Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 8/24/05 10:52 PM, JusticeofSarcasm wrote: Where the fuck is UNpossible (aka EGA)?

The parrots got him.

At 8/24/05 12:52 AM, mikemill123 wrote: with the divorice rate like it is now Its not a bad idea for anyone to sign one, unless your the one going into a marriage with no money.

The divorce rate is the way it is because there are people who need pre-nups. If you are concerned enough about the future of the commitment you're entering enough to have a legal contract drafted then perhaps you should rethink the whole thing.

At 8/23/05 10:02 PM, CartesianDiver38 wrote: i know when u first get married u may think the marriage will last forever but what if they guy fucks up somehow and then the girl just divorces his rich ass and gets half

And you're saying that's unfair?

At 8/23/05 09:56 PM, stafffighter wrote: Yes, but they will be busy dealing with stafffighter, a wounded loner with a secret and a beat up leather jacket, will they unravel the mystery of why he didn't capitalize his name?

Needs an eye patch.

My wife and I didn't sign one or even contemplate it for two reasons: First we are both poor college students and aren't worth a nickel and second, why would I bother marrying her if I thought there was any chance I would need a pre-nup? The problem with our society isn't a lack of pre-nups, it is a lack of thoughtful consideration when deciding to spend the rest of your life with someone.

Oh yeah... I forgot about 'splodin heads.

At 8/23/05 03:23 AM, -LazyDrunk- wrote: Do tell, what is your sentence?

I don't think It would be a good idea to say. I was in the kitchen stirring the macoroni and cheese and then I heard her yell "what the hell" from the other room. The question I have is why in the hell was I the one making dinner.

At 8/22/05 09:11 PM, NumaHater666 wrote: Wow, BeFell, you took that waaaaay too seriously. Someone had their feelings hurt, huh?

No, your argument was bad and I pointed it out, that's what we do here.

I have never read Dawkins, but thanks for helping me out on that one, I'll have to check it out. Oh, and before you get all huffy, remember that the theory doesn't apply to those who actively attempt to convert.

I'm sorry disagreeing with you is "huffy," are you sure you're not taking it waaay too seriously?

I made very clear that it was just my opinion (or st least tried to), and I didn't call religion a virus, simply that it spreads compulsively, much like a disease.

"I didn't mean to offend, I was simply describing it in the offensive terms possible."

May I state that while the basic tenets set forth in the bible are old ideas, there are newer and newer ways to recruit coming forth all the time. New "interpretations" of religious values allow for the same old ideas to be applied to new things without any thought to the possiblity of updating such ideas as the outdated and hateful anti-gay stance.

Why didn't you say that?

In regards to your flame on the childhood issue,

Umm... I disagreed with you, I didn't flame you.

I'd like to point out that what I have to say is not always true; just as with any theory it is not an absolute. However, residing in a religious household growing up is a huge factor in most cases of development of faith. Though you point out a wonderful argument, the flaw lies in that you state it as though it was the precise opposite of what I said, when in reality it was pretty much a corrollary of the same idea.

So your theory applies only some of the time but you still find it reasonable to use as evidence to support your claim?

Also, please bear in mind I am talking about every sect that could be construed as a religion, including atheism (of course minus any statement about God).

So what exactly is the point you are trying to make? People develop ideas as they grow rather than following a set mind frame from birth? Is anything that we is not a natural part ourselves and our phsyche thus assigned virus like qualities. I could apply the basic principles of your argument to anything from NASCAR to cherry pie.

At 8/22/05 08:54 PM, stafffighter wrote: A few years ago a law was made here that while you can drive at 16 you can't have a passenger untill you're 18. To me that was just blantently some law maker who didn't date in highschool making sure no one else did

Boy, you have an exscuse for everything.

At 8/22/05 08:30 PM, seventy-one wrote:

At 8/22/05 08:28 PM, FBIpolux wrote: Anyway, I was thinking about this : Young people drives so bad. The age for the driving liscence should be 18 or 20.

Didn't they change it to 18, awhile ago?

No your parents are just lying to you to shield you from the harshness of the real reason they don't want you to drive.

Basically you're an idiot and the idea of you behind the wheel of a car frighetness them to the point of soiling themselves.

At 8/22/05 08:14 PM, NumaHater666 wrote: This post is not a personal attack, nor is it an attempt to change anyone's opinion, it is a sincere effort to at least ask someone to think about what is often taken for granted.

My Theory of Viral Religion states that when a religion is constructed with an intrinsic nature including the active attempt at conversion of non-believers, it becomes viral, infecting, if you will, anyone without the proper means to fend it off.

Funny this seems a lot like the work of Richard Dawkins which one might have encountered in a basic critical thinking class. Of course your version is so narrow minded and full of holes I'm sure it's just a coencedence.

Nowhere is this statement more true than with developing children and their faith-based growth. I have had a number of people tell me that children are born believing in God and lose that faith later in life, rather than the other way around. I do not agree, because parents already infected by that religion will have the first (and, in many cases the only) chance to shape that child's world view regarding faith. If you never took a child to church, never preached at them or forced them to pray as you do, then when they were thirteen told them that if they do not follow this specific set of rules set by an invisible man in the sky they will go to hell, they'd immediately assume you had lost your mind. Furthermore, if that were true, every child would be born believing in the same god.

Are you familiar with the concept of conversion? There are many examples of children who grow up in non religious environments and encounter religion in their teens or adult years who become full believers. There are also many cases of children being brought up in religious homes and abondoning the faith of their parents. Too claim that religion has to be forced upon people from early childhood is foolish and simply not true.

As far as all children being born with a faith in God that could very well be true but they certainly would not harness the understanding to act in such a capacity and the belief could easily be shunned or manipulated by the environment the child is raised in.

This theory extends to the emotionally unstable as well. Those who are roped into cults or more mainstream religion usually begin to do so because they were approached by an infected host while they were fragile, confused and desperately in need of something to believe in. The host will do their most earnest in attempting to transfer their beliefs into this person, because part of many religions is to do so, and thus...another being is infected.

This statement prejudicial and ignores the fact that free will is still a factor. You speak as if religion were some sort of predator waiting to snatch people up as soon as they let their guard down. Even those who are unstable still have choice.

I do not wish to be misunderstood here. I am not assigning a moral value to the practicing of religion, I am simply stating my observations regarding how in the modern world religions which have not changed with society as the years go by can still flourish. Thank you for reading, and I would love to hear any rebuttal you may have.

You seem to contradict yourself here by claiming religion is something unchanging which is not like a virus at all. A virus is constantly mutating and searching for a way to infect in any matter it can. By your assertion that religion remains a constant one could argue that is evidence of an inherent truth that draws people to it rather than some malicous disease.

Have you ever written something about somebody in the lounge assuming that person would never read it only to find them reading it the next day and then you got in trouble?

Ok, she isn't in the mood so I'm going to do the dishes, aparently...

At 8/20/05 06:50 PM, JusticeofSarcasm wrote:

At 8/20/05 06:41 PM, Zen_Gaijin wrote:

At 8/20/05 06:38 PM, TheShrike wrote:

At 8/20/05 12:37 PM, Proteas wrote: wookatdakitty!

Oh shit... he's gone furry on us!

Damn that pic is so friggin cute.

Must...resist...cuteness....of....... Ooooooooooooooooh pretty kitty.

That's not so cute, look it's Butters in a bear suit, that's the cutest thing in the world isn't it?

...

Fuck you guys, I'm gonna go have sex with my wife.

I hate Asians girls, they are always babbling in their incoherent pokemon speak and whining because they can't reach anything higher than five feet.

At 8/18/05 10:26 PM, MALforPresident wrote: have you read "Origin" its about wolverine's beginning. though contrary to what i was expecting, it didn't in any way ruin the whole mystery part about him, because it just opens up more mystery.

apparenly he's 187 years old

He didn't originate from Australia did he? The guy who did the voice acting in Pryde of the X-Men called Toad a dingo.

Everybody knows that Stan Lee inserted Wolverine in the '70s as the token hoser in order to convince young Canadian children to buy his comic books.

I have the entire X-Men the Animated series collection, thank you E-Bay. It even has this freaky thing made in '89 that features Wolverine with an Australian accent. My knee hurts because somebody ran me over...

At 8/18/05 08:51 PM, BrickMurus wrote: ...

STFU N00B

At 8/18/05 09:39 PM, john_waters wrote: I can't think of anyone I really, truly hate.

*clears throat*

At 8/16/05 10:37 PM, -Illustrious- wrote: Was that submission that you voted on under judgement?

Shh... it's cute when he thinks he's smart.

I got a new laptop today and an x-ray.

It's only a problem with people who cheat the system. If I'm not mistaken that requires two IP adresses. I would think B/P points wouldn't be worth that much effort.

At 8/15/05 08:27 PM, TheShrike wrote:

At 8/15/05 08:07 PM, BeFell wrote: I WAS RUN OVER TODAY!!!

Stop wearing teh biggles suit in public.

But it keeps me warm and mothers won't let their children come near me.

In other news I am very pissed off that on the same day I reach 9 voting power they took away my ability to see how big of impact my huge ban penis makes.

This is the first time I've taken almost full advantage of the 40 kb limit, I think it's probably my best so far.

I WAS RUN OVER TODAY!!!

I was peddling my bike home from work minding my own business when I rode in front of a Chevy Blazer sitting at the intersection waiting to make a right turn when all of the sudden he floored it into my back tire and ran it over. I was able to bail and even landed on my feet so I could stand and watch my frame tear a hole in his sidewall.

So we swapped info then I walked my bike to the repair shop that was conveniatly located just up the block.

My Dad owns a trucking company with trucks that pull fifty five foot four axle trailers and weigh 98,000 pounds when fully loaded. Is it really sad that the largest vehicle I have ever driven is the 10X14 UHAUL my wife's friend rented today to move stuff from her storage unit to her dorm room?

But what about the poor people who are too dumb to be get their GPA above 2.5 so they are offered no financial aide? WORKING FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS AND SAVING IS TOO HARD!!!

At 8/13/05 06:53 PM, capn_g wrote: Maybe so they could power themselves cheaply while maintaining a saleable resource to generate export profits from for generations to come? Just a thought.

Nuclear energy is cheaper? I think they just have to dig oil out of the ground refine it and burn it. Nuclear energy is much more complex and expensive. Besides they have a shitload of oil I don't think they have to worry about running out.

If you really believe that they truly are just developing their nuclear capablilities purely for energy production whithout any thought of producing a weapon then good luck to you.

At 8/13/05 06:47 PM, PhysicsMafia wrote:

At 8/13/05 06:40 PM, BeFell wrote:

At 8/13/05 06:35 PM, Angry_Jerk wrote: I was talking about:

You could always try quoting who you're talking to.

i think he was using my quote as an explination of what he was trying to say

I was speaking to the fact that he should have quoted you when he was reponding to you rather than burying it in a response to me. Most people I would have realized he wasn't talking to me but I assumed he was just some new guy going off on a tangent.

At 8/13/05 06:56 PM, bryanzuber wrote: The Moral: Pissing off a bunch of third world countries with slavery and genocide will catch up with you sooner or later.

Who exactly have we pissed off with slavery and genocide? I think that's the sort of thing I might have heard about.

GET A HAIR CUT HIPPIE!!!!

At 8/13/05 06:35 PM, Angry_Jerk wrote: I was talking about:

You could always try quoting who you're talking to.

At 8/13/05 06:21 PM, PhysicsMafia wrote: well if he was running then he was resisting arrest and force was required to aprehend him

I agree, your post just made it seem like you though the police should be able to beat people because of the circumstances of their crime.