Etdlahq Memorial Bar - your shelter from forum crashes

[kamap1]

I would be if not for certain aspects of "reality", for all we know we are just hooked on a big *** computer and made believe we can't fly but once we see behind the rabbit hole we can fly in this maybe not so very real world.

Its not a tough one, the crazy SOB's are at fault and if they can't control themselves they aren't fit to be around people.

Psychique maybe if not psychopatic.

 

[Drystan1]

Drystan .... You need a new job, honey!

*Cuddles for truth*
succinct, and accurate.

The whole short skirt=asking for it thing is a tough one. There's a certain level of reality that does come into play when you are dealing with crazy SOBs.

Yes, girl in short skirt will draw attention over one who wears standard, covering clothing. She may want to draw attention, esp from males. But she is not inviting someone to get close, intimate or physical with her. There's a difference between observing/admiring, and forcing what one believes on another. There is that line between wanting some attention, and having someone force their reality, their desires on one who is not willing. The problem is that humans, self-centered creatuers, who live, feel and breathe in their world, their mind, will believe their desire is what everyone desires. They may believe that because of the dress, attire, or confidence, wants them specifically to promote their own personal desires, which isn't the case.

I'm also thinking the same thing but then you can leave the theist behind I think.
An agnost is someone who believes there might be something out there but unless there is proof won't believe nor disbelief it, they leave it in the middle and respect other people for their believes aslong as those believes leave other people in their dignity and don't opress others, so extremist islam = no no, regular normal day islam = ok.
.

Hmmm... I would... partially state that I am a theist as well. Agnostics believe (depending on interpretation,) that the idea of a god cannnot be proven, but still may exist despite no physical proof ("Faith,") in one of infinite forms. A defined religeous (Christian, Muslim, Buddhist etc) god may, or may not exist, but also may not... There is no proof, just 'faith.'
Theism is that a, or multiple, gods (undefined) may exist, and may intervene in this world.

While I don't believe they intervene (as a [of many] human definition,) there still is no proof one way or other; "intervene" may be before human conception/birth, within the 'spirit realm' if one believes in that, or in the physical/human realm.

This goes beyond what I've really considered to others - there may be a god/gods/godess/godesses, there may not be. I have no proof either way, but I'd like to believe (faith) that there is more than the physical realm.

P.S religion is a delicate topic for many people. I will not change your opinions/beliefs, you will not change mine. We all have our own personal opinions, beliefs and religious backgrounds. I shall be careful not to push my belief (as undefined as it is.) With this comment, please keep it... Rational? I hope we all (including myself!) understand what I mean.

 

[kamap1]

I understand, so you basically do have faith in something but you aint sure what that something is, then indeed the agnostic theist definition suits you.

I'm an agnost, there may or may not be something, if there is, the "thing" will hopefully be big hearted enough that if I have led a good life I will get into whatever afterlife might or might not be.
I don't have faith there is something but I can't say there isn't cause there is no proof for or against.
There are still things sience can't explain and might or might not be "godly" intervention.
I will let people be in their religion unless they try and force their believes on me then I will "strike back" with a vengeance.

A discussion I had with some catholic person
She went: The universe is the biggest proof god excist, cause its such a big puzzle that it can't be put there just at random and lead to everything we know.
Me rebutal: Take a puzzle throw it on the ground if it didn't come up right, do it again and keep going, somewhere along the line it will be put right by random. Are you absolutely certain that this is the first time this happened, who knows the universe has happened before but since nothing and no one is around we don't know.

Also you know, there are four hundred billion stars out there, just in our galaxy alone. If only one out of a million of those had planets, and just of out of a million of those had life, and just one out of a million of those had intelligent life; there would be literally millions of civilizations out there and if there wasn't, it'll be an awful waste of space.

So who is to say that the puzzle didn't just randomly happen there is no proof and nothing you say is a fact or can be proven, so ts good that you believe so but I don't and I have a rational way to explain it, so please consider dropping the topic and don't try and change my mind about it cause that won't happen.
Doesn't the bible say somewhere that God isn't anything without faith, I have no faith therefor God doesn't excist for me.

That was so much fun.
For everything she said I had a comeback, I knew more about the bible and the teaching of Jezus / God then her and she definatly came across as a catholic nutjob that couldn't comprehend that there where people with a different view then hers but she had to concede and say that I made some good points and that she wouldn't bother me no more.

 

[Goldtru1]

Yes, girl in short skirt will draw attention over one who wears standard, covering clothing. She may want to draw attention, esp from males. But she is not inviting someone to get close, intimate or physical with her. There's a difference between observing/admiring, and forcing what one believes on another. There is that line between wanting some attention, and having someone force their reality, their desires on one who is not willing. The problem is that humans, self-centered creatuers, who live, feel and breathe in their world, their mind, will believe their desire is what everyone desires. They may believe that because of the dress, attire, or confidence, wants them specifically to promote their own personal desires, which isn't the case.

Of course you are right, but the sad reality is often different. I'm not defending or excusing men who behave that way. I'm just saying that there are inherent risks in how a girl presents herself. People can be evil and crazy and you can't control that. People do things that are horribly wrong and you can't control that. That's all.

 

[Drystan1]

@Goldtru - We are on the same page. There are those people who believe that skimpy clothes/short skirt means a female is willing to have a male push their belief (that the female is interested in them) onto them (the female.) This simply isn't true, but due to cultural differences, human differences, self-centeredness, and/or sexual differences, the female who may, or may not, want a reaction about her appearance, the male may think she's deserving of sexual advances.
As said, this isn't true. She may be wearing more revealing clothing, but she is NOT wanting advances from strangers. Whether she would like to be noticed is not the issue - the issue is the person who believes their personal reality; that they are right; and pushes this on someone else. There is no excuse in this instance - one person may push their own beliefs on another, who was not willing, and that is not right at all.

There are risks, and I hope the females I have been close to understand this (as I would never wish anything negative upon them,) but there is still no reason anyone should push themselves on another.
The punishment should (and generally speaking) lies with the one who pushes themselve/their opinion/belief on someone else, who may not be willing. It's just sad that the victim then has to live with the consequence. There should be a consequence to the aggressor, and not the victim.

This includes the original topic of a schoolkid taking a pony lunchbox/bag to school. The aggressor should not be allowed to force their opinion, and intimidate/offend, someone who just wants to express themself and share a part of themself.

@kamap - there are religeous fanatics among every religion. Including atheism. Not one will convince the other - they are all based on belief, faith, or any other term. There is no proof for any organised religion, including atheism, which is simply the "belief" that no god exists. Even an atheist cannot "prove" that no god exists - it is something that science or physics cannot prove (at this stage?). I know a lot of christians at this stage in life, and they would not deny that their god exists. Just as much as I would deny that their god exists or doesn't. They have faith that their god exists. I have faith that a god may exist, or doesn't. Neither of us are right, neither are wrong - there is no scientific evidence; just "faith."

 

[kamap1]

Its sad that there are fanatics, fanatics give the others that have the same train of though / believes a bad rep just by beeing associated with the fanatics while they don't want anything to do with them.
Look at Syria for example the normal syrian people are largely muslims (if I'm not mistaken) they just want the dictator gone and nothing else, why the extremists (al-queda and the like) want the dictator gone cause then they can have all the power and be dictators themselves.

 

[Goldtru1]

*squirts seltzer water at Drystan

Sorry!! I'm SO sorry Dry. It just got so serious in here and I kind of lost it for a second.

*squirts more seltzer out of a giant fake flower

Ooops! I did it again! Eeek!

 

[kamap1]

So Goldtru I hope you aren't wearing something white with no bra under cause if Drystan retaliates with more water.
Do I have to say more, know what I mean, nudge nudge, wink wink.

 

[Goldtru1]

Mr Kamap, you are a married man! Now let me get out of this soaking wet white cheesecloth dress before I catch my death of cold. I just need to find my other clothes ...

 

[djmbbandie]

*turns on heat in Bar

Don't mind me, doing maintenance!

*serves Dew

*serves wine

*serves sangria

 

[kamap1]

Yes I am a married man, what are the point(s) you are making in that soaking wet white cheesecloth dress while its this cold in the bar?

Do I need to stare some more, wink wink nudge nudge, I'll say no more.

I'm not sure but I don't think my wife minds me looking at beatifull women as long as she knows I love her and find her beatifull aswell, which is the case even if she doesn't find herself beautifull.

A quote we both found funny: Love is seeing a beautiful woman & looking away out of respect for your wife. TRUE love is nudging your wife & saying "Honey, check her out"

 

[pharphis]

gnosticism and theism do not answer the same questions. One can be any combination of gnostic or agnostic with theist or atheist.

I'm an agnostic atheist, for example. I don't believe there is a god and I don't believe it can be proven/disproven (like tooth fairies)

But the definition has been used differently by fence-sitters in recent years who don't want to upset others. I'll freely admit I thought agnosticism was the "open-mindedness" some claim it to be instead of the evidence-based question since I too was told it meant otherwise several years ago and never checked.

I've been listening to a lot of debates on whether theism is good/bad and similar topics recently and I'm surprised even by the number of scholars who don't know the distinction, and describe agnosticism as a "type" of atheism, or as a more "open-minded" viewpoint than atheism.
They aren't comparable

 

[pharphis]

Its sad that there are fanatics, fanatics give the others that have the same train of though / believes a bad rep just by beeing associated with the fanatics while they don't want anything to do with them.
Look at Syria for example the normal syrian people are largely muslims (if I'm not mistaken) they just want the dictator gone and nothing else, why the extremists (al-queda and the like) want the dictator gone cause then they can have all the power and be dictators themselves.

If I were faith-driven I would be a fanatic too. If I truly believed that people were going to suffer for all eternity I would be screaming in the streets trying to save them. I agree with Penn Jillette on this issue: Only the most crazy (yelling in the street crazy) people really believe in god. I'm not saying you have to be crazy to believe in god, but that if you truly did you would devote your entire life to trying to save others and preach your truth.

I'm too lazy to figure out who said the following but it's something else I agree with that should be said:
without religion, good people do good things and evil people do evil things.
with religion, good people may do evil things (because the ultimate authority tells them too)

 

[djmbbandie]

Did you guys hear about the college running back who skipped the combine and stayed in an airport for two days because God told him to?

 

[pharphis]

@Goldtru - We are on the same page. There are those people who believe that skimpy clothes/short skirt means a female is willing to have a male push their belief (that the female is interested in them) onto them (the female.) This simply isn't true, but due to cultural differences, human differences, self-centeredness, and/or sexual differences, the female who may, or may not, want a reaction about her appearance, the male may think she's deserving of sexual advances.
As said, this isn't true. She may be wearing more revealing clothing, but she is NOT wanting advances from strangers. Whether she would like to be noticed is not the issue - the issue is the person who believes their personal reality; that they are right; and pushes this on someone else. There is no excuse in this instance - one person may push their own beliefs on another, who was not willing, and that is not right at all.

There are risks, and I hope the females I have been close to understand this (as I would never wish anything negative upon them,) but there is still no reason anyone should push themselves on another.
The punishment should (and generally speaking) lies with the one who pushes themselve/their opinion/belief on someone else, who may not be willing. It's just sad that the victim then has to live with the consequence. There should be a consequence to the aggressor, and not the victim.

This includes the original topic of a schoolkid taking a pony lunchbox/bag to school. The aggressor should not be allowed to force their opinion, and intimidate/offend, someone who just wants to express themself and share a part of themself.

@kamap - there are religeous fanatics among every religion. Including atheism. Not one will convince the other - they are all based on belief, faith, or any other term. There is no proof for any organised religion, including atheism, which is simply the "belief" that no god exists. Even an atheist cannot "prove" that no god exists - it is something that science or physics cannot prove (at this stage?). I know a lot of christians at this stage in life, and they would not deny that their god exists. Just as much as I would deny that their god exists or doesn't. They have faith that their god exists. I have faith that a god may exist, or doesn't. Neither of us are right, neither are wrong - there is no scientific evidence; just "faith."

From another post of yours, first:
I think you would identify more with deism than theism. Theism is identification with a religion, but you sound more like you believe (or wish to) believe there is a creator/authority who isn't defined by our religions.

I wouldn't classify atheism as a religion and atheism isn't a belief in no god but a disbelief in gods. This is why it's not faith-based and hence not a religion. I know it sounds like I just repeated you but think of it this way;
atheism is the disbelief in a god due to lack of evidence that there is a god. In this sense it isn't faith-based, because it's evidence-based. This is true whether you believe it's possible (gnostic) or not (agnostic) to find evidence of such. Religions require faith. In the same way I wouldn't describe my opinion that the tooth fairy isn't real as a faith- but as evidence-based thinking.

Absence of evidence is certainly not evidence of absence but I'm of the mind that if there is no evidence for something you shouldn't believe it, otherwise I subscribe to any sort of medical treatment that has yet to be tested.

You also say that you have a faith a god may exist, or doesn't. That's a tautology and so I don't think you need faith to say "either something is or is not".
I would agree that you can't lump people as wrong or right based on their religious beliefs or lack thereof, and there are arguments both ways saying that theism is a good or bad thing.

All of that being said, I would say that sure you can describe someone as a fanatic with respect to atheism. Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Bill Maher are just a few that I'm familiar with. I don't think fanatic is necessarily a bad term, it just suggests fervor with expression of their belief or practice. These people want to share with the world their views on why religion is a poisonous thing in our society with respect to most (or all) aspects of society. In the case of atheism, part of this fervor would side with trying to convince people to make the most of their current life, because there's no reason to believe in a second or eternal life.

I'm not sure if I fit in that category for expression but I certainly agree

/inb4 BPC disapproves of my atheistic opinions

 

[Moar]

This is a very interesting disussion and I want to throw my 2 cents in.

I believe that every god and godess is manmade. We create our gods after our needs and some of them care to shared needs by many and as such becomean established religion. When I feel the need for it I can dream up my own god or godess for a night where it's hard to fall asleep and feel some faith and love. That's how the human minds works in my opinion. We search for reassurement all the time and when human reassurement is not available or enough then we find it in our gods. They are a projection of all we want to be.

I don't know in what category of theism or not that puts me, but I live comfortably with it.

*cuddles please*

Edit: On the short skirt issue. I am firmly of the belief that everybody should be able to walk around being naked without anything bad happening. That's not how it is in reality, so lock the pervs that don't respect others up. Or shoot them. Or something.

 

[pharphis]

This is a very interesting disussion and I want to throw my 2 cents in.

I believe that every god and godess is manmade. We create our gods after our needs and some of them care to shared needs by many and as such becomean established religion. When I feel the need for it I can dream up my own god or godess for a night where it's hard to fall asleep and feel some faith and love. That's how the human minds works in my opinion. We search for reassurement all the time and when human reassurement is not available or enough then we find it in our gods. They are a projection of all we want to be.

I don't know in what category of theism or not that puts me, but I live comfortably with it.

*cuddles please*

Edit: On the short skirt issue. I am firmly of the belief that everybody should be able to walk around being naked without anything bad happening. That's not how it is in reality, so lock the pervs that don't respect others up. Or shoot them. Or something.

lol agreed entirely with the last bit.

I agree with all of your post, actually.
I think that puts you in atheism, since you believe religion is man-made (as do I) and it suggest you're not a deist

 

[Moar]

I think I am mostly an existencialist (that spelling looks off). I'm influenced by Sartre, Feuerbach and Kant in my beliefs. I'm also a realist so I see that we can not ever have the perfect existencialist civilisation. People are bastards and don't respect others. Some will not ever treat someone the same way they want to be treated. I'm living my life that way anyway and I'm happy with it.

 

[Drystan1]

Absence of evidence is certainly not evidence of absence but I'm of the mind that if there is no evidence for something you shouldn't believe it, otherwise I subscribe to any sort of medical treatment that has yet to be tested.

Isn't that the purpose of the scientific method though? Going back many years ago, there was no evidence that an anti-cancer drug could exist. We have and are developing drugs now to help cancer patients, because someone, despite no evidence for it, still believed it was possible. They aren't 100% cures, but the potential is there, and came out of something trying something that didn't exist.

Another example. Humans haven't discovered every life form on earth. There are animals in the depths of the ocean we haven't identified yet. There is no proof of their existence (It's only a small step of faith to believe that we haven't discovered everything.) So you don't believe they exist, or that there are new species yet to be discovered?
My thought process is that ~70% of the earth is ocean. and I believe less than 5% of that has been searched; The average ocean depth is ~4200 meters, while the deepest part is ~11,000 meters deep. There's no evidence that says there are things living there, but given our current knowledge (and knowledge gaps,) or rainforest ecosystems and dynamics, or caves, of the solar system, of previous discoveries and scientific breakthroughs - things that may not have been believed previously - it would be likely that there'd be more to discover.

You also say that you have a faith a god may exist, or doesn't. That's a tautology and so I don't think you need faith to say "either something is or is not".
I would agree that you can't lump people as wrong or right based on their religious beliefs or lack thereof, and there are arguments both ways saying that theism is a good or bad thing.

I have faith that a god may exist, or doesn't.

Uh... Error in typing. I believe that there could be a god or higher purpose, but I acknowledge that there may not be. But the belief/faith is that there is something higher.

----

I also somewhat classify atheism as a religion, because (while most start as jokes/satire,) there are the odd ones who join an atheist club or page to try to share their belief that no god exists, and who want to convert others away from other religious belief. They do what religious groups do - argue their points and reasoning to try convince others that they are right, which is why there are so many difficulties discussing religion. It's not really an accurate definition, but it somewhat fits. My bad there.

 

[Drystan1]

*squirts seltzer water at Drystan

Sorry!! I'm SO sorry Dry. It just got so serious in here and I kind of lost it for a second.

*squirts more seltzer out of a giant fake flower

Ooops! I did it again! Eeek!

*sets up water-filled bucket trap over door ways*