Prove there's a god.

[Aura Mytha]

Mylan wrote:

<quoted text>Who cares about that? The liability insurance will factor everything in. You're just proving how it makes great sense. Enjoy.

Good to know you plan on buying some.

[Aerobatty]

jamesfraser wrote:

It's all about faith...I have faith in my God and I believe HE exists :)

Good for you.

Enjoy.

[Pat]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
You have no evidence to support that I'm lying.

A claim made without knowledge to back it up is a lie. You don't really believe you are that special do you? That some god would leave untold billions in the dark and secretly come to you? You have one hell of an inflated ego.

It is an established maxim and moral that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him.
-- Abraham Lincoln

[Tide with Beach]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

Happy Birthday, dude man!

Thanks, man, dude.

[Aura Mytha]

Mylan wrote:

<quoted text>Life is fragile. Pretty much anything can kill. Time for some common sense.
OH look. gun liability insurance is here to save the day.
What a perfect solution.

Have you banana peel proofed your home?

[Aura Mytha]

Mylan wrote:

<quoted text>HWat an as swipe. Want to know how many children are killed by GUNS every year? THOUSANDS! In 1999, alone there were 3,385 firearms-related deaths for children. Since then there has been TENS OF THOUSANDS of children's lives killed by guns. So basically what you're saying is that those hundred of children killed by drones is just a drop of water in the ocean compared to the amount here in the US killed by guns.
I agree.

Do you really think saying a thousand kids get killed here a year , makes it ok that Obama kills 9 kids a day in Pakistan and Afghanistan?
Those statistics are including the 15 year old street punk that was shot by the police because he was armed breaking into somebody's house. And the 16 year old gang bangers in Detroit and LA.
Pull your head out your hiney mam.

[Aerobatty]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
But you don't understand my dog, and you also don't understand my cat. I know you know what dogs are and I know you know what cats are, it's just a shame that you don't know what God is.
Because if you did, you would know that I'm telling you the truth.

We do know what god is.

And we know you're telling the truth.

We also know your truth exists only in your mind.

And that is where the shame is.

[Aerobatty]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
No, actually what makes sense because of the government stays the f*ck out of peoples lives. If people want to eat hotdogs and hamburgers and drink fattening beer and sodas and whatever other kind of crap they want, then they should be allowed to.
Likewise, if people want to smoke, then they should be allowed to, at no extra cost!

Let them pay higher insurance premiums, then.

[RiversideRedneck]

Pat wrote:

How many of those heart disease, cancer, chronic lower respiratory diseases and stroke deaths were smokers?
According to the CDC, over 400,000 people in the USA alone, die from cigarette related illnesses every year

Appr 126,000 of the 600,000 heart disease related deaths are caused by smoking.

So the other 474,000 heart related deaths are NOT caused by smoking, but mostly by bad diets.


I'm not saying that smoking us good for you in any way, I'm just saying that if insurance companies want to charge higher rates for smokers, then they should also for fat asses.

I pay an extra $50 a month for my insurance because I smoke. But there's this fat bitch at works that's 350 lbs. she don't pay extra, even though she's at the hospital twice a month....

Real fair.

[RiversideRedneck]

Pat wrote:

A claim made without knowledge to back it up is a lie.

I know.

I have knowledge.

Again, you're admitting that you have no evidence to support your assertion that I'm lying.

[RiversideRedneck]

Aerobatty wrote:

<quoted text>
Let them pay higher insurance premiums, then.

Then in all fairness you should say that people that are willfully fat and willfully risk diabetes, or the ones that have already willfully got diabetes should pay higher insurance premiums too.

Because if I'm willing to smoke and take the risks, then I'm willing to pay a higher insurance premium. Why aren't fat people charged a higher insurance premium too? Over the course of their life, fat people go to the hospital more than smokers do.

[Pat]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
I know.
I have knowledge.
Again, you're admitting that you have no evidence to support your assertion that I'm lying.

You have belief, not knowledge. Belief is not knowledge.

[Pat]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Appr 126,000 of the 600,000 heart disease related deaths are caused by smoking.
So the other 474,000 heart related deaths are NOT caused by smoking, but mostly by bad diets.
I'm not saying that smoking us good for you in any way, I'm just saying that if insurance companies want to charge higher rates for smokers, then they should also for fat asses.
I pay an extra $50 a month for my insurance because I smoke. But there's this fat bitch at works that's 350 lbs. she don't pay extra, even though she's at the hospital twice a month....
Real fair.

The bottom line is that the insurance company is justified to charge you more just as they are justified to not charge fat people more, it is their business and their assumed risk, though I agree, they should have a right to charge her more but I am willing to bet you that they have already factored into their rates for the percentage of their customers who are fat.

[RiversideRedneck]

Pat wrote:

<quoted text>
You have belief, not knowledge. Belief is not knowledge.

OK.

[Pat]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
I know.
I have knowledge.
Again, you're admitting that you have no evidence to support your assertion that I'm lying.

Fact: there is no knowledge of any gods.
Fact: a belief in god requires faith.
Fact: if there were any knowledge of god, the existence of god would be a matter of fact, not a matter of faith.

Therefore your claim that you possess knowledge of god is a lie until YOU prove otherwise no different than me claiming to have found life on Pluto is a lie unless I can prove it.

[RiversideRedneck]

Pat wrote:

<quoted text>
The bottom line is that the insurance company is justified to charge you more just as they are justified to not charge fat people more, it is their business and their assumed risk, though I agree, they should have a right to charge her more but I am willing to bet you that they have already factored into their rates for the percentage of their customers who are fat.

How do you figure? She literally goes to the hospital two times a month. She so damn fat it's destroying her knees and she has to go in for regular checkups. She's only 26, one day soon she's gonna need knee surgery, which is going to cost insurance company a ton of money.

In the past 10 years I've been in the hospital two times, once because I had a bad flu, another time to get a hearing check because I'm going deaf.

But they charge me an extra $50 a month because I smoke.

Nice.

[RiversideRedneck]

Pat wrote:

<quoted text>
Fact: there is no knowledge of any gods.
Fact: a belief in god requires faith.
Fact: if there were any knowledge of god, the existence of god would be a matter of fact, not a matter of faith.
Therefore your claim that you possess knowledge of god is a lie until YOU prove otherwise no different than me claiming to have found life on Pluto is a lie unless I can prove it.

OK.

You're hard-headed.

Got it.

[Pat]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Then in all fairness you should say that people that are willfully fat and willfully risk diabetes, or the ones that have already willfully got diabetes should pay higher insurance premiums too.
Because if I'm willing to smoke and take the risks, then I'm willing to pay a higher insurance premium. Why aren't fat people charged a higher insurance premium too? Over the course of their life, fat people go to the hospital more than smokers do.

Because fat people are already factored into the general health insurance rates. All that is relevant here is that an insurance company is justified in charging you more for smoking and that fact does not change depending on how they decide to charge or not charge fat people.

[Freebird USA]

Pat wrote:

<quoted text>
You have no basis to claim anything exists outside the natural realm you foolish liar.

Save yor bait for someone who will tak it.
So you disagree Hawking and Krauss?

[Pat]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
How do you figure? She literally goes to the hospital two times a month. She so damn fat it's destroying her knees and she has to go in for regular checkups. She's only 26, one day soon she's gonna need knee surgery, which is going to cost insurance company a ton of money.
In the past 10 years I've been in the hospital two times, once because I had a bad flu, another time to get a hearing check because I'm going deaf.
But they charge me an extra $50 a month because I smoke.
Nice.

How does a fat person being an increased insurance risk change the fact that a smoker is an increased insurance risk? Why should you get to have a say concerning insurance company rates for fat people? That's between them and the insurance company and none of your business. You have the freedom to drop your insurance, change your insurance or quit smoking. You do not have the freedom to tell a insurance company what to charge their customers.