1

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A stance against the modern woman.

« on: September 04, 2010, 02:53:02 PM »

There is no agreed-upon criteria:Society must evaluate and judge each case and idea.

Judge the cases/ideas by what, though?  How do you decide whether the benefits are worth the cost?

That's up to each individual to decide. I've clearly already shown my personal, subjective criteria.

Well, if you're trying to convince us that half the population must be stripped of certain rights, you need to show how decreased birthrates are directly attributable to the woman's rights movement, and you need to persuade us that these decreased birthrates are a bad thing.

2

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A stance against the modern woman.

« on: September 03, 2010, 07:06:26 PM »

There is no agreed-upon criteria:Society must evaluate and judge each case and idea.

Judge the cases/ideas by what, though?  How do you decide whether the benefits are worth the cost?

3

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A stance against the modern woman.

« on: September 03, 2010, 01:23:58 PM »

In certain cases, yes.

What sort of cases?

The OP describes a pretty good case.

I mean, what is the set of agreed-upon criteria that you can use to determine whether the rights of huge segments of the population should have their rights restricted?

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A stance against the modern woman.

« on: September 02, 2010, 04:28:05 PM »

In certain cases, yes.

What sort of cases?

5

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A stance against the modern woman.

« on: September 02, 2010, 12:14:13 PM »

They are convinced that in their 40s, they can still act like a college-aged party girl, as seen in the ridiculous cougar phenomenon. As a consequence, Western birthrates have fallen to dangerous levels.

How do you know that this is a cause-and-effect scenario?

Woman are preferring crazy, Sex in the City style lives instead of having (enough) children. I recently read in a psychology magazine, Psychology Today I believe, that woman are preferring having only one child, which is clearly not sustainable for the human race, as a result of wanting to both have a family and a career/social life. Woman working is irresponsible for society.

Ok, fair enough.  Do you then believe that rights are privileges, and we should limit the rights of certain groups to obtain certain goals?

6

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A stance against the modern woman.

« on: September 02, 2010, 11:52:02 AM »

They are convinced that in their 40s, they can still act like a college-aged party girl, as seen in the ridiculous cougar phenomenon. As a consequence, Western birthrates have fallen to dangerous levels.

How do you know that this is a cause-and-effect scenario?

7

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What's wrong with selfishness?

« on: September 02, 2010, 11:39:27 AM »

It depends on what system of morality you're using.

8

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: God

« on: January 19, 2009, 03:34:05 PM »

It's faith. Once you believe it is valid, you will never question it.

Can you tell me exactly what you mean by "faith"?

"Diety" obviously exists as a concept. It's the nature and manifestation of said which is open for debate.

When I ask whether God exists, I am asking whether the concept of God has any instances in reality.

I am a devout christian, and I can say to you that there isn't any real evidense that he is real.

Why do you believe, then?  Is it an a priori proof, or a personal experience that has you swayed?

9

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: God

« on: January 19, 2009, 01:56:23 PM »

You don't that's the funny thing. But once you read it, you just know. Please learn more about him. He is truely awesome.

I'm looking for more than a vague feeling that a book is valid.

10

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Gun Control

« on: January 19, 2009, 01:55:46 PM »

We are debating the current meaning of a constitutional amendment. They do not routinely get changed or thrown out. It takes a lot to change one.

Yes, but it does happen.  Also, given the question "How far should it go?" posed by the OP, I would consider all options to be on the table.

Yeah... but we are discussing the intent of the law. Not whether it should be thrown out. We were arguing that they can't redefine what it means to suit the times. They would have to change it through the proper channels.

So, the current debate is how it should be interpreted. If there is a move to alter it from the constitution then a new debate will show up about that.

If that is what the debate has evolved into, so be it.  I simply thought that "What do you believe are the advantages of gun control, disadvantages.  How far should it go?" was not solely a question about the U.S. Constitution.

11

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: God

« on: January 19, 2009, 01:52:39 PM »

Trust, you have to get to know him by reading scripture. Once you do it is an awesome feeling.

How do you know that scripture is valid?

12

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Gun Control

« on: January 19, 2009, 01:51:34 PM »

We are debating the current meaning of a constitutional amendment. They do not routinely get changed or thrown out. It takes a lot to change one.

Yes, but it does happen.  Also, given the question "How far should it go?" posed by the OP, I would consider all options to be on the table.

13

Philosophy, Religion & Society / God

« on: January 19, 2009, 01:48:42 PM »

I did not find a relevant topic in this section, so I decided to make a new one.

Does God exist?  If so, how do we know?

14

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Gun Control

« on: January 19, 2009, 01:47:13 PM »

You're approaching this from a utilitarian view.  Why not approach it from the "I don't have the right to order you what to do" view?

We are debating the laws, if they didn't have a right to tell us what to do, it wouldn't matter what laws they made.

Sure it would.  They're the ones with the black-uniformed police.

Hence they can make laws for us.

Does might make right?

That is immaterial. The very fact that we are debating laws, means we are admitting that what they say matters.

Laws are frequently changed or thrown out.  When debating the law, it is important to consider that.

15

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: How Life Began

« on: January 19, 2009, 01:26:50 PM »

This is pretty close, chief.  The inability to create (from nothing) replicating proteins that competed for survival was the main objection to abiogenesis.

Close, but no Cigar.

Go away, troll.

Thats not trolling. I used a common phrase to say something.

What, then, is your main objection to this article?

16

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Gun Control

« on: January 19, 2009, 10:44:19 AM »

You're approaching this from a utilitarian view.  Why not approach it from the "I don't have the right to order you what to do" view?

We are debating the laws, if they didn't have a right to tell us what to do, it wouldn't matter what laws they made.

Sure it would.  They're the ones with the black-uniformed police.

Hence they can make laws for us.

Does might make right?

17

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: How Life Began

« on: January 17, 2009, 07:18:26 PM »

This is pretty close, chief.  The inability to create (from nothing) replicating proteins that competed for survival was the main objection to abiogenesis.

Close, but no Cigar.

Go away, troll.

18

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: How Life Began

« on: January 17, 2009, 06:41:56 PM »

This is pretty close, chief.  The inability to create (from nothing) replicating proteins that competed for survival was the main objection to abiogenesis.

19

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: How Life Began

« on: January 17, 2009, 05:44:36 PM »

I knew that we'd find empirical evidence of abiogenesis being possible.

20

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Evolution???

« on: January 17, 2009, 05:41:41 PM »

What "glitches" are you talking about, Virgo?

Maybe he's talking about the little ones, like the fact that there is no evidence what so ever to say that the evolution theory is true.

I lol'd.

Then I thought you might be serious.

I grew concerned, and advised you to Google "evidence" and "macroevolution".

21

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Gun Control

« on: January 17, 2009, 05:39:54 PM »

You're approaching this from a utilitarian view.  Why not approach it from the "I don't have the right to order you what to do" view?

We are debating the laws, if they didn't have a right to tell us what to do, it wouldn't matter what laws they made.

Sure it would.  They're the ones with the black-uniformed police.

22

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Gun Control

« on: January 17, 2009, 04:20:28 PM »

You're approaching this from a utilitarian view.  Why not approach it from the "I don't have the right to order you what to do" view?

23

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Is The Human Race Destined for Extinction?

« on: January 17, 2009, 04:13:57 PM »

It is logically possible for the entire human race to instantaneously die.  The probability, though infinitesimal, reaches 100% given infinite time.

Yes.

24

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Athiest World

« on: January 17, 2009, 04:06:35 PM »

This is what it would be like, if the majority of people were athiests.
ATHIEST KID: Mom, I'm going to go fuck a hooker.
ATHIEST MOM: Okay, son.
ATHIEST KID: Afterwards, I'm going to go smoke pot with my friends, since it's "not addictive."
ATHIEST MOM: Okay, come home soon!

The athiest kid leaves the room. The father comes home from work several minutes later.

ATHIEST DAD: Hey!
ATHIEST MOM: Hi, honey! I'm pregnant again. I guess I'll just get another abortion, since "fetuses don't count as human life."
ATHIEST DAD: Okay, get as many abortions as you want!
ATHIEST MOM: Oh, and don't go in the bedroom.
ATHIEST DAD: Why not?
ATHIEST MOM: There are two gay men fucking eachother in there.
ATHIEST DAD: Why are they here?
ATHIEST MOM: I wanted to watch them do it for awhile. They just aren't finished yet.
ATHIEST DAD: Okay, that's fine with me!

Suddenly, their neighbor runs into the house.

ATHIEST NEIGHBOR: Come quick, there's a Christian outside!
ATHIEST MOM: We'll be right there!

The athiest couple quickly put on a pair of black robes and hoods. They then exit the house, and run into the street, where a Christian is nailed to a large, wooden X. He is being burned alive. A crowd of athiests stand around him, all wearing black robes and hoods.

RANDOM ATHIEST: Damn you, Christian! We hate you! We claim to be tolerant of all religions. But we really hate your's! That's because we athiests are hypocritical like that! Die, Christian!

THE END

Scary, isn't it?

Obvious troll is obvious.

25

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Flat Earth Society chat room

« on: October 23, 2008, 03:03:20 PM »

I've tried 6660 to 6669.

26

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Flat Earth Society chat room

« on: October 22, 2008, 11:25:47 AM »

My connection is being refused.  What port should I use?

27

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Of Astronauts

« on: June 27, 2008, 01:07:59 PM »

To everybody who thought that their sniveling posts had some sort of meaning - you fail.

I realize that 1984 is fiction.  Thanks for that news-flash.  My point was that there are not necessarily hundreds of people in on the conspiracy - too many people to have to trust.  I feel that it would be simple enough to make up an imaginary person, fake a few photographs, etc., and say that they went into space.

28

Flat Earth Debate / Of Astronauts

« on: June 27, 2008, 10:34:04 AM »

Most of those astronauts who have allegedly been to space may not have existed at all.

Please recall "1984", when Winston simply conjured Comrade Oglivy out of thin air.  Such a scenario might easily happen in today's world.

Discuss.

29

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The wrong argument

« on: May 19, 2008, 01:55:35 PM »

I view somebody as a human being with the full rights thereof once they are physically separate or rational.

30

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Reptilians, God, and the true nature of the universe

« on: May 19, 2008, 01:51:33 PM »

You are all evil, heartless monsters.  May you die cold, in pain, and alone.