AtheismPoliticsMemesMindMattersStringRandomInteractFeedbackLinksDebateHome
Loading...
|
Littering is a general problem not confined to smokers. And yet... When you actually watch who causes litter it soon becomes obvious that smokers also cause far more non-cigarette litter than do non-smokers. Smokers get used to the idea of outdoors being their own gravity-operated ashtray. They drop their ash, their butts, their packets plus the gum they chew when they are not smoking to get rid of the taste they claim to enjoy and of course they also are massively over-represented among the gobbers and spitters for the same reason. Smokers treat the whole world as a waste disposal site for the effluent from their habit and they justify it as if they smoke out of the goodness of their hearts as a job creation scheme. It is no surprise to find that they are also heavily represented among the general litterers and fly-tippers. http://mwillett.org/mind/wordstreets.htm http://mwillett.org/mind/do_not_smoke.htm -- Martin Willett http://mwillett.org/ Right, so you expect me to believe government statistics verses my
life No of course not, you will believe anything except what you think you are supposed to believe. If "they" want you to believe something it must be false, if it is bullshit that only a person with half a brain could credit you seize upon it. "And you can't create hormones while your smoking either. Oxygen is how your body turns sugars into energys that create testosterone." There is no hope for you if you think that makes any sense. If smoking really did make men impotent in significant numbers the slums of the world wouldn't be overflowing with scrawny little bastard children would they? Smoking does impair sexual function and fertility in both sexes but the effect is usually too late in life to have a big impact on the fertility rates of a whole population. More's the pity. -- Martin Willett http://mwillett.org/ arnabas Collins wrote: Yes, that would be an excellent reason for America's siding with the Arab world against Israel. When you come to think about what America actually gains from the opposite strategy you really are left to wonder what the fuck they are doing and why. What good is Israel to America? Israel has never lifted a finger to help America or to further American foreign policy objectives. Israel isn't a member of NATO. Israel has never housed US nuclear missiles (the only US missiles ever in Israel were Patriot anti-missile missiles donated by Uncle Sam to defend Israel). The world is covered in USAF bases, but not Israel. Israel hasn't contributed a single soldier to help Americans fighting in Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Chile, El Salvador, Somalia, Afghanistan or Iraq. Israel is by far the biggest recipient of military aid and by far the richest country to receive any form of foreign aid. Most countries with a GDP on the level of Israel's are net aid donors. Israel is the kind of friend who never comes when you're in trouble but demands you help when they are in trouble - including when they have started the fight. America is being taken over by the Jewish lobby and the whole of the USA is run in the interests of Israel and the American people have been brainwashed into thinking it is reasonable, that the Israelis are the good guys and the only friends America has. Can America afford a friend like that? Americans should cut their losses and just give every Israeli citizen half a million dollars, a big chunk of land in Utah, Nevada or California and a green card: it would be significantly cheaper. -- Martin Willett http://mwillett.org/ |
AtheismPoliticsMemesMindMattersStringRandomInteractFeedbackLinksDebateHomeIs Sex With Animals Always Wrong?Give Peace a ChanceHow to Win the Lottery without buying a ticketMeatheads, Slobs and Pencil Necked GeeksIs Equality Possible?CircumcisionReligious indoctrination is child abuseShould Adultery be Illegal?Consent MattersThe Logic of ChristiansWhy I am an AtheistWhy We are AtheistsDo You Want to Buy My Soul?The Power of FaithFaith, Hope and BeliefThe Leap of FaithWhat the Bible Says About AbortionThe Scientific MembraneRespecting GodCircumcisionFamily Values in The BibleEvolution: Do you Get it?Why Believe in Jesus?Islam: tolerating intolerance?The Cedars of LebanonThe Big ProblemPollyanna Meets Captain KirkDoes God Bless America?Ticket ToutsPaedophilia is Not a CrimeKill the puppy dogs23 Sperm CurrySatanic VersesSatanic ChallengeEvil and the Satan HypothesisGive Peace a ChanceChristianity and CivilizationThe Scientific MembraneRespecting GodSeeking JesusThe Cult of ChristDesecrationFashionable PeopleThere's Nowt as Queer as FolkThe Ghosts of PuritanismPalace Admits Prince Charles is GayThe Future Does Not SuckThe Great American Blow JobAborting BabiesFree PornographyAnimal RightsWomen and IslamEvils of MusicMasturbationTeenage SexThe Clitoris |
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE! wrote: Assh*les? Oh the irony. Straight talking h*nesty, tr*th and integr*ty with no euphem*sms. -- Martin Willett http://mwillett.org/ Michael Rippie wrote: Why would anybody who was trying to build a fake ruined church in a genuine
ghost town by holding an illegal raffle of a motorcycle he doesn't own be
considered a fit and proper person to be allowed to carry any form of weapon
more dangerous than a plastic spork? Martin Willett http://mwillett.org/ I would be very interested to hear from Christian men about how God gets involved in their sex life. Statistics clearly show that the vast majority of men and boys masturbate and many sexologists go further and believe that ALL men and boys masturbate at least at some time in their life and that all deniers are simply liars. In contrast some women and girls do not masturbate ever, most people probably know more women who do not masturbate than they know homosexuals. But men are different, it is a statistical certainty that millions of men masturbate while believing that it is a sin and that their god is watching them do it. It is a certainty because the proportion of males who masturbate is far higher than the proportion of unbelievers. How was it for you? I have been an atheist since I was 12, and probably longer. I have no memories of ever feeling guilty or sinful for masturbating as I was violating any laws of God. I have no memories of ever thinking that the Holy Spirit, God or Jesus was watching me, ever, doing anything. Doesn't it put you off your stroke? I have never bought the idea of sin or the Devil. Neither idea makes any sense. Neither does the idea of sin being something that either God or the Devil can add to the world. Murder is an inherent possibility in a universe in which mortal beings live, it is not jealousy (or rage or curiosity) that creates murder it is empthy and law that define the action as wrong. Sin and crime are defined by man and all human cultures have the concept to some degree or another. Almost as universal as masturbation is a suspicion of masturbaters. They are up to no good. This is in many ways true. If it wasn't human nature would be irrational. If your theory assumes everybody is irrational that should be a good indication that you need to work on it or replace it. "People are just crazy" is never a very helpful theory and it never helps you accurately predict what will happen, if everybody is crazy nobody would be able to predict anything, ever. Common sense tells us that some people have managed to get very rich by making imperfect but accurate enough predictions about the way people will respond. Another theory that totally fails to predict anything is the hippie mantra of if it feels good do it. Why doesn't it feel good all the time? Why do you ever do anything else? Why do some people do it more than others and feel the need to deny that they have done? The hedonist model doesn't predict anything, a theory that doesn't make useful predictions is no use as a theory. Neither the hippie nor the Catholic theory actually do anything to predict people's masturbation habits. If the Devil wants people to sin why don't all people sin in the same way and why don't all murderers also have sex with animals and children and steal money from charity collection boxes and why aren't all masturbaters also thieves, rapists, church arsonists and Satan worshippers? The Devil made me do it theory is a travesty, it does nothing to explain why certain people commit certain sins or crimes but not others. Why does the Devil tempt people to do what they are inclined to do? Simple: for the same reason children's invisible friends are invisible to other people, even children with other invisible friends. The Devil is an ex post facto explanation designed to minimize cognitive dissonance. And yes, there is a simpler way of expressing that but some people regard using that word as if it is a sin. But then again many of those people are lying wankers, aren't they?
Natalie Clifford Barney wrote: There are sound reasons why all men get the urge to masturbate at some time but women vary and some women never masturbate and don't suffer any negative consequences, heresy but true. Variation is the key to female success. Men are simpler animals and a simpler strategy works. Does your theory explain why people ever stop masturbating and watch soaps or make a cup of tea instead? If it doesn't it's a lousy theory DanielAlbertDesfosses wrote: Sperm counts can also be too high for optimum fertility, and sperm can be stale if a man goes too long between ejaculations. None of this is stuff the religious want to know about as it confuses them terribly. -- http://mwillett.org . The Last Church. ORG is a con. One lone illiterate nutcase trying to raise money apparently to build a fake ruined church while spending an inordinate amount of time debating gun laws on usenet. What is the connection? It has got to be dodgy. How else can you interpret his win-a-motorbike-for-making-a-donation scam (look here are photographs of several different motorbikes you can't win). Or better yet his "quotation" from a letter that apparently gives him permission to house an audio download on his website in a letter dated before the invention of the world wide web yet alone before his website existed. Then you see some pictures from Tanzania of healthy happy children in a school who apparently need him to send them food, right alongside a logo telling you his site is invalid. As if you needed telling. Run a mile from this armed lunatic. Never send him money. Don't drink his Kool Aid. -- http://mwillett.org > The morality rules of a religion are not products of the religion but rather a codification of the natural rules that allow a social animal to survive. The problem with viewing these rules through the lens of religion is that they are very often distorted and can become contrary to the natural rules, especially when ethnocentricity comes into play. Correct. Morality has nothing to do with wearing turbans or veils or long-sleeved blouses. It has nothing to do with fasting or praying or sacrificing animals or refusing to eat the flesh of particular animals or sticking up the right pictures in your house. Religion wraps itself up in morality like a daft-dodging Republican hawk wraps himself up in the stars and stripes. Religion wraps itself around marriage as if it invented it. Religion wraps itself up in law as if it invented it. Religion claims as its own anything which is good. It's a nice day praise God, Arsenal won, thank the Lord, you're looking pretty today my child Allah be praised. Most modern laws have nothing to do with Christianity. Civilised nations are expressing greater moral sensitivity than ever before and this has nothing to do with the god that asked for the slaying of Isaac. Civil partnerships, race, sex and age discrimination, the minimum wage, universal healthcare and so on have NOTHING to do with anybody's god or Bible. This is an extension of secular humanist values that require no gods and deny no gods. Modern western civilised nations don't need religion. Whether they needed religion to get where we are is another matter and it is not relevant to the future. A hell of a lot of things were required to make the modern world, many of which I have no wish to see in the future such as slavery, the industrial revolution, enclosures stealing land from the rural poor, the Black Death, the invasion of the Mongol hordes, the End Permian Mass Extinction Event and the government of Margaret Thatcher to name just a few. -- Martin Willett http://mwillett.org/ > During the Monday night Bible study, the Lord revealed to me that
reading the Bible is like going to a movie - where you see the movie from
the beginning to the end. This god of yours, why doesn't he ever reveal himself to people he hasn't been formally introduced to? It seems totally pathetic to me that an entity that could fling galaxies about and design worms whose entire lifespan takes place in the tears of hippopotamuses couldn't get his act together and pass a message on to somebody whose ancestors weren't beaten up by his followers. The universe I live in is far grander than the one your god was postulated to explain. He really doesn't fit. He's far too small, puny, parochial, quixotic, inconsistent, way too Jewish and obsessed with sex in a most unhealthy way. I'd say he was just what you would expect a nation of Bronze Age shepherds who could write better than they could fight would invent to explain why what their hierarchy wants to do is the only right thing to do. Go ahead. Start your Bible from page one. And read it with your mind open. Use your brain, not any other part of your anatomy. Read it as you would read a novel or a history book. Ask yourself who wrote it. Now ask yourself who really wrote it. Now be reasonable. Look at the evidence. It was not written by somebody who knows much about cosmology, geology, astronomy, geography, biology, history or archaeology. If it was inspired by a god it must have been either a lying god or a very small and ignorant one. A far more reasonable hypothesis is that it was the writing down of oral tradition by a tribal scribe who was just getting the hang of the concept of writing. It has obvious similarities with ancient books written by Greeks and the Norse in which their gods and heroes had their myths written down for the first time. The early chapters of Genesis reveal no Satan and no afterlife. The snake? A talking snake. It says it was snake. It doesn't say Satan disguised as a snake. "Now the serpent was more subtle than any animal of the field which Yahweh God had made." Genesis 3:1 Hello? Not Satan. Can that be any clearer? God treats the snake as if it was a snake, if the snake was a disguise of Satan then pulling the legs off all snakes as punishment (which the Lord does) would be as crazy as, well, of punishing newborn babies for something their great ^n grandparents did. Yahweh God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil. Now, lest he put forth his hand, and also take of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever..." That surely means that Yahweh is one god among many gods, and he has a tree which would give eternal life, which he has to guard with cherubim and a flaming sword. This isn't the omnipresent omnipotent god that philosophers speak of. He was walking in another part of the Garden when the Original Sin took place. He did not witnesses it. He convicted mankind on confession evidence. Surely a decent lawyer would have got Adam and Eve off and had Yahweh prosecuted for being an agent provocateur, carelessly leaving a loaded tree in a garden and not keeping a proper guard on it... We could have him put away until, well, doomsday. Whenever that is. It's a myth. A tribal myth. Compare it to other tribal myths. Why not compare it to the myth of your own tribe? All tribal creation myths are stupid and illogical but are somehow just cute enough to survive. The entire foundation of all the churches is built upon ancient Hebrew myths. Laugh at it. It really is hysterically funny that people have believed such utter nonsense for so long. Since when has gullibility been the ultimate virtue? -- Martin Willett http://mwillett.org/ Making the News | Making the News 2 | Making the News 3 | Making the News 4Making the News 5 | Making the News 6 | Making the News 7 | Making the News 8 |
© 1999 - 2008 by Martin Willett. |
mwillett.org: Debate Unlimited |