[theguardian.

phoenixone1 comments on Feb 9, 2022:

They need to be taught a SERIOUS lesson...the school needs to have the BOARD OF EDUCATION there schedule a BUDDHIST, MUSLIM, HINDU, JEWISH, CATHOLIC, PROTESTANT, LUTHERAN, WICCAN, SATANIST, SANTORINI, AGNOSTIC AND ATHIEST as Guest speakers...they want to play the Religious card...FINE...LETS ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 9, 2022:

I didn't see Pastafarian on that list...

Yeah, I MIGHT be a deviant in our so-called modern society.

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 8, 2022:

Maybe it's because I don't want to be alive anymore anyway, but I'd rather die than fuck a girl that doesn't want to sleep with me.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 9, 2022:

@mischl Eh, what can you do? My brain has decided I need to die but hasn't given me permission to commit suicide yet. It sucks super fuckin' bad, but there's nothing I can do about it so I just suffer through it and hope I die in my sleep, or get hit by a huge truck running a light at an intersection, or get shot by someone who's robbing the gas station I walk into, etc. Any kind of accident or natural process would do, but preferably one that gets me before I can be saved (in my sleep on a Friday night would be best).

So I guess I was also banned from the conservative group.

TheInterlooper comments on Jan 8, 2022:

And the Guinness Book of World Records for biggest circle-jerk goes to... @darren316 @Lorajay @dalefvictor @Churchless @phxbillcee @Mooolah @racocn8 @wordywalt As a special thanks to @JeffMurray for his hard work as the pivot man, we give you the honor of cleaning up the mess. I'm sure ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 9, 2022:

@UrsiMajor They stopped giving us the numbers like they used to, but I think Ohio is still kinda bad.

So I guess I was also banned from the conservative group.

TheInterlooper comments on Jan 8, 2022:

And the Guinness Book of World Records for biggest circle-jerk goes to... @darren316 @Lorajay @dalefvictor @Churchless @phxbillcee @Mooolah @racocn8 @wordywalt As a special thanks to @JeffMurray for his hard work as the pivot man, we give you the honor of cleaning up the mess. I'm sure ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 9, 2022:

@UrsiMajor I think it's because he's jealous that he's a creepy douche and I have a pretty girl that asks me how I'm doing. Yeah, shockingly I've been working in aerosolizing bronchoscopic procedures on covid positive patients for two years and still haven't caught Covid. It's gotta be because masks don't work and I'm just the luckiest fuckin' person alive, right? Mentally I'm a disaster though. I'm sure you're aware though as I don't aim to keep that a secret here.

Supreme Court allows Alabama voting maps that advocates say disenfranchise Black voters

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 8, 2022:

We're fucked. Hope I'm dead before he's president again.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 9, 2022:

@snytiger6 Biden has lost support of independents AND democrats. There's no reason to think Trump couldn't beat him. Fuck, Biden's approval rating is absolute shit.

Trump tells Joe Rogan to 'stop apologizing' for Spotify controversies on covid misinformation, ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 8, 2022:

Wait, Trump is telling a racist to not apologize for being racist? And he wonders why people think *he's* a racist??

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 9, 2022:

@snytiger6 There's a thousand ways to *know* Trump is a racist, but he feigns to be genuinely surprised anyone would ever think that about him. I swear he should wear pearls so he has something to clutch.

So I guess I was also banned from the conservative group.

TheInterlooper comments on Jan 8, 2022:

And the Guinness Book of World Records for biggest circle-jerk goes to... @darren316 @Lorajay @dalefvictor @Churchless @phxbillcee @Mooolah @racocn8 @wordywalt As a special thanks to @JeffMurray for his hard work as the pivot man, we give you the honor of cleaning up the mess. I'm sure ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 9, 2022:

@UrsiMajor I love that after he said he was turning off notifications he still had to come back to read. Just like his orange savior, he runs his mouth all day spewing vile shit everywhere, but has the thinnest fuckin' skin imaginable. He's a fragile-ass bitch.

Which of these do you believe the Earth to be?

freedom41 comments on Feb 8, 2022:

It was a toss up between round and fucked.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 9, 2022:

Should have been a multi-select poll.

Which of these do you believe the Earth to be?

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 8, 2022:

Fuck me, is there really a flat Earther on this site?

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 9, 2022:

@Castlepaloma I have no idea what you're talking about, but the exact opposite of fear mongering seems to be taking place with regards to climate change. It's SO MUCH worse than it's being portrayed. They are downplaying the shit of of it. Hell, it's being downplayed so much half the fuckin' country doesn't even believe it exists.

Which of these do you believe the Earth to be?

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 8, 2022:

Fuck me, is there really a flat Earther on this site?

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 9, 2022:

@Castlepaloma You are incorrect. A positive feedback loop has begun with the thawing permafrost, and one recently concluded study shows that it contains 4x the amount of carbon that humans produce. Even if humans became carbon neutral (which is impossible) it still wouldn't matter. "The Earth is fucked" (or more accurately, humans are fucked) isn't an opinion, it's a statement of fact. I *BARELY* started to scratch the surface reading about it, and everything I've read spells doom.

So I guess I was also banned from the conservative group.

TheInterlooper comments on Jan 8, 2022:

And the Guinness Book of World Records for biggest circle-jerk goes to... @darren316 @Lorajay @dalefvictor @Churchless @phxbillcee @Mooolah @racocn8 @wordywalt As a special thanks to @JeffMurray for his hard work as the pivot man, we give you the honor of cleaning up the mess. I'm sure ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 9, 2022:

@TheInterlooper You snowflake cuntbag. It was your comment about a bunch of members defiling each other that served to help creep her out, and now your poor sensitivities are so hurt that she'd think you may be a creep or that you're getting alerts about a conversation that hurts your poor little feelings. Man do I hate fuckin' Republicans.

So I guess I was also banned from the conservative group.

TheInterlooper comments on Jan 8, 2022:

And the Guinness Book of World Records for biggest circle-jerk goes to... @darren316 @Lorajay @dalefvictor @Churchless @phxbillcee @Mooolah @racocn8 @wordywalt As a special thanks to @JeffMurray for his hard work as the pivot man, we give you the honor of cleaning up the mess. I'm sure ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 8, 2022:

@UrsiMajor Wait, they actually complained to you that you weren't reposting their shit? That's a fragile bitch right there. I have no room in my life for conservatives. None. Disowned all of my conservative relatives without a second thought. I realized this life is so fucking awful every day, I don't need any more friends or family in it to make it any worse. Anyway, I have no life, so I'll watch everything and decide for myself what's good; I don't need someone who supports a man that says you shouldn't apologize for saying racist shit to tell me how good Ozark is.

So I guess I was also banned from the conservative group.

TheInterlooper comments on Jan 8, 2022:

And the Guinness Book of World Records for biggest circle-jerk goes to... @darren316 @Lorajay @dalefvictor @Churchless @phxbillcee @Mooolah @racocn8 @wordywalt As a special thanks to @JeffMurray for his hard work as the pivot man, we give you the honor of cleaning up the mess. I'm sure ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 8, 2022:

@UrsiMajor Well, luckily, they have this handy label that tells you they are awful piles of shit for one or more reasons, "Conservative", that way you can know you want them to fall off a cliff, even without knowing too many particulars.

Yeah, I MIGHT be a deviant in our so-called modern society.

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 8, 2022:

Maybe it's because I don't want to be alive anymore anyway, but I'd rather die than fuck a girl that doesn't want to sleep with me.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 8, 2022:

@mischl They're not excited about the sex, they're excited about the money. It's a job. I think about how likely I'd be to go to work if they weren't paying me and overlay that feeling onto what the girl's state of mind would be. Like, "I hate this shit so much, there's no chance I'd do it for free. I think I'd up and walk the fuck out of this bitch if they even cut my pay by $5 an hour." I couldn't fuck a girl that thought about me the same way most people think about their jobs. It would be such a boner killer. But again, I desperately want to die, even when things are "going good" so just the slightest hint of a displeasurable situation actively makes me think about how much better dying would be than whatever is happening.

We don’t need God.

Fernapple comments on Feb 8, 2022:

First I am convinced, that a single overarching morality for everyone, or even a single way of achieving that, would be a bad thing, because there is nothing healthier than free debate. And the gods eye view, just moves the problem back one step. Because if people can't agree on right and wrong, ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 8, 2022:

@skado Yes, but the problem is, man chooses their god, and also the rules of his they'll follow, so they're generally never behaving better than they would be without him. This point has been made before here and everywhere else, so I'm not sure how it's not accounted for in your theory. I think TMW (who won't respond to me, so whatever) missed the mark in his reply. When people say, "If someone only doesn't do X because god, then they're shitty people" they're not actually suggesting that people actually want to rape people, and if they stop believing in god, they *will* start raping, they're saying that people pick and choose the moral framework or the parts of the moral framework that align with their internal morality and the framework itself doesn't actually argument their behavior.

We don’t need God.

Fernapple comments on Feb 8, 2022:

First I am convinced, that a single overarching morality for everyone, or even a single way of achieving that, would be a bad thing, because there is nothing healthier than free debate. And the gods eye view, just moves the problem back one step. Because if people can't agree on right and wrong, ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 8, 2022:

I'm never surprised when scrolling, reading a brilliant reply and see your name pop up. Nothing I can add to that.

Trump tells Joe Rogan to 'stop apologizing' for Spotify controversies on covid misinformation, ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 8, 2022:

Wait, Trump is telling a racist to not apologize for being racist? And he wonders why people think *he's* a racist??

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 8, 2022:

@rainmanjr I don't understand what you mean?

A recent interlocutor informed me that Evolutionary Psychology wasn’t real science, so if that’s...

AnneWimsey comments on Feb 6, 2022:

And this picture is germane because....?

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 8, 2022:

@skado I love how you can respond to this, but not the objections above...

A recent interlocutor informed me that Evolutionary Psychology wasn’t real science, so if that’s...

AnneWimsey comments on Feb 6, 2022:

And this picture is germane because....?

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 8, 2022:

@skado I think she prefers the pictures to be relevant to the linked material, too...

A recent interlocutor informed me that Evolutionary Psychology wasn’t real science, so if that’s...

DenoPenno comments on Feb 7, 2022:

Good luck with your claim. It is hard for me to believe atheists are more intelligent because a great many of them believe stupid shit just like religious people do. I see some atheists not believing in a god simply because they do not want to and have never had any desire to go in that direction. ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 8, 2022:

@Canndue So that's the silly part. If a definition is different for almost every single person, the word tends to be meaningless. People like their words to mean something, hence, the tendency to associate it with a definition that would make it universal.

A recent interlocutor informed me that Evolutionary Psychology wasn’t real science, so if that’s...

DenoPenno comments on Feb 7, 2022:

Good luck with your claim. It is hard for me to believe atheists are more intelligent because a great many of them believe stupid shit just like religious people do. I see some atheists not believing in a god simply because they do not want to and have never had any desire to go in that direction. ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 8, 2022:

@Canndue I'm just telling you why people probably associate it with aliens...

The apologist and the ax murderers accomplice.

Matias comments on Feb 6, 2022:

That´s a very Christian idea behind this story: that we are all sinners.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 8, 2022:

@Fernapple "*I know some people have a problem with Clancy because he molested children, but he reads to the blind AND helps out at the food bank every weekend."*

A recent interlocutor informed me that Evolutionary Psychology wasn’t real science, so if that’s...

DenoPenno comments on Feb 7, 2022:

Good luck with your claim. It is hard for me to believe atheists are more intelligent because a great many of them believe stupid shit just like religious people do. I see some atheists not believing in a god simply because they do not want to and have never had any desire to go in that direction. ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 7, 2022:

@Canndue I think it's because if the flying object was from our world, *somebody* knows what it was. In that respect, it's *technically* identified, just not by everyone. I wouldn't call differential equations unsolvable just because *I* can't sit down with a pencil and paper and solve 'em...

A recent interlocutor informed me that Evolutionary Psychology wasn’t real science, so if that’s...

FvckY0u comments on Feb 7, 2022:

"intelligence the ability to rise above one’s instincts." True not only of religion but other instincts as well.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 7, 2022:

@darren316 I think essentially the same thing. We only had minor sticking points as we were both pointing out the flaws that @skado can't seem to see with his blinders on. Notice how he framed this whole post as a false dichotomy? * "Hey all you self-absorbed atheists. I know how much you love to pat yourselves on the back for how fuckin' great you think you are. And CERTAINLY you must agree you're all so much smarter than those idiot believers, right? Well, have I got some good news for you. You can cite this study that proves it for the low, low price of... admitting Evolutionary Psychology, and by extension, all the stuff I've been saying about religion being a result of evolution and how we shouldn't destroy it because we absolutely need it for our survival is real, is honest-to-goodness science." *

A recent interlocutor informed me that Evolutionary Psychology wasn’t real science, so if that’s...

FvckY0u comments on Feb 7, 2022:

"intelligence the ability to rise above one’s instincts." True not only of religion but other instincts as well.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 7, 2022:

@darren316 My point was that the way this was conducted was about as least scientific as it could be, and furthermore, even if it was it still doesn't say what he thinks it does.

A recent interlocutor informed me that Evolutionary Psychology wasn’t real science, so if that’s...

FvckY0u comments on Feb 7, 2022:

"intelligence the ability to rise above one’s instincts." True not only of religion but other instincts as well.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 7, 2022:

@darren316 1. I was simply stating that denying instincts doesn't *always* equate to intelligence. Your definition is much better except... 2. Morality is fluid and subjective. Even if you could get a good, universal definition of it (which I think is impossible) it likely wouldn't be scientific (which is part of the aim of this post) and even still, following such code wouldn't necessarily equate to intelligence. 3. Atheists can be just as unwilling as theists in the areas mentioned. There is nothing to say the atheist was ever a believer. I have met some spectacularly stupid atheists. I have also met two guys who independently both described themselves as agnostic Christians who were absolutely brilliant.

A recent interlocutor informed me that Evolutionary Psychology wasn’t real science, so if that’s...

FvckY0u comments on Feb 7, 2022:

"intelligence the ability to rise above one’s instincts." True not only of religion but other instincts as well.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 7, 2022:

Now that you say that, that's not really that good of a definition. I have the instinct to drink water every day. Not sure how intelligent it would be to actively fight against that. 😝

I'd add trump to the mix for good measure

HippieChick58 comments on Feb 7, 2022:

I can't imagine anything that would put me in a boat with those people, but yeah, I'd save the boat. My sister lives on a lake, she'd keep my boat and I'd have more reasons to visit her.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 7, 2022:

Maybe they needed someone to steer the boat off a gigantic waterfall and someone had to die for that cause? I'd volunteer for that gig. I would die a hero.

Is this guy single?

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 6, 2022:

Fuck all of that.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 6, 2022:

@SeaGreenEyez I'm like Elmyra from Tiny Toons when I'm around cats. Straight up want to squeeze them to death they're so cute. Sometimes I'm the kitty whisperer and people be like, "How the fuck you holdin' that cat that hates everyone?" Those are my best days. My last two cats pooped outside. Chandler started to learn to poop in the toilet, but he was already full grown and the thing got too flimsy when I started taking the rings out.

Is this guy single?

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 6, 2022:

Fuck all of that.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 6, 2022:

@SeaGreenEyez If I were to own anything it would be a kitten, and that kitten would poop in the toilet.

Is this guy single?

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 6, 2022:

Fuck all of that.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 6, 2022:

@SeaGreenEyez No way. You're talking to a guy that smothers his home in Conquer to kill the fuck out of every creepy crawler that unwittingly wanders inside.

There may be a reactionary attitude creeping into this site's administration.

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 6, 2022:

Looks like the other post and user are no longer available. Unless that person blocked me, but I don't ever remember coming across that name before.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 6, 2022:

@anglophone What got removed?

There may be a reactionary attitude creeping into this site's administration.

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 6, 2022:

Looks like the other post and user are no longer available. Unless that person blocked me, but I don't ever remember coming across that name before.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 6, 2022:

@anglophone If you click on the user and post links, do they show up?

In my continuing effort to understand why so many atheists and agnostics (the people one would ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 5, 2022:

I think we're also discounting the difference between necessary and sufficient. Just because something is evolutionarily linked, doesn't mean it was necessary, and especially doesn't mean it's *still* necessary. Yes, an evolved trait could be the reason why a species survives and thrives, but that ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 6, 2022:

@skado And that is the very argument you've repeatedly failed to support. You are *still* claiming that religion continues to be crucial for our continued survival (in yet another way now by stating they have not developed traits that would allow them to survive sans religion) with zero support whatsoever.

The apologist and the ax murderers accomplice.

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 6, 2022:

Wrote this a long time ago. I think I even posted it here because I remember getting into a ridiculous argument with TMW (who I won't bother tagging because he refuses to talk to me anyway) about it. It is quite possible that religious moderates are not only part of the problem, but the biggest ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 6, 2022:

@Fernapple I don't know about that, but I'll take the compliment.

In keeping with the standards that have become the norm on this site (if they were ever different) I...

puff comments on Feb 5, 2022:

Perhaps it's just atheists form their own beliefs whereas theists adopt someone elses. As for the person? We are all individual and some will hold extreme views and defend to the death but most fall in the middle bell shaped curve like most other things. Science is humanities pursuit of ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 6, 2022:

@skado "The way it appears to me is atheists rely on theists to frame their perception of God, and then reject the God so framed, without further consideration." Yes because there's no need to reject the *concept* of a predisposition for a non-physical, non-specific non-entity that humans "needed" (used, but possibly unnecessarily had other advantageous traits evolved instead) *in the past* to flourish, as said concept isn't intrusive in their lives. It's the theistic perception of God that needs to be fought and rejected to protect principles they hold dear. You have yet to present evidence, even after being repeatedly asked, for your claim that religion is crucial for the continued survival of humans, and failing that, there is no need for non-theists to "further consider" and "frame their own perception of God".

Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Toonman comments on Jan 30, 2022:

Or God? Why the fuck are you on this platform?

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 5, 2022:

@Toonman I love this response so much. *chef's kiss*

Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

snytiger6 comments on Jan 29, 2022:

From what I have read, homosexuality evolved as a form of species survival. The problem is when it comes to homosexuality, most people only think in term of modern day humans. However science has recorded homosexuality as being present is thousands of species. In order to understand how ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 5, 2022:

@Greatest 1. You obviously, incorrectly, believe that nature (evolution) has intention (and foresight) such that it modifies genetics to create mutations it knows will be beneficial in whatever future environment the being and its offspring will find itself. That could not be more wrong, on so many levels, even if a evolutionarily biologist tried to write the most ridiculously wrong thing he could just for laughs. 2. If you were correct that nature has control of these devices to create "our best possible end" how could you possibly explain such horrible designs like having our food pipe and our wind pipe be a common pipe allowing some to choke to death before they could reproduce? How about sterility? How about a hatred of children and a desire to never reproduce? How about suicidal ideation? I implore you to learn at least the fundamentals of evolutionarily biology before speaking any further on the subject.

Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 29, 2022:

1. Where did you get the notion that believers think god created people *as* homosexuals? I was under the impression that a vast majority of Christians believe that free will exists, that homosexuality is a choice, and that homosexuals have chosen that for themselves. 2. I believe most of the ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 5, 2022:

@Greatest Again, the intent of your comment is inscrutable.

Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

TheMiddleWay comments on Jan 29, 2022:

I think it's important to note that at least in judeo-christianity, there is absolutely no scripture or mandate about homosexuals. It is an interpretation of a few passages in the Bible that obliquely can be read as applying to homosexuals and then even more obliquely as condemning the practice. ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 5, 2022:

@Greatest I have no idea what you're trying to say with that comment.

What do you think?

Beowulfsfriend comments on Feb 5, 2022:

I have long opposed the death penalty as a country should not be engaged in killing their own people. Often, I have had people try to argue the emotional, "how would you feel if........ your family. " I always respond with, "I hope someone stops me from doing exactly what you want, killing them ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 5, 2022:

I argue that same exact point. The premeditated actions of a government shouldn't be the same as extremely irrational emotional responses of a loved one. Furthermore, if an individual murderers someone out of vengeance, we try them and potentially punish them severely. What are we to do when the government perpetrates such actions? Should the government be in prison for premeditated murder?

re: SARS-CoV-2 and chewing gum: For awhile I've been wondering if common non-prescription chewing...

Retiredsteve comments on Feb 5, 2022:

COVID has been proven to be spread mostly by breathing it in. Most people breath thru their nose.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 5, 2022:

@kmaz I think I lost the thread and failed to present my point correctly. The question isn't whether a person can chew gum with a mask on, it's more, knowing what we know, should the scientific community focus money and time on gum or could it be better spent on research and measures that have a higher likelihood of increasing safety?

In my continuing effort to understand why so many atheists and agnostics (the people one would ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 4, 2022:

1. Why do you have such a giant boner for this topic? You talk about it constantly. 2. Even if everything you're saying about it is 100% true, what does it matter?

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 5, 2022:

@skado And right back to the motte-and-bailey fallacy. Claiming that you're not trying to advance your argument that religion is still crucial for humans when challenged about it.

re: SARS-CoV-2 and chewing gum: For awhile I've been wondering if common non-prescription chewing...

Retiredsteve comments on Feb 5, 2022:

COVID has been proven to be spread mostly by breathing it in. Most people breath thru their nose.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 5, 2022:

@kmaz I've worked in aerosolizing bronchoscopic procedures on covid positive patients since the beginning of the pandemic. I'm really careful and always wear a mask when I go out. However, I don't do anything to prevent covid ingestion. I don't quarantine my purchases or mail. I don't wipe anything off before bringing it inside or using it. I don't even use hand sanitizer much outside of work. Two years in, I still haven't gotten covid. That's all anecdotal, but those practices were based on the best available evidence I had. If I had to guess, if you came in contact with a concentration of covid particles in a high enough viral load that you'd become infected even while wearing an appropriate mask, chewing antiviral gum likely wouldn't create an environment in your nasal airway that would have been able to stop it. I'd instead concentrate on measures that would have a much bigger impact on your safety. Just my two cents.

In my continuing effort to understand why so many atheists and agnostics (the people one would ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 4, 2022:

1. Why do you have such a giant boner for this topic? You talk about it constantly. 2. Even if everything you're saying about it is 100% true, what does it matter?

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 5, 2022:

@skado I didn't use an Ad Hominem (FYI, an Ad Hominem seeks to discredit your argument by pointing out personal flaws. Simply pointing out flaws is not an Ad Hominem), you are the one that's trying to derail things by claiming I did instead of once again answering the objections to your claims.

In my continuing effort to understand why so many atheists and agnostics (the people one would ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 4, 2022:

1. Why do you have such a giant boner for this topic? You talk about it constantly. 2. Even if everything you're saying about it is 100% true, what does it matter?

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 5, 2022:

@skado You have committed yet another logical fallacy: the motte-and-bailey fallacy. You were advancing your argument that religion is still crucial for humans and that we shouldn't wish to abolish it (by making statements like, "There is ample scientific reason to suspect religion of some description is critical to our survival"), but when challenged you claimed you're only talking about how religion was needed historically (by making statements like, "This post is an invitation for people to share their reasons for believing religion is not a product of evolution. If you grant that religion was an evolved trait then you are not the person this post is questioning."). You are being intellectually dishonest. If you want to defend religion, pull your pants up and defend it against the challenges and objections people make to your claims. This is why the same few people feel like that *have* to comment on your incessant religion-boner posts: the dishonesty sewn into them.

In my continuing effort to understand why so many atheists and agnostics (the people one would ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 4, 2022:

1. Why do you have such a giant boner for this topic? You talk about it constantly. 2. Even if everything you're saying about it is 100% true, what does it matter?

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 5, 2022:

@skado That's your takeaway? You realize the intention of that reply is a fallacious argument, right? The "evidence" in the first quote is referring to the evidence you posted about religion being an evolved/necessary thing, historically, for the survival of our species. *That* evidence is irrelevant to me because I'm willing to grant that as a given. The "evidence" in the second quote refers to your claim that religion is *still* critical to the survival of humans. That evidence, on the other hand, I do not believe exists, so the "love to see that" is a tongue-in-cheek way of saying, "I don't think you can produce what you'd need to to back up your claims". That is the fallacy of equivocation, and if you're going to harp on people for not having integrity, you should exercise some yourself.

In my continuing effort to understand why so many atheists and agnostics (the people one would ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 4, 2022:

1. Why do you have such a giant boner for this topic? You talk about it constantly. 2. Even if everything you're saying about it is 100% true, what does it matter?

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 5, 2022:

@skado I haven't looked at the evidence because it doesn't matter what the evidence shows. None of your conclusions follow logically from your premise (like that religion is still necessary for our survival), so I don't really need to verify if the premise is correct. And your claim about engaging in a discussion invalidating a statement of disinterest about the premise being true also fails. There are plenty of reasons one might engage in the discussion, possibly just to point out logical fallacies being made by the OP, but that doesn't mean they are "more interested than they admit" in the content necessarily. And I'd love to see this scientific evidence that religion is still critical to our survival.

In my continuing effort to understand why so many atheists and agnostics (the people one would ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 4, 2022:

1. Why do you have such a giant boner for this topic? You talk about it constantly. 2. Even if everything you're saying about it is 100% true, what does it matter?

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 4, 2022:

@skado So you think we're probably going to be extinct soon, but could be wrong, so you want to save religions because of the off chance that it's somehow necessary for the survival of the human race even though you don't have any scientific evidence to suggest that's the case. And you're going to accomplish this by challenging people to find scientific evidence to disprove your theory that lacks any scientific evidence? And you don't realize this is tedious for the few people that feel the need to correct you with the same responses every time you post about this?

In my continuing effort to understand why so many atheists and agnostics (the people one would ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 4, 2022:

1. Why do you have such a giant boner for this topic? You talk about it constantly. 2. Even if everything you're saying about it is 100% true, what does it matter?

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 4, 2022:

@skado 1. That's fine then. Seemed more of an agenda than a hobby. 2. Even if what you said was true, it doesn't logically follow that we *still* require it for our survival. 3. Even if our species did require it, you just said you think our species will be extinct soon, so again, what does it matter??

SIGH.

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 10, 2022:

Best post ever! I love this so much I can't even stand it. We need more pictures. And will there be a name change forthwith? Or maybe a name change suggestion contest?

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 4, 2022:

@SeaGreenEyez So, so cute. Looks super comfortable with you.

We are animals and, as such, are often driven more by instinct than we are willing to admit but, as ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 1, 2022:

I think all humans should stop having children forever.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 3, 2022:

@puff That's not the biggest problem with a one child policy. Millions of children can live without siblings and aunts and uncles. It's much more of a source of social ills that there are millions of men with no hope of finding a woman.

We are animals and, as such, are often driven more by instinct than we are willing to admit but, as ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 1, 2022:

I think all humans should stop having children forever.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 3, 2022:

@Austin-Cambridge Eh, I'm used to it. Been feeling this way for years now.

Extreme heat in oceans ‘passed point of no return’ in 2014 | Oceans | The Guardian

LucyLoohoo comments on Feb 2, 2022:

We're fucked. I don't mind thinking of humanity dying but I'm infuriated that we're taking this beautifully adapted ecosystem and millions of innocent life forms with us.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 3, 2022:

This.

Extreme heat in oceans ‘passed point of no return’ in 2014 | Oceans | The Guardian

Barnie2years comments on Feb 3, 2022:

Just another spin of the globe. If you follow the history of the Earth, massive change occurs on a regular basis. We maybe accelerating the warming, and we could always be hit by a major meteor or a massive volcanic explosion that would cover the Earth in ash cloud and create a new ice age instead ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 3, 2022:

I don't even want to be alive now and I think that's a ridiculous response.

I can't!

FvckY0u comments on Feb 2, 2022:

I could do without wings and pasta.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 2, 2022:

@darren316 Also, Beyond Burgers are never going in my body again. They tasted okay, still not a replacement flavor-wise, but what killed it for me was horrendous gas pain. Like brutal. Never again. Apparently that's a common side effect from them, too.

I can't!

FvckY0u comments on Feb 2, 2022:

I could do without wings and pasta.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 2, 2022:

@darren316 Veggie pasta like spaghetti squash is fine when you're on a diet or whatever, but I don't think that would ever hit the spot for me if I was craving real Italian food.

Four year old shoots self in head in back of car.

racocn8 comments on Feb 2, 2022:

The presence of cannabis is a red herring. The intended implication is that the mother and her friend weren't paying attention. One cannot give children 100% attention. It's a reasonable assumption they didn't know about the gun until it was too late. That should put responsibility back on the ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 2, 2022:

This.

I can't!

FvckY0u comments on Feb 2, 2022:

I could do without wings and pasta.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 2, 2022:

@darren316 If you think going from a flame-grilled Wagyu beef burger to a Beyond Burger isn't a loss, I feel sorry for your taste buds.

I can't!

FvckY0u comments on Feb 2, 2022:

I could do without wings and pasta.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 2, 2022:

@darren316 I mean, that's a lot of Italian, Chinese, and American foods to lose.

I can't!

FvckY0u comments on Feb 2, 2022:

I could do without wings and pasta.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 2, 2022:

Pasta?? No lasagna? No cavatelli? No ravioli fried or sauced? No noodle soups, ramen, or pho? No stir fry, chow mein, or lo mein? No wantons, egg rolls, or crab rangoons? No pasta salad or macaroni salad? No Mac & cheese? Edit: the & cheese originally didn't have a space and it changed to a link to the cheese group on agnostic.

I can't!

Mooolah comments on Feb 2, 2022:

It is a complicated world don't we know. 1) the taco is sans animal flesh 2)wings are free range anti biotic free 3)bread is 20 whole grain gluten free 4) pasta is served with a vegetarian sauce gluten free 5)the burger is plant based

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 2, 2022:

I could delete all of that, easy.

I can't!

Canndue comments on Feb 2, 2022:

Bread…don’t eat it now.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 2, 2022:

Why wouldn't you just delete burgers then as bread essentially deletes burgers anyway.

Question about design on NFL caps

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 31, 2022:

This what you're taking about? Personally I think it's just a design.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 2, 2022:

@WilliamCharles Apparently they're "sideline caps" with "racing-style design". https://www.cleveland.com/browns/2021/08/new-era-releases-official-nfl-sideline-hats-so-you-can-dress-like-a-coach-on-gameday.html

We are animals and, as such, are often driven more by instinct than we are willing to admit but, as ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 1, 2022:

I think all humans should stop having children forever.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 2, 2022:

@puff Because as much as I want humanity to instantly end as soon as possible it's partially/mostly for selfish reasons, and I know it won't happen. Additionally, I know most people don't feel like I do either, so just because *I* want to die doesn't mean I want people who don't want to die to suffer. And that's really important key difference. We're not talking about an all or nothing magical death of everyone meaning no one would have the capacity to suffer the sickness or mourn the loss of others. Also, yes I want humanity to end, but I want it to be instantaneous and totally blindside everyone. *I* don't want to do anything to cause it. I can't even get myself to cause my own death, and I care a lot more about a lot of people than I care about myself. I'm really kind of surprised you couldn't put any of that together on your own...

We are animals and, as such, are often driven more by instinct than we are willing to admit but, as ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 1, 2022:

I think all humans should stop having children forever.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 1, 2022:

@puff And that takes us back to my first reply to you. How are you going to feel when your grandchildren are living in the deplorable hellscape they've inherited from us? That going to be satisfying for you?

We are animals and, as such, are often driven more by instinct than we are willing to admit but, as ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 1, 2022:

I think all humans should stop having children forever.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 1, 2022:

@puff Of course I am. Children are awful. I lost the love of my life because she wanted children and I didn't. It took her almost a year of saying we had to break up for her to actually leave me because we had a perfect relationship otherwise. She said some of the most heartbreaking shit I've ever heard in my entire life like, "You've ruined my life. For as long as I live, no matter who I end up with, I'm going to be stuck with my second choice." Anyway, if I couldn't want children to keep her, I can't imagine anything that *would* make me want any.

We are animals and, as such, are often driven more by instinct than we are willing to admit but, as ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 1, 2022:

I think all humans should stop having children forever.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 1, 2022:

@puff That's about the dumbest thing I could think of. You can't regret not being born, you can't suffer while alive, you can't dread not being able to die, you don't have to institute a system of murdering everyone as they turn 50 (which some, or even most, would hate and say, "Why was I even born then, and why would I even want children if I won't get to watch them grow up?")

Why Aren’t All Drugs Legal? - Freakonomics

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 31, 2022:

I think there are lots of bans than have an effect on the behavior they're trying to control. Do you have any idea how fast my 600hp Cobra can go? Neither do I, but I'd find out the same day they abolish speed limits...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 1, 2022:

@rainmanjr I know that car inside out. Been driving it for almost a quarter century. Don't think I'd wreck on an open track... Also don't know of a track near me that I could do that though.

We are animals and, as such, are often driven more by instinct than we are willing to admit but, as ...

ChestRockfield comments on Feb 1, 2022:

I think all humans should stop having children forever.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 1, 2022:

@puff I wonder if they'll think it's the best when 50% of the Earth's population will have to migrate because their homes are under water...

There is no one way to believe in determinism and there is no one way to believe in free will.

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 29, 2022:

Belief does not require choosing. In fact, it completely defies the notion of choice. Could you choose to start believing in God? In Santa Claus? That the sky is pink with orange polka dots? The rest of your post is exactly correct. People cannot choose whether or not to believe any given ...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 1, 2022:

@Heraclitus And I'll add just one more tidbit. There is a significant proportion of the members here that do not believe in free will. If you were to ask anyone that has discarded they notion, they'd likely tell you that there's less of a chance someone could start believing in free will again than start believing in god again. I've known numerous people in my life that started believing in god after being a non-believer, but exactly zero people that have started to believe in free will after realizing it was an illusion. Do you think there could be a reason such a large percentage of people who likely base stuff on reason and evidence at a [slightly] better rate than the general public don't believe in free will?

Confession .

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 28, 2022:

It's not the * job * of an agnostic (or atheist) to convince anyone of anything...

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 1, 2022:

@Mcflewster You and I seem to differ on the definitions of 'atheist' and 'agnostic' (as do many people here). They deal with different questions, one of knowledge, the other of belief. I am both an agnostic and atheist, and I'm equally certain of both positions. I am certain that right now I, nor anybody else, can't know whether or not a god exists. I am also certain that I personally lack a belief in a God. Again, it would be *nice* if anyone who holds one or more of those positions would help to normalize it, but I stated my fears about saying it is the duty of one, above.

Investing can include a lot of things , other than the stock market .

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 31, 2022:

Magic the Gathering cards, especially the reserve list cards. Dual lands, which are reserved cards, have outperformed the stock market every year for over a decade at least.

ChestRockfield replies on Feb 1, 2022:

@Cast1es I buy collections if she still has them.

This'll give you dreams?

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 30, 2022:

Fuck that. And that dude that was all, "I'd hate for people to spray them with insecticide" is more than welcome to take all the spiders into his home. I use Conquer at my house. Kills the fuck out of all walking bugs as they try to come in, and a good treatment lasts about 6 months. I highly ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 31, 2022:

@FrayedBear The method of suicide isn't the obstacle; you should be able to figure that out based on what I do for a living. You should also know that being found, "saved", and potentially *half* rehabilitated seems is more of a deterrent for suicide than anything else. If/when I can do it, it will be in a manner than will guaranteed death and eliminate the possibility of someone stopping me. Also, I fuckin' hate the cold; there is likely a zero percent chance being cold will ever be on the escape menu.

There is no one way to believe in determinism and there is no one way to believe in free will.

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 29, 2022:

Belief does not require choosing. In fact, it completely defies the notion of choice. Could you choose to start believing in God? In Santa Claus? That the sky is pink with orange polka dots? The rest of your post is exactly correct. People cannot choose whether or not to believe any given ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 31, 2022:

@Heraclitus I actually think *you're* missing the point of the silliness argument. Anything can be as silly as the pink sky when the opposite of it is so readily apparent to someone. And if you can *choose* what you believe, it shouldn't matter how silly it is. But combine those two things, and you have the answer to your question. Sam Harris presented evidence that made the proposition of free will seem silly to me, and even you admit one can't choose to believe something silly. Now, layer on top of that the fact that you can't control what evidence you're exposed to and whether or not you'll find that evidence convincing (remember how much I didn't want to buy Sam's evidence) and you can start to see how any given proposition could be forced into or out of the realm of believable (or silly) for you, regardless of whether you want it to happen or not? To be fair, the pink sky et. al. was in reference to the proposition that one can choose to believe something, not about the existence of free will in general. Also, I'm getting the sense that when you say 'determined' it has an air of predestination or fate (as in a desired outcome) that things will then have to happen in such a way that said desired outcome could be realized. If that's not how you meant it, good, because nothing could be further from what I mean than that. All in all, though, every time you said something to the effect of, 'well, unless it was determined...' you were absolutely right. I didn't have a choice whether it not to respond last time (or this time). You had no choice in what evidence you found more compelling, compatibilism or determinism. And I don't have control over what I care about. I *wish* logical consistency of my beliefs wasn't something I cared about, but it is, to a detrimental degree, among many other things. Anyway, I know it's unlikely I'd be able to convince you, and I don't even know if it's possible for you to be convinced. You have no choice whether or not you'll read Free Will by Sam Harris, or if you'll do any other research on the topic, nor do you have any control if you'll believe any of the evidence presented to you. So if the first paragraph made you think a little and you wanna pick my brain some, cool. If you wanna wash your hands of me, that's okay too.

Trump Calls On Massive Protests If Prosecutors Go After Him And Offers Pardons To Jan.

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 30, 2022:

Our democracy is over.

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 31, 2022:

@mischl I wish, too, but I've seen the numbers and the trajectory. No reason to think that is enough less than half that the cheating done by that half won't still make it a contest or that it's not going to be worse than it was last election given Biden's numbers...

Why Aren’t All Drugs Legal? - Freakonomics

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 31, 2022:

I think there are lots of bans than have an effect on the behavior they're trying to control. Do you have any idea how fast my 600hp Cobra can go? Neither do I, but I'd find out the same day they abolish speed limits...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 31, 2022:

@Cyklone Had it up to 165 this past summer. It was still gaining hard and had a great and a half left to go. Be surprised if she quit on me before 180-190. But that's quite a few more miles to drive that fast considering if you get popped you're going to jail.

Trump Calls On Massive Protests If Prosecutors Go After Him And Offers Pardons To Jan.

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 30, 2022:

Our democracy is over.

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 31, 2022:

@mischl Half of the electorate doesn't believe in facts or free and fair elections. What's worse, that half thinks that same thing about the other half. I'm not saying our democracy is *going to* end, I'm saying it's already over. It's kind of how we've already past the point of no return for global warming, but most people haven't realized it yet.

Question about design on NFL caps

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 31, 2022:

This what you're taking about? Personally I think it's just a design.

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 31, 2022:

@linxminx Anything can be copied. I authenticate Magic the Gathering cards, and some of the fakes are getting pretty good at really fine details many players can't tell the difference on.

Why Aren’t All Drugs Legal? - Freakonomics

Cyklone comments on Jan 31, 2022:

It's very profitable keeping drugs illegal, despite the fact that it is pointless. Those who manufacture transport and retail illegal drugs would be out of business the day they became legal and that money flows down to a lot of influential people and places, from Mexico, the golden triangle and ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 31, 2022:

I don't think illegal drug producers/sellers would be put of business, especially when you cite how much the legal ones will be taxed to pay for other programs. I hear a lot of complaints about how exorbitantly expensive legal weed is here.

I am trying not to pay to much attention to the news, but where ever I go I get more confused.

Charles1971 comments on Jan 31, 2022:

The rich and the corporations are doing just fine. The economy is doing fine for them. Lobbyists and political donors pull the strings of too many of our politicians. We're the wealthiest country in the world yet our education system is underfunded, we are lagging behind in infrastructure, and our ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 31, 2022:

Unfortunately, that path to rock bottom is likely going to include enough unrest that we fall under authoritarian rule.

This'll give you dreams?

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 30, 2022:

Fuck that. And that dude that was all, "I'd hate for people to spray them with insecticide" is more than welcome to take all the spiders into his home. I use Conquer at my house. Kills the fuck out of all walking bugs as they try to come in, and a good treatment lasts about 6 months. I highly ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 31, 2022:

@FrayedBear Do you know me at all yet? I don't even want to be alive anymore. Couldn't care less about the shit you mentioned.

There is no one way to believe in determinism and there is no one way to believe in free will.

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 29, 2022:

Belief does not require choosing. In fact, it completely defies the notion of choice. Could you choose to start believing in God? In Santa Claus? That the sky is pink with orange polka dots? The rest of your post is exactly correct. People cannot choose whether or not to believe any given ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 30, 2022:

@Heraclitus *I promised myself I wasn't going to try to convince people of this anymore because it always turns out to be a complete waste of my time. I know I'm not a tenth as eloquent or intelligent as the person who convinced me of the truth, and I barely hung on long enough to his argument for it to click for me. I really admired his previous works and the person that gave me the book is someone whose opinion I really respect, so that kept me reading long after I was ready to put it down and disregard it as complete nonsense, so what reasonable chance would I have to convince you given that to you I'm just some random guy on the internet you already think is crazy. But against my better judgment, I'll post this response, do with it what you will.* Yes, those examples are "silly", but once you break it all down, there's no random extra step in the process of forming a belief for *non-silly* examples where choice exists. What exactly would even determine if an example was silly enough that you would no longer have choice in the matter? Certainly the line of silliness would be different from person to person and proposition to proposition, no? So what exactly determines whether or not you had a choice? Or is it simply a convenient tool to say that any time you couldn't choose to believe the opposite of what you believe it was because the example was too silly? But once you compare that notion to the realization that the line of silliness is fluid for each person and each proposition, and that it can be changed by the addition of external forces (like learning new information) you can start to see how *none* of it is a matter of choice. I watched a movie last year about these pills that were developed that could give people super powers for a short period of time. Near the end of the movie, the hero explains one of the powers that can be granted by the pill is that of the pistol shrimp. I had never heard of such a creature, so when he explained that it "hits you so fast it vaporizers the water around you 8,000 degrees hotter than the surface of the sun, the shockwave will rip the flesh right off the bone" it sounded completely "silly" to me. If I had not seen that movie which caused me to look it up, there's no way I could have chosen to believe that a shrimp could create temperatures hotter than the surface of the sun deep in the ocean. Right? That sounds like pure nonsense, or at least it did to me. Maybe you're a marine biology buff like my buddy was, and you'd read about them years ago, so you didn't bat an eye when I quoted that. But as soon as I looked it up, that crazy silly proposition quickly turned into just a thing I believed that wasn't silly at all. Now you'll probably say I *chose* to look up the information, so that's how I *chose*...

Religion is evolution’s protection against ‘extinction-due-to-evolutionary-mismatch’, just as ...

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 29, 2022:

Even independent from the benefit of religion ceasing to exist, I'd still opt for human extinction, preferably instantly, unforeseen, and as soon as possible.

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 30, 2022:

@BufftonBeotch That'd work for me.

On the issue of abortion.

FvckY0u comments on Jan 29, 2022:

You said it yourself, it's a moral question. It is not a legal question IMO. Abortion should be legal. Morally if a person is opposed then don't get one.

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 29, 2022:

@SirDaddyGru By that rationale, and your statements below that suggest we shouldn't worry about killing those in comas and under general because they can't suffer, all a woman need do to be allowed to abort under your asinine belief is have her doctor anesthetize the fetus in-utero prior to the abortion. Problem solved! Hell, by your ridiculous assertions, not only should a woman be allowed to abort her fetus all the way through to the birthing process, there's no reason why she couldn't put the baby to sleep with drugs in her breast milk and kill it in its crib as long as it can't suffer the process. Are you even *starting* to understand why your position is so irrational and illogical?

On the issue of abortion.

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 29, 2022:

The reason your position fails is that it allows for the murder of individuals that cannot experience suffering. Should we be allowed to kill people who are in a coma? What about those under general anesthesia? The only argument I've found you need, and the only argument I believe people should ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 29, 2022:

@SirDaddyGru 1. I never made a claim that depended on feelings. I don't know where you're getting that from, but my position, or my objection to yours, has nothing to do with "feeling bad". 2. My objection to your position allowing for the killing of people in comas or under general anesthesia is only partially about what the person would care about. You don't think the family would care? How about that person's life insurance company? How about the team of medical professionals caring for the patient? 3. I'm not empathizing with things because they can breathe. You are drawing ridiculous conclusions from my comment and Strawmanning the fuck out of them. 4. I never claimed bodily autonomy would apply to the fetus. I think your comprehension of my argument is quite poor. 5. Not for nothing, but those that can *no longer* give consent can still maintain autonomy with proper legal documentation. Let's not be sloppy with our words. 6. I never said the word "murder" in reference to the fetus. It would be 100% accurate in the context I gave though. Also, name me a region where someone can run into an operating room and kill the patient on the table that's under anesthesia and it *wouldn't* be considered murder. 7. I made no claims about morality and have no reason to defend yet another Strawman you've made of my argument. 8. The difference between 'murder' and 'kill' is intention and/or premeditation. *I'm* not conflating anything. You're the one that's shitting out informal fallacies like it's your job and pretending that it's my argument.

The Future

Shaggy2018 comments on Jan 28, 2022:

Doesn't matter...those so inclined will use it regardless. Only thing slowing its progress is cost. Until you can buy it like viagra it's a rich person's tool to design their kids.

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 29, 2022:

@Danny9 Hopefully in a few years people will realize they should stop having children.

Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

TheMiddleWay comments on Jan 29, 2022:

I think it's important to note that at least in judeo-christianity, there is absolutely no scripture or mandate about homosexuals. It is an interpretation of a few passages in the Bible that obliquely can be read as applying to homosexuals and then even more obliquely as condemning the practice. ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 29, 2022:

I think it's more important to note that it's not only two passages, and it doesn't seem vague AT ALL. 1 Timothy 1:9-10 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous, but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine Leviticus 18:22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. Leviticus 20:13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will And that's not including god raining down burning sulfur to kill cities full of men who wanted to rape men as that's not as plainly obvious as the other passages.

Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

DenoPenno comments on Jan 29, 2022:

When I was a Christian I believed that homosexuals had chosen that lifestyle. This belief was shared by other believers who really want to define "sin" and choosing to "sin." Various bible verses back this up so it is no wonder that Christians believe in "conversion therapy." The problem is that ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 29, 2022:

I had a "girlfriend" in 3rd grade and that's only like 8yo, so I don't think it's unreasonable to think some people could know what they're attracted to by 6...

Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

KKGator comments on Jan 28, 2022:

I have asked that very question of some believers. I have asked if they believe their god created everything. When they answer in the affirmative, I ask them where they come off disrespecting their god's creations? Then I point out that homosexual behavior is naturally occurring in well over 1500...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 29, 2022:

@KKGator They would say he didn't. That he gave man free will and they used it to do evil. Obviously none of this makes any sense or holds water, but in my experience these are the types of things they tell themselves to square their beliefs with the nature of reality enough that it doesn't all fall apart for them.

Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

KKGator comments on Jan 28, 2022:

I have asked that very question of some believers. I have asked if they believe their god created everything. When they answer in the affirmative, I ask them where they come off disrespecting their god's creations? Then I point out that homosexual behavior is naturally occurring in well over 1500...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 29, 2022:

@Beowulfsfriend *I'm* not saying it's a sin. I don't believe in sins. Maybe you missed the 'they' in my reply?

Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

KKGator comments on Jan 28, 2022:

I have asked that very question of some believers. I have asked if they believe their god created everything. When they answer in the affirmative, I ask them where they come off disrespecting their god's creations? Then I point out that homosexual behavior is naturally occurring in well over 1500...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 29, 2022:

Don't they just say some form of 'he created the sinner, not the sin'?

Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Druvius comments on Jan 28, 2022:

Homosexuality is present in countless species. It provides parents for orphaned and abandoned young. so makes perfect sense it is found in numerous species.

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 29, 2022:

Evolutionary biology has no intention. This could be a happy effect, but not a cause of homosexuality.

Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Fernapple comments on Jan 29, 2022:

An old question. If god is the creator, then how can you disrespect his creation, and if you find something imperfect in that creation, then how are you not disrespecting the creator ?

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 29, 2022:

I think that's why free will is so important to the religiously-bigoted. They need to be able to blame this thing they love to hate on humans instead of their god.

Confession .

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 28, 2022:

It's not the * job * of an agnostic (or atheist) to convince anyone of anything...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 28, 2022:

@Mcflewster You know what definition of that word I meant... unless you didn't know that was one of the definitions?? Either way, by attaching these responsibilities to that label, *you* are the one that gives credence to the belief that atheism/agnosticism is a belief system of its own. Would it be nice if everyone took part in dispelling incorrect beliefs about atheism? Absolutely, but I have a problem saying it's their responsibility.

France has passed a new law criminalising the use of so-called "conversion therapy" to attempt to ...

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 26, 2022:

As much as I hate people that demonize homosexuality or would force conversion therapy, it seems an odd thing to make illegal. If we created an * actual * method of conversion that could work on sexuality, or any other trait for that matter, that people would like to change, how is that somehow ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 28, 2022:

@Petter Wait, now I'm curious. Are *you* saying sheep-fucking should be legalized?

Confession .

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 28, 2022:

It's not the * job * of an agnostic (or atheist) to convince anyone of anything...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 28, 2022:

@Mcflewster No, I'm saying that atheist and agnostic are simply labels/shorthand to describe a lack of belief. It's not a mantle we're forced to take up upon declaration. It's that sort of thinking that kind of lends credence to the belief that 'atheist' is a religion itself.

France has passed a new law criminalising the use of so-called "conversion therapy" to attempt to ...

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 26, 2022:

As much as I hate people that demonize homosexuality or would force conversion therapy, it seems an odd thing to make illegal. If we created an * actual * method of conversion that could work on sexuality, or any other trait for that matter, that people would like to change, how is that somehow ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 28, 2022:

@Petter I don't understand how this relates to what I said. I didn't use the phrase 'unnatural sex' either, so I don't know that I'm qualified to define the limits of it for you. The verbiage "legalize it" almost seems to encourage it. Decriminalize may be the more appropriate term? I don't know, but I'm not necessarily endorsing that either. My point about that was not to determine what was right and wrong, but simply that our current set of laws are incongruent.

Those mocking and celebrating the deaths of the un-vaxxed. What you going to do about this guy?

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 27, 2022:

What's different about this guy than any of the other anti-vaxxers?

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 27, 2022:

@puff We've had this argument too many times. We fundamentally disagree. No point talking about it again.

Those mocking and celebrating the deaths of the un-vaxxed. What you going to do about this guy?

ChestRockfield comments on Jan 27, 2022:

What's different about this guy than any of the other anti-vaxxers?

ChestRockfield replies on Jan 27, 2022:

@puff 730 reports, likely most of which are completely unrelated given the recent study showing 2/3 of all reactions were placebo related, divided by the 93% of your 25.69 million is three thousandths of one percent, even if they were all real. So yeah, pretty unlikely, especially weeks after the vaccination.