Fiery_penguin_of_doom Posts

Forever? You would seriously give up your own welfare to the benefit of others? I doubt you would if you somehow winded up in this situation.

And frankly, just what the hell do you mean that I don't deserve freedom OR safety. Yes, I admit that I am a coward and that I choose safety over freedom. (And as long as you are no puffed-up, self-righteous douche you should have no problem with this.)I would do this any day if it came to an extreme situation like this. Because it would benefit me more than living in a free, but harsh world where I would get nothing without working my ass of.

You have just made E. O. Wilson very sad. Along with ants, bees, wasps, termites and any other social insect.

Seriously, who here would be willing to work for anything but personal gain?

I don't choose peace over freedom for the sake of my fellow citizen either, I choose because I want peace and order.

A male has penis its for penetrating a vagina so that it can perfectly implant a sperm which is to reproduce, that is the normal way to use it and yeah just in case for some smartass its also used for peeing. The vagina is perfectly designed for the penis to be penetrated and also for peeing and giving birth.

You see using things they are not NATURALLY designed for can't be called normal. Will you say its normal if a man is breast feeding or being pregnant? Or using a frying pan as a fan? Or using a shovel as a spoon?

It isn't normal so it isn't fine.

No. It doesn't have to be anyway. I'm not saying that most dictatorships aren't like that, but it isn't impossible for their to be benevolent dictators who truly have their hearts set on their people and their culture.

Think of it this way. You may not have many individual freedoms or even a say in how your government works, but things get done at a much faster and complete rate than a democracy. People bicker, argue and fight in democracy and sometimes things, even very important things, don't get taken care of. You don't have that problem with a dictatorship. Granted that only applies if the ruling party agrees with it, but I digress.

Well, I choose the dictator because of the fact that it says "No more violence and suffering forever"
So basically it wouldn't end up in war? Right? Since a war would bring suffering and violence, breaking the "forever" part.

I find neither attractive, but neither do I feel threatened by either.
All gays and lesbians I've met IRL were deeply disturbed, horrible people though.

Take a guess.

I've also not argued that if the Founding Fathers were Atheists we'd be any different today from it. We'd likely have the same documents, and same separation of church and state. I've only argued - well at least speculated - that nations themselves would be better off not being founded by religious beliefs. Or at least, I should say not propagating the belief system in schools, government, and societies. Better than they would be with them.

The problem here isn't with integration of church into government, or doctrine into law, as it is in Saudi Arabia and other countries. The problem is with the belief system itself being supported and spread among individuals. Intolerance, anti-science, and discrimination. Obviously these are things that can't be controlled or dictated due to our individual freedoms - I view this as a good thing anyways. The problem with society this way is that education isn't as good as it should be, it isn't encouraged, and children are often indoctrinated into certain religious beliefs without choice. If we are to make progress with regards to freethinking and humanism it'll have to come through better education, and social and cultural changes. These are dictated, if anything, by the people and generations themselves. Our world is changing in ways that it never has before. I wonder sometimes if we are on the verge of another intellectual renaissance & enlightenment, or on the brink of a new dark age of anti-science, mysticism, paranoia and nationalism. Coupled with terrorism and nuclear ambition it is really a frightening prospect.

. . . . . WTFizzatshityouaresayingFPoDdesu? Someone found his pr0n stash and he lost his access to teh intarwebz because of that?

I'm not entirely convinced that Deism then is equivalent to Agnosticism now. Deism then, as it is now, held a belief in a God, albeit without dogmatism or doctrine specifically. Agnosticism now holds no belief in a God, like Atheism. The difference is that Agnosticism allows for you to also hold no belief that God doesn't exist as well. It's an opinion of uncertainty, where Deism, by it's own definition, is a belief in a deity of some sort. Unless you are mentioning Agnostic Theism (which is still different) Deism hasn't ever been equivalent to Agnosticism, which is in fact closer to Atheism without any aforementioned attachments to other theistic beliefs at all.

You should do your own version of how to catch a predator!
I think you alone would make the world a safer place!
*hug*

Mmmm.... I heard that a man no longer feels the urge to have sex if their no longer have their manhood. Or is that wrong? (i recall seeing this on tv a time ago when i used to watch tv. And the man was getting a new(similar) manhood surgery because he lost his manhood and could no longer feel any urges.)

Hmmm, what I'm thinking of is.... If the person is registered as a sex offender, depending on how severe their crime was and how many offends they have....I think they should have their "pleasure area" "Disabled" somehow, seeing how they cannot control or use the thing down there properly. This might even reduce sex offend rate by scaring people away from offending.

It's probably not so much the lack of a comp (tho that may hav sumthin to do with it) as it is the fact that good internet doesn't exactly come cheap. With internet access, you really do get what you pay for; if you shell out big bucks odds are you're getting sum badass bandwidth, conversely if you're dropping chump change for internet, you really aren't getting shit for that money. Or it could be that Hinata`s Pimp AKA lil`Von here is one of the unfortunate individuals in the world who's place of residence is outside of all his local internet provider's coverage areas. Whichever one it is, I hereby salute him for his downright ballsiness and commitment to this site needed in an act such as accessing FAKKU from a public terminal. Oh, and before I forget.......~desu.

I'm fairly certain that it's common knowledge that the Founding Fathers still believed in God even if they were not intent on establishing religion. Nobosaki's question was what if they didn't believe in God [at all]?

We have a secular government, being that we do not impose religious law. That doesn't say anything about the types of beliefs elected officials hold, or that the majority of citizens hold either. Atheism and secular beliefs are still a minority (although growing) group.

If I had to choose a political party, I'd pick Democrat. But I don't think every single person should be a Democrat. I'd hope that all people would feel the same way, that the political party they endorse should not be the only political party. Why? Because that makes people lazy. Without different sides, there is only uniformity. That's my view on politics.