Stop what you're doing and laugh at the U.S.

[L[0ne]R]

The nukes. My only worry about the US is the nukes. And I do hope the US doesn't go completely apes**t one day and start WW3.
Other than that I'm sure people will either not care, or find a way around.


P.S. I don't really believe in God, but I don't deny his existence either. So then what does that count as?

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

P.S. I don't really believe in God, but I don't deny his existence either. So then what does that count as?

Agnostic.

[L[0ne]R]

Er yeah, I knew that. I was referring to the whole "you either believe or you dont" part that someone before me posted.

[ds dude]

I hope no one took my other post seriously, I was just trying to break the ice. What that means.
Loner, US will never start WW3.

[croat1gamer]

Lets ignore the Middle East where almost the same amount of countries is participating in active warfare as it was during WW1/2.

@ Mangled/{Law} Gamer_2k4- May i remind you that the Bible is an allegoric writing. Plus it was based of some older stuff, like the Jewish Tora/Talmud and the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh and similar.

I get far too much enjoyment from mocking them, sorry. But your attitude also stinks, why care? Well... in 20 years down the line when half the science graduates in America believe that man and dinosaur co-existed and aren't going to be taken seriously by properly educated people who aren't even scientists will you still not care? Should they care? Should anyone care?

The main problem regarding this topic would be what can i/you/we/they consider the "canon" understanding of our world and its evolution. It couldve been done by the currently scientifically accepted evolutional theories or by an omnipotent Flying Spaghetti Monster.
//stuff to be added, but im late for school

[amb2010]

Ah religious debates on the internet, fun stuff. That second link was hilarious. *Looks at first picture* (interesting idea) *Looks at second* (hmmm) *third* (.......) *closes page*

First off I'll say I'm agnostic and I hate religion. Now before people come running in spewing insults and getting their panties in a knot. I view religion as a business that just prays on peoples beliefs. I'm not against those beliefs, just the way "religion" contorts those beliefs into the feelings of "either you're with us or against us" kind of stuff.

I can't help but wonder why you are so...offended by the theme park. Aside from further proving my point up above, what does it honestly have to do with you? If you don't like the idea, simply don't go there. I'd imagine the shit-storm they'll receive after opening will be bad enough to close the place down but people can do what ever they want. If they want to waste 150mil on something like that, whats wrong with it? It's not like it's your money that's funding the place and if people honestly want to do it why stop them. I feel the people that do the polar bear swimming contest are complete and utter morons but you don't see me ranting and raving about them holding the competitions every year.

As to the second part. You seem to be twisting quite a bit of info there. The bill does not mention anything about the right to teach religion or religious beliefs in school. What it does want to entitle is the ability to allow schools and teachers to acknowledge that other routes exist. Now while that may sound like "teaching religion" it isn't. The "unconstitutional" thing mentioned in article is that of the separation of church and state. While the bill is on the line the reason it got past the house is because its not allowing the teaching of religion but allowing teachers and schools to tell students "hey just because its in this book doesn't mean its what you need to believe" No it isn't talking about things that are accepted by both parties (like gravity) and such that are indisputable but things that, no matter how sound they are scientifically, are not 100% accurate such as the theory of evolution (the one where we came from bacteria, not the one about how we evolve to over come obstacles and are always "evolving", can't remember which one was the big E or the lowercase e) since no matter how much information we gather, we cannot go back in time to find out if it was true(same applies for religion). I find that it could be a huge advancement in education. If used properly (which it probably won't) it would increase both a person education and willingness to accept someone's belief even if it is different (as opposed to the whole "you're either with us or against us" mentality the religious debate has)

Also if anyone would start world war 3 it would be the US most-likely, we're all evil war hungry monstrosities that like to start fights all the time for laughs(sarcasm for those that failed to get it). Yeah we have nukes, most countries do. You how ever Loner, wouldn't need to worry about us nuking you since if the US was to invade Canada it would most likely be for the resources at which point nuking the resources wouldn't be too smart (of course if someone like Bush can get a hold of the launch codes...well who knows then). If we'd nuke anyone it would probably be the people in Asia since they pretty much control our economy now.

[Blacksheepboy]

"Awwh gawd we're running around in a fuckin box beating ourselves against the walls"

[Gizd]

Eh. All discussions about religion seem to be based on theory that a religious person is always fanatic.

[croat1gamer]

One of the main reasons why i avoid religion-based topics on the internet.

[Mangled*]

Indeed, my attitude is depressing. 
A single human being only has one way in which they view the world/universe/ideas, this is a very narrow perspective that follows you until death.  Nothing is known, nothing can be known (at least you don't speak in absolutes), and nor does it matter.  In a way, every human is the center of their own individual universe, a universe that only exists through their eyes; prone to a life of isolation we are.  I live for myself, nothing more.  Social issues are not a concern, consider how insignificant a single human, or a single life is. Morality cannot exist if everyone is somewhere else perceptually. A single human life is not long enough to mean much either, nothing really matters, Mangled.

Meaning is a fairytale, as is freedom, and the idea of power.  Apathy and Thought are really the only constants, but these are still individual, nothing is consistent.

The only conclusion I can think of: perhaps you're still innocent, perhaps you still believe in meaning, or maybe you just haven't seen enough.  Maybe you'll move on, maybe you'll see passed your own bias, but we simply are not looking at the same thing.

Your twisting comes from your inability to see passed your bias.

Everything can have a meaning, of course that is down to the individual's perspective. Personally everything holds meaning to me, personal meaning, not universal meaning. You can embrace life and find joy in every day, if you think that's all meaningless then sucks to be you, and if you attribute that joy to a God then you've missed the point in everything you've experienced.

You contradict yourself, because if you feel it doesn't matter then why are you even sharing your opinion?

I am biased, everyone is, but I am biased towards honesty and social progression.

//stuff to be added, but im late for school

I'll wait. 

First off I'll say I'm agnostic and I hate religion. Now before people come running in spewing insults and getting their panties in a knot. I view religion as a business that just prays on peoples beliefs. I'm not against those beliefs, just the way "religion" contorts those beliefs into the feelings of "either you're with us or against us" kind of stuff.

I can't help but wonder why you are so...offended by the theme park. Aside from further proving my point up above, what does it honestly have to do with you? If you don't like the idea, simply don't go there. I'd imagine the s**t-storm they'll receive after opening will be bad enough to close the place down but people can do what ever they want. If they want to waste 150mil on something like that, whats wrong with it? It's not like it's your money that's funding the place and if people honestly want to do it why stop them. I feel the people that do the polar bear swimming contest are complete and utter morons but you don't see me ranting and raving about them holding the competitions every year.

As to the second part. You seem to be twisting quite a bit of info there. The bill does not mention anything about the right to teach religion or religious beliefs in school. What it does want to entitle is the ability to allow schools and teachers to acknowledge that other routes exist. Now while that may sound like "teaching religion" it isn't. The "unconstitutional" thing mentioned in article is that of the separation of church and state. While the bill is on the line the reason it got past the house is because its not allowing the teaching of religion but allowing teachers and schools to tell students "hey just because its in this book doesn't mean its what you need to believe" No it isn't talking about things that are accepted by both parties (like gravity) and such that are indisputable but things that, no matter how sound they are scientifically, are not 100% accurate such as the theory of evolution (the one where we came from bacteria, not the one about how we evolve to over come obstacles and are always "evolving", can't remember which one was the big E or the lowercase e) since no matter how much information we gather, we cannot go back in time to find out if it was true(same applies for religion). I find that it could be a huge advancement in education. If used properly (which it probably won't) it would increase both a person education and willingness to accept someone's belief even if it is different (as opposed to the whole "you're either with us or against us" mentality the religious debate has)

I'm with you in terms of how you feel about religion.

I'm not offended by the idea of someone building a Biblical Theme park, but I'm firmly against it on the grounds that it presents a a fictional account of history as fact. Factual information being corroborated by evidence, fictional information being contradicted by evidence with no supporting evidence.

The thing is that some Christian parents will take their kids there rather than a natural history museum. Now tell me do you think it's less likely or more likely that a child raised as a Christian is going to believe literally in the ridiculous story of Noah if he or she is taken to this theme park as a child?

As for the 'twisting', I am not twisting anything, in fact I am un-twisting the wording and agenda of the bill that is being pushed. I guess it isn't completely clear from the article, as bills with an underhand agenda are worded in a way to conceal that agenda.

If you're genuinely interested in what this bill is about you can watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdfBrhRJeHw a science teacher speaks in front of the Tennessee education committee and gets her words twisted against her by comittee members in response. This is what it's all about.

[SadistAtHeart]

Mangled, you'll be pleasantly surprised to know that most of the U.S. laughs at Tennessee and Kentucky as well.

[amb2010]

Ah that youtube video cleared quite a bit up. I feel bad for the lady giving the speech since it was obvious how dead-set the council was against her and just how horrible their general attitude was. I'm not sure if it was just me but I didn't sense any attempt to offend people in her speech, I thought it was a very good speech that explained their point in a way to not cause offense but apparently he thought she was calling him stupid.

Eh. All discussions about religion seem to be based on theory that a religious person is always fanatic.

I will admit that I feel this way sometimes. Usually when ever a debate goes on about this subject the religious side are the ones that get all worked up and angry while the scientific side usually remains calm. While yes having a deep faith in a belief, enough to cause you to get heated up in a discussion is good, constantly showing an aggressive attitude when someone "threatens" that belief is definitely the wrong thing to do. Of course there are always the occasion when its reversed but it is much more common to see someone defending their religious belief, something that is deeply rooted in their life-style, in a very offended and defensive manner that just makes them seem like a "fanatic".

[Illuminatus]

I'm not discussing with you I'm just commenting (I like to comment).

Tiny rooms for the insects and large rooms for the elephants and refrigerated rooms for the polar bears! Food for all the animals, particularly the ones who eat other animals, so do we need extra animals? What about plants? No plants on board? what do the plant eaters eat?

This gave me some laughs. Thx.

@Rai-Dei:

Inaction is dangerous! Remember the holocaust?

Godwin's law ftw!

[iDante]

Mangled, you'll be pleasantly surprised to know that most of the U.S. laughs at Tennessee and Kentucky as well.

This is exactly true, unfortunately they have as much a say in the government as the rest of us.

Mangled* you're right about everything, like usual.

[Mangled*]

Mangled* you're right about everything, like usual.

Thank you for recognising!

[jrgp]

Mangled* you're right about everything, like usual.

Thank you for recognising!

I agree with what you're saying and the fact that we live in a fucked up society, but do we really need a topic to bash the US for this? In my opinion, the benefit the US has on the rest of the world is worth its eccentricities.

[Mangled*]

I agree with what you're saying and the fact that we live in a f**ked up society, but do we really need a topic to bash the US for this? In my opinion, the benefit the US has on the rest of the world is worth its eccentricities.

We do need a topic to bash the US, just trust me on this.

But what is the benefit?

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

How about all the countries we assist with food/medical care/other relief work, all the exports and imports we provide, the technology that we produce, and things like that?

[Mangled*]

How about all the countries we assist with food/medical care/other relief work, all the exports and imports we provide, the technology that we produce, and things like that?

So just like many other countries you provide international aid and have charities, and like pretty much all countries you have imports and exports.

Oh, stop, let me catch my breath because I am blown away. You mean to tell me that the US does things!? It does things! WOW. WHAT?! THIS IS A COUNTRY THAT DOES THINGS!??

Way to stand out from the crowd. The fact that you have some economic impact outside of your borders has nothing to do with and doesn't justify the lunacy that goes on within them.

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

How about all the countries we assist with food/medical care/other relief work, all the exports and imports we provide, the technology that we produce, and things like that?

So just like many other countries you provide international aid and have charities, and like pretty much all countries you have imports and exports.

Oh, stop, let me catch my breath because I am blown away. You mean to tell me that the US does things!? It does things! WOW. WHAT?! THIS IS A COUNTRY THAT DOES THINGS!??

Way to stand out from the crowd. The fact that you have some economic impact outside of your borders has nothing to do with and doesn't justify the lunacy that goes on within them.

Just as a dump truck can haul more than a pickup truck, the US can contribute more to such things by way of being so much BIGGER than other countries.  Proportionally, the economic benefits of our trade is significantly greater than what the world gets from, say, Greece.  Besides, you're flipping your arguments faster than an OCD person trying to turn off a light switch, and with each change you set up a new straw man to attack.

You asked what the benefit the US provided.  You didn't ask how we justified whatever you think is wrong with it, and you said nothing about it being "related" to said things.  Then, when it was explained to you, you immediately did an about face, said "oh um yeah THOSE things yeah of course I knew about that but uh it doesn't matter quick let me act surprised so that you won't realize what an idiot I am," and blamed me for not defending against a claim you didn't make.

This is what happens when you try to lump everyone in a country together.  You read about a couple of people you disagree with, so you claim that the country itself is awful, then, when you're proven wrong, you backpedal faster than a crash-bound kid trying out a bike with handbrakes for the first time.  You're exactly right, our economic impact has absolutely NOTHING to do with some peoples' religious preferences.  So why do you act like the two are immutably linked?