Thompson: God is Behind Take-Two Stock Slide
Thompson: God is Behind Take-Two Stock Slide
December 30, 2008
Is God behind the recent plunge of Take-Two Interactive's stock price?
When it comes to business, should one's religious beliefs even matter?
For the controversial, disbarred attorney Jack Thompson, the answer to these questions would seem to be yes.
On Friday, GamePolitics reported on Thompson's claim that he planned to lead a stockholder revolt aimed at ousting Take-Two chairman Strauss Zelnick.
While Thompson says that he wants to hold Zelnick accountable for T2's tumbling share price, his comments must be weighed in light of the disbarred attorney's oft-expressed distaste for Take-Two and its chairman.
As to the would-be shareholder revolt, it brought to mind a recent e-mail exchange between GP and Thompson which may shed some light on the anti-game activist's apparent belief that divine retribution of the Christian deity is behind Take-Two's depressed stock price. Those e-mails follow:
--------------------------
From: Jack Thompson
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 6:44 AM
To: Dennis McCauley
Subject: Spin this, Strauss...
GOD STRIKES TAKE-TWO DOWN
Take-Two dropped $2.35 to $9.72 in extended trading after the announcement and fell as low as $9.60. The shares... have declined 35 percent this year. The results contrast with comments Zelnick made in an interview on Nov. 3, when he said sales of the company’s video games hadn’t been hurt by the recession...
-------------------------
From: Dennis McCauley
To: 'Jack Thompson'
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 6:52 AM
Subject: RE: Spin this, Strauss...
So, if T2’s business reverse was God’s vengeance, does that mean that God struck you down too when you were disbarred?...
--------------------------
From: Jack Thompson
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 9:10 AM
To: Dennis McCauley
Subject: Re: Spin this, Strauss...
...If you had any understanding of the Bible and of God you would understand that persecution comes Christians' way, and we are blessed by it. There is no blessing for Zelnick, who is not a Christian, when he gets what he deserves...
---------------------------
From: Dennis McCauley
To: 'Jack Thompson'
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 6:54 AM
Subject: in relation to your Take-Two shareholder revolt...
...Are you saying that problems for Christians are blessings, while problems for non-Christians are vengeance from the Almighty? Also, how do you know what Zelnick’s religion is?
---------------------------
From: Jack Thompson
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 7:11 AM
To: Dennis McCauley
Subject: Re: in relation to your Take-Two shareholder revolt...
Here's another passage of Scripture that you don't understand and never read: "All things work to the good for those who love the Lord and are called according to His purpose." That group would include me and not Zelnick. Zelnick is not a believer in the Gospel. How do I know? Because the man who got us together [secretly, in Manhattan in 2007] is a Christian, with a massive ministry in Hollywood and the rest of the entertainment industry. It was because of the spiritual aspect of this struggle that he got the two of us together, and Zelnick failed the test.
If you knew anything about the Gospel, you would understand further that Paul, whose writings are considered part of the canon, tells Christians, not unbelievers, that we are to "count it all joy" when trials and tribulations come our way.
I have been persecuted for my faith, not because I did anything wrong, by those committed to evil. Glad to clear it up for you. And as it now stands, Mr. Zelnick's problems at Take-Two are minuscule [sic] compared to the eternity of punishment that is coming his way unless he repents and accepts Christ as I did 32 years ago this month. You might do well to read the Gospel of John yourself. Come to think of it, I'll write Strauss about all this and send you a copy...
---------------------------
Thompson did not respond to GP's request to name the man who supposedly brokered the 2007 meeting with Zelnick. The letter to Zelnick which Thompson mentions can be viewed here.
GP: Serious consideration was given as to whether to publish this story as I realize that some will find Thompson's comments about non-Christians offensive. Ultimately, in deciding to publish, the opportunity to provide an insight into Thompson's mindset outweighed the other issues.
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGINGamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 11/23/09 at 07:42am
JDKJ: Leaders never follow. Followers never lead.
JDKJ: Leaders never follow. Followers never lead.
Posted 11/23/09 at 06:48am
DarkSaber: Anyone been following this Hadley Climatic Research Centre server hack story?
DarkSaber: Anyone been following this Hadley Climatic Research Centre server hack story?
Posted 11/22/09 at 11:48pm
ZippyDSMlee: AE:they feeding you well? I am enjoying win7 and heading to bed...uhg I need to get up early and start back to cleaning/painting blahg >< need tog et stuff done befor thanksgiving....
ZippyDSMlee: AE:they feeding you well? I am enjoying win7 and heading to bed...uhg I need to get up early and start back to cleaning/painting blahg >< need tog et stuff done befor thanksgiving....
Posted 11/22/09 at 11:41pm
Andrew Eisen: Just got home from an eight hour recording session at Capitol Records. A lot of fun but damn exhausting.
Andrew Eisen: Just got home from an eight hour recording session at Capitol Records. A lot of fun but damn exhausting.
Posted 11/22/09 at 08:44pm
BearDogg-X: 10 N. O. Who Dat?
BearDogg-X: 10 N. O. Who Dat?
Posted 11/22/09 at 09:45am
ZippyDSMlee: JD:I think doc phill is still sout about the break up with his wife he dose not fill holes as much as make them bigger these day
ZippyDSMlee: JD:I think doc phill is still sout about the break up with his wife he dose not fill holes as much as make them bigger these day
Posted 11/22/09 at 12:06am
JDKJ: You should get Phil McCraken to help you spackle those banisters.
JDKJ: You should get Phil McCraken to help you spackle those banisters.
Posted 11/21/09 at 11:57pm
ZippyDSMlee: Oh in the pirate hunter article I need my song ieda heckled DS,JD,Beemon sic im !!!
ZippyDSMlee: Oh in the pirate hunter article I need my song ieda heckled DS,JD,Beemon sic im !!!
Posted 11/21/09 at 11:56pm
ZippyDSMlee: JD:no I am tried from prepping the banisters for painting , worked on them from 12 to 4 and 6 to 8...after I got back from the store...got up early got ready...blah...been up all day..I need a nap...
ZippyDSMlee: JD:no I am tried from prepping the banisters for painting , worked on them from 12 to 4 and 6 to 8...after I got back from the store...got up early got ready...blah...been up all day..I need a nap...
Posted 11/21/09 at 11:42pm
JDKJ: No. You gonna stay up late tonight soldering?
JDKJ: No. You gonna stay up late tonight soldering?
Posted 11/21/09 at 11:41pm
ZippyDSMlee: JDKJ:Don't you mean Mctite?
ZippyDSMlee: JDKJ:Don't you mean Mctite?
Posted 11/21/09 at 11:33pm
JDKJ: @Zip: Neil, Bob, and Lik McTaint. The McTaint brothers. LOL!!!
JDKJ: @Zip: Neil, Bob, and Lik McTaint. The McTaint brothers. LOL!!!
Posted 11/21/09 at 09:44pm
Flamespeak: I still think military personell, killing other military personell, on a military complex should be handled by military courts.
Flamespeak: I still think military personell, killing other military personell, on a military complex should be handled by military courts.
Posted 11/21/09 at 09:43pm
Flamespeak: I could see this a mixture of the two charges rather than just one or the other.
Flamespeak: I could see this a mixture of the two charges rather than just one or the other.
Posted 11/21/09 at 09:43pm
Flamespeak: I think this was mainly a person who snapped, but evidence is showing he definitely had strong inlinations to islamic-extremism.
Flamespeak: I think this was mainly a person who snapped, but evidence is showing he definitely had strong inlinations to islamic-extremism.
Posted 11/21/09 at 09:41pm
Flamespeak: People are trying to claim that Hasan's actions were not terrorism. I don't jump on the 'terror train' like others, however
Flamespeak: People are trying to claim that Hasan's actions were not terrorism. I don't jump on the 'terror train' like others, however
Posted 11/21/09 at 09:38pm
mentor07825: Britain certainly does deserve it! And the French! God damn it, it was a hand ball!!!
mentor07825: Britain certainly does deserve it! And the French! God damn it, it was a hand ball!!!
Posted 11/21/09 at 09:34pm
ZippyDSMlee: mentor07825:Well Brittan dose deserve it....
ZippyDSMlee: mentor07825:Well Brittan dose deserve it....
Posted 11/21/09 at 09:33pm
ZippyDSMlee: Alyric:I don;t hasliburton having to pay back billoins... don;t you love it when the rich roll over the goverment without a care?
ZippyDSMlee: Alyric:I don;t hasliburton having to pay back billoins... don;t you love it when the rich roll over the goverment without a care?
Posted 11/21/09 at 09:32pm
mentor07825: I say we nuke the whales, for the benefit of both mankind and the environment.
mentor07825: I say we nuke the whales, for the benefit of both mankind and the environment.
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
Jack Thompson...making enemies of all races and beliefs since 1972....
since he's older than that.. i have to wonder what made you pick the date.
Nothing against christians... but if what Thompson says is true, how does God tell a christian that what they're doing is wrong? Or is that the point... simply believing allows you to do whatever you want because all consequences are a blessing from God?
Like when Pat Robertson implied that the US should assassinate Chavez... all the backlash from that was a blessing from God and not that he was simply wrong?
To clarify some of John Bruce's inane ramblings, scripturally God sends things like famines, plagues, wars, pestilance to punish and chastise his people when they are doing wrong. He also does so to turn them back to him when they stop believing. Jack is claiming that T2's stock price is the result of God chastising and punishing T2 for their evil practices.
When he says that hardshhips are blessings to beleivers he is correct. A true believer would recognize the plague, famine etc and God telling them to be obedient. It also states in the New Testiment that non believers would persicute believers and that the beleivers should rejoice in that as that is part of the proof that they are on the right track. John Bruce here beleives that his disbarment is part of that persicution of him based on his belief.
This is all scripturally speaking. Yes I am a Christian and believe the same scriptural doctrines of persicution and chastisement, but I don't believe that T2 itself is being punished for their misdeeds nor that John Bruce's disbarment is in any way related to his being a "Christian"
In my personal and spiritual opinion, the whole recession is part of a punishment on us and our dependance and love of wealth and the appearance thereof no matter the cost. In the scriptures famines and plagues etc affected both believers and non believers and only the believers saw it for what it was.
Don't worry. We will get out of this finacial slump soon, but I don't think it will happen by throwing more money at the problem. After all, when the house is on fire, you don't try to put it out using gasoline.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
That is one hell of a catch all if I have ever seen one.
If(follower == true){
punishment
}else if (follower == false){
punishment
}
Any loon can say that what they are doing is God's word. Any loon could be correct, and God could be one crazy SOB. Assuming that he isn't and that he is infallible, other than making faulty humans, believers of different groups of the same religion believe each other is wrong. So if they say they are both doing what God tells them to, and claim each other as false believers, then who is wrong and who is right?
This is why I saw religion is total BS. It causes more arguments than it solves. I will always listen to an active agnostic over and atheist or a theist, poly or mono.
I like the logic that, all theist are poly-non-theist, atheist just bring it one God further than them, and discount all Gods, while an agnostic says there is no solid proof either way to any of them, but prefer either a theist or non-theist view that we just don't understand at this time.
Researching differences between religions, even cult like ones, it brings me to the conclusion that there is no way any religion in this world is correct as it stands today. So they are all false religions, and following a false religion is more wrong than going off of your own judgment, and God gave man free will by the belief of religion. So we should have the free will to drop the whole mess and live life as moral and ethical as we can, and if you believe in God, pray that your morals and ethics are the right ones, after all, God created you, and he is infallible. So they have to be correct, unless you are a crazy nut job, but who is to say they are not correct.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
I still don't understand why people take religions as the be-all end-all for their lives. Just follow the good things they teach instead of inciting hate for others if you really want to practice a religion.
Yes, followers are affected by said punishments, but it is often not a severe for them because they are either prepared before hand as they were listening to warnings, or they are provided for during it to ease their burden.
Also, yes any person can say they are doing the will of God, but as the scriptures state, "By their fruits you will know them. John Bruce has shown by his actions to not be true follower of God. A true follower would not be so hateful, decietful and contentious.
Next, following a false religion is only really wrong if you know it is a false religion. I mean really know. If you do not know any better, you will not be punished for it.
But as you said, we have been given the free will to follow God correctly, incorrectly, follow the wrong God, or not follow any God. God gave us that ability. But any person who believes in their path will try in some way to convert you to the same path. Some are more insistant and forceful, while others are more casual and respectful.
But like I said, by their fruits you will know them.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
Well put, I'm a Christian myself and I agree 100% that while Jack claims to be Christian he most definitely does not exude that feeling from his ramblings. I like how you word your post too, in our small group studies we focused on that as well about, by their fruits you will know them, and to keep ourselves in check and each other in check. Apparently no one is helping jack keep himself in check >.<
Lets be clear, jack does not represent Christians in general :P
------------------------------------
I am a signature virus, please copy and paste me into your signature to help me propagate.
That is one hell of a catch all if I have ever seen one.
If(follower == true){
punishment
}else if (follower == false){
punishment
}
You do know that many of these "reigious moralists" have committed many exceptions they fail to catch, right? ;)
GameSnooper
What he doesn't realize, is that he's not being persecuted for his beliefs.
"For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God." - 1 Peter 2:20
Paraphrase taken from the first half: "You're getting beat up for the bad things you've done? So what?"
He tries to get what he wants by lying and threatening. Even if God wanted him to stand against T2 or another company, he's disqualified himself for any reward by his methods.
I'm not qualified to judge another man's soul, but there's a reason this is in the Bible:
"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." - Matthew 7:15-23
It's also interesting to note that this section comes right after verse 12, which reads in part:
"Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them"
As a Christian who was born again almost 27 years ago, and has played video games about as long, I think Thompson's fruit stinks, and he should think about some repentence of his own.
well put :)
------------------------------------
I am a signature virus, please copy and paste me into your signature to help me propagate.
Well put too.
I agree that after reading what you have said and quoted from the Bible, I find the same thing in King Soloman's words
"Do onto others as you wish to do onto yourself."
I am not good at quoting from the bible but those few lines are well worth mentioning.
It is from people like you guys who are Christians and also Gamers who really know that if you want to talk like the bible, you have to read it first.
and if you want to talk about videogames, you have the play them first to understand them.
There have been many times in my young life where I had made an incorrect judgement on certain videogames because I had not played them at the time, and looking back on them and seeing how wrong some of my words were I have been able to learn from my own mistakes and become a better person.
For Jack on the other hand, I kinda feel the way he talks trash about Take-Two's games is a sign that he has not even played games like GTA even though he has a habbit of taking photos of himself with a game cover in his hands.
instead of proving that you own the game, please prove to have PLAYED the game before making comments on it.
Videogame Reviewers critizice videogames that don't play well because they played those games. Videogame (Violence/Addiction) critics critizice videogames even if they have not played them at all.
This is not meant to be a rude thing to say, but it is just a way to try and ask them if they say something about a videogame, do they have the experiece to back it up?
"After all, when the house is on fire, you don't try to put it out using gasoline."
Debates are like merry go rounds Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it's over they have the same positions they started in.
It is simple.
1. Click on the smiley icon then place one in your post.
2 After that right click on the smiley and go to the properties screen.
3. Then paste your image address in the URL box.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- "The most difficult pain a man can suffer is to have knowledge of much and power over little" - Herodotus
Thanks. I hope you like the picture.
----------------------------------------------------
Debates are like merry go rounds Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it's over they have the same positions they started in.
You can also click and drag the picture into the comment field from another window/tab.
"A true believer would recognize the plague, famine etc and God telling them to be obedient."
Or maybe bad things just happen? How do you distinguish between nature and God? When malaria kills children despite fervent prayer, confession and heartfelt repentance... well where is the blessing? 1-2 million die of malaria a year every year, overwhelmingly children and in thoroughly devout, Christian, parts of Africa.
It's human nature to ascribe rational cause even when there might not be any. I'd be more cautious, claiming to know the mind or intention of god(s) is risky business, and more likely to reflect personal bias than "truth"... In that regard Jack is the perfect example why such pronouncements concern me.
Gift.
Real christians are guided by morality.
For example, if what I am doing brings a woman to tears in a courtroom, I can be pretty sure that whatever I'm doing is not for the glory of God.
Jack is a mental illness victim first, and a Christian second, if not third after "Egomaniac" or "Narcissist".
-I apologize-
I would put narcissist first, and before you put Christian you should have paranoid, delusions of grandeur and a whole mess of other things.
----------------------------------------------------
Debates are like merry go rounds Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it's over they have the same positions they started in.
When someone truly believes they know how God thinks or behaves, that is when they've truly lost touch with their faith.
Well put my friend, very well put.
Zen aka Jeremy Powers
Panama City, Fl.
Well said.
I will also put in, as I have every time Thompson says something about his own inane version of Christianity, that believing that just because he is a Christian that he somehow is better than everyone else who isn't goes against EVERYTHING that Christ ever taught. Thompson is going to get a big surprise when he faces Christ on the last day. What Thompson says is indeed likely to offend non-Christians, but it offends me as a Christian as well.
As C.S. Lewis said, paraphrasing, a prostitute is more likely to get into Heaven than a devout Christian who loves himself more than anything else in the world.
Amen brother!
Hey, Jack, here's a piece of scripture you've never read or understood:
"Do not use the name of your Lord in vain!" Exodus 20:7
Or my personal favorite,
"DO NOT JUDGE, for you will be judged yourself." Matthew 7:1
And here's one I found while looking for that last one.
"It's now what goes into your body that defiles you; you are defiled by what comes from your heart." Mark 7:15,16
"Do not use the name of your Lord in vain!" Exodus 20:7
well, according to Exodus 34:14, his name is Jealous. doesn't mean Jack's off the hook though
岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」
What that actually means is that God does not tolerate worship of another god. You have to understand the time period this verse was written in. During that time, it was nothing for people of other (non-Israelite) nations to believe in gods other than the one of their nation. For instance, the Edomites had their own gods and the Amalekites had their own gods. It was considered perfectly normal for an Edomite to also worship a god of the Amalekites and vice versa.
Contrast that with the Biblical teaching that there is only one true God. You can see that this was a safeguard to the Israelites to prevent them from being involved in the worship of false gods.
John Bruce however, has his own warped brand of religion (I can barely even call it Christianity). Kincyr, I know you don't think well of religion, and I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise. But please understand that not all Christians (or even other religious groups for that matter) should be judged by the vile actions of a small number of professed members.
If John Bruce actually "had any understanding of the Bible and of God", he would know that God would no longer use just one person to exercise his will. The very fact that he believes that he alone was commissioned by God for a special work shows an arrogant and haughty attitude, which God detests. It's just one more trait of the NPD that he suffers from.
So please, do not blame all Christians for the acts of a few.
What that actually means is that God does not tolerate worship of another god.
then there's a redundant redundancy (yes, I'm being ironic), as Exodus 34:14 states "For thou shalt worship no other god: for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God."
岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」
Yep, Moses in the 10 commandments was not happy with the people who were worshipping the golden idol (I think it was a calf made of gold), and therefore he knocked it over.)
Makes me think that the bible used that example that man must not realy on money to solve all of their problems, thus is the reason why we are having a Recession to remind ourselves that money is not the be all and end all.
However, would not any religion (true or false) set up a clause(s) that only worship of their particular relgion/cult will lead to "Salvation" and the worship of x would lead to "hell"? In some ways, there really isnt that much of a difference in pre Jew/Christian relgions like the Greek myths, etc that for the most part current religions replaced. Will Christianity(or fill in blank religion) join the ranks of the Greek myths and their multiple gods? Is there really any evidence that Moses received the 10 commandments on a mountain in the middle of a long desert journey or is it more of a myth with possible some truth but most forgetten through the passage of time(and memory)?
C.S. Lewis is backed up by Jesus himself, at least according to Luke 14:26
岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」
Questionmark 1987....Could I add that to my Sig. Brilliant piece.
To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; credible we must be truthful. Edward R. Murrow
@ GP
"I realize that some will find Thompson's comments about non-Christians offensive." I think a lot of Christians would also find Thompson's comments offensive.
No kidding. Jack Thompson is beyond a fanatic; he must have such a fierce messiah complex it's utterly blinded him to his own flaws. God never called us to be delusional.
honestly... i just refer to JT as JESUS JACK JONES THOMPSON!!!!!! keep us amused... :D
Jesus Jack Jones Thompson.... is dead... (funeral udruge, followed by Celebrate :D )
Yes, I agree, and I don't think what I wrote is at odds with your point here.
Two things...
1) This is non-news. Jack is disbarred, insane, and disgraced. He makes empty threats and is now utterly NOTHING. I really have no idea why Dennis insists on being Jack's personal media outlet. If JT really has something to say, he can post it on Human Events.
2) Jack is simply underscoring what atheists, agnostics, and non-believers have been saying for years: Christianity is founded on hate and hypocracy. If you are a Christian and are offended by this, good for you. But even "tolerant" Christians need to realize that their faith isn't all it pretends to be. Perhaps you people need to reach out to Jack and help one of your own...
I agree, this is non-news. This person is over he is as ridiculous to me as Fred Phelps now, except this one's mantra is "God hates GAMES".
I think this is news, but not relative to GamePolitics.com; there is no political slant to the story. I'd expect to see this on a videogame website, but not a political game site. However, I do enjoy reading about Jack's past failures and impending ones. Further, religion is so interpretive that Jack just sounds like a damn charlatan when he spews his understanding as the Way.
. . Wisdom begins in wonder. - Socrates . .
Not sure how long you've been reading GP, but we've always covered issues relating to religion and games. And we've always covered Thompson, since he is squarely in the political arena vis-a-vis games.
I have been reading and appreciating GP for a very long time. I rarely post. But I do find now that JT has been disbarred, he is no longer squarely in the political arena. Just my opinion though. It is your site.
He is now - as penny arcade put it - literally the equivalent of an old man yelling from his porch. And now he's been gagged as well. It's time to euthanize this poor dog (figuratively - of course ;) )
I've read your site for at least two years, perhaps longer. I understand why you post about Thompson and actually like to read about the loser. I only wonder how this particular post is applicable to both games and politics since Thompson is, essentially, no longer of any political influence, if he ever was. I suppose I didn't consider the affect his take-down delusions could have in the political arena. This particular post isn't yet political in nature, it is only comically-related to games.
Regardless, I read them all.
. . Wisdom begins in wonder. - Socrates . .
I also kind of find this is non-newsworthy. It just doesn't make much sense to quote a disbarred lawyer on religious matters, even when they're about the stock on some video game company. Besides that you're giving him attention, which isn't healthy for his ego, it sure won't be posted on religious boards, it won't be posted on video game newsboards, it won't be on the news on TV or in the newspaper. It just plain isn't newsworthy, no matter how you look at it. Get over Jack Thompson already. ;) Please.
Um, wut?
Until the church sold out to Rome, it was very accepting of those who wouldn't otherwise get a chance at the time. Corruption is what caused Christianity to have many of the flaws it does now, but it was HARDLY founded on hate and hypocrisy.
Honestly, is this any different from me saying atheism is founded on hate and elitism just because the more vocal atheists build whole careers around firing just that off at those who might happen to believe in God?
Oh really?
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/int/long.html
I'm inclined to agree with you, my cohorts' last story on him was the disbarrment. (Which even made our top 3 stories this year.... it wasn't #1 though, ironically enough.)
300 Episodes and counting: http://www.orangeloungeradio.com/
My favorite part of the bible is the Noah story that the Jews stole from the Sumerians. What is yours?
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
The "may he who has not sinned cast the first stone" story that was added in the first millenium? Or perhaps all of the homophobic verses inserted by King James?
King James doesn't out right say same sex relations is wrong, it just hints toward it. No English translation is right from any of them I have read. New Living is one of the worst...
I think the "may he who has not sinned..." is funny, because we have all sinned. So no first stone can be cast, which means no stones may be cast at all. It seems to be another version of "judge not lest you be judged."
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
Funny how? That people don't follow that teaching? Jesus' point there is exactly the one you just made: since no one is without sin, no one may cast a stone. So, no more stoning people for adultery.
What year were those words written again? I thought that section was around 200AD.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
Because "Noah" and "Gilgamesh" are such similar names.
Typical religious nutball response. This is tantemount to ancient plagerism, which is kind of pathetic when you think about it. You're so uncreative you can't create your own mythology?
The similarities outweigh the differences in the stories. It isn't a bad thing. Their changes to the story have more impact and drama to catch people's attention, but I like the original story more. Less falseness, and easier to relate to. The bible is mostly stories stolen from other cultures and religions, but because they teach valuable lessons. If the bible included all of the stories they have, especially all of them about Jesus, the bible would be at least 5 times longer.
Then people would be looking at the story about Jesus laying naked with a man, and wonder exactly what the meaning of that is, especially since in the bible, laying means to have sex with more often than not, but emphasizing on the nudity seems odd... (might hint to a lost ritual even) or is that story in the bible?
Either way, it is the same story. In the Noah story, they exaggerated a LOT. Global flood, 2-7 of every animal, and other things that are not logical, even more so if you do not believe in evolution at all, and to the extreme if you think the universe is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs were alive at that time. They wanted the story to be EPIC, and with how they told it, it was. They wanted people to easily remember the story, and many of us do. The problem is, not many people remember the lessons in the story, which were easier to see and remember in the original version. Noah and Gilgamesh are not the original names of either character. Both are from different languages.
There are not many, if any, stories in the bible that were else where before hand that were made less epic. That is one of the keys to the puzzle that it isn't the original story. If I tell you about the raccoon I almost hit 5 years ago, I am not going to remember the exact size, and to make the story less lame, I made make things more exciting. That is human nature. Believing that the Noah story was taken from the Sumerians fits much better in logic than any other rationalization though. The area that got flooded at the end of the ice age was the Garden of Eden/Atlantis. Once you fit those together, plus other stories, the whole world makes a little bit more sense.
Now the key is to be able to do the research to prove it, and find more tablets if Bush's or Saddam's insanity and war hasn't destroyed some of the most important documentation we could have. Bone samples and dive teams will be some of the most important research we can do in near Iraq.
Many religious groups in the US would fight against such research though, because they don't want to be proved wrong, and do not believe in their religion strong enough to believe that there is no way it is true. Absolute belief is absolute ignorance. You have to question everything around you to truly believe, you have to want the truth, not just how you been taught. Ignorance wants to keep how you were taught and not find any truth, and accept as is. That is part of why intelligent design is being taught in some schools, while evolution is banned.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
"need to reach out to Jack and help one of your own..."
you can't help someone that doesn't want the help O.o
------------------------------------
I am a signature virus, please copy and paste me into your signature to help me propagate.
Take Two's stock slide is because it was overvalued when rumors started about the takeover. The price shot up to around 25 per share and stayed there till the buyout was dead. The stock returned to its old price quickly then started sliding with the rest of the economy.
EA has also dropped almost 75% in the last year if I recall correctly.
Sales for both companies are down, while spending at both really hasn't changed.
People just don't have as much money for games now, and this is what we get.
I'm sure 99% of the comments won't have anything to do with discussing why T2's stock tanked.
Does HT believe that the Noah flood was a global flood or a regional one, and how old does he believe the world is? I think this could get fun, and I would enjoy debating his beliefs with reality.
We already know he thinks being gay is wrong, even though it was never said in the original writings, only the English translations, and that same sex marriage is against God's 'will', even though marriage wasn't thought of as a church ritual until the 1700s if I remember right.
Marriage existed 100 years before the church had anything to do with it in Rome. The church was originally just going to help keep records as a good gesture, but in the 1700s they, for the first time, said that same sex marriage was wrong, when it has been happening for 1700+ years...
I think Dennis is just trying to pull Jack back onto the site myself, but that is fine. I want to debate with him anyways.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
even though marriage wasn't thought of as a church ritual until the 1700s if I remember right.
Actually I'm almost positive you've got that backwards. It always was a church/cultural ritual. The 1700s was when it started to show up as something done by the State.
-Gray17
It existed before the new testament, which would be at least 100AD. Marriage was same and opposite sex then and before then I know at least of the first year AD, and maybe before. Also a transfer of land, cattle, or other things was a major part of the marriage for farm families. So they needed someone to record it because the state didn't have the resources to do so. I need to find where I found it before, but the church was happy to take on the burden for the state to help out. I could have sworn there was a good story behind it too.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
I know it existed before the new testament. I just said it always was a church/cultural ritual. You're trying to claim that "marriage wasn't thought of as a church ritual until the 1700s" when the fact of the matter is it's been a sacrament to the Roman Catholics since at least the early 1200s.
-Gray17
Marriage predates your religion, stop trying to imply that it wasn't ritualized until your belief system appeared. There is numerous accounts of polytheistic marriages in Ancient Rome, some I'm sure bare a great resemblence to the Catholic one. If there is one truth about christianity (ha! a pun), its that whatever it cannot dismiss as evil to do away with is indoctrinated into its own dogmatic annuls. Take christmas trees for example, and the ring at weddings.
I'm not trying to imply that it wasn't ritualized until my belief systems. I'm refuting the implication that it was only ritualized and held sacred by my belief system three hundred or less years ago.
-Gray17
I was replying the the thread in general Krono, not just you.
The Catholic Church only sanction marrage to cash in on it. Rome at one point had banned marrage, as marrage was a hold over from matriarchel relgions/societies. But the nobles kept on doing it anyway, so it was decided to bring it under the church doctrine and make money off of it.
The limitation of who can get marriage was 300 years ago, not the religious linkage as a whole. To monitor it, they required a priest or like ranking member of the church was required to be there at first for proof of marriage to help record it, which was 1900 years ago or so. Back then, same sex marriage was no different than opposite sex. It wasn't fully engulfed to the point where the church regulated any rules that apply to marriage unto 300 years ago.
I am not always good getting my thoughts out right... It is what I get for not rereading my post before posting it.
I think Yuuri may be right though. I think my version was the more idealized version that the church supports the idea of instead of the real reason. My point was mostly that Jesus was dead before the church included religion, let alone restrictions on sexual preference in a case such as marriage.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
Well Jack is officially off the meds. Wow, I mean just wow. If one didn't think he was nutty beforehand... doesn't he realize how he contradicts himself 500% in his emails? :P
Dennis, I think Jack secretly likes you
What's not to like?
I don't think you got it, Dennis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Game on, brothers and sisters." -Leet Gamer Jargon
Thompson is right. He is just a little biased against T2 in particular.
You see, God isnt only behind the slide of T2 stock. God has unleashed the Angel of Death upon the global market. Its common knowledge that God hates capitalism. He's an anarchist. Duh.
Actually, No. Scripturally speaking, God loves those that follow him and blesses them with wealth, success, prosperity, etc. It is when they love that Wealth etc more than God that they are punished with the loss of said wealth and prosperity.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
You know how you spot a christian? They always capitalize the word "God", as if he is reading the internets and deciding who to put on his naughty list for not making him a person, place, thing or idea.
People who talk to imaginary friends alone are deemed crazy, groups of people who talk to the same imaginary friend are deemed religious. I wonder, if people raped/murdered/stole in a group if it would any more acceptable.
Y HALO THAR Pandralisk. Not spewed enough hate and intolerance for the year? Trying to get your quota in before the ball drops?
Ha, christians screaming discrimination is like mother nature screaming global warming. Just because we've gotten you on your knees after centuries of being abused and tormented doesn't mean you're the victim.
Comeupance and all that crap.
That metaphor makes no sense whatsoever. Also, how is your belief in "mother nature" any different than the Jew or Christian's belief in Yahweh or the Muslim's belief in Allah?
Those who lack the mental maturity to do an honest self evaluation probably lack the mental maturity to properly debate, but I'm going to press my luck with you because I have a feeling you're going to make a fool of yourself.
I don't pretend that the forces of nature (re: mother nature) is sentient nor capable of feeling pain. I'm projecting social and emotional qualities onto an inanimate aspect of reality. It is subsequently different than a bunch of weak minded individuals prostrating themselves infront of a dead jew nailed to a pair of 4x6's.
There is no logical reason for people to believe this gibberish, they are just looking for an easy answer, even in the face of condemning counter arguements.
When a dead Jew comes back to life, that's a pretty damn convincing counter argument.
And don't kid yourself. Nihilism is the easiest answer there is. It doesn't require any effort, any thought, any logic or intelligence. Learning to suss out the truth from the lies, to take the right path instead of relying on blind faith or blind unbelief--that's hard. That's the hardest thing I've ever had to do.
He came back to life? Says who? Even in that fairy tale, no one saw him resurrect, they just found an empty tomb. People from other places in the world call that tomb-robbing, thanks.
Nihilists are as pathetic as religious people, the fact that there is no divine being holdign your hand is hardly depressing nor a reason to give on trying to aim for a series of goals. If anything, it forces you to question your reality and give pause to the complexity that has been given form by chance occurance.
Sure, because tomb robbers make a habit of breaking into tombs wherein broke Jews convicted of treason are buried, and stealing their bodies. I bet they were secretly Brazilian organ harvesters or something.
ok, that made me LOL.
I bet they were, those Brazilians had spaceships, ala Indiana Jones.
All mockery of your inability to explain your own mythos aside, your fairy tale is full of holes. The put the body of the dead guy into a cave, pushed a big rock infront of the entrance to keep out grave robbers, they come back, rock is moved and the body is gone. I guess they had some real bad CSI on the case if the only explanation they have is RESURRECTION! I guess if I eat an apple and leave no trace behind, I resurrected my apple.
Well, when said dead guy showds up at your house for dinner 3 days after your shoved a big rock in front of the cave you burried him in, I guess that means he body was simply stolen.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
Or he was the first Harry Hudinhi (If I spelt that right). I've seen that Chris Angel guy "levitate", maybe we should worship him too.
Actually, Harry Houdini (that's the correct spelling by the way, lrn2google jackass) wasn't some cheap street-performer like Chris Angel or David Blaine. He performed amazing escapes that stressed the body in every way, and supposedly he could even hold his breath for three minutes because he had a special training regimen including a bathtub filled with ice and ice cold water. He was aman physically fit and mentally fit, able to pick any lock and undo any knot, and that mix of intelligence and agility made him the greatest magician ever seen.
Thanks for the useless information Austin, who knows what we'd do without people like you maning google and wikipedia for us.
Actually, a lot of successful divers are big fans of Houdini's methods for controlling one's breathing. Just because you can't find use for it in your myopic viewpoint doesn't make it useless.
Oh, and I knew it without google or wikipedia.
I don't think he's Pandralisk. Honestly, looking at his other comments in this thread, I almost prefer Pandralisk.
No one should prefer Pandralisk over anyone else.
While he is no pandralisk, derovius is drinking from the same flask.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
Hey, leave my alcohol alone! Mine! You can have the Smirnoff. Leave me with my Everclear...
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
I didn't mean to imply he was actualy Pandralisk; I was using the name as an insult.
I tend to be more insulted when I have some idea who you're trying to put me in parallel with. Looks like your blind faith has failed you again.
Pandralisk was a commentor on GP who dispised all religion and blamed it for all the ills in the worlds. Much like you.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
Its too bad he seems to be the minority, the man has his facts straight from the sounds of things.
Really? Because honestly, I find that more atheists try to force their world view on people during conversations than the other way around.
But that's fine, it's become the pop-culture religion, just like bisexuality has become the pop-culture sexual orientation.
well in general, Atheists and the religious force their world views on others more or less the same; both groups have their share of nuts
However, if you only look at places like gamepolitics, then ya, it is Atheists who force their world view more often as these places do not seem to attract religious nuts aside from Jack... same might go for a lot of the forums or blogs you might be interested in
Anyone religious here tends to really want nothing more than a certain level of tolerance from non-believers... hence why those like devious gets attacked while other atheists never hear a word; it's one thing to say you don't believe in god, but another thing to say that everyone who does are idiots
There has still been more religious wars and deaths in those wars than any other type of war. If you are as dumb as Palin, then you think this war in Iraq is a religious war instead of an idiotic president not getting solid proof of anything needed to go into such a war.
Religious people are more likely to be racist, sexist, and/or against different sexual preferences than non-religious people. (I am just against stupid people, no matter the sex or race of the person.) Both religious and non-religious people are about equally against people of different belief. Christians stick out in the US as being against each other because of the insane variety of sub religions in the group that were created in the US, though they like to act like they are doing things the way they have been done all along. (Cults... gotta love them.)
I have never heard of an Atheist cult that committed mass suicide, but religious cults do every now and then in the world. I have never heard of an Atheist terrorist group either, but I am sure there is some of some sort, but far more rare than religious based terrorist groups.
Bisexuality isn't that new. The current take on it culturally is new, but Greeks and other ancient civilizations experimented with bisexuality and never named it to my knowledge, same with homosexuality. It just wasn't divided up until recently.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
There is much truth in this statement. Roman society also had a good deal of homosexuality in it, as did the Persian and many other ancient societies.
Actually many ancient cultures recognized homosexuality and bisexuality. Most Native American tribes actually saw them as acting as a bridge between the male and female, and considered such a one to be blessed with great wisdom.
Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.
I'm afraid that we don't listen to rambling morons. It seems we can compare you to Jack Thompson as well.
---
XBOX LIVE GamerTag: Harry Miste | Steam ID: Harry Miste | PSN ID: HMiste | EYE. HAVE. YOU.
Lol Well sorry to burst your bubble but I am in the same mindset. Stopped beliving in God and the word of the bible many years ago. I am not a big fan of religion. I am not Pandralisk. But I suppose I have many of the same views. His were alot more extreme as I really don't care what other people believe. What's in my own head is good enough for me. But what other people believe is there own business.
I do not think any one is a idiot for believing in something different then what I believe. I have many religious friends who at first could not believe that I did not beleive in the word of Jesus or follow the bible. I have discussed it with them alot and in the end we are still friends who believe in other things.
I tend to roll my eyes at the more hardcore religious people that tend to tell me that its the only belief that is possible and that not believing it is the wrong choice for my life. But who are they to say whats good for my life?
I am completly happy with my life. I don't need all the answers to life questions. I just want to enjoy my life as it comes and whatever happens after happens.
I just claim we are all idiots, because in 50, 100, and 500 years everything will be so different that we just can't even begin to get it. I just enjoy the debate. I like to debate many things, just religion is one of the most touchy for people. Might as well get people more comfortable about debating about it. I learn something new every time though, and that is what is important to me as an Agnostic.
I think that if there is a God, he would have to be pretty selfish to want people to praise him like people do. I would think that he would want them to just be good people and for them to achieve great things in life. If there is a god of any sort, I think that he would be in a plane of existence that is just now becoming known to us through m-brane theory or one we have no idea about at all.
In reality, that would most likely mean another being from a different dimension is the god people are looking to, and everything claimed as an act of God is natural events or than maybe the existence of our universe. Another theory is that we are all virtual people in a virtual world that real man kind has created. Everything is real to us because we are simulations that are there for testing or entertainment, and only a few people if any are real. (I don't remember what quote I read that that idea is based off of, but it was a pretty interesting concept.)
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
What is wrong with capitalizing the word God? It is his title. It may not be his actual name, but it is still a title. There is a difference between referencing the generic term god when discussing the concept of divine beings and referencing a specific one. Just as their is a difference when referencing the the generic term doctor when discussing the profession and referencing a specific doctor.
It is a matter of respect that Christian show. So why does it bother you so?
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
The way I see it, there are many religions, with many gods, but each religion has 'God' or 'Gods' when assigned to that particular religion, I capitalise to show that I am referring to someone's own God, rather than some other religions' god.
It's one part clarification, one part respect for the other persons' beliefs.
Religion is anathema to intellectual thought and discussion. To admit to having a belief in said religion is to admit that you want someone to tell you the answer, regardless of its basis, for the sake of the answer.
If anything, I'm showing you more respect by trying to shame you out of your dillusion than turning a blind eye to your condition.
You have no clue as to what you are are talking about. When someone is looking for answers they ask questions. IS asking questions wrong? Do you expect everyone to have to actually perform all research and study when they want to build something? Isn't easier to seek out someone with the answers rather than trying to figure it out on your own?
By shaming people and insulting them because they choose to believe that we are more than animals that build things and there is more to life than eat drink and have sex you are not showing respect to us. You are insulting us.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
Oh, you're right, I have no idea what I'm talking about. I only went to Catholic school from elementary to Grade 12. Thats what? 13 years of exposure to you people?
The entire problem with religion, or whatever title you want to give faith-based belief systems, is that they refuse to look inward on themselves. They do not ask questions, indeed the entire concept of "taking it on faith" implies that you do no thinking/postulating on your own, but leave the entire decision up to some invisible force for which there is no evidence w.r.t. its existance.
This egotistic notion that we are more than animals is laughable, and there is no basis beyond your fictional religious text to indicate otherwise. At its fundemental level, life is exactly about consumption of resources to sustain ones life and breeding to spread ones genetic material. To argue otherwise is dillusional. Indeed, everything else is stacked upon these fundemental aspects of an organisms life cycle and are nothing more than the product of human culture.
Stop living in your little fantasy world because the logical alternative to this make-believe state of affairs scares you.
How sad an existance you must have.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
Why? Because I do nice things for people because I like to see them smile or because I get to sleep in on Sundays? Maybe a little of both.
Dero, believe it or not, not everybody who believes in a diety is incapable of thinking for themselves. It was me thinking for myself that let me to my path. And yes, like you I was raised as a Christian, it just didn't feel right for me. As a friend of mine once put it. "If new data enhances (or at least doesn't harm) an organism's chances for survival, that data could be considered as "True" and accepted. If however the data causes harm to the organism, the data must be considered "False" and discarded or the organism dies." AKA "If it works, it is true."
In other words. Your path is whats "True" for you, but might not be "True" for others. The same problem for most religions is that they have those that believe that ONLY their path is the "True" one.
Respect garners respect. I respect your views, I simply ask you respect mine in turn.
Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.
"Respect garners respect. I respect your views, I simply ask you respect mine in turn."
Thank you. I was raised a Christian as well but simply stopped belieing in that stuff a long time ago. I don't believe in God or the word of the Bible. There are many who I have talked to who are shocked by this as if there is only one way to think and that the only true way is through the bible. I respect others people beliefs even Jack Thompsons. But not everyone believes in the same thing.
The only way to support their beliefs is to push the notion that people who do not believe are bad/evil/etc. So, there is fundementally no possible way for their to be a mutual respect between a religious and non-religious person when their own rules demonize the other party. In addition, these groups perpetrate what is tantemount to terrorist acts against people whose beliefs are not their own. I draw your attention to that church that pickets funerals with anti-gay this and that, and how they are happy soldiers are dead. There are also the people who murder abortion doctors, set said clinics on fire, equally applicable terrorist acts on stem cell facilities.
I could go on and on with how absurd the notion of mutual respect is in regards to religion v. non-religion. I will leave you with this: cite me a source where an athiest has burned a church to the ground, killed a priest/rabbi/etc.? I cannot think of a single incident where a non-religious person has commited such terrible acts.
Really Derovius? I do not believe your evil because you don't follow my religion, It is the choice you made and I'm happy you find joy in it. I do wish others felt the same as I, but that is their choice as well, and I hope they find joy in it as well. But I admit I do have issues with those that do try to force others to follow their way of thinking instead of letting them follow their own consience (sp?)
Blessed Be.
Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.
Lol wow. Because he has different beliefs then you means he has a sad life. Good of you to judge someone like that. Guess you need to judge me cause most of what he is saying I agree with.
What delusion would you be shaming me out of? That a little bit of respect is worth showing, as long as no-one tries to force something on me? I'm not stating a belief in a person's god, I'm simply respecting the fact that they choose to believe.
Considering some of the opinions I've seen on here, yes, that probably is a delusion, but it's one I'd rather have.
If religious people were harmless, I would have no problem with this. They are however a roadbump in the path of progress for fields like stem cell research and cloning. They can be as blind to science as they want, but get the hell out of the way.
They're not opposed to adult stem cell research.
So you're going to ignore an entire field and the obvious benefits of using embryonic stem cells because of their source? Thousands of people die pointless everyday, but the cure for cancer or severe neurological diseases will cost too much. Get over yourself.
I was just correcting you on a flawed thought you have. Then you attack me for no reason, about something totally unrelated to what I said. I did not even mention my thoughts on this topic (not like you'd care anyway if I was for or against it.)
Please get over YOURself.
"He" does not exist, so there is no need for "he" to have a title, correct? We might as well go around capitalizing everything, as at one point or another someone, somewhere, will project human social norms and emotions on it.
i.e. "That tree looks so sad with its drooping leaves"
Attempting to purport your shortsighted "faith" in something that doesn't exist by referring to it as a person is foolish.
Completely disregarding someone and insulting their intelligence because you don't believe as they do is foolish.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
Belief is irrelevant if not back up with fact. You show me some cold hard facts that there is some white-bearded father figure up in the clouds looking out for me and we will discuss further.
Prove there isn't one. Oh, yes. That old trick. :)
Seriously, belief is irrelevant if not backed up with fact? Unless you know all relevant information possible on the face of this planet, then, at least, some of your observations must be based on belief as you have not witnessed everything that you may or may not have an opinion of.
"You show me some cold hard facts that there is some white-bearded father figure up in the clouds looking out for me and we will discuss further."
Perhaps in your 13 years of forced Catholicism you were never taught about iconography and it's importance in grasping much larger messages. Probably no white bearded dude in the clouds, but the picture helps to grasp the scope of the concept. Do some people believe in the Bible word for word? Sure. Some people believe the WWF is real as well. People are people.
Perhaps having Catholicism shoved down your throat was the wrong thing for you, but there is general "good" in much of the messaging. Humans have a way of twisting religion to fit their own individual needs, but that does not mean that some good does not come of religion. So some idiots do some horrible things in the name of religion. What else is new?
But who are you, so brilliant and wise, to do us all a favor and open our eyes? Glad you have all the answers. Since all religion is a farce, and things are simply ordered, get us that grand unification theory! Hope it's all made out of strings :)
Need proof and fact? Fact: You are a hilarious troll. Proof? It's all over GP.
"Seriously, belief is irrelevant if not backed up with fact? Unless you know all relevant information possible on the face of this planet, then, at least, some of your observations must be based on belief as you have not witnessed everything that you may or may not have an opinion of."
Once again I must repeat myself; one need not know everything there is to know in order to question the validity of a postulation. If someone was to tell me that gravity was too weak to hold objects to the surface of the earth, and that if I jumped into the air that conservation of angular momentum would fling me into space, I could test said theory. I could jump. Oh snap, off I fly into space.
Religion lacks this very fundemental self-check. Its entire system is based off the notion that we mere humans could not comprehend "deities" plans and that all we see are the subsequent after effects. Worse still is the punishment of questioning said deity to suppress free thought and conjecture.
"Perhaps in your 13 years of forced Catholicism you were never taught about iconography and it's importance in grasping much larger messages. Probably no white bearded dude in the clouds, but the picture helps to grasp the scope of the concept. Do some people believe in the Bible word for word? Sure. Some people believe the WWF is real as well. People are people."
You cannot change the fundementals of a religion can call it christianity 2.0. The truth is the truth. To imply otherwise is to admit that you haven't the slightest clue whats going on, just like scientists when they first start out, and that you're lied for 2000+ years about it. You ready for that PR circus?
"But who are you, so brilliant and wise, to do us all a favor and open our eyes? Glad you have all the answers. Since all religion is a farce, and things are simply ordered, get us that grand unification theory! Hope it's all made out of strings :)"
Things are hardly simply ordered, such is further conjecture that this god figure does not exist. The chaotic forces and composition of nature beneighs no grand scheme. Moreover, explanation of this reality is confined by the equally fallible language we as humans have constructed to use as its medium. You may find the concept of strings amusing, but how else was this postulate to be explained beyond this analogy. Maybe you could paraphrase it for us.
"Once again I must repeat myself; one need not know everything there is to know in order to question the validity of a postulation."
Correct. Including your assertion that religion is based on fairy tales.
"Its entire system is based off the notion that we mere humans could not comprehend "deities" plans and that all we see are the subsequent after effects."
Just as we mere humans still can understand the vastness of space nor the inner workings of our feeble minds. And, BTW, observing the subsequent after effects is exactly what has allowed us a better understanding of our known universe. The Big Bang theory is based on the faith that our assumptions are correct. In my mind, this is the same faith that someone may put into a deity. There is no "proof", just observation of subsequent after effects.
"Worse still is the punishment of questioning said deity to suppress free thought and conjecture."
Completely agree with you in that this is the unfortunate result of organized religion. And it sucks.
" You cannot change the fundementals of a religion can call it christianity 2.0. The truth is the truth. To imply otherwise is to admit that you haven't the slightest clue whats going on, just like scientists when they first start out, and that you're lied for 2000+ years about it. You ready for that PR circus?"
So, 2000 years from now, will scientists refute the discoveries we now take as implied fact? Hindsight is an amazing thing. Truth is the truth? Define truth! If it's based on what can be observed, then the truth is only as meaningful as the moment it was observed. In research, we have a base of faith, the hypothesis. Just because we proved our theory does not mean it will always hold true, but we have faith it does.
And I am not changing the fundementals. For example, you would be surprised to see that Orthodox religions actually welcoming the questioning/discussion of the church. Seems that you are the one who wants everything cut and dry, right or wrong, true or false. Sorry to break it to you, but very few things in life are.
" Things are hardly simply ordered, such is further conjecture that this god figure does not exist. The chaotic forces and composition of nature beneighs no grand scheme. Moreover, explanation of this reality is confined by the equally fallible language we as humans have constructed to use as its medium. You may find the concept of strings amusing, but how else was this postulate to be explained beyond this analogy. Maybe you could paraphrase it for us."
Or, the ordering is so complex and layered that we can't understand it yet. One could argue that only the mind of God, or a God, could put this together. The fact that we see spinning of quarks in pairs, in opposite directions, in separate locations demonstrates that there is a connection that we don't fully understand yet. Or we have faith that there is an explanation.
As for string theory, I think it is EXTREMELY interesting and it is a unification theory that, on the surface, sounds reasonable (and it is VERY cool to think of the possibilities). The FACT is, we just don't know, but theoretical physicists have faith that they are moving in the right direction.
"Correct. Including your assertion that religion is based on fairy tales."
To imply that the contents of the christian's bible is somehow based in reality is to admit to incest, at the very least. If its not the Adam and Eve thing, its Noah's Ark. Quite frankly, to think that every woman I look on in a sexual fashion is somehow related to me is a little disturbing.
"Just as we mere humans still can understand the vastness of space nor the inner workings of our feeble minds. And, BTW, observing the subsequent after effects is exactly what has allowed us a better understanding of our known universe. The Big Bang theory is based on the faith that our assumptions are correct. In my mind, this is the same faith that someone may put into a deity. There is no "proof", just observation of subsequent after effects."
Once again, I need to correct your use of language; there is no faith, or belief in science. Ideas are proposed and tested. The religious parallels have no such trial and error attitude, their ideas are 100% from the moment they hit the paper. If you believe anything else, you are not following your religion as it was laid out. Is a simple concept like this that hard for you to understand?
"So, 2000 years from now, will scientists refute the discoveries we now take as implied fact? Hindsight is an amazing thing. Truth is the truth? Define truth! If it's based on what can be observed, then the truth is only as meaningful as the moment it was observed. In research, we have a base of faith, the hypothesis. Just because we proved our theory does not mean it will always hold true, but we have faith it does."
2000 years? No, trying 300 years for Newton's laws; mind you its not refutation but rather considering an oversimplification of the truth. Such is why the quantum momentum equation now has been adjusted to account for low velocities. As you said yourself, truth is truth, such is why when two individuals (or more) come upon the same conclusion, one can consider the reality of the phenomenon to be a shared experience, thus making it true. Yet again, here I am correct your misuse of the word faith. A scientist has no faith in his hypothesis, thats why its a hypothesis. To guess and check is the extension beyond faith, for faith stops at guess.
"And I am not changing the fundementals. For example, you would be surprised to see that Orthodox religions actually welcoming the questioning/discussion of the church. Seems that you are the one who wants everything cut and dry, right or wrong, true or false. Sorry to break it to you, but very few things in life are."
Of course they are, their stories have been disproven and made their lies much less believable. Now they are trying to realign themselves to hold onto their long-held power. Everything in life is right or wrong, true or false. Even the most complex situation can be broken down into singular, binary responses of yes/no, right/wrong, true/false. The issue lies in the complexity and how to pull it apart.
"Or, the ordering is so complex and layered that we can't understand it yet. One could argue that only the mind of God, or a God, could put this together. The fact that we see spinning of quarks in pairs, in opposite directions, in separate locations demonstrates that there is a connection that we don't fully understand yet. Or we have faith that there is an explanation. "
No, not really. Order in and of itself suggests benevolance, chaos suggests chance occurance on a massive scale. If something put a plan in motion to create something, there is a traceable pattern returning us to the root of said plan. Its absence suggests a lack of planning. The universe is about balance, pairing is the ultimate reason why quarks do not occur naturally, why electrons flow between species to obtain balance and therefore react said species, etc. All I see are self-checking systems of reality, there is no divinity here. There is simply no need for balance in a system guided by a divine force, seeing as the addition of said divine force would in and of itself been to be balanced in reality.
"As for string theory, I think it is EXTREMELY interesting and it is a unification theory that, on the surface, sounds reasonable (and it is VERY cool to think of the possibilities). The FACT is, we just don't know, but theoretical physicists have faith that they are moving in the right direction."
No, wrong yet again. The evidence points them in said direction, and they plod along in search of the answer. They didn't sit in the lab one day, flip a quarter and say, "Heads for string-whatsit, tails for M-whatsit".
I have to go with Derovius here.
The bible is the theft of older stories reworked to suit a purpose in lesson, not reality. So I would say that it is a fairy-tale, because it is exaggerated stories that can be scientifically disproved, especially the idea of a global flood, which there is no record of within the time line of those stories and geological evidence.
Hindsight is an amazing thing, the problem is religious text changes to suit the times and social acceptance, and it is ignored that those changes were ever made or they are discounted because of Jesus dying for sin, but not others, with no record of what one he did and did not die for. There were bibles back in the US slave era that said it was against God's will for a black and a white to have relations even. Some churches in the hick sticks still preach it.
The key thing is that things have never been as well recorded and researched as they are today, which brings debate because of the difference in knowledge of those who researched it and those who just believe what they were taught. It is amazing how EXTREMELY few people go back to the original text of their own book no matter what language it may be in, and find people who have made direct translations. Once you do that, you will realize that half of the stuff said in the bible is full of it, and so general that you can rework it to say whatever you want.
It is also amazing that the US is one of the most religious countries in the world, yet the majority of the civilized world is pulling away from religion like a bad habit that they found a drug to cure... and boy do people like their drugs for quick fixes.
I like m-brane theory....
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
@Derovius:
" No, wrong yet again. The evidence points them in said direction, and they plod along in search of the answer. They didn't sit in the lab one day, flip a quarter and say, "Heads for string-whatsit, tails for M-whatsit"."
Ummm...sorry. Perhaps you should do a bit of research. It is almost just like that. Here is a simple breakdown of the most glaring issues with ST: http://www.misunderstooduniverse.com/String_Theory_Death_of_Physics.htm
Most interesting bits?
"In order to make string theory work on paper our four dimensional real world had to be increased to eleven dimensions. Since these extra dimensions can never be verified, they must be believed with religious-like faith -- not science."
"The only prediction ever made by string theory -- the strength of the cosmological constant -- was off by a factor of 55, which is the difference in magnitude of a baseball and our sun."
"String theory with its undetectable extra dimensions; its unprovable-predictions on how these dimensions behave; its hopeful implications that there will be observable phenomena in the unseen future; its incessant invocations for Einstein's belated approval; and its promise of a unified theory of everything, invokes the same basic elements of faith of every other earthly religion."
More from this 2005 article: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18825293.700
or this: http://www.geocities.com/drratiram_sharma/StringTheoriesReappraisal.htm
Even Michio Kaku, one of my favorite physicists (definitely recommend his book Parallel Worlds), admits that many of his theories are, at present, untestable and, at present, unproven.
Lastly, the concept of negative proof applies when discussing anything that is not directly testable with an observed outcome, including the existence of God, a God or a Higher Being. It does not prove nor disprove its existence.
I am not here to assert that there is or is not a God or god. I have my own beliefs and they are just that, my own. There are many atrocities in the world that are committed in the name of religion, politics, greed, power, money, etc. Religion does not have the market cornered on crazy use of it. The people that use the name of God to justify their actions are just as arrogant, boastful and misguided as those they attack. To lump all people that follow a faith as stupid, ignorant sheep is just as close minded and ignorant.
I am not trying to change your mind or your belief, whatever that may be. And this brings us back to the original intent of this particular thread of discussion. I don't believe anyone here asked for your guidance or opinion regarding their beliefs and you have been, thus far, unable to hold a civilized discussion regarding this. I have found over the years that people like yourself, with a deep seated resentment to something such as this, have been damaged or hurt in a profound way and lash out like a child. That, or they just crave attention by taking a contrary position.
Believe what you will. Just keep it to yourself unless someone asks you to judge them.
Now hold on a damn minute... the WWF isn't real?
Shit.
. . Wisdom begins in wonder. - Socrates . .
It is real, but rehearsed. I thought it was totally fake, but an interview with Hogan proved that injuries are real, but they are accidents, and everything else is rehearsed. So they are acting... kinda like a live skit...
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
Indeed :) It is not that is it "fake" as it is "scripted". They are actors and everything is planed and rehearsed. The physical element is real, a lot of the hits are not. Love how the ring is almost as bouncy as those inflatable "Moon Bounce" attractions at every local fair.
Personally I find it ineresting that there is nothing so dogmatic as an atheist like yourself.
You are dogmaticly certain that there is no God so you lash out at anything that states an opinion to the contrary.
You are dogmaticly certain that anyone who professes faith is somehow a non-intellectual, despite many people, like E.Z.K>, who show the very clear ability to reason.
You maintain with dogmatic certainty that everyone else is wrong and only you are right, yet make the accusation that it is the believer who is narrow minded.
You lambast the believer with your professed dogma that they are intolerant and should not believe as they do, showing yourself to be woefully intolerant yourself.
Just an observation, but you may wish to think about your own dogma before you seek to condem those who have one different than your own. If you do actually think about it that is.
Own'd! ^_^
Well said.
Honestly derovius (see what I did there?), if I profess to believe in God (I did it again) and he truly doesn't exist, as long as I do not harm others, what have I lost? If I live a moral life, help others and generally behave myself, what does that matter to you?
Basically, IMO, you don't want the responsibility to live within limits you do not like. Therefore, to make yourself feel better about the choices you make, you claim there is no higher power to hold you accountable.
If that's the way you choose to live, so be it. Just don't condemn others for choosing differently.
I do, very cute. You referring to a fictional deity as he again though, so negative points I'm afraid.
And don't pull the Pascal wager on me, for all of Pascals genius, he was still burdened by his religious obligations. Imagine the mathematical wonders he could have given us if he didn't spend his remaining years devoted to such fiction. Moreover, you imply that I am some how immoral because I don't worship your deity; whats the next step, you going to kill me? Or others who don't believe the same as you? Hell, those evil Muslims believe in a perverted deity compared to mine, lets make war with them right?
Indeed you assume that I am somehow living a life that is socially unacceptable, religion aside. Morality is not the sole property of religion, indeed people who are only moral because of their religion are some of the most selfish people one can find. You are only kind to people because you want to get in your heaven? You don't rape because you're scared of hell? What if some new jesus came up to you and said, "Change of rules boys, rape is forgivable if you do it in the name of our deity". To be a morally upstanding neo-christian, would you rape for your deity?
You're missing my point. If I am wrong and there is no god, what have I lost? If I am right, and there is a god, what have you lost?
Pascal wager is logical infallible, and therefore not a true argument. Replace god with unicorn, and its equally as stupid.
Taking it apart section by section, you have this:
1. If deity doesn't exist, and you worship it, you waste valuable resources and time from your finite life on a dead end.
2. If said deity does exist, and you do worship it, you get rewarded accordingly
3. If said deity does exist, and you do not worship it, you get punished accordingly
4. If deity doesn't exist, and you do not worship it, you do not waste valuable resources or time from your finite life on a dead end.
There, all possible combinations for this situation. This is where you come back at me by saying, "but believing makes me a better person morally." No, you can be a socially acceptable person without religion, regardless of what your indoctrination at jesus camp has told you.
You are still missing my point.
I don't mock you and say that you are intellectually deficient because you don't believe in a god. However, you are saying that about us. If we choose to believe in God, how does that affect YOU? Why do you feel the need to tell us that we are ignorant, brainwashed halfwits if it has no bearing on your life? By shoving your beliefs down our throats, you are no better than John Bruce.
"You are still missing my point."
Maybe if you made one, I'd be able to destroy it and we could move on.
"I don't mock you and say that you are intellectually deficient because you don't believe in a god."
Thats kind of a hard sell; me being stupid for not embracing a deity whose existance cannot be proven.
"However, you are saying that about us. If we choose to believe in God, how does that affect YOU?"
Stem cell research, cloning, abortion, the right to bury loved ones in the ground without cheering crowds yelling how glad they are their god killed said dead person. Oh the list could go on and on, do I really have to waste my time telling you how much better the world would be without organized religion?
"Why do you feel the need to tell us that we are ignorant, brainwashed halfwits if it has no bearing on your life?"
See above.
"By shoving your beliefs down our throats, you are no better than John Bruce."
Except there is fairly solid proof that religion is keeping society back due to outdated traditions and superstition. If anything, John Bruce is part of your camping, seeing as he is cheering for your team.
Wow, Phalanx has specifically stopped you from performing stem cell research, cloning, having an abortion, and he gathered a crowd to cheer when you buried you loved one? Phalanx, why would you do all that?
You're missing his point. Yes, there are bad Christians out there. But you're not attacking bad Christians. You're attacking all Christians apparently on the assumption that all Christians, good or bad, contribute to these things. Phalanx has never done anything bad to you, so why does it matter if he believes in a god or not?
Religion has power because people submit themselves to them. To bring down said religion, you remove the base: its followers.
The problem is not the individual, but the ideology. As I said, by comparison, there has never been equivalent events involving athiests. Zero tolerance should be enacted for this behaviour, as they are obviously in no position to police their own people.
Zero tolerance... that's the kind of thinking that lead to the crusades
When you go and try to rid the world of religion, what do you do to those that will not let go? What does the concept of "zero tolerance" tell you to do to those people? Essentially in the end you force your way of thinking on them in the same damn fashion that the religious have done throughout history... you successfully become that which you condemn... you're beliefs are different, relying on science, but your methods become all the same... hatred, discrimination all the thing you blame religion for you will come to commit. To fight your devil you yourself shall become a devil.
By embracing the concept of "Zero tolerance" you have taken the first step. Zero tolerance brings you into conflict and brings you to hate people, even people that have done no real harm to you or anyone else; you force your thoughts and opinions upon them... the next step is going on to exactly how far you will try to push those people. Frankly you're joining the ranks of the nut case religious
thinking about it, i do believe, Stalin and Mao were very big on the idea of purging religion from their nations... heh, and i think i also once heard Stalin himself was originally raised as a christian before becoming an atheist
while you war agaisnt the religigous nuts, The more intelligent atheists and theists on the other hand embraced the concept of tolerance... Accept the beliefs of others, live and let live and move on... you live your way, and i live my way, and we let nothing more than the laws and rules of our nation judge our actions
No, I said there is no proof in a god like deity, in any of the numerous places humanity has poked and proded in its lengthy travel to becoming the most technologically advance animal on this planet. What I'm doing is telling you believing in an unverifiable (purposely?) concept makes you look like a fool.
Reasoning is not necessarily a key component of intelligence. My dog knows that if I put her favourite toy in the toy basket, and than place the basket ontop of her cage, that the toy is still in said basket. She reasons is continued existance even though she cannot verify its existance without pulling said toy basket down. By your logic, my dog is as smart as E.Z.K.
I maintain that concepts without proof, or rather, concepts which require no proof to be accepted, are deterimental to ones ability to act as intelligent beings. If there is anything preventing our species from obtaining higher scientific heights sooner it is this nonsensical superstition and baseless faith system. It had its place back when you were as likely to get an axe to the face walking to buy bread as reach the ripe old age of 30. Just like the idea that the earth is not flat, its time to correct yourselves.
Ignorance is intolerable, especially in a day and age where all people in our society are given the gift of an education. People had an excuse to be stupid 300 years ago, only a handful of them were given a proper education. There is no excuse for this nonsense to continue.
You continuously use the dogmatic concept as if this is some sort of belief structure in and of itself. I have no faith in science, whenever I disagree with a theory I am fully capable of recreating the results and proving to myself its validity. Try doing the same with your religion.
Do you believe that there may be life somewhere else in the vastness of the Universe?
If so, prove it.
Didn't they find indicators of bacterial life either in the ice of Mars or in its geological structures? Oh snap, what do I win?
Bring an alien to my house. Prove that aliens exist. If you still believe that there are little green men out there, but have no proof of it, then you have no right to criticize us for what we believe.
I'm satisfied with the article I read, thank you. If you need more proof, by all means get into that "devils work" space shuttle and fly to Mars. Simple probability tells us that for our planet to be the only ecosystem with life in the universe is unlikely, if not impossible. With atleast 100 billion stars in our galaxy alone, assuming atleast one satillete with the potential of holding life, thats 100 billion planets. 1 in 100 billion? Unlikely to be a true expression of life in our galaxy. Even so, if there is one "Earth" per galaxy, there are many, many more galaxies out there with their own Earths.
What I'm doing is telling you believing in an unverifiable (purposely?) concept makes you look like a fool.
So I'm a fool for believing in the existence of Hawking radiation until it's actually observed?
-Gray17
Absolutely, there is no reason that Hawking is 100% correct about everything. In fact, you would probably make his day by proving him wrong to adjusting his theory.
I'm sure that I would make his day by improving upon, or outright proving wrong his theory.
However you're calling me a fool for assigning any quanity of belief to it in absence of proof. That's an incredibly weak argument to make as it means that all the people that assign a given scientific theory enough belief to test it are fools for even trying.
-Gray17
There difference being that people do not believe in science, science demonstrates its validity by definition. One person proposes that phenomenon is due to <insert relationship>, or follows <insert mathematical model>. Other people either agree or disagree, and attack said argument with the scientific method to determine its truth. Einsteins theory of general relativity is a good example of this, people were so blown back by the notion that time was interrelated to velocity that people actively tried to disprove him. Many experiments later and it still holds.
Yet you show your own ignorance and intolerance by your very response.
You're just as dogmatic as the people you're attempting to revile. The difference is that you believe in nothing while even people of faiths not my own believe in something.
Faith does not equate to a lack of intellect, that's a rather pathetic strawman that's so overused as to be ridiculous at this point. Another mistake you make is in equating education to intelligence when the two can be mutually exclusive. You can take an unintelligent person and fill their head with all the education one can afford and they'd still be unintelligent.
You demand ireffutable proof of the existence of God, yet you've closed your to even the possibility that you might be wrong. A fool demanding proof of his foolishness as it were. Even if someone were to bring forth the evidence you demand you would refute it out of hand because you cling to your dogma as if it were the only answer worth considering for an intelligent man. When in truth an intelligent man listens and is willing to at least hear out those who disagree. Things that you have shown that you're unwilling to do.
The human intellect is an interesting thing. The most interesting thing about it is the sheer lack of humanity that is born of it's worship.
What is intollerable is your attitude, born of your own ignorance and prejudice. You act with smug superiority when you truly have no answers of your own, save to naysay anyone who disagrees with you.
Thank you. I'm done arguing with him. He's as bad as JT.
Oh, more faith I see. Given no proof to hold onto your beliefs, you demonize me to discredit my position. You are a credit to your religion sir.
You are doing much the same only ten times worse. You have provided no proof that you are correct, but rather you are simply insulting those who have faith and belittling their convictions.
Till you put up, I suggest you shut up.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
Correct in what? I have to teach you philosphy to show you what an infallible arguement is? Pfft, you people aren't worth the effort if thats what it has to come to.
Well, Derovius, if we're not worth the effort, then please leave this site and do not post here ever again.
You hide from the discussion only to appear and add that? You could have saved yourself the embarassment and just stayed quiet you know...
Okay, in retrospect, I sounded harsh in my previous comment. But I will say this: My previous comment was in regard not to the discussion itself, but your attitude about it. It would be to your benefit to have an open mind, not an "I'm right, you're wrong" attitude and the penchant to deliver insult comments (a la Jack Thompson).
Anyway, about the discussion about God, I'll make this simple. Are you wrong in not believing in God? No. Am I wrong in believing in God? No. It's all in what we believe in. It's that simple. But please, don't try to force-feed your belief to others, which is what you appear to do.
That's all I have to say. But I will give you some credit for replying to one of my comments. Jack Thompson never did, for some reason...
"Yet you show your own ignorance and intolerance by your very response."
I am ever so eager for you to correct me.
"You're just as dogmatic as the people you're attempting to revile. The difference is that you believe in nothing while even people of faiths not my own believe in something."
So you're saying that to question ones existance and reality is as bad as living as an emotional and financial slave to these religions. Ah, good sir, you make me smirk. Thank you.
"Faith does not equate to a lack of intellect, that's a rather pathetic strawman that's so overused as to be ridiculous at this point. Another mistake you make is in equating education to intelligence when the two can be mutually exclusive. You can take an unintelligent person and fill their head with all the education one can afford and they'd still be unintelligent."
Perhaps you need to realign yourself with the definition of faith. To take something regardless of its backing is a very unintelligent response to a problem. As for your comments on intelligence, I direct you to the first sentence of this paragraph, simply applied to the word intelligence this time. You seem terribly confused by their meanings.
"You demand ireffutable proof of the existence of God, yet you've closed your to even the possibility that you might be wrong. A fool demanding proof of his foolishness as it were. Even if someone were to bring forth the evidence you demand you would refute it out of hand because you cling to your dogma as if it were the only answer worth considering for an intelligent man. When in truth an intelligent man listens and is willing to at least hear out those who disagree. Things that you have shown that you're unwilling to do."
I could very well be wrong, there is no evidence to that effect however. Therefore my position is that I am not wrong, until such evidence arrives. You howeevr come to the table and tell me that I am wrong for not accepting something as truth until its disproven. Gullible is the word I think I shall use for this specific stance you have taken. Indeed I have a bridge in my back pocket for you.
"The human intellect is an interesting thing. The most interesting thing about it is the sheer lack of humanity that is born of it's worship."
So you to try and argue that without religion the world would devolve into mindless chaos. They certainly have you trained well, sir.
"What is intollerable is your attitude, born of your own ignorance and prejudice. You act with smug superiority when you truly have no answers of your own, save to naysay anyone who disagrees with you."
Wonderful irony, the people who tied women to wooden stacks, splashed them with petroleum and set them on fire are calling me ignorance and full of prejudice. You have no ground to look down upon me, you people have been the scourge of reason and enlightenment since the Dark Ages.
The problem with your argument is it's inherrant fallacy and utter lack of capacity or room to reason.
"I demand proof that I am wrong" goes your argument. The problem is that whenever anyone uses this particular argument they have no intention of being proven wrong. Nothing that is said to you, or anyone, who resorts to it is that you can't be proven wrong in your own mind. It wouldn't matter what you were shown because you've completely closed your mind to the very possibility that you are, in fact, wrong.
A fool demanding proof of his foolishness, as I said previously.
"The problem with your argument is it's inherrant fallacy and utter lack of capacity or room to reason."
Thank you for making my point, my argument is fallible, it can be disproven, so stop whining about being persecuted and disprove me.
""I demand proof that I am wrong" goes your argument. The problem is that whenever anyone uses this particular argument they have no intention of being proven wrong."
Lets find out, give it a stab, so to speak. All I see is you stalling, like your lack of evidence will suddenly be a nonissue if you wait long enough.
"Nothing that is said to you, or anyone, who resorts to it is that you can't be proven wrong in your own mind. It wouldn't matter what you were shown because you've completely closed your mind to the very possibility that you are, in fact, wrong."
I think some sort of profound evidence there is a white-bearded father figure looking down on me would be quite convincing. The sad truth is that you have no evidence, and simply refuse to admit to that fact, much less what it implies.
"A fool demanding proof of his foolishness, as I said previously."
You statement says nothing to the topic at hand. Show me evidence of your deity, or admit that you have none. Its really that simple.
Okay, here goes:
The universe exists. No natural laws can fully explain the origins. Why did the big bang occur? What is the purpose of the universe? How did the pre-creation 'stuff' that would become the universe come into existence? Science is incapable of answering these questions. At the moment, we must choose to believe that somehow, the universe came into being by itself, or that it had help from a supernatural power.
The universe is aesthetically pleasing. There is no scientific reason for mountains, hills, space, etc. to be beautiful. They imply a sense of the artistic, of the creative intelligence behind the formation of Earth.
The universe is very damn useful. What are the odds that a universe where mankind can forge a machine that lets us have this conversation across miles and miles of wires exists? The inherent usefulness of the physical world implies an benevolent intelligence behind the laws of science. If the world is a product of random chance interactions between atoms, then the very fact that science has laws is a nearly indescrible coinicidence. Or a miracle. Which stands the test of reason better?
Christianity specifically has this defense: Eleven laymen and a tax collector followed a Jewish prophet named Joshua, called Jesus in Greek. Jesus was arrested, excecuted by the Roman govenrment and buried. Over the course of the next century, thousands upon thousands of Jews and non-Jews claimed that he had risen from the dead. Many of these people suffered persecution. Thus we know that they believed in the ressurection sincerely. Many of the desciples of Jesus personally suffered persecution but did not recant their beliefs, thus we can be certain beyond reasonable* doubt that they weren't lying about the ressurection.
This leaves us with several posibilities.
-One, some party took the body of Jesus so that the disciples couldn't do the same and claim he had ressurected. This is unlikely because that party would have undoubtedly presented said body when the new religion began to spread.
-Two, Jesus wasn't dead despite two floggings, six hours on a cross, and a spear through his side. The Roman soldiers who excecuted him were too incompetent to make sure he was dead. Putting him dark cave with a rock in front of the door somehow revived him.
-Three, there was no ressurection and dozens of followers had a mass hallucination that convinced all of them beyond any doubt that a ressurection had occured. Conveniently, the body also dissapeared to help convince them of this delusion.
-He actually came back to life.
*If you want to be unreasonable, you could claim that the disciples of Jesus all agreed to lie about his ressurection and start a new religion around it in order to get revenge against those who sentenced Jesus to die. In which case, you would have to concede that their revenge worked flawlessly and they should be commended for a tremendously successful Ganatos Roulette. But like I said. Unreasonable.
"The universe exists. No natural laws can fully explain the origins. Why did the big bang occur? What is the purpose of the universe? How did the pre-creation 'stuff' that would become the universe come into existence? Science is incapable of answering these questions. At the moment, we must choose to believe that somehow, the universe came into being by itself, or that it had help from a supernatural power."
So, in response to a very complex problem your solution is to make up an answer, call it truth and move on? People who do not seek to solve problems, and become sedentary in their views on the natural of reality do not progress. If the world was filled with people like you, we'd still be living by candle light and horse-drawn carriage. To invent and advance is to question.
"The universe is aesthetically pleasing. There is no scientific reason for mountains, hills, space, etc. to be beautiful. They imply a sense of the artistic, of the creative intelligence behind the formation of Earth."
Aesthetics are a human response to stimuli, nothing more. As is the concept of art. Given what you've said thus far, I can only speculate you have absolutely no background in science whatsoever, as you continue to apply humanistic traits to that which is not human. Science is not "happy" or "sad", and patterns are not "beautiful" or "ugly". If the numbers show a consistent mathematical relationship, there is a pattern given the context.
"The universe is very damn useful. What are the odds that a universe where mankind can forge a machine that lets us have this conversation across miles and miles of wires exists? The inherent usefulness of the physical world implies an benevolent intelligence behind the laws of science. If the world is a product of random chance interactions between atoms, then the very fact that science has laws is a nearly indescrible coinicidence. Or a miracle. Which stands the test of reason better?"
So now your deity invented the internet for you to? I'll stop there, the level of stupid is overpowering.
"Christianity specifically has this defense: Eleven laymen and a tax collector followed a Jewish prophet named Joshua, called Jesus in Greek. Jesus was arrested, excecuted by the Roman govenrment and buried. Over the course of the next century, thousands upon thousands of Jews and non-Jews claimed that he had risen from the dead. Many of these people suffered persecution. Thus we know that they believed in the ressurection sincerely. Many of the desciples of Jesus personally suffered persecution but did not recant their beliefs, thus we can be certain beyond reasonable* doubt that they weren't lying about the ressurection."
Because stubborn, pig-headed people under torture tell only the truth. We should inform the authorities, if they torture people almost to death we can do away with courts all together. Your foolish logic is a testiment to religious people everywhere and I thank you for providing me with evidence of your irrational thought processes.
"-One, some party took the body of Jesus so that the disciples couldn't do the same and claim he had ressurected. This is unlikely because that party would have undoubtedly presented said body when the new religion began to spread."
Or they conned the followers by taking the body themselves to making a highly unplausible event take place? Desperate people are psychologically incapable of being disuaded of their beliefs when they are desperately attached to them. Having your so-called messiah nailed to a dark age torture device and die of exposure sounds like a desperate occurance, yes?
"Two, Jesus wasn't dead despite two floggings, six hours on a cross, and a spear through his side. The Roman soldiers who excecuted him were too incompetent to make sure he was dead. Putting him dark cave with a rock in front of the door somehow revived him."
Lol, the human body is a magnificant example of natures strive for perfection, the amount of punishment that the body can sustain before it systems start to fail would boggle your simple little mind.
"-He actually came back to life."
No, no he didn't, sorry.
I take back my earlier comment. This is not blind unbelief. This is comitted, willful unbelief. I doubt you'd even consider belief in God if he reached down and slapped you. You don't really want any argument that God might exist--you just want something to 'destroy' in order to make your internet penis look bigger. It's quite pathetic.
For whatever reason, you hate people of faith so much that you won't even consider that our words might be true. And it's clear your faith in science and your own brainpower is far more unshakeable than my faith in God. Being full of yourself is not intelligence, man. It's foolishness. You don't have to be a believer to know that.
@ Derovius
The way you're acting, it only proves that you worship a god with the same fervor as the people you are calling fools: you insult them because the god they worship is not the one you do; you try to dissuade them from believing into their god and try to make them believe in yours, even if they are content with their belief and no one suffers from them believing in their god. The god you worship is Logic.
I believe in God, I'm proud of it, and there's no way you can stop me from doing so while you continue to act the way you are. I really, really don't think humans normally act purely on logic alone. We love, hate, and feel a plethora of emptions that can and will make us make illogical decisions instead of logical ones. I agree to some degree, that we need logic. But as humans, our ability to be illogical is part of our nature; throwing this away and making everyone act only on logic will take away what makes us human, and make us just like every other animal in the world. Insulting us won't make us say that you're right. We believe in God or multiple gods, and as long as we don't harm anyone or try to justify immoral and evil acts with the words "I'm doing God's will", we have the right to believe any way we want to, in any god, whether God, logic, or otherwise.
I'm a Catholic, but I don't try to make everyone believe in my God. I have always seen different religions as the ways humainity has tried and will try to see God, not with mine being superior for such-and-such reason; in addition to this, believing that there is no God is another way to see Him, just as not seeing is another way of viewing the world around you, in a sense.
But to me, logic sounds like a cruel and cold thing to worship. When you're lonely, having God there with you to share your lonliness and your fears is a good feeling. With logic, the only thing it can do is to tell you, plainly and bluntly, "You're alone". Say that there is no God, for argument's sake. Even though there is actually no God with you when you are alone, it's still a better feeling than actually feeling that you are completely and utterly by yourself in your pain.
Well, anyway, believe what you want to believe, but don't make fun of others because your belief system is in contrast with theirs.
"The way you're acting, it only proves that you worship a god with the same fervor as the people you are calling fools: you insult them because the god they worship is not the one you do; you try to dissuade them from believing into their god and try to make them believe in yours, even if they are content with their belief and no one suffers from them believing in their god. The god you worship is Logic."
Those who lack the language to describe an idea will use what they know to communicate. You know nothing other than worship, so the idea of a strong grounding in an idea, some could say unwavering, smecks of devotion. Logic is an philosphical idea, a way by which humanity has attempted to seperate themselves from their bias view of what reality is in the search of the absolute truth of a subject. It cannot be worships, deified or brought down to the level of a religious act, as it is in its purest form that which is not human. Religion is a human construct, as logic, but is however subject to interpretation and therein lies its failure.
"I believe in God, I'm proud of it, and there's no way you can stop me from doing so while you continue to act the way you are. I really, really don't think humans normally act purely on logic alone. We love, hate, and feel a plethora of emptions that can and will make us make illogical decisions instead of logical ones. I agree to some degree, that we need logic. But as humans, our ability to be illogical is part of our nature; throwing this away and making everyone act only on logic will take away what makes us human, and make us just like every other animal in the world. Insulting us won't make us say that you're right. We believe in God or multiple gods, and as long as we don't harm anyone or try to justify immoral and evil acts with the words "I'm doing God's will", we have the right to believe any way we want to, in any god, whether God, logic, or otherwise. "
You're absolutely right, to be a logicly thinking individual is anathemic to a humanist or religious individual. Such is the definition of perfection, that which is everything beyond what one is capable of being. You have crossed yourself in a rather blatant manner, to be a christian is not to acknowledge that humans are animals, but you are somehow special due to the tinkering of a deity. If you believe otherwise, you are obviously confused as to where you lie, much like a bisexual is generally considered a confused person, not sure whether they are completely heterosexual or completely homosexual.
"I'm a Catholic, but I don't try to make everyone believe in my God. I have always seen different religions as the ways humainity has tried and will try to see God, not with mine being superior for such-and-such reason; in addition to this, believing that there is no God is another way to see Him, just as not seeing is another way of viewing the world around you, in a sense."
So you think Taoism and Scientology are looking for your god? Not all religions worship one deity, or a deity at all, its the blind faith you all have in common that is your failing.
"But to me, logic sounds like a cruel and cold thing to worship. When you're lonely, having God there with you to share your lonliness and your fears is a good feeling. With logic, the only thing it can do is to tell you, plainly and bluntly, "You're alone". Say that there is no God, for argument's sake. Even though there is actually no God with you when you are alone, it's still a better feeling than actually feeling that you are completely and utterly by yourself in your pain."
It sounds like you have psychological problems if you need an imaginary friend to talk to when you're lone. Perhaps even social problems, as most normal lonely people find other lonely people and are then no longer lonely. To live in a land of make believe to make yourself feel good about yourself or your future/past is really pathetic.
"Well, anyway, believe what you want to believe, but don't make fun of others because your belief system is in contrast with theirs. "
Simple scrutiny destroys your positions time and again. Its hard not to keep people from running head long off a logical cliff when you see whats waiting for them at the bottom. Try thinking for yourself, I know its hard to do when you've been spoon fed the answers, but you'll be a better person for it.
What you are is clearly evident. Much like the oft maligned Pandralisk you are a bully.
Any who think differently than you are clearly inferior beings before your own self appointed greatness. It is men like you sir, so enamored of their own intellect and smug sense of superiority, that are the reason why there is so little in the way of civil discourse.
It shouldn't matter to you so much. I'm a Christian, and I will continute to whorship and believe in God because it makes me happy.
As I stated previously, simple amusement for simple minds.
As I thought of stating previously, you're an asshole.
That he is. TROLL ALERT!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Game on, brothers and sisters." -Leet Gamer Jargon
Holy shit, a reply without facepalm. By the way, that Amy person is looking for you.
Know why he's facepalming? Because of people's stupidity, such as yourself.
---
XBOX LIVE GamerTag: Harry Miste | Steam ID: Harry Miste | PSN ID: HMiste | EYE. HAVE. YOU.
Amen to that.
He does not sound like one to me.
Simple amusement like petty insults?
It isnt that they are stupid, it is that they have flawed logic. I think we all agree that Jack has flawed logic, and that he is definitely smart, you have to be to even try to begin to explain his flawed logic, but we would say he is stupid because of his flawed logic.
It just does not compute. It is much like 0.3 with 3 remaining (which is 1/3) plus 0.6 with 6 remaining (which is 2/3), it equals 0.9 with 9 remaining and 1. So does 0.9 with 9 remaining exist? or is it really 1.
[I do not know why my brain loves this little thing, but it seems to be something I always revisit ever few years.]
The believers closed off to fully questioning their religion to the point that they say that the Noah flood story and the Sumerian flood story are not the same, or that many other stories in the bible were not taken from else where I would say were narrow minded. Then the reality that man has so distorted religion in a way even from the gathering of stories for the new and testament, that it is illogical to follow any religion, especially based off of Christianity. I would follow the Jewish belief before the Christian belief any day, but still I would poke and prod it to find every hole I can to try to figure out where truths lye and lies lye.
I just want science to dig into religion for science to prove the truths and falsehoods of religion because of the extremist groups, mainly Pentecostals in my experience, that so strongly believe in such things as a global flood, 6000 year old universe, and dispute evolution. Then the governments to deal with Scientology, and societies to deal with violence, local and terrorist.
As the same time, there are idiots out there that still think the Earth is flat. So I guess morons will always exist even with scientific proof, but at least scientific proof of things destroys their numbers. I don't care as much about other Christian groups that stay the hell out of the way of scientific research. They can go on their happy way, but for the dweebs that hinder research and our education system, by getting it to teach intelligent design instead of evolution. There is real scientific evidence that proves evolution but not intelligent design, and those people make be blow my top because of the waste in time of proving research to the dumbest of people, with their stupid flawed logic, like the people who believe that Earth is flat.
In the end, isn't flawed logic the same as non-intelligent? Because that flawed logic affects the inner workings of their entire understanding of everything, and understanding is what intelligence is, isn't it? In the end, I claim that we all have flawed logic, but to different degrees, and that we are all non-intelligent, and that science will eventually pull the people who have slightly flawed logic closer with even less flawed logic, while having them outcast people with extremely flawed logic, because it isn't worth our time to try to rationalize things to them.
Just like why a more intelligent species wouldn't deal with us because we are so far intellectually beneath them, we wouldn't deal with teaching ants what we know. I think the human race may one day separate between the ignorant with flawed logic and the more intellectually superior with far less flawed logic.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
"Doctor House" doesn't exist either, but it's still proper to capitalize his title and name even if you know that
The title of Doctor is not House's alone, there are legitimate incarnations of said professionals. Such is why I did not go off on a diatribe about you capitalizing Jesus, given that this is the alias the jewish prophet used. From what I understand, historical records back up the notion that there was a cultist matching his description and actions around the time in question.
I can make up a title right on the spot, one that isn't used in real life, and apply it to a fictional character and it would still be proper to capitalize the title when writing it...
I can also run naked through the streets, doesn't mean its within the rules to do so.
God can be spelled as God or god depending on understanding, belief or laziness. This is due to the numerous number of gods in ancient religions that makes god not only a name but also a title such as graphic designer or physicist. When we start capitalizing career titles, more non-believers will start capitalizing it as God instead of god.
If the person understands of it as a title instead of a name, then it is god in any situation even as your god or my god. If the person understands it as the name, then it would be God.
I would feel very weird typing, "Megan Fox is one hell of a hot Actress." Though Microsoft Word grammar check doesnt dispute it for me, so maybe... I claim that god has no name though, or that we are not told his original name ever because it does not matter, though according to Christians Jesus is his Earth name. Now saying jesus would be disrespectful and incorrect, because that is definitely a name, though lord and god are titles which do not require capitalization, but it is typically done as so in respect. I do capitalize Microsoft Word though, so I guess that is disrespectful in a way, but it just depends on the understanding of the use.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
Well this could get rather debatable...
Thing is "doctor" is only capitalized when referring to someone by name, "Doctor Stephen" or something like that while it's not capitalized when using it in general. HOW you used the word dictates whether it is capitalized or not...
"Doctor" is used much in the same way as "Lord", "Lady", "Sir", "Duke" and so forth (all of which also evade MS grammer check)... If you are wiring about someone who has been knighted you refer to them as "Sir [name]", but if you are just talking in a formal manner to refer to a man in front of you it's just "sir".... similarly, if you refer to duke in general their would there would be no capitalization, but refer to a particular duke by name and it's proper to capitalize the "duke"
The way it seems most career names such as "actress" and "designer" are not seen as titles in the same manner as "Doctor", "King", "President", "Professor" and so forth (again avoiding MS grammer checks)... you could say that a "psychologist" is considered just a job and not a title, while the term "Doctor" is both a job and a title, hence why one is normally capitalized and the other is not... in fact, when referring to psychologist by title you refer to him as "Doctor"; his job is being a psychologist but his proper title is Doctor
In the end, it really doesn't matter. It is a dated system, like our education system, and just a status thing for the ego driven IMO. [Many doctors like to think they are God...] It is like, woo hoo, you spent 8 years in college "learning" about art, so you are a doctor now since you have a phd.
It used to be a title where people saved lives or made great achievements, but now we have plastic surgeons, and I would not say they are doing anything important other than the ones doing reconstructive surgery to those injured. Of course I don't like big tits, so I wouldn't think there is something important to it. In your examples, they were titles of importants due to services, other than Lady for the more recent terms which was more like Mr. Miss. or Mrs. I think Mr. and Mrs. is all we really need title wise.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
Plastic surgery was born out of the need to give back dignity to terrible disfigured people. Simply because its officers have sold themselves out to the vanity of others does not debase its honorable beginnings.
I think JT picked the wrong religion and pissed off God, and so he got disbarred.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
Dennis said:
"So, if T2’s business reverse was God’s vengeance, does that mean that God struck you down too when you were disbarred?..."
I loved the comeback. :D
- Warren Lewis
I cackled at that one. GP for the win.
Yeah, when I first saw that "Thompson sez God made stocks fall" remark, I immediately thought, "No, Jack, God didn't make those stocks fall; he did get you disbarred."
If God was behind the fall of Take Two Stock, then God must be responsible for Jack Thompson's downfall because, last I checked, God was a nice and forgiving entity. He doesn't approve a lot of things, and that includes the ex lawyer's harrassing tactics. Better yet, you could say God and Karma tag teamed the man and watched him cause his own downfall.
In the end, though, no one can really know because, y'know, to me? We're all part of the plan. God's plan. If God wanted the stocks to fall, there was a bigger purpose behind it. If someone lost their job due to their own incompetence, maybe God wanted them to learn from thier mistakes. God, to me, helps us learn from our mistakes and, perhaps, lead us in a direction to make ourselves better. God doesn't control everything, he just helps us see what is there and we, as people, decided what to do and what to learn.
... and, those who refuse to learn are doomed to repeat them.
That goes to show that Jack Thompson didn't learn jack shit.
(This is as religious as I get, for I keep my beliefs out the door. Good ol' Mom, teaching me this. Forgive me!)
Amy Levandoski
I love the infinity of religion. Einstein was almost right, but the universe isn't infinite in size, but in growth given current scientific understanding, m-brane theory may change that too. Human incompetence is it's own matter.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
An' you don't need to be religious to figure that one out! Amen, DeepThorn. Amen!
Amy Levandoski
I am fine if people believe in such-and-such religion, but when they start going around saying that people are evil purely because they don't believe in such-and-such religion, then I take offence in that. Those people are just taking the bible too literally.
If we look at Christianity, and take everything literally, then majority of Christians have committed a big sin of shaving your beard.
Scientologists and people who think the world is 6,000 years old are the only people I try to attack, though I do admit it is wrong to. You can use the bible to fight any side of any story too. So it isn't even taking it literally, it is taking it how they want to.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
This is why religion is a joke, people devote their entire lives to this nonsense because they are too weak to stand on their own two feet. There is a reason why their saviour uses the sheppard analogy, they are little more than sheep.
Spoken like an atheist from the people I know, haha.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
Does not make it any less true. I wish they would do a psychological study on church go'ers, I wonder how many dependent personalities they would find.
I wonder how many they would find among self-proclaimed atheists. After all, its the new pop-culture religion, just like cabbalah used to be. It's right up there with being a Wiccan. All the coolest people are doing it. Jackass. Are you bisexual too? Do you like to dress up in dark clothes and listen to the latest emo bands too? Do you write shitty poems about how bad the world makes you feel?
Your inane belief that people with religion are less intelligent than you is just that; inane. You look down on people you don't agree with or understand, that's an intelligent way to live. Sure, there are some people who should always be looked down upon; extremists, for example (it's not hard to hate Falwell or bin Laden). But to say that religion alone caused those people, instead of parenting, personal problems, and just a good dash of overall crazy, is just senseless, which I suppose could sum up most of your arguments.
Ah, the wonderful byproduct of organized hate speech. "Those that don't follow the word are everything thats wrong with the world". There is simply no discussion to be had with someone like you, you cannot argue rationally, you stab at the air with your insults hoping they will somehow land home and make your point. Indeed, you are a waste of my time :(.
Where did I suggest that those who don't follow the word are everything that's wrong with the world? Really, you do an amazing job of reading into what people say to find whatever you want.
"I wonder how many they would find among self-proclaimed atheists. After all, its the new pop-culture religion, just like cabbalah used to be. It's right up there with being a Wiccan. All the coolest people are doing it. Jackass. Are you bisexual too? Do you like to dress up in dark clothes and listen to the latest emo bands too? Do you write shitty poems about how bad the world makes you feel?"
1) I'm Pagan
2)I'm Straight.
3)I and most of my fellows wear jeans, quite a few wear suits.
4)Old country and hard rock all the way baby.
5)the only poetry I write is during ritual work.
Please do not try to lump us all in to that idiotic "Hollywood" stereotype. It's almost as offensive as saying all Christians are dogmatic,hate mongering ****-tards.
Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.
Wow, he really has crossed over the sanity event Horizon.
Could he really get more blatantly two-faced?
Forgot to add, who was behind the share-drops of all the other companies? Was that God as well?
Why was that Jack? Was that because the US tolerates homosexuality, are we next going to see you standing outside Wall St holding a 'God hates Fags' sign with the Phelps family, because that's about as sane as you are appearing right now.
I have yet to see a journalistic quoting of something which Jack Thompson has written which didn't require the use of a "[sic]." Damn, he is one non-spelling-ass moron.
For all the people Thompson accuses of having 'Friend Frontal Lobes', it really does put it into perspective when you realise that Thompson never flew off the handle, simply because he never had a grip in the first place.
He's rapidly crossing over from 'annoying religious disabarred attorney' to 'Physcopathic evangelical death-cultist'.
Would't be surprised one day to see him walking through Miami with a shotgun 'doing God's work', he has the sort of mentality that looks like it could end that way.
Which is why, to the extent at all possible, I've recently taken to giving the Coral Gables area a wide berth. I'm told that shotgun pellets in my ass are bad for my health.
"I have been persecuted for my faith, not because I did anything wrong, by those committed to evil. Glad to clear it up for you''
riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight....
he STILL thinks he was disbarred because of his religious beliefs?
seriously? I mean SERIOUSLY? I have no words to describe how baffling that strange leap of logic is. Did the '27 counts of misconduct' part get erased from JTs brain or something?
This is Jack Thompson, he lives in Jack Thompson world where he can do no wrong, and everyone else is a sinner who needs to turn to him for absolution.
Jack Thompson world is incompatable with reality, as everytime some kind of interface is attempted, the courts reject it due to this strange thing we have in reality which is called 'law'.
Jack Thompson's world? Damn, if Alice fell down that rabbit hole, it would of been a true horror story.
Alice's adventures with the stupid looking ass. I see a big seller
he STILL thinks he was disbarred because of his religious beliefs?
No, he knows exactly why he got disbarred, but if he admitted that, his whole "crusade" would come undone. His fragile psyche demands that he maintain a facade at all times, which is why we get comments like the above from him all the time.
As a non-religious Agnostic, I am not offended by the article OR the Traitor John Bruce's religious views.
Why?
Because I'd rather believe in NO God than to believe that "God", a being who is SUPPOSED to be good, honorable, ethical, and loving would, based on the repeated ramblings of the Traitor John Bruce, actually be in support of bigotry, hate, ignorance, dishonor, corruption, using lies and deceit, supporting slavery (through a forced dictatorship), advocate abuse of all types, even against children, and many, many other immoral, obscene, perverted acts.
Fortunately, I am intelligent enough to know that his use of the word "Christianity" is a sham as he, in fact, is a follower of a SPECIFIC sect of a "Christian" faith. We know, factually, that there are MANY sects within the "Christian" religion and many of them do not follow the exact same beliefs.
The Traitor John Bruce is among those who have modified and interpreted a Holy Bible ("Hot Sacrement" modded if you will) to mean what he PERSONALLY believes. As many individuals do. Some follow their religious text, some interpret it to satisfy their own limitations. "God made in the image of its believer" rather than "man was made in the image of God".
The belief system ALWAYS fits the believer's needs. If their overall sect changes their beliefs and the individual chooses not to, then the sect has strayed, not the individual. If individual decides to later interpret a holy text differently and the sect does not follow, again, the sect has strayed, not the individual. "God" follows the individual. Strange that. God seems to be so many things, even contradictory to itself.
Why else would it be that if bad things happen to the Traitor John Bruce, it must be a "good" thing for his "God" to do it to him but if his "God" does bad things to those who oppose his views, it must be a "good" thing? Simple, the specific "God" that the Traitor John Bruce worships is HIS "God", created in his own image. HIS "God" can do NO wrong to him. If HIS "God" allowed T2's stock to go up, it isn't because HIS "God" was doing something good for T2, it will be because HIS "God" had a secret plan that would strike at any time. If it never happened, well, HIS "God" is just waiting for the "right" time. Amazing how that works, huh?
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 has also updated his MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl
... Wow. That is a lot to really think about there. I would have never thought of it that way. Then again, I always look forward to your responses the most along with Shadow and EZK's responses.
Amy Levandoski
What responses for Shadow? The kid types facepalm in 90% of this replies, and nothing else. The remaining 10% consist of images or images with a descriptor saying, "facepalm".
Seriously, the kid has the social graces and intellectual insight of an inbred kentucky redneck with self-diagnosed asperger's syndrome...
Hey, you shouldn't mock his intellectual insight. Not until you've seen some evidence of it, at least.
"There is no sin except stupidity." - Oscar Wilde
Lol, this made my day, thank you.
Perhaps she looks forward to his comments because those combined with your treatment of him is somehow humorous.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
I think it's more likely she likes the attention.
"There is no sin except stupidity." - Oscar Wilde
Most women do, makes them feel special.
Your just as awesome too, sortableturnip!
Amy Levandoski
Simple amusements for simple minds. "Oh look, a penny!"
Only for the simple minded such as yourself, Derovius.
Never judge a book by it's cover. In the case of JT and other stupid news, I'd rather take with a grain of salt and move on. You should lighten up, you take everything too seriously.
Amy Levandoski
Oh, I see what you did there. You're not a stupid head, I'm a stupid head right? Genius.
As for lightening up, perhaps you are spineless enough to let others walk all over you, but some of us have pride in our convictions.
You're not a stupid head, I'm a stupid head right? Genius.
Hm, that seems to ring bells... Oh right, it's the way you always argue against people, they're dumb, you're not. Would you perhaps be a fan of Jackieboy? You behave quite similar.
I was referring to her completely lack of originality, turning one persons comment on her qualities back at them because she literally has nothing to fight with.
Man, someone got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning....
Seriously, do I know you? I keep finding your random comments at the bottom of my genius, and I want to know why you're so clingy...
Derovius is a lot of things, but simple-minded isn't one of them.
"There is no sin except stupidity." - Oscar Wilde
...Shadow's? Is him saying "Hi, Amy!" nearly everytime you appear that big an event?
"There is no sin except stupidity." - Oscar Wilde
Uhh... Is it wrong to say hey to your friends?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Game on, brothers and sisters." -Leet Gamer Jargon
Nope. However, singling out the females on GP for individual greetings does run the risk of making you mock-worthy. You see anyone else doing that?
"There is no sin except stupidity." - Oscar Wilde
Pfff, as if he doesn't say hi to others as well. Last time I checked I didn't have boobs.
Maybe he mistook Michael for Michele. Or maybe you're especially feminine. So many possibilities, its maddening...
What alternate dimension have you been living in? Say hello to my twin for me while you're there.
"There is no sin except stupidity." - Oscar Wilde
I think some people are just jealous ;)
You're absolutely right, I wish I could be an unbelievable douchebag like him one day.
Thanks. :) I try and make people think. Sometimes, I just leave them in confusion. Not as much as Zippy mind you, but.... :D
BTW, great artwork. :)
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 has also updated his MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl
Fortunately, I am intelligent enough to know that his use of the word "Christianity" is a sham as he, in fact, is a follower of a SPECIFIC sect of a "Christian" faith. We know, factually, that there are MANY sects within the "Christian" religion and many of them do not follow the exact same beliefs.
That's precisely an example of why 'religion' and a personal relationship with God are two VERY different things.
If one considers many of the 'leaders' of 'religion' - an example would be pedophile priests... It's easy to see that religion itself has done more to damage the relationship humans should have with God, than anything else possibly could.
Personally, I don't think god really cares about the stock market or video games. I think God cares about what each individual thinks, intends, and does.
No one suspects God to attack. He has a built in stealth mode. None expects when God strikes next! Much like the Spanish Inquisition...
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
Hey Jack....
"That group would include me and not Zelnick. Zelnick is not a believer in the Gospel. How do I know?"
You forgot about something...
Matthew 7
1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Don't pick and choose your passages Jack. You are - afterall; a lawyer. Or were, at least. Oh, but maybe I shouldn't make judgemental assumptions, huh?
Don't quote fiction to make a point, its almost as pretentious as quoting dead authors.
He is merely proving Jack's arguement (which is based on the bible) contradicts actual passages from the basis of his arguement. Quite well done in my opinion. Whether that is fiction or not, that is in the eye of the beholder...
in any case it's just fighting fire with fire
...figuratively speaking
岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」
And your "I'm an athiest and therefore I'm better than all of you" crap isn't?
Seriously, do you have anything better to do in this post than make snarky comments to attempt to enlarge your e-peen?
Welcome to the internet. You must be new here.
No, no, I'm not new to the internet at all (plus I'm involved in fandom, so I have lots of experience with e-peen abuse), but I've never seen it THIS bad before.
I mean, there's trolling, and then there's TROLLING.
"Burn the witch!"
*Hangs up a pentacle*
Touchy subject there for some of us.
Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.
Ok, we get it, you don't believe in God and you hate religous people. Stop trolling.
And quoting fiction and dead authors is ALMOST as pretentious as quoting philosophers.
Because people who try and think about the nature of existance are the devil right? Save your song and dance, I know it all too well.
There you go again. You complain about Christians having faith in God, yet you're willing to denounce the entire thing as fictional without a shred of proof. I'm not saying you have to believe, but by your own logic, shouldn't you at least concede that if you don't have any proof that God doesn't exist, there exists at least a small chance that he does?
(FYI, I'm not Christian. I capitolize God because it's grammatically correct to do so.)
Middle Eastern Goat Herders from 2000 years ago, filtered through a few centuries of word-of-mouth story telling before being translated into Greek leaves me somewhat skeptical. And its not grammatically correct to capitalize god in the middle of sentence, its an idea, not a person.
Otherwise I Should Just Capitlize Everything In The Sentence In the Off Chance That It May Vaguely Be Referring To A Fictional Entity.
There's a difference between skepticism and dismissal. By referring to God as fictional, you are saying that you believe there is absolutely no chance that there is a God. Since you have no proof of this, you're showing just as much blind faith as the people who say there IS a God without any proof.
And God is a proper noun, therefore, it gets a capital G.
When a person asserts the exsistence of something, the burden of proof is there's, so as to prevent someone from doing something like claiming dragons are real unless proved otherwise; there is no evidence to support their exsistence, but no evidence to prove they don't other than the assertion's lack of proof.
It is normally held that due to the supernatural abilities of "God", it could conceal itself perfectly, or defy the laws of science and reason, and is therefore not provable nor disprovable in the arena of science. There are also questions of what could be considered proof of a mythical deity's exsistence, as some people would consider life alone as proof, although life alone proves nothing but life alone, so would say one who chooses not to believe in a higher power. Then of course there's the question of how to define god, is it defined by it's power or it's supposed omnibenevolence, yatta yatta yatta...
Ah, but when someone asserts that something doesn't exist, the burden of proof is on them. If I want to disprove a theory, I need to prove that it doesn't work. There is evidence, sketchy as it may be, that God exists, mostly in the form of various eye-witness accounts transcribed in the Bible. I'm agnostic, so I'm certainly not suggesting that anything in there is solid proof. There's no actual evidence to suggest that God doesn't exist.
Aitheists don't bother me. It's a belief that's just as valid as any other. Militant aitheists bother me, though, again, just like any militant theist. Derovius seems to believe that there's a zero percent chance that God exists. Anyone who truly believed in (and understood) science would agree that the odds of a truth never reach an absolute, be it 0 or 100 percent. I'm reasonably sure that if I let go of a ball, it will fall down, but I can't be 100% certain even of this simple fact.
To all the Christians who are offended by the lack of reverance to your faith:
There is a lot of anger directed at Christianity because of the horrible things that have been done in the name of your faith. There are many bad people out there who use your faith to justify their actions and words: Jack Thompson, Pat Robertson, and Fred Phelps for instance.
Their attempts to force their faith on others and impose Christian "values" onto the laws and governments that affect everyone pisses people off. Trying to destroy modern science and pretend the world is only 1000's of years old pisses people off. The hatred they have for homosexuals pisses people off. Their attempts to ban anything they deem "Un-Christian" like games, Harry Potter, D&D, etc pisses us off. Their attempts to dominate our sex lives and the rights of women (abortion) pisses us off.
The anger felt toward Christianity has valid roots. And again, its time for the "moderate" Christains to retake control of their faith and start putting the lunatics to the fringes where they belong. Too many extremists have too much influence on your faith.
Most of us don't have anything to do with the lunatics. They just shout the loudest and get all the TV time.
That's the point he's trying to make, and I happen to agree with him. You've got too many looney toons out there making life tough for the rest of you.
"There is no sin except stupidity." - Oscar Wilde
And Columbine proved that all gamers are murderous lunatics...
Careful you don't hurt yourself, as that's quite a point you got there.
Actually, its along the lines of "Guns kill people", which is more a definition of the tools function than a revelation.
Holy hell. Thompson has always been a douche, but I've never thought he was as bad as, say, the Westborough Baptists. You know, those guys that laugh as tidal waves kill houndreds of thousands of people and claim it's God's wrath. Or go to the funerals of soldiers and hold protest rallies in front of the grieving families, sneering that the soldier deserved to die and isn't getting into heaven.
Seriously, Thompson? You're this bad, now? Invoking the wrath of God with glee at those you happen to not like? That's about the most UNChristian-like thing you can do.
I don't think he's gotten that bad but he's certainly getting there at least in terms of logic (err a little bit).
In an interview one of the WBC crazies said (paraphrasing), 'Jesus said those who preached for him would be hated, and since we're hated a lot we must be doing it right'.
Ignoring for a second the horrendous logic, I wouldn't be surprised if JT thought something similar.
----------------------------------------------------
Debates are like merry go rounds Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it's over they have the same positions they started in.
@GP: It's pure speculation on my part, but there's some possiblity that the mysterious meet-broker whom Jack-O will not disclose is Lloyd John Ogilvie. Ogilvie was the pastor of Hollywood Presbyterian, one of, if not the, largest Presbyterian Churches in the world. Jack-O is Presbyterian. Ogilvie grew up in the Kenosha, Wisconsin, area. Someone in Jack-O's household is also from the Kenosha area. Jack-O, the person in Jack-O's household with the Wisconsin roots, and Ogilvie are not too far removed in age from each other. Ogilvie is a major player with both Hollywood and Capitol Hill connections (he was the Hill Chaplain for a while) and he and Zelnick are members of the same speakers bureau, All American Speakers. All this may amount to nothing more than a hill o' beans . . . but that's no reason for me not to speculate.
Interesting, JDKJ...
But I thought that JT grew up in Ohio?
Ugh... Don't remind me...
@GP: Well, trurth be told, he never, ever grew up. Maybe chronologically, but certainly not in terms of his mental development. He's just "from" Ohio. Cleveland, to be precise. But his wife, Patricia Thompson, nee Halverson, is from Wisconsin. A Cheesehead (You opened the door. I was trying to be discreet).
I gots mad investigative skills. Ya'll hiring? Have shovel, will dig.
*Hands JDKJ a shovel and points at a grave marked "Jack Thompson's humanity"* Go get it big boy.
Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.
Whatever you do don't mistake it for the grave next to it *Jack Thompson's career*
----------------------------------------------------
Debates are like merry go rounds Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it's over they have the same positions they started in.
A while back, PA made a wonderful point: Jack Thompson is a blessing. Cuz, imagin if a bright, intelligent, charismatic man took up the anti-videogame fight. We'd be screwed... instead we get this nut-ball lunatic. And he never had a chance.
Jack has just illustrated here the most insuffrable thing I find about Christians. I don't mind if they choose to live their lives as they see fit as long as they don't try to impose their lifestyle or morality on mine. And when I get into a discussion or an argument with them about why they think my own lifestyle is "wrong" and when I ask them for justifcation, they go into automatic pilot mode and start quoting chapter and verse from the Bible, which only shows me that they are incapable of thinking for themselves and instead have to quote from a book whose veracity is at best dubious. And they do it that smug self-assured, condescending and self-rightousnes tone that I just want to sock them one. I realize it's only a certain sect and a small minority that really do that, but as others say, they shout the loudest and they ruin it for everyone else.
"Never justify anything. If it needs justification, it's already wrong." -Solomon Short
So if someone asked you why they should rape, murder or steal, you would make up some justification on the spot rather than reference a law book?
That is what you are expecting Christians to do. Why would you expect them to make a justification for you when the Bible spells it out well enough for them?
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
It's not what they do that I have the issue with Zach, so much as how they do it. If they didn't come across as so morally superior when they do that, then I'd be willing to cut them some more slack. It just seems to me that when they start doing it, it's like they're sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting, "I'm not listening! LA-LA-LA-LA!" Like they'll cut off any intellgent rebuttals you might make so they can preserve their own moral absolutism. Jack kind of does the same thing, either by not aswering the question at all, switching the subject to something totally irrelevant, or falling back on Bible quotes.
In that case, good. It just seemed like you meant otherwise. I have no problem with getting people to explain themselves and justify their position. But if they are just using the scripture verses to basically disregard your questions or to act high and mighty, I will side with you.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
Thank you. And sorry for any misunderstandings. I knew you were a Christian from your earlier posts and I have a couple other friends who are also Christians, and like you they absolutley HATE what JT does as they know it makes them look bad. It wasn't intended as a slight against you or them. It just drives me nuts how some can use it to jusify their own hatred and reinforce their own ignorance when they should be spreading love and forgiveness instead.
Right there with you, manta. I was stuck at DMV two weeks ago and this born-again Christian sat next to me and started grilling me about my life. He proceeded to pick my life apart and show me how my agnostic ways were preventing me from reaching my potential. So, I started asking HIM questions, and the answers were all the same: "It's God's plan."
Why do people get away with murder?
Why do innocents die?
Why are there so many believers suffering in poverty and destitution?
Etc, etc, etc...
So yeah, I totally feel you on the whole high-horse thing.
"There is no sin except stupidity." - Oscar Wilde
You know, my own personal feeling is that Thompson desperately wants for their to be some kind of conspiracy, I suspect that by now he sees either Homosexuals or Gamers behind every single problem in his life.
I think that if he wandered into the road and nearly got hit by a car, he wouldn't think 'Maybe I should have looked before I walked out', he genuinely would have thought 'I bet that was a gamer or a gay trying to kill me!', he really is that paranoid.
I don't think it's so much about 'stopping evil' as 'being important' in Thompsons' mind, he know how insignificant he's become in the larger picture, and it frustrates the hell out of him.
How much, I wonder, is Thompson really losing his mind, and how much is just a show for attention, he's so far managed to get 2 stories on a well-read Politics site without having to physically raise a finger, just by being a goofball. It might make him look an idiot, but at least people are looking. To Thompson, I suspect the attention is more important than the opinion.
As has been said before, the best way to deal with the spite and venom of people like Thompson is to treat hm as exactly what he is, a screaming, impotent, petulant child who wants attention and is prepared to make a scene in order to get it. Let him scream and don't give him the attention he lusts, he only creates controversy because controversy sells.
He's offically gone off the deep end.
"I have been persecuted for my faith, not because I did anything wrong, by those committed to evil."
So hang on, let me get this straight. When Godfearing Christians receive negative repercussions, it can't possibly be because they did something wrong. It must be that evildoers have targeted them in some kind of diabolical plot. Plus, negative repercussions are a happy gift from God anyway? So truly bad things can't possibly happen to Christians then.
So that must mean that Godfearing Christians can do all sorts of crimes and as long as they believe themselves to be Godly, they're blameless and being sent to prison for murder or rape is the result of Satan's power, or it's a happy gift from God's goodness.
Where do I sign up for this Born Again Christianity thing? 'Cos when I'm really old, at death's door, and when the threat of a long prison term loses its sting, I really might fancy committing a few juicy (and guilt-free) murders. Heck, under those rules even mass murder starts to sound good. I'm not too keen on the French, and one time this Austrian guy looked at me in a funny way.
Exactly. They think that they are somehow exempt from normal behavior and manners because they pretend to talk to an invisible man in the coulds. It makes them no different from Islamic terrorists who blow themselves up in civilian areas because they are doing "God's bidding".
Bear in mind also that Jack almost certainly suffers from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, and as an article I read recently pointed out, many Narcissists are extremely religous as that kind of thinking is almost totally in sync with their own mindset.
why doens't JT comment here anymore? is he IP banned or something. His commentery is a great stress reliever for me, nothing better to get back after a long tiring day to laugh my butt off at his immaturity.
GP: Serious consideration was given as to whether to publish this story as I realize that some will find Thompson's comments about non-Christians offensive. Ultimately, in deciding to publish, the opportunity to provide an insight into Thompson's mindset outweighed the other issues.
Honestly, I find his comments about Christians far more offensive. He is not a true Christian. If he were, he would not act the way he does.
Seriously, as a Christian I can't STAND the way he feels the need to "represent" us. "God smites the non-believers!" is a claim centuries old, but "God smites us and we love it"? There is a degree of living with persecution (see: Beatitudes), but his words are extreme perversion of that concept.
It's pretty ironic to hear "we're blessed by persecution" coming from a guy who's known for shouting "help help I'm being repressed!" and filing lawsuits over every little thing.
The only thing I can say to Jack Thompson is **** you! This guy is just a useless waste of space.
Libertarian Republican from Mesa Arizona: MySpace http://profile.myspace.com/32118614 Facebook http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1441642492&ref=name
Message to Jack: Vince McMahon already did a crappy storyline about him suing God, so your blame of God is nothing new. Besides, your share is pretty much worthless either way.
-----------------
When Jack Thompson runs his mouth, does anyone really care what he has to say anymore?
Actually, Vince wrestled against God, so Jack can still sue him if he wants.
Jack Thompson continues to prove why he is, was, and ever will be the Metropolitian Moron of Miami.
Maybe Thompson should quit hiding behind his so-called "faith" to justify his actions. And, Jacky Boy, we all know it's not in Christ, it's in a demon pretender.
Maybe if Jack had practiced what he preached about growing up and getting a life, he would have never been disbarred.
Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.
He's not really hiding behind his fath, it just happens to be a big part of him, so when he's denying any wrong-doing on his part, naturally, his faith is going to get thrown into the mix at some point.
Sooo, Thompson is going to email soemone on the Internet names Jesus?
Sounds Mexican.
Reminds me of what Gemma Morrow (Katey Sagal's character on Sons of Anarchy) once said, "Jesus is just a guy who mows my lawn." lol.
Well, as much as God is responsible for the global economic meltdown, then The Disbarred One might actually be correct.
I do love how he's getting to be ideologically aligned with Fred Phelps more openly these days, though.
-- http://pixelantes.blogspot.com/
Ugh. I can't read this. It's killing my brain cells.
----
I'm an attention whore. So visit my DevaintArt and feed my ego. Feed the whore. http://keaton2008.deviantart.com/
He only believes in one god? What a lunatic! My pantheon and I are having a good chuckle at his narrow-minded monotheism. (Except for the evil god in the back, who I can only assume is continuing with his nefarious scheme to have me die of old age.)
---
The Mammon Industry
Oh yeah. I'm just positive that John Bruce is being persecuted for his beliefs. I mean its not like he did something completely unprofessional to put his job in danger, like file gay porn or an insulting picture book for adults. If he did something like that he would be in trouble. But luckily for Jack its just persecution.
Wait, he did file gay porn? Sorry John Bruce. I know you aren't really big on this whole personal responsibility thing. But its high time you learn that your actions have consequences. You can scream persecution till your red in the face. But really your crimes are pretty evident to anyone with half a brain.
-Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person's fear of their own freedom-
Jack is just a nut job.
Every religion has them and he is one of them.
Why isn't he quoting the passages where it tells you to murder your children if they get out of line, or murdering people for working on the Sabbath, or murdering people for believing in a different God than the one in the bible, etc.? No one really believes in the bible, they pick and choose to use what fits their own personal agenda. If people actually believed in the bible they'd do EVERYTHING is says, and not just what they want to choose from it. Jack Thompson uses the bible and religion because it fits his agenda, that's all. Most biggots do.