# Christian repubs lol



## exphys88 (Mar 5, 2013)




----------



## DOMS (Mar 5, 2013)

Your post is short, but stupid.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 5, 2013)

DOMS said:


> Your post is short, but stupid.



Thanks!  So is yours.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 5, 2013)

still bitter and angry huh?


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 5, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> still bitter and angry huh?



Just pointing out the hypocrisy.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 6, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> Just pointing out the hypocrisy.



by comparing christianity with sharia law?


that's quite a stretch.. even for you


----------



## jay_steel (Mar 6, 2013)

for someone that claims to believe in freedom and equality you sure like to bash religion allot. I do believe that some Christians are over the top, but people who bash and ones religion are just as guilty and bad.


----------



## KelJu (Mar 6, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> by comparing christianity with sharia law?
> 
> 
> that's quite a stretch.. even for you



The image doesn't compare Christians with sharia law. The image compares Islamic fundamentalist with Christian fundamentalist via analogy. It is a more than fair analogy. One would throw me in jail for the rest of my life and the other would blow me up. Both options are pretty bleak.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 6, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> by comparing christianity with sharia law?
> 
> 
> that's quite a stretch.. even for you



Kelju said it perfectly.  I'm merely pointing out the problem with someone of any religion wanting to mix their religion into politics, which is what many republican christians want.  Abortion, gay marriage, polygamy, and contraception are a few examples.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 6, 2013)

jay_steel said:


> for someone that claims to believe in freedom and equality you sure like to bash religion allot. I do believe that some Christians are over the top, but people who bash and ones religion are just as guilty and bad.



I just want christians to keep their primitive views out of our legislation.


----------



## theCaptn' (Mar 6, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> I just want christians to keep their primitive views out of our legislation.



Thankfully we don't have that problem in Aus. The Christian Right down here are the laughing stock of politics. It's the Green movement that are a concern


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 6, 2013)

theCaptn' said:


> Thankfully we don't have that problem in Aus. The Christian Right down here are the laughing stock of politics. It's the Green movement that are a concern



lol, yeah christian americans are some of the dumbest people of any civilized nation in regards to science.  the amount of them that still believe the earth is 6,000 years old is astounding.


----------



## charley (Mar 6, 2013)

...... That's the Problem with FREEDOM......you got to put up with all of it... I personally think organized religion is BUNK.... But in AMERICA we have 'freedom of religion' .......so you can 'bitch & moan' all you want but can't do anything about it....


----------



## DOMS (Mar 6, 2013)

jay_steel said:


> for someone that claims to believe in freedom and equality you sure like to bash religion allot. I do believe that some Christians are over the top, but people who bash and ones religion are just as guilty and bad.



The liberal left, they're all "We're -- like -- all totally accepting and understanding." Until you say something that pisses them off that is. Talk about hypocrites...


----------



## dogsoldier (Mar 6, 2013)

Y'all know what?  Christian, Mooslum, Jew, tree hugger, what ever.  If people just minded their own business more, things would go a whole lot better for everyone.


----------



## njc (Mar 6, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> lol, yeah christian americans are some of the dumbest people of any civilized nation in regards to science.  the amount of them that still believe the earth is 6,000 years old is astounding.



You dont need to be so insulting.  The vast majority of Christian SCHOLARS and indeed the majority of the main fathers of the Faith were not Biblical literalists.  Literalism is fairly new thing which came along with the Protestant reformation.  The aforementioned non-literalists do not believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old.  

There are lots of scientists who are Christians.  A good book on the topic is "Finding Darwins God."  Written by an evolutionary biologist who is also a Christian.  I do agree with your point about leaving religion out of politics.  But your partially strawman insults are, well, insulting.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 6, 2013)

KelJu said:


> The image doesn't compare Christians with sharia law. The image compares Islamic fundamentalist with Christian fundamentalist via analogy. It is a more than fair analogy. One would throw me in jail for the rest of my life and the other would blow me up. Both options are pretty bleak.



so muslims burying a woman up to her head and stoning her to death for trying to go to school, and christians wanting to preserve traditional marriage/keep women from slaughtering their babies/etc..(no fucking threat of imprisonment lmao.. shameful) is the same principle?

got it


----------



## KelJu (Mar 6, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> so muslims burying a woman up to her head and stoning her to death for trying to go to school, and christians wanting to preserve traditional marriage/keep women from slaughtering their babies/etc..(no fucking threat of imprisonment lmao.. shameful) is the same principle?
> 
> got it




No, it is not the same principle, nor does it resemble anything I said.


----------



## theCaptn' (Mar 7, 2013)

I vote for transsexual Taliban cannibals


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 7, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> so muslims burying a woman up to her head and stoning her to death for trying to go to school, and christians wanting to preserve traditional marriage/keep women from slaughtering their babies/etc..(no fucking threat of imprisonment lmao.. shameful) is the same principle?
> 
> got it



One kills a woman right away and the other saddles her with an unwanted child for the rest of her life.


----------



## jay_steel (Mar 7, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> One kills a woman right away and the other saddles her with an unwanted child for the rest of her life.



Its called responsibility and there is all ways adoption. Infants are easily adopted out, the only way i approve of abortion is by rape, incest, or the mothers life. If it was just her being stupid and irresponsible then what will that teach her? Should we allow her to have 10 abortions in her life time? If I didnt want a girl should I have the right to abort every baby that is not a boy? The form of abortion is extremely barbaric, an acid bath that destroys the infant, sucking it out in pieces. Then if the infant survives they drive a steak through its skull... Maybe I was just raised differently and would never accept any girl having an abortion, as a man if she did not want the child I would have easily been a single dad even at the age of 16. My dads sex talk with me was if you get a girl pregnant you get a job and you take care of her and that child no matter how much you hate the bitch. I believe in holding people accountable and responsible, if your responsible enough to have sex your responsible enough to have the child and either give it up for adoption or care for it.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 7, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> One kills a woman right away and the other saddles her with an unwanted child for the rest of her life.




you're right.. 

but since day one, i was told that "as a man, im responsible for my actions"..

i was just raised differently i guess..


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 7, 2013)

jay_steel said:


> Its called responsibility and there is all ways adoption. Infants are easily adopted out, the only way i approve of abortion is by rape, incest, or the mothers life. If it was just her being stupid and irresponsible then what will that teach her? Should we allow her to have 10 abortions in her life time? If I didnt want a girl should I have the right to abort every baby that is not a boy? The form of abortion is extremely barbaric, an acid bath that destroys the infant, sucking it out in pieces. Then if the infant survives they drive a steak through its skull... Maybe I was just raised differently and would never accept any girl having an abortion, as a man if she did not want the child I would have easily been a single dad even at the age of 16. My dads sex talk with me was if you get a girl pregnant you get a job and you take care of her and that child no matter how much you hate the bitch. I believe in holding people accountable and responsible, if your responsible enough to have sex your responsible enough to have the child and either give it up for adoption or care for it.





Standard Donkey said:


> you're right..
> 
> but since day one, i was told that "as a man, im responsible for my actions"..
> 
> i was just raised differently i guess..




Unfortunately not everyone is raised like you were.  Contraception fails, women get pregnant.  In my opinion pro-lifers need to put their money where their mouths are and start adopting kids by the gross.  

Don't get me wrong, I'm not for abortion.  Not at all.  But I'm not going to take away that option because somehow my beliefs are better than those of someone else.


----------



## theCaptn' (Mar 7, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> Unfortunately not everyone is raised like you were.  Contraception fails, women get pregnant.  In my opinion pro-lifers need to put their money where their mouths are and start adopting kids by the gross.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I'm not for abortion.  Not at all.  But I'm not going to take away that option because somehow my beliefs are better than those of someone else.



Wow! This is a GREAT idea! You think the pro-lifers would LEAP at that idea rather than just preach their rhetoric


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 7, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> Unfortunately not everyone is raised like you were.  Contraception fails, women get pregnant.  In my opinion pro-lifers need to put their money where their mouths are and start adopting kids by the gross.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I'm not for abortion.  Not at all.  But I'm not going to take away that option because somehow my beliefs are better than those of someone else.



you do realize that it takes many years to adopt a child right? and that's not an american child.. that's a child from Asia or some shit.

an american child would be worth his/her weight in gold, especially a white one (sad but true).. there are tens of thousands of families who are wanting to adopt who aren't christian.

it's just the people don't want to take responsibility for their actions, carry the child to term, and pay for the medical bills etc.. the ones that do get put up for adoption would be adopted out immediately if it werent for all the beauracracy red tape bullshit.

i like how christians/decent people in general wanting people to be held accountable for their actions means that they (christians/decent people in general) should have to pick up the slack of the worthless fucks 


real sound logic there


----------



## jay_steel (Mar 7, 2013)

we live in a world were every one needs the easy way out. There is no more sacrifice in the average persons life. Their sacrifice is taking the time to collect there gov't check. It cracks me up how many people think they should get paid more money for more then what they do. I thought of this yesterday at fresh n easy. The picketers were complaining about they under pay staff... I have yet to see any of their staff do ANY thing but stand there and maybe bag three grocery. We live in a world with no consequence any more, you break the law your out in a few hours. Bring the laws of singapore over here and lets see how things change.


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 8, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> you do realize that it takes many years to adopt a child right? and that's not an american child.. that's a child from Asia or some shit.
> 
> an american child would be worth his/her weight in gold, especially a white one (sad but true).. there are tens of thousands of families who are wanting to adopt who aren't christian.
> 
> ...



So that means you aren't going to practice what you preach?  Christians want people to be held accountable for their actions?  Christians should be held accountable for the large number of unwanted children they want to protect from abortion.  

If you save a life you are responsible for it.

Perhaps you should start the adoption process now.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 8, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> So that means you aren't going to practice what you preach?  *Christians want people to be held accountable for their actions?  Christians should be held accountable for the large number of unwanted children they want to protect from abortion.  *
> 
> If you save a life you are responsible for it.
> 
> Perhaps you should start the adoption process now.



lmao what???

christians want people to be held accountable for their actions.. therefore christians should be held accountable everyone else's actions?


ahh.. a non sequitar.. what was your score on the SAT by chance? LOL


----------



## theCaptn' (Mar 8, 2013)

If Christians (and other religious arseholes) would just stfu and let the rest of the world live the life they chose, the world would be a slightly better place


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 9, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> lmao what???
> 
> christians want people to be held accountable for their actions.. therefore christians should be held accountable everyone else's actions?
> 
> ...



I'll take that as you aren't willing to be responsible for the lives you save.


----------



## nikos_ (Mar 9, 2013)

Iron Maiden - Hallowed Be Thy Name - Live After Death - HD Video With Closed Captions2.m4v - YouTube


----------



## nikos_ (Mar 9, 2013)

.


----------



## FUZO (Mar 9, 2013)

OkCupid | exphys88 / 24 / M / Athens, Ohio


----------



## maniclion (Mar 9, 2013)

I'm going home now to play with my anal prayer beads of sanctity....


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 9, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> I'll take that as you aren't willing to be responsible for the lives you save.




ill take that as people shouldnt be responsible for the lives they create


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Mar 9, 2013)

birth control pills should be mandatory for welfare leeches


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 9, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> birth control pills should be mandatory for welfare leeches




the jews got the right call on this one


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 9, 2013)

njc said:


> You dont need to be so insulting.  The vast majority of Christian SCHOLARS and indeed the majority of the main fathers of the Faith were not Biblical literalists.  Literalism is fairly new thing which came along with the Protestant reformation.  The aforementioned non-literalists do not believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old.
> 
> There are lots of scientists who are Christians.  A good book on the topic is "Finding Darwins God."  Written by an evolutionary biologist who is also a Christian.  I do agree with your point about leaving religion out of politics.  But your partially strawman insults are, well, insulting.



46% of Americans don't accept evolution.  That makes nearly 46% of Americans stupid.

Evolutionary biologists who are Christian are also stupid.  Once you accept that Adam and Eve did not exist, and we evolved, you have thrown out the entire premise of Christianity, which is the fall of Adam and the death of Christ to give us salvation.  No scientists w any sort of rational thinking would believe that Jesus died and came back to life 3 days later.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 9, 2013)

FUZO said:


> OkCupid | exphys88 / 24 / M / Athens, Ohio



Lol, I'm 33 and live in CA, you know this because you've received mail from me .  But I'm glad you are searching my screen name.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 9, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> so muslims burying a woman up to her head and stoning her to death for trying to go to school, and christians wanting to preserve traditional marriage/keep women from slaughtering their babies/etc..(no fucking threat of imprisonment lmao.. shameful) is the same principle?
> 
> got it



You do realize that the bible says homosexuality and adultery is punishable by death right?  I'd bet my life savings that plenty of Christians would love to see the Old Testament be made law.  Think KKK


----------



## theCaptn' (Mar 9, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> 46% of Americans don't accept evolution.  That makes nearly 46% of Americans stupid.
> .



That is incredibly high. In Australia it would be something like 10% or less.

My old Anglican headmaster believed in evolution, as did the pastor who taught biology and chemistry. 

There is a big debate at present about churches behaving like corporations, making profits and not paying tax. It sounds like these greedy sons of bitches are about to meet the tax man soon


----------



## LAM (Mar 9, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> birth control pills should be mandatory for welfare leeches



welfare recipients cost US taxpayers about 60B a year while the US financial sector about 1T a year.  now who's the bigger leech on the system?


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 10, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> You do realize that the bible says homosexuality and adultery is punishable by death right?  I'd bet my life savings that plenty of Christians would love to see the Old Testament be made law.  Think KKK




so the KKK are christians now? and christians go by the old testament now?

please stop rewriting reality to try to support your argument..


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Mar 10, 2013)

LAM said:


> welfare recipients cost US taxpayers about 60B a year while the US financial sector about 1T a year.  now who's the bigger leech on the system?



true...what do welfare leeches contribute though?


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 10, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> ill take that as people shouldnt be responsible for the lives they create



People like you have saved so many but you won't accept responsibility for them.  Why?


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 10, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> so the KKK are christians now? and christians go by the old testament now?
> 
> please stop rewriting reality to try to support your argument..



Most Klan members are christians and have you ever heard of the Ten Commandments?


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 10, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> People like you have saved so many but you won't accept responsibility for them.  Why?




ur entire stance is based on such a laughably flawed premise.. and yet, you keep running with it.

and LOL@ the kkk being christians.. please zap.. u can't say "glory hallelujah, now let's go lynch some niggers"

lmao.. yeah god gave us the ten commandments? there are actually over 600, and in the new testament, jesus gave us two more that REAL christians are to follow - "love the lord with all of your heart" and "*love your neighbor as yourself"


*you're comedy bro.. pure comedy


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 10, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> ur entire stance is based on such a laughably flawed premise.. and yet, you keep running with it.
> 
> and LOL@ the kkk being christians.. please zap.. u can't say "glory hallelujah, now let's go lynch some niggers"
> 
> ...



If you love your neighbor then quit trying to force your antiquated beliefs on him.  That's what muslim extremists do.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 10, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> If you love your neighbor then quit trying to force your antiquated beliefs on him.  That's what muslim extremists do.




being against slaughtering babies is "antiquated beliefs"..? i fear for this generation lol..

and no.. christians dont "force".. they vote.. u dont seem them blowing themselves up and cutting people's heads off/stoning people.. once again.. you post laughable bullshit and try to masquerade it as "fact"


i have to ask..are you trying to be an idiot? or..


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 10, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> so the KKK are christians now? and christians go by the old testament now?
> 
> please stop rewriting reality to try to support your argument..



serious?  of course they're christians.  and yes, christians quote the old testament all the time, in fact the belief that homosexuality is a sin is from the old testament only.  Jesus never said anything about it.  The funny thing is that christians always quote the old testament to show that homosexuality is a sin, but omit the part that says homo's should be put to death.  I guess they get to pick and choose which scriptures to follow?


----------



## LAM (Mar 10, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> true...what do welfare leeches contribute though?



at least that don't have a negative effect on the real economy.  you can't make money out of thin air and not expect it to have an increasing negative effect on an economy.  especially when manufacturing is steadily being moved away and middle-class paying jobs being permanently lost and people getting thrown into the low wage service sector.  it doesn't really matter if it's from automation or off-shoring this problem is a *US problem* and not a problem created by the individual.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 10, 2013)

theCaptn' said:


> That is incredibly high. In Australia it would be something like 10% or less.
> 
> My old Anglican headmaster believed in evolution, as did the pastor who taught biology and chemistry.
> 
> There is a big debate at present about churches behaving like corporations, making profits and not paying tax. It sounds like these greedy sons of bitches are about to meet the tax man soon



we should open a church and ask for stupid people to donate 15% of their income to us.  There are plenty here in the US.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 10, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> serious?  of course they're christians.  and yes, christians quote the old testament all the time, in fact the belief that homosexuality is a sin is from the old testament only.  Jesus never said anything about it.  The funny thing is that christians always quote the old testament to show that homosexuality is a sin, but omit the part that says homo's should be put to death.  I guess they get to pick and choose which scriptures to follow?



nah..kkk aren't christians. read what i wrote about loving your neighbor as yourself

u do realize that christians take a pretty moderate stance on homosexuality.. (again.. for you morons with your incessant stupidity, "love the sinner, hate the sin") when compared to the muslims right?

it's odd how u never attack muslims.. curious as to why that is. lol.. it's painfully obvious you have something against us


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 10, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> nah..kkk aren't christians. read what i wrote about loving your neighbor as yourself
> 
> u do realize that christians take a pretty moderate stance on homosexuality.. (again.. for you morons with your incessant stupidity, "love the sinner, hate the sin") when compared to the muslims right?
> 
> it's odd how u never attack muslims.. curious as to why that is. lol.. it's painfully obvious you have something against us



of course I realize that, and I'm glad I don't live in a muslim country.  I live in a christian nation, which is why I comment on them mostly.  

I'm pointing out the hyprocisy of a christian wanting to force their religion (or their cherry picked scripture) into our laws, while simultaneously criticizing muslims for doing the same.  I am not comparing the 2 religions in current times, it's obvious that muslims are way more fucked up. 

and christianity is defined as a person who accepts jesus christ as the son of god, which KKK members definitely do.  They are christians whether you admit it or not, so are the westboro baptists.  Remember all sin is forgiven, so you can be as fucked up as you want to be and still get into heaven.  Jim Jones is sitting in heaven right now and Ghandi is burning in hell, according to the bible.


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 10, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> being against slaughtering babies is "antiquated beliefs"..? i fear for this generation lol..
> 
> and no.. christians dont "force".. they vote.. u dont seem them blowing themselves up and cutting people's heads off/stoning people.. once again.. you post laughable bullshit and try to masquerade it as "fact"
> 
> ...



You're just posting emotion.  Emotion has zero credibility.  Difference between you and I is I have to TRY to be an idiot.


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 10, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> nah..kkk aren't christians. read what i wrote about loving your neighbor as yourself
> 
> u do realize that christians take a pretty moderate stance on homosexuality.. (again.. for you morons with your incessant stupidity, "love the sinner, hate the sin") when compared to the muslims right?
> 
> it's odd how u never attack muslims.. curious as to why that is. lol.. it's painfully obvious you have something against us



Why do you have something against anyone who isn't christian or holds your same values?


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 10, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> You're just posting emotion.  Emotion has zero credibility.  Difference between you and I is I have to TRY to be an idiot.



nothing he posted there was emotion. perhaps previous posts were, but the one you were replying to certainly wasn't. Do you know what Roe VS. Wade says?

a woman has the right to an abortion without government interference before viability of the child. Second that the state has the right and power to restrict abortion after fetal viability as long as provisions are made for abortions in instances to protect the life and health of the mother. third it reaffirms fact the state has legitimate interests from the beginning of pregnancy in protecting the health of the woman, and life of the child. 
this is according to Justice O'Conner 

Christians, and all who find abortion deplorable are Constitutionally justified in voting for representatives, and laws to limit abortions and protect unborn children. But that isn't emotion. That is just cold hard facts from the supreme court of the united states.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 10, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> of course I realize that, and I'm glad I don't live in a muslim country.  I live in a christian nation, which is why I comment on them mostly.
> 
> I'm pointing out the hyprocisy of a christian wanting to force their religion (or their cherry picked scripture) into our laws, while simultaneously criticizing muslims for doing the same.  I am not comparing the 2 religions in current times, it's obvious that muslims are way more fucked up.
> 
> and christianity is defined as a person who accepts jesus christ as the son of god, which KKK members definitely do.  They are christians whether you admit it or not, so are the westboro baptists.  Remember all sin is forgiven, so you can be as fucked up as you want to be and still get into heaven.  Jim Jones is sitting in heaven right now and Ghandi is burning in hell, according to the bible.


according to an improper interpretation of the bible maybe


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 10, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> of course I realize that, and I'm glad I don't live in a muslim country.  I live in a christian nation, which is why I comment on them mostly.
> 
> and christianity is defined as a person who accepts jesus christ as the son of god, which KKK members definitely do.  They are christians whether you admit it or not, so are the westboro baptists.  Remember all sin is forgiven, so you can be as fucked up as you want to be and still get into heaven.  Jim Jones is sitting in heaven right now and Ghandi is burning in hell, according to the bible.



lol ok u got it bro im not going to argue


im bowing out of this one.. i concede


----------



## theCaptn' (Mar 10, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> lol ok u got it bro im not going to argue
> 
> 
> im bowing out of this one.. i concede



Yes! One more Christian converted!


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 10, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> nothing he posted there was emotion. perhaps previous posts were, but the one you were replying to certainly wasn't. Do you know what Roe VS. Wade says?
> 
> a woman has the right to an abortion without government interference before viability of the child. Second that the state has the right and power to restrict abortion after fetal viability as long as provisions are made for abortions in instances to protect the life and health of the mother. third it reaffirms fact the state has legitimate interests from the beginning of pregnancy in protecting the health of the woman, and life of the child.
> this is according to Justice O'Conner
> ...



Many states and the federal government are doing a pretty good job to limit that access to abortion.  Based solely on christian beliefs.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 10, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> Many states and the federal government are doing a pretty good job to limit that access to abortion.  Based solely on christian beliefs.



it could be based on a belief in a flying spaghetti monster for all I care. It doesn't matter where your moral code gets defined from. Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Athiest, or whatever. you are allowed to vote for laws and representatives that hold to your ideals. That's the government you live in son. Show me a better government, and we will talk. According to the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States, abortion can be regulated. We have an obligation to protect both a woman's right to privacy before the child becomes viable, but also to protect the fetus which can become a child. If you don't like it. Then go somewhere else where it's ok to kill children even after they have become viable outside of the womb.


----------



## LAM (Mar 10, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> Many states and the federal government are doing a pretty good job to limit that access to abortion.  Based solely on christian beliefs.



the legislation is being passed as a guise on protecting the fetus when it's nothing more than an effort to keep the population in the US as high as possible for economic reasons.  those that think politicians on the right "fight" for the fetus are blind as a bat, they fight for the consumption based economy that has ruined the US as politics and economics are one and the same in the US.


----------



## heckler7 (Mar 10, 2013)

LAM said:


> welfare recipients cost US taxpayers about 60B a year while the US financial sector about 1T a year.  now who's the bigger leech on the system?


welfare dues arent enough to raise a family and to concieve in disparity is  child abuse. And dont be nieve and think most people on welfare arent blowing what little funds they have on drugs and alcohol, when that money should be feeding their child.


----------



## 240PLUS (Mar 10, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> Thanks!  So is yours.



2 Stupids don't make a smart lol!


----------



## 240PLUS (Mar 11, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> serious?  of course they're christians.  and yes, christians quote the old testament all the time, in fact the belief that homosexuality is a sin is from the old testament only.  Jesus never said anything about it.  The funny thing is that christians always quote the old testament to show that homosexuality is a sin, but omit the part that says homo's should be put to death.  I guess they get to pick and choose which scriptures to follow?



Phuckin Athiests...always pulling the old testament out of their ass. Tell me this (just as argument no pun intendid) what GOOD or FRUIT has HOMOSEXUALITY produced?

GIVE ME AT LEAST.... SAY 2 positives from homosexuality and I'll give you a Donut Shop that's never been visited by cops. Just sayin


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 11, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> it could be based on a belief in a flying spaghetti monster for all I care. It doesn't matter where your moral code gets defined from. Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Athiest, or whatever. you are allowed to vote for laws and representatives that hold to your ideals. That's the government you live in son. Show me a better government, and we will talk. According to the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States, abortion can be regulated. We have an obligation to protect both a woman's right to privacy before the child becomes viable, but also to protect the fetus which can become a child. If you don't like it. Then go somewhere else where it's ok to kill children even after they have become viable outside of the womb.



But why don't christians want to respect a woman's right to privacy and access to abortion?  You're just throwing up a strawman argument.  

You aren't old enough to be calling me "son", son.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 11, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> But why don't christians want to respect a woman's right to privacy and access to abortion?  You're just throwing up a strawman argument.



oooooh! i know the answer to this one!

it's because christians don't see the gutting an unwanted human life out of the womb to be disposed of in a garbage receptacle as a woman's "right to privacy".

maybe we will be just as "evolved" and "forward-thinking" as you liberals someday"

maybe someday


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 11, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> oooooh! i know the answer to this one!
> 
> it's because christians don't see the gutting an unwanted human life out of the womb to be disposed of in a garbage receptacle as a woman's "right to privacy".
> 
> ...



But you won't take responsibility for the lives you save.  Or are you only against abortion just so you can feel good about yourself?


----------



## 240PLUS (Mar 11, 2013)

Good luck on this one guys smh


----------



## theCaptn' (Mar 11, 2013)

240PLUS said:


> Phuckin Athiests...always pulling the old testament out of their ass. Tell me this (just as argument no pun intendid) what GOOD or FRUIT has HOMOSEXUALITY produced?
> 
> GIVE ME AT LEAST.... SAY 2 positives from homosexuality and I'll give you a Donut Shop that's never been visited by cops. Just sayin



Homosexuality leaves more females available for retarded dudes like you to misunderstand and fail to satisfy


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 11, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> But you won't take responsibility for the lives you save.  Or are you only against abortion just so you can feel good about yourself?



u still havent come up with a reason why christians should take responsibility for all the children that dont get aborted..

logic would dictate that the people who create the lives are responsible for them..

im really interested in hearing your reasoning


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 11, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> But why don't christians want to respect a woman's right to privacy and access to abortion?  You're just throwing up a strawman argument.
> 
> You aren't old enough to be calling me "son", son.


What straw man are you talking about? All Christians don't vote as a block, and they certainly don't all vote Republican. If we did then Obama wouldn't have ever entered politics to begin with. let alone become president.

I've shown that Christians, and any others have the right to vote for laws that limit abortions. While some individuals may want to ban abortion altogether there has been no serious challenge to overturning Roe VS. Wade since the decision was announced. So again, I ask, Where is the Straw man?

The state has a right and an obligation to protect a fetus. This is established even in Roe v Wade. So my question back to you. Why doesn't those who are for abortion regardless of religious affiliation respect a Christians right to regulate it according to their conscience?

I don't care how old you are son. you still need to be taught like one.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 11, 2013)

looking back I should not have posted that last line. That was a cheap dig that didn't need to be said. If I could edit it out and erase that last line I would.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 11, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> But you won't take responsibility for the lives you save.  Or are you only against abortion just so you can feel good about yourself?



Why is it the liberals always think someone else should take responsibility for another persons actions? If you conceive a child I believe you should take responsibility for it. regardless of it not being "convenient" for you. If you are going to play with adult actions, you must accept adult responsibilities.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 11, 2013)

theCaptn' said:


> Homosexuality leaves more females available for retarded dudes like you to misunderstand and fail to satisfy



He asked for TWO reasons.


----------



## theCaptn' (Mar 11, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> He asked for TWO reasons.



Well you can thank homosexuality for anal bleaching


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 11, 2013)

theCaptn' said:


> Well you can thank homosexuality for anal bleaching



No credit for that one. That credit goes to Thai whores


----------



## theCaptn' (Mar 11, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> No credit for that one. That credit goes to Thai whores



Sounds like you've led an interesting life


----------



## Standard Donkey (Mar 11, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> Why is it the liberals always think someone else should take responsibility for another persons actions? If you conceive a child I believe you should take responsibility for it. regardless of it not being "convenient" for you. If you are going to play with adult actions, you must accept adult responsibilities.



a liberal being held accountable for it's actions is like a snail having salt poured on it lmao


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 11, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> u still havent come up with a reason why christians should take responsibility for all the children that dont get aborted..
> 
> logic would dictate that the people who create the lives are responsible for them..
> 
> im really interested in hearing your reasoning



It's the same reasoning that states only the rich should pay taxes, that McDonalds is responsible for fat people, Tobacco companies should pay for cancer, and AR rifles caused sandy hook not a mentally unstable person in a bad healthcare system. Oh yeah, and I should have to pay for someones healthcare other than my own including abortions if they so elect to have one. 

Basically it's that line of reasoning


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 11, 2013)

theCaptn' said:


> Sounds like you've led an interesting life



Southeast Asia.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 11, 2013)

240PLUS said:


> Phuckin Athiests...always pulling the old testament out of their ass. Tell me this (just as argument no pun intendid) what GOOD or FRUIT has HOMOSEXUALITY produced?
> 
> GIVE ME AT LEAST.... SAY 2 positives from homosexuality and I'll give you a Donut Shop that's never been visited by cops. Just sayin



That's an irrelevant question, although statistically some of the worlds greatest inventors, musicians, teachers, soldiers have been homosexuals.

And it's those that oppose homosexuality that pull out the Old Testament, since Jesus never condemned it.  The problem is that Christians quote Leviticus when arguing that its a sin, yet they ignore the part that says its punishable by death.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 11, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> That's an irrelevant question, although statistically some of the worlds greatest inventors, musicians, teachers, soldiers have been homosexuals.
> 
> And it's those that oppose homosexuality that pull out the Old Testament, since Jesus never condemned it.  The problem is that Christians quote Leviticus when arguing that its a sin, yet they ignore the part that says its punishable by death.


Christians don't ignore the part that says it's punishable by death. They just recognize the new testament as well and the higher law as given to us by Jesus. Homosexuality as a sin didn't change, but how we are to treat the sinner did. There is nothing hypocritical about it. When an adulterer was brought before Jesus for judgement he didn't say that adultery was no longer a sin. He acknowledged the sin, and the sinner, then gave new instruction on treating the sin and sinner. New instruction for both the sinner, and the populace. All sexual sin can be viewed as such. From Adultery to Homosexuality. The simplicity and purity of the teachings of Christ are really remarkable.


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 11, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> Why is it the liberals always think someone else should take responsibility for another persons actions? If you conceive a child I believe you should take responsibility for it. regardless of it not being "convenient" for you. If you are going to play with adult actions, you must accept adult responsibilities.



Why is it that christians are so concerned with bringing more lives into this world and once they are born they wash their hands of them?  Bringing more lives into this world is an adult action, being responsible for those lives is an adult responsibility.


----------



## theCaptn' (Mar 11, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> Christians don't ignore the part that says it's punishable by death. They just recognize the new testament as well and the higher law as given to us by Jesus. Homosexuality as a sin didn't change, but how we are to treat the sinner did. There is nothing hypocritical about it. When an adulterer was brought before Jesus for judgement he didn't say that adultery was no longer a sin. He acknowledged the sin, and the sinner, then gave new instruction on treating the sin and sinner. New instruction for both the sinner, and the populace. All sexual sin can be viewed as such. From Adultery to Homosexuality. The simplicity and purity of the teachings of Christ are really remarkable.



Have you ever considered the practical reasons why the bible might have anti-gay sentiments?

I'll warn you now, thinking through this question may require critical thinking


----------



## 240PLUS (Mar 11, 2013)

theCaptn' said:


> Homosexuality leaves more females available for retarded dudes like you to misunderstand and fail to satisfy



Your so cool Captain....sailing the 7 seas. Godamn Gordon Fisherman...phucking lame ass. Go do some more benching or something with your club muscles lol!!


----------



## 240PLUS (Mar 11, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> That's an irrelevant question, although statistically some of the worlds greatest inventors, musicians, teachers, soldiers have been homosexuals.
> 
> And it's those that oppose homosexuality that pull out the Old Testament, since Jesus never condemned it.  The problem is that Christians quote Leviticus when arguing that its a sin, yet they ignore the part that says its punishable by death.



Why is it irrelevant sir?


----------



## 240PLUS (Mar 11, 2013)

What does sentiment mean? Should I be Jewish to know that word?


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 11, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> Christians don't ignore the part that says it's punishable by death. They just recognize the new testament as well and the higher law as given to us by Jesus. Homosexuality as a sin didn't change, but how we are to treat the sinner did. There is nothing hypocritical about it. When an adulterer was brought before Jesus for judgement he didn't say that adultery was no longer a sin. He acknowledged the sin, and the sinner, then gave new instruction on treating the sin and sinner. New instruction for both the sinner, and the populace. All sexual sin can be viewed as such. From Adultery to Homosexuality. The simplicity and purity of the teachings of Christ are really remarkable.



Lol, so the sins in the Old Testament are still a sin?

Here's some examples from Leviticus, the same book that says homosexuality is a sin:

That'll shall not cut the hair on the side of your head, nor trim the beard.

Do not wear clothing of different material

You're not supposed to marry a widow.

The list goes on and on, yet these sins are ignored.  Would you vote for a law against trimming beards?


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 11, 2013)

240PLUS said:


> Why is it irrelevant sir?



Why does homosexuality have to produce something good?  What good has a woman giving her husband a blow job done?  Should we legislate that oral and anal sex be illegal since it doesn't do anything positive for society?


Btw, lesbian porn has made me happy before.  That's a positive thing about homosexuality.


----------



## Swiper (Mar 11, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> Why is it that christians are so concerned with bringing more lives into this world and once they are born they wash their hands of them?  Bringing more lives into this world is an adult action, being responsible for those lives is an adult responsibility.



when do you believe life begins? 

Are you ok with a 8-9 month old  baby being terminated by abortion?


----------



## 240PLUS (Mar 11, 2013)

I tell everyone this, I had a homosexual Uncle whom was an awsome guy. He passed a few years ago from illness that we never knew what it was. It was probably HIV but he never told the family. So my opinion for homosexuality is very strong in opposition. I don't judge gays, I just disagree. He was a great guy, but loved hairy ass and balls. I just don't get it. Ashame. And if the bible condemns it, then let it. People have condemned Christians for centuries so what ever. But I do shit that doesnt make sense either like put complex compounds in my body just to give me an edge. Guess it all boils down to judging others. But the Captain is still a fucktard. LOL


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 11, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> Lol, so the sins in the Old Testament are still a sin?
> 
> Here's some examples from Leviticus, the same book that says homosexuality is a sin:
> 
> ...



It's sad when people who don't understand the bible try and use it for their own uses. Those first two were for those who had taken the Nazarite vow. Like Samson who lost his powers when he had his hair cut. Not everyone had taken that vow, therefore it wasn't a sin for everyone.....ah hell, it doesn't matter. believe what you want. you aren't going to figure it out anyways.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 11, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> Why is it that christians are so concerned with bringing more lives into this world and once they are born they wash their hands of them?  Bringing more lives into this world is an adult action, being responsible for those lives is an adult responsibility.



there are so many things so fundamentally wrong with this that i don't even know where to begin


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 11, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> It's sad when people who don't understand the bible try and use it for their own uses. Those first two were for those who had taken the Nazarite vow. Like Samson who lost his powers when he had his hair cut. Not everyone had taken that vow, therefore it wasn't a sin for everyone.....ah hell, it doesn't matter. believe what you want. you aren't going to figure it out anyways.



He lost his power when he cut his hair?  Sounds like a cool story...if you're 9 and like power rangers.


----------



## NoviceAAS (Mar 12, 2013)

I keep my bible right next to Esops fables and Grimms fairy tales , same category


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 12, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> there are so many things so fundamentally wrong with this that i don't even know where to begin



What's wrong is trying to force your beliefs on someone else.


----------



## Swiper (Mar 12, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> What's wrong is trying to force your beliefs on someone else.





Swiper said:


> when do you believe life begins?
> 
> Are you ok with a 8-9 month old baby being terminated by abortion?



what's the problem, why can't you answer my simple questions?


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 12, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> What's wrong is trying to force your beliefs on someone else.



How is anyone forcing their beliefs on someone else, other than you? I've already shown the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that it is the responsibility of the State to protect not only the life of the mother, but of the unborn child. Limiting abortion after the viability of the child is LEGAL you twit. are you illiterate? I have a right to vote for whoever I want, as do you (hence the reason i'm forced to live with obama for 4 more years, thank you very much)


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 12, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> He lost his power when he cut his hair?  Sounds like a cool story...if you're 9 and like power rangers.



And this further goes to show how much of a fool you are for trying to use the bible to support your idiotic claims.


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 13, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> How is anyone forcing their beliefs on someone else, other than you? I've already shown the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that it is the responsibility of the State to protect not only the life of the mother, but of the unborn child. Limiting abortion after the viability of the child is LEGAL you twit. are you illiterate? I have a right to vote for whoever I want, as do you (hence the reason i'm forced to live with obama for 4 more years, thank you very much)



Thank yourself for Obama.  Voting for Romney was voting for Obama.  

As far as forcing their beliefs on someone else I'm not for creating laws to limit or restrict someone else.  That's on you.


----------



## Swiper (Mar 13, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> What's wrong is trying to force your beliefs on someone else.





Swiper said:


> when do you believe life begins?
> 
> Are you ok with a 8-9 month old baby being terminated by abortion?





Swiper said:


> what's the problem, why can't you answer my simple questions?



LOL avoiding my questions makes it seem like you're a hypocrite. what's your problem?


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 13, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> And this further goes to show how much of a fool you are for trying to use the bible to support your idiotic claims.



And you're obviously a retard to think the bible has anything useful in it, and depend on it to know how to live a good life.
For those of us w the ability to think, we're moral w/o the fear of hell.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 13, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> Thank yourself for Obama.  Voting for Romney was voting for Obama.
> 
> As far as forcing their beliefs on someone else I'm not for creating laws to limit or restrict someone else.  That's on you.



care to tell me how voting for an opponent was actually a vote for Obama? 

Again, I vote for representatives, who vote for laws that protect unborn children. Something even liberal judges rule the state has an obligation to do. 

Yes, You absolutely do vote for laws to place limits and restrictions on people. I guarantee it.  If you don't think you do then you further show just how foolish you are.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 13, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> And you're obviously a retard to think the bible has anything useful in it, and depend on it to know how to live a good life.
> For those of us w the ability to think, we're moral w/o the fear of hell.



Killing babies is moral? WTF? do you even read your posts before you hit reply? 

I don't depend on the bible to know how to live a good life. stop making ridiculous assumptions you know nothing about


----------



## KelJu (Mar 13, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> Killing babies is moral? WTF? do you even read your posts before you hit reply?



Killing fetuses is moral. Killing babies not so much.


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 13, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> care to tell me how voting for an opponent was actually a vote for Obama?
> 
> Again, I vote for representatives, who vote for laws that protect unborn children. Something even liberal judges rule the state has an obligation to do.
> 
> Yes, You absolutely do vote for laws to place limits and restrictions on people. I guarantee it.  If you don't think you do then you further show just how foolish you are.



Voting for either Romney or Obama was voting to keep the status quo.  

So you admit to forcing your views onto someone else.


----------



## theCaptn' (Mar 13, 2013)

Unborn children don't need protection, born children do from unfit parents. 

There are more than enough unwanted and unloved children on the planet. Abortion isn't exactly a pleasant option for woman to go through, either physically or mentally but sometimes it's a better option than bringing a child into this world that can't or won't be cared for.

I have never seen pro-lifers tackle that side of the debate.


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 13, 2013)

Swiper said:


> LOL avoiding my questions makes it seem like you're a hypocrite. what's your problem?



No point in bothering with ridiculousness.


----------



## KelJu (Mar 13, 2013)

theCaptn' said:


> I have never seen pro-lifers tackle that side of the debate.



And you never will because they are self righteous cock suckers. I have never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, fucking ever talked to a pro lifer who has adopted an unwanted child. I have heard stories. I have been sent links to one or two, but never have I engaged a pro lifer who has done anything but run their cock sucker. 

Then on top of it, you have to listen to the same cock suckers bitch about having to pay to pay for the healthcare and/or incarceration of these kids who grow up to be fucked up.


----------



## Swiper (Mar 13, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> No point in bothering with ridiculousness.



lmao.  you can bash everyone's  position on abortion yet you won't even answer a couple of question on your position.  you're a fucking joke.


----------



## Dark Geared God (Mar 13, 2013)

ask the 100's of kids i left in all over the world...they be happy living in filth at least they be living..or dieing of the pox or the flux..


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 13, 2013)

KelJu said:


> Killing fetuses is moral. Killing babies not so much.



The supreme court has ruled that the state has an obligation to protect fetuses who have become viable outside of the womb. this isn't rocket science here. You're a smart dude Kelju. a fetus the day before birth has the same rights as the day after. label it what you want, it's still a human being bro.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 13, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> Voting for either Romney or Obama was voting to keep the status quo.
> 
> So you admit to forcing your views onto someone else.



don't be so dense. I vote for laws and representatives that share my views. As do you. As does everyone. It's how a society functions. without people coming together to form laws to determine how their society will function, regardless of the system used. 

When you vote for a pro-abortion candidate you are voting for your views to be accepted universally in society. You are saying "I accept abortion of 7 month old fetuses, and because I accept this you have to as well" as an example. Don't get so high and mighty here. you are the exact same as what you are accusing others of.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 13, 2013)

KelJu said:


> And you never will because they are self righteous cock suckers. I have never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, fucking ever talked to a pro lifer who has adopted an unwanted child. I have heard stories. I have been sent links to one or two, but never have I engaged a pro lifer who has done anything but run their cock sucker.
> 
> Then on top of it, you have to listen to the same cock suckers bitch about having to pay to pay for the healthcare and/or incarceration of these kids who grow up to be fucked up.


How many couples who have adopted children have you spoken with? and all of them have said we are for abortion? you must be joking.

Many adoption agencies are run by churches. you think all those people are pro-choice?


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 13, 2013)

theCaptn' said:


> Unborn children don't need protection, born children do from unfit parents.
> 
> There are more than enough unwanted and unloved children on the planet. Abortion isn't exactly a pleasant option for woman to go through, either physically or mentally but sometimes it's a better option than bringing a child into this world that can't or won't be cared for.
> 
> I have never seen pro-lifers tackle that side of the debate.



you've never seen a pro-lifer argue for adoption over abortion? 

Dude if there was a way to keep these rejects from getting pregnant to begin with i'm all for it. show me that piece of legislation right now, and i'll call my representative and have him vote for it.


----------



## Swiper (Mar 13, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> Voting for either Romney or Obama was voting to keep the status quo.
> 
> So you admit to forcing your views onto someone else.



tell that to lam, he voted for Obama, twice.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 13, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> Killing babies is moral? WTF? do you even read your posts before you hit reply?
> 
> I don't depend on the bible to know how to live a good life. stop making ridiculous assumptions you know nothing about



What is the point of reading the bible then?  

I haven't even mentioned babies in this thread.  Of course nobody likes abortion, but it's just not practical to force women to carry them if they don't want to.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 13, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> you've never seen a pro-lifer argue for adoption over abortion?
> 
> Dude if there was a way to keep these rejects from getting pregnant to begin with i'm all for it. show me that piece of legislation right now, and i'll call my representative and have him vote for it.



How bout free contraceptives for everyone?  It seems that those that bitch about it would rather pay for a welfare child over contraceptives.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 13, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> How bout free contraceptives for everyone?  It seems that those that bitch about it would rather pay for a welfare child over contraceptives.



You are smart enough to know flooding the market with free contraceptives would do very little. People still wouldn't use em. I mean hell. Condoms are already made free all over the place


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 13, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> You are smart enough to know flooding the market with free contraceptives would do very little. People still wouldn't use em. I mean hell. Condoms are already made free all over the place



I'd still try, and other forms like the pill are much more effective.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 13, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> I'd still try, and other forms like the pill are much more effective.


 98% seems pretty effective to me. Like I said, condoms are always either very cheap or even free. Just like you said, I'd try. We have, people choose not to use them. Therefore they chose to get pregnant, or accept the risk of becoming pregnant when they don't want to be. 

Condom Effectiveness

In one year, only two of every 100 couples who use condoms consistently and correctly will experience an unintended pregnancy?two pregnancies arising from an estimated 8,300 acts of sexual intercourse, for a *0.02 percent per-condom pregnancy rate.*[3]
In one year with perfect use (*meaning couples use condoms consistently and correctly at every act of sex), 98 percent of women relying on male condoms will remain pregnancy free*. With typical use, 85 percent relying on male condoms will remain pregnancy free.[3]
In one year with perfect use, 95 percent of women relying on the female condom will remain pregnancy free. With typical use, 79 percent relying on female condoms will remain pregnancy free.[3]
By comparison, only 15 percent of women using no method of contraception in a year will remain pregnancy free.[3]


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 13, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> 98% seems pretty effective to me. Like I said, condoms are always either very cheap or even free. Just like you said, I'd try. We have, people choose not to use them. Therefore they chose to get pregnant, or accept the risk of becoming pregnant when they don't want to be.
> 
> Condom Effectiveness
> 
> ...



You misunderstood me, I meant its much easier and more practical to get a shot every 3 months, or to take a pill every morning.

How do you suggest we force women to carry babies?  Should we pay to keep them locked up in jail?


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 13, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> You misunderstood me, I meant its much easier and more practical to get a shot every 3 months, or to take a pill every morning.
> 
> How do you suggest we force women to carry babies?  Should we pay to keep them locked up in jail?



I'm sorry, have I ever suggested that women should be forced to carry babies? Have I ever said anything about overturning roe vs. wade and banning abortion? 

No, what i've been saying this entire time is that people who bitch about pro-lifers should understand what roe vs wade really says. and it is that the government has the right and obligation to protect fetuses as soon as they become viable.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 13, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> I'm sorry, have I ever suggested that women should be forced to carry babies? Have I ever said anything about overturning roe vs. wade and banning abortion?
> 
> No, what i've been saying this entire time is that people who bitch about pro-lifers should understand what roe vs wade really says. and it is that the government has the right and obligation to protect fetuses as soon as they become viable.



Ok, I guess I misunderstood your position.

Explain "protect fetuses as soon as they become viable."  What does that entail?


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 13, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> Ok, I guess I misunderstood your position.
> 
> Explain "protect fetuses as soon as they become viable."  What does that entail?



It means we have the right and obligation to restrict abortion once the child becomes viable outside of the womb. As of right now it is commonly accepted that a premature child can live outside the womb at 24 weeks gestation. with some living as young as 21 weeks. 

As much as it sucks I am realistic enough to know that while abortion is a horrendous thing, making it completely illegal is worse to our society now than making it legal with restrictions. I'm not so radical that I believe we shouldn't make restrictions without taking into account the safety of the mother. or in instances of rape/incest. 

All this said I am a Christian and believe that all human life is sacred most especially innocent children. abortion is a terrible thing and should be limited to as few instances as possible, and yes, much of my charitable donations goes towards family services to that end. 

Blanket statements against Christians on this issue is bullshit, closed minded, bigotry. exactly the thing they accuse Christians of being. the fact they don't see their own hypocrisy is ludicrous. 

The Intolerance of Tolerance - Stand to Reason


----------



## 240PLUS (Mar 14, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> It means we have the right and obligation to restrict abortion once the child becomes viable outside of the womb. As of right now it is commonly accepted that a premature child can live outside the womb at 24 weeks gestation. with some living as young as 21 weeks.
> 
> As much as it sucks I am realistic enough to know that while abortion is a horrendous thing, making it completely illegal is worse to our society now than making it legal with restrictions. I'm not so radical that I believe we shouldn't make restrictions without taking into account the safety of the mother. or in instances of rape/incest.
> 
> ...



I don't argue with these Mutards anymore Bio. Pro-lifers are "self-rightous" because they hold mutards responsable for going, getting prego, and saying fuck it lets just kill it and not deal with it LOL. Because it's all about "me" and my black boyfriend shooting me full of cum because it feels good and I was drunk. Damn right, you got knocked up, its on you. You can justify it all you want, RLMAO heh heh.


----------



## theCaptn' (Mar 14, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> It means we have the right and obligation to restrict abortion once the child becomes viable outside of the womb. As of right now it is commonly accepted that a premature child can live outside the womb at 24 weeks gestation. with some living as young as 21 weeks.



That sounds more reasonable. Usually the decision is made well before this point.

If it makes any difference to opinions in general, women don't chose abortion as a convenient contraception method. It's a fkg appalling thing to have to go through.


----------



## Zaphod (Mar 14, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> don't be so dense. I vote for laws and representatives that share my views. As do you. As does everyone. It's how a society functions. without people coming together to form laws to determine how their society will function, regardless of the system used.
> 
> When you vote for a pro-abortion candidate you are voting for your views to be accepted universally in society. You are saying "I accept abortion of 7 month old fetuses, and because I accept this you have to as well" as an example. Don't get so high and mighty here. you are the exact same as what you are accusing others of.



You don't believe in abortion so don't get one.  I don't believe in restricting that option to someone else.  Talk about high and mighty.  Quit being a putz.


----------



## Dark Geared God (Mar 14, 2013)




----------



## KelJu (Mar 14, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> How many couples who have adopted children have you spoken with? and all of them have said we are for abortion? you must be joking.
> 
> Many adoption agencies are run by churches. you think all those people are pro-choice?




I personally know about 9 families who adopted. I was friends with the adopted children of 7 of those. Three of my college professors adopted children. One of my computer science professors adopted two Chinese baby girls. I was close friends with a dude who was adopted by two professors from Springhill. My cousin is fostering a young boy who was taken out of his home after the father broke the kid's arm. He was only 2 years old. The father is an abusive drunk with a criminal record a mile long. My cousin is Christian, but pro-choice. I guess blame that on being from Connecticut.  

I am not going to be a douchebag and say something stupid like: "everyone I know who adopts children are pro-choice, therefor only pro-choice couples adopt". However, I will say that the people who are the most vocal about their beliefs about abortion are the ones who have done the least to help the problem. It is so selfish, and you should be ashamed.  

If you bitch about entitlement spending to take care of the healthcare needs of low income children, then shut the fuck up about abortion. If you haven't given a home to a child who desperately needs one, then shut the fuck about about abortion. If you have adopted a child, then you can say whatever the fuck you want, because you have earned that right by taking ownership and responsibility of a problem rather than just talking out of your ass. 

Not one fucking sanctimonious pro-lifer on this board has adopted a child. You bunch of opinionated egotistical cock suckers.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 14, 2013)

KelJu said:


> I personally know about 9 families who adopted. I was friends with the adopted children of 7 of those. Three of my college professors adopted children. One of my computer science professors adopted two Chinese baby girls. I was close friends with a dude who was adopted by two professors from Springhill. My cousin is fostering a young boy who was taken out of his home after the father broke the kid's arm. He was only 2 years old. The father is an abusive drunk with a criminal record a mile long. My cousin is Christian, but pro-choice. I guess blame that on being from Connecticut.
> 
> I am not going to be a douchebag and say something stupid like: "everyone I know who adopts children are pro-choice, therefor only pro-choice couples adopt". However, I will say that the people who are the most vocal about their beliefs about abortion are the ones who have done the least to help the problem. It is so selfish, and you should be ashamed.
> 
> ...



you are way the fuck out of line here. For every story you have I can match you one for one. So fuck off. Im unmarried, so i'm not making babies, and i'm not adopting.  I have every intention of adoption over having my own kids, but i'm smart enough to get married first.


----------



## KelJu (Mar 15, 2013)

I'll own up to that. I was in a dickhead mood all day yesterday and was out of line for being rude and obnoxious. But, what I said is true. 

The anger comes from the insinuation that people who are pro-choice are that way because they do not want to be responsible. In reality, it is the opposite. People are trying to solve a problem. The problem is that children are brought into the would without a supportive family to nurture and prepare them for life. Those children grow up fucked up and end up having fucked up children of their own who then have fucked up children, and on, and so on. 

The numbers reported for physical, sexual, and emotional abuse by children in the foster care system is horrific. Is is disgusting. I remember seeing numbers reporting that kids in foster care homes are 4 times more likely to be molested. Kids in group homes were around 30 times more likely to have been molested. New research in cognitive neuroscience has shown physiological damage to children growing up without a family. "NOT psychological!" Physiological trauma leads to chronic medical problems for those kids. They grow up to be crack whores and criminals. 

That is fucked up. There are only two solutions available at this time: Adopt the unwanted children, are prevent their existence. Abortion is a terrible solution. It is terrible that it even has to be done. But, it is far better than doing nothing. If you aren't adopting, and you are pro-life, then you are perpetuating a problem that will exist forever. 

To be pro-choice, and not adopt, basically puts a person into a category of epic immorality. It contributes to the suffering of countless generations of people. It contributes to the downfall of the nation. It contributes the raising healthcare cost. It contributes to the crime rate. It contributes to higher taxes. It contributes to child sex slavery. It contributes to drug addiction. Almost every major societal problem we have is made worse when children aren't taken care of. On top of it, the children suffer far more than society will. 

Adopt them, love them, and take care of them, or prevent them from being. Anything else is irresponsible.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 15, 2013)

While in college I worked in a group home for at risk youth. Each of these kids had been taken from their families by the state because of bad family situations. We the staff were the primary care givers. It was a terrible system, with many flaws, and there was tons of things I wish i could change about that scenario. Despite all the negative associated with it, I couldn't imagine looking any one of those kids in the eye and telling them it would have been better for them and society to have never gotten the chance to draw breath. 

I've kept in contact with 3 of them, and of the 3, 2 now have a healthy normal life.


----------



## Swiper (Mar 15, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> You don't believe in abortion so don't get one.  I don't believe in restricting that option to someone else.  Talk about high and mighty.  Quit being a putz.



lol coming from someone who won't state their  position on when life begins and wether you'll kill a 8-9 month baby in the womb.   you have no credibility on this issue.  why people even respond to a fool like you on this issue is beyond me.  stfu or answer the questions.


----------



## jay_steel (Mar 15, 2013)

I plan on adopting. We want two kids of our own and third one will be adopted. I told her I want to find a black kid so when he makes it to the NFL we can retire. No but serious though i do plan on adopting a child. A matter of a fact I would not have been born if it wasnt for adoption. My moms best friend was given up for adoption and when she went to go look for her real family she meet her brother who came down to meet her in CA and thats when my mom meet my dad.


----------



## KelJu (Mar 15, 2013)

You guys need to go adopt, then. Intentions aren't doing anything for the children that need a family now. You are demanding that these children exist, therefor the only moral coarse of action is caring for them.  

Otherwise, it is just empty talk.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 15, 2013)

KelJu said:


> You guys need to go adopt, then. Intentions aren't doing anything for the children that need a family now. You are demanding that these children exist, therefor the only moral coarse of action is caring for them.
> 
> Otherwise, it is just empty talk.



Bullshit. I sleep easily at night and i feel no sense of hypocrisy whatsoever stating publicly people need to take responsibilities of their actions.


----------



## KelJu (Mar 15, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> Bullshit. I sleep easily at night and i feel no sense of hypocrisy whatsoever stating publicly people need to take responsibilities of their actions.



No bullshit. It is the truth. You are bullshitting yourself. There is no hypocrisy in stating people need to take responsibility. The hypocrisy comes in when you do not take responsibility while claiming that people should take responsibility. 

Are you taking care of the human souls that you demand exist? No, you aren't. None of the pro-lifers in this thread are. I am not talking about this anymore until ya'll face that fact and admit to it, or go adopt a child who needs a home. 

No. I am not talking about this anymore until you face that fact.


----------



## Dark Geared God (Mar 15, 2013)

Both of you are Dickheads^^^^


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 15, 2013)

KelJu said:


> No bullshit. It is the truth. You are bullshitting yourself. There is no hypocrisy in stating people need to take responsibility. The hypocrisy comes in when you do not take responsibility while claiming that people should take responsibility.
> 
> Are you taking care of the human souls that you demand exist? No, you aren't. None of the pro-lifers in this thread are. I am not talking about this anymore until ya'll face that fact and admit to it, or go adopt a child who needs a home.
> 
> No. I am not talking about this anymore until you face that fact.


We really won't miss you in this thread, or any other threads in the future dealing with abortion I assure you. I don't need to talk about what i've done to justify my opinions. neither does anyone else. have a good one


----------



## theCaptn' (Mar 15, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> We really won't miss you in this thread, or any other threads in the future dealing with abortion I assure you. I don't need to talk about what i've done to justify my opinions. neither does anyone else. have a good one



You don't talk for anyone else my friend.  I like kelju's opinions as much as I like yours - keeps things interesting


----------



## heavyiron (Mar 15, 2013)

I think abortion is basically legalized murder. Its pathetic what excuses people can come up with to kill a defensless little one.

I give money to an orphanage every month and have done that for like 15 years. I just started giving money to another one about a year ago so I put my money where my mouth is.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 15, 2013)

heavyiron said:


> I think abortion is basically legalized murder. Its pathetic what excuses people can come up with to kill a defensless little one.
> 
> I give money to an orphanage every month and have done that for like 15 years. I just started giving money to another one about a year ago so I put my money where my mouth is.



How would you enforce laws that force a woman to carry her baby?


----------



## 240PLUS (Mar 15, 2013)

Well exphys.... Lets use Leviticus as our starting point. It worked for the Jews.


----------



## er80sc (Mar 16, 2013)

We could sit around and blame faith for the worlds problems, but when it comes down to it, we've been fighting and bickering long before the Quran, Bible, Torah were around.

We could be apart of that bickering, bicker about the bickering, or just go to the gym and lift. I say lift.

God bless, guys!


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 16, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> How would you enforce laws that force a woman to carry her baby?



the same way those laws are enforced today. Before the child is viable Doctors are allowed to perform abortions. After they are viable we remind them of their Hippocratic oath which states to do no harm. Outside of protecting the life of the mother we prevent doctors from performing these procedures. seems pretty simple.


----------



## Bowden (Mar 16, 2013)

240PLUS said:


> Well exphys.... Lets use Leviticus as our starting point. It worked for the Jews.



Leviticus is a great part of the bible.
Nothing like cannibalism to keep the population numbers under control.

(26:29) "Ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat."


----------



## heavyiron (Mar 16, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> How would you enforce laws that force a woman to carry her baby?


We need to remove the gun show loophole. I mean the birth control loophole millions of whores have used over the last 40 years to dismember their little ones. 

Make killing a healthy baby a crime. Women are such cowards that kill for birth control. Its not just their body. 

Men are even worse cowards for encouraging women to kill their healthy little ones. What a pathetic selfish society we have become. Any man that supports his woman getting an abortion for birth control is the lowest cowardly scum there is.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 16, 2013)

Bowden said:


> Leviticus is a great part of the bible.
> Nothing like cannibalism to keep the population numbers under control.
> 
> (26:29) "Ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat."



Ok, you can quote it. Just like any blind childish fool.  But if you can explain it's meaning in context i'll leave this discussion.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 16, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> Ok, you can quote it. Just like any blind childish fool.  But if you can explain it's meaning in context i'll leave this discussion.



Lol, there are so many instances in which god, who is also Jesus not only ordered the murdering and raping of women and children, but engaged in it himself.  The fact that you would worship something like that is atrocious.  

But it's ok cause Jesus now says murdering is bad.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 16, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> the same way those laws are enforced today. Before the child is viable Doctors are allowed to perform abortions. After they are viable we remind them of their Hippocratic oath which states to do no harm. Outside of protecting the life of the mother we prevent doctors from performing these procedures. seems pretty simple.



Sounds fairly reasonable, except the problems that arise from women seeking abortions at illegal places.  Should we lock these women up to prevent this?


----------



## Bowden (Mar 16, 2013)

bio-chem said:


> Ok, you can quote it. Just like any blind childish fool.  But if you can explain it's meaning in context i'll leave this discussion.



Intelligent people understand that you cannot explain the meaning of the context of any passage in the Bible as the passages in it are the products of the era of the people that wrote it.
Those people had social norms that are different than people today and those societal norms are reflected in the passages in the Bible as to the people that wrote them.

The context and meaning of any passage in the Bible are also based on the interpretation of the individual that is reading it.
Different sects in Christianity interpret Biblical passages in different ways.
Some sects insist that the Bible is the literal word of God and is written exactly as God spoke it.
That Man should not try to interpret the contextual meaning of it, rather take it at face value exactly as written.

The Bible is one of the most contradictory books ever written.
This is because it was written over thousands of years by multiple individuals who had their own understanding of what the contextual meaning was of the passages in the preceding versions that they based their 'version updates' on.


----------



## theCaptn' (Mar 16, 2013)

^eloquently said


----------



## LAM (Mar 17, 2013)

Bowden said:


> Intelligent people understand that you cannot explain the meaning of the context of any passage in the Bible as the passages in it are the products of the era of the people that wrote it.
> Those people had social norms that are different than people today and those societal norms are reflected in the passages in the Bible as to the people that wrote them.
> 
> The context and meaning of any passage in the Bible are also based on the interpretation of the individual that is reading it.
> ...



it's nice to see that some people understand general semantics and the inherent problem with all language especially that of the written word.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 17, 2013)

Bowden said:


> Intelligent people understand that you cannot explain the meaning of the context of any passage in the Bible as the passages in it are the products of the era of the people that wrote it.
> Those people had social norms that are different than people today and those societal norms are reflected in the passages in the Bible as to the people that wrote them.
> 
> The context and meaning of any passage in the Bible are also based on the interpretation of the individual that is reading it.
> ...



Basically, it's a worthless book written by men w their own agendas; it contradicts itself, and it has nothing to do w god except that it reveals that he is an evil, raping, murdering, jealous psychopath who is also his son and the Holy Spirit.


----------



## troubador (Mar 17, 2013)

It's pretty straightforward, piss god off and he'll hand down some freaky punishments. 



> [SUP]27 [/SUP]And if ye will not for all this hearken unto me, but walk contrary unto me;[SUP]28 [/SUP]Then I will walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins.
> [SUP]29 [/SUP]And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.
> [SUP]30 [/SUP]And I will destroy your high places, and cut down your images, and cast your carcases upon the carcases of your idols, and my soul shall abhor you.



This is one stupid self-indulgent thread.


----------



## 240PLUS (Mar 18, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> Basically, it's a worthless book written by men w their own agendas; it contradicts itself, and it has nothing to do w god except that it reveals that he is an evil, raping, murdering, jealous psychopath who is also his son and the Holy Spirit.



Oh I know, Darwin's "origins of species" was a killer read. Lol!!


----------



## LAM (Mar 18, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> Basically, it's a worthless book written by men w their own agendas; it contradicts itself, and it has nothing to do w god except that it reveals that he is an evil, raping, murdering, jealous psychopath who is also his son and the Holy Spirit.



and ultimately it will always be nothing more than a book written by men.  men who are misogynous that over the century's have lied, murdered and admitted to back-dating texts.  a real trustworthy bunch


----------



## LAM (Mar 18, 2013)

and they also have no problems protecting homosexual pedophiles from criminal prosecution....


----------



## maniclion (Mar 18, 2013)

er80sc said:


> We could sit around and blame faith for the worlds problems, but when it comes down to it, we've been fighting and bickering long before the Quran, Bible, Torah were around.
> 
> We could be apart of that bickering, bicker about the bickering, or just go to the gym and lift. I say lift.
> 
> God bless, guys!



See absolute drivel, the Bible was supposedly started when God created Adam and Eve and they started passing the "Word of God" to their children, so how could we have been bickering long before we were supposed to even exist?  

I love abstract thought for art, but abstract reality just don't jibe with me...


----------



## LAM (Mar 18, 2013)

maniclion said:


> See absolute drivel, the Bible was supposedly started when God created Adam and Eve and they started passing the "Word of God" to their children, so how could we have been bickering long before we were supposed to even exist?
> 
> I love abstract thought for art, but abstract reality just don't jibe with me...


 
haven't you heard?  the earth is only 6,000 years old.  LMAO!


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 18, 2013)

240PLUS said:


> Oh I know, Darwin's "origins of species" was a killer read. Lol!!



I liked it actually.  But then again I like intelligent books, not fairy tales about a murdering god that rapes and kills children.


----------



## 240PLUS (Mar 18, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> I liked it actually.  But then again I like intelligent books, not fairy tales about a murdering god that rapes and kills children.



......Then don't phuck with him/her


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 18, 2013)

240PLUS said:


> ......Then don't phuck with him/her



I'm sure Darwin could kick his ass.  The bible says god is gay.


----------



## 240PLUS (Mar 18, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> I liked it actually.  But then again I like intelligent books, not fairy tales about a murdering god that rapes and kills children.



Bad hypothesis though and ill supported. How do you explain the fact the sudden evolution of humans with large brains. Where is this "missing link." Oh they found an ape that supposedly is the link between sapiens and neanderthal. What a joke. Evolution takes millions of years (supposedly) but yet us humans just popped up out of nowhere. Darwin was a drunk and lost his mind but needed to finish his book to please the science crowd. He had a great agenda though, problem is its made up.


----------



## 240PLUS (Mar 18, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> I'm sure Darwin could kick his ass.  The bible says god is gay.



Hey if he's gay then great. Darwin liked to dual stroke off his followers. LOL!!! Hey its all good exphys88, just creating conversation.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 18, 2013)

240PLUS said:


> Bad hypothesis though and ill supported. How do you explain the fact the sudden evolution of humans with large brains. Where is this "missing link." Oh they found an ape that supposedly is the link between sapiens and neanderthal. What a joke. Evolution takes millions of years (supposedly) but yet us humans just popped up out of nowhere. Darwin was a drunk and lost his mind but needed to finish his book to please the science crowd. He had a great agenda though, problem is its made up.



Lol, the only ones that think there's a missing link are retarded creationists.

Hint: read any biology, paleontology, geology, zoology, or anthropology book for the answers you seek.  Every biological science, and nearly every scientist in every civilized nation is in agreement that evolution is a fact.  Oh, and the Vatican as well. 

If you're having problems, just start off w a 6th grade biology text lol.


----------



## LAM (Mar 18, 2013)

240PLUS said:


> Bad hypothesis though and ill supported. How do you explain the fact the sudden evolution of humans with large brains.



changes in the diet starting with more omega fatty acids.  it's one of the main reasons why asians appear to be more intelligent than the rest of the world have higher mean IQ's, etc. but it mostly comes down to the diet and of course different values and standards in education.


----------



## Little Wing (Mar 18, 2013)

Janis Joplin - Mercedes Benz - YouTube


----------



## maniclion (Mar 18, 2013)

240PLUS said:


> Bad hypothesis though and ill supported. How do you explain the fact the sudden evolution of humans with large brains. Where is this "missing link." Oh they found an ape that supposedly is the link between sapiens and neanderthal. What a joke. Evolution takes millions of years (supposedly) but yet us humans just popped up out of nowhere. Darwin was a drunk and lost his mind but needed to finish his book to please the science crowd. He had a great agenda though, problem is its made up.



The missing link is fire, the instant we learned to create fire and cook food we freed up time spent foraging and hunting because meat could be preserved by cooking it.  We could also venture to colder climates where we had to spend winters huddled with nothing but our minds...  Great leaps were made then.  

I only see religion as an anchor holding us back from evolving higher.  Take away the threats of eternal damnation, that seed of fear planted in the mind and most religions would get as much lip service as Snow White and the 12 dwarves or was it disciples can't recall with all this book learnin' I keep myself busy with...if Darwin and Einstein were here today they would attest, for it was the greatest hindrance for them both to continue on with the inspired findings they first saw....Had Albert let go of his notions of God he and Tagore may have dug a bit deeper into the truth of it all...

I do hope for a higher conscious, but I think it might be us as a collective conscious, the universal mind.  Waves we are unaware of at present that connect us subconsciously just might be  real.  Who knows but the brilliance of science is we can look for it.  It may be a weaker, but more important force than gravity.


----------



## FUZO (Mar 19, 2013)

This is one stupid self-indulgent thread.[/QUOTE]


Just look who started it


----------



## IronAddict (Mar 19, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> Lol, the only ones that think there's a missing link are retarded creationists.
> 
> Hint: read any biology, paleontology, geology, zoology, or anthropology book for the answers you seek.  Every biological science, and nearly every scientist in every civilized nation is in agreement that evolution is a fact.  Oh, and the Vatican as well.
> 
> If you're having problems, just start off w a 6th grade biology text lol.




There's the prob right there, ex. The sciences don't jive with this crowd. science is the work of an idle mind, and you know idle minds are the devils playground. lol


----------



## troubador (Mar 19, 2013)




----------



## 240PLUS (Mar 19, 2013)

troubador said:


>



Hilarious


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 19, 2013)

FUZO said:


> This is one stupid self-indulgent thread.




Just look who started it[/QUOTE]

I wouldn't expect you to be smart enough to understand evolution, you think that squirting coffee up your ass is fun and cures cancer.


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 19, 2013)

FUZO said:


> This is one stupid self-indulgent thread.




Just look who started it[/QUOTE]

Does your wife know that you complain about your sex life here?  Kinda embarrassing for her, don't ya think?

http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/showthread.php?t=149687


----------



## FUZO (Mar 19, 2013)

Atleast I have a wife of 22 years and children and theres no complaining you just dont know how to read a thread correctly


----------



## exphys88 (Mar 19, 2013)

FUZO said:


> Atleast I have a wife of 22 years and children and theres no complaining you just dont know how to read a thread correctly



I have a wife of 13 years. What's your point?


----------

