Maybe McCain should have vetted PalinFollow

Try telling that to a young muslim who is being taught by his Imam that 70 virgins await him when he kills the infidels.

You might also point out to him that Infidel doesn't mean non muslim either but i doubt you will get very far.

Both words now have new meanings, far different to their historic ones, hardly strange when you consider most of the English language is constantly evolving.

Just ask Stubs what Un-natural means.

In the year 2000 Jihad means holy war.

Infidel means someone who doesn't believe in YOUR religion.

You can argue all you like about what the root of the word is but the reality is that when a dictionary defines a word you can be pretty fUcking sure thats how people are using it!

While I was being facetious when I said it sounded like a Jihad to me, I don't believe your translation is what was meant, either.

What she's saying is that the Iraq war is sanctioned by god. Or, if you will, part of god's plan.

Edited, Sep 5th 2008 11:15am by Belkira

Fortunately we have a new testament.

Yeah, I like the second act with the gay carpenter, too.

How do you know that little green ants don't push objects around and that objects stop moving because the ants all have huge penises which get crushed under the object which causes it to stop moving by exerting a magical dong-force onto the objects which causes enough phallic green blockage to stop the object in question.

I mean we are trying to prove negatives here right? Who needs friction? Open a fucking logic book. Please.

First I thank you for complementing my ****. It's very nice of you.

Secondly, I abort millions of babies everyday. Well to be honest I haven't been able to recently due to medication side effects but still. It's the thought that counts

When your objection is something like "well there is no evidence that God isn't involved" then you really really do need to open a @#%^ing book

Look dude. Logic is the way in which humans can think if you want your thoughts to be consistent with themselves, not may think, not optionally choose to think, CAN think. You do not always have to be in accordance with logic and in fact most people are not always in accordance with it. What is important is that if you do NOT think in accordance with logic, then your thoughts are going to be self-contradictory QED

Again, open a damn book. Please. This isn't even hard logic. It's easy stuff that you could learn with a simple argument form book.



I was trying to think of something funny to respond to this but I failed because I'm stuck in SERIOUS BUSINESS DEBATE MODE. I'll try harder next time.

Edited, Sep 5th 2008 1:58pm by Pensive

Hah!

Now you're just trolling. Click the ******* links you numbskull. READ.

View: You are an ignorant troglodyte who does not understand extremely basic concepts about how thoughts must correlate in the human mind in order to be consistent. You can NOT prove a negative. Why would you even ask such a stupid question like: "How can you prove that God doesnt' have a hand in it?"

Here I'll refer you to a guy that can explain it fully. It's called the falsifiability criterion which is the foundation for modern @#%^ing science as we know it.

Ten seconds of research. If you read this, then I will talk to you, otherwise, game over.

Edited, Sep 5th 2008 2:12pm by Pensive

Why exactly is "pseudo intellectual" supposed to be an insult? "Intellectual" alone is often insulting enough if you are of the persuasion that books and learning are evil and only pragmatic goals and hard work are the important things in life. If someone is truly living in an ivory tower as an intellectual, then why call him a pseudo version of that? It's a meaningless term; it's a statement that conveys no information at all. Why insult someone further when the original word is enough you uneducated Neanderthal?

I've never once seen the term used as anything but a pejorative, and used exclusively by someone who feels threatened intellectually by another, such as: "How DARE you make an argument against me with a different ideology? I'm the TRUE intellectual you damn heathen. Now excuse me while I ignore the entire enlightenment ideal and read hustler instead of the Critique of Pure Reason; it's much more intellectual than the latter."

You studied these from an encyclopedia? Before I deride you any further I want to know if this is true or not. I'm, against my better judgment, giving you credit that you did not study those figures from an encyclopedia.

You got a minor in philosophy without at least learning ******* argumentum ad ignorantum and modes ******* tollens? What the **** kind of philosophy did you study?