The effect of religion
-
VonHagNDaz wrote:
you never see someone on a marijuana binge getting into a car and killing innocent people...
You do see an awful lot of bad grammar, punctuation, and participation in lame arguments though. Everything has its price...
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
Pardon me. I was not aware that we had a grammar Nazi in our midst. If you would prefer me to take the time to punctuate and correct all of the errors in all of my posts, I will gladly do so. Please, let me know if this minor inconvenience will make your time at The Soapbox more enjoyable. Regarding my participation in lame arguments, it's a character flaw comparable to making comments about one's bad grammar and punctuation inside of a forum.
------------------------------ I win because I have the most fun in life...
-
Pardon me. I was not aware that we had a grammar Nazi in our midst. If you would prefer me to take the time to punctuate and correct all of the errors in all of my posts, I will gladly do so. Please, let me know if this minor inconvenience will make your time at The Soapbox more enjoyable. Regarding my participation in lame arguments, it's a character flaw comparable to making comments about one's bad grammar and punctuation inside of a forum.
------------------------------ I win because I have the most fun in life...
VonHagNDaz wrote:
Please, let
That comma really shouldn't be there.
-
Ok, I have known several individuals whose lives have been ruined by alcohol, yet none whose lives have been ruined by pot smoking (and I know several). So my personal experience, being equally as important as yours, says the exact opposite of your experience. Therefore, I must be right, pot doesn't hurt anyone. Now, does that sound reasonable? Of course not. Personal experience is no replacement for real evidence and honestly, the subject of illicit drug use is so controversial that nobody is willing to do honest, objective studies on the subject. They're always trying to make a conclusion either that pot DOESN'T hurt or that it DOES. Personally, I have never and will never smoke tobacco OR pot, and that is because I value my own well being and state of mind enough that I think they are bad choices. But that is my choice, and not one I'm going to make for anyone else. The fact is, national policies controlling behavior do nothing but cost massive quantities of money and do little to inhibit the behavior in question, because people are people and they'll do as they please whether or not it's illegal, because there will always be someone willing to sell them what they want to buy. It's the lesser of two evils to legalize stuff so that at least it can be regulated and taxed. And even maybe then people can have objective conversations on the stuff, rather than heated debates based on circumstantial and shaky evidence.
------------ Cheers, Patrick
I never came to any of those conclusions. What I specifically said is that, given my personal experience, I will continue to oppose legalized marijuana. That's its use or restriction are subject to the democratic desires of the public. Personally, I believe its detrimental to the nation and to individuals. Your experience, being different than mine, might lead you to a different conclusion. That's where democracy comes into play. Of course, since potheads are too lazy to vote, I'll probably always win.
-
Shog9 wrote:
You do see an awful lot of bad grammar, punctuation, and participation in lame arguments though. Everything has its price...
:laugh: That's kind of my point! Potheads don't even realize how marginilized their lives become because they're looking out from inside the fishbowl. Sure it doesn't incite violence, but does it need to in order to be detrimental. BTW, another guy I knew got high and jumped on the highway going over 100MPH at night. He claimed that being high made him a better driver.
Red Stateler wrote:
He claimed that being high made him a better driver.
:shrug: Even if it did, at least in terms of improving reaction time or something (highly unlikely, but...) - it's still dumb to go out speeding at night. I don't agree one bit with the drug laws in this country, especially with regard to weed - there are more than a few friends who've used the stuff to lead something approaching normal lives after illness or injury had left them in constant pain and doctors had left them horribly messed up on painkillers (hydrocodone - the real opiate of the masses...). But none of that changes the fact that it does affect your judgment and perception, and only a fool would ignore or marginalize those effects.
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
-
VonHagNDaz wrote:
Please, let
That comma really shouldn't be there.
Red Stateler wrote:
That comma really shouldn't be there
Interrupters - Use commas to set off introductory words and expressions which interrupt the sentence. These expressions are often called parenthetical expressions because the words themselves are not essential to the sentence and could be placed in parentheses. Examples of introductory words and interrupters: yes, no, well, indeed, nevertheless, however, I believe, in fact , of course, in my opinion, on the other hand, to tell the truth, on the contrary.
------------------------------ I win because I have the most fun in life...
-
Pardon me. I was not aware that we had a grammar Nazi in our midst. If you would prefer me to take the time to punctuate and correct all of the errors in all of my posts, I will gladly do so. Please, let me know if this minor inconvenience will make your time at The Soapbox more enjoyable. Regarding my participation in lame arguments, it's a character flaw comparable to making comments about one's bad grammar and punctuation inside of a forum.
------------------------------ I win because I have the most fun in life...
VonHagNDaz wrote:
I was not aware that we had a grammar Nazi in our midst.
I wasn't aware you were gonna take that personally... I'd have added "wearing oversized sunglasses" to the list. ;P Lighten up, duuude. It's a joke, see...
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
-
Red Stateler wrote:
That comma really shouldn't be there
Interrupters - Use commas to set off introductory words and expressions which interrupt the sentence. These expressions are often called parenthetical expressions because the words themselves are not essential to the sentence and could be placed in parentheses. Examples of introductory words and interrupters: yes, no, well, indeed, nevertheless, however, I believe, in fact , of course, in my opinion, on the other hand, to tell the truth, on the contrary.
------------------------------ I win because I have the most fun in life...
VonHagNDaz wrote:
Interrupters - Use commas to set off introductory words and expressions which interrupt the sentence. These expressions are often called parenthetical expressions because the words themselves are not essential to the sentence and could be placed in parentheses.
An interrupter, who's role is to interject an aside like this one, interupts the flow of the sentence. You used it incorrectly to disrupt a sentence that, without an interrupter like this one, had no break in its flow.
-
I never came to any of those conclusions. What I specifically said is that, given my personal experience, I will continue to oppose legalized marijuana. That's its use or restriction are subject to the democratic desires of the public. Personally, I believe its detrimental to the nation and to individuals. Your experience, being different than mine, might lead you to a different conclusion. That's where democracy comes into play. Of course, since potheads are too lazy to vote, I'll probably always win.
Red Stateler wrote:
I never came to any of those conclusions. What I specifically said is that, given my personal experience, I will continue to oppose legalized marijuana. That's its use or restriction are subject to the democratic desires of the public. Personally, I believe its detrimental to the nation and to individuals. Your experience, being different than mine, might lead you to a different conclusion. That's where democracy comes into play.
Good point. It's worth noting that others might come to a different conclusion though, and trying to understand why, and if warranted, incorporating that knowledge into your own thinking. That responsibility is mine, too, I don't mean to say only you should do it. Everyone should. To paraphrase - "The sign of an intelligent mind is the ability to hold an idea in one's mind without accepting it." - Aristotle
Red Stateler wrote:
Of course, since potheads are too lazy to vote, I'll probably always win.
You say that tongue in cheek (I think?) but there's actually some evidence that that is true..
------------ Cheers, Patrick
-
VonHagNDaz wrote:
I was not aware that we had a grammar Nazi in our midst.
I wasn't aware you were gonna take that personally... I'd have added "wearing oversized sunglasses" to the list. ;P Lighten up, duuude. It's a joke, see...
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
I just cant win today... :(
------------------------------ I win because I have the most fun in life...
-
AndyKEnZ wrote:
No it's not it's a plant, you can't grip bits of metal with it. I've yet to meet anyone whose life has been adversely affected, can't same say the same for alcohol. How exactly do you think it "hurts" people? or are you thinking of people putting their fingers in a vice?
That's the ironic part. I've never seen anybody actually ruin their life through alcohol. Maybe because it takes quite a bit more to become a raging alcoholic than a pothead. Poison Ivy is a plant too, btw.
Red Stateler wrote:
I've never seen anybody actually ruin their life through alcohol.
I have and could provide a list if you'd like. just for the record, alcohol literally kills brain cells. fyi - I'm speaking as recovering alcholic that hasn't had a drink in 20 years..
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
-
Red Stateler wrote:
I never came to any of those conclusions. What I specifically said is that, given my personal experience, I will continue to oppose legalized marijuana. That's its use or restriction are subject to the democratic desires of the public. Personally, I believe its detrimental to the nation and to individuals. Your experience, being different than mine, might lead you to a different conclusion. That's where democracy comes into play.
Good point. It's worth noting that others might come to a different conclusion though, and trying to understand why, and if warranted, incorporating that knowledge into your own thinking. That responsibility is mine, too, I don't mean to say only you should do it. Everyone should. To paraphrase - "The sign of an intelligent mind is the ability to hold an idea in one's mind without accepting it." - Aristotle
Red Stateler wrote:
Of course, since potheads are too lazy to vote, I'll probably always win.
You say that tongue in cheek (I think?) but there's actually some evidence that that is true..
------------ Cheers, Patrick
Patrick Sears wrote:
You say that tongue in cheek (I think?) but there's actually some evidence that that is true..
Yes, I say that tongue-in-cheek. But as you pointed out, liberal turnout (and liberals use drugs far more than conservatives do since we just drink a lot) is much lower.
-
Red Stateler wrote:
I've never seen anybody actually ruin their life through alcohol.
I have and could provide a list if you'd like. just for the record, alcohol literally kills brain cells. fyi - I'm speaking as recovering alcholic that hasn't had a drink in 20 years..
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
I have and could provide a list if you'd like. just for the record, alcohol literally kills brain cells. fyi - I'm speaking as recovering alcholic that hasn't had a drink in 20 years..
I'm not denying or minimizing the effects of alcoholism. But I also think that it takes a good deal more effort to experience the ill-effects of alcoholism than with pot. Now that I think about it, I think I might know one. She quit smoking pot a few years ago and may have substituted it with drinking. I'm not sure of her extent, but her life is hardle hunky-dory.
-
I just cant win today... :(
------------------------------ I win because I have the most fun in life...
Awww... You're ok, i was just having a bit of fun. I sit around listening to stoners argue a lot, and it really gets old. But you're right in that it's a whole lot nicer than watching people get into actual physical fights.
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
-
No conclusions can be reached through the personal experiences of one person, or even of everyone who posts in these forums. I'm atheist but consider myself a very moral person and spend a great deal of mental effort defining that morality, because I believe it to be important to be a responsible adult. And I'm not alone. It would be a mistake to attribute religious conviction as the sole or even major determiner of behavior and life choices; even the most devout religious individuals have been known to live depraved lives.
------------ Cheers, Patrick
Patrick Sears wrote:
I'm atheist but consider myself a very moral person and spend a great deal of mental effort defining that morality, because I believe it to be important to be a responsible adult. And I'm not alone.
I strongly suspect, but certainly cannot prove, that you're more alone than you think. My rationale is that if existence (all forms) truly end for "you" when you die there is little or no reason to live a moral life.
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
-
Red Stateler wrote:
Oh, of course not! let's just sweep that little episode under the rug!
That is not what I said. Don't put words in my mouth.
----- Formerly MP(2) If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown
It is hard enough for Red to put coherent words into his own mouth, so don't come down too hard on him when he tries to put them into yours. At least he has the gist of it.
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music should programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milk -
[dumb] Anyone who disagrees with him is obviously a stupid leftist gay. :rolleyes: [/dumb]
VB and C# are languages written to cater to the lowest common denominator. C++ assumes a level of skill in the developer. - Christian Graus, on C# and C++
Nah, that's Henize. Anyone who disagrees with Red is an athiest. :rolleyes:
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music should programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milk -
Patrick Sears wrote:
I'm atheist but consider myself a very moral person and spend a great deal of mental effort defining that morality, because I believe it to be important to be a responsible adult. And I'm not alone.
I strongly suspect, but certainly cannot prove, that you're more alone than you think. My rationale is that if existence (all forms) truly end for "you" when you die there is little or no reason to live a moral life.
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
He is not alone, not by a long shot.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
My rationale is that if existence (all forms) truly end for "you" when you die there is little or no reason to live a moral life.
What about other people, and your children?
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music should programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milk -
Le Centriste wrote:
I am talking about the idiots who blow themselves up in the name of Allah
could i ask you what will makes you kill you self ?? don't say idiots , they have the brave to die for what they believe in. i don't understand why in your opinion they are idiots ?? please tell me
When you get mad...THINK twice that the only advice Tamimi - Code
Tamimi - Code wrote:
don't say idiots , they have the brave to die for what they believe in
This is the first time I've seen somebody on CP openly support suicide bombing. X| The bravery to die for something one believes in is something to be admired; cold blooded murder of innocent civilians is not. At least that swine Adnan used to only crawl under his bridge and hide when people confronted him on his views on suicide bombing. And before you go into your 'that infidel hates Muslims :((' mode, let me tell you I'm not an Islamophobe. My views on suicide bombing are the same irrespective of whether the terrorist is a Muslim in Kashmir, a Hindu in Sri Lanka or a Christian in Israel/the Occupied Territories. Every time I come to the Soapbox 'just to read the posts' I see more and more justification in just staying away. :sigh:
Cheers, Vikram.
"But nowadays, it means nothing. Features are never frozen, development keeps happening, bugs never get fixed, and documentation is something you might find on wikipedia." - Marc Clifton on betas.
Join the CP group at NationStates. Password:
byalmightybob -
He is not alone, not by a long shot.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
My rationale is that if existence (all forms) truly end for "you" when you die there is little or no reason to live a moral life.
What about other people, and your children?
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music should programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milkDavid Wulff wrote:
What about other people, and your children?
Why would I care about other people in this context? The concept of others would be meaningless and I would adopt the most hedonistic approach to life I could find. I might work to cause no pain but I certainly wouldn't work to be moral. That would give me the latitude to steal, maybe not everything somone has but certainly I could convince myself that it was okay to liberate the excess. Ditto diddling someone's wife. etc.
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
-
David Wulff wrote:
What about other people, and your children?
Why would I care about other people in this context? The concept of others would be meaningless and I would adopt the most hedonistic approach to life I could find. I might work to cause no pain but I certainly wouldn't work to be moral. That would give me the latitude to steal, maybe not everything somone has but certainly I could convince myself that it was okay to liberate the excess. Ditto diddling someone's wife. etc.
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
I can say with a fair amount of qualified experience that what you describe has absolutely nothing to do with the lack of religious accountability in atheism. Claiming that religion (and let's not beat around the bush -- you mean your flavour of religion) is required for respect, as well as morals, is absurd. The last 2,000 years is merely a second in man's history and yet both concepts existed firmly before that and in many ways we are not alone in such behaviour. Why don't Christians just counter that unfortunate fact by claming that God gives everyone morals regardless of their free will? Sure people would laugh at you, but at least it would be an understandable opinion to hold. I have never understood the whole 'walled' mentality that many religious people have. What does it achieve? In fact I so am truely, honestly, surprised that you could even begin to consider that it may be valid that, quite simply, I don't believe that you think that for a moment. You are trolling. :|
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music should programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milk