Dark_wizzie's Rants

This is obsolete, go to [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Welcome to Dark_wizzie's Rant Thread!

10/30/12
Tolerance

Going to make a short one for today. Some people might say that the atheists do not tolerate people and get in people's faces. Well, scientists don't exactly go to churches, picketing at the fences, telling the church-goers that the science they teach is wrong. It's the religious people that want to shove their information into the science classroom. And religion isn't a fucking science. There is no evidence to support it. People want others to just say 'here's evolution, and here's religion, and they are both equally good options.' No, they are not.

Now, let's get to the core of today's point: Religion is too widespread. It controls USA, period. All presidents have been and will continue to be Christian only. Parents brainwash their children before they can make a decision for themselves. Children are impressionable. The result is a flawed human being. One that is damaged by the dogma and general bullshit spread by the parent. It's like a virus. By nature, parents must spread their word of religion. It saddens me that a few of my friends have fallen prey to this deception, including a person that I still admire greatly.

Why the fuck do I care? Why not let them be? When a person is unable to objectively analyze things, do things without the restraint of religion, that is a problem. That is a core problem with the logic and thought process of an individual. Do I want to be friends with a person that worships the Loch Ness monster? Fuck no, they're insane. Do I wanna be friends with somebody that believes in a burning bush, talking snake, son of god, resurrection, virgin birth, god that watches you have sex and really cares about how and who you have sex with? No, I cannot.

So therein is the dilemma. If I shun all religious people from my life, I lose many friends, and that special person. If I accept people for being religious, I accept people for being flawed, dumbasses. Now, you might make the case that they are just victims, sick in some way, shape, or form, and I should tolerate and try to cure it. Well, no. First off, if a person is a victim to a virus that causes the common cold, do I let them cough on me? No. I tell them to get the fuck away until they're not sick. Second, religious people tend to fall into two categories: 1) (Majority) Uneducated, ignorant people that never read their own Bible, or 2) Legitimately insane Christians in which reason and logic has long jumped off the train. The former is easier to convince, but the second is impossible. Even with the first, people cling to what they know, what they live by.

Religion has a " moral license " to be insulted.

People get insults, and use that as an excuse to run away. (In their defense, if they change their mind and see the light, it won't be in front of my face, it'll be behind closed doors. It's a shame to admit your life has been devoted to a sham) When a Christian wants to debate me and ask me why I don't believe in their god, I'm not insulted. I welcome a debate. I don't argue from authority, I argue with facts, reason, and logic. Do I get pissy over people saying 'bless you' after I sneeze? No. Then what's the problem here? Give and take. Learn to debate. Don't be a pissy bitch.

So I'm at a crossroads. If I don't shun religious nutcases, I compromise who I am as a person. I'm saying, these guys are fucking deluded, but I wanna party with them cuz i got no friends lul.


10/28/12
Not So Holy Now

Just going to post a picture this time.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]



10/23/12
Everybody is Awesome!

It seems like in USA we live in a society where everybody is good. Everybody takes home a trophy for trying hard some other retarded reason. Newflash: The world doesn't work that way. There are people who are better than you at something. Period. They are completely superior in every possible way in that task. There are no subjectives, no buts, and, ors. This thought arised when I was looking at religion. Theologists are saying 'my side is just as good as yours, everybody's side is equal and has a right to their own opinion', You have a right to stupidity, but you don't have a right to call your stupidity equal to rational thinking. Sometimes, life is blunt and uncaring, black and white. Some stances on an issue are simply flawed.

I have a friend (who is a nice guy, in his defense) who isn't that intelligent from my observations. When asked what he thought about his intelligence, he said he's smart in some things. Which ones? 'You know, religion and theory'. Give me an example. 'Everybody has a good side no matter how bad they may seem, you know, they've got a bit of good and a bit of evil'. ......No. I guess people have to get over the fact that some people are more important than you. They affect more people in every way possible.

Everybody wants to think themselves as above average. A common statistic used by psychologists is that 80% of people think they are above average. Straight away you should be able to tell that something is wrong. For the sake of our egos, perhaps because the people know and love are the very same biased people we turn to in order to judge how good we are--we pump ourselves up to be more than we are. The irony is that intelligent people tend to think they are average. So basically speaking, dumb people think they are smart. Smart people think they are average. Why? Well, smart people might hang out with other smart people, and in comparison look dumb. I actually know a friend like this.

So, rest assured, mates. You are probably average intelligence. That's not so bad. Hell, being under average intelligence ain't so bad either. You can more than compensate by being hard working - that beats being smart and lazy any time.
Being wise is having knowledge from experience, received through age. Knowledge is simply knowing facts and information. It has no bearing on actual intelligence. Intelligent people can make novel connections. They can come up with things nobody else has ever come up with before. There's a certain level of critical thinking involved. Think of facts as surgery tools. Having good surgery tools doesn't mean you won't kill somebody if you do surgery one them. But having good surgery tools is invaluable to a good surgeon.

There are different type of intelligence... being very socially adept without any training is in itself a form of emotional intelligence. You read people's expressions and act accordingly. Many people have to learn how to act through socializing during school. But no matter the type, look objectively; don't cut a guy slack because he's bad at other things.

10/18/12 - Updated 10/31/12
Common Arguments for Religion



1. If God didn't exist, where would our morals come from?

Answer: This question is actually an insult rolled into a question. You are saying that human beings are not able to define what is good or bad without religion. Hey, I'm agnostic. I'm not out killing people. I don't need to be afraid of divine punishment to do good things. I do good things be I feel like it. I'm quite offended. Religious people have done horrible things; Child mutilation (both female and male), caused wars and crusades, forced people to be baptized, etc. One can argue that atheists and agnostics have done bad things, for example Hitler. But Hitler's religious affiliation did not cause him to do what he did. If you say that Hitler thought the way he did because he lacked morals, that makes no sense because the Catholic Church itself has done multiple inexcusable acts. Excluding child molestation, look at Rwanda. Converted the crap out of them, told them condoms increased chance of HIV. So here we have a HIB outbreak, and people are being told 'just abstain! Be loyal to your wife/husband!' and not to use condoms. Gee, I wonder why there was a problem in the first place? Like it or not, the Catholic Church has done so much damage. After the shove religion down your throats or killed you, they ensure you have HIV, THEN they offer some money to you to look like the good guy. Good guys, they are not.

If morality comes from the supernatural, name me on moral action made by a believer that couldn't be made by non-believers.
Can you make an example of a vile act that could only be done in the name of religion?
I thought so.


Hitler is also a bad example. He was a a Christian. While the other horrible leaders were not, I find it ironic that 'god' orchestrated all of this and caused it to happen; god is the source of all happiness, and all the bad stuff comes from us... and who made us... god. All of this is no more bloody than all of the crimes and wars started by Christians and religious people... 'kill all men and children, keep the virgin women (for rape)'...

Nobody owns me or has the right to own me. If you made children, you don't have a right to do whatever you want with them. The thought of a god standing by, watching men kill each other and die during childbirth during the last 98,000 years and then randomly stepping in during the last 2 thousand years... THEN God decides the best way to fix this is to make a son, then have him offered as a human sacrifice in the remote part of Palestine is the BEST WAY to fix things. In fact, if there is a god that can interfere with our lives, it is incredibly immoral for god to allow child rape and torture. Saying 'god has a plan' is so ridiculous, you must be morally bankrupt to suggest it. There is a god, that creates us sick for his pleasure. There is a god, that force us into everlasting torment for committing THOUGHT crimes.

What of absolute morality? First off, as you will read later, the absolute morality brought on by religion isn't absolute, or really moral. I don't even think I WANT absolute morality. I want morality that is discussed and understood by everybody. We all know that our definition of what is and isn't moral changes over time. As it should. Religion has ABSOLUTE morality, so over time it becomes what it is: old and irrelevant. What about the ten commandments? Trust me. I can make better commandments than that. That's not a reason for god at all - unless I'm a god, and a better one at that.


2. But Eric, religious belief is my evidence! Here I am telling you, I believe in the metaphysical world.
Imagine if a friend of yours runs up to you, tells you that his life changed when he was destined to marry Jessica Alba. The conversation would go like this if I were you.

Me: Why do you believe this?
Him: You don't understand. This belief gives my life meaning. I now know my purpose in life. It's It's to be Alba's husband. This belief has made me a better person. Now I'm very patient and I treat kids very well because one day I have to raise it with Alba.
Me: *Insert profanity*
Him: You can believe whatever you want, but I don't want to live in a universe where I don't marry Jessica Alba.

Now replace marrying Alba with believing in God. Or, imagine a dude that believes Elvis is still alive. Hey, I know this isn't a scientific god, but it's a faith thing, it's a metaphysical thing.
You be came Christian because you were raised in a Christian family. The same goes on for other religions in other countries. This demonstrates that people's beliefs are shaped by their surroundings. If there is an absolute truth, it shouldn't be able to be switched based on your own country of origin. Also, sit back and think about this. God made a son in a virgin's womb. who then went on to be killed and resurrected. This same god is apperently all-knowing, and loving. This same god tells others to kill other people. This same god wants to save us all. This same god won't save us and will send us to eternal torment if we don't believe in him. To fix this, this god decides to let a few people see him, and write books about it centuries later. 2000 years later, it ends up being illiterate bullshit. This all-knowing god never thought about a better way to demonstrate this god truly exists. This god REALLY wants to save you, but he wants you to believe in him without evidence, through 'faith', and this god will kick the shit out of you if you don't. How do you know this god is for real? Well, this book says so. Has anybody actually went to heaven? We don't know because people that leave for heaven can't come back. We just have to have 'faith'. Of course, being all-knowing, this god cares deeply about your sexual thoughts, habits, and desires. This god thinks a man with a man is an abomination. Clearly, this god has made flawed human beings. This god wanted to make people in the image of himself, but failed, horribly.This 'merciful' god will send billions of people into hell, where they will wish they had died because it would take torture to a whole new level. When it said 'you should only worship me', it was because people believed there were other gods at the time. So this god is a jealous god. Sound familiar? Sound ridiculous? Yeah. Why is faith, the act of believing in something without evidence, somehow noble? Seems stupid in my eyes.

At least Lucifer didn't create human beings with free-will, intelligence, and curiosity, and then curse them and all of their decedents (yet unborn) for using those very traits.
"You want to expand your minds, learn about the universe, and improve yourselves? How DARE you?! I created you to be puppets, not peers!"



3. Religion is useful, though.

Answer: You don't believe something because of its utility. Religion can be useful, but have no actual content. It functions like a placebo. And there's a reaosn why doctors don't give out placebos to patients to make them 'feel better'.

4. What happened before the big bang, then?

Answer: Nobody knows for sure. There are theories, such as the multiverse. Sounds weird, I know. But the universe doesn't care about your common sense. If you were born in the 18th century and I told you that this cup I have right here is actually energy in another form, and that I can unleash the energy and theoretically make a huge-ass bomb, would you believe me? No. And here's the point: Religion is old. It is very old. Because of this, the crap we get from the bible are mostly accepted simply because they are old. Modern (non-shitty, non-religious, real) science is very new when you look at the human timeline. That is the reason why science is not trusted. It's new, it's whacky, I don't know about it (and you don't), get it away from me, I don't want to believe it. What strikes me is the arrogance of religious people who act like they've posed a question that destroys agnostics and atheists by asking about scientific theories they don't even understand. Big bang is a theory. Yes, but so is the theory of gravity. A theory has been tested in experiments and has shown time and time again, the ability to predict things based on its claims.

Don't question big bang without going to study it. And you didn't because it is extremely complex. It doesn't take FAITH to believe that the big bang is real. Really. Don't use the words like 'space and time' or god existing outside 'space and time' if you don't even know exactly what it means. All scientific evidence aside, I find it more ridiculous that there is a god that invents the world, does all of these immoral things, and desperately care about who we have sex with. God, if you see this, stay the fuck away from what I do and do not do in bed.

But let's assume for a second, that we have literally no clue about what happens before the Big Bang. First off, you are in no position to disprove the leading theoretical physicists of today. (And FYI: Most of them are not religious. It's because they know how to think for themselves and can smell BS from a mile away.) The complexity of it all is enough to destroy both of our respective brains. Second, even if we had no clue, that doesn't prove there is a god. Before people had no clue about what lightning was, and just pointed to the sky and said 'IT'S THE GODS!'. It was used to make sense of the things that occur, such as diseases. As time passed, people grew a pair and started thinking for themselves. Going against the antiquated ideas of the church was dangerous, though. Regardless, eventually we knew that the world wasn't flat, the sun didn't rise and fall around the earth, etc. If you want to define god as what we don't know, then god is an ever-shrinking pocket of scientific ignorance. Be prepared for the day that god ceases to exist altogether. My advice to you is this: Get a book, read about what evolution really IS. While its main principle is simple, the entire thing is very complex. Stop trying to disprove it, and read on it. Get educated about it. THEN, if you still doubt it, debate about it. The difference between science and religion is that science isn't afraid to admit science is wrong. That's how people move forward. That's the problem with religion: its ideas are antiquated and struggling to keep up with a world where science is booming.

Don't you dare say that science can and will NEVER give answers to morality or the mysteries of the universe; doing so is complete ignorance. Do you think people would have dared to dream to land on a celestial body 5000 years ago? NO. Don't be so fucking arrogant. Don't make claims you don't understand and don't know for sure!

Speaking of arrogance: The idea that god cares about YOU, but not other animals, that god created man as image of God, is just ridiculous. It's very arrogant and self-indulgent. Oh, I'm so great, I must be SPECIAL! Jesus Christ will probably come to earth in my lifetime! I'm that important!

Also, if the universe DID come from nothing, and in your arrogance you assert that is not possible, what about God? God came from nothing? You can't make exceptions for God.

On another note: Religious people want atheists to explain the big bang (when they are not scientists), but cannot explain god. God brought suffering into the world by giving up 'free will', where he will then punish us for using the very same attributes god built into us. You have to believe God with NO EVIDENCE. The omniscient god's way of convincing us he exists is by stone tablets and word of mouth over centuries where it is then written into books (in a dead language, that is stupid, the idea that all-knowing god would choose a dead language to dictate to the world about his existence) of multiple languages, extremely open to interpretation and dogma and general bullshit. All to get into God's exclusive club called 'heaven'. You have to fit a certain profile, think a certain way, love Jesus over your family, be willing to sacrafice your son, do this not from fear of hell, not be homosexual (because god is very concerned about what you do in bed), etc etc. I call bullshit.

What people fail to realize is even if evolution and the big bang are disproved, it does not prove god. Not knowing does not mean your god is real. Even if the argument from ignorance, that failed logic, is correct, why YOUR god?

One last point: Something CAN come from nothing. Go study quantum mechanics.

5. All you have are theories? That's just bullshit, it takes less faith to believe in god.

Answer: The definition of a theory is a hypothesis that has been tested over and over and seems to fit. It's not a hypothesis. It's a simple idea whipped out because scientists have nothing better to do. You can't say 'I BELIEVE' in the word of god. The bible is not evidence to back up your belief until you prove the bible to be true. Faith, by definition, is believing without adequate proof. I call that wishful thinking. The human brain is very prone to malfunction. Very often, we think we are thinking rationally, where in fact we are not. We are also prone to mental illnesses and hallucinations. When all we can sense are electrical impulses interpreted by the brain, it's not hard to see why some people sense false things. Sometimes this leads to people feeling insecure. Or maybe sometimes the awe and wonder of the world leads people to believe there is a god - which in itself is horrible logic. It's always the less educated ones that claim to be able to disprove evolution or prove god.

Sidenote: For those that want to bring up 'The Matrix' paradox - That we all live in a world that's not real, and we can't find out for ourselves what the real world is... that may be true, but there's no way to prove it. So I'll toss that aside for the purpose of this article. Another brought up idea is what I call the 'Stargate Idea', from the sc-fi, Stargate, where aliens use technology to pose as gods and enslave mankind. Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from divine presence.

You cannot assert that because science changes and finds better answers, that science knows nothing; it's in fact, the beauty of science; the willingness to accept one is wrong and find the correct answer. Just because the date of the universe changes according to our understanding, it doesn't mean that all answers are equally as correct; it's very incorrect to say that the universe is 1 year old, or 6000 years old. If you go to the doctor, you trust the knowledge science has brought to the table for health. You accept science for everything until it contradicts your faith. You can't say you have all this absolute truth from the bible, give no truth and no evidence, then turn around and take science for everything else. You accept modern health with open hands, and applaud new discoveries made for health instead of yelling 'SCIENTISTS KNOW NOTHING!', even though at any time in any field of study, old things may be disprove. Or, you are a nutcase that really hates doctors, in which case I say: You're choking. You want me to do the Heimlich maneuver, or pray for you? If you answered the second, fuck off my forum and stop reading this.

6. Name me one piece of evidence against the bible.

1. Krishna in India 1000 years before Christ. Carpenter, born of a virgin, baptized.
2. Persian god, Mithra, 600 years before Christ. Born December 25th, performed miracles, resurrected on the third day, known as the lamb, the way, the truth, the light, saviour, the messiah.
3.Timothy 2:11-12 : "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man,she must be quiet."
4. Deuteronomy 22:23-24 : "If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the young woman because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man’s wife. You must purge the evil from among you."
5. Exodus 21:7 ""If a man sells his daughter as a female slave, she is not to go free as the male slaves do."
6. Genesis 38:24 "About three months later Judah was told, “Your daughter-in-law Tamar is guilty of prostitution, and as a result she is now pregnant.”Judah said, “Bring her out and have her burned to death!”"
7. Multiple religions of the Meditteranean region a thousand years before Christianity had similar tales.
8. 1280 BC - Egyptian Book of the Dead describes a god named Horus,s on of the god Osiris, born to a virgin mother, baptized in a river, later beheaded, tempted in the desert like Jesus, healed the sick, fixed the blind, walked on water, raised the dead, had 12 disciples, crucified, and resurrected after 3 days.
9. There hasn't been a shred of evidence for Moses' story. After having god kill every firstborn son to get what Moses and 'god' wants (why doesn't god just change the pharoah's mind? Much less bloodshed, this is mass genocide), Moses and his company wanders the desert for 40 years. Not a single shred of evidence left to prove it. And they were out for FORTY YEARS.
10. Exodus 22:18 (KJV) "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." (With all the divine knowledge, god doesn't know witchcraft ain't real?)
11. Jeremiah 19:7-9 Killing is good!
12 Isaiah 13:15-18 Mercy to enemies is over-rated.
13. Judges 11:29-40 - Child abuse is pretty cool.
14-9999.

It always amazes me how many times this God orders the killing of innocent people even after the Ten Commandments said “Thou shall not kill”. For example, God kills 70,000 innocent people because David ordered a census of the people (1 Chronicles 21). God also orders the destruction of 60 cities so that the Israelites can live there. He orders the killing of all the men, women, and children of each city, and the looting of all of value (Deuteronomy 3). He orders another attack and the killing of “all the living creatures of the city: men and women, young, and old, as well as oxen sheep, and asses” (Joshua 6). In Judges 21, He orders the murder of all the people of Jabesh-gilead, except for the virgin girls who were taken to be forcibly raped and married. When they wanted more virgins, God told them to hide alongside the road and when they saw a girl they liked, kidnap her and forcibly rape her and make her your wife! Just about every other page in the Old Testament has God killing somebody! In 2 Kings 10:18-27, God orders the murder of all the worshipers of a different god in their very own church! In total God kills 371,186 people directly and orders another 1,862,265 people murdered.

The God of the Bible also allows slavery, including selling your own daughter as a sex slave (Exodus 21:1-11), child abuse (Judges 11:29-40 and Isaiah 13:16), and bashing babies against rocks (Hosea 13:16 & Psalms 137:9).

This type of criminal behavior should shock any moral person. Murder, rape, pillage, plunder, slavery, and child abuse can not be justified by saying that some god says it’s OK. If more people would actually sit down and read the Bible there would be a lot more atheists like myself.

Jesus also promoted the idea that all men should castrate themselves to go to heaven: "For there are eunuchs, that were so born from their mother's womb: and there are eunuchs, that were made eunuchs by men: and there are eunuchs, that made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." (Matthew 19:12 ASV) I don't know why anyone would follow the teachings of someone who literally tells all men to cut off their privates.

The God of the Bible also was a big fan of ritual human sacrifice and animal sacrifice.

And just in case you are thinking that the evil and immoral laws of the Old Testament are no longer in effect, perhaps you should read where Jesus makes it perfectly clear: "It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB) There are many more quotes on this topic at my "Do Not Ignore the Old Testament" web page.

I know that most Christians believe that God is a good and loving god, and wants people to do good things. I believe that most people want to do good things and behave morally. I also believe that many Christians haven’t really read the Bible, or just read certain passages in church. This is understandable, as the Bible is hard to read due to its archaic language and obscure references. Also many priests and preachers don’t like to read certain passages in the Bible because they present a message of hate not love.

7. The bible didn't mean that literally.

Answer: ORLLY? Because where did it say 'don't take this literally'? In science do we say 'the big bang started the universe... (in fine print) nah, just kidding!'? Because it sounds like you are picking and choosing which part of the bible to take literally: the part you WANT to take literally. And when you do that, everything can mean anything, and when that happens, everything means nothing. Speaking of which, no, evolution and the Christian belief where god created mankind in 6 days and rested (the almighty god is too tired!) on the 7th conflicts with the theory of evolution. You can't say 'for god it's only 5 days where in fact for us it's billions of years', because that's not literally said in the bible.

8. The bible is harmless.

Answer: The bible isn't harmless, it's obsolete. How can people objectively investigate the world when they believe everything is made by god? How do you demonstrate intelligence when you fail a basic test of intelligence and believe in huge, fantastic claims, and state with certainty what happens after death (if you are going to heaven after death, go kill yourself...), and be intelligent? Something doesn't ring true. Also, you weren't BORN a Christian. You were TAUGHT to be a Christian. That's not freedom of religion. You're having religious dogma throw in your face at an age before you can rationally think for yourself, and abandoning that faith later on in life isn't just distressing, it simply won't happen for the majority of them even when the evidence says otherwise. Every time a parent teaches their child to believe in a religion, they are forcing it upon them. Yes, they can technically choose to say 'it's bullshit', but do you recall saying that when you were 3-5 years old about Santa Clause? No, because it simply doesn't happen. It's like telling a kid, 'Hey, I'll rape you, ok?' and when the kid says 'ok' because the kid doesn't know what 'rape' means, that makes it ok because the child 'choose' to allow it. No. If you want to believe in a space daddy, that's one thing. But if you want to make others believe in space daddies, you're like a cancer to society.

Don't forget the child mutilation, crusades, HIV, etc. Think about it: Good people will do good things regardless of religion. Bad people will do bad things. But it takes religion to make a good person do horrible things. Think of one thing done by a religious person in the name of religion, that is good, that a non-religious person can't do without. Now do the opposite. Now think of one wicked thing a religious person did because of religion.

All presidents of USA have been Christians. Why? Because it's unofficially required. There isn't a separation of church and state, and people know it. What this is, is intolerance to a certain degree.

Religion has no harm? Atheists are discriminated against. America is a Christian nation. Every president has been Christian. It was founded under Christian principles. It dominates our way of life in America. President Bush himself said that he doesn't care for or trust atheists. Atheists get discriminated. But ok, let's just look at the general population in terms of effect. Crusades. Inquisition. Persecution of the Jewish people. Injustice towards woman (AKA half of the population). Forced conversion of indigenous people, especially South America. African slave trade. How about the whole entire Middle East? Christians shoved rheir religion into little kids' throats. In Africa, people are taught not to use condoms in places with the worst HIV rates in the world. Pastors actually lied saying that condoms increase the chance of contracting AIDS. This wasn't the motion of a few crackpots. The Catholic Church agreed. Gays are condemned not for that gays have done, they have been condemned for what they are. You're made in the image of not? Oh no you're not. You're a faggot. And you can't join our church and be saved. You will now die in eternal torment. Not only that. Religion, being an old relic from our past to explain previously unknown phenomena, will hinder the scientists trying to understand it. If the human species is to rise to its full height, we cannot have the giant majority of the world deluded.

I can't say religion lowers your IQ-- I can say that those with lower IQ tend to believe in it. The most religious countries are the poorest. That's a fact. (USA is primarily Christian. What is our debt now?) People with the lowest IQs tend to be religious. There was only one test where atheists lost to theologists... That's in a test where Atheists lost... because they were more nervous... because their brain activities showed they actually gave a damned about finding out the answer to the question. The theologists breezed through, no pressure, because they can't be assed to care.

And no, the bible telling people to kill other nations, and keep only the virgin women (for what else, to rape) would not be counted as 'harmless'. And yeah, Inquisition, Crusades, etc.

The problem with, say, Christianity is this: If you are 100% sure that me, being an agnostic atheist, will go to hell and suffer an eternal hell, you must be obligated to get be away from the path that leads me to hell. If you don't, you are morally bankrupt because you don't think using up time in your life is worth it to save me from eternal suffering. That, of you don't really believe in god and hell. So by logic, all real, non-morally bankrupt Christians must spread their word and do all they can to convince people. This is by nature, like a virus.


It takes some superstition, some idiocy, for normal people to want to mutilate their children; somehow it is ok to cut off a child's foreskin, to saw it a bit there (because the image of god you were made in isn't good enough), and cutting off a female's genitals isn't OK. People even laugh about circumcision. Their morals have been so twisted and so lost in the dogma of religion, to the point that they cannot tell right from wrong.

9. If you don't believe in a specific god, what is your point to life? What is there to live for?

Answer: The universe is vast. Have you seen the pictures from the Hubble telescope? It's extremely complex, and there's a certain beauty; a beauty from the entropy, the clutter. Looking at people, how they behave, why the behave... for example, why you choose to believe in bullshit-- I find that interesting. Frustrating when people fall short of rational thought, but always cheering on for people to think for themselves. With that in mind, from all the wonders of the sky, do I give two shits about a burning bush? No. We have microscopes now that can literally see molecular bonds, peering into the world at a previously unprecedented scale, to understand the world of quantum mechanics and chaos, and the beauty and mysterious stemming from that chaos. Also the idea is fundamentally flawed, that if I die, all things mean nothing. Some argue that what I've done to my loved ones, the time I've spent and the impact I've imparted on them is quite literally priceless. But to think that everything means nothing because everything that has a beginning has an end... that in itself is dumb. By that logic, all of your experiences amount to nothing because they've past. No, by the time I've died, I've had so many experiences, so many surprises, so much love, hate, jealousy, friendships, knowledge, to the point that I know my life has been lived to its maximum. The material things I've possessed over the span of my lifetime may be immense, but nobody can take away my experiences and my legacy lives through the people I've touched.

The world is so interesting, so infinite, so grand. Why do I need a book to tell me how I should live my life? The sublime beauty of the universe outshines any and all works by man - the bible, the Qu'ran, etc. Dare I ask for more? So when people ask me why I find a purpose to life being an agnostic, I go back to my point: The world is beautiful.

10. If science keeps changing all the time, it has no meaning and cannot predict things with 100% certainty. The universe is so amazing, there must be a designer.

Answer: And a book is the word of god, THAT has absolute certainty? You cannot say anything is 100% this or that because there is always a possibility of error. That's the difference. Scientists are not afraid to admit they were wrong and to question things, whereas religious leaders assert this way is the right way because they argue from authority, not truth. By your logic, nothing is for certain, therefore nothing in the entire world means anything because it is not certain. You cannot give an exception to 'god' because it feels nice to do so. Because answers change, it doesn't mean all other answers are equally as valid.
Now, you claim that the universe is so amazing it must have a designer, and because we cannot figure the precise details of every single thing related to the start of this universe, god must exist. That's an argument from ignorance. It's logically and fundamentally flawed. You can say 'this looks like it is designed. Therefore, it must be god', where we have evidence about how old the universe is, and you're dismissing that. You can't have it both ways. You require evidence, or you do not. If you do, you lose, If you don't, then you don't care for reason and you are deluded.

11. What about Pascal's wager? Religion hasn't done any harm, it makes people better.

Answer: Pascal's wager forgets the fact that all other religion have their own gods. So if every religion has equal chance of being real, picking one is like trying to win the lottery. (A non-existent lottery.) In just Christianity alone, there are over 300 major divisions of Christianity. Another fundamental flaw with Pascal's wager is the assumption that worshiping a god, you lose nothing if god isn't real. If god isn't real, you don't go into heaven or hell. Your time is limited, and you've wasted it praying for a non-existent god. Also, if you believe in a god because of the Pascal's wager, it's not real belief or worship, Therefore, you're still going to hell. Think about it. If god were omniscient, wouldn't god recognize the real reason for your faith? How about this, let's start an Atheist's Wager. Treat people nicely and try to make the world a better place because you are a good person. When you die, if there is a god, god isn't stupid enough to send you to eternal torment because god knows you've been a good person.

12. But I've felt god! I've seen miracles!

Answer: The human mind is prone to hallucinations. Try to convince a schizophrenic that their hallucinations are hallucinations. I've tried. It's futile. Also, 'I've felt it' isn't proof. Why the hell should I believe YOU because you said you felt something? It's questionable as to why coming back from the brink of death is an act of god. Again, there's no evidence to prove that, and to say that I don't have proof is an argument from ignorance. Burden of proof rests on the guy making the claim that God had offspring through a virgin girl, who later on came to heal people and do crazy shit, died, and got resurrected 3 days later. It's also funny to see people miss the fact that god apperently cures cancer. But never amputated limbs. Why? Because the second would actually require divine intervention, the first would not. Here's a thought for you. Why is it that when you are sick, you go to the doctor and use the technology brought about from science, yet when it comes to the origins of the universe, you use 'faith'? Why don't you 'faith' away your problems? Why doesn't god cure amputees, but cure cancer patients?

Do I need to disprove somebody that Bigfoot is real? NO. If you think bigfoot is real, you need to prove to me that bigfoot is real. I don't have to do a thing. I donj't need to disprove every religion ever constructed and will be constructed. They need to prove they are the real deal.

13. It takes faith to believe in scientific evidence. Atheism is just a religion.

Answer: Atheism isn't a religion.

re·li·gion/riˈlijən/
Noun:
The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.

Atheism is the exact opposite: NOT believing and NOT worshiping a superhuman controlling power. How people manage to confuse that is honestly beyond me. Atheism is not an institution; we are not unified in beliefs other than that god doesn't exist. Nothing more, nothing less. In fact, atheism is a word that shouldn't even exist. Replace religion with anything else. Take astrologers. We don't have a word for 'not astrologers'. People that are not astrologers don't wake up reminding themselves that they are not astrologers. Religion is to atheism as abstinence is to sex position, and not smoking is to habit. They are contradictory. By literal English definiton, both cannot be true. One cannot be atheist and believe in any sort of religion whatsoever.
To deny that would be foolish.

Atheism has no dogma; saying that the 'dogma' is the fact that we don't believe god exists isn't dogma, that's the friggin' definition. There are no tenants of universal truths tied to atheism. One can believe or not believe in evolution and be an atheist.

A scientific theory is not a vague guess, it is a framework that fits the evidence and predicts future events/outcomes. It is tested and if it proves to be accurate it is accepted, if new evidence comes to light then the theory is changed/adjusted/rejected accordingly.


14. If your life is going to be over, why bother living?

Answer: Why have sex with a pretty girl if it's going to be over soon? Why watch a movie when it'll be done in an hour or two? Why live life? Because living now is better than dying. I know my time is limited, that's just all the more reason to enjoy my life.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]


Being religious, you claim to know what god thinks and believes; an extremely arrogant and ignorant claim. In fact, nations that are more religious tend to have lower average IQ and be more poor. That's a statistical fact. Science and religion are from two different time periods. Science emerged about 2000 years after all that religion nonsense. Just by the time gap, there cannot be any science in religion. In a roundabout way, religion was science of the past, because it was used to explain everything before we had any clue how the world worked. Religion is a relic of the past. Like slavery. And you know what, if the idea of a space daddy that ends up torturing most of the world, billions of people, spreads the gospel of raping women, sexism, racism, slavery, and murder gives you life, then here is my reply: FIND A BETTER FUCKING REASON TO LIVE. Replace it with something that makes more sense.


Here is what religious people have to do to win the debate:
1) Prove Evolution is incorrect (Not an easy feat, since every scientist in the world agrees it's real; not a single argument has been made that disproves evolution, and the claims are always made by non-biologists; in fact, simply looking at tree rings, we know that the world is over 6,000 years old.)
2) Prove the world is designed (Not an easy thing to do, because if the world is designed, everything is designed, making it impossible to know it is designed; you know a painting is designed because you know painters paint paintings, you've seen it before; I've yet to see god make another universe. Instead of a painting in a room, you have a painting in a sea of paintings, and there's no relative comparison. While we've seen paintings made by people millions of times, same cannot be said for the universe being made. You cannot jump to 'universe didn't create itself' because nobody said the universe was created nor designed. You cannot say the universe is too orderly, when in fact the world is chaotic and entropy rules; sand dunes look orderly but are not designed.)
3) Prove that God exists (Impossible)
4) Prove that YOUR god is the REAL god

Burden of Proof
The default position is to look at the world we know of, and to not believe. Everything is false until proven or a reason is given. If my friend says he bought a dog, I can believe that because the claim isn't fantastic and I know from past experiences that he doesn't lie. If we discover a new piece of land on earth, we can assume there is life, because previously we've found out that life exists everywhere on earth. But if we're talking about god, god is a major claim about biology, chemistry, cosmology, and philosophy. The amount of proof needs to reflect the magnitude of the claim. I have yet to see a god make a universe. Atheists have no dogma tied, it states nothing about the origin of the universe. All it states is that, there is no god. The end. That's all. Atheists don't need to PROVE that all religions ever constructed are false; they are also not required to prove your religion is false. All religious people are atheists with respect to other religions, they just think their's happen to be right. (And if you were born somewhere else on the globe, you'd be saying the same thing for a different religion) You also can't say that Atheists are claiming that there is a world without a god. You can't take the contra-positive of the statement "Theists believe that we have a universe with a god" and assume that's true. The default stance in anything, not just religion is one of not believing. Do you believe in the spaghetti monster? No. The default position is to not accept any claim without any sort of evidence.



Until you fulfill all of that, in that order, you have not proven religion.
And no, 'eye witnesses' do not count. They were all mentally ill, poor, hysterical, uneducated people. And after that we have accounts told, past on from person to person many, many times. Where, a rational person would ask themselves if they themselves were having hallucinations, if they saw what happened with their own eyes. What does Christianity say? Those laws of natures can be suspended. And in your favor if you say the right prayers and believe in the right gods.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]


If we get hit on your head, we forget faces.
If we get nicked during brain surgery, we forget English.
Somehow, when we lose our entire fucking brain, our 'spirit' lifts from our body, and we go to heaven, speaking English and recognizing grandma.
Everything about who we are, our memories, hopes, dreams, etc are all the product of something physical going on inside out heads.

There isn't my logic or your logic. There is only one correct logic. There is only one correct answer. Don't believe because you want to believe. That's called being weak. Faith is gullibility. It is the surrender to reason and everything that separates us from other animals. Nowhere else is this kind of logic allowed, only in religion.

Religion affects people and their actions. You will vote based on what you believe; you will not agree on abortion, for example. It limits how you look at the world and your options. You don't live in a vacuum.

If you want to disprove evolution, don't even try if you think we came from monkeys or apes, that cats came from dogs, or 'show me the transitional fossils'. That demonstrates a fundamental flaw in your understanding of evolution, and pelase don't reproduce and spread on your stupid genes.

But most of all...

9/22/12 - Updated 10/23/12
Religion






People will point at the bible and say that gay marriage is unacceptable due to their religion. What they fail to think about is that just a bit after where it says that in the bible, it states that the parent may stone their child to death if they disobey them. The bible also allows selling your daughter into slavery, those who work on the Sabbath should be killed, people with long hair are the best, a man should not go near a woman when she is on her period. The bible allows slaves, so on and so forth. You can say that the bible is not literal, but that means you would then be picking and choosing which part of the bible is true and needs to be taken literally, and which part, taken literally. You can't say 'God created mankind, and even though the Bible says 6 days and evidence proves otherwise, it actually means 6 days to God because time is different for god.' The last time I checked, 6 is equal to 6. If I can't figure out without a shadow of doubt, which part of the Bible is FOR REALS, and meant to be taken literally, then the whole entire book has absolutely no meaning.

The bible isn't taken literally because it's a piece of edited material, where people decide which stories make the cut. Scriptures written centuries after the occurrence does not count as first-hand experience. Hell, even eyewitnesses are known to be pretty bad and fallible. The fact that the bible is touted as the most sold book in the world... does not make it any more valid than Mao's nice little book, which sits in second place, or the best selling song of all time. I wouldn't trust edited stories from people that wrote about them centuries after it happened any more than I would take the words sung in a best-selling song as truths.

Think about how Noah fits all the species in the world and stuffs them in a boat. Think about how the best evidence for Jesus being resurrected is the fact that there is no body. Think about how 'God' rained a shitstorm in Egypt because this dude named Moses wants out of their kingdom. (To my understanding there is no proof that Moses existed, or the Exodus story is valid. Considering how Jews ran out from the baddies to wander in the desert for 40 years, you'd figure somebody, somewhere, would have left SOMETHING to find as evidence.) By the way, the shitstorm, if it happened, completely fucked over the whole entire place. As if insect infestation and plague wasn't enough, 'God' had to go out of his way to kill every firstborn son. Now 'God' is a murderer. (Well he already is, given the fact that he 'caused the flood that wiped out the world'.) Back to Moses. If God really needs to send an old man to talk to the Pharaoh and cause 10 days of utter hell to get what he wants, that's a very inefficient and inhumane way to do things. (Think of all the poor animals! AND HUMANS! AND WE ARGUE ABORTION IS BAD!) If god is truly moral and want less suffering he could just end it. Or at least, playing by his rules, make it so that people can more easily accept a god. Not by writing in stones or paper, find a better way to communicate, don't give your gospel to a bunch of illiterate nutcases in the middle of the desert, pick the Greeks or Chinese that had a brain.

There's this idea that if we die, our souls rise out from our bodies. But everything about who we are can be damaged by damaging the brain, be it the ability to recognize faces or to speak. Somehow, if we kill the entire brain, we get the ability to rise out, live, and speak English.



My conclusion, then, is that all people that believe in a specific god need FAITH to believe in it, if they are not delusional. Problem is, other people see faith, I see blind trust. I equate blind trust as foolishness. As Bill Maher said: '7/10ths of people that took this poll said that it is important that the president have strong religious beliefs. But here's my test. If you believe in a judgement day, I have to seriously question your judgement. If you believe you are in a long term relationship with an all-powerful space daddy who will party with your ghost when you die, you can't have my vote because I can't trust you at the levels of government because there is an electrical storm going on in your head. ' Now, 7/10ths or not isn't a universal FACT, but it is true that in America (yeah, I know, not everybody lives in USA), basically every single president is Christian. What does this say about separation of church and state? USA was founded on the premise of freedom, including from religion. But are we really? Is church really separate from state?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Some state that 'there are things we still don't know about the world, and that must be god.' Bill O'Reilly makes the grave mistake of saying that when he noted 'nobody knows what causes tides'.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The problem is, there is a giant list of things we didn't know in the past, which we now know. If you this is how you want to define 'god', then 'god' is an ever-shrinking pocket of scientific ignorance.

You can't prove god, and you can't disprove the fact that there no god in the world at all, because better science looks identical to divine presence, should somebody like Jesus pop up one day. It bugs me that otherwise rational people would lose all sanity and put blind faith in an all-powerful god every Sunday.

Many people in USA "are Christians". Are they? How many of them go to church because they want to, and live their life as if there is a god? A huge majority have to say no. I have a friend that 'kind of' believe in a god. No, you don't kindda believe in a god. You are or are not, there is no in-between.

Children are not born with the idea of religion. It's grown up, stupid people that force their religion on their children. I believe the large majority of people in the Philippians are Catholic. Not because THEY SEE THE TRUTH, but because their parents make them believe in it. Why fight for freedom of religion when you force your kids into a religion? That's a whopping hypocrisy, and it's not moral. It's a form of brainwashing.


9/8/12
Are we arguing yet?

I'm not going to list personal examples, so I hope the following is enough to explain...
When people say 'I argue", I am really "discussing". When people see "angry", I see "passionate". When people say "he always wants to be right", I think "I want to get my opinions out there". 99% of the time I am fine with people disagreeing with me. The 1% include issues like it's not ok to murder people. Otherwise, for the rest of the 99%, if everybody agreed with me, the world would be a very boring place.

Let's start with discussing. Over the internet, there is no facial expressions or tone of speech. My idea is, it's not an argument until somebody starts inserting attitude and profanity. There have been times when people thought I was arguing with them, then acted accordingly, which leads me to my next item of discussion...

...Passion. When I go around and I make long-ass posts that the majority don't even bother to read ( more like 99% ), I do it because it matters to me. Why do I feel, why do I post, why do I care? This needs to be conveyed in a proper debate.

Do I like being right? Everybody does. I like my ideas validated. But I'm not always right. Unless I stick my ideas out there, I'll never get feedback or confirmation that I am indeed correct. If I'm wrong, I learn something. I never say you have to agree with me, I'm just putting it out there for you to think about. There is no 'ego' involved.




9/6/12
Nudity > Violence

Article at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] shows how a game with sex is removed promptly from Steam.

"We submitted the game on Thursday, when Steam Greenlight launched," explained Miriam Bellard, co-founder No Reply Games, "but they took it down almost straight away. Many people still view games as 'for children' in spite of the fact that
the average gamer is 30 years old. The gaming establishment is fine with violence and gore but is uncomfortable with sexual themes."

Sounds true to me. I just don't understand what's going through people's heads. We can dismember people's head and watch them bleed from where there head once was, and get a M rating. Have a non-violent game with sex, then it's Adults Only. Pathetic.

"I think it's traditionally a religious mentality, that is that sex is more crude than violence. More fundamental Christians have always demonized sex, but have not historically been that way about violence. They were always okay with burning and stoning heretics. Even though things aren't like this anymore (at least in western culture), that view that sex is dirty, improper or vile has still carried over to the modern day. When you think about it, it really is a bizarre stance. How could it be that a nipple is more offensive? How is it that something we all inherently do or desire be so frowned upon? Something that is fairly harmless too, especially when consensual! We live in really strange society."

I guess my question is why the human body without clothes on is deemed as offensive. What exactly is so mature about the human form that warrant AO rating?



8/31/12
Terrorists instill terror. Fun fact.

Mom takes airplane home Sept 10-11th. We finally figured out why ticket prices are so low that day: Sept 11th. People are so retarded, eating Mcdonalds is riskier for your well being than terrorists, but airlines have to lower prices and planes are not even being filled. Terrorists want to instill terror, and if everybody is so paranoid about this crap that means they've won.

8/29/12
My taste in music is better than yours!


Here's why boy bands like One Direction and people like Justin Bieber get hated on. When it comes to music, males and females are a little different. That's to be expected because our brains work differently. When is the last time you heard a guy proclaiming their love for Taylor Swift (her music, not her body)? There isn't anything wrong with loving a band to death. However, if girls start loving boy bands because the guys are cute and hip and new, not because their music is good, that's bad. I don't care about the physical looks or the personality of the people singing. They can be half mutilated for all I care. I just need to like their music. I'm not encouraging people to HATE on One Direction, I personally find it dumb to hate on bands. People's tastes differ. (How would you feel if a person comes up and says your taste in music is CRAP?) But for the sake of sanity, girls, please stop going ga-ga over one boy band after the other.


My opinion on Bieber: I dislike his music. When your lyrics is 50% "Oh Baby", it annoys me. But if you like it, live and let live.


My opinion on One Direction: It's meh. It's ok.


My opinion on Nicki Minaj: Her lyrics are trash... egotistical and often about drugs or sex or some shit. But if you like it, live and let live.


Just don't come up to me and say classical music, music without lyrics, game music, or Coldplay is CRAP and feel the need to walk up to me and notify me of your superior taste in music.

8/21/12
Mad Billionare

Person: You know what Eric, pretty girls have it pretty hard, too.

Eric: ...Uhh, how?

Person: We intimidate most guys and we're left with only a few guys that chase after us, and some girls end up with crappy guys.

Eric: That's like a billionaire complaining he is rich and all girls want him for his money. Here's a thought. How about the pretty girls grow up and ask some 'intimidated' guys out? I'm pretty sure you girls are quite capable of seeing who would make a retarded boyfriend. You act like shit just happens to you and you're helpless. Wake up, and realize you can CHANGE SHIT if you GROW A PAIR. God gave you looks and you complain. You don't deserve those looks, sister.*

*I may not have said those actual words but that was what I was thinking.


8/20/12
How DARE you call me pretty!

WATCH THIS VIDEO

WATCH THIS VIDEO

The following messages will include a brutally, almost offensively honest truckload of truth.
------------

Guys = cannot objectify women
Girls = Can talk about all the dirty things they want to do to David Beckham.
HOORAY FOR DOUBLE STANDARDSSS#($*(*&%#(#%&!!!!

You know why females are trained to look nice? Because evolutionary it gets you a mate. That's the way it has been for countless years and continues to be a factor today. But how DARE guys find some females attractive! THEY MUST BE PIGS! That must mean you have sex with pigs then. Ew. So you walk out the door after putting up makeup and wearing those really hot short shorts for what? You come home to meet your loved one... in sweatpants. Face it. You want to look pretty. Consciously or not, you do it because you want the attention.

We live in an age, folks, where women wear shorter shorts than all the shorts made in history of mankind. Females are wearing tons of cleavage, and some of them are saying that it should have absolutely NO effect on anyone. That is quite retarded. God DAMN the guy that faps to a picture of a girl looking coyly at the camera with a truckload of cleavage on display! YOU ARE BEING A HYPOCRITE, SISTER.

In ye' olden days of the caveman and cavewoman, having a sub-par man rape a female is disaster; the female risks death... all for a man that has sub-par genes and may ditch her. This is why females subconsciously are wary of sub-par men giving sexual attention to them. But in order to attract the ideal man, she needs to look beautiful. It was the men that risked their lives to prove their awesomeness, and after that, having women like him is a good thing. Although, contrary to popular belief, we live in 2012 now. You're not really going to die if you have a baby. If a man makes sexually-suggestive comments, the guy is will be cited.

So back to the girl living in 2012 that wears the hot clothing outside. The girl wants the attention. Then they rationalize their wariness by saying men objectify women and are horrible. You know what, guys are human beings to. It's just, many of us are cool with it. So once again to the group of 'feminists' saying men have it all, YOU. SUCK. BALLS.

EVERYBODY JUDGES PEOPLE. EVERYBODY. If I wear the shitty shoes and the not-so-cool shirts and I have a pizza-face type of acne over, trust me, girls, you'd subconsciously (or even consciously, that's fine too) decide you don't really want to get to know me. They say a female judges a man based on the shoes that he wears. That sounds superficial. Because it is. In the cave-dwelling ages, you think the guys and girls have time to chat and socialize with every female and male to figure out which one had the best collective personality? NO, man. NO. A guy sees a very cute looking girl, and is intrigued and walks over to get to know her. THAT'S how it works.

You know why females earn less than males? Because the studies account for average wages. Men are wired to tolerate more risk. This means more fail like idiots trying to start a business, and a select few actually succeed. THAT'S WHY. Nobody is discriminating you. Hell, I know a few guys that WORSHIP females. Women that have no children have higher wages than men. Having a child is YOUR CHOICE, unless you were raped. Unless the average working-female who has a child got raped, something is clearly wrong here. Some feminists are all for 'independence from men and having to have children'. Well, guess what? Given time, a lot of you WANT men, a lot of you WANT children. Way to fight for nothing. Men are statistically more likely to take more risks, meaning more possible gain; they also statistically accept working further from home, more dangerous jobs, etc. (The dangerous jobs going back to risk tolerating.) THAT is why men make more money.

The feminists arguing and bickering and bitching over how UNFAIR life is are really the bane of society. How are we going to move forward with this crap?

...But you know what? MEN like WOMEN. MEN are sexually attracted to WOMEN. WOMEN like MEN. WOMEN are sexually attracted to MEN. (Not counting gays)

It's a funny thing, really. The video shows a tale of two female businesswomen in their 50's. They remember when they visited Italy the men were all coo-coo for them, and they were pissed off. Come age 50, they go back, they are STILL pissed. Because men didn't give two hoots about them.

I'd make my day if you watch the video. It's highly educational, but most importantly, it is a HOLY-MOTHER-OF-GOD-SHINING-BEACON-OF-TRUTH.

8/10/12
Money for Game Money, and Conforming

New rant! OH BOY!

"Later on he goes on to explain why humans are willing to spend real-world money on virtual items: they pay to win, whether it's a payment in time or in currency. Some people are "rich" in time where others are "rich" in currency. Anyone who spends more time will also have the skills to back it up, but anyone paying for gear -- which is heavily tied to the hero's abilities -- is
seemingly no different than a golfer purchasing a nice set of clubs.

"A thousand dollars for a good set of golf clubs gives you the ability to play the game of golf better than someone of equal skill playing with a $10 garage sale set," he writes. "It doesn't automatically make you good, but it helps you get there. And if you love that game, then by all means play your best."

"What people don't realize is that currencies are only a numerical representation of value," he adds. "As soon as there is a collective demand for goods, both virtual and 'real' value is created. Humans developed currencies to represent this value in a tangible way, and to make the exchange of these goods more liquid. When there is collective demand from real people for an item within a game market, the same value is created as anything else in the world, and you can put a number on it. That number can be different depending on the currency you are using to represent the value.""

OMG NO ERIC BUT I'D NEVER SPEND CASH ON A FUCKING GAME! Bro. If time is money, you've just spent your bank's worth. Can I say life is time? You're spending your life grinding away, not having fun in the game to win.

Please don't judge people so quickly.


Side note and slightly related:
For those of you that look down upon those that spend time and effort to look well: I consider it as something that must be worked at to be achieved. Just like studying makes a good student, working out and eating right makes a better looking person. They have different priorities, that's all. Don't look down at every person that doesn't go to college; how is the world going to function if everybody went to Harvard? They just have DIFFERENT PRIORITIES. And that's fine. That's their life.

Whether you like it or not, you ARE influenced by society. Society tells you showering once a day is desirable. Society tells you eating this is good, eating that is disgusting. In other parts of the world, having eggs for breakfast is as disgusting as it gets. Numerous psychological studies back this up; you ARE influenced by society. Don't try to be a "rebel" by saying you don't conform at all, whatsoever, because that makes you a liar. Society tells you what to wear, how to act. In most cases, that's a GOOD thing. Where do you think your standards come from? It's passed down. I call it learning.


8/5/12
Runescape: Shameful Pleasure?

Why are people so scared of me referring them on Facebook about Runescape? Is the act of playing this video game and not that so shameful? On a similar note, I wouldn't feel any shame if I believed in this religion and not that. Back when I played Runescape, I have no problem telling people I do. People who will judge me and dislike me because of a game I play to waste time are people I don't want to spend time to talk to, anyways. Who the fuck are you to tell me what is acceptable and not acceptable to do in my spare time, anyways?


So, let's all use our heads and think about this before we discriminate somebody for playing Runescape the next time. This is really, really sad.

8/2/12
Rectangles FTW

Apple is suing Samsung because the shape of their phones are rectangles. Tell me what is wrong with that picture. Apple also patented the shape of a wedge-shaped laptop. Maybe Apple should sue all? Apple doesn't invent anything ground up, Apple takes ideas others used and make it better, then patent the living crap from it. (Then charges you a funny price for it, if we're talking about Macs). Apple makes big margins, so why are they doing frivolous lawsuits and stifling competition by suing people over rectangles? When companies have a conflict, they work together to get problems resolved, for the sake of the industry, to new products can be made to raise the level of technology. One company has failed to do this over and over again, starting lawsuits. And that is Apple. UPDATE: Apple wins, then wants to sue Samsung for THREE BILLION dollars. In response to backlash, Samsung recorded the strongest sale so far.

Moral of the story: RECTANGLES ARE EVIL AND IF YOU MAKE THEM YOU SHALL BE PUNISHED!!!

7/31/12
Not My Door to Open

Today I was walking to a college. Both a girl and I happened to walk through a door. Since she was closer, I waited for her to open the door. She stood at the door, looked at me, and I just looked at her. Then, she asked me if I was going to open the door for her, since it's the gentleman thing to do.

Jesus christ, what are you, 5? You don't know how to open doors? Why are you asking me? You're closer, you open the door. So I said, "You were closer, so you should open the door." Then the thought comes flying back to me. Why should a man open a door for a woman? Is she not physically capable of performing such a basic task? Do not try to justify gender equality when a female can't stand to open a door. Don't be all poo-poo and sad. If you want gender equality, quit crying about all the 'gentleman' thingies I'm supposed to do. Don't YOU want to be a gentlewoman?

If you're all for destroying old gender roles, why should a guy always ask a girl out? If you're all about female empowerment, why are you so scared of risk you sit there and pray the guy will approach you? There's something pretty hypocritical about this if you ask me.

Sure, you should do things because it's a nice thing to do. But she was closer to the door. Standing at the door and asking me to open the door because I'm a guy is pretty sexist.

I'm not 100% into the whole super duper Femenist movement thing. Granted, females deserve the same opportunities men have. But what I'm starting to find out is that all the bickering about men making more is in fact, women wanting to work less hours to go home and take care of the kids. So you're fighting all these years to be out, pushing all these reforms for women in the workplace, then you're sort of killing the point by running back home to take care of Timmy the Baby. I understand, progress has been made, not all females are like this. I just don't see why a small group of ladies decide to say they are the victim of everything, that they are getting discriminated left and right. Darling, you work in the tech industry, and you'll become the baby everyone loves.

Before I get hate mail, I'm not saying all girls are babies that can't open doors. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying, a small group of females are like this. I'm also saying, it irks me that in this day and age women expect men to be gentlemen and open doors and ask them out. Whaaaaaat?

7/27/12 - Updated 10/23/12
Circumcision is mutilation, quite simply.





Is it just me, or is forced circumcision really just child abuse? Why do you have to mutilate what god gave you? If your son wants circumcision when they're 18, fuck, they can go pay for their OWN circumcision and have it done on THEIR time. But choosing for a baby whether to cut off sensitive tissue should be illegal. But NO. We're going to cut a chunk of skin off of your penis because we can and its what your parents did to you. No painkillers given to the baby; it's not safe to drug a newborn. SO YOU CUT IT AND CLIP IT OFF AND YANK IT OFF WHILE THE BABY IS BLEEDING OUT THE GODDAMN PENIS.


"Circumcision. If I'm talking about female circumcision in the Western world, I'll rightly be met with gasps of horror. How could people think about cutting off the clitoris and labia of a healthy girl? If I'm talking about male circumcision, people react far more calmly, as if they're being offered full milk or half and half, as if the difference were purely cosmetic. "For some reason if you clip off a female's clitoris, it's quite illegal, but if you clip off the skin of a guy's penis, it's pretty damned acceptable.

No, a baby won't rememer isn't an excuse. Because first, they do, for quite a while. This has been documented. The penis is sensitive. If you rip stuff off without painkillers, it will be traumatic. They get nightmares. Also, 'they won't remember' isn't an arguement. How about you cut a baby with knives, slap and kick them, because they won't remember? I'd like to think society has moved past this and can do common sense.Seriously now. Guys, how would you feel if I yank shit out of your penis? I know I'd be scared shitless.

If having a foreskin increases the chance of UTI (Mind you, males already have a very low chance vs females, and for males it really only occurs when the guy doesn't clean himself for a century), and we're all about preventing every FUCKING little thing, let's just do gastric bypass to every man, woman, and child to prevent heart problems!

Foreskin is not a privilege; it is a BIRTH RIGHT.

While it IS legal to harm your future child's penis and potential sexual enjoyment, it is not MORALLY acceptable to do so. Don't chuck in your religion bullshit, either. Just because Jews do it doesn't make it ok. You know what? Criminals have been killing people for a long time. That doesn't make killing ok. You know that the Jew culture also has people sucking blood from the male's penis, right? You can believe whatever you want; but once you start inflicting physical harm in the name of your religion, I draw the line there. And sucking blood from a penis is just disgusting. Did I just critisize their culture? You betcha'. Before you gasp in shock, you know what I'm saying makes sense. So don't judge me or label me. I'm not Hitler the 5th.

Circumcision means less work cleaning your body? WHAT? Bro. How about I cut off your head so you don't have to wash your hair? How about I cut off your boobs so there's less surface area to clean? If I can clean the rest of my body, I'm quite capable of cleaning foreskin, thank you very much.

Who even suggested circumcision? A gazillion years ago. But who came up with the idea that, oh, we're going to lump off part of the nerve endings of the penis and be all fucking righteous about it? How can you look yourself in the mirror each morning and agree with FORCED REMOVAL of BODY PARTS from a SEXUAL AREA on a HELPLESS BABY???

Some women argue that a circumcised penis looks better. 1) They're retards, go find a non-idiotic woman 2) Do they have like a... dried glans penis fettish? 3) If you're THAT desperate to get girls, you've got problems. Americans just are not happy with the way they look. Get a boob job. Get a penis job. It's saddening. There's not a single major medical journal that recommends circumcision. It is a relic of the past, like religion, only much worse. Some people think that the foreskin is good because it can be used to treat burn victims. Well, here's what happens: 1) Most are thrown out 2) Used for cosmetic companies that can find alternative to foreskin 3) Used for burn victims without consent. But are we in a shortage of skin grafts? ........................No. We'll just peel it off dead people. Or pigs.

There is the function of the foreskin; it keeps the glans moist and lubricated. Without it, the glans becomes dried out, sort of like a rock. Rocks don't generate good vibrations, if you know what I mean. The rolling back and forth motion the foreskin provides is great... because that's the way nature intended it. In fact, there are even condoms... "ripped for her pleasure" to simulate the foreskin, I got a better idea. Don't cut it off in the first place!!! Oh yaeh, and the nerves in the foreskin are jammed packed; it's also folded, so it's longer than it looks. It retracts when aroused for more comfort. Without foreskin, masturbating as a guy would be more difficult. Which was the precise point in the 1800s; masturbation was seen as bad, and people tried to prevent that by vouching for circumcision. Oh yeah, and cutting off skin literally makes your penis shorter. Just saying.

I'd like to stress the fact that once you do circumcision, you can't really un-do it. If you don't do it, you can do it whenever you feel like. This time with enough anesthesia, preferably.

By the way, circumcision leaves ugly scars. I'd be slightly self concious in the bedroom if my penis has a gigantic brown V mark from being sliced up.
So I guess my question here is, why is this legal? Why is it not hailed as immoral? And, if YOU have a male baby, will you choose circumcision for your son?
If the first rule of medicine is to do no harm, I'm pretty sure circumcision is a harmful thing. I'm also pretty sure doctors want to do it because it's an extra procedure for more profits. Circumcision is fucking bad, and bad for fucking.

Circumcision must be done for god -> Masturbation is wrong so cut off the foreskin to decrease pleasure -> Circumcision suddenly prevents disease (debatable, but must be unanimously accepted to warrant mutilation; even then, there's this thing called a condom...) -> Circumcision must be done for conformity because all the other guys have it done. -> Some people in other countries see through the bullshit, and like the non-metric system, USA is left behind, religious, self-righteous, and more stupid than ever.


Closing statement: If you HEAR the SCREAMS of the babies getting their fused foreskin clipped off, you will never want to do that for your kid, even if it was beneficial. I've watched a live dissection of a dead human being. This is just as bad. (Only the baby is alive and innocent, making this seem much more wrong.)

Jesus facepalm.

---
Reader comments:
Nathan: yeah i know, im just saying it does have 'some' purpose, even if so small. kind of like if parents did some procedure to cut off a part of your head, forcing you to be bald for life. little less to clean but still lol

"I myself could never convince myself to attend such a barbaric ceremony (which is hard living in Israel when every infant has it), and everywhere I just saw blood...in my mind....walls with blood...couldn't get in 100 meter radius to such places. Everybody is celebrating blood, pain and mutilation."

You guys are not NAIVE enough to think circumcision is a quick "cut and fix", right? Because it isn't quick, painless, bloodless, nor a fix. You're not stupid enough to make assumptions like this, right? Good, because I CBA to defriend people.

"Also "regular non-extremic" Jewdaism of "male circumcision" is more powerful in Europe/USA that extremic Islam of female circumcision.Also we as a modern culture were tought to care only for female sexual pleasure/orgasm, and care less about male one, as "male will have such anyway".

If that's true, that's again, quite sad. There are so many double standards for males and females. People people try to victimize females, saying they have all the shit coming while being a man is so easy. Since orgasms are the best feeling in the world and we are designed to want them over almost anything else;

(Our brain partly shuts off during it; a test of rats showed they'd rather get stimulation than fufil basic needs (eating, drinking water), so they end up dying);

I find it EXTREMELY cruel and unusual to deprive one of that in any way shape or form, or diminish the feeling.

I'm unique in that I'm not that attached to people. So if my parents did that to me, especially when I'm 12 and I already voiced my opinion on this matter, I would literally leave my home and pretend I don't know them. Because I refuse to be part of a family that allows mutilation, and I really don't give two fucks whether religion or any other reason for that matter, convinced them to do it. Something at their core isn't right. No excuses. There is always a choice and they made it. So. Fuck. Them.

"But that's in Israel....can't understand at all parents that do it in other countries. Those have really no reason to do so. Lack of health or any other benefits where proven long time ago, and the sexual, psychololical and ethical damage is clear. Though indeed it probably makes penis less sensitive and allows men to have the sexual act longer with more chances of pleasing a woman."

Hell yeah. I don't really hear people making fun of uncircumcised penises in USA. There is the idea that making the penis less sensitive allows men to please the woman better;Not saying I'm an expert in this field since I'm still a virgin and I plan to be until the right one comes along;
But there are more ways to please a woman than using your penis. Females very rarely get a vaginal orgasm, anyways, it's all clitoral stimulation. Because, let's be honest: women are capable of experiencing more pleasure than a male in the bedroom, and it's not like extra foreskin = instant-cum and an unsatisfied partner.
But as a guy all you have is the prostate and the penis. And for most, just the penis. And I would go insane if that is diminished.


IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT.
LEAVE (OUR) COLLECTIVE PENISES ALONE PLEASE. THANK YOU.

7/25/12
Selective Service: Selective Sexism

Males are required to sign up for selective service in case of a draft, but females are not? What kind of sexist crap is this? Females want gender equality? This is a good place to start. It's ok to make fun of a man on TV about his weight. Do that for a girl and IT'S ON! Girls can hit on guys on the news, but if a guy does that, he bet his ass he'll get sued for sexual harassment. Sure, there has not been a draft in a long while; but if there is one later, don't be complaining at home about how unfair life is when the guys are out there, dead. I'm not saying men have it harder than women. I'm just saying, for the few of you out there STILL complaining, life isn't ponies and rainbows for the rest of us. Let's just call it 50-50 for this one, ok?

6/17/12
Why Parents Should Not Ban Porn for Their Teenager

This is a response to comments at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] where the talk was about a mother searching up their teenage son's laptop and finding porn. The teen is 18.
Human beings are sexual beings. It is through evolution that we have come to desire for sex.

So you make the argument that porn is degrading to women? Why is it degrading to women that a female and a male have sex? Shouldn't it also be degrading to males? If both at 18 or over, what is the problem here? Even if it's a rape video, that's their business. (Mind I add, you yourself probably have a fetish, but due to social stigmas, you won't allow yourself to think about it.)

Addiction? When the hell was the last time you heard of a teenager addicted to porn? Now, when was the last time you heard of a teenager addicted to World of Warcraft? Then by that logic, we should ban WoW. You can get addicted to almost anything in life. This doesn't mean we should be sheltered from EVERYTHING. So you put up the argument that 'just because they're gonna watch anyways doesn't mean you shouldn't ban it'. So, if everyone is going to watch it, and it's as addictive and as horrible as you say it is (and you probably watch it anyways, you hypocrite...), why is it that I'm not seeing sex freaks at high school? That's right, you don't have an answer. Sir, do you EVEN KNOW what true addiction is? Have you been addicted, truly addicted to something? Then WHY THE FUCK are you slinging around the word 'addiction' around so carelessly? Better shut your mouth before you say something else embarrassing.


How will the teenager handle having sex for the first time if he never watched porn? Lol.

Newsflash: He's 18. He's been watching porn for 5 years or so. If you're even a half decent parent, you know that your son isn't out part-aying and having sex with random ladies. If that's the case, that means five years of this stuff and he's still fine. WHAT IS THE PROBLEM HERE?! Do you not have better things in his life to micromanage? Or do you just LOVE snooping around his laptop? I bet you read his emails too. What a violation of trust and privacy. If he's not wanking off, he's either going to explode, or have real life sex, possibly with random people. Would you prefer that? Well, I hope so, but with your level of logic, I'm starting to get scared here about your answer.

If your son/daughter is too stupid to realize that porn does not always equate to how real life sex will be like, he'll probably end up killing themselves one day, because he is THAT STUPID. And thankfully, I do not know anyone that fits into that category.


And yes, the teens will do it anyways, whether you allow it or not. Making it forbidden almost adds to the excitement. Almost all guys and girls masturbate in their teenage years, it's natural. I consider watching porn as merely an extension of their arsenal of, shall we say, pleasure. Take away the porn, and they'll find some other way or procuring porn (and they will), or they will use their imagination. And let's just say, they have vivid imaginations.


I have a friend that to this day (he is 18), does not watch porn nor know what an orgasm is. Do you want this to be your kid? He who is so sheltered, he doesn't understand basic human reproduction? Imagine if he was your kid. Very soon he will live on his own. How is he going to make rational and informed decisions about sex if he hasn't even seen it?


We live in a society that is like the Puritans when it comes to sex for teenagers. We can see a guy's leg get blown off, but if a guy sees a female body, OH MY GOD, WE MUST AVOID THAT AT ALL COST. Tell me, does that make any sense at all? And how well is this society working, by the way? We want to censor all sexual content. Tell me, how well is it working for the teenagers? Are we getting 0% sex talk and unwanted pregnancies? Quit being so stubborn and locked in the your way of thinking. Stop for a second and question what everyone seem to believe is true, ok?


Parents, stop tossing around lame-ass excuses as to why porn is bad, evil, taboo, when you yourself probably watched it as a teenager.

This ranks as one of the dumbest commonly held beliefs by parents that I know of.

This post is reserved for future edits.

This post is reserved for future edits.

New article. Finally done with the whole religion thing for now. Onto another topic! I might do a few Youtube videos of me discussing what I wrote here... Of course, 99.999999% of the world doesn't care. But sometimes I do things for myself, to organize thoughts and opinions. Just by the act of writing this stuff out I learn new things, both about myself and the world.

I wonder what the next topic's going to be about. Religion's a biggie. How about the concept of freedom?

Thomas wrote:I wonder what the next topic's going to be about. Religion's a biggie. How about the concept of freedom?

I'll see if I get to that.

I'm going to work on updating older posts for now, adding bold text, videos, etc.

Did a new entry, and I am currently ironing out typos and adding new content to the religion portion of the rants. I want to finalize it a bit more before I release it to my friends.

Hehe, you need the manifesto to be perfecto!

Hmm, what do you think of posting this on a blog instead?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

no matter how many times i go back and read this thread it always makes me stop and think

This has been made obsolete by this thread:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Nice blog!