto thee, Art thou also become weak as we? art thou become like unto us?
11 Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.

This refers to the judgement against Lucifer.

Isaiah 14:15-20
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.
16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?
18 All the kings of the nations, even all of them, lie in glory, every one in his own house.
19 But thou art cast out of thy grave like an abominable branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust through with a sword, that go down to the stones of the pit; as a carcase trodden under feet.
20 Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial, because thou hast destroyed thy land, and slain thy people: the seed of evildoers shall never be renowned.

[phinkasaurus]

Genesis 1:1,2
Isaiah 14:12-14
Isaiah 14:9-11
Isaiah 14:15-20



still no dinosaurs...
mmmmm
:confused:

This was the first sin, Pride.
like the pride of believing you have the ONE true way to god?

[racer5.0stang]

still no dinosaurs...
mmmmm
:confused:


like the pride of believing you have the ONE true way to god?

No, like the pride of being above God.

I cannot explain dinosaurs, although they obviously existed. What I did try to explain was that man has been on earth, but the earth was created before man and no time line was given.

[Ace42]

So you can authoritatively dismiss evolution, but have no explanation for dinosaurs?

Why not stick your head in the mud and count worms?

[ASsman]

Or God.

[racer5.0stang]

So you can authoritatively dismiss evolution, but have no explanation for dinosaurs?

Why not stick your head in the mud and count worms?

And how do you dismiss creationism? Obviously dinosaurs where created by God as is everything else.

If I wanted to build a 20x30 building, and had all the parts necessary to do the job, and just laid them on the ground, do you think that it would build itself?

[Qdrop]

And how do you dismiss creationism? Obviously dinosaurs where created by God as is everything else.

If I wanted to build a 20x30 building, and had all the parts necessary to do the job, and just laid them on the ground, do you think that it would build itself?


Richard Dawkins: the Blind Watchmaker.

read it. learn.


now drop it.

[Ace42]

Obviously dinosaurs where created by God as is everything else.

If I wanted to build a 20x30 building, and had all the parts necessary to do the job, and just laid them on the ground, do you think that it would build itself?

Yeah "obviously" - because there aren't like dozens of alternative explanations rooted in scientific fact, or anything.

And, how do you think babies are made? God reaches inside the womb and puts the bits together like Lego? So is that how you age? Because God adds cells to you one at a time? What about when you die? Is that when god gets bored of you, and says "fuck it, just be a disembodied soul, it's easier that way" ?

I'm not saying there is no place for a God[s] in the world, not at all. However, creationism as fundamentalists believe it is totally irrational and without any factual or supportive evidence whatsoever. There is, however, plenty of evidence for the opposite.

Evolution is not theory, it is scientific fact. Invest in a microscope, scoop up some pond scum, and see what happens when you introduce different variables to it. Guess what, the microscopic life changes and adapts.

Scientists have WITNESSED first hand bacteria evolving to become resistant to low-levels of antibiotics.

It's been over a century since Darwin, and yet as the years go buy, more evidence supports his case, and less supports creationism.

Every major argument for Creationism has been debunked time and time again. One of the contemporary criticisms of Darwin was that you could see that dinosaurs had "long necks in order to try and keep their heads above water during Noah's flood" - this is patently nonsense, and been proved to be as much. DNA testing, the sampling of the human genome have shown just how similar we are to primates both genetically and sociologically.

The ONLY argument out of DOZENS that the creationists have left is "Your theories aren't complete" - an inherantly weak argument. I could say "Aha, my theory is the universe was shat out of the arse of a space-kangaroo" and be as complete as creationism.

So it comes down to "I believe the literal meaning of a very specific translation of an incomplete and lost work, that has been altered changed and subverted repetedly for several millenium, that is an incomplete extract of a marginally different Jewish text"

Well, bully for you, but that doesn't count as an argument. And given your total irrationality and inability to argue anything sensibly, I think that would be enough to make even dedicated creationists reconsider their opinions.

[phinkasaurus]

Obviously dinosaurs where created by God as is everything else.

see it's this spot that gets me. It's not obvious. god created everything? the proof?
the bible.
the proof of the bible?
it's god's word.
ahh..circular

i'm sorry this thread got hijacked, and I am helping that happen. no more.


<out

[Qdrop]

SO we could use the "survival of the fittest" mantra all we want, but soon we have to think about the entire planets survival, not just our immediate neighbors. This falls into the "social cooperation and survival" part of you post.

agreed......to a point.

but how do you balance self-preservation (America's current power and it's future) with the good of it's nieghbors - both allies and enemies?
something has got to give......
if we (americans) want to sustain our current status, (and of course we do. we've grown accustomed to it. it's all we know) then someone, somewhere has to suffer. unless you are wishing for a complete paradigm shift in social wealth distribution and equilibrium......but i think communism is SOOOOOO 80's.....don't you?

deparate people do desparate things.

[racer5.0stang]

Ace, you still didn't answer my question.

[Ace42]

What part of listing the numerous flaws of creationism wasn't showing how I can dismiss it?

[phinkasaurus]

if we (americans) want to sustain our current status, (and of course we do. we've grown accustomed to it. it's all we know) then someone, somewhere has to suffer. unless you are wishing for a complete paradigm shift in social wealth distribution and equilibrium......but i think communism is SOOOOOO 80's.....don't you?
and there is the issue. "we american's" aka nationalism.

why not "we, people of earth"?
or "we, humans"?
the dividers only do that, divide us.

and not all of us in this country wish to maintain our current status, especially not at the expense of the rest of the world (and it at the expense of the ENTIRE WORLD).


and, yes I am wishing for a complete shift in the world relations, social and cultural.
and imperialist states waving a communist flag was sooooooo 80's, i agree.
we can do better next time.

[Qdrop]

and there is the issue. "we american's" aka nationalism.

why not "we, people of earth"?
or "we, humans"?


oh, answer your own question. you know the answer to that.

nationalism, ethnocentrism, tribalism, racism.......all have their roots in biology.
congnotive psychology.....which has evolved for thousands of years.
Dr. Suess wrote a book about it.

the "US vs. You" mentality evolved for survival reasons.....it served a purpose.
it's very difficult, if not impossible to over come on a grand scale.

but we can dream can't we?

[phinkasaurus]

are you being sarcastic there?

we can dream or we can make it happen, by changing our actions and our opinions.

dreaming does nothing, action everything.

[Whois]

Genesis 1:26,27
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Funny, doesn't say anything a/b apes.

Thats because the bible is myth...so sorry.

[Whois]

This Thanksgiving I will thank the Native Americans. For all the cheap land! Suckas!

I don't know why the Army doesn't just give Iraqis blackets that have been sprayed with smallpox...it worked with the indians.

[Whois]

Genesis 1:1,2
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

There is no time frame between verse one and verse 2.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Here he talks a/b the earth after some cataclysmic judgment, such as the fall of Lucifer.

Isaiah 14:12-14
12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High

This was the first sin, Pride.

Isaiah 14:9-11
9 Hell from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming: it stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations.
10 All they shall speak and say unto thee, Art thou also become weak as we? art thou become like unto us?
11 Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.

This refers to the judgement against Lucifer.

Isaiah 14:15-20
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.
16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?
18 All the kings of the nations, even all of them, lie in glory, every one in his own house.
19 But thou art cast out of thy grave like an abominable branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust through with a sword, that go down to the stones of the pit; as a carcase trodden under feet.
20 Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial, because thou hast destroyed thy land, and slain thy people: the seed of evildoers shall never be renowned.

So, does god talk to you as well?

[Qdrop]

are you being sarcastic there?

we can dream or we can make it happen, by changing our actions and our opinions.

dreaming does nothing, action everything.

what "action" can you take to overcome hundreds of thousands of years of sociobiological evolution?

if you can answer that, you get a lollipop.

and please, concrete example/solutions....no wish-washy, wax poetic crap.
no Braveheart, "look to the future", never give up, positive thinking pep talks disguised as lectures.

i'm settin you up to fail, i apologize.

it's just that this board excells at spitting out rhetoric on a multitude of subjects....
but they are usually just cynical observations backed with countless blogs from joeliberal's website links.
rarely do i ever hear SOLUTIONS to anything.

[phinkasaurus]

what "action" can you take to overcome hundreds of thousands of years of sociobiological evolution?
for a start, have you heard of Participatory Economics? Check the link in my sig.

secondly, when one decides something is inevitable, one accepts it.
when one decided that something is capable of changing, one can work towards changing it. (some poetic crap for you)

i have many opinions, but mostly they center around a more egalitarian society, easily boiled down to the marxist catch phrase, "From Each according to means, To each according to needs"

now to get to that point? shit yeah, wwe have alot of shit to overcome, but sitting and accepting it as unchangeable does not even get you started.

[Qdrop]

for a start, have you heard of Participatory Economics? Check the link in my sig.

secondly, when one decides something is inevitable, one accepts it.
when one decided that something is capable of changing, one can work towards changing it. (some poetic crap for you)

i have many opinions, but mostly they center around a more egalitarian society, easily boiled down to the marxist catch phrase, "From Each according to means, To each according to needs"

now to get to that point? shit yeah, wwe have alot of shit to overcome, but sitting and accepting it as unchangeable does not even get you started.

i'll check out your link.

but you really feal that marxist or any kind of socialist system is truly compatible with human nature?
on the surface, one would think it possible....egalitarian seems fair and equitable...all needs are met, perfect social interaction and cooperation.

but where in nature do you see this existing? have any social (pack) animal species evolved into this form of social living?
any?
any primates other than us?

so how can you expect it to mesh with our society...on the most basic biological scale to a complex economic one?
simply because we can think it, we can do it?
we can break the bonds of animal behaviors and evolution because we can imagine it?

no.

that was called lamark's theory....the competing theory of evolution about 150 years back or so.
animals evolved because they, in a sense, NEEDED to.....they willed because they needed it.
giraffes necks grew because the needed to reach the leaves.....use and dissuse.
this has long been proven false.

you cannot will an evolution in behavior.....you cannot make it happen.
nature controls us.....not vice-versa.

i guess this is where i part with liberal philosophy so sharply: ideaolgy vs. reality (pragmatic reality).
i commend you for you heart....but i criticize you for your ignorance.

[phinkasaurus]

Qdrop:
where in nature do you see animals using bulletin board systems? Humans are not like any other animals on this planet. Our brains have made us seperate and distinct. Yes, Lamark's Theory has been disproven and rightly so, concerning species evolution. What I believe we are entering now is society evolution. Now, the societies that are the most successful are the ones that will last the longest. Now, brute strentgh and endless wealth cannot do it alone, especially when the short sighted profit motives associated with these adversly affect the living conditions we all share.

Human Nature? What do we know of human nature? We have advanced past nature in a sense. Mapping the human genome, vaccinations, and people living with dibilitating deformities or dieseases way past their evolutionary possibitlies, etc etc. We are still suseptable to nature and the earth has the final say on it's planet, but as a species humans have the most chance of organized change or destruction on a profound level, out of all life forms on this planet.

And human nature does not preclude kindness. Human nature does not preclude compassion. Nor does human nature neccesitate greed or disregard for your fellow man. These are all decisions that societies and people make. Think about it. Is your grandmother (insert elderly relative here) a mean selfish person? If so, can you think of no one that is unselfish? They exist.
Broadly Gandhi, Mother Teresa, MLK jr are a few. .

Bottom line, accepting the theory that human nature precludes any real change of our relationships is defeatist. What is the point then? Why even have these debates? Why do you even post on these threads, Qdrop? Your intellegence is not in question, you seem very wel informed and educated, so it can't be proving your self that way.

marxism and socialist gov't can and do work and are compatible with humanity. even if "making sure that society is good, becasue then I know I am good" is viewed as an enlightened self interest of sorts, that is still in line with your view of human nature right? that is a place to start.

if we don't change, humanity will be "evolving" right out of existance.

[Whois]

Please don't feed the trolls.

[Qdrop]

Please don't feed the trolls.

you are a fucking ass.

just put me on your Ignore list already.

coward.

haven't seen you contribute anything worthwhile to any of these threads.

crumb.

you just spit out the rhetoric and jump on Ace's jock, ect.

adopting the message board mantras "don't feed the trolls" ect....

you are a fucking lemming......

[Qdrop]

Qdrop:
where in nature do you see animals using bulletin board systems? Humans are not like any other animals on this planet. Our brains have made us seperate and distinct. Yes, Lamark's Theory has been disproven and rightly so, concerning species evolution. What I believe we are entering now is society evolution. Now, the societies that are the most successful are the ones that will last the longest. Now, brute strentgh and endless wealth cannot do it alone, especially when the short sighted profit motives associated with these adversly affect the living conditions we all share.

Human Nature? What do we know of human nature? We have advanced past nature in a sense. Mapping the human genome, vaccinations, and people living with dibilitating deformities or dieseases way past their evolutionary possibitlies, etc etc. We are still suseptable to nature and the earth has the final say on it's planet, but as a species humans have the most chance of organized change or destruction on a profound level, out of all life forms on this planet.

And human nature does not preclude kindness. Human nature does not preclude compassion. Nor does human nature neccesitate greed or disregard for your fellow man. These are all decisions that societies and people make. Think about it. Is your grandmother (insert elderly relative here) a mean selfish person? If so, can you think of no one that is unselfish? They exist.
Broadly Gandhi, Mother Teresa, MLK jr are a few. .

Bottom line, accepting the theory that human nature precludes any real change of our relationships is defeatist. What is the point then? Why even have these debates? Why do you even post on these threads, Qdrop? Your intellegence is not in question, you seem very wel informed and educated, so it can't be proving your self that way.

marxism and socialist gov't can and do work and are compatible with humanity. even if "making sure that society is good, becasue then I know I am good" is viewed as an enlightened self interest of sorts, that is still in line with your view of human nature right? that is a place to start.

if we don't change, humanity will be "evolving" right out of existance.

ehh.....you're missing the point...or rather, the big picture.
despite my efforts, you still seem to think that because man can build things and go on message boards, we can overcome and ignore our animal roots.
we can simply out-think our pre-programmed behaviors.

we can't......but i don't think i can go any farther with you on this. i'm not going to convince you.....we come from 2 very separate schools of thought.

of course human nature does not preclude compassion or kindness....where in my previous posts did i say this?
compassion and cooperation has significant survival value.....as do all of the virtues we possess.

i'm not trying to come off as defeatist.....just a realist.....a pragmatist.
i don't beleive we should throw our hands up at the sky and say "fuck it!...we're animals!!"
we should, instead, look to first accepting what we are and what our evolved behavioral tendancies are...and work WITHIN those constructs.....
controled capitalism works best fiscally for example.......

i'm not sure if i'm going to make any headway with you here, though....

[ASsman]

you are a fucking ass.

just put me on your Ignore list already.

coward.

haven't seen you contribute anything worthwhile to any of these threads.

crumb.

you just spit out the rhetoric and jump on Ace's jock, ect.

adopting the message board mantras "don't feed the trolls" ect....

you are a fucking lemming......
And you believe you have contributed? Hahah.... Also what's with the double spacing. Sisko used to do that, coincidence?...I think not.

[Qdrop]

And you believe you have contributed? Hahah.... Also what's with the double spacing. Sisko used to do that, coincidence?...I think not.


yes i do think i've contributed......i don't follow and parrot.....like many on this board.

whether you agree with anything i write or not, you can't dismiss me. (unless you want to put me on YOUR ignore list too, go for it....coward.)

have some respect.
that is, after all, the SUBJECT of this thread.

see, this is EXACTLY why this thread was started....because people like you who cannot only respect another's opinion...but won't even tolerate it.


sisko??.....dude, don't even start that shit. any moderator can run the IP address if they think i'm some ex-asshole who got banned.
fuck off.

fucking gossip queen.......back to high school with ya.

[ASsman]

yes i do think i've contributed......i don't follow and parrot.....like many on this board.
You don't follow and parrot? What I was under the impression that is all you did. Or has being pro-bush, pro-war, and conservative become the minority now. Or do you believe just because MTV seems to be for a canidate, it is pop-culture and everyone is merely following it blindly.

whether you agree with anything i write or not, you can't dismiss me. (unless you want to put me on YOUR ignore list too, go for it....coward.)
Meh, putting you are my ignore list or just ignoring you for being a complete moron. Same shit. In either case how is that being a coward? You don't see me stopping Jehovas Witnesses just for a good argument, which I know they won't give up on.

"I cannot be proven wrong because it is my unsupported opinion. So I win." - from me to a previous idiot.

have some respect.
that is, after all, the SUBJECT of this thread.[/repect]
Respect for whom, or what? And why should I.

[quote]see, this is EXACTLY why this thread was started....because people like you who cannot only respect another's opinion...but won't even tolerate it.
Like the 11 states who thought gays opinion was untolerable? Don't speak to me about tolerating. Do you tell this to Jews too? Hey you survived the Holocaust, no harm done. You should tolerate Nazi opinions. Do you tolerate fascist opinion? I will treat someones opinion as such, an opinion. Unsupported by fact, a mental fart.

fucking gossip queen.......back to high school with ya.
Meh, you're the one who types like hes on AIM with his girlfriends.

Note: We aren't talking about opinions on Healthcare, or Taxes. We are talking about something Black and White. War and Peace. Killing the innocent for no reason.

[Ace42]

Don't quote the troll. Despite his dellusions of grandieur, he is just another troll pretending that his weak grasp of pseudo-science somehow legitimises his unsupported assertions. The guy's too opinionated to even see just how transparent he really is. Ignore him and he'll go away. That or he'll keep calling everyone who doesn't want to play with his smelly nose-picking self "cowards."

However, if you don't quote him, we won't even be able to hear his juvenile foot-stamping. So yeah. Don't.

[Whois]

Besides, we'd respect him more if he would wipe George's cum off his face.

[phinkasaurus]

controled capitalism works best fiscally for example.......
here's the crux of why we don't agree.

i believe people can and would enter into relationships of exchange and coexistance without needing a profit motive behind it. apparntly, you feel humanity needs (or is incapable of escaping) this profit motive. and by profit motive, I mean one half of the exchanging parties benifiting at the expense of the other half. In captialism, controlled or "free market", someone always gets a "better deal", and someone is always taken, aka exploited. at it's core, the values of capitalism are selfish and self serving. "Me First!" is the common mantra. this I cannot agree with, nor do I think it's inevitable, as dictated by our hardwiring.

sure, we should accept what we are, where we came from, and move forward from it. early mankind did not just accept living in caves or as namdic groups. they moved forward, advanced, and changed their relationships with each other and surrounding groups.

one day all of humanity will do the same.
i hope.
or we will die out.

[Qdrop]

You don't follow and parrot? What I was under the impression that is all you did. Or has being pro-bush, pro-war, and conservative become the minority now. Or do you believe just because MTV seems to be for a canidate, it is pop-culture and everyone is merely following it blindly.


Meh, putting you are my ignore list or just ignoring you for being a complete moron. Same shit. In either case how is that being a coward? You don't see me stopping Jehovas Witnesses just for a good argument, which I know they won't give up on.

"I cannot be proven wrong because it is my unsupported opinion. So I win." - from me to a previous idiot.

have some respect.
that is, after all, the SUBJECT of this thread.

Respect for whom, or what? And why should I.


Like the 11 states who thought gays opinion was untolerable? Don't speak to me about tolerating. Do you tell this to Jews too? Hey you survived the Holocaust, no harm done. You should tolerate Nazi opinions. Do you tolerate fascist opinion? I will treat someones opinion as such, an opinion. Unsupported by fact, a mental fart.


Meh, you're the one who types like hes on AIM with his girlfriends.


ok...oh ignorant one...

first off: i'm an independant. i voted for Kerry. I'm not "pro-war" so to speak...i beleive we went to war under false pretenses when we didn't have to...but we are there and must finish the job.
i am embarrassed by bush and terrified where this country is headed in the next 4 years.
i'm socially liberal and accepting of virtually all life styles, including homosexuality.

see, you are so used to seeing things in black and white that you just painted me as a southern GOP redneck hick........

fuckin idiot.

and i type like i'm talking to my girlfriend on AIM?

possibley, i do that.

you should try getting one, girls are great.....really.
try it...get up from the computer, go outside and go say hi to a pretty girl. go on.
see where it leads......you may like it.

[ASsman]

This coward will use his ability to use his ignore list. It's like TIVO! But really, attacking me saying I should go back to high school. Then using that post to increase your maturity level. Pure brilliance.

Also, you must respect my opinion. Stop disrespecting it hypocrit.


dis·re·spect Audio pronunciation of "disrespect" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (dsr-spkt)
n.

Lack of respect, esteem, or courteous regard.


re·spect Audio pronunciation of "respect" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-spkt)
tr.v. re·spect·ed, re·spect·ing, re·spects

1. To feel or show deferential regard for; esteem.
2. To avoid violation of or interference with: respect the speed limit.
3. To relate or refer to; concern.


n.

1. A feeling of appreciative, often deferential regard; esteem. See Synonyms at regard.
2. The state of being regarded with honor or esteem.
3. Willingness to show consideration or appreciation.
4. respects Polite expressions of consideration or deference: pay one's respects.
5. A particular aspect, feature, or detail: In many respects this is an important decision.

[Qdrop]

This coward will use his ability to use his ignore list. It's like TIVO!



another fucking coward.

i embarrassed you by showing how you ignorantly marginalized me because of your preconcived notions....and you go run and hide.

wow, i'm on all of the liberals' ignore lists now.....and i'm not even a conservative........craziness.

jesus...is this why we lost the election?....are liberal cowards?
i never would have pegged them as such.......
depressing.

[Ace42]

Being on my ignore list, I couldn't see what he actually said, but I'd imagine it went something like this:

"Wah, mummy, these mean men won't listen to me. Wahhhhh. The big boys don't like me, which makes them all poopie-heads! I didn't want to be in their stupid club for stupid people anyway, because only stupid people wouldn't let me in the club. Wah...

I wish they didn't take their ball with them. And I wish I had friends."

Just like that.

[Qdrop]

Being on my ignore list, I couldn't see what he actually said, but I'd imagine it went something like this:

"Wah, mummy, these mean men won't listen to me. Wahhhhh. The big boys don't like me, which makes them all poopie-heads! I didn't want to be in their stupid club for stupid people anyway, because only stupid people wouldn't let me in the club. Wah...

I wish they didn't take their ball with them. And I wish I had friends."

Just like that.

this from a guy with a Dragonball Z avatar....
how's the toy collection coming along, ACe?

[drobertson420]

this from a guy with a Dragonball Z avatar....
how's the toy collection coming along, ACe?


He's too busy playing his "Star Wars" game.... ;)

[racer5.0stang]

What part of listing the numerous flaws of creationism wasn't showing how I can dismiss it?

The part where the building builds itself.

[Qdrop]

The part where the building builds itself.

where?...when?

were in evololution does the claim of "a biuling biulding itself" come in?

what part of evolution are speaking of?

[racer5.0stang]

where?...when?

were in evololution does the claim of "a biuling biulding itself" come in?

what part of evolution are speaking of?

Well, the part where all the molecules are laying in a puddle and merge together to form the some of the first "life". It is the same concept.

[Qdrop]

Well, the part where all the molecules are laying in a puddle and merge together to form the some of the first "life". It is the same concept.

why are you looking for an answer to that on a message board? if you are truly interested in that question.....read some Richard Dawkins or Stephen Gould books.

try the Blind Watchmaker.
that will answer your question far more eloquently than anyone here.

but see.....you don't actually want an answer to that......this isn't about a quest for knowledge......
you just want to test the intellect of me or others personally....
you want to see if WE know.......
you just want to argue.....in circles.
so you'll feel like a good little christian.....and can sleep at night.....
and can look at your fellow parishioners in church in the eyes and feel like you're as good as them.....and you'll go to heaven too.....and you belong and are doing your part.

[racer5.0stang]

why are you looking for an answer to that on a message board? if you are truly interested in that question.....read some Richard Dawkins or Stephen Gould books.

try the Blind Watchmaker.
that will answer your question far more eloquently than anyone here.

but see.....you don't actually want an answer to that......this isn't about a quest for knowledge......
you just want to test the intellect of me or others personally....
you want to see if WE know.......
you just want to argue.....in circles.
so you'll feel like a good little christian.....and can sleep at night.....
and can look at your fellow parishioners in church in the eyes and feel like you're as good as them.....and you'll go to heaven too.....and you belong and are doing your part.

I am not trying to test you intellect, only open your eyes to the truth. I asked a simple question, which was toward Ace42, and no one has answered it.

Maybe you forget or overlooked the question in it's simplicity. Here it is again.

If you have all the materials needed to construct a building and leave them lying on the ground, do you think that it will construct it self?

It is a yes or no question.

Actually what I do, is between me and God, not between me and other people.

Revelation 20
11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

10 out of 10 people, die.

[Qdrop]

I am not trying to test you intellect, only open your eyes to the truth. I asked a simple question, which was toward Ace42, and no one has answered it.

Maybe you forget or overlooked the question in it's simplicity. Here it is again.

If you have all the materials needed to construct a building and leave them lying on the ground, do you think that it will construct it self?

It is a yes or no question.


if i give you a plausible theory/answer like you are requesting....will you let this go?

yes or no?

[racer5.0stang]

if i give you a plausible theory/answer like you are requesting....will you let this go?

yes or no?

Define "let this go"

It is possible.

[Qdrop]

Define "let this go"

It is possible.

meaning : stop asking the same question and harping on it.
and quoting the bible every 10 min.

[racer5.0stang]

meaning : stop asking the same question and harping on it.
and quoting the bible every 10 min.

Ok I will stop, if my question is answered.

I will not stop quoting the bible.

[phinkasaurus]

If you have all the materials needed to construct a building and leave them lying on the ground, do you think that it will construct it self?

no.

you need a supernatural force that resides on an unproovable plane of existance to put all the peices together in a supreme plan that only the supernatural force can understand, while any of the sentient materials will never fully grasp it. and the materials were brought into the world through sin, and therefore will never be worthy or good unless they repent and ask the supernatural force for forgiveness.

wow, this sounds rediculous.

question for you:
If god created life, man in particular, like we see it today, and this disproves or discounts evolution, how do you explain the domestic animals humanity has created through selective breeding?

[racer5.0stang]

no.

you need a supernatural force that resides on an unproovable plane of existance to put all the peices together in a supreme plan that only the supernatural force can understand, while any of the sentient materials will never fully grasp it. and the materials were brought into the world through sin, and therefore will never be worthy or good unless they repent and ask the supernatural force for forgiveness.

wow, this sounds rediculous.

question for you:
If god created life, man in particular, like we see it today, and this disproves or discounts evolution, how do you explain the domestic animals humanity has created through selective breeding?

The ability to manupulate genetics and nature.

What sounds ridiculous is to here some one talk a/b evolving from apes and they actually believe it.

Here is a question for you. How did the human eye evolve?

[Qdrop]

Ok I will stop, if my question is answered.

I will not stop quoting the bible.

you promised:


bam! (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html#chance)

"Nor is abiogenesis (the origin of the first life) due purely to chance. Atoms and molecules arrange themselves not purely randomly, but according to their chemical properties. In the case of carbon atoms especially, this means complex molecules are sure to form spontaneously, and these complex molecules can influence each other to create even more complex molecules. Once a molecule forms that is approximately self-replicating, natural selection will guide the formation of ever more efficient replicators. The first self-replicating object didn't need to be as complex as a modern cell or even a strand of DNA. Some self-replicating molecules are not really all that complex (as organic molecules go).

Some people still argue that it is wildly improbable for a given self-replicating molecule to form at a given point (although they usually don't state the "givens," but leave them implicit in their calculations). This is true, but there were oceans of molecules working on the problem, and no one knows how many possible self-replicating molecules could have served as the first one. A calculation of the odds of abiogenesis is worthless unless it recognizes the immense range of starting materials that the first replicator might have formed from, the probably innumerable different forms that the first replicator might have taken, and the fact that much of the construction of the replicating molecule would have been non-random to start with. "

now drop it.

[racer5.0stang]

and the materials were brought into the world through sin, and therefore will never be worthy or good unless they repent and ask the supernatural force for forgiveness.

Man was made innocent and perfect, but with free will. Sin was already in the world because Satan(Lucifer) and his angels had already fallen because of Satan's sin which was pride. After man sinned, which was he ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil after God told him not to, then sin was then made abundant through Adam and his seed.

It was a test of Man's faith and Man fell miserably. God knew that Man would fail and sent salvation through His son Jesus Christ.

[Qdrop]

God knew that Man would fail .....

*sigh*
then why go through the motions?

why can't you see the circular thinking?

don't you see the philosphical dead ends in these "stories"

God created people so that they could worship him?
rather self serving, eh?

he creates tests for man, when he already knows the outcome?
then isn't it pointless?

if he already knows the outcome.....then that implies destiny.
destiny means that all outcomes are aleady written.....thus, no free will.

see, racer......that's checkmate. it's over.
but you will continue.....like the unsinkable rubber duck you are......

[racer5.0stang]

you promised:


bam! (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html#chance)

"Nor is abiogenesis (the origin of the first life) due purely to chance. Atoms and molecules arrange themselves not purely randomly, but according to their chemical properties. In the case of carbon atoms especially, this means complex molecules are sure to form spontaneously, and these complex molecules can influence each other to create even more complex molecules. Once a molecule forms that is approximately self-replicating, natural selection will guide the formation of ever more efficient replicators. The first self-replicating object didn't need to be as complex as a modern cell or even a strand of DNA. Some self-replicating molecules are not really all that complex (as organic molecules go).

Some people still argue that it is wildly improbable for a given self-replicating molecule to form at a given point (although they usually don't state the "givens," but leave them implicit in their calculations). This is true, but there were oceans of molecules working on the problem, and no one knows how many possible self-replicating molecules could have served as the first one. A calculation of the odds of abiogenesis is worthless unless it recognizes the immense range of starting materials that the first replicator might have formed from, the probably innumerable different forms that the first replicator might have taken, and the fact that much of the construction of the replicating molecule would have been non-random to start with. "

now drop it.


Wow. So all life is purely due to chance. wow, so who created the first atoms and molecules?

[phinkasaurus]

The ability to manupulate genetics and nature.
also known as evolution.


What sounds ridiculous is to here some one talk a/b evolving from apes and they actually believe it.

Here is a question for you. How did the human eye evolve?
whenever eye sight became a favored physical trait, proabably way back in the day when most animal life was in the oceans. Then as mammals slowy made their way forward in time, the eye would shift and change depending on which species it was surving with. The human eye, I believe, came into it's modern state when mammals developed forward sight (wrong name, but i mean two eyes both on the front of the face). As a bonus, our brians became much larger in that region, but on the down side we lost most of sense of smell.


What sounds ridiculous is to here some one talk a/b evolving from apes and they actually believe it.
that's funny. a plausible proven in modern science (biology, geology, anthropology) theory sounds rediculous, while a theory based on one book and the untestable unprovable "word of god" doesn't?

why does it rain? is that angels crying?
why does the sun rise and set? is that Apollo chasing it away on his chariot?
how are babies born? the stork?
why do we get sick? is that bad spirits in our blood?

your thoughts on this:
religion is an ancient science, used in early part of man's history to explain his environment in a way primitive man can understand.

[Ace42]

The part where the building builds itself.

That is a false analogy. Buildings are not living.

Buildings can no more build themselves without people than babies can be conceived without sperm and eggs.

Bodies are not buildings, and suggesting that they are comparable is just stupid and illogical.

That has nothing to do with "God."

wow, so who created the first atoms and molecules?

Why does a "person" or a "life form" have to create anything? Who created the valley? You'd say "God" and you'd be wrong. Geologists can observe the rate at which ice-flows carve out valleys. In some places it is happening fast enough to be actually observable. What creates the valleys is no "sentience" it is merely part of an ongoing process.

The idea that there needs to be a "start" is a very contrived and linear conception. There is no reason why there "has" to be a start. Time is relative (sorry again, this has been proved scientifically) and as such there need not be necessarily a "start."

And even if there was a "start" - it does not have to be a sentient entity at the start of it. You think God said "let there be light" and there was.

What if there was no God saying anything. Exactly the same scenario, but instead of this unseen figure existing nebulously, things "just happened"

There is as much evidence to suggest this is the course of events as your theory. Infact there is a great deal more so, because a theory of spontaneous generation doesn't end up saying "oh, but I can't explain dinosaurs, it was just God fucking with us"

What your theory boils down to is "I believe in God, because I don't understand how any other explanation works" - well sorry, but your inability to interpret scientifically aquired fact is not a justification. Your argument is the same argument used to state the world is flat. "How come we don't all slide off the edges? Everyone knows that you fall down - so if we are on the top of a ball, anyone at the edges would slide and slide and slide until they drop off"

Well, just because you are too stupid to understand the complexities (and it is a lot more complex than 'somebody said something, and it happened, just like in this book I've got written by people who hadn't even heard of dinosaurs) doesn't mean that you have a cast-iron case. It just means you are a gibbering buffoon.

Can't understand how something as complex as an eye came into being? They used to say that about birds wings. And yet, here we are, just over a century later, and we can fly faster than any living thing on the planet.

That happened in a century. We have cameras that far exceed the capabilities of the human eye. This occured within centuries of the phenomena they are based on being discovered.

So, you think that in hundreds of BILLIONS of years of evolution, developing an eye is just impossible by a natural process alone?

Tish and Fipsy.

Bacterium have evolved to be resistant to anti-biotics within living memory. These are simple organisms developing ways to outfox human ingenuity and super-complicated chemical engineering. God doesn't "create" them, we can look in a petry dish and see the process occuring. There is no "spontaneous" appearance of a new strain, but merely the next step in a process.

So they can grow resistant and survive something SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO KILL THEM AS EFFECTIVELY AS POSSIBLE. But in the immeasurably long time of life on Earth, they can't simply organise themselves into a sensory organ? Yeah, that's very common sense thinking right there.

[phinkasaurus]

Wow. So all life is purely due to chance. wow, so who created the first atoms and molecules?

no one or thing "created" them. they just were. pretty scary huh?

[Qdrop]

no one or thing "created" them. they just were. pretty scary huh?


Stephen Hawkings- space is finite but without boundries.

time never began, nor will it end.......it has always been.

the "big bang" and the "big crunch" are part of a never ending or beginning line of "big bangs" and "big crunches"........


why does every creationist like to use the "how did the human eye evolve?" question?
it's like they were all coaxed by the same web page.

sorry, the human eye is NOT an example of irreducable complexity...as creationists would like to beleive.
too much micheal Behm......not enough Gould.

[Qdrop]

here...

before you even get started..


irreducable complexity dismantled (http://www.talkdesign.org/faqs/icdmyst/ICDmyst.html)

have a look....

in fact, just look at the whole talks.orgins site......

[Jasonik]

The Bible is a metaphor, and existentially speaking, our reality is a metaphor, and so then is science. They are both merely prisms through which we look, to try to see meaning.

From Albert Einstein:
"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."
"I believe in a Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings."
"Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe - a spirit vastly superior to that of man...In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is indeed quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive." [Letter to a child who asked if scientist pray]
"I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. [He was speaking of Quantum Mechanics and the breaking down of determinism.] My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance -- but for us, not for God."
"It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure." -- Albert Einstein
"There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle." --A. Einstein

"What really interests me is whether God had any choice in the creation of the world." --Albert Einstein

[Ace42]

Very apt.

[Qdrop]

jasonik: dabbling in a bit of Intelligent Design, eh?

[phinkasaurus]

jasonik:
is that from a collection of his quotes on the subject? if so can you post a link? if not, great job for putting them all together, thanks!

[Jasonik]

jasonik:
is that from a collection of his quotes on the subject? if so can you post a link? if not, great job for putting them all together, thanks!
There are no such thing as stupid questions....just stupid people.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=einstein+quotes+god

[Ace42]

It's at times like this I find myself thinking "what would Ozzy say?"

Probably "Sharon!!! The f****** house is on fire"

[phinkasaurus]

There are no such thing as stupid questions....just stupid people.

:confused:
thanks....

[racer5.0stang]

That is a false analogy. Buildings are not living.

Buildings can no more build themselves without people than babies can be conceived without sperm and eggs.

Bodies are not buildings, and suggesting that they are comparable is just stupid and illogical.

That has nothing to do with "God."



Why does a "person" or a "life form" have to create anything? Who created the valley? You'd say "God" and you'd be wrong. Geologists can observe the rate at which ice-flows carve out valleys. In some places it is happening fast enough to be actually observable. What creates the valleys is no "sentience" it is merely part of an ongoing process.

The idea that there needs to be a "start" is a very contrived and linear conception. There is no reason why there "has" to be a start. Time is relative (sorry again, this has been proved scientifically) and as such there need not be necessarily a "start."

And even if there was a "start" - it does not have to be a sentient entity at the start of it. You think God said "let there be light" and there was.

What if there was no God saying anything. Exactly the same scenario, but instead of this unseen figure existing nebulously, things "just happened"

There is as much evidence to suggest this is the course of events as your theory. Infact there is a great deal more so, because a theory of spontaneous generation doesn't end up saying "oh, but I can't explain dinosaurs, it was just God fucking with us"

What your theory boils down to is "I believe in God, because I don't understand how any other explanation works" - well sorry, but your inability to interpret scientifically aquired fact is not a justification. Your argument is the same argument used to state the world is flat. "How come we don't all slide off the edges? Everyone knows that you fall down - so if we are on the top of a ball, anyone at the edges would slide and slide and slide until they drop off"

Well, just because you are too stupid to understand the complexities (and it is a lot more complex than 'somebody said something, and it happened, just like in this book I've got written by people who hadn't even heard of dinosaurs) doesn't mean that you have a cast-iron case. It just means you are a gibbering buffoon.

Can't understand how something as complex as an eye came into being? They used to say that about birds wings. And yet, here we are, just over a century later, and we can fly faster than any living thing on the planet.

That happened in a century. We have cameras that far exceed the capabilities of the human eye. This occured within centuries of the phenomena they are based on being discovered.

So, you think that in hundreds of BILLIONS of years of evolution, developing an eye is just impossible by a natural process alone?

Tish and Fipsy.

Bacterium have evolved to be resistant to anti-biotics within living memory. These are simple organisms developing ways to outfox human ingenuity and super-complicated chemical engineering. God doesn't "create" them, we can look in a petry dish and see the process occuring. There is no "spontaneous" appearance of a new strain, but merely the next step in a process.

So they can grow resistant and survive something SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO KILL THEM AS EFFECTIVELY AS POSSIBLE. But in the immeasurably long time of life on Earth, they can't simply organise themselves into a sensory organ? Yeah, that's very common sense thinking right there.

What small and dismal world you live in.

I am sorry that you cannot see the truth which is right before your very own eyes. If God doesn't exist, then why do you refer to Him as God?

[Qdrop]

I am sorry that you cannot see the truth which is right before your very own eyes. If God doesn't exist, then why do you refer to Him as God?


THAT'S your counter agrument?

dude...seriously......you make creationist look worse than they already do.

seriously......just drop it.

[racer5.0stang]

THAT'S your counter agrument?

dude...seriously......you make creationist look worse than they already do.

seriously......just drop it.

I was not try to impose a "counter agrument". It is obvious that both sides are in a dead heat neither willing to give any ground. I guess we should agree to disagree. I hope this doesn't change our message board relationship and I don't end up on your dreaded ignore list.(sarcasm)

[phinkasaurus]

I am sorry that you cannot see the truth which is right before your very own eyes. If God doesn't exist, then why do you refer to Him as God?

out of respect, I'd imagine.
and because imaginary friend has no respect in it at all. and

this is the respect thread, right?

[racer5.0stang]

out of respect, I'd imagine.
and because imaginary friend has no respect in it at all. and

this is the respect thread, right?

You have an imagninary friend?

[ASsman]

What small and dismal world you live in.

I am sorry that you cannot see the truth which is right before your very own eyes. If God doesn't exist, then why do you refer to Him as God?
.... Because that's his name moron.


truth Audio pronunciation of "Truth" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (trth)
n. pl. truths (trthz, trths)

1. Conformity to fact or actuality.
2. A statement proven to be or accepted as true.
3. Sincerity; integrity.
4. Fidelity to an original or standard.
5.
1. Reality; actuality.
2. often Truth That which is considered to be the supreme reality and to have the ultimate meaning and value of existence.


I have yet to see any facts. Also if facts existed it would go against the whole point of faith. DUH. If we don't need faith, then what are we wasting our time here on. Shit, if (the artist formerly known as GOD) were to show himself to everyone one, what would the point of your existance. Or you you not believe we are in a obstacle course back to (the artist formerly known as GOD). Like some Jehovas Witness or some shit.

[phinkasaurus]

You have an imagninary friend?
no, I have science.
[tips hat]

[Ace42]

It is obvious that both sides are in a dead heat neither willing to give any ground. I guess we should agree to disagree. I hope this doesn't change our message board relationship and I don't end up on your dreaded ignore list.(sarcasm)

Yeah, heaven forbid someone who can't even understand what I am saying, or objective fact, could admit that the chances are, like with everything else, their understanding of a complicated and metaphysical text is simplistic and often patently absurd.

I mean, who could argue with a cast-iron argument like "Well, the objective fact you offered makes me feel dismal."

Hell, let's not believe anything that makes us feel bad. Oh wait, Republicans don't.

http://www.beastieboys.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=35796&highlight=bush+supporters+touch

[racer5.0stang]

.... Because that's his name moron.


truth Audio pronunciation of "Truth" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (trth)
n. pl. truths (trthz, trths)

1. Conformity to fact or actuality.
2. A statement proven to be or accepted as true.
3. Sincerity; integrity.
4. Fidelity to an original or standard.
5.
1. Reality; actuality.
2. often Truth That which is considered to be the supreme reality and to have the ultimate meaning and value of existence.


I have yet to see any facts. Also if facts existed it would go against the whole point of faith. DUH. If we don't need faith, then what are we wasting our time here on. Shit, if (the artist formerly known as GOD) were to show himself to everyone one, what would the point of your existance. Or you you not believe we are in a obstacle course back to (the artist formerly known as GOD). Like some Jehovas Witness or some shit.

He actually has many names. But some of you say that He does not exist, so when you say God, it refers to a supreme, omnipotent being, and you by saying that agree that He exists and is your God.

I am glad that Webster gave you the definition of the word truth, kinda like Bill Clinton.

Well the bible is fact and we believe it through faith or dismiss it through ignorance.

[Ace42]

He actually has many names. But some of you say that He does not exist, so when you say God, it refers to a supreme, omnipotent being, and you by saying that agree that He exists and is your God.

Well the bible is fact and we believe it through faith or dismiss it through ignorance.

Firstly, I can refer to Dracula by name. It doesn't mean I agree and that he is really a Transylvanian vampire. I find it rather sad that you use this obviously backwards logic to try and defend your position, and yet can see no fault in it.

And FFS, think about this for at least a second. If something is "fact" you do not need faith in it. The mere fact that you need "faith" to believe it means it is uncertain by its very nature.

No wonder you don't understand the bible, you don't even understand the words you are using yourself. And yet you think you understand the words of the bible. Pathetic.

[Funkaloyd]

So by saying that Alice never lived and Wonderland doesn't exist, I am actually agreeing that Alice was a real person and Wonderland is as real as the air we breath?

[ASsman]

Actually I believe Jesus never existed because Im jewish. Which is a fact, that directly contradicts with your fact.

[ASsman]

Argument (1)
Santa Claus: When I write my list for Santa Claus, I feel such a rush of joy and happiness. With all these emotions, Santa Claus MUST be real!
Jesus Christ: When I pray to Jesus Christ, I feel such a rush of joy and happiness. With all these emotions, Jesus Christ MUST be real!

Argument (2)
Santa Claus: If you don't believe in Santa Claus, you'll get no presents!
Jesus Christ: If you don't believe in Jesus Christ, you'll not go to heaven!

Argument (3)
Santa Claus: If you don't believe in Santa CLaus, you'll get charcoal in your stockings and you'll be laughed at by all the other children!
Jesus Christ: If you don't believe in Jesus Christ, you'll go to hell and burn in eternity in a bottomless pit where you feel pain eternally!

Argument (4)
Santa Claus: You just gotta have faith that Santa Claus is real!
Jesus Christ: You just gotta have faith that Jesus Christ is real!

Argument (5)
Santa Claus: Stupid head!
Jesus Christ: Heathen!

Argument (6)
Santa Claus: Our elders are intelligent and knowledgeable beings. They gave us knowledge of Santa Claus. Since they are intelligent and knowledgeable beings, as well as honest beings, they would never lie to us about the knowledge of Santa Claus.
Jesus Christ: Our elders are intelligent and knowledgeable beings. They gave us knowledge of Jesus Christ. Since they are intelligent and knowledgeable beings, as well as honest beings, they would never lie to us about the knowledge of Jesus Christ.

Argument (7)
Santa Claus: Santa lives far, far away. He lives at the North Pole! However, we do see his effects, and just because we can't see him, it doesn't mean he doesn't exist.
Jesus Christ: Jesus lives far, far away. He lives at the North Pole! However, we do see his effects, and just because we can't see him, it doesn't mean he doesn't exist.

Argument (8)
Santa Claus: Santa Claus has magic. If you can create millions of presents for millions of children and deliver them all on one night, then he must be magical. If you believe in him, then you'll get him working for you and giving his magical powers to you!
Jesus Christ: Jesus Christ has magic. If you can create billions and billions of grams of matter in one week, then he must be magical. If you believe in him, then you'll get him working for you and giving his magical powers to you!

Argument (9)
Santa Claus: We can know that Santa is real! Where did the presents come from? Natural phenomenon? Natural phenomenom has explained nothing!
Jesus Christ: We can know that Jesus is real! Where did the Universe come from? Natural phenomenon? Natural phenomenom has explained nothing!

Argument (10)
Santa Claus: Santa Claus use to be a saint who delivered presents to children. He did exist in one form! Therefore, he must truly be alive and around today!
Jesus Christ: Jesus Christ was formed from the religion of various religions. Saturn, a god of a thousand year old religion, was born of a virgin mother, performed miracles, and was resurrected. Christmas, December 25, is actually the birth of the god Saturn, from December 25, as well, except it was called Saturnalia. He did exist in one form! Therefore, Jesus must truly be alive and around today!

Argument (11)
Santa Claus: Santa Claus, as you know, has been commercialized by the market. All around Christmas, people are buying lots and lots of toys. Lots of this money goes to charity and such. Why would you want to hurt good things like Santa Claus?
Jesus Christ: Jesus Christ, as you know, has been commercialized by the churches. The churches use the money they get from willing donors to do good things and sometimes religion can even bring a community to either be closer or go on a crusade to rape women and torture children. Why would you want to hurt goods things like Jesus Christ?

Argument (12)
Santa Claus: But all the other kids believe in Santa Claus, and they're not stupid! Santa Claus must be real!
Jesus Christ: But all the other people believe in Jesus Christ ,and they're not stupid! Jesus Christ must be real!

Argument (13)
Santa Claus: You'll believe someday! When you get your presents and see that they were designed with intelligence and beauty and that you wanted those exact ones, despite the fact that you told your parents or that you may have gotten ones that you didn't want, you'll know that a supreme designer of toys must exist. It must be Santa Claus!
Jesus Christ: You'll believe someday! When you look into the world and see that animals are designed with intelligence and beaty and that they exist to reach a means, despite the fact that many of them have vestigal organs or that Natural Selection perfectly explains it, you'll know that Jesus Christ must exist. It must be Jesus Christ!

Argument (14)
Santa Claus: Sure! You may say Santa Claus is illogical, but that doesn't mean anything. Santa Claus created logic! He can disobey it!
Jesus Christ: Sure! You may say Jesus Christ is illogical, but that doesn't mean anything. Jesus Christ created logic! He can disobey it!

Argument (15)
Santa Claus: Well, certainly NOT believing in Santa Claus is ALSO a myth!
Jesus Christ: Well, certainly NOT believing in Jesus Christ is ALSO a religion!

Argument (16)
Santa Claus: The burden of proof is on the skeptic!
Jesus Christ: The burden of proof is on the skeptic!

Argument (17)
Santa Claus: That's it! I proved Santa Claus and he exists! End of debate!
Jesus Christ: That's it! I proved Jesus Christ and he exists! End of debate!

Argument (18)
Santa Claus: Why be a good little boy without Santa Claus? You're good and you get no presents. If you're bad, nothing happens. You're a fool and immoral!
Jesus Christ: Why be a good person without Jesus Christ? You're good and you don't get heaven. If you're bad, nothing happens. You're a fool and immoral!

Argument (19)
Santa Claus: Why don't you just kill yourself now? There's no hope to live without Santa Claus!
Jesus Christ: Why don't you just kill yourself now? There's no hope to live without Jesus Christ!

Argument (20)
Santa Claus: If Santa Claus isn't real, what is the meaning of life?
Jesus Christ: If Jesus Christ isn't real, what is the meaning of life?

[infidel]

Well the bible is fact and we believe it through faith or dismiss it through ignorance
More like though intelligence.
Gods are nothing more than imaginary friends that humans invented to elevate their sense of self importance and to blame when things don't go right. People who claim to believe in god do not really do so. They just wish to believe in god. They somehow feel that their lives are meaningless without god, so they choose to close their eyes to evidence against the existence of god.

[Ace42]

HERETIC

http://www.subgenius.com/slaq.htm

[ASsman]

You guys just don't get it. You should listen to some Christian Rock.

[drobertson420]

You guys just don't get it. You should listen to some Christian Rock.

I Prefer "Christian Death-Metal"

[American]

Why does a "person" or a "life form" have to create anything? Who created the valley? You'd say "God" and you'd be wrong. Geologists can observe the rate at which ice-flows carve out valleys. In some places it is happening fast enough to be actually observable. What creates the valleys is no "sentience" it is merely part of an ongoing process.
Who cuts up the veggies??? The knife or the person holding it? I would have to say the knife, but only because we want it to and are making it. You should understand my point.

The idea that there needs to be a "start" is a very contrived and linear conception. There is no reason why there "has" to be a start. Time is relative (sorry again, this has been proved scientifically) and as such there need not be necessarily a "start."
There is no reason why there "Does not have" to be a start. Everything that we as humans know has a start. We just can't figure out if it was the chicken or the egg.

And even if there was a "start" - it does not have to be a sentient entity at the start of it.
Just becuase it does not have to doesn't mean that it is not possible. Works both ways.

What if there was no God saying anything. Exactly the same scenario, but instead of this unseen figure existing nebulously, things "just happened"
"What if" is not a valid argument. "What if" Hitler had been victim of abortion? "What if" Uranium didn't exsist? "What if" Ace42's mind was open instead of anti?

There is as much evidence to suggest this is the course of events as your theory. Infact there is a great deal more so, because a theory of spontaneous generation doesn't end up saying "oh, but I can't explain dinosaurs, it was just God fucking with us"
Seems to me that you are obsessed with pig-fucking and dinosaurs. Hmmmmm,, a pig-o-saurous,,,,,,,

What your theory boils down to is "I believe in God, because I don't understand how any other explanation works" - well sorry, but your inability to interpret scientifically aquired fact is not a justification.
Another weak argument. Astonomy is a hobby of mine and I know that there are far more scientific questions than there are answeres. Also, if you ask someone to break down in to scientific facts, how an engine works, I'll gaurantee that they will not include "Who" and "How the engine was built. These are two critical questions that have to be answered. Sure it may work but it wouldn't if no one ever built it. Once again, I'm sure that you understand my point.


Well, just because you are too stupid to understand the complexities (and it is a lot more complex than 'somebody said something, and it happened, just like in this book I've got written by people who hadn't even heard of dinosaurs) doesn't mean that you have a cast-iron case. It just means you are a gibbering buffoon.
Looks like you are looking at it from the simple point of view avoiding any complexities. No dinosaurs = no God? Far too simple. But easier I guess. Poor Ace42.....

Can't understand how something as complex as an eye came into being? They used to say that about birds wings. And yet, here we are, just over a century later, and we can fly faster than any living thing on the planet.
And on the 12148174 to the 12431245761`235412369 power day, God clarified that he invented the ability to evolve so Ace42 would shut up.



So, you think that in hundreds of BILLIONS of years of evolution, developing an eye is just impossible by a natural process alone?
Until you show me the proof. Not a scientist's educated guess or opinion.
Hint: It is IMPOSSIBLE to prove that God does not exsit.

Tish and Fipsy.

What kind of Fairy wanker words are those? LOL, I crack myself up when I call someone a gay wanker! Wanker,,,,,

Bacterium have evolved to be resistant to anti-biotics within living memory. These are simple organisms developing ways to outfox human ingenuity and super-complicated chemical engineering. God doesn't "create" them, we can look in a petry dish and see the process occuring. There is no "spontaneous" appearance of a new strain, but merely the next step in a process.
Once again, back to my cutting theory. I would say that a micro-organism on a piece of fuit and the right place would see a knife cutting through the fruit. Of course this microbe might not know what a knife is. Either way, it can see things at a much smaller level and would not see the person doing the cutting. I guess by now you see where I am going with this,,,, God is MUCH bigger than us.

[American]

Hell, let's not believe anything that makes us feel bad.

Kind of like the war in Iraq right? Or kind of like Bush being re-elected? Neither one were justified? Your sarcasm is catching up with you Ace42.

[American]

Firstly, I can refer to Dracula by name. It doesn't mean I agree and that he is really a Transylvanian vampire. I find it rather sad that you use this obviously backwards logic to try and defend your position, and yet can see no fault in it.

And FFS, think about this for at least a second. If something is "fact" you do not need faith in it. The mere fact that you need "faith" to believe it means it is uncertain by its very nature.

No wonder you don't understand the bible, you don't even understand the words you are using yourself. And yet you think you understand the words of the bible. Pathetic.
We have to have faith and there is nothing wrong with that even though you imply that there is. It is not a sin to have uncertainty about God or the Bible. It is obvious that the "will to choose" that God blessed us with has caused this uncertainty.

[American]

Actually I believe Jesus never existed because Im jewish. Which is a fact, that directly contradicts with your fact.
If you were as smart as you think you are you would know that it is a FACT that Jesus existed. What the Jews believe is NOT a FACT is that Jesus was the Messiah.

[American]

Argument (1)
Santa Claus: When I write my list for Santa Claus, I feel such a rush of joy and happiness. With all these emotions, Santa Claus MUST be real!
Jesus Christ: When I pray to Jesus Christ, I feel such a rush of joy and happiness. With all these emotions, Jesus Christ MUST be real!

Argument (2)
Santa Claus: If you don't believe in Santa Claus, you'll get no presents!
Jesus Christ: If you don't believe in Jesus Christ, you'll not go to heaven!

Argument (3)
Santa Claus: If you don't believe in Santa CLaus, you'll get charcoal in your stockings and you'll be laughed at by all the other children!
Jesus Christ: If you don't believe in Jesus Christ, you'll go to hell and burn in eternity in a bottomless pit where you feel pain eternally!

Argument (4)
Santa Claus: You just gotta have faith that Santa Claus is real!
Jesus Christ: You just gotta have faith that Jesus Christ is real!

Argument (5)
Santa Claus: Stupid head!
Jesus Christ: Heathen!

Argument (6)
Santa Claus: Our elders are intelligent and knowledgeable beings. They gave us knowledge of Santa Claus. Since they are intelligent and knowledgeable beings, as well as honest beings, they would never lie to us about the knowledge of Santa Claus.
Jesus Christ: Our elders are intelligent and knowledgeable beings. They gave us knowledge of Jesus Christ. Since they are intelligent and knowledgeable beings, as well as honest beings, they would never lie to us about the knowledge of Jesus Christ.

Argument (7)
Santa Claus: Santa lives far, far away. He lives at the North Pole! However, we do see his effects, and just because we can't see him, it doesn't mean he doesn't exist.
Jesus Christ: Jesus lives far, far away. He lives at the North Pole! However, we do see his effects, and just because we can't see him, it doesn't mean he doesn't exist.

Argument (8)
Santa Claus: Santa Claus has magic. If you can create millions of presents for millions of children and deliver them all on one night, then he must be magical. If you believe in him, then you'll get him working for you and giving his magical powers to you!
Jesus Christ: Jesus Christ has magic. If you can create billions and billions of grams of matter in one week, then he must be magical. If you believe in him, then you'll get him working for you and giving his magical powers to you!

Argument (9)
Santa Claus: We can know that Santa is real! Where did the presents come from? Natural phenomenon? Natural phenomenom has explained nothing!
Jesus Christ: We can know that Jesus is real! Where did the Universe come from? Natural phenomenon? Natural phenomenom has explained nothing!

Argument (10)
Santa Claus: Santa Claus use to be a saint who delivered presents to children. He did exist in one form! Therefore, he must truly be alive and around today!
Jesus Christ: Jesus Christ was formed from the religion of various religions. Saturn, a god of a thousand year old religion, was born of a virgin mother, performed miracles, and was resurrected. Christmas, December 25, is actually the birth of the god Saturn, from December 25, as well, except it was called Saturnalia. He did exist in one form! Therefore, Jesus must truly be alive and around today!

Argument (11)
Santa Claus: Santa Claus, as you know, has been commercialized by the market. All around Christmas, people are buying lots and lots of toys. Lots of this money goes to charity and such. Why would you want to hurt good things like Santa Claus?
Jesus Christ: Jesus Christ, as you know, has been commercialized by the churches. The churches use the money they get from willing donors to do good things and sometimes religion can even bring a community to either be closer or go on a crusade to rape women and torture children. Why would you want to hurt goods things like Jesus Christ?

Argument (12)
Santa Claus: But all the other kids believe in Santa Claus, and they're not stupid! Santa Claus must be real!
Jesus Christ: But all the other people believe in Jesus Christ ,and they're not stupid! Jesus Christ must be real!

Argument (13)
Santa Claus: You'll believe someday! When you get your presents and see that they were designed with intelligence and beauty and that you wanted those exact ones, despite the fact that you told your parents or that you may have gotten ones that you didn't want, you'll know that a supreme designer of toys must exist. It must be Santa Claus!
Jesus Christ: You'll believe someday! When you look into the world and see that animals are designed with intelligence and beaty and that they exist to reach a means, despite the fact that many of them have vestigal organs or that Natural Selection perfectly explains it, you'll know that Jesus Christ must exist. It must be Jesus Christ!

Argument (14)
Santa Claus: Sure! You may say Santa Claus is illogical, but that doesn't mean anything. Santa Claus created logic! He can disobey it!
Jesus Christ: Sure! You may say Jesus Christ is illogical, but that doesn't mean anything. Jesus Christ created logic! He can disobey it!

Argument (15)
Santa Claus: Well, certainly NOT believing in Santa Claus is ALSO a myth!
Jesus Christ: Well, certainly NOT believing in Jesus Christ is ALSO a religion!

Argument (16)
Santa Claus: The burden of proof is on the skeptic!
Jesus Christ: The burden of proof is on the skeptic!

Argument (17)
Santa Claus: That's it! I proved Santa Claus and he exists! End of debate!
Jesus Christ: That's it! I proved Jesus Christ and he exists! End of debate!

Argument (18)
Santa Claus: Why be a good little boy without Santa Claus? You're good and you get no presents. If you're bad, nothing happens. You're a fool and immoral!
Jesus Christ: Why be a good person without Jesus Christ? You're good and you don't get heaven. If you're bad, nothing happens. You're a fool and immoral!

Argument (19)
Santa Claus: Why don't you just kill yourself now? There's no hope to live without Santa Claus!
Jesus Christ: Why don't you just kill yourself now? There's no hope to live without Jesus Christ!

Argument (20)
Santa Claus: If Santa Claus isn't real, what is the meaning of life?
Jesus Christ: If Jesus Christ isn't real, what is the meaning of life?
The same bogus argument could be made comparing you and satan. Also, you lost all of your religion credentials with the Jesus never existed argument. Existed and the Son of God are 2 different things to believe.

[American]

More like though intelligence.
Gods are nothing more than imaginary friends that humans invented to elevate their sense of self importance and to blame when things don't go right. People who claim to believe in god do not really do so. They just wish to believe in god. They somehow feel that their lives are meaningless without god, so they choose to close their eyes to evidence against the existence of god.
First off, there is no evidence that God does not exist. Not being able to see him is not a valid argument. Just because things evolve doesn't prove that God does not make them evolve. Secondly, thinking that we only believe in God because of meaning to our lives is about the simplest, closed-minded, intelligent way to look at it. Maybe we believe because of experiences we have had in our life. Maybe we believe because of what we feel in our heart. Does love exist? Does anger exist? Does hate exist? You can't see any of the 3 but you can sure feel them.

[drobertson420]

First off, there is no evidence that God does not exist. Not being able to see him is not a valid argument. Just because things evolve doesn't prove that God does not make them evolve. Secondly, thinking that we only believe in God because of meaning to our lives is about the simplest, closed-minded, intelligent way to look at it. Maybe we believe because of experiences we have had in our life. Maybe we believe because of what we feel in our heart. Does love exist? Does anger exist? Does hate exist? You can't see any of the 3 but you can sure feel them.


And Thirdly,...Not all people that voted for Bush are religious Zealots... :)

[American]

I'm a Christian but I'll be the first to admit that there are Christian extremist in the world and lots of them. Unfortunately since they are the minority of Christians they get all of the attention. You can't let a few bad apples ruin an entire basket.

[ASsman]

That's the last time I'll see you quote him Drobert.

[what_the_doofus]

What part of "Thou shall not kill" is offensive? \


Unless you want to kill....
the murdered filmmaker was percepted to be against some muslims.

[Qdrop]

That's the last time I'll see you quote him Drobert.


oh, what a threat........

you are such a fucking pansy.