16
Spam / Re: Random Pics
« on: January 16, 2011, 07:07:57 PM »
Bah
Shinobi Legends Forum - Shinobi Legends Game Site
- April 27, 2024, 07:39:00 PM
- Welcome, Guest
News:
Ever wondered if your ideas have been talked about in the forum already? Well, try out the "search" option, where all your questions can be answered.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
17
Spam / Re: NarutoRPG
« on: January 16, 2011, 07:04:43 PM »
This is mine now.
Shikki, make me a sammich. Hiro, do push ups until the sammich gets here
Shikki, make me a sammich. Hiro, do push ups until the sammich gets here
18
Spam / Re: Australia FTW
« on: January 16, 2011, 07:03:21 PM »
AUSTRALIA IS FOR AMERICA'S REJECTS
22
Spam / Re: Real life pictures. (NO SPAMMING)
« on: October 29, 2010, 04:28:02 AM »
Too much effort to see what you're talking aboot, eh.
I haven't made a postie in a while so I don't really know what's been goin' down.
I haven't made a postie in a while so I don't really know what's been goin' down.
23
Spam / Re: Real life pictures. (NO SPAMMING)
« on: October 29, 2010, 04:23:26 AM »
Why revive when you can review my English masterpiece:
The church has long held a high role in civilizations and societies world wide. It was the central pillar that held up many a people, and has caused much violence, strife and prosecution through the ages. We now live in a country that was founded on beliefs of personal expression. Even though people are able to choose what to, or not to, believe in, we, as a country, are still plagued by those deeply enthralled with their own religious views. There are many controversies that could be a great benefit to society, fields of medicine and research that are being restricted by those who argue based upon religious morals. The government should take decisive action, and push out funding or laws that aid in these fields. Abortion, gay marriage, and stem-cell research to name a few, are all being held back by devotees to a god. It is just ridiculous that although it is stated in our Constitution that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” (United States Constitution, 1st amendment) there are still issues up for debate based upon religious arguments. Even though there may be a religion’s values that could be applied to a large portion of the population, it should not affect people who do not believe the same way. Arguments based upon religious beliefs should hold no merit in issues whose results may play a part in the lives of everyone, thus, the separation of church and state should be a goal for the United States government.
Gay marriage is an issue with a long history of controversy. This issue is a part of society that should be protected by the freedom of expression under the Constitution’s first amendment. At the moment, gay marriage is only legal in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, Maine, and New Hampshire. Some denominations in these, among many other states, are still pushing for Constitutional change involving the banning of same-sex marriage. Underneath all of the weakest arguments lie a few core principles, most tying back to religion. One of these main principles is the statement that gay marriage goes against religious values. And while this is may be for your religion, it’s just for your religion. (Bidstrup) In the 1996 Baehr v Lewin court case, the Morman society attempted to say that there voice against same-sex marriage represented the voices of all other religious groups in the state of Hawaii. In response to this, the Buddhist population made public that they were highly supportive of gay marriage. This case shows how different each religion is in their own beliefs and stances about issues. The government should not be influenced into legal action by the many different religious groups. Each man or woman should be able to make their own choices in life and not be inhibited by the ridiculous view of others. (Vestral)
In college, Daniel George, a teacher at Great Mills High School, had a Muslim friend who closely followed the dictations of his religion. Every day, during class he would go to the back of the room and say the prayers mandated to him by his god. He never bothered anyone or made a commotion out of his practice, and after the first time they saw it, no one bothered him (George). This is a prime example of where religion should be placed in life. The friend clearly showed his religion, but it didn’t interfere with the life of anyone other than himself. No one was inhibited from their choices by his, and could act as they believed. As this situation scales up to a community, state or country, it should hold true. Religious groups should have no say in any issue that affects people other than themselves unless they take a purely political, social, or economical stance. All of those are valid reasons to back, because they are more concrete things that everyone can relate to. They fill a place that religion never could. Politics, economics, and social happening do affect everyone, whether they like it or not. Pop culture, music and otherwise, isn’t forced down anyone’s throat. It is a choice whether to listen to, watch, or partake in, just like it is a personal choice to follow a certain faith, if any. There is a definite split between the crowds who enjoy the musical stylings of current artists or those who’ve past their prime. Hobbies, actions, and, to some, even lifestyles may correlate to the type of music they like. Even with all of these differences, they do not go at each others throats, attempting to change the opinions and actions of others. This theory can easily be translated over to religion, showing that certain religious fold need not make decisions that will affect those that don’t believe the same way. Religion is purely a personal decision, just like the type of music you listen to, and because of this, should not be able to influence the lives of others. The government does not make any decisions based upon the views of a music group, and the government should not make decisions based upon the views of a religious group.
The Prohibition movement of the early twentieth century was a push from the Women’s Christian Temperance Union in an attempt to ban the production, transportation, sale and consumption of any alcoholic beverage in the country. After the Revolutionary War, drinking became more and more popular among the male population of the United States. At one point during the climax of the country’s drinking, there was about one saloon for every 150 to 200 American adults, even the non-drinkers. The WCTU claimed that all of this alcohol was creating many domestic and economic problems. They connected alcoholic beverages to many of the evils plaguing the nation at this time. After many years of reform and protest, the 18th amendment was added to the United States Constitution. The Prohibition era lasted from 1919 to 1933. During this time, many groups formed to fight the amendment, speakeasies opened their doors, and gangsters had access to new avenues of profit through the alcohol black market. Even though there were officials appointed to put a stop to illegal alcohol consumption, their low pay and lack of training made them easy to bribe. (Rosenberg)
The WTCU was made up of mainly middle to low- class, Protestant, white women. Protestant is a key word in this statistic. As more Catholic and Jewish people emigrated from their respective countries, it became evident that the Prohibition pushed by the WTCU was indeed a Protestant belief. The other religions approved of alcohol consumption as much as current United States citizens. Resulting from this purely Protestant belief, even the most average, normal American became a lawbreaker in an attempt to drink. The 18th amendment, the amendment pushed by religious activists became the only amendment to be repealed from the Constitution. How does this look? When the church comes together with the state to form laws affecting the entire country, it ended in disaster. The beliefs of one religious group were pressed onto the people by the government, and it turned a large portion of the nation into criminals. History has a tendency to repeat itself, and this is surely no exception.
A religious argument is founded upon the beliefs and rituals of the person that worships in that way. The holy book of the Christians, the Bible, contains certain passages that go against controversies such as gay marriage:
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. (Corinthians 6:9)
This passage describes homosexuals as wicked. It says that they will not “inherit the kingdom of god.” Weapons such as these only hold credence to those who believe in them. They are tools that can be easily broken down by the dismantling of the religious force behind them. A common metaphor in battle is that of cutting off the snake’s head. If you take the snake’s head off, there is nothing more to worry about as the body is now useless. Gunning for the head of the religion, the god, effectively nulls the beliefs and arguments that may stem from it. This next section attacks religion itself, and any core theories behind it in an attempt to cut the head off of the snake.
Saint Thomas Aquinas is, by some, considered to be one of the most influential philosophers of the medieval times. He lived during the thirteenth century, and during his fifty years of life, produced five ‘ways’ or ‘proofs’ of the existence of god:
The First Way- Since everything is moved by something else, there must have been something that made the first move. This something is God.
The Second Way- Every effect has a cause that pushed it into fruition. Therefore, the first caused must have been made by God.
The Third Way- At one point, nothing existed. There must have been something that brought the first thing into this world, and that thing was God.
The Fourth Way- Everything is compared to other things by qualities such as ‘goodness.’ Since that is so, there must be an ‘Absolutely Good Being.’
The Fifth Way- Creatures and mechanisms on this earth are so intricately
designed that there must have been a designer. This intelligent designer is God. (Aquinas)
Aquinas’s first three ways are, essentially, all reiterating the same basic idea. Each of them assumes that god is immune to the same forces that make him necessary in the first place. Along with that assumption, even if there was an event that pushed each of these forward, it could’ve been anything. Aquinas gave a name to this event, he called it God. If this event were God, it doesn’t exhibit the other qualities Christians attribute to their god. The events demonstrate no show of omnipotence, no show of omniscience.
The other two proofs stray away from the strand of thought that produced the first three. The comparison to ‘goodness’ in the fourth way can be substituted with any other comparable attribute you might use to describe a person. Even with that said, the logic behind seems to be quite flawed. Aquinas said that comparison is all relative to what we as humans can conceive. Because we are limited to only what we can imagine, there must be a ‘perfect being’ that tops all others in that category. The assumption that there is a being that tops the others just brings us back to the argument over whether or not there is indeed a god. This ‘proof’ is in no way a logical insight into the existence of any otherworldly figure.
In Richard Dawkin’s book The God Delusion, he brings forth arguments against the existence of any higher being. Through the points he brings up, the scientifically proven arguments against a god are much stronger than the weak arguments for. Dawkins’ main point is constituted by the idea that life is much too complicated to be ‘designed,’ but it wasn’t also just come upon by sheer chance. This point ties closely into Aquinas’s fifth way, and provides a strong argument against it. Dawkins’ puts forth the idea of a gradient that connects to two. Natural selection has brought the complex, intricate organisms we know today up from the simpler creatures of yesteryear. One example that is related to throughout much of the book is about a Boeing 747. This idea was created by Fred Hoyle, who said “the probability of life originating on Earth is no greater than the chance that a hurricane, sweeping through a scrap yard, would have the luck to assemble a Boeing 747.” Although this core quote may seem to be pointing to Intelligent Design, Dawkin’s complexity gradient brings it into perspective. Instead of the hurricane assembling the Boeing, maybe it just blew the parts out of the scrap heap and into the open. Then an employee of the scrap yard saw them and created a simple mechanism. Then someone else came along and added to it. Then another. Once enough pieces and parts were added, maybe a Boeing 747 would be standing there. This is the natural selection gradient. There was no higher power that created that airplane, and there was no higher power that created that field of grass and bugs that is your front yard. (Dawkins)
The separation of church and state is an imperative step in changing our country, the United States of America, for the better. It would open up more freedom for individuals with their own beliefs and give control back to those who do not see an issue the same way a religious fanatic does. The last time a national law was put forth by a religious group, it ended in disaster. There is no doubt in my mind that government interaction with any sort of church would end just as poorly.
The church has long held a high role in civilizations and societies world wide. It was the central pillar that held up many a people, and has caused much violence, strife and prosecution through the ages. We now live in a country that was founded on beliefs of personal expression. Even though people are able to choose what to, or not to, believe in, we, as a country, are still plagued by those deeply enthralled with their own religious views. There are many controversies that could be a great benefit to society, fields of medicine and research that are being restricted by those who argue based upon religious morals. The government should take decisive action, and push out funding or laws that aid in these fields. Abortion, gay marriage, and stem-cell research to name a few, are all being held back by devotees to a god. It is just ridiculous that although it is stated in our Constitution that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” (United States Constitution, 1st amendment) there are still issues up for debate based upon religious arguments. Even though there may be a religion’s values that could be applied to a large portion of the population, it should not affect people who do not believe the same way. Arguments based upon religious beliefs should hold no merit in issues whose results may play a part in the lives of everyone, thus, the separation of church and state should be a goal for the United States government.
Gay marriage is an issue with a long history of controversy. This issue is a part of society that should be protected by the freedom of expression under the Constitution’s first amendment. At the moment, gay marriage is only legal in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, Maine, and New Hampshire. Some denominations in these, among many other states, are still pushing for Constitutional change involving the banning of same-sex marriage. Underneath all of the weakest arguments lie a few core principles, most tying back to religion. One of these main principles is the statement that gay marriage goes against religious values. And while this is may be for your religion, it’s just for your religion. (Bidstrup) In the 1996 Baehr v Lewin court case, the Morman society attempted to say that there voice against same-sex marriage represented the voices of all other religious groups in the state of Hawaii. In response to this, the Buddhist population made public that they were highly supportive of gay marriage. This case shows how different each religion is in their own beliefs and stances about issues. The government should not be influenced into legal action by the many different religious groups. Each man or woman should be able to make their own choices in life and not be inhibited by the ridiculous view of others. (Vestral)
In college, Daniel George, a teacher at Great Mills High School, had a Muslim friend who closely followed the dictations of his religion. Every day, during class he would go to the back of the room and say the prayers mandated to him by his god. He never bothered anyone or made a commotion out of his practice, and after the first time they saw it, no one bothered him (George). This is a prime example of where religion should be placed in life. The friend clearly showed his religion, but it didn’t interfere with the life of anyone other than himself. No one was inhibited from their choices by his, and could act as they believed. As this situation scales up to a community, state or country, it should hold true. Religious groups should have no say in any issue that affects people other than themselves unless they take a purely political, social, or economical stance. All of those are valid reasons to back, because they are more concrete things that everyone can relate to. They fill a place that religion never could. Politics, economics, and social happening do affect everyone, whether they like it or not. Pop culture, music and otherwise, isn’t forced down anyone’s throat. It is a choice whether to listen to, watch, or partake in, just like it is a personal choice to follow a certain faith, if any. There is a definite split between the crowds who enjoy the musical stylings of current artists or those who’ve past their prime. Hobbies, actions, and, to some, even lifestyles may correlate to the type of music they like. Even with all of these differences, they do not go at each others throats, attempting to change the opinions and actions of others. This theory can easily be translated over to religion, showing that certain religious fold need not make decisions that will affect those that don’t believe the same way. Religion is purely a personal decision, just like the type of music you listen to, and because of this, should not be able to influence the lives of others. The government does not make any decisions based upon the views of a music group, and the government should not make decisions based upon the views of a religious group.
The Prohibition movement of the early twentieth century was a push from the Women’s Christian Temperance Union in an attempt to ban the production, transportation, sale and consumption of any alcoholic beverage in the country. After the Revolutionary War, drinking became more and more popular among the male population of the United States. At one point during the climax of the country’s drinking, there was about one saloon for every 150 to 200 American adults, even the non-drinkers. The WCTU claimed that all of this alcohol was creating many domestic and economic problems. They connected alcoholic beverages to many of the evils plaguing the nation at this time. After many years of reform and protest, the 18th amendment was added to the United States Constitution. The Prohibition era lasted from 1919 to 1933. During this time, many groups formed to fight the amendment, speakeasies opened their doors, and gangsters had access to new avenues of profit through the alcohol black market. Even though there were officials appointed to put a stop to illegal alcohol consumption, their low pay and lack of training made them easy to bribe. (Rosenberg)
The WTCU was made up of mainly middle to low- class, Protestant, white women. Protestant is a key word in this statistic. As more Catholic and Jewish people emigrated from their respective countries, it became evident that the Prohibition pushed by the WTCU was indeed a Protestant belief. The other religions approved of alcohol consumption as much as current United States citizens. Resulting from this purely Protestant belief, even the most average, normal American became a lawbreaker in an attempt to drink. The 18th amendment, the amendment pushed by religious activists became the only amendment to be repealed from the Constitution. How does this look? When the church comes together with the state to form laws affecting the entire country, it ended in disaster. The beliefs of one religious group were pressed onto the people by the government, and it turned a large portion of the nation into criminals. History has a tendency to repeat itself, and this is surely no exception.
A religious argument is founded upon the beliefs and rituals of the person that worships in that way. The holy book of the Christians, the Bible, contains certain passages that go against controversies such as gay marriage:
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. (Corinthians 6:9)
This passage describes homosexuals as wicked. It says that they will not “inherit the kingdom of god.” Weapons such as these only hold credence to those who believe in them. They are tools that can be easily broken down by the dismantling of the religious force behind them. A common metaphor in battle is that of cutting off the snake’s head. If you take the snake’s head off, there is nothing more to worry about as the body is now useless. Gunning for the head of the religion, the god, effectively nulls the beliefs and arguments that may stem from it. This next section attacks religion itself, and any core theories behind it in an attempt to cut the head off of the snake.
Saint Thomas Aquinas is, by some, considered to be one of the most influential philosophers of the medieval times. He lived during the thirteenth century, and during his fifty years of life, produced five ‘ways’ or ‘proofs’ of the existence of god:
The First Way- Since everything is moved by something else, there must have been something that made the first move. This something is God.
The Second Way- Every effect has a cause that pushed it into fruition. Therefore, the first caused must have been made by God.
The Third Way- At one point, nothing existed. There must have been something that brought the first thing into this world, and that thing was God.
The Fourth Way- Everything is compared to other things by qualities such as ‘goodness.’ Since that is so, there must be an ‘Absolutely Good Being.’
The Fifth Way- Creatures and mechanisms on this earth are so intricately
designed that there must have been a designer. This intelligent designer is God. (Aquinas)
Aquinas’s first three ways are, essentially, all reiterating the same basic idea. Each of them assumes that god is immune to the same forces that make him necessary in the first place. Along with that assumption, even if there was an event that pushed each of these forward, it could’ve been anything. Aquinas gave a name to this event, he called it God. If this event were God, it doesn’t exhibit the other qualities Christians attribute to their god. The events demonstrate no show of omnipotence, no show of omniscience.
The other two proofs stray away from the strand of thought that produced the first three. The comparison to ‘goodness’ in the fourth way can be substituted with any other comparable attribute you might use to describe a person. Even with that said, the logic behind seems to be quite flawed. Aquinas said that comparison is all relative to what we as humans can conceive. Because we are limited to only what we can imagine, there must be a ‘perfect being’ that tops all others in that category. The assumption that there is a being that tops the others just brings us back to the argument over whether or not there is indeed a god. This ‘proof’ is in no way a logical insight into the existence of any otherworldly figure.
In Richard Dawkin’s book The God Delusion, he brings forth arguments against the existence of any higher being. Through the points he brings up, the scientifically proven arguments against a god are much stronger than the weak arguments for. Dawkins’ main point is constituted by the idea that life is much too complicated to be ‘designed,’ but it wasn’t also just come upon by sheer chance. This point ties closely into Aquinas’s fifth way, and provides a strong argument against it. Dawkins’ puts forth the idea of a gradient that connects to two. Natural selection has brought the complex, intricate organisms we know today up from the simpler creatures of yesteryear. One example that is related to throughout much of the book is about a Boeing 747. This idea was created by Fred Hoyle, who said “the probability of life originating on Earth is no greater than the chance that a hurricane, sweeping through a scrap yard, would have the luck to assemble a Boeing 747.” Although this core quote may seem to be pointing to Intelligent Design, Dawkin’s complexity gradient brings it into perspective. Instead of the hurricane assembling the Boeing, maybe it just blew the parts out of the scrap heap and into the open. Then an employee of the scrap yard saw them and created a simple mechanism. Then someone else came along and added to it. Then another. Once enough pieces and parts were added, maybe a Boeing 747 would be standing there. This is the natural selection gradient. There was no higher power that created that airplane, and there was no higher power that created that field of grass and bugs that is your front yard. (Dawkins)
The separation of church and state is an imperative step in changing our country, the United States of America, for the better. It would open up more freedom for individuals with their own beliefs and give control back to those who do not see an issue the same way a religious fanatic does. The last time a national law was put forth by a religious group, it ended in disaster. There is no doubt in my mind that government interaction with any sort of church would end just as poorly.
24
Spam / Re: I saw a Mudkipz!
« on: October 07, 2010, 11:49:06 PM »
I know October if the most frightening month of the year, but even I didn't expect this
25
Spam / Re: DBZSUPERPOWERSKABLOWICECAN'TCOPEWITHTHIS
« on: October 07, 2010, 01:05:00 AM »
You have a hole in your hull
26
Spam / Re: We like to...
« on: October 07, 2010, 01:04:39 AM »
You like getting it on with fish, Ice?
Too each their own, I guess
Too each their own, I guess
27
Spam / Re: i post random life questions on random forums
« on: October 07, 2010, 01:04:16 AM »
Psh, Tango Down.
Puh-lease
Puh-lease