But lets take something else as I find the idea borderline inane. Lets take like dealing with bullies in school. Say little Jimmy wants to try out for basketball, but his archnemisis bully is also going to. By our new residential... crazy person...'s idea that parents should discourage things that could get a kid "beat up". I as the parent should... not let them play basketball? What if the science teacher makes them lab partners? Or they play the same intrument in band? You see my point.
Agreed, it seems like people try to get around confronting this. I notice a fair bit of "such and such name will cause them to be bullied" or since we're on the topic of homosexuals, "being raised by homosexuals will cause them to be bullied"; no, it's bullies who cause people to be bullied, and they'll latch onto any justification they can, whether it's true or not. No sense trying to get around it; we know who the problem is. It's the people who deliberately manipulate some and/or intimidate other fellow students because they can. We need to stop going easy on them just because they supposedly "don't know better"; neither do mentally ill adults. If it's hard to prove, get better proof. Set up surveillance cameras in classrooms if they need to. If that strains the budget maybe they can sell those microscopes-for-every-student that are used about once a year to see what they already saw in the textbook.
Stair I googled Hero Lover and got this:
Matt, you're talking about people that use a book that supposedly preaches peace and love to enslave brown people and destroy equality. They will use anything to justify anything.
~Rico
Matt, you're talking about people that use a book that supposedly preaches peace and love to enslave brown people and destroy equality. They will use anything to justify anything.
Were you referring to my response to abSeamiller or my response to you? If the latter, you realize that when I used the word "justification" I was referring to those used by bullies themselves right? Just checking.
As for the "peace and love" thing, that depends on which part of the book. If it's the part that tells you that if someone slaps you on one side of the face you should turn around and let them slap you on the other side, probably. If it's the part that tells you to kill people for gathering wood on the sabbath day, probably not. The bible isn't even consistent. I like the way someone on youtube put it; what you get out of the bible depends on what you're looking for. And when you mention enslaving brown people, are you referring to the bible verses saying slaves should be submissive to their masters being used to keep slaves in line?
I can't even be sure right now. But my brown people reference was refering to people using bible passages to make slavery look moral. Much like they do with gays today.
~Rico
Pope Benedict XVI is a delusional prick who should go burn some Harry Potter books or something.
AbSeamiller, your nonchalance is admirable.
i 
Love your Avatar Photos!
Stair I googled Hero Lover and got this:
~Rico
OI. Stop with the double+ posts >=( It's naughty.
matthayter700 wrote: The bible isn't consistent."
applauding
Sex is so messy. Is gay sex too messy?
when We are Gay, we Come to Play---when We are Straight we Wing it:
how E'er we Merge, how E'er we Purge; impress the Mess, then Sing it.
OI. Stop with the double+ posts >=( It's naughty.
Sex is so messy. Is gay sex too messy?
when We are Gay, we Come to Play---when We are Straight we Wing it:
how E'er we Merge, how E'er we Purge; impress the Mess, then Sing it.
o.o The writing style reminds me of this cartoon.
Anyway, I think you're supposed to edit your posts to add more in instead of replying to your own posts to say more. I still remember when I didn't know how to edit my posts and ended up with two official warnings for spamming with all the double-posting I did...
Indeed, and this serves as his last warning. Or I begin editing. And if Corky's on, maybe I'll let him. He seems more coherent than this joker.
~Rico
AbSeamiller, your nonchalance is admirable.
i
Thanks.
abSeamiller, please post with single posts. f you are replying to multiple people just use mutiple quotes.
Yeah, good luck with that one guys.
Yeah, good luck with that one guys.
o.o Good luck with what? And who were you saying that to?
Yeah, good luck with that one guys.
Indirect statement is indirect.
It's generally a safe assumption that when the past few posts have been on a particular topic then the next post, unless otherwise noted, will be on that topic too. Context is also something you might find it wise to pay attention to. I know the internet is a big and scary place, but you're old enough to not need someone to hold your hand anymore.
The word 'pope' rhymes with 'dope'.
Just thought I'd mention that! 
*modrights*
It's generally a safe assumption that when the past few posts have been on a particular topic then the next post, unless otherwise noted, will be on that topic too. Context is also something you might find it wise to pay attention to. I know the internet is a big and scary place, but you're old enough to not need someone to hold your hand anymore.
So are cities, but I've noticed that if you stop and ask for directions people will point you to where you need to go. You, on the other hand, responded with a condescending remark without answering in the slightest the question a couple people asked you, and didn't seem to clarify who or what you were referring to; it's still vague even if you look at "the last few posts..."
It's generally a safe assumption that when the past few posts have been on a particular topic then the next post, unless otherwise noted, will be on that topic too. Context is also something you might find it wise to pay attention to. I know the internet is a big and scary place, but you're old enough to not need someone to hold your hand anymore.
So are cities, but I've noticed that if you stop and ask for directions people will point you to where you need to go. You, on the other hand, responded with a condescending remark without answering in the slightest the question a couple people asked you, and didn't seem to clarify who or what you were referring to; it's still vague even if you look at "the last few posts..."
Amen to that. Screw it anyway, it's not that important.
It's generally a safe assumption that when the past few posts have been on a particular topic then the next post, unless otherwise noted, will be on that
topic too. Context is also something you might find it wise to pay attention to. I know the internet is a big and scary place, but
you're old enough to not need someone to hold your hand anymore.So are cities, but I've noticed that if you stop and ask for directions people will point you to where you need to go. You, on the other hand,
responded with a condescending remark without answering in the slightest the question a couple people asked you, and didn't seem to clarify who or what you
were referring to; it's still vague even if you look at "the last few posts..."
Heh, well said.
I can't even be sure right now. But my brown people reference was refering to people using bible passages to make slavery look moral. Much like they do with gays today.
~Rico
Except slavery back then was the equivalent of butlers and maids of today. Also, the Bible said to respect said slaves
They still used it to rationalize what they did, which is the point.
That is so not equivelent *reads nothing else but V2's one post and leaves this topic*
Pope Adolf the Perv Shuffler needs to shut the ++%@ up.
Pope Adolf the Perv Shuffler needs to shut the ++%@ up.
Amen to THAT!
It's vapid, self-serving intolerance, such as that !$!+ he spews that must be stamped out at any cost. The Catholics have already set the human race and civilization back over 800 years.
It's vapid, self-serving intolerance, such as that !$!+ he spews that must be stamped out at any cost. The Catholics have already set the human race and civilization back over 800 years.
Ignorance is the root of all evil, not money (as some people believe). I truly believe that ignorance is the root of all evil. It is not Christianity or any other religion alone which has set the human race and civilisation back over 800 years, but rather the ignorant aspects of religions and also the ignorance stemming from certain non-religious beliefs (to be fair). Ignorance must be driven from this Earth if we are to end suffering, pestilence, war, famine, violence, hatred etc.
Ignorance is one thing. It can be overcome. Blind, willful ignorance, such as that preached by the high and mighty Church is the real problem.
Ignorance is one thing. It can be overcome. Blind, willful ignorance, such as that preached by the high and mighty Church is the real problem.
Blind, willful ignorance is a type of ignorance. Ultimately, it's still ignorance. The darkness of ignorance can be overcome by the light of wisdom.
Hmm... in the mention of ignorance vs. willful ignorance I noticed the latter phrase was vaguely familiar from a cartoon describing it as unacceptable. And then I remembered what it was and looked it up.
I suppose it's somewhat relevant to a thread that's indirectly about religion, and I must say, even I think that cartoon is over the top. I don't think it's a good idea to focus on attacking the arguer instead of the argument, (the author seems to be saying it's about the former) and while I myself think that buying into religious dogma might suggest something about the people who do so, even then I'm not that inclined to assume that "something" MUST be that they're "idiots" when there's other things that "something" could be. And if it wasn't supposed to be about why religion is wrong, then what's with the "I'm not touching you on a cosmic scale" argument?
Generic ignorance can be overcome with education. Willful ignorance based on 'faith' and 'belief' is nearly impossible to overcome.
Generic ignorance can be overcome with education. Willful ignorance based on 'faith' and 'belief' is nearly impossible to overcome.
I couldn't agree with you more.
Generic ignorance can be overcome with education. Willful ignorance based on 'faith' and 'belief' is nearly impossible to overcome.
Agreed. Dogma can be a parasite on one's thoughts, scaring people out of thinking for themselves through circular reasoning in which fear is at the core of the problem. And this problem isn't exclusive to religion.
And this problem isn't exclusive to religion.
Very true. Dogma is universal.
Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
LMFAO!!!!!
Controversial territory, Ichigo, controversial territory. 
Well, it sure-as-hell wasn't a bunch of atheists who flew those planes into the WTC and Pentagon on 9/11... The Church didn't build the Apollo/Saturn system...
Well, it sure-as-hell wasn't a bunch of atheists who flew those planes into the WTC and Pentagon on 9/11... The Church didn't build the Apollo/Saturn system...
To be fair, I don't think Islam is exclusively at fault for such attacks. Some aspects of US foreign policy helped trigger the kind of resentment towards the US that helped motivate some of those attacks in the first place.
To be fair, I don't think Islam is exclusively at fault for such attacks. Some aspects of George W. Bush helped trigger the kind of resentment towards the US that helped motivate some of those attacks in the first place.
Fixed.
~Rico
To be fair, I don't think Islam is exclusively at fault for such attacks. Some aspects of George W. Bush helped trigger the kind of resentment towards the US that helped motivate some of those attacks in the first place.
Fixed.
~Rico
It's not just Bush either; much of the stuff that helped motivate it was done long before Bush got into power. o.o
Moslems have been chewing the same anti-Western vomit for CENTURIES. This goes back to the Crusades.
