Can you? People want to make your disgust illegal.
I've never stopped any same-sex couples from calling themselves married, but I've been stopped from saying my opinion on countless forums, subreddits, comment sections, and in real life.
I could be arrested in Scotland for what I've posted here.
I could be denied entry to Canada.
So if you're against forbidding things, it's a complex issue.
I see your point and it's a good one. You should have the right to say "I don't like homos". But you shouldn't have the right to interfere in their life in any way. |
|
|
|
I hate to break this to you, but Atheists do have a belief.... They believe there is no god and there is no almost atheist.
That is simply not true... If you tell me that the Christian God exists, and I do not believe you... that does not mean I believe no gods exist Atheism is not a belief that no gods exist... Atheism is the lack of belief in a god You are thinking about Agnosticism - Gnosis is greek for knowledge and A+gnosis would be "No Knowledge" or simply put, "I do not know." This person is awaiting further evidence to allow them to properly decide to believe in god or even disbelieve. x or not x. Atheism - Believes there is no god -- Regardless of proof or no proof. Trust me, I know exactly what I am talking about (why do Christians always think they know more about Atheism than an Atheist?) Christians try to twist the definition of every word, this is nothing new... feel free to speak with BADecker about how little I give a fuck about what your personal definition of a word is... You are correct about Agnosticism, Gnosis = knowledge, etc... You can be an Agnostic Atheist, or an Agnostic Christian... the terms are not mutually exclusive (and any honest Christian is Agnostic... any Christian who claims to know for certain that God exists is either a liar or a fool) Atheism falls into multiple categories... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AtheismThe most basic of which is a lack of belief in a deity... also referred to as negative Atheism, weak Atheism, or soft Atheism... You are conflating soft/weak/negative Atheism with hard/strong/positive Atheism... but both categories are Atheists, I assure you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_atheismWell, I'm no perfectly sure with what you say. For me an agnostic is someone that doesn't believe in God. An Atheist is someone who believes there is no God. So they are mutually exclusive in my opinion. |
|
|
|
AH! Where did I look at anything else but the Big Picture? I give you national, international and annual stats only!
Well if you said only what you said, better stop talking as it's pretty damn useless.
I will determine the value of my own efforts, thanks for trying to think for me again though. I know in your native French Caliphate this is considered hospitality. Here some people still value independent thought. Not trying to think for you, just giving what I think about you and what you said. I think all what you said is useless and that you're protecting yourself by an extreme sensitivity (thanks for the word as I had the wrong one) to any kind of logical fallacy because you have no argument behind. You know most people have some kind of tolerance on those things for the simple reason that language is rarely precise enough to express one's mind without any possibility to misinterpret it. Seems you're taking any debate like a mathematical one, without any kind of approximation. Well I'd recommend you to go back to science, and if you want we can talk about Quantum Theory applied to nanoscale, here I'll agree on the fact that there is no place for any kind of approximation or interpretation. On a subject where so much of reality is lost in manipulated statistics and rhetoric, the "mathematics" of language are crucial. Without his rule there can be no exchange of logic, because we would be forever lost in fallacious argument which means nothing in reality. You declaring my statements useless does not make it so no matter how much you repeat it to try to convince others of this. The only thing I am protecting is the right for humanity to defend itself. If you actually even knew how to define a logical fallacy, you would know that using logical fallacies means you have no argument, pointing them out does not mean you have no argument. I have once again emboldened your logical fallacies. I know you won't bother to learn from this, but maybe someone else will learn from your mistakes. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoquehttps://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulityhttps://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagonThere was no logical fallacy in my last post as I solely express my own opinion and point of view. There is no logic in this post, only my feeling about you and the emptiness of your mind  |
|
|
|
Hey! I don't like Burger King but that's really cool to see a shop like this accepting btc especially in Europe! |
|
|
|
So there is a reason for all the sorrow, terrible diseases and children dying?
Yes, there are lot of verses regarding that things but you can also refer to my earlier post as I had explain everything has a reason and God let it happen to us. God let sorrow,terrible diseases,famine,wars,killings, etc. happen so that people will come to Him because He is the only one that can save us. And I believe God(God the Father /great I AM /I AM HE) (Isaiah 43:10-11 " Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour") God is Jesus Christ, He revealed it at John 8:24. He said that "I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins." In short, if we don't believe that Jesus Christ is God we will die from our sins. That's why terrible things are happening in many people because they don't come to God. And they're hearts where hard as stone to believe that God is real. And why can't he just let people alone and die in peace? Why does he have to kill babies? Because the babies refused to come to him? --' |
|
|
|
|
Well this economy is complete bulshit. You can't have an economy based on infinite growth that's a nonsense from the very beginning!
|
|
|
|
Moloch, you beat me to it.
Not that it matters... BADecker knows he is lying... He thinks if he can get another fool to believe his lies, that he is doing Gods work... (which is the reason I started clipping his nonsense out of replies I make) I don't think he knows he's lying. i think he can't really understand this ^^ |
|
|
|
If Trump is not nominated the Republican party will be a goner and Hillary will be your leader. Take that to the bank grasshoppers.
Hmm... Bernie forever <3 |
|
|
|
well atheists donot believe in religion...wic is why they hate religion!
Non sequitur. Not believing in something doesn't mean you hate it. Well, for rational people, anyway. I don't believe in UFOs. I don't hate them. I don't believe in the Easter bunny. I don't hate it. I don't believe in Destiny. I don't hate it. You get the idea - you can think up other examples yourself. Yeah and we don't believe in God, but we believe in religion (hard to not believe in it as it's rather obvious religions exist) and I hate it ^^ |
|
|
|
AH! Where did I look at anything else but the Big Picture? I give you national, international and annual stats only!
Well if you said only what you said, better stop talking as it's pretty damn useless.
I will determine the value of my own efforts, thanks for trying to think for me again though. I know in your native French Caliphate this is considered hospitality. Here some people still value independent thought. Not trying to think for you, just giving what I think about you and what you said. I think all what you said is useless and that you're protecting yourself by an extreme sensitivity (thanks for the word as I had the wrong one) to any kind of logical fallacy because you have no argument behind. You know most people have some kind of tolerance on those things for the simple reason that language is rarely precise enough to express one's mind without any possibility to misinterpret it. Seems you're taking any debate like a mathematical one, without any kind of approximation. Well I'd recommend you to go back to science, and if you want we can talk about Quantum Theory applied to nanoscale, here I'll agree on the fact that there is no place for any kind of approximation or interpretation. |
|
|
|
are there any chess for bitcoin games out there?
Gambling on chess online for bitcoin is a really bad idea no matter how good you think you are. Hehe, oh right, it must be impossible to protect against the enemy cheating online. How can you cheat in chess? You play vs a computer at the same time and just copy its moves. Oh yeah not bad... Considering that even world champions have problems and can't be sure of winning against some programs it's a good way to cheat xD |
|
|
|
... On the next reward halving hundreds of millions of dollars in obsolete mining hardware will be sold cheaply privately or online. This will open a window of vulnerability giving an attacker the possibility to buy a huge amount of hashing power for very little money and execute a 51% attack.  Right, or simply a mega factory mine which hasn't bought into the latest generation gear & is stuck with hangars already built out & running. Unable to mine by the rules, so no longer invested in BTC, but able to form an axis of evol with other newly-obsoleted factory mines & wreak havoc  This is a very strange experiment.  If I had the money I’d probably do it just for sport. And I like Bitcoin.  Well I understand you but... it would take so much effort ^^ But you would actually control bitcoin and that would be crazy cool... The end of it would be that it would just kill bitcoin though! |
|
|
|
Well if I can't interpret your words in any way, your assertion is... Useless. Because if what you meant to say is just EXACTLY what you said, you just basically said "we have a higher diversity" without linking it to the subject. My only interpretation was to consider that your argument about racial diversity was to be linked to the higher violence in the USA. If it is not what you wanted to say then sorry for the interpretation. It's just that your statement is useless.
Sorry I thought you tried to add an argument. You were just posting without any goal. I'll stop interpreting whatever you say, though you should maybe read a bit of philosophy about the use of language because it seems you never understood the important part of language: words are MEANT TO BE INTERPRETED! Otherwise just talk to yourself. If you don't take into account what the person you're talking to then no need to talk.
You can interpret all day if you want, your problem is that you repeated those internal interpretations as if they came from me. That is your gap in logic. You don't get to interpret my statements then attribute them to me. As for the rest of your statement I suggest you research logic before you pretend to teach me "the philosophy" of language. Ah! Talking about logic? Well if you want to talk about logic, last time I checked I gave you proofs that USA society is much more violent and that could maybe be correlated to the gun freedom. And you never gave any argument to counter this. And I seriously suggest you to read a bit more. Seems you have a lot to learn about communication if you know so much already about logic. Actually I did offer a counter argument to you, just because you are too willfully ignorant to perceive it doesn't mean it did not happen. One example I gave that is a cause of violence is the diversity of the US population. You automatically assume that correlation equals causation, which is your argument I emboldened above. You assume that these statistics are accurate enough to be compared 1 to 1 when there are many vast differences between our countries not included in those statistics that you just brush aside in order to jump right to your bias of guns being the cause, not a result of violence. This is not "proofs", at best is is flimsy circumstantial evidence with no proof of correlation. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-causeI thought you would like this article considering it concerns your home country: https://www.rt.com/news/332608-guns-eagles-death-metal-paris/That's why I added the "maybe" in italic, because it's not a proof in itself as you can't prove anything concerning the violence/gun debate unless you make some kind of A/B testing. And this is not a counter argument. You talked about racial diversity, I took it as a counter argument and explained why it's not enough to justify the difference of violent crimes rates. Not at all. Then you came and say "I never said that" well of course but you implied it, proof is you're talking about it again here. Do whatever you want I don't care. Fact is we got less violent crimes and less deaths every year, and gun control is a good explanation of this. I'm not saying it's the absolute proof, maybe other factors can explain it, but I don't see any factor important enough to explain it and you didn't provide any. Oh and the Death Angels can say whatever they want and Donald Trump too, the people killed on that night were killed in a matter of seconds. Having guns wouldn't have changed a thing, it would probably have increased the number of deaths in fact because everyone was totally panicking! There was a lot of injuries on that day and the following days because people thought someone was a terrorist. In a restaurant there was a huge panick move because a lightbulb exploded. Well think whatever you want but the guns wouldn't have done shit against the bombs or the 3 guys firing Ak-47 in the Bataclan. Unless there was some kind of psycho professional always ready to shoot even at a concert, maybe it could have done something... Like saving a dozen of life maybe. But what's sure is that the dozen of life that would have MAYBE been saved here wouldn't have repayed the thousands of killed you got everyyear because of gun freedom. In fact it wouldn't even repay the children that kill themselves by accident everyyear. So no sorry but that's the wort kind of argument. Look at the big picture not just one spectacular event. Adding "maybe" doesn't make your premise any less of a logical fallacy. I give you credit for learning how not to use exclusive language tho, at least you are learning something, even if it has nothing to do with guns. I said exactly what I said, I didn't imply anything. You can interpret what i said all day, but at the end of the day I said what I said, not what you interpret me as saying. I find it very ironic a gun control advocate is telling me to look at the big picture not a single spectacular event. It seems this is the favorite game of the gun control crowd any time one of these evens happen in the US. I guess when it happens in a country with strict gun control clearly it is just an outlier and should be disregarded. Funny how those standards flip depending on how it serves your bias against people having a right to self defense. AH! Where did I look at anything else but the Big Picture? I give you national, international and annual stats only! Well if you said only what you said, better stop talking as it's pretty damn useless. |
|
|
|
Black Lives Matter Co-Founder: Climate Change Is Racist, Form Of “Global Anti-Blackness”…
Come on, are these people totally losing it? Sometimes it almost sounds like some crazy cult.
It is. It's like you may have not heard of it but there are some Miss election only for blacks. To chose the Miss black France for example. And when you ask them "it's not racist at all, it's normal!" xD Losers & Whiners. Not sure I understood what you meant buddy... Might get an explanation? |
|
|
|
I sure do love to live in Serbia now, you made this shit happen westerns not deal with it. Also, kebab removal service s out of order atm
Well Serbia might have bigger problems with mafia and poverty.... |
|
|
|
i call that living as humanity were intended, why do we have to be in competition? we are all equal like it or lump it  Where did anyone said the contrary? Races have nothing to do with competition! It's just that you're too dumb to even understand that... a race is a competitive sport you fool, clearly not reading what your being told  im not accepting your opinion as its wrong :/ I think we read what you write, then we read the dictionnaries and decide that you're wrong and stupid as what you're saying isn't confirmed by any kind of definition existing. people pay to have words defined in dictionaries pal, i live in england therefore am qualified to discuss my own language, the language I've used for over 30 year, sorry you lot are dumb, stop accepting bullshit that is written, facts dont care about your feelings or the bullshit your attempting to sway my beliefs with lol, well funny thing is that you don't talk English then. You talk the local language. English is the language taught internationally and defined by Oxford. If you don't use the definition of the Oxford dictionnary well sorry but you don't talk English! Someone from the Whales might talk his own language but he won't say it's English ^^ |
|
|
|
Well if I can't interpret your words in any way, your assertion is... Useless. Because if what you meant to say is just EXACTLY what you said, you just basically said "we have a higher diversity" without linking it to the subject. My only interpretation was to consider that your argument about racial diversity was to be linked to the higher violence in the USA. If it is not what you wanted to say then sorry for the interpretation. It's just that your statement is useless.
Sorry I thought you tried to add an argument. You were just posting without any goal. I'll stop interpreting whatever you say, though you should maybe read a bit of philosophy about the use of language because it seems you never understood the important part of language: words are MEANT TO BE INTERPRETED! Otherwise just talk to yourself. If you don't take into account what the person you're talking to then no need to talk.
You can interpret all day if you want, your problem is that you repeated those internal interpretations as if they came from me. That is your gap in logic. You don't get to interpret my statements then attribute them to me. As for the rest of your statement I suggest you research logic before you pretend to teach me "the philosophy" of language. Ah! Talking about logic? Well if you want to talk about logic, last time I checked I gave you proofs that USA society is much more violent and that could maybe be correlated to the gun freedom. And you never gave any argument to counter this. And I seriously suggest you to read a bit more. Seems you have a lot to learn about communication if you know so much already about logic. Actually I did offer a counter argument to you, just because you are too willfully ignorant to perceive it doesn't mean it did not happen. One example I gave that is a cause of violence is the diversity of the US population. You automatically assume that correlation equals causation, which is your argument I emboldened above. You assume that these statistics are accurate enough to be compared 1 to 1 when there are many vast differences between our countries not included in those statistics that you just brush aside in order to jump right to your bias of guns being the cause, not a result of violence. This is not "proofs", at best is is flimsy circumstantial evidence with no proof of correlation. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-causeI thought you would like this article considering it concerns your home country: https://www.rt.com/news/332608-guns-eagles-death-metal-paris/That's why I added the "maybe" in italic, because it's not a proof in itself as you can't prove anything concerning the violence/gun debate unless you make some kind of A/B testing. And this is not a counter argument. You talked about racial diversity, I took it as a counter argument and explained why it's not enough to justify the difference of violent crimes rates. Not at all. Then you came and say "I never said that" well of course but you implied it, proof is you're talking about it again here. Do whatever you want I don't care. Fact is we got less violent crimes and less deaths every year, and gun control is a good explanation of this. I'm not saying it's the absolute proof, maybe other factors can explain it, but I don't see any factor important enough to explain it and you didn't provide any. Oh and the Death Angels can say whatever they want and Donald Trump too, the people killed on that night were killed in a matter of seconds. Having guns wouldn't have changed a thing, it would probably have increased the number of deaths in fact because everyone was totally panicking! There was a lot of injuries on that day and the following days because people thought someone was a terrorist. In a restaurant there was a huge panick move because a lightbulb exploded. Well think whatever you want but the guns wouldn't have done shit against the bombs or the 3 guys firing Ak-47 in the Bataclan. Unless there was some kind of psycho professional always ready to shoot even at a concert, maybe it could have done something... Like saving a dozen of life maybe. But what's sure is that the dozen of life that would have MAYBE been saved here wouldn't have repayed the thousands of killed you got everyyear because of gun freedom. In fact it wouldn't even repay the children that kill themselves by accident everyyear. So no sorry but that's the wort kind of argument. Look at the big picture not just one spectacular event. |
|
|
|
Black Lives Matter Co-Founder: Climate Change Is Racist, Form Of “Global Anti-Blackness”…
Come on, are these people totally losing it? Sometimes it almost sounds like some crazy cult.
It is. It's like you may have not heard of it but there are some Miss election only for blacks. To chose the Miss black France for example. And when you ask them "it's not racist at all, it's normal!" xD |
|
|
|
are there any chess for bitcoin games out there?
Gambling on chess online for bitcoin is a really bad idea no matter how good you think you are. Hehe, oh right, it must be impossible to protect against the enemy cheating online. How can you cheat in chess? |
|
|
|
Ahah! Am I the only one having the impression there is a tsunami of sale incoming? xD |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
