Where do we start off on a discussion about reproduction? A scientific discussion about reproduction starts with the development of germinal cells in a fetus which develop on their way to become fully functional adult reproductive organs and from there on to conception upto the child birth. But what are creationist discussions concerned about, under the heading of "reproduction"? Their idea of human life is a gift from god, and any discussion about the manufacture of this gift is often suppressed by "god did it". So what is this gift supposed to be? Sperm? ovum? viable fetus? newborn? Creationists aren't heard of talking like "god gifted the man a sperm and the woman an ovum, from which they could conceive a zygote". So is it a viable fetus? No, because the knowledge of age of viability was not known in biblical times and jesus never bothered to get bible updated on this. Its not a newborn because there is a deadly idea called "anti-abortion". Creationists aren't heard of making distinctions between "zygote", "embryo" and "fetus" in their anti-abortion propaganda, perhaps because of their ignorance of human embryology (I take it that they are ignorant of human embryology because it is actually a telltale of human evolution).
Fear of hell being the cause of persistence of faith is not a new concept, but what most theists don’t understand that just like the admittance of any other kind of fear, admitting fear of hell and/ or the wrath of god is an essential element in the faith of anyone who had ever developed any doubt about his faith. I hold the view that since doubt is the one of the most basic element of human thinking, there never existed a believer, no matter how unshakable he may sound, to have never entertained a doubt about his/her faith. But there is Pascal's wager which is basically stupid, yet powerful tool on the theist's mind.
As some men are more courageous than others, some fear the unseen and unreported more than the others, this goes a way in deciding as to precisely what kind of theists will have the fear of god's wrath, as an important factor in determining the persistence of their faith. So what if u are a coward and keep as priority your own safety above all truth? What if your life or your genes made you so helplessly afraid of the unpleasant things that in order to have a stable and non-suicidal mind it becomes essential for you to be a hypocrite in all sensitive matters in life? What if u are so hopeless that your therapist advises a world of fantasies for u to stay sane?
Is there a way to allow such people to stay cool without religion?
So far as one section of our species can go to devalue, abuse, and oppress another section, the selfish motives, more often than not, call for a limit to oppression. A master can cane its slave as much as one wants to, but will mostly refrain from permanently damaging the slave’s organs of labor, the hands and the legs. Acute impulses to dominate an individual or a group of individuals are thus limited in intensity by the rationale to persistently dominate them.
Here is why “I think” female genital mutilation (FGM) is not popular, rejected or even condemned by the majority of muslim populations, even though they already are the most misogynist sections (I use “sections of people” and not religion, because pick any group, based on whatever differences, nothing get more misogynist than muslim “section&rdquo on the planet and possess the capacity to go worse.
Every demand of peace and
This is one of the dumbest things I've seen from people who don't follow cultures with an open mind. They take a small section of the culture and then say, "Islam spawns terrorists".
There are 2 billion muslims in the world but only a few thousand extremists taking up arms against america and their allies. I think that makes up, what?, .000001% of 2 billion?
Pretty crazy to say Islam is a religion of hate when you could come up with a lot more "christian" soldiers with the same extremist attitude.
Over the past couple of weeks I've had discussions with people who are completely lacking in any common sense. They have told me that George Zimmerman committed murder but that there wasn't enough evidence to convict him.
Now you have this woman coming out talking about being a juror and how she owes an apology to Trayvon's family. She says that Zimmerman committed murder but that there wasn't enough evidence to convict him.
There was enough evidence for you to come to a conclusion that he didn't act in self defense but you didn't have enough evidence to convict him for??? She also said the case shouldn't have gone to trial. HUH?
It doesn't get any dumber than this people. Pure stupidity.
Several times previously I've seen this issue and while I don't know all the details, rape is rape.
Yet, in the Middle East, if you are a woman and you are raped, it must be your fault.
It really baffles me that a woman is to blame, even if she was drinking. Time and time again I hear of stories that "the men were seduced".
WTF? Get a hold of your fucking hormones and thinking like a educated human. This, "it was her fault" is a bullshit cop-out.
I imagine rapists must love Dubai. No jail time for them. If they rape a woman they go free on the "she was too hot" plea.
For a very, very long time, black people have been treated poorly and with racist people controlling if they voted, drove a car or owned land. It has been an extremely tough road for their race.
Most people don't know this but the slave industry of the 1700's existed long before America was even found by the Europeans. Black tribes would enslave defeated tribes to do their labor. When the white Europeans stumbled on this slave system they took advantage of it. Then in America, cheap slave labor became the backbone of the southern states.
After decades of fighting for equal rights, some of the black community want more than they deserve. They want to use the history of the black slaves from the 1700's to get more rights, but they already have all the rights I have; and more. They can do any thing I can do with even more programs and money being available to them because they are a minority.
Being in real estate, I have had the dishonor of seeing blacks who take advantage of the system.
There was an entire family who collected not only permanent unemployment but disability benefits, but they worked part time for cash and had no disabilities. They spent most of their free time not bettering their lives, but sitting at home smoking weed and watching soap operas or game shows.
I'm against the recent cover of the Rolling Stone magazine. I dislike that they would put the face of a bomber, a murderer on their magazine.
I support those companies who refuse to distribute it and those who pulled it from their shelves.
So is Rolling Stone magazine just trying to increase sales or are they trying to make a point? Their view is that he is an iconic figure. I disagree.
That face is now an iconic figure because Rolling Stone magazine did this; they now created him as being an iconic figure.
Shame on them.