Like
Haha
Sad
Hug
Wow
Hmmm
Grrr/Dislike
Send SmileNavigation
The Big Bounce: nothing 'created' the universe...it's always been here, always will be here.
Omnedon comments on Apr 22, 2020:
How does the Big Bounce happen if the universe is not only expanding, but expanding faster and faster all the time?
Storm1752 replies on Apr 22, 2020:
Because it reaches a farthest point of expansion and then begins to start contracting again.
Why? I'd have to delve into it further.
I'm not an expert, just noting the Big Bang theory has several problems, and now that some contrarian colleagues have figured out the math, the Big Bounce is becoming a more and more respectable counter-theory.
Omnedon comments on Apr 22, 2020:
How does the Big Bounce happen if the universe is not only expanding, but expanding faster and faster all the time?
Storm1752 replies on Apr 22, 2020:
Because it reaches a farthest point of expansion and then begins to start contracting again.
Why? I'd have to delve into it further.
I'm not an expert, just noting the Big Bang theory has several problems, and now that some contrarian colleagues have figured out the math, the Big Bounce is becoming a more and more respectable counter-theory.
A piece from the Obama era but also helps explain what led up to Trump.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I couldn't agree with you more about everything you said, EXCEPT there is a dramatic difference between the two political parties, in my opinion.
The path out of this is still (for how long?) there, IF people would VOTE.
Eventually even that way out will be blocked. The door is still open, but ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 22, 2020:
@WilliamCharles
No representations.
Once again, you're all process, evading/avoiding content.
You know what?
Nevermind.
F*ck it.
Have a nice day.
Hope your friend is more straightforward. There are plenty of false generalists like you around.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I couldn't agree with you more about everything you said, EXCEPT there is a dramatic difference between the two political parties, in my opinion.
The path out of this is still (for how long?) there, IF people would VOTE.
Eventually even that way out will be blocked. The door is still open, but ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 22, 2020:
@WilliamCharles
No representations.
Once again, you're all process, evading/avoiding content.
You know what?
Nevermind.
F*ck it.
Have a nice day.
Hope your friend is more straightforward. There are plenty of false generalists like you around.
A piece from the Obama era but also helps explain what led up to Trump.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I couldn't agree with you more about everything you said, EXCEPT there is a dramatic difference between the two political parties, in my opinion.
The path out of this is still (for how long?) there, IF people would VOTE.
Eventually even that way out will be blocked. The door is still open, but ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 21, 2020:
@WilliamCharles You are discussing the discussion rather than addressing the matters at hand.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I couldn't agree with you more about everything you said, EXCEPT there is a dramatic difference between the two political parties, in my opinion.
The path out of this is still (for how long?) there, IF people would VOTE.
Eventually even that way out will be blocked. The door is still open, but ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 21, 2020:
@WilliamCharles You are discussing the discussion rather than addressing the matters at hand.
In the absence of theism what are the big questions in life you contemplate?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I'm very interested in Panpsychism and the nature of consciousness, favoring the idea it is possessed by every particle of matter, from barely-conscious quarks to partially-conscious humans, to nearly fully-conscious beings on possible higher planes or dimensions.
A nearly superstition-free ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 21, 2020:
@prometheus Take a dog, the closest to humans emotionally. Same blood, heart, lungs, etc. Similar memory, five senses, intelligent...what's different?
Scientists identified the 'inferior frontal gyrus' as what gives us the ability to think abstractly, be self-aware, etc., which is our evolutionary leap. It allows us an additional level of consciousness, makes us unique. (It's what extraterrestials bred into us, arguably.)
If it's true the universe is eternal, having no beginning or end (Big Bounce v. Big Bang), IT is 'god,' then. WHAT is the universe? Indestructible matter and energy, right, two forms of the same thing, which cannot be created or destroyed?
But is it self-aware? Maybe not, in and of itself. THAT WE KNOW OF.
Did the universe (matter/energy) EVOLVE self-awareness? Did it have it intrinsically or did it need a place to 'reside?'
Am I saying the universe "caused" self-awareness deliberately? No. It IS beholden to it's own self-contained laws, and so self-awareness must be contained WITHIN those physical laws.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I'm very interested in Panpsychism and the nature of consciousness, favoring the idea it is possessed by every particle of matter, from barely-conscious quarks to partially-conscious humans, to nearly fully-conscious beings on possible higher planes or dimensions.
A nearly superstition-free ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 21, 2020:
@prometheus Take a dog, the closest to humans emotionally. Same blood, heart, lungs, etc. Similar memory, five senses, intelligent...what's different?
Scientists identified the 'inferior frontal gyrus' as what gives us the ability to think abstractly, be self-aware, etc., which is our evolutionary leap. It allows us an additional level of consciousness, makes us unique. (It's what extraterrestials bred into us, arguably.)
If it's true the universe is eternal, having no beginning or end (Big Bounce v. Big Bang), IT is 'god,' then. WHAT is the universe? Indestructible matter and energy, right, two forms of the same thing, which cannot be created or destroyed?
But is it self-aware? Maybe not, in and of itself. THAT WE KNOW OF.
Did the universe (matter/energy) EVOLVE self-awareness? Did it have it intrinsically or did it need a place to 'reside?'
Am I saying the universe "caused" self-awareness deliberately? No. It IS beholden to it's own self-contained laws, and so self-awareness must be contained WITHIN those physical laws.
A piece from the Obama era but also helps explain what led up to Trump.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I couldn't agree with you more about everything you said, EXCEPT there is a dramatic difference between the two political parties, in my opinion.
The path out of this is still (for how long?) there, IF people would VOTE.
Eventually even that way out will be blocked. The door is still open, but ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 21, 2020:
@WilliamCharles Dial WHAT back?
I've made perfectly reasonable comments and made what I consider valid points. Either address them or don't, but don't tell me to "dial it back."
I've expressed my opinion respectfully, and I expect the same in return.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I couldn't agree with you more about everything you said, EXCEPT there is a dramatic difference between the two political parties, in my opinion.
The path out of this is still (for how long?) there, IF people would VOTE.
Eventually even that way out will be blocked. The door is still open, but ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 21, 2020:
@WilliamCharles Dial WHAT back?
I've made perfectly reasonable comments and made what I consider valid points. Either address them or don't, but don't tell me to "dial it back."
I've expressed my opinion respectfully, and I expect the same in return.
🎃🍟🍎 Do you believe in meatless Monday's?
IrishTxJudy comments on Apr 19, 2020:
Going meatless one day a week is nothing new. I think during WWII they had something like that due to rationing. And Catholics did it on Friday’s but somehow fish was ok. As a former catholic, I found that odd.
Humans are omnivores, we both meat and grains, vegetables and the like. I won’t ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 20, 2020:
No excuses for eating factory meat. Have delivered the other kind.
Animal flesh in general superfluous.
No excuses for not eating veggies. FROZEN readily available.
I'm not perfect. Ice cream and chocolate (sugar) my downfall.
IrishTxJudy comments on Apr 19, 2020:
Going meatless one day a week is nothing new. I think during WWII they had something like that due to rationing. And Catholics did it on Friday’s but somehow fish was ok. As a former catholic, I found that odd.
Humans are omnivores, we both meat and grains, vegetables and the like. I won’t ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 20, 2020:
No excuses for eating factory meat. Have delivered the other kind.
Animal flesh in general superfluous.
No excuses for not eating veggies. FROZEN readily available.
I'm not perfect. Ice cream and chocolate (sugar) my downfall.
🎃🍟🍎 Do you believe in meatless Monday's?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I eat organic, cage-free, free range eggs, and yogurt and nonfat dry milk from cruelty-free sources.
And maybe a little fish.
Works for me.
People who eat meat, chicken, etc. from agribusiness factory farms are Neandrathals.
Of course the practice should be stamped out through education and ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 20, 2020:
@1of5 I think it's ethical to kill and eat fish occasionally, yes.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I eat organic, cage-free, free range eggs, and yogurt and nonfat dry milk from cruelty-free sources.
And maybe a little fish.
Works for me.
People who eat meat, chicken, etc. from agribusiness factory farms are Neandrathals.
Of course the practice should be stamped out through education and ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 20, 2020:
@1of5 I think it's ethical to kill and eat fish occasionally, yes.
A piece from the Obama era but also helps explain what led up to Trump.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I couldn't agree with you more about everything you said, EXCEPT there is a dramatic difference between the two political parties, in my opinion.
The path out of this is still (for how long?) there, IF people would VOTE.
Eventually even that way out will be blocked. The door is still open, but ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 20, 2020:
@WilliamCharles Excuse me?
What's your clarification?
I contested your assertion "the words Democrat and Republican are absolutely meaningless." Do you agree with that statement or not?
While I wholeheartedly agree with the "gist" of your post, it'd seem to me we should know who our friends and enemies are, relatively speaking.
While it is true the super-elite have managed to stack the electoral deck in their favor--our true allies thus marginalized and all but eliminated from public view--it is patently false Democrats are identical to Republicans.
To the contrary, given the conservative monopoly of AM radio (due to Reagan's demolition of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987), it's amazing Democrats survive at all. It's partially due to enormous Republican blunders Democrats are even competitive.
To ever become the dominant party again might take an actual catastrophe.
Otherwise, the 'vast right-wing conspiracy' marches on, forcing Democrats to steadily retrench and cede territory.
But to claim the Left has no allies is to cede defeat. It's to say, as a die-hard Bernie Bro might, democracy is finished and we might as well go hide in the woods.
The Democrats have had TWO candidates who were capable of weathering the Republican Attack Machine--Clinton and Obama. The rest were shamelessly dismantled. Looks like the
Dems may have done it again by choosing Biden, but that remains to be seen, given Trump's obvious vulnerabilities.
Imagine a Congress with decisive Democratic majorities...are you telling me there'd be no difference? Are you seriously saying that?
Your general "gist" is perfect. I totally agree with you. Who we REALLY need is another Theodore Roosevelt to dismantle the corporate empires which have overwhelmed the will of the people. But Uncle Joe would do just fine, because despite his shortcomings and missteps he is liberal to the core.
Unfortunately, what may seem obvious to us is lost on many who are distracted by clown shows, ephemera, side issues, and propaganda.
I take a stoic approach, and worry about things which immediately concern me and over which I have control.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I couldn't agree with you more about everything you said, EXCEPT there is a dramatic difference between the two political parties, in my opinion.
The path out of this is still (for how long?) there, IF people would VOTE.
Eventually even that way out will be blocked. The door is still open, but ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 20, 2020:
@WilliamCharles Excuse me?
What's your clarification?
I contested your assertion "the words Democrat and Republican are absolutely meaningless." Do you agree with that statement or not?
While I wholeheartedly agree with the "gist" of your post, it'd seem to me we should know who our friends and enemies are, relatively speaking.
While it is true the super-elite have managed to stack the electoral deck in their favor--our true allies thus marginalized and all but eliminated from public view--it is patently false Democrats are identical to Republicans.
To the contrary, given the conservative monopoly of AM radio (due to Reagan's demolition of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987), it's amazing Democrats survive at all. It's partially due to enormous Republican blunders Democrats are even competitive.
To ever become the dominant party again might take an actual catastrophe.
Otherwise, the 'vast right-wing conspiracy' marches on, forcing Democrats to steadily retrench and cede territory.
But to claim the Left has no allies is to cede defeat. It's to say, as a die-hard Bernie Bro might, democracy is finished and we might as well go hide in the woods.
The Democrats have had TWO candidates who were capable of weathering the Republican Attack Machine--Clinton and Obama. The rest were shamelessly dismantled. Looks like the
Dems may have done it again by choosing Biden, but that remains to be seen, given Trump's obvious vulnerabilities.
Imagine a Congress with decisive Democratic majorities...are you telling me there'd be no difference? Are you seriously saying that?
Your general "gist" is perfect. I totally agree with you. Who we REALLY need is another Theodore Roosevelt to dismantle the corporate empires which have overwhelmed the will of the people. But Uncle Joe would do just fine, because despite his shortcomings and missteps he is liberal to the core.
Unfortunately, what may seem obvious to us is lost on many who are distracted by clown shows, ephemera, side issues, and propaganda.
I take a stoic approach, and worry about things which immediately concern me and over which I have control.
🎃🍟🍎 Do you believe in meatless Monday's?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I eat organic, cage-free, free range eggs, and yogurt and nonfat dry milk from cruelty-free sources.
And maybe a little fish.
Works for me.
People who eat meat, chicken, etc. from agribusiness factory farms are Neandrathals.
Of course the practice should be stamped out through education and ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 20, 2020:
@MarkiusMahamius Okay, they weren't AS bright and yes, they were unlucky as well, if you consider the 'missing link' was probably extraterrestials coming along and genetically modifying homo sapiens, not Neandrathals. Or maybe humans USED to be Neandrathals.
Most likely the former. Idk. I'll have to Google it.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I eat organic, cage-free, free range eggs, and yogurt and nonfat dry milk from cruelty-free sources.
And maybe a little fish.
Works for me.
People who eat meat, chicken, etc. from agribusiness factory farms are Neandrathals.
Of course the practice should be stamped out through education and ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 20, 2020:
@MarkiusMahamius Okay, they weren't AS bright and yes, they were unlucky as well, if you consider the 'missing link' was probably extraterrestials coming along and genetically modifying homo sapiens, not Neandrathals. Or maybe humans USED to be Neandrathals.
Most likely the former. Idk. I'll have to Google it.
Moral Compass
WilliamFleming comments on Apr 20, 2020:
Congratulations for advancing to a higher level of awareness or courage and honesty or whatever.
My opinion is that there’s no such thing as a sin against God. There are only mistakes, or what might seem to be mistakes in retrospect. I like what Donald Trump said in that regard: I don’t ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 20, 2020:
I normally agree with you and get your point, but two demurrals:
1) Trump said something intelligent?
2) the "natural unfolding of nature" includes most things animal and human, but just an addendum with which I suspect you might agree:
There is a subset of actions taken by a small number of human beings which some may regard as 'evil,' but can be better characterized as 'deranged.'
The word 'evil' usually refers to a supernatural force, emanating from/personified by the fallen angels and their attendant demonic spirits.
True or not true, the real situation is, some people for a number of reasons you're familiar with, are grotesquely 'broken,' and cannot be held responsible for their own actions.
Putting (deserved) punishment aside, they warrant PITY as much as they do condemnation. At some point (womb? early childhood? something else?) it all went horribly wrong (even if invisibly so) and the result was unspeakably wrong, immoral, incredibly hurtful decisions. The stuff of nightmares becoming reality.
The word 'evil' is usually reserved for such instances. There seems to be no other applicable word.
But when its source meaning is carefully considered, is 'evil' even a factually legitimate word?
I'm not so sure.
WilliamFleming comments on Apr 20, 2020:
Congratulations for advancing to a higher level of awareness or courage and honesty or whatever.
My opinion is that there’s no such thing as a sin against God. There are only mistakes, or what might seem to be mistakes in retrospect. I like what Donald Trump said in that regard: I don’t ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 20, 2020:
I normally agree with you and get your point, but two demurrals:
1) Trump said something intelligent?
2) the "natural unfolding of nature" includes most things animal and human, but just an addendum with which I suspect you might agree:
There is a subset of actions taken by a small number of human beings which some may regard as 'evil,' but can be better characterized as 'deranged.'
The word 'evil' usually refers to a supernatural force, emanating from/personified by the fallen angels and their attendant demonic spirits.
True or not true, the real situation is, some people for a number of reasons you're familiar with, are grotesquely 'broken,' and cannot be held responsible for their own actions.
Putting (deserved) punishment aside, they warrant PITY as much as they do condemnation. At some point (womb? early childhood? something else?) it all went horribly wrong (even if invisibly so) and the result was unspeakably wrong, immoral, incredibly hurtful decisions. The stuff of nightmares becoming reality.
The word 'evil' is usually reserved for such instances. There seems to be no other applicable word.
But when its source meaning is carefully considered, is 'evil' even a factually legitimate word?
I'm not so sure.
Once upon a time, "life" was defined as the ability to replicate, but no longer.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
Your point?
Storm1752 replies on Apr 19, 2020:
@Petter Yeah, I reviewed it and while there is a germ of a point there, it seems you want the READER to generate the point, which indicates to me your post is like a virus, inert.
It just sits there waiting to trick an unsuspecting reader into not only replicating it, but generating auxiliary 'points.:
Sorry. Not falling for it.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
Your point?
Storm1752 replies on Apr 19, 2020:
@Petter Yeah, I reviewed it and while there is a germ of a point there, it seems you want the READER to generate the point, which indicates to me your post is like a virus, inert.
It just sits there waiting to trick an unsuspecting reader into not only replicating it, but generating auxiliary 'points.:
Sorry. Not falling for it.
🎃🍟🍎 Do you believe in meatless Monday's?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I eat organic, cage-free, free range eggs, and yogurt and nonfat dry milk from cruelty-free sources.
And maybe a little fish.
Works for me.
People who eat meat, chicken, etc. from agribusiness factory farms are Neandrathals.
Of course the practice should be stamped out through education and ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 19, 2020:
@MarkiusMahamius Oh no, don't get me wrong, they were VERY successful for a very long time.
But let's face it, they weren't all that bright.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I eat organic, cage-free, free range eggs, and yogurt and nonfat dry milk from cruelty-free sources.
And maybe a little fish.
Works for me.
People who eat meat, chicken, etc. from agribusiness factory farms are Neandrathals.
Of course the practice should be stamped out through education and ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 19, 2020:
@MarkiusMahamius Oh no, don't get me wrong, they were VERY successful for a very long time.
But let's face it, they weren't all that bright.
A piece from the Obama era but also helps explain what led up to Trump.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I couldn't agree with you more about everything you said, EXCEPT there is a dramatic difference between the two political parties, in my opinion.
The path out of this is still (for how long?) there, IF people would VOTE.
Eventually even that way out will be blocked. The door is still open, but ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 19, 2020:
@WilliamCharles Why did you quote the article if you didn't agree with it?
Or DO you agree with it and just can't be bothered to defend it?
Nevermind.
Doesn't matter.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I couldn't agree with you more about everything you said, EXCEPT there is a dramatic difference between the two political parties, in my opinion.
The path out of this is still (for how long?) there, IF people would VOTE.
Eventually even that way out will be blocked. The door is still open, but ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 19, 2020:
@WilliamCharles Why did you quote the article if you didn't agree with it?
Or DO you agree with it and just can't be bothered to defend it?
Nevermind.
Doesn't matter.
Once upon a time, "life" was defined as the ability to replicate, but no longer.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
Your point?
Storm1752 replies on Apr 19, 2020:
@Petter About?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 19, 2020:
Your point?
Storm1752 replies on Apr 19, 2020:
@Petter About?
What are atheists for?
prometheus comments on Apr 19, 2020:
You have to go look at the linked paper which I'm not sure many are reading. TL;DR it assumes the research indicating there maybe a "god gene" is true and humans are evolved to be theistic. Then it asks "but why then do we still have atheists" and examines what the benefits of atheism are.
...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 19, 2020:
Nonsense.
It's should go without saying once we became aware of ourselves and our world--unique among animals (due to the infusion of alien DNA)--we were going to wonder who we were and where we came from!
THAT'S where religion came in.
There's no "theistic gene," but there IS a completely natural need for us to explain our own existence.
Religion no longer satisfies that need for many people (unless they're brain dead or willfully ignorant), so they are increasingly looking for answers elsewhere.
A genetically-generated theistic predisposition toward religion is a ridiculous joke, if you will excuse my bluntness.
prometheus comments on Apr 19, 2020:
You have to go look at the linked paper which I'm not sure many are reading. TL;DR it assumes the research indicating there maybe a "god gene" is true and humans are evolved to be theistic. Then it asks "but why then do we still have atheists" and examines what the benefits of atheism are.
...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 19, 2020:
Nonsense.
It's should go without saying once we became aware of ourselves and our world--unique among animals (due to the infusion of alien DNA)--we were going to wonder who we were and where we came from!
THAT'S where religion came in.
There's no "theistic gene," but there IS a completely natural need for us to explain our own existence.
Religion no longer satisfies that need for many people (unless they're brain dead or willfully ignorant), so they are increasingly looking for answers elsewhere.
A genetically-generated theistic predisposition toward religion is a ridiculous joke, if you will excuse my bluntness.
What are atheists for?
Surfpirate comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I just woke up, put the coffee on and read this post. I immediately thought to myself, as I often do, What can I do to make religion better, today? Tax it was my first idea but I haven't had my coffee yet, so who knows what other wonderful ideas to help religion become better will come before the ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 19, 2020:
I agree: taxing religions is a good idea. As any successful business enterprise, mega-churches should contribute their fair share.
Of course, the majority of churches are practically empty, so they could not be taxed because they have no taxable income.
Surfpirate comments on Apr 19, 2020:
I just woke up, put the coffee on and read this post. I immediately thought to myself, as I often do, What can I do to make religion better, today? Tax it was my first idea but I haven't had my coffee yet, so who knows what other wonderful ideas to help religion become better will come before the ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 19, 2020:
I agree: taxing religions is a good idea. As any successful business enterprise, mega-churches should contribute their fair share.
Of course, the majority of churches are practically empty, so they could not be taxed because they have no taxable income.
What are atheists for?
BestWithoutGods comments on Apr 19, 2020:
Atheism is a scientific viewpoint. Theism is superstition gone out of control.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 19, 2020:
How is atheism a "scientific viewpoint?"
It seems to me it has nothing to do with science, other than the fact that school of thought correctly points out much of religion's claims are unscientific.
But atheism itself is not 'proven' or 'disproven' by science.
Atheists cannot use science to bolster their assertion life is either an accident and/or meaningless, for example.
If anything, atheism is, like religion, an science-neutral belief system for which there is no corroborating evidence whatsoever.
BestWithoutGods comments on Apr 19, 2020:
Atheism is a scientific viewpoint. Theism is superstition gone out of control.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 19, 2020:
How is atheism a "scientific viewpoint?"
It seems to me it has nothing to do with science, other than the fact that school of thought correctly points out much of religion's claims are unscientific.
But atheism itself is not 'proven' or 'disproven' by science.
Atheists cannot use science to bolster their assertion life is either an accident and/or meaningless, for example.
If anything, atheism is, like religion, an science-neutral belief system for which there is no corroborating evidence whatsoever.
Let's discuss censorship.
motrubl4u comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Admins are cowards. They've done it to me too. They get butthurt but refuse to explain themselves. They seriously get into these censorship binges where they just delete stuff that might offend a cockroach. They're truly some of the biggest cowards I've ever seen, like to an equal level as ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@motrubl4u Are you Sgt. Spanky's PR man?
motrubl4u comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Admins are cowards. They've done it to me too. They get butthurt but refuse to explain themselves. They seriously get into these censorship binges where they just delete stuff that might offend a cockroach. They're truly some of the biggest cowards I've ever seen, like to an equal level as ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@motrubl4u Are you Sgt. Spanky's PR man?
Let's discuss censorship.
SeaGreenEyez comments on Apr 18, 2020:
I hate to be the Bad News Fairy, but I have posts that vanish often. It happens. *shrugs* I don't believe it's censorship, a conspiracy or anything of a nefarious nature. This is a free site, run by who? I don't know. We shouldn't need to know.
I don't think you should get an answer ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
'Get a life,' is how I'd have expressed it.
I spend MANY empty hours entertaining myself here. Go ahead, censor away!
SeaGreenEyez comments on Apr 18, 2020:
I hate to be the Bad News Fairy, but I have posts that vanish often. It happens. *shrugs* I don't believe it's censorship, a conspiracy or anything of a nefarious nature. This is a free site, run by who? I don't know. We shouldn't need to know.
I don't think you should get an answer ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
'Get a life,' is how I'd have expressed it.
I spend MANY empty hours entertaining myself here. Go ahead, censor away!
Is this the USA Reality.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 18, 2020:
It'd be great if government policy was to ELIMINATE as many jobs as possible through automation.
Some jobs are not expendable of course, but maybe 50% would be a good intermediate goal.
The unemployed would have an enviable life, but not as good as the employed, so employment would still be the ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@yvilletom Yes, in this fantasy world people would be intentionally relieved from the burden of repetitive, boring, tedious, routine, soul-crushing tasks better done by machines.
After all, if goods and services can be better manufactured/produced without human labor, shouldn't they be?
This would emancipate millions, even billions, from rote activities, freeing them to create, invent, and innovate.
Formal employment in fields requiring human labor--technical, research and development, administrative, etc., etc.--would be rewarded above and beyond the unemployeds' standard of living, so jobs would still be coveted.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 18, 2020:
It'd be great if government policy was to ELIMINATE as many jobs as possible through automation.
Some jobs are not expendable of course, but maybe 50% would be a good intermediate goal.
The unemployed would have an enviable life, but not as good as the employed, so employment would still be the ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@yvilletom Yes, in this fantasy world people would be intentionally relieved from the burden of repetitive, boring, tedious, routine, soul-crushing tasks better done by machines.
After all, if goods and services can be better manufactured/produced without human labor, shouldn't they be?
This would emancipate millions, even billions, from rote activities, freeing them to create, invent, and innovate.
Formal employment in fields requiring human labor--technical, research and development, administrative, etc., etc.--would be rewarded above and beyond the unemployeds' standard of living, so jobs would still be coveted.
Ok, so here goes agnosticism versus atheism 101
gnostic has to do with knowledge
Theism has ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Wrong.
There is NO SUCH THING as an "agnostic atheist," as has been pointed out many times.
This is at the crux of the misunderstanding many atheists have about the difference.
What they are really alluding to is the difference between a 'strong' atheist and a 'weak' atheist, since both require a...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@anglophone True. Probably is INVARIABLY an ANTI-THEIST!
That doesn't mean they don't share an attraction to 'belief systems,' unlike Agnosticists.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Wrong.
There is NO SUCH THING as an "agnostic atheist," as has been pointed out many times.
This is at the crux of the misunderstanding many atheists have about the difference.
What they are really alluding to is the difference between a 'strong' atheist and a 'weak' atheist, since both require a...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@anglophone True. Probably is INVARIABLY an ANTI-THEIST!
That doesn't mean they don't share an attraction to 'belief systems,' unlike Agnosticists.
Ok, so here goes agnosticism versus atheism 101
gnostic has to do with knowledge
Theism has ...
Word comments on Apr 18, 2020:
I know i exist, many people think my name is God. It is true, i really do exist.
belief means to hold as true, disbelief means to hold as false, unbelief would be like undoing, did believe now does not believe or would be holding as false.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@Word The way I've always understood it is unbelief is a more proactive (or reactive) REJECTION of a belief in God, whereas non-belief is the absence of belief (and unbelief) in God...it simply is not there.
So atheism is unbelief, Agnosticism is non-belief.
Word comments on Apr 18, 2020:
I know i exist, many people think my name is God. It is true, i really do exist.
belief means to hold as true, disbelief means to hold as false, unbelief would be like undoing, did believe now does not believe or would be holding as false.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@Word The way I've always understood it is unbelief is a more proactive (or reactive) REJECTION of a belief in God, whereas non-belief is the absence of belief (and unbelief) in God...it simply is not there.
So atheism is unbelief, Agnosticism is non-belief.
Ok, so here goes agnosticism versus atheism 101
gnostic has to do with knowledge
Theism has ...
Word comments on Apr 18, 2020:
I know i exist, many people think my name is God. It is true, i really do exist.
belief means to hold as true, disbelief means to hold as false, unbelief would be like undoing, did believe now does not believe or would be holding as false.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
But your statement is false. Nobody thinks your name is God.
Word comments on Apr 18, 2020:
I know i exist, many people think my name is God. It is true, i really do exist.
belief means to hold as true, disbelief means to hold as false, unbelief would be like undoing, did believe now does not believe or would be holding as false.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
But your statement is false. Nobody thinks your name is God.
Ok, so here goes agnosticism versus atheism 101
gnostic has to do with knowledge
Theism has ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Wrong.
There is NO SUCH THING as an "agnostic atheist," as has been pointed out many times.
This is at the crux of the misunderstanding many atheists have about the difference.
What they are really alluding to is the difference between a 'strong' atheist and a 'weak' atheist, since both require a...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@AHWalter1989 It's a carton of ice cream divided into three sections: vanilla, chocolate, and strawberry.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Wrong.
There is NO SUCH THING as an "agnostic atheist," as has been pointed out many times.
This is at the crux of the misunderstanding many atheists have about the difference.
What they are really alluding to is the difference between a 'strong' atheist and a 'weak' atheist, since both require a...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@AHWalter1989 It's a carton of ice cream divided into three sections: vanilla, chocolate, and strawberry.
Ok, so here goes agnosticism versus atheism 101
gnostic has to do with knowledge
Theism has ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Wrong.
There is NO SUCH THING as an "agnostic atheist," as has been pointed out many times.
This is at the crux of the misunderstanding many atheists have about the difference.
What they are really alluding to is the difference between a 'strong' atheist and a 'weak' atheist, since both require a...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@AHWalter1989 Don't tell me: Neopolitan rules.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Wrong.
There is NO SUCH THING as an "agnostic atheist," as has been pointed out many times.
This is at the crux of the misunderstanding many atheists have about the difference.
What they are really alluding to is the difference between a 'strong' atheist and a 'weak' atheist, since both require a...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@AHWalter1989 Don't tell me: Neopolitan rules.
Ok, so here goes agnosticism versus atheism 101
gnostic has to do with knowledge
Theism has ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Wrong.
There is NO SUCH THING as an "agnostic atheist," as has been pointed out many times.
This is at the crux of the misunderstanding many atheists have about the difference.
What they are really alluding to is the difference between a 'strong' atheist and a 'weak' atheist, since both require a...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@AHWalter1989 If one has a lack of knowledge (everybody), one doesn't know.
If I enter a room with a black box sitting on a table, I don't know what is in the box (unless someone tells me).
I can say, 'I believe it's a statue,' with of course no basis for that satement.
I'm probably wrong, of course; it could be any number of an infinite list of things. But I may for some insane reason say with certainty, 'It's a statue. I believe that to be true.'
OR I could say, 'I don't know what's in the box.'
I can't say both.
One person cannot say,
'I believe there is no god," and,
'I don't know if there's a god or not.'
Why do I say that? Because practically EVERY atheist to whom I have spoken or read their words have pronounced their BELIEF with conviction.
They are REALLY saying, 'There is no god.'
They may qualify that somewhat with a weasal word or two, or say grudgingly, 'Of course, I don't know that for a fact, so I'm sort of agnostic, but I'm as sure of it as I am sure there's not a purple dragon in my garage.'
In other words it's a distinction without a difference.
So (please?) stop saying there's such a thing as an agnostic atheist.
You mean an agnostic whose opinion it is there is no god, but truly doesn't know.
A 'weak' atheist is someone who is 90% sure rather than 99.9%.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Wrong.
There is NO SUCH THING as an "agnostic atheist," as has been pointed out many times.
This is at the crux of the misunderstanding many atheists have about the difference.
What they are really alluding to is the difference between a 'strong' atheist and a 'weak' atheist, since both require a...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@AHWalter1989 If one has a lack of knowledge (everybody), one doesn't know.
If I enter a room with a black box sitting on a table, I don't know what is in the box (unless someone tells me).
I can say, 'I believe it's a statue,' with of course no basis for that satement.
I'm probably wrong, of course; it could be any number of an infinite list of things. But I may for some insane reason say with certainty, 'It's a statue. I believe that to be true.'
OR I could say, 'I don't know what's in the box.'
I can't say both.
One person cannot say,
'I believe there is no god," and,
'I don't know if there's a god or not.'
Why do I say that? Because practically EVERY atheist to whom I have spoken or read their words have pronounced their BELIEF with conviction.
They are REALLY saying, 'There is no god.'
They may qualify that somewhat with a weasal word or two, or say grudgingly, 'Of course, I don't know that for a fact, so I'm sort of agnostic, but I'm as sure of it as I am sure there's not a purple dragon in my garage.'
In other words it's a distinction without a difference.
So (please?) stop saying there's such a thing as an agnostic atheist.
You mean an agnostic whose opinion it is there is no god, but truly doesn't know.
A 'weak' atheist is someone who is 90% sure rather than 99.9%.
Ok, so here goes agnosticism versus atheism 101
gnostic has to do with knowledge
Theism has ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Wrong.
There is NO SUCH THING as an "agnostic atheist," as has been pointed out many times.
This is at the crux of the misunderstanding many atheists have about the difference.
What they are really alluding to is the difference between a 'strong' atheist and a 'weak' atheist, since both require a...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@AHWalter1989 So you're saying an opinion always IS a belief?
No.
If I say, 'Vanilla is the best ice cream flavor,' I'm expressing my subjective opinion, not an all-encompassing truth. For ME that may be true, but it's certainly not true of everybody.
If I say, 'I believe vanilla is the best ice cream flavor,' I'm implying much more. Someone might respond, 'Well, YOU might think so, but I like Rocky Road best.'
So most people would say (I think) belief is more a statement of objective FACT.
'I believe God exists,' has a different ring than, 'It's my opinion god exists.' The first is a deeply-held conviction, the second a cognitive construction.
An Agnostic would say it's his or her opinion god does or does not exist; an atheist or a theist would say they BELIEVE god does or doesn't exist.
Do you see my point?
Probably not.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Wrong.
There is NO SUCH THING as an "agnostic atheist," as has been pointed out many times.
This is at the crux of the misunderstanding many atheists have about the difference.
What they are really alluding to is the difference between a 'strong' atheist and a 'weak' atheist, since both require a...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
@AHWalter1989 So you're saying an opinion always IS a belief?
No.
If I say, 'Vanilla is the best ice cream flavor,' I'm expressing my subjective opinion, not an all-encompassing truth. For ME that may be true, but it's certainly not true of everybody.
If I say, 'I believe vanilla is the best ice cream flavor,' I'm implying much more. Someone might respond, 'Well, YOU might think so, but I like Rocky Road best.'
So most people would say (I think) belief is more a statement of objective FACT.
'I believe God exists,' has a different ring than, 'It's my opinion god exists.' The first is a deeply-held conviction, the second a cognitive construction.
An Agnostic would say it's his or her opinion god does or does not exist; an atheist or a theist would say they BELIEVE god does or doesn't exist.
Do you see my point?
Probably not.
Is this the USA Reality.
RoboGraham comments on Apr 18, 2020:
There is an excellent argument for continuing this practice.
If we switch to single payer, how will the health insurance mafia continue to get rich off of the desperation of sick people?
This is America, Profit over People
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
Profit generation by turning people into consumption-units of wealth production for the elite.
Goal: invention of androids which are near-perfect replicas of humans, into which the elite can download their consciousnesses, to achieve immortality.
RoboGraham comments on Apr 18, 2020:
There is an excellent argument for continuing this practice.
If we switch to single payer, how will the health insurance mafia continue to get rich off of the desperation of sick people?
This is America, Profit over People
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
Profit generation by turning people into consumption-units of wealth production for the elite.
Goal: invention of androids which are near-perfect replicas of humans, into which the elite can download their consciousnesses, to achieve immortality.
Why is the Satanic Temple officially recognised as a tax-exempt religious organisation.
Word comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Why is the secret religion of the Masonic Lodge secret religion racist devil worshipers, most commonly and publicly known as the government of the United States of America, since the Masonic Lodge secret religion racist devil worshipers freedom from England July 4, 1776, being lead by the angelic ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
You're a crazy troll.
GO AWAY.
Word comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Why is the secret religion of the Masonic Lodge secret religion racist devil worshipers, most commonly and publicly known as the government of the United States of America, since the Masonic Lodge secret religion racist devil worshipers freedom from England July 4, 1776, being lead by the angelic ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
You're a crazy troll.
GO AWAY.
Ok, so here goes agnosticism versus atheism 101
gnostic has to do with knowledge
Theism has ...
MarkWD comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Oh go ahead and get a few whacks in on this horse if you feel like it. Conversations which didn't include you don't really do you a lot of good. The only thing I'd take exception to is
"Everyone is "agnostic" by default because no one knows whether god actually exists or not."
But in fact ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
Put another way, nobody knows, but some THINK they do.
MarkWD comments on Apr 18, 2020:
Oh go ahead and get a few whacks in on this horse if you feel like it. Conversations which didn't include you don't really do you a lot of good. The only thing I'd take exception to is
"Everyone is "agnostic" by default because no one knows whether god actually exists or not."
But in fact ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
Put another way, nobody knows, but some THINK they do.
Ok, so here goes agnosticism versus atheism 101
gnostic has to do with knowledge
Theism has ...
Word comments on Apr 18, 2020:
I know i exist, many people think my name is God. It is true, i really do exist.
belief means to hold as true, disbelief means to hold as false, unbelief would be like undoing, did believe now does not believe or would be holding as false.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
Wrong. Unbelief and non-belief are two different things.
Word comments on Apr 18, 2020:
I know i exist, many people think my name is God. It is true, i really do exist.
belief means to hold as true, disbelief means to hold as false, unbelief would be like undoing, did believe now does not believe or would be holding as false.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 18, 2020:
Wrong. Unbelief and non-belief are two different things.
Why did 'god' create Atheists (or Agnostics, or Secular Humanists)
Storm1752 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
I'm not an atheist.
As an agnostic I do think there may be a system of reward and punishment based on Natural Law, and I'm convinced this system DOES sometimes compel me to perform acts of kindness.
But mostly I think Natural Law itself is instinctive and innate, not learned.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@creative51 My "natural law thing?"
Ok a y.
Didn't know it was that serious.
Peace.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
I'm not an atheist.
As an agnostic I do think there may be a system of reward and punishment based on Natural Law, and I'm convinced this system DOES sometimes compel me to perform acts of kindness.
But mostly I think Natural Law itself is instinctive and innate, not learned.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@creative51 My "natural law thing?"
Ok a y.
Didn't know it was that serious.
Peace.
Why do men like long hair on women?.....(.or men).
Storm1752 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
Why do women like short hair (and no facial hair) on men?
They just do.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@Mooolah it's a cultural thing?
Do some cultures favor short hair on females?
I don't know...I don't think so.
Don't YOU think the same thing?
Some may say it signals youth and fertlity?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
Why do women like short hair (and no facial hair) on men?
They just do.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@Mooolah it's a cultural thing?
Do some cultures favor short hair on females?
I don't know...I don't think so.
Don't YOU think the same thing?
Some may say it signals youth and fertlity?
Why did 'god' create Atheists (or Agnostics, or Secular Humanists)
Storm1752 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
I'm not an atheist.
As an agnostic I do think there may be a system of reward and punishment based on Natural Law, and I'm convinced this system DOES sometimes compel me to perform acts of kindness.
But mostly I think Natural Law itself is instinctive and innate, not learned.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@creative51 But is it a universal ideal?
That's the real question.
Most people would agree first-degree murder is wrong, but people still kill each other.
Do some cultures approve of it? In a way, yes, I suppose, given certain citcumstances. Does that make it right? No, not to me, but to some people it does.
The Golden Rule is unambiguous and crystal clear. Can some poke holes in it? Sure.
If your point is there is no such thing as right and wrong, I disagree.
I also disagree most people in most cultures do not KNOW the difference.
I think they do, cultural variations notwithstanding.
That's natural law.
Whoops! There I go again. Sorry!
Please don't puke.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
I'm not an atheist.
As an agnostic I do think there may be a system of reward and punishment based on Natural Law, and I'm convinced this system DOES sometimes compel me to perform acts of kindness.
But mostly I think Natural Law itself is instinctive and innate, not learned.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@creative51 But is it a universal ideal?
That's the real question.
Most people would agree first-degree murder is wrong, but people still kill each other.
Do some cultures approve of it? In a way, yes, I suppose, given certain citcumstances. Does that make it right? No, not to me, but to some people it does.
The Golden Rule is unambiguous and crystal clear. Can some poke holes in it? Sure.
If your point is there is no such thing as right and wrong, I disagree.
I also disagree most people in most cultures do not KNOW the difference.
I think they do, cultural variations notwithstanding.
That's natural law.
Whoops! There I go again. Sorry!
Please don't puke.
Why do men like long hair on women?.....(.or men).
Storm1752 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
Why do women like short hair (and no facial hair) on men?
They just do.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@Mooolah Okay.
Because they look better.
How's that?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
Why do women like short hair (and no facial hair) on men?
They just do.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@Mooolah Okay.
Because they look better.
How's that?
Why did 'god' create Atheists (or Agnostics, or Secular Humanists)
Paul4747 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
Seems like a trick question....
This is yet *another* paradox for believers. If God knowingly, deliberately created humans as flawed and free-willed creatures (Psalm 103:14, "For he knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust"), how then can we face eternal punishment for exercising that ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@Paul4747 We argue about religion for the same reason we argue who's the G.O.A.T, LeBron James or Michael Jordan?
Because we can, and there's no definitive answer. It's not like anyone REALLY knows, after all, so the argument will never reach a conclusion with someone on top. Nobody's wrong, and nobody's right. Perfect.
Paul4747 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
Seems like a trick question....
This is yet *another* paradox for believers. If God knowingly, deliberately created humans as flawed and free-willed creatures (Psalm 103:14, "For he knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust"), how then can we face eternal punishment for exercising that ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@Paul4747 We argue about religion for the same reason we argue who's the G.O.A.T, LeBron James or Michael Jordan?
Because we can, and there's no definitive answer. It's not like anyone REALLY knows, after all, so the argument will never reach a conclusion with someone on top. Nobody's wrong, and nobody's right. Perfect.
Why did 'god' create Atheists (or Agnostics, or Secular Humanists)
Gwendolyn2018 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
Yeah, that's great, but atheists are still going to hell.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
The Pope says atheists can go to Heaven!!!
Feel better?
Gwendolyn2018 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
Yeah, that's great, but atheists are still going to hell.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
The Pope says atheists can go to Heaven!!!
Feel better?
Why did 'god' create Atheists (or Agnostics, or Secular Humanists)
Storm1752 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
I'm not an atheist.
As an agnostic I do think there may be a system of reward and punishment based on Natural Law, and I'm convinced this system DOES sometimes compel me to perform acts of kindness.
But mostly I think Natural Law itself is instinctive and innate, not learned.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@creative51 Can you accept the Golden Rule as universal, or would/do some cultures disagree?
Which ones?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
I'm not an atheist.
As an agnostic I do think there may be a system of reward and punishment based on Natural Law, and I'm convinced this system DOES sometimes compel me to perform acts of kindness.
But mostly I think Natural Law itself is instinctive and innate, not learned.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@creative51 Can you accept the Golden Rule as universal, or would/do some cultures disagree?
Which ones?
Why did 'god' create Atheists (or Agnostics, or Secular Humanists)
Storm1752 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
I'm not an atheist.
As an agnostic I do think there may be a system of reward and punishment based on Natural Law, and I'm convinced this system DOES sometimes compel me to perform acts of kindness.
But mostly I think Natural Law itself is instinctive and innate, not learned.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@creative51 I can't control what other people think and/or say, and I can't imagine to what kind of "bullshit" and "strange behavior" you are referring.
Natural law is a very simple concept, and merely means there is such a thing as morality and 'right and wrong' which has nothing to do with anyone's subjective opinions.
I wouldn't even attempt to list what a REAL '10 Commandments' would look like...maybe there's 20.
The 'Golden Rule' covers it all, though, as far as I'm concerned
And, please, don't puke on my account! I'd feel SO guilty...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
I'm not an atheist.
As an agnostic I do think there may be a system of reward and punishment based on Natural Law, and I'm convinced this system DOES sometimes compel me to perform acts of kindness.
But mostly I think Natural Law itself is instinctive and innate, not learned.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@creative51 I can't control what other people think and/or say, and I can't imagine to what kind of "bullshit" and "strange behavior" you are referring.
Natural law is a very simple concept, and merely means there is such a thing as morality and 'right and wrong' which has nothing to do with anyone's subjective opinions.
I wouldn't even attempt to list what a REAL '10 Commandments' would look like...maybe there's 20.
The 'Golden Rule' covers it all, though, as far as I'm concerned
And, please, don't puke on my account! I'd feel SO guilty...
It seems like with so many different beliefs and religions in the world it would be impractical if ...
Seminarian comments on Apr 17, 2020:
A quark (/kwɔːrk, kwɑːrk/) is a type of elementary particle and a fundamental constituent of matter. Quarks combine to form composite particles called hadrons, the most stable of which are protons and neutrons, the components of atomic nuclei.[1] Due to a phenomenon known as color confinement, ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
What's inside a quark?
What's inside that?
Seminarian comments on Apr 17, 2020:
A quark (/kwɔːrk, kwɑːrk/) is a type of elementary particle and a fundamental constituent of matter. Quarks combine to form composite particles called hadrons, the most stable of which are protons and neutrons, the components of atomic nuclei.[1] Due to a phenomenon known as color confinement, ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
What's inside a quark?
What's inside that?
This is my opinion.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
I don't believe IN anything, but my OPINION is yes there is an afterlife, and yes a system of reward and punishment would seem to be in place. I think morality and ethics spring from 'natural law' (look it up) and are innate in most people.
I don't consider my self 'insecure,' just think 'belief' ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@Omnedon I've studied case histories of people who claim prior lives and the circumstantial evidence seems valid and convincing.
I only base my opinion concerning morality on that same reincarnation to which I just referred. Karma would be the punishment which leads you back to future lives.
In theory, anyway.
Plus, I just 'feel it in my gut' rewards and punishments for good and bad behavior exist. No proof. I don't need any. It's just my opinion!
Storm1752 comments on Apr 17, 2020:
I don't believe IN anything, but my OPINION is yes there is an afterlife, and yes a system of reward and punishment would seem to be in place. I think morality and ethics spring from 'natural law' (look it up) and are innate in most people.
I don't consider my self 'insecure,' just think 'belief' ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@Omnedon I've studied case histories of people who claim prior lives and the circumstantial evidence seems valid and convincing.
I only base my opinion concerning morality on that same reincarnation to which I just referred. Karma would be the punishment which leads you back to future lives.
In theory, anyway.
Plus, I just 'feel it in my gut' rewards and punishments for good and bad behavior exist. No proof. I don't need any. It's just my opinion!
This is my opinion.
WilliamFleming comments on Apr 17, 2020:
I’d think that agnostics don’t know if there is an afterlife and make no claims about its nature. IMO it is irrational to have beliefs or disbeliefs about things that you have no way of knowing or understanding.
From a cosmic perspective the question of an afterlife is nothing but meaningless...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@WilliamFleming About Owl,conservative values based on a limited perspective are therefore of limited value.
And, to me an 'enemy' has surety and conviction based on among other things a lack of humility. I oppose those who oppose my utter refusal to believe what they believe.
WilliamFleming comments on Apr 17, 2020:
I’d think that agnostics don’t know if there is an afterlife and make no claims about its nature. IMO it is irrational to have beliefs or disbeliefs about things that you have no way of knowing or understanding.
From a cosmic perspective the question of an afterlife is nothing but meaningless...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@WilliamFleming About Owl,conservative values based on a limited perspective are therefore of limited value.
And, to me an 'enemy' has surety and conviction based on among other things a lack of humility. I oppose those who oppose my utter refusal to believe what they believe.
The two biggest challenges that I have encountered in dating are women who smoke and women are too ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
I couldn't buy a date so can hardly afford being too picky, but a drunk smoker would be an absolute no.
(P.S. Notice how many responses from women. They love telling anyone who'll listen who they won't date and why.)
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@BitFlipper Yes, what do you mean?
BOTH men and women have standards. Again stereotypically, for men it's beauty, for women, money.
In both cases it's more layered and nuanced than that...many things enter the equation. But both are standards.
What's the double one?
In my case, the standard has only been met a few times. (Not that it's all my choice.)
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
I couldn't buy a date so can hardly afford being too picky, but a drunk smoker would be an absolute no.
(P.S. Notice how many responses from women. They love telling anyone who'll listen who they won't date and why.)
Storm1752 replies on Apr 17, 2020:
@BitFlipper Yes, what do you mean?
BOTH men and women have standards. Again stereotypically, for men it's beauty, for women, money.
In both cases it's more layered and nuanced than that...many things enter the equation. But both are standards.
What's the double one?
In my case, the standard has only been met a few times. (Not that it's all my choice.)
Do you know anything about Deism?
Triphid comments on Apr 16, 2020:
Deism simply means the belief in a Supreme Divine Entity/Entities that exist/s everywhere and anywhere but can never been proved conclusively to have ever existed, in other words something in which you my put faith into to believe if you are gullible enough to do so.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
Oh, and you pretend to KNOW better, right? That you have absolute knowledge on the matter?
What you have, my friend, is an OPINION based on nothing more than the 'knowledge' your average theist has for his or her position.
Your five senses? Do you believe there's something called an 'atom?' Why? You can't see it, feel it, smell it, hear it, or in any other way detect it.
Someone told you so? You've read about them? Are you really that gullible?
Triphid comments on Apr 16, 2020:
Deism simply means the belief in a Supreme Divine Entity/Entities that exist/s everywhere and anywhere but can never been proved conclusively to have ever existed, in other words something in which you my put faith into to believe if you are gullible enough to do so.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
Oh, and you pretend to KNOW better, right? That you have absolute knowledge on the matter?
What you have, my friend, is an OPINION based on nothing more than the 'knowledge' your average theist has for his or her position.
Your five senses? Do you believe there's something called an 'atom?' Why? You can't see it, feel it, smell it, hear it, or in any other way detect it.
Someone told you so? You've read about them? Are you really that gullible?
Do you know anything about Deism?
jeshuey comments on Apr 16, 2020:
Deism is essentially a speed bump on the road from theism to atheism. Little more, or less.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
Just because atheists insist on saying things like that over and over again doesn't make it true.
To the contrary, it displays lazy thinking bordering on willfull ignorance.
They say the same thing about Agnosticism.
Actually, atheism is much more closely related to theism, the two being belief systems based on nothing more than faith in their respective positions.
Agnosticism, on the other hand, shares with atheism only a repugnance for organized religion. Many agnostics, though, also find ATHEISM repugnant.
Some atheists just don't get it.
It's like the uneasy relationship between Judaism and Christianity: Christians think themselves closely related theologically to Jews; most Jews think Christians' beliefs laughable: a "Messiah" who doesn't 'save' anything or anybody and dies on a cross? What nonsense!
I'm personally an 'agnostic neo-deist.'The two terms are compatible in a sense. My research has indicated (to me) strong circumstantial EVIDENCE reality is not confined to the five senses. There is more, arguably.
For instance, I've not personally seen or been abducted by extraterrestials, but I think it very likely (not certain) they not only exist but are a presence on our planet.
Similarly, there are strong indication something which could be defined as 'god' exists, but for now it can't be known for sure, so one has no choice but to take an agnostic stance.
Some people call themselves 'agnostic atheists,' which is a contradiction in terms. You're either one or the other but it's IMPOSSIBLE to be both. Maybe a 'weak' atheist as opposed to a 'strong' atheist, but that has nothing to do with Agnosticism whatsoever.
NEO-deism is merely an opinion something ineffable probably exists which explains everything. The fact we don't know what that is, is entirely beside the point.
jeshuey comments on Apr 16, 2020:
Deism is essentially a speed bump on the road from theism to atheism. Little more, or less.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
Just because atheists insist on saying things like that over and over again doesn't make it true.
To the contrary, it displays lazy thinking bordering on willfull ignorance.
They say the same thing about Agnosticism.
Actually, atheism is much more closely related to theism, the two being belief systems based on nothing more than faith in their respective positions.
Agnosticism, on the other hand, shares with atheism only a repugnance for organized religion. Many agnostics, though, also find ATHEISM repugnant.
Some atheists just don't get it.
It's like the uneasy relationship between Judaism and Christianity: Christians think themselves closely related theologically to Jews; most Jews think Christians' beliefs laughable: a "Messiah" who doesn't 'save' anything or anybody and dies on a cross? What nonsense!
I'm personally an 'agnostic neo-deist.'The two terms are compatible in a sense. My research has indicated (to me) strong circumstantial EVIDENCE reality is not confined to the five senses. There is more, arguably.
For instance, I've not personally seen or been abducted by extraterrestials, but I think it very likely (not certain) they not only exist but are a presence on our planet.
Similarly, there are strong indication something which could be defined as 'god' exists, but for now it can't be known for sure, so one has no choice but to take an agnostic stance.
Some people call themselves 'agnostic atheists,' which is a contradiction in terms. You're either one or the other but it's IMPOSSIBLE to be both. Maybe a 'weak' atheist as opposed to a 'strong' atheist, but that has nothing to do with Agnosticism whatsoever.
NEO-deism is merely an opinion something ineffable probably exists which explains everything. The fact we don't know what that is, is entirely beside the point.
Do you know anything about Deism?
Atheist3 comments on Apr 16, 2020:
Wow! You don't want to get 'bogged down'.
Deism believes that a god exists but god does not intervene in the creation.
A god like that is as good as no god.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
No, wrong. It's just you, like I, don't understand any of it. And how could you?
BUT, based on your own observations and a priori deduction, it's the only thing which makes sense.
'God' obviously is impersonal and doesn't intervene. Doesn't answer prayers. Doesn't favor the good over the evil at any given moment. Etc.
BUT, it IS an Explanation for existence, isn't it? Whether or not that explanation is understandable is beside the point.
Deism simply postulates 'god' exists.
NEO-deism (me) goes one step further and negates the word, DEITY. It does not identify 'god' as any specific thing, whether it be an entity or a cup of custard. It merely suggests 'it' exists.
Not very satisfying, is it? It's not supposed to be. It's not trying to be.
Personally, I don't see the difference among the terms, 'deism,' Agnosticism, pantheism, even ignosticism.
The only way we can get an inkling of 'god' is through investigation of what we can empirically observe via our five senses directly (and through instrumentation) and 'a priori' through deductive thought. This to me indicates it's existence, but doesn't 'prove' anything.
The main point is, 'god' is at present unknowable. Maybe it's essence will one day be discovered. In fact I personally am convinced. But for now, enjoy the show.
Atheist3 comments on Apr 16, 2020:
Wow! You don't want to get 'bogged down'.
Deism believes that a god exists but god does not intervene in the creation.
A god like that is as good as no god.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
No, wrong. It's just you, like I, don't understand any of it. And how could you?
BUT, based on your own observations and a priori deduction, it's the only thing which makes sense.
'God' obviously is impersonal and doesn't intervene. Doesn't answer prayers. Doesn't favor the good over the evil at any given moment. Etc.
BUT, it IS an Explanation for existence, isn't it? Whether or not that explanation is understandable is beside the point.
Deism simply postulates 'god' exists.
NEO-deism (me) goes one step further and negates the word, DEITY. It does not identify 'god' as any specific thing, whether it be an entity or a cup of custard. It merely suggests 'it' exists.
Not very satisfying, is it? It's not supposed to be. It's not trying to be.
Personally, I don't see the difference among the terms, 'deism,' Agnosticism, pantheism, even ignosticism.
The only way we can get an inkling of 'god' is through investigation of what we can empirically observe via our five senses directly (and through instrumentation) and 'a priori' through deductive thought. This to me indicates it's existence, but doesn't 'prove' anything.
The main point is, 'god' is at present unknowable. Maybe it's essence will one day be discovered. In fact I personally am convinced. But for now, enjoy the show.
Do you know anything about Deism?
Novelty comments on Apr 16, 2020:
My favorite version of a Deist Deity is in this very short story.
I don't believe in it but it's a better message than any I can find in traditional religion.
I first learned about Deism in American History class, many of the founding fathers were Deist.
Of course in actual Deism no conversation ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
The Egg, huh? Well, it WAS refreshingly original.
Thanks.
Novelty comments on Apr 16, 2020:
My favorite version of a Deist Deity is in this very short story.
I don't believe in it but it's a better message than any I can find in traditional religion.
I first learned about Deism in American History class, many of the founding fathers were Deist.
Of course in actual Deism no conversation ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
The Egg, huh? Well, it WAS refreshingly original.
Thanks.
The two biggest challenges that I have encountered in dating are women who smoke and women are too ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
I couldn't buy a date so can hardly afford being too picky, but a drunk smoker would be an absolute no.
(P.S. Notice how many responses from women. They love telling anyone who'll listen who they won't date and why.)
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
@Cutiebeauty I rest my case. It's been proven both because of this observable fact AND because it makes deductive sense.
I am triumphant.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
I couldn't buy a date so can hardly afford being too picky, but a drunk smoker would be an absolute no.
(P.S. Notice how many responses from women. They love telling anyone who'll listen who they won't date and why.)
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
@Cutiebeauty I rest my case. It's been proven both because of this observable fact AND because it makes deductive sense.
I am triumphant.
The two biggest challenges that I have encountered in dating are women who smoke and women are too ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
I couldn't buy a date so can hardly afford being too picky, but a drunk smoker would be an absolute no.
(P.S. Notice how many responses from women. They love telling anyone who'll listen who they won't date and why.)
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
@CutieBeauty Not quite.
I was making a flippant, 'knowing,' hopefully piercingly insightful remark about WOMEN'S unreasonably sky-high standards. Men's standards, in my view, may be more realistic.
One possible reason for this is women have power in the sexual realm which enables them to leverage that power into a plethora of choices.
When one is poor, choices are limited by what one can afford. Burger King or Taco Bell or Sav-a-Lot?
When one is rich, choices are virtually limitless. A menu might as a result be harder to navigate. So many choices!
Similarly, a strikingly beautiful woman (such as yourself) is in a manner of speaking for purposes of this discussion, "rich." She thus has a much wider range of choices than a less attractive woman. This might result in indecision bordering on the compulsive: what if she chooses, then almost instantly unearths an even more desirable companion/lover (richer, more handsome, more refined, more highly educated and sophisticated, etc.)?
A financially rich man has a similar problem, of course. His 'menu' is less limited the wealthier he is.
All this is of course very simplistic. In the cases of both men and women attributes cannot be measured strictly according to one or two variables. I've just chosen the more extreme and stereotypical ones to make a general point, specifically in the case of women:
who, aware of their leverage in the sexual arena, sometimes use that power to make unwarranted and unreasonable value judgments in other areas. So to speak.
It can get very complicated, too much so to make sweeping generalizations. But that's what people like me do.
(P.S. Consider: if as you say women have reasonable standards men can't meet, doesn't that make them a priori AND empirically UNreasonable?)
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
I couldn't buy a date so can hardly afford being too picky, but a drunk smoker would be an absolute no.
(P.S. Notice how many responses from women. They love telling anyone who'll listen who they won't date and why.)
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
@CutieBeauty Not quite.
I was making a flippant, 'knowing,' hopefully piercingly insightful remark about WOMEN'S unreasonably sky-high standards. Men's standards, in my view, may be more realistic.
One possible reason for this is women have power in the sexual realm which enables them to leverage that power into a plethora of choices.
When one is poor, choices are limited by what one can afford. Burger King or Taco Bell or Sav-a-Lot?
When one is rich, choices are virtually limitless. A menu might as a result be harder to navigate. So many choices!
Similarly, a strikingly beautiful woman (such as yourself) is in a manner of speaking for purposes of this discussion, "rich." She thus has a much wider range of choices than a less attractive woman. This might result in indecision bordering on the compulsive: what if she chooses, then almost instantly unearths an even more desirable companion/lover (richer, more handsome, more refined, more highly educated and sophisticated, etc.)?
A financially rich man has a similar problem, of course. His 'menu' is less limited the wealthier he is.
All this is of course very simplistic. In the cases of both men and women attributes cannot be measured strictly according to one or two variables. I've just chosen the more extreme and stereotypical ones to make a general point, specifically in the case of women:
who, aware of their leverage in the sexual arena, sometimes use that power to make unwarranted and unreasonable value judgments in other areas. So to speak.
It can get very complicated, too much so to make sweeping generalizations. But that's what people like me do.
(P.S. Consider: if as you say women have reasonable standards men can't meet, doesn't that make them a priori AND empirically UNreasonable?)
Is there a meaning to life and if there is, does it even matter?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
No. Living itself isn't good enough.
Is it for you?
Maybe some atheists feel that way. Or maybe they're just kidding themselves.
I've never gazed at my navel, btw.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
@Surfpirate Being an agnostic, I realize age-old 'mysteries' are such because they are unknown given the current state of our knowledge, and perhaps unknowable.
But that's what makes them interesting.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
No. Living itself isn't good enough.
Is it for you?
Maybe some atheists feel that way. Or maybe they're just kidding themselves.
I've never gazed at my navel, btw.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
@Surfpirate Being an agnostic, I realize age-old 'mysteries' are such because they are unknown given the current state of our knowledge, and perhaps unknowable.
But that's what makes them interesting.
Would you want to move to or live in a country, State, or society that is basically the same as your...
Deb57 comments on Apr 16, 2020:
Once something becomes forbidden, it also becomes more attractive. We tend to be contrary like that. It is also in our natures to try to apply justice to unjust situations. We want to blame someone for our losses, even if that someone is imaginary. We want to accredit someone or something for our ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
You mean if we banned Christianity and Islam they'd be more popular?
THERE'S an unsettling thought.
Deb57 comments on Apr 16, 2020:
Once something becomes forbidden, it also becomes more attractive. We tend to be contrary like that. It is also in our natures to try to apply justice to unjust situations. We want to blame someone for our losses, even if that someone is imaginary. We want to accredit someone or something for our ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
You mean if we banned Christianity and Islam they'd be more popular?
THERE'S an unsettling thought.
Would you want to move to or live in a country, State, or society that is basically the same as your...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
It's a great idea. Sign me up.
That is, ORGANIZED RELIGION would be banned, right? People can still talk about whatever they want?
Is 'spiritualism' allowed?
Card tricks?
Magicians?
Where do we draw the line?
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
@prometheus You must not have heard of David Blaine...that stuff is REAL!
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
It's a great idea. Sign me up.
That is, ORGANIZED RELIGION would be banned, right? People can still talk about whatever they want?
Is 'spiritualism' allowed?
Card tricks?
Magicians?
Where do we draw the line?
Storm1752 replies on Apr 16, 2020:
@prometheus You must not have heard of David Blaine...that stuff is REAL!
The One Thing Missing From Your Sex Life? Bondage?
[refinery29.com]
EyesThatSmile comments on Apr 15, 2020:
It amazes me how many people Aren’t into bondage.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 15, 2020:
Until now, just never been curious.
EyesThatSmile comments on Apr 15, 2020:
It amazes me how many people Aren’t into bondage.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 15, 2020:
Until now, just never been curious.
The two biggest challenges that I have encountered in dating are women who smoke and women are too ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
I couldn't buy a date so can hardly afford being too picky, but a drunk smoker would be an absolute no.
(P.S. Notice how many responses from women. They love telling anyone who'll listen who they won't date and why.)
Storm1752 replies on Apr 15, 2020:
@BitFlipper I've been thinking of that myself, but my d*mn standards keep getting in the way.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
I couldn't buy a date so can hardly afford being too picky, but a drunk smoker would be an absolute no.
(P.S. Notice how many responses from women. They love telling anyone who'll listen who they won't date and why.)
Storm1752 replies on Apr 15, 2020:
@BitFlipper I've been thinking of that myself, but my d*mn standards keep getting in the way.
Is there a meaning to life and if there is, does it even matter?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
No. Living itself isn't good enough.
Is it for you?
Maybe some atheists feel that way. Or maybe they're just kidding themselves.
I've never gazed at my navel, btw.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 15, 2020:
@Surfpirate You'd have to explain your question, I'm afraid. How can I do ANYTHING outside of living?!? As a PART of living obvious questions arise as to the 'meaning of life,' don't they? It's a part of living for some people, including me. Nothing mysterious about it.
If in the process of asking these questions certain potential, tentative 'answers' occur to one, and that person finds others who have thought the same, associations may form; not because it's 'necessary,' but because it just happens.
Like this site.
As an agnostic, I'm always reading interesting things about the nature of consciousness, physics, the natural world, pre-Ice Age civilizations, an almost infinite number of things--not because I HAVE to, but because I'm curious. Simple as that.
Maybe you're confusing atheists and agnostics. I almost envy the former's absolute certainty about a number of basic things. I just can't do that.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
No. Living itself isn't good enough.
Is it for you?
Maybe some atheists feel that way. Or maybe they're just kidding themselves.
I've never gazed at my navel, btw.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 15, 2020:
@Surfpirate You'd have to explain your question, I'm afraid. How can I do ANYTHING outside of living?!? As a PART of living obvious questions arise as to the 'meaning of life,' don't they? It's a part of living for some people, including me. Nothing mysterious about it.
If in the process of asking these questions certain potential, tentative 'answers' occur to one, and that person finds others who have thought the same, associations may form; not because it's 'necessary,' but because it just happens.
Like this site.
As an agnostic, I'm always reading interesting things about the nature of consciousness, physics, the natural world, pre-Ice Age civilizations, an almost infinite number of things--not because I HAVE to, but because I'm curious. Simple as that.
Maybe you're confusing atheists and agnostics. I almost envy the former's absolute certainty about a number of basic things. I just can't do that.
What if ALL drugs were legal?
mtnhome comments on Apr 15, 2020:
I think those with addictive personalities would kill themselves off pretty quickly. I've been a supporter of this idea (eliminate recreational drug restrictions) for most of my life. Let them do what they want. The rest of us will be fine.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 15, 2020:
@Green_Chile_Type Just devise a legal, non-addictive 'heroin' and 'meth,' etc., which is actually GOOD for you and the problem would disappear.
The real problem is 'society' WANTS you to suffer as a result of drug use, because 'it' thinks there is something inherently wrong with artificially elevating one's mood unless it is officially a 'disorder' being treated by the sanctioned mental health industry.
mtnhome comments on Apr 15, 2020:
I think those with addictive personalities would kill themselves off pretty quickly. I've been a supporter of this idea (eliminate recreational drug restrictions) for most of my life. Let them do what they want. The rest of us will be fine.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 15, 2020:
@Green_Chile_Type Just devise a legal, non-addictive 'heroin' and 'meth,' etc., which is actually GOOD for you and the problem would disappear.
The real problem is 'society' WANTS you to suffer as a result of drug use, because 'it' thinks there is something inherently wrong with artificially elevating one's mood unless it is officially a 'disorder' being treated by the sanctioned mental health industry.
The two biggest challenges that I have encountered in dating are women who smoke and women are too ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
I couldn't buy a date so can hardly afford being too picky, but a drunk smoker would be an absolute no.
(P.S. Notice how many responses from women. They love telling anyone who'll listen who they won't date and why.)
Storm1752 replies on Apr 15, 2020:
@Cutiebeauty Ouch.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 15, 2020:
I couldn't buy a date so can hardly afford being too picky, but a drunk smoker would be an absolute no.
(P.S. Notice how many responses from women. They love telling anyone who'll listen who they won't date and why.)
Storm1752 replies on Apr 15, 2020:
@Cutiebeauty Ouch.
The two biggest challenges that I have encountered in dating are women who smoke and women are too ...
whiskywoman comments on Apr 15, 2020:
my requirements are simple hot and hung lol actually I guess its not so simple but I don't do old and I don't do average and I don't do assholes had plenty of those in my life I don't wanna a soul mate and I don't want to move in or have you move here
no liars is big for me if you lie ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 15, 2020:
Remind me to run the other way!
whiskywoman comments on Apr 15, 2020:
my requirements are simple hot and hung lol actually I guess its not so simple but I don't do old and I don't do average and I don't do assholes had plenty of those in my life I don't wanna a soul mate and I don't want to move in or have you move here
no liars is big for me if you lie ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 15, 2020:
Remind me to run the other way!
We may never un-do what Republican law makers are doing, and getting away with doing, during this ...
Mofo1953 comments on Apr 12, 2020:
GOTTA VOTE ALL OF THEM OUT! BLUE WAVE IN NOVEMBER!
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@Theresa_N Oh?
And you'd rather have Humpty Dumpty?
Hubert Humphrey was great, and would be PERFECT right now.
Biden will be fine.
FDR is not walking through the door any time soon.
Mofo1953 comments on Apr 12, 2020:
GOTTA VOTE ALL OF THEM OUT! BLUE WAVE IN NOVEMBER!
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@Theresa_N Oh?
And you'd rather have Humpty Dumpty?
Hubert Humphrey was great, and would be PERFECT right now.
Biden will be fine.
FDR is not walking through the door any time soon.
We may never un-do what Republican law makers are doing, and getting away with doing, during this ...
Buddha comments on Apr 12, 2020:
you're correct, our country will never be the same.
And, even if biden wins, he isn't sharp enough or committed to the progressive movement.
I have no faith in him.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
Baloney.
Biden will do fine if purists like you will actually vote for him.
Republicans left unchecked will lead this country to utter ruin.
Buddha comments on Apr 12, 2020:
you're correct, our country will never be the same.
And, even if biden wins, he isn't sharp enough or committed to the progressive movement.
I have no faith in him.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
Baloney.
Biden will do fine if purists like you will actually vote for him.
Republicans left unchecked will lead this country to utter ruin.
One might say that there is an air of intellectual superiority about enthusiastic libertarians, ...
davknight comments on Apr 12, 2020:
Libertine bourgeois are only slightly less stupid and greedy than Philistine bourgeois.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
Libertine: a man who ignores/flaunts moral principles.
Philistine: one who has no appreciation of culture and the arts.
Care to explain your statement?
davknight comments on Apr 12, 2020:
Libertine bourgeois are only slightly less stupid and greedy than Philistine bourgeois.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
Libertine: a man who ignores/flaunts moral principles.
Philistine: one who has no appreciation of culture and the arts.
Care to explain your statement?
One might say that there is an air of intellectual superiority about enthusiastic libertarians, ...
Allamanda comments on Apr 12, 2020:
Absolutely, and this in fact exactly what has happened in the social democratic countries, and must happen elsewhere if we're to survive at all. There has to be recognition of the value of life in general, the value of the quality of life for all, our place in the environment and our safety in the ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
Come again? "The economy is not an entity, it is an effect?"
It is a result of any number of political policy decisions by a ruling party, you mean? Hopefully tempered by the wishes of the minority party? Which hopefully reflect the will of the governed, but in the U.S. is not to a varying degree?
Allamanda comments on Apr 12, 2020:
Absolutely, and this in fact exactly what has happened in the social democratic countries, and must happen elsewhere if we're to survive at all. There has to be recognition of the value of life in general, the value of the quality of life for all, our place in the environment and our safety in the ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
Come again? "The economy is not an entity, it is an effect?"
It is a result of any number of political policy decisions by a ruling party, you mean? Hopefully tempered by the wishes of the minority party? Which hopefully reflect the will of the governed, but in the U.S. is not to a varying degree?
One might say that there is an air of intellectual superiority about enthusiastic libertarians, ...
DavidLaDeau comments on Apr 12, 2020:
The answer is in the party platform. I have been a card holding member of the Libertarian party. What you have written does not jive. The Libertarians are normally considered socially liberal and fiscially conservative. This means many do want the best of both worlds. It is a mistake to see them ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@Jetty Moderate conservatives? Liberal conservatives?
Let's just throw around labels like confetti!
Libertarians are ULTRA-conservative fiscally, ULTRA-liberal socially. It's wacky garbage! It's throwing up your hands and saying, "What the hell! Let's REALLY throw everything we got at the fan and see if anything sticks!"
Will somebody please get serious here?
Libertarians and socialists have WAY too little in common fiscally, and in general just because socialists are more liberal than conservatives (of course) it doesn't mean they want everybody to do whatever they want, no consequences.
It's ludicrous to even entertain the notion a Grand Compromise is even thinkable.
DavidLaDeau comments on Apr 12, 2020:
The answer is in the party platform. I have been a card holding member of the Libertarian party. What you have written does not jive. The Libertarians are normally considered socially liberal and fiscially conservative. This means many do want the best of both worlds. It is a mistake to see them ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@Jetty Moderate conservatives? Liberal conservatives?
Let's just throw around labels like confetti!
Libertarians are ULTRA-conservative fiscally, ULTRA-liberal socially. It's wacky garbage! It's throwing up your hands and saying, "What the hell! Let's REALLY throw everything we got at the fan and see if anything sticks!"
Will somebody please get serious here?
Libertarians and socialists have WAY too little in common fiscally, and in general just because socialists are more liberal than conservatives (of course) it doesn't mean they want everybody to do whatever they want, no consequences.
It's ludicrous to even entertain the notion a Grand Compromise is even thinkable.
One might say that there is an air of intellectual superiority about enthusiastic libertarians, ...
WilliamFleming comments on Apr 12, 2020:
Absolutely! Even China, a communist country, has its free market side. We should try not to attack each other because of opinions. Arguing is ok.
A combination that I like is state capitalism as it exists in Norway. Governments might acquire partial ownership of publicly owned corporations and ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
William, I sincerely doubt libertarians would approve of partial state ownership of ANYTHING. We're talking compromise, not capitulation, and libertarians are too bad-ass for that.
WilliamFleming comments on Apr 12, 2020:
Absolutely! Even China, a communist country, has its free market side. We should try not to attack each other because of opinions. Arguing is ok.
A combination that I like is state capitalism as it exists in Norway. Governments might acquire partial ownership of publicly owned corporations and ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
William, I sincerely doubt libertarians would approve of partial state ownership of ANYTHING. We're talking compromise, not capitulation, and libertarians are too bad-ass for that.
One might say that there is an air of intellectual superiority about enthusiastic libertarians, ...
beenthere comments on Apr 12, 2020:
So you are proposing a capitalist socialist society? How does that work?
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@david75090 Yes, but with certain RULES we buy, sell and trade. Libertarians want there to BE no rules...how's that grab you?
beenthere comments on Apr 12, 2020:
So you are proposing a capitalist socialist society? How does that work?
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@david75090 Yes, but with certain RULES we buy, sell and trade. Libertarians want there to BE no rules...how's that grab you?
One might say that there is an air of intellectual superiority about enthusiastic libertarians, ...
t1nick comments on Apr 12, 2020:
Libertarians have nothing to feel superior about. Their entire premise is based on flawed and specious grounds. And the type of people who are drawn to Libertarisnism have hidden agendas that have nothing to do with an economic philosophy.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@t1nick Great insight. Thanks.
t1nick comments on Apr 12, 2020:
Libertarians have nothing to feel superior about. Their entire premise is based on flawed and specious grounds. And the type of people who are drawn to Libertarisnism have hidden agendas that have nothing to do with an economic philosophy.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@t1nick Great insight. Thanks.
One might say that there is an air of intellectual superiority about enthusiastic libertarians, ...
Freespirit64 comments on Apr 12, 2020:
I always thought the idea of socialism was intellectually elevated.
Does it not take a certain level of maturity and intelligence to be able to rise above the "hooray for me and Fuck you" mindset?
I'm still in awe of people who insist on defending the very systems that screw them.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
Like gay Republicans?
They'd seem to be, or should be, a dying breed.
Freespirit64 comments on Apr 12, 2020:
I always thought the idea of socialism was intellectually elevated.
Does it not take a certain level of maturity and intelligence to be able to rise above the "hooray for me and Fuck you" mindset?
I'm still in awe of people who insist on defending the very systems that screw them.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
Like gay Republicans?
They'd seem to be, or should be, a dying breed.
I suppose that by now, just about everyone on the planet is aware of the COVID 19 Novel Coronavirus ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 10, 2020:
There are only TWO possible rational answers to this very common question:
1) 'God' doesn't exist, or
2) 'God' is not a personal entity, but an impersonal force.
The first answer is self-explanatory.
The second admits the circumstantial evidence does not allow for an individual, identifiable ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@maturin1919 We'll talk again. If I think of anything else to say maybe I'll be back for more.
Your mind is closed like a steel trap It's probably not your fault; maybe it's genetic? Overly-strict patents? Something else?
Anyway, hope we talk again.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 10, 2020:
There are only TWO possible rational answers to this very common question:
1) 'God' doesn't exist, or
2) 'God' is not a personal entity, but an impersonal force.
The first answer is self-explanatory.
The second admits the circumstantial evidence does not allow for an individual, identifiable ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@maturin1919 We'll talk again. If I think of anything else to say maybe I'll be back for more.
Your mind is closed like a steel trap It's probably not your fault; maybe it's genetic? Overly-strict patents? Something else?
Anyway, hope we talk again.
Do you think if someone, who has committed a heinous crime, should be given a chance for forgiveness...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 12, 2020:
Yes of course, they should be released.
They were high on drugs and being manipulated and pressured into it by a maniac.
The worst day of their lives was the day they met Charlie Manson.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@VeronikaAnnJ No, they're what, pushing 80? I sincerely doubt they'd do it again!
They were probably sorry the next day, never mind NOW!
Let 'em go.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 12, 2020:
Yes of course, they should be released.
They were high on drugs and being manipulated and pressured into it by a maniac.
The worst day of their lives was the day they met Charlie Manson.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@VeronikaAnnJ No, they're what, pushing 80? I sincerely doubt they'd do it again!
They were probably sorry the next day, never mind NOW!
Let 'em go.
As US Consigns Iranians to Death, Corporate Media Look the Other Way | FAIR
rogerbenham comments on Apr 9, 2020:
If only people would stop thinking other people are inferior or bad or nasty. Why, why, why can't people accept others as equals and their cultures as being no better, no worse than their own. Why does the USA hate so much of the world? Is it because it itself is a dying power lost in its greed? ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
Hate to tell you this but the Sufi mystics have about as much status as Jews in Iran these days.
rogerbenham comments on Apr 9, 2020:
If only people would stop thinking other people are inferior or bad or nasty. Why, why, why can't people accept others as equals and their cultures as being no better, no worse than their own. Why does the USA hate so much of the world? Is it because it itself is a dying power lost in its greed? ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
Hate to tell you this but the Sufi mystics have about as much status as Jews in Iran these days.
As US Consigns Iranians to Death, Corporate Media Look the Other Way | FAIR
DenoPenno comments on Apr 9, 2020:
This goes a bit deeper in that I was formerly able to watch Iranian news on their official English channel and now it seems that something is blocking that channel. It loads but is not watchable. Ignoring the certificate qualifications does not solve this problem. As this worldwide mess continues I ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
The Shah was better than the current regime but let's face it, we screwed them but good in 1953 when we deposed their democratically-elected government in the first place.
By doing so we really screwed ourselves.
DenoPenno comments on Apr 9, 2020:
This goes a bit deeper in that I was formerly able to watch Iranian news on their official English channel and now it seems that something is blocking that channel. It loads but is not watchable. Ignoring the certificate qualifications does not solve this problem. As this worldwide mess continues I ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
The Shah was better than the current regime but let's face it, we screwed them but good in 1953 when we deposed their democratically-elected government in the first place.
By doing so we really screwed ourselves.
As US Consigns Iranians to Death, Corporate Media Look the Other Way | FAIR
ArtemisDivine comments on Apr 9, 2020:
If Iran didn't want sanctions placed on them then they should have acquiesced to putting a stop to furthering their prohibited nuclear program. I don't think the sanctions on Iran are a major factor to the spread of covid 19. The Iranian government hasn't put their country on lockdown to slow the ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@ArtemisDivine You're joking of course.
ArtemisDivine comments on Apr 9, 2020:
If Iran didn't want sanctions placed on them then they should have acquiesced to putting a stop to furthering their prohibited nuclear program. I don't think the sanctions on Iran are a major factor to the spread of covid 19. The Iranian government hasn't put their country on lockdown to slow the ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@ArtemisDivine You're joking of course.
If we have it his way.
AnneWimsey comments on Apr 10, 2020:
Day after tomorrow! Happy Good Friday!
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
I prefer Sinful Saturday.
AnneWimsey comments on Apr 10, 2020:
Day after tomorrow! Happy Good Friday!
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
I prefer Sinful Saturday.
I suppose that by now, just about everyone on the planet is aware of the COVID 19 Novel Coronavirus ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 10, 2020:
There are only TWO possible rational answers to this very common question:
1) 'God' doesn't exist, or
2) 'God' is not a personal entity, but an impersonal force.
The first answer is self-explanatory.
The second admits the circumstantial evidence does not allow for an individual, identifiable ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@maturin1919 Except you read just enough to make an inane comment like, "either Looney or a good con man." It looks like now you know just enough to be WORSE than ignorant.
Read, There Is A River, and then tell me was either.
I'M saying regardless of where he got his information, it was not from a book and he didn't make it up...it was too detailed and esoteric for that. And largely accurate in his medical diagnoses and treatments. He helped a lot of people.
SOME people are truly psychic. He explains it (in a sleeping trance, of course) but it's still mysterious, although far from 'magic'...more like scientifically grounded.
He's one of the only reasons I'm an 'agnostic neo-deist' rather than an atheist.
But you believe what you want. The truth is the truth...it doesn't change based on someone's opinion.
Have a nice day.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 10, 2020:
There are only TWO possible rational answers to this very common question:
1) 'God' doesn't exist, or
2) 'God' is not a personal entity, but an impersonal force.
The first answer is self-explanatory.
The second admits the circumstantial evidence does not allow for an individual, identifiable ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 12, 2020:
@maturin1919 Except you read just enough to make an inane comment like, "either Looney or a good con man." It looks like now you know just enough to be WORSE than ignorant.
Read, There Is A River, and then tell me was either.
I'M saying regardless of where he got his information, it was not from a book and he didn't make it up...it was too detailed and esoteric for that. And largely accurate in his medical diagnoses and treatments. He helped a lot of people.
SOME people are truly psychic. He explains it (in a sleeping trance, of course) but it's still mysterious, although far from 'magic'...more like scientifically grounded.
He's one of the only reasons I'm an 'agnostic neo-deist' rather than an atheist.
But you believe what you want. The truth is the truth...it doesn't change based on someone's opinion.
Have a nice day.
It still amazes me that Americans who spend so much time and energy on politics do not understand ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 11, 2020:
The "youth" don't vote, usually, so it doesn't matter.
I can never get over this inference Biden has to "earn" their vote. Like Obama "earned" the black vote? Like Hillary "earned" the female vote?
Are they expecting Biden to become someone else to kiss up to them?
Voting is a right AND a ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@RoboGraham I checked: Right on student loans but he now is for LIMITED forgiveness; Right on mass incarceration, though much of that happened on the state level; unfair on civil rights--he was against forced busing, as were a lot of people including many blacks...he was hardly a "segregationist" and has a LOT of black support; unfair on cutting Medicare., Medicaid and Social Security, but right on Med4all; wrong on Iraq--a lot of misguided (for reasons I can't fathom) Democrats voted for that war, when it was obvious very early on no WMDs.
So yes, Bernie (or Warren, or several others) would've been better. I voted for him.
BUT the difference between a Biden administration and a continued Trump administration is still like night and day.
I'm a democratic socialist, but a middle-of-the road Democrat and the cabinet he'd assemble, the policies (in general) he'd pursue, the judges he'd appoint, the brake on rampant Pub criminality and unconstutional behavior he'd represent, the damping-down of evangelical-inspired reactionism, the quieting of the rabid gun lobby, etc., etc., would itself be worthy of my tempered support and some compromise of my purist principles.
Trump and his supporters are downright scary in a way even Bush couldn't match. On a whole different track, I think civil society is evolving rapidly and just needs to be left alone by these maniacs.
If Sanders runs as an Independent it'll doom Biden and I won't vote for him. But a lot of people will, which will be a disaster. Trump could very well win again anyway, which'll mean another four-year news blackout in my house. It'll also mean more retrograde slippage in the state of our society here and in our standing around the world.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 11, 2020:
The "youth" don't vote, usually, so it doesn't matter.
I can never get over this inference Biden has to "earn" their vote. Like Obama "earned" the black vote? Like Hillary "earned" the female vote?
Are they expecting Biden to become someone else to kiss up to them?
Voting is a right AND a ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@RoboGraham I checked: Right on student loans but he now is for LIMITED forgiveness; Right on mass incarceration, though much of that happened on the state level; unfair on civil rights--he was against forced busing, as were a lot of people including many blacks...he was hardly a "segregationist" and has a LOT of black support; unfair on cutting Medicare., Medicaid and Social Security, but right on Med4all; wrong on Iraq--a lot of misguided (for reasons I can't fathom) Democrats voted for that war, when it was obvious very early on no WMDs.
So yes, Bernie (or Warren, or several others) would've been better. I voted for him.
BUT the difference between a Biden administration and a continued Trump administration is still like night and day.
I'm a democratic socialist, but a middle-of-the road Democrat and the cabinet he'd assemble, the policies (in general) he'd pursue, the judges he'd appoint, the brake on rampant Pub criminality and unconstutional behavior he'd represent, the damping-down of evangelical-inspired reactionism, the quieting of the rabid gun lobby, etc., etc., would itself be worthy of my tempered support and some compromise of my purist principles.
Trump and his supporters are downright scary in a way even Bush couldn't match. On a whole different track, I think civil society is evolving rapidly and just needs to be left alone by these maniacs.
If Sanders runs as an Independent it'll doom Biden and I won't vote for him. But a lot of people will, which will be a disaster. Trump could very well win again anyway, which'll mean another four-year news blackout in my house. It'll also mean more retrograde slippage in the state of our society here and in our standing around the world.
I suppose that by now, just about everyone on the planet is aware of the COVID 19 Novel Coronavirus ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 10, 2020:
There are only TWO possible rational answers to this very common question:
1) 'God' doesn't exist, or
2) 'God' is not a personal entity, but an impersonal force.
The first answer is self-explanatory.
The second admits the circumstantial evidence does not allow for an individual, identifiable ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@maturin1919 Instead of making stuff up, why don't you tap out his name on your phone keyboard and actually read something about him yourself?
You're like a lot of atheists: you open and close with your conclusion, without research, fact-gathering, or any other information from any source whatsoever.
Therefore, it seems, your "conclusions" are based on nothing but pre-conceived notions, unsubstantiated assumptions, and uninformed conjecture.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 10, 2020:
There are only TWO possible rational answers to this very common question:
1) 'God' doesn't exist, or
2) 'God' is not a personal entity, but an impersonal force.
The first answer is self-explanatory.
The second admits the circumstantial evidence does not allow for an individual, identifiable ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@maturin1919 Instead of making stuff up, why don't you tap out his name on your phone keyboard and actually read something about him yourself?
You're like a lot of atheists: you open and close with your conclusion, without research, fact-gathering, or any other information from any source whatsoever.
Therefore, it seems, your "conclusions" are based on nothing but pre-conceived notions, unsubstantiated assumptions, and uninformed conjecture.
It still amazes me that Americans who spend so much time and energy on politics do not understand ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 11, 2020:
The "youth" don't vote, usually, so it doesn't matter.
I can never get over this inference Biden has to "earn" their vote. Like Obama "earned" the black vote? Like Hillary "earned" the female vote?
Are they expecting Biden to become someone else to kiss up to them?
Voting is a right AND a ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@RoboGraham Gore was progressive and he won. He was cheated out of it, Hillary was a poor candidate but she also won the popular vote.
Blacks turned out in historic numbers for Obama. He also benefitted from a deep unpopular war and a catastrophic recession.
ALL Democratic candidates favor the things Obama and Sanders favor. They are not unique.
ALL Democratic candidates favored the campaign finance laws in place at the time of Citizens United, which opened the floodgates to unlimited contributions; for the first time money was equated with free speech.
Except for first Ralph Nader (whose third-party candidacy sunk Gore into a dead heat with Bush, and the Florida Supreme Court fraudulently broke the tie) and now Sanders (who in 2016 ran strongly with white voters but poorly with blacks and other minorities), most Democrats were FORCED to accept contributions from wherever they could get them. Most contributions to Dems come from like-minded individuals and corporations, but some corporations give to both parties to maintain access. It does NOT mean they favor Dems equally, nor does it mean it affects Dems' positions on the issues or their actions once in office.
Even a cursory look at the relative actions of members of each party bears that out.
Look at Obamacare. NOT ONE SINGLE REPUBLICAN voted for it and obstructed it at every turn. EVERY Republican governor opposed it and refused to expand Medicaid.
Finally the Individual Mandate was defeated in court and a once-promsing reform was all but dead .
No difference?
What's wrong with you, Buddy?
You consider Joe Biden a "right-wing candidate?" I'm sorry, I refuse to believe you are really that misinformed.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 11, 2020:
The "youth" don't vote, usually, so it doesn't matter.
I can never get over this inference Biden has to "earn" their vote. Like Obama "earned" the black vote? Like Hillary "earned" the female vote?
Are they expecting Biden to become someone else to kiss up to them?
Voting is a right AND a ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@RoboGraham Gore was progressive and he won. He was cheated out of it, Hillary was a poor candidate but she also won the popular vote.
Blacks turned out in historic numbers for Obama. He also benefitted from a deep unpopular war and a catastrophic recession.
ALL Democratic candidates favor the things Obama and Sanders favor. They are not unique.
ALL Democratic candidates favored the campaign finance laws in place at the time of Citizens United, which opened the floodgates to unlimited contributions; for the first time money was equated with free speech.
Except for first Ralph Nader (whose third-party candidacy sunk Gore into a dead heat with Bush, and the Florida Supreme Court fraudulently broke the tie) and now Sanders (who in 2016 ran strongly with white voters but poorly with blacks and other minorities), most Democrats were FORCED to accept contributions from wherever they could get them. Most contributions to Dems come from like-minded individuals and corporations, but some corporations give to both parties to maintain access. It does NOT mean they favor Dems equally, nor does it mean it affects Dems' positions on the issues or their actions once in office.
Even a cursory look at the relative actions of members of each party bears that out.
Look at Obamacare. NOT ONE SINGLE REPUBLICAN voted for it and obstructed it at every turn. EVERY Republican governor opposed it and refused to expand Medicaid.
Finally the Individual Mandate was defeated in court and a once-promsing reform was all but dead .
No difference?
What's wrong with you, Buddy?
You consider Joe Biden a "right-wing candidate?" I'm sorry, I refuse to believe you are really that misinformed.
It still amazes me that Americans who spend so much time and energy on politics do not understand ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 11, 2020:
The "youth" don't vote, usually, so it doesn't matter.
I can never get over this inference Biden has to "earn" their vote. Like Obama "earned" the black vote? Like Hillary "earned" the female vote?
Are they expecting Biden to become someone else to kiss up to them?
Voting is a right AND a ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@TomMcGiverin The Dems were taken by surprise late 70s-early 80s, found themselves on the defensive, and were overwhelmed by anti-democratic people indifferent to the Constitution, the 'marketplace of ideas,' compromise, and respect for others' opinions and points of view.
These people are autocratic, and deeply contemptuous of others they consider inferior and in some cases sub-human.
It is a mistake to think they have only a different ideology.
It may even be a mistake to think they think they're 'good' and Dems are 'evil.'
I'm not sure they even care about such things.
They DO care about winning though, that's for sure.
Maybe it's REALLY, for them, all about money and what it can buy.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 11, 2020:
The "youth" don't vote, usually, so it doesn't matter.
I can never get over this inference Biden has to "earn" their vote. Like Obama "earned" the black vote? Like Hillary "earned" the female vote?
Are they expecting Biden to become someone else to kiss up to them?
Voting is a right AND a ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@TomMcGiverin The Dems were taken by surprise late 70s-early 80s, found themselves on the defensive, and were overwhelmed by anti-democratic people indifferent to the Constitution, the 'marketplace of ideas,' compromise, and respect for others' opinions and points of view.
These people are autocratic, and deeply contemptuous of others they consider inferior and in some cases sub-human.
It is a mistake to think they have only a different ideology.
It may even be a mistake to think they think they're 'good' and Dems are 'evil.'
I'm not sure they even care about such things.
They DO care about winning though, that's for sure.
Maybe it's REALLY, for them, all about money and what it can buy.
I suppose that by now, just about everyone on the planet is aware of the COVID 19 Novel Coronavirus ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 10, 2020:
There are only TWO possible rational answers to this very common question:
1) 'God' doesn't exist, or
2) 'God' is not a personal entity, but an impersonal force.
The first answer is self-explanatory.
The second admits the circumstantial evidence does not allow for an individual, identifiable ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@maturin1919 Check out Edgar Cayce.
Unless you're afraid it'll shake you out of your misinformed comfort level.
You may be ridiculously surprised.
On the other hand, perhaps you're just too content to care you don't know what you're talking about.
Faith healers? No clue, as I said.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 10, 2020:
There are only TWO possible rational answers to this very common question:
1) 'God' doesn't exist, or
2) 'God' is not a personal entity, but an impersonal force.
The first answer is self-explanatory.
The second admits the circumstantial evidence does not allow for an individual, identifiable ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@maturin1919 Check out Edgar Cayce.
Unless you're afraid it'll shake you out of your misinformed comfort level.
You may be ridiculously surprised.
On the other hand, perhaps you're just too content to care you don't know what you're talking about.
Faith healers? No clue, as I said.
It still amazes me that Americans who spend so much time and energy on politics do not understand ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 11, 2020:
The "youth" don't vote, usually, so it doesn't matter.
I can never get over this inference Biden has to "earn" their vote. Like Obama "earned" the black vote? Like Hillary "earned" the female vote?
Are they expecting Biden to become someone else to kiss up to them?
Voting is a right AND a ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@RoboGraham This century??? It's 2020. Obama won because of the BLACK vote.
No, it's fine, as I said.
If people want to stick with your attitude, and ToolGuy's, and TomMcGiverin's, and those like you who insist it's the Democrats' fault almost as much as the Pubs, that there's a rough moral equivalency between the two groups, that there IS no "vast right-wing conspiracy" poisoning the minds' of ordinary, working-class people, convincing them to vote against their own best interests, then fine.
If some people want to pretend the problem is Democratic candidates not accommodating spoiled, clueless non-voters enough, not progressive enough to rouse them from their principled inertness, rather than face the fact ultra-rich corporate oligarchs are pulling the strings and manipulating people like you, then fine.
If they won't listen to people like me and wake up to who their REAL enemies are, the truth will be forced on them by events as this downward spiral continues.
The rest of the world is not standing still, and eventually it'll pass us by if we continue to live in your fatalistic fantasy land.
For if what YOU all are saying was true--which it most certainly is not--we are doomed and there's no hope.
If that"s what you want us to believe, you're either trolls sowing seeds of discontent and division, or you're yourselves so deeply cynical about human nature your idea of a solution is some kind of anarchist, nihilistic chaos from which will spring some kind of 'rebirth.'
If, on the other hand, your hidden agenda is motivated by your opinion mankind is a virus to be killed off, it may be because your own lives are virulent sores, and so you have nothing constructive or useful to offer us.
Regardless of WHY you're spewing such vicious nonsense is beside the point, though.
The fact is you are, and you're wrong.
Dead. Wrong.
Sooner or later the would-be 'electorate' will shake themselves out of their complacency. I hope you're long gone by the time that happens
Storm1752 comments on Apr 11, 2020:
The "youth" don't vote, usually, so it doesn't matter.
I can never get over this inference Biden has to "earn" their vote. Like Obama "earned" the black vote? Like Hillary "earned" the female vote?
Are they expecting Biden to become someone else to kiss up to them?
Voting is a right AND a ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@RoboGraham This century??? It's 2020. Obama won because of the BLACK vote.
No, it's fine, as I said.
If people want to stick with your attitude, and ToolGuy's, and TomMcGiverin's, and those like you who insist it's the Democrats' fault almost as much as the Pubs, that there's a rough moral equivalency between the two groups, that there IS no "vast right-wing conspiracy" poisoning the minds' of ordinary, working-class people, convincing them to vote against their own best interests, then fine.
If some people want to pretend the problem is Democratic candidates not accommodating spoiled, clueless non-voters enough, not progressive enough to rouse them from their principled inertness, rather than face the fact ultra-rich corporate oligarchs are pulling the strings and manipulating people like you, then fine.
If they won't listen to people like me and wake up to who their REAL enemies are, the truth will be forced on them by events as this downward spiral continues.
The rest of the world is not standing still, and eventually it'll pass us by if we continue to live in your fatalistic fantasy land.
For if what YOU all are saying was true--which it most certainly is not--we are doomed and there's no hope.
If that"s what you want us to believe, you're either trolls sowing seeds of discontent and division, or you're yourselves so deeply cynical about human nature your idea of a solution is some kind of anarchist, nihilistic chaos from which will spring some kind of 'rebirth.'
If, on the other hand, your hidden agenda is motivated by your opinion mankind is a virus to be killed off, it may be because your own lives are virulent sores, and so you have nothing constructive or useful to offer us.
Regardless of WHY you're spewing such vicious nonsense is beside the point, though.
The fact is you are, and you're wrong.
Dead. Wrong.
Sooner or later the would-be 'electorate' will shake themselves out of their complacency. I hope you're long gone by the time that happens
States Introduce Bills to Ban Marriage Equality to Get It Back in Front of SCOTUS
Storm1752 comments on Apr 9, 2020:
THESE are the things we should be focused on, not the clown-in-chief.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@snytiger6 The Pub criminals didn't get their chosen candidate/president, so they took surprise winner Trump and fashioned him into a court jester for everyone to laugh at.
In the meantime, while everyone is throwing rotten tomatos at the buffoon, they work behind the scenes to transform a modern, progressive country into a grotesque cariacture of itself.
Case in point: undoing marriage equality.
Just one front in the raging war, one we now appear to be losing.
Hopefully temporary losses of ultimately inconsequential battles.
I happen to think so, but we'll see.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 9, 2020:
THESE are the things we should be focused on, not the clown-in-chief.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@snytiger6 The Pub criminals didn't get their chosen candidate/president, so they took surprise winner Trump and fashioned him into a court jester for everyone to laugh at.
In the meantime, while everyone is throwing rotten tomatos at the buffoon, they work behind the scenes to transform a modern, progressive country into a grotesque cariacture of itself.
Case in point: undoing marriage equality.
Just one front in the raging war, one we now appear to be losing.
Hopefully temporary losses of ultimately inconsequential battles.
I happen to think so, but we'll see.
What did you think about Abraham's response to God's little test reported in Genesis 22?
Storm1752 comments on Apr 9, 2020:
I'm sure you're employing satiric sarcasm to mock the Jews of that time period, not actually asking a serious question.
But okay, the rabbis and political leaders wanted unquestioned obedience from their people. And this obedience would be rewarded. After all, 'god' stopped him, right, and then ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@SandBKnox No, of course not.
Aside from the fact there is no Abrahamic-style god in the first place, if there WAS, 'he' wouldn't ask such a barbaric thing.
You know this, so ergo your question amounts to a legitimate mockery. The story is ridiculous and SHOULD be ridiculed.
It's existence points to an obvious ploy by religious and/or political leaders to manipulate their gullible tribe into obeying them no matter what they command, however inane, foolish or murderous.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 9, 2020:
I'm sure you're employing satiric sarcasm to mock the Jews of that time period, not actually asking a serious question.
But okay, the rabbis and political leaders wanted unquestioned obedience from their people. And this obedience would be rewarded. After all, 'god' stopped him, right, and then ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@SandBKnox No, of course not.
Aside from the fact there is no Abrahamic-style god in the first place, if there WAS, 'he' wouldn't ask such a barbaric thing.
You know this, so ergo your question amounts to a legitimate mockery. The story is ridiculous and SHOULD be ridiculed.
It's existence points to an obvious ploy by religious and/or political leaders to manipulate their gullible tribe into obeying them no matter what they command, however inane, foolish or murderous.
I suppose that by now, just about everyone on the planet is aware of the COVID 19 Novel Coronavirus ...
Marionville comments on Apr 10, 2020:
I don’t think you’ve posted this on the right site...we all agree with you that there is no god or deity that will protect against this virus. No argument, only agreement....so nothing to discuss!
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@Marionville Sorry. I re-read the original post and your response and of course you're right.
I differed with poster (and you) belief in ANY 'god' by ANY definition is therefore ludicrous.
No of course no 'god' is going to prevent or heal ANY malady.
God wouldn't be a person or something else person-al like that. Duh.
Nor anything to be worshipped or venerated. Give me a break.
What IS discussable is if there is ANY kind of 'god,' but that discussion goes on endlessly here. That's one of our main topics.
But that has nothing to do with the beer virus.
Marionville comments on Apr 10, 2020:
I don’t think you’ve posted this on the right site...we all agree with you that there is no god or deity that will protect against this virus. No argument, only agreement....so nothing to discuss!
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@Marionville Sorry. I re-read the original post and your response and of course you're right.
I differed with poster (and you) belief in ANY 'god' by ANY definition is therefore ludicrous.
No of course no 'god' is going to prevent or heal ANY malady.
God wouldn't be a person or something else person-al like that. Duh.
Nor anything to be worshipped or venerated. Give me a break.
What IS discussable is if there is ANY kind of 'god,' but that discussion goes on endlessly here. That's one of our main topics.
But that has nothing to do with the beer virus.
I suppose that by now, just about everyone on the planet is aware of the COVID 19 Novel Coronavirus ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 10, 2020:
There are only TWO possible rational answers to this very common question:
1) 'God' doesn't exist, or
2) 'God' is not a personal entity, but an impersonal force.
The first answer is self-explanatory.
The second admits the circumstantial evidence does not allow for an individual, identifiable ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@maturin1919 Not everyone who calls himself or herself a psychic IS one, obviously. Many psychics have said their gift cannot be used for personal gain.
I don't know much about faith healing, one way or the other, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are SOME real ones.
But I don't know.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 10, 2020:
There are only TWO possible rational answers to this very common question:
1) 'God' doesn't exist, or
2) 'God' is not a personal entity, but an impersonal force.
The first answer is self-explanatory.
The second admits the circumstantial evidence does not allow for an individual, identifiable ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@maturin1919 Not everyone who calls himself or herself a psychic IS one, obviously. Many psychics have said their gift cannot be used for personal gain.
I don't know much about faith healing, one way or the other, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are SOME real ones.
But I don't know.
I suppose that by now, just about everyone on the planet is aware of the COVID 19 Novel Coronavirus ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 10, 2020:
There are only TWO possible rational answers to this very common question:
1) 'God' doesn't exist, or
2) 'God' is not a personal entity, but an impersonal force.
The first answer is self-explanatory.
The second admits the circumstantial evidence does not allow for an individual, identifiable ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@maturin1919 Yes.
Precisely.
Because although there is plenty of fakery and "bullshit," as you so succinctly and delicately put it, when the subject is ESP, psychism, and many other phenomenon out of the ordinary, there is also much which is genuine.
It's unfortunate the pranksters exist, but they are a fact of life. They make it inevitable born naysayers, prone to deny whole categories of experience, will automatically say, "You see? The whole thing is Baloney." And many others will nod their heads sagely, safely store that subject under 'hoax' in their mental files, and move on.
Psychics-- Edgar Cayce, the most documented and respected psychic in history, was not infallible, but undeniably had access to information from an undetermined souce about which he otherwise knew nothing at all.
Crop Circles--public perception to the contrary, many cannot be explained away as two men with a shovel, rake, and kite string. Many proven genuine.
Reincarnation--endless scientifically-compiled case histories prove it is at the very least circumstantially proven.
Extraterrestials--well-documented by video footage, trustworthy eyewitness testimonials (commercial/military pilots, policemen/law enforcement, former governmental officials/scientists with first-hand knowledge, etc.), archeological evidence, etc.
Paranormal--video recordings and visials, instrument readouts, testimonials, etc.
In the digital age, more and more evidence is accumulating these and many other similar phenomena cannot be easily and blithely dismissed as obvious fakery. To the contrary, they are slowly but surely being proven to be plausibly, if not CERTAINLY, real.
Is this evidence of 'god?'
Of course not. Who knows the cause?
But, as we study and document these things, the causes and sources will possibly, eventually, be pinpointed, and so, depending on our definition of 'god,' we will come closer to an explanation, a definition, and an answer for previously unknown 'mysteries.'
Naysayers, scoffers, mockers, debunkers are understandably skeptical of all this. Some people are born that way, or have been jaded by upbringing or life experiences.
The first blow for many was discovering there is no Santa Claus (seriously); from there it wasn't much of a leap to question the cariacture of 'god' offered by gullible parents and other authority figures.
It was easy to apply this well-founded skepticism to ANYTHING even remotely related to elusive/unseen events not personally observed.
This does not mean such skepticism amounts to final and indisputable truth.
What it DOES mean is an open and inquiring mind is necessary to make the necessary distinctions and differentiate truth from fiction when it comes to a field riddled with such a huge amount of fraud, fakery and outright lies.
There is a ...
Storm1752 comments on Apr 10, 2020:
There are only TWO possible rational answers to this very common question:
1) 'God' doesn't exist, or
2) 'God' is not a personal entity, but an impersonal force.
The first answer is self-explanatory.
The second admits the circumstantial evidence does not allow for an individual, identifiable ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 11, 2020:
@maturin1919 Yes.
Precisely.
Because although there is plenty of fakery and "bullshit," as you so succinctly and delicately put it, when the subject is ESP, psychism, and many other phenomenon out of the ordinary, there is also much which is genuine.
It's unfortunate the pranksters exist, but they are a fact of life. They make it inevitable born naysayers, prone to deny whole categories of experience, will automatically say, "You see? The whole thing is Baloney." And many others will nod their heads sagely, safely store that subject under 'hoax' in their mental files, and move on.
Psychics-- Edgar Cayce, the most documented and respected psychic in history, was not infallible, but undeniably had access to information from an undetermined souce about which he otherwise knew nothing at all.
Crop Circles--public perception to the contrary, many cannot be explained away as two men with a shovel, rake, and kite string. Many proven genuine.
Reincarnation--endless scientifically-compiled case histories prove it is at the very least circumstantially proven.
Extraterrestials--well-documented by video footage, trustworthy eyewitness testimonials (commercial/military pilots, policemen/law enforcement, former governmental officials/scientists with first-hand knowledge, etc.), archeological evidence, etc.
Paranormal--video recordings and visials, instrument readouts, testimonials, etc.
In the digital age, more and more evidence is accumulating these and many other similar phenomena cannot be easily and blithely dismissed as obvious fakery. To the contrary, they are slowly but surely being proven to be plausibly, if not CERTAINLY, real.
Is this evidence of 'god?'
Of course not. Who knows the cause?
But, as we study and document these things, the causes and sources will possibly, eventually, be pinpointed, and so, depending on our definition of 'god,' we will come closer to an explanation, a definition, and an answer for previously unknown 'mysteries.'
Naysayers, scoffers, mockers, debunkers are understandably skeptical of all this. Some people are born that way, or have been jaded by upbringing or life experiences.
The first blow for many was discovering there is no Santa Claus (seriously); from there it wasn't much of a leap to question the cariacture of 'god' offered by gullible parents and other authority figures.
It was easy to apply this well-founded skepticism to ANYTHING even remotely related to elusive/unseen events not personally observed.
This does not mean such skepticism amounts to final and indisputable truth.
What it DOES mean is an open and inquiring mind is necessary to make the necessary distinctions and differentiate truth from fiction when it comes to a field riddled with such a huge amount of fraud, fakery and outright lies.
There is a ...
I suppose that by now, just about everyone on the planet is aware of the COVID 19 Novel Coronavirus ...
p-nullifidian comments on Apr 10, 2020:
Well stated! Worship of any kind is intolerable. Do I as a father want my children to worship me? Perish the thought! It has been said that God is as far above us as we are above a common bug. Of what possible use would worship by a lowly bug be to a deity? It's high time the world raise their ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 10, 2020:
If 'god' is a THING, it wouldn't be worshipped any more than a beam of light or anything else.
If it WERE an entity, I certainly--based on 'his' track record--wouldn't be kneeling!
p-nullifidian comments on Apr 10, 2020:
Well stated! Worship of any kind is intolerable. Do I as a father want my children to worship me? Perish the thought! It has been said that God is as far above us as we are above a common bug. Of what possible use would worship by a lowly bug be to a deity? It's high time the world raise their ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 10, 2020:
If 'god' is a THING, it wouldn't be worshipped any more than a beam of light or anything else.
If it WERE an entity, I certainly--based on 'his' track record--wouldn't be kneeling!
I suppose that by now, just about everyone on the planet is aware of the COVID 19 Novel Coronavirus ...
Marionville comments on Apr 10, 2020:
I don’t think you’ve posted this on the right site...we all agree with you that there is no god or deity that will protect against this virus. No argument, only agreement....so nothing to discuss!
Storm1752 replies on Apr 10, 2020:
I don't agree with your premise
Marionville comments on Apr 10, 2020:
I don’t think you’ve posted this on the right site...we all agree with you that there is no god or deity that will protect against this virus. No argument, only agreement....so nothing to discuss!
Storm1752 replies on Apr 10, 2020:
I don't agree with your premise
Today was Reap the Rewards of Eight years' Worth of Drinking.
Jolanta comments on Apr 9, 2020:
Maybe, just maybe AA is for you 😂
Storm1752 replies on Apr 10, 2020:
AA sucks. Not necessary.
It's a religious cult.
Jolanta comments on Apr 9, 2020:
Maybe, just maybe AA is for you 😂
Storm1752 replies on Apr 10, 2020:
AA sucks. Not necessary.
It's a religious cult.
Today was Reap the Rewards of Eight years' Worth of Drinking.
JohnnyQB comments on Apr 9, 2020:
And to think, I don't even drink... I feel like I am missing out.. ;)
Storm1752 replies on Apr 10, 2020:
Don't fret. Alcohol killed my girlfriend and lots of other people I've known.
Way overrated, especially considering the cost, hangovers, health fallout, etc.
Better off without it.
WAY better.
JohnnyQB comments on Apr 9, 2020:
And to think, I don't even drink... I feel like I am missing out.. ;)
Storm1752 replies on Apr 10, 2020:
Don't fret. Alcohol killed my girlfriend and lots of other people I've known.
Way overrated, especially considering the cost, hangovers, health fallout, etc.
Better off without it.
WAY better.
Today was Reap the Rewards of Eight years' Worth of Drinking.
creative51 comments on Apr 9, 2020:
Pot beats the hell out of alcohol any day of the week. Been toking since 1970, take my word for it.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 10, 2020:
@creative51 Yeah, right.
creative51 comments on Apr 9, 2020:
Pot beats the hell out of alcohol any day of the week. Been toking since 1970, take my word for it.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 10, 2020:
@creative51 Yeah, right.
Humans are NOT the end result of the evolutionary process.
[youtube.com]
t1nick comments on Apr 9, 2020:
Duh, it would be anthropocentric to think we are the final step in evolutionary complexity, or that we are even important in scheme of things. Except for the damage we cause to the planet. Sort of like a planetary virus, we are. Hmmm.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 9, 2020:
I wouldn't say that.
There are greater and lesser people than you or I. The world is full of criminal trickery, but also full of heroism.
Sure there's a negative side to life, and to us as human beings, but there is also a very positive side.
Sometimes I think some people confuse negativity with wisdom, as if anyone who recognizes the good things about us are Pollyannas wearing rose-colored glasses.
I tend to think negativity, and casting things in the worst possible light, CAN be an alarm, a prod, to point out bad behavior and to goad others toward improved actions.
But just being negative because one is unhappy with oneself and his or her life, or with life in general, is like screeching ones fingernails across the surface of a blackboard...disturbing and unpleasant but only succeeding in annoying others like a misbehaving child annoys adults.
It's bitterness for it's own sake, throwing a temper tantrum because one has simply given up, an unproductive waste of time.
I think mankind has developed light years in a very short time, and IF we can make it through and tip things in the right direction, we will enter an incomparably better era.
It seems things are getting better and worse in equal measure, simultaneously, and the two 'forces,' toward dissolution and solution, will at some point meet and there will be a resolution one way or the other.
That's the way I've always thought of it, and I've also always thought an individual can affect that outcome in his or her small way not by being giddily optimistic or morosely downbeat, but by keeping a balanced perspective.
If we pass this test, I think and hope, our evolution can continue.
This can only be a good thing.
t1nick comments on Apr 9, 2020:
Duh, it would be anthropocentric to think we are the final step in evolutionary complexity, or that we are even important in scheme of things. Except for the damage we cause to the planet. Sort of like a planetary virus, we are. Hmmm.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 9, 2020:
I wouldn't say that.
There are greater and lesser people than you or I. The world is full of criminal trickery, but also full of heroism.
Sure there's a negative side to life, and to us as human beings, but there is also a very positive side.
Sometimes I think some people confuse negativity with wisdom, as if anyone who recognizes the good things about us are Pollyannas wearing rose-colored glasses.
I tend to think negativity, and casting things in the worst possible light, CAN be an alarm, a prod, to point out bad behavior and to goad others toward improved actions.
But just being negative because one is unhappy with oneself and his or her life, or with life in general, is like screeching ones fingernails across the surface of a blackboard...disturbing and unpleasant but only succeeding in annoying others like a misbehaving child annoys adults.
It's bitterness for it's own sake, throwing a temper tantrum because one has simply given up, an unproductive waste of time.
I think mankind has developed light years in a very short time, and IF we can make it through and tip things in the right direction, we will enter an incomparably better era.
It seems things are getting better and worse in equal measure, simultaneously, and the two 'forces,' toward dissolution and solution, will at some point meet and there will be a resolution one way or the other.
That's the way I've always thought of it, and I've also always thought an individual can affect that outcome in his or her small way not by being giddily optimistic or morosely downbeat, but by keeping a balanced perspective.
If we pass this test, I think and hope, our evolution can continue.
This can only be a good thing.
Like I said, by picking Biden, Democrats are kissing their future goodbye.
[yahoo.com]
nicknotes comments on Apr 9, 2020:
Maybe we need Governor Newsom of California as a dark horse candidate.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 9, 2020:
Brokered convention?
Wouldn't THAT be nice?
nicknotes comments on Apr 9, 2020:
Maybe we need Governor Newsom of California as a dark horse candidate.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 9, 2020:
Brokered convention?
Wouldn't THAT be nice?
Looking at some of my post.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 8, 2020:
You MUST have offended me at some point, but I went back over some of your comments and posts and see nothing at all to object to.
That in itself makes me think you're harboring some extremely dangerous thoughts, and are over- compensating by being bland and non-controversial.
I would seek help ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 8, 2020:
@HankSherman I rest my case.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 8, 2020:
You MUST have offended me at some point, but I went back over some of your comments and posts and see nothing at all to object to.
That in itself makes me think you're harboring some extremely dangerous thoughts, and are over- compensating by being bland and non-controversial.
I would seek help ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 8, 2020:
@HankSherman I rest my case.
What is your opinion of private citizens owning firearms.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 7, 2020:
I realize it's a constitutional right, so there's only so much which can be done,
even less we're actually going to do, thanks to the NRA and the gun industry.
That's just the way it is, unless people vote in other politicians. Will that happen?
Eventually, yes.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 8, 2020:
@RoboGraham If it WASN'T a constitutional right? Ban them except for:
Hunters,
Homeowners,
Members of militias,
Gun enthusiasts,
Everybody else.
Exceptions:
Mentally unstable people,
Criminals.
The same as I'd do now.
As usual, liberals/progressives have it about right.
Pubs want NO restrictions whatsoever, which WOULD be about right in their libertarian, anarchist, Objectivist fantasy world.
Storm1752 comments on Apr 7, 2020:
I realize it's a constitutional right, so there's only so much which can be done,
even less we're actually going to do, thanks to the NRA and the gun industry.
That's just the way it is, unless people vote in other politicians. Will that happen?
Eventually, yes.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 8, 2020:
@RoboGraham If it WASN'T a constitutional right? Ban them except for:
Hunters,
Homeowners,
Members of militias,
Gun enthusiasts,
Everybody else.
Exceptions:
Mentally unstable people,
Criminals.
The same as I'd do now.
As usual, liberals/progressives have it about right.
Pubs want NO restrictions whatsoever, which WOULD be about right in their libertarian, anarchist, Objectivist fantasy world.
Taking a wider view, it's clear that different cultures at different times invent whatever gods they...
CommunityTom comments on Apr 7, 2020:
I think Islam and atheism will grow while Christianity's numbers and influence will decrease.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
Islam is just as doomed as Christianity.
But Agnosticism is already gaining steam. From it a new paradigm will emerge.
Atheism is a dead end.
Just my opinion.
CommunityTom comments on Apr 7, 2020:
I think Islam and atheism will grow while Christianity's numbers and influence will decrease.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
Islam is just as doomed as Christianity.
But Agnosticism is already gaining steam. From it a new paradigm will emerge.
Atheism is a dead end.
Just my opinion.
Taking a wider view, it's clear that different cultures at different times invent whatever gods they...
Mofo1953 comments on Apr 7, 2020:
Religions will eventually disappear as science knowledge grows.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
@itsmedammit Panpsychism is interesting...
Mofo1953 comments on Apr 7, 2020:
Religions will eventually disappear as science knowledge grows.
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
@itsmedammit Panpsychism is interesting...
Taking a wider view, it's clear that different cultures at different times invent whatever gods they...
Jk1960 comments on Apr 7, 2020:
now that would be cool a bunch of atheists develop a new religion. I’m game
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
Too bad Scientologists got to that name first!
Jk1960 comments on Apr 7, 2020:
now that would be cool a bunch of atheists develop a new religion. I’m game
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
Too bad Scientologists got to that name first!
Taking a wider view, it's clear that different cultures at different times invent whatever gods they...
Larry-new comments on Apr 7, 2020:
The greatest scam ever perpetrated upon the human race.
We will know that progress has been made when unbelievers stop being obsessed with talking about it.
Kind of like Trump haters, talking about nothing but.....DID YOU SEE WHAT HE SAID TODAY????? Got news for them...Trump loves it, because ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
How true.
Trump is just a distraction, designed to lure our eyes and ears away from the real problems.
While we shake our heads at his latest outrage, the people he appointed are busy dismantling, eviscerating and castrating our government, so the super-rich can get even more obscenely wealthy, and our lives become even more unlivable.
It'll be over soon, though.
Larry-new comments on Apr 7, 2020:
The greatest scam ever perpetrated upon the human race.
We will know that progress has been made when unbelievers stop being obsessed with talking about it.
Kind of like Trump haters, talking about nothing but.....DID YOU SEE WHAT HE SAID TODAY????? Got news for them...Trump loves it, because ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
How true.
Trump is just a distraction, designed to lure our eyes and ears away from the real problems.
While we shake our heads at his latest outrage, the people he appointed are busy dismantling, eviscerating and castrating our government, so the super-rich can get even more obscenely wealthy, and our lives become even more unlivable.
It'll be over soon, though.
Here’s my conundrum about Easter and Passover.
Jk1960 comments on Apr 7, 2020:
Jesus was a doomsday promoter that pissed the Romans off and they killed him as they did 100’s of others. No big deal. It then took about 350 years and a meeting arranged by the Roman emperor with church leaders to actually make him a deity. It’s all BS. It all goes back to money and power....
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
Wrong.
'Jesus' wasn't killed by the Romans because he was made up BY the Romans as a more palatable, pliant substitute for Jewish zealotry.
The Romans wrote the myth up so the JEWS were blamed for 'his' fictitious death, not them.
Jk1960 comments on Apr 7, 2020:
Jesus was a doomsday promoter that pissed the Romans off and they killed him as they did 100’s of others. No big deal. It then took about 350 years and a meeting arranged by the Roman emperor with church leaders to actually make him a deity. It’s all BS. It all goes back to money and power....
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
Wrong.
'Jesus' wasn't killed by the Romans because he was made up BY the Romans as a more palatable, pliant substitute for Jewish zealotry.
The Romans wrote the myth up so the JEWS were blamed for 'his' fictitious death, not them.
Here’s my conundrum about Easter and Passover.
echosam comments on Apr 7, 2020:
How can it be the 100% accurate, inerrant word of God if they didn't even get the guy's name right.
Judaism records that a man, Rabbi Jeshua, existed, he was crucified, and his followers started a religion called "Nazerine Judaism" after his death. They agree that Christianity is an offshoot of ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
Jesus (the myth, not the name) was an invention of the Romans.
Your entire spiel is, therefore, in error
echosam comments on Apr 7, 2020:
How can it be the 100% accurate, inerrant word of God if they didn't even get the guy's name right.
Judaism records that a man, Rabbi Jeshua, existed, he was crucified, and his followers started a religion called "Nazerine Judaism" after his death. They agree that Christianity is an offshoot of ...
Storm1752 replies on Apr 7, 2020:
Jesus (the myth, not the name) was an invention of the Romans.
Your entire spiel is, therefore, in error
Photos
Details
Agnostic, Humanist, Secularist, Skeptic, Freethinker
Open to meeting women - BirthdayNovember 17
- Interested InFriends
- EnjoysMovies, Food, Music, Science, Books, Outdoors, Sports, Art, Love, Sex, Theater, Travel
- EducationGrad School
- Top tags#god #agnostic #atheism #republicans #world #religion #DonaldTrump #Atheist #vote #government #reason #hope #democrats #Jesus #truth #sex #religious #hell #belief #laws
- Level8 (69,676pts)
- Followers 21
- Fans 0
- Following 30
- Fav. Posts 2
- Referrals1
- Joined Jul 19th, 2018
-
Last Visit
Over a year ago
Not in search results
Storm1752's Groups
Common Ground
55 members, Host
Topic of the day
94621 members
Just for Laughs
3330 members
Memes R Us
3037 members
FreeThinkers
2692 members
Quotes
2155 members
Introverts Unite!
2015 members
Out Of The Illusion
1736 members
50s +
1671 members
Singles/Mingle/Chat
1653 members
Music Fans
1282 members
Trump Pinata
1141 members
Human Sexuality: Everything About It
1017 members
Sexy Classy Pics
773 members
Sex, Drugs, Rock and Roll
641 members
Mental Health Support
631 members
Music of the Movies
510 members
Uncommon words and their meanings.
505 members
Movie Lovers
475 members
Florida Freethinkers
444 members
Science, Health & History Tidbits
419 members
CLASSIC ROCK RULES
391 members
Dating for Real People
370 members
Liberal/Progressive Party
303 members
P.A.T.C.H. People Against The Christian Hypocrites
294 members
Jokes and humor about religion
282 members
SapioSexuals
249 members
36 Questions
247 members
The Best of Late Night & News
202 members
Simple Thoughts
194 members
Non-nude sexy pics
190 members
Sun Moon Stars
150 members
Biden 2020
140 members
American Humanists Association
136 members
Dharma Café
133 members
EROTICA/EROTIC STORIES
122 members
L7new
103 members
Religious Naturalism
95 members
All Things Asia
82 members
Feminist Atheists
44 members
Illogical atheists guide for ending Christianity
38 members
Ask Males ANYthing
37 members
Origins of Heaven and Hell
33 members
Elon Musk
30 members
UAPs, UFOs, USOs and 1st Contact
29 members
Consortium of thoughts
20 members
Broken Hearts Club
18 members
Taboo Island Atlantis
15 members
Community Senate
381 members