Yes af_newbie, we do have a great legal framework, incarceration, rehabilitation programs to deal with such people, but these would be effective only if the person gets caught.
The question is if the person could get away scot-free every time, let's say he is extremely clever, so clever that he is able to commit crimes without leaving any tracks and never gets caught, what is stopping him from being morally corrupt?
When a person does not have any empathy for others and does not care about the law, nothing can stop such a person. Ask all the priests who molested young boys. You cannot convince such people that hell exists. If they are smart enough to avoid being caught, they are smart enough to figure out that religion is for suckers. Fairy tales for old people. Not sure what are you getting at? |
|
|
|
Some of us are born with this thing called empathy.
Yes, many of us are in fact, good humans with a sense of responsibility, care about others, have empathy etc. I am not talking about us, I am talking about the humans who are criminals, thieves, murderers, how can morality be taught to them? They don't believe in our morality of empathy, they think it is weak. Their morality is survival of the fittest etc. They will steal if they have to, lie if they have to, kill if they have to, in order to fulfill their needs. If they can get away with it every time, what is stopping them from continuing to do so? We have developed a secular legal framework, incarceration, rehabilitation etc. to deal with such people. Notice that churches never run prisons or punish criminals. Instead they "forgive them" as long as they join their cult, pay the price. Truly sickening to see them protecting the rapists and pedophiles. Raising a child is more than forcing him/her to memorize the 10 commandments and scare them with hell and eternal damnation. How many MS13 gang members were born in Christian families? All of them. Clearly, you need more than the imaginary hell to raise a well-adjusted child. |
|
|
|
I don't understand where atheism gets its morality from? What is stopping an atheist from stealing, lying, cheating etc? There is no karma, no God, no punishment.
The normal answer I get is that a person who cheats, steals, and lies would be condemned by the society that he is living in, so it would make sense that even an atheist would act moral.
But what if he can do it without the knowledge of anyone? What if nobody could ever catch him because he is simply too clever? If he could get away scot-free every single time, what is stopping the atheist from being morally corrupt?
Some of us are born with this thing called empathy. |
|
|
|
But God exists... fact.
It wasn't a fact. It doesn't have any evidence that God really exists. Facts are said to be true and only by evidence. The faith part is believing Him when He tells us about the coming resurrection.
There is no ressurection buddy. Brace yourself and accept the real fact of life.Every life forms are meant to be wastes for the sole reason of Life Cycle. Arguing with BADecker is a waste of time. You have to understand that his delusion is severe, his beliefs are unshakable, no matter how many facts you present. This is a person who believes that the universe was literally created in 6 days, that Earth is 7000 years old, that global flood that killed all fauna and flora happened 4000 years ago and that we are descendants of Noah and his wife. He thinks that all the animal diversity we see in nature comes from animals that were on a wooden boat with Noah, 4000 years ago. He is not a person you can have a rational conversation with. |
|
|
|
Except Moses was a legendary figure, not a historical one.
Prove it. If the best you can come up with is the opinion of a bunch of atheist scholars who presuppose that Moses must have been mythical because of their atheist assumptions and the general paucity of ancient records 3000+ years ago then of course I am going to reject your statement out of hand. I would instead happily refer you to any group of observant Jews who would patiently explain the historical fact that they have accurately transmitted their holy texts without error across millennium. Why would I care to prove it? You should care about such proof. No physical historical records exist of Moses, so there is nothing to prove. I have no interest in Jewish or Christian mythology, I am not an ancient history buff. You would only be proving that it isn't mythology.  Just read my previous post. It is not possible to prove that he was a historical person. There is no historical evidence. |
|
|
|
For humans to understand what is cause and what is effect, does it matter? If a non-time-held cause causes a time-held existence, so what? A timeless cause can do this.
What is the temporal system you are talking about?
The one you exist in. Spacetime. Why do you think that having no "before" indicates no cause? After all, time is part of what makes a time-free cause to be evident.
...
Effects and causes happen in spacetime. Without spacetime, there are no causes or effects. It is non-sensical to talk about effects or causes in the absence of time. Causes happen before effects, in TIME. It's easy to understand that there is at least one cause without time. What is that cause? It is the cause that time was the effect of.Your mistake is you are extending (space)time to an instance before the (space)time was created. You are basically saying that time was not created at the Big Bang moment. You know that this isn't what I am saying. Why do you know this? Because you know that there isn't any BB. The Cause of the universe caused the component parts of time, which He later turned into time. The Cause was not before. It simply was the Cause. Why wasn't the Cause before? Because time didn't exist, yet. Therefore the Cause was simply the Cause. Once the components of time existed... once they were brought into being... time existed after a fashion. Wake up and stop letting your retarded engineer training keep you from recognizing the truth. You are putting the cart before the horse. How do you know the universe was created by a guy? Maybe the universe was always here in one form or another. Have you considered that possibility? Maybe we are part of a simulation done by some high school students from an alien civilization. Maybe we are on the other side of a singularity of some black hole in another universe. Have you considered all the possibilities? Or Maybe you just picked the one that feels most comfortable to you? As for the cause without time, sorry buddy, no time, no cause. It is pretty self-explanatory. Our reality is based in spacetime. Just because your imagination takes you outside of it, it does not mean that your delusion is true. It does not matter how many times you repeat it, or how many copies of a book you give away for free. |
|
|
|
For humans to understand what is cause and what is effect, does it matter? If a non-time-held cause causes a time-held existence, so what? A timeless cause can do this.
What is the temporal system you are talking about?
The one you exist in. Spacetime. Why do you think that having no "before" indicates no cause? After all, time is part of what makes a time-free cause to be evident.
...
Effects and causes happen in spacetime. Without spacetime, there are no causes or effects. It is non-sensical to talk about effects or causes in the absence of time. Causes happen before effects, in TIME. It's easy to understand that there is at least one cause without time. What is that cause? It is the cause that time was the effect of.Your mistake is you are extending (space)time to an instance before the (space)time was created. You are basically saying that time was not created at the Big Bang moment. |
|
|
|
https://www.demelolaw.com/bill-c-51-proposed-changes-to-sexual-assault-law-in-canada/Does any one else see a problem with this? Is this not just guilty until proven innocent? Do people have any concept of the damage that will be done to innocent people in a blind quest to protect women at all costs? This just totally upends the standard of innocent until proven guilty and forced the accused to first prove they are innocent before being able to access evidence that might exonerate them. https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl/cuol-mgnl/c51.htmlWell, not really. The rape provisions are really related to "she asked for it" type of defense, which is no defense if you ask me. It is like saying, I killed her because she was too old anyway. I guess you will have to walk into these dating situations with a well-written contract. The other provisions that they want to drop are kinda funny: Challenging someone to a duel (section 71); Advertising a reward for the return of stolen property “no questions asked” (section 143); Possessing, printing, distributing or publishing crime comics (paragraph 163(1)(b)); Publishing blasphemous libel(section 296); Fraudulently pretending to practice witchcraft (section 365); and, Issuing trading stamps (section 427). That is a pretty sad personal attack, not even an argument. You aren't refuting any of the information presented you are just making more accusations that it is justified because you think it was designed to do XYZ. The fact is it does these things regardless if you think it is justified to turn the state into an indiscriminate system of imprisonment of men for little more than the crime of being male. Rapists should go to prison. Imprisoning people is a serious act and requires an honest examination of all of the evidence in order to have an impartial hearing. This bill totally demolishes that and opens the door to rife abuse with false accusations, mistaken identities, and just general fuck ups. You keep pretending subjecting men to indiscriminate imprisonment and preventing them from presenting evidence to defend themselves is acceptable. Hopefully it is not you who ends up in a cage getting raped over a false accusation. Of course it always happens to some one else right? Wow, slow down. By "you" I meant you, I and every other man alive. I don't think they will indiscriminately imprison men. That is a stretch. BTW, I do feel sorry for all the women that were raped. How about you? If you (you, I and every oner man) are in a situation and she is not into it, get up and walk away. There is plenty of fish elsewhere. PS. "Personal attack"? WTF, I don't even know you. |
|
|
|
https://www.demelolaw.com/bill-c-51-proposed-changes-to-sexual-assault-law-in-canada/Does any one else see a problem with this? Is this not just guilty until proven innocent? Do people have any concept of the damage that will be done to innocent people in a blind quest to protect women at all costs? This just totally upends the standard of innocent until proven guilty and forced the accused to first prove they are innocent before being able to access evidence that might exonerate them. https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl/cuol-mgnl/c51.htmlWell, not really. The rape provisions are really related to "she asked for it" type of defense, which is no defense if you ask me. It is like saying, I killed her because she was too old anyway. I guess you will have to walk into these dating situations with a well-written contract. The other provisions that they want to drop are kinda funny: Challenging someone to a duel (section 71); Advertising a reward for the return of stolen property “no questions asked” (section 143); Possessing, printing, distributing or publishing crime comics (paragraph 163(1)(b)); Publishing blasphemous libel(section 296); Fraudulently pretending to practice witchcraft (section 365); and, Issuing trading stamps (section 427). |
|
|
|
For humans to understand what is cause and what is effect, does it matter? If a non-time-held cause causes a time-held existence, so what? A timeless cause can do this.
What is the temporal system you are talking about?
The one you exist in. Spacetime. Why do you think that having no "before" indicates no cause? After all, time is part of what makes a time-free cause to be evident.
...
Effects and causes happen in spacetime. Without spacetime, there are no causes or effects. It is non-sensical to talk about effects or causes in the absence of time. Causes happen before effects, in TIME. |
|
|
|
A cause cannot exist without time. The argument in the video is wrong at the 8 seconds mark. A cause can exist without time. Your argument is wrong at its start. Without time you will not be able to tell what is the cause and what is the effect. Cause and effect can only exist in a temporal system. Without time there is no "before", so there is no cause. Sleep on it. Maybe one day you will understand it. |
|
|
|
A cause cannot exist without time. The argument in the video is wrong at the 8 seconds mark. |
|
|
|
How in the world dense are you? You ask a stupid, simple question, and I give you a simple answer. You asked the simple question of what my explanation of the interesting discovery was. I gave you the simple answer, that evolution is a hoax. Now you act like you asked me of why I think that soft tissue survived millions of years. Such wasn't what you asked the first time. Yet you deride me for answering your first question with the simple answer that that question deserved. To say it plainly, as the video expressed, the soft tissue didn't survive for millions of years. The video says it look like tissue from the times of ancient Egypt. There isn't any millions of years. The earth is less than 7,000 years old according to best guesstimates of any scientist. That is not what science says. I just wanted to hear from you one more time that Earth is less than 7,000 years old, ROFL. https://phys.org/news/2018-11-toast-proteins-dinosaur-bones.htmlYou have things mixed up. What science says is not always what scientists say. Science absolutely says that anything beyond about 5,000 years is not known for sure. Scientists agree when they say that to the best of their knowledge the earth is billions of years old. They know that the best of their knowledge can be easily mistaken on this subject... because of things they haven't taken into account. The facts of dead, soft tissue not being able to last more than a few days, at most, without degradation, is common knowledge. Take any dead animal and place it underground. Dig it up a weak later and see the decay. Dig it up a year later, and you will have a hard time recognizing it. Decayed dinosaur tissue would decay just as fast as any dead animal. But freeze the animal, and it might last for an indefinite period of time... but not millions of years. Your evolution is failing you. Why? Evolution is a hoax. Then the dinosaurs should be running around a few days ago. ROFL. |
|
|
|
It is an interesting discovery. Scientists explained it. What is your explanation? Evolution is a hoax. Is "Evolution is a hoax" the answer to everything in your world. I asked you what do YOU think is the explanation why the soft tissue survived millions of years? How in the world dense are you? You ask a stupid, simple question, and I give you a simple answer. You asked the simple question of what my explanation of the interesting discovery was. I gave you the simple answer, that evolution is a hoax. Now you act like you asked me of why I think that soft tissue survived millions of years. Such wasn't what you asked the first time. Yet you deride me for answering your first question with the simple answer that that question deserved. To say it plainly, as the video expressed, the soft tissue didn't survive for millions of years. The video says it look like tissue from the times of ancient Egypt. There isn't any millions of years. The earth is less than 7,000 years old according to best guesstimates of any scientist. That is not what science says. I just wanted to hear from you one more time that Earth is less than 7,000 years old, ROFL. https://phys.org/news/2018-11-toast-proteins-dinosaur-bones.html |
|
|
|
It is an interesting discovery. Scientists explained it. What is your explanation? Evolution is a hoax. Is "Evolution is a hoax" the answer to everything in your world? I asked you what do YOU think is the explanation why the soft tissue survived millions of years? |
|
|
|
It is an interesting discovery. Scientists explained it. What is your explanation? |
|
|
|
Abraham was not mentally ill. But you are, for not understanding the difference between Abraham and a mentally ill person. But this is only the little reason for you. The BIG reason is that you won't let yourself accept the evidence for God in nature. If you did, you might start to understand that Abraham obeyed God. I beg to differ. Why did God create mentally ill people? You know that God didn't do this. You know that Satan deceived people into sin, sin which brought about all kinds of changes in people, including mental illness... including your mental illness that keeps you from recognizing that God exists, through everything that we see in nature. Didn't God create Satan? |
|
|
|
2. Don't shit where you eat.
Hmm... How to phrase this? Hmm... Is it really a divine rule and all? Yeah? M'kay Don't pollute water, air, and soil. |
|
|
|
Can we upgrade all religions if needed?  for example Jesus Pro Islam 2.0 Please describe these upgrades, how are they different from the original? 1. You only have one life to live, use it wisely. 2. Don't shit where you eat. 3. Be nice to nature, nature will be nice to you. 4. Trust, but verify. 5. Be skeptical, don't trust your senses or gut feelings. |
|
|
|
Abraham was not mentally ill. But you are, for not understanding the difference between Abraham and a mentally ill person. But this is only the little reason for you. The BIG reason is that you won't let yourself accept the evidence for God in nature. If you did, you might start to understand that Abraham obeyed God. I beg to differ. Why did God create mentally ill people? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
