Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous LONGEVITY | Give us your Frankens, your Stevenses, your hot issues… Next »
And Mary and Joseph rode their dinosaurs into Bethlehem where a stork was waiting with Baby Jesus who was conceived through abstinence and wishing on a star…
(Sarah Palin)
picture: dunno source, via our lol builder. lol caption: aliasbekah
 | Teal Deer on THE FABRIC OF OUR LIVES |
 | waggle237 on Keeping the Internet Hone… |
| waggle237 on Keeping the Internet Hone… |
| waggle237 on Keeping the Internet Hone… |
 | Selenis on Royally Busted |
| Selenis on RIP Florence Green, Aged … |
 | airkerma on Prop 8 Ruled Unconstituti… |
 | neoritter on How Far We Haven’t … |
| neoritter on How Far We Haven’t … |
 | Life, Liberty, Pursu… on Take it to the Grave |
Cheezburger Company Blog
I Can Has Cheezburger? Home - Lolcats n Funny Pictures 
I Has A Hotdog - Loldogs n Cute Puppies 
Just Capshunz - All of the Internet. Captioned
Animal Videos - Cute and Hilarious Animal Videos
Animal Gifs - Cute and Hilarious Animal Gifs
Daily Squee - So cute your brain might explode. 
Historic LOLs - Captioned Portraits of Yore
My Food Looks Funny - Funny Food Photos
So Much Pun - Visual Puns and Jokes
ROFLrazzi - Lol Celebs and All That's Fab Funny in Showbiz 
Totally Looks Like - Stuff That Looks Like Other Stuff
Must Have Cute - See. Want. Must Have!
lol
when i read that caption i imagine it being spoken by The Church Lady from old SNL.
Finally! The truth comes out. Thanks Sarah!!
She’s even got the red suit! ::happy::
Yep, that is the definition of creationISM: a redefining or discarding of verifiable science if it conflicts with a Bible Story. She actually believes Dinos walked at the same time as man and that the world is just 6,000 years old. LOL!! She wants her beliefs taught not as theology but as SCIENCE. Can you say: SCARY! I think she alone has helped Obama into the white house. Thanks Sarah!
Evolution is not science. The big bang is a “theory”, and therefor it takes
faith to believe it, making it a religion and and religion taught in schools.
Gravity is a theory too, is it a religion as well?
1) you don’t understand the word ‘theory’ when applied to science – to dumb it down it means ‘tested model that supports most observed phenomena’
2) Evolution is a very good model for what we see in adaptive behaviour and development of organisms, the mathematical underpinning of the model having applications as diverse as breeding cows with specific traits, quickly, and making the internet work very fast, with resilience so you can spout your boiled crap about theories…
Thank you for pointing that out for all the idiots, unfortunately i believe they lack the mental capacity to understand a word can have two meanings.
So thats where Jesus came from….
Nah, he came from Mexico as an illegal trying to steal your job picking beans.
Did he go to Utah?
It just wasn’t all that funny. Try again!
Agreed.
Bible literalists probably shouldn’t be using the internet. Too scary for that sort. Srsly.
Your logic (or lack thereof) is ridiculous. People who believe the Bible literally shouldn’t use the internet because…because you immediately disrespect their views and thus they are retarded?
Learn to argue, not just sling insults.
Secondly, this lol isn’t funny. Not only is is disrespectful to someone’s views, it isn’t even accurate to what “Bible literalists” really believe.
Disagreed. Massive LOLs!
Oh yes indeed. Much giggling ensued. Will show the teenager when she comes in. “See what happens when you don’t get an education?” LOL
I think THIS is why the lol is funny. Abstinence only education is a joke. I honest to god Know a girl who thought you could get pregnant by KISSING. I WISH I was making that up.
Here is the reality of it. My high school gave out condoms. Guess what? No one cared. THink about it from the point of a rebellious teenager. Why would they do something the school tells them to?
Mine scared me into not wanting the hiv. Or babies.
Well…. That’s exactly why we need education to go with the condoms. And it has to be said “This is what can happen when you don’t use condoms”, instead of “Use condoms or you are a bad person”. Then provide the condoms and hope for the best. Even the rebellious will flinch at the STD pictures. I know a lot of teenagers aren’t so worried about pregnancy, but i really think the more education the better. And I really don’t think it should start in high school when kids are less apt to respond to the guidance of the wizened adult. Kids need to be taught these things much younger. Kids are experimenting sexually at very young ages, even if it’s not intercourse. Ever play “Show me yours I’ll show you mine…”?
I don’t expect it will change the world but I do believe the more education someone has about something, the better prepared they are to make the right choice. Or, failing that, the best choice.
OH! OH! OH! I have an even BETTER idea! How about, and I know this is a long shot, why don’t we teach them that you can still get STDs, and babies even with condoms, birth control, and other methods of contraception, and that abstinence is the only 100% thing? Yeah, that might work! Yeah, even at 15, when girls are getting pregnant at 13, I know that believing something besides abstinence is 100% is moronic. Teach them what REALLY happens after sex, with or without condoms. I know that I won’t get pregnant until after I am happily married, to a man I know I’ll never divorce, and when we are ready. Not when someone pawns alcohol off of their older cousin, brings it to a party, and gives it to every teen there. Unfortunately, it seems I’m the only one that knows better these days…
It is hard to tell where the sarcasm is, and is not, in your post.
Nobody will ever convince all teens to forgo physical relationships, because as Madonna said, ‘girls just wanna have fun’.
Madonna/Cinda Lauper, same difference.
All 80s music blends in together…
Nice save PiMan!
Emily, please print out your comment, tuck it away in your diary and read it again on your 35th birthday. You’ll cringe so hard, even your moralistic, arrogant facade will crack into a thousand pieces!
Innocence. Wasted on the young.
Oh I actually lol’d on that, thank you!
This reminds me of when I too was young and had the burden of knowing more than everyone around me. How do you stand going through each and every day knowing how much smarter you are than EVERYONE around you. This must be what Cassandra felt when no one in Troy would believe her prophecies. Don’t worry, one day you just might grow up and realize what an insufferable ass you sound like. BTW, I must say I LOVE the phrase “happily married, to a man I know I’ll never divorce.” With the latest virus on my computer that I had to have sent out to be fixed, I needed the laugh, thanks.
Actually, not quite true. I’ve found that lesbianism works quite
well in that I can have sex, yet absolutely not get pregnant.
I know you’re not, because my father knew a girl who believed the same thing.
Do you call her Mom?
Go to the bible dinosaur museum in southern ohio, then make that statement. besides, literal bibleist shouldn’t use the devil’s tool created by evolutionists.
PWNED
That lifesized model of a guy riding a triceratops is brilliant, a lol waiting to happen.
It’s a LOL that HAS happened. Google “LOLCreashun” for the results.
Computers are of the DEVIL.
Holy Crap, I am not really talking to myself, AM I?
Then I guess I am an incurable Satanist and that I shall rot in hell for as long as I live. I guess that’s what comes of having a best friend who’s told you since 1st grade she’s the Devil and she’s taking you to hell with her later. Oh, and that I am the goddess of revenge. Hee hee.
And you are a moron. Shut up and enjoy the joke for christ’s sake. Friggin christians…
This.
why did you name youself after some sheets?
At least he’s not a muslin….
Different thread!
That thread is relevant to his interests.
Pun intended?
That’s a sheety thing to say. He’s bound to cotton on to the fact that we’re making fun of him. You really shouldn’t go around making blanket statements like that.
FU. I’m a Christian (and an Obama supporter, and a supporter of gay rights) and I think this LOL is hi-larious. Palin’s a ditz. And the Bible I agree is defninitely not infallible ‘cuz it says women are inferior and supposed to be servants. That’s so stupid. So think before you post, Charlie-may stereotypes are not true.
For instance I could say all males are asses.
Really? I read the Bible and its says wives should subject themselves to their husband. And in the same turn, husbands should subject themselves to their wife. Where does it say women are slaves?
Wherever it was, it certainly didn’t cover how to respond on the forum correctly. I can’t figure out why he’s taking to Charlie when he didn’t post anywhere near the comment he responded to.
Some people see ‘Reply to comment’ and click away!
Hulk SMASH.
Don’t know, but I can’t be the only one who noticed that he said “FU, I’m a Christian.” Now I don’t know about you, but I don’t see that one going over with my mom, or Sister Mary-ruler-across-the-palms.
Since I know your mother and she’s verbally b-slapped me for dropping the f bomb before, I’d have to say I’d agree.
In almost every passage in the Bible about women it is implied. One does not see ANY passages where women are elevated to the same status as men. And let us recall that in the Bible it is written that Eve was created merely as a companion for Adam. Hmm, is it possible that male influences of that time period affected that?
And if you say that women are not equal to men, I will hunt you down and punch your lights out.
a few points.
I believe in God
I believe God is capable of anything because he is GOD
I believe God exists outside of Time however he can be in it too
I believe God created the world
I believe God created Man/Woman (from Man)
Given that, do you think God would be capable of protecting his Word?
Why is it that a manuscript/scroll can be compared (that is one that is say 3000 years old) to a modern day translation and no mistakes are found?
I don’t think the God you hold in your hand is capable, but the one I hold in my heart is, He is capable of protecting His message about Jesus for eternity.
You either believe it and believe that Jesus is your saviour, or you don’t, to which you don’t fall under the Christian category.
I apologise if you don’t like that, I suggest you do some research.
To the rest of you, before you offer me a spuing mass of reasons why God doesn’t exist, I am not interested in hearing it, I’ve done enough research for myself to feel that our modern idea of who we are and what we are here for, leaves to many unanswered questions.
“I believe God is capable of anything because he is GOD”
Here’s a riddle for you then.
If God can do anything, can he create a rock he cannot lift?
Ah, I agree! I’m a Christian Obama supporter, and a supporter of gay rights too. I think this is hilarious! The bible likely uses a ton of metaphors. It’s pretty ridiculous to take it literally word for word anyway. I thought the only part of the old testament we listen to is the ten commandments… Plus, the bible is supposed to be the word of God that he told man to write, but the guys writing it probably made a lot of stuff to suit their own social stigma, like the whole “women are inferior” thing.
Although, it would be cool if dinosuars and humans existed at the same time… It would be totally kick-ass to ride a dinosaur.
Marshy, I urge you to do your research.
The whole old testament points to Jesus, it is not just there for the 10 commandments.
Observe the Jews fervour for keeping their Lords command. If you are happy to use the world ‘probably’ then it shows your lack of knowledge in the area. The scribes went through rigorous routines when they wrote the Word of God, in fact, if they wrote his name, they would go and wash afterwards… EVERYTIME!
The dinosaurs in Bible are not expanded upon, God created all things, and there was a laviathan in a River, plus a monster of the deep… Where anyone has managed to glean the information about anything further, baffles me.
Have you actually studied the Bible? Or do you hold God in the palm of your own hand?
Hey…just remember, the Bible was edited by some guys who claimed that God was talking to them. Of course, they did edit it to suit their purposes, didn’t they. Holy cow…no wonder why he’s ticked…and i thought that G W was our falut.
Pretty much my thinking on it. It was written by man. They are claiming biblical inspiration that we would institutionalize for today.
Well, technically it was edited by a bunch of guys following a pair of religions that had been ordered to reconcile the two faiths for the good of the empire. (Council of Nicaea) Naturally, some alterations of beliefs ensued.
Wow, you and I managed to get in two mentions of the Council of Nicaea on the same thread. What does that mean, do you think?
that i love you both
Well, you know, Great Minds Think Alike.
Unfortunately, it’s also said that Fools Seldom Differ, so I’m just plain confused now.
I was waiting for someone to tell me I have my facts wrong on the council, that the Zoroastrians weren’t really merged with Christianity, but I guess I must be right
Where did the Zoroastrians come in? The Arians were not Zoroastrians; they were Christians, just heritical ones.
Was it edited? Please educate us all..
What were these purposes that they edited for then?? Do you know anything about life on earth 3 or 4 thousand years ago?
Nope, this is pretty hilarious.
It’s funny because it is inaccurate, among other things. First off, it is a joke about Sarah Palin being stupid (hence the inaccuracy…), secondly, it is a dig at her stance on abstinence only sex-ed. It’s not unfunny, some people are just viewing this as offensive for the wrong reasons. It is meant to be offensive toward Sarah Palin, not Christian beliefs/the story of Jesus.
I agree, she’s not stupid. She is, however, narrow minded and ignorant. Worse, she shares Bush’s belief that she doesn’t *need* to know anything. Please dear God don’t let us fall victim to another one of those!
True and most Christians are not creationists. I think getting people to focus on myth is a way of averting the real issues. I think some of these political people play to peoples beliefs (mythos) instead of having people focus on why their health insurance is going away and jobs are being sent oversees. America is turning in a big ghetto and are too busy trying to justify what manger Jesus was born in and how many species walked the earth at that time. Good grief!
But Christians will find it offensive because of how they feel about Jesus.
It’s a stab at Palin’s belief that humans and dinosaurs coexisted.
Get off your high horse, at least until you actually get the joke.
i think that was the point… to make it so out there that it’s funny… which it is. stop being so sensitive.
um, yes, “Bible literalists” = “retarded folks”. What was the question?
(creationISM & Young Earth CreationISM – note: creation is different than creationISM, most Christians globally are NOT creationISTS. CreationISM today is confined primarly to the southern States of the US and to only a couple of ‘denominations’). Christian scholar Saint Augustine in “The Literal Meaning of Genesis (De Genesi ad litteram libri duodecim)” written centuries ago: “Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he hold to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion.”
One should look up the Jewish Calendar and see how it falls on the Lunar/Solar/Planetary signs perfectly.
It was only when the Gregorian Calendar, which we all follow these days, came about that confusion was seen and conformity lost.
The universe has a pulse.
Science is great, I love it, but it lacks the answers to the ‘Why’ questions in places that really should be answered for any theory to be taken as far as it has.
Massive lulz indeed.
actually I looked it up and bible literalist means retarded HAHALAWLSERVED
Retard as in Tard/Tardy means late, originating from the french, Tard.
Maybe you should have looked on Wiki? or used a Dictionary?
Biblical – refers to the bible
Literalism – adherence to the exact letter or literal sense
Retarded – Occuring or developiong later than desired or expected, delayed, often offensive: affected with mental retardation.
Try this one:
Sarcasm – harsh or bitter derision or irony, a sharply ironical taunt, sneering or cutting remark
Served…?
Disagreed
Massive lulz.
I disagree!
I don’t know, it just seems a bit bland. But that’s on my end. According to some, that makes a Biblical Realist. “lolwut?”, one might say.
Ugh, I meant to say that makes ME a Biblical Realist. Damn fingers.
Literalist* Today is so not my day. -_-
I knew that ‘immaculate conception’ thing was just too ridiculous to be true. This makes so much more sense!
“Immaculate conception” is what happened on Saint Anne to get St. Mary. Jesus was “Virginal conception”… Do try and keep up with medieval nonsense promulgated in the 21st Century as solipsistic fact supported by ‘faith’…
Nooo, Jesus just had a really high midi-chlorian level!
My nerd-dar just went crazy
But what does the scouter say about his power level?
Over five thousand!!!
Finally! (But it’s “IT’S OVER 9000!!!!!”) technically, you need the capitals and multiple exclamation marks.
“Immaculate conception” is the belief that Mary was concieved and born without the taint of original sin. The “virgin birth” is the doctrine that Mary became pregnant without the aid of a human father. The former doctrine is peculiar to Roman Catholics; the latter is a fairly mainstream Christian belief.
Saint Anne? St. Mary who?
Sounds distinctly Catholic to me. Have you been hiding throughout the last 50 years?
DYOR
This would actually be a top scoring answer on a high school biology test if this loon got her way.
Keep drinking that kool-aid
Hey – Kool Aid!
It’s a default response when he’s annoyed at a comment but can’t think of anything to say.
See – “Hey, Kool Aid!” is supposed to make a HUGE smiling pitcher of red Kool Aid break through a wall and run at you when you call him. Am I the only one remembering this?
OH YEAH!
Crasha-Banga-Boomer-Anga.
No, there is at least one other dinosaur on this thread!
Kool-aid is (literally) a foreign concept to me, only through the internets do I know it’s some powdered drink and that it was used to mix with drugs in a cult suicide. Never seen any of the adverts or packaging.
For those of us with ex-hippie parents (yes, Charlie was a long haired hippie before he joined the army) we weren’t allowed to have kool-aid until it started coming in sugar free, which was awhile. We were allowed to drink Crystal Light though, and sometimes Tang. Not quite as exciting, I know. I was twelve before I had kool-aid made with real sugar at my cousin’s house and thought at the time that there had never been a better tasting drink in the history of drinks. But then again, I was twelve.
LOL!!! Well at 12 kool-aid made with sugar is only upped by like… maybe pop… spiked with Kool-aid.
That sucks, because the crap in artificial sweeteners is WAY worse than highly refined cane sugar.
You have my sympathies for having had to endure psycho ex-hippie parents
Well, it’s not like we even got to drink that very often, that wasn’t until we got older. We usually had juice. My mom even had these tupperware popsicle makers and we made popsicles out of juice. I appreciate it now when I have a taste of veggies and actual natural foods, not preprocessed crap.
I loved when my mom made tupperware popsickles! That was the coolest thing.
If you think that’s bad, take a look at all the other stuff in the package. Seriously, if you’re still breathing now, a little more sweetener is a piece of cake
No way! I remember those commercials clearly. I can’t be alone in this.
Yeah, I remember it as well.. I loved my kool-aid, now it just has a bad connotation. Thanks Jim Jones..
“Oh yeah!”
“Oh yeah? Oh no! You’d better fix that wall before my Dad gets home and beats me with a toaster!”
Look up Oklahoma HB2211, which is based on existing legislation in Texas. I’m not sure Sarah Palin is one of them, but there are plenty of people who want schools to give children passing science grades for spouting religious dogma.
Hahaha, quite funny.
something about this lighting makes her look as old and haggard as hillary… scary.
What can be scarier than Hillary?
Palin’s the only thing that comes to my mind.
Michelle Obama without makeup ?
Hilary is a MILF
Michelle is a proud, beautiful woman. Not “hot”, as such, but I think she has a real Jackie O thing going on. Like maybe Jackie with a sincere commitment to tanning.
Jabba the Hut?
Bring me Obama and the Biden- they will pay for this outrage!
Rahsa Naba Doe-ah Gola Wookiee Nipple Pinchy!
An existential hell that lacks the physical tortures displayed in horror films, yet forces you to re-live every haunting memory that you’ve ever had over…and over…and over…
So a family reunion?
No hun… Only YOUR family reunions are quite that bad. ^_~
A high school year book would suffice for many.
I think Neil Gaimen did a short story along those lines. It was an interesting concept.
I don’t think anybody who actually believes that the earth is only 10,000 years old is fit to hold any office above city dog catcher. Seriously, how can any person with any brain power actually believe dinosaurs and humans occupied the same space at the same time?
who said they had brain power?
Hrm… It could have been made 10,000 years ago, but has the characteristics of being millions/billions of years old! God’s cool like that.
Ah yes…..as suspected, a Biblical literalist. Truth isn’t scary once you open your eyes and try it….there’s no need to ditch the religion, just adjust for known facts.
You’re not ‘sdjusting for known facts’ if you’re willing to accept the premise that (as it says in the Bible) a day is as a thousand years. So your Seven Days of Creation could have (probably did) take a REALLY long time.
if a day= a thousand years, then those seven days of creation took 7000 years and according to the bible it’s been around 6000 years since everything was created, based on the ages of the people in the bible ect (that’s how they came up with the under 10,000 years number to begin with). So by the whole a day is a thousand during creation logic that gets you up to around 14,000 to 17,000 years, sorry to tell you that’s still WAY off, bottom line is there is no way to reconcile a literal interpretation of the bible with known fact, either accept it was a metaphor or get on the crazy bus with all the other “I dun care bout no facts” people and believe that the earth is under 10,000 years old and all evidence to the ontrary is god “testing our faith”
First off, all the evolutionists here can stop toting their views as “known facts.” It’s called the “Theory of Evolution” for a reason. It’s a theory. It CANNOT be proven. Why not? Because it already happened. Science demands you be able to repeatedly do the same experiment, receive the same results, and then base your conclusion off those results. As everything you claim to be a fact occurred (by your standards) millions of years ago, you cannot prove it.
Secondly, the Bible has huge generation gaps that could be filled in by anything from one generation to ten thousand generations. The gap is right before Noah’s time, in case anyone wants to argue that. So, no, the Bible does not necessarily teach that the earth is 6,000 years old. That number is only from the genealogies mentioned and does not take into account the huge gaps.
Know your opponent’s (and your own) views before you start tossing out ultimatums.
Uh no. Evolution happens and can be seen in action in any hospital any day of the week. If you understand evolution you’d understand that unless you insist on a literal “Creation” myth version of humans coming into being you could reconcile the two things.
Evolution: the type of environment dictates the individuals who will be successful and reproduce in it and thus pass on their genetics. An individual that is well suited for the Gobi Desert would not be successful in the Antartic, and vice-versa. One small difference in an individual (a mutation) that gives that individual an edge may lead to that difference being passed on to their offspring. Over time that genetic change becomes a characteristic of that population through breeding. Ta-da! Evolution. That’s how we get resistant bacteria folks. That one oddball bacteria that is naturally resistant get sUS to wipe out all its nonresistant competition. Bingo. Evolution in action, losers are us.
There’s nothing to prevent a thinking Christian from saying God planned it that way. Nothing at all.
You’ve got your terms wrong, sir. I’m not sure what hospitals you’re looking at (quite frankly, I didn’t get that argument at all…), but evolution, according to the evolutionists, takes millions of years. As far as I know, you haven’t been living millions of years, so it’d be hard for you to “see” it in a hospital. Secondly, when something adapts to its environment, it’s called “survival of the fittest,” not evolution. What you’re describing is microevolution, in which a species changes itself according to its needs. However, it does not CREATE anything…it merely adapts. Macroevolution has not and will not be proven, because it involves a species literally changing into another species. It is not making minute changes to body parts it already had; macroevolution is CREATING new body parts.
Macroevolution, also known as speciation, has been documented numerous times. It’s been proven. Please educate yourself before acting all arrogant, you just end up looking like a fool.
I hate to resort to name calling, but you, sir, are an ignoramus.
1) Definition of “Theory”: FAIL
2) Evolution is a verb, not a noun. “Millions of years” requirement: FAIL
Macro-evolution is the one that actually has been proved, with micro-evolution being the harder to prove one.
I recall reading of a species of fish that was thought to have gone extinct in the seventies, but recently a scientist was studying fish in the area and spotted a fish that looked distinctly like the aforementioned fish. Upon closer examination, he found that is was actually a crossbreed of the extinct fish and another fish from the area. This crossbreed has now become the dominant species of the area.
You’re not talking about the coelocanth(sp?) are you?
If he is talking about the one off the east coast of Africa, yes. It is a deep water fish that is blue and about 9 feet long.
Evolution is a fact. The theory that explains the known facts is called Natural Selection. The word ‘theory’ is used differently in science than it is in every day usage. The word in science that most closely fits the vernacular meaning of theory is ‘hypothesis.’ A theory is a hypothesis that has been tested and found useful. That does not mean it is correct. There is no ‘correct’ in science. Only useful. If a hypothesis makes useful and accurate predictions, it is called a theory.
–
We know that Newton’s theory of gravity is incorrect, but it is still useful because in most situations (i.e. in non relativistic frames) it is accurate, and the calculations are less complex than Einstein’s more accurate theory. So engineers still use Newton’s theory most of the time.
–
The thing you must realize about science is that these theories form an interlocking, mutually supporting web of knowledge. When a theory is accurate but does not fit in this web, it requires a rethinking of the entire web, which forms the basis of a scientific revolution.
–
We have witnessed evolution. We have seen speciation in the lab, with frit flys branching off and forming a new species that can not mate with the original population. We have seen the evolution of entirely new traits, such as the ability to digest nylon, a substance that does not occur in nature. This evolutionary jump required the creation of entirely new biochemical pathways.
–
Natural selection is just a theory like gravity is just a theory.
Things fall, that is the observed fact. Gravity is the theory that
explains why. Things evolve, certain different species have traits in common, and those traits form sets and supersets with a distinct pattern. Natural Selection is the theory that explains those observed facts.
*sighs* Seth’s so dreamy when he gets all knowledgeable…
And you can see how species change by looking at man’s best friend. Yes it was selective breeding on our parts but you can see how one species can change over generations to become animals that barely resemble the ancestor species.
*smirks at Jane*
Woot!
Well said! Yes I have to constantly tell people the same. A theory in science does not mean a guess, that is: hypothesis. To even be called a theory means it has a library full of supporting data. If these people think theory means a “guess” they should not take antibiotics, the study of germs is called “Germ Theory”.
I think you need to look up what a scientific theory is.
What are your views on the theory of gravity and molecular theory?
Pffft, Science is a crock. And the metric system is a tool of the devil. My car gets forty rods to the barn and that’s the way I likes it!!!
You mean “hogshead” instead of “barn,” I believe. One of old Abe’s greatest moments! (equal to 0.00198 miles per gallon)
Or for a “barn” quote, how about “‘Tis a fine barn, but surely ’tis no pool, English…” “D’oh’eth!”
LOL, my bad.
Would that be a US or Imperial Barn?
Not sure, does it have Storm Troopers?
Gravity is a law, sir. Might wanna go back to 2nd grade and learn some stuff you missed. And as to molecular theory, scientists cannot exactly tell or predict the results; nor can they repeat them exactly according to their own procedures. Thus, it is a theory.
The theory of evolution is different in that it cannot be shown to do what people even suspect it will do, like in molecular theory. It is ludicrous and self-contradicting to say that something takes millions of years to happen, and yet in the last two hundred years, we’ve seen it. And if you say we haven’t seen it, then you can’t prove that it’s there.
Yes, we can say we’ve seen it, as it’s an ongoing process. To get from dinosaur to bird takes millions of years, but there are many examples of traits, big and small that we can see change. The easiest example is bacteria evolving into antibiotic-resistant varieties. Also, if you studied evolution theory, you would see that although it’s a long, ongoing process, certain traits happen in a very short amount of time. That’s because if a new trait shows up as a random mutation, and it’s a great one, like longer toes, making it easier to climb trees, and therefore avoid predators, that trait will be favored and be dominant in only a few generations. It’s such a great adaptation, the species breeds it in. Your argument is unfounded.
Evolution is both theory and FACT. Populations change genetic traits over time. This is observable, it is fact. Speciation occurs over time. This is observable, it is fact. Explanations given as to how these facts occur are theories. Refinement of Darwin’s proposals are considered the most accepted theory behind evolution, other theories that were proposed and later rejected include Lamarckism and Transmutationism.
Consider yourself pwnd.
What the hell are you on about? A theory in the scientific test means it is testable and observable. Evolution is a theory, like anything else in science is a theory, which means it is science and can be taught in science class. Intelligent Design is not a theory because it is completely untestable and therefore cannot be taught in a science class.
As for your first point, I’ve helpfully included a link for you about the history of gravitational THEORY.
Gravity is a theory. Falling is a fact. Theories of Gravity seek to explain the fact of falling. Evolution doesn’t take millions of years to happen in a lab. Especially with species that have very short generations, like fruit flies.
*poke* But they’re all still fruit flies. Call me when they start turning into, I don’t know, monkeys or something
How about the evolution of entirely new traits that were never seen in nature before, like the ability to digest nylon? Seeing as how there was nothing even remotely like nylon in nature before we invented it, there is no way any species could have evolved the ability to digest it before then. And digesting it is not easy, it requires entirely new biochemical pathways. Yet we have seen this completely new ability evolve.
but you’re still not jumping species yet. That’s where the big problem most of us non-believers in evo have. Sure, you’ve got the evolution that covers adapting to survive, in whatever form that takes, but you’re still not getting horses from birds.
Yes, the evolution of the ability to digest nylon is ‘jumping species’ equivalent to horses from birds. The nylon eating bacteria are an entirely new species that simply could not have existed before we invented nylon. Sorry. Nylon is VERY hard to eat, evolving the ability to digest it involves the addition of nmerous completely new chemical pathways. It is a new trait, like an extra arm or an eye would be a new trait.
Nor does evolution say you will get horses from birds. Evolution simply states that creatures evolve over time in response to their environment. So your statement is actually a decent bit ignorant of how things work.
As for not believing in evolution, that is your truth to deny not ours. It happens and is still happening. It is based on generations, which in some species can take millions of years but drastic changes can happen as Seth stated above.
I don’t know Seth, that just sounds to me like a species adapting the ability to eat a new food source… It’s still bacteria, right? I don’t know what I believe about evolution, like someone else said somewhere in these comments evolution could just be a tool used by God in the physical, just wondering…
They key here would be “common ancestor”. I love it when some people try and say that believing in evolution means you believe people evolved from monkeys. People AND monkeys evolved on different pathways that at one time, a very long time ago, was the same evolutionary branch.
@ema: Speciation is a complex thing, because the definition of species is difficult problem. For instance, have you heard of ‘ring species?’ That is a set of related species that aren’t really separate, but aren’t the same. Consider the case of arctic terns. For simplicities sake, and because I can’t remember the exact numbers and names, lets say there are ten species, A-J. The A species
can interbreed perfectly well with B and J.
–
A can breed with C and I, but the offspring are infertile, like ligers and mules. A can not breed with the other species. Each individual species is like A, it can breed with its nearest neighbors, but not with those further around the ring.
–
Evolution could well be a tool used by God. It is important to remember that the theory of Evolution is not a theory of origins. It says nothing about how life started in the first place. In fact, we do not have a theory about the origins of life, as the word theory is defined in the sciences. All we have are hypotheses. None of these have enough evidence supporting them to be called theories, yet.
So since no one was around 2000 years ago to witness anything, does that mean there’s no proof Jesus existed?
Well, there are other historical texts that speak of him existing and being crucified. The historian Josephus (sp?) is one I know of.
@Seth: I’m not disputing that evolution occurs in the form you’re describing. Adaptation of the species is easy to track. The problem I have is what Jane mentioned, the ‘common ancestor’ for everything. Evolution could be a design of God, just like the Big Bang. I don’t think Creation and the Big Bang are mutually exclusive either. I just don’t think it happened spontainiously. Evolution and the Big Bang had a common cause, if you will
@froofrou: A number of well respected scientists happen to be Christain and hold exactly that belief, so you are in good company. Don’t let anyone tell you that science and religion are incompatible. They are just different, and speak to different areas of human experience. Many scientists believe in God.
Seth, you ought to know by now that I don’t let anyone dictate what I think
I refuse to think that God limits Himself to being less than perfect and omnicient.
My boss came in. Let me finish that post. If God is truly perfect and omnicient, then He can do whatever the hell he wants to in order to get the world like He chooses (I’m only talking about animal and plant life here, not the evil that’s in the world). So, that’s why He made (or caused to evolve) the platypus, because He knew it would give us something to try to figure out for the next million years
I think the important distinction is the religious experiences are not repeatable by an outside observer, because they are completely personal. Even if you can repeat an experience, it is still entirely inside you, or at least not accessible to other humans. Science can only deal with things that everyone can experience and come to an agreement on. Religion has no way to prove to someone who has not, say, experienced grace that such an experience is possible.
–
In defense of religion in general, sociological studies have shown that there are only three things that reliably correlate with human happiness. First thing is having enough money, property or whatever to get by. Having more than that does not, on average, make you any happier. Second is community, people in close knit communities are, on average, happier. Third is religion. Now, one could posit that ‘religion’ fits under the category of ‘close knit communities.’
But note that taking all three together, we get the basic outline of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs: survival, socialization, self actualization.
Religion adds something lacking in mere close knit community, namely, a path towards self actualization.
damn theories…evolution…gravity…when will people stop believing in these damn theories.
I believe gravity qualifies as a law
Laws were made to be broken.. just ask OJ!
I believe the various and constantly changing gravitational theories count as just that, theories. Like everything in science and unlike unshakable religious dogma.
Which theory of gravity qualifies as a law, Einstein’s theory, or Newton’s theory? Do those theories apply to all situations, or only some?
Answering my own rhetorical questions: They both qualify as a law, and they are both WRONG. We know they are wrong, and how they are wrong, so we know where we can use them, and where we can’t. Newton’s theory does not work at relativistic speeds, and Einstein’s theory doesn’t work at subatomic level. We have no unified theory of gravity that works in all cases.
‘A day is as a thousand years’ is a poetic term meaning that time doesn’t exist to an immortal being like God. Quit being so literal already!
ME: Look Bobby, Genesis 1 is a poem. It’s in verse form and is different from genesis 2.
BOBBY: *face twists into an expression of naked horror* Are you… a LIBERAL!
Hey, I remember Genesis 1:
1 Oh hai. In teh beginnin Ceiling Cat maded teh skiez An da Urfs, but he did not eated dem.
2 Da Urfs no had shapez An haded dark face, An Ceiling Cat rode invisible bike over teh waterz.
3 At start, no has lyte. An Ceiling Cat sayz, i can haz lite? An lite wuz.4 An Ceiling Cat sawed teh lite, to seez stuffs, An splitted teh lite from dark but taht wuz ok cuz kittehs can see in teh dark An not tripz over nethin.5 An Ceiling Cat sayed light Day An dark no Day. It were FURST!!!1
Where does Long Cat fit into all of this?
It actually make Genesis make more sense?
Lol, I was just thinking that. Someone needs to publish the LOLBible!
I believe it’s been done
http://www.lolcatbible.com
When were the cheezburgers created?! Or, did they always exist?
If a cheezburger is nommed in the kitchen, and no one is around to witness it, does the nom fill your stomach?
I believe Ceiling Cat could answer that, but then he would have to nom you!
Blasphemy! Blasphemy! Burn the witch! Seven days means seven days! LOL
Holy f*ck you sure are anal. I’m no Biblical anything. I was making a joke. Pull that pole out, why don’t you? While you’re at it, stop treating anybody with a differing opinion from you like a complete dumbass.
Upon reading, I may (or may not) have misinterpreted half of that. Better to mention that now before stuff blows up. Or, as they say “n b4 the flames”. If I did indeed read your comment wrong Carmen, then I do apologize. If not, well, it stands, obviously.
Woo Hoo! I love righteous indignation.. Go! Man! Go!
…wut?
Exactly.
Until someone old enough to discredit her comes out, or until she starts forcing her views on others, I’d say let her believe what she wants.
Besides, she didn’t really say that dinosaurs and people thing, it started out as satire on a blog, and exploded from there. Click my name.
Yes, Phaelin, God is cool like that. The question is, why would God create the earth with the appearance of being millions/billions of years old? Just to confuse us? Just to give us things to fight about? The Lord God gave us our brains and expects us to use them.
sheesh….
10,000 years is for liberals. True believers know it’s only 6,000.
Duh.
True believers know that your opinion doesn’t reflect Christianity’s thoughts in entirety. Don’t pretend to speak for an entire demographic.
failure to comprehend humor WIN !
Leland usually is the guy proclaiming everyone’s “disrespect” and the like…..
on a satire site…
Maxwell Silverhammer is the guy who thinks it’s funny when satire is placed solely on one group, rather than fairly. Satire is funny until it makes fun of something that is dear and close to you. I’m sure if Obamessiah was mocked once, that lol’s ratings would rocket downward, because a vast majority of this site’s viewers are more liberally based (and that’s a useless point to try to argue, just take a look at the last 100 PK lols and it shows itself). So, yeah, it is disrespectful to make fun of what group. Actually, in the real world, that’s called prejudice, which, if you’ll recall, is exactly what white people were 50 years ago. Most people didn’t like prejudice, and neither do I.
In the comments, Obama is mocked all the time, such as every time a republican calls him ‘Obamessiah’ (which I’ve never seen an honest democrat or independent say).
Actually bud, if you’d LOOK at what I post instead of frothing at the mouth
over every little transgression people have against your views, you’d see I
make fun of both sides. But then, that would mean you’d have to look for
something you dont believe then eh?
As you can tell… check The Failcop postings too, I fail everyone.. not just
the right.
There are barely words enough in the language to describe the extent to which you fail. Mature people who are secure in their beliefs can laugh when their beliefs are satirized. It is the insecure person who reacts with hostility or complaints of prejudice. Not to mention the epic loserdom of comparing white-on-black prejudice in the real world to a stupid lol site. Go cry elsewhere, emo kid.
please english better.
please to english better leland dude.
WIN!!!!!
There’s a unified Christian thought on the date of creation? Bugger me with a gate post and tell me you love me, but that’s a new idea to me!
Aside from “There’s a God, and he did stuff” there isn’t a unified Christian thought on anything. I think he’s lying, which may or may not be breaking the ninth commandment, depending on your demonintation. (yes, I had to look it up)
Basically, I think they can lie to non believers…
Add to that people who believe in virgin births. Boy, the hoo-har when that bishop admitted it was pretty far fetched and was probably down to a mistranslation or exaggeration. Boy, that was messy.
Campaigning does that to you I guess. Even Obama looks tired these days. McCain? Well, how much older could he look? At a certain point he’ll switch to the Crypt Keeper, but that’s still a ways off…
Agreed. Saw him on Daily Show the other night and he’s put on some grey.
You know, that’s probably one of the worst pictures of Sarah Palin….
…and I’d still bang her.
I’ve always thought she looked good – then I saw this pic:
http://punditkitchen.com/2008/10/29/political-pictures-sarah-palin-rnc/
It does explain the wardrobe buy. Why didn’t the RNC just say so? We all have that one friend who needs Stacy and Clinton!
Oh hell no, that picture of her makes me so want to bang her right then and there in the supermarket aisle….
What are your feelings for a greased knot-hole?
i think that’s how we got Columbus Day too…
Aight – I’m a little tired of the whole Christian bashing thing… let’s bash on Muslims and Scientologists (no, i am NOT suggesting that they are an actual religion) some more..
.
Of course, that was sarcasm… I admit that those who believe the Earth is only 10,000 years old are a bit off the wall, but I am seriously tired of Christian bashing – we’re not all nuts.
.
That said… I ROFL’d on this one… HAHAAAAAAAA
I’ll stop bashing the Christians when they stop bashing the homos.
*masturbates on bible*
There’s a difference between bashing and disagreeing. Christians don’t agree with homosexuality because the Bible (their holy text) says it’s wrong. It’s like an evolutionist disagreeing with Creationism, based on texts they view as truth (such as Darwin’s initial writings). Just because you disagree with what someone is doing doesn’t mean you hate them.
There’s a huge difference between experience being out of touch with theory and theory being out of touch with experience.
Evolutionists don’t try to ‘cure’ creationists, though.
No, but they shout them down and do their best to suppress them (happened to me, before you flame)
Maybe there are some like that. Most just want to keep the religious version out of public schools. Teach the intelligent design version in sunday school or at home. They don’t even have to be mutually exclusive, like you have said before froufrou, The creation story sort of follows along with the big bang and evolution in the relative order the science has discovered that it all went down.
But people are so opposed to even letting your version in that it in essence becomes a case where people are put down and not allowed to use their rights of free speech. Evolution gooooooood. Intelligent Design eeeeeeeeeeeevil. I’ve heard of teachers fired for even mentioning intelligent design as a possible belief that other people have, not even as a ‘scientific theory’.
It really should be left to Sunday school or home. Mentioning in the classroom interjects religious supposition, and from some teachers, it could be pushing their religious agenda. Leaving them totally separate is the way to go. Otherwise you’d have to have everybody’s creation theories in school, including Flying Spaghetti Monster. Maybe you don’t agree, but it really is the most fari to leave it out altogether, and just teach it outside public schools if that’s how you want your own kids taught.
Yeah, I heard those stories as well, some blogs reporting that a teacher was fired just for mentioning ID, or just for having a Bible on his desk.
Oh, he also used a red hot piece of metal to brand a crucifix on his pupils hand, but then that wasn’t the reason he was sacked, no sir, so that wasn’t worth mentioning when frothing about how oppressed Christians are.
Because all religious people are psychotic nuts who want you to convert or die.
No, but there are a few who push their agenda all the time. Normally you just roll your eyes at them.
That’s not my point, my point is that a lot of these stories are embellished, like the whole “Prayer banned in schools” lie and the constant cry that such and such a chain has “Banned Christmas” when actually they use the word Christmas all over their website apart from one heading which says “Holiday goods” and incorporates Hanukkah stuff as well.
That’s true. Some of that comes from Bill O’Reilly’s one man crusade fighting the war on Christmas. Not that many people really care about “Happy Holidays” but he whips the fanatics up into a frenzy.
Actually, if you watch the recently released movie “Expelled,” you’ll see documented evidence showing that teachers and professors who attempt to teach Creationism alongside evolutionism are immediately fired.
And secondly, there is just as much “proof” for Creationism as there is for the Big Bang theory. The Big Bang theory in and of itself is so logically flawed, it’s painful.
An Expelled of course is pure, unfiltered truth with not a hint of an agenda or spin or editing or…. Seriously, “proofs” for Creationism? Where? nYHou holy book does not constitute scientific proof. Merely pointing out that we do not have every single piece of the puzzle in place is not “proof” of Creationism.
And I think that a lot of the scientific community would be rather surprised to hear that the Big Bang theory is “so logically flawed, it’s painful.” Shall we ask Dr. Hawking about that?
My father was a rocket scientist (literally) and a Protestant minister all at the same time. He taught us that science is a striving to understand the Creation in a different way than faith. To him, there was no contradiction between believing tat God created the Universe and trying to understand how it works.
I don’t understand why some Christians feel the need to take the Bible literally. Or at least profess to since it is impossible to actually do so and live in a modern world. (Anyone ever actually read Leviticus beyond the “gay” passages?)
Teachers SHOULD be held accountable for trying to push their religious agenda in a ppublic scholl where everybody may not be christian. I’m ok with you teaching intelligent design at home or in church, but not in a public school. That degrades the science, and makes kids unprepared for college science courses(besides the religious agenda thing) The rest of the world would laugh at the US for this. The US used to be ahead of the curve on scientific innovation. Maybe this rediculous stuff is part of the reason we are now being outstripped by countries like Japan and Switzerland.
*public school
I keep saying we need school reform.. LOL
Many Europeans for certain are puzzled by the whole evolution vs creation “debate.” My cousins in the Netherlands are Christians and considered conservative in their country but they really wonder at this attempt to teah religion in science classes. And yes, some of them laugh about it.
Yeah, hence the Flying Spaghetti Monster was born…The guy who invented it was pointing out the absurdity of it all, yet obviously we still see a lot of nutjobs that can’t see that it simply can’t qualify as science.
Leland: The Big Bang theory is based on evidence that the universe is expanding, so people looked at the numbers to figure out when the universe would have started if the universe has been expanding at a constant rate.
Latest evidence says the expansion actually been accelerating.
Oh please, are people seriously going to cite EXPELLED? Oh, for petes sake, you might as well cite Loose Change as evidence Bush blew up the WTC. Get a grip, man.
LOL, Ben Stein in Expelled tried to correlate the teaching of evolution to the Holocaust. Epic Godwin fail!!
Froofrou: please encourage the teaching of intelligent design in churches, so young Christians will know it’s okay to learn science. Otherwise, no, there’s no call to be bringing up invisible beings who guide our destiny. Especially since leading Christian thought is that God doesn’t give proof of his existence because He values Faith over Thought. See also: Babelfish
Don’t quote an atheist author as the reason why I should accept one view of God. That’s just as silly as me trying to quote nothing but scripture to convince you that the sky is blue!
Besides, that’s not the leading Christian thought. That’s a speculation by a guy who was seeing religion through his own weirdly tinted glasses.
Besides, if God didn’t want us to think, He wouldn’t have given us the capacity for thought and instead made us to be thoughtless automotons. (did I spell that right?) We are offshoots of God, so therefore He must be a thoughtful, humorous, emotional Being who loves us. Because we sure as shootin’ love ourselves!
No, Intelligent Design not Science. You’re welcome to teach it in your sunday school but not in my kids’ biology class.
It’s simple froufrou: keep science in science class. Intelligent Design is not science, thus does not belong in the class room.
Some of us just want to keep the fictional, unsupported and disproven story of the universe out of science class. What you want to do with it in comparative religion, at home or in church is none of my business and I couldn’t care less.
You disagree with eating shellfish and tattoos too?
Neh, but wearing mixed threads will end you striaght in hell!
stripes and plaids don’t mix either..
I wonder if they adhere to the burned offerings and tassels stuff too… OT says that God’s likes those….
Don’t forget you can’t eat bats because they are unclean birds
Yep, I read “bats” as “babies”. Sigh. Hooray for Halloween!
Um… standing on street-corners yelling homophobic slurs and holding signs saying their god hates gays and gay people are going to – campaigning to overturn rights that are protected by the constitution, tying a young man to a fence in the middle of nowhere, stoning him then leaving him to die of exposure. Yeah, those are ENTIRELY the same thing as evolutionists disagreeing with a creationist.
Moral relativity FAIL!
More like, judging an entire group of people by a few crazed nuts FAIL. I personally know an evolutionist who joined others to beat up a creationist…just for his beliefs. Therefore, by your “logic,” all evolutionists are psychotic, violent jerks who physically assault everyone who disagrees with them.
As soon as you show me a documented pattern of evolutionists violently oppressing Christians then I might be persuaded to think that Evolutionists come close to holding a candle to the centuries of abuse, repression, violence, denial of rights, attempts to take away guarantee rights, protesting against, arresting, convicting etc. that so-called Christians have perpetrated against gay people – and that’s just in this country.
Nope, sorry, your isolated incident does not an argument make.
Trolling ability is weak in this one…
ZOMG! ANOTHER WIN!!!
The difference is, there is no movement among homosexuals to prevent christians from being teachers, from adopting, or from marrying. For that matter, outside of, maybe, Falluja, there are no”Christian Beatings” going on. NO one ever met a christian in a bar and took him out in a cold October night to be beaten and left to die, tied to a fence; at least, not based on his religion. Not in our country, anyway.
Plus, homosexuality is only mentioned in one place in the Bible, and it’s right next to the instructions to avoid shellfish, cheese on your burger, and two kinds of cloth at the same time. It’s also right next to the text that instructs you to kill your child if he back talks you. How can you cherry pick that? “Hmm, no, I like cheeseburgers, Crab Louie, and poly-blend pantsuits, so obviously Jesus meant for us to change that… But damn, I sure hate me some gay folk, so obviously this one is still in force!”?
Sorry, btw, to those christians out there who are actually intelligent, sincere worshipers of the Prince of Peace. I don’t mean to slam you guys, just the scary christians who want to change our laws to match their small minded view of God. No better than a muslim who wants to enact Sharia law, imho.
I would probably fit in that category, PM. But, while I may be a Christian, my views are not certainly mainstream. Plus, I don’t get easily offended by off the wall comments. In fact, I’m more offended by televangelists then by anything a non-Christian could possibly say.
You’re a good man, Eddie.
In bed, blogs, threads, and other places on the web and beyond.
Teleevangelists… uuuuuHHHHHHHNNNhhhhh!
It’s mentioned in more than one place, but interestingly, only male/male is forbidden specifically.
That’s cos God finds girl-girl hot…
Cuz it is…
That’s the problem with picking and choosing – there were people who were citing the bible as proof that slavery was okay and proof that people of different races shouldn’t get married.
Never mind were, the head of my local church wrote to the paper frothing at the mouth that a Catholic group had called racism a “sin” because as far as he was concerned the Bible clearly states that different races should stay apart and not mix.
Boy was he taking that out of context! Different RELIGIONS shouldn’t mix, and that was because God didn’t want His people to get dilluted! I hate stupid people.
The problem with that statement is that you are a mutt of them doing just that. His people were the Hebrew people of the Middle East. Somehow, I don’t think you are of that descent. That makes you a heathen mutt.
And besides, that statement was for the tribes to not mix with the other tribes in Canaan in order not to lose who they are. They did, got punished for it, and we have a bunch of new stuff in place because of it.
-
As far as me being a heathen mutt, my religion is not the religion of the Old Testament where that decree was made. My religion is from the New Testament, where there were missionaries who went forth and ministered to other peoples and nations, thereby getting the heathen mutts to convert and causing what we have today. That wasn’t intermixing, that was conversion.
It’s just going back to how some people, not all of them Christians, hate everyone who is different from them. I mean seriously. Why do you care if Jane and Jay are getting hitched unless you wanted to marry Jane or Jay? Seriously!
And don’t you conservatives quote the Bible at me; my church director has already TOLD me that I’m going to hell. We covered that way back when I started wearing studded leather bracelets to church.
I’m getting married?! When? Who? Are they cute?
Nah, Lynn and I are just going to claim you as part of harem based on my awesomeness. Or not, haven’t quite decided. Our third is a jealous girl and we value her input.
hmmm ok.. I consider myself a Christian.. not what you’d call born again – but I believe.
I don’t hate homos… I disagree totally with their point of view, but.. here’s how I figure it… They want to believe that people are born gay – but they don’t want to do the required act to procreate – PERFECT!
Darwin Wins w/ Homos
Darwin would win if the trait didn’t crop up so frequently. Why it does, I don’t know, but it isn’t just something that happens to humans. It occurs in other species as well.
Despite the findings concerning physiological differences in the brains of male homosexuals in comparison to male heterosexuals the research hasn’t turned up any concrete causes. Hormonal influences during the pregnancy look like a likely path so far, but it’s going to take a lot of time before science can explain what causes some to be born homosexual instead of straight.
God or nature’s way of preventing overpopulation, perhaps?
Some argue that point for why Hitler popped. Random thought, no offense or anything meant.
Everybody have fun tonight, every body WANG Chung tonight.
Only one person gets to wang chung tonight, and he has one more initial than you.
*wang chungs with authority*
Sorry I’m late. The wang has arrived.
Actually, homosexuality holds many advantages for a species, which is why it is so common in nature. First, it is a bonding experience that can help diffuse tensions and aggression, which is important for a species trying to work as a tribe or pack. Second, it provides good practice, as it is easier to learn sexuality with someone who has the same equipment you do, before moving on to the more complicated stuff. You will find that most sexual behaviors provide some form of evolutionary advantage.
Actually, selection only applies if the trait is genetic and hereditairy. Wether or not homosexuality is both, is not yet known. So you can’t say if it would be selected against.
Granted, it’s a little difficult to test, seeing how homosexuals aren’t usually in the business of propagating their genes, but it could still be tested with siblings.
Sorry, but since when have you known the thoughts of EVERY gay person out there? Maybe you should sit down and talk to a few gay people instead of just saying how much you disagree with them. The ones you see in gay pride parades acting completely lewd are not a depiction of every gay individual.
Spread the love, folks!
OH!?!!.So you’re suggesting that Christians shouldn’t generalize about the way homosexuals think?..
.
Gee…
I’m suggesting that people don’t make generalizations. And I don’t see why it’s such a problem to make that suggestion because I’m not making a generalization in the process. I’m not saying that all Christians are homophobic or making any such accusation on the behalf of gay individuals.
Yes, ALL generalizations are BAD!
Thanks, my roommate is an ex-gay. But I appreciate your immediate judging my words without considering the thought put behind them.
ex-gay. I feel sorry for him.
Is being an ex-gay like being an ex-con? Just askin’.
snort.
Well, you know, we all do some experiementing in college.
Or before. Sexuality is about attraction and as we can see in society, plenty of people have sex with those they aren’t attracted to or only think they are attracted to. It can be an emotional attraction instead of a physical attraction.
I am a heterosexual male, I actually know this all the more from experimenting. I tried guys and… No. Just no. Didn’t work for me. I need to be the only sword in the duel.
I’ve experimented and came to the same conclusions you have. I’ve even been in love with a guy, thought that would make up for the lack of attraction, but nope. Sorry to be crude, but I like boobs, butts & curvy bodies.
–
I could have pretended, but that’s all it would have been. No amount of love and respect can make up for a complete absence of physical chemistry in the long run. You can’t change a gay into a straight any more than you can do the reverse. It just isn’t a choice.
Ya and not to mention would have been unfair if you ended up phoning it in on sexual encounters for the rest of the relationship.
Mmmm, give me curves with T&A. Lynn has such a great hourglass, just delightful from behind……….. I think I need to go pray. >_>
I’m SO glad to hear there are guys at there that like the curvy. And here I was having massive hate for my figure everytime one of my small breasted friends buys a cute bra. For the record, double D’s usually only come in beige white and pink, if you’re lucky, and they have nice wide granny straps. *grumbles*
You see? Being an evil overlord has its perks! Curvacious brides!
….. And cheezeburgers.
Congratulations, you know at least one ex-gay person, and completely missed the point of my post as well. Please, indulge us all and consider the possibility that there are homosexual people out there who are not all devoid of morals and who honestly deserve the same rights as heterosexual individuals. I assure you, they’re out there. That was what I was suggesting when I recommended that you sit down and speak with some gays.
Ex?
WTF does that mean?
Please.
Means the person tried the same gender for a while and then came back. They think the act of sex defines sexuality when sexuality is just the word to state what attracts you.
People who hit this argument seem to think that you must be attracted to somebody to have sex with them.
Um what?!
It really isn’t a point of view. It simply is a sexual orientation. They aren’t going to give you Teh Gayz if they exist close to you. Chances are, they aren’t even interested in you. They just want what you want, to be left alone and have all the choices you and I have. They aren’t looking for converts, they simply are, no more or less than you or me.
Besides, there wouldn’t be any homos if the straight people would stop having all the gay babies. Blame them.
Exactly! As a lesbian woman, I can say (at least for myself) that I just want to live. And you don’t have to choose a side between Christianity or evolution or anything else to agree that living is what all of us are here to do!
I remember another quote from I can’t remember who…
“Gays won’t destroy the sanctity of my marriage. It is all the straight women sleeping with my husband that are the problem.”
Paraphrased but I always laugh when I remember it. Besides, as a disgusting pervert, what isn’t to love about Lesbians?
Besides that I have no chance with them……. >_>
And the skyrocketing divorce rate among “traditional” couples. It kind of amuses me that all this religious fuss is surrounding gay marriage and romance while so many male/female couples are getting divorced.
Ya, I don’t see a huge rabble rousing over that except for some halfass values babble but gays. HO NOES!!!
*sigh*
Yeah, and I’ve seen gay couples that make better parents than several straight ones I know.
True.
Of course the problem is that nobody considers themselves a bad parent, so you’re always better then “those gays down the street”.
I’ve seen heterosexual couples that make better parents than gays. So what? That’s terrible logic.
Secondly, it has not been proven in any way or form that gays are “just born that way.” It simply has not been done. And, if you disagree with me, the burden of proof is on you, as its your claim.
Well, can you prove that people AREN’T born gay?
What do you think of homosexuality in other animals then? What made them that way?
Yawn…
HAHAHA! I never really thought about it – every gay person was conceived during straight sex! HAHAHA! That is awesome! You’d think God woulda caught that early on, no? DWN = WIN!
There is a lot I can just bullshit about but sex… Sex, I know sex and sexuality. It isn’t evil, it isn’t to be feared, it just needs some responsibility involved.
And a whole lot of leaving consenting adults alone. And thank you, I try.
I don’t recall anyone saying sex is evil at all. But if you know so much about sex, then you might remember that procreation only works with a female and a male. Plus, the idea of “leaving consenting adults alone” is a great one…except that if you leave consenting gay adults alone, and they choose to adopt a child…it’s no longer them, alone. It now brings a child into the picture, one that has no choice in its upbringing. So they’re not just minding to themselves. Gays are also attempting to get government benefits just because of their orientation. Again, that’s not them keeping to themselves.
Like I’ve said before. I’ve known gay couples that offer a much more stable household and teach better values than straight couples I have also known. A loving, home that values all its members is better than a guy who beats his wife and the wife is an alcoholic who neglects the kids. HMMMMM, tough one. Being straight doesn’t make them better parents.
Gays are trying to get the benefits that have belonged to fellow human beings in this country for a very long time. It’s also worth noting that heterosexual parents are not instantly better than homosexual parents because there is both male and female representation: if I had to choose between two loving mothers and a family where I was abused, I’d choose the mothers any day. Adoption should be about which parents can provide best for their child, and any parental gender roles should be secondary to that.
–
On a similar note, homosexuals being denied the rights of marriage sounds an awful lot like the “separate, but equal” movements where individuals with skin color were forced to use separate facilities that, despite denial, were greatly sub-par compared to the facilities of the white population. I don’t doubt that this comparison will start a whole flurry of disagreement, but is it really appropriate to tell people that they can’t have rights because of something so petty as skin color or sexual preference?
Oh noes, teh gays are getting uppity and asking for equality! How dare they!
Oh Leland, STFU. I’m hetero and not having kids – so FU and your procreation ideas. Should I be denied my RIGHT to marry and get my spouse’s benefits? It comes down to dollars, doesn’t it? What else could “government benefits” be? I haven’t heard of teh gays wanting welfare for having teh gay, have you? If you’re talking about Social Security – yeah, spouses of any gender should be ENTITLED to their spouse’s SS. Marriage is a legally binding contract. CONTRACT. Look it up. Not soley for the purpose of making teh babies.
And what about the kid who has an alcoholic parent who beats them – did the kid choose to be born or adopted into that? Learn to logic. Better yet, mind your business and life and let other people mind theirs. KTHNXBYE.
Honestly, it’s not like they’re having gay sex in front of the kid they adopted any more than a straight couple would have sex in front of THEIR children, so how on earth do you justify that they shouldn’t be allowed to adopt because they’ll negatively influence the child.
I am still wondering what is actually wrong with being gay…
TEH BIBLE SAYS SO.
Yeah, I just decided to leave that alone, I had enough for one post.
*sigh*
First of all, not all sex is about procreation. Sex can just be sex.
Secondly, you still leave the gay couple alone since they are no more likely to screw the child or screw in front of the child. No more than a heterosexual couple. So, leave them alone. It isn’t a hard concept.
Third, gays are simply trying to get the couple benefits that the heterosexual couples have. No more or less. Procreation has nothing to do with it since there are plenty of childfree couples who are married. They are trying to keep to themselves but we keep telling them how to live.
Sooooo, in summary. Gays are people who want what we want. They want the same access to partner choice and martial bliss/hell that the heterosexual couples have. They demonstrate because the plug ignorant masses keep trying to stop them from having the same rights thus preventing them from keeping to themselves like the rest of us.
Then again, considering how nasty demonstrations against gays can be, I am not so sure we are keeping to ourselves as heterosexuals.
DWN, you should know by now sex isn’t supposed to be fun! It’s only allowed a few days of the month during the woman’s fertile period. I’m sure most Christians adhere to that standard, we all are for overpopulation!
Don’t forget the sheet with a hole in it, and no peeking!!
Then I am a horrid, wicked, naughty, and vile sinner. Mmm sin…
Yep, you’re still going to hell. LOL
It’s okay, I get revenge by banging Lynn while she wears a schoolgirl outfit.
Oh… they’re interested in me..
.
lulz
some guys actually do like to convert…
sorta like missionaries?
Gee, being gay is a philosophy! I never knew
God’s teeth but the colony grow loud retards with more alacrity than a week dead horse grows maggot in July…
Well, actually these days there are other ways than the old tried and true that Darwin knew. Invitro fertilization has changed the equation considerably.
All Christians are born again.
But I get what you mean.
Don’t do that…it makes the pages stick together and we can’t figure out who begat whom!
w00t!
I’m sure you thought this was incredibly funny, and you may have even gotten a chuckle from a few people. But I find it offensive and would appreciate it if you would be a bit more considerate in the future. I am a Christian and I don’t bash Gays. They have a right to free will just as I do. I may not agree with their lifestyle, but I won’t disparage them for it.
“They have a right to free will just as I do.”
Does that mean you won’t support changing the constitution in order to ensure they can’t express the same amount of free will as you can by, say, marrying and adopting?
That is not what I said, so please don’t make it sound like that is what I was implying. I personally have no problem with gay marriage because it’s a legal issue and not a moral issue. If the laws were all based on morality, we would all be in trouble.
… Is it just me or does she look like a man with her jaw like that?
No, you’ve got it all wrong. She devours the flesh of men with that jaw. It is the very sight of their DEMISE!
She unhinges her jaw to devour them, the way Miley Cyrus does! =O
Like snakes eating prey of seemingly ridiculous size… *ENTER HORROR WRITING MODE*
Jesus was a baby? [a href=“http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/10/081010-shark-virgin-birth-2.html”]I thought he was a shark![/a]
wow. I fail.
you mixed up html and bbcode. this site only uses html.
Try this:
<a href=”website here”>text here</a>
lol, ty
the angel what-his-name actually cam to Mary and told her she was chosen by God to carry his son. There was no wishing on a star. But it’s a little fuzzy since the last time I read a Bible was like 4 or 3 years ago and the last thing I read was Revelation. Go figure
oh and wasn’t Christmas like placed in dec 25 just to replace a pagan holiday and Jesus’ actual birthdate would fall somewhere between january through april or something like that…
Of course Jesus wasn’t born on Christmas day, that would suck and he’d get less presents. God wouldn’t do that to his son.
LOL — WIN
Yule.
Considering when the taxes were traditionally collected, it would place Jesus of Nazareth’s birth in the spring time. The celebration was later changed to coincide with the winter solstice, which is a major Pagan holiday in order to get converts. So, when the Pagans were forced to build the Christians’ churches, they would slip in some of their own symbols. I found a couple at the Vatican in St. Peter’s. It’s really interesting.
But then you can also go into how all of the stories about Jesus of Nazareth seem to be lifted from other ancient religions, like ancient Egypt’s Horus. But I don’t want to piss anyone off.
I talked about this the other day on a different LOL. The ancient church hijacked most of the holidays they celebrate.
A lot of religions have done this. I think it’s a way to get their religion to the forefront of people’s minds at the time, then it just takes over.
Did we jack the Chinese New Year for a while?
-
The main reason I have for viewing Christ as a historical figure is that most legends come about after anywhere from 150-600 years of storytelling that blows the original story out of proportion. The story of Jesus as Savior was being spread in it’s original form less than 15 years after His death, making Him either the real thing or the best fake ever. And the best liars on His payroll. And a LOT of seriously gullible people.
-
As far as hijacking holidays, well, everyone has their faults
I’m not disputing Jesus may have been a real historical figure, only the way the ancient church forced everybody to convert over the first 300 years or so. My ancestors should have been allowed to continue honoring the seasons and thanking Odin for writing, etc or whatever they believed. Unfortunately missionaries never work like “here’s a different point of view. We like it.” The ancient church really had a pretty diabolical racket to take over the religion of pretty much all Europeans.
The ancient church was an offshoot of something that was never intended to happen and wouldn’t have happened except for that damned free will. The way Jesus set up His church wasn’t like the commune it became, nor were His followers supposed to force everyone to believe in Him. Read the four Gospels and Acts. Jesus told His followers to go into the cities and preach, but if the people rejected them, they were to leave the cities and brush the dirt from their feet as they went. The acient church with its idiotic, power-hungry leaders perverted the whole process and created The Crusades.
I totally agree there was a political agenda behind it. The church was the richest organization in the world for centuries. What most people don’t acknowledge though, is that these same guys founding the religious orders and whatnot, are the same ones who decided what books are in the bible of today. They only chose certain writings of the multitude available. It’s thought by some they chose some books that helped them justify the suppression of women, for example. There are a lot more wh0res and other sinners in the bible than there are positive female role models. We don’t even know how much of a perversion the modern christian faith is from the original teachings. Just from the multiple translations, much has been lost/changed. See Council of Nicaea, etc. They supposedly even voted on whether or not women even HAD souls at at least one time.
This sort of stuff is why I have a problem with “revealed”, that is, by-the-book religions in general.
That’s why I tend to go off the ancient translations and Dead Sea Scroll-type findings to show where the ‘real’ is. I love the argument that a lot of (Baptist) Christians make that it’s a sin to drink. Period. Of course they ignore the fact that Jesus brought a keg to a party. And He brought the good stuff, too!
-
Jesus hung out with wh0res, sinners, tax collectors…….the man described as ‘a man after God’s own heart’ was one of the biggest sinners in the Old Testament……..these stories are in there for a reason: to show us that we are mortal and God doesn’t expect us to be perfect, only to repent and turn to Him when we do fail.
-
Sometimes I hate the people in my religion
LOL. That’s one reason the ultra right- bible thumpers are so scary. They think they have some sort of divine authority based on the highly subjective interpretation of a single book. They have a BAD political agenda, including rewriting history to say that the founding fathers were all Christian, etc. They haven’t learned from history that mixing religion and politics has pretty much ALWAYS been a BAD idea.
Christian denominations that have a zero tolerance for alcohol have always confused me, but for the more well known point that he allegedly turned water into wine.
The zero tolerance thing comes from the book of (crap, I think it’s) Hebrews 14. I’m not in front of my Bible right now and my memory is shot; it may be Romans 14. Anyway, it’s the chapter dealing with not putting stumbling blocks in front of a brother. Don’t drink in front of an alcoholic, basically. What extremists have done is take that small part out of context, wrap it up, and use it like a sledgehammer to tell others that they’re not supposed to do ANYTHING that might make others sin. That’s not what the chapter is saying! It’s saying don’t judge, that’s God’s job. Don’t be stupid around people you know to be weak in the faith because it will cause them to falter. Stay away from excess.
-
And the ‘stay away from excess’ part is the important one. There are only a few sins actually mentioned in the New Testament that still apply. They are big ones, but there aren’t that many. The rest are mostly about moderation. Hell, eating too much can be a sin if you’re overindulging to the point that you make yourself sick.
-
The story with the water into wine has always fascinated me because there are a lot of people who try to make that story into something it’s not. “Oh, He just made simple grape juice.” “Oh, that wine was run off from the porus stone they used in the pots, it wasn’t REAL wine.” That’s taking something and turning it to fit your own narrow view. The guests at that party commented that the host had kept the good stuff until the last, which wasn’t traditional. You put out the good stuff first, then let the people get good and drunk, THEN bring out the crappy stuff because they wouldn’t know the difference. Jesus brought the good stuff to the party, and enabled drunkards to get more drunk. I hate it when people portray it otherwise!
Ofcourse then the right comes in and screams that that’s just an interpretation as well, or “that’s twisting God’s own words” or something like that.
Anyway, I never had anything against christians, I only have something against the religion itself, not the followers. Nor do I have anything against the moral idea’s like “turn the other cheek”, things like that. I only have something against, what I call “reality claims”. Stuff like: there is a supreme being we call God. Simply claims about reality, apart from what someone beleifs. It’s also wierd for me to see that those things are often named beleifs, but are treated in every other aspect as it if was rock solid fact. I never got that.
Can I just say how much I love the phrase “Jesus brought the good stuff to the party”?
“The church was the richest organization in the world for centuries.”
It still has a cash flow that Microsoft would give body parts to have…
We must have war… God Demands it!
More like, we must have trolling, Maxwell demands it…
Ok, you’re starting to piss me the hell off. *SMACK* STAY IN THE KIDDIE POOL! *SMACK* Leave Maxwell the hell alone, and come back here when you’ve got a decent argument to make that you can frame to people without delving into name-calling! It’s making you look like an idiot, and making the rest of us Creationism-believing Christians look like twerps for putting up with a skid mark like you! *SMACK* Get thee back to thy rock, Heathen, until thee can up with some knowledge! *SMACK*
Go LOGIC LEAGUE!!
I love it when froufrou plays smack-a-troll.
I could totally go for being the enforcer of the LL
Ask and you shall receive! I appoint froofrou our official Logic League Troll Smacker. Trolls beware!
Oooh titles. I dig it. Congrats Froufrou.
*Hug*
*chuckle* You tell ‘em, Froo!
You freakin’ go girl! Thanks so much for that..
Send them scurrying for their bridges!
Im not really worried about Leland. I think he’s got a little bit of
of sand in his vag and unfortunately, wants to take it out on me
for pointing it out in an earlier thread.
And to Leland: You’re on a satire site, people are going to be
making remarks that you wont find funny, get over it. You can
either grow a pair (ovaries or balls, your choice) or you can GTFO
And I would appreciate if you wouldnt speak again until you can
grow up and join us adults in our appreciation of what is humor.
You may not like it, but we love it.
You’re imbuing the ancient church with a little too much power. The ancient church caught a lot of grief from Roman authorities for refusing to worship the deified Emperor. It wasn’t until Christianity was legitimized under Constantine I that the church started gaining some authority. The combination of civil and religious authority was what eventually led to military campaigns and forced conversions. BTW, minerva146, your ancestors got exposed to Christianity primarily through exposure to missionaries and Christian captives, not through military force. (See Wikipedia on the Christianization of Scandinavia)
Unless, of course, you’re talking about Olaf I of Norway.
I never said they were converted by actual, physical force. The church simply gave them no alternatives. They hijacked the holidays etc, and said this is the real way it is, so go to church or burn in hell. I also understand it wasn’t an overnight change. I think some of the blame can be placed on Constantine; Afterall, he convoked the council of Nicaea. By that time, the church had already garnered a fair amount of influence, and Constantine figured to ride the crest of the wave. It was a political move, but doomed the rest of Europe to be converted. It secured some of his right by instilling some divine right. I do know the history. The formation of the “official” dogma at the Council of Nicaea was a political tactic, disguised as a religious one. Unfortunately there are now millions of people who base their spirituality on what was decided there and in the subsequent centralization of church authority.
“It secured some of his right by instilling some divine right. ”
Sorry, that’s worded badly. i was talking about securing divine right of kings. Stupid formatting still not letting me see what I wrote.
On taxes. Basically, there’s no evidence out side of the bible that Taxes were collected that way. It really makes no sense having to up stumps from where you’re living to go pay taxes where you were born.
The whole episode was written to retro fit Jesus to ‘prophecy’…
It makes even less sense to send people away and make them pay taxes elsewhere…
Of course, prophecy is easy to fullfill if you’re writing a story with the prophect right next to you on the table. Robert Jordan did it all the time.
PS: Not to many sheppards out with their flock in the middle of winter either
Too many prophesies between the Old and New Testament to make up a story that would cover all of them.
-
*sigh*
-
I’m not sure why I bother anymore.
True, but a lot of them ARE vague enough to be interpreted or “fit” in many ways. Sort of like Nostradamus
They made a damn good stab… why do you think Martin Luther was defeated on getting rid of Revelations when the Württemberger Protestants started codifying the bible in late 1540s (just before the Catholics got there in 1563 at the 19th Ecumenical Council in Trentino)?
I believe you’re lacking something in your life. It’s called a sense of humor.
-_-’
Get on my buses leaving soon to vote in other states besides your own !
ACORN can’t rig this by themselves you know !
Don’t worry, the RNC can show ACORN how it’s done if they get it wrong.
Time to drop the retarded election system, and just elect a president by popular vote. You know, get some equality in the system.
Hey classic, nothings funnier than yet more cliched anti religious bigotry and villification.
We’ll quit once they stop shoving their religion in our faces, kthnx.
rAmen /b/rother!
Shoving the religion in your faces? I’m fairly sure this site keeps bringing religion back up via Palin jokes, not the psycho religious zealots you blame. Maybe we’ll stop talking about it when y’all stop hating, kthnx?
OK, so we won’t stop hating if you won’t stop shoving, and you won’t stop shoving if we won’t stop hating?
–
Petition to end the insanity. All in favor?
It’s just that you treat beleifs (souls) as facts, and you want to enforce those on other people (anti-abortion stance, anti-gay marrage, etc). It’s simple: your beleifs are exactly that, beleifs, not facts. Stop treating them like that, stop trying to enforce them on other people.
You win the internetz.
Why on earth do you come here then? Why go looking for stuff you find insulting? That’s like a black person Googling KKK sites. If you seek out a cowpatty don’t pitch a hissy fit when you get it on your shoes.
ramen?
I see you have not been touched by his noodley appendage. (click my name for info).
I think the average Religionist has bigotry sewn up 90% of the time…
I wouldn’t say average. I know a ton of sane-minded ones. As they say, it’s the noisy ones that make us look bad. Same goes for any group really. Just look the middle-east.
Oh, even the middle of the road ones are pretty nasty when you get through the veneer…
I think in America, you get to choose whether or not you want to be religious. Cue: Soviet Union joke…
Wahmbulance on its way…
I’m going to save this, print it on card stock, and send it out at the holidays! Maybe not to certain family members though lol.
Who cares about the Biblical inaccuracies? I am a Christian and I found this HILARIOUS!!! I do not find it offensive. It’s just a jab at Sara Palin, not the Bible.
You know, it irritates me when people mis-spell her name……..I guess it’s a near and dear issue to my own heart
Can you please lend Leland some of your funny? He’s sadly lacking.
Actually, funny isn’t the only thing lacking in Leland’s life..
I’m with you.
People need to relax.
talking but not walking? better re-evaluate…
LOL!
Maybe you should all just stop over-analyzing it. It’s a joke.
And a hilarious one at that.
THANK YOU!
This might be the funniest one I’ve seen yet…
i acutally kind giggled at the LOL, then saw your post and actually LAUGHED.
i misspelled and then correctly spelled the same word in one post? ugh…early work mornings w/o coffee suck..
So funny I almost spit out my breakfast! Thanks.
keep laughing…I guarantee it won’t be funny when you stand before God on Judgement Day
Man, if there is a God I sure hope He is more loving than you give Him credit for.
*EPIC APPLAUSE*
If there’s a Judgement day, I owe your god a severe kicking…
Reminds me of Concrete Blonde’s, haunting, Tomorrow Wendy (Click my name for the song)
I told the priest don’t count on any second coming/
God got his @ss kicked the last time he came down here slumming.
He had the balls to come the gall to die and then forgive us/
No I don’t wonder why I wonder what he thought it would get us
Let me ask you, are you scared of dying and meeting up with a pissed off Allah, Ganesh or Zeus?
Xenu scares the crap out of me.
Hecate is gonna totally kick your ass when you die y’know..
Bigger question: Am I more afraid to die and meet a God displeased with my lack of piety or are you more afraid to die and find there is nothing?
Option 1 for me
Ditto for me. If there is nothing, then I’ve done nothing to lose. But if there is a God and I didn’t do the right thing because I was hedging my bets that there IS not God, then I’m screwed.
Ah, the logical fallicy of Pascals wager. You’re not hedging your bets at all, because any God would be more annoyed at worshipping the wrong God and spereading lies about his wishes than simply being disbeliever. If you want to hedge your bets you’re goign to have to worship lots of different Gods – but even that won’t work, because so many of them have as a basic tennant that they are the one true God.
It also assumes that there are no downsides to living your life as a believer.
What would the downside be? I can’t think of any..
It depends on if the believer lifestyle also comes with restrictions that range from mildly irksome to contradictory to your current values. I enjoy having a beer or two on occasion, so if I joined belief set X that forbade drinking that would be a downside. If I like to go out and snowboard on Sunday but belief set Y says you have to sit in church all morning that would be a downside. If belief set Z says that all all wimmin should stay in the kitchen with a bun in the oven both literally and figuratively then that would definitely be a downside for me. If belief set A says that being gay is eeeeeeeeevil then that’s an obvious downside for those that are gay.
Oh, ok I get what your saying. In “my” belief system I do have moral guidelines that I try to follow based on the teachings of Jesus. For example, he was pretty much against the religious leaders of the day because of the way they put restrictions on the Jews. He then gave the commandment that 1) You shall love the Lord your God, and 2) Love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang the original 10. So fun isn’t out of the question, it’s just a matter of degrees.
Partially true. Only a few religions insist on there being only “One true God.” Namely, those of Judeo-Christian lineage. (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) Ost other religions have a larger pantheon, or ancestor worship, etc. It’s only because they are so pervasive in our culture that it’s perceived that religion consists of a “true god” to begin with. Even the Jews had other gods/goddesses until Jehovah got jealous and insisted on being the only one they were allowed to honor.
No, if there is nothing, then you’ve wasted all your chances to do anything with your life that ancient tribesmen wouldn’t approve of.
Like? I don’t think I’ve wasted my life and I’ve managed to make quite fulfilling. In fact, I can guarantee I’ve done and seen more then some ancien tribesman.
Didn’t say anyone had wasted their life, just their chances to partake of behaviors that the ancient tribesmen (would have) disapproved of. I choose not to be bound by their superstitions, and feel better for it.
Superstitions like, don’t murder anyone, don’t steal, don’t commit adultery, don’t be envious… ? Following probably *most* of their rules will actually help most people led more fulfilling and successful lives. Which ones do you dissaprove of?
Probably the part that some figure from hell was the seducer and cause of all sin. Also the concept that we must be good, not because it is right, but because an all powerful arbiter of justice would punish us if we weren’t.
Those are the ones off the top of my head as both remove responsibility from us and place it on figures outside our senses.
But those aren’t rules, those are just explanations. The rules are still good and useful.
(By rules I mean the ones I mentioned above as examples…)
Not true.. You are good because most people have a sense of what is right and wrong. If you actually take the time ti read the Bible, you will find that we are each responsible for our actions. We are then held accountable for them.
n8 is doing his best to be a complete atheist without acknowledging that there are some good parts to Chrstianity
(love you n8!) I’m surprised that no one has thrown in the other set of commandments that is really similar…..crap, drew a blank on who wrote them. I believe he was Islamic. But, they aren’t quite the same, and if you take the Bible at face value, don’t predate the original Pentatuch.
Superstitions like that praying will heal your child better than taking them to a doctor, superstitions that are still claiming lives even in Western developed countries to this day. Superstitions like refusing blood transfusions that would save your life. Superstitions like sitting in a building one day a week, praying 5 tiems a day instead of doign something productive. Superstitions like phycologically damaging yourself because you’ve been told that the sexuality you secretly hold is sinful. Superstitions like nailing yourself to a piece of wood, lashing your own back with razors, cutting your childs head with a sword or going without food for days. Superstitions like whipping yourself up into a frenzy and trampling each other to death at a pilgramage. Superstitions like avoiding contraception that could protect you from STIs. Superstitions like giving money you can’t afford to the Vatican or the Church of Scientology. Superstitions like handling poisonous snakes. Superstitions like not being with the person you lvoe because they’re the wrong religion or gender… I could go on…
I was speaking about the 10 commandments. Tell me how the 10 commandments are bad for society. They aren’t and if you follow them as best you can, whether you believe in God or not you will probably have a happy life. No guarantees of course, but if you don’t follow them you are surely asking for trouble. I don’t know where those things come from you mention above, seems like most of those are modern interpretations.
” if you don’t follow them you are surely asking for trouble.”
Thou shalt have no other God but me? If you don’t follow the God of the bible you are asking for trouble? Some of the rules in the ten commandments are common sense and are accepted by just about any society, whether religious or secualr. Some others, if enacted in law, would be completely opposed to the constituion.
Following “Thou Shalt Not Kill” when your family is about to get murdered by an axe murderer and you’ve got a shot gun would certainly have a negative effect. And it’s not “Thou shalt not kill except…”, “Thou shalt not kill but…” It’s thou shalt not kill. And it’s not a suggestion, it’s a commandment. So you have to follow it… (pause) Or, you can say “Hmm, that interpritation doesn’t make sense to me – I think I’ll choose another translation.” And kid yourself you’re moulding your views around your holy book instead of vice-versa.
“Keep the Sabbath holy” – How do you do that? Do you refuse to work on a Sunday, even if it means losing your job? Do you create laws to stop anyone working on a Sunday even if it damages your economy? Do you shut up shop on a Sunday, even when there is demand for your business and when your employees need the hours to pay their rent?
The one about not covetting your neighbours posessions is a bit of a hoot as well, seeing as the American Dream is essentially based on coveting, keeping up with the Joneses, building yourself up to have that nice house, that big car.
What would you be missing out if you followed these rules? How would you suffer if you didn’t murder anyone? Or if you missed out on cheating on your spouse, well you might feel like you’re missing something but believe me your are in for a world of trouble in most cases, possibly even resulting in *being* murdered. How do you suffer if don’t get to lie? Or steal? It might seem like you should be able to do that, but in the end you will always be sorry for it. It might seem that these are common sense but they were given at a time when they were ANYTHING but common sense and they have shaped our world since then. Following these rules, with the exception of the first one, is actually beneficial to all people.
It doesn’t say ‘thou shalt not kill’. The correct translation of the original is ‘thou shalt not MURDER’, which allows you to use deadly force when necessary. If thou shalt not KILL was the actual statement, then God would be contradicting Himself when He says that people should give a life for a life, and so on.
“The one about not covetting your neighbours posessions is a bit of a hoot as well, seeing as the American Dream is essentially based on coveting, keeping up with the Joneses, building yourself up to have that nice house, that big car” – Well if that’s your interpretation of the American Dream I feel sorry for you. Coveting the possesions of others will lead to stress and unhappiness and possibly make you very unhealthy. It may also lead you to break laws which can lead to jail and further unhappiness.
The fact is that it is not possible to directly translate one language to another with absolute precision. Languages do not simple transpose one set of chracters into another and retain all meaning and inferences, which is why if you get two people to translate the same piece of text, even in modern languages, you will end up with different texts with subtly different meanings.
“Do you shut up shop on a Sunday, even when there is demand for your business and when your employees need the hours to pay their rent?” – There are businesses that do that and get along just fine, again, I am talking about how following any of them would be bad for non believers… What would they be missing out on? Or would it actually improve their lives by following them.
About the translation – as froofrou points out, if God meant kill instead of murder he would be contradicting himself, and we don’t believe he does so we accept the translation of “murder” instead of “kill”
@ Ceefax: Keeping the Sabath holy has different interpretations, and is blown out of the water if you read Romans 14. In there it states that one man’s day may be more holy than another man’s day, and that it’s not one specific day of the week. Harley Davidson riders hold Monday in a higher regard, and take that day off every week. So do hairdressers. I keep Sunday, because it’s more convenient. Just about every business (outside of large corporations) are off at least one day a week, and NO ONE requires their workers to work 7 days a week. So where is the problem? Just because the BUSINESS doesnt’ close down, but instead allows its workers to take that day for themselves doesn’t make the business evil.
@ Ceefax: I’m sorry, it seems like ema and I have just buried you in stuff. I promise we’re not trying to convert you against your will, but you seem to have some preconceived ideas about religion that need to be corrected. I like that you’re able to form an intelligent argument, and that you have principles you’re sticking to
-
@ema: GO GIRL!!!
Just to quickly qualify what I’m saying about translations and murder vs kill. Take a word in English, seeing as we’re talking about killing, let’s go for “slay.” You’ve got this text saying that someone was slain. Just think about the word for a second and all the implications you get from it. How violent was the death? Was it justified? Was there likely to be a weapon involved? What was the killer like? Is the victim innocent? Was it planned or heat of the moment? You get lots of little inferences just from those few letters. Now imagine you’re translating it into another language – there will not be a word which has EXACTLY the same implications that the word Slay has. Maybe you have to choose between the Chinese word for “kill” or “slaughter”, both of which are similar, but aren’t exact.
Now, to the word “Murder” and it being the ‘correct’ translation. Murder in the English language means illegally killing someone. That’s what makes the death penalty, killing in self defence, policemen killing in the line of duty, soldiers killing in war etc not murder. But abortion, in the United States, is also not illegal. Does this mean that abortion does not violate the Ten Commandments, in your opinion?
What I’m trying to say is that both Kill and Murder are people making what is, in their judgement, the best approximation of what the word means in English.
Yes, but we aren’t going to throw out the whole book because of some issues with translations. There is still value there and if you look at the whole scripture I think you can make an informed opinion on what the translation really is.
I’ve thought long and hard about this, ema. I’ve looked into all the major world religions and many of the minor ones. I’ve talked at length with many religious and spiritual people. I was raised as a respectful agnostic, my parents tried to put religious beliefs in perspective and let me make my own decisions. I’ve come up with some theories.
–
First, it is my current belief that religion has been a positive force for mankind, overall. It has it’s pluses and minuses, but they add up to a net positive. We’ve heard a lot about the negatives in this thread, but let me state what I feel to be the biggest one. It isn’t the intolerance it seems to cause,
because it’s hard to find a tolerant culture suddenly becoming intolerant with the adoption of a new religion.
–
The problem with religion is that it teaches people that there are final ultimate truths, and that people can stop thinking for themselves once they have found the right final ultimate truth. Not everyone falls prey to that problem, as witnessed by, oh say, you and froofrou. I believe that anyone who can think for themselves can spot the signs of it in others.
–
But religion gives so much to humanity. Frankly, most people never progress beyond the crime and punishment level of moral reasoning, and so the idea of someone watching over them and handing out justice gives many people a reason to be ‘good’ people, i.e. productive citizens and not a drain on society.
–
And it gives people who progress beyond that level of moral reasoning a framework that is time tested and found to be workable and useful by numerous people throughout history. All major religions do. Some better than others, IMHO, but most differences can actually be traced to culture. Contrary to popular beliefs, recent studies have shown that religion adapts itself to the culture and not vice versa.
–
I think you will find that the people who object to religion vehemently had it forced on them, and were forced to reject it. I never had to do that, I culd always look at it objectively. I did go through a period where I believe that it was a net negative overall, but experience and analysis since then has changed my opinion.
–
As closing thought, you should watch George Carlin’s bit on the ten commandments. He claims they boil down to “Don’t hurt other people,” and “Respect the source of thy nookie.”
Nice post Seth! I think we have a lot in common when it comes to this subject. I have also spent a lot of time studying other religions, I still practise yoga and pranayama and find there are huge benefits there and wish that other Christians could see beyond their fears that other spiritual traditions do have things to offer. I never had any religion forced on me so maybe you are right about that, I can look objectively at the whole thing and don’t feel threatened.
@seth: That was simply brilliant. It does put things into perspective. There are times when I can be eloquent, unfortunately I wasn’t doing so well on this subject. At any rate, I would never force what I believe on anyone, even my own family, and I have a problem with those that do. I would only hope that others would respect what I believe without disparaging me for it.
I’ve got to get in on the love fest and agree with Jane. Seth’s dreamy when he’s expounding
I know sexy when I read it!
Every single one of those superstitions is held by the kook fringe of the religion, the same way that the Islamic kook fringe believes that it is ok to blow up buildings to make a point. The mainstream doesn’t hold with any of those, except for the sitting in a church building one day a week, which isn’t a bad thing. And it’s also NOT REQUIRED.
But if you believe that one interpritation of that one religion is the one true religion it doesn’t help you very much, does it? Pascal’s wager is false for several reasons, one of which, as demonstrated, is that it wrongly assumes that there are no downsides to believing and the other being that you don’t know which religion is the correct one to follow. I hate Phelps as much as anyone, but I think his horrible spiteful God is just as likely to be the one true God as anyone else’s deity.
n8 was talking about following the superstitions of ancient herdsman. I pointed out that they believed in following the 10 commandments from the old testament. What is the down side to following the 10 commandments?
Phelps’ horrible spiteful God is a corruption and perversion of the actual God, with whom there is love. And you’re arguing for something that you’ve argued against in the past, i.e. that the kook fringe is the definition of the religion. You’ve argued (and I say you in general) that you can’t judge Islam by the radicals, and then come in here saying that it’s ok to judge Christianity that way.
-
The mainstream comes nowhere close to the beliefs you outlined in your diatribe against ‘superstitions’. So if I’m in a religion that is pretty close to the center, and goes along with the Biblical teachings instead of following a weird outlying fringe, where am I going wrong? If you read the Bible, nowhere in there does it say that it’s easy, fair, or anything of the sort. Christians have had to put up with some really crappy things over the centuries simply because they are Christians. So why is my devotion to something that has been held near and dear to so many hearts such a bad thing? Why should I not preach to people what I have found to be ‘the Way’? If I am sure that I have found the Way, then why can’t I proclaim that?
-
I’m not discounting anyone else’s religion. I think I’ve found the right way. I want everyone else to end up where I will end up. Just because some nut perverts the religion to fit his own warped view of the world doesn’t make God any less real, or any less the same God. It’s a VIEW of God that is really whacked out.
I don’t remember having this discussion with you to be honest, are you sure it was me? You’re talking about the “actual God” in a way that makes you seem wilfully ignorant of the fact that what you see as the “actual” and “real” God may be slightly or completely different to that of other people, who may also see your interpretation of God as a “Perversion” and either too lovey-touchy-feely or too judgemental and spiteful. From the moment you decide which religion to follow or which translation of your text to read you are making up your own God, one which most fits with your beliefs of what God should be.
I said ‘you’ in the general sense. Go back and read the top of the post
@Ema
You’re the one who brought up the 10 commandments specifically, I was speaking of the superstitions in general. Though I will tell you that I covet like a madman and I’m fine with that. I also pay lip service to Odin and the Flying Spaghetti Monster (fully in jest of course) so that’s No Other Gods and Takeing the Name in Vain right there. I’m free to be as flippant and covetous as I like because I’m not bound by an arbitrary list of BS that some barbarian brought down off a mountain. (I guess he could hear the voices in his head better from up there?)
But the 10 Commandments are just one subset of the Christian religion that I ignore. I eat pork (big no-no in the Old Testament), I do “work” (as defined) on the Sabbath, and I had sex prior to marriage. (A good bit of that, in fact.) I wear clothing not made of linen, I trim my beard and cut my hair. According to the superstitions, all of these are cause for God the Madman to torture me in Hell forever. Are you starting to get an idea of why I think the whole religion is stupid?
And again, it’s not just Christianity. All the other theistic religions are just as retarded. The only religions worth paying any attention to are the ones focused on getting through life with maximum joy and minimum pain, like Confucianism, Taoism, or Buddhism. When’s the last time a Buddhist persecuted anyone?
Ugh, “takeing”. I hate the margins on these text boxes almost as much as I hate religion. Almost.
Well, coveting is not good for your health!!
It’s stressful. It’s also healthier to take at least one day a week off for rest. Also, I think especially back in those days it was a whole lot safer to keep sex in a monogomous relationship because there were diseases that we sort of have more control over now days. But even now you would be safer and healthier. All I am saying is that you would not miss anything much if you followed the 10 commandments, more than that you would probably have a safer, better life. But, you don’t have to of course!! The other stuff you mention I think was mainly cultural. Anyway, the rules were never given so that we would follow them to the letter, it’s impossible to do it for anyone. For non-believers I think they are still very good guidelines.
@ n8: All of those things you mentioned outside of the Big Ten are just custom and times related anyway. I’ve said before that there is no way to be perfect and not break any commandments, and God specifically says that if you do one you do them all. The Commandments are there to show us that we cannot possibly be good on our own (if you accept the premise that one sin is just as bad as another), and must therefore accept the Gift of Salvation to get into Heaven. The Commandments were fullfilled in the New Testament anyway, and are there as a guidline to daily life. You’re taking the Old Testament and trying to force ema and me into a box as far as Christianity is concerned. I think Eddie said it best a little further up: that in the New Testament Jesus gave us two new commandments to follow that are more important than the old Ten: Love the Lord you God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself. Which sounds pretty good to me
Only about half of the ten are suitable for non-Christians.
After all:
Not my god
Have other gods if I want to
I can idolise what I want, such as another god
The sabbath is a purely religious thing, I am not obligated to tak that day for rest
The rest are reasonable rules of to live by, but so are a couple of the Pillars of Islam.
Christians who go to church one a week and Muslims who pray five times a day are a kook fringe?
What if one of the kook fringes of a religion is right? The followers of Jesus were seen as a kook fringe of Judaism back in their day.
Yes, those superstitions. Thanks, Ceefax!
So, the desperation is getting that deep. Nice.
This is the kind of elitist, libelous crap that liberals have been squawking for the last 8 years, and it’s only going to get worse for the next four years if Obama wins.
So typical, to portray a conservative as somehow stupid, because they have some sort of religious view. Aren’t liberals supposed to be accepting and loving of everything and everyone?
RELIGONZ IZ DUM OMG IM SO KEWL!!!1
…Idiot.
Beats the elitist, libelous, anti-education, pro-ignorance that Conservatives have been squawking about since the Contract with America.
Palin gets portrayed like this because she is for taking books out of libraries and against educating children about their own bodies. That’s pro-ignorance and that’s why she’s getting taken to task.
It’s not religion that I think it’s dumb. Just Sarah Palin.
And not even dumb. She’s smar-ish. But Jesus she’s ignorant.
Listen, Bus, if someone asked you this minute what newspapers you read, I mean, even if you were nervous, even if you were being interviewed on TV,
don’t you think you’d have an answer? Criticism is not libel.
smarmy-ish? smearish? smore-ish?
hmmm, smores.
Oh, right. This is “criticism”, I forgot. Because she really believes all of that in the caption. I forgot that “criticism” includes how you can bend the truth to make someone look dumb.
The truth is, liberals think she’s “ignorant” because she’s not liberal. If she were a liberal woman, they’d be fine with her. But since she’s not, it’s okay to treat her like an idiot. It works one way, but not the other.
No amount of liberal thinking would make me want to vote for this woman.
If you don’t want to see politicians positions caricatured, what in the hell are you doing on a political satire site? You want politicians pictures captioned with things they actually said verbatim, go the Reuters.
I don’t think she is clueless because she is a conservative, i think she is clueless because after 7 years of war she has no idea about the president’s doctrine that took us there, that despite having active military bases in her state, she has no idea how they got into the conflict that they serve in. That the only thing she can do is repeat stupid little catch phrases and misinformation.
This is awful. Shame on you.
Shame on who?
I agree with her about the dinosaurs. Everything’s better with dinosaurs. Yes. Even the Bible.
Wow, not even clever in the least.
This must be how her daughter got pregnant too, because she was taught abstinence-only so she couldn’t possibly have had premarital sex. Maybe Sarah is the grandmother of the next Jesus!
BTW- To all of you are offended by this, get over it. I’m a Christian and I believe in evolution by natural selection, plate tectonics, gradualism in geology, and even that the Earth is round and revolves around the sun. Remember that the ‘father of genetics’, Gregor Mendel, was also a monk.
But you still believe the myth that Bristol Palin was taught only abstinence-only sex ed? Sarah Palin has stated she is in favor of teaching kids in sex ed class about condoms.
She’s a troll, and if you’ll kindly step to the right I will dispatch her for you
-
P.S. PK hates me. I had about 4 posts in the thread to Ceefax and you up above that were eaten *sigh*
They eat mine alot, then they show up later when the thread has gone past the point and your’s got skipped over, very frustrating
Yea, me too, and it never makes any sense why and when it’s just whenever the PK post monster is feeling hungry I guess…
LOGIC LEAGUE TO THE RESCUE!!!
Well done you.
But for Evolution to work (if we are talking by natural selection) it’s intrinsic links with DNA also have to work.
Since I don’t think man will ever be able to claim discovery of the creation of DNA (or the evolutionary process by natural selection that lead to the creation of DNA) we are stuck.
You cannot hold God in the palm of your hand.
This lol is SO spot on. Sarah Palin is completely crazy! She doesn’t even believe climate change is man-made! Even George Bush now believes climate change is man-made!
Plus, Palin is such a hypocrite! She’s a keen hunter, yet she claims to be Pro-Life? WTF?
I wholeheartedly agree with this lol (as stupid as that may sound).
Lol, mary and joseph could never afford a dinosaur silly, otherwise they could stay in the hotel and play in those cool spa baths they have there
you forgot the part where Jesus hides the dinosaur bones to trick no believers into comeing up with evolution. lol, she proly believes this
Religious nutters believe that having a baby if you are a teen is ok so long as you do not get pregnant and get an abortion. Drop out of school.Not god but the taxpayers will take care of you and you can then belittle the non-believers.
This is pretty funny. But the lighting DOES make her look pretty old…
Just looking at that picture… She looks like William ‘Gil Grissom’ Peterson in ‘Charlie’s Aunt’.
Not a political comment, just one of those ‘My god, she looks just like…’ moments
good info
Her intelligence baffles me….
This LOL offers a bit of an explanation:
http://cheezburger.com/View/4142067712
makes me glad there is a hell for haters to burn in.
Liberals are pure evil.
How about conservatrolls that necropost two year old pics that weren’t particularly funny to begin with? They go to heaven, right?
Makes me quite, quite happy I’m going to hell. I’d rather burn in eternal fires, putting up with Liberals, than spend a week in the presence of you and any god that’d actually welcome you.
Three year old*
I was going for the average between 2008 and 2010, seeing as how this thread has been necroposted and spambotted already.
Jeez, you’d think they’d leave the poor dead thing alone already…
It’s almost Halloween, we’re just getting into the spirit here!
But do you weigh as much as a duck?
No, but I did turn someone into a newt once. He got better.
english much?
3rd grade english.
I can only imagine the numerous ways that could have happened.
Ghetto english, I was thinking.
Seems a little southern to me…
I’ve heard of claims that people can get pregnant from toilet seats. It is highly uncommon/unlikely, but infinitely more likely than your mockery of a suggestion.
Burn her anyway!!
It could be a transfer from men’s airport bathrooms used by West-Coast (GOP) Senator’s while traveling back and forth.
Or at least her clothes… We can stop there… >_>
Ahhh, but does she weigh as much as a duck?
We have to check for the third nipple anyway.
This could get interesting… Keep talking…
Dibs on nipple inspection. I promise to be very thorough.
He is a good man. And thorough.
*applauds* Excellent post my friend, very well done!
you are just chock full of WIN
Vapid attempt at ‘Homespun wisdom’… sort of a saccharine reacted Norman Rockwell-Grandpa Walton-It’s A Wonderful Life style bullshit that Americans seem to lap up…