[quote]dantheman wrote:
the fact that you use fox as a news source is the most shocking part of this thread…[/quote]
Why is that so shocking?
[quote]Hagar wrote:
dantheman wrote:
the fact that you use fox as a news source is the most shocking part of this thread…
Why is that so shocking?
[/quote]
Yes, do explain.
[quote]Chewie wrote:
Hagar wrote:
dantheman wrote:
the fact that you use fox as a news source is the most shocking part of this thread…
Why is that so shocking?
Yes, do explain. [/quote]
Because his college professor says so.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Chewie wrote:
Hagar wrote:
dantheman wrote:
the fact that you use fox as a news source is the most shocking part of this thread…
Why is that so shocking?
Yes, do explain.
Because his college professor says so. [/quote]
hahah, good ones guys…actually i was thinking maybe it’s the fact i didn’t grow up with a bible being drilled up my ass…or possibly the fact i trust that “liberal” media much more…or maybe the fact that bill o’reilly is the devil reincarnate…kidding, but seriously…
how can you trust a news source that has such a blatant tilt towards the seemingly fascist neo-conservative movement, that even true republicans will never defend…
hell, if i wanted to listen to WASP banter about how awesome W is, I will watch Colbert…at least he doesn’t take himself too seriously…
[quote]dantheman wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Chewie wrote:
Hagar wrote:
dantheman wrote:
the fact that you use fox as a news source is the most shocking part of this thread…
Why is that so shocking?
Yes, do explain.
Because his college professor says so.
hahah, good ones guys…actually i was thinking maybe it’s the fact i didn’t grow up with a bible being drilled up my ass…or possibly the fact i trust that “liberal” media much more…or maybe the fact that bill o’reilly is the devil reincarnate…kidding, but seriously…
how can you trust a news source that has such a blatant tilt towards the seemingly fascist neo-conservative movement, that even true republicans will never defend…
hell, if i wanted to listen to WASP banter about how awesome W is, I will watch Colbert…at least he doesn’t take himself too seriously…[/quote]
All this from a 10 year old having a baby. Wow.
[quote]dantheman wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Chewie wrote:
Hagar wrote:
dantheman wrote:
the fact that you use fox as a news source is the most shocking part of this thread…
Why is that so shocking?
Yes, do explain.
Because his college professor says so.
hahah, good ones guys…actually i was thinking maybe it’s the fact i didn’t grow up with a bible being drilled up my ass…or possibly the fact i trust that “liberal” media much more…or maybe the fact that bill o’reilly is the devil reincarnate…kidding, but seriously…
how can you trust a news source that has such a blatant tilt towards the seemingly fascist neo-conservative movement, that even true republicans will never defend…
hell, if i wanted to listen to WASP banter about how awesome W is, I will watch Colbert…at least he doesn’t take himself too seriously…[/quote]
No one have ever guessed that a liberal would use any chance they get to push their political beliefs on someone else. /sarcasm
I choose to get my news from where I chose. Go preach your liberalism somewhere else.
hahah, yea i really didnt mean to jack this thread…sorry
chewie, you asked why i felt that way, i told you…i don’t really care what you all think or believe…in fact im glad their are people with opposing views, otherwise this shit would be really really boring
[quote]rsg wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Europeans have basically rejected religion. Since, for most folks, religion is their source of morality, they see their country become like that, a degenerate pool of animals all trying to fuck anything that moves, including little children.
We have some of that here with that shitbag that filmed himself getting off on a 3 year old in Las Vegas. No religion, no morality, the society descends into Satanism.
That’s funny, if it weren’t for religion, where would you draw your morals from?
You do not need religion as a source of morality; I choose what is right and wrong by common sense and laws, not religion. Common sense tells us that being a child who has not even developed physically and mentally, cannot raise another child.
Also, Satanism is another form of a “religion”. No religion = atheism.[/quote]
Moral laws come straight out of the various world religions. It is fear of divine retribution that societies use to control their populations. The ‘common sense’ and ‘laws’ that you adopt have roots in a religion. This is common history which you should know.
I personally am a naturalist, following the Eudaimonaic principles espoused by the ancient Greek philosophers (and, no, I’m not gay like Plato…give it up, those old jokes are tiresome.)
BTW: Satanism is a consequence of atheism. Humans have an inborn desire to believe in SOMETHING.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
BTW: Satanism is a consequence of atheism. Humans have an inborn desire to believe in SOMETHING.
[/quote]
I would like to see someone provide evidence of that one.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
rsg wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Europeans have basically rejected religion. Since, for most folks, religion is their source of morality, they see their country become like that, a degenerate pool of animals all trying to fuck anything that moves, including little children.
We have some of that here with that shitbag that filmed himself getting off on a 3 year old in Las Vegas. No religion, no morality, the society descends into Satanism.
That’s funny, if it weren’t for religion, where would you draw your morals from?
You do not need religion as a source of morality; I choose what is right and wrong by common sense and laws, not religion. Common sense tells us that being a child who has not even developed physically and mentally, cannot raise another child.
Also, Satanism is another form of a “religion”. No religion = atheism.
Moral laws come straight out of the various world religions. It is fear of divine retribution that societies use to control their populations. The ‘common sense’ and ‘laws’ that you adopt have roots in a religion. This is common history which you should know.
I personally am a naturalist, following the Eudaimonaic principles espoused by the ancient Greek philosophers (and, no, I’m not gay like Plato…give it up, those old jokes are tiresome.)
BTW: Satanism is a consequence of atheism. Humans have an inborn desire to believe in SOMETHING.
[/quote]
And here I thought that emotions controlling mores were evolutionary adaptions to enable us to live in groups and are practically the same all over the world, religion or not.
8 year olds, Dude.
-dizzle
A-Dizz with the post of the thread.
I was always one for belief in self.
Just my opinion.
What is belief again? I mean, evolution might be considered a belief, no?
[quote]meangenes wrote:
What is belief again? I mean, evolution might be considered a belief, no?[/quote]
To believe in something, as opposed to knowing, is to vaguely accept as fact something about which you have insufficient evidence. Since a religious experience can’t be proved, in the same way that you could prove a physical law (by testing it), the believer accepts a subjective experience as proof TO HIM.
In other words, a religious claim can’t be made ‘falsifiable’, in the jargon.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
meangenes wrote:
What is belief again? I mean, evolution might be considered a belief, no?
To believe in something, as opposed to knowing, is to vaguely accept as fact something about which you have insufficient evidence. Since a religious experience can’t be proved, in the same way that you could prove a physical law (by testing it), the believer accepts a subjective experience as proof TO HIM.
In other words, a religious claim can’t be made ‘falsifiable’, in the jargon.
[/quote]
Do you believe you are alive?
[quote]USNS physique wrote:
We have much worse crimes in our oh so “religious” society. I never saw our religions prevent anything. Priests sodomize underage boys constantly, then the church has to pay out millions to the victims’ families. So much for the religion-as-cure-for-what-ails-us bullcrap.
Satanism…lol.[/quote]
Do you think European Priests don’t molest children?
[quote]orion wrote:
That is interesting, because a solid part of our child molesters are catholic priests.
[/quote]
I think “solid part” may be overstating their involvement quite a bit.
[quote]dantheman wrote:
hahah, good ones guys…actually i was thinking maybe it’s the fact i didn’t grow up with a bible being drilled up my ass…or possibly the fact i trust that “liberal” media much more…or maybe the fact that bill o’reilly is the devil reincarnate…kidding, but seriously…
how can you trust a news source that has such a blatant tilt towards the seemingly fascist neo-conservative movement, that even true republicans will never defend…
hell, if i wanted to listen to WASP banter about how awesome W is, I will watch Colbert…at least he doesn’t take himself too seriously…[/quote]
Getting your news from one source, no matter what source, is not a good idea. What happens then is your opinions become based on the one source you listen to and you become as skewed as that source is.
[quote]meangenes wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
meangenes wrote:
What is belief again? I mean, evolution might be considered a belief, no?
To believe in something, as opposed to knowing, is to vaguely accept as fact something about which you have insufficient evidence. Since a religious experience can’t be proved, in the same way that you could prove a physical law (by testing it), the believer accepts a subjective experience as proof TO HIM.
In other words, a religious claim can’t be made ‘falsifiable’, in the jargon.
Do you believe you are alive? [/quote]
According to Descartes ‘I am’. ;D
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
meangenes wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
meangenes wrote:
What is belief again? I mean, evolution might be considered a belief, no?
To believe in something, as opposed to knowing, is to vaguely accept as fact something about which you have insufficient evidence. Since a religious experience can’t be proved, in the same way that you could prove a physical law (by testing it), the believer accepts a subjective experience as proof TO HIM.
In other words, a religious claim can’t be made ‘falsifiable’, in the jargon.
Do you believe you are alive?
According to Descartes ‘I am’. ;D
[/quote]
Word 