heyrabbit

got a hammer of hope

coffeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

We can call atheism whatever we want. Does the "ism" suffix make atheism a belief? Doesn't matter right now. Whatever atheism is, you want people to change how they think. You believe your thinking is the truth, and their thinking is false. Now there's nothing wrong with thinking people are wrong & forming arguments against it. Thats healthy debate. But my point is that when you go to the point of saying things like "you should be forced to take a skill testing question before being allowed to give birth. "do you believe in god?". ", that is simply being intolerant. No not at all do i think fundamentalists are the only problem. Far from it!! Religion has caused many conflicts, wars, etc. throughout history. Moderates, fundamentalists, everything in-between. all i wanted to know before is why moderates are to blame & fundies not? They are both. This i pretty much agree with. I have a big problem with the way churches themselves do things. I was raised Roman Catholic, and the last sacrament is Confirmation, which we do in grade 6. Thats ridiculas. How can a child confirm his faith when he isn't of the age where he usually begins to question things his parents say. There should be a sacrament in the church when you are like 35 or something, when you are an adult & have gone through most of the phases of questioning your beliefs. Its so convienient that parents/church locks you into catholicism right before entering Jr. High School. And yeah i agree mostly with the whole "parent brain wash thing". But i think it goes hand-in-hand with everything else parents teach kids. Parents pass all their beliefs & lessons to their children, its hard for religious beliefs (being so powerful) not to be included, but its still no excuse. Why not teach them about all other beliefs & let them decide. I still stand by what i said, that parents aren't LYING to their kids. For me, i have thought about what school system i'd send my kids (if i have them). I went through the Roman Catholic school system & had very fun positive experience, and the religion really served me well growing up. But on the other hand, i reject much of what the church preaches & stands for now, so i'm hesitant to put my kid into that system. i hesitantly said that you might be, under definition, a bigot. You inferred that anyone who believes in God shouldn't be allowed to have babies. You called moderates "dangerous idiots". ad hominem. After your above quote, you continue to say: The "ism" in atheism makes it sound like a practice which is why so many people mistake it for that. it's no more of a practice than if you were to call yourself an amurdourist (someone who practices not killing people). I just made that up. anyway, I've talked about all that before. I really don't think people need to drastically change the way they think. it's really more about being honest, and changing how people react to what they think. Most people know the logical fallacies and everything that doesn't make sense regarding religious belief, but their cognitive dissonance is what's preventing them from responding to it in a rational way. smoking is a good example to give you an idea of that. people know what's wrong about it but they do it anyway. yes, extremists and moderates are both to blame. that's what I was saying from the start, but people were reluctant to agree. atheists can be blamed to some extent too. my goal really isn't to offend everyone. I'm sorry I have, but I think my belligerent comments make me look foolish more than anything, so I didn't think I'd offend too many people. those comments you mentioned were just stupid invidious remarks made just for the sake of rattling sabers. I don't actually think moderates are idiots. so I agree that those comments are stupid, but they were also facetious. and they aren't the extent of my opiion; they aren't even my opinion at all. they're a tiny fraction of what I've written. parents do lie. they not only abstain from teaching christianity objectively(because any attempt to do so would be viewed as blasphemous) they literally train kids to know god. this is lying because however delusional people are about god, most people will freely admit that it's a subjective truth. they train kids to 'know' god, not to 'believe' in god. believing is a result of it. and obviously people don't want to emphasize too much that it's a belief, because that assumes that there are other beliefs to be had. this is not like passing down every other belief, as you put it. it would be if parents took their kids to communist school every saturday to study why communist, say. but those sorts of things don't happen on the same scale as religious belief. you're definitely not obligated to debate at all. that's okay. but it won't be the last thread I make on the subject oppressing people would defeat the purpose entirely. and it wouldn't change beliefs, it would just suppress them. killing people would eliminate belief, but I'm not suggesting that either. the nazi point just demonstrates that you do agree that it's not pointless to object to organized, oppressive delusion. the actual fighting and motives is almost irrelevant to the point. the point is that people objected to genocide of a nation and they did so because the nazi antisemitism was predicated on delusional beliefs about the biology of race and eugenics. even if the allies all hated the jews, they were doing which is perceived as being ethical and virtuous, not pointless.

hahahah.

YES, don't feel sorry. lord of the rings was terrible for many reasons. I specifically hated because the endings took like half an hour. you know how normally a movie miht pan away slowly then fade out at the end, well LOTR would fade out to like 6 endings in one movie. terrible

beatles- hello,goodbye

veal +pasta

his talking to americans-loaded-question-thing was funny but I could never watch 22 minutes or the rick mercer report. that east coast humor is too silly sometimes. oh look a picture with penguins!! bahahah. or,look, rick mercer is in scuba gear, what a humorous situation! ahahah.

doesnt like math, or does, what the fuck do i know

this would be awesome, although I doubt it would be anything like 72. the officiating would be more like the olympics, so I'd guess that the russians would have an edge in that department. also, it's always better to have the underdog status in these situations. russia's chances of winning would be much greater if the last 4 games were to be in Canada.

english muffin

long live kiffy, myth to legend

actually, come to think of it, a lot of it probably had to do with the coolness of his videos. props to, whatever his name is

10 blond on blondesque

the breakfast club ;)

black eyed peas- where is the love

anagram = i ate sedgn(?)

I agree with matrix to a certain extent. I think it really depends on what your tastes are. since he was eccentric, some people will love him and some will hate him. kubrick should be appreciated for certain things but not others. his work seemed a lot like a painting than a film. his sets were deliberate, as was his crazy use of color and all the symbolism in the imagery, etc. so if you're impressed by the artsy fartsy stuff then I guess you'll like it. I appreciate it for that but I can't watch full metal jacket without getting bored, even though it's a good movie. same thing with a clockwork orange. and if I get bored, that doesn't impress me much. and it's not because I have a short attention span. eyes wide shit is my fav out of all of his. the only movie that comes to mind is Pulp Fiction. over-rated big time IMO

here's my lengthy 2 cents.(yes I know i like to bitch and moan) I disagree with matrix about character development. there's really no character development at all. we find out random things about their pasts, but the characters don't grow or change. they don't interact with each other and they don't act in a way that makes any sense. there's really no conflict between them (which is essential to any story. so if you're wondering why it's blah, that's why). it's like they're all using weed all the time. there's not even fixed settings. in most films you have distinct places where people, gather, you know, do to do stuff! but in this they just sit on random spots on the sand or walk around in the jungle. yeah they're on a deserted island, but there's not really a substantial camp or anything that's familiar other than their little huts which we rarely get a view of. It's frustrating for some people because it's like RPG game. everyone inanimately walks around and interacts in an autonomous, nonsensical way. This hasn't ruined the show yet because the strength of the show lies in the concept. Much like an alfred hitchcock or twilight zone episode, we all want to see what's so fucking special about the ending. how successful the show will be viewed in the end will depend largely on whether or not they somehow manage to bring everything together in a clever and purposeful way (all their pasts and all the weird shit that's happened). the trouble is that the longer they wait to tie up the mystery, the less likely it becomes that all the random, non-eventful episodes will have been worth watching. (if it's all going somewhere or of it really is like the Lost Writer's parody). What I think could happen is that people will stop watching, the show will get canceled, they'll be forced to tie it up early, and that will be an excuse for the ending not making any sense.

as I've said before, it's my opinion that religious peoples are intrinsically dangerous. And I actually do think that much of the world is delusional about god, and in a sense I do think humanity needs to save itself. That's quite an impertinent thing to say but let's keep it in perspective. I'm not the one claiming to know something that you don't know. it's the other way around. I want people to lose their beliefs. I'm not asking them to gain any new ones. there's a huge difference there. it seems as though you're still under the impression that fundamentalists are the only problem relating to religion. I've written quite a bit recently in trying to expel this fallacy and I don't think you responded to any of it, so I won't get into much detail right now. I might go back and quote myself if you'd like. but yes, I do think that moderates support and apologize for terrorists. the obvious example would be those in afhanistan, iraq, and pakistan who've aided in hiding osama bin laden and the taliban. not every person who witnessed or helped osama was an extremist. our society apologizes for terrorists by ignoring and making excuses for what causes their actions. When terrorists go on and say "I'm decapitating this man because of our jihad and in the name of allah" we have a tendency to ignore what they're telling us. why? because most of us are religious ourselves so we're obviously not going to want to blame the problem on religion, when it's the obvious answer. if the desire to have sex with children were considered a virtuous quality, but actually doing it were not, then it's really not hard to understand how this hypothetical society would have problems with pedophiles. I guess you ignored all the posts I've made trying to explain the connection between belief and action. Beliefs do hurt people. and I'm not preaching a belief, I'm denouncing beliefs. for the 6 billionth time, atheism is not a belief.

i dunno if MG is really hockey music. guns n roses is hockey music.

uhmmm, juice

it's a crap shoot anywway, in both conferences now