DescentBB

Zuruck wrote:Is this turning into another profiling topic?

Get rid of religion, it has been the SOLE cause of all this stuff that we talk about. The ONE AND ONLY cause of this war, the Olympic kidnappings, the majority of the major conflicts in history have all been religious based. Get rid of it, let us see if the world could be a little more harmonious...let's at least give it a try.

I'll bet you'll notice that the world won't stop turning when you stop praying. You'll wake up in the morning the same, Cheerios will taste the same, your car will get the same mileage.

Any takers?

actually... that can be quite damaging to the psyche in most cases, such a change is a huge shakeup on people's sense of self (among other things), a personal crisis that takes a long time to recover from (if ever). Also some people can just snap.

Even if you happen to actually be a fair haired girl you should drop the dumb blonde routine. It's just not working here and it's probably quite insulting to real idiots everywhere.

ok dude, just stop it. i'm getting real ★■◆●ing sick of your abusive attitude. It started a week ago and i let it slide thinking that you'd just had too much coffee and you'd rant for a few days - hey whatever i'm cool with that we all have to blow off steam. This new abusive attitude of yours has been continually grating on my nerves since it started and now they are finally getting raw. I'm getting to the point where i loose interest in any thread in here as soon as you start spewing your hateful FOX tripe.

roid wrote: ok dude, just stop it. i'm getting real **** sick of your abusive attitude. It started a week ago and i let it slide thinking that you'd just had too much coffee and you'd rant for a few days - hey whatever i'm cool with that we all have to blow off steam. This new abusive attitude of yours has been continually grating on my nerves since it started and now they are finally getting raw. I'm getting to the point where i loose interest in any thread in here as soon as you start spewing your hateful FOX tripe.

Go back and read the exchanges between Tigerassault and myself then tell me with a straight face that I haven't given him all the respect and patience he deserves. Or maybe you really think he is as dense as he pretends to be.
My best guess is it's all an act, just playing dumb to avoid having to rise to the challenge. So I finally lost patience with the lame tactics, misquoting and pretending not to understand simple english. I think he got off relatively light.

Second, I think you're just frustrated that you can't reconcile your own position with the reality I force you to think about.
So instead of trying to discuss the issue you want dismiss it as FOX tripe.
Why not go and find where my position was hateful or FOX-like (whatever that is) and quote it back to me?
I bet you'll find the way I express displeasure with islamo-fascism is delivered more rationally, logically and backed by much more substance than any of your many diatribes on christianity or americans.

This new abusive attitude of yours has been continually grating on my nerves since....

The closer we get to dumbassed politically correct ideas causing us to let islamo-fascists gain the upperhand the more aggravated I become.

Kilarin wrote:This is about as offensive as you can get, but do you see Jews shooting people, burning embassies, vandalizing cars? Hmmm, nope. They choose to protest without violence. Most Muslims are decent people, but there is a very important cultural difference here

To be fair, now that I think about it, The people in LA do seem to burn down thier own city every so often.

No, we see what the Jews do through a filtered lens. What happens when they fire missiles into neighborhoods? How many times have they missed their targets?

Roid, I don't really care if people can't get over it. The fact of the matter is that religion causes far more problems than it solves.

Cuda, can you explain how the left is going to eradicate mankind? The difference between you and me is that I see all people in this country as equal, regardless if they believe the same things I do. You do not, you belive them to be equal ONLY if they believe exactly what you do. You feel as if you have the patent on the \"correct\" way of living and that is the only way people should live. Sadly, you will believe this till the day you're gone, which won't be soon enough. Liberalism will consume America, and it can't come soon enough.

Zuruck wrote:can you explain how the left is going to eradicate mankind?

Talk to anyone who has lived in one of the communist atheist states. Atheist are JUST as bad at abusing people as theist. Arguably worse.

The problem is a human problem, not a religion problem.

Zuruck wrote:No, we see what the Jews do through a filtered lens. What happens when they fire missiles into neighborhoods? How many times have they missed their targets?.

Do you not recognize the difference between violent response to an unprovoked attack and launching an unprovoked violent attack?
Granted innocents die as a result of both but there is a big difference in the two! There is no moral equivalency between a country defending herself and a 50+ years of constant attacks ranging from all out multi-country assaults on them to random terrorist bombs going off on buses and in restuarants filled with unsuspecting civilians! And then the very countries that put them in that predicament have the balls to tell them they are over-reacting!!! Heh!!

So your lens filter needs a little windex in my view!

If I walk up to you and hit you and your family with a baseball bat and you pick up a bat and swing back at me and we go at it like that for a number of swings and you accidently hit an innocent civilian in the process is it your fault or mine that people got hurt?

Zuruck wrote:No, we see what the Jews do through a filtered lens. What happens when they fire missiles into neighborhoods? How many times have they missed their targets?

OH PLEASE!!!!!! if memory serves during this entire Isreal-Hezbolla conflict it was the isreali's that dropped leaflets and even made phone calls to the residents of areas that they planned on attacking. UNLIKE hezbolla that indescriminatelly launched missle after missle into Isreali cities. try watching a Video called Pallywood, I mentioned it in another thread. maybe you'll start to open your eyes a little after viewing it but I doubt it.

Zuruck wrote: Cuda, can you explain how the left is going to eradicate mankind? The difference between you and me is that I see all people in this country as equal, regardless if they believe the same things I do. You do not, you belive them to be equal ONLY if they believe exactly what you do. You feel as if you have the patent on the "correct" way of living and that is the only way people should live. Sadly, you will believe this till the day you're gone, which won't be soon enough. Liberalism will consume America, and it can't come soon enough.

well first off your making a hell of an assumption about me personally since we have never met. you have NO IDEA what I want to happen to anyone or whom I think is an equal,obviously by your comments you would prefer me dead. so one must wonder which of us wants to eradicate the other side. so I suggest you get off your high horse before someone comes along and knocks you off of it. "Judge not lest you be Judged"
second I think Kilarin said it well enough, Hrm Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot just to name a few "NON-Christians" that have killed multi millions

Zuruck wrote:This country needs an openly atheistic president...maybe then we could get some balance and have the country start heading the right way again.

Good luck, a study came out that said that 57% of America wouldn't vote for an atheist president, even if they are well qualified.

Atheists are also less trusted to marry someone daughter, even though we have 50% lower divorce rate than anyone else (ATHEISTS: 20%, CHRISTIANS: 70%)

Go USA, show that tolerance!

Dakatsu wrote:...even though we have 50% lower divorce rate than anyone else (ATHEISTS: 20%, CHRISTIANS: 70%)

Go USA, show that tolerance!

Kind of a stretch there isn't it? After all you aren't necessarily intolerant of someone just because you wouldn't vote for them! People usually look for more than just someone they can tolerate when choosing a representative so if you have a predominantly christian nation then it stands to reason that a majority will prefer to elect someone who shares their views. So your assumptions based on the poll are flawed and the poll, like any other poll, could have it's questions designed to illicit a response that supports a theory instead of providing an objective view.
what poll was it, what were the questions asked, who did they ask etc.

And I'd love to know all that and more about the divorce rate question, especially because my instincts tell me that atheists have less baggage about divorce so it would seem to come easier to them. Will that be overcome by religious peoples proclivity to satisfy the church and thus marry sooner and more often than athiests? So first we need to know the marriage ratio of both groups don't we before we know if the comparison even makes sense, right?

Please post the poll source because that is an interesting take on it.

Will Robinson wrote:Go back and read the exchanges between Tigerassault and myself then tell me with a straight face that I haven't given him all the respect and patience he deserves. Or maybe you really think he is as dense as he pretends to be.
My best guess is it's all an act, just playing dumb to avoid having to rise to the challenge. So I finally lost patience with the lame tactics, misquoting and pretending not to understand simple english. I think he got off relatively light.

Second, I think you're just frustrated that you can't reconcile your own position with the reality I force you to think about.
So instead of trying to discuss the issue you want dismiss it as FOX tripe.
Why not go and find where my position was hateful or FOX-like (whatever that is) and quote it back to me?
I bet you'll find the way I express displeasure with islamo-fascism is delivered more rationally, logically and backed by much more substance than any of your many diatribes on christianity or americans.

This new abusive attitude of yours has been continually grating on my nerves since....

The closer we get to dumbassed politically correct ideas causing us to let islamo-fascists gain the upperhand the more aggravated I become.

1: If you think that I am trying to avoid many of those topics, then make another topic with these points and I will reply to every one of them. And make it easier for me to understand, I won't deny that I have great trouble understanding your posts.
2: No Will, his debates were rational, logical, and backed by much more substance than you should give him credit for. For example, you do not think that Diplomacy will work against the 'Islamofascists', and you will support that with logic; but you will not consider that it has already been shown that Diplomacy does work, because it does not confirm to the logic you used.

Zuruch wrote:Roid, I don't really care if people can't get over it. The fact of the matter is that religion causes far more problems than it solves.

Unfortunately, it's not. The correct question is 'does removing religeon solve more problems than it causes?'.
I'd say it doesn't, but I'm sure others would think otherwise.

Dakatsu wrote:Atheists are also less trusted to marry someone daughter, even though we have 50% lower divorce rate than anyone else Razz (ATHEISTS: 20%, CHRISTIANS: 70%)

70%? Wow! I did kinda think that Atheists would have a lower pdivorce rate, yes; but I didn't think the Christians would be so high.
And as I read before that the overall divorce rate was 40%, I'd also like to see your scource.

Will Robinson wrote:Will that be overcome by religious peoples proclivity to satisfy the church and thus marry sooner and more often than athiests? So first we need to know the marriage ratio of both groups don't we before we know if the comparison even makes sense, right?

Bingo. We discussed this very poll over here.

But I wouldn't say that this shows the "opposite" of the Bana study, or invalidates it.
Bana's second study (2004) improved on their methodology by limiting itself to people who had been married at least once, and came up with equal divorce rates for Christians vs. non-Christians. EQUAL. And no, thats not quite as bad as "greater", but I still find it a quite shameful result.

Kilarin wrote:....Bana's second study (2004) improved on their methodology by limiting itself to people who had been married at least once, and came up with equal divorce rates for Christians vs. non-Christians. EQUAL. And no, thats not quite as bad as "greater", but I still find it a quite shameful result. [/i]

Why shameful, identifying yourself as a christian doesn't necessarily make you any more likely do anything other than show up to church more often than a non-christian.
I know an awful lot of people who would answer a poll identifying themselves as christian everytime they are asked yet by observing their day to day behavior you wouldn't expect them to be particularly devout or extramoral.

TIGERassault wrote:1: If you think that I am trying to avoid many of those topics, then make another topic with these points and I will reply to every one of them. And make it easier for me to understand, I won't deny that I have great trouble understanding your posts.

Why do I have to repeat it? Pick one, quote it and tell me where I lost you.

2: No Will, his debates were rational, logical, and backed by much more substance than you should give him credit for. For example, you do not think that Diplomacy will work against the 'Islamofascists', and you will support that with logic; but you will not consider that it has already been shown that Diplomacy does work, because it does not confirm to the logic you used.

Show me one instance of diplomatic sucess dealing with islamo-fascists. Go ahead, any example....

Kilarin wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:Will that be overcome by religious peoples proclivity to satisfy the church and thus marry sooner and more often than athiests? So first we need to know the marriage ratio of both groups don't we before we know if the comparison even makes sense, right?

Bingo. We discussed this very poll over here.

But I wouldn't say that this shows the "opposite" of the Bana study, or invalidates it.
Bana's second study (2004) improved on their methodology by limiting itself to people who had been married at least once, and came up with equal divorce rates for Christians vs. non-Christians. EQUAL. And no, thats not quite as bad as "greater", but I still find it a quite shameful result.

Yep... the divorce rates among those who married were found to be EQUAL between the two groups. In my experience, Christians are the more likely group to marry (Atheists tend to be more comfortable "living together") which means a lot more of those relationships you just EXPECT to fail turn into marriage-and-divorce for Christians vs. live-together-and-breakup for Atheists.

A better survey would look at the whole spectrum... include basically any sort of intended-to-be-long-term sexual relationship and look at the percentage of each type that ends for each group.

Dakatsu wrote:

Zuruck wrote:This country needs an openly atheistic president...maybe then we could get some balance and have the country start heading the right way again.

Good luck, a study came out that said that 57% of America wouldn't vote for an atheist president, even if they are well qualified.

Atheists are also less trusted to marry someone daughter, even though we have 50% lower divorce rate than anyone else (ATHEISTS: 20%, CHRISTIANS: 70%)

Go USA, show that tolerance!

We Atheists do pretty good don't we.

Also, I wonder how many Christians would like to divorce but stay together because of their religion.

Bee

Will Robinson wrote:Show me one instance of diplomatic sucess dealing with islamo-fascists. Go ahead, any example....

Islamofascists only? Well, I can't, because I dont know of any successes in removing Islamofascists.

TIGERassault wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:Show me one instance of diplomatic sucess dealing with islamo-fascists. Go ahead, any example....

Islamofascists only? Well, I can't, because I dont know of any successes in removing Islamofascists.

Then why did you specifically say that it had?!?

TIGERassault wrote:No Will, his debates were rational, logical, and backed by much more substance than you should give him credit for. For example, you do not think that Diplomacy will work against the 'Islamofascists', and you will support that with logic; but you will not consider that it has already been shown that Diplomacy does work, because it does not confirm to the logic you used.

You see, I was willing to consider that it had worked and asked you show me an example of it having worked. You claimed it had been shown to work yet now you say you can't think of any example where it had....

I can give you one, sort of, not that it resulted in them giving up much but we actually did have some give and take through peaceful means.
In the '80's after the islamo-fascist Iranians, including the man who is now president of Iran, had taken over the U.S. embassy by force, made hostages of the american men inside and refused all forms of diplomacy to secure the hostages release they found themselves invaded by Iraq and in need of weapons.
So for something like 8 billion in cash plus a promise to deliver weapons to them they were willing to negotiate with us for the release of hostages held by fellow islamo-fascists in Lebanon.
Now if that's your idea of diplomacy then I guess you could use that one instance. I can't think of another and, for me, that example is not one that gives warm fuzzy feelings and hope for a diplomatic solution to future conflicts!!

So at this point I'd like to ask you to reconsider rejecting my position because you feel I don't seek a diplomatic resolution.
It seems pretty clear that there is none available that we could live with, and for the Israeli's I say "can't live with" literally!

Will Robinson wrote:

TIGERassault wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:Show me one instance of diplomatic sucess dealing with islamo-fascists. Go ahead, any example....

Islamofascists only? Well, I can't, because I dont know of any successes in removing Islamofascists.

Then why did you specifically say that it had?!?

TIGERassault wrote:No Will, his debates were rational, logical, and backed by much more substance than you should give him credit for. For example, you do not think that Diplomacy will work against the 'Islamofascists', and you will support that with logic; but you will not consider that it has already been shown that Diplomacy does work, because it does not confirm to the logic you used.

You see, I was willing to consider that it had worked and asked you show me an example of it having worked. You claimed it had been shown to work yet now you say you can't think of any example where it had....

I meant that diplomacy wor...
Nevermind; I'm fed up arguing.

TIGERassault wrote:I meant that diplomacy wor...
Nevermind; I'm fed up arguing.

Weak.

Where and when does diplomacy work? You're saying it should work in the specific cases mentioned above (dealing with Islamofascism), so give some reason why it should actually work there. I'm pretty sure it doesn't -- you can negotiate with people who want resources or land or respect, but you can't negotiate with people who want you to convert or die and will keep trying to force you to no matter what concessions you give.

TIGERassault wrote:I meant that diplomacy wor...
Nevermind; I'm fed up arguing.

As Lothar points out, weak. And that is being generous but I'll refrain from expounding in a personal nature since I'm sure Lothar doesn't want to have to call me down again and truely I don't really enjoy insulting people but sometimes you guys really ask for it. I know that makes me just as guilty of something wrong for thinking that way but this stuff is deadly serious. We're not debating the best way to implimant welfare or something. The whole world could be screwed if the illogical, politically correct flat out stupid line of thinking you guys use prevails at the leadership level!
Anyway...
Sure diplomacy works, generically speaking, but we were never speaking about the world in general. Your opening statement in this thread for example was that I lack an understanding that muslims are human!
My response was quite specific regarding the islamo-fascist subset of muslims.

You would do well to think of a response then try to think what the most obvious rebutal might be, then if the rebutal makes more sense than your original response you know that you need to rethink your position.
You, and a few others around here, are so hell bent on finding fault with my position that you don't stop and think. Instead you just react. You just declare I'm wrong and then struggle miserably to support your declaration.

Kilarin wrote:equal divorce rates for Christians vs. non-Christians. EQUAL. And no, thats not quite as bad as "greater", but I still find it a quite shameful result

Will Robinson wrote:Why shameful, identifying yourself as a christian doesn't necessarily make you any more likely do anything other than show up to church more often than a non-christian.

Shameful because Christians OUGHT to be doing better.

I'm posting this again because I wont let Zuruck off the hook on his comments. forgive me Mods, I've grown weary of Zurucks hit and run tactics.

Zuruck wrote: The difference between you and me is that I see all people in this country as equal,

Really??? do you see Christians as equal to you? I would venture to say that EVERYONE on this forum knows the answer to that. or would you like me to post some of your comments regarding Christians that you have made in this and other threads just to refresh your memory?

Zuruck wrote: you belive them to be equal ONLY if they believe exactly what you do. You feel as if you have the patent on the "correct" way of living and that is the only way people should live.

you truly do not have ANY concept of what your talking about do you?

"for all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God"

unlike you, I KNOW that I'm no better than the next man, but I will agree with you that I do feel that I have a better way to live my life, which by the way I do not FORCE upon anyone, nor do I wish that someone would die if they do not believe the way I do. can you say the same? apparently not by your previous comments.

"For the mouth says what the heart feels"

I might disagree with someones action and how they handle certain situatuions but I am willing to discuss, debate, and learn from them. we might agree to disagree in the end but at least I will debate them on it. And unlike you I do not wish them dead for the way they believe.

Zuruck wrote: Sadly, you will believe this till the day you're gone, which won't be soon enough. Liberalism will consume America, and it can't come soon enough.

this is the First and only thing that we agree upon. I will believe till the day I'm gone and it wont be soon enough. and you are correct Liberalism IS consuming America. like the ebola virus eating at its flesh and devouring it. It's a shame really that this once great nation has turned into the classless and morally decrepid society that it is today.

Zuruch its time for you to stand up and be counted. you pop in here BLAST Christians and any thing you feel Christian people do with nothing to sustantiate your claims except your "feelings". it is your pure hatred for anyone that has the smallest belief in God the sustains your total existance. and when someone calls you on your points you change the subject or run off to a different thread not to return. and I have talked on the phone to others on this forum that have noticed your habits as well. there are others here that do not agree with Christianity but at leat they have the courage and the Moral fortitude to debate the issue. sadly the same cannot be said about you.

You know, I get at Will sometimes but I like him. I really do, he seems to know what he's talking about, we rarely agree (i don't even know if it that's often) and I come at him pretty hard. If you need to continue to say that I hate Christians than quit saying it, because it's simply not correct. I HATE RELIGION!! Is that clear enough? Do you really feel that if you woke up tomorrow and there was no religion that the world would be any different?


it's interesting that you would say that liberalism would promote moral decrepidness, don't you think blatant discrimination is morally unjust?

Zuruck wrote:If you need to continue to say that I hate Christians than quit saying it, because it's simply not correct. I HATE RELIGION!!

Sort of "Hate the sin, love the sinner" for Athiest...

He hates God too.

*shrug* His deal.

bummer

We Atheists do pretty good don't we.

Guess so! I wonder, my girlfriend is Catholic, if it is 20 & 70, I wonder if for us it evens to 45%?

He hates God too.

I can really see how atheists can hate god when we don't believe he exists...

Kinda like someone saying they hate their dog when all they have are two cats...

Dakatsu wrote: I can really see how atheists can hate god when we don't believe he exists...

Not quite. I am an atheist because I don't believe in the God of the bible and I believe the bible is just a book written by men with wild imaginations.

However, whether a higher power exists outside our known universe... to me... is unknown.

And treat that girl with kindness Dakatsu... Always.

Bee

Bet51987 wrote:

Dakatsu wrote: I can really see how atheists can hate god when we don't believe he exists...

Not quite. I am an atheist because I don't believe in the God of the bible and I believe the bible is just a book written by men with wild imaginations.

However, whether a higher power exists outside our known universe... to me... is unknown.

And treat that girl with kindness Dakatsu... Always.

Bee

Believing in a higher power would be agnostic atheist (I am an agnostic). However incase of the event that god didn't exist, we can't hate him if we are not sure there is a higher power.

Funny how people call me a satan worshipper due to me being atheist/agnostic, yet I don't believe in satan...

And I will never hurt my girlfriend, in fact I made sure it was the other way around.

Speaking of bible, I am getting to the fun part, the Jesus stuff!

P.S: Where can I get a copy of the books from the Koran from the internet? I want to see what the Islamos add to the Bibble Jibble.

Dakatsu wrote:Speaking of bible, I am getting to the fun part, the Jesus stuff!

What version are you reading?

Dakatsu wrote:Where can I get a copy of the books from the Koran from the internet?

Try Here. (Google is your friend!)

Kilarin wrote:

Dakatsu wrote:Speaking of bible, I am getting to the fun part, the Jesus stuff!

What version are you reading?

Dakatsu wrote:Where can I get a copy of the books from the Koran from the internet?

Try Here. (Google is your friend!)

Omg Google you suck, not showing me that!

I believe it is the King James version, but I'm not sure...