Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Criptfeind]

So... extremely delicious, and excellent in soup?

Hah! I knew the gays were holding out!

Get over here! It is time for breakfast!

[Phmcw]

I was reading the bible again, and was impressed by how thin the case against homosexuals and gay marriage was.

It's funny because while there is a lot of things you can hold against new testament and Jesus' doctrine, the conservative view of Christianity is so much at odd with it that literally none of these criticism apply.

For the new testament, you must live for other in the name of God, in poverty, holding nothing but no one dear but God.
Jesus hasn't said ANYTHING about homosexuals and repeatedly turned down many laws coming from the Leviticus, a book that is completely irreconcilable with Jesus' teaching.

Yet the conservatives keep pretending that wealth is a right (we're told by Jesus that pretty much every wealthy man is going to hell) homosexuality is an abomination, and war is Ok (Jesus wouldn't even fight for his own life, and told his followers that any persecussion must be endured for God's glory).
There is also the "pardon seven times" with the seven times probably meaning forever, because when someone has already told me that he would cut that damn tree if it doesn't bear fruit next year six times, I'm pretty sure he won't do it the seventh.
Don't is seems to contradict the "three strike and you're out policy?
....

[shadenight123]

inconsistencies are the same in every religious books.
scurry the net and you'll certainly find books speaking of "x errors in Xreligious bookX"
all religions are flawed in their books.
which makes all religion flawed and all religious mens flawed? no. it simply is proof that religions should be taken with a pinch of salt.
but why think when shutting down the brain is easier?

[Truean]

Jesus was all about helping the poor and sick.

http://moviebob.blogspot.com/2011/09/republicans-cheer-for-letting-uninsured.html

They're still all "Good Christians" (TM) though....

I don't care if people in the US don't want to pay for stuff in the US. Too damn bad. Stuff costs money; we haven't paid too much, we've paid too little. Now our infrastructure is going to hell. We have water main pipes that are without exageration over 100 years old in some cases and many, many over 50 years old, with absolutely NO maintenance having been done on them, beyond emergency repair. This is an engineering system, which requires maintenance we haven't given. It is past the point of requiring replacement and will eventually collapse if we don't do something. But then, I must be overreacting It's not like this has happened before.

We have sewer systems that spew raw sewage into water systems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcosan#Sewer_overflow_advisories. That river, by the way, leads into the Ohio River, which means all the communities along the Ohio River drawing from that river for drinking water, were drinking diluted sewage from Pittsburgh PA.... This is called a "Watershed" problem.

Same thing with healthcare. Disease kills king and commoner alike. If people really have love for this country instead of lip service, then they should pay for it.... Holy shit aren't we sill fighting two wars things that allegedly aren't wars but sure seem to have a lot of troops involved for a decade or so?

Surely, they support "religious freedom...?"

But I thought religious freedom meant the freedom to follow Christianity?! (always the speaker's particular brand)

That people actually think such things almost drives me to alcoholism. Damn humanity, turnin' me into a cynic. I want my innocence back.

Which religion should we legislate into law?
[Everyone immediately raises their hand] "Mine!"

Problem: they're all different and equally valid....

[Phmcw]

inconsistencies are the same in every religious books.
scurry the net and you'll certainly find books speaking of "x errors in Xreligious bookX"
all religions are flawed in their books.
which makes all religion flawed and all religious mens flawed? no. it simply is proof that religions should be taken with a pinch of salt.
but why think when shutting down the brain is easier?

Here that's not even the problem : Jesus is the son of God, supposedly, and has been sent to earth to save man of his sins.
So his word is way above those of anyone before and after him, and are the only correct interpretation of God's will.
That, at least is simple. Choosing the olds passages is an act consciously hypocrite, and I have no doubt that it's done on purpose.

I know Christians, and I know fundamentalists. I don't like that way of thinkings but they are nothing like Americans conservatives.

[Andir]

Unhealthy in biblical times?

At the time...sure.  I mean, if you look at the religious requirements they follow teachings that may have been beneficial at the time.  Obviously, you don't want your fellow man to get sick or stop reproducing.  It doesn't benefit your community to allow that.  They needed every strong and able bodied person and their children to compete with neighboring tribes.  Of course, in order to get some people to follow that word, you needed to put some weight behind it.  Today it's taxation that influences social change, then it was fear.

[scriver]

Some of it, sure, but not a majority. They weren't based on any kind of actively rational thinking, just happenstance and cultural hang-ups. For example, while not having kids might be bad thing, condemning homosexual relationships or sex still doesn't make any sense. It's not like being gay stops you from having sex with a woman if duty calls for it - in fact, that's how it was in old Greece, and a loy of other cultures too for that part. No matter who you fucked for pleasure you would still go home at the end of the day and do your duty with your wife (or husband) and make some kids to keep the bloodline going.

[Phmcw]

Unhealthy in biblical times?

At the time...sure.  I mean, if you look at the religious requirements they follow teachings that may have been beneficial at the time.  Obviously, you don't want your fellow man to get sick or stop reproducing.  It doesn't benefit your community to allow that.  They needed every strong and able bodied person and their children to compete with neighboring tribes.  Of course, in order to get some people to follow that word, you needed to put some weight behind it.  Today it's taxation that influences social change, then it was fear.

it's more than that actually : in context the texts were pretty reasonable, as if you keep the pretty liberal mindset that nomad tribe seems to have about sex in a large sedentary community, you'll probably get wiped by stds. "No sex unless needed" is definitely not a bad idea if you don't have access to modern health-care. And it's not an unreasonable assumption that God hates promiscuous peoples if he send them horrible sickness.
Edit :
Why war on drug is a joke :

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The profits were astronomical at every step. In 1978 each kilo probably cost Escobar $2,000 but sold to Lehder and Jung for $22,000, clearing Escobar $20,000 per kilo. In the next stage they transported an average of 400 kilos to south Florida (incurring some additional expenses in hush money for local airport authorities) where mid-level dealers paid a wholesale price of $60,000 per kilo; thus in 1978 each 400-kilo load earned Escobar $8 million and Lehder, Ochoa, and Jung $5 million each in profits. Of course the mid-level dealers did just fine: after cutting the drug with baking soda each shipment retailed on the street for $210 million, almost ten times what they paid for it.

Soon Lehder was hiring American pilots to fly a steady stream of cocaine into the U.S., paying them $400,000 per trip. At one trip per week, in 1978 this translated into wholesale revenues of $1.3 billion and profits of $1 billion

Edit 2 : For once I am impressed by Obama, it's really a simple but useful measure.

[EveryZig]

Selling your daughter into slavery can also do wonders for your health 

[kaijyuu]

Edit 2 : For once I am impressed by Obama, it's really a simple but useful measure.

Interesting. Very interesting.

I'm not so certain that for-profit health insurers are going down in blazing glory, but it sure as hell is going to stifle them. Also I see no reason for them to want to give out rebates, so far less reason to avoid paying customer bills.


Long haul, yeah for-profit health insurance is going away. Provided, of course, that this isn't somehow repelled in the future.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Long haul, yeah for-profit health insurance is going away. Provided, of course, that this isn't somehow repelled in the future.

The Supreme Court is hearing a case this year on the mandatory health insurance clause. The three big options they have are: Approve that the government may force private citizens to buy things with their own money if the legislature demands it, remove the mandatory health insurance clause from the Affordable Care Act, or declare the entire Affordable Care Act unconstitutional.

I have no idea which way it will go, and neither does anyone else, I think.

[Truean]

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-december-1-2011/america-s-next-tarp-model?xrs=playershare_fb

O Son of a Bitch.... I knew it and here's the proof....

We sent the Banks more than $7.7 Trillion in Tarp Not Tarp, but we can't afford shit....

The government was loaning money to the banks at 0.001% interest, who bought bonds for 3% and made $Billions. The Government sold the banks $1 bills for $0.97 each.... Banks gave their employees and leaders bonuses for being smart enough to say yes. The US is the world's dumbest loan shark....

Welp, we're fucked....

[Luke_Prowler]

That was mentioned in the Occupy topic, but it still boggles the mind.

But hey, not all is lost, there's still plenty of time to join Chaos. Plenty of opprotunity and fulfilment, and Tzeentch worshipers get free dental.

[Euld]

Stephen Colbert discusses SOPA, and makes fun of everyone.

[Sheb]

Not exactly prograssive rage, but a slight bit of smug pride: While the republicans are busy trying to decide which brand of evil James Bond villain they want their candidate to be, Belgium's new prime minister, Elio Di Rupo is the gay son of Italians immigrant whose widowed, illiterate mom was so poor she had to send some of her kids to an orphanage. He also got a PhD in chemistry with the greatest grade you can get.

And you know the best part? No one gives a damn. All the media are busy discussing real policy issues like the new budget, which is kinda balanced (I mean, if everyone from the trade union to the bosses' federation, including greens, socialists and liberals are bitching, the pain must be quite fairly spread.).

Belgium: We may need 18 months to form a government, but we do it right.
P.S. I also support rebranding the American Dream as the Belgian Dream.