NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
When did you become the appraiser of all religions??
Everyone jumps immediately to the catholics although homosexuality is against the Koran and Allah too... Oh wait, that is a politically correct religion, nevermind...
Gay wedding cakes and the bigots who won't bake them.
- Thread starter BigNBushy
- Start date
- Status
Everyone jumps immediately to the catholics although homosexuality is against the Koran and Allah too... Oh wait, that is a politically correct religion, nevermind...
midgetaus
Member
I mentioned "religious freedom".... I at no stage mentioned Catholics, Mulsims or any other denomination of religious belief
Defensive much....
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
You asked "When did god...."
What religion were you referring to?
You are making many assumptions with your statement.
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
Incorrect. It takes zero faith to not hold a belief. The burden of proof always lies on the person making the claim, not the one rejecting it. It doesn't take faith for you to not believe in the gremlins, because the burden of proof for gremlins existence hasn't been filled. If you'd like to claim the burden of proof has been filled for belief in god, I'm going to ask for demonstrable proof or make the counter claim that the burden of proof required to justify your belief in god, is weak.
Most (the vast majority) of atheists don't claim god doesn't exist, that's the stance of a Gnostic atheist, which I will admit, does require faith. The vast majority of atheists are simply skeptics, requiring evidence before the burden of proof for belief is filled. Similarly, I don't believe aliens have visited earth (notice I didn't say 'I believe aliens don't exist'?) There is a very distinct difference between saying, "I haven't seen enough evidence to beleive aliens exist", and "I know aliens don't exist".
Atheism is more often the not, simply the rejection of beliefs put forth by believers. It's my understanding based from experience, that 99% of atheists are Agnostic atheists.... e.g. don't believe in god, but don't claim to know god doesn't exist. This position requires no faith, as rejecting a belief based on the fact it has no supporting evidence doesn't require the belief in something 'unjustified' (i.e. faith). If you have evidence, you don't need faith. That's the entire point of having faith, believing in something even though you never get to see it, or touch it, or communicate with it, etc. If you could just spark up a fatty with god, no one would have faith, everyone would have a very valid, and demonstrable reason to believe in god.
Correct, but it is usually true that the explanation with the least amount of assumptions is usually correct. The one that doesn't assume that an invisible, all-powerful, omniscient, omnipresent being is pulling the strings from 'another dimension', in an attempt to control how we behave, so he can save us from ourselves (even though he created us with these faults), so we can go to heaven, (instead of hell, which he also created) and spend the rest of eternity in a 'blissful state', with him? It sounds so plausible compared to, when you die your biological functions stop, and you rot in the ground. Albeit, the 'god' story sure sounds more interesting, it makes a million and one unproven assumptions, and is most likely false due to making all those assumptions.
Pascal's wager is a very poor tool to use for showing the validity of a religion.
If there is a god, and he does exhibit all the qualities stated in the bible, omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, (let's not get into the fallacy that is, being omniscient and omnipotent at the same time, we'll save that for another day) then he would know what you're thinking, and can tell why you have faith. If it's just to 'get out of jail free', don't you think he'd know? Any Christian that just believes in an effort to hedge their bets, is in a way, spitting in gods face..... if god exists.
I have no doubt that you've struggled with your faith, and probably convinced yourself that god has answered you via some way that could be completely coincidence, e.g. god showing you a 'sign'.
As a side note; asking god for a sign, and getting one, e.g. asking god for a sign, then winning on a lotto ticket), is no more proof of gods existence than asking god for a sign, not receiving one, and claiming that as proof that god doesn't exist.
Million dollar question, and really, it's not an easy answer. I'm not a medical professional, but IMO I think the law should reflect the likelihood of survival, and should also take into account other considerations. I don't think abortions after 24 weeks should be allowed, except for extenuating circumstances, e.g. the mother could die, the baby has an untreatable major birth defect that will severely limit their life quality.... (even then, I'm not so sure, I know there are reasons not to abort, just liekt here are reasons to abort)
Knowing the info that I know, right now, I'd say that once a baby has a 50/50 chance of living, it needs to get the benefit of the doubt. It's no longer more likely to die without the mother.
This reminds me of the question, "If you take atoms away from a table one at a time, at which point does it stop being a table? When does it lose its 'tableness'?
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
I feel like you mean energy in one of those, pseudo-scientific, Deepak Chopra ways that doesn't follow along with reality. Unless you're talking about the ability to do work (that's what energy is), and not the ability of consciousness to leave the body VIA some mystical, pseudo-scientific, mumbo-jumbo, you are just spouting non-sense.
How does one cultivate (grow) energy? I hate this new age, garbage. Throwing around terms you don't understand in an attempt to explain phenomenon you don't understand. LOL
Go, New Agers, Go....
So your idea of when personhood forms has all to do with legal status? The baby needs to be born, at which point is it only possible to gain a SSN and a certificate of live birth, and only then does it become a person.
What a frightening view, how can you defend this from morality? So one day, the baby is floating around in amniotic fluid, something happens, hormones are released and a couple of hours later the baby is born. So within those few hours the oral dignity of that baby goes from nonexistent to fully vested?
midgetaus
Member
The bill was about "Religious Freedom" it wasnt about a specific religion... it was about their ability to discriminate under the guise of religion... and as religion has either a "god" or "gods" I feel my statement is true and correct.... you got rather defensive assuming I was attacking solely Catholics.
Tell me what part of that you are have trouble understanding?
welcome to our little dark corner here at riu
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
yep...... Who is this "government" we generically talk about? It's one group of intolerant people who backed by politics, the "law", want to control others. We have become a totalitarian state with Obama as our new Hitler.
I dont know that I would go that far, but I do agree with the sentiment.
This "government" is the one set up by our founding fathers, that has, like a man tied to a tree with a knife in his mouth, has sawed away many of the ropes that were meant to restrain it.
It has been a step by step, small measure one after the other, process over decades to get from the small government we started with, to a government now that pretty much gets to do whatever it pleases. Used to the states had power, the War of Northern Aggression started the decline in earnest of state power. Now the only entity that decides the limits of federal government power is the federal government.
Changing how senators were chosen.
Mandatory deduction from payroll for taxes.
Making state governments dependent on federal dollars.
And usurpation of vast amounts of power by the executive.
Just a few of the massive mistakes made along the way that WE have allowed to happen.
We have a president now who is using executive order all willy nilly like. The typical civil liberty advocates who normally would protest such abuses of power are asleep at the wheel, saying only that Bush used as many executive orders as Obama. They willfully ignore and intentionally confuse the issue by only comparing the number of orders given, and ignoring the nature of the orders. I don't care if a president issued 1000 executive orders, it does not arise to abuse of power if the orders have the proper scope. A president may abuse his power grossly if the scope of such an order is improper.
I am waiting for the day when a republican is in the white house and starts issuing the same type of executive orders Obama is currently giving. Folks like uncle buck will be beside themselves with
anger at the nerve of such a president, who was given the authority to do thus from his lord, Obama.
Obama is probably not the man who will make America into a dictatorship, but he has done more than any one president in history to lay the groundwork for this to eventually happen.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
your energy is so negative.
you need to have your aura cleansed.
http://orgonitesaustralia.wordpress.com/products/orgonites/orgone-energy-personal-protection-pendant/
pSi007
Active Member
I would make the fags pay for their cake first, then I would sculpt mass volumes of hydrogenated enriched cocks and balls on every available location of the Gay Cake. I would also make them sign a contract of NO-REFUNDS, regardless whether or not they approve of the cake. Hey, there is no law for "bad taste"..
Eye kill Me...
If it were a female's Gay-wedding, I would sculpt a large pile of trash with a camera on top. (plastic disposable)
Call the place, Great Cakes, only dropped 1x.! Your money, Our business..
Eye kill Me...
If it were a female's Gay-wedding, I would sculpt a large pile of trash with a camera on top. (plastic disposable)
Call the place, Great Cakes, only dropped 1x.! Your money, Our business..
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
your energy is so negative.
you need to have your aura cleansed.
http://orgonitesaustralia.wordpress.com/products/orgonites/orgone-energy-personal-protection-pendant/
BEFORE;
AFTER;
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
your skepticism and doubt are preventing the magic from working.BEFORE;
AFTER;
if you believed, you would see the proof of the energies you refuse to understand!
also i need $3000 to use as a focus or i cant cause the spirits to rain wealth upon you.
once you remit these funds, the floodgates will open and youll win the lotto.
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
Should I use the lube now or later? You know what? I'm just gonna go ahead and throw the lube away, it won't hurt will it?your skepticism and doubt are preventing the magic from working.
if you believed, you would see the proof of the energies you refuse to understand!
also i need $3000 to use as a focus or i cant cause the spirits to rain wealth upon you.
once you remit these funds, the floodgates will open and youll win the lotto.
aren't we very witty yet not TLDR this eveningyour skepticism and doubt are preventing the magic from working.
if you believed, you would see the proof of the energies you refuse to understand!
also i need $3000 to use as a focus or i cant cause the spirits to rain wealth upon you.
once you remit these funds, the floodgates will open and youll win the lotto.
go for it; let me know how it works out. subbed.
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
Same thing holds true of liberals, if all of humanity was liberal, where would money come from?
- Status