Atheism or agnosticism? :: Free Realms

#479 REDACTED, Posted: May 04 2011 at 8:59 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Drift,

#480 May 04 2011 at 9:02 AM Rating: Good

Ailitardif

Sage

2,069 posts

I'm bumping it to 1700% sure.

Oops, I meant 70%.

____________________________

http://www.marriageissogay.com/

Song of the day:
May 26, 2011 -- Transplants

#481 REDACTED, Posted: May 04 2011 at 9:02 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Atard,

#482 May 04 2011 at 9:04 AM Rating: Excellent

__DEL__1657498899608

Guru

12,049 posts

Uglysasquatch wrote:

I think everyone's missing something significant here. Varus used capitalization and grammar very well in that post. What's happened?

Perhaps even more significant, he said "God" instead of "G*d" Smiley: eek

#483 May 04 2011 at 9:05 AM Rating: Default

Driftwood

I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning

Scholar

9,395 posts

Quote:

You should have paid more attention to this 'just keep silent'.

You know, part of living in a "free" country is being able to openly talk and debate politics. To be able to criticise one's government. To be able to question authority. We live in the US and Canada respectively, in the year 2011, not a 1960s Warsaw Pact country. If you think it's better to stay silent, I think you're living in the wrong place.

____________________________

10k before the site's inevitable death or bust

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.

Alan Watts wrote:

Eske wrote:

I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.

#484 May 04 2011 at 9:06 AM Rating: Good

Guenny

Sage

4,042 posts

I've actually noticed over the past week or two that varus seems to be getting bored with himself. He's breaking the fourth wall quite often and his attempts at trolling are getting a little weak/desperate.

#485 REDACTED, Posted: May 04 2011 at 9:08 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) drift,

#486 REDACTED, Posted: May 04 2011 at 9:10 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Guenny,

#487 May 04 2011 at 9:13 AM Rating: Good

lolgaxe

+1

50,767 posts

Then let me be the first to tell you how glad I am that you've found time in your busy schedule as a noble insurance salesman to offer your opinions on politics on a video game forum in the face of such a tragedy.

____________________________

George Carlin wrote:

I think itâ€™s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.

#488 May 04 2011 at 9:14 AM Rating: Decent

Driftwood

I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning

Scholar

9,395 posts

Quote:

And in a free country it's my right to tell you to shut the f*ck up you don't know what the h*ll you're talking about and furthermore you don't possess the education or intelligence necessary to begin to contribute anything to the conversation other than sound bytes you've heard some liberal from npr mutter.

I've never listened to NPR in my life. I actually had to Google it to know what it was.

It is your right to tell me to shut up. However it's as though you'd expected me to listen.

Exactly what would further education help me to bring to the conversation, when I'm done with my Culinary course will I suddenly be more intelligent that I was before? Formal education is not a prerequisite for intelligence or intellect.

____________________________

10k before the site's inevitable death or bust

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.

Alan Watts wrote:

Eske wrote:

I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.

#489 May 04 2011 at 9:17 AM Rating: Good

Guenny

Sage

4,042 posts

varusword75 wrote:

Guenny,

You don't think that i'm in insurance and having to deal with claims from the recent disasters could have anything to do with it do you? Amazing what you can see when you step out of your box.

Edited, May 4th 2011 11:11am by varusword75

So what you're saying is that you'd like me to take you seriously. Gotcha big boy. You are such a bacon of light.

#490 May 04 2011 at 9:21 AM Rating: Good

Ailitardif

Sage

2,069 posts

varusword75 wrote:

Atard,

Quote:

I'm 62% sure that varus is gbaji's sock

I'm 97.75% sure you're retarded.

That hurt my internet feelings.

____________________________

http://www.marriageissogay.com/

Song of the day:
May 26, 2011 -- Transplants

#491 May 04 2011 at 9:23 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1709511392366

Sage

6,471 posts

Guenny wrote:

varusword75 wrote:

Guenny,

You don't think that i'm in insurance and having to deal with claims from the recent disasters could have anything to do with it do you? Amazing what you can see when you step out of your box.

Edited, May 4th 2011 11:11am by varusword75

So what you're saying is that you'd like me to take you seriously. Gotcha big boy. You are such a bacon of light.

Okay, wait, wait. Now I want my title to be "Bacon of Light".

#492 REDACTED, Posted: May 04 2011 at 9:23 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Guenny,

#493 May 04 2011 at 9:40 AM Rating: Excellent

__DEL__1657498899608

Guru

12,049 posts

varusword75 wrote:

furthermore you don't possess the education or intelligence necessary to begin to contribute anything to the conversation other than sound bytes you've heard some liberal from npr mutter.

But your education was public schooling, which you decry, a degree for teaching (which you quit after a year), and hooking up with drunk co-eds (pretty sure educating isn't done through osmosis).

So that leaves intelligence, except you don't read sources, believe in facts, or care what other people think.

So that leaves... ego and paranoia? Check and check!

#494 May 04 2011 at 9:42 AM Rating: Good

Guenny

Sage

4,042 posts

varusword75 wrote:

Guenny,

Quote:

So what you're saying is that you'd like me to take you seriously

You're assuming I have an opinion on the matter.

You seem quite defensive and quick to throw out the "I DO INSURANCE SO I R IMPORTANT" card. Don't ask me why you're trying to prove yourself to a liberal *****, ask yourself.

#495 May 04 2011 at 9:55 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1630282721753

Sage

14,174 posts

Quote:

To your first point, no. The discussion has to do with the potential for a child. There is no child yet.

To your second point, I have an issue with "partial birth abortions." I don't think they should be outright banned, but I am for stipulations on how that should only be "for the health of the mother" that we allow those to happen. IMO, once the cells are a viable baby, you've reached the point of no return. Unless the mother's life is in danger at that point, I see no reason why the pregnancy shouldn't continue and adoption is your recourse if you don't want to keep the baby.

In other words you want to force women to carry babies to term, depriving them of their bodily autonomy.

Sickening.

#496 May 04 2011 at 10:08 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1649636418093

Sage

30,646 posts

Almalieque wrote:

So, are you going to answer the question or not? Why is a woman with two children MORE RESPONSIBLE than a woman with one child?

You already explained it rather nicely. One person has more responsible actions than another. That doesn't mean they are more responsible as a person, just that they have more responsibility.

Almalieque wrote:

That scenario would be as equal as you can get under scenario two, because it wouldn't matter what the man or woman wants, the abortion would only be granted on a case by case scenario.

So instead of a man forcing the woman to carry the baby, the government will. /facepalm

Almalieque wrote:

Nope, stating the facts. I'm pointing out how you're using your emotions with pregnancy to make a point. "Waaaaaah, I had to carry a baby for 9 WHOLE months and YOU DIDN'T!! It won't ever be equal!! Waaaaahh I should be able to do what I want.. You can NEVER go through that, YOU'LL NEVER UNDERSTAND, BLAH, BLAH BLAH, WAAH, WAAH,WAAH.....!!!"

I would wager that most men would rather birth a child than pay 18 years of child support..

lol

Almalieque wrote:

Belkira wrote:

To your first point, no. The discussion has to do with the potential for a child. There is no child yet.

Contradict often? Oh, wait of course you do...

I see no contradiction there.

Almalieque wrote:

Belkira wrote:

To your second point, I have an issue with "partial birth abortions." I don't think they should be outright banned, but I am for stipulations on how that should only be "for the health of the mother" that we allow those to happen. IMO, once the cells are a viable baby, you've reached the point of no return. Unless the mother's life is in danger at that point, I see no reason why the pregnancy shouldn't continue and adoption is your recourse if you don't want to keep the baby.

Interesting... I'll save that for later as you can't even grasp this concept. I don't want you too confused.

lol

Almalieque wrote:

False. You're making up crap again.. hence why you said "something", you don't even know what it is.

You accused me of saying that a man should have a say in abortion and I gave you the same response that I gave Natalia, "quote me saying that or STFU". Then you said "no, you go find it!" That doesn't make any sense, you made the accusation, now render me some evidence or STFU.

No, dearie. This was all about how I stated that you weren't talking about anything "prior to sex." You were talking about abortion. You said, "Where did you tell me that?" And I told you to go look it up. Nice try.

Almalieque wrote:

Here's your confusion, I NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER said anywhere that they should be equal in a "decision". That's your misunderstanding. The first scenario gives the woman total control and THERE IS NO decision in the second scenario. I explained that to you numerous of times. In the second scenario, abortion by default is not authorized and are only approved on a case by case scenario. The decision wouldn't be up to the parents, so it wouldn't matter if one or both wanted the abortion.

So when are you going to answer the question about what happens if a man wants the baby but the woman doesn't? I mean, we're talking about fairness here, right??

#497 May 04 2011 at 10:11 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1630282721753

Sage

14,174 posts

Quote:

So instead of a man forcing the woman to carry the baby, the government will. /facepalm

That's what you're arguing for, though.

#498 May 04 2011 at 10:12 AM Rating: Default

Almalieque

The All Knowing

10,265 posts

Nilatai wrote:

I'm just pointing out that what you are saying and what you think you mean are two different things.

Really? Is it really that hard to admit that you misunderstood? You have yet provided any sentence that could be interpreted as "A man should have a say in the woman having an abortion".

Nilatai wrote:

If they don't know how do they dock his pay?

Good question. I actually talked to legal on this topic a few weeks ago in reference to getting some money that someone owes me. It isn't the military making the rule, it's the court. The court makes the rule and the military is very supportive. The court doesn't care that they are not officers, only who the dad is, his job and how much money he is making. The military complies with the court order.

Nilatai wrote:

No, you misunderstand. The "why?" was directed at this:

Quote:

:
My whole argument was that abortion should only be authorized on a case by case scenario in situations such as, rape, health, etc.

Almalieque wrote:

I support case by case by case abortions because I know stuff happens in life and every scenario can't be covered in one regulation.

Really proving my point here in your lack of reading skills....

Nilatai wrote:

I don't have a problem with governmental assistance. I don't have a problem with forcing men to pay for their kids, either. I'm just wondering why you think one is okay and the other isn't?

Almalieque wrote:

Since option 1 is totally stupid, as it'll probably increase the number of dead-beat dads, I'll go with option 2.

I'm open to other solutions, but that's the only two I can think of.

Really proving my point here in your lack of reading skills....

Nilatai wrote:

You mean aside from your displaying misunderstanding of basic scientific and mathematical concepts? Nothing.

As what? Especially math. Please tell me what mathematical concept? Oh, wait, is this going to be another "men tell women to have abortions" BS that you can't produce?!

#499 May 04 2011 at 10:17 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1649636418093

Sage

30,646 posts

Kavekk wrote:

Quote:

So instead of a man forcing the woman to carry the baby, the government will. /facepalm

That's what you're arguing for, though.

No, I'm not. Perhaps in the case of late-term abortions, but that's something different, IMO.

#500 May 04 2011 at 10:24 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1630282721753

Sage

14,174 posts

Belkira wrote:

Kavekk wrote:

Quote:

So instead of a man forcing the woman to carry the baby, the government will. /facepalm

That's what you're arguing for, though.

No, I'm not. Perhaps in the case of late-term abortions, but that's something different, IMO.

No, that's stupid. How is forcing someone to carry a baby different than forcing someone to carry a baby? Honestly, if you can explain that to me I will give you the biggest fucking medal there ever was.

I meab this is especially strange because earlier you refused to call it a baby, rather than a foetus, until late in the term anyway.

#501 May 04 2011 at 11:56 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1649636418093

Sage

30,646 posts

Kavekk wrote:

Belkira wrote:

Kavekk wrote:

Quote:

So instead of a man forcing the woman to carry the baby, the government will. /facepalm

That's what you're arguing for, though.

No, I'm not. Perhaps in the case of late-term abortions, but that's something different, IMO.

No, that's stupid. How is forcing someone to carry a baby different than forcing someone to carry a baby? Honestly, if you can explain that to me I will give you the biggest fucking medal there ever was.

I meab this is especially strange because earlier you refused to call it a baby, rather than a foetus, until late in the term anyway.

If the fetus/baby/cells are viable outside of the womb, then the pregnancy has already advanced far enough that I feel it's too late to perform an abortion. No one forced the woman to wait that long.

You don't have to like it, or even be ok with it. That's not my problem. I really don't need a medal from you.