Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 2/21/14 01:18 PM, ASmallOstrich wrote:

I believe in handling yourself. Simple as that, I have no responsibility to take care of anyone that I don't want to, and that's how it should be. You talk about housing for the poor, and feeding the hungry, but all in all, I don't care about them, and why should I?

This is one of the fallacies of forced taxation and the welfare system holding people down and violating the balance of the "free market". I don't believe that the "free market" is a great system but I think that if it would be without Government influence that it could be a far better option than Big Government.

We should have the right to use what is ours for reasons that we choose on an individual basis. I agree, no corporate bailouts, but no individual bailouts either. Let the people fall, and they will see there is a problem, and fix it themselves. And kill or be killed was in the sense of hold your own, or fail, that's how it should be simple as that, why do I need to care, or worry about the guy next door through the forced taking of what is rightfully mine? Is spreading wealth not the same as thievery, just under the guise of tax?

We really can't care about others in this world when all we can do economically speaking is take care of ourselves and our family's. It costs Million's of dollars to retire with an acceptable level of dignity and comfort and if you legitimately worked for it than you are morally and ethically entitled to it and you should be rewarded. What people need to ask themselves honestly is how much value do I have to give to society ? Education and training need to be easily accessible and financially viable for all people so as to increase their individual value to society and in turn ramp up production, innovation and creativity. Why should people have to go into debt with the bank's in order to create more value for society ? Our jobs should not be to work and be in debt to the Banks, Government and Corporations rather we should be working for and with each other.

At 2/20/14 07:15 PM, Wriggle wrote:

He's actually pro American and wants to uphold the true values of what America was supposed to be. What America is today was not what it was intended to be. The Government hijacked your Country, your rights, and your banking system and even tried to conquer the world but it failed at that.

There is a difference between pro-American and pro U.S.

Don't get those 2 confused. I don't NEED a sheet of paper and a certain flag to know I have rights. These rights are god given- The are UNALIENABLE. I have them until they get taken away.

That's Natural Rights and yes I agree it's the way to be. Government will always try to limit and or take away peoples Natural Rights and replace them Legal Rights which is just another means of subjugation. People don't even recognize the root word in Government which of course is Govern - 2. to exercise a directing or restraining influence over; guide: the motives governing a decision. 3. to hold in check; control

U.S. = Voluntary union of NATION STATES.

Our state is out nation.

I don't know how long or well it would hold up as there is strengthen in numbers but I do agree that Big Government is no good and I completely understand the want and need to be sovereign from oppression and subjugation.

At 2/20/14 02:57 PM, Entice wrote:

By going out of your way to point out that you hate us you're diminishing the actions of others who act on that hate by, for example, beating innocent people.bic.

Hey we don't even know if these gay men were the instigators. For all we know the gay guy's that got beat could have bean popping off at the mouth about gay right's and acting like a flamer which in Russia is apparently grounds to get an ass whoppin placed upon you. If these gay guy's would STFU and stopped actin femmy and dressed like a man to blend in then they would be just fine and dandy.

At 2/20/14 03:38 PM, Razefan wrote:

At 2/20/14 12:15 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 2/20/14 11:56 AM, Angry-Hatter wrote: Well, I'm sorry that you're so anti-American.

He's actually pro American and wants to uphold the true values of what America was supposed to be. What America is today was not what it was intended to be. The Government hijacked your Country, your rights, and your banking system and even tried to conquer the world but it failed at that.

Hilarious. It's been like this the whole time. America was founded on the white mans right and you know it. If anything the US is the best it has ever been right now. The sad part is how bad that really is.

Don't know what the "white mans right" means. The US is not in a good spot at all right now. Look for things like rising gas prices and increased good and services cost as this will be a prime indicator that America no longer holds the World Reserve currency.

At 2/20/14 01:19 PM, BrianEtrius wrote: I think it's great that you're announcing your rebellion straight to the NSA and FBI.

See you in at least 18 months!

I don't think it's unlawful to talk about this matter.

At 2/20/14 11:06 AM, Angry-Hatter wrote:

At 2/20/14 04:26 AM, leanlifter1 wrote: They are the same.

They are different. One claims certainty about the nonexistence of god, while the other does not. Both lack a belief in god, but they arrive at that conclusion from different directions.

Honestly Light, this is starting to look like a lost cause. How do you reach someone who posts links that irrefutably disprove his own position, yet insists that they actually prove his case? I'm done trying to explain simple distinctions to this character, as he has proven time and time again that he is incomprehending in the face of nuance. If you'd like to keep flogging that dead horse, I wish you the best of luck.

Oh god LOL. You guy's once again are debating shades of gray seems to be popular here on NGS LOL. There's radical Atheism or Strong Atheism that claims no deities exist while soft Atheism claims the exact same fucking thing but these people with this mind set have more logic in that if proof existed that deities are real then they would naturally change their position. There is one meaning to Atheism but more than one individual mindset that may adhere to the Atheist logic but the meaning of Atheism does not change.

At 2/20/14 11:56 AM, Angry-Hatter wrote: Well, I'm sorry that you're so anti-American.

He's actually pro American and wants to uphold the true values of what America was supposed to be. What America is today was not what it was intended to be. The Government hijacked your Country, your rights, and your banking system and even tried to conquer the world but it failed at that.

At 2/20/14 11:33 AM, Gario wrote:

At 2/19/14 09:37 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 2/19/14 07:48 PM, Gario wrote:

There was a control group of 29 non-homophobic males (out of 64 total), so they did have a baseline to compare against. I personally think the only .

Rhetorical nonsense and non conclusive.

Wow, you are unintelligent. You may not have understood my post because of your inability to comprehend scientific jargon, but I was agreeing with you in the post, you dumbass. You dismissed it because you literally didn't understand it. Re-read the post and you'll see that my point was that the experiment was inconclusive given the data that was extracted. Or you won't see it because your level of comprehension seems to be insignificant.

Wow your real mean man I would like an apology please. We both agree then that it's retorical nonsence and conclusive. It's like this sharpnova put it well in one of his posts "if someone hates X, they must be X" and this is so wrong that it's really not even funny it's without logic. Oh and I was not implying that your post was nonsense and non conclusive rather that this so called homo phobe testing was ridiculous. Shit homophobe is not even a word it was a term coined by someone that was Gay and pissed off.

At 2/20/14 11:26 AM, Wriggle wrote:

What are your views of secession, Newgrounds? Any thoughts? Lets talk about it.

Delusions of grandeur. They are gonna roll over you with a Tank so no you can protect shit . The Government wins.

At 2/20/14 04:17 AM, Light wrote: lol, thanks aviewaskewed for taking Tankdown to task for lumping all atheists together as if they were the same....

They are the same. You are debating shades of gray is all.

At 2/20/14 01:23 AM, Warforger wrote:

At 2/19/14 09:37 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: Rhetorical nonsense and non conclusive.

.....This is the definition of delusional. Leanlifter, where are your sources for what you believe?

You have given nothing of value to the topic. Not Philosophical or moral or intellectual value of any kind. Where are your sources for what you believe to be true is it Government ? Do you want to be controlled ? You are a very bitter an ill tempered person. Please try to use logic and rational if you wish to converse in the future.

At 2/19/14 07:48 PM, Gario wrote:

There was a control group of 29 non-homophobic males (out of 64 total), so they did have a baseline to compare against. I personally think the only .

Rhetorical nonsense and non conclusive.

At 2/19/14 07:05 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 2/19/14 06:25 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: The article was invalided because they used closet homosexuals and not straight males

Um... That's like saying that a study determining whether a set of hills count as mountains or not is flawed because the hills they used were mountains and not hills.

No it's like using the wrong tool for the job. If I am trying to prove that chocolate ice cream tastes like vanilla ice cream and I use vanilla ice cream that is colored brown then I proved nothing and my research is botched. I hate the Taliban therefor I must be a terrorist.

At 2/19/14 06:38 PM, JackFrost23 wrote: There are no separate parties in State, Local, and Federal congresses, only people who lap up the milk of lobbyists. Give them enough money and they could swing either way they wished. This is what we are seeing in Congress today.

Allot of very rich motherfuckers in Congress today. Just sayin !

At 2/19/14 06:13 PM, AxTekk wrote:

At 2/19/14 06:09 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: You are searching for the wrong answers. You are trying to erroneously use rhetorical nonsense to lay claim that all straight men are gay

Of course they aren't. All I'm trying to say is the people who obsess over the wrongness of homosexuality

Nobody here said that homosexuality is wrong well I didn't at leased. What is wrong is pushing baseless ill informed rhetoric on people to try and push a false ideal. The article was invalided because they used closet homosexuals and not straight males and they had no control group let alone evidence that the experiment even took place.

At 2/19/14 05:38 PM, AxTekk wrote:

At 2/19/14 04:19 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 2/19/14 10:53 AM, AxTekk wrote:

At 2/18/14 08:25 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: Who says it's Science ?

Anyone remotely familiar with the empirical method brah

Sorry but posting one paragraph with no references or experiments, methods or spreadsheets, tests, or data-log's or a double blind clinical trials is not science it's rhetorical nonsense.

You clearly aren't familiar with pubmed lmao

The study is well established, let me google the experimenters names and the year for you.

http://my.psychologytoday.com/files/u47/Henry_et_al.pdf

Oh, look first result!

You are searching for the wrong answers. You are trying to erroneously use rhetorical nonsense to lay claim that all straight men are gay but the problem is that you are misinformed and just looking for any information that makes you feel good about your sexual preferences no matter how bogus it might be. A gay person can hide behind Government bureaucracy and affirmative action all they want but that does not make gay's a victim, others do not make gay's a victim only gay's make gay's a victim because you have a choice to make. Choosing to be gay is a causality from social pressers I outlined in my last post. I suggest you read it as it will help you understand why and how people are the way they are. Don't try and push your opinions on homosexuality and throw rhetorical garbage in my face please.

At 2/19/14 11:34 AM, ASmallOstrich wrote:

Hand outs solve nothing, ...

It would solve many issues and stabilize allot of needs that would go unmet or under cut for allot of people including Health Care, Housing, Food and clothing. Once these are met then self actualization can be achieved and the economy will flourish. It's as simple as that.

basic nature shows kill or be killed.

Whens the last time Americans lived in basic nature or are you trying to talk psychology with me ? I think in modern society we have something called a Police force to protect and serve the Innocent. Problem is the Government has a monopoly on violence and privatized Policing would be much more effective as to trump stagnancy/corruption and promote competition to achieve and maintain moral and ethical excellence within policing/security.

Humanity's flaw is our want to help those who can't function in a competitive society.

That's a very broad sweeping generalization of over 7 Billion individual's. You will have to elaborate much more than that to make a valid point.

Limited government yes, cash handouts no.

So no Governmental bailout's to Corporations I agree. No Governmental subjugation payments to other countries I agree. Limited Government is perhaps the only thing that will save America from economic collapse at this point.

At 2/19/14 10:53 AM, AxTekk wrote:

At 2/18/14 08:25 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: Who says it's Science ?

Anyone remotely familiar with the empirical method brah

Sorry but posting one paragraph with no references or experiments, methods or spreadsheets, tests, or data-log's or a double blind clinical trials is not science it's rhetorical nonsense.

I'd like to say I don't think you're homophobic

I am cause I have an issue with any Homosapien man or woman that would try to shove a foreign object up my rectum and try and call it a good time. I also have a phobia of getting a hernia but these aforementioned conditions do not mean I am gay rather just means I am comfortable using my rectum as it was designed and intended which is for defecation and the passing of gas. The article you posted is flawed and invalid because it is not based on the scientific method but instead on rhetorical nonsense as it states that straight men got aroused by homosexual erotica which would mean the test was biased because they chose only homosexual males or (closet homosexuals) as test subjects and not straight males.

Choosing to be Gay is a learned behavior just like everything in life. For example an individual is not inherently born Jewish they learn it because people are a product of the environment they are born into.

Really? So you could choose to enjoy sucking dick?

You could enjoy swinging a sledge hammer in the sand for all I care so long as it does not hurt or impose upon others.

The idea of a rasa tabla model of psychology was big in early philosophy but it's been pretty comprehensively debunked. Religion, culture etc. is 100% artifice but we are definitely born with the seeds to be certain people within us.

Genetic makeup only takes one so far. Social pressers, Family, Government, Religious dogma, Money, Media, Education system, and "the status quo" are powerful forces of influence upon all people especially young people in adolescence in their developing years. We are all born into this world on the same clean innocent slate however it is the above denoted factors that typically to some degree create a neurosis inside us all. The degree to which this neurosis affects us is up to the individual's choices made.

Being gay really isn't easy right now.

That's an individual's choice. These gay men that got beat up in Russia did so on their own accord. They gave the power to these bully's by falling into the bullies trap a trap that is upheld by the status quo. Everyone has a need to fit in, to love and be loved, achieve self actualization, safety, security etc and putting a label "Gay" on any human in pursuit of these basic fundamentals of healing and prosperity toward the human condition needs to ask the question why.

At 2/18/14 11:59 PM, Samuraikyo wrote:

At 2/18/14 11:00 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 2/18/14 10:50 PM, Samuraikyo wrote:

Lousiana is one of the few states that not only blocked the AHCA from coming into the state, but they also did not expand medicaid to it's people so everyone here basically got screwed into either ultra high rates of Obamacare or if the article is true, government loopholes and greed due to the vast confusion. I'm not 100% sure but as long as they have the insurance this shouldn't be happening. I've never heard of this until now.

I was under the impression that an act of congress overruled any and all state powers. Also since when have Insurance companies not tried to fuck around it's policy holders from time to time ?

Well you CAN get the Affordable healthcare here through the healthcare website or phone, but the rates are going to be extremely high because of the active blocking they have been doing (We tried it through the website but then eventually went through our parish). It's literally costing Louisiana more tax dollars blocking it, then if they were to just allow it. This is why any semi-intelligent person or someone savy in politics, hates Jindal/Vitter.

So it's not that it isn't being offered here, it's just the rates are really high. And given the really stupid people who live here, they probably believe it's all Obama's fault. Granted the HIV story is true, but i've not heard anything locally. I mean like I said, if the story is true, it's related to the insurance companies fucking around and being assholes with loopholes they may have been granted because of the active blocking by our state.

Don't take this the wrong way but your Government is Quasi fucked from both ends State and Federal. This kind of garbage really pisses me off because the people have little to no power to challenge the oppressors. You must be able to challenge your Congressman on the communal level I mean this was supposed to be setup as a democratic republic for fuck sakes with freedom, equal decision making and happiness for all. Where did the real American values go what about the god dam America dream ?

At 2/18/14 10:50 PM, Samuraikyo wrote:

Lousiana is one of the few states that not only blocked the AHCA from coming into the state, but they also did not expand medicaid to it's people so everyone here basically got screwed into either ultra high rates of Obamacare or if the article is true, government loopholes and greed due to the vast confusion. I'm not 100% sure but as long as they have the insurance this shouldn't be happening. I've never heard of this until now.

I was under the impression that an act of congress overruled any and all state powers. Also since when have Insurance companies not tried to fuck around it's policy holders from time to time ?

At 2/18/14 08:56 PM, WallofYawn wrote:

At 2/18/14 08:41 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: Having more Oil reserves means having the ability to outlast and out gun the other team it means the difference between victory and defeat. Why the hell do you think the US is trying to secure so many Oil reserves. Oil is the life blood of this crazy society we have created and it is the life blood of war.

I see. Well, hell...you've shattered my argument to pieces. Good point indeed sir. I tip my hat off to you. Didn't consider that, honestly. :)

Note that the Americans hold the world reserve currency which is what almost every other country in the world must convert to in order to buy Oil this is referred to as the US Petrodollar. Iran has refused to use the Petrodollar which is why US is attacking them as well as Indian, China and Russia have refused the Petrodollar. This is a big problem as it devalues the American dollar and will in turn decrease the purchasing power of the average American.

At 2/18/14 08:19 PM, WallofYawn wrote: Oil would actually be an example of Economic superiority, not military superiority.

See now you are forgetting that Wars take unimaginable amounts of Oil to fuel and maintain the Tanks, Airplanes, Personal Carries, Ships, Submarines, Helicocksuckers, drones, uniforms, feed the personal/house, make the Ammo, Guns, etc. Having more Oil reserves means having the ability to outlast and out gun the other team it means the difference between victory and defeat. Why the hell do you think the US is trying to secure so many Oil reserves. Oil is the life blood of this crazy society we have created and it is the life blood of war.

At 2/18/14 08:22 PM, WallofYawn wrote: Here's an idea, stemming from other thread but thought deserved its own topic:

What if wars were fought using drones, or robots, fighting other drones/robots, on both sides, without human casualties?

Would you still be anti-war, if no one dies? I personally, think this is the way warfare is headed anyway. There will always be those who threaten human life, but what if it became unpopular to do so, and we found other ways of fighting wars/settling disputes?

Thoughts?

I don't think many sane people want war at all. Mech wars would be a stupid waste of resources just like normal wars. Really I think war is already fairly mechanized. Mostly wars are fought and won with bombs now in days. War is stupid and I would not want to make a decision on how they are fought.

At 2/18/14 07:50 PM, AxTekk wrote:

At 2/18/14 07:46 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: That's not science that is rhetorical nonsense. Were the men tested closet homosexuals ? The only somewhat logical hypothesis would be to entertain the notion that homosexuality could be mother natures why of population control.

No. No, it is science.

Who says it's Science ?

I'd like to say I don't think you're homophobic

I am beginning to think you wish I was.

- I think you're just a lil ignorant, and that if you got to know some *normal* LGBT people you'd find us a lot more bearable. I'd say 90% of us don't rub it in peoples faces, we just do our daily stuff like standard human beings. Having said that, I will never judge a gay man for acting feminine because I understand how difficult it can be trying to fit into a society that has deemed you without purpose.

I don't know WTF a transgender individual is supposed to be is that a hermaphrodite ? That said I have known a few Gay men but they were actually men and you would never know they liked male company unless they told you. I have no problem with these types so long as they don't make a pass at me.

Hell, the camp gay people are only acting out the role that you gave them.

That's a cop out.

You tell kids that gay people are flamboyant, effeminate fashionistas? Don't be surprised when the gay kids can't see themselves as anything else.

Choosing to be Gay is a learned behavior just like everything in life. For example an individual is not inherently born Jewish they learn it because people are a product of the environment they are born into.

At 2/18/14 07:39 PM, WallofYawn wrote:

More like every other country is threatened by the US. I hardly think that Korea has enough Military personal and highly trained personal in general let alone weapons and technology to make a stand against Canada let alone the US LOL.::::::::::

All other comments aside, I want to clarify for you, that NK DOES have a large military for it's size, they DO have lots of weapons and WMD, and they are backed up by China. NK isn't the immediate threat, but being allied with communist China means you can basically consider the Chinese Army the same as NK's army. One and the same.

We invade NK, and we deal with China, who outnumber us 3 to 1, are better trained, better equipped and more willing to die for their cause. Go and watch a video on Chinese military on youtube. They make us look like a joke.

Read my last post. Those who control and secure the most Oil reserves wins any war pending the fact that the must command the biggest and baddest Military. The US holds all the cards the Oil the Military and the control. This is just the way it is.

At 2/18/14 07:11 PM, AxTekk wrote:

At 2/18/14 05:56 PM, sharpnova wrote: Everything you just said falls right under the umbrella of what sheep are led to believe by the mass media.

And it's not even a remotely sophisticated view.

And it happens to be backed by empirical science.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8772014

You're honestly such a cunt, I really don't mind being judged by you.

That's not science that is rhetorical nonsense. Were the men tested closet homosexuals ? The only somewhat logical hypothesis would be to entertain the notion that homosexuality could be mother natures why of population control.

At 2/18/14 07:18 PM, AxTekk wrote:

At 2/17/14 06:19 PM, X-Gary-Gigax-X wrote: I see this subforum of newgrounds as the underworld of Hades, a grim and gloomy land of shadow, where poor lost souls wander lost in the darkness of t...

best fucking post 2014, and it's only february

The irony of this post is astounding. The ignorance remarkable.

At 2/18/14 06:48 PM, ASmallOstrich wrote:

At 2/17/14 03:42 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 2/17/14 05:18 AM, ASmallOstrich wrote:

At 2/17/14 01:40 AM, xxxcreep wrote: At 2/16/14 11:14 PM,

The problem with this type of thinking is that "The Economy" should never trump or interfere with the health of Humans. Canada has less economic troubles than the US and Canada has better health care than the US as does France and the UK and Sweden, Denmark etc. The affordable Care act is more about lining the pockets of a few people rather than providing excellent health care for everyone. If you don't have your health than all the money in the world means fuck all to you. Health is infinitely more valuable than money. Health is priceless.

I don't care if its not directly related to me, why should I? Money, though it's being misused and the entire system of it reworked, is supposed to be a marker of work put towards your country/society, and your money, or work, should be put towards who/what you want, not what the state decides. Universal healthcare is just another arm of the government in your pocket,

Or we could do it this way. Limited Government that provides the bare minimum and grants $20,000 dollars a year to each citizen to be put toward anything you want. Smart people will use that money to invest into the health care of their choosing. Police and security forces will also be up for grabs on the "Free Market" so use that 20 grand wisely. Will the "Free Market" be able to regulate and control the masses without total anarchy or are we civil and smart enough to Govern ourselves on the "Free Market" ?

At 2/18/14 06:40 PM, Angry-Hatter wrote:

At 2/18/14 05:33 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: A raging homophobe that does not outwardly hate on gay men does not change the fact that they are in fact a homophobe. The reality here is that homosexually is most defiantly among us in society but deities are not. I am not challenging ones faith in a deity/s rather I am using logic that ones faith in deity/s cannot be proven or tested. Once again words fail because they can be up to a matter of opinion.

Of course, but that is not the question. Just because someone uses flawed and fallacious logic to make an argument does not automatically mean that the point they are arguing is incorrect. That's called the argument from fallacy.

I am not using an argumentative fallacy I am using logic. The meaning of Atheism still means the opposite of Theism and if you construe the meaning of either the other is invalid.

Consider the following. Let's assume that every single claim made by religion throughout human history has been false, that no human being has ever been in contact with any supreme being or deity, and all claims of supernatural occurrences have natural explanations behind them. In other words, nothing supernatural has ever occurred on the planet Earth.

Lets forget assumption and realize the facts. The fact of reality is there are Peyote plants scattered all around the area in where Moses witnessed the burning bush or whatever the fuck he though he seen LOL. Lets use logic in that he was probably high as fuck on Peyote and misinterpreted events as some sort of god like experience. Oh I don't know what happened shit it must be the God's.

Assuming this, would it be safe to assume that no supernatural deity's exist or have at some point existed?

Not at all heck I have had some profound experiences that could be said to be very spiritual on magic mushrooms but does that mean I should lie to every one and tell them I spoke to God ?

The answer is no. The religious folk may be completely full of it when they make the claim that there is a god (or gods), that is, they have no logical reason to believe that it's true. BUT, there's still the possibility that a god exists IN SPITE of this.

I am reserving the right to say that we don't understand what the hell we are talking about or how to deal with it.

Radio waves cannot be witness with the human eye or touched, tasted smelled etc but we would both agree they are real.

Yeah, because we have been able to invent instruments that are able to measure different kinds of waves. There's a preponderance of evidence that suggests that radio waves exist.

Perhaps the Human body includes a built in antenna that allows us to enter in other realms that are both hear and not here kinda like radio waves. This antenna can be called the Pineal gland and third eye Chakra.

That said I personally don't believe in stories written by man rather I believe there is an energy pulsing through the universe and that this energy has been misinterpreted through allegories.

I find that the explanation is much simpler than that. Human senses and reasoning abilities are not perfect. We are in fact very prone to imagine things. Our ability to empathize and recognize intentions in other creatures sometimes misfire. Sometimes we believe that intelligence and intent exists where none exists, that is, we athropomorphize inanimate objects. A famous example is how humanity has throughout the ages worshiped the sun as a deity with a personality and agenda. No outside phenomenon needed, we're just a bunch of flawed primates.

Perhaps the Son of God is a personified allegory and is really spelled Sun.

That doesn't mean that I KNOW for certain that life doesn't exist elsewhere. I couldn't possibly know that. I'm open to evidence to the contrary.

I know for a fact that life exists outside of this realm in the Galaxy Zeta Reticuli but you will have to have faith that I am telling you the truth and that one day you will know for a fact that it's real.

Well I hope your mind is open to the vast possibilities of this crazy place we live in. Heck we don't even know if the universe is real just that we have been told it is. We could be in a Truman show type thing.

Indeed. I can't even know for certain that anyone other than me has consciousness. I might be a brain in a vat getting fed a simulated computer program, and everyone else is just a soulless computer program. Occam's razor instructs that I should go with the theory that makes the fewest assumptions however, which is why I believe that it's more likely that the world as I perceive it is an accurate representation of what reality actually looks like.

Well we all know that this reality exists because we all agree that it's real and that quantification.

I wish God would be proven fact cause it would make life so dam simple to live.

Why would it? All moral conundrums we have today would still be here tomorrow, even if we could prove that a god existed. Even if that god came out with a definite opinion on moral questions, that still wouldn't mean much, because moral reasoning must stand or fall on its own merits. The god could come out against gays, but that wouldn't make gay bashing moral.

If a supreme being has absolute control over your fait then I would suggest to do what it asks of you.

You can't, I can't, nor can anyone else. You cannot prove a negative. Are you telling me that you KNOW that god or gods do not exist? How do you know?

I know that the Bible is a misinterpretation and allegory with parables written by man which tells me it's full of lies cause men like to control shit.

Forget the Bible. The Bible is obviously not an accurate description of reality, as made evident by its innumerable inconsistencies and inaccuracies.

Exactly. It's a logical fallacy that can be 100% up to a matter of opinion.

The Bible being wrong has ultimately no bearing on the question "is there a god (or gods)?" The Bible might be a complete fantasy, and gods could still exist. The two are not mutually exclusive.

I believe God put the Bible there to test mans faith.

At 2/18/14 06:00 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 2/18/14 05:50 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: A world not based on solid moral and ethical fiber is destined for corruption and hurt.

Corruption is a concept based solely on morality.

Ah yes but but corrupt morals are not a solid foundation to base sound logic. Can morals be corrupt sure they can so does that mean we throw morals completely out the window because some humans with a neurosis cant ascertain between right and wrong ? Rather I think morally speaking we have an obligation to correct or bring at leased bring to light the neurosis affecting people in power today for the betterment of the many not the few with the neurosis.