Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, bolverk said:

 

 

These are people who manipulate their religion to match their politics when they should be modifying their politics to match their religion. Christianity teaches we are ALL God's children. It's a message of inclusion, sharing the message of love for one another, treating your neighbor as you would treat yourself. And yet their politics preach exclusion, which also happens to run counter to the foundational notion of this nation: ALL are equal. 

How the fuck do you reconcile that your core belief, excluding icky others, runs counter to both your religion and your republic?

I strive to be like this every damn day and I know I fall short but wake up the next vowing to be better and more Christlike. But we are all sinners hence why we believe he died for our sins. I fail all the time. The idea is I have to keep evolving and being better nicer more inclusive and understanding while still knowing the difference between right and wrong. Killing someone is wrong. Cheering on someone’s death is wrong. Celebrating someone’s demise is wrong. Except at a lake man. I am sure there is a Bible passage somewhere that supports this.

 

what you said resonates with me every damn day. I try and fail but I keep trying to be more like Jesus. I’m down with JC. Man. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

I want her to be given a chance to lead.

Girliepop, Christian nationalists don't let women sit at the head of the table. Not in any real sense. 

Edited by safe sex
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

I agree with your post. She might, too. The truth will out.

It's 2025.  Assume the absolute worst of people.  You will very rarely be incorrect.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

I strive to be like this every damn day and I know I fall short but wake up the next vowing to be better and more Christlike. But we are all sinners hence why we believe he died for our sins. I fail all the time. The idea is I have to keep evolving and being better nicer more inclusive and understanding while still knowing the difference between right and wrong. Killing someone is wrong. Cheering on someone’s death is wrong. Celebrating someone’s demise is wrong. Except at a lake man. I am sure there is a Bible passage somewhere that supports this.

 

what you said resonates with me every damn day. I try and fail but I keep trying to be more like Jesus. I’m down with JC. Man. 

 

That's all cool, Nicole. Personally, I can't call myself a Christian because I don't believe in any of the superstitious stuff, like a literal God, miracles, being raised from the dead, and all that jazz. Feels too much like magical thinking. Sorry, I'm a rationalist in that way.

That said, I do consider myself a "philosophical Christian," a term I just made up in my head that may or may not exist. The core message is easy as shit to get behind: love God (I substitute that with Nature, or if you prefer, the Creation or Universe or maybe just the Big Bang, the Multiverse) and love your fellow human, which I will admit is becoming increasingly difficult. At the very least, I strive not to actively harm, hate, or exclude others based solely on immutable and defining characteristics.

The Golden Rule. It's really, really basic stuff that only toddlers should struggle to understand. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, bolverk said:

 

That's all cool, Nicole. Personally, I can't call myself a Christian because I don't believe in any of the superstitious stuff, like a literal God, miracles, being raised from the dead, and all that jazz. Feels too much like magical thinking. Sorry, I'm a rationalist in that way.

That said, I do consider myself a "philosophical Christian," a term I just made up in my head that may or may not exist. The core message is easy as shit to get behind: love God (I substitute that with Nature, or if you prefer, the Creation or Universe or maybe just the Big Bang, the Multiverse) and love your fellow human, which I will admit is becoming increasingly difficult. At the very least, I strive not to actively harm, hate, or exclude others based solely on immutable and defining characteristics.

The Golden Rule. It's really, really basic stuff that only toddlers should struggle to understand. 

I'm with you in that I don't believe the supernatural/superstitious stuff. I think we go somewhere when we leave this existence on Earth. But I'm also aware this might be all we've got so let's make the most of it and try to be the best we can to everybody else to make this existence as fulfilling as we can.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Posted
On 9/19/2025 at 4:06 PM, Willfully Horn said:

Leo can, and should already have, reassign(ed) the ultra conservative bishops in this country, and name bishops that reflect the rhetoric Leo is preaching.

Timothy Dolan is very conservative, and I would love to see Leo remove him from New York. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

It's 2025.  Assume the absolute worst of people.  You will very rarely be incorrect.

I’ve been doing that much longer than this year.  Rarely Incorrect.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
Just now, C-Man said:

I'm with you in that I don't believe the supernatural/superstitious stuff. I think we go somewhere when we leave this existence on Earth. But I'm also aware this might be all we've got so let's make the most of it and try to be the best we can to everybody else to make this existence as fulfilling as we can.

Point I Approve GIF by Ford

  • Like 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, bolverk said:

 

That's all cool, Nicole. Personally, I can't call myself a Christian because I don't believe in any of the superstitious stuff, like a literal God, miracles, being raised from the dead, and all that jazz. Feels too much like magical thinking. Sorry, I'm a rationalist in that way.

That said, I do consider myself a "philosophical Christian," a term I just made up in my head that may or may not exist. The core message is easy as shit to get behind: love God (I substitute that with Nature, or if you prefer, the Creation or Universe or maybe just the Big Bang, the Multiverse) and love your fellow human, which I will admit is becoming increasingly difficult. At the very least, I strive not to actively harm, hate, or exclude others based solely on immutable and defining characteristics.

The Golden Rule. It's really, really basic stuff that only toddlers should struggle to understand. 

Again, I agree with your post. It aligns with my own beliefs. Apparently, I am a liberal Quaker.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 1
Posted
13 hours ago, Vegas64 said:

I watched the memorial; it really was a beautiful send off and the wife Erica especially was really moving in her strength and forgiveness. Say what you will, but I do believe they try/tried to be Christians to the best that they knew how or were taught and thought was the right way. At least that's what my take away was.

You do not say what Charlie Kirk said about women, women of color, LGBTQ+, Muslims, etc... if you are a real Christian.  A Christian Nationalist, sure.  But not a real, old school, Christian.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Nicole44 said:

Here is the article from the NYT. On Erika. I don’t think it’s behind a paywall. But I could also find the author and invite them to Rainey…

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/21/us/politics/erika-kirk.html

 

48 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

This is my concern dude. I want her to be given a chance to lead. Politically everyone is notating the overwhelming response to his death. And the number of requests for chapters. It’s foolish I guess to assume or want to have hope that the powers that be on both sides will truly ever allow my sex to lead jackshit, 

 

this is why I have to blow off steam at the lake, ya know? I’m sure everyone can understand 😂 

 

Celebrate In Love GIF by HBO Max

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Posted
7 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Handmaids Tale Serena Joy Waterford GIF by HULU

Had to stop watching the show after like season four (maybe? I don't remember exactly, but it was just too much), so I don't know the full context of this gif but I hope it means this bitch got what was coming to her. 

Posted
52 minutes ago, Doug A said:

and if there is no JC, where are you left?

Following the teachings of Christ and loving one’s neighbor isn’t a colossal waste of my time on earth. Like Ten Commandments type of stuff but with kindness and inclusiveness and love for everyone as much as possible. I believe I have faith. But what if it’s all true. Real. Most historians concede Jesus existed. Many religions say he did. Just that he was not supernatural nor the Son of God. Or God walking the earth in the flesh. I’d rather believe that all of this leads to heaven. And I see evidence of God and love every day. If it’s all bullshit then I’m dead and that’s the end. I lose far more imo if I choose not to believe. If it’s all true people are going to be bargaining like mother fuckers at the end. I guess? 

  • Like 1
Posted
41 minutes ago, C-Man said:

I'm with you in that I don't believe the supernatural/superstitious stuff. I think we go somewhere when we leave this existence on Earth. But I'm also aware this might be all we've got so let's make the most of it and try to be the best we can to everybody else to make this existence as fulfilling as we can.

Confused James Franco GIF

  • Haha 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

Following the teachings of Christ and loving one’s neighbor isn’t a colossal waste of my time on earth. Like Ten Commandments type of stuff but with kindness and inclusiveness and love for everyone as much as possible. I believe I have faith. But what if it’s all true. Real. Most historians concede Jesus existed. Many religions say he did. Just that he was not supernatural nor the Son of God. Or God walking the earth in the flesh. I’d rather believe that all of this leads to heaven. And I see evidence of God and love every day. If it’s all bullshit then I’m dead and that’s the end. I lose far more imo if I choose not to believe. If it’s all true people are going to be bargaining like mother fuckers at the end. I guess? 

There's a term for this:  Pascal's Wager.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

There's a term for this:  Pascal's Wager.  

Yes. I also saw evidence of God when my aunt passed and we were all in the room with her. I saw it. I cannot unsee it. It completely altered how I see stuff. That and being sober since 2022. I look at my posts when I used to drink and I’m like “wow send me straight to hell.” 
 

I was watching the 24 hour CBS station and a few others after the memorial ended and reporters were asking the people leaving what they thought of Erika forgiving her husband’s killer. The predominant answer was “well she’s a better person than me,” if her decision especially if sincere to do this impacts like even just one person or 50 out of a crowd and continues to impact more then damn. That’s a good thing. For all of us, Jmo. 

Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

Following the teachings of Christ and loving one’s neighbor isn’t a colossal waste of my time on earth. Like Ten Commandments type of stuff but with kindness and inclusiveness and love for everyone as much as possible. I believe I have faith. But what if it’s all true. Real. Most historians concede Jesus existed. Many religions say he did. Just that he was not supernatural nor the Son of God. Or God walking the earth in the flesh. I’d rather believe that all of this leads to heaven. And I see evidence of God and love every day. If it’s all bullshit then I’m dead and that’s the end. I lose far more imo if I choose not to believe. If it’s all true people are going to be bargaining like mother fuckers at the end. I guess? 

If I live a good life and am good to those around me simply because I want to be--not out of fear of not making it to heaven--and it turns out that there is a God and heaven, and he denies me entry because, while I was a good and decent person, I didn't believe in him hard enough...then that needy, insecure bitch can get fucked. I'll take my chances with the devil.

Edited by aggie08
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
  • Rage+1 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Confused James Franco GIF

 

There's a contradiction there, for sure. Personally, I don't know if I subscribe to it. Still, I could see someone latching onto an idea floating out there that I've seen that consciousness = information = data = energy, while also keeping in mind the law of conservation of energy. Where does all that energy in our bodies go when the body expires? It's an interesting idea that I haven't delved into studying the matter.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Nicole44 said:

This is my concern dude. I want her to be given a chance to lead. Politically everyone is notating the overwhelming response to his death. And the number of requests for chapters. It’s foolish I guess to assume or want to have hope that the powers that be on both sides will truly ever allow my sex to lead jackshit, 

 

this is why I have to blow off steam at the lake, ya know? I’m sure everyone can understand 😂 

It's annoying always having to push back on "both sides," but here we are again. The Democratic party has twice in the last three presidential elections nominated a woman to lead. The guy in between selected a woman as his vice president. Both of those women lost handily in elections in which sexism was rampant and blatant. Your ire should be directed to the other party who injected blatant sexism into their campaigns and the American people who voted in large numbers in support of that sexism. The result is that the Democratic party cannot nominate another woman for the foreseeable future, it would be political malpractice to do so at this point, not because they don't trust women to lead, they've twice now proven otherwise, but because of American politics in which the majority have spoken and said they will refuse to elect a woman.  

Edit to add that the Democrats had Nancy Peolisi pulling a lot of strings for a long time. Three of the four women on SCOTUS were from Democrat administrations. Saying that neither side will truly allow women to lead is asinine.

Edit again that I just realized this is DT but my post is a response about political "sides" that I felt merited a response.

Edited by 'stache
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Rage+1 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

If I live a good life and am good to those around me simply because I want to be--not out of fear of not making it to heaven--and it turns out that there is a God and heaven, and he denies me entry because, while I was a good and decent person, I didn't believe in him hard enough...then that needy, insecure bitch can get fucked. I'll take my chances with the devil.

 

giphy.gif

Posted
53 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

I was watching the 24 hour CBS station and a few others after the memorial ended and reporters were asking the people leaving what they thought of Erika forgiving her husband’s killer. The predominant answer was “well she’s a better person than me,” if her decision especially if sincere to do this impacts like even just one person or 50 out of a crowd and continues to impact more then damn. That’s a good thing. For all of us, Jmo. 

The problem with that is you can’t ignore the guy who spoke after her who loudly contradicted that message. 77 million people voted for that message, not the message of Mrs. Kirk.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

It's annoying always having to push back on "both sides," but here we are again. The Democratic party has twice in the last three presidential elections nominated a woman to lead. The guy in between selected a woman as his vice president. Both of those women lost handily in elections in which sexism was rampant and blatant. Your ire should be directed to the other party who injected blatant sexism into their campaigns and the American people who voted in large numbers in support of that sexism. The result is that the Democratic party cannot nominate another woman for the foreseeable future, it would be political malpractice to do so at this point, not because they don't trust women to lead, they've twice now proven otherwise, but because of American politics in which the majority have spoken and said they will refuse to elect a woman.  

I am independent. I am not tethered to either party.  If I want to write in Robert Earl Keen or Dolly Parton as my next vote in 2028 I will fucking do that.

Kamala is saying in HER book in HER words that Biden and HIS circle threw HER and the COUNTRY under the bus by him refusing to step aside much earlier when he had zero business running again. She said Biden and the WH team didn’t back her up enough. That  Biden WH didn’t defend her well nor tout her many accomplishments. That they hid her from the public. That 107 days wasn’t enough time for people to see what she could do. Her words not mine. Maybe read her book when it comes out? 

The above are all Her words. Not mine. That’s what she is saying. Yes she blames other things like racism and sexism but she is saying she lost primarily bc of Biden. 

I blame Biden. You can blame sexism and racism as why and we certainly have that here and all across the globe. No country is immune.

 If she had been a man she still loses. If she had been a white man she still loses. Why is it so hard to accept? I blame Biden, he handed the baton straight back to Trump. 

Will a woman ever win? Or be anything other than a token on a ticket? I hope so. But Kamala’s 107 days have more to do with Biden than the rest of the country being fucked in the head. There is serious evidence from multiple credible sources that he should have never sought reelection. So if you’re pissed, blame him. And his circle. They weren’t thinking about a single fucking one of us. 

so while I love your posts and all…your ire should be directed at Biden. According to Kamala. 

29 minutes ago, mchookem said:

Charlie was a perfect representative of American Christianity.

Bingo. 

Posted
Just now, Nicole44 said:

The above are all Her words. Not mine. That’s what she is saying. Yes she blames other things like racism and sexism but she is saying she lost primarily bc of Biden. 

I blame Biden. You can blame sexism and racism as why and we certainly have that here and all across the globe. No country is immune.

 If she had been a man she still loses. If she had been a white man she still loses. Why is it so hard to accept? I blame Biden, he handed the baton straight back to Trump. 

Will a woman ever win? Or be anything other than a token on a ticket? I hope so. 

I mean, the only time Trump has won the presidency was when he ran against a woman.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I mean, the only time Trump has won the presidency was when he ran against a woman.

Yeah. I get it. But I’m going with what Kamala is saying on this one. She would know better than me. Tomorrow the book is available but I already reserved mine. 

giphy.gif

Edited by Nicole44
Posted (edited)
49 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

I am independent. I am not tethered to either party.  If I want to write in Robert Earl Keen or Dolly Parton as my next vote in 2028 I will fucking do that.

Kamala is saying in HER book in HER words that Biden and HIS circle threw HER and the COUNTRY under the bus by him refusing to step aside much earlier when he had zero business running again. She said Biden and the WH team didn’t back her up enough. That  Biden WH didn’t defend her well nor tout her many accomplishments. That they hid her from the public. That 107 days wasn’t enough time for people to see what she could do. Her words not mine. Maybe read her book when it comes out? 

The above are all Her words. Not mine. That’s what she is saying. Yes she blames other things like racism and sexism but she is saying she lost primarily bc of Biden. 

I blame Biden. You can blame sexism and racism as why and we certainly have that here and all across the globe. No country is immune.

 If she had been a man she still loses. If she had been a white man she still loses. Why is it so hard to accept? I blame Biden, he handed the baton straight back to Trump. 

Will a woman ever win? Or be anything other than a token on a ticket? I hope so. But Kamala’s 107 days have more to do with Biden than the rest of the country being fucked in the head. There is serious evidence from multiple credible sources that he should have never sought reelection. So if you’re pissed, blame him. And his circle. They weren’t thinking about a single fucking one of us. 

so while I love your posts and all…your ire should be directed at Biden. According to Kamala. 

Bingo. 

Your quote was "the powers that be on both sides will truly ever allow my sex to lead jackshit" which isn't true. The Democrats have now twice nominated a woman to the top of the presidential ticket. I think you're reading way too much into Kamala's book and to the extent she's saying those things its annoying af. Nevertheless, if Biden was "the powers that be" and didn't want Kamala on the ticket couldn't he have directed otherwise? Not to mention the plan was to keep him out of the spotlight during the campaign so he did very little in support of her but he certainly did nothing publicly to undermine her.

The Democrats also for the last 20 years have elected a woman as Speaker of the House when they had the majority. Republicans have never elected a woman as Speaker. Are you suggesting that the leadership role of the Speaker of the House isn't "jackshit.?" Not to mention that referring to Kamala and Clinton as "tokens on the ticket" is asinine and about as sexist as anything else posted about those candidates. I'll just never understand "both sides"-erism in the current environment. I'm also not going to write a novel here about the numerous other examples of sexism, including revokation of womens' right to bodily autonomy and procreation decisions, which again, came solely from one "side."

Edited by 'stache
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, bolverk said:

 

There's a contradiction there, for sure. Personally, I don't know if I subscribe to it. Still, I could see someone latching onto an idea floating out there that I've seen that consciousness = information = data = energy, while also keeping in mind the law of conservation of energy. Where does all that energy in our bodies go when the body expires? It's an interesting idea that I haven't delved into studying the matter.

Yeah, something along those lines. Maybe. Maybe not. Clumsily worded, no doubt. Don't believe in things from an organized religion viewpoint. I have a feeling that something happens with regard to our souls. I also fully understand this might be it and the minute we die, it's just over. Or we have eternal dreams or something like that. Again, I try not to give it too much thought because there's not anything I can do about it.

  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Yeah.  Your "bingo" very likely misses the point that was actually made by that statement.

Wrong. It’s why even why many of y’all on surly (not naming names) were kind enough to provide me with some churches to look at here. People whose posts here don’t always align with my own but who saw my quest to find a true Christian church not a Christian nationalist church as sincere. So  Many of the churches I have visited have  put me off.
 

What I believe is from the Bible, particularly the New Testament, but when I go to Bible based churches I feel like most just cherry pick whatever they want from the New Testament.
 

I am still looking for a church home but some here were kind enough to give me some places to look.

Kirk wasn’t really on my radar much at all until the few weeks before he was killed. Much of what he said, like Jaime Lee Curtis, I vehemently disagree with.

But I liked the idea of him giving people a platform to debate with him. People like Van Jones and so on. people can say he was full of shit and slick and a snake oil salesman and a racist POS cocksucker and whatever else but I liked the concept of that. And his idea we need to talk more not less.
 

People fail to realize that many of the listeners weren’t just his supporters. They came to hear. my cousin and his husband went to an event hoping to debate about LGBTQ+ rights. They didn’t have the opportunity but they came away from that event thinking it was a good thing. Even if they 💯 disagreed with him.
 

And that IN THEORY is how it should be practiced. Opening up your tent to others. His methods may have been severely flawed but the CONCEPT is not.
 

 We can argue about his sincerity and his beliefs and if he was a racist POS. But my ability to accept the absolutely horrible memes and jokes about his death and other things said about him stop there. I can’t get on board with some of the shit floating around that to me is borderline psychotic. I didn’t follow him. I didn’t really know much about who he was. Until he was killed. Much of what I’ve heard I didn’t agree with. But I believe he didn’t deserve to be killed for it. So my shit stops at that point. 
 

so if all the above is legible and makes sense then I am disagreeing with you. I was agreeing with @mchookem on this. Christian Nationalism isn’t my ethos dude or i’d Have found a church home already that makes me feel closer to Christ. And also supports my curbing the population by using our fine lakes. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

People fail to realize that many of the listeners weren’t just his supporters. They came to hear. my cousin and his husband went to an event hoping to debate about LGBTQ+ rights. They didn’t have the opportunity but they came away from that event thinking it was a good thing. Even if they 💯 disagreed with him.

Dancing upon your opponents good faith is a central tenet of his """debate""" style. He never substantively addressed his oppositions points, and relied HEAVILY on logical fallacies to form his position. He was a troll, who delighted in knowing that he could lie while his opponent stuck to good faith and facts. To quote Sarte:

 

They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

 

Kirk was murdered while whatabouting gun violence to deflect onto "gang violence" (read: nonwhite violence). He literally died while arguing in bad faith.

I understand your sentiment of wanting better and more open dialogue, but pinning your hopes on CK for that is like hoping Joe Camel would lead a healthcare revolution 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted

I somewhat respect his willingness to talk to anyone, even though he never did so in good faith, but I don't respect his debate acumen at all. Most of it was against unprepared college students who only got a small amount of time to speak before he went back to churning through talking points. He mostly got completely dunked on in every 1 on 1 debate he did. clearly had very little real knowledge, and didn't care to learn.

Besides, debates are fucking stupid anyway. They are probably the worst possible way to try and arrive at any kind of truth. Their only value is in propagandizing, to widely differing degrees of effectiveness.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

 

I understand your sentiment of wanting better and more open dialogue, but pinning your hopes on CK for that is like hoping Joe Camel would lead a healthcare revolution 

Thank you for at least dialoguing with me and reading my posts and trying to decipher them. And recognizing my sentiment of wanting a true platform like that. But I cannot pin my hopes on CK (because murdered) nor did I. But I am hoping that his widow’s sentiments align with my own. If they don’t they don’t. But she is faced with an actual turning point here. I am giving her the grace and space to figure it out. That’s a lot to take on as a young mom of two. I cannot predict the future but her saying she forgave his killer gave me some hope. ❤️❤️❤️ but I don’t place my stock in humans. We are all seriously flawed af. Even those with the best intentions fail to see their own hypocrisy. I’m trying to clean up my own soul first, that’s a task in and of itself. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

I somewhat respect his willingness to talk to anyone, even though he never did so in good faith, but I don't respect his debate acumen at all. Most of it was against unprepared college students who only got a small amount of time to speak before he went back to churning through talking points. He mostly got completely dunked on in every 1 on 1 debate he did. clearly had very little real knowledge, and didn't care to learn.

Besides, debates are fucking stupid anyway. They are probably the worst possible way to try and arrive at any kind of truth. Their only value is in propagandizing, to widely differing degrees of effectiveness.

Maybe it’s because I was on the debate team in high school and in a debate club in college but I love true debates. I get supremely fucking pissed watching Congress. No one follows any type of rules whatsoever.  Over the line. Mark it zero damnit. 

200.gif

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, BabaYaga said:

There's a term for this:  Pascal's Wager.  

 

2 hours ago, aggie08 said:

If I live a good life and am good to those around me simply because I want to be--not out of fear of not making it to heaven--and it turns out that there is a God and heaven, and he denies me entry because, while I was a good and decent person, I didn't believe in him hard enough...then that needy, insecure bitch can get fucked. I'll take my chances with the devil.

There's also historical evidence of Muhammad. Both Christianity and Islam have at their core that they are absolutely right and others are absolutely wrong (paraphrasing obviously). So if you picked wrong, you're fucked. Or more accurately, if you were born into the wrong one, you're fucked. That's also why I can't get on board with any of it, because it sure sounds like a lottery of birth type situation. If the one you were born into is right you win, if born into the one that's wrong, you lose. Makes zero sense considering there's no tangible proof to steer you one way or the other. I don't know enough about the other smaller world religions to know if they also at their core similarly believe that they are the one true religion and everyone else is doomed. 

Edited by 'stache
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

Maybe it’s because I was on the debate team in high school and in a debate club in college but I love true debates. I get supremely fucking pissed watching Congress. No one follows any type of rules whatsoever.  Over the line. Mark it zero damnit. 

200.gif

Yeah but debate is just another sport, when you think of it. Fun to play, but ultimately meaningless. No one's mind ever gets changed and no truth is ever brought to light. All that matters is if you are better rhetorically than your opponent. It's why so many people fall for the stupid shit that comes out of Ben Shapiro's mouth. Sure, the shit he's saying is unbelievably pants on head stupid, but he's generally saying it more confidently and loudly than anyone else in his vicinity so people just believe it.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, 'stache said:

There's also historical evidence of Muhammad. Both Christianity and Islam have at their core that they are absolutely right and others are absolutely wrong (paraphrasing obviously). So if you picked wrong, you're fucked.

Point of order: Jesus Christ is highly revered as a prophet in Islam, though his divinity is not recognized. Muhammed is not extended anywhere near the same level of charity by mainstream Christianity. The overall level of vitriol is very one sided.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Point of order: Jesus Christ is highly revered as a prophet in Islam, though his divinity is not recognized. Muhammed is not extended anywhere near the same level of charity by mainstream Christianity. The overall level of vitriol is very one sided.

Truth. 
 

this is another point (whether you intended it or not) why I believe in Jesus. Not just that he existed. Evidence of that is overwhelming. But his life, his existence and his death made it around the world. That’s another reason I have faith. They believe he was important just that he wasn’t the ONE. And that’s huge to me. But he is highly revered as you say outside of Christianity. That’s incredible to me. 

Posted
3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

It's 2025.  Assume the absolute worst of people.  You will very rarely be incorrect.

Especially in CR.

Posted
14 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

Truth. 
 

this is another point (whether you intended it or not) why I believe in Jesus. Not just that he existed. Evidence of that is overwhelming. But his life, his existence and his death made it around the world. That’s another reason I have faith. They believe he was important just that he wasn’t the ONE. And that’s huge to me. But he is highly revered as you say outside of Christianity. That’s incredible to me. 

yeah, i know that the algonquins, the ancestral puebloans, iroquoian, weeden island culture, the adena, and hohokan in north america...as well as the eastern han dynasty people in asia, and the khoi-san people in southern africa were all well-known for their revering of jesus and mourning his death in the first century.

it's truly incredible!

just amazing.

good lord.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
Just now, sidis said:

yeah, i know that the algonquins, the ancestral puebloans, iroquoian, weeden island culture, the adena, and hohokan in north america...as well as the eastern han dynasty people in asia, and the khoi-san people in southern africa were all well-known for their revering of jesus and mourning his death in the first century.

it's truly incredible!

just amazing.

good lord.

And how can that be explained in a time when we didn’t even have a way to communicate across the globe? Damn. 🤲 

Posted (edited)

So I really REALLY want people to realize that the CK """memorial""" yesterday was nothing more than a political rally. The President of the United States saying that he HATES Americans who don't like him. His top advisor was straight out of the mid-1930's germany with his rhetoric. Classic shit with "our enemies are DANGEROUS! But they're also NOTHING and CAN DO NOTHING!"

 

They weren't there for peace and reconciliation. They were there to assign enemies and coordinate their "army" against whoever he says "they" are

Edited by Captainant
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 3

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...