Comments
540,601 - 540,620 of 729,793 Comments Last updated 53 min ago

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569385
Dec 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

I guess the following is just another day in the life of a "good" Christian:

"'You killed Jesus' scrawled on Hanukkah menorah

The Hanukkah menorah is a sign of peace and joy, symbolic of a miracle in the Jewish religion.

But a menorah in Miami Beach, Fla., has also become an attraction for hate speech, with someone scribbling "you killed Jesus" on the base of the prominent Chabad Hanukkah display.

Rabbi Zev Katz, who put up the menorah, is disappointed.

"I hoped that people from other religions, we could all get along, we all have what we believe in, respect each other and live with each other," said Katz, of Chabad House in Miami Beach."

Unfortunately for Rabbi Katz, this isn't the first anti-Semitic attack against his giant menorah.

"Twelve years ago someone smashed it, terrible, and we weren't sure if we're going to actually light the menorah the first night of Hanukkah," he said.

But they did then, and they will again this Saturday night as Jews ring in the first night of Hanukkah. Organizers said they are expecting 1,000 people to attend.

At Temple Beth Torah, in the Wellington community near West Palm Beach, there was more anti-Semitism this past weekend. In that incident, somebody painted a swastika along with some offensive words on a dumpster."

So.....what does this tell us? Not only that anti-semitism is alive and well in the USA, but that there are those who try to SHOVE their beliefs into the faces of those who believe differently.

Funny- I doubt there is even ONE incident of a JEW committing such acts against religious CHRISTIAN symbols.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/04/15...

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569386
Dec 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

OCB wrote:
<quoted text>OMG. This has been answered for you numerous times already, RR.
Engaging in the PHYSICAL act of sex does NOT change one's PHYSIOLOGICAL and PSYCHOLOGICAL make-up.
I think it was IANS or another wonderful poster here who gave you several excellent examples.
Along those same lines- I can use the heel of my shoe to hammer in a nail- that doesn't change my shoe into a hammer- it is still a shoe.
I can use a needle to remove a splinter from my finger- that doesn't change a needle into a pair of tweezers- it is still a pair of tweezers.
Not sure how much more or how much better this can be explained to you:
But a gay person having sex with a straight person does not change that person from what they actually are- which is gay.
And you do not GET that sexual arousal need not have anything to do with being attracted to a PERSON.
Really- this has been beaten into the ground; as I posted to someone else, your homophobia results in your irrational emotions getting the better of you and preventing you from seeing this topic objectively, reasonably and rationally.
Go buy a book on human sexuality- maybe then your questions can be answered to your satisfaction and so that you can understand what this topic is all about.
The heel of your shoe wouldn't call itself a hammer.

The needle wouldn't call itself tweezers.

Seriously? Those are terrible examples.

I guess I'll have to go but a book, you people are beyond clueless on sexuality.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569387
Dec 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You should read it. That article isn't a lie.
The Darwin fish is a mockery of the Jesus fish. It teaches atheist intolerance of religion, particularly Christians.
It IS a lie. It doesn't teach anything any more than a Jesus fish teaches anything.

It simply is a reflection of the views and beliefs of the individual- just like the Jesus fish is.

If you don't think so, then your Jesus fish is doing the same thing: teaching Christian intolerance of other beliefs, particularly atheists.

Put your self-inflicted persecution complex back on the shelf, RR.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569388
Dec 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
No.
Empathy
Humility
You don't understand.
Oh, but I DO understand since both are a major part of my character and psychological make up.

But since you can't make the same claim, what I don't understand is why you are talking about that which you know not.

You are one of THE least empathetic and humble people here, RR.

What you know about either wouldn't even begin to cover the head of the world's smallest pin.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569390
Dec 4, 2012
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I was talking about the Bible and you bring up "FICTIONAL CHARACTERS" from novels.
*hint* the Bible isn't a novel.....
No- but it IS a work of fiction and at the very least, I don't have to believe it is fact to discuss the characters found within its pages.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569391
Dec 4, 2012
 
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Look at you.
You asked repeatedly for an illustration of how your church damaged me. I repeatedly told you that it was not about me. You persisted, even becoming petulant about it. I reluctantly provided a personal example, which you snarkily referred to that a having had a prayer answered.
And now you call it whining as you flaunt your indifference atheists and to the hardship your church's scapegoating creates for us. Do you think that you just helped yourself there?
How do you think that you are doing for Christianity on this thread? Do you think that your presence leads to skeptics questioning their choices, or to reconfirming them? Do you think that you are showing us something tempting in the Christian faith, or serving as a disincentive?
The prayer was answered because you actually answered a question.

Sorry, but I don't see how you were treated sooooo badly by the church. You said the whole town was out to get you. I think you're lying & exaggerating.

I think I'm doing just fine for Christians on this thread. People read my posts and if I can get even ONE person to think or second guess their atheism, my job is going well.

How's your atheist movement going?

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569392
Dec 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
The heel of your shoe wouldn't call itself a hammer.
The needle wouldn't call itself tweezers.
Seriously? Those are terrible examples.
I guess I'll have to go but a book, you people are beyond clueless on sexuality.
And a gay person having sex with someone of the opposite sex doesn't call themselves straight!

No- they are EXCELLENT examples; what is terrible is your inability to grasp that a GAY person can have sex with someone of the opposite sex and still be 100% gay.

You'll have to go buy a book- wow! That'll be a first for ya!
yahoo

Jackson, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569393
Dec 4, 2012
 
de ten you will see
Doctor REALITY

Little Rock, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569394
Dec 4, 2012
 
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>It IS a lie. It doesn't teach anything any more than a Jesus fish teaches anything.
It simply is a reflection of the views and beliefs of the individual- just like the Jesus fish is.
If you don't think so, then your Jesus fish is doing the same thing: teaching Christian intolerance of other beliefs, particularly atheists.
Put your self-inflicted persecution complex back on the shelf, RR.
TODAY is the day of salvation,for the Lord Jesus Christ has not promised that you will live to see tomorrow:

“MEET ROSEMARY-She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569395
Dec 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm heterosexual. I'd rather masterbate than even imagine screwing a dude just to get my rocks off. He'll, I'd rather f_ck a knot hole than a dude. I'm straight, your handsome nephew is bi.
.. you do not get to define me or my nephew ..

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569396
Dec 4, 2012
 
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Durability of an organism is the main attribute that qualifies it as being "fit" to survive.
Nope. It's the ability to produce more viable offspring.
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
The whole point of reproduction is to preserve the genes, as such; but reproduction would not be necessary if the genes were indestructible.
Do you know the difference between a gene and an organism?
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
How is it that evolution selects for the fittest, and gives rise to entities that have needs; when needs are characteristic of weakness and not fitness?
Needs are not weaknesses when the needs can be met. You need oxygen, which is not a weakness if you can stay out of old refrigerators and lake bottoms.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569397
Dec 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Predators are in direct conflict with evolution. Predators cannot exist without grazers; so why did evolution facilitate predators, when it is possible that organisms can survive by grazing?
Your understanding of this material is badly deformed, no doubt by your faith science teachers. Predators exist because they can, and they are not in conflict with evolution. The only thing in conflict with evolution is your church.
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Why does natural selection encourage the birth of organisms that must depend on each other for survival; when it is possible to make organisms that depend only on one abundant food source?
Sorry. Having millions of questions is fine. But you lack the basic education in the field for a reason: you don't care about any of the answers to your questions. They all are declarative statements of your faith disguised as inquiry.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569398
Dec 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
BTW consensus is not a part of scientific method.
Actually, it is a product of the vetting aspect of the scientific method in the broader sense, which goes beyond observing, hypothesizing, experimenting, collecting data, and induction (generalization).

It's not science just because it's published. It's only accepted into the scientific community after it has been subjected to the larger scientific method: peer review and the test of time.

If the results are reproducible, if they are never contradicted by other findings, if they lead to confirmed predictions, or if they suggests additional avenues of inquiry that are also fruitful, then consensus will be achieved and the information called scientific knowledge.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569399
Dec 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't see the similarity?
They have the same beard, they're both old men, they both keep a naughty and nice list, they both bribe you to be good, you have to write to one and pray to the other, they both descend from and alight to inaccessible realms, and you never see either.
The only difference is that they later tell you that Santa is a myth. You have to figure the god part out on your own.
Religion:

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/religion

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569400
Dec 4, 2012
 
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. as the legendary Topix poster, Buck Crick, once said, "50% of homosexuals were born that way. The other 50% not so much." ..
Buck just visited one of the threads.

Single post, about my colorful silk bloomers....

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569401
Dec 4, 2012
 
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Do you know what God has in common with all things that exist? YOU CANNOT PROVE THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST, JUST THE SAME WAY YOU CANT PROVE THAT THE THINGS THAT EXIST DONT EXIST.
THEREFORE GOD IS WITHIN THE ZONE OF THE EXISTENT, as it relates to proof.
Your argument also applies to elves, pixies, sprites, brownies, fairies, nymphs, satyrs, fawns, changelings, ghosts, goblins, spirits, ghouls, giants, poltergeists, doppelgangers, poltergeists, demons, devils, angels, djinns, succubi, incubi, zombies, mummies, werewolves, banshees, gnomes, trolls, imps, gargoyles, dragons, mermaids, unicorns, sea serpents, furies, harpies, minotaurs, medusae, gremlins, warlocks, and sirens.

They are also in your "Zone of the Existent."
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
You have absolutely no critical thinking skills; so all your education amounts to noting essentially.
Nice thinking yourself there, Aristotle.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569402
Dec 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Nobody cares about your carting.
Like a taint carbuncle, you need lancing and draining.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569403
Dec 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Emotions dont require sexual expression.
Sometimes it does it on its own.
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
No amount of love and intimacy that you feel for someone of the same sex, justifies you to have sex with that person.
Nobody cares what the scary chicken on a stick taught you about right and wrong. Humanists justify our lives and our habits by other standards: reason and the Golden Rule.
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Sex has no naturally consistently effective function but reproduction;
Then you're doing it wrong.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569404
Dec 4, 2012
 
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
ask the evos, they will tell you. The main role of sex is the propagation of the species.
I'm an evo. The main role of sex in my life is to get my freak on and to see the face of god (BTW, he looks a lot like Willie Nelson).
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
If you love someone you would tend to want to see them reproduce and bring offspring that are like them, so that you can have "more of them" to love.
Really? You seem to see people as reproduction units.
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
In homosexual relationships, there is no chance for reproduction so the genes of the partner are doomed to death and eradication form the life cycle and removed from the circle of life; WHERE IS THE LOVE IN THAT?
Most gay people I know are parents. Most have propagated their genes.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#569405
Dec 4, 2012
 
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>And a gay person having sex with someone of the opposite sex doesn't call themselves straight!
No shit, they'd call themselves bi.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••