Athiests and Agnostics alike,

Pages:
1
…
8
9
10
11

Athiests and Agnostics alike,
Tweet Topic Started: Nov 24 2008, 10:00 PM (4,231 Views)
_Saladin_	Jun 21 2011, 05:12 PM Post #241
Major Bullshit Posts: 2,763 Group: A414A Member Member #28 Joined: January 1, 2008	Wether they're needed or not isn't the problem, you should still be allowed to have them regardless of wether you need them.



Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 05:17 PM Post #242
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	also I don't get why religious people like unknown can say they are also not creationists. He's basically saying he disregards most of the Bible but accepts the part about a "God". As if thats the only part that makes "sense", how can you simply ignore an entire story but only consider seriously the part that interests you? I mean am I missing something here? Why would it then be impossible for an atheist to live similarly to the moral doctrines of the Bible for example? (even though morals don't have to derive from religion)



Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 05:19 PM Post #243
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	_Saladin_ Jun 21 2011, 05:12 PM Wether they're needed or not isn't the problem, you should still be allowed to have them regardless of wether you need them. its an unnecessary extension of power in most cases except for hunting- which I haven't thought about lol. How can only hunters have firearms? I guess I retract my previous statement.



_Saladin_	Jun 21 2011, 05:32 PM Post #244
Major Bullshit Posts: 2,763 Group: A414A Member Member #28 Joined: January 1, 2008	Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 05:17 PM also I don't get why religious people like unknown can say they are also not creationists. He's basically saying he disregards most of the Bible but accepts the part about a "God". As if thats the only part that makes "sense", how can you simply ignore an entire story but only consider seriously the part that interests you? I mean am I missing something here? Why would it then be impossible for an atheist to live similarly to the moral doctrines of the Bible for example? (even though morals don't have to derive from religion) They will claim that it's metaphorical or allegorical and shouldn't be taken literally, but that just makes it completely arbitrary because how do you know which parts to take literally and which ones to not?



gs	Jun 21 2011, 06:03 PM Post #245
Slow down Posts: 16,297 Group: Animals Member #1 Joined: December 12, 2007	Jack the IV Jun 21 2011, 04:37 PM Lol marty, you can't support weed and yet say firearms should be banned. The more freedom the people are given, the better :) yeah because weed kills people ... are you serious?



The_Fry_Cook_of_Doom	Jun 21 2011, 06:04 PM Post #246
:OOOOOOOOOOOOMAAANN Posts: 18,587 Group: A414A Member Member #35 Joined: January 11, 2008	I am non religious; it wonderfully simplifies your life.
	Jam It's okay to be mad at your fiends sometimes


_Saladin_	Jun 21 2011, 06:39 PM Post #247
Major Bullshit Posts: 2,763 Group: A414A Member Member #28 Joined: January 1, 2008	gs Jun 21 2011, 06:03 PM Jack the IV Jun 21 2011, 04:37 PM Lol marty, you can't support weed and yet say firearms should be banned. The more freedom the people are given, the better :) yeah because weed kills people ... are you serious? What? You missed his point.



DragonLegend	Jun 21 2011, 07:15 PM Post #248
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	_Saladin_ Jun 21 2011, 05:12 PM Wether they're needed or not isn't the problem, you should still be allowed to have them regardless of wether you need them. Dude... Did someone hack into Saladin's account?



Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 07:15 PM Post #249
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	_Saladin_ Jun 21 2011, 05:32 PM Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 05:17 PM also I don't get why religious people like unknown can say they are also not creationists. He's basically saying he disregards most of the Bible but accepts the part about a "God". As if thats the only part that makes "sense", how can you simply ignore an entire story but only consider seriously the part that interests you? I mean am I missing something here? Why would it then be impossible for an atheist to live similarly to the moral doctrines of the Bible for example? (even though morals don't have to derive from religion) They will claim that it's metaphorical or allegorical and shouldn't be taken literally, but that just makes it completely arbitrary because how do you know which parts to take literally and which ones to not? yeah I've heard some say that but its still such silly nonsense.



DragonLegend	Jun 21 2011, 07:15 PM Post #250
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	gs Jun 21 2011, 06:03 PM Jack the IV Jun 21 2011, 04:37 PM Lol marty, you can't support weed and yet say firearms should be banned. The more freedom the people are given, the better :) yeah because weed kills people ... are you serious? Do you support banning knives and cars? They kill people, too.



DragonLegend	Jun 21 2011, 07:16 PM Post #251
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	By the way, guns don't kill people; people kill people. Guns kill people the same way pens make spelling mistakes.



Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 07:19 PM Post #252
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	thats so cliche but even though its true you have to admit guns do make it a lot easier and encourage it. lets say you want to kill your neighbor: 1. You have a gun, you go over at night and simply shoot him while he's sleeping or 2. You don't have a gun, you go over at night and have to strangle/fight/stab him to death. number 2 is a lot more gruesome and takes more guts and thinking about it. It really discourages a lot of homicides if you have to physically see them dying at your hands rather than an instant shot to the head.



DragonLegend	Jun 21 2011, 07:42 PM Post #253
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	Likewise, it's much easier to defend yourself with a gun than with a knife/bare arms. The question is, do gun rights prevent more deaths than they 'allow'? Numerous studies tell us yes. The real question, though, is: Is security at the expense of liberty worth it?



Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 08:20 PM Post #254
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	i already said I agree with you and I know about that quote which is why im against the patriot act and all the other shit after 9/11



DragonLegend	Jun 21 2011, 08:34 PM Post #255
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	I know you agree with me, but you said that guns make it easier to commit murder, and I simply added that they also make self-defense easier.



gs	Jun 21 2011, 09:04 PM Post #256
Slow down Posts: 16,297 Group: Animals Member #1 Joined: December 12, 2007	_Saladin_ Jun 21 2011, 06:39 PM gs Jun 21 2011, 06:03 PM Jack the IV Jun 21 2011, 04:37 PM Lol marty, you can't support weed and yet say firearms should be banned. The more freedom the people are given, the better :) yeah because weed kills people ... are you serious? What? You missed his point. no, i'm saying i support people's freedom when it comes to things that are harmless, not when it comes to things that make it so easy to kill one another. my post simply commented on his comparison of 2 things that aren't comparable.



Jack the IV	Jun 21 2011, 09:05 PM Post #257
The Gent's Club Posts: 7,869 Group: Mr. Pink Member #43 Joined: February 19, 2008	Should we ban alcohol then? Alcohol kills more people than guns.
	In battle, in the forest, at the precipice in the mountains, On the dark great sea, in the midst of javelins and arrows, In sleep, in confusion, in the depths of shame, The good deeds a man has done before defend him.


gs	Jun 21 2011, 09:09 PM Post #258
Slow down Posts: 16,297 Group: Animals Member #1 Joined: December 12, 2007	sigh im not saying everything that kills people should be banned, i was just saying weed and guns aren't comparable lol. seems like you all missed my point. as for the whole legal guns shit, it messes with the police's authority, enables people to take matters into their own hands, makes it so much easier to just go out and go on a killing spree when you're in a depression (take them school shootings as an example). i just don't think it's necessary to allow everyone a gun, creates more problems than it solves imo.



DragonLegend	Jun 21 2011, 10:26 PM Post #259
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	Then why is it that places with high gun ownership and loose gun laws often have low crime rates, while places with low gun ownership and strict gun laws have high crime rates? Every argument for gun control is completely irrational, emotional and lacks basis in reality!



gs	Jun 21 2011, 10:44 PM Post #260
Slow down Posts: 16,297 Group: Animals Member #1 Joined: December 12, 2007	DragonLegend Jun 21 2011, 10:26 PM Then why is it that places with high gun ownership and loose gun laws often have low crime rates, while places with low gun ownership and strict gun laws have high crime rates? same reason i had sex with keeley hazell the other day oh wait



Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 11:02 PM Post #261
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	dragon tbh thats simply because no one is going to try and rob another person if they know everyone has a gun. that doesn't necessarily mean they're safer. its the same principle as MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) in the cold war: USSR and USA both had nuclear weapons and neither wanted to bomb the other knowing full well the retaliation would leave both countries destroyed. However, was the world any safer? No.



gs	Jun 21 2011, 11:06 PM Post #262
Slow down Posts: 16,297 Group: Animals Member #1 Joined: December 12, 2007	? last i checked US crime rates were way up there



DragonLegend	Jun 21 2011, 11:26 PM Post #263
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 11:02 PM dragon tbh thats simply because no one is going to try and rob another person if they know everyone has a gun. that doesn't necessarily mean they're safer. its the same principle as MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) in the cold war: USSR and USA both had nuclear weapons and neither wanted to bomb the other knowing full well the retaliation would leave both countries destroyed. However, was the world any safer? No. Dude... that's what safe means. If you're capable of defending yourself, and this fact was known to criminals, and they didn't attack you... What's the problem here?



DragonLegend	Jun 21 2011, 11:31 PM Post #264
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	gs Jun 21 2011, 11:06 PM ? last i checked US crime rates were way up there That's because America isn't a single entity with unified laws. Each state and locality has its own laws, including gun laws. The high crime/strict gun control states and localities are responsible for the relatively high national crime rate. America has a federal-state-local system. Comparing America to the Netherlands is like comparing the EU to Kuwait.



Big Richard	Jun 21 2011, 11:58 PM Post #265
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	DragonLegend Jun 21 2011, 11:26 PM Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 11:02 PM dragon tbh thats simply because no one is going to try and rob another person if they know everyone has a gun. that doesn't necessarily mean they're safer. its the same principle as MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) in the cold war: USSR and USA both had nuclear weapons and neither wanted to bomb the other knowing full well the retaliation would leave both countries destroyed. However, was the world any safer? No. Dude... that's what safe means. If you're capable of defending yourself, and this fact was known to criminals, and they didn't attack you... What's the problem here? its an illusion of safety, you're not actually free from danger - you're just protected against it. two different kinds of safety if you would look at it like that



Jack the IV	Jun 22 2011, 01:14 AM Post #266
The Gent's Club Posts: 7,869 Group: Mr. Pink Member #43 Joined: February 19, 2008	The thing is, most homicides that involve firearms are handguns. If you ban firearms people are still going to have handguns, they're tiny and can be hid everywhere. Banning firearms would just take away safety from the average American who has a shotgun or rifle in their home for protection or recreational purposes. Oh, by the way, in Switzerland, all males are issued assault rifles. They don't have much crime there do they marty?
	In battle, in the forest, at the precipice in the mountains, On the dark great sea, in the midst of javelins and arrows, In sleep, in confusion, in the depths of shame, The good deeds a man has done before defend him.


gs	Jun 22 2011, 01:22 AM Post #267
Slow down Posts: 16,297 Group: Animals Member #1 Joined: December 12, 2007	Jack the IV Jun 22 2011, 01:14 AM The thing is, most homicides that involve firearms are handguns. If you ban firearms people are still going to have handguns, i'll stop you right there. no one has a gun here



Jack the IV	Jun 22 2011, 02:07 AM Post #268
The Gent's Club Posts: 7,869 Group: Mr. Pink Member #43 Joined: February 19, 2008	Everyone has a gun in switzerland.
	In battle, in the forest, at the precipice in the mountains, On the dark great sea, in the midst of javelins and arrows, In sleep, in confusion, in the depths of shame, The good deeds a man has done before defend him.


gs	Jun 22 2011, 02:23 AM Post #269
Slow down Posts: 16,297 Group: Animals Member #1 Joined: December 12, 2007	you know this how?



DragonLegend	Jun 22 2011, 02:28 AM Post #270
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 11:58 PM DragonLegend Jun 21 2011, 11:26 PM Big Richard Jun 21 2011, 11:02 PM dragon tbh thats simply because no one is going to try and rob another person if they know everyone has a gun. that doesn't necessarily mean they're safer. its the same principle as MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) in the cold war: USSR and USA both had nuclear weapons and neither wanted to bomb the other knowing full well the retaliation would leave both countries destroyed. However, was the world any safer? No. Dude... that's what safe means. If you're capable of defending yourself, and this fact was known to criminals, and they didn't attack you... What's the problem here? its an illusion of safety, you're not actually free from danger - you're just protected against it. two different kinds of safety if you would look at it like that By safety I don't mean that nobody wants to hurt you. I mean that they, for the most part, can't, because you can defend yourself.



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General chat · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
…
8
9
10
11