Well that says it all then dunnit! Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. Did he also want them to kill babies and make shoes with their skin?
Do you believe in God?
- Thread starter tortie
- Start date
iHearAll
Well-Known Member
apparently. dont you love god?
claypipe69
Well-Known Member
fuck man sorry what happend to you My brother went to catholic boarding school he copped it all round I missed out lucky me. 
kama will catch up with the low life perps
kama will catch up with the low life perpsThere is no god to love. Unfortunately children get religion forced upon them as young as 2-3 years old! So what chance do religious people really have? It's not their fault! They can believe in all that bollocks, just at least let one generation 'your kids' choose for themselves whether they want to follow a faith, when they are old enough to do so.
I'm giving my kids £500 for every exam they pass for their gcse's. I'm giving them £500 for failing religion! They already know that it's a load of bollocks!
We are all still waiting for proof from god. There won't be any though will there! Same with father christmas...
I'm giving my kids £500 for every exam they pass for their gcse's. I'm giving them £500 for failing religion! They already know that it's a load of bollocks!
We are all still waiting for proof from god. There won't be any though will there! Same with father christmas...
Are you taking the piss or are you religious? Hard to tell
claypipe69
Well-Known Member
GOD has a lot to answer for allowing these scumbags actions
Sorry to hear of that with your brother! I'd love to see % stats of child abuse survivors and abuse related suicide's. I reckon 9 out of 10 survivors were abused by religious people!fuck man sorry what happend to you My brother went to catholic boarding school he copped it all round I missed out lucky me.
claypipe69
Well-Known Member
Man I lived a different hell I hand an evil stepfather who was a overpowering perp I nearly Gassed myself when I was 12 instead I found the streets a safer place than home
claypipe69
Well-Known Member
Yes he got what he deserved karma caught up with him bizzaro he believed in the devil & god weird ass perp
Life ain't always easy, but you came through it.
The shit things that happen to us when we're young make us better people. Like parenting skills. Compassion for other people with problems.
Example. My wife and I quit drinking alcohol, go on daytime dates whilst the kids are at school, don't leave them with babysitters. You may think that is boring, but my ptsd linked to child sex abuse is so severe, I'm willing to give up part of my social life to guarantee my 3 kids come through to 18 clear from the bad things in life, nice and safe and loved.
I also improve their life with my growing. It's enabled me to buy a sportscar and a campervan. We have a great life. I just did everything opposite to my own childhood. Can't fail then mate!
Man I lived a different hell I hand an evil stepfather who was a overpowering perp I nearly Gassed myself when I was 12 instead I found the streets a safer place than home
The shit things that happen to us when we're young make us better people. Like parenting skills. Compassion for other people with problems.
Example. My wife and I quit drinking alcohol, go on daytime dates whilst the kids are at school, don't leave them with babysitters. You may think that is boring, but my ptsd linked to child sex abuse is so severe, I'm willing to give up part of my social life to guarantee my 3 kids come through to 18 clear from the bad things in life, nice and safe and loved.
I also improve their life with my growing. It's enabled me to buy a sportscar and a campervan. We have a great life. I just did everything opposite to my own childhood. Can't fail then mate!
iHearAll
Well-Known Member
confusingYes he got what he deserved karma caught up with him bizzaro he believed in the devil & god weird ass perp
claypipe69
Well-Known Member
I hear you I wouldnt let my son go for stay overs I would always go on school trips I was so paranoid he was only allowed to go surfing with a least 2 mates I found it hard to trust people who showed interest in him if they wernt his age I didnt even trust his uncle around him.
well his Mum had the same thing you had she was in a home from 3 to 16 it she got raped an passed around by the keepers. She was more over the top than I was. He is now 40 so job done without any trauma He is a mother nature follower strong believer in karma....You ar right it all makes us stronger ,,,,
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
Your first comment:
Go back to my post, and show where I insinuated anything even closely related to the bolded type; nothing more, nothing less.
*you automatically assume that anyone who believes in some *form of immaterial *source falls into your category of theist - circumstancial ad hominem
Last edited:
GreenLogician
Well-Known Member
Are you serious? You didn't say anything except exactly those bolded bits in your first message.
You: "Science requests, "Give us one free miracle and we'll explain the rest." And the one free miracle is the appearance of all the matter and energy in the universe and all the laws that govern it from nothing"
Me: "Don't believe that those [from nothing-like models] are the only alternatives to goddidit. It's a lie."
You: "The math breaks down at singularity. Science requests, "Give us one free miracle and we'll explain the rest."
Me: "Going from 'I don't know', i.e. 'the math breaks down at the singularity' to 'it must have been magic'" + "It's your mistake claiming there's a miracle where the math of General Relativity breaks down, not the science's." + "Science doesn't say 'beyond that there's a miracle'"
AND now you are going back to your typical and apparently only debate tactic- making up lies about your opponent.
It's getting worse and worse now, show me where the hell I said that anyone who believes in 'some form of immaterial source' is a theist??
You are trying to copy me, calling out bullshit. But you are failing and just making up everything you rebut.
You have expressed everything I've described.
I haven't expressed anything you've lied about me expressing.
You may be stuck and prevented from seeing the light, because of this doctrine you seem so firmly attached to - that everyone is equally rational, no matter what they believe. You appear to have been trained to attack other people whenever they question you, closing your eyes, blocking your ears, and just saying "You do that too!" to ignore criticisms, making up any lie about what they believe or have said just to change the subject from your claim's shortfalls.
Your turn. Go back to any of my posts and show me where I said anyone who believes in 'some form of immaterial source' is a theist.
Or where I said science will eventually solve all the mysteries of nature. Or anything you've pretended I said.
Then get over trying to use the tu quoque fallacy, and start supporting the truth of anything you've said about science.
Step 1: Assert falsehoods about science and people.
Step 2: When called out, tell more lies that those calling you out have said similar things and commit versions of the same errors.
Never address the errors you made.
^Getting sick of this strategy.
Last edited:
GreenLogician
Well-Known Member
You: "*you automatically assume that anyone who believes in some *form of immaterial *source falls into your category of theist"
--- If this is what you are going to appeal to, you again didn't pay close attention to what I said, and only saw what you wanted to see:
Me: "Going from 'I don't know' [...] to 'it must have been magic' is classic theist fallacy town"
If this is where you think I said that anyone who believes in any form of immaterial source qualifies as a theist, you've made 2 serious mistakes in misreading this.
1. It's saying that committing a particular fallacy is a 'classic theist' thing, not belief in any type of immaterial source.
2. It's saying theists consistently commit this fallacy, but not that ONLY theists commit this fallacy.
For someone to commit this fallacy (not 'believe in some form of immaterial source', that wasn't even mentioned), is not sufficient for them to qualify as a theist.
You need to believe in a god to qualify as a theist.
That fallacy is the most common reason for believing in gods, but that doesn't mean anyone who commits the fallacy therefore believes in gods.
Flying is a classic bird activity. Doesn't make you a bird if you fly.
--- If this is what you are going to appeal to, you again didn't pay close attention to what I said, and only saw what you wanted to see:
Me: "Going from 'I don't know' [...] to 'it must have been magic' is classic theist fallacy town"
If this is where you think I said that anyone who believes in any form of immaterial source qualifies as a theist, you've made 2 serious mistakes in misreading this.
1. It's saying that committing a particular fallacy is a 'classic theist' thing, not belief in any type of immaterial source.
2. It's saying theists consistently commit this fallacy, but not that ONLY theists commit this fallacy.
For someone to commit this fallacy (not 'believe in some form of immaterial source', that wasn't even mentioned), is not sufficient for them to qualify as a theist.
You need to believe in a god to qualify as a theist.
That fallacy is the most common reason for believing in gods, but that doesn't mean anyone who commits the fallacy therefore believes in gods.
Flying is a classic bird activity. Doesn't make you a bird if you fly.
Last edited:
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
Verbose.
Look, this is no strategy. You might enjoy being a strategist, might not, but I don't have to. Deal with that, please, and do not project your attitude.
The quote shows what you just posited, take it or leave it, you can't have both. When it is all boiled down there is no difference, and to say that science continues where god did it left off sounds like special pleading to me (call it what you will).
The immaterial reference was to show you that you do not know my state of mind regarding a *source. But you had it all figured out before I had the chance to say that I have a view that is outside of what you assume I have. A simple copy and paste will illustrate that. The crazy part is that you misinterpreted the quote, plain and simple, so the rest of the conversation was moot from go.
The the word "miracle" in the quote is not meant to be taken so literally, that's on you.
GreenLogician
Well-Known Member
"do not project your attitude."
--- See, you are still doing it. Every message you are trying to project your flaws onto me, as I've been describing.
Now you are doing it again, trying to say that's what I'm doing too, as a distraction to ignore how you've been doing it.
You've done nothing else.
"to say that science continues where god did it left off sounds like special pleading to me (call it what you will)."
--- Who said that? Not me.
'I don't know' is what should continue beyond where scientific evidence stops.
'God did it' is often fallaciously inserted there instead. It should never be invoked until the evidence suggests it; an unsolved mystery is not evidence a god did it, nor is it a miracle.
"The the word "miracle" in the quote is not meant to be taken so literally, that's on you."
--- Where does McKenna say what he means?
How about that science says the universe must have come from nothing, is that meant to be taken literally?
Is anything in the quote meant to be taken at face value, or should we just imagine it says what you'd prefer it says?
What interpretation of the quote do you want to defend?
--- See, you are still doing it. Every message you are trying to project your flaws onto me, as I've been describing.
Now you are doing it again, trying to say that's what I'm doing too, as a distraction to ignore how you've been doing it.
You've done nothing else.
"to say that science continues where god did it left off sounds like special pleading to me (call it what you will)."
--- Who said that? Not me.
'I don't know' is what should continue beyond where scientific evidence stops.
'God did it' is often fallaciously inserted there instead. It should never be invoked until the evidence suggests it; an unsolved mystery is not evidence a god did it, nor is it a miracle.
"The the word "miracle" in the quote is not meant to be taken so literally, that's on you."
--- Where does McKenna say what he means?
How about that science says the universe must have come from nothing, is that meant to be taken literally?
Is anything in the quote meant to be taken at face value, or should we just imagine it says what you'd prefer it says?
What interpretation of the quote do you want to defend?
Last edited:
7am in England today and this thread has given me anxiety. I'm leaving this thread. I apologise if I upset anybody! People can believe in whatever faith/religion they want. Maybe religion takes the flack from me for the abuse I suffered. I am outspoken, loud and irritate the f*ck out of people sometimes. Make controversial comments, to the extent that it's a bad idea me being in this thread.
I have nothing else to say hear, except 'Claypipe69' Sounds like you did a really great job with parenting! Good on you and the mrs!
Over 'n' Out!
I have nothing else to say hear, except 'Claypipe69' Sounds like you did a really great job with parenting! Good on you and the mrs!
Over 'n' Out!