Lawyers are "frisbee chuckers"?
Porn by state=they are all red states
- Thread starter Topspin
- Start date
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Because neither one can be objectively or materialy demonstrated. It's just so much mental masturbation. Rational people have better things to do with their time in the real world.
So what happens if life is found on Mars? I suspect that we will find some sort of life there. But I don't make the leap to assurance, which would again be a leap of faith. Even with the evidence that exists that there is more likely than not some form of life on Mars it would still take a leap of faith for me to believe 100% that it is there.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
That's an irrational argument. You either can demonstrate materialy and rationaly that there is a God or you cannot. What anyone else believes is not relevent.
You know I am no "Jesus freak", you can be "out" if you wish. And thread-hijacking is a time-honored tradition on this board.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
I think you are half right. You're certainly right that you cannot prove an negative, so trying to prove there is no God is irrational but to prove their is a God the burden of proof belongs to the person that believes in that God and wishes to prove that Gods existence.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Ahmen.
christiefan915
Catalyst
Except they make no attempt to prove such a thing and are direct and honest about the fact that their position takes faith, while atheists pretend that theirs does not.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
That's purely an opinion that you've provided exactly no objective or rational evidence for. Given no natarulistic or material evidence of a God one can certainly draw a rational conclusion that the evidence supporting the existence of a God is lacking. You're argument is completely irrational, poorly stated, semi-literate and devoid of critical thinking.
You keep stating opinions with out backing them up with facts or material evidence or independantly verifiable observations. That's very irrational of you.
Evidence supporting lacking =/= 100% assurance. That is where the faith lies.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Exactly. This need to prove that which cannot be proven is indicitive of a deep seated personal insecurity.
Topspin
Verified User
Rubbish.Having a moral code is not contingent on being religious.
quite the contrary religious pompus mutha fuckers have murdered millions more people than non-religious have.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/31905302?slide=1
Why does this matter.
1. Because of the false outrage from the moral right, they don't believe the shit they preach
To be clear, I assume that gay porn is more popular in red states because of all the evidently repressed closet gay male republicans.
I think a lot of straight males of all political persuasion can go overboard with porn. But, I'm assuming that the straight liberals are tending to look more at heterosexual porn.
Stop interrupting with on-topic posts. We have a perfectly hijacked thread, don't spoil it.
So, your demand that they prove the existence of the center of what they freely admit is a faith is a "deep seated personal insecurity"? Fascinating.
Topspin
Verified User
WHILE that is a very nice slam, wish mine were as thought out.
My take is 99% of pron watching is straight, but hey I have only 1 gay friend that I'd be afraid to discuss this with so what do I know.
My take is red staters are more repressed and are not out tagging ahh making nice with liberal chicks.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
if the life has already been taken, there isn't a whole lot one can do to bring it back. what we can do though, is make it so that said perpetrator can never do it again.