AstroProdigy

Believing in something is fine for you, but if you only believe for the purpose of comfort and the fear of death then your faith is false and if God existed he would see right through it anyway. If Christianity really taught people to love their neighbors then Christians wouldn't be the biggest m!@#$%^&* murderers in history. The fact is that people will do whatever they want to do regardless of religion and what ends up happening is religions like these are simply used as an excuse to do some really messed up things. I admitted to myself years ago that God can't exist simply because I wished him to. There is no wishing star. Things are the way they are no matter how much you dislike them and just because cancer is terrible and I fear it doesn't mean I will stop believing it exists. The same goes for death. People invent an afterlife so that they don't really die because they don't want to stop existing. That's the major appeal Christianity has anyway other than the eternal !@#$%^&* threat. Maybe if people focused on doing the right thing because it's a good idea instead of because there is some being watching them and keeping score then people would be sincerely good. Oh and most people believe in something more and that hasn't done anything to stop violence. The percentage of nonbelievers is small and with the exception of Communism (which had become an ideological movement similar to western, Christian ideologies) atheists and agnostics are the most reasonable people in the world. Hitler dreamed of new Jews because "the Jews killed Christ". That didn't hurt any one? Beliefs are fine, but when you let them have influence on the world instead of rational thought that's when all the bad things happen. Edit: Hitler dreamed of NO Jews*

I'll kiss you PoLiX.

Where did God come from. I don't think your precious bible says that and if you say "he just was" then you're just using the argument you're bashing people for using supposedly for how the compounds required for life were created even though technically you are a re!@#$%^&* and don't know science and seem to have gotten your information from www.scienceisevil.com

Why nuke the sun? Nuke the moon and wait for the fun to come down on us.

Last time I checked tasers don't calm you down. If 6 members of campus security are having difficulty detaining one man then they really aren't trying very hard. I don't know about you, but he didn't strike me as a massive bodybuilder or martial arts expert so they could have detained him with 2. The police also didn't follow the book. They were going to put him in jail and yet I didn't see anywhere them reading him his rights. I also don't see him !@#$%^&*aulting them so for him to be resisting arrest they'd have to have been arresting him from the beginning and if they were arresting him from the beginning that'd be an arrest for talking. They also said he incited a riot which is utter bull!@#$%^&*. It's nothing to do with the system, though. It's just some re!@#$%^&*ed campus security who don't know how to do their job. Have you ever been tasered NBV? Try multiple times and then talk about how people are just !@#$%^&*ing and it calms people down.

Sorry I haven't been around for a while with college and all. Just want to make a point here. The definition of terrorism from dictionary.com: 1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes. 2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization. 3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government. The reason for dropping the a-bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was to scare the population into submission. When they didn't submit after the first bomb we dropped another one and were prepared to continue this until Japan surrendered. This perfectly follows the definition of terrorism. We used violence on their civilians (we killed mostly civilians) and threatened to continue doing it until Japan was a flaming pile of radioactive ruins in order to coerce the Japanese for our political purpose of winning the war. Don't get me wrong after looking at the facts I think it was totally justified. From the example we got from Japanese civilians on outlying islands in the Pacific they were ready to fight to the death. The Japanese saw the emperor as their God and as long as their emperor told them to fight to the death most of them would do so and the result is millions and millions of dead Japanese and hundreds of thousands of dead Allied soldiers in a war that would make the German invasion of Russia look like a cup of tea. It would be a tomb for Allied soldiers and would likely require exterminating most of the Japanese people. Using the a-bomb was very effective because the emperor saw that we could massacre his people without heavy losses on our side and had to capitulate. It was a smart move by the Japanese emperor to surrender and was a smart move for us to do it. The occupation of Japan was also done brilliantly. These were smart guys who know what they're doing, not like the people in charge now. The point is that although it was both justified and effective it was still terrorism since we terrorized Japan into surrendering. All this goes to show is that regardless of what you hear from leaders terrorism can be extremely effective. The difference between what we did in Japan and what Al Qaeda is doing is while we did it after a heavy war with Japan and really helped them out after Al Qaeda does it without a war as a premise and does it for some psychotic dream of a worldwide Islamic caliphate. Christian groups in the United States say non Christians don't belong here and these are the same people who support war against extremist Muslims the most. What's the difference? Not much. I'm not saying all Christians believe this (most don't), but the extremists do as do extremist Muslims think non Muslims belong there. Al Qaeda takes it further by trying to force the entire planet to convert, but otherwise the ideology is pretty similar. It's just a matter of extra extremism. Al Qaeda really started to hate us only after we sent troops to Saudi Arabia, which is the holy land that no infidel can be allowed to go, and kept them there. Saudi Arabia rejected Osama bin Laden's help to push back Saddam in favor of America. That was a good move since if I were a corrupt dictator I wouldn't trust Mujahedeen to not try to overthrow me afterwards, but it explains how this really got going. The US also props up an extremely corrupt aristocracy that robs the tremendous oil wealth of Saudi Arabia from the people and uses it to support thousands of spoiled princes to drive their Cadillacs and go gamble, drink, and hire hookers. Sure if we let the regime fall it will be replaced by an extremist Islamist group that threatens us and paralyzes the oil market, but this explains the reasoning for Arabs from Saudi Arabia to be willing to kill themselves to "fight the infidel". Suicide bombing serves a few purposes actually. It can be about forcing Islamic ideology on the world, but only in the most extreme terrorist groups. The way it's done today it's usually to try to beat back infidels like the US from Muslim lands. It can also be used for greed. The people who blow themselves up aren't the greedy ones; they're the stupid ones who get used as a tool. The people who run things are the one profiting from this if not financially in a power hungry way.

I staffed DS for a few months back in SSZ and Chambahs you were as crappy a sysop as any of the rest. Light Hazard and Blondemoments supported you? Light Hazard was a typical worthless development staffer who did as little as possible and blondemoments was a worthless !@#$%^&* who Light Hazard e-dated until she wanted to run away from home and live with him and he said "no !@#$%^&*" and then she turned emo and fat. Don't get me wrong there's nothing personal here Light Hazard is a close friend of mine and this isn't a knock on you since I think to make a good staff you'd have to be a loser and cool people naturally abuse and mess with staff because it's lots of fun! Anyway it's all the same thing. There's a "staff battle" every few months or so in DS it makes for good e-drama when you want a laugh. It never changes and everyone always wants to take credit as the "good guy" when everyone in DS staff just looks for their own interests anyway. I still think Halo is worse, though.

It's up for me cuz I own your face.

Cry moar redwaller? Women need to stay in the kitchen. :-(

Russky is a traitor to the penis clan I think we need to m!@#$%^&* on him.

No global warming has been politicized by Bush and the oil companies that own him. They politicized it because you can't argue with scientific proof just because you don't like it' date=' but if you turn it into a political issue it becomes an "us versus them" issue and you can stall action as long as possible. The exact same thing happened with the tobacco companies years ago in case you forgot and they stalled action for decades because of it. That's the whole point here. Seriously Mars warming has nothing to do with earth warming and any climatologist I've talked to or seen talk has said that it was a load of crap. A small minority might still say they aren't convinced that there's enough proof to prove global warming is real, but this is a complete bull!@#$%^&* argument. Some of the weaker scientists cracked? Wow dude you really have no idea what you're talking about. Seriously you need to think for yourself all you're doing is repeating your party line on everything. They fed their followers the smoke and mirrors argument to delay action as long as possible. You see they will never win the debate, but they must stall action as long as possible or maximum profit. Then when action is stalled as long as possible and the environment is really getting screwed the oil companies will be "friends" to the environment.

People forget the end of the world was supposed to come lots of times. After the world doesn't end in 2012 they'll forget in a few years and say the end times are coming in 2020 because the first 2 numbers are the same as the last 2 numbers and thats bad mojo.

I can easily see how things were made up about Jesus after his death. There were hundreds of years that there was no regulation of what people considered the life of Jesus. This is similar in my opinion, and bear with me, to language. Latin didn't change for centuries because it was controlled and regulated by Rome. Christianity was originally just Judaism with a messiah after all so we can compare this flavor of Judaism to Latin. After Rome fell Latin, like this flavor of Judaism, found itself without regulation and changed into many different languages. It changed and convulsed into many different languages just like this flavor of Judaism. What we end up getting is lots and lots of different Romance languages with the original Latin dead. This can be compared to all the different forms of "Christianity" that existed. In the end most of those "Christianities" were killed off and more diversity was brought in later on. When it comes to Romance languages many of the languages have been killed off or endangered while others have survived. The whole point of this confusing comparison is that when you really look at the historic cir!@#$%^&*stances of Christianity it's basically people trying to out Christianize each other thinking their specific interpretation is righter than others. Why are Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and Anglicanism the biggest flavors of Christianity? Because it conquered the most. That's why French, Spanish, and Portuguese are the most spoken Romance languages too. When you really look at the origins of Christianity you must conclude these are all wrong and there probably is no original "right" Christianity, !@#$%^&*uming Christianity is right at all. If it is then it's probably in a dead version or one followed by an obscure and very small group of people. That's why I'm a proud agnostic. We're the only ones willing to admit we don't know !@#$%^&*. Sorry if that was confusing it works better in my head. I must have forgotten and said planet when I meant biosphere. I really don't care if we kill predators. I mean I don't think we should just do it for nothing or for their skins, but if they're in the way or endangering us we should go ahead. We can also use them to reduce exploding deer populations for example. There's nothing wrong with not being nice to nature as long as you're smart enough to create a self sustaining system. The way we're doing things now is just destroying with little replenishing from some liberals who are trying to swim against the tide. I don't know what's going to keep America from falling, Sever. Chances are there's no way to do it. I'm hoping that the hard and humiliating fall that we're getting closer and closer to will finally wake up the masses to rebel from the elites who control the country because I'm afraid if the fall is gradual Americans will never see it and it will only continue to feed into itself forever. Luckily the rest of the world won't stagnate the way we are.

I said the BIOSPHERE is alive, not earth. We don't even have the capability to destroy the earth, but what we are doing to the biosphere is making it sick like a person would with harmful bacteria. We probably wouldn't kill it; we'd just make it so sick that it can't support us and when all or almost all of us die it will start to rebuild itself. We can kill a biosphere to suit our needs, but that will probably more costly than simply creating a biosphere from scratch. Besides by simply replacing biospheres we are not solving the problem that is we exist in an unlivable state. We might as well figure out how to maintain a biosphere indefinitely before we venture to colonize other ones. What struck me in Zeitgeist is that he says Jesus is called the Son, but that's sort of a typo when you hear it and they really mean Jesus is the Sun. However, this is an English language think. I don't know ancient Aramaic so I can't comment on that language. Isn't it possible Jesus existed, but most of the stuff in the Bible about him is made up? I'm just not convinced Jesus the man never existed and the video doesn't really prove he never existed. The most it proved is that most of the stuff in the Bible about him is made up. I can see people exaggerating stories about him after his death over the years especially considering the first few centuries had many different ideas of Jesus and what happened with him and only the ones embraced by Constantine really survived. You're right about the rich. It's very understandable why the bottom line is the only thing that matters to most of them. What troubles me is why everyone else is dumb enough to follow them to their own detriment. I guess that is just one of the fundamental flaws of democratic capitalism. 2012 isn't a new age. Astrology and people who murder their own to appease the Gods aren't exactly my cup of tea. Also as for some places not getting warmer look at the trend for the entire earth. I took an atmospheric sciences class. I basically heard exactly what I've been hearing from climate scientists; only the paid off scientists (oil companies fund their research if they like what they're saying), the people looking to be famous by not going with the crowd, and the die hard extreme skeptics still deny global warming is happening and a large and growing majority agree the evidence we're causing it is very strong. We won't all die, but there are hundreds of millions of people who will become refugees and natural disasters will only get worse.

Still if we ever hope to advance ourselves to be more than we are now we have to act like it; not killing the biosphere that made us is a good start. I watched the Zeitgeist video and then went and looked up the myths about some of these ancient religions. The fact is that most of them have MANY different legends about them and if you nit pick exactly what you want you can say you proved just about anything. I agree the parts about Jesus being born of a virgin and being resurrected and such were made up afterwards, possibly from other religions, but that doesn't mean that Jesus never existed and the "he fed people with fish therefore he's a representation of Pisces is a pretty weak argument. Just because Zeitgeist is convincing doesn't mean it's all true as shown by the way he nit picked mythology for his point. Also, I was confused as to where the creator of Zeitgeist got his Jesus=Sun instead of son. Is that a typo thing? You know that doesn't necessarily refer to other languages if their word for son is very different from their word for sun. Just like not all bacteria is harmful to the human body, not all species are harmful to the planet. We just happen to have the genetics that turn us from a beneficial part of the environment to a very harmful leech. We're not even smart "bacteria" because we don't realize at this rate we're screwing ourselves too. I know you're not a red stater. You're a libertarian from what I can see.

Why would the earth flip itself? Sounds like someone has no understanding of mechanical physics. ;-) Also, scientists aren't stupid; if the catastrophic event were happening it would have already been happening for thousands of years and would continue to happen for thousands of years; no life would live under those conditions with exception to maybe underground bacteria. Anyway, this is about as accurate as the earth is flat theory. The Maya didn't know more about space than we did. Just because we destroyed their culture there's no need to give them some imaginary reverence and last time I checked my ancestors were too busy living under the British after a period of Turkish imperialism to destroy anyone so I really don't care to give imaginary reverence to a culture that, although ahead of it's time, was not ahead of our time. Sticking the book of revelations into it just proved that it's fake. We all know Christianity's a fairytale; it's like Neverland and the land of Oz. I think I can not covet my neighbors wife I think I can not covet my neighbors wife. Right now we're like a disease to the earth's biosphere; we multiply too much and are taking up too much space. It's not surprising things are getting messed up it's the common logic that everyone but red staters (who have their entire philosophy strictly dictated to them) can see. There is no dooms day scenario. Even an asteroid impact probably won't wipe us all out unless it's a really rare, really big asteroid and that we can detect. It's also only a matter of centuries max before we establish colonies elsewhere. Short of an idiotic nuclear strike or an alien invasion we're 99.9% safe.

Haven't we gotten a tad bit off topic?

Washington maybe because he is the only president who actually had enough influence to destroy our democracy and become king. He steadfastly supported democracy, however, and even set a precedent of a 2 term limit despite no legal obligation in order to prevent a president from becoming too powerful.

Bush's approval ratings had already plummeted due to his illegitimate election and constant vacations before 9/11. 9/11 is what saved his presidency. Anyway, you can't really blame Clinton for what happened in Somalia and I hardly think saving the Bosniaks and Albanians from genocide is a "mistake". He tried to commit to a less selfish foreign policy. Kosovo had nothing to offer us economically, but it was the right thing to do. We should have also acted in Rwanda, but the public support was so against it and it happened so quickly what do you expect? It's not like Bush has done anything for the people in Darfur despite the years of warning for the ongoing conflict. Truman had successes to point to. When history judges presidents it tends to focus on the successes. Bush has no successes. Everything he's touched has gone downhill. Back when our media was blindly following the president and not being factual you had no problem? The job of reporters is to be skeptics. They are an extra oversight of the government and if they just blindly follow the president it's like Congress blindly following the president (and they did that too). Our country was extremely united after 9/11, but instead of using that to help us, Bush used it for his own political ends. He milked it as much as he could until we were too divided for him to milk it any further. We will be united if we all use our brains and don't let politicians use us. Making the national language English is stupid. We've never had English as our official language. It is part of the American way. Our melting pot culture means we will not force others cons!@#$%^&*utionally to speak English as that is their choice. We already have very strong economic pressures; there's no reason to destroy an American legacy just for people who think America belongs to 8th generation Anglo-Saxons. The people who think we should be "polite" and not question the government are the people who don't value our democracy. Honestly now, when Clinton got a blow job all the Republicans thought it was their CONS!@#$%^&*UTIONAL RIGHT to know everything, but now political matters are none of our business? If we are the ones putting politicians in office then ignoring the things they do because its "not appropriate" will only continue a cycle of electing corrupt people.

People are always "blinded" when they support m!@#$%^&* genocides, etc. The point is evil is a relative thing. Back in ancient times when you exterminated a tribe of "barbarians" you were a hero. Christianity did nothing to change it. Only better education changed things and that is more a matter of common sense than a belief in absolute evil. Therefore, it's all a matter of opinion.

I think what he means that any group (including religious groups) will abuse power. What that means is as long as religious ins!@#$%^&*utions are separate from the state then they will have no room to abuse power. The people who want to abuse power won't be able to and only the people who want to help people will be able to. If anything, political power combined with religious power doubly corrupts. Also, Pope John Paul II and Mother Teresa had no ability to run states. Islamic leaders who are both religious and political leaders are corrupted just the same. Should I remind you of the wonderful examples of Saudi Arabia and Iran. People are almost never too good to be corrupted by power and there are few examples where people haven't been (George Washington is one of a few cases).

JFK managed to take on racism issues; something only done with Lincoln. He also led the country through the Cuban Missile Crisis and was willing to compromise. Anyway, he was a very like able person and he could have used that for a successful 8 years. Clinton had a fairly calm world, but at the same time he had no ability to use the world stage as a claim to success (Reagan) and helped along the biggest boom in US history. Bush would have turned the world against us while wasting money and lives (probably would have invaded Iraq), squandered all extra money from the boom on tax cuts for the rich, and cut any program he could.

Its hard to say. JFK or Clinton I'd say. JFK most likely would be if he wasn't !@#$%^&*!@#$%^&*inated.

What Hitler did to the Jews played zero role on his downfall. He got beaten by the Allies for overextending his aggression+not invading the Soviet Union before winter set+not taking the British Isles. What he did to the Jews united Germans against them and was a great propaganda tool. It also sent a message to other minorities not to mess with Hitler. Anyway, the Ottoman Empire committed a genocide on 3 million Christians and has only been rewarded by this with Muslim absolute supremacy in Anatolia. Hitler is proof of a psychopath if anything. Good people in Germany actually thought he was a great man at the time and now people see him as the most evil person in history. It's all a matter of perception. If he had won in World War 2 he'd be seen as a saint. After all many saints in Christian history were actually m!@#$%^&* murderers as were popes.