>> ^rottenseed:

"like a boss"? "not a single fuck was given"? Come on, those trickle-down net colloquialisms don't even apply.


You look at the security guards face at 0:54, and you tell me if he gives a fuck.

no, no sir, he does not.

Well, based on the links you posted previously, the community doesn't seem to consider this a dupe.

Instead of unilaterally isdupe'ing things that aren't exactly dupe, perhaps down-voting qualifies as a more individual response that says "no sir, don't like it."
>> ^bareboards2:

I haven't a clue, my lovely! You can dupe it, that is a perfectly valid response -- you do have a case and someone might agree with you.

hahahahaha. Thats laughable.

hahahahahaha I say!

Edit- If a video is Killed, then it is perfectly fine for ANYONE else to post that same said video. It was killed and reposted, albeit by the same person.

Not a dupe. no Sir.

Churches are different. This is true. But most religions do not go about teaching negative behavior.

Point missed. You cannot speak for all churches no matter how much you would like to.


You are using absolutes here (when implying that all the morals that a church teaches are the right ones).

No sir, it's the churches that use absolutes. This is what I talked about in 5: You are misrepresenting the point of churches. Their point is not to make people moral, it is to teach their religion.

I did not say "all the morals".

How exactly does a church teach a moral system where they admit that some of the morals that they teach are wrong?


3. You're saying that the best way to teach morals is to make people believe in God. Many people strongly disagree.
No - I did not say that. I said that churches/religion were places where moral behavior is taught, and that should be encouraged rather than denigrated.

"The answer is obvious - and probably antithetical to a lot of the people here in the Sift. But it is undeniable. MORALITY. Personal morality. And what is the best venue for acquiring a personal morality and philosophical ethic?

Church."

Undermining organizations that instruct their members to be better people - merely because you may not agree with all their tenents - is counterproductive to producing a moral people.

You are blatantly misrepresenting the purpose of a church and acting like the unquestioning following of a supposed supernatural entity isn't the entire point of the organization. In order for the church to work at all, its teachings must be regarded as axiomatic, which means that no moral advancement would ever be achieved. And, to be blunt, it's a bunch of horseshit. Morals are worthless if we don't know the reasons they exist.

Many people strongly disagree? Then those people are morons.

Make a better argument and prove your point, then.


Let's move it away from religion for a second.

The entire fucking conversation is about religion. Without religion, we're not talking about supposed supernatural entities handing down axiomatic rules that we must follow. If you want to talk about an organization that examines, questions and teaches morals with the intent of advancing humanity by education and the use of reason, then you're not talking about church and we're not having this conversation.

But then a group of Wittgenstienians come along who strongly disagrees with the Utilitarian philosophy.

This is a straw man that has nothing to do with what I'm saying. A church without religion that only did good deeds wouldn't be a church, it would be only a charity. I don't have a problem with charity. I have a problem with religion.

religions do contribute to the societal good, and that there is little or no societal benefit that results from hassling them merely because you don't agree with them.

Religion isn't needed for people to do good. And in what way am I hassling you or your religion? You brought it up and suggested that everyone should be religious. Don't act surprised and play innocent when people disagree with you.

At what point did I ever make statements about "the true purpose of religion"?

I'm having a hard time believing that you don't understand what religion is.

>> ^MarineGunrock:

1:04-1:15 For the...lose?


No sir, even though you lose, that time frame is definitely still win.

-" oh no ..sir... Your in the wrong room, Interpretive hand dancing is in the conference room across the hall. "

"I can easy your pain"

No sir, no you cannot.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Butter plus face.


No sir, she's not a butter face. The face is merely plain compared to the rest of it. The tits, however, look like they might touch her feet if not for the bikini top.

>> ^iwastheturkey:

first!


No, sir. You weren't first, nor was Thomas Edison. *rolleyes*

>> ^heathen:

>> ^Yogi:
>> ^BoneRemake:
at first I thought that was the guy off of tv show buffy the vampire slayer. then I realized its lil Crusher from The next generation.

Who do you think he played on Buffy?

I'm guessing Jonathan?


WHAT?! The adorable awesome Jonathan?!? No sir...No I won't put up with this. You will go pay Hulu $10 a month and watch the entire Buffy series again sir until you know your place in the Whedonverse!

What a fricken stupid ad. What exactly is the call to action supposed to be. What exactly is the message supposed to be other than lots of kids go missing or are abducted. It's stupid, doesn't give any guide as to what you can do, other than presenting with a website. Spending that amount of time on watching the ad they could have given at least a few positive things that could be done.

No sir, I don't like it.

Peyote or DMT, like this would feel, always figured I have.>> ^BoneRemake:

>> ^Throbbin:
This is what I always figured Peyote or DMT would feel like.

feel ?
no sir, when you are on the drug, you would feel it, this, this would equate to what you might experience visually, to be in that head space, that .... realm. you cannot compare physical with watching a video.. although I understand what you may of meant, I disagree with the way you framed your sentence.

>> ^Throbbin:

This is what I always figured Peyote or DMT would feel like.


feel ?

no sir, when you are on the drug, you would feel it, this, this would equate to what you might experience visually, to be in that head space, that .... realm. you cannot compare physical with watching a video.. although I understand what you may of meant, I disagree with the way you framed your sentence.

Yup, nothing crazy here, no sir!

>> ^NordlichReiter:

>> ^rougy:
Cenk's wrong.
You know, America, if you're so god-damned short-sighted, chintzy, and selfish to invest in a girl with a 4.09 GPA who has been here since she was eight years old, then you're too god-damned stupid to deserve any of the respect that you demand, even if it is at the point of a gun.

Our taxes, no sir. Give her a free ride? Fuck where does that leave the ones who are still at Ellis Island?


It's pathetically petty to deny any sort of aid to a person who has distinguished themselves to the degree that she has.

I like you, NR, but last I heard everyone left at Ellis Island was dead.

Her parents brought her here when she was eight years old.

She's lead an exemplary life, at least in academic terms, and I think that a country--a country that brags so much about free markets and wise investments--that denies this young person any kind of assistance based on what amounts to a fluke of geography has its head up its ass.