DescentBB

I'll take that bet.

TIGERassault wrote:$10 says that, although Prime has a distinct foetuses-are-life-too stance, he beleives that sperm and the egg by themselves are distinctly unhuman in every way and can be killed off whenever you want without being morally bankrupt.

I think I told you above you are incorrect. While reproductive cells are not human, they are sacred and therefore should not be used in anything but sex under marriage.

You owe me ten bucks TIGER...

Aggressor Prime wrote:I think I told you above you are incorrect. While reproductive cells are not human, they are sacred and therefore should not be used in anything but sex under marriage.

But I presume not sacred enough to get yourself castrated to prevent tousands of sperm being killed off everytime you have a wet dream...

Aggressor Prime wrote:I think I told you above you are incorrect. While reproductive cells are not human, they are sacred and therefore should not be used in anything but sex under marriage.

So are cows but.. we eat those.

Zuruck wrote:Where would Bush's connections to the Bin Laden family rank in terms of sleaze?

WillyP wrote:Pretty high, I would reckon, but he's not up for re-election.

I think Zurucks point was (sorry if I'm putting words into your mouth) that if you look closely enough, EVERY politician that rises high enough to run for the Presidency has some skeletons in their closet.

It's inevitable if you think about it. Nobody rises that high on their own or in a vacuum. They need friends. Some of those friends will invariably be crooked or have a shady past. This doesn't mean that that the politician in question continues to benefit from the relationship while knowing full well about the skeletons.

People shouldn't always be held accountable for the actions of those they chose to associate with.

Now having said that, let me say that there is a much better reason to not vote for Hillary. She thinks you the citizen should be subordinate to the State and that the State knows better than you how to manage your daily life. Just look at her health care plan. That's all the reason you need to not vote for her right there.

Wait until the slum landlord Rezco goes to trial and Obama gets dragged into that. Wonder how the Obama idolaters in the press will handle it.

Foil wrote:

Testiculese wrote:We need far less humans than we have now. About 2 billion less. 22% off this country's population growth is a good thing!

Humans need predators, I think. (Besides ourselves)

True, population growth is too high for humanity to sustain for much longer. But there is a huge moral difference between keeping population growth down via contraception and the intentional taking of an already-conceived life. If they're morally the same to you, would you consider the taking of a newborn's life any different?

Also, you said humans need predators "other than ourselves"... but that seems to be the very definition of abortion to me, humans intentionally taking human lives. So what did you mean there?

Contraception should always be used so that the abortion issue should never come up. If I had my way, I would legislate temporary sterilization of every child from puberty to...some age...25? By then most people are mature enough to plan kids.
I would enforce two children max, then permanent sterilization, at least until the population dropped by at least a billion.

Unfortunately, that's impossible. Far too many implications. Government-mandated operations? Scary. If there was a way to do it without surgery, and without a prescription of pills and such...(I know there is Depovera, or something, but it causes side effects)

I don't like abortion. However, being a realist, it becomes a necessary thing. Bringing a child into the world to suffer in poverty and misery for most, if not all, of it's life is vastly more disgusting to me that nipping it off before it has a chance to suffer at all. Usually three lives are ruined by the introduction of one. Those two existing lives are more important than one that hasn't lived yet.


I wasn't talking about abortion when I said we need predators. It was just a smartarse comment. We need something to cull the herd before the grass is all gone. (I know we do plenty in this department ourselves, people aren't happy unless there's some killing going on.)

I think the accepted population control of this church is WAR. Which is inevitable when doctrine is to pump out kids with no family planning, straining available resources.

They campaign very hard against abortion, but once you're old enough to fight your life is apparently worthless. So the age bracket between -9 months and 16 years is the only human life they care about, once you pass 16 years you're fair game.

I don't see the church holding picket lines outside of army recruitment centers.

Aggressor Prime wrote:

Testiculese wrote:Your culture of life is killing this planet, Prime. We need far less humans than we have now. About 2 billion less. 22% off this country's population growth is a good thing!

Humans need predators, I think. (Besides ourselves)

1 spiritual being is greater than all the physical beings in the uiniverse. The universe was made for man and we are the universe's rulers, not the other way around. If you believe otherwise, think about what it would mean if you killed yourself to save the physical world. It is totally illogical and therefore you won't do it. Why should anyone else?

The earth can only be better off with more humans. We are perfected by perfecting our natures (which other humans can help us do), not killing imperfect people (since everyone is currently imperfect, killing imperfect people is killing everyone). Every human is born with a purpose no physical being can accomplish that can perfect the human race. Every human we murder is another wasted purpose and another step away from imperfection. The more imperfect we are, the less complete we are, the more unhappy we become, the closer our ultimate destruction becomes.

Sorry for the triple post, but I just made a post to each post I wanted to comment on.

I know why you're doing this, and I must say I disagree with the personality you're putting on. I believe that everything has a soul, just maybe not the same kind humans do. Just because something isn't how we see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I say this just for the sake of arguement, since I know what you're up to.

Illogical? I think not. We can't exist without the physical world.

TIGERassault wrote:

Aggressor Prime wrote:I think I told you above you are incorrect. While reproductive cells are not human, they are sacred and therefore should not be used in anything but sex under marriage.

But I presume not sacred enough to get yourself castrated to prevent tousands of sperm being killed off everytime you have a wet dream...

What? Castration is a grave sin.

@ Alter-Fox: If you want to elivate everything up to human status, that is your right to think. However, the Bible clearly emphasizes the superiority of humans in the two creation stories. We are both the pinnacle point of creation (1st creation story) and everything was made for man (2nd creation story).

Aggressor Prime wrote:

TIGERassault wrote:

Aggressor Prime wrote:I think I told you above you are incorrect. While reproductive cells are not human, they are sacred and therefore should not be used in anything but sex under marriage.

But I presume not sacred enough to get yourself castrated to prevent tousands of sperm being killed off everytime you have a wet dream...

What? Castration is a grave sin.

I think you've just contradicted yourself.

Aggressor Prime wrote:

Bet51987 wrote:

Foil wrote: I may not agree with Bettina on certain aspects of the subject, but I would never imply that she is like a Nazi, as you did. I honestly think you owe her an apology.

Thanks Foil but he didn't directly call me a Nazi so no apology is neccessary. I initially thought that he was just being overly passionate about his views but it seems more intense than that... like a passionate hatred. In my church, my priest is also very passionate and when he holds up the Eucharist, the love he has for Jesus is mesmerizing to everyone and I never take my eyes off of him. He holds it up for a long time and his passion is full of light, very unlike Prime's.

Don't let it eat you up Prime.

Bee

Don't act like you know my fire within. I show no hatred to anyone. I take in the Eucharist every Sunday with no less passion than the Priest that performs the Sacrament at your Mass, recognizing the bread as the body of my Lord. But I think you fail to understand what this means. We Catholics take in Jesus not to be magically saved, but to allow Jesus to enter our bodies so that we may become like Him, perfect. By taking in the Eucharist, we take on the Cross of Jesus, the Cross of Perfection in an imperfect world. We are called to fight out against death and promote life. I do not wish evil on anyone, quite the opposite. I want people to embrace the Truth before the falsehoods within them destroy them. Sometimes the Truth may be blinding, especially for those who always lived in the darkness before, but Catholics should not deny the Truth to those who need it the most, these dwellers of the dark.

Perfect? But one of the central messages that the church always had was that humans are imperfect and cannot be perfected.

Promote life? I hate to point it out, but humans are not the only things that live.

@Agressor... you need some serious help on playing Devil's Advocate. Your arguements are weak, mechanical, and self contradictory.

Alter-Fox wrote:

Aggressor Prime wrote:

TIGERassault wrote:

Aggressor Prime wrote:I think I told you above you are incorrect. While reproductive cells are not human, they are sacred and therefore should not be used in anything but sex under marriage.

But I presume not sacred enough to get yourself castrated to prevent tousands of sperm being killed off everytime you have a wet dream...

What? Castration is a grave sin.

I think you've just contradicted yourself.

I fail to see the contradiction.

Aggressor Prime wrote:

Alter-Fox wrote:

Aggressor Prime wrote:

TIGERassault wrote:

Aggressor Prime wrote:I think I told you above you are incorrect. While reproductive cells are not human, they are sacred and therefore should not be used in anything but sex under marriage.

But I presume not sacred enough to get yourself castrated to prevent tousands of sperm being killed off everytime you have a wet dream...

What? Castration is a grave sin.

I think you've just contradicted yourself.

I fail to see the contradiction.

First you say that all gametes are sacred, then you say you aprove of killing them whenever anyone has a wet dream. The contradiction is obvious to me... because of my lack of common sense, I see things differently.

Alter-Fox wrote:

Aggressor Prime wrote:

Bet51987 wrote:

Foil wrote: I may not agree with Bettina on certain aspects of the subject, but I would never imply that she is like a Nazi, as you did. I honestly think you owe her an apology.

Thanks Foil but he didn't directly call me a Nazi so no apology is neccessary. I initially thought that he was just being overly passionate about his views but it seems more intense than that... like a passionate hatred. In my church, my priest is also very passionate and when he holds up the Eucharist, the love he has for Jesus is mesmerizing to everyone and I never take my eyes off of him. He holds it up for a long time and his passion is full of light, very unlike Prime's.

Don't let it eat you up Prime.

Bee

Don't act like you know my fire within. I show no hatred to anyone. I take in the Eucharist every Sunday with no less passion than the Priest that performs the Sacrament at your Mass, recognizing the bread as the body of my Lord. But I think you fail to understand what this means. We Catholics take in Jesus not to be magically saved, but to allow Jesus to enter our bodies so that we may become like Him, perfect. By taking in the Eucharist, we take on the Cross of Jesus, the Cross of Perfection in an imperfect world. We are called to fight out against death and promote life. I do not wish evil on anyone, quite the opposite. I want people to embrace the Truth before the falsehoods within them destroy them. Sometimes the Truth may be blinding, especially for those who always lived in the darkness before, but Catholics should not deny the Truth to those who need it the most, these dwellers of the dark.

Perfect? But one of the central messages that the church always had was that humans are imperfect and cannot be perfected.

Promote life? I hate to point it out, but humans are not the only things that live.

While the Protestant churches may not emphasize the neeed for perfection, the Catholic Church certainly does. We model our lives so that we may die sinless in order to enter heaven, for we believe only the sinless go strait to heaven.

Human life, by its spiritual element, is worth more than all other life. No other being has the power of choice. Everything else is run 100% by a mathematical equation (the physics of nature) and cannot disobey this equation. By our indepedence from this equation, from our physical bodies being that our source of being is spiritual, we can choose and therefore perform the higher functions like love.

Alter-Fox wrote:

Aggressor Prime wrote:

Alter-Fox wrote:

Aggressor Prime wrote:

TIGERassault wrote:

Aggressor Prime wrote:I think I told you above you are incorrect. While reproductive cells are not human, they are sacred and therefore should not be used in anything but sex under marriage.

But I presume not sacred enough to get yourself castrated to prevent tousands of sperm being killed off everytime you have a wet dream...

What? Castration is a grave sin.

I think you've just contradicted yourself.

I fail to see the contradiction.

First you say that all gametes are sacred, then you say you aprove of killing them whenever anyone has a wet dream. The contradiction is obvious to me... because of my lack of common sense, I see things differently.

I never said a wet dream was ok.

Aggressor Prime wrote:
Human life, by its spiritual element, is worth more than all other life. No other being has the power of choice. Everything else is run 100% by a mathematical equation (the physics of nature) and cannot disobey this equation. By our indepedence from this equation, from our physical bodies being that our source of being is spiritual, we can choose and therefore perform the higher functions like love.

I disagree. I think all life should have equal value. I also believe, from past experience, that those are not your true beliefs. If you review the tone of your posts, you'll find them overly formal and artificial sounding. You have to work on making your false arguements more real.

It's self contradictory because you seem impassioned and at the same time bored of your supposed beliefs. I know this because I'm a writer. You have to get rid of the bored aspect. (Obviously)

roid wrote:I think the accepted population control of this church is WAR. Which is inevitable when doctrine is to pump out kids with no family planning, straining available resources.

They campaign very hard against abortion, but once you're old enough to fight your life is apparently worthless. So the age bracket between -9 months and 16 years is the only human life they care about, once you pass 16 years you're fair game.

I don't see the church holding picket lines outside of army recruitment centers.

The Church holds a consistant ethic of life, from conception to natural death. We just see far more people, innocent people, dying by abortion that such an issue as this is most important. If we are going to end war, we have to start at the root of the problem. The root is the devaluation of human life. We need to start seeing the value of human life and this task begins by stopping abortion.

Alter-Fox wrote:

Aggressor Prime wrote:
Human life, by its spiritual element, is worth more than all other life. No other being has the power of choice. Everything else is run 100% by a mathematical equation (the physics of nature) and cannot disobey this equation. By our indepedence from this equation, from our physical bodies being that our source of being is spiritual, we can choose and therefore perform the higher functions like love.

I disagree. I think all life should have equal value. I also believe, from past experience, that those are not your true beliefs. If you review the tone of your posts, you'll find them overly formal and artificial sounding. You have to work on making your false arguements more real.

It's self contradictory because you seem impassioned and at the same time bored of your supposed beliefs. I know this because I'm a writer. You have to get rid of the bored aspect. (Obviously)

I can't argue against your beliefs. I can only tell you that you are wrong. And concerning if I am writing my views or views I do not believe in, I do believe in what I post. Otherwise I wouldn't waste my time posting.

Aggressor Prime wrote:

roid wrote:I think the accepted population control of this church is WAR. Which is inevitable when doctrine is to pump out kids with no family planning, straining available resources.

They campaign very hard against abortion, but once you're old enough to fight your life is apparently worthless. So the age bracket between -9 months and 16 years is the only human life they care about, once you pass 16 years you're fair game.

I don't see the church holding picket lines outside of army recruitment centers.

The Church holds a consistant ethic of life, from conception to natural death. We just see far more people, innocent people, dying by abortion that such an issue as this is most important. If we are going to end war, we have to start at the root of the problem. The root is the devaluation of human life. We need to start seeing the value of human life and this task begins by stopping abortion.

I do agree that abortion is not good, and somewhat evil. However, I also think that humans are overpopulating the planet, that we've already overstepped our bonds reproduction wise.

@Agressor... I don't think the bible said anything about the universe when it was referring to man's supposed dominion. It just mentioned the Earth. And reading between the lines, I can support my beliefs too.

Me thinks this thread has gone waaayyy off topic.

First, the thread was talking about this:

WillyP wrote:The Clintons have such wonderful friends!

But we're now talking about wet dreams .... Somehow, I have a hard time connecting wet dreams with who the Clintons have been friends with...

This may be a good time for a thread split.

Aggressor Prime wrote: And concerning if I am writing my views or views I do not believe in, I do believe in what I post. Otherwise I wouldn't waste my time posting.

I know for a fact that you're lying there, and I don't tolerate dishonesty very much. A writer looking at this would be able to figure it out without even seeing the OTHER TOPIC.

Techpro... I agree about the thread split. I don't even want to fathom how this got so far off topic.

BTW - even if there isn't a non-human with a soul at present, there soon will be.

I have this exact same arguement all the time, whenever I get on the phone with a particular friend. We've never finished it, so I predict that this thread will go on until we're all dead, or until the universe implodes in May. This is one of those debates that has been going on as long as humans exist, and has caused many wars, so it's pretty pointless trying to resolve it here. This debate itself is part of human nature, a part we have to overcome. We have to accept each other's differences. I know that, having lived with Tourette's Syndrome for my whole life.

Oh, and personally, I'm disgusted with the human race, mostly for causing global warming and possibly ending the universe this May. I don't want anything to do with them.

Alter-Fox wrote:

Aggressor Prime wrote: And concerning if I am writing my views or views I do not believe in, I do believe in what I post. Otherwise I wouldn't waste my time posting.

I know for a fact that you're lying there, and I don't tolerate dishonesty very much. A writer looking at this would be able to figure it out without even seeing the OTHER TOPIC.

Techpro... I agree about the thread split. I don't even want to fathom how this got so far off topic.

BTW - even if there isn't a non-human with a soul at present, there soon will be.

I have this exact same arguement all the time, whenever I get on the phone with a particular friend. We've never finished it, so I predict that this thread will go on until we're all dead, or until the universe implodes in May. This is one of those debates that has been going on as long as humans exist, and has caused many wars, so it's pretty pointless trying to resolve it here. This debate itself is part of human nature, a part we have to overcome. We have to accept each other's differences. I know that, having lived with Tourette's Syndrome for my whole life.

Oh, and personally, I'm disgusted with the human race, mostly for causing global warming and possibly ending the universe this May. I don't want anything to do with them.

While you may think you know I'm being dishonest, you can't be 100% certain. You can only be 100% certain of Cogito. If I am being dishonest, I am not aware of my dishonesty.

If you really want to disconnect from the human race, please go to a cave and live the rest of your live out in that cave. Do not communicate anymore with other humans as this is something humans do.

Okay, I concede that I can't know for sure. That means there are two things that could be happening. Either you're such a poor writer that everything you write makes you seem bored about your beliefs, or you've gotten so good at lying that you don't notice it. After all, you did say in the OTHER TOPIC that you were lying about virtually the same thing you're arguing here. A third option is that you lied in the other topic and didn't notice it. The fourth, and last thing that could be happening is that you're the liar paradox given a body to walk around in... assuming you have a body of course.

No offense intended. I just got a little silly. It pays not to assume anything, and you seemed to think that the spiritual was all that mattered.

Aggressor Prime wrote:

Alter-Fox wrote:

Aggressor Prime wrote: And concerning if I am writing my views or views I do not believe in, I do believe in what I post. Otherwise I wouldn't waste my time posting.

I know for a fact that you're lying there, and I don't tolerate dishonesty very much. A writer looking at this would be able to figure it out without even seeing the OTHER TOPIC.

Techpro... I agree about the thread split. I don't even want to fathom how this got so far off topic.

BTW - even if there isn't a non-human with a soul at present, there soon will be.

I have this exact same arguement all the time, whenever I get on the phone with a particular friend. We've never finished it, so I predict that this thread will go on until we're all dead, or until the universe implodes in May. This is one of those debates that has been going on as long as humans exist, and has caused many wars, so it's pretty pointless trying to resolve it here. This debate itself is part of human nature, a part we have to overcome. We have to accept each other's differences. I know that, having lived with Tourette's Syndrome for my whole life.

Oh, and personally, I'm disgusted with the human race, mostly for causing global warming and possibly ending the universe this May. I don't want anything to do with them.

While you may think you know I'm being dishonest, you can't be 100% certain. You can only be 100% certain of Cogito. If I am being dishonest, I am not aware of my dishonesty.

If you really want to disconnect from the human race, please go to a cave and live the rest of your live out in that cave. Do not communicate anymore with other humans as this is something humans do.

I don't know, I'd rather become a real fox. Technically if I'm human I have something to do with the human race. If you look at my account on facebook (Wazz Azzle), you'll see it's already prepared. Of course, I know I'm crazy. That's why I'm a paradox and thus I don't exist.

BTW - did you know the universe will possibly end in May... that's possibly one of the only things I've said here that isn't some form of joke. It has to do with the Large Hadron Particle Collider.

P.P.P.P.P.S. - I thought I might add, foxes can laugh. And that's not a joke either.

Alter-Fox wrote:Okay, I concede that I can't know for sure. That means there are two things that could be happening. Either you're such a poor writer that everything you write makes you seem bored about your beliefs, or you've gotten so good at lying that you don't notice it. After all, you did say in the OTHER TOPIC that you were lying about virtually the same thing you're arguing here. A third option is that you lied in the other topic and didn't notice it. The fourth, and last thing that could be happening is that you're the liar paradox given a body to walk around in... assuming you have a body of course.

No offense intended. I just got a little silly. It pays not to assume anything, and you seemed to think that the spiritual was all that mattered.

I'm guessing you are using the following quote to derail my posts in the OTHER TOPIC:
"My personal beliefs on marriage, religion, life have not been presented in my arguments used in this endeavour."
I say this because this may be the strongest thing I said to prevent youy from seeing my views. I do not have a record of what I posted, but this is used to cover these instances:
1. I said something too such an extreme that it escapes my belief system (like homosexuals are evil instead of the actions of homosexuals are evil).
2. My personal beliefs were not organized in a way that would show the true layout of my logic (monster paragraph).

Concerning the degradation of this post. Due to my favorite canidate now dropping out, Mike Huckabee, I will need to rethink how to best defend the Republican nominee. Having said all I need to say about Hillary, I will no longer entertain this post with my comments. Please continue this post as you will it.

Oh, I couldn't say anything about that. I don't know anything about American politics, as I'm just an ignorant little Arctic Fox... at least that's what my facebook profile says. It also contains some of my musical compositions, and I'm planning to sample some of my writing there too... in particular the prologue to Wyvern's Form, a novel I'm working on, and maybe an excerpt from Planet Draconia, the third book in the trilogy (I'm writing all three at the same time.)

Aggressor Prime wrote:Human life, by its spiritual element, is worth more than all other life.

That's true according to your religion but as a humanist I disagree. If, for example, you and my dog were drowning I would save her first then go back for you since God may save you before I do.

Alter-Fox wrote:I disagree. I think all life should have equal value.

Exactly. So, do I.

Also, don't worry about the LHC. It can't come anywhere near the power needed to create a black hole with sufficient mass to pull in the man standing next to it... let alone the universe. The cosmic rays that bombard the earth, and everything else, every single day have much more energy than the LHC could ever have, and we are still here.

Bee

Aggressor Prime wrote:derail my posts

That's a laugh. You are currently derailing approx FOUR threads with your offtopic religiously subjective gibberish

Bet51987 wrote: Also, don't worry about the LHC. It can't come anywhere near the power needed to create a black hole with sufficient mass to pull in the man standing next to it... let alone the universe. The cosmic rays that bombard the earth, and everything else, every single day have much more energy than the LHC could ever have, and we are still here.

According to Popular Science, it could cause the vacuum state of the universe to decay if it's not completely stable. According to Popular Science, it might also reveal alternate universes. My opinion... Hopefully, it won't destroy the universe, but will reveal more universes.

That would be a real drag if the universe were destroyed.

And the more universes the better, I suppose.

;P

Bet51987 wrote:

Aggressor Prime wrote:Human life, by its spiritual element, is worth more than all other life.

That's true according to your religion but as a humanist I disagree. If, for example, you and my dog were drowning I would save her first then go back for you since God may save you before I do.

Alter-Fox wrote:I disagree. I think all life should have equal value.

Exactly. So, do I.

Also, don't worry about the LHC. It can't come anywhere near the power needed to create a black hole with sufficient mass to pull in the man standing next to it... let alone the universe. The cosmic rays that bombard the earth, and everything else, every single day have much more energy than the LHC could ever have, and we are still here.

Bee

So does that mean a flea has the same value as a human being, or that Hitler had the same value as the millions he had killed or terrorists have the same value as their victims?

Value relative to what?

Clue me in please.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:That would be a real drag if the universe were destroyed.

How would we know

Dedman wrote:

Sergeant Thorne wrote:That would be a real drag if the universe were destroyed.

How would we know

Good question. It's like, if time slowed down or stopped, we wouldn't perceive it. In fact time could be slowing or stopping regularley, but we'd still perceive it the same way.

Spidey wrote: ...So does that mean a flea has the same value as a human being, or that Hitler had the same value as the millions he had killed or terrorists have the same value as their victims?

Value relative to what?

Clue me in please.

Of course not and I think you know what I meant by that. Everything is relative and you and a dog, for example, have equal value.

Bee

Well if you and Hitler were drowning I would save you and not him.

If you and my dog were drowning I would save you first and then go back for my dog.

Spidey wrote:Well if you and Hitler were drowning I would save you and not him.

If you and my dog were drowning I would save you first and then go back for my dog.

I would save my dad first, my dog second, then go back for you.

Bee

Spidey wrote:Well if you and Hitler were drowning I would save you and not him.

If Hitler was drowning, I'd certainly save him on the basis that he would've had to have been resurrected! I sure as hell wouldn't let that pass me by just because some other random person was going to die.

Bee… your reply proves that you believe that one life can have more value than another, at least relative to you…if you didn’t you would save the closest to you, or the one in the most danger. (or sum such)

Thank god for Christians…they at least put human life over that of dogs.