- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| New Religion thread | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Nov 10 2009, 06:24 PM (316 Views) | |
| Deleted User | Nov 10 2009, 06:24 PM Post #1 |
|
Deleted User
|
So anywho, I noticed that the last reply from the old religion thread was from earlier this year, so here's a new thread. My religion has changed throughout the year. Now I'm a Quathagan. Quaker - follow the principles of Quakerism like peace, equality, community, etc. Pagan- I have a thing for nature and New Age. Atheist- I do not believe in any gods or goddesses. There you have it. Now on to the debate part. I have some things about Christianity that don't seem plausible. Like the fact that the dinosaurs are never mentioned within the seven days Earth was created by God. Dinosaurs had been around for billions of years before humans showed up, which makes you kinda think that Evolution is pretty believable. Plus, the Bible was also written by man, not directly written by God. So it's highly possible that the writers' opinions are spread out in all 66 books. One thing that I've recently thought about is that God apparently created us in his image, when God is suppose to be perfect, but we aren't. Gets you thinking there's some contradiction in this religion, huh? The argument has been used against gays mostly that they chose to go against God and all that BS, but there are strong gay Christians. Hmmm. LOL! |
 
|
|
| Another Random Geek | Nov 10 2009, 08:47 PM Post #2 |
Chapter Master of the Blood Angels
|
 Because let's face it, most threads about religion end quickly and hilariously. That being said, I'll try to address by beliefs as seriously and intelligently as possible. I am an atheist. Though my mother is a Christian, and often makes me go to church against my will, she has never punished or insulted my beliefs, despite her misguided conviction that I'm just going through a rebellious phase or something. I bear her no ill will, as I know she loves me and only does what she thinks is best. My father is an Atheist, but is not very outspoken about his beliefs. Mom doesn't even know he's one, (though you'd think his antipathy about going to church would be a hint :rolleyes:) and I didn't know he was one until I flat out asked him. I would LIKE to have a religion, but simply put, I haven't found one that doesn't violate my moral code or give science the bird. Though I'd like nothing more than a benevolent protector, watching over me and ensuring an eternal life after death in paradise with my friends and loved ones, I do not think there is an omnipresent, all powerful guardian of all, and if there is one, I highly doubt it's the one most of my friends and loved ones believe in. Simply put, Yaweh kills large sums of innocent people on a regular basis in the Judeo-Christan bible. Many people I know often dismiss this by saying that this is "symbolic," and not meant to be interpreted literally, though to be honest, I fail to see the latent symbolism in the the slaughter of the Midianites. This isn't just a judgement against the Christians. Many other religions have similar unfortunate texts, as evidenced by the hordes of militants, extremists, fundamentalists, and terrorists of every religion and creed. Now, you might also bring up some of the Eastern philosophies and religions. Buddhism, for example, (note that I'm talking about the original type, not the Mahayana Buddhists,) doesn't really have a God, and neither kind of Buddhism encourages mass slaughter to my knowledge. (Feel free to correct me on this if I'm wrong.) However, I find the Buddhist views on rebirth profoundly disturbing as well. The spirits of good people have fortunate rebirth, and the spirits of the evil and disturbed have not-so-fortunate ones. Going by that logic, almost everyone in the continent of Africa really screwed the pooch last life. Before anyone accuses me of being a bigot, I'd like to say that I don't think religious people, or religion itself is inherently bad. Religious people have done much good in the abolitionist and civil rights movements, and done much charity and human rights work. If religion is used as a motivational tool for people to fight against injustice or help people, then it is a tool for good, just as it is a tool for evil if it is used as an excuse to kill and enslave people. I could go on, but honestly, I really don't have time to type my... confession? Manifesto? I dunno... I could go on about evolution and the big bang and whatnot, but I honestly don't feel like it. Most people dismiss these things as either God's design or heretical ramblings whenever I bring them up anyway. I don't really think religion itself is good or evil, but like any man-made tool, can be used for both, and think that most religious doctrines have moral and immoral aspects to them, as the people who made them, were flawed human beings who are neither completely good nor completely evil. And that's the way I see it. Honestly, I'll be surprised if anyone bothers reading this massive wall of text. |
 | |
 |
|
| RotenDrache | Nov 10 2009, 10:33 PM Post #3 |
*playing a piano*
|
Much like ARG this will indeed blow up and end in disaster. Even though I follow the Catholic branch of Christianity, I also incorporated Buddhism to the religion because of my peaceful demeanour. I don't agree with the church sometimes, it's a normal feeling, that is why I incorporated another religion into my own thus allowing me to fulfill my own wants and needs. That's all I'm going to say, I honestly don't like religion talks. |
 "Ich werde diese Klavier spielen, weil ich böse bin." People that know my real name go ahead and use it, I don't care as much if you do anymore. | |
|
|
|
| Thuktunthp | Nov 10 2009, 10:51 PM Post #4 |
|
Dinosaurs would not have any need to be mentioned specifically, they would fall in under land animals, birds, etc. You should also know the idea that dinosaurs were around before humans is entirely speculation. The bone a T-Rex was found in the northern US with soft tissue still attached- tissue can't remain like that for billions of years. Also, the Bible mentions dinosaur-like creatures several times, specifically the Behemoth and the Leviathan. You may not believe the theological aspects of the Bible, but few even try to dispute its historical authenticity. Also, as regards to the seven days. I believe it is a literal seven days, however it is not heresy and in fact is not an uncommon belief that pairs the "six day creation" with "one day to God is like a thousand years" resulting in an entirely metaphorical view of the six-days. We were created in his image meaning not that we look like him, or that we are him, but that we are spiritual beings. Eternal beings who were raised above the physical (animals, plants, etc). The phrase "God is perfect" is in fact a bit misleading. It should, instead, be "Perfection is God". What is evil is that which is contrary to the nature of God. We were created apart from God (though with the purpose of having a relationship with him), and we were created with free will. That is why we are not perfect. I'm not sure how one would use that argument against gays; yes, homosexuality is a sin- but what most people tend to ignore is that it is listed as a sin along with greed and sexual immorality (i.e. those CEOs with the golden parachutes and anyone who spanks it or sleeps around). You've heard people say its symbolic? wow, five bucks says they came up with that off the top of their heads. No one with any knowledge in the area would claim that. Though it should be pointed out that rarely did the Jewish God do the killing, but rather told the Israelites to declare holy war on the peoples they were fighting. This was for the purpose of protecting the Israelites, not just physically, but also to prevent temptation to fall away from the one true God. This was where the world was at at that point in time; such deeds were not constrained only to the Jews, but were done by every nation. A doctrine of hope and love wasn't about to be accepted by anyone- the time had not yet been fulfilled. God gave his people the law, and this law was designed to keep the Israelites righteous. As righteous as possible. We are now in a new age, an age where the Law has been fulfilled, we are not ruled by the letter of the law but the spirit of it. Love is our guiding principle. As for "militants, extremists, fundamentalists, and terrorists of every religion and creed", well, an true extremist Christian should be a great leader and a significant benefit to society, a fundamentalist Christian should be the loving to any and everyone, there is no such thing as a Christian terrorist, and whereas there is a time for force- a Christian should rarely resort to it. "The single greatest cause of atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips, then walk out the door and deny Him by their lifestyles. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable." -Brennan Manning (Also quoted by DC Talk) It is a sad fact, but I speak the truth when I tell you that there are a great many people claiming to be Christians that aren't. Be surprised, for I bothered. I am a Christian. If I were to ally myself with a particular denomination, it would have to be part of the Restoration Christian Movement. I believe in the Truth of the Bible, I believe that Jesus, the Son of God, came to earth and dwelt with man, I believe He died and I believe he rose. I am saved by grace through faith. I believe in the trinity. As it pertains to denominations of Christianity, I rather like Augustine's saying, "In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, and in all things love". |
|
Lady from the moment I saw you standing all alone you gave all the love that I needed so shy like a child who has grown Some things are meant to be take my hand take my whole life too for I cant help falling in love with you I'd lie for you and that's the truth do anything you ask me to I'd even sell my soul for you I'd do it all for you You've got a man on your mind you've got a weight on your shoulders how you ever gonna find the words to say goodbye They say that anger is just love disappointed they say that love is just a state of mind I would give anything I own give up my life my heart my home I would give ev'rything I own just to have you back again I wonder if she's sorry for leaving what we'd begun there's someone for me somewhere and I still miss someone Nothing lasts forever but the earth and sky it slips away and all your money won't another minute buy All we are is dust in the wind Vanity of Vanities, All is Meaningless | |
|
|
|
| dinowoman | Nov 11 2009, 03:49 AM Post #5 |
Living Fossil
|
I also read the whole of ARG's post. And everyone else's. I became a Christian when I was 16 (as a result of my best friend meeting a man on a ship in the middle of the North Sea, which I believe to be what some Christians call a "Godincidence"). However, I have never been a fundamentalist and I was 20 before I discovered there was anyone who took the creation story literally. I was honestly quite shocked at the discovery. (As someone who has been interested in palaeontology since the age of 6, I'm hardly likely to be a creationist!  ) When I was a small child I asked my dad about the biblical account of creation and he explained that it was a very simplified version of what happened because people at that time wouldn't have been capable of understanding anything more. I still think that description holds true. I have never found any dichotomy between Christianity and science.When I was first converted I took everything I was taught at face value because I felt other Christians were more knowledgeable than I was and knew what they were talking about. But I have always been one for thinking things through for myself and over the years I have modified my beliefs and some of what I now believe would put me at odds with mainstream Christianity. For a start, I think the church has got its priorities wrong. I like the quote that Thuktunthp used: I'm not sure it's the greatest cause of atheism, but I think it probably is the greatest cause of anti-Christian feeling. To listen to Christians speak, you could easily get the impression that the most important issue in Christianity is sex, and I've heard some Christians get really vehement when condemning sex outside of marriage or homosexuality. The thing that Jesus emphasised above everything else was the need for love (he rarely mentioned sex), but to hear many Christians speak and act, you'd never know it. Some seem more interested in condemning than loving. I also believe that some of the teachings in the Bible that people take as absolutes were actually context-dependent and were relevant to the social conditions in which they were being preached, but do not necessarily apply in the same way today. These include the aforementioned sex outside of marriage and homosexuality. I won't go into details because I can imagine my views starting a debate that would fill a thread on its own. I can also say: However, for me the "the Truth of the Bible" is often implied rather than literally stated. (I must also admit to occasionally having doubts. For instance, as ARG pointed out, in the Old Testament a lot of slaughter went on in the name of God and sometimes I wonder if God really did order them to do such things, or whether they merely believed they were acting in God's name. It also bothers me that when the New Testament was compiled, not all scriptures were included, and the decision about what to include and what to leave out was made by men. I can only trust that they truly were guided by the Holy Spirit when they made that decision, and not by personal preference or expedience.) I think my philosophy is nicely summed up in Thuktunthp's quote from St. Augustine:
|
 
| |
|
|
|
| Teenage Mage | Nov 11 2009, 11:32 AM Post #6 |
I'm not inclined to resign through maturity
|
I am agnostic. Probably the best way to describe my beliefs would be to say that I believe in everything simultaneously and in nothing specifically. I do not think I could ever be a part of an organized religion because I just don't have the kind of mind to completely submit to the rules and customs someone else told me I had to. I'm far too pedantic and irreverent; I would always be questioning the rules that were supposed to be irrefutable and wondering why this was, why we have to do this, is this really the right way? But I don't call myself atheist because neither do I have a firm belief that there is no higher power of any kind. I'm sure I sound a bit of a wuss to some people, since I don't appear to have made up my mind about anything. But it doesn't really bother me. I am not agonizing in indecision here, I just haven't submitted myself to any firm belief, whether that be belief in God or belief that there is no God. I don't refute any kind of conclusive science, though. As far as I'm concerned things like evolution do not fall under beliefs; they are facts, simple as that. One thing I do wholeheartedly believe in, though, is freedom of religion, which includes freedom from religion and freedom to not have a religion. I have little patience for people who try to aggressively convert other people, especially if it's me they're trying to convert, and I cannot abide anyone who is extreme in their thinking that the other side is wrong, whether they're going about screaming about how you're all going to hell if you don't join their religion right now or denouncing all believers as morons with a condescending smile on their face. I believe that everyone should be allowed to believe or not believe how they wish, unless their religion includes virgin sacrifices and that sort of thing, I believe that no one should be forced to follow a religion that is not theirs, and I do not think that religion has any place in government, laws or the running of a country. I'm pretty lucky in that my parents have never forced me to do anything religion wise; we celebrate Christian holidays but don't go to church and have never exactly been stringent in our religious practices, such as they are. They're open to me taking whatever path I choose in that regard, which I am thankful for. |
| |
|
|
|
| Experiment 1337 | Nov 11 2009, 05:47 PM Post #7 |
Can't see an invisible ninja.
|
I'll try to make this short. I am atheist, and agree with everything ARG said above. However, I have coined the term 'Quatheist' for my personal beliefs. I am Quaker by philosophy, atheist by religion. Look up Quakerism if you have any questions about it. To put it simply, I don't believe in God, but believe in the 5 core Quaker values- simplicity, peace, integrity, community, and equality. So that's me. Now for the arguments.First problem, right there. The dinosaurs emerged about 250 million years ago and went extinct 65 million years ago. The earliest form of human emerged around 2 million years ago. We have geological proof of this, unless God wanted to make an immense hole in the story of the universe. If the world is only 6000 years old, how come we have rocks that date to 3.8 billion years ago? Unless all the geology ever is spontaneously wrong. The tissue was inside the bone, not attached. Which makes it much more physically possible. Two words: Dinosaur Skeletons. The Bible-writers saw dinosaur skeletons (they did exist back then) and theorized that there were huge beasts that God had made. So is having feelings for your neighbor's wife, and wanting what other people have. To not sin, we have to deny our inner self, the very things that make us human. Why would a God make us in such a way that we would have to go against our grain? Also, why would homosexuality be a sin? It's not like the gays have any control over whether they're homosexual or not. And before you say it's a choice, I know several gays, and they all say that they didn't choose it! It's like burning blond-haired, blue-eyed people at the stake because they have blond hair and blue eyes. It's not their fault, so why should they be punished for it? So instead of killing them himself, he ordered their murder. That's like saying "Hitler didn't kill all those Jews. The soldiers holding the guns did." Which is technically true, but it's not like the soldiers, or the Israelites, had any choice. If they disobeyed their orders, they would die, be it literally (with the soldiers) or metaphorically (with the Israelites' souls). If there is no such thing as Christian Terrorism, why is there a Wikipedia page for it? The St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre, for instance, or the Gunpowder Plot. There are plenty of Christian terrorists. The fact that you're Christian and don't want to face the fact that your people do, in fact, kill other people (a shocker, I know) doesn't make it any less true. |
|
Releasing control art restriction systems 3… 2… 1. Approval of Situation A recognized. Commencing the Cromwell Invocation. Ability restrictions lifted for limited use until the enemy has been rendered silent. I have no name, only a bar code. The pen is indeed mightier than the sword...when launched out of a rail gun. By day, test subject. By night, ninja. Nightcrawler is the original BAMF. I'm just a fig newton of your imagination. Blink and you're dead. | |
|
|
|
| Another Random Geek | Nov 11 2009, 06:52 PM Post #8 |
|
Chapter Master of the Blood Angels
|
I'd like to clear some things up. 1.) It is not speculation that dinosaurs predated humans. It's an accepted scientific fact. the article linked here shows how we know the fossil is 68 million years old, far older than the first hominids. Furthermore, the "tissue" (see here) appears to actually be slime. 2.) There are Christian terrorist groups. Here is a list of them. Perhaps you meant that members of these groups are not real Christians due to their violent actions. If this is so, I am curious to know if you think the Taliban are "real" Muslims or if members of Babbar Khalsa are real Sikhs. That being said, I must admit I admire your sentiment here:
If everyone thought like that, the world would be a lot safer place. EDIT: It appears the OP has been banned for what I assume to be his rather rude conduct. I'd take that as a reminder to keep it civil, guys and girls!  DOUBLE EDIT: It seems 1337 ninja'd me. (How fitting.) Edited by Another Random Geek, Nov 11 2009, 09:10 PM.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| Cataphrak | Nov 11 2009, 09:16 PM Post #9 |
Shut up, I know what I'm doing.
|
Great, my ancestors (you know, the ones who built a stable society in China before your literal interpretation tells you the world was even CREATED) would like to have a word with you. I'm what I call a "Technical atheist". I'm not against the idea of an omnipotent being (or several) who are, for some reason, out for the aggregate well-being of a race of violent, selfish and disgustingly self-righteous upright, hairless apes on this insignificant little blue planet in the goldilocks zone of a common main sequnce star in a spiral galaxy not unlike many millions of others. I do not believe in a god (or gods) because there is no repeatable, proof that one exists, and as the burden of proof rests not on the skeptic, but the believer, I default towards not believing in God. My thoughts on religion are, I think, well known enough. A final note: A scientific theory is not something to be simply dismissed as such out of hand. A THEORY is a when there there is a start point and a result which are undeniable fact, with merely the gaps being unknown. In this case, we KNOW the first life forms on Earth were single-celled organisms some 2 billion years ago and we KNOW that the Earth's ecosystem could only support said single-celled organisms. We also KNOW that the world is now full of different species of animals, including this rather annoying one called homo sapiens which insists that the world was created just for their benefit. We KNOW that species gradually evolved to get where we are now, we just don't know the exact how. In short, evolution is a theory in the same way that gravity is just a theory. I invite the next person to dismiss it on the grounds that its "just a theory" to test the viability of their argument by throwing themselves off a cliff. They should be fine, gravity's just a theory right? |
   -----Smexy-----|----Smartass----|-----...Zeth----- Spambot Kills: x60 | |
|
|
|
| Another Random Geek | Nov 11 2009, 09:43 PM Post #10 |
|
Chapter Master of the Blood Angels
|
Cata is right, science is NOT in favor of theism. That being said, the lack of evidence for God isn't the main reason I'm an atheist, (though it is a significant factor,) the reason is that I find the actions of God, as depicted in the Bible, to be morally reprehensible. That, I think, is far more important than the factual inaccuracies of the Bible. I do not think it is okay to kill prisoners of war, take foreign women as sex slaves, massacre entire populations, or prohibit people from eating delicious bacon. (That last one was a joke, BTW.) That people can claim that a perfect and divine being could condone such actions disturbs me. Furthermore, I've noticed that people have only mentioned the Hebrew's unsavory actions. You must remember that Yahweh played an active role in the slaughter. Even more disturbingly, unlike the massacres of the Hebrews, which are largely ignored due to the profound discomfort they tend to cause people, God's violent actions are celebrated openly. The story of Passover and the Great Flood are celebrated and told to impressionable young children, glorifying the killing of every firstborn in Egypt, and the drowning of most of the planet. How can ordinarily peaceful people believe this is good? Thuk said God's actions were necessary to maintain the law, but how was killing children who had nothing to do with the Pharaoh necessary? Why was it necessary to kill most of humanity? PS: No offense, but could someone also explain why God couldn't defeat a people with iron chariots, even though he was, you know, God? Though it doesn't bug me nearly as much as the scientific and ethical flaws of Abrahamic religions, it still seems kind of pitiful. Edited by Another Random Geek, Nov 11 2009, 09:55 PM.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| Millskelly1 | Nov 11 2009, 10:35 PM Post #11 |
|
With homosexuality, there's no way it's a sin because the Bible only says it's bad, but doesn't say how it's bad. Care to explain that? I'm gay, did NOT choose it, and it's as natural as heterosexuality. I guess the primary idea of love is man/woman, but now more and more people are seeing that there are different types of love platonic or not. That's how it is. Love and attraction isn't based on gender and neither should marriage. This is why I'm glad I don't believe in anything but the 5 points of Quakerism and the whole nature loving thing. Everybody is not going to be the same in nature. Plus the idea of community is to accept all people even if they're criminals or just normal people of all types. Certain religions seem to judge other people of different religions because they are not part of that certain religion. Like the people of one religion (e.g. Christianity) have a way of everyday living that they believe everybody should live because they think it's the only way. Nobody's going to believe the same things or live the same way, which is why I believe there's no right or wrong religion, culture, or way of living, unless it is intentional crime/murder which might be caused by mental illnesses or home life problems, etc. |
| Ekke Ekke Ekke Ekke Ptang Zoo Boing Zow Zing | |
|
|
|
| dinowoman | Nov 12 2009, 04:37 AM Post #12 |
|
Living Fossil
|
Since the topic of homosexuality has come up as a specific issue, I'll give my thoughts on the matter here. When I first became a Christian I just accepted that it was wrong because that's what the Bible said. But I began to find it increasingly hard to reconcile that with the fact that God created us. It makes no sense for God to create a race of beings of whom a significant minority are gay, lesbian or bi, and then condemn that minority for something over which they have no control. In addition, the Bible barely mentions homosexuality. If it's such a major sin, why isn't there more said about it? I believe that biblical teaching on homosexuality is the result of social conditions at the time. Many years ago, I read all through the book of Leviticus, where the original Jewish laws were set out, and found it fascinating. Not only did it give a wonderful glimpse of what life was like at that time, but it was also apparent that each law had been laid down to serve a practical purpose. In these early Old Testament times, the Israelites were a small tribe surrounded by powerful pagan nations. Since they were instructed not to practice any kind of birth control, it's probably safe to assume it was important for them to keep increasing their numbers in order to maintain their identity and avoid being swallowed up by their neighbours, as well as making God's people into a significant force. Sex between men would have been unproductive and therefore something to be discouraged. So such a law would have served a practical purpose. But nowadays most Christians (I know it doesn't apply to Catholics) see nothing wrong in ignoring biblical teaching on birth control (and in our modern, overcrowded world it would be irresponsible for everyone to avoid it), so if a command like that is seen as context-dependent, what makes homosexuality any different? In the New Testament, when Paul condemns it, as a Pharisee he would have been very well aware of the whole of Jewish law, and I would imagine that the idea of homosexual practices being wrong would have filtered through the generations so that the idea had become the norm. But since he was preaching largely to the Gentiles, there was also an additional factor involved. There was a philosophy prevalent amongst Greek and Roman intellectuals that women were inherently evil. Consequently, it wasn't uncommon for men to use their wives purely for procreation, and satisfy their sexual needs with each other. I suspect it was this that Paul was referring to, particularly as elsewhere he urges men not to ignore their wives' sexual needs. Lastly, I have noticed that a lot of straight men are very uncomfortable with the whole concept of homosexuality. Since society in the past was extremely male-dominated, it's even possible that anti-gay commands found their way into Jewish law due to simple homophobia, rather than due to any spiritual inspiration or practical purpose - I notice the Bible never mentions lesbianism. (The Hebrew term specifically means sex between two men, and the Greek words used by Paul are one that appears to have been translated directly from the Hebrew, and another which was Greek slang for a passive partner, usually a young boy. Nowhere is sexual activity between women mentioned.) It bothers me that there are gay people who are being driven away from faith in Jesus because they know they will be condemned by the church for their sexuality. I know someone on another forum who does have a deep personal faith, but he won't call himself a Christian because he is gay, and he would never go to church. I have known others (such as my brother-in-law) who grew up as Christians, but left the church and lost their faith when they began to realise their sexual orientation. I once read a magazine article in which the writer had followed the fortunes of a group of gay Christians who had attended a residential "cure" for their condition, run by a Christian organisation. They all eventually emerged, claiming they had overcome their homosexuality. But when the writer went back to check up on them some time later, every one of them had either backslid or developed some form of mental problem due to being in denial. The church would probably claim it didn't work because they didn't have enough faith, but maybe it didn't work because God didn't require them to change in the first place! |
|
| |
|
|
|
| Another Random Geek | Nov 12 2009, 05:58 PM Post #13 |
|
Chapter Master of the Blood Angels
|
I am curious how an intelligent person such as yourself determines what parts of the Bible are the words of God. For example, was Jesus right in saying slaves should obey their masters, (which means you condone slavery,) wrong, (which means God was wrong,) or did he never say it at all, (which means the Bible has mistakes in it, and is therefore, not a divine piece of work.) It seems like a catch-22 to me. (No offense) EDIT: The offending verse. The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord. -Matthew 10:24 Edited by Another Random Geek, Nov 12 2009, 06:47 PM.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| Millskelly1 | Nov 12 2009, 06:48 PM Post #14 |
|
Yeah. It's not up to other people to judge and decide how people should live their lives. I see some Christians who fall under the dictator category very well because they like to scare others into converting because they think those people are living the wrong lives, which on a world-basis is impossible because there is no right or wrong way of living life. |
| Ekke Ekke Ekke Ekke Ptang Zoo Boing Zow Zing | |
|
|
|
| Another Random Geek | Nov 12 2009, 07:10 PM Post #15 |
|
Chapter Master of the Blood Angels
|
Well, I wouldn't go THAT far. I mean, I'd say rapists, child molesters, serial killers, and 40 year olds who live with their moms all have wrong ways of life. But if you mean that there isn't a wrong religion, language, race, gender, sexual orientation, or favorite flavor of ice cream, then yeah, I agree with you. In my humble opinion, it's what you do, not what you believe that matters. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Serious Debate · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
4:55 PM Mar 20
