Be a Supporter!
Response to: Science VS Religion Posted September 3rd, 2007 in Politics

At 9/3/07 03:38 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote: And an afterlife without God, how can that happen?

if the soul is eternal there is nothing preventing it from continuing without body or creator. and if the soul is eternal, it had no beginning, therefore it could not have had a creator. if the soul was not created, then no god is required for its current existence, and by extension, no god would be required for its countinued existence.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted September 3rd, 2007 in Politics

At 9/3/07 07:53 PM, SevenSeize wrote: Yes, this is quickly turning into politics in the lounge.

Let's talk about cheese instead.

cheese is awesome.

Response to: Romans of North America. Posted September 3rd, 2007 in Politics

every nation will fall simply because nothing is eternal. so to all you useless bastards with your "America is doomed" bullshit, shut the fuck and stop thinking you're so bloody clever.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted September 3rd, 2007 in Politics

At 9/2/07 11:58 PM, stafffighter wrote: My friends always manage to get a paintball right in that gap between your mask and the visor. And thanks to my hairline that's a big white target.

instant kill...i would just be mangled and bleeding.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted September 2nd, 2007 in Politics

if paintball is any indication of what sort of injuries occur in gun battles, my right lung would be a sieve.

as well as some (brachial) arterial bleeding, shattered scapulas, punctured intestines (and assorted abdominal and thoracic injuries) with a sprinkling of lower body injuries including a punctured foot. yay!
Response to: About the Friendly Fire Incident Posted September 2nd, 2007 in Politics

you put alot of effort in trying to put the blame on the non-American troops but even if it was the fault of the Americans i don't see how it is that big a problem. friendly fire is a fact of war, especially in modern warfare.

Response to: Hitler's Nazi religion Posted August 31st, 2007 in Politics

At 8/31/07 10:15 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote: Hitler was christian, but a new form of christian that was full of hatred and racism and aspects of other relligions.

just because its full of hatred and racism doesn't make it a new form or anything particularly different.

and believing in Atlantis, near flawless men and other fun things doesn't make one part of a new sect of Christianity. many Christians believe in Atlantis and most white supremacists are Christians, not some other version of it.
Response to: Hitler's Nazi religion Posted August 31st, 2007 in Politics

At 8/31/07 03:04 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote: Now who says that? Im a theist and I have never heard anybody say that, nor did that Idea ever pop into my head.

i've heard it said. it was in one of those "look who was an atheist and what evil they've done" thread.

and saying Hitler was Christian is hardly an attempt at bashing Christianity. (had to include it, some people are idiots)
Response to: Hitler's Nazi religion Posted August 31st, 2007 in Politics

At 8/31/07 02:49 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote: Well, he was a christian, but much of the stuf he believed in wasnt so christian.
You need to read this to really get it.
link

it was a mildly warped extremist Christianity. all of Hitler's occult projects were relatively secret so as not to create conflict with his image as the righteous God-fearing leader of an aryan, Christian Germany.

Response to: Hitler's Nazi religion Posted August 31st, 2007 in Politics

At 8/31/07 02:27 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote: Ive heard some people on the newgrounds BBS call hitler a christian and that WW2 was caused by religion.

That is wrong, I will tell you now what Hitler belived.

Hitler wasn't a Christian? i guess you've never read Mein Kampf, or heard any of his speeches for that matter.

Response to: Revived murder victims Posted August 31st, 2007 in Politics

At 8/31/07 12:05 AM, stafffighter wrote: Then they should stop using the term clinically dead. They're doctors. They should know you don't fuck around with that word.

they might, since reviving people whose hearts have stopped is relatively common. the definition of death is becoming rather unclear.
at the moment those who can't be saved and who aren't being kept alive artificially (his/her heart won't pump on its own and theres no brain function but those cells are still alive and well...is a pile of living cells dependant on machines a living human?) are the dead.

Response to: Rome Is On Fire Posted August 31st, 2007 in Politics

you got me all worked up for nothing.

don't fuck with the eternal city, buddy.
Response to: Revived murder victims Posted August 31st, 2007 in Politics

due to todays technology being clinically dead (respiratory and cardio-vascular functions have ceased) does not necessarily mean one is truly "dead". and considering that nothing is documented until a person is officialy declared "dead" (once all attempts to reanimate him/her have ceased) that person still only dies once.

Response to: Women vow world wide sex strike Posted August 30th, 2007 in Politics

At 8/27/07 10:51 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:
i don't think anyone dared tell them what they thought of one less breast.
Except Herecules and Thesues.

but they, like Chuck Norris, were not men, they were divine.

Response to: Hippies Posted August 29th, 2007 in Politics

At 8/25/07 11:08 AM, Boarean wrote: ...

all this bitching makes me wonder whether or not you're a closet hippie.

Response to: Revealed: The Undercover Wmd Posted August 29th, 2007 in Politics

At 8/29/07 09:25 PM, Ropedgag12345 wrote:
At 8/29/07 09:20 PM, SolInvictus wrote: no hablos ingles.

faggot.
?

i really don't know.

Response to: Comunism Posted August 29th, 2007 in Politics

At 8/29/07 06:45 PM, wisthekiller wrote: i know no-one wants to talk about it, but here i go.

this comunism you speak of reminds me of something known as communism.

useless fucking assholes.
Response to: Revealed: The Undercover Wmd Posted August 29th, 2007 in Politics

no hablos ingles.

faggot.
Response to: Women vow world wide sex strike Posted August 28th, 2007 in Politics

At 8/28/07 07:32 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: Differen't people hold thier alchohol differently Cellar.

!GRAH! off topic alcohol argument !GRAH!

Response to: Women vow world wide sex strike Posted August 27th, 2007 in Politics

At 8/27/07 10:38 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: Well, the Amazons had to mutilate themselves to reach a certain peak in thier fighting prowess.

i don't think anyone dared tell them what they thought of one less breast.

Response to: Women vow world wide sex strike Posted August 27th, 2007 in Politics

what about today's fighting women? or yesteryear's Amazons?

Response to: Blobal worming isnt the only proble Posted August 22nd, 2007 in Politics

At 8/22/07 12:50 PM, Cuppa-LettuceNog wrote: WHOO-WHOO! Here comes the parody train, last stop is y....

awww!1 Mad Ox stoppd in mdi sntanse!

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted August 22nd, 2007 in Politics

At 8/22/07 07:58 PM, SolInvictus wrote: think it's a Cuppa alt that started it so he could spend the rest of the thread spelling thinks in special ways?

spelling things*

stupid thread goned an'eated my brainses.
Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted August 22nd, 2007 in Politics

At 8/22/07 04:19 PM, reviewer-general wrote: Oh my fucking God . . . . . .

-----------------

Has everyone seen this?

think it's a Cuppa alt that started it so he could spend the rest of the thread spelling thinks in special ways?

Response to: Science VS Religion Posted August 21st, 2007 in Politics

At 8/20/07 02:02 PM, Elfer wrote: Nah. In real life things like the crusades weren't about religion, they just used that to trick people into fighting for their cause.

the leaders yes, but those fighting were either seaking salvation (since those who fought would supposedly be absolved of their passed digressions) or felt it was a good and proper thing to do, because of what they were told by their leaders.

Response to: Science VS Religion Posted August 21st, 2007 in Politics

At 8/20/07 01:30 PM, Memorize wrote: Now could I, for example, just replace the word "leaders" or "motherland" with "God" and claim it was caused by religion?

to a certain extent, it was an attempt to deify (in the sense of garnering absolute power). i was by no means trying to insinuate that the USSR merely created another religion and that religion itself is the problem. though the country was intended to be absolutley everything for the worker, above God and divine commandments, as there should be nothing else to occupy the mind and soul of the worker than his duty to the state.

it was more a philosophy than religion but it does give to the leaders the same powers and influence as would a god, or a divine ruler of old.

Response to: Science VS Religion Posted August 20th, 2007 in Politics

At 8/18/07 02:31 PM, Memorize wrote: 2 words: Soviet Union.

Have fun.

i'm not denying or trying to argue that atheists have not, do not and will not commit attrocities but there is a difference in the reasoning behind the Churches actions and those of the Soviet Union's.
the crusades, witch hunts, etc... openly used religion as an excuse for violence either because the ones calling for the violence truly believed their cause and means just or because they wished to gain weatlh and personal power. but in all these cases religion was clearly used as the tool to push these actions forward.
what is different from what the Soviet Union did is that at no point was atheism itself used as an excuse for the purges. the reasoning behind the oppression of religion was not to strengthen atheist influence in the USSR but to eliminate any possibility of organised subversion and to attempt to destroy anything that fell short of complete devotion to the state and its leaders. now of course at the end of the day, the result is that atheism (though it would seem to be more of a religion with human leaders as "gods") replaces religion simply because it is the only other option.

it's the difference between fighting "for God (or atheism)" and fighting "for Stalin/the motherland/the worker" etc...

a thread about ideology and it's uses would be an interesting one.
Response to: Science VS Religion Posted August 17th, 2007 in Politics

so Dre-Man went from proclaiming the superiority of nihilism and trusting only what can be concretely proven to stating that science and the supernatural are both equally valid seeing as what has been proven and tested by science is still merely belief as we cannot trust perception. interesting.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted August 16th, 2007 in Politics

damn Pearl Jam gets me nervous. all i want to do is listen to good music, not develop bipolar disorder.

Response to: Canada air force, no wai, yes wai Posted August 15th, 2007 in Politics

At 8/15/07 01:28 AM, LightandDark wrote: Cellardoor6 likes to bring down everything Canada tries to do

sure it wasn't Jos attempting to overhype a few planes?