1730 replies to this topic

[pkdust]

Answer please. And keep it civil. The immature need not enter.

I'll add my opinions in a bit. Must sleep.

Yes. reminds me of the song Cassie by fireflight

[Johnnyboy]

I do not believe in god.

[dreller120]

Nope.

[DreadPirateRoberts]

I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings. -Albert Einstein

[nyquil]

Do i believe in God, yes and no. I believe there is a greater power, but that you don't need to necessarily go to church all the time or at all just have the faith.

[Amagius]

There is a creator. There is no personal God.

[DreadPirateRoberts]

Why does there have to be a creator?

[Amagius]

Why does there have to be a creator?

Infinite loop of creation. It's a debatable, but a priori truth.

The only major religion that dodges this is Buddhism, but it does so in a queer way.

[DreadPirateRoberts]

Infinite loop of creation. It's a debatable, but a priori truth.

The only major religion that dodges this is Buddhism, but it does so in a queer way.

can you give an example of an a priori truth?

It's very possible that the universe has always existed, and it has developed that way it has simply because that is its nature.

[killik]

No, but the idea does keep stupid people civilized.

[Inkheart]

No, but the idea does keep stupid people civilized.

That was one of its initial goals; it certainly doesn't serve that purpose today.

[Amagius]

can you give an example of an a priori truth?

It's very possible that the universe has always existed, and it has developed that way it has simply because that is its nature.

As an example, a larger object cannot fit inside a smaller one. An a priori truth can be proved without any scientific evidence. Likewise, an creation entails its creator. I didn't phrase it exactly correctly, and I invite you to look for the philosophical proofs that support or go against that proof.

Still, it's that old wheel. "Who created me?"
'God'.
"Who created God?"
'Uh.'

"Who created me?"
'A random occurrence that led to my ancestry.'
"Who / What started that?"
'Uh.'


Edit: Also, I notices we're on Pg. 63. Nice job, mods! If we've covered this ground before, let's go forward.

[Inkheart]

While a creation does indeed require a creator, you make the mistake of assuming that the Universe is a creation. If you've got the time and attention span for it, Lawrence Krauss's A Universe from Nothing is very enlightening; essentially, because subatomic particles seem to be able to pop in and out of existence, the Universe really could have come to be simply by chance and without anything resembling a prime mover.

Edited by Inkheart, 25 November 2011 - 03:26 PM.

[Amagius]

While a creation does indeed require a creator, you make the mistake of assuming that the Universe is a creation. If you've got the time and attention span for it, Lawrence Krauss's A Universe from Nothing is very enlightening; essentially, because subatomic particles seem to be able to pop in and out of existence, the Universe really could have come to be simply by chance and without anything resembling a prime mover.

Without reading, I'm going to ask, "What presupposes a prime mover?"

I'll just say that by stating there is a "primer mover" it agrees with the my fact that there is a creator. No matter how much existence emulates a prime mover.

[Leaf]

i overdosed on heroin once.... Had to get a shot of narcan to wake me. Trust... something happens when you die. I came pretty close and it wasn't just blackness. But who knows... maybe a near death experience is just a self preservation mechanism like some doctors try to explain away. But why so many people from so many different backgrounds and religions see the same thing is beyond my understanding.

Edited by LeafMashes, 24 December 2011 - 11:38 AM.

[Sweeney]

i overdosed on heroin once.... Had to get a shot of narcan to wake me. Trust... something happens when you die. I came pretty close and it wasn't just blackness. But who knows... maybe a near death experience is just a self preservation mechanism like some doctors try to explain away. But why so many people from so many different backgrounds and religions see the same thing is beyond my understanding.

Wait, so a drug-addled, oxygen-deprived hallucination is evidence for... what, exactly?

[Fearless1333]

No, but the idea does keep stupid people civilized.

This. >.>

[redlion]

This. >.>

I would argue the other way around. There are plenty of people that would have been civilized if they hadn't been told by their imam that killing themselves and civilians of a western country would guarantee them a spot in heaven. Nevermind the fact that suicide is a sin in islam...

[Applepi]

I would argue the other way around. There are plenty of people that would have been civilized if they hadn't been told by their imam that killing themselves and civilians of a western country would guarantee them a spot in heaven. Nevermind the fact that suicide is a sin in islam...

I dont want to start something but there's no such text in the koran. Islam is an excuse a few extremists have used to convince (brainwash, etc) people into hating western culture. I'm not sure what the motivation was behind this but its just an excuse. This is analogous with the crusades. I dont believe there is a religion that explicitly says go out and kill everyone who doesn't follow me, but as long as religious differences exist people will always use it as an excuse to kill other people.

[redlion]

I dont want to start something but there's no such text in the koran. Islam is an excuse a few extremists have used to convince (brainwash, etc) people into hating western culture. I'm not sure what the motivation was behind this but its just an excuse. This is analogous with the crusades. I dont believe there is a religion that explicitly says go out and kill everyone who doesn't follow me, but as long as religious differences exist people will always use it as an excuse to kill other people.

No such text as what? If you're referring to the bit about killing civilians, notice I said 'told by their imam' not 'told by their religion.' Of course I know that islam doesn't prescribe killing civilians, but that's exactly my point: religion is often used by unscrupulous men to get what they want.

If instead, you were referring to no text on suicide as a sin, I suggest you look again. All abrahimic religions proscribe such acts. Killing oneself will not make one into a martyr.

[MsRose]

I dont want to start something but there's no such text in the koran. Islam is an excuse a few extremists have used to convince (brainwash, etc) people into hating western culture.

It's not difficult to "brain-wash" people when we bomb their country, sold Saddam the weapons he committed genocide with and then have the audacity to set up military bases in their country. Perhaps they dislike that we're not the same religion as them, but it is by no means the reason they targeted us.

The fact that people want to hide behind the slogan "they hate our freedom" doesn't make it anymore true. And to this day we commit foreign obscenities. It's amazing how unpublicized it was when the Obama administration (not Obama personally, but the people he appointed) a branch of ATF literally let guns walk into the hands of the Mexican Drug Cartels. How can we not expect the world to be upset by things like that?

Spoiler

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_JoUQtQR-k&feature=related

Since the start of the Mexican Drug war, 45,584 people have been murdered by the Mexican drug cartels. Among the casualties approximately 1,000 children, 1,000+ police and prosecutors and 58 reporters.

[Cheat]

I'm wiccan so I guess not.

[MsRose]

I'm wiccan so I guess not.

I thought wiccans had two gods? A God and a Godess? I could be mistaken though.

[redlion]

I'm wiccan so I guess not.

How do you not know either way?

It's amazing how unpublicized it was when the Obama administration (not Obama personally, but the people he appointed) literally sold guns to the Mexican drug cartel. How can we not expect the world to be upset by things like that?

Spoiler

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_JoUQtQR-k&feature=related

Since the start of the Mexican Drug war, 45,584 people have been murdered by the Mexican drug cartels. Among the casualties approximately 1,000 children, 1,000+ police and prosecutors and 58 reporters.

Two things. First, it is completely unreasonable to hold Obama responsible for the ATF's actions. You shouldn't mention his name as though he were involved. That's usually called slander or libel. Without doing any further research, (I'm typing this immediately after watching the video) I have my doubts about the story. None of the sources want to be named? Something is fishy about the ATF supposedly 'forcing' gun stores to sell arms. That's not their job under any president.

Second, they didn't 'literally' sell guns to the cartels. This isn't equivalent to Iran-Contra; we're not air dropping AR-15s and banana clips into Sinaloa. Even if the allegations from the video are true, at worst the ATF is forcing stores to accept cash (legal tender) for goods. The gun stores still have the right to refuse service. Even the ATF can't take that away.

Also, the video was clipped short. Anyway, I'm off to do some research on the subject. If anyone knows something further, do tell.

Edit1: Alright, a quick read of wikipedia will tell you that these ATF guys are small fry. When they were caught, they didn't even respond directly, but rather they had the Justice Department speak for them. That's how you know none of this was done on Obama's orders. These guys were not appointed by Obama. The agents of the ATF are classed as 'inferior officers' of the Fed, appointed not by Obama but by Secretaries and undersecretaries from the justice department. The ATF was given broad discretionary enforcement powers in the wake of 9/11 (George Bush, DHS, Patriot act) which has allowed them to operate without much oversight, so long as they kept coming up with 'positive' results. Allegedly, operation gunrunner was their attempt to falsify statistical data regarding the number of american guns fueling the drug cartels' violence as part of Operation eTrace (which is a failure by all counts). This is a case of police assuming more police are necessary. This has nothing to do with the head nigga in charge.

[MsRose]

How do you not know either way?

Two things. First, it is completely unreasonable to hold Obama responsible for the ATF's actions. You shouldn't mention his name as though he were involved. That's usually called slander or libel. Without doing any further research, (I'm typing this immediately after watching the video) I have my doubts about the story. None of the sources want to be named? Something is fishy about the ATF supposedly 'forcing' gun stores to sell arms. That's not their job under any president.

Second, they didn't 'literally' sell guns to the cartels. This isn't equivalent to Iran-Contra; we're not air dropping AR-15s and banana clips into Sinaloa. Even if the allegations from the video are true, at worst the ATF is forcing stores to accept cash (legal tender) for goods. The gun stores still have the right to refuse service. Even the ATF can't take that away.

Also, the video was clipped short. Anyway, I'm off to do some research on the subject. If anyone knows something further, do tell.

Edit1: Alright, a quick read of wikipedia will tell you that these ATF guys are small fry. When they were caught, they didn't even respond directly, but rather they had the Justice Department speak for them. That's how you know none of this was done on Obama's orders. These guys were not appointed by Obama. The agents of the ATF are classed as 'inferior officers' of the Fed, appointed not by Obama but by Secretaries and undersecretaries from the justice department. The ATF was given broad discretionary enforcement powers in the wake of 9/11 (George Bush, DHS, Patriot act) which has allowed them to operate without much oversight, so long as they kept coming up with 'positive' results. Allegedly, operation gunrunner was their attempt to falsify statistical data regarding the number of american guns fueling the drug cartels' violence as part of Operation eTrace (which is a failure by all counts). This is a case of police assuming more police are necessary. This has nothing to do with the head nigga in charge.

Alright alright, I recant: Obama in no shape or form had anything to do with these jerks. It would appear that I was misinformed via my friend Troy (damn you Troy!)

EDIT: I think the confusion was caused by the flashy titles people were using while writing about the story: "Project Gunrunner directly linked to Obama" Which is incredibly misleading because the only ties are extremely (extremely) loose. But the way it was explained to me, which is also incorrect, was that people whom he appointed in ATF were responsible. It seemed plausible to me because it's impossible to appoint so many positions and not have one bad apple. Thanks for digging.