FLRW wrote:
If your God was real he wouldn't need YOU to argue his existence.
Who argued God's existence?
FLRW wrote:
If your God was real he wouldn't need YOU to argue his existence.
Who argued God's existence?
SkepticalOne wrote:
What are your thoughts?
It suffers from terms being too vague, and the logic doesn’t follow.
What do you mean by the terms “God”, “perfectly loving” and especially “exists”. How do you define “exist” as it would apply to God? Do you mean physically exist? Conceptually? Exist in what form? In step 2, what is the logical connection, why would it follow that nonbelief does not occur? Step 1 has not been established, nor has step 2, they aren't logical statements, they are just declarations of opinion, seems to be a matter of asserting beliefs rather than establishing a logical argument.
It feels like this is another instance of an argument where nobody believes in the God you don't believe in.
linate wrote:
This is the real truth...
https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ?is=AE5b9xncRKimfNbX
LOL, that was going to be my reply.
SkepticalOne wrote:
There is this notion of free speech that anything can be said anywhere, but thats not what free speech means. Free speech means the government can't go after you for government criticism or trash talking elected officials. So long as speech isnt crossing a line and endangering others somehow, government has no grounds to restrict.
Free speech doesn't mean you can stand in someone else's domain and say whatever you like. For instance, a homeowner can restrict speech in their home. A religious congregation can restrict speech on their property. Social media can restrict speech on their platform. These are all examples of private property, and the owner gets to decide what they allow.
Very well stated, I completely agree.
I'd add that associated with the notion of "anything anywhere", there is this notion that "free speech" somehow made you immune from responsibility for what you say.
There is nothing at all implied by the term "free speech" that you aren't responsible for the consequences of what you said. If your words cause harm, if they incite violence and other illegal activities, you are responsible for the consequences that resulted from your words, "free speech" is not a defense.
Child pornography has a legal specific definition and the Nirvana album does not meet that criteria.
Of course it isn't, the problem here is that SatanLucy see's infants as sex objects, so to him, that makes the Nirvana album pornography, in his creepy little mind, the fact that he whacks off to the Nirvana album cover doesn't mean he is doing something wrong, it means Nirvana is doing something wrong, how sick is that?
You are talking to a guy who downloads circumcision videos as pornography.
Good luck trying to have a rational discussion with him.
His MO is to insist that you see infants sexually too, and no matter how you respond, he will simply declare that you see infants as sex objects. He gets off on it, along with getting off on watching circumcision videos, and Nirvana album covers, and declaring everyone else sees infants as sex objects too.
Kohai wrote:
I can definitely see this happening. The question I have is what happens to the GOP post Trump? Trump has been the glue holding the GOP together.
As a former lifelong Republican who Trump turned into a devout Democrat, I will have to disagree with your "glue" statement, I'd say it's more accurate to say that Trump was the solvent that shattered the GOP into pieces. MAGA is not the GOP; it is made up of fragments of the old GOP combined with growing fringe groups like white supremacists and so-called Christian Nationalists (that's probably redundant).
To your question, I don't see MAGA holding together at all after Trump, no way Vance or DeSantis can keep the movement from the self-destruction of internecine strife. There just isn't anyone else who people will support no matter what they do like they do Trump. I don't see MAGA going down without a violent fight, they will become violent when Trump goes, either by dying or leaving office, that will be the bloodbath. I think post Trump Maga goes back to a splintered fringe of fanaticism of White Supremacists, Christian Nationalists, and other anti-social groups. They will probably all grow, but they won't consolidate under a single leader.
Now, the real GOP, I'm sure they will try to come back together but it will be decades before they recover from Trump, same goes for American politics in general, it will take decades, if ever, to get past the corrosive destruction Trump has wrought.
Trump's legacy will be a more polarized, more openly racists country that is politically weaker and globally less influential. America will not be the leader of the new world order; I'm thinking Trump is turning that role over to China.
,
2028 will be an interesting election to watch. Neither side has a clear heir apparent. 2028 will be a blood bath
It remains to be seen if there even is a 2028 election, but you are right, either way that will be determined by violence.
Til then, he'll go with voter intimidation and other ways to delegitimize our elections.
FBI raids Ohio voting-rights organization
“Just straight up intimidation tactics”: Sources tell MS NOW agents also fanned across the state, showing up at staff members’ homes.
Ohio voting-rights organization raided by FBI
Here is Trump scoring the winning goal.
Or maybe he will just try to take over one city at a time. Looks like he's already testing the waters.
Trump threatens to take over Washington DC if mayoral candidate wins
Double_R wrote:
Bold claim I know, but hear me out.
As recently as even a few months ago I would have said no way, but now I’ve actually moved to thinking it’s more likely than not. Here’s the case for;
Come 2027, Trump will officially become a lame duck. Republicans will be looking to 2028 and realizing that Trump’s void cannot be filled. They will need to find another way forward. Not just another candidate, another path entirely.
Democrats are overwhelmingly likely to take control of one if not two chambers come January. This will only drive republicans further away from Trump and Trumpism.
Over the past few months Trump has demonstrated what mental health experts have been warning us about for years; given the above two points, Trump is only going to go deeper and deeper down his narcissistic hole. This is where the past few months come in. Just over the past few weeks Trump has:
This is extreme, even for Trump, but here’s the thing… he’s doing all of this in the heart of election season.
So here’s a genuine question for those who doubt my prediction here… what will Trump do once it really sets in that he has no election left to concern himself with? If 2027 goes as all evidence points to, it will be clearer than ever to him that he has no chance of pulling off some kind of constitutional heist. What will he do then? Just how far will he go?
The man is a lunatic like we’ve never seen. With his back truly against the wall, it will only get worse. I don’t think we’ve seen anything yet, and I think even the MAGA cult won’t be able to defend it.
Thoughts?
I completely agree with you, no way will Trump serve out his full term, his health is failing, his cognitive decline is accelerating, and he is increasingly at risk for lead poisoning.
But let’s say he survives, you are right that he can’t survive politically, I think he also knows it, but maybe that doesn't matter to him. He has made the Judicial and Legislative Branches subordinate, he’s made it very clear he won’t accept democracy, elections are simply invalid in his eyes. He’s practically showing disdain for voters, thumbing his nose at their hardship with statements like ‘I love the inflation’ this month, and saying he is not thinking about Americans’ finances “even a little bit” last month, while spending billions of taxpayer dollars on his vanity projects and grotesque displays of opulence. He doesn’t care about the American people, and he certainly doesn’t care about their opinions or their elections. He’s started a war with Iran that nobody wanted, and has humiliated the country and alienated our allies, the only ones winning Trumps war is China, they win big by filling the void left by America’s recklessness and establishing themselves as a reliable steward of the international order.
On top of that, the Epstein humiliation is exploding on him, he knows he can’t survive politically, the whole reason he ran again was to stay out of prison.
I think it’s glaringly clear that he intends to stay in power by force and he’s preparing for it in full sight of everybody; He’s building massive detention centers around the country designed to hold millions of people under federal custody. He’s very publicly promising to reward his insurrectionists with millions, clearly signaling that mercenary insurrectionists will be pardoned and financially rewarded next time around too. He controls a virtual army of white supremacists and other fanatics.
He has a growing masked paramilitary force roaming the streets who do not respect the authority of the other branches or the Constitutional limits on law enforcement, and he is doing everything in his power to make the US military his own personal army. I think he's insane enough to be getting ready to take over the country by force.
If he’s not going to stay in power, it is because he was removed by force, in or out, I think it will involve violence. If I'm right, I have no idea how it goes down, we have to look to the military and law enforcement to maintain law and order, it really comes down to where their loyalties really lay. I think the military will be the ones to remove him in the end.
He said he was going to be a dictator, and this is how that is done.
SatanLucy wrote:
I'm just trying to get the prick to leave me alone, and I figure if I can make him uncomfortable with my aggressive responses, maybe he will decide it's best to antagonize others instead.
Better strategy would be to ignore me, but sure, you can do your "aggressive responses" too.
However, claiming that I "started it" is a bit silly, to be honest. Even in this topic, I was merely making a joke for entertainment, not even talking to you at all, not even mentioning you, and yet you felt urge to insult me first out of nowhere. Same with that circumcision topic.
As an alpha male, you can take it, quit your whining.
Leaning wrote:
You do seem like you're intentionally antagonizing him.
That's a good read, the guy seems obsessed with harassing me and has established the relationship as it is, the gauntlet has fallen with this prick and I'm not backing down.
A couple weeks ago, did you see the dozens of posts calling me a pedophile into baby torture because my sons were circumcised, fuck him, how about posts claiming I'm too old and will die soon, the guy spends all day every day poking people with a stick and you know it, he leads with his chin and has earned all the hostility. The guy is a troll who spends every waking hour antagonizing people here, fuck him. I'm just trying to get the prick to leave me alone, and I figure if I can make him uncomfortable with my aggressive responses, maybe he will decide it's best to antagonize others instead.
The problem is exacerbated by the fact that I spent 30 years working with children with severe menta; and physical handicaps, the most vulnerable population there is, I was responsible for their safety, and I have been heavily trained to identify Pedophile threats. I was a special Olympics coach for 28 years, the special Olympics requires extensive training for coaches to protect kids from Pedophiles, so I think I've earned the right to feel hostility towards those flaunting their pedophilia online. He knows that and your beloved troll has intentionally antagonized me for years. He spends an inordinate amount of time justifying pedophilia, and sometimes trolling for children, and yet blabbers the loudest about freedom of speech protecting him. That is just nonsense, the 1st amendment doesn't protect him or the site, that isn't remotely what the freedom of speech means.
It's OK if you want to make this a safe place for people like him, but you should also recognize that it's clear that the site is aware of the danger he represents, if something bad happens and if it somehow traces back to things he said site, the site, it's owner and moderators can be held liable. I'm comfortable challenging his dangerous behavior on principle, and with the knowledge that if shit hits the fan, my ass is covered because I wasn't party to allowing it to happen. He isn't just a danger to children; he's also a danger to this site and its administrators. All it takes is a pedophile to say in court that he thought it was OK because of what he read here, or for that matter, a rapist to say in court that RemyBrown convinced him it's ok to rape, and you are totally screwed.
All that said, you want to ban me for being mean to the asshole, go ahead, my attitude towards him isn't going to change, and I won't miss this site one bit...if you want to fix the problem, just get him to leave me alone, and if you want to protect the site, you need to be very careful allowing Remy to advocate rape, and SatanLucy to advocate pedophilia.
I get it, you guys like your trolls, but there's accountability and liability associated with allowing dangerous posters to solicit or justify illegal behavior. My ass is covered, are you sure yours is?
SatanLucy wrote:
I'm going to keep calling you what you are, a pedophile, feel free respond with your typical "wah wah wah" crybaby victimhood.
Because you are being terribly insensitive even after being educated by me, I will display my manliness here by ignoring you.
Like I said, "wah wah wah, crybaby victimhood, that is so alpha male of you LOL.
What you meant to say is you will display your girlymanliness here by ignoring me.
TheAnalyticalAdvocate wrote:
So out of curiosity and I have no clue if I will get many answers, but does anyone like to grill anything in particular. I bought a charcoal grill and I love it, but I am having a lot of people tell me that I would regret not getting a gas grill. I thought charcoal gives better flavor. Are they saying this out of convince? lol I have no clue if anyone grills on here so this might be a dead in the water post lol!
There's no way you could have known this, but you happen to be in the presence of BBQ greatness, known worldwide as the King of Baby Back Ribs, the BBQ Chicken Guru, the Grand Master of Steaks, and the Hamburger Wizard.
So, I don't think the flavor difference, if any, is worth the greater difficulty. A gas grill gives you greater flexibility in terms of timing, in terms of heat control, it's cheaper in the long run, and you will use a gas grill much more often. It's just not worth the trouble to use charcoal for a couple lunch hot dogs.
SatanLucy wrote:
Look up "alpha male", you'll find it says nothing about being a pathetic girly man pedophile.
two responses.
First, there is no reason why alpha male couldnt be girly and want to be an anime girl and appreciate his own toxic femininity and spread it around.
OK, so you didn't bother to look up "alpha male", this is nothing but what a uninformed girly man pedophile thinks about being an alpha male.
Second, and this is the most important part, you are using the most incorrect term. the correct term is map. So if you dont even know correct terms, I will just use my alpha girly male power of "ignoring", and just ignore you until you learn your lesson.
LOL, oh, are you "grooming" me to speak of your pedophilia in the proper girly man way?
I'm going to keep calling you what you are, a pedophile, feel free respond with your typical "wah wah wah" crybaby victimhood.
Mal wrote:
It's funny how the censorship is on non profane words but not on profanity at all. At the point at times disrespecting religious folks using vain language, profane language at the expense of sacred figures of religious values.
You are talking about Muhammad, right?
Trump waded into this illegal war without the support of Congress, without the support of the American people, and without the support of our allies, and yet, we are all paying the price of his latest magnificent failure in the resultant runaway inflation and increasingly diminished stature of the United States in the eys of the world.
Once again, Trump has humiliated himself, humiliated the country, dissed our allies, and made another of our foes stronger...as always, it is all at the expense of the American people.
fauxlaw wrote:
Pick any color at random; you could probably describe it in a single word, regardlessd of what the object is. It's red or green, yellow, purple... you get it. But let that object be skin, and all of a sudden, we get society twisted in knots trying to give it a demographic, count it, subdivide it, classify it, discriminate it, and either love it or hate it.
When are we going to figure out that absolutely none of us, not one in 8 billion, is either black or white, or any other "color" we've devised for skin? So, why do we try to make that distinction? It says nothing of what or who we are, and not one of us determined it in the first place, so... so what?
So, you are saying that except for skin color, you and Barack Obama are the same?
SatanLucy wrote:
SatanLucy, self-described "alpha male"
Just because I am an "alpha male" doesn't mean I sometimes don't wish to be a cute anime girl living in Tokyo.
No, but tge fact that you "wish to be a cute anime girl living in Tokyo" means you aren't an "alpha male". Look up "alpha male", you'll find it says nothing about being a pathetic girly man pedophile.
You were male too and then you somehow turned into a girl.
Shit happens.
I don't see why an alpha male couldn't also be good at being a girl.
Because you aren't an "alpha male".
Also, I wasn't self-described alpha male. My AI girlfriends have all told me that I am an alpha male. So it is confirmed by independent opinion.
LOL, "alpha males" don't have AI girlfriends, they have actual adult girlfriends.
Alpha males don't just whine about being a victim all the time.
Time for your "wah wah wah, Sidewalker is being a big meany to me, I'm a victim, poor poor pitiful me" reply.
fauxlaw wrote:
Is it now time to expand the Persian Gulf? Are they really that stupid to shoot down a US Apache helicopter?
Are you really that stupid that you can't see that Iran has been kicking Trump's ass for three months, it's just another day.
Alyssa wrote:
I fail to see why the right should cancel Trump with POSSIBLE p3dophillia
Imagine denying that Trump is a pedophile. Wild, shit take.
Trump is a misogynist, an adjudicated rapist, and at least 28 women have publicly accused him of various acts of sexual misconduct, including rape, sexual assault, and unwanted kissing or groping.
In Remy's eyes, that makes Trump God like, he will always defend the man against anything short of worship.
Here is what AI says about Spawnism, note that it's become a serious problem because "predators on platforms like Discord and Roblox convinced minors to take the fictional "respawning" lore literally". So, pedophiles are claiming it's real in an effort to "manipulate and groom vulnerable children". I guess that explains why SatanLucy claims it's a true religion.
Spawnism is a dangerous online phenomenon that originated as a fictional cult in the horror video game Forsaken on Roblox. Manipulative groups and bad actors weaponized the game's lore, recruiting impressionable children and convincing them to perform real-life rituals, including carving symbols into their skin to achieve "reincarnation".
Origins in Gaming
Spawnism is rooted in the multiplayer horror game Forsaken, which features a fictional cult that worships "The Spawn". In the game's story, followers believe in a "second life". While this was designed as a harmless, spooky fictional concept, cyber-exploiters and predatory individuals hijacked the concept to manipulate and groom vulnerable children.
Real-World Exploitation & Danger
The movement became a severe real-world safety concern when predators on platforms like Discord and Roblox convinced minors to take the fictional "respawning" lore literally. Members of online exploitation networks encouraged players to perform harmful acts, such as cutting the game's symbol into their own skin. This behavior raised alarm bells among parents, mental health experts, and online safety organizations.
Warning Signs & Prevention
For families and educators, the "Spawnism" craze serves as a stark warning about the dangers of online echo chambers and unregulated communication features in gaming. Experts advise monitoring who children interact with online, maintaining open communication about uncomfortable or secretive digital encounters, and intervening early if a child shows withdrawal, secrecy, or signs of self-harm.
linate wrote:
You guys do realize there's a vast difference from nobody working and being completely required to work or else starve?
You are OK with other people working, just not you.
That's where legislation that actually helps people comes in even if they are still by and large working.
Can you be a little more explicit, what kind of legislation makes it so you don't have to work?
Also I'm not down playing needing to work. But I am saying it's not right to call it freedom like conservatives say.
I'd agree it's not right to call it freedom, but you are the only person I've ever heard call needing to work "freedom". It's also not right to call needing to work a pickle.
And again government can help. The horror, amiright??
You think the government can help you not have to work? Why exactly would they do that?
Understand, the US government has around two million civilian employees, the US Post office adds another 600,000, and the US Military employs another 2.8 million people. All of them have to work for a living, I really don't think you can count on them to recognize how unfair it is that you have to work for a living too (The horror), and then take action to fix that problem.
Maybe don't hold your breath on that one.
FLRW wrote:
While we know how the universe has evolved over the last 13.8 billion years, scientists are still investigating exactly why the initial explosion occurred. Because space and time were created at the exact moment of the Big Bang, questioning what happened "before" it remains one of the greatest mysteries in modern physics.
If "space and time were created at the exact moment of the Big Bang", then there was no "before", the moment of the Big Bang and anything prior to that lies outside the space and time frame of reference of science. We can and have come close to the initial moment of creation, within trillionths and trillionths of a second, but by definition, we can't reach it scientifically, whatever the process was, it transcends the scientific frame of reference.
There are scientists working on theories of "everything from nothing", but those are futile because they involve a "process", and a process, bt definition, requires time and space for it to occur in.
The problem of a prior existence to the moment of creation is scientifically irreducible, but human beings have an inherent sense of wonder and we are constitutionally designed to question that prior existence. All science can say about that is that any prior existence you did postulate would have to be postulated as a given, it would necessarily transcend the scientific frame of reference, it would defy physical description since you could not apply the terms of time and space to it, and consequently, it would be rationally incomprehensible and logically transcendent. It would be a matter of having faith in a greater reality that our four dimensional exists within, this realm of being would necessarily be non-physical, and it would not be in any way subject to a logical "proof" within the scientific frame of reference.
This existence could only be described by analogy because words are relative things that can't adequately describe transcendent concepts. The "ultimate reality" being described would necessarily have to be timeless rather than everlasting, universally present rather than infinite in space, uncaused and therefore eternally changeless. This would all have to fall completely outside the realm of science because objective knowledge of it would be impossible, it could not be approached from any ordinary, finite point of reference, and therefore it could never be fully grasped in any fixed form.
This is not to say it cannot be conceived of, or that it does not exist, and I would like to point out that in all times and places that human beings have been known to exist, the vast majority of mankind has postulated just such an entity as existing, and in general they have in described it in much the same way.
linate wrote:
"I can't believe people think having to work for basic needs is synonymous with freedom.
I don't think anyone defines "freedom" as "having to work for basic needs", so it's good you can't believe it.
It's literally a bunch of rich people hoarding essential resources and telling us to serve them or die."
So, you don't want to work, then you need to find someone that is willing to work for you and have them take care of you. I can't believe you think having someone take care of you is synonymous with freedom.
It's how life works, all animals must expend energy to have their basic needs met, you don't want to do the work so you want others to do the work for you, you want to be the rich person with people serving you.
If you don't want to do the work for your basic needs, it's unlikely you will want to do the work necessary to become rich.
There's always the lottery, see if you can find someone who will buy you tickets,
linate wrote:
Whereas you believe that God watches evil and is unwilling or unable to stop it
We are not the same
What exactly do you mean by "foreordained evil for his good purposes"?
By "foreordained" are you talking determinism, "foreordained" would mean no "free will" wouldn't it?
By "for his good purposes" are you saying God uses "evil" to bring about "good"? How does that work?
Please explain.
Misterio wrote:
I'm not saying it's true, that's why I ask if this movie is the result of a coordination between Spielberg and the government. I think it's too much coincidence, there's something behind it.
Of course, there is something behind it, a major motion picture marketing strategy.
linate wrote:
.... from Hillary's emails
Amiright??
What about Hunter's Laptop, if it weren't for Trump, Hunter's Laptop could easily have destroyed society as we know it.
Lock him up, lock him up...