View Full Version : Cuter Than Palin
Strike For The South
11-03-2010, 14:51
http://www.argusleader.com/article/20101103/NEWS/11030323/
From the rough and tumble South Dakota at large
Kristi Noem.
I'd let her balance my budget.
IYKWIMAITYD
Louis VI the Fat
11-03-2010, 15:11
You fools, look at what you could have had!
Mild ('mother I'd like to date') Kirsti is nowhere near as hot as her opponent Herseth Sandlin!!
https://img526.imageshack.us/img526/2335/noemsandlin427jc080310.jpg
Doable, but I think our Femke has better arguments http://blikopsittard.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/roger-vrenken-blik-op-sittard-femke-halsema-2.jpg
And certainly our Marianne http://www.publiek-politiek.nl/content/download/4482/24343/file/mariannethieme.jpg
Would let neither handle my budget though, and I would declaw them.
HoreTore
11-03-2010, 17:08
Doable, but I think our Femke has better arguments http://blikopsittard.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/roger-vrenken-blik-op-sittard-femke-halsema-2.jpg
Uhm....... No. Just no.
Also Louis, no babes outside the babe thread!! I'll have you whipped!
Marianne from the dutch is nice, but you probably already knew that you got nothing on Yulia Tymoshenko (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yulia_Tymoshenko).
Absolutely nothing at all. (http://www.google.com/images?client=opera&rls=de&q=Yulia%20Tymoshenko&oe=utf-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi) ~;)
Nobody has anything on that Italian minister of whateverwhocares http://orderorder.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/410ed04f81700700e36181a281ab90bc_carfagna.jpg
@Horetore you suck skippyballs through a straw, Femke is a classy woman. We are a bit in a love hate relationship, when she opens her mouth spell is broken stuff should go in it not the other way around.
HoreTore
11-04-2010, 07:38
Nobody has anything on that Italian minister of whateverwhocares http://orderorder.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/410ed04f81700700e36181a281ab90bc_carfagna.jpg
@Horetore you suck skippyballs through a straw, Femke is a classy woman. We are a bit in a love hate relationship, when she opens her mouth spell is broken stuff should go in it not the other way around.
I wouldn't touch her even if she paid me.
Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
Skullheadhq
11-04-2010, 09:49
Her majesty was better (when she's young), as our royal bloodline gave us beautiful princess.
Mild ('mother I'd like to date')
You came up with that term yourself?
Her majesty was better (when she's young), as our royal bloodline gave us beautiful princess.
Yes a perfect blend of nazi and junta genes, and it allready shows in that little monster when she pulls other kids from stuff she wants to play with.
The Stranger
11-04-2010, 12:16
Doable, but I think our Femke has better arguments http://blikopsittard.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/roger-vrenken-blik-op-sittard-femke-halsema-2.jpg
And certainly our Marianne http://www.publiek-politiek.nl/content/download/4482/24343/file/mariannethieme.jpg
Would let neither handle my budget though, and I would declaw them.
herseth sandlin > femke halsema
though femke halsema is definitly cute for a dutch politician.
The Stranger
11-04-2010, 12:18
Uhm....... No. Just no.
Also Louis, no babes outside the babe thread!! I'll have you whipped!
that is not a good picture btw... fragony has no style XD besides he is an old man
http://www.nettyroyal.nl/charlotte.html
yummie
HoreTore
11-04-2010, 16:32
that is not a good picture btw... fragony has no style XD besides he is an old man
http://www.nettyroyal.nl/charlotte.html
yummie
Too bad she's a royal, and therefore inbred.... As I want healthy children, she's out of the picture.
gaelic cowboy
11-04-2010, 17:32
Too bad she's a royal, and therefore inbred.... As I want healthy children, she's out of the picture.
Silly Horetore everyone knows all they do is marry well, the actual breeding is done with the servants don't you know.
The Stranger
11-05-2010, 00:39
Too bad she's a royal, and therefore inbred.... As I want healthy children, she's out of the picture.
technically you are inbred too! its all in the bible you know
Louis VI the Fat
11-05-2010, 02:18
You came up with that term yourself?Yes, and on the spot too! I make 'em up as I go. I'm easy like that. You put in a quarter, you press 'play', and Louis does his thing. It never stops.
gaelic cowboy
11-05-2010, 03:52
I for one am going to be suspicious of any politician with charisma or good looks etc etc for the rest of my life to paraphrase willy shakespere "Let me have politicians about me that are fat; Sleek-headed ones and such as sleep o' nights"
We had over ten years of an apparently ordinary man "Who got it" and who "You could have a beer with" apparently had charm the X-factor etc an easy relationship with people he was the man to lead us, everyone else was grey and boring.
Well like the Piper in Hamlein he led us off the cliff, honestly ordinary man what a laugh he was driven round this country for over approx 30yrs in state cars he was far from an ordinary man.
This Palin craic will bite ye all in the :daisy: bigtime she is just another Hope/Change politician but it's Change the social order and Hope God fixes the economy
it's freaky how close to reality this joke is becoming:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqI2i_fIdP0
"I think we can go dumber!".
The Stranger
11-05-2010, 15:37
hehe XD
This is a superficial topic guys, we want nothing to do with sense and reason here, it's all about the looks. ~;)
Well there is this Belgian female politician who posed nude on the cover of a magazine, but well I obviously can't post that. But if you're 18 or older you could google Barbara Steeman. She isn't really a high profile politician though.
This female politician promised us 400.000 'jobs'. :o
http://cache4.asset-cache.net/xc/74185206.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF878921CC759DF4EBAC47D0CD691FDA8D5506B68351E77830B2A89B270981978251CF77
Annick De Ridder could be doable after a night of heavy drinking:
http://www.demorgen.be/static/FOTO/pe/16/15/5/media_l_1595465.jpg
Kim Geybels, great body, but the face ain't all that...:
http://www.nieuwsblad.be/Assets/Images_Upload/2010/09/03/nb0309geybels.jpg.h170.jpg.280.jpg
Bah. Jill Filipovic (feminist activist) trumps all.
https://img560.imageshack.us/img560/1106/jillfilipovic.jpg
The Stranger
11-09-2010, 10:43
Bah. Jill Filipovic (feminist activist) trumps all.
https://img560.imageshack.us/img560/1106/jillfilipovic.jpg
this one cracks me up!!! a feminist activist with a typical 16 year old "guys look how sexy i am" picture!
im so macho =_=
this one cracks me up!!! a feminist activist with a typical 16 year old "guys look how sexy i am" picture!
im so macho =_=
That came to mind chez-Frag as well, but she's hot in a girl-next-door kinda way. Italian minister of roflwhocares remains unchallenged imho.
HoreTore
11-09-2010, 22:38
this one cracks me up!!! a feminist activist with a typical 16 year old "guys look how sexy i am" picture!
im so macho =_=
Why on earth should being feminist be in opposition to wanting to be/feel sexy....?
That's like saying you have to be a virgin to say that you think the focus on sex has gone too far in society.
There is Sexual Liberation movement and a movement against the abuse of women/stereotypes for sex within the feminist movement.
Different factions want different things.
The Stranger
11-10-2010, 00:35
Why on earth should being feminist be in opposition to wanting to be/feel sexy....?
That's like saying you have to be a virgin to say that you think the focus on sex has gone too far in society.
no thats not what i mean. im just saying the pose is a typical pose for 16 year old girls who wanna take daring on/off the edge fotos to seduce innocent young boys into their flesh eating vaginas.
i mean... how serious would you take a feminist activist who stars in a ****movie (not the lesbian one... but german hardcore XD)
Rhyfelwyr
11-10-2010, 01:41
How seriously does anyone take feminists anyway, they are just people that need a problem.
How seriously does anyone take feminists anyway, they are just people that need a problem.
Well... last time this subject came up, I believe one poster said a womans place is in the home should not be in the work place and another poster told a moderators wife to shut up and make him a sandwich.
I don't think the 'problem' has disappeared yet.
You mean he still didn't get the damn sandwich?
How seriously does anyone take feminists anyway, they are just people that need a problem.
Feminist fɛmənɪst noun
A person who supports the equality of women with men.
A member of a feminist political movement.
One who believes in the social, political, and economical equality of the sexes.
I guess you shouldn't take me seriously then.
Rhyfelwyr
11-10-2010, 13:19
I guess you shouldn't take me seriously then.
It's just the hardline femininists that go to the trouble of calling themselves feminists that insist on taking the underlined bits above to their natural conclusions, which doesn't work and ends up in stupidity. Women cannot be fully equal with men, they will never be as strong, for example (generally speaking).
The average person on the other had simply wants women to have the right to choose what they want to do with their life, whether it be pursuing a career or working in the kitchen. Because the reality is women, when given the choice, are going to be more likely than men to want to do the latter. It's not all social conditioning either, it's just biology.
Ever heard a feminist getting worked up over the dominance of males picking up the trash it really doesn't represent society I feel it should be 50/50, can't all lead a multinational after all. We need a quotum, force it.
gaelic cowboy
11-10-2010, 14:17
There has been a bit of a flap over here cos two women politicians resigned from standing at the next election and there is no sign of a women to takeover. Apparently the solution is to create a list of women candidates at least thats what our "Betters" believe yes the smashing of democracy is how we shall ensure more representation of women in the Dail.
It will fail utterly to actually elect any of the women though of course as Irish politics is clientelist and parochial by nature, this is simply due to the fact we live in a small country. I could state on the org my inention to go to Offaly and have a chat with Brian Cowen tomorrow and there is a better than 60%-70% chance I could do it no hassle.
Rhyfelwyr
11-10-2010, 14:57
Yep, don't forget to fight gender discrimination by putting women into political office on merit of the fact that they are women.
HoreTore
11-10-2010, 17:17
Yep, don't forget to fight gender discrimination by putting women into political office on merit of the fact that they are women.
We did something similar here.
We forced all companies to have at least 40% of both sexes represented at the boards(which in practice meant increasing the percentage of women to 40), if not then they would be shut down. This applied to every company represented at the stock exchange. Of course, everyone on the right went nuts, saying that we should only select those who are qualified, that the women will be scorned, etc etc. You know, the normal hysteria.
But what actually happened? There was a time limit, I believe it was in 2008, and all the companies had a few years to comply. Naturally, some went about conforming quickly, others delayed. What's interesting, is that every company who got more women on their boards early performed better than those who delayed. The sooner you filled up with women, the better your company performed.
In conclusion: of course I believe that people should be chosen on their qualifications, not their sex or whatever. But I also believe that the people who own companies are completely incapable of selecting the best qualified people to be on their boards. And if they are forced to widen their pool of potential candidates and are forbidden to go with their first instincts, then they will be more likely to pick the best people. Because honestly, most business owners have shown themselves to be utterly incompetent.
Rhyfelwyr
11-10-2010, 17:30
So the ends justified the means. Meh, happens I guess.
Strike For The South
11-10-2010, 17:35
We forced all companies to have at least 40% of both sexes represented at the boards
Is this what Norway worries about?
HoreTore
11-10-2010, 18:06
So the ends justified the means. Meh, happens I guess.
As company owners have shown themselves to be completely incompetent when it comes to hiring people, the means are justified on their own.
Rhyfelwyr
11-10-2010, 19:09
As company owners have shown themselves to be completely incompetent when it comes to hiring people, the means are justified on their own.
And the government is... competent?
HoreTore
11-10-2010, 23:27
And the government is... competent?
As this example shows:
At least more competent.
EDIT: Though to be fair, I have always viewed the government as competent, or competent enough anyway. There is certainly no less waste of resources in the government than there has been in the other places I've worked, Shell and Autolink in particular. Shell has a bureaucracy that would've made Lenin blush, while Autolink has a policy of paying double wages for labour working at 50%.....
EDIT AGAIN: This excludes the military of course, nobody can compete with that retarded organization when it comes to wasting stuff. But then again, the entire military is waste, so........ :clown:
Companies who prepare early to achieve new government sanctioned quota, seem to be lead effectively. Naturally those do better overall...:juggle2:
gaelic cowboy
11-11-2010, 00:11
The workers in the sugar plant in Mallow probably would disagree on the government competence angle.
Greencore sugar plant closure 'not necessary' (http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1110/greencore.html)
The European Court of Auditors has found that the closure of the Greencore sugar plant in Mallow in 2006 may not have been necessary.
The European Court of Auditors has found that the closure of the Greencore sugar plant in Mallow in 2006, with the loss of 240 jobs, may not have been necessary.
The closure came about as a result of a major restructuring of the EU sugar sector following world trade rulings and a drive to make the sector more competitive.
But in a highly critical report published this afternoon the Court of Auditors says that the European Commission was using out of date information, that overall sugar production had become less competitive as a result of the reforms, and that the cut in prices was not passed on to consumers.
Ireland's member of the European Court of Auditors, Eoin O'Shea, told RTÉ News: 'It's possible that [the Greencore Plant] would still be operating today if it were not for the sugar reforms introduced by the European Commission.'
In 2005 and 2006, the EU negotiated a major reform of the sugar sector partly because subsidised European production allegedly hurt small producers in the developing world.
The plan was to reduce production by 6m tonnes or 30% by 2010 and it was partly done by cutting the price of sugar by 36%.
At the time, there were 285,000 sugar beet growers in the EU, a figure that has since been reduced to 164,000.
In all 75 sugar factories, including the Greencore plant, closed with the loss of 20,000 jobs.
According to the report into the sector by the Luxembourg-based European Court of Auditors, Ireland was the only member state with just one factory to close.
It described the factory as 'large, modern and potentially efficient'.
The European Commission had argued at the time that only factories that became unprofitable after the price cuts were implemented would have closed.
However, today's report shows that 'no comparison of the productivity of individual producers or factories was available'.
It also showed that the Commission was using data from 2001 and that it had not taken account of changes within the Greencore operation when its proposal was made in 2005.
Overall, the report says, sugar production was not made more competitive. It is now controlled by a small few - 75% of the EU's production is now carried out by only six industrial groups.
It says that ultimately the EU has had to become a net importer of sugar, whereas before it was a net exporter. It also said that reductions in the bulk price of sugar were not passed on to the consumer.
Ireland received €213m in restructuring aid after the closure of the Greencore plant, in which 240 factory workers and 3,700 growers lost their jobs.
At the time, much of the debate during the negotiations between member states and the European Commission was over compensation and how much should be shared between Greencore and the workers.
Some Irish farmers fought for the plant to be kept open, while others focussed on what compensation could be achieved.
Ireland East MEP Mairead McGuinness said: 'It is very clear that the Commission has questions to answer arising from the Court of Auditors report. Lessons need to be learned.
'The sugar reforms resulted in the complete loss of the Irish sugar industry.'
Fine Gael Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Spokesperson Andrew Doyle said the report leads to the inescapable conclusion that the Government of the time was asleep at the wheel.
Labour Agriculture Spokesperson Sean Sherlock said that in the wake of the finding, serious questions arise as to the suitability of Mary Coughlan for high office.
Is this what Norway worries about?
Euro thingie, everything MUST BE A REPRESENTATION OF SOCIETY. Under labour it went so far here that you couldn't get a promotion at (highest levels of) the police if you are a white male, no matter how qualified. Nope that is not rightwing bull that was policy, that's what they care about ES MUSS SEIN
HoreTore
11-11-2010, 21:38
Euro thingie, everything MUST BE A REPRESENTATION OF SOCIETY. Under labour it went so far here that you couldn't get a promotion at (highest levels of) the police if you are a white male, no matter how qualified. Nope that is not rightwing bull that was policy, that's what they care about ES MUSS SEIN
.....And it resulted in companies performing better. Explain how that is bad, Frags?
.....And it resulted in companies performing better.
Says who, exactly. That's like asking the IPCC if the earth is warming up. If they are qualified they'll get there.
HoreTore
11-12-2010, 22:16
Says who, exactly.
The people who count the money they made from said companies.
Checking whether a stock goes up or down is actually rather easy to check....
The people who count the money they made from said companies.
Checking whether a stock goes up or down is actually rather easy to check....
And cherry-picked molded if you have a cause, show me something real
HoreTore
11-13-2010, 13:30
And cherry-picked molded if you have a cause, show me something real
.....are you accusing the stock exchange of favouring feminism....?
The Stranger
11-13-2010, 15:47
say what you want... but royalty pwns!
http://www.google.nl/imgres?imgurl=http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/07_02/PrinMarthaLouiseAP_468x644.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-470787/Norwegian-princess-wants-teach-people-talk-angels.html&usg=__WpBtG2XY85FuL1vq7dz3HGMn9iQ=&h=644&w=468&sz=83&hl=nl&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=oTX1R0x4oWS4bM:&tbnh=143&tbnw=98&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmartha%2Blouise%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dnl%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:nl:official%26biw%3D1024%26bih%3D553%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=463&vpy=47&dur=1429&hovh=263&hovw=191&tx=108&ty=150&ei=sKTeTIPVJJDKjAfQj_HKAQ&oei=sKTeTIPVJJDKjAfQj_HKAQ&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=19&ved=1t:429,r:3,s:0
Rhyfelwyr
11-13-2010, 18:34
"Norwegian Princess Martha Louise has announced that she is clairvoyant and wants to help people by teaching them how to talk to angels."
Seems the effects of inbreeding were less visible in this one...
The Stranger
11-13-2010, 19:45
who cares that shes crazy as long as shes hot... no one cared that angelina jolie was crazy as a stick...
HoreTore
11-14-2010, 00:00
who cares that shes crazy as long as shes hot... no one cared that angelina jolie was crazy as a stick...
She's not "hot" in any way either, she's just a mental pasient unaware of her condition. A sad thing, really.
The Stranger
11-14-2010, 00:20
well... she used to be sexy XD on the screen anyway. or are you talking about the princess now?
HoreTore
11-14-2010, 00:24
well... she used to be sexy XD on the screen anyway. or are you talking about the princess now?
Yes, that was the lobotomized princess.
And don't you talk smack about my darling Angelina, she's coming to live with me after she's got Brad Pitt's money!!!!!
The Stranger
11-14-2010, 00:39
why is she crazy??? cuz she talks to angels... whatever half the globe hears voices. u know what is crazy? pretending to by normal, like everyone else...
HoreTore
11-14-2010, 00:42
why is she crazy??? cuz she talks to angels... whatever half the globe hears voices. u know what is crazy? pretending to by normal, like everyone else...
She has voices in her head, and they're not coming from anyone around her.
If that's not a sign of mental disorder, I don't know what is.
The Stranger
11-14-2010, 01:28
i dont see how that is a mental disorder. perhaps a mental deviation... its just labeled as a mental disorder. some people hear their own voices when they think some dont... who is to judge which one is sane and which one isnt...
perhaps her conclusion is farfetched but doesnt make her insane
HoreTore
11-14-2010, 01:31
i dont see how that is a mental disorder. perhaps a mental deviation... its just labeled as a mental disorder. some people hear their own voices when they think some dont... who is to judge which one is sane and which one isnt...
perhaps her conclusion is farfetched but doesnt make her insane
When you're convinced you can talk to fairytale creatures; yes, you are.
The Stranger
11-14-2010, 01:34
i never read the book :P have no intentions either... i wouldnt dismiss angels as fairy tale creatures only because you and i dont believe in them... oh well.. cant be bothered to defend her :P call her a loon all you want to but the pictures ive seen of her... she looked pretty beautiful on them XD
HoreTore
11-14-2010, 01:45
i never read the book :P have no intentions either... i wouldnt dismiss angels as fairy tale creatures only because you and i dont believe in them... oh well.. cant be bothered to defend her :P call her a loon all you want to but the pictures ive seen of her... she looked pretty beautiful on them XD
There is no such thing as an "angel" and it's impossible to talk to dead people.
End of story.
The ones who believe they can are either insane or con-artists and belong in either a mental hospital or jail.
There is no such thing as an "angel" and it's impossible to talk to dead people.
End of story.
The ones who believe they can are either insane or con-artists and belong in either a mental hospital or jail.
Hear hear!
The Stranger
11-14-2010, 13:58
There is no such thing as an "angel" and it's impossible to talk to dead people.
End of story.
The ones who believe they can are either insane or con-artists and belong in either a mental hospital or jail.
what makes you so certain that there are none. because billions of people before you have believed otherwise
and dont even dare to make a scientific claim or analogy because this is not a scientific matter, this is a bout a truth or non-truth science can make no claim about that is more or less true than any other
.....are you accusing the stock exchange of favouring feminism....?
No I accuse feminists of claiming said succes.
HoreTore
11-14-2010, 14:15
what makes you so certain that there are none. because billions of people before you have believed otherwise
and dont even dare to make a scientific claim or analogy because this is not a scientific matter, this is a bout a truth or non-truth science can make no claim about that is more or less true than any other
"Billions of people" before me have also believed a cat crossing the street before you or breaking a mirror means bad luck.
In short: dead people are dead and angels are the delusions of the insane.
No I accuse feminists of claiming said succes.
The ones who published the numbers and came with the obvious conclusion were not feminists, frags, but rather economists working for a financial institution(they're big on statistics you know).
Yeah yeah, conclusion on demand, easy to credit economic growth to giraffes dancing the flamingo if you try hard enough.
The Stranger
11-14-2010, 14:46
"Billions of people" before me have also believed a cat crossing the street before you or breaking a mirror means bad luck.
so nothing here makes it clear that they were wrong. you just state a fact you dont give any arguments about why they werent right. and like i said, science wont do here. you have to beat them on their own turf.
with such a line of reasoning you might as well say
angels dont exist because this morning i had breakfast.
or to make a better one
what you say now is wrong because something entirely else you said before was also wrong.
Rhyfelwyr
11-15-2010, 00:36
"Billions of people" before me have also believed a cat crossing the street before you or breaking a mirror means bad luck.
I'm a bit skeptical of just how superstitious people were on the past. Just because they had their good/bad luck things doesn't mean they really took them seriously, I remember something about this on the BBC and a lot of people today still won't walk under a ladder if they can avoid it. Doesn't mean they take it too seriously, just one of these things, I have a feeling people in the past were the same. :shrug:
gaelic cowboy
11-15-2010, 00:44
I'm a bit skeptical of just how superstitious people were on the past. Just because they had their good/bad luck things doesn't mean they really took them seriously, I remember something about this on the BBC and a lot of people today still won't walk under a ladder if they can avoid it. Doesn't mean they take it too seriously, just one of these things, I have a feeling people in the past were the same. :shrug:
These things die hard Rhy I know people who are still a bit afraid to interfere with what people colloquially call a fairy fort usually just an ancient burial cairn.
There is no such thing as an "angel" and it's impossible to talk to dead people.
End of story.
The ones who believe they can are either insane or con-artists and belong in either a mental hospital or jail.
You're such an angel...
Louis VI the Fat
11-15-2010, 02:52
There is no such thing as an "angel" and it's impossible to talk to dead people.
End of story.
The ones who believe they can are either insane or con-artists and belong in either a mental hospital or jail.There are others:
The berieved, who in their grieving despair want to believe it all makes sense, serves some sort of purpose.
Those who are left behind, with unfinished business with the deceased, whom they 'talk to'.
The lonely, the abandoned, the wretched, who still want believe in something.
Some really do believe, Some believe, but know deep down it is not real, but have to cling on to it for consolation. They don't all belong in a mental hospital. Of all the nasty things people do, should it be a poor widower who talks to her deceased husband who should be send to a mental institution?
HoreTore
11-15-2010, 08:17
There are others:
The berieved, who in their grieving despair want to believe it all makes sense, serves some sort of purpose.
Those who are left behind, with unfinished business with the deceased, whom they 'talk to'.
The lonely, the abandoned, the wretched, who still want believe in something.
Some really do believe, Some believe, but know deep down it is not real, but have to cling on to it for consolation. They don't all belong in a mental hospital. Of all the nasty things people do, should it be a poor widower who talks to her deceased husband who should be send to a mental institution?
Like they say on South Park:
"When you die, don't you rather want real peace than float around talking to this :daisy: hole?"
I remember something about this on the BBC and a lot of people today still won't walk under a ladder if they can avoid it.
Well, that is because people don't want objects dropped on their head, or the ladder to collapse on them.
HoreTore
11-15-2010, 16:06
Well, that is because people don't want objects dropped on their head, or the ladder to collapse on them.
Bingo!
Rhyfelwyr
11-15-2010, 16:11
Well, that is because people don't want objects dropped on their head, or the ladder to collapse on them.
No! Though who knows maybe that's where the superstition around these things came from.
I just doubt anybody really believed that a black cat was going to cause them bad luck.
The Stranger
11-15-2010, 16:23
doesnt matter horetore makes his truth and his contemporary truth into a universal and eternal truth. bad bad horetore... he cant stake the claims he makes. perhaps in 400 years the people will be laughing that we ever thought that it was true that angels didnt exist or that it was true that we cause global warming etc etc
gaelic cowboy
11-15-2010, 16:25
No! Though who knows maybe that's where the superstition around these things came from.
I just doubt anybody really believed that a black cat was going to cause them bad luck.
The ladder one is about not breaking a "Trinity" made from the ground the wall and the ladder.
HoreTore
11-15-2010, 16:41
doesnt matter horetore makes his truth and his contemporary truth into a universal and eternal truth. bad bad horetore... he cant stake the claims he makes. perhaps in 400 years the people will be laughing that we ever thought that it was true that angels didnt exist or that it was true that we cause global warming etc etc
Yes, because the people who believe in angels aren't making up their own truth.....................yes..............
But I guess logic goes out the window for some people when they reflect upon their faith... If they reflect upon it at all, that is.
EDIT: If someone said to you that Sauron was real and that his best friend was Gandalf, whom he talked to every day.... What would you call that?
The Stranger
11-15-2010, 16:50
nuts. XD
im not at all a believer btw i dunno if your second comment was aimed at me. and my logic is quite sharp. check the multiculti thread, i have the same debate with sasaki.
HoreTore
11-15-2010, 17:00
nuts. XD
....and how is it any different from believing in angels...?
im not at all a believer btw i dunno if your second comment was aimed at me. and my logic is quite sharp. check the multiculti thread, i have the same debate with sasaki.
The second comment was aimed at everyone who believes in angels and other fantasy creatures.
The Stranger
11-15-2010, 17:08
i was being sarcistic about my nuts.
but i think you overlook an area of truth and fulfillment and that you make scientific claims in areas where science has no jurisdiction.
you claim that angels do not exist but you cannot be sure about it. you cannot prove it scientifially. neither can they prove scientifically that they do exist. so you have to beat them at their own turf, locate the inconsistensies etc instead of just saying you are crazy because you believe in god and angels which is not an argument.
edit
i would tell the dude that that would be highly unlikely because if sauron and gandalf were real and they were like the book of tolkien describes than they would not be friends but enemies.
see, lokate inconsistency, aim and destroy!
Seamus Fermanagh
11-15-2010, 17:08
I believe in angels, though I have never spoken to one (nor do I expect to do so).
Does she really hear angels talking? Unlikely, I think -- but I am not she. Yet it is far more comforting to hear someone believe in angels than in voices that urge destruction. Assisi seems truer to the spirit of things than does Arnaud-Amaury, at least to me.
HoreTore
11-15-2010, 17:21
i was being sarcistic about my nuts.
but i think you overlook an area of truth and fulfillment and that you make scientific claims in areas where science has no jurisdiction.
you claim that angels do not exist but you cannot be sure about it. you cannot prove it scientifially. neither can they prove scientifically that they do exist. so you have to beat them at their own turf, locate the inconsistensies etc instead of just saying you are crazy because you believe in god and angels which is not an argument.
edit
i would tell the dude that that would be highly unlikely because if sauron and gandalf were real and they were like the book of tolkien describes than they would not be friends but enemies.
see, lokate inconsistency, aim and destroy!
I never said he believed Sauron was his friend, did I?
And yes, i do attack the inconsistencies, why on earth would you think I don't? That was why I talked about logic, ya know. Some people just can't grasp that extremely low odds still means that something will happen from time to time. For example, if you think about someone, and unknown to you they fly above you that very instant, that is still a coincidence, it does not show that you have some otherworldly connection with that person. It was nothing but a coincidence.
But still, the burden of proof rests on the one who makes a claim, not the one who does not believe it.
I believe in angels, though I have never spoken to one (nor do I expect to do so).
Does she really hear angels talking? Unlikely, I think -- but I am not she. Yet it is far more comforting to hear someone believe in angels than in voices that urge destruction. Assisi seems truer to the spirit of things than does Arnaud-Amaury, at least to me.
She has started a school where you can learn to talk to angels, from which she is making plenty of cash. Which makes her a con artist, and no, that's not very comforting.
Seamus Fermanagh
11-15-2010, 17:54
... She has started a school where you can learn to talk to angels, from which she is making plenty of cash. Which makes her a con artist, and no, that's not very comforting.
I attend such a school most Sundays, though we do tend to teach that the responses will be more "indirect" than this woman's school likely teaches. Still, such teachings seem far less harmful to me than does the average Al Queda camp curriculum.
I attend such a school most Sundays, though we do tend to teach that the responses will be more "indirect" than this woman's school likely teaches. Still, such teachings seem far less harmful to me than does the average Al Queda camp curriculum.
But certaily not less creepy imho. And just as dangerous. I'd speak my mind but I would really offend you.
The Stranger
11-15-2010, 18:13
I never said he believed Sauron was his friend, did I?
And yes, i do attack the inconsistencies, why on earth would you think I don't? That was why I talked about logic, ya know. Some people just can't grasp that extremely low odds still means that something will happen from time to time. For example, if you think about someone, and unknown to you they fly above you that very instant, that is still a coincidence, it does not show that you have some otherworldly connection with that person. It was nothing but a coincidence.
But still, the burden of proof rests on the one who makes a claim, not the one who does not believe it.
cmon horetore you can do better than this.
1) lets assume that the burden of proof lays with the one that makes the claim this doesnt mean that the one who doesnt believe in it has no obligation to back his statements up with arguments. all i have seen you do so far is this: i dont believe in angels so everyone who does believe in angels is nuts. this is just dogmatic.
2) you also make a claim, many, but lets take this claim: For example, if you think about someone, and unknown to you they fly above you that very instant, that is still a coincidence, it does not show that you have some otherworldly connection with that person. It was nothing but a coincidence.
how can you be so certain that this is a coincidence. im not saying that it is not. and indeed it doesnt show that you have a otherworldly connection with that person, but it doesnt rule it out either. neither does it show that it was coincidence and at the same time it doesnt rule it out either.
again you just dismiss their case in favor of yours without showing why their arguments are flawed.
She has started a school where you can learn to talk to angels, from which she is making plenty of cash. Which makes her a con artist, and no, that's not very comforting.
it would make her a con artist if what she tries is either impossible or she is being a fraud. have you attended one of these classes (with an open mind) and tried to see for yourself?
Seamus Fermanagh
11-15-2010, 18:20
But certaily not less creepy imho. And just as dangerous. I'd speak my mind but I would really offend you.
I'd be less offended than you might believe, Frags. I spent most of my twenties and into my thirties as an agnostic, lapsed Catholic. I chose to return to the faith because I have the gift of belief DESPITE countervailing opinions -- but am well aware of the harshly critical views thereupon advanced by others.
Still, it is probably best that you refrain, as others might be offended and then I'd have to put my green hat on.
Strike For The South
11-15-2010, 18:27
I'd be less offended than you might believe, Frags. I spent most of my twenties and into my thirties as an agnostic, lapsed Catholic. I chose to return to the faith because I have the gift of belief DESPITE countervailing opinions -- but am well aware of the harshly critical views thereupon advanced by others.
Still, it is probably best that you refrain, as others might be offended and then I'd have to put my green hat on.
We're not so different you and I
Sunday school is more about connecting with the flock and finding Jesus through discussion. Even at my Southern Baptist good ol boy infused church, no one ever perpetuated the insanity that is attributed to Palin
There was also free breakfeast
I'd be less offended than you might believe, Frags. I spent most of my twenties and into my thirties as an agnostic, lapsed Catholic. I chose to return to the faith because I have the gift of belief DESPITE countervailing opinions -- but am well aware of the harshly critical views thereupon advanced by others.
Still, it is probably best that you refrain, as others might be offended and then I'd have to put my green hat on.
Oh I won't, but Iike your take on things, same for Hryfrirremirklh ffs
Louis VI the Fat
11-15-2010, 18:56
We're not so different you and I
Sunday school is more about connecting with the flock and finding Jesus through discussion. Even at my Southern Baptist good ol boy infused church, no one ever perpetuated the insanity that is attributed to Palin
There was also free breakfeastI've been to Sunday School. Once. It was in some small town in North Carolina, so I assume it was Southern Baptist, but I don't remember. Certainly not Catholic. I was sixteen, staying with some people. They asked me to go to Sunday School. They felt it their duty to at least inform their guests of the Lord, tell them that the only saviour is through the Lord.
As their guest, I naturally complied. Also, most of their bedsheets had two suspicious holes in them and I was but a scared, isolated Catholic boy...
I didn't understand the half of what they said in school, and failed to pay much attention to the other half as I got bored after a while. It was hot, it was all in English which I hadn't really mastered yet, it was a regular Sunday so they discussed something too detailed to be of interest to the mostly uninterested outsider. They didn't even call you forward for a little little snack and some wine like they do in a decent church.
They were good people though. All of them. A lovely afternoon well spend. :smitten:
Strike For The South
11-15-2010, 19:02
Well they are bloody philistines in Carolina
Louis VI the Fat
11-15-2010, 19:06
Well they are bloody philistines in CarolinaThat's what they called teh Texans. Upstarts. Unwashed frontiermen imagining themselves southern gentlemen.
HoreTore
11-15-2010, 20:26
I attend such a school most Sundays, though we do tend to teach that the responses will be more "indirect" than this woman's school likely teaches. Still, such teachings seem far less harmful to me than does the average Al Queda camp curriculum.
Most con artists are far less harmful than OBL's buddies, but we should still prosecute them for their frauds. Just like this one should be. And AFAIK, most sunday schools are free, you don't pay 1.000 dollars for a couple of weeks like you do on this one. And yes, their curriculum has been heavily covered and ridiculed in the press, so we do know what nonsense goes on in there....
......
This discussion is now over for me at least.
Tellos Athenaios
11-15-2010, 20:43
@Seamus: actually there's a fair amount of “danger” in schools which proclaim to provide a one sure way to whatever it is you really want. It is the danger of addiction. It is the exact same danger as in the drug dealing warlords of Africa: that the subjects become addicted to the “goods” and enslaved to those who control the supply.
There is a lot of truth in Marx's adage that religion is the opium of the masses: scratch out “the” and “of the masses” and you have what it is for the religious zealots. A positive feedback loop of religious satisfaction is exactly the same as a positive feedback loop of opium (or alcohol or tobacco or anything) induced satisfaction and can be quite as dangerous: you become mentally and sometimes even physically dependent on it. (In case of religion: psychosomatic diseases/disorders, depression etc.)
gaelic cowboy
11-15-2010, 20:49
II've been to Sunday School. Once. It was in some small town in North Carolina, so I assume it was Southern Baptist, but I don't remember. Certainly not Catholic. I was sixteen, staying with some people. They asked me to go to Sunday School. They felt it their duty to at least inform their guests of the Lord, tell them that the only saviour is through the Lord.
As their guest, I naturally complied. Also, most of their bedsheets had two suspicious holes in them and I was but a scared, isolated Catholic boy...
I didn't understand the half of what they said in school, and failed to pay much attention to the other half as I got bored after a while. It was hot, it was all in English which I hadn't really mastered yet, it was a regular Sunday so they discussed something too detailed to be of interest to the mostly uninterested outsider. They didn't even call you forward for a little little snack and some wine like they do in a decent church.
They were good people though. All of them. A lovely afternoon well spend. :smitten:
:laugh4: Good man Louis after reading this I have no doubt ye will fit in here no bother and thats an undeniable fact, if you ever decide to retire to the West of Ireland to write a great French novel or read Yeats/Joyce etc then I will be sure and stand you a pint in my local Pat Guiry's of Foxford.
(invitation open to all Org memebers Pat Guiry's Bar Foxford Co Mayo)
The Stranger
11-15-2010, 21:15
This discussion is now over for me at least.
im dissapointed.
gaelic cowboy
11-15-2010, 21:32
@Seamus: actually there's a fair amount of “danger” in schools which proclaim to provide a one sure way to whatever it is you really want. It is the danger of addiction. It is the exact same danger as in the drug dealing warlords of Africa: that the subjects become addicted to the “goods” and enslaved to those who control the supply.
There is a lot of truth in Marx's adage that religion is the opium of the masses: scratch out “the” and “of the masses” and you have what it is for the religious zealots. A positive feedback loop of religious satisfaction is exactly the same as a positive feedback loop of opium (or alcohol or tobacco or anything) induced satisfaction and can be quite as dangerous: you become mentally and sometimes even physically dependent on it. (In case of religion: psychosomatic diseases/disorders, depression etc.)
If there is one things you could not accuse mainstream churches of being it is backwardness they are far to cosmopolitan for that, even now they are being evolved from within and without into a post-evolution belief. The real danger of what you posted is in the apathy of the mainstream church believers versus the newer churches their absolute certainty is the real danger for an Atheist that I assume you are yes/no.
Tellos Athenaios
11-15-2010, 22:07
If there is one things you could not accuse mainstream churches of being it is backwardness they are far to cosmopolitan for that, even now they are being evolved from within and without into a post-evolution belief. The real danger of what you posted is in the apathy of the mainstream church believers versus the newer churches their absolute certainty is the real danger for an Atheist that I assume you are yes/no.
It's not mainstream church offering some extra bible reading time or other scripture study. It is those schools/institutions which take it upon themselves to go the extra religious mile: some are called “cult” others madrassah yet others are simply scams using religion to extract money from the attendance. The danger is in the positive feedback loop. At some point you will literally be unable to think outside of the little mental orbit you and your “school” have confined you to: it will almost literally re-wire your brain. It will come to define your life, and turning away from it will be every bit as difficult as staying clean is for a crack addict.
It is a major danger to those who have shown themselves receptive to the particular addiction.
It is only a minor danger to the person who does not care about whether or not there is a God.
By the way, colour me yes.
Rhyfelwyr
11-15-2010, 22:24
Meh don't get all the rhetoric about logic and brain washing, half the population are happy to take it for granted that there was nothing and then an explosion that made everything, and that this idea somehow makes sense. :shrug:
The real danger of what you posted is in the apathy of the mainstream church believers versus the newer churches their absolute certainty is the real danger for an Atheist that I assume you are yes/no.
Heh very true I feel like I live on the borderline between those two worlds.
Tellos Athenaios
11-15-2010, 22:34
Meh don't get all the rhetoric about logic and brain washing, half the population are happy to take it for granted that there was nothing and then an explosion that made everything, and that this idea somehow makes sense. :shrug:
It is not what you take for granted. What I'm referring to is that at some point, well beyond “taking for granted”, you will define your world in terms of your dogma; instead of the other way around.
So if your dogma “sent you off to a foreign land”/“to go and kill the American man” you will quite simply do so without requiring any “why” or any sort of “justification” whatsoever.
So if your dogma states “have sex with this man” you will quite simply oblige.
So if your dogma states “give me all your money” ditto.
The point is you are rendered exceedingly vulnerable to all sorts of abuse; just to get your daily dogmatic fix.
[...] ridiculed in the press, so we do know what nonsense goes on in there....
So much about the neutral press and their fair and balanced views?
That doesn't mean I disagree with whatever they said but when the press starts ridiculing people I start becoming suspicious of whatever else they say as well, since they're obviously very biased.
HoreTore
11-16-2010, 08:46
So much about the neutral press and their fair and balanced views?
That doesn't mean I disagree with whatever they said but when the press starts ridiculing people I start becoming suspicious of whatever else they say as well, since they're obviously very biased.
By reporting exactly what she said during her "lessons" you automatically ridicule her.
@Seamus: actually there's a fair amount of “danger” in schools which proclaim to provide a one sure way to whatever it is you really want. It is the danger of addiction. It is the exact same danger as in the drug dealing warlords of Africa: that the subjects become addicted to the “goods” and enslaved to those who control the supply.
There is a lot of truth in Marx's adage that religion is the opium of the masses: scratch out “the” and “of the masses” and you have what it is for the religious zealots. A positive feedback loop of religious satisfaction is exactly the same as a positive feedback loop of opium (or alcohol or tobacco or anything) induced satisfaction and can be quite as dangerous: you become mentally and sometimes even physically dependent on it. (In case of religion: psychosomatic diseases/disorders, depression etc.)
More eloquent than I could ever put it
Rhyfelwyr
11-16-2010, 14:57
More eloquent than I could ever put it
It's nonsense, 99% of people that go to all the religious ceremonies and what not across the world don't see religion as anything more than a few rituals they go through every week or so. I've never heard of people getting withdrawal symptoms because they missed the Mass...
Tellos Athenaios
11-16-2010, 15:23
I guess you overlooked this: It's not mainstream church offering some extra bible reading time or other scripture study. It is those schools/institutions which take it upon themselves to go the extra religious mile: some are called “cult” others madrassah yet others are simply scams using religion to extract money from the attendance.
Alcohol is nothing but component of a tasty drink for 99% of the people who sample some occasionally. But the AA exists for a reason.
It's nonsense, 99% of people that go to all the religious ceremonies and what not across the world don't see religion as anything more than a few rituals they go through every week or so. I've never heard of people getting withdrawal symptoms because they missed the Mass...
Because they don't miss them? Remains a self-imposed obligation.
Rhyfelwyr
11-16-2010, 16:52
Because they don't miss them? Remains a self-imposed obligation.
Yep, religious rituals are more a sort of group activity, not a fix, organised religion is mainly a social thing.
Which is why I am 100% against it, always felt my church feels too much like a social club.
Yep, religious rituals are more a sort of group activity, not a fix, organised religion is mainly a social thing.
Which is why I am 100% against it, always felt my church feels too much like a social club.
And how does your church feel about that
Rhyfelwyr
11-17-2010, 00:24
And how does your church feel about that
Mixed, I'm not the only one to think like that, one guy who shared my sentiments is now training to be a minister.
In a way I'm backwards and progressive at the same time. Progressive in that it removes the ritual and formal worship and what not supported by the traditionalists, backwards in that its based on Puritan views on condemining non-scriptural worship.
Mixed, I'm not the only one to think like that, one guy who shared my sentiments is now training to be a minister.
In a way I'm backwards and progressive at the same time. Progressive in that it removes the ritual and formal worship and what not supported by the traditionalists, backwards in that its based on Puritan views on condemining non-scriptural worship.
Personally I don't really get the concept of "worship", I go to church almost every Sunday, pray, read the scriptures, etc. yet for some reason I've never felt like I've worshiped God, probably becuase the way I think of worshiping is bowing down and giving praise, which is something I don't do and honestly I don't think I'd be comfortable doing.
Mixed, I'm not the only one to think like that, one guy who shared my sentiments is now training to be a minister.
In a way I'm backwards and progressive at the same time. Progressive in that it removes the ritual and formal worship and what not supported by the traditionalists, backwards in that its based on Puritan views on condemining non-scriptural worship.
Damn you I'm the one with the labels you aren't supposed to slap them on yourself, is nothing sacred anymore
Rhyfelwyr
11-17-2010, 11:24
Damn you I'm the one with the labels you aren't supposed to slap them on yourself, is nothing sacred anymore
Gotta understand where you stand.
I would worship for what some might consider coincidence and imaginary moral guidance. Someones unconditional love and guidance, in my opinion a gift, that rids me of the guilt of takeing that for granted. I would expect nothing in return, well, perhaps a sense of contentment that I did, or made an attempt to understand my concept of belief.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.