Gplex wrote:
Only children cannot handle insult. Are you a child?
I have every right, and plenty of reasons to take this position on a book that is not compatible with the universal declaration of human rights.
So your only rebuttal to my claim that the bible is clearly written by primitive ignorant human beings, is that I might be bias. WTF. Are you serious!
This is one of the most typical arguments use by those who claim to see ghosts, faith healers etc. Why do they use these types of arguments? Because it is nearly impossible to disprove this claim.
Whenever you hear someone say “open your mind”, or “you are too bias”. It is code for “think the way I think” or “don’t question the way I think”. It’s a blatant attempt to silence those who call BS.
Only a child insults. Are you a child?
But in sincerity, get over yourself. You are just as bad as every other selfish mongrel that lives today. The world obviously only beats to your drums, and your beliefs are how everyone should believe. And just because you appreciate or study some form of science, you must be right.
That’s how I interpret just about everything you say, just as you interpret my suggestions of trying to be more culturally relevant as being a method of hiding. That’s honestly all any religious debate is anymore, one culture against another. Which one is right? Once you all finally realize this and how pointless it’s been this stupid conflict will stop.
You talk about how the Bible says this and that, but what about what actual Christians are doing? That’s all that really matters.
RageOverdose wrote:
Only a child insults. Are you a child?
Wrong. Only a child insults with lies. I am telling the truth. The bronze age religions are primitive form of science.
RageOverdose wrote:
But in sincerity, get over yourself. You are just as bad as every other selfish mongrel that lives today. The world obviously only beats to your drums, and your beliefs are how everyone should believe. And just because you appreciate or study some form of science, you must be right.
Who said I was right, I said your position is clearly wrong, these a huge difference. I don’t have the answers, but it doesn’t mean I can’t recognize when someone else doesn’t have them either.
RageOverdose wrote:
That’s how I interpret just about everything you say, just as you interpret my suggestions of trying to be more culturally relevant as being a method of hiding. That’s honestly all any religious debate is anymore, one culture against another. Which one is right? Once you all finally realize this and how pointless it’s been this stupid conflict will stop.
It strange how the culture of the free world, seems so right.
RageOverdose wrote:
You talk about how the Bible says this and that, but what about what actual Christians are doing? That’s all that really matters.
No it doesn’t. As long as Christians continue to hold up the bible as a source of good, and douche bag, can come along, and restart the dark ages.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
Gplex wrote:
Wrong. Only a child insults with lies. I am telling the truth. The bronze age religions are primitive form of science.
A child insults with whatever, be it lies or not. A child can insult a fat peer or even adult by pointing out that they are fat and making fun of it, and it is based on truth. But a child is a child, they are not complete in their understanding of their socialization yet.
Also, Greek/Roman philosophy is the true primitive form of science. Science, actually, didn’t exist until many centuries after the Roman Empire fell.
Gplex wrote:
Who said I was right, I said your position is clearly wrong, these a huge difference. I don’t have the answers, but it doesn’t mean I can’t recognize when someone else doesn’t have them either.
Can’t argue with that.
Gplex wrote:
It strange how the culture of the free world, seems so right.
Many other cultures feel the exact same way. It’s typical human behavior to think one’s own way of life is the best way. But how free is your free world anyway? Only “free” but not truly, because few humans want a truly free world.
Gplex wrote:
No it doesn’t. As long as Christians continue to hold up the bible as a source of good, and douche bag, can come along, and restart the dark ages.
The Christians also helped us get out of the Dark Ages, it went both ways.
RageOverdose wrote:
A child insults with whatever, be it lies or not. A child can insult a fat peer or even adult by pointing out that they are fat and making fun of it, and it is based on truth. But a child is a child, they are not complete in their understanding of their socialization yet.
I have told many people that they are fat. Only girls seem to take offence. But I still take the same stand. If you are fat, accept it or do something about it. Taking offence is just a way of avoiding the truth. As for children making fun of other children. Well that’s what children do, that’s one of the reasons why we don’t trust them.
My point in this from my first post on this subject to you is if we have to respect beliefs, we could never say anything about anyone’s belief. E.g. If someone believe that it was there right to rape children, then we could never say anything that could “insult” them. You may argue that their beliefs are evil, but evil is base on your own perspective, and has no set point that we can all agree on. So after you thought about this fact, you will realize that you’re beliefs, and this person, who believes that they can rape children, has no real difference to distinguish them. Thus there is no reason why your beliefs should be respected more than anyone else.
RageOverdose wrote:
Also, Greek/Roman philosophy is the true primitive form of science. Science, actually, didn’t exist until many centuries after the Roman Empire fell.
Philosophy is not science. Some of the Greeks where primitive, but many great men (they where sexist) came up with many discoveries and predictions that are not primitive, by our standards.
RageOverdose wrote:
Can’t argue with that.
Somehow I think you are one of those people who feel unconformable saying, “I don’t know”.
RageOverdose wrote:
Many other cultures feel the exact same way. It’s typical human behavior to think one’s own way of life is the best way. But how free is your free world anyway? Only “free” but not truly, because few humans want a truly free world.
I don’t know, it might be the interactions with students who come from overseas, who are always saying “it is far better here”. Also I know I would not be very comfortable in an islamic run state, or north korea. Of course there must be restrictions to prevent other people from stomping on your freedom. Trying to argue this point, is as silly as trying to convince people that we can’t know anything.
RageOverdose wrote:
The Christians also helped us get out of the Dark Ages, it went both ways.
Wow, way to ignore what I said. You have ignored the points I have shown you, and gone off on each reply in some other direction.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
That must be in my top Twenty statements, of people ignorant of the facts. And in the top ten of statements most self contradictory.
Pretty sure their development of philosophy and logic influenced the later development of science. Science is a process, not some intrinsic concept of nature.
I mean, you can correct me if you want to, I don’t take offense to being proven wrong.
Gplex wrote:
I have told many people that they are fat. Only girls seem to take offence. But I still take the same stand. If you are fat, accept it or do something about it. Taking offence is just a way of avoiding the truth. As for children making fun of other children. Well that’s what children do, that’s one of the reasons why we don’t trust them.
My point in this from my first post on this subject to you is if we have to respect beliefs, we could never say anything about anyone’s belief. E.g. If someone believe that it was there right to rape children, then we could never say anything that could “insult” them. You may argue that their beliefs are evil, but evil is base on your own perspective, and has no set point that we can all agree on. So after you thought about this fact, you will realize that you’re beliefs, and this person, who believes that they can rape children, has no real difference to distinguish them. Thus there is no reason why your beliefs should be respected more than anyone else.
Who said respect meant you couldn’t do anything to anyone? I again never even mentioned respect, but understanding. I’ve established this multiple times and you continue to argue as if I’m talking about respect. I don’t give two shits if you insult someone if you have a good understanding of the situation and still choose to do it. In fact, I find it funny. Thing is, I don’t know you and my skeptical(maybe cynical) nature means I can’t believe you do unless I see it.
And insults aren’t necessary to describe truth. Many people actually respond more positively to non-insulting remarks of any truth than to insults.
Gplex wrote:
Philosophy is not science. Some of the Greeks where primitive, but many great men (they where sexist) came up with many discoveries and predictions that are not primitive, by our standards.
I guess I said that wrong, unfortunately.
Such philosophical developments eventually led to science. The processes of science were aided in their fruition thanks to philosophy. I was basically just trying to say, though, that religion isn’t even a primitive form of science, but philosophy.
Gplex wrote:
Somehow I think you are one of those people who feel unconformable saying, “I don’t know”.
No, I say it often. I don’t see how you came to that conclusion by that comment. I was just saying I respect what you said. I have no problem with it and I don’t find any reason to argue it. Not knowing anything has nothing to do with it.
I will admit, I am stubborn to say I don’t know, but not afraid to do it and it doesn’t bother me to do so.
Gplex wrote:
I don’t know, it might be the interactions with students who come from overseas, who are always saying “it is far better here”. Also I know I would not be very comfortable in an islamic run state, or north korea. Of course there must be restrictions to prevent other people from stomping on your freedom. Trying to argue this point, is as silly as trying to convince people that we can’t know anything.
I met a Chinese girl who preferred Communist China to America in my high school. Of course, she wasn’t at a disadvantage in her society, so I guess she liked it better. I met a Japanese girl who preferred collectivist Japan. It’s all depending on the situation of the person. I agree, though, that universal freedom seems so right, but if you’re going to integrate it into other cultures, using an ethnocentric point of view can be rather intrusive and full of conflict.
Gplex wrote:
Wow, way to ignore what I said. You have ignored the points I have shown you, and gone off on each reply in some other direction.
You always make the so-called “criminals” of the Dark Ages to be Christians (well, the Crusades are their faults, but that was stupid anyway). They also made it better. And, what I’m saying is that Christians aren’t going to send us to another Dark Age, for many reasons. One, atheists are a larger minority now than they used to be, especially in America, so many citizens aren’t directly influenced by Christianity on a day to day basis. Two, many Christians are intelligently inclined (many aren’t as well). Also, all the major civilizations in the world are secular, so the influence religion has isn’t too strong.
I didn’t ignore anything you said. Why do we always have such communication problems? I misunderstand you, you misunderstand me. Happens every time.
RageOverdose wrote:
Who said respect meant you couldn’t do anything to anyone? I again never even mentioned respect, but understanding. I’ve established this multiple times and you continue to argue as if I’m talking about respect. I don’t give two shits if you insult someone if you have a good understanding of the situation and still choose to do it. In fact, I find it funny. Thing is, I don’t know you and my skeptical(maybe cynical) nature means I can’t believe you do unless I see it.
And insults aren’t necessary to describe truth. Many people actually respond more positively to non-insulting remarks of any truth than to insults.
Understanding? Is that code for respect or be quiet? Respect and not insulting someone goes and hand in hand.
In a sparing match I always try to anger the person; they always make stupid mistakes, react with aggression, instinct and what they want to do, and not what they should do to avoid being hit. All because they cannot control their emotions. It’s the same in a debate. An angry person will say what they are feeling and won’t try and cover up what they are thinking.
RageOverdose wrote:
I guess I said that wrong, unfortunately.
Such philosophical developments eventually led to science. The processes of science were aided in their fruition thanks to philosophy. I was basically just trying to say, though, that religion isn’t even a primitive form of science, but philosophy.
Prove that without greek philosophy there would be no science. Religion is a fail attempt to understand the universe. So a failed science.
RageOverdose wrote:
No, I say it often. I don’t see how you came to that conclusion by that comment. I was just saying I respect what you said. I have no problem with it and I don’t find any reason to argue it. Not knowing anything has nothing to do with it.
I will admit, I am stubborn to say I don’t know, but not afraid to do it and it doesn’t bother me to do so.
Ahhh what?!?! Say it often; don’t say it because you are stubborn, but not afraid to say it… alright then.
RageOverdose wrote:
I met a Chinese girl who preferred Communist China to America in my high school. Of course, she wasn’t at a disadvantage in her society, so I guess she liked it better. I met a Japanese girl who preferred collectivist Japan. It’s all depending on the situation of the person. I agree, though, that universal freedom seems so right, but if you’re going to integrate it into other cultures, using an ethnocentric point of view can be rather intrusive and full of conflict.
America is no longer part of the free world. China is becoming more and more like the free world. You know dam well that if someone has the same freedoms we have (which most of china and japan has) that they would rather be at home.
NO. My view that everyone should be free like we are in the free world (should I exclude you, bush took most of your rights, and you guys let him) is basic human rights, that so far cannot be logically (yes your respect different culture arguments is illogical) disputed. As soon as someone gets a taste of freedom, they usually don’t want to give it up (unless you are a bunch of spineless Americans, who are afraid of Muslims)
RageOverdose wrote:
You always make the so-called “criminals” of the Dark Ages to be Christians (well, the Crusades are their faults, but that was stupid anyway). They also made it better. And, what I’m saying is that Christians aren’t going to send us to another Dark Age, for many reasons. One, atheists are a larger minority now than they used to be, especially in America, so many citizens aren’t directly influenced by Christianity on a day to day basis. Two, many Christians are intelligently inclined (many aren’t as well). Also, all the major civilizations in the world are secular, so the influence religion has isn’t too strong.
I didn’t ignore anything you said. Why do we always have such communication problems? I misunderstand you, you misunderstand me. Happens every time.
1 billion a minority? Christianity today is not the same Christianity 200+ years ago and far too many Christians are educated for Christianity to send us back to the Dark Age, but a nuclear war started by Christianity little brother could defiantly send us back. But as long as the bible is held up as some unquestionable book, with beliefs that cannot be insulted, it will continue to be a dangerous belief system that can be revived at anytime.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
Wow there is a debate on tv, on how people shouldnt call fat people fat. God must have sent me a sign...
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
Gplex wrote:
Understanding? Is that code for respect or be quiet? Respect and not insulting someone goes and hand in hand.
In a sparing match I always try to anger the person; they always make stupid mistakes, react with aggression, instinct and what they want to do, and not what they should do to avoid being hit. All because they cannot control their emotions. It’s the same in a debate. An angry person will say what they are feeling and won’t try and cover up what they are thinking.
I just want to make sure your conclusions are well thought out and relieved of as many misconceptions, misinformation, or bias as possible.
When people have an understanding of something, they also remove many of negative emotions that occur as a reaction to what someone does, so that your judgment won’t be full of bias or what it should not be. It’s basically so someone won’t be blind in their conclusions.
As for the rest of your post, it would be the first time I don’t disagree with you anywhere. As for the philosophy, I can’t provide a source, just some logic, and I think you’ll want more than that.
RageOverdose wrote:
I just want to make sure your conclusions are well thought out and relieved of as many misconceptions, misinformation, or bias as possible.
When people have an understanding of something, they also remove many of negative emotions that occur as a reaction to what someone does, so that your judgment won’t be full of bias or what it should not be. It’s basically so someone won’t be blind in their conclusions.
As for the rest of your post, it would be the first time I don’t disagree with you anywhere. As for the philosophy, I can’t provide a source, just some logic, and I think you’ll want more than that.
Understanding and removing “negative” emotions has nothing to do with each other. My judgments is almost never bias, I will listen, think about what they have said, then make a judgment call on what the person has said. I don’t ignore the person and rant off on another subject.
Show me this logic.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
RageOverdose wrote:
A child insults with whatever, be it lies or not. A child can insult a fat peer or even adult by pointing out that they are fat and making fun of it, and it is based on truth. But a child is a child, they are not complete in their understanding of their socialization yet.
There is a massive difference between obesity and a religious ideology. Religious ideologies can command murder, sexism, racism, genocide, slavery and injustice, hold back scientific progress and oppress basic human rights. Is a person who calls Al Qaeda a group of homicidal maniacs a 'child'? Is a person who says Robert Mugabe is evil a 'child'? Is a person who says the Flat Earth society are morons a 'child'? No, a truly immature person is someone who claps his hands over his ears and ignores all this evil and stupidity to live a comfortable life in a fantasy world...
__________________
Last edited 11 Jun 2009 07:19 am by Shaun of the Living
im so fly climbin while droppin for k johns spot//
dimensions die, i master time, dudes ask and yes im gods watch//
we agree bibals a sacred business, half the readers are nog washed//
n lifes not, i note his messages, so in empty books were not lost//
__________________
Moose E.B. AKA CartOOn Villain
Last edited 11 Jun 2009 07:24 am by That Dude Moose E.B.
King Boo wrote:
And why would he punish something even though it was him that planned for them to do the thing he said not to. What is he retarded?
Because Adam and Eve disobeyed him.
There is something I’ve always been curious aboot. God told Eve that if she ate the fruit, she would die. But was the world before the fall of mankind not death free? How could God expect her to know what death is if it didn’t exist yet?
riptorn311 wrote:
I’m saying that all the problems mankind caused was a result of god...God let mankind get into the situation he was in by planting the tree of knowledge...It was god that tempted man in the garden, not the serpent...The tree was a result of god. the snake was a result of god...curiosity was a result of god...and mans fall from grace is a result of god...
So, you’re saying that God should force us to love and obey him?
RageOverdose wrote:
I just want to make sure your conclusions are well thought out and relieved of as many misconceptions, misinformation, or bias as possible.
When people have an understanding of something, they also remove many of negative emotions that occur as a reaction to what someone does, so that your judgment won’t be full of bias or what it should not be. It’s basically so someone won’t be blind in their conclusions.
As for the rest of your post, it would be the first time I don’t disagree with you anywhere. As for the philosophy, I can’t provide a source, just some logic, and I think you’ll want more than that.
Understanding and removing “negative” emotions has nothing to do with each other. My judgments is almost never bias, I will listen, think about what they have said, then make a judgment call on what the person has said. I don’t ignore the person and rant off on another subject.
Show me this logic.
I base this off the FAE (Fundamental Attribution Error), where people tend to explain things others do based upon personality rather than situation. People tend to get upset when they just think someone is lazy, stupid, or hateful, instead of seeing it for what it really may be. Understanding something, basically a situation, can remove any sort of bias. As you already stated, people who are angry or upset in any manner tend to say what they really are thinking and not what they should or feel they should. They can also make baseless judgments or bias conclusions.
You, however, have said you already don’t do this, so I won’t preach understanding to you anymore.
Shaun of the Living wrote:
There is a massive difference between obesity and a religious ideology. Religious ideologies can command murder, sexism, racism, genocide, slavery and injustice, hold back scientific progress and oppress basic human rights. Is a person who calls Al Qaeda a group of homicidal maniacs a 'child'? Is a person who says Robert Mugabe is evil a 'child'? Is a person who says the Flat Earth society are morons a 'child'? No, a truly immature person is someone who claps his hands over his ears and ignores all this evil and stupidity to live a comfortable life in a fantasy world...
Escapists are immature? I never thought that, I just figured they couldn’t find any solace in the actual world and escape with whatever method to find peace.
But I agree with you, religion can cause problems because of how people won’t think for themselves, but it isn’t just religion that will do it. PETA is arguably another example of sheep being herded.
Insulting people is just something I’d rather not do. I can still tell people the truth (you’re too fat to be healthy: you’re just taking the word of this guy without question: you’re too ignorant to make a good judgment), and while it can offend them just as easily as any insult, it is usually just because they can’t accept the truth or don’t want to.
