Found 400 results
Found 400 results
to be honest, I have no idea what he's trying to get across. That we let women do whatever they want because it's the path of least resistance? That arguing with females is pointless, and that men's ultimate goal is to have sex with women and that all sacrifices possible need to be made in order to reach it?
And now that sex is bad and we need to take drugs to supress our sexual instincts?
I mean, I get that he's a comedy writer and all, but this isn't funny, it's just confusing and disturbing. When Dave Chappelle goes on about how men get to the point and women talk forever (and here it is ), you know there's a punchline at the end because it's a joke. It's funny and satirical.
This stuff that Adams is writing is either his real opinion, which makes it disturbing, or just nonsense to spike controversy and get in the news, which makes it retarded.
I take from it the same thing I took from the last time I stumbled across a Scott Adams blog:
That he is an idiot and even more of an incoherent rambler than I am.
I copied and saved it directly from his site, because sure enough, a couple of days later he took it down. But as we all know, nothing on the internet ever gets deleted.
Me and my friend were just about to have a sick threesome with some hot chick in a jumbo sleeping bag when I saw this girl in a tree across the road watching us with binoculars.
It's understandable to be upset, you just don't have to direct at someone you're debating with.
I still think it is entirely unreasonable to force a woman to have an abortion. I'd a pro-choice person but it is the woman's choice to do so. I mentioned it being need based as a way to cut down. I honestly don't have an answer for the situation as a whole. If it was more need based instead of the mother choosing, it would cut out a lot of women who get the child support for convenience, not because they need it.
A lot of your problems are with the court system, which is completely ****ed. The bias towards women is insane when children are involved.
The whole situation is ****ed up. I don't think the man should be able to force the woman have an abortion but I don't see a solution. That's something I see as a complete breach of personal freedom.
Uh, haha, but no.
If you believe something is moral, you believe it should be universal. Go ahead and tell me why this isn't true.
"If we adopt the principle of universality : if an action is right (or wrong) for others, it is right (or wrong) for us. Those who do not rise to the minimal moral level of applying to themselves the standards they apply to others -- more stringent ones, in fact -- plainly cannot be taken seriously when they speak of appropriateness of response; or of right and wrong, good and evil.
In fact, one of the, maybe the most, elementary of moral principles is that of universality, that is, If something's right for me, it's right for you; if it's wrong for you, it's wrong for me. Any moral code that is even worth looking at has that at its core somehow."
You're justifying an already racist practice by saying it already happens anyway. I'd say it's pretty damn important to your point.
Lol, implying there's a difficult part to your argument. The hardest part is trying to get my head around the tacit bigotry there.
I think the problem with most "scene" chicks is that they don't have the drive or attention span to play an instrument seriously because after a while it becomes work and isn't "cool" anymore. I've seen plenty that hang around local bands and swoon over the members and crap, but there's very few I've ever met that would have the sort of drive it takes to play an instrument or do much of anything involving originality or creativity.
You need to get your head out of your politically correct sand. So does the guy with the baby photo as his display picture.
Blame it on society if you wish. Where is this happening again? Iran. Oh you mean the self proclaimed Islamic theocratic state whose laws, values and justice system are based on the religion of Islam?
Like another poster said, Iran used to be fairly nice, somewhat more similar to more civilized countries we would associate with "the first world", until the Islamic revolution which brought in a theocratic system of government based on Islam.
Now what do we see? Well even just from the past couple of months we have seen:
1) A woman had her face melted off, blinded in both eyes, because she refused to marry a man. This man then decided to throw vitriol in her face. His punishment? It was intended to be that he would lie down, while his victim dropped the same acid into his own eye. This is not an isolated case.
2) The gang raping we're hearing about now.
And that's not to mention things which have been going on for years. Beating women who refuse to wear the cloth bags they have been housed in. The sentencing to death of, by stoning in many cases, of victims of rape and adulterers (invariably women).
I blame the religion. You say society is to cause. But the religion is itself the cause for society being this way. Shouting "racist" or "you're clumping all of Islam together omg you disgust me, how inconsiderate" does nothing. People are suffering in other parts of the world because the religion their nation follows does nothing to prevent it.
EDIT: And additionally, stop using how Christianity was hundreds of years ago to try to vindicate your point. A) it has nothing to do with how Islam is now - if you can find a single logical link between the two you are a genius B) Christians have wizened up. There's no comparison. I don't know why you even put anything in there about it.
Just a general question.
What do people mean when two people really "compliment each other"? Or bring out the best in each other, etc. I mean it should sound obvious but what makes a couple compliment each other? Being very similar or very different? Examples? Confus
Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist. Atheism is contrasted with theism, which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.
That's what atheism is, there's a definition and that's that. If you say it's something else then it isn't because that isn't what the definition is.
However, if people go and do violence because a religious book says it's okay to do that violent act then you can blame religious indoctrination and therefore the text with the violent incitement in it.
No it wouldn't. Atheism doesn't promote it at all, my warped interpretation would. Atheism for me would fail to be what it actually is, and rather be a name associated with and the exterior outlet of my hateful nature.
Religion does not lead to explicitly bad people, explicitly bad people find religion and warp it.
Which is exactly why the religion isn't to blame.
But that isn't Islam. This is my whole point! If I construed the idea of Atheism to mean that I have to go out and slaughter everyone who believes in a God, Atheism wouldn't be at fault. I would, for warping it.
And their interpretation is disgusting, I fail to see how that adds to the argument though. Nobody has ever claimed their interpretation of Islam is fine and dandy, you're arguing points that aren't there.
Your post was almost entirely pointless. Your argument is one of correlation implying causality, which is simply not the case. The overwhelming majority of Muslims see this crime in just as disgusting a light as you do. It's just that Islam is the new scare-word used by the media. Religion shouldn't even come into play with regards to this kind of crime. It's like me murdering someone and the media making a huge deal out of the fact I'm atheist. It's irrelevent. A person cannot use their religion as an excuse to commit such hideous crimes. Firstly, because very few religions that I know of actually promote these crimes, and secondly, because a person should not need a religion to tell them that gang-rape is wrong. If these people genuinely think what they're doing is acceptable then their religion is irrelevent. They cannot have developed the impression that gang-rape is fine from their religion, as nowhere in the Qur'an does it promote such actions.
If rape is on the increase in Iran and the Middle East then it the society at fault, not the religion. As I recall there is currently estimated to be almost 3 million Muslims in the UK, a large increase from only about 25,000 one hundred years ago. Now, forgive me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain rape statistics have been decreasing.