Prove there's a god.

“Spelin 'n' tpyin...”

Since: Feb 08

...are my strong suits!

#406485 Dec 9, 2011
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
You know mate, I don't have a problem with people finding solace in religion. As I said, My mom and sister are Christian. I still respect their religion, and I will still go to church with the fmily once a year, for the Christmas service. My family is not and never were Bible-belt worshippers, and not at all science denying. They find peace and solace in the religion - power to them.
Where religion crosses the line, IMHO, is when people refuse to do introspection, and just decide that every problem they have can be solved by 'letting Jesus into your life'. For instance. I went through the breakup to end all breakups this year. I have literally moved across a country to try and salvage what I can, and still failed. Obviously, I went through some depression. Had I been a Bible thumper, I would have gone to church, and just heard 'you need more Jesus in your life, these things happen for a reason' and crap like that. Point is, it would have provided a very short lived high, allowing me to slump back to depression the following week.
Case in point: A very dear friend to me drinks too much, and drives wrecklessly. He would total a car, and his mom would make a senseless comment like 'he is not worshipping God correctly' or something like that. Never, for a second, does she believe that he actually needs to lay off the booze.
There you go again... posting my thoughts.

It's a placebo. It's convenient. It's easier to imagine one has forgiveness, or a solution, or a path to contentment... than to actually strive and work for them.

Remember the TV show 'Magnum PI'? There was one episode, and I can't remember exactly how he put it, but Magnum said something to the effect...

“You've got to believe God's helping with every little thing you do; as if nothing's possible without him... then go about doing it as if he doesn't even exist and it's all solely up to you.”

It's sad how some don't even bother with the last part.

Hope your friend gets his act together. I've lost a couple to drunk driving... both with religious families/upbringing. Not blaming that for their misfortune, but it certainly didn't do anything toward preventing it.

Time to “make the doughnuts.”

Read ya later.

“Spelin 'n' tpyin...”

Since: Feb 08

...are my strong suits!

#406486 Dec 9, 2011
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed. Religion is nothing but a placebo. Now, placebos sometimes work, but quite often they don't. And they certainly don't work for most serious problems.
Sounds like your friend needs a serious dose of detox, and his mother needs a serious dose of reality check.
Damnit!

You too!

<placebo>

Stop!

“Spelin 'n' tpyin...”

Since: Feb 08

...are my strong suits!

#406487 Dec 9, 2011
=)

Bye.

“Faith means not wanting to ”

Since: Nov 10

know what is true.

#406488 Dec 9, 2011
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>...one...don't test him, dude.
Wrong.... Meaningless threats, seriously if there was a god I would have been stricken by now!!!

“Listen to the sounds”

Since: Feb 09

of your own extinction......

#406489 Dec 9, 2011
Atomic_G wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong.... Meaningless threats, seriously if there was a god I would have been stricken by now!!!
Really? Why do you think so?

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#406490 Dec 9, 2011
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Can't I stereotype, just once, without being called on it?
http://verydemotivational.memebase.com/2011/1...
They exist for a reason.
http://www.motivateusnot.com/demotivational-p...

“Faith means not wanting to ”

Since: Nov 10

know what is true.

#406491 Dec 9, 2011
RAW wrote:
I don't need proof. Your disbelief is the proof.
How is that proof?
RAW wrote:
and its funny how everyone says science proves there is no god.
Who's everyone?
RAW wrote:
The ability of not wanting to surrender to God over self satisfaction is the reason people doubt that he exists.
You fail as a mind reader!

“Faith means not wanting to ”

Since: Nov 10

know what is true.

#406492 Dec 9, 2011
True Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? Why do you think so?
I am really 'bad' when comes to 'blasphemy' and if 'god' was going strike someone, anyone down for it, that would be me!!!

“Faith means not wanting to ”

Since: Nov 10

know what is true.

#406493 Dec 9, 2011
lilnita wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not racist I just think that mixed people are an ABOMINATION to mankind.
Thanks for your hatred to me and my family!

I think morons like you are an ABOMINATION to mankind!!!!

“Faith means not wanting to ”

Since: Nov 10

know what is true.

#406494 Dec 9, 2011
lilnita wrote:
<quoted text>
She flirts way too much...that is my problem.
Lighten up...

“Faith means not wanting to ”

Since: Nov 10

know what is true.

#406495 Dec 9, 2011
La Strega Kaitlin wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you bore it do death with one of your insipid, bullshit posts?
Bahahahahahahah... the poor guppy!

“Listen to the sounds”

Since: Feb 09

of your own extinction......

#406496 Dec 9, 2011
Atomic_G wrote:
<quoted text>
I am really 'bad' when comes to 'blasphemy' and if 'god' was going strike someone, anyone down for it, that would be me!!!
If you really know God exists and you really know God, and then blaspheme against Him, perhaps you may be punished. But right now no one has universal proof so it's all based on belief. The worst thing that blasphemy could amount to, is the sin of deliberately making claims about something that you know you have little knowledge off.

It's complicated. Sometimes one may think one knows something and is speaking the truth and hence talk, but in reality one doesn't know and is not speaking the truth. And then are other implications, such as deliberately causing unrest through blasphemy.

If there is a God, He would know the intentions behind your blasphemy, and judge accordingly.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#406497 Dec 9, 2011
Hidingfromyou wrote:
The above is quite interesting, but I'm not familiar with the situation. Bush was impeached in 2006? Pelosi replaced someone? What constitutional remedies are there for bad presidents - and how did Bush circumvent them?
No, Bush was never impeached.

In 2006, the Republicans had the White House, and majorities in both houses of Congress. The war in Iraq was extremely unpopular and the left was anxious to begin impeachment proceedings.

There was what is called a midterm election - in the middle of Bush's second term. As a result, the Democrats, who had been more or less loathed, swept the elections and recaptured both houses:

"The election resulted in a sweeping victory for the Democratic Party which captured the House of Representatives, the Senate, and a majority of governorships and state legislatures from the Republican Party." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_el...

It was considered a mandate to Congress to unfund Bush's cruel and illegal war, and to impeach him.

Nancy Pelosi, a representative from California, became the Speaker of the House. Many of us were anxious to see Bush impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors such as his illegal war of aggression, flouting the Geneva Conventions, outing a CIA operative, and later, his felonious wiretaps http://tinyurl.com/78cochx .

Impeachment is the remedy the framers of the Constitution gave the country for cases just like this one - a rogue president. Bush actually referred to the Constitution as "just a goddamned piece of paper" :

"It is the business of the Congress to prevent the president from doing more damage than he's already done to the people, interests, health, well-being, safety, good name and reputation of the United States -- to cauterize the wound and stem the flows of money, stupidity and blood." -- Lewis Lapham, March 2006, quoted by David Corn http://www.iraqtimeline.com/impeach.html

Many were also interested in revenge for the way the Republicans badgered Clinton almost from day one with special prosecutors looking for something to impeach him over. They flitted from Whitewater to Paula Jones when they couldn't manufacture a scandal there, and then to Monica Lewinski when they couldn't trump up any charges there either, caught Clinton in a lie about legal, consensual sex, and impeached him.

I for one was was furious, and had actually said at that time, whoever the next Republican president is that the Democrats can badger and humiliate should get a special prosecutor assigned to him even before taking office just to show that you cannot do that and get away with it. So, with the sweeping victory by the opposition, a new Congress, and a mandate to end the war and the Bush presidency, the stage was set.

Then Pelosi dropped the bomb - impeachment was "off the table" - not even a consideration. Next, the Democrats passed Bush's war budget, giving him every nickel he wanted, and even let him escalate the war, the so called "surge" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War_troop_s... .

It was as if nothing had happened. The government was the same. The policies were the same. It was apparent at that point, if not sooner, that the parties were really one, that liberal interests in particular were not represented by that government, and that the American people had no say over important matters any more - the death throes of American democracy.

Incidentally, in case you don't know, an impeachment is merely an indictment of a president, not a conviction. It's the filing of formal charges by the House of Representatives, and leads to a trial, in this case, by the Senate. What Pelosi said in effect was that the president was above the law.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#406498 Dec 9, 2011
"What Pelosi said in effect was that the president was above the law."

I should amplify - What Pelosi said in effect was that the REPUBLICAN president was above the law, and that the will of the voters was irrelevant.

“Faith means not wanting to ”

Since: Nov 10

know what is true.

#406499 Dec 9, 2011
True Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
If you really know God exists and you really know God, and then blaspheme against Him, perhaps you may be punished. But right now no one has universal proof so it's all based on belief. The worst thing that blasphemy could amount to, is the sin of deliberately making claims about something that you know you have little knowledge off.
It's complicated. Sometimes one may think one knows something and is speaking the truth and hence talk, but in reality one doesn't know and is not speaking the truth. And then are other implications, such as deliberately causing unrest through blasphemy.
If there is a God, He would know the intentions behind your blasphemy, and judge accordingly.
That explains why I am still here, if there is a god. Cause no ill harm is behind it.....

You make 'god' sound merciful.... others don't!

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#406500 Dec 9, 2011
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have them in with fancy goldfish? That might be the problem - goldfish pee lots of nasty chemicals.
One fancy goldfish. Well filtered 40 gallon tank. Never had a problem mixing goldfish and others before. First time I had guppies and platys, though. Maybe a ph tolerance thing.

Good tip to consider, thank you.

“Mercury bubbles blast!”

Since: Mar 11

Mercury

#406501 Dec 9, 2011
La Strega Kaitlin wrote:
waaasssuuup wrote:
<quoted text>
science + humanism = marxism. you'll have to ask those who've already been down that road how it all ends;)
<quoted text>
I'm betting he's never read Marx in his entire life. He wouldn't allow himself to. I *have* read Marx's "Communist Manifesto," so I speak from a position of knowledge: Marx was an asshole. The only thing he ever said that made sense was that religion is the opiate of the masses.
One of my profs told me that Engels actually wrote most of it. I'm not sure if that is true. She also really didn't like Marx as a person.

His theory has been greatly worked upon and is still used in the social sciences - restructured as "societal inequalities" and "social hierarchies" it is used in bio-cultural anthropology and is an evolutionary theory.

“Mercury bubbles blast!”

Since: Mar 11

Mercury

#406502 Dec 9, 2011
Me: media is not good for facts.
La Strega Kaitlin wrote:
Books are media. Magazines are media. Media is how we convey and communicate ideas.
Now, if you're talking about the mainstream media, like PMS-NBC or FUX News, well, that's different.
Yeah, that's kind of what I meant.

“Mercury bubbles blast!”

Since: Mar 11

Mercury

#406503 Dec 9, 2011
La Strega Kaitlin wrote:
La Strega Kaitlin wrote:
<quoted text>
Yup.
It's not Stregheria Wicca, it's just Stregheria. Wicca is a similar but separate belief system, developed by Gerald Gardner in the 1950s or thereabouts, and which borrows heavily from Stregheria (or so it seems to me, anyway); the original Stregheria dates back to around the time of the Etruscans.
<quoted text>
Belief in an afterlife dates back more than 40,000 years; there are burial sites at least that old, containing bodies and their possessions that, apparently, might be needed in the next life.
Neanderthal used to bury their dead. They've been found buried with flower petals covering the body. One was found with a rose quartz axe head - totally useless for chopping, it would shatter.

I don't have dates on the burials offhand, but they evolved around 400-300kya.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#406504 Dec 9, 2011
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
No. SCOTUS is one of three branches assigned protecting it - the one you don't vote for. Democracy there is best of nine. Didn't you know that? Did you think that those judges had to ask you what you thought for America to be considered a form of democracy. If so, you need some basic American government and civics education.
You are a complete moron.

For a democracy, laws are "legislated". The citizens elect their "legislators". They are susceptible to the "will of the people".

The judicial branch is not a legislative branch. They are not susceptible to the will of the people. They are not allowed by the democratic principles to legislate.

When they change the Constitution, they legislate. They rule us without consent of the people.

You left here for Mexico for reasons based on a totally idiotic misunderstanding of government and politics. It was smart to protect your savings from the liberal democrats who are constantly trying to confiscate it. The conservative republicans can only contain them, and preserve your cash for you to a limited extent.

And you are stupid for thinking Bush committed any impeachable offense.

Do you also think he had demolition explosives planted and blew up the world trade center on 911?

You must get your political insight from Rosie O'Donnel and fatass Michael Moore.

The closest thing Bush did to an impeachable offense was when he let those two border guards go to prison for shooting the wetback in his beaner ass while he was smuggling dope from your new homeland.

If people like you ever get any real political power, this nation is finished. We have to defeat your side at any cost. ANY COST! You are a more dangerous enemy than any foreign nation.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 4 min RiccardoFire 7,980
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 5 min too lazy to log in 272,845
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 10 min June VanDerMark 603,224
News Deputy ambushed, fatally shot at gas station ne... 21 min discocrisco 1
gay bottom in gurgaon (May '14) 32 min Ajay 562
Ex-Wife of Dr. Shine, Dee Dee Freeman Moving on... (Apr '12) 35 min Gwendolyn 3
The Christian Atheist debate 1 hr emperorjohn 3,813
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 5 hr Lyndi 177,850
More from around the web