XD So mean Noir
We haven't had any true satanists I suppose.

Well here are the Eleven Rules of Earth;
1 Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.
2 Do not tell your troubles to others unless you are sure that they want to hear them.
3 When in another's lair, show him respect or else do not go there.
4 If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat him cruelly and without mercy.
5 Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal.
6 Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the person and he cries out to be relieved.
7 Acknowledge the power of magic if you have used it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained.
8 Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself.
9 Do not harm little children.
10 Do not kill non-human animals unless attacked or for your food.
11 When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.


Here are the Nine Satanic Statments;
Satan represents indulgence, instead of abstinence!
Satan represents vital existence, instead of spiritual pipe dreams!
Satan represents undefiled wisdom, instead of hypocritical self-deceit!
Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it, instead of love wasted on ingrates!
Satan represents vengeance, instead of turning the other cheek!
Satan represents responsibility to the responsible, instead of concern for psychic vampires!
Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all fours, who, because of his "divine spiritual and intellectual development, has become the most vicious animal of all!
Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification.
Satan is the best friend the church has ever had, as he has kept it in business all these years!

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I agree with a lot of what prince of death just posted as rules. I wish I new where it was I found those rules. Nice place....

@^^: no offence intended, but for some reason i found those really funny XD

It was the "!"s

Do satanists still label it as sins? I would think that in order to justify that they are good they'd label them something else... I suppose it just shows that some people really believe in being evil rather than covering their religion as justified.

From what I understand, Satanists don't actually worship Satan. They simply are against the morals of Christianity. Right? Actually,I think what he's talking about isn't satanism exactly... Hopefully he'll tell me if I'm right or wrong.

I'm not even sure if they are against the morals of Christianity (because then they'd approve of stuff like stealing and killing too), but nowadays it's more of a thing to counter Christianity. Somesort of anti-Christianity.

Not sure though x_X

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanists

cult anyone?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanists

cult anyone?What is the difference between a religion and a cult?

Religion: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

Cult: a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.

According to that the difference is that a religion is what you believe in and a cult is a group that's together because they have the same beliefs...

HMMM...that's interesting :)

So basically the Christian church is in fact a Christian cult.

That seems about right. :mellow:
Too bad most people (or is it just me?) associate cults as evil hoohahs doing strange things around a bonfire. The nooblets will flame.

I am a pegan!!!11 Burn me on stakes Christians!

Isn't a cult just a small group of people who believe in a faith that has a really small following?

It differs. Cults can be unique too. Like worshipping some made up half-horse-turd-cake thing. People can be weird. That's why cults are usually filled with hoohahs.

And isn't it p[a]gan, or am I stupid? I hope I'm not stupid. That would be sad :cry:

The easily recognized difference between a religion and a cult is that a cult's founders/leaders are still alive.

It differs. Cults can be unique too. Like worshipping some made up half-horse-turd-cake thing. People can be weird. That's why cults are usually filled with hoohahs.

And isn't it p[a]gan, or am I stupid? I hope I'm not stupid. That would be sad :cry:

I don't know really. If Firefox didn't correct me I'm usually fine with it :D

The easily recognized difference between a religion and a cult is that a cult's founders/leaders are still alive.

Catholic church has the pope :mellow:

And isn't it p[a]gan, or am I stupid? I hope I'm not stupid. That would be sad :cry:
It's spelled Pagan. No clue what a pegan is

A Pagan is a heathen (person that does not believe in your own god). Christians call everyone that isn't Christian a Pagan. Islamic calls everyone that isn't Islamic a Pagan. Jews call everyone that isn't Jewish a Pagan.

Though it's mostly used to reference a user of Craft, or other Satanic religions.

Another prime example of time slowly eroding the meaning of words to mean something other than what it originally meant (usually into something "evil").

Or maybe my 1964 Oxford Dictionary is wrong. I own some pretty old/unreliable crap.

Na, you're right. Gay used to mean something like happy.

Well Satanisism for us is the worship of the all holy lord lucifer, but we do go against the beliefs of the christians

Wait I'm confused if your lord is holy then why do you still label your actions as sins >_<
If you were against the beliefs of christians you'd be tolerant of other cultures XD and there would be a lot of gray areas in your beliefs

Well Satanisism for us is the worship of the all holy lord lucifer, but we do go against the beliefs of the christians

Why worship the devil though? And if you're against all the Christian beliefs does that mean you support stealing and killing? Because the bible is against it.

0_0 I'm pretty sure half of what Gakht does is pretty much against everything in The Bible... Are Satan worshippers J-Rockers 0_0

No, J-rockers are just weird.

Agreed. XD

Wait I'm confused if your lord is holy then why do you still label your actions as sins >_<
If you were against the beliefs of christians you'd be tolerant of other cultures XD and there would be a lot of gray areas in your beliefs

The way we see it is that the christian "god" is just an angel hidding behind a curtain of light and that lucifer is the real god but was tricked into banisment. His actions by some could be said as evil but we see them as the truth. And what christians teach as the evil acts

I have encountered some Christians who believe that the god of the Old Testiment was none other than Lucifer himself, judging by the cruel commands and irrational demands.

0_0 I'm pretty sure half of what Gakht does is pretty much against everything in The Bible... Are Satan worshippers J-Rockers 0_0


No, J-rockers are just weird.


Agreed. XD

Yes... as seen by YamaP and Kame singing Seishun Amigo.

Anyway back to religion...
That just kind of adds to the idea that religion is wrong because their deities are still fallable

That just kind of adds to the idea that religion is wrong because their deities are still fallible.How does having fallible deities make religion wrong?

In the sense of christians god is omnipotent, he can't be fallible. Movie-Dogma
If satan was defeated or tricked by god, one of his angels, that raises the question of why he created something able to do that, God did it out of an act of benevolence when he created angels, but if Satan has opposite principles, he should be unable to create. Simply because of the nature of his existence.

In the sense of Christian God is omnipotent, He can't be fallible. Movie-Dogma
If Satan was defeated or tricked by God, one of His angels, that raises the question of why he created something able to do that, God did it out of an act of benevolence when He created angels, but if Satan has opposite principles, he should be unable to create. Simply because of the nature of his existence.Okay, that might explain why the Christian religion is wrong. So, what about all the other religions that have fallible deities? Are all of them wrong?

No I'm just talking about ones where the deities are all powerful.

Na, you're right. Gay used to mean something like happy.

What the hell? Since when doesn't it? Oo
Maybe it only means "happy" these days in American English?

If I may add my opinion, a quote I once read about religion goes as follows: "Good people do good things, and bad people do bad things. But it takes religion to get a good person to do bad things." Of course, religion has inspired people to do many good things as well. However, I feel that ultimately, religion just creates a dependency. People need to be able to accept the reality of things, rather than just what they wish to believe. And because people do not wish to accept the reality of things, religion has led to countless wars.

Many religions, exspecially Christianity, promote intolerance. Sure, there may be a few religions that escape these generalizations, but I believe that most religions are just creating a dependency and/or promoting intolerance. The benefits from religion do not make the many horrible things that religion has influenced strongly dissappear.

Whether or not a deity is fallable or not has nothing to do with whether or not the religion in itself is bad or good.

No I'm just talking about ones where the deities are all powerful.I believe that the word 'omnipotent' might be more concise. A fallible deity cannot be omnipotent, an omnipotent deity cannot be fallible, is that what you mean?

eh... kind of. Though buddha is omnipotent and omniscient but he is fallible.
I know it doesn't mean the religion is nighty it's simply that it is in its founding principles, wrong.

eh... kind of. Though Buddha is omnipotent and omniscient but he is fallible.
I know it doesn't mean the religion is nighty it's simply that it is in its founding principles, wrong.Nighty?

Also, I would like to know from where you learnt that Buddha is omnipotent.

Er... from the journey to the west series. Though it's important to realize that he is only one of many deities in chinese culture.
Nighty is nightmare.

Er... from the journey to the west series. Though it's important to realize that he is only one of many deities in Chinese culture.
Nighty is nightmare.Please look up the appropriate quote. I have read through the Journey to the West many times, but my memory is faulty.

Also, bear in mind that the Journey to the West may be one of the Four Great Classical Novels of Chinese literature, it might not be recognised as an official religious text.

His name itself is enlightened one. That proves his omniscience, and now I search around when buddha drops the mountain of five fingers on him to find proof of his omnipotence.

and Journey to the West represents a lot of china's cultural beliefs. The whole point of the story is to attain enlightenment through the individual "way
Edit: so buddhist west says :The Buddha was not a god and he made no claim to divinity. He was a human being who, through tremendous effort of heart and mind, transformed all limitations.
being able to overcome all limitations though he does not see himself as a god shows his omnipotence. I think we got through that when he dropped the mountain and when we learn that the universe is an extension buddha since everything is a extension of people who reach enlightenment.

Ah well, I realised that I am trying to get you to prove that Buddha is omnipotent, but I'm too lazy to see it through.

XD Yeah I'm a little lazy too...

What the hell? Since when doesn't it? Oo
Maybe it only means "happy" these days in American English?

I mean that nowadays when you say gay everyone thinks you mean people who prefer their own gender over the other =p

Well yeah... it's the popularization of words and ideals through common practice. Magnum is a term referring to wine, yet people assume it is a high power/caliber gun with large recoil ._.;

In the sense of christians god is omnipotent, he can't be fallible. Movie-Dogma
If satan was defeated or tricked by god, one of his angels, that raises the question of why he created something able to do that, God did it out of an act of benevolence when he created angels, but if Satan has opposite principles, he should be unable to create. Simply because of the nature of his existence.

Are you saying God couldn't have created Satan? Well Satan, also known as Lucifer, was an angel that God created. Lucifer was a head angel in fact. God always allows His creations to choose to do bad or good. Lucifer chose to be bad. He was jealous of God and he led some other angels to rebell against God. God then sent them to hell.

Er... if you read my stuff fully I in that quote say.
that raises the question of why he created something able to do that, God did it out of an act of benevolence when he created angels

Freewill was something that he gave them, and satan abused it, the fact that things evolve past our original intent is never a fault. There has never been any statement as to god's ultimate goal in doing the things he does, so he could have in fact created evil for a greater purpose. Possibly to create a stark comparison of the afterlife that would make man seek redemption.
This is of course coming from an atheist.

If God is to be defined as perfect, then nothing will go against what he intends. I wouldn't neccessarily classify it as a "fault" per se, but it certainly would disprove the Christian's view of his perfection if Satan were to be against his intention.

I watched a programme called the "trouble with atheism". Apparently Darwin's evolution theory approach only deals with how life has changed and not where it has come from. Also, atheism doesn't give any morale guidance and people who have tried to create atheist societies ultimately fail since they end up killing each other.

I also think football/soccer seems to be a sort of religion in England because it has the same sort of beliefs, only God is replaced with a team they support. Could this be classified as religion?

sorry it's a bit off topic but I thought it was an interesting point.

Also, atheism doesn't give any moral guidance and people who have tried to create atheist societies ultimately fail since they end up killing each other.Does theism give moral guidance? Can you give us any examples of atheist societies that failed because they ended up killing each other?

Does moral guidance only come from religion? I was under the impression that much of religion's guidance comes in the form of stories. Can't experience compensate for that?
Nightmare, God never had his intentions printed, therefore lucifer could be all part of his plans >> no idea what those plans are.
Teams... that idolization and devotion, but it isn't religion. they don't look to the players constantly for reason or "guidance" and the team only does what is expected of them, nothing miraculous. No miracles or great influence on life kind of defeat anything from being a religion.
That kind of goes back to false idolization and most people will deny that anything they obsess over is a false idol.
Darwin's theories... everyone misconstrues it.

Er... if you read my stuff fully I in that quote say.
that raises the question of why he created something able to do that, God did it out of an act of benevolence when he created angels

Freewill was something that he gave them, and satan abused it, the fact that things evolve past our original intent is never a fault. There has never been any statement as to god's ultimate goal in doing the things he does, so he could have in fact created evil for a greater purpose. Possibly to create a stark comparison of the afterlife that would make man seek redemption.
This is of course coming from an atheist.

Well, Lucifer was jealous of God and wanted to be God. So God told him he could be the king of hell, that's the whole story in a nut-case.

The reason god created the angels and us is to worship him. But he also gave us the choice, because God wants us to want to love him. Look at it this way, if you could have everyone in the world love you, would you? And if you would, could you live with the fact that if you gave them a choice, only a small fraction of a percent of the world would actually love you?

(Note, I know some of this is off of you're quote, I just needed a good place to start :))

He created us to worship him? Sounds like he has one big ego problem then.

Well, Lucifer was jealous of God and wanted to be God. So God told him he could be the king of hell, that's the whole story in a nut-case.

The reason god created the angels and us is to worship him.

Angels were the first failure of God. God gave them power and knowledge, thus corruption was born from those two aspects, half of them independent of his word, though still obeying. Samael showed excessive amounts of Greed, Gluttony, Pride, Envy, Lust, Sloth, and Anger (sound familiar? They're the seven sins), and was cast down to earth by a trick set up by God.

Then God grew dissatisfied by his seven choirs, and decided to try creation again; molding two creatures that had no power and knowledge. Rather, he gave them the power of life though child bearing. Those two were called Adam and Lilith. Lilith claimed Adam as inferior and left the Garden of Eden of her own will. Crossing the Red Sea, she gained knowledge from communication to Samael, making the fallen angel her second husband (or one form of), creating the first demons of the world.

God, angered by her incompetences, ordered three angels--Senoy, Sansenoy, and Semangelof--to bring her back, threatening to kill 100 children for each day she remained outside the garden. In return of God's decree, she continued to prey of Adam and the newly created Eve for all eternity.

That was when Satan, or Samael, journeyed beyond the Red Sea and tempted Eve with the first sin. Showing her how to obtain the forbidden knowledge that caused the failure of Angels though one of the two forbidden trees in the garden, the Tree of Knowledge and the Tree of Life.


That is the part of Creation that is left out of the Bible. The creation of Angels, the falling of Samael, Adam's first wife, and why the first sin was birthed.

*cracks up laughing*

sorry.. just can't hold back the laughter, no offense. Its just this thread was always so funny to read.

See, I like physical evidence. As a result, I usually tend to joke about the existence of God as "if s/he does exist, s/he doesn't want us to meet her/him and is hiding somewhere, or ran off far into the other side of universe from shame of having created something so hienous and useless as humans (and is currently heading further away from us, hence the reason for universe's expansion)

Aw come on you believers out there, put that hammer of Holy Wrath down. You're not taking me serious are you? Well you're never supposed to.


We live in this world because WE perceive it to be what it is.
Rather circular logic here, but this world exists beacuse we see it as "existing". Our belief in its existence is the very thing that keeps its identity. Reality is 'objective', but as a whole, it could be 'subjective' to us humans hm?

So maybe there is an alternate universe where God does exist and converse with us. Or Satan, or both, or something along the lines of that. We're just stuck here because our belief is that God exists.. yet we will never find him/her?

It's a poor faith that requires constant reassurance :P
I think that last one was blasphemy to many people Kou XD
Do religions entertain any ideas of alternate realities?
Oh here's something fun from last month's time magazine
http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/pdf/20061211_essay.pdf

If worship was really god's reason for making people then not only is he horribly insecure, but he made the worst worshippers you could ever produce...

That brings up the idea of god being imperfect because he made something that isn't perfect.

I always say God as a Linux user, not osx

:P
very funny rad.
but yeah if he's fallable then that disproves a lot of religions.

That brings up the idea of god being imperfect because he made something that isn't perfect.

For one part, making testicles on the outside was probably not a very bright idea.

XD
The idea is that sperm can only be produced at certain temperatures so the testicles have to be able to adjust. Body heat is too high >>

but once again we have to know what God's intentions are to know if he made a mistake or not. Maybe he doesn't like guys O_o

For one part, making testicles on the outside was probably not a very bright idea.

Not to mention the way the retina is structured, which creates a blindspot and wastes light or the appendix which seems to serve no purpose other than to get infected AFAIK. Both, however, make perfect sense under an imperfect system of evolution in which a flawed but functional structure that enhances survival and reproduction even a bit is better than nothing.

Edited away because I'm silly.
Sorry all! X3

That brings up the idea of god being imperfect because he made something that isn't perfect.

I always say God as a Linux user, not osx

OSX isn't perfect either you know?

That brings up the idea of god being imperfect because he made something that isn't perfect.

I always say God as a Linux user, not osx
So if I make a watch that's perfect that means I am perfect?

If God made another being that were perfect it would simply be another god. duh.

Being "all powerful", as deity means, is not perfection. In fact, it's a pretty big hamartia if you think about it.

hamartia?

Fatal Flaw; a flaw that brings about one's end.

Being "all powerful", as deity means, is not perfection. In fact, it's a pretty big hamartia if you think about it.

God is all powerful, yes, but doesn't the bible also state that god is perfect?

To make a perfect watch doesn't necessarily mean you are perfect. To make one thing that is perfect and fail at making everything else perfect isn't perfect. But making everything but one thing perfect is also failure at perfection.

God is all powerful, yes, but doesn't the bible also state that god is perfect?

To make a perfect watch doesn't necessarily mean you are perfect. To make one thing that is perfect and fail at making everything else perfect isn't perfect. But making everything but one thing perfect is also failure at perfection.
What if we were intended to be imperfect?

It is imperfection that moves towards individuality and defines our character. It would be pointless if anything was perfect. Humans would lack drive.

The same can be said about the Christian God. If He is perfect, then where was his drive to make humans? A desire to see imperfections? Isn't desire an emotion similar to envy; wishing for something to be better/different from what currently is? Rather than a desire to see imperfection, maybe it was to end boredom. But that's still the same thing--wishing for something different, a change from whatever normal exists.

So in essence, so called perfection breaks itself into imperfection, because of the perfection's imperfections. To be more direct, perfection is imperfection.

This applies for any type of being. Just thought I'd throw out a bit of my Philosophy.

Like I was saying earlier perfection is defined by your goal :P so maybe it is necessary for humans to exist as an error to create something or do something. That doesn't prove god fallible, but who knows I still agree with angelic saying that maybe it's all just god's ego, and that would disprove the idea that god is "good"

Funny Penn and Teller debunking the bible and basically calling Christians hypocrites and immoral. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viMPB_rXZrk&NR) Its really good though many things in it are common knowledge among many people on Ichigos.

A perfect being, by my thoughts, can't make imperfect anything. Your probably going to prove me wrong.

So you're saying that the bible calls the Christian God, whom is perfect and all powerful (Omnipotent), creating both the world, angels, the seed of sin, humans, and destroyed the world twice (I believe, once with the Garden, another with Noah's great flood; regardless, there is at least once), is perfect?

That doesn't sound too perfect.

Therefore, by your own logic, you state that God isn't perfect.

Sin needed to be washed away.

So you're saying that the bible calls the Christian God, whom is perfect and all powerful (Omnipotent), creating both the world, angels, the seed of sin, humans, and destroyed the world twice (I believe, once with the Garden, another with Noah's great flood; regardless, there is at least once), is perfect?

That doesn't sound too perfect.

Therefore, by your own logic, you state that God isn't perfect.

All I was saying was the bible calls god perfect (which I am starting to think was my misinterpretation) but his actions contradicts that notion (which I think you are saying) meaning he is a NOT perfect and the people who wrote the bible do not understand the meaning of hypocrite.

So yeah, god is imperfect. Sadly he is omnipotent.

We have never seen perfection so how would we recognise it when we see it? How can you say he isn't? Moreover... how can you say he is? @_@@_@@_@

How many times have I said that... I'm gonna go crawl into a hole now XD

We have never seen perfection so how would we recognise it when we see it? How can you say he isn't? Moreover... how can you say he is? @_@@_@@_@

Plus, if you really think about it, perfection is an opinion. Everyone's definition of "perfect" is different.

Marlon... No ::stern command:: bad boy don't you dare repeat what I said 10,000 posts ago, bad bad marlon. the next person to restate this idea has just proven as soon as an opinion goes off page, it is ignored in this thread.

Here's an interesting video. This is presented by a Christian Reverand, I believe.

Demystifying Paganism
A very detailed video by a Reverend explaining Paganism to his Christian congregation. Presented in a logical, truthful way without the drama and lies so common in these situations. Everyone can learn from this video.
http://www.care2.com/news/member/362617688/194989

Marlon... No ::stern command:: bad boy don't you dare repeat what I said 10,000 posts ago, bad bad marlon. the next person to restate this idea has just proven as soon as an opinion goes off page, it is ignored in this thread.

Ummm... Okay? XD You lost me. Sorry if I restated something you'd said already; I wasn't aware of that.

EDIT: OMG, Septy, that's a great video. Very truthful.

XD that video...
What about voodoo and wicca? They hurt animals.
His voice is very insulting, it is too sarcastic. I'm sure half the people out there secretly want to kill him.
Though I believe having this video is necessary because many people are intolerant. I have some respect for this man.

I can't stand his accent... and he can't stand still.

I only had time to watch the first ive minutes but I am impressed at his view and he makes a good balanced point.

What about voodoo and wicca? They hurt animals.
Wiccans don't hurt animals.

Voodoo isn't paganism as far as I know. From what I've noticed of voodoo, when animals are being used, they get quiet, and look almost dead in behavior, and when you leave them alone they are perfectly fine. They are killed, though. If you are Christians (which the only practitioner of Voodoo I know is) then you should know that the bible says that animals are to be used for whatever humans want. I am not sure how swiftly the animals are killed (I don't like chicken smell nor am I interested in that part...though now I am). I should ask... Well, the person I know eats the chicken afterwards (I think) so it isn't just a wasting corpse. *shrug*

Being Wiccan, I know for sure that we don't "sacrifice" animals or anything.

In fact, doing so in rituals is considered harmful and unneccesary.

I agree with septermagick completely, voodoo is a different kind of practice. I don't think it's really all that nature-based (If so, please correct me), so it's not paganism.

Also, putting out another point here, I really don't believe in Hell. I do believe there is something after death, but not eternal torture. What kind of all-powerful deity (I'm not referring to just the Christian God, I mean all Gods and/or Goddesses) would punish someone for only being human?

It wouldn't be fair. The world is full of unfairness, I know, but our fate after death shouldn't be.

That video didn't really do anything for me. My religion teaches me not to judge people, for that is God's job. I never really knew much about paganism and all the video did was say what paganism isn't and bash those who misunderstood paganism through ignorance. I thought it was a poor video.

That's good asuka but the idea is it's targetted at people that don't know a lot about different groups. So before you rate it, think about how it would affect others =)

thats the thing, it only targetted people who bashed Paganism through misjudgement. But i guess it did "demystify" paganism by saying what it wasn't...

@_@@_@@_@@_@@_@

I always thought Paganism was just multicultural/God belief.

It just means that you're not Jewish, Christian, or Muslim. I think it was kind of an insulting word back when it was invented...which is probably why it still carries negative connotations...

Hopeless I demand you go watch that video to understand what a pagan is XD

Toshihiko, I demand that you go look at a dictionary to understand what a pagan is. XD

Taken from dictionary.com:
a person who is not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim.

I'm sure that there's more than one definition of the word "pagan." The one I gave was just the one that I was always taught...I also looked it up first to make sure that at least one source agreed with me, lest someone say "go look at the video!" and make me look like an idiot. ;)

Also, I watched like half the video, and got bored with it, as I've never felt any ill-will towards any religion.

You have to realize that dictionary.com is based off of popularized definitions...
and the definition expressed the video is pertaining to Christians which are the majority at the moment. we're talking about pagans in terms of religious belief from the perspective of Christians

Ok...well, the definition of the word "pagan" in the Webster dictionary says:

Heathen, one who worships an idol

When I talk about the meaning of words, I like to refer to the word's *actual definition as decided by the English language,* not by what random religions make them out to be. Also, I'm a Christian, and most of my friends are Christians. They carry the same definition of the word "pagan" as I do. So uhm, the definition I gave is correct by two dictionaries, and all my Christian friends? ^ ^"

Or maybe you meant to say that we were talking about pagans in terms of the religious belief of stupid Christians? If that's what you meant, then yes, they probably do associate a different meaning than me, my friends, and the dictionaries do, because me, my friends, and dictionaries aren't stupid. XD
But again, the beliefs of stupid people do not make my beliefs wrong - if anything, my beliefs serve to show that their beliefs are flawed. ;)

~whee

And I hope that message didn't come off as any flavor of mean. Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that anyone on this forum is stupid, you guys all kick ass in my book. :3 (Well, most of you, and everyone in this thread at least. XD)

Heathen, one who worships an idol

But that definition is more specific in that it excludes certain religions that don't worship idols. =P So non God based religions aren't all grouped under pagans. Your earlier one:

a person who is not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim.

is basically saying anyone outside of those religions which is only a definition from one groups perspective.
Pagans by your new definition are anyone idolizing a false god so any religion can define paganism.
So... your first definition was callous but from your history I suppose it's acceptable.
Which of those two definitions are you willing to put your support behind? to go for the former would proclaiming pride or supremacy of your religion over polytheistic groups =/ so you find yourself in a small pickle.
And though I think you are more tolerant, that video was obviously more of the traditional Christian views and will speak to a lot more people that are more inclined to follow the old ways.
Also idols themselves are a creation of Christian thought. seen in...
"An idol is a representation of something in the heavens or on the earth. It is used in worship and is often worshiped. It is an abomination to God (Exodus 20:4)"
~bleh...
An atheist fighting hard to find the truth behind religion. It's just fun arguing XD
This thread is to vent so no grudges held and no words held to reputations I hope >>

Haha, first of all, I put my support behind the second definition, just because its actually the definition I learned over the years. I confused myself because whenever people would ask whether or not Jews or Muslims were considered "pagan" back in the day, the teacher would answer "no, they didn't worship idols, so they weren't considered pagans." My mistake. X3

Still, my first definition was not callous in any way, as like I said, I hold no grudge against other religions. When I said "pagan means anyone who isn't a Muslim, Jew, or Christian." I meant just that, and nothing more. ;) I was in no way suggesting that pagans were worse than non-pagans. In all honesty, I find Islam, Judaism, and Christianity kind of boring when compared to many "pagan" ones. :3

Also, I'm really only a Christian by name, because I was born one. I'm really not very religious at all. My view is "maybe there's a god or gods, but if there is, it doesn't make much of a difference." XD

And of course there are no hard feelings, I'm just having fun too. Like I just said, I really don't have a religion either, so this is just to mess around XD

Also, idols may have been a product of Christian thinking, but Christians are not supposed to worship them. As your quote says, "they are an abomination of God." ;) Actually, that quote is from Exodus...so that's really more of a Jewish thing anyway... X3

If you're a devout Christian/Jew who's easily offended, don't bother to retort unless you're a masochist.

Wow. Dictionary fights.

First, webster's is a crappy dictionary, and Dictionary.com's worse than Uncyclopedia.


Pagan however, DOES mean one who worships an idol (whether formless or not) Now.. I'm not going to bother to point out that Christian's so called God is a formless idol, so by trying to separate themselves by calling others with a lame word like Pagan, they've made a fool of themselves lol.

Heathen however, specifically means NOT of CHRISTIAN OR JEWISH. Also, it implies a VERY NEGATIVE connotation. Therefore yes, Islam, Hindu, Atheism etcetcetc as well as our generalised definition of Pagan, are ALL heathen. That's right, you self righteous faggots, not only you went on a stupid Crusade to wank off a few knights for some non existent cup, you've even made word to describe yourselves as superior to other religions. And then you hid it all in the smiling face of the modern religion. Now that's one massively screwed up bunch you got there.

Either way, both Pagan and Heathen are gimpy words that sound cooler when you're not trying to associate it with religion. You know.. like the slang 'jewish'


Religion just sucks. It gives another reason for idiots to fight amongst themselves, because you never want EVERYBODY on the same side of the fence do you? There's always got to be US and THEM.

First, webster's is a crappy dictionary, and Dictionary.com's worse than Uncyclopedia.

You just shot one of the two de factos of English Dictionaries. :mellow: I have to wonder what dictionary you would consider as ``not crappy''.

i'm not sure myself as to whether i can find a dictionary that doesn't suck :mellow:

i mean.. oxford is pretty crap too and then whatelse... :mellow:

dtctionayr sucks it is"!!!"!!! lige wsucks too!!!l33t alone religian itself!!! hahahaha

You just shot one of the two de factos of English Dictionaries. I have to wonder what dictionary you would consider as ``not crappy''.

Funny, I was just going to ask Kou the same thing; thanks for taking care of that for me, M. X3


Wow. Dictionary fights.

Hey, come now. Let's not get all sarcastic, mr sarcastic...face... XP
I was merely pointing out that dictionaries are usually a better way to learn the meanings of words than random priests were. ;P


Either way, both Pagan and Heathen are gimpy words that sound cooler when you're not trying to associate it with religion. You know.. like the slang 'jewish'

That made me laugh because I totally agree. Same goes for "blasphemy!", "heretic!", and "you're a pathetic sin against nature, AND AGAINST GOD!" I say all of those fairly regularly, and like I said, I don't really have a religion. ;)



Religion just sucks. It gives another reason for idiots to fight amongst themselves, because you never want EVERYBODY on the same side of the fence do you? There's always got to be US and THEM.

I disagree with your statement, simply because the bolded statement within your....larger statement...has been stated....correctly? X3
Like you said, as human beings, we always want people on the other side. Religion isn't the cause of fighting, its just one more sorry excuse idiots use after they've already decided to pick a fight. Religion actually brings a lot of hope to the world - there are a lot of poor, oppressed, or otherwise severely handicapped people in this world. For a lot of them, the only thing that gives them hope is religion. Religious organizations also do a lot of good around the world in the form of charity work - I went to a Catholic highschool for example, and we raised enough money to build a school, a well, and some other things for some random town in Africa, in just a few years...

So yes, religion gives people an excuse to fight with one another. Does that make it bad? Not at all; people will fight one another no matter what. At least religion has a good side to it too, in the form of the joy, hope, or financial help it can bring to people. ^_^

Edit: I just reread this and it's one of the most badly written posts I've ever done. I only got four hours sleep last night, so I'm exhausted and my head is all cloudy and such. Please excuse how poorly written/unorganized this post was. XD

I would agree with you that religion can give one hope and inspiration. But don't you think it is far better for one to find hope and inspiration within himself, rather than being dependent on something like religion?

Secondly, yes, religion has caused many fights, wars, and bloodshed. Haven't you heard of the Salem Witch Trials?!?! If you read Joshua in the Old Testiment of the bible, you'll find it is packed to the brim with bloodshed as Joshua led the Israelites to slaughter one nation after another, in the name of their entity.

When you say "religion gives people an excuse to fight", you make it sound like they wish to fight in the first place regardless of their religion, and merely cover up with the excuse of religion. Sorry, but there have been countless times where people fight for the reason of religion. You should really read up on your history!!!

Saying religion has a good side too doesn't make it a good thing. You could say that the holocaust had a good side too in the sense that it made us who we are today, but that doesn't make it a good thing either! Just because you can find a positive side about something does not make the situation, practice, or whatever it is any better.

Religion, it isn't good or bad by definition. Though regardless of it's alignment in our opinion, it is our reason for living, and the end we see for life. Sure it's been abused, but it's something that an individual has to discover. The subject is very delicate, as every word concerning influences our devotion to it. Kou, as I was saying earlier yes from a different perspective Christianity can be a form of Paganism which is why I made Hopeless choose a definition.

Religion has been abused in that it has been used to justify many things, and that it has birthed through misinterpretation and prejudice, many terms and ideals that would not be accepted in culture otherwise. Crusades are a prime example. The original Crusades were undertaken to reclaim Jerusalem from the Muslims and were sanctioned by the pope. Personally proclaimed crusades like that of Joan of Arc, the Crusade of the Tatars, and Norther Crusades of Germany. Meow meow meow~

The fact that many parts of history like the Salem trials mentioned above have been seen as disturbing is proof that we as a culture are changing and persecution on a wide scale is unacceptable without just reason. Though those situations are examples within our society they are of the minority being observed by the future majority. If religious leaders then were the leaders now it would be acceptable to us to do.

As far as religious terms in everyday talk go =P words become normalized and we have to just deal with it. Though many times our assumptions can cause a lot of problems... so we try to be precise in our words.

Faith overall is one of our governing forces, therefore from the perspective of the victors of history their faith is the correct one. It isn't about finding a positive or a negative to define religion it's about having definitive stance and sticking with it. Virtues defined by religion can be used in many ways but at the same time people that are completely devoted are willing to give up their values to further their religion.

Religion is more of an embodiment of belief. Even if we don't have religion we still have belief. So it isn't right for us to condemn religion as a source of conflict, but like in all things our differences are what create conflict. Of course passive religions are kind of the neutral party in all of this. They don't seek to expand aggressively but don't die out. Because being passive does not mean they are inactive or ineffective in representing their beliefs.

We as a society have to be more tolerant right? Nah... because in this subject we're divided and our uneasy truces are always at risk. A step towards a positive future by any group will be unacceptable, therefore without force of will or might religion will stay as it is now. As long as we don't allow ourselves to be subjugated by the beliefs of others and ignorant of our own virtues we'll be okay.

OH crap I'm rambling!! I give up @_@ Sorry if that confusing jumble of fluff bothers anyone. I'll check back later. By the way~~~ once again I'm an Atheist.

I disagree with your statement, simply because the bolded statement within your....larger statement...has been stated....correctly? X3
Like you said, as human beings, we always want people on the other side. Religion isn't the cause of fighting, its just one more sorry excuse idiots use after they've already decided to pick a fight. Religion actually brings a lot of hope to the world - there are a lot of poor, oppressed, or otherwise severely handicapped people in this world. For a lot of them, the only thing that gives them hope is religion. Religious organizations also do a lot of good around the world in the form of charity work - I went to a Catholic highschool for example, and we raised enough money to build a school, a well, and some other things for some random town in Africa, in just a few years...

So yes, religion gives people an excuse to fight with one another. Does that make it bad? Not at all; people will fight one another no matter what. At least religion has a good side to it too, in the form of the joy, hope, or financial help it can bring to people. ^_^

Edit: I just reread this and it's one of the most badly written posts I've ever done. I only got four hours sleep last night, so I'm exhausted and my head is all cloudy and such. Please excuse how poorly written/unorganized this post was. XD

I know religion does have more merits than flows and all, but then its my nature to bend the facts to suit my..... sarcastic case XD

Why do you think religion has more merits than flaws?

Mmm... it's human nature to have hope. The easiest way to achieve this is to think of intelligent design, that something has purpose and/or that there is something out there taking care of you when you live, and die.

Religion could be a survival instinct, just like love. Where would mankind be without the passion of love, or the belief in something higher? Think of it... even though it might not be true (Spoiler: It probably isn't), religion has still given hope.

What do people hope for?

Better, greater things. If you dislike something, you hope that it'll turn to your favour. If you feel that something is wrong, you hope that it'll get better. That's how I view hope.

Kinda funny, if you ask me. Why hope when you can go out and physically try to make the item greater/better? But I suppose it fits in with humanity's illogical ''pathos''.

Kinda funny, if you ask me. Why hope when you can go out and physically try to make the item greater/better? But I suppose it fits in with humanity's illogical ''pathos''.

well a lot of people hope bush dies why don't they kill him themselves :P

well a lot of people hope bush dies why don't they kill him themselves :PMore people hope to earn money, to feed hungry mouths, to cure the sick, and all that hoping will achieve nothing by itself. Nothing.

I think that's the several thousand Iraqis and Iranians currently at war or protesting the US Leo .-.
Besides most of the people complaining in the US only hope/complain they provide no alternative, so they can't act.
Sometimes we hope for the worst in favor of others right? Hope is completely self centered...

I know religion does have more merits than flows and all, but then its my nature to bend the facts to suit my..... sarcastic case

That made me laugh. No worries though, I'm the same way a lot of the time. XD


Mmm... it's human nature to have hope. The easiest way to achieve this is to think of intelligent design, that something has purpose and/or that there is something out there taking care of you when you live, and die.

Religion could be a survival instinct, just like love. Where would mankind be without the passion of love, or the belief in something higher? Think of it... even though it might not be true (Spoiler: It probably isn't), religion has still given hope.

Indeed. What Noir said is exactly why I believe religion is more of a good than a bad thing. It may cause wars, hatred, prejudice, and a bunch of other evils in this world, but in the end, it's what convinces many people in the world to keep on living. X3

Indeed. What Noir said is exactly why I believe religion is more of a good than a bad thing. It may cause wars, hatred, prejudice, and a bunch of other evils in this world, but in the end, it's what convinces many people in the world to keep on living. X3I'm not so convinced that all of us deserves to live.

Life is one of those things where it isn't about deserving it. Who are we to decide anyway XD
Be nice Dark everyone should have as many chances as they are willing to take.

Some people get too many chances than they deserve. And others, not enough.

Life is one of those things where it isn't about deserving it. Who are we to decide anyway XDWhy is life isn't about deserving it? Why is it not for us to decide?


Be nice Dark everyone should have as many chances as they are willing to take.This I agree, and this is why we have people winning the Darwin Awards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_Awards).

For the same reason that we can't decide what is right and what is wrong in the world. As individuals we don't have the authority to define those things. As a society we get into conflict over those things. Religion and morales are some of the common things in our world that help us define the quality of life.
Besides, the individual chooses success of life. By our interactions with our environment and how we are responded to, and how we respond in turn (negatively/positively) we decide for ourselves whether our life is successful. Even then there are degrees of failure that are made by the person, mostly made by comparisons to others. There is no standard to compare a human, just as there is no way to see the potential of a person. If we're in a position to judge, not judging biased by our emotions or our own qualities seen in life would be showing a proper maturity as we are no better than anyone else. That is why we cannot decide and why life is not something that can be called deserved.

I obviously disagree.

If you can't decide what is right and what is wrong in this world, who can?

Who was it that told you that as individuals we don't have the authority to define these things? Why is it that as individuals we don't have the authority to define these things?

There are many factors that help us determine our quality of life (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_of_life), and you will find that religion is a very minor one. Morality usually does not come into consideration. Also, people get their morality outside of religion. For more information on my last point, have a look at Richard Dawkins' thoughts on the origins of morality (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR_z85O0P2M&source=rss), around two minutes into the video.

Yes, there is no way to see a potential of a person right now, but there are standards to compare the success of different people. You contradict yourself by saying that there are different degrees of success and failure, and then by saying that there are no standards to compare humans, because the former alone implies that successes and be compared to successes, and failures can be compared to other failures.

Our exam grades indicates our academic successes and failures. Uur income and savings reflects on our financial success and failures. The contributions and damages we have made to the society measures our ability to live with other people. Our past and present tells us how well or badly we have lived our life, be it for ourself or in the name(s) of some fictional entity/entities.

You still haven't told us why is it not for us to judge, when we already do so with so many standards of success and failure.

Why do you think that we are no better than anyone else? There are so many people with inferior resources that have became so much more successful than the rest of us, yet there are also so many of us with superior resources that have turned into failures that damage society.

How do you define maturity?

Dark Bring, it's obvious why you can't decide what is "right or wrong" or "who deserves to live."

It's because the people you would condemn to death, would condemn *you* to death. The people you would call "wrong" would call you "misunderstanding," "ignorant," or just plain wrong yourself.

Your opinions would cancel each other's out. You could say "Go with the majority's opinion instead," to which I say "maybe, but the majority is fucking stupid, so I don't see how that works either."

In my opinion, there is no right or wrong. Everything just is what it is, essentially making the universe perfect. That "broken piece of garbage chair" you just threw out isn't flawed. It's a perfect example of shattered wood. That murderer who killed 10 people with a toothbrush isn't a pathetic example of a human being. He's a perfect example of a toothbrush wielding killer.

The human mind is just an organic computer. It reacts to textures and heat through our skins, tastes through our tongues, light through our eyes, sound from our ears, and odors through our noses. We're all just products of our brain's state from when we were born, and then all the subsequent events we've been through thereafter. "Choice and morality" are just illusions; therefore, "good and evil" are also illusions. Nobody really "deserves" to live and nobody really "deserves" to die.

We're a bunch of very advanced pocket calculators. I say get over it, and try to bring as much happiness to the universe as you can, as nobody deserves it any more than any other person out there. ;)

EDIT: And that was so fun. People who say "SOME PEOPLE DON'T DESERVE TO LIVE!" annoy me so much. I've been wanting to say "Heads up! You don't *really* deserve to live either!" forever. Glad I finally got around to it. XD


Why do you think that we are no better than anyone else? There are so many people with inferior resources that have became so much more successful than the rest of us, yet there are also so many of us with superior resources that have turned into failures that damage society.
edit edit: Hah, I didn't even see that part of your post until just now, so I guess I kind of accidentally answered your question. ;)
Was my answer convincing enough, or do you need another one? X3


If we're in a position to judge, not judging biased by our emotions or our own qualities seen in life would be showing a proper maturity as we are no better than anyone else. That is why we cannot decide and why life is not something that can be called deserved.
And thanks Toshihiko, you got like +500 respect points for that. :3

Was my answer convincing enough, or do you need another one? X3I think you confuse persuasion with passion, but I tend to enjoy the latter over the former, most especially when it comes to a clashing of words. En garde!


Your opinions would cancel each other's out.An opinion is not a tangible force. Example: There are supporters and dissidents for the liberation/invasion of Iraq, and their opinions have not cancelled out.

Why has the invasion/liberation of Iraq gone ahead, despite opposing opinions? That is because of Power.

Power comes in many forms, most of which are wielded by successful people in life. The public may have a dim view of President Bush, but nobody can deny that Bush is a powerful man. Without Power, or without sufficient Power, opinions are but intangible, negligible, or half-hearted notions.

However, with sufficient Power, an opinion can be a force to reckon with. That is why Bush has invaded/liberated Iraq, in spite of people who has opposing opinions and power.

If I am sufficiently powerful, I wouldn't even bother with the majority's opinion, be they too smart or too stupid for their own good, but this will invariably lead to my downfall. (Also see Dictators.) The majority may be fucking stupid, but without Power, there is little you can do in the face of The Majority.


In my opinion, there is no right or wrong.Not all of us are as transcended as you are. That is why we can give the wrong answers to our homework and exam questions. That is why we can say things that can upset other people. That is why we progress, because through disagreeing with one another, through the journey of finding the rights and the wrongs, we stumble ahead and acquire knowledge instead of being gratified with the present and stagnating in peace. You are looking at too big a picture where humanity doesn't even show up, because The Big Picture Is That Nothing Matters.


"Choice and morality" are just illusions; therefore, "good and evil" are also illusions.By now I have sufficient evidence to declare you a nihilist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism). I hereby declare that "happiness and unhappiness" are also illusions, and because illusions do not matter, there is no point in making the world a happier place, because the world is also an illusion. Because everything is an illusion, everything is pointless.

But the world is not an illusion, and things matter to people. Just because choice and morality is an illusion to you, there were and still are that are fighting for the right to choose and fighting for just causes. Just because good and evil is an illusion to you doesn't mean that there are no people out there who think that the Holocaust was evil, that Hiroshima was evil, that the Tiananmen Square Massacre was evil, that Mother Theresa was good, that Princess Diana was good, that Jesus Christ was good.

What doesn't matter is your opinions, not because of what you believe in, but because you lack the Power to turn your opinions into something that matter.

I think you confuse persuasion with passion, but I tend to enjoy the latter over the former, most especially when it comes to a clashing of words. En garde!

That may be; everybody gets confused sometimes. You, for example, have confused your fencing terms. You meant to say "Touche'. " ;)


An opinion is not a tangible force. Example: There are supporters and dissidents for the liberation/invasion of Iraq, and their opinions have not cancelled out.

Of course opinions are not a tangible force. I'm sorry if I made them sound like they were. I was merely stating the same thing you did - your opinion on who deserves to live or die means crap. Thank you for re-stating that for me. Of course, you then bring up that opinions *do* matter if there is force behind them. You seem to be stating that whoever has more power has the opinion that matters, or the "correct" opinion as you'd call it. After all, you did say that we as human beings have the right to decide who lives or dies and that the people in powers' opinions are the only ones that matter. So I suppose by that logic, the Holocaust was correct. I guess slavery was OK too. I mean, sure, the slaves and Jews didn't like those events, but hell! They weren't in power at the time, so their opinions were meaningless!


Not all of us are as transcended as you are.
Apparently not. How sad. ;__;


That is why we can give the wrong answers to our homework and exam questions. That is why we can say things that can upset other people. That is why we progress, because through disagreeing with one another, through the journey of finding the rights and the wrongs, we stumble ahead and acquire knowledge instead of being gratified with the present and stagnating in peace.

I also upset people, do poorly on exams once in awhile, and stumble ahead for knowledge. Just because our lives are inherently meaningless, doesn't mean we have to live in boredom. Many people *love* videogames for example. Are they accomplishing anything by playing them? Of course not. They play them to pass the time and to stay happy. Some people may not like playing videogames all day; they might like to do art, math, or any number of other things. I may be a Nihilist, as you said, but I feel no need to die just yet, and while I'm here, I plan on doing things that make me happy. That's why I am an artist, musician, programmer, and loyal friend.


You are looking at too big a picture where humanity doesn't even show up, because The Big Picture Is That Nothing Matters.
Yes, please excuse me for not being as close-minded as you, and suggesting that human beings are *not* the center of the universe. I'm sorry if I upset you.


By now I have sufficient evidence to declare you a nihilist.
Haha, assign any name to me that pleases you. I've also learned a bit about existentialism, and I may be one of those. I don't know enough about either nihilism or existentialism to really make a decision though; maybe I'm a bit of both. ::shrugs::


I hereby declare that "happiness and unhappiness" are also illusions,
Go ahead, I'm not arguing. ;)

and because illusions do not matter, there is no point in making the world a happier place, because the world is also an illusion. Because everything is an illusion, everything is pointless.
The way I see it, the world may be an illusion, but it's a damned convincing one. Now, I don't think either of us wants to die until we're good and old, so we have two choices. We can either stand up and do the things that make us happy everyday, even if they are pointless, or we can take the route you seem to be suggesting, which is that we curl up into little balls and await our death like cowards, just because our egos can't take the fact that the universe doesn't center around us. ;)



But the world is not an illusion, and things matter to people. Just because choice and morality is an illusion to you, there were and still are that are fighting for the right to choose and fighting for just causes. Just because good and evil is an illusion to you doesn't mean that there are no people out there who think that the Holocaust was evil, that Hiroshima was evil, that the Tiananmen Square Massacre was evil, that Mother Theresa was good, that Princess Diana was good, that Jesus Christ was good.
I think I've already addressed this enough in my earlier paragraphs. The world may be an illusion, but it's a damned convincing one. We may as well enjoy our stay.


What doesn't matter is your opinions, not because of what you believe in, but because you lack the Power to turn your opinions into something that matter.

Haha, so maybe one day I'll come back to debate with you when I'm rich. Then I'll be correct before I type even a single letter! ^ ^

What he probably meant is that there is no (cliche) black and white in society. Yes we're in Iraq but we're also pulling out after Bush was convinced. In that situation it was our duty to support the decision of our representative(Bush). If the majority is against something then they can find a way to change things. The majority of the Legislative is democrat now right? I agree that without power people will have problems, but if they really are the majority they'll get it done, and if they're really adamant they'll get their point across even being the minority. Having determination is one of the deciding factors in battle.

And I did not contradict myself earlier. I said that success and failure don't exist except in the mind of the individual, and only that person. I also said that it was wrong to judge because doing so would be taking the low road as far as morales go.
In this society opinion are tangible since the person who speaks it can be changed and influenced. What hopeless was saying is that everything has a role and we all play it out as we should. Though that is close to nihilism you're taking it the wrong way in saying that he says nothing matters, he's going the opposite way and saying everything matters. Ki as an extension of your will is tangible... ki can be influenced, what does that mean?

The level of maturity I was talking about meant realizing that you are no better than anyone else. The maturity to be able to remain objective and unbiased, which I kind of stated -.-;

The stating of what is right and wrong helps define who we are. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed with devastating results, but what about the fire bombings? The Doolittle raid was a declaration of all out war meaning that there were no moral implications in choosing targets. Sure to others hiroshima was a war crime, but it was a necessary war crime. Kind of a "better us than them" situation. In those instances some people were wrong, but you have to know some people were willing to be seen as evil and give up their morals to prevent others from having to do the same.


As stated by time magazines person of the year article, the world is changing due to the power of the internet to allow people to say whatever they want and eventually change the minority into a majority. There is no lack of power anymore, it is more of a lack of determination or persuasiveness.

There is still a lot we need to experience and learn about to be able to decide things, if there was anyone that knew about every walk of life I would gladly listen to their decision till then, we have to rely on people to gauge their own lives based in the stance they have taken.

Last sentence in cat speak
Meow meow meow meow meow meow~~~~~!! meow.

crap hopeless posted before me...
And he meant en garde saying he was about to start. if you had said en garde then he would respond touche.

Though that is close to nihilism you're taking it the wrong way in saying that he says nothing matters, he's going the opposite way and saying everything matters.

Thanks again, Toshihiko, after reading about Nihilism, I was going to post something to that affect. You beat me to it though. ^ ^
Basically, everyone has equal worth, so nobody has a right to decide what others deserve, since we all "deserve" the same exact thing.


And he meant en garde saying he was about to start. if you had said en garde then he would respond touche.

Haha, I know. Touche' is what you say when you get hit. I was suggesting that Dark Bring had lost this argument before he had even started. I'm a sarcastic bastard like that sometimes. ;)

That may be; everybody gets confused sometimes. You, for example, have confused your fencing terms. You meant to say "Touche'. " ;)Curses! Hollywood, why do you always lie to me! :cry:

EDIT: HopelessComposer you sore loser you *grrrrr*


Of course opinions are not a tangible force. I'm sorry if I made them sound like they were. I was merely stating the same thing you did - your opinion on who deserves to live or die means crap. Thank you for re-stating that for me. Of course, you then bring up that opinions *do* matter if there is force behind them. You seem to be stating that whoever has more power has the opinion that matters, or the "correct" opinion as you'd call it. After all, you did say that we as human beings have the right to decide who lives or dies and that the people in powers' opinions are the only ones that matter. So I suppose by that logic, the Holocaust was correct. I guess slavery was OK too. I mean, sure, the slaves and Jews didn't like those events, but hell! They weren't in power at the time, so their opinions were meaningless!To clear up this mess of confusion, first I'd like to go back to your previous post, and ask you how opinions cancel out one another.

Next, I never said the opinion of whoever has more power is the "correct" opinion. Also, I never said that people in powers' opinions are the only ones that matter. Might doesn't make right, but the victor writes the history.

Of course the Holocaust was correct! To Hitler, of course!
Of course the Holocaust was wrong! To the Jews, of course!
Of course the Holocaust was wrong! The world is an illusion, of course!


I also upset people, do poorly on exams once in awhile, and stumble ahead for knowledge. Just because our lives are inherently meaningless, doesn't mean we have to live in boredom. Many people *love* videogames for example. Are they accomplishing anything by playing them? Of course not. They play them to pass the time and to stay happy. Some people may not like playing videogames all day; they might like to do art, math, or any number of other things. I may be a Nihilist, as you said, but I feel no need to die just yet, and while I'm here, I plan on doing things that make me happy. That's why I am an artist, musician, programmer, and loyal friend.You stated that there is no right or wrong. I am telling you that there is a relative right or wrong. What is right to us may be wrong to other people. What means nothing to us might be something to other people. And vice versa.


Yes, please excuse me for not being as close-minded as you, and suggesting that human beings are *not* the center of the universe. I'm sorry if I upset you.Please don't feel sorry, because I find such exchanges exciting, not upsetting. Also, please provide evidence of my close-mindedness and, er, suggesting that human beings are the centre of the universe.


The way I see it, the world may be an illusion, but it's a damned convincing one. Now, I don't think either of us wants to die until we're good and old, so we have two choices. We can either stand up and do the things that make us happy everyday, even if they are pointless, or we can take the route you seem to be suggesting, which is that we curl up into little balls and await our death like cowards, just because our egos can't take the fact that the universe doesn't center around us ;)Of course the universe doesn't centre around us, it's only a damn illusion anyway! (even if it is a somewhat convincing one)

Please provide evidence that my ego can't take the fact that the universe doesn't centre around us. In fact, please provide evidence that there is a universe! Did you not declare that everything our sense perceive is an illusion? Maybe I am but a figment of your imagination.

You were right when you mentioned that I seemed to be suggesting the route of curling up into little balls and awaiting our deaths like cowards, because I am not suggesting that route at all! What I would like to see is people fighting for and achieving their personal successes, not be stagnant and content!


I think I've already addressed this enough in my earlier paragraphs. The world may be an illusion, but it's a damned convincing one. We may as well enjoy our stay.If the world is an illusion, then your


Haha, so maybe one day I'll come back to debate with you when I'm rich. Then I'll be correct before I type even a single letter! ^ ^There are many different kinds of power, and money/finance is but one of them. The power that the likes of Bill Gates and Geoge Soros wields are quite different to the power that Mother Theresa and Gandhi holds. Also, like I mentioned previously, Might does not make Right.

Dark ignored me (_ _)

Sorry, dance class in five minutes, will come back to yours!

Curses! Hollywood, why do you always lie to me!

EDIT: HopelessComposer you sore loser you *grrrrr*

Hahaha, that made me laugh *so* hard. Don't worry, I don't think anyone is really familiar with fencing terms. The only two I know are "En guarde" and "touche' " and that's only because I once had a plastic lightsaber sparring match with a friend, and he laughed at me when I answered his "En Guarde" with a "touche" (Since I'd basically admitted to losing before we had even started fighting. XD


To clear up this mess of confusion, first I'd like to go back to your previous post, and ask you how opinions cancel out one another.
Ok, maybe I shouldn't have said opinions cancel each other out, because you seem to be caught up on this now. What I really meant to say is that because neither yours, nor anyone elses opinions really hold any absolute weight, (since we're all basically computers), all we have to go on is relative weight. Since your opinions are as meaningless as anybody elses, your opinions have a 1:1 weight ratio with mine, or anybody elses. In other words, you can't be more correct than anybody else, because nobody is "correct" or "wrong." You may be asking yourself "Why is Hopeless arguing with me then?" To which I answer: because I'm hardwired to do so, god damnit! I may be a soulless robot made of meat, but I still want people to be in agreement with me! XD ;)


Next, I never said the opinion of whoever has more power is the "correct" opinion. Also, I never said that people in powers' opinions are the only ones that matter. Might doesn't make right, but the victor writes the history.

Sorry, but when you said this:

Without Power, or without sufficient Power, opinions are but intangible, negligible, or half-hearted notions.

I read it as "without power, or without sufficient power, opinions are but intangible, negligible, or half hearted notions." Oh wait, that's exactly what you said. Clearly, things that are "negligible" hold more meaning to you than they do to me. ;P
But, joking aside, I'm letting that go, as I can see that you meant something different, and that you just didn't say it the way you really meant to. I do the same thing all the time, so I try to be forgiving about things like that. XD


Of course the universe doesn't centre around us, it's only a damn illusion anyway! (even if it is a somewhat convincing one)

Originally, I never said the universe was an illusion. I said that "right and wrong" were. You put those words in my mouth, and I kept them there for a bit simply because I was too lazy to spit them out, but...to be perfectly clear now, I don't think the universe is "simply an illusion" per se'. I just think that that is a *possibility* and that it doesn't really matter either way. Not that that really matters for out argument anyway, but whatever, I just thought I'd throw that out there.


Please provide evidence that my ego can't take the fact that the universe doesn't centre around us. In fact, please provide evidence that there is a universe! Did you not declare that everything our sense perceive is an illusion? Maybe I am but a figment of your imagination.

Haha, again, I never said that the universe didn't exist (though....who can really be sure?) And of course, I can't prove that the universe actually exists, because nobody can do that. As for proof of your ego not being able to take this possibility, I'll just use your refusal to accept what I'm saying as a possibility. Why else would you have reason to disagree with me?


You were right when you mentioned that I seemed to be suggesting the route of curling up into little balls and awaiting our deaths like cowards, because I am not suggesting that route at all! What I would like to see is people fighting for and achieving their personal successes, not be stagnant and content!

It seems me and you want the same thing then. The only difference between me and you then, is that you think you have the right to decide what is "right" or "wrong," aka, you think it is in your moral boundaries to be a god among men. You say "People have to work hard and grow!" I say "People may do things I disagree with, but I have no right to judge them."

If the world is an illusion, then your

Haha, I don't know what you're trying to say here. Since you seem like a smart person, I'll assume it was just a weird typo. Please explain what you meant though, as that quote is baffling me as it stands now. XD


There are many different kinds of power, and money/finance is but one of them. The power that the likes of Bill Gates and Geoge Soros wields are quite different to the power that Mother Theresa and Gandhi holds. Also, like I mentioned previously, Might does not make Right.

Again, I said what I said because you told me that "opinions without power are negligible." Now that you seem to be retracting your statement, I'm in agreement with you. ^_^

Anyway, let me summarize my points into one quick little list. I'd like you to give me your opinions on each object, as I think over the last few posts, both our views have become a little muddled in the heat of debate. X3

-------------------------list separation line of coolness! X3 --------------

a.)Human beings make decisions with their minds.

b.)Human minds are just natural computers.

c.)As computers, we are a product of the original state of our mind at birth and of all the events we experience thereafter.

d.)Because of c., free will is merely an illusion, the same kind of illusion say, video game characters have. We're only acting by reflex, not by true thought, as true thought is simply impossible in this universe.

e.)Because of d., there can be no "right" or "wrong." Without free will, how can we be anything but what we are?


Please answer the above in abc order, one at a time. I'd like to see exactly where you're disagreeing with me. Thanks! ^_^
Also, don't ignore Toshihiko! :P
X3

EDIT: Also, I think we're gathering an audience for this thread...the view count jumps SO MUCH whenever I check it. XD

What he probably meant is that there is no (cliche) black and white in society.I'm saying that there are different shades of grey.

FAKE EDIT: After writing the responses below, I will hereby champion that there is black and white.


Yes we're in Iraq but we're also pulling out after Bush was convinced.You're pulling out? I need to read more news.


In that situation it was our duty to support the decision of our representative(Bush).I have no idea how things work when it comes to politics.


If the majority is against something then they can find a way to change things. The majority of the Legislative is democrat now right? I agree that without power people will have problems, but if they really are the majority they'll get it done, and if they're really adamant they'll get their point across even being the minority. Having determination is one of the deciding factors in battle.If you have the most resources, you win. It doesn't matter how many of you there are.


And I did not contradict myself earlier. I said that success and failure don't exist except in the mind of the individual, and only that person.Please point out where I accused you of contradicting yourself.

Also, I don't see what's wrong with that opinion.


I also said that it was wrong to judge because doing so would be taking the low road as far as morales go.Please give me an example to illustrate your argument.


In this society opinions are tangible since the person who speaks it can be changed and influenced.My sloppy wording is snapping at my heels now, I think.

Opinions are as tangible as the effect they produce. The more resources you can invest into realising your opinion, the more potent its effects becomes. With a ton of resources, your opinions are a very tangible matter.


What Hopeless was saying is that everything has a role and we all play it out as we should. Though that is close to nihilism you're taking it the wrong way in saying that he says nothing matters, he's going the opposite way and saying everything matters.I'm saying that we need to strive to be better, he's saying that it doesn't matter,so long as you be as you will.


Ki as an extension of your will is tangible... ki can be influenced, what does that mean?Please provide an alternative example. I will not entertain New Age hippiness in a serious discussion (unless its a serious discussion about New Age hippiness).


The level of maturity I was talking about meant realizing that you are no better than anyone else. The maturity to be able to remain objective and unbiased, which I kind of stated -.-;What makes you think that you are no better than anyone else?


The stating of what is right and wrong helps define who we are. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed with devastating results, but what about the fire bombings?You mean Dresden? Of course it is wrong, people died there, man!


The Doolittle raid was a declaration of all out war meaning that there were no moral implications in choosing targets.I don't understand what you mean to say, but if civilian lives were lost, then it was wrong.


Sure to others Hiroshima was a war crime, but it was a necessary war crime.The lesser of two evils is still evil.


Kind of a "better us than them" situation.Better to die doing what is good than live doing what is evil.


In those instances some people were wrong, but you have to know some people were willing to be seen as evil and give up their morals to prevent others from having to do the same.Evil done in the name of good is still evil.

Give me an example of when plumbing the depths of depravity has not encouraged other people to break the previous record.


As stated by Time magazine's Person of the Year article, the world is changing due to the power of the internet to allow people to say whatever they want and eventually change the minority into a majority. There is no lack of power anymore, it is more of a lack of determination or persuasiveness.I think I should officially replace all uses of 'power' with 'resources'. Again, the size of a population matters, and it doesn't.


There is still a lot we need to experience and learn about to be able to decide things, if there was anyone that knew about every walk of life I would gladly listen to their decision till then, we have to rely on people to gauge their own lives based in the stance they have taken.Of course, of course.

HopelessComposer might have to wait 'til tomorrow for a response to his post - 10:44 PM here and exams in 3 weeks (fish!).

HopelessComposer might have to wait 'til tomorrow for a response to his post - 10:44 PM here and exams in 3 weeks (fish!).

That's cool, its 12:40 am here, and I'm just getting in...I'm actually happy you didn't post anything, as I'm too tired to write a long response at the moment, and that would've bothered the hell out of me all night! XD

I would post but can i ask (to save me time) how do you quote everything you want to talk about?

You can either hit the "quote" button on the bottom of someone's post to quote their entire post, or you can copy and paste things you want to quote and surround them with quote /quote tags. Quote tags have brackets around them though...so an example would look like this:

This is how you quote lol ^ ^

Except, of course, you spell "quote" with only one q when doing the tags. Hope that helps. ^_^

Ok, maybe I shouldn't have said opinions cancel each other out, because you seem to be caught up on this now. What I really meant to say is that because neither yours, nor anyone else's opinions really hold any absolute weight, (since we're all basically computers), all we have to go on is relative weight. Since your opinions are as meaningless as anybody else's, your opinions have a 1:1 weight ratio with mine, or anybody else's. In other words, you can't be more correct than anybody else, because nobody is "correct" or "wrong."It is clear by now that we have a very different interpretation of 'weight'. Your 'weight' hinges on the nature of the opinion, whereas I equate the 'weight' of an opinion to the influence it has on other people.


You may be asking yourself "Why is Hopeless arguing with me then?" To which I answer: because I'm hardwired to do so, god damnit! I may be a soulless robot made of meat, but I still want people to be in agreement with me! XD ;)First, I don't want you to stop arguing with me so much that I wouldn't even entertain the probability. Secondly, I may a soulles robot made of meat too, but I don't want everybody to agree with me.


As for proof of your ego not being able to take this possibility, I'll just use your refusal to accept what I'm saying as a possibility. Why else would you have reason to disagree with me?I think it is proof of your ego that you cannot accept my disagreement. The reason why I disagree with you is because your argument does not convince me.


It seems me and you want the same thing then. The only difference between me and you then, is that you think you have the right to decide what is "right" or "wrong," aka, you think it is in your moral boundaries to be a god among men. You say "People have to work hard and grow!" I say "People may do things I disagree with, but I have no right to judge them."I have no idea what you mean by being a god amongst men. What is your definition of the word 'judge' in the context of the above quote?


Haha, I don't know what you're trying to say here. Since you seem like a smart person, I'll assume it was just a weird typo. Please explain what you meant though, as that quote is baffling me as it stands now. XDI have no idea what happenned there, and if the world being an illusion (or not) has got nothing to do with this discussion, I have a pretty good feeling that that post is irrelevant.


Again, I said what I said because you told me that "opinions without power are negligible." Now that you seem to be retracting your statement, I'm in agreement with you. ^_^I think it is now reworded to be "opinions without power have negligible influence".

-------------------------------------------------------------------------


a.)Human beings make decisions with their minds.Agreed, I don't believe in destiny.


b.)Human minds are just natural computers.Agreed.


c.)As computers, we are a product of the original state of our mind at birth and of all the events we experience thereafter.Partially agreed. I do not believe in Nature, only Nurture, when it comes to the development of human minds. I also believe that our experiences do not have total influence on shaping our minds.


d.)Because of c., free will is merely an illusion, the same kind of illusion say, video game characters have. We're only acting by reflex, not by true thought, as true thought is simply impossible in this universe.I fail to see how free will is an illusion because of C. Video game characters are not sentient beings - they are graphics animated by lines of programming that does not grant them consciousness in any shape or form, and they do not make decisions with their own minds. I am baffled by how you can equate a video game character with a conscious, sentient being. Lastly, even identical twins have different responses to the same experience - there is more to living as a human than merely making a knee-jerk response to the stimuli you experience everyday.


e.)Because of d., there can be no "right" or "wrong." Without free will, how can we be anything but what we are?A city is besieged by a vastly superior army. The chief of the army demands that the city sacrifices twelve virgins of both sexes to appease their gods, the alternative being that the city falls to the invaders and all within is put to the sword and fire. The virgins were sacrificed, and the army moved on to the next city. Do you think that was neither the right thing or wrong thing to do?

Heh, k.


Partially agreed. I do not believe in Nature, only Nurture, when it comes to the development of human minds. I also believe that our experiences do not have total influence on shaping our minds.

Ok, so what *do* you believe shapes our minds? No matter what you believe shapes our minds, you have to admit that it is outside the mind itself. You can't believe "the mind magically shapes itself." Also, not believing in nature seems kind of ridiculous to me. Are you suggesting a mentally handicapped person would have the same reaction to a great work of art as a genius would? Or perhaps you're suggesting that people aren't born mentally retarded, and are only made so through the events they experience during life. Of course, if you believed that, I'd die on the spot upon reading your next post stating that you do. XD


I fail to see how free will is an illusion because of C.
I'd think it would be fairly obvious. You just said you agreed that our minds were just natural computers. Do computers have free will?


Video game characters are not sentient beings
Why not? They react to things, learn, and move about in 3d space. They may not do it in as advanced a way as we, but they do all the same things. Their actions are guided by computer systems, and they react to their enviroments. Our actions are also controlled by computers, and we react to our envirorments. We just do it better than they do. Which brings up my point once again. Sentience as you define it doesn't exist, we'd just like to think it does.


Lastly, even identical twins have different responses to the same experience
Forgive me for sounding rude, but what the hell is your point? Are you suggesting that because identical twins look the same, that they have the same EXACT brain makeup at birth, and go through all the same EXACT experiences through life? That sounds ludicrous to me.


A city is besieged by a vastly superior army. The chief of the army demands that the city sacrifices twelve virgins of both sexes to appease their gods, the alternative being that the city falls to the invaders and all within is put to the sword and fire. The virgins were sacrificed, and the army moved on to the next city. Do you think that was neither the right thing or wrong thing to do?

These actions disgust and anger me, of course. But unlike you, who attributes them to evil or other such magicks, I attribute them to a series of unhappy misfortunes, leading up to the chief of the army being "programmed" (by his genetics and by what he had experienced in life up until that point) into a person who would cause harm to others. We both agree that it is a sad thing that it happened. The only difference between you and me is that you see yourself as better than the chief, while I only see myself as luckier than him, in that I have had the fortune to turn out to be a person who would rather bring people happiness than to see them suffer.

Just because I believe there is no such thing as "good" or "evil" in this world, doesn't mean I am a sociopath. Please stop suggesting that I am. ;P

Let me ask you something also...are you a religious person? Jesus told us all that we were not in the right to judge others, that we were all equal to one another. I'm only saying the same thing he did, albeit for slightly different reasons. Since you brought Jesus up as a "good man" earlier, I figured I'd throw that out there for you. The way I try to live my life is the same way Jesus taught. So stop asking me whether or not bad things happening in the world bother me, as they do. I just wouldn't condemn the people committing the acts, as you would.


I'm not so sure some people deserve to live.
That's what got me arguing with you in the first place. Just thought I'd remind you, just so you wouldn't say "I wouldn't condemn people! What are you talking about?!" ;)

And we've been going in circles for awhile now...quite honestly, I'm getting bored playing word games with you, so I have one final question for you. If you can't answer it in a way that satisfies me, or if you dodge the question, I'm done arguing, as I really don't see a point to it anymore. Here it is:

You've said that you agree that human minds are computers. You've also said that though this is true, free will still exists. You've also stated that you don't believe that the only two things that make up what we become are our envirements and genetic makeup. You seem to be suggesting that there is some mysterious, magical third force that shapes the way our minds develop. I want to know what else shapes our minds, if not our enviroments and genetic makeup. I also want to know if you believe computers have free will, and if not, then how the hell do human beings? (Is it magic again, like how our brains are shaped and molded?)

I'm sorry, that was more than one question. Anyway, please answer my last paragraph fully, as I can see only two possible outcomes of you doing so. Either you'll agree with me, or you'll admit to magic or God shaping our minds and somehow granting them freewill, even though they are merely natural computers, in which case, I'll see no more reason to argue with you, as "magic lol" does not constitute an answer in my book. ;)

Or maybe you'll surprise the f!ck out of me, and give me a real answer, in which case, you're even smarter than I thought. ^_^

I would post but can i ask (to save me time) how do you quote everything you want to talk about?

I swear I am the only person who uses the Multi-Quote function. Button is labelled MQuote, beside the Quote function, for quoting more than one person.
Spread the love, baby!

Oh and:


Lastly, even identical twins have different responses to the same experience

Forgive me for sounding rude, but what the hell is your point? Are you suggesting that because identical twins look the same, that they have the same EXACT brain makeup at birth, and go through all the same EXACT experiences through life? That sounds ludicrous to me.

I think that's what he's trying to refute, you know.

I swear I am the only person who uses the Multi-Quote function. Button is labelled MQuote, beside the Quote function, for quoting more than one person.
Spread the love, baby!

Holy crap! There *is* an MQuote button there! Oo
lol, whatever, I like copy and paste anyway. XD

I think that's what he's trying to refute, you know.
If that's what he's trying to refute, he's in trouble. > <

Ok, so what *do* you believe shapes our minds? No matter what you believe shapes our minds, you have to admit that it is outside the mind itself. You can't believe "the mind magically shapes itself."Why, I so happen to believe that "the mind magically shapes itself"!

Of course things outside our mind (i.e. experiences) shape our mind. However, we also shape our own minds without outside interference or assistance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autosuggestion


Also, not believing in nature seems kind of ridiculous to me. Are you suggesting a mentally handicapped person would have the same reaction to a great work of art as a genius would? Or perhaps you're suggesting that people aren't born mentally retarded, and are only made so through the events they experience during life. Of course, if you believed that, I'd die on the spot upon reading your next post stating that you do. XDI'm sorry, I didn't realise that you have not engaged in any 'Nature vs Nurture' debates before, and it is completely my fault that I have assumed so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_versus_nurture

Are you suggesting that no mentally handicapped person is capable of having the same reaction to a great work of art as a genius would? Are you suggesting that a genius is entirely a product of genetic and various inborn biological factors?



I'd think it would be fairly obvious. You just said you agreed that our minds were just natural computers. Do computers have free will?Having had time to actually do some research for this argument, I hereby retract my original statement that I agree with you on that point altogether. See the following reply.


Why not? They react to things, learn, and move about in 3d space. They may not do it in as advanced a way as we, but they do all the same things. Their actions are guided by computer systems, and they react to their environments. Our actions are also controlled by computers, and we react to our environments. We just do it better than they do. Which brings up my point once again. Sentience as you define it doesn't exist, we'd just like to think it does.Here is why you cannot equate a human mind with a computer program. Programs are defined purely formally or syntactically and since minds have an intrinsic mental content, it follows immediately that the program by itself cannot constitute the mind. The formal syntax of the program does not by itself guarantee the presence of mental contents. Example: A computer, me for example, could run the steps in the program for some mental capacity, such as understanding Chinese, without understanding a word of Chinese. The argument rests on the simple logical truth that syntax is not the same as, nor is it by itself sufficient for, semantics. For more detail, see the the Chinese Room argument (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room).


Forgive me for sounding rude, but what the hell is your point? Are you suggesting that because identical twins look the same, that they have the same EXACT brain makeup at birth, and go through all the same EXACT experiences through life? That sounds ludicrous to me.If I haven't told you already, please do not apologise for using expletives, it shows emotional commitment!

Let me rephrase my statement for you. I believe that genetically identical twins have different responses to the same experience. Does that sounds ludicrous to you?


These actions disgust and anger me, of course. But unlike you, who attributes them to evil or other such magicks, I attribute them to a series of unhappy misfortunes, leading up to the chief of the army being "programmed" (by his genetics and by what he had experienced in life up until that point) into a person who would cause harm to others.I do not attribute the cause of these actions to evil. I attribute the cause of these actions to free will.


We both agree that it is a sad thing that it happened. The only difference between you and me is that you see yourself as better than the chief, while I only see myself as luckier than him, in that I have had the fortune to turn out to be a person who would rather bring people happiness than to see them suffer.There is a huge variety of emotional responses that one can have for acts of evil, so please do not presume to judge my emotional reaction. On the contrary, I do not understand why you feel sad towards this example. Should you not be resigned to the fact that it is all a matter of probability and numbers?


Just because I believe there is no such thing as "good" or "evil" in this world, doesn't mean I am a sociopath. Please stop suggesting that I am. ;PFor the record, I do not think that you are suffering from an anti-social personality disorder.


Let me ask you something also...are you a religious person?No, I am not a religious person.


Jesus told us all that we were not in the right to judge others, that we were all equal to one another. I'm only saying the same thing he did, albeit for slightly different reasons. Since you brought Jesus up as a "good man" earlier, I figured I'd throw that out there for you. The way I try to live my life is the same way Jesus taught. So stop asking me whether or not bad things happening in the world bother me, as they do. I just wouldn't condemn the people committing the acts, as you would.I think that Jesus was a good man, fictional or not, for reasons different from his believers.


That's what got me arguing with you in the first place. Just thought I'd remind you, just so you wouldn't say "I wouldn't condemn people! What are you talking about?!" ;)Of course I condemn people. I certainly believe that certain people do not deserve to live!


And we've been going in circles for awhile now...quite honestly, I'm getting bored playing word games with you, so I have one final question for you. If you can't answer it in a way that satisfies me, or if you dodge the question, I'm done arguing, as I really don't see a point to it anymore.Oh yes, about dodging questions, What is your definition of the word 'judge' in the context of the above quote? (see post before)

Also, I apologise for not being able to answer your (paragraph of) question(s), as I have had the opportunity to clarify the expression of my opinions, and certain of the premises to your question(s) are now no longer valid. Please review your question(s) and I will happily answer them for you.


Or maybe you'll surprise the fuck out of me, and give me a real answer, in which case, you're even smarter than I thought. ^_^I don't like you implying that I haven't given you a real answer at all throughout our exchange, because I can't very well enjoy an argument without being fully involved. However, feel free to think whatever you like of me, it's no skin off my nose, so long as you are arguing against me.

Edit: I've read your last post again, and I've changed my mind. I don't see a reason to continue this after all. Sorry, it's just that I've been very busy lately, and this just seems like too much work to be spending on something so...ineffectual to my life.

It was fun though. Sorry again!

Oh, and a judge is someone who judges whether or not people have committed a crime/what their punishment should be. In a perfect world with perfect people, we wouldn't need judges or their punishments. Sadly, if we do not deter people from committing crimes through exacting punishments on "bad" people, the world would fall into anarchy. I could happily be a judge, as they are needed, and bring good to the world, in a roundabout kind of way.

Once more, sorry for not continuing this argument with you; you seemed to be enjoying yourself, as was I. I just have so. much. crap. to do. XP

i'm so happy to be able to find this forum... i just cant tolerate myself to announce this to the whole world

the news i'm going to say now is not a lie... it's up to you if you wont believe it
<_<

1. in year 2011 world war will start...
2. in year 2430+ an anti-christ will be born, their parents are bishop and a nun... too evil... -_-
3. world war 4 is a nuclear war

and if any of you notice the world's climate is starting to become abnormal and volcanoes erupting, mysterious comets, they are the signs of warnings from God to repent.

this news is for christians only

there will be also jihad, iraq and iran will merge for it, and they will invade europe and maybe america

I'd like to know where you got this information...

i'm so happy to be able to find this forum... i just cant tolerate myself to announce this to the whole world

the news i'm going to say now is not a lie... it's up to you if you wont believe it
<_<

1. in year 2011 world war will start...
2. in year 2430+ an anti-christ will be born, their parents are bishop and a nun... too evil... -_-
3. world war 4 is a nuclear war

and if any of you notice the world's climate is starting to become abnormal and volcanoes erupting, mysterious comets, they are the signs of warnings from God to repent.

this news is for christians only

WHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

u r funny

MusicHeart, are you a fan of Nostradamus? XD

^Just what I was thinking.

@MusicHeart:
omg ur not serious??1`!!
I can hardly believe you took it upon yourself to say something so stupid. Let alone expect anyone to believe that.

i'm so happy to be able to find this forum... i just cant tolerate myself to announce this to the whole world

the news i'm going to say now is not a lie... it's up to you if you wont believe it


1. in year 2011 world war will start...
2. in year 2430+ an anti-christ will be born, their parents are bishop and a nun... too evil...
3. world war 4 is a nuclear war

and if any of you notice the world's climate is starting to become abnormal and volcanoes erupting, mysterious comets, they are the signs of warnings from God to repent.

this news is for christians only

Ah, of course. Just like that time earth ended 7 years ago. Come on guys, obviously he knows what he's talking about!

EDIT: And why is this message for Christians only? Are you suggesting that only Christians are stupid enough to believe you? XD

And you double posted.

EDIT: And why is this message for Christians only? Are you suggesting that only Christians are stupid enough to believe you? XD

Likely XD

Religion is all fine and dandy, as long as you don't impose it on people. Whether you go to church or temple, it's fine with me as long as you don't force me to come.

And lucky me, my Grandmother's Evangelical. So I got a Bible for Christmas. Joy. I need a big "I'M A BUDDHIST" shirt. Of course, that kinda contradicts itself, doesn't it? XD

i'm so happy to be able to find this forum... i just cant tolerate myself to announce this to the whole world

the news i'm going to say now is not a lie... it's up to you if you wont believe it
<_<

1. in year 2011 world war will start...
2. in year 2430+ an anti-christ will be born, their parents are bishop and a nun... too evil... -_-
3. world war 4 is a nuclear war

and if any of you notice the world's climate is starting to become abnormal and volcanoes erupting, mysterious comets, they are the signs of warnings from God to repent.

this news is for christians only

Lol thank for making my day even better with a laugh.

Valcanoes always have been erupting. It did more in the past too lol

If a comet that everyone was expecting is mysterious, I'm a Sherlock Holmes book.

Repent everyone

i'm so happy to be able to find this forum... i just cant tolerate myself to announce this to the whole world

the news i'm going to say now is not a lie... it's up to you if you wont believe it
<_<

1. in year 2011 world war will start...
2. in year 2430+ an anti-christ will be born, their parents are bishop and a nun... too evil... -_-
3. world war 4 is a nuclear war

and if any of you notice the world's climate is starting to become abnormal and volcanoes erupting, mysterious comets, they are the signs of warnings from God to repent.

this news is for christians only

I lol'd.

"volcanoes erupting, mysterious comets"? EEK! Natural occurrences!

See, people like these are why George Bush is the president.

Well apparantly, God's been trying to get us to repent for an awfully long time. You'd think after all this time he'd get the point and make the universe implode. Guess not.

Yeah, I mean obviously were not getting it. We didn't get it when there was just two people and now that theres billions.

How the hell can we all be converted? lol

Well apparantly, God's been trying to get us to repent for an awfully long time. You'd think after all this time he'd get the point and make the universe implode. Guess not.

Yeah, if he was all powerful, wouldn't she be able to make us all believe.

God's female?

Nevermind. God could make the Earth spin cockwise if he wanted but he doesn't, its just a fact of life.

uhm.. i thought to put "this news is for christian" thing 'coz the other people with other religion might get angry 'coz they might think christianity is the real religion or great religion or something...
:heh:
maybe i shouldn't have posted it...
:\
oh well...
got some of the info from here
http://www.visionwebhosting.net/christian-web-hosting-provider/Christian-Web-Hosting0134.htm

i dunno if i should believe you musicheart but i also read something like that in this site

Let's face it fellow earth humans Nuclear War is enevitable in our lifetime, it's not a pesimistic point of view but an educated one taking in to consideration, overpopulation, primative & illogical thinking, fanaticism in religion, powerhungry governments. Every goverment wants the biggest slice of pie..but there's only so much pie to go around.

Here below are some prophecies: (it must be noted that i got this information from a tape randi winters did called 'prophecies' i must state that i've written it in the shortest and laziest way possible and it isn't word for word by any means) it's 2am in the U.K btw) (I took out the most 'juicy' bits)..I'd also like to say that i've heard that randi winters isn't exactly a reliable source regarding the Meier material so with caution make what you will of the tit-bits below.

Death & destruction will sweep from the east and the west, the old mother earth will be shaken violently and angrily the result of mans madness the reward for his insanity. America , China, India will be countries that will burn. whole countries will sink under the water. when mt vesuvious errupts it will signify the beggining or commencing of world war 3 expect political assasinations as a major part of the war will start with an invasion at night unsuspectedly. China will march in to India and take it over. Europe burns and sinks in ashes & embers with so much destruction. the 3rd world fire is conjured up by the hands of humans through religious sects, hate, greed, power. it happens because people don't seek the truth and it is a lesson to earth humans because they don't seek a spiritual life. europe will be the central point for the things that are going to happen. 100 atomic suns will glow and destroy everything in a roaring fire, it will be so severe the land of germany will 'steam'. the powerful will hide in their bunker shrines laughing while they toss their deadly fire on peace seeking europe. radioactive radiation will destroy much of the life in europe implemented with chemical and biological bombs. aslo in the way of a neutron weapons whole countries and lands will quake. because of the chemical bombs so many new dieseases will be made and many people will die a very slow and painful death. people would be driven in to unmercifully horrible deaths just as it was predicted 2000 years ago the cause once again is politics, religion and other earth insanities. The world war will break out in europe and everyday of no war will be very precious.The powerful of the world will designate europe as the area for the battle so that their own land will remain intact. The powerful will beat it war axe on europes head. Christian and non christian countries will fall to their death. 25 million people will be led to death in India, because the yellow storm wave of china will push in to india and start the bloddy battle for new dehli. India will be completly conquered by the powers of the chinese.persia and turkey will also fall in to the waring as russia invades these two countries and takes them over because of the oil reserves there.the balkan states will fall in to uproar and will cause their own war. africa and arabia will be taken over so that the conquering of europe will be easier.russia will head a 3 headed dragon across to the west conquering the balkan countries. Italy will be destroyed and millions of people will be made homeless, religious leaders in general will meet a brutal death as the pope flees across the atlantic towards south america for safe haven. Russia will march through hungary, austria, italy, switzerland, france. The american weapon depots in france will be taken over by the russians and the russians will lead the war against england, spain and scandanavia. this war will be terrible for the entire world but especially for europe. plagues and dieseases unknown to earth scientists at the time will arise and rage across the land of europe which will be caused by the bacteria and the radiation and dead rotting human corpses lying everywhere. germany wil suffer an attack from the east from the GDR through which a civil war will be sparked were german will fight against german. france will invade norway and sweden, finland will be conquered as well, all the countries bordering the north sea and england will be destroyed by a terrible flood which is caused by the flood bomb and by a powerful hurricane cities and towns will submerge under the sea and most of scotland will be lost..england's position as a world leader will be totally destroyed forver as the russians from the east will cause a revolution to break out in england itself which will cause more bloodshead and turmoil will greatly exceed that of the german civil war, south wales will be deafeated though bloodshed, revoltys..ireland bleeds to death in a murderous war america will be thrown in to another war and it will be with canada because of political complications. America will be over burdened with so much pain and attack that it will not be able to run to the aid of europe. america for the most part will be destroyed..through nature catastrophe weapons china will ignite parts of the lower athmosphere and burn everything below it (elemental weapons) also terrible and horrible hurricanes will run across the american continent wint no mercy caused by the elemental weapons, monsterous gigantic waves of fire will burn america and will leave evrything in debris and ashes. a supermassive hurricane will rage over america it will go towards the norrth eats then it will move out to the atlantic were it will cause a raging storm producing such a high tidal wave that observers will say that it looks like a huge mountain. it moves towards europe and . 2/3 of humanity will die in the 3rd world war..death will be in the billionfold..5 out of 8 billion people will perish.america will have 2 civil wars which will divide the country politically in to 4-5 parts.if the worlds power hungry in power don't come to a compromise everything on the planet will be destroyed. hunger and problems will slowly suffocate russia, the last and most significant sigh for the 3rd world fire will be a political murder which will take place in a country of the east. church leaders will be massacred in france due to the cowardice of the pope.


Skitish I know but i'm very tired..

I just really do hope these prophecies don't materialize! or were all in ankle deep blood.



take care, be well


--Satchi, Steelmark Forums


MOD EDIT: Posting other forum links are not allowed. I quoted the post in this post, which, by the way, isn't very related to this topic.

God's female?

Nevermind. God could make the Earth spin cockwise if he wanted but he doesn't, its just a fact of life.If there is no evidence for it, how can it be a fact of life?

God's female?

Nevermind. God could make the Earth spin cockwise if he wanted but he doesn't, its just a fact of life.

I'm Buddhist/Aetheist so I don't believe in God, but when I refer to him, I use both genders.

There is a higher power/spirit in Buddhism btw. Kind of like a god.

Just to get that out of the way.

There is a higher power/spirit in Buddhism btw. Kind of like a god.

Just to get that out of the way.

That's why I put /Atheist. I love Buddhism's ideas, but I don't believe in God.

Dude, God could be, like, a llama. And like we'd ever know.


*I've been adding 'like' in my sentences much too often. I blame the.. the..

^Hell yeah. All hail Lord Lama! :3

0_0 Kill the non-beliver who worships Lamas! 0_0

There is only Llama, and through Llama we trust... :cry:

(Llama bless you)

Christian: Heathens!!1
Atheist: There is no Llama, it is your imagination.
Buddhist: So long as your mind is at peace.
Agnostic: Who the hell cares?
Humanist: Depending on higher powers will get you nowhere.
Luceferian: Embrace your desires of the Llama!
Drunk Dude: Llamas! Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet.


..Sorry, I just couldn't resist.

Id like to warn that I havent read this thread...here goes

be grownups and watch the whole thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kH5zfTVt9X4

To all the above posters, stop comparing lama lords to religion in an not-even-funny way or you'll all receive infractions.

To all the above posters, stop comparing lama lords to religion in an not-even-funny way or you'll all receive infractions.

But this is the religion thread! We were just pointing out how ridiculous religions can be. I'm Christian, and I find my own religion to be hilarious honestly. My savior turns into a loaf of bread for me every Sunday, and I have the privilege of devouring his body once a week! To me, that's even more far-out there than God being a llama. Actually, in Christianity, God is love, God is all powerful, all knowing, and everywhere. So I suppose that would make him a llama, among other things. (Other things being everything else apparently...)

I'd of said "Sorry for the spam," if you'd said "People, stop spamming in this thread," but since you said "Stop calling God a llama," I got the feeling that you had a problem with the content of our spam, instead of the spam itself. Which you shouldn't. Just pointing that out. XD

And sorry for the spam. I pledge never to call God a llama in this thread again, unless I'm doing it dead-seriously to help prove an argument. :heh:

To all the above posters, stop comparing lama lords to religion in an not-even-funny way or you'll all receive infractions.

Including M? Oooh...

By the way I enjoyed your post, M. Hehe

Including M? Oooh...

I was going to ask the same thing, but decided against it, in case the answer was a "yes."

It didn't seem a fair question to ask, as one of our Mods would be undermined either way. = \

Including M? Oooh...

By the way I enjoyed your post, M. HeheJaso, your crude attempts to play people off against one another will only result in you getting swatted like a fly one day. You were warned.

Okay back to religion please...

Jaso, your crude attempts to play people off against one another will only result in you getting swatted like a fly one day. You were warned.

Yes, lets.

I believe that it is wrong to falsely accuse others of doing unkind things in which they were not doing.

That's not religion, but blaming people without evidence is a trend in religion that we should eliminate. False accusations actually helps society progress though... Let's just drop accusations all together because they don't help enough to be useful. >_<

Yes, lets.

I believe that it is wrong to falsely accuse others of doing unkind things in which they were not doing.Are you talking about religion, or are you talking about yourself?

He's talking about what you want him to be talking about.

Ok so whats every1's favorite religion ?

I'm a fence sitter and know a small amount about most religions sooo.......

i choose the humble religion of sitting on a fence, but i can't deciede what would happen if i were to die....

and i have alot of rash thoughts on life after death

Ok lol, I know I sucked last time I was in here but now, with HC and DB lol I'm a bit more aware of what to do so I'll give it another shot! Darkbring bring it on lol :)


I don't beleive in religions, I only think that they are things that keep people occupied other than asking themselves questions that tend to make one go insane. Like why are we here? Well God created us, and thats the end of that question which is rather simple and without logic. Not without logic completely, but without explaination.

I for one, can not for the life of me understand why people in general are obsessing about the "What is the purpose of life?", "Why are we here?" type of questions. Some may call me ignorant for not caring but Lets face it, if you found a verifiable answer to that question how fun would our lives be?

I say screw religion and make the best of your time here.

To the people that state that the bible is the truth on the sole basis that its old; check out the gilgamesh epic maybe thats true too =), as I understad it, it is dated long before the bible.

Ok lol, I know I sucked last time I was in here but now, with HC and DB lol I'm a bit more aware of what to do so I'll give it another shot! Darkbring bring it on lol :)

I don't beleive in religions, I only think that they are things that keep people occupied other than asking themselves questions that tend to make one go insane. Like why are we here? Well God created us, and thats the end of that question which is rather simple and without logic. Not without logic completely, but without explaination.
My position is pretty much the same Celeste. :) Long ago people believed in god because they could not understand nature, well, now we know pretty much about nature and one of the only thing which still appears to be a miracle (at least for me) is the big bang. This is why I don't exclude that there might be a god, but if he exist he doesn't care for us and has nothing to do with the bible or other "holy" things.
Nowadays religion is very often abused to manipulate people imo...

ok ok but can any1 tell me what happens when we die ?...... face it you can't

unless you've died and been reborn with proff of those events ?
no ?

ok ok but can any1 tell me what happens when we die ?...... face it you can't

unless you've died and been reborn with proff of those events ?
no ?

There have been people who've had near death experiences. They come back with stories of heaven, and all we can do is beleive, or not beleive. It's that way with any question of faith. I beleive that it is the reason for us living, and that if we DID know everything, we would feel empty. Or maybe our purpose was, to be able to ask the question in the first place...

spot what happens to your *spirit* when u die your selfconsioucness can u imagine it stoping and turning into nothing, your state of being just disapearing ? *nothing* ?

ok ok but can any1 tell me what happens when we die ?

Before I can answer that question, you have to define what exactly you consider "we" to be. :3

haha yes yes

well as "we" i mean you

what do u think ?

Well, I mean, as human beings, would you say we have souls attached to us? Are we just bundles of electricity? Are we created by a god, or are we just piles of clay that were given a chance at sentience just by pure luck? Etc etc...

to answer that i would need to know which u are most fond of.... which do u relate to? the one you think is right


i'll get back onto things when i can shouldn't be long

I have no real opinion on this. My opinion is that we have an equal chance of anything happening to us when we die. Hopefully it's something good! XD

lol then you and me are on the same page:P

I definitely don't think that we are purely coincidental. How can we just exist because of some biochemical reaction? I don't believe in the we are just bundles of energy, to even think that we are just atoms interacting together, Ahhhh. I still believe I will go to heaven. It is much better than thinking that humans will become nothing when they die.

Why? Is a kinda "long" sleep really that bad? Of course heaven would be nicer, but that's the only reason why people believe in that.

Ok lol, I know I sucked last time I was in here but now, with HC and DB lol I'm a bit more aware of what to do so I'll give it another shot! Darkbring bring it on lol :)


I don't beleive in religions, I only think that they are things that keep people occupied other than asking themselves questions that tend to make one go insane. Like why are we here? Well God created us, and thats the end of that question which is rather simple and without logic. Not without logic completely, but without explaination.

I promise you, there is not a single person on earth that believes in a religion because it keeps them occupied. Religion isn't some evolutionary thing we created to keep us from going insane. I don't believe in God so I can have an answer to my questions, I believe in God because believing in God gives me a will to live, gives me something to hope for after all is said and done. Anyone who questions what I believe in can go ahead, for I promise you, you will never understand what I believe until you too believe in it.

Religion isn't some evolutionary thing we created to keep us from going insane.

Of course not, that wouldn't make any sense. We created religions because they're true, which is why there are so many contradictory religions out there. XD


I believe in God because believing in God gives me a will to live

That seems kind of contradictory. If you didn't have the will to live, you'd either commit suicide (which some people would call insane) or you would wallow in pathetic grief until you died, as you'd lack the will to do anything. That would also drive you insane. And I was a total Christian until a few years ago (now I'm rather ambiguous) and I still don't understand what you mean when you say: "Anyone who questions what I believe in can go ahead, for I promise you, you will never understand what I believe until you too believe in it." I believed the same thing you did, and nothing magical or out of the ordinary happened. :heh:

Well believing in God gives ME a will to live, it could be very different for others, I can only speak for myself. Without hope of an afterlife, or without belief in something greater than this, I probably would live a very miserable life that would end soon.

And obviously you do not believe in what I believe in, because as you stated, you were christian until a few years ago, well what I believe has stuck with me through thick and thin and will stick with me through it all. You're beliefs must not have been as strong as mine (Oh and I am posting this with utmost repsect, so please do not take offense in anything I say. I could be absolutely wrong about you, but I do not know you so I am just going off of what I see here. Cheers)

Well believing in God gives ME a will to live, it could be very different for others, I can only speak for myself.

If that's true, then how can you say this:

I promise you, there is not a single person on earth that believes in a religion because it keeps them occupied.

Hahahaha. ;)
I think people believe in religion for a few reasons: because they've thought about the universe and weighted science against religion and such, and came to the conclusion that there must be more than just math out there running the universe. (Where did math come from right?) Some people need it because it gives them a will to live. Others need it to stay sane. I'm sure there are other reasons too. All of them are viable, though I'd agree with the first reason the most. Personally, I don't think there's strong enough evidence to either prove or disprove god(s), so I just focus on being happy. ^_^


And obviously you do not believe in what I believe in, because as you stated, you were christian until a few years ago, well what I believe has stuck with me through thick and thin and will stick with me through it all.
Nah, we probably believed in the same thing. My beliefs just changed a bit is all. Beliefs change all the time. ^_^


(Oh and I am posting this with utmost repsect, so please do not take offense in anything I say. I could be absolutely wrong about you, but I do not know you so I am just going off of what I see here. Cheers)
Oh, of course not. Anyone who is easily offended shouldn't be in a religion thread right? Things can get pretty heated in here sometimes. :heh:
No offense is meant to you either of course. ^ -^

ok so when you said


(now I'm rather ambiguous)

where would you place yourself atm ?

You can't just quote that one portion and pretend that directs the argument, he explains where he thinks he is. Make an argument. If you "have no opinion on the topic" Then why are you arguing it?
Now, Go back and read all of hopeless' comments so I can bash down your rebuttal to them =D

If that's true, then how can you say this:


Hahahaha. ;)
I think people believe in religion for a few reasons: because they've thought about the universe and weighted science against religion and such, and came to the conclusion that there must be more than just math out there running the universe. (Where did math come from right?) Some people need it because it gives them a will to live. Others need it to stay sane. I'm sure there are other reasons too. All of them are viable, though I'd agree with the first reason the most. Personally, I don't think there's strong enough evidence to either prove or disprove god(s), so I just focus on being happy. ^_^


Nah, we probably believed in the same thing. My beliefs just changed a bit is all. Beliefs change all the time. ^_^


Oh, of course not. Anyone who is easily offended shouldn't be in a religion thread right? Things can get pretty heated in here sometimes. :heh:
No offense is meant to you either of course. ^ -^

@Your First Sentence: Aye, that isn't very fair, each of those sentences were directed at a different thing. When it comes to why someone believes in god, I can only tell you why I believe in him. But I can tell you that no one believes in a religion to keep themselves occupied. Further in detail, I don't know why Lucy believes in god, but I can tell you that she does not believe in him to keep herself occupied.

@the rest of your post: Fair enough

^Oops, my mistake. I must've read something wrong. Or maybe I was just trying to be a pain in the ass for a second, I honestly forget. :heh:
Anyway, I see what you were saying now, haha ;)

@Toshihiko:
Haha, thanks. XD
I was going to say, I've already *said* where I stand right now, go read my comments! (To One Winged I mean)

Yeah, I'd just like to share this little quote thing, I got it in a chainletter, but I actually liked it alot. Please read it, I'm just trying to stir up the religion thread again, I really enjoyed it.




I don't believe in Santa Claus, but I'm not going to sue
somebody for singing a Ho-Ho-Ho song in December. I
don't agree with Darwin, but I didn't go out and hire a
lawyer when my high school teacher taught his theory
Of evolution.

Life, liberty or your pursuit of happiness will not be
endangered because someone says a 30-second prayer
Before a football game.

So what's the big deal? It's not like somebody is up there reading the entire book of Acts. They're just talking to a God they believe in and asking him to grant safety to the players on the field and the fans going home from the game.

But it's a Christian prayer, some will argue.

Yes, and this is the United States of America, a country
Founded on Christian principles. According to our very
own phone book, Christian churches outnumber all others better than 200-to-1nt. To a football game in Jerusalem, I would expect to hear a Jewish prayer.


If I went to a soccer game in Baghdad, I would expect to hear a Muslim prayer.


If I went to a ping pong match in China, I would expect to hear someone pray to Buddha.


And I wouldn't be offended. It wouldn't bother me one bit. When in Rome . . .



But "what about the atheists?" is another argument.

What about them?
Nobody is asking them to be baptized. We're not going to pass the collection plate. Just humor us for 30 seconds. If that's asking too much, bring a Walkman or a pair of ear plugs. Go to the bathroom. Visit the concession stand. Call your lawyer!

Unfortunately, one or two will make that phone call. One or two will tell thousands what they can and cannot do. I don't think a short prayer at a football game is going to shake the world's foundations.

Christians are just sick and tired of turning the other cheek while our courts strip us of all our rights. Our parents and grandparents taught us to pray before
eating, to pray before we go to sleep.

Our Bible tells us to pray without ceasing. Now a handful of people and their lawyers are telling us to cease praying.



God help us.

And if that last sentence offends you, well ... just sue me.

The silent majority has been silent too long. It's time we let that one or two who scream loud enough to be heard know that the vast majority don't care what they want. It is time the majority rules! It's time we tell them, you don't have to pray; you don't have to say the pledge of allegiance; you don't have to believe in God or attend services that honor Him. That is your right, and we will honor your right.. But by golly, you are no longer going to take our rights away. We are fighting back .. and we WILL WIN!

God bless us one and all .. especially those who denounce Him. God bless America, despite all her faults. She is still the greatest nation of all.

God bless our service men and women who are fighting to protect our right to pray and worship God.


May this be the year the silent majority is heard and we put God back as the foundation of our families and institutions.

Well if we're pulling up old ideas/quotes let's talk about the cnn issue again
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiyJzWy3CDQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viW2FjNtlQM

I have no problems with athiest, and I also think that it is NOT a very christian thing to discriminate against Athiests. As for video two, that's just the views of three people. I think removing religion from the united states would destroy all views of moral, and whats right and wrong. Just look at this great nation, we get fined or even put in jail for harming domestic animals, yet killing unborn babies is alright? Its because of non-spiritual people that our country allows this, its because they don't have a founded belief to guide their actions. And now they want to get rid of religion from every day activities.

Hey isn't george bush a "very" religious guy ?
(XD < cracks up at David Lettermans "Great Moments in Prezzie History")

It's not that people don't want religion, it's just that they want the right religion. What that is is up for debate.

@ Ph34r: Which group of people are you talking about?

. I think removing religion from the united states would destroy all views of moral, and whats right and wrong. Just look at this great nation, we get fined or even put in jail for harming domestic animals, yet killing unborn babies is alright? Its because of non-spiritual people that our country allows this, its because they don't have a founded belief to guide their actions. And now they want to get rid of religion from every day activities.

since when is moral a spiritual matter? what you are indirectly stating here is that people who dont believe in a "God" lack moral and a sense of right and wrong. This, I assure you is not the case.

thank goodness, that abortion is "allowed" as an option. Do you even consider the economic effects of having a child? think it through...

Its not because of a lack of guidelines that I am for abortion, its because believe that it can be justified.

I ask you this: Is it moral to frown upon the use of condoms in the middle of an AIDS epidemic?

the following might upset people...

Im sorry for you if you have been indoctrinated into christianity.
it is obviously a human invention just like judeism, budism, and the greek mythology, and you know it. Humans have always made up religions ever since we got brains to think with. we made up stories to explain the inexplicable. I think its degrading to the human intellect that we still cling to these stories, and even kill in the name of these so called "Gods".
yes I think religion should be reduced from everyday activities! I actually think it should be reduced from the face of the earth, as it causes more harm than good in my opinion.

thats my views of things, thanks for listening.

edit: Oh, and that founded belief would be science...

1) The athiest has gotten his morals from a religious person, I assure you. Tell me, where do you get you're morals? Where did he get his morals? Next, where did he get his morals? And I ask this for forever, you may not be able to give me an answer for very long, but I can. I'll tell you where the founding people of this world got their morals...religion. I ask you prove me wrong here.

2) So adoption isn't even an option any more? "Whoops, i'm pregnant, but instead of doing the humane thing and bearing my 9 month punishment for making a stupid choice, I'm just going to kill the baby" That is definately morally right.

3) If you're founded belief is science, then sex is our means of reproduction. According to that, any other use of sex is morally wrong.

4) Hey, thats you're opinion. I'm not going to try to, or shove anything down your throat. In my opinion, the law is far from moral and the more you take away religion, the more people are going to stop caring about whats right and wrong.

Stupid choices don't alway result in pregancy. Many times a poor, innocent girl gets raped and has t live with it for 9 months. Now, I wouldn't want to bear that burden for 9 months. The major thing that I can't stand is biased christians going and only saying that bad choices lead to pregnancy. Another big thing is that some couple experience extreme financial burden going to a hospital for the regular pregancy check-ups. (i.e. hospitals aren't cheap and will just as soon charge an insuranceless couple with bills that they simply can't afford)

And since when are non-christians trying to take christian right away. I don't watch the news all the time, but that would be unconstituional, and the courts wouldn't allow it. Of course, getting rid of religion would be so too, so I can't say I'm against that. My opinion on religion; look at what you have and want, look at existing religions, then, if you like what you see, convert to it. Or, if you don't, make your own. No one can tease you for it, since we have freedom of religion. That's what I did, and I've never been happier. I know exactly what to belive, and I'm happy with that. Although, Ichigos is a bit english, and I can only speak for America.

That's my opinion, anyway.

I was speaking general. (I'm just guestimating) I bet you that a very larger majority of all people who get abortions got pregnant because the condom broke, they didnt use one, or the birth control didnt work. Though whatever the reason you got pregnant, killing an innocent unborn baby is wrong. (Oh and they have pregnancy strips, so you dont really have to get a check-up)

1) The athiest has gotten his morals from a religious person, I assure you. Tell me, where do you get you're morals? Where did he get his morals? Next, where did he get his morals? And I ask this for forever, you may not be able to give me an answer for very long, but I can. I'll tell you where the founding people of this world got their morals...religion. I ask you prove me wrong here.

2) So adoption isn't even an option any more? "Whoops, i'm pregnant, but instead of doing the humane thing and bearing my 9 month punishment for making a stupid choice, I'm just going to kill the baby" That is definately morally right.

3) If you're founded belief is science, then sex is our means of reproduction. According to that, any other use of sex is morally wrong.

4) Hey, thats you're opinion. I'm not going to try to, or shove anything down your throat. In my opinion, the law is far from moral and the more you take away religion, the more people are going to stop caring about whats right and wrong.


you are hillarious!

1: I belieave that a kid get tought indirectly the notions of right and wrong through experiences and mainly His/her parents. weather or not the parents are religious or not is not doesnt matter. look at flock animals, like monkeys and such. Do they tare them selfs to pieces just because the arent religious?
I believe actions that is good for the flock is rewarded over time and after a couple of hundredthousands of years we have an inert morality. thats evolution for you... oh yeah you dont believe in evolution right.
oh yeah. on the whole morality subject: how many wars have been faught over religion?

2::heh: Do you really think every child gets adopted?!!? in that case you are really naive.

3: No, according to science, sex is a great stress-release. and basicly something thats good for you. never ever have I heard that sex is moraly wrong but from the mouths religious people....

4: thank you. And yeah we are all entitled to an opinion.

Abortion should be legal even from a christian viewpoint. The entire idea behind free will is that we should choose to do the right thing and not be forced to.

As for sex, I think it's something special that should only happen between two married people of the opposite sex. The Bible doesn't say only have sex if you want a kid, it just says no fornication (sex before marriage). "The basis of many Christian views comes from the idea that human sexuality was created by God with the twin purposes of procreation and intimacy—bringing a sexually active couple into a close emotional and spiritual relationship through the close physical relationship. As such, it should be restricted lifelong relationship between a man and a woman. Marriage is a commitment to a close and lasting relationship and a basis on which to build a stable family"

1) The athiest has gotten his morals from a religious person, I assure you. Tell me, where do you get you're morals? Where did he get his morals? Next, where did he get his morals? And I ask this for forever, you may not be able to give me an answer for very long, but I can. I'll tell you where the founding people of this world got their morals...religion. I ask you prove me wrong here.

Before you ask us to prove you wrong, we should ask you to prove yourself right.
You have your opinion, but you have not supported it.


2) So adoption isn't even an option any more? "Whoops, i'm pregnant, but instead of doing the humane thing and bearing my 9 month punishment for making a stupid choice, I'm just going to kill the baby" That is definately morally right.

Please tell me this is not going to be one of those long discussions on when a zygote is able to be considered human.
And please explain the benefit of punishment. In my belief, punishment [and revenge, though irrelevant] is a [selfishly] stupid and pointless act of [self-righteousness] (false) justice.


3) If you're founded belief is science, then sex is our means of reproduction. According to that, any other use of sex is morally wrong.

Cow manure. (Bull shit.)


4) Hey, thats you're opinion. I'm not going to try to, or shove anything down your throat. In my opinion, the law is far from moral and the more you take away religion, the more people are going to stop caring about whats right and wrong.

Although it is true that religion is a large part of what man bases their moral are, it shouldn't have to be. It doesn't have to be.

I think its degrading to the human intellect that we still cling to these stories, and even kill in the name of these so called "Gods".

So God's non-existence is a fact then eh? You can say for certain how the universe started? How incredibly arrogant of you! Both your audacity and (apparent) understanding of the origins of the universe amaze me. Please, teach me, wisest of wise men. Sage among sages, grant me your infinite wisdom!

I mean...you do know for a fact that religion, something 99% of mankind has believed in since the beginning of time is false, correct? You're not just talking out of your ass when you claim that billions of people have been wrong over the years right? I'd hope not; that'd be embarrassing. An insult to the human intellect, to put it in your own words. ;)

Now that that's out of the way, time to make retorts to random quotes.
@MethodX:

Before you ask us to prove you wrong, we should ask you to prove yourself right.
You have your opinion, but you have not supported it.
Indeed. Sorry Asuka, but not only have you not proven your theory correct, but I'd have to say that I'd disagree with your opinion there.


Please tell me this is not going to be one of those long discussions on when a zygote is able to be considered human.
What exactly do you consider "humanity?" I'd give my opinions on abortions and such here, but you'd all think me a terrible person.

And please explain the benefit of punishment. In my belief, punishment [and revenge, though irrelevant] is a [selfishly] stupid and pointless act of [self-righteousness] (false) justice.

Hell yeah. ^_^

Although it is true that religion is a large part of what man bases their moral are, it shouldn't have to be. It doesn't have to be.
Damned right, and even the bolded part is debatable. I know plenty of people who don't give a damn what their respective religions say; they act on their own morals. The Christian Church actually says to always use your own judgment, even if it goes against church teachings; we were given free will for a reason.
@OneWinged:

you are hillarious!
Haha, you're pretty funny yourself.

on the whole morality subject: how many wars have been faught over religion?
What's your point? Do you know how much good has been done because of religion? I don't think you can even begin to grasp how much religion has helped humanity.

never ever have I heard that sex is moraly wrong but from the mouths religious people....
There's a first time for everything. I'm a non-religious person and guess what. I'm telling you sex before marriage could viably be considered morally wrong. Not that I care. I'm just saying.

Do you really think every child gets adopted?!!? in that case you are really naive.
Does it matter if every child gets adopted?(!!?) I'd rather be living in a foster home than being non-existent. The naivety of you, thinking unborn babies would rather die than live in a foster home. ;P

Yeaaaaaaahhhh....religion thread. Fun shit. XD

HopelessComposer: I mean...you do know for a fact that religion, something 99% of mankind has believed in since the beginning of time is false, correct?

sorry Hopeless but this planet alone has been around for over 10million years according to science... and i dont think we where around for even a million right ? XD sorry had to say something

@ One_Winged:
1) You're right, I don't believe in evolution such as that. So each to our own. (As for an answer to your question, look in the old religion thread, i think we spent about 100 pages on that.

2) "Does it matter if every child gets adopted?(!!?) I'd rather be living in a foster home than being non-existent. The naivety of you, thinking unborn babies would rather die than live in a foster home."

3) Just because sex is a stress releiver, doesn't mean that that is its scientific purpose, its purpose is reproduction.

@ Methodx
1) The oldest printed book that we have found today dates to 868 A.D. This book is the Diamond Sutra. It just so happens that this book is a bhuddist book with moral teachings in it. Now, I ask you to prove me wrong.

2) Tell me, how is a human zygote NOT a human? It is made from humans, it is created in a human. Everything about it is human... So tell me, how is a zygote not human?

3) "You have your opinion, but you have not supported it."

sorry Hopeless but this planet alone has been around for over 10million years according to science... and i dont think we where around for even a million right ? sorry had to say something
Lmao, you picky bastard. I knew someone would say something about that; I should have edited it. XD
Oh well, you guys know what I meant. :heh:

Also, the Earth is around 4.5 billion years old. Not ten million. I'm not sure how old the human race is supposed to be. We're very very young compared to the Earth and such though...

I believe the human race has been around for about 33,000 years.

Wow 4.5 billion >.< i was way off XD

I believe the human race has been around for about 33,000 years.
That sounds about right actually. :)

Wow 4.5 billion i was way off
lol. XD

@ Methodx
1) The oldest printed book that we have found today dates to 868 A.D. This book is the Diamond Sutra. It just so happens that this book is a bhuddist book with moral teachings in it. Now, I ask you to prove me wrong.

Have you ever heard of Aristotle and Plato? Or maybe later Kant? Ever heard of something called ethics? (yes, that's part of philosphy) We actually learn that in school and guess what? It's got nothing to do with religion. And it's way older than the ten commandments.

oh and yeah. I kind of agree with HopelessComposer. We have don't know much of the "outside" of the universe and why everything is as it is and how everything started etc. There might actually be "something" out there. That's why I like natural philosophy it's somewhat like religion for scientists (more reasonable, more logical), it's about how we interpret what we know, suspect and see :ichigo:

:: Loads Psg::
Who's ready to get shot down?

"Just because sex is a stress releiver, doesn't mean that that is its scientific purpose, its purpose is reproduction." Sex as we proved in the porn thread is not for the sake of reproduction. It is directly linked to emotions and physical conditions of people.

"The oldest printed book that we have found today dates to 868 A.D. This book is the Diamond Sutra. It just so happens that this book is a bhuddist book with moral teachings in it. Now, I ask you to prove me wrong."
Catalogs from as far back as 3300 Bc Sumeria are still used today.
Vedas (probably composed about 1500-1200 BC)and Upanishads (c. 400 BC) Were widely used Buddhist texts. Egypt used heiroglyphic epics to detail their culture in 3500 bc. Text is important in some senses, but oral is important too. The Nordic culture has survived for a long time, yet all of their texts pre thirteenth century have been lost. All text after was attributed to a priest historian and his work on the "Kings' Sagas"


"Tell me, how is a human zygote NOT a human? It is made from humans, it is created in a human. Everything about it is human... So tell me, how is a zygote not human" Does a fetus think? It doesn't even breath in the same way. The human body rejects many under developed embryo on its own. If you want to go that far you should say that an egg is a person, as is a sperm, then we'd just be committing mass genocide. Unless you're saying that it's just the fetuses cause I mean they're so different... what with their independent thought and ability to act on their own. They're so developed... It's not like they're just a random assortment of cells, like a cancer with a brain.

"it is NOT a very christian thing to discriminate against Athiests"
That is so Christian, it's in the bible.

"Does it matter if every child gets adopted?(!!?) I'd rather be living in a foster home than being non-existent. The naivety of you, thinking unborn babies would rather die than live in a foster home."
There is the question of whether someone would love that child, and there is the question of whether we as a world can support that child. The people that ultimately decide the fate of these organisms are people that have to think rationally all the time, and the people they counsel. If people really believed that their child wouldn't last and that no one would accept them, they would stop them before they developed. A child is supposed to be a symbol of love. If the parents won't love it, and no one else will, why exist without it? Why exist feeling unwanted? Why create another tack on to the next generation weighing it back because we aren't able to make the extra effort. If the results of current system aren't used for anything but military bulk and homeless statistics, they should not have a place. It is better that a few kids excel. There just isn't a place for everyone.
Religion... it forces us to create a place for them. Whether it is good or bad. If any group is willing to call them self righteous let them take all the extra children. They won't. Do you know why? They understand that sacrifice has to be made sometimes. Religion is a good ideal to fall back on, but there is still bureaucracy if you can't understand that, you will hamper your religion and become an overly idealistic burden. To believe otherwise, in other words, is not only naive, but just not humanly possible. By that I mean that anyone who thinks that well of their religion would have died in the first 10 months of that way of thinking.



"oh and yeah. I kind of agree with HopelessComposer. We have don't know much of the "outside" of the universe and why everything is as it is and how everything started etc. There might actually be "something" out there. That's why I like natural philosophy it's somewhat like religion for scientists (more reasonable, more logical), it's about how we interpret what we know, suspect and see "
-We do not know much compared to what is out there, but we know and can prove more than what religion has given us. Religion is not logical. Given the choice between the two, we have one based on the illusion of knowledge, and one based on an illusion of ideals. When stated like that, you have no idea which is which right? Well the thing is that they both require leaps of fate. An Angel brought science to the world in a hallucination, and an angel brought hope and guidance to people in the form of religion. Saying that we interpret what we know suspect and see is saying that we define life based on life and compare everything to it. That is more perspective than either. The two disciplines require you to sacrifice the notion of interpretation and adopt the ideals of others and expand on it. Science is at this point moving beyond religion since it delivers tangible results. Religion... is stagnant. There is no way for it to move forward in a society where Science can be carried by even a minority into the future. Religion... requires the majority. Aristotle and Plato commented on the phenomena of human nature, and expressed popular belief. At that time there was a lot of religion in science. Natural place and movement based on spirits? That sounds religious. Biblical ideas coexisted with Greek ideals. They were from different areas. The Ten commandments came after, but their religions were created at similar times according to their cultures advancement. Though Greece was a bit ahead. At the same time though Athens was contrasted by Sparta. Showing that brawn eventually died out where as ideals were adapted more readily and lasted longer. Who is to say the same won't happen now. Technology seems to be carrying over more than religious ceremony and honoring. It isn't possible in science to pursue a way, and not help people. Your work as soon as it came to life would spark inspiration in someone else or show a new way. Religion for ones own sake is something private that people may not accept due to their ability to relate.


I went overboard. It's kind of redundant...


Edit: Also, as far as humans being around for 33,000 years. At what point do they become intelligent. It is not in this situation about how long we've been alive, but how long we have recorded our ideals and started to think about our existence. Where does culture begin? Ah well... Until next time.

I went overboard. It's kind of redundant...
A bit.But what can I say, I agree with almost everything you said. :heh:


Natural place and movement based on spirits? That sounds religious. Biblical ideas coexisted with Greek ideals. They were from different areas. The Ten commandments came after, but their religions were created at similar times according to their cultures advancement.
It sounds very religious. Many Greek and philosphical ideals were accepted into Christianity, for example the idea of an afterlife in heaven (the Greek Elysium).

An Angel brought science to the world in a hallucination, and an angel brought hope and guidance to people in the form of religion. Saying that we interpret what we know suspect and see is saying that we define life based on life and compare everything to it. That is more perspective than either. The two disciplines require you to sacrifice the notion of interpretation and adopt the ideals of others and expand on it.
Exactly! ^^
What I meant to say is, science can give us this "illusion of knowledge", it can show us how many things work. But how we interpret the laws of nature is up to oneself. The beliefs behind all the science. That's what I wanted to point out. Many people think that science is unemotional. It sure is rational, but dispassionate? No way! Looking at the starry sky is great! Using a telescope to see how galaxies work, wouldn't that be magnificant then?

:: Loads Psg::
Who's ready to get shot down?
psh. I'm a master pilot. Nobody shoots down my ownage-plane. NOBODY!


Sex as we proved in the porn thread is not for the sake of reproduction. It is directly linked to emotions and physical conditions of people.
Indeed. Just because science says sex can be used to reproduce doesn't mean that science says it can't be used for other things too.

"The oldest printed book that we have found today dates to 868 A.D. This book is the Diamond Sutra. It just so happens that this book is a bhuddist book with moral teachings in it. Now, I ask you to prove me wrong."

Catalogs from as far back as 3300 Bc Sumeria are still used today.
Vedas (probably composed about 1500-1200 BC)and Upanishads (c. 400 BC) Were widely used Buddhist texts. Egypt used heiroglyphic epics to detail their culture in 3500 bc. Text is important in some senses, but oral is important too. The Nordic culture has survived for a long time, yet all of their texts pre thirteenth century have been lost. All text after was attributed to a priest historian and his work on the "Kings' Sagas"
lol. Request granted. With a vengeance. XD

Does a fetus think? It doesn't even breath in the same way. The human body rejects many under developed embryo on its own. If you want to go that far you should say that an egg is a person, as is a sperm, then we'd just be committing mass genocide. Unless you're saying that it's just the fetuses cause I mean they're so different... what with their independent thought and ability to act on their own. They're so developed... It's not like they're just a random assortment of cells, like a cancer with a brain.
Independent thought and ability to act on their own eh? Is that how you define "humanity?" So do you enjoy hunting old and handicapped people on the weekends then? XD
Seriously though, if you don't say humanity starts at conception, then when does it start? The problem with saying it doesn't start with conception is that conception is really the only black and white requirement out there. Saying things such as "humans can think and have emotions" means that vegetables are less "human" than chimps are. While some people would agree with that to an extent (*cough*me*cough cough*), most people would call you a horrible bastard for thinking that.

There is the question of whether someone would love that child, and there is the question of whether we as a world can support that child. The people that ultimately decide the fate of these organisms are people that have to think rationally all the time, and the people they counsel. If people really believed that their child wouldn't last and that no one would accept them, they would stop them before they developed. A child is supposed to be a symbol of love. If the parents won't love it, and no one else will, why exist without it? Why exist feeling unwanted? Why create another tack on to the next generation weighing it back because we aren't able to make the extra effort. If the results of current system aren't used for anything but military bulk and homeless statistics, they should not have a place. It is better that a few kids excel. There just isn't a place for everyone.
Religion... it forces us to create a place for them. Whether it is good or bad. If any group is willing to call them self righteous let them take all the extra children. They won't. Do you know why? They understand that sacrifice has to be made sometimes. Religion is a good ideal to fall back on, but there is still bureaucracy if you can't understand that, you will hamper your religion and become an overly idealistic burden. To believe otherwise, in other words, is not only naive, but just not humanly possible. By that I mean that anyone who thinks that well of their religion would have died in the first 10 months of that way of thinking.

Blah blah, blahblahblah. You're saying here humans shouldn't be brought into this world if there's a good chance they won't have a good life anyway. Does that mean I can go around killing lunch ladies and elderly cancer patients then? I mean, their lives are probably gonna suck anyway. The lunch lady's family hates her, and that old dude's family all died from cancer last month. Time for euthanasia! Someone get the needles and cyanide! Oh wait, what? We shouldn't decide whether or not people should live? You're telling me many people decide to go on living even when their lives suck? Oh, sorry, m'bad. To take a quote from a dying leper from Princess Mononoke, because I love that movie and it just popped into my head:

I know what rage feels like, I know grief, hate, and pain....life is hard; it is suffering, yet we always find reasons to keep living. Forgive me, I'm making no sense!
Ahahahahahahaha, that was so dorky. XD
Anyway, the point is, we shouldn't decide people's fates just because their lives suck. Who says people need to have good lives anyway? People can usually find enough reasons to live to keep themselves going. And if they don't, they kill themselves. I don't see why anyone besides the person in question should have a say on what happens to said person.


-We do not know much compared to what is out there, but we know and can prove more than what religion has given us. Religion is not logical. Given the choice between the two, we have one based on the illusion of knowledge, and one based on an illusion of ideals. When stated like that, you have no idea which is which right? Well the thing is that they both require leaps of fate. An Angel brought science to the world in a hallucination, and an angel brought hope and guidance to people in the form of religion. Saying that we interpret what we know suspect and see is saying that we define life based on life and compare everything to it. That is more perspective than either. The two disciplines require you to sacrifice the notion of interpretation and adopt the ideals of others and expand on it. Science is at this point moving beyond religion since it delivers tangible results. Religion... is stagnant. There is no way for it to move forward in a society where Science can be carried by even a minority into the future. Religion... requires the majority. Aristotle and Plato commented on the phenomena of human nature, and expressed popular belief. At that time there was a lot of religion in science. Natural place and movement based on spirits? That sounds religious. Biblical ideas coexisted with Greek ideals. They were from different areas. The Ten commandments came after, but their religions were created at similar times according to their cultures advancement. Though Greece was a bit ahead. At the same time though Athens was contrasted by Sparta. Showing that brawn eventually died out where as ideals were adapted more readily and lasted longer. Who is to say the same won't happen now. Technology seems to be carrying over more than religious ceremony and honoring. It isn't possible in science to pursue a way, and not help people. Your work as soon as it came to life would spark inspiration in someone else or show a new way. Religion for ones own sake is something private that people may not accept due to their ability to relate.

Uhh....nevermind, that paragraph is too long to even answer. I'll just make a response to Matt's response instead.


What I meant to say is, science can give us this "illusion of knowledge", it can show us how many things work. But how we interpret the laws of nature is up to oneself. The beliefs behind all the science. That's what I wanted to point out. Many people think that science is unemotional. It sure is rational, but dispassionate? No way! Looking at the starry sky is great! Using a telescope to see how galaxies work, wouldn't that be magnificant then?
Indeed. Just because I have science doesn't mean I can't entertain the notion that something greater is out there. Science doesn't have to disprove religion - it can very well be an aid to strengthen ones religious views. The more we understand the universe, the more we appreciate how amazing it really is. I don't see how that's helping to disprove God/gods.

By the way, speaking of the numbers mentioned earlier.

God created Earth in 7 days, man was created on the seventh day.

4.5 billion years - 33,000 is definitely NOT 7 days. Conclusion: either Christians are wrong or Christians can't count XD

Actually, man was created on the 6th day; God rested on the 7th.

Well, what's one day? XD Well, by Christian Logic that would still be several millions of years :think: but my point is still clear XD

Conclusion: either Christians are wrong or Christians can't count XD

Or... its just Angelic.

I worry when he preches about these things and then fails to destinguish the difference between 6 and 7...

:lol::lol::lol:

Independent thought and ability to act on their own eh? Is that how you define "humanity?" So do you enjoy hunting old and handicapped people on the weekends then?
Seriously though, if you don't say humanity starts at conception, then when does it start? The problem with saying it doesn't start with conception is that conception is really the only black and white requirement out there. Saying things such as "humans can think and have emotions" means that vegetables are less "human" than chimps are. While some people would agree with that to an extent (*cough*me*cough cough*), most people would call you a horrible bastard for thinking that.
-Vegetables react to direct stimuli, this shows that though their body is more often than not shattered, they retain their personalities. This in science is simply because our brain is a series of reactive responses. In religion, if the spirit is still there, someone has to make up a medium to notice it.
Yes I am saying it doesn't start with conception by the fact that a miscarried fetus or one that is not even notice (As I said earlier) is disregarded. If they are disregarded why not disregard the known fetuses? In addition, at what point does God or whatever bestow a soul? Eve gained a soul after being created by God from Adam after he breathed life into her. Couldn't we say that until the baby's heart beats and the neurons in it's head activate, that it is not yet alive? That would be much like Catholics believing that until baptism you are not alive and regardless of actions will go to limbo. If Eve had a soul while still a part of Adam, why was Adam not counted as two separate beings? Thus, before the cells take shape, and they are stem cells what is wrong with choosing to destroy a part of ourselves? And if you're comparing to chimps, by almost all religions they have no souls. The idea that the body is a shell is popular as well no? So if someone is suffering unable to express them self, even before birth, isn't it right to give it a chance to move on? All religions teach us to move on, Sometimes life has no chance here. Who are we to decide? We, being the people making the choice, are or should be educated to some degree. Even someone ignorant that goes in will be warned of the consequences. Many people argue the value of life, our culture chooses what is acceptable. Sentience is conception by our cultures current definition. If there isn't enough tissue to relay thoughts the baby is still not alive, so during the first 4 months, we're in the clear. After that, it's all circumstance. Don't be naive and think that the world is able to harbor new blood or that everyone is willing to put their descendants through hell just for a slim chance at a good future. We all know the risks when allowing life to live. If you wanna do anime, FMA their teacher is relieved knowing she did not make her baby die twice. She didn't mind it never coming back, but she didn't want it to suffer.


Blah blah, blahblahblah. You're saying here humans shouldn't be brought into this world if there's a good chance they won't have a good life anyway. Does that mean I can go around killing lunch ladies and elderly cancer patients then? I mean, their lives are probably gonna suck anyway. The lunch lady's family hates her, and that old dude's family all died from cancer last month. Time for euthanasia! Someone get the needles and cyanide! Oh wait, what? We shouldn't decide whether or not people should live? You're telling me many people decide to go on living even when their lives suck? Oh, sorry, m'bad. To take a quote from a dying leper from Princess Mononoke, because I love that movie and it just popped into my head:

- Reading my other statements would have been nice. Sacrifices sometimes have to be made, I said that several times. In order to prevent insurrection didn't god cleanse his own angels after the coupe of the morning star? Are you saying that everyone has the right to live at the risk of other people dying in their place? Have you read the book "Alive"? That is a prime example of life quality choices. At some point, whether in desperation or ignorance of the greater morals that we ourselves put forth, we make people into resources and expendable options. I never said kill without purpose, far from it, Death itself is a purpose. God demanded martyrs is that not proof? Buddha has to no longer exist to become a Buddha. There are different reasons for living, society demands that we take the one most beneficial or become ousted. If you really believe that death has no place in society, you're questioning the divine in that sense. It is their creation don't you think? That is if you think that there was a divine that created anything. Death is accepted in almost all religions. As an individual if you don't accept it, you're not embracing the full brunt of your religion, you're creating a happy go lucky far away place that only exists in your dreams, and even then your humanity and your sentience would question it. Because that is just not possible. The Matrix showed us that death served a purpose, to feed the living. It also showed us that perfection is unacceptable, there must be a one that transcends his humanity to reach a place where he is able to help the people. See the similarity? All Religions regardless of their ideas, will try to move one and continue growing. Otherwise they would not reach the light of day. If there is a divine, we are in it's service, so who are we to ask if life is worth living. It's like saying an action works towards a goal we do not know of. Everyone is working towards a goal they set forth, and will gauge life based on that. If a parent says "that is no the life I want for my child" Who are we to argue? Who are we to say that a child will not live like their parent, and if they live in spite of that, they are not that person's child. Humanity without its roots is nothing. In order to grow efficiently, some branches have to break under their own bearing.



Indeed. Just because I have science doesn't mean I can't entertain the notion that something greater is out there. Science doesn't have to disprove religion - it can very well be an aid to strengthen ones religious views. The more we understand the universe, the more we appreciate how amazing it really is. I don't see how that's helping to disprove God/gods.

Read my long ass rant. Comparison of Sparta and Athens compliments of the movie "The 300" Which is historically inaccurate but fun as hell <<<<bad pun in the religion thread.


::pulls back the bolt on his psg:: any questions?

Yes, why does your sniper rifle have a bolt, and not a bullet/shell?

And why are you putting that rubbish down? You are behaving just like the prats in the last thread who got religion thread closed almost perminately.

Grow up.

I was just proving my point through outside resources, and Hopeless and I always do this sorte in the absence of Db. Thus the cocky "blah blah blah" and the Psg. And a Psg is single action. So to reload and eject shells after you fire, you pull the bolt back. If you'd notice each part of my post is directed to an earlier made comment, so there is nothing wrong with them, your spam at this point and insult directed at me is not appreciated if you aren't making a religious point. You think I need to grow up, get a point, stick to it, and post it. Disprove what I said, don't read the last sentence and judge it off that. We're here to discuss this, and if you're not reading other people's views you're just a nuisance. The fact that you responded to none of our posts shows that your just doing this to seem important or to attack something completely irrelevant to our arguments. Now argue your point on religion, or go cry in a corner, that's what I do lol.

You grow up, Jaso. I've yet to see you contribute.

Or... its just Angelic.

I worry when he preches about these things and then fails to destinguish the difference between 6 and 7...

:lol::lol::lol:

I just can't be arsed to remember Genesis.

Yeah, it's funny when people are true Christians, and feel the love, but can't remember things right from the bible.

Exactly like me--and I don't care if I can't even remember Genesis. :heh:

To Toshihiko, I apologise, after re-reading my post. Too far.


You grow up, Jaso. I've yet to see you contribute.

To methodx:

Shut up.

From, Jaso.

:topic:

Also, your actions are being looked down upon, Jaso. Contribute or GTFO.

This is not in response to anyone.

just a statement
The difference betwen science and religion is that religion is based blind acception while science is based on critical review.

someone says:
Im god...

the zealot replies:
ok, if you say so

the scientist replies:
ok, prove it

=)

Uh oh, religion thread dramas.
I seem to have missed them though. And yeah Jaso, don't worry about me and Toshihiko; we're only messing around in here. It's for fun. It's a generally accepted man law that when arguing with a fellow man, you must be at least a little condescending towards him. Otherwise you both end up getting bored and decide to get drunk together, at which point, all spirit of argument is lost and no productive debate takes place for the rest of the evening. So you see, we're doing this for the future of mankind. XD

And Toshihiko....your posts are so damned long. I'll answer your latest tomorrow, as I'm too tired to type all I'd need to type to disarm you of your Psg. ;)

1) The athiest has gotten his morals from a religious person, I assure you. Tell me, where do you get you're morals? Where did he get his morals? Next, where did he get his morals? And I ask this for forever, you may not be able to give me an answer for very long, but I can. I'll tell you where the founding people of this world got their morals...religion. I ask you prove me wrong here.

1) Religion doesn't always deal with god, just to get that out of the way. Confucianism anyone?
Morals have nothing to do with religion. Not eating or hurting any animals is a daily part of my morals, and I'm yet to see a religion with that strictly and religiously enforced. You also speak of "where did so-so get his morals, and so-so from then". If you go far back enough, there will be no religion, or at least Christianity, which I assume your trying to get at.
I'm just fired because some people at our schools accused atheist of having no morals.


I know this has been talked of before, but Noah and his ark. Theories and debut's please? I'm asking because our school is allowing debate to talk about religion, and because when the non-christians refuse to talk about any other religion due to lack of knowledge...

Confucianism is not a religion. In fact his ideals are sometimes seen as anti Buddhist. Yet he acknowledges Buddha and the Court of the Jade emporer.


I obviously disagree.

If you can't decide what is right and what is wrong in this world, who can?

Who was it that told you that as individuals we don't have the authority to define these things? Why is it that as individuals we don't have the authority to define these things?

There are many factors that help us determine our quality of life (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_of_life), and you will find that religion is a very minor one. Morality usually does not come into consideration. Also, people get their morality outside of religion. For more information on my last point, have a look at Richard Dawkins' thoughts on the origins of morality (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR_z85O0P2M&source=rss), around two minutes into the video.

Yes, there is no way to see a potential of a person right now, but there are standards to compare the success of different people. You contradict yourself by saying that there are different degrees of success and failure, and then by saying that there are no standards to compare humans, because the former alone implies that successes and be compared to successes, and failures can be compared to other failures.

Our exam grades indicates our academic successes and failures. Uur income and savings reflects on our financial success and failures. The contributions and damages we have made to the society measures our ability to live with other people. Our past and present tells us how well or badly we have lived our life, be it for ourself or in the name(s) of some fictional entity/entities.

You still haven't told us why is it not for us to judge, when we already do so with so many standards of success and failure.

Why do you think that we are no better than anyone else? There are so many people with inferior resources that have became so much more successful than the rest of us, yet there are also so many of us with superior resources that have turned into failures that damage society.

How do you define maturity?



Ironically, I realized that since coming back, I've taken up Dark Brings position and somehow abandoned my own XD

The idea of Noah's ark... There was a time of a population bottle neck around the time that people believe Noah existed. However, our own 40 days and 40 nights of rain here in Hawaii shows that the story is an exaggeration. The story of Noah is a leap of faith. To believe that humanity will save the world, and our sins can disappear simply by destroying those that are not righteous. It is about restarting the world under the image of someone we believe is god. Though there is some debate that it might have been an event caused by lucifer... ah well.

Non-Christians are not ignorant of religion.

Actually, I notice that Christians are typically ignorant of religion. Not necessarily their own religion, but of other religions. Mainly because it is stated in the ten commandments that you are not allowed to practice other religions.

Of course, this doesn't mean you cannot study other religions, but they (Christians and similar religions) sometimes interpret that code, law, or however you wanna define the ten commandments, as such.

This was not intended as a bash against Christians.

I wouldn't mind religion so much if religious people would just keep it to themselves instead of annoying others with it.

Kay, sorry but I really can't be assed to read two pages of all this, so since ya'll put so much thought into it, I'm just going to agree that you have very good points and opinions and I have no reason to try to prove them wrong. Though, just at the last few easy posts:
M: That is correct M, however Alot of it however is that many christians are just full of themselves and have decided that Christianity is the only true religion, learning about others is just a waste of time. I pitty those types of people.

As for noah's ark, it took him 120 years to build his ark, I think in 120 years anyone could build a big ass ark that could hold all the animals in the world. The the thing about the story is, Noah had never seen rain in his life, for at the time all their water came from the ground, so when God told Noah it was going to rain for 40 days and 40 nights, he probably didn't have much of a clue. Just building the ark took alot of faith, but further more, Noah and his family were the only ones at the time who still believed in God. So, to think, for a 120 years people probably gave him all kinds of shit about have a big ass half-built ark/completed ark in his front lawn.. It is a story of very much faith indeed. (Also, I'm not interested in debating if the story is true, go search through the old religion thread, I promise you, this debate is also in there. I was just giving some information)

You're saying Noah was over a 120 years old? LOL, if he started building the ark in his twenties that'd mean he was over a 140 years old, we can't even stretch life to that extend these days, so there's NO WAY that that story is true.

I'm just fired because some people at our schools accused atheist of having no morals.
That's why school and religion should be strictly separated (and in many countries they are). Imo it's much better to have a subject like Ethics, were you learn about philosophy and ALL of the big religions. Not just one.


You're saying Noah was over a 120 years old? LOL, if he started building the ark in his twenties that'd mean he was over a 140 years old, we can't even stretch life to that extend these days, so there's NO WAY that that story is true.
I don't think this is up for discussion... One shouldn't take the bible literally (that is if you aren't a christian fundamentalist... <_<). If you took everything in the bible literally... it'd just be a ridiculous phantasy book with a bad storyline.

Genesis 7:6 Noah was six hundred years old when the flood waters came upon the earth.

I wouldn't mind religion so much if religious people would just keep it to themselves instead of annoying others with it.

I totally agree. My friend kept saying to me that, because I was his friend, he would save my soul and help convert me from Catholic to Protestant Church in Christianity. I told him two words we are all familiar with and he said he would say a prayer for me begging forgiveness...

...wierdo.

Genesis 7:6 Noah was six hundred years old when the flood waters came upon the earth.

And you believe that crap?

I mean, I do mean offense because if someone actually believes that someone lived to be any where around 600 years old let alone have this giant flood that apparently covered the world...

Where did this water come from? A better question: where did it go? water doesn't disappear like that.

lol RD. If someone believes in God, they believe in miracles. They kind of go hand-in-hand, you know? You might as well have said "YOU BELIEVE IN GOD?!!? GODS DONT JUST POP OUT OF NOWHERE YOU KNOW!"

Actually, you could say the same to someone who doesn't believe in God. "You don't believe in God?! Universes don't just pop out of nowhere you know!"

And for the record, I agree that the old testament is kind of silly. Though I took 12 years of religion class throughout elementary and highschool, and my religion teachers all said those stories were meant to be taken figuratively. I'd have to agree with them...


You're saying Noah was over a 120 years old? LOL, if he started building the ark in his twenties that'd mean he was over a 140 years old, we can't even stretch life to that extend these days, so there's NO WAY that that story is true.
Again, that's silly to say. If God was around, Noah could live as long as he damn well pleased. What you just said is basically the same thing as when somebody watches a Mickey Mouse cartoon and goes: "What the hell!? How does a mouse have a dog as a pet?! THAT MAKES NO SENSE!~!!"

And you know, of course I say "What the hell? What about the fact that he talks and wears pants? You didn't notice that?"

I guess my point is....don't pick on something as irrelevant as Noah's age when we're talking about a story where God gets pissed and kills 99.999999999999999999999% of the human population by using the hugest flood in the universe.

But thats the problem with religous text. Some say its figurative, others say its literal. But because its religous and has to do with an omnipotent god, your either dead right or dead.