Found 400 results
Found 400 results
how is it stupid?
it makes sense, as god is on a different level than us, so who are we to tell if it is stupid or not. don't be so close-minded.
Technology has overcome many of the difficulties of being fat.
Needs are very important in correlation with wants
why eat if you don't need to?
why breathe if you don't need to?
why do anything you if you don't need to?
while wants can and often do trump needs, without a need for something it is harder to want to do something.
Yes it is. Have you never heard of interventions?
well your example doesn't work here because
1. people who are addicted don't "enjoy" or "love" the drug, they need it.
2. people who are addicted need not stay addicted. many have overcome their addictions.
i see why he's been giving you the facepalm
How can he be wrong about an opinion? Changing is a lot easier than you think it is.
Your previous statement just saying he's wrong and implying you're right places you on a high horse.
i saw that. but he was saying that you cannot tell whether he exists or not, because we cannot even come close to comprehend the essence of a "god". so he's not saying that a god can exists and not exist at the same time. but at the same time, with our minute knowledge of what a "god" even is, anything could be possible.
I just feel a need to say, and you probably don't care, but you're a cynical jackass. Have fun on your high horse.
that's due to various factors. While not medically sound, being fat (not obese) is usually non-fatla just very unhealthy and cumbersome. many fat people live generally productive lives and are happy being fat, so the need to lsoe weight is not necessary. if they want to lose weight, a little push and encouragement and they can do it if they don't think they can.
You don't understand addiction.
They don't love it, at all. That's very rude and inconsiderate of you to say that. Addictions are extremely hard to overcome. You have no idea how difficult it is to quit. Their bodies need it because their minds are convinced that if they don't get it, they'll die, so they put the body through immense pain which can only be cured by more drugs.
no it isn't.
again, they jsut don't know how to change, or even that they can change.
Sigh. You are absolutely the most close minded individual I have ever seen.
Where are you getting this? I see people change themselves all the time. The fact that there is a large market for self help books is just proof that a lot of people are wanting to change.
In my experience, people who don't want to change are either
1. fearful of change
2. those who don't know how
3. those who don't know they can change
4. clinically insane
I would disagree with that. If a person wants to change they'll actually change, look at people who've come out of drug rehabilitation programs successfully, completely different person than before. This happens often, when a person is unhappy with their life style. This is why chemical castration won't work if it's mandated.
Not being open to other possibilities is stupid.
Being convicted/going to prison takes away the right to own property for the time served. Rofl.
Anyway - taking away the persons' right to reproduce is a human rights violation, but I'm not sure if I want to introduce an individual back into society who has raped children. Just saying.
Ever heard of enforcing law? That takes away the person's right to act within their own means. They get sentenced to jail time. Don't tell me you don't believe in law and order now?
And yes, thinking you are correct no matter what is absolutely idiotic. Of course you wouldn't know though.
Thinking you are correct all the time = stupidity and ignorance.
I can't feel sympathy for paedophiles. Now if this were physical castration that'd be different. Making them sterile/reducing their libido will prevent the further problem of this occurring. Once you consciously infringe upon another persons' rights, I think your own should be taken away, and this is a justified punishment.
All those that Do not care say I.
*quietly hopes mamosa didn't notice the first bit of quoted post...*
Call me a moron, but I'm completely failing to tell whether this is supposed to support, or go against what I said, and really in general what the hell you're trying to say with this
^to mamosa: because 90% of what you HAVE posted in here is spam; and other people were spamming and you are a name i usually associate with spam.
Are you implying I'm an avid flamer?
Not that I needed to, Devon took care of it
It's a decent enough analogy, except that the father is not responsible for how his child thinks. God is. God made us how we are. You can say he gave us free will, but God still made us curious, and essentially gave us all our little personality quirks. I would think God would've clued in to the fact that telling very curious creatures that they're not allowed to eat something would only heighten their curiosity, thus making it even more likely that they'd go for it.
And as for the association of knowledge and sin, fair enough, but you directly related knowledge and danger. It's that kind of attitude, that any knowledge beyond what God gave us, is dangerous and shouldn't be trusted, that essentially kept most of the population basically retarded during the Middle Ages.
I seem to be going back to him a lot lately, but Galileo said it best : "I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
Yeah, because the majority opinion is always right
An idea is only considered insane so long as those who propose it make up a minority. That has no bearing whatsoever on the ideas actual insanity though.
What? No, I'm saying that such a creature as a God would be past black-and-white human terms of strictly "existing" or "not existing" and, since we have no concept or interaction with anything approaching the essence of what it would mean to be God, we can't really use such a simple statement as "it exists or it doesn't" doesn't quite... cut it.
This thread has become annoying. Ganoosh and Mamosa; I've tried to be lenient... but seriously if you guys don't cut back on using it as a personal chat thread I'm just going to ban you. Sure, you can bull****... but constant back and forth bantering about nothing is just annoying and makes it so it doesn't bring the community together anymore.
I have no problem with you guys outside that, don't take it personally... I just hate coming in this thread anymore because I know its just going to be you two (and a bit of greyeyedfire) bantering about nothingness and really making so any 'actual' posts in here are ignored.
Oh well of course, but my point was that holding such a strong belief is just as detrimental as someone holding such a strong belief that there IS a God, it's just the other side of a seesaw.
Care to? Pfft, I flat out DO
You can hold whatever opinions you like.
I'll stick with the science though, thanks.
Oddly enough, people can be shown that things are wrong, there are a number of reform techniques that have proven successful and an entire field of science devoted to using them and discovering more.
When it comes to religion, flat-out stating that atheism is "the truth" is genuinely closeminded.
Jail frequently reforms people, particularly when time and effort is put into it, rather than being put into ridiculous forced castration programmes that are purely populist.
Thanks for that.
I never said that all pedophiles rape children. They, in fact, do not all rape children.
Thanks for letting us all know, Cpt. Obvious.
Unrelated comment is unrelated.
Rape is rape; the victim of rape is only determined by sexual preference, meaning that the Polish government, in castrating these individuals, is discriminating against them based on their sexual preference.
Then congratulations, you don't fully understand the purpose of a correctional facility OR what chemical castration does to a person.
No, prison is a means by which criminals are meant to be reformed into respectable citizens suitable for society.
And why do you think they raped children?
Probably because they're sexually attracted to children.
If they're going to castrate all people who rape children then they have to castrate all people who rape men, women, animals and inanimate objects.
Either way, castrating a person as repercussion for any crime is cruel and unusual punishment.
This is so fucked up....
How can they do this to people?
Sure, they may be pedophiles but still, it's ridiculous. They're castrating these criminals based on their sexual preference.
If someone isn't reformed then why would they be released?
All you're creating here is a false dichotomy. The choice is not between allowing paedophiles to roam the streets and chemically castrating them.