Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #11 - captainprincess (03/25/2014) [-]
Hey it's only fair scum of the earth get to see what it feels like to be treated like it right.

I mean if I had my way, personally, I would have any all religious people executed in public.
But that's probably why I'm not in charge of anything.
User avatar #217 to #198 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
forsooth for I am viciously burned
#150 to #11 - BeaverBalls (03/26/2014) [-]
1/10 made me reply
User avatar #218 to #150 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
no you did that to yourself
User avatar #143 to #11 - anonefgthree (03/26/2014) [-]
Had to check to see if this was a troll. Great progressive thinking :^)
User avatar #219 to #143 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
is it? Seems a bit backwards and old fashioned to me
User avatar #256 to #219 - anonefgthree (03/26/2014) [-]
I was being sarcastic since these type of words come from a lot of 'progressive' liberal's mouths
User avatar #257 to #256 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
I have to be honest
I really and truly don't care
#130 to #11 - carefree (03/26/2014) [-]
I love you anyway
User avatar #124 to #11 - toosexyforyou (03/26/2014) [-]
I don't agree with what you said but you're aware that you don't have a popular opinion so carry on then. +1 respect
User avatar #221 to #124 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
I'm aware of many things people think I'm not
#90 to #11 - xxxsonic fanxxx (03/26/2014) [-]
***** you just went full opinion
User avatar #222 to #90 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
I thought this said full onion for a minute
now I feel dumb and hungry
#75 to #11 - xxxsonic fanxxx (03/26/2014) [-]
You are societies cancer
User avatar #223 to #75 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
yeah no
User avatar #225 to #69 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
sad king >:
User avatar #226 to #60 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
no
I hate children
#58 to #11 - xxxsonic fanxxx (03/26/2014) [-]
3edgy5me
User avatar #227 to #58 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
that guy sounds cool man
wish2learnhisways
#53 to #11 - vladstronsy (03/25/2014) [-]
Deny this troll his food boys.
User avatar #228 to #53 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
how's that workin out
User avatar #50 to #11 - cppaulsson (03/25/2014) [-]
extremism is retarded (you suck)
User avatar #229 to #50 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
It's also effective
User avatar #237 to #229 - cppaulsson (03/26/2014) [-]
it's the most ineffective way to progress. it creates more extremism from the opposite side, which leads nowhere. (you still suck)
User avatar #239 to #237 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
It works if you see it through. Let not a single one survive the purge and it's all gone.
User avatar #240 to #239 - cppaulsson (03/26/2014) [-]
well, it didn't go to well for the nazis... it made israel happen. yay. keep on going. you might at least create nations that like war!
User avatar #241 to #240 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
Yeah 'cause they made the mistake of also trying to occupy land. They wanted the whole world and with the way other countries were responding to events, if Germany had simply stayed in Germany and made some kind of effort to exterminate the jews surreptitiously without starting land-wars, they probably would have gone about completely uninterrupted.

Also, just about every nation likes war. It makes sense, most of them were born of it.
User avatar #242 to #241 - cppaulsson (03/26/2014) [-]
the nazis would sooooo have killed the russian and polish jews without invading. yeah. right. smart man.
User avatar #243 to #242 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
Well, no, they probably wouldn't have. Hence their mistake.

Can you logic?
User avatar #244 to #243 - cppaulsson (03/26/2014) [-]
you said everybody, hence EVERYBODY. meaning you know...everybody. meaning not only german jews in this case. how do YOU logic?
User avatar #245 to #244 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
Who everybody?
Are you making **** up now?

I haven't even used the word everybody once
what's with this straw-grasping it's not like it's difficult to oppose me everyone else is getting along just fine
User avatar #246 to #245 - cppaulsson (03/26/2014) [-]
"Let not a single one survive the purge and it's all gone". you are right. you didn't use the WORD everybody. i do think "let not a single one survive" is the same as kill everybody though. please stop being stupid?
User avatar #247 to #246 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
I'd like to but since I've derailed you into being semantic pedant I'm having too much fun with it
User avatar #230 to #47 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
What
WHERE!?
#45 to #11 - AnonymousDonor (03/25/2014) [-]
alright   
fighting very hard to suppress the rustling you're handing out, let's approach this logically   
   
of course i'm not gonna bother pointing out the distinction between truly religious people and hateful narrow-minded 						*****					 who just happen to be part of a religion, since you somehow think getting rid of religion will somehow get rid of dualistic bigotry   
   
so let's think: a religious person, at their core, is just someone who believes in something they have not yet seen. a bit more to it, i know, but bear with me   
let's say you do "have your way" and somehow publicly execute all religious people at once, and taking a great absence from logic lets assume the world cheers you on for it   
   
if religion is so "cancerous", how are you going to prevent it from coming back? just kill everyone who has an idea that hasn't been already proven? kill off every unproven scientist, every mathematician? halt all progress?   
 how is this "completely beneficial for all humanity"?   
   
i am now giving you the chance to logically defend your position
alright
fighting very hard to suppress the rustling you're handing out, let's approach this logically

of course i'm not gonna bother pointing out the distinction between truly religious people and hateful narrow-minded ***** who just happen to be part of a religion, since you somehow think getting rid of religion will somehow get rid of dualistic bigotry

so let's think: a religious person, at their core, is just someone who believes in something they have not yet seen. a bit more to it, i know, but bear with me
let's say you do "have your way" and somehow publicly execute all religious people at once, and taking a great absence from logic lets assume the world cheers you on for it

if religion is so "cancerous", how are you going to prevent it from coming back? just kill everyone who has an idea that hasn't been already proven? kill off every unproven scientist, every mathematician? halt all progress?
how is this "completely beneficial for all humanity"?

i am now giving you the chance to logically defend your position
User avatar #232 to #45 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
Well first off, I don't. It's not a cure-all to everything, it's a cure all to religion specifically. Atleast in my mind it is but I'm no politician or strategist so ofcourse I could easily be mistaken.

Not that I'm going to listen to much of anyone on the internet tell me so because they're just mad at my extreme approach. The reason you shouldn't tell me that just-because-doesn't-mean angle that I get so very tired of is because it makes no difference to me. Eggs and omelets and such.

Quite simply I am convinced and have yet been shown evidence to the contrary that religion as a whole has provided absolutely no benefit to humanity whatsoever and everything it claims responsibility for like morality and good deeds and such is easily one of the most transparent falsehoods it displays.

To think that without a religious preaching mankind would not look after oneanother and would not be able to distinguish a system of "Yes do this" and "No don't do this" is so absurd as to literally call the entire species unfathomably retarded and incapable of thought. It would honestly suggest that we, the human race, cannot look after ourselves and need to be babysat.

Clearly this is not the case, so I look at religion with the distasteful eye of say, for a rough comparison at a stretch, an OC thief or something.

It is however, ontop of it's uselessness, continuing to provide division and hatred and prejudice and segregation and the rejection of actual progress in many scientific fields, opposing that which would bring us leaps and bounds further, in the name of morality or playing god.

neither of these things would be an issue to oppose scientific progress were religion not around, I think.

Can't say for sure but I am convinced of this.
#264 to #232 - AnonymousDonor (03/26/2014) [-]
well first off its not a just-because-doesnt-mean angle. not entirely. the evil i think you're looking for is the cancerous hatred   
it is spread through everything and must be attacked at its source, and since you've already admitted that there are at least a few religious who are innocent (which you don't care about killing), then its source obviously isnt religion   
in other words you kill off religious people (lets assume forever) and they'll just find some other stupid difference to blow out of proportion and fight/hate for   
   
per your next point, there's something you may not yet know about absolutes. first off they dont really exist, but that's another topic. secondly, they only "exist" in blind faith - as someone pointed out before, your vehemence in believing all religion is always wrong is the same as those fundamentalists who believe the earth is 6000yrs old. i.e. it is not the evidence that is lacking, because no matter what you're given, your mind can always rationalize it to your point, correct or not. i will illustrate with 2 examples of religious benefits:   
--early medieval monasteries were the birth of technology. while everyone else farmed with their hands, the christian monks developed ploughs    
--buddhist monk meditation. eventually brought to the US, the clarity of their 'religious' meditation not only centers one's life but lowers stress levels and reduces risk of heart attack   
   
as for your last point of religion harming scientific progress, i would only ask that you attempt to study science yourself. i am a religious scientist, and the first thing i can tell you is that there are a TONS of others exactly like me. indeed, it was even the first Jesuits of Christianity who founded and dominated early science that led here. and not once in my many  years of being in and around the labs has anyone's faith or lack thereof (and there is much diversity) ever gotten in the way. we are all brilliant, understanding, and knowledge-seeking (for different reasons)
well first off its not a just-because-doesnt-mean angle. not entirely. the evil i think you're looking for is the cancerous hatred
it is spread through everything and must be attacked at its source, and since you've already admitted that there are at least a few religious who are innocent (which you don't care about killing), then its source obviously isnt religion
in other words you kill off religious people (lets assume forever) and they'll just find some other stupid difference to blow out of proportion and fight/hate for

per your next point, there's something you may not yet know about absolutes. first off they dont really exist, but that's another topic. secondly, they only "exist" in blind faith - as someone pointed out before, your vehemence in believing all religion is always wrong is the same as those fundamentalists who believe the earth is 6000yrs old. i.e. it is not the evidence that is lacking, because no matter what you're given, your mind can always rationalize it to your point, correct or not. i will illustrate with 2 examples of religious benefits:
--early medieval monasteries were the birth of technology. while everyone else farmed with their hands, the christian monks developed ploughs
--buddhist monk meditation. eventually brought to the US, the clarity of their 'religious' meditation not only centers one's life but lowers stress levels and reduces risk of heart attack

as for your last point of religion harming scientific progress, i would only ask that you attempt to study science yourself. i am a religious scientist, and the first thing i can tell you is that there are a TONS of others exactly like me. indeed, it was even the first Jesuits of Christianity who founded and dominated early science that led here. and not once in my many years of being in and around the labs has anyone's faith or lack thereof (and there is much diversity) ever gotten in the way. we are all brilliant, understanding, and knowledge-seeking (for different reasons)
User avatar #270 to #264 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
perhaps, but I'm not quite convinced of that. I've not seen much evidence to suggest otherwise, really. I would posit moreso that those innocent within the viral folds of religion have simply resisted it's bile through **************** . They still perpetuate a system which continues to infest it's disgust and so no, I would hold no remorse in their casualty. The general collective MIGHT find something else to justify pointless hatred, sure. But considering the current concentration, I'm convinced that the purging of the religious would burn out a good 90+% of them, and they wouldn't have the strength of refuge to build up momentum again.

They might, but I don't see it, personally. It'd be a damn-near fatal blow I'd think. Put it on the edge to where it'd just die out in a few generations.

I'm not interested in being better than them, hell I'm not interested )when this subject is concerned anyway) in even being a good person. Only in doing what I know is good for all mankind.

Yeah, I know what it means to say something like that. I'm not above hypocrisy when it's an objective benefit for all others. If Religion is truly what brought these beneficial things into being, and not simply the actions of those people, spurred on by the various worldly needs, but instead tasked to do these things by their religion or their god, then fine. Their past has some small instances of good.

It's not enough to outweigh the cancer that it is now though. Nowhere near. It has outlived it's use if indeed it ever had any, and there is no use in keeping ahold of it's rotting corpse, as it spread it's plague.

As for science. Firstly, only the religious would appear to be against stem cell research and genetic testing. Those things which could truly advance mankind beyond anything we've ever known. Only the religious seem to oppose teaching children the evolutionary theory.

I mean for ****** sake abortion is still a "hot topic" because of them, and only them.
Or so it seems.
#274 to #270 - AnonymousDonor (03/26/2014) [-]
okay well for starters you more or less dodged my entire point about hatred not rising from religion, instead using more rhetoric to describe your opinion and giving no evidence to the contrary (aside from "resisted its bile through **************** ")
--and then you mention that if 90% were killed it would be enough, as if Hitler's attempt at genocide did not already give strong evidence that that doesn't work

--dunno where your personal sense of morality came from but i never asked and i dont care

you then defend against my argument of religious benefits with "if religion is truly what brought these beneficial things into being" (and it is. in the first case, it was the monk's calling to create technology to better understand 'God's creation' and the second is literally what buddhism is centered on) then it was only back then and now useless
--i will start my counter by adding that i study science for the exact same reason as the monks - while not explicitly stated in my faith's doctrine, i can promise you i wouldnt be scientist without it
--i will now give several examples of modern religious scientists who i can only assume are doing the same - Francois Englert, Arieh Warshel, Michael Levitt, Martin Karlplus ...and these are just from the 2013 Nobel laureates in Physics and Chemistry. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates granted, they are all Jewish, but it's still a religion
on another not, if you killed off all religious people, none of these men would have been born to make the discoveries they did (sure you could argue others would have eventually, but it would have taken longer)

lastly, you argue that only the religious are stifling stem cell/evolution research. in this case, those religious are a very small minority, and killing all religious because of that is completely illogical


i appreciate the fact that you are treating this debate civilly, but i hope you're starting to see the lack of logic and foundation in your arguments
User avatar #278 to #274 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
I've always seen the lack of logic in it's parts sure. I mean if I ever boasted that it was some kind of perfect plan to fix everything then I've got to apologize for doing that 'cause it's not.

But it would damn sure be effective at it's aim, and it would be a damnsight improvement for humanity all the same. And only that.

Nothing of importance would be lost.
#281 to #278 - AnonymousDonor (03/26/2014) [-]
what i meant was there's a lack of logic in those premises as well   
   
not only will it be ineffective at its aim, because religion will return and surmount nonetheless - not only have i given historical evidence toward this end, i also pointed out your inability to define religion at all. thus since we must go with my definition, your action would stifle scientific and human progress more than religion ever could   
--assuming you can think of a defense to that, you still haven't proven or actually given any evidence for how it would actually improve humanity    
   
and i've already demonstrated that without religion we would have lost ALL of the most scientific nobel laureates of the past year. if that isn't "something of importance" then how about ....sigh i'm too tired to keep looking up examples of all the hundreds of successful, useful, and necessary religious people that you are so hellbent on killing   
--to be honest the fact that you would still willingly kill off so many brilliant scientists is itself enough. i can no longer even pretend to respect you   
   
i can only take solace in the 99% likelihood that your opinion will, luckily, never come to light   
   
im tired of arguing with an absolutist blindly following their beliefs   
there's no place for it in real religion, and there's no place for it elsewhere   
i have confirmed that you are the very embodiment of the hatred and ignorance you despise religion for   
and you have exhausted my patience   
   
good day
what i meant was there's a lack of logic in those premises as well

not only will it be ineffective at its aim, because religion will return and surmount nonetheless - not only have i given historical evidence toward this end, i also pointed out your inability to define religion at all. thus since we must go with my definition, your action would stifle scientific and human progress more than religion ever could
--assuming you can think of a defense to that, you still haven't proven or actually given any evidence for how it would actually improve humanity

and i've already demonstrated that without religion we would have lost ALL of the most scientific nobel laureates of the past year. if that isn't "something of importance" then how about ....sigh i'm too tired to keep looking up examples of all the hundreds of successful, useful, and necessary religious people that you are so hellbent on killing
--to be honest the fact that you would still willingly kill off so many brilliant scientists is itself enough. i can no longer even pretend to respect you

i can only take solace in the 99% likelihood that your opinion will, luckily, never come to light

im tired of arguing with an absolutist blindly following their beliefs
there's no place for it in real religion, and there's no place for it elsewhere
i have confirmed that you are the very embodiment of the hatred and ignorance you despise religion for
and you have exhausted my patience

good day
User avatar #284 to #281 - captainprincess (03/27/2014) [-]
well you dropped the pretense of civility awful quick
0
#269 to #264 - seymion has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #39 to #11 - leetabix (03/25/2014) [-]
You know being a terrible person without religion is worse than being a good one with it, im pretty sure with the mindset you have neither side wants you.
User avatar #238 to #39 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
I don't care which side wants me or not and yeah, no
being a good person without religion is the best you can be
User avatar #25 to #11 - gabemczombie (03/25/2014) [-]
That is exactly why you shouldn't be in charge of anything you narrow-minded **** .
User avatar #26 to #25 - captainprincess (03/25/2014) [-]
Oh please

Please get madder
#87 to #26 - hillbillypowpow (03/26/2014) [-]
I just don't understand. I'm not mad or anything, just genuinely confused. You don't like these people for being closed minded, but you're condemning anyone who shares their beliefs even if they don't share the closed mindedness. I'm not trying to insult you, I'm seriously just trying to understand you.
#88 to #87 - hillbillypowpow (03/26/2014) [-]
Unless you're just ******* with us to make us mad. If that's the case, carry on man, it seems like mission accomplished here.
User avatar #213 to #88 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
It's sort of 50/50

I do genuinely feel this way, but making people mad about it is just priceless all the same
User avatar #27 to #26 - gabemczombie (03/25/2014) [-]
Do you feed of negative emotions?
Captainprincess is a ghost
User avatar #214 to #27 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
AAAABOOGABOOGABOOGA
User avatar #251 to #214 - gabemczombie (03/26/2014) [-]
*Gasp*
#14 to #11 - rambomanthree (03/25/2014) [-]
Saying all religious people ought to be shot is like saying all people who like chocolate ice cream instead of vanilla should be shot.

Not all religious people are bad, a lot of them are.. but people can be assholes regardless of race, gender, religious, sexual orientation, height, weight, what they are a fan of..

there are two sides to every story
everyone thinks every battle is always good guys versus bad guys.. black vs white..

But the truth is, every group of people has it's bad apples
its almost always grey vs grey
#216 to #14 - xxxsonic fanxxx (03/26/2014) [-]
"Saying all religious people ought to be shot is like saying all people who like chocolate ice cream instead of vanilla should be shot."

this really isn't true though. I'm pretty sure religious beliefs have more impact on peoples life and choices than chocolate ice cream.
#126 to #14 - thesinful (03/26/2014) [-]
You like chocolate? BURN THE HERETIC!






I'm ****** with ya. Got a coworker who only buys plain vanilla ice cream. Don't know how the **** she can do that.
User avatar #233 to #126 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
Death to the false emperor!
#104 to #14 - jaked (03/26/2014) [-]
Here, you might want to read this before engaging him/her.
User avatar #215 to #104 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
pages are tattered and dog-eared and the type face is too small
0/10 would not read
User avatar #16 to #14 - captainprincess (03/25/2014) [-]
This is not news to me. I would still do it anyway.
It would be entirely worth it to cut out the cancer that is all religion. There would not be many innocent casualties.
#96 to #16 - weeeeeeeeeeee (03/26/2014) [-]
You are so cool and different.
User avatar #211 to #96 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
Cool. Not trying to be but cool.
User avatar #61 to #16 - captainfuckitall (03/26/2014) [-]
You sound like one of those Chinese Communists that walked into Tibet and started slaughtering thousands of pacifist monks/innocent Tibetans, burning hundreds of their ancient temples, destroying priceless works of art, degrading the philosophy and culture that has predominated since the country was nearly formed, and then claim that everyone else is the bad guy.
User avatar #212 to #61 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
yeah I figured I would sound like that
meh
-22
#18 to #16 - rambomanthree Comment deleted by rambomanthree [-]
User avatar #23 to #18 - captainprincess (03/25/2014) [-]
I'd say it makes no difference. Their removal is still completely beneficial for all of humanity. Regardless of wether or not it's the same exact logic they geenerate their cancerous miasma with. There is no other way to stop them and to halt their spreading disease, thank to sink to their level first.

It's an unfortunate truth, and I hate it, but I honestly think it's the only possible way to do it.
#201 to #23 - xxxsonic fanxxx (03/26/2014) [-]
So you believe that everyone with an opinion should be shot because some people with that same opinion are assholes? There are asshole atheist as well, why not shoot that group of people instead?
User avatar #208 to #201 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
Because atheists as a whole are atleast not spreading a cancerous dogma that continues to hold the species down in the mud
#54 to #23 - xxxsonic fanxxx (03/25/2014) [-]
You are truly one of the biggest morons I've ever had the misfortune of seeing on this site, if you actually believe this that most religious people are bad? "There would not be many innocent casualties"? I'm not even going to begin to explain how wrong you are with that statement. I'm just going to let you fester in your own extreme stupidity. The only people who agree with you on this are other idiotic atheism extremists. Obviously, I'm not going to generalize the entire group of atheists, as I have a few atheist friends who are actually tolerant.
User avatar #209 to #54 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
Then you've not met many lol
#31 to #23 - seymion (03/25/2014) [-]
Religion is the base of our morality cutting it out know would still leave a system formed by religion. What would you do about whatever religion left behind?
User avatar #210 to #31 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
It isn't
It thinks it is but it isn't
#253 to #210 - seymion (03/26/2014) [-]
Values changed when religions changed, here hasn't been an instance where a culture hasn't changed when switching religions and if nothing else our morals are shaped by our culture.
User avatar #254 to #253 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
And what a grand ******* job they're doing.
#265 to #254 - seymion (03/26/2014) [-]
You know what, seeing as I like my life it does seem like a decent job.
User avatar #267 to #265 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
So you credit your life to religion do you?
Aight cool

I don't
I credit mine to me mostly
#268 to #267 - seymion (03/26/2014) [-]
I don't credit my life to religion, I credit my life to the world around and my own actions, but you have to be pretty thick to believe that the world around hasn't been shaped by religion.
User avatar #271 to #268 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
It has indeed been shaped.

It's been dented and cut, bearing bruises and festering wounds that continue to be torn open by the god-fearing people of the world not content with allowing us to make any actual social progress.

I mean for ****** sake who on this earth but the ass-backwards religious still think homosexuality is a problem, a deviation to be opposed. Who but they with demands to decide for others beyond themselves still demand that every fetus must be carried to term, MUST be born and forced into a life where it is not wanted, or cannot be adequately cared for.

There has been no opposition to these trivial, stupid matters that ought to be decided years ago, and were by anyone with the power of thought, than they who cry to the world that their invisible wanker sky man will be upset should anyone (but for his chosen holy warriors ofcourse) violate the sanctity of life.

Life itself is now a threat to our species' survival. There are too many people, people who live and die in abject suffering simply because they are too many in such a small space.

And we're supposed to think that life is some sacred jewel to be protected at all costs?

The church itself wades in OCEANS of bloodshed from it's not-eve-very-distant past, boasting about the sanctity of life as it tramples it's opponents to death.

Oh for certain, our culture has been shaped by religion. But I see no benefit having come from it.
#272 to #271 - seymion (03/26/2014) [-]
Literally none of the issues you describe are something that all religious people are a part of, hell I know a good sized blob of non-religious people who are still against abortion and stem-cell research, GM-crops.

Religion might be waist deep in blood, but so are nations and ideologies I still wouldn't demand the execution of every person that associates with it.
User avatar #273 to #272 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
I doubt those people exist, personally. And if they do then in too small a number to matter.

The difference being that only the religious chant about life being some sacred, protected commodity, when they themselves bathe in the blood of the foes. Their angle of opposition is one they themselves are not aligned to.
#275 to #273 - seymion (03/26/2014) [-]
They do unfortunately at ******* med school at that.

But you know what I'll agree with your idea on another basis, Scandinavia, where I live, is among the least religious places in the world, so by killing of religious people easily a good half of the worlds population maybe even a full three quarters, the world would be open for the taking for me and my northern European brethren.
User avatar #276 to #275 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
nordic pride amirite
perkele
#277 to #276 - seymion (03/26/2014) [-]
Wouldn't your plan kill more or less all of Africa and by far the most of south east Asia?
User avatar #279 to #277 - captainprincess (03/26/2014) [-]
********** maybe?
depends on who's willing to die for a religion really.

Actually that's kind of a core factor when considering who exactly would be killed if I were ever to have this power.
Probably should have mentioned that much earlier.
#280 to #279 - seymion (03/26/2014) [-]
Jesus Christ mention that earlier, this suddenly makes you a million time less of a psycho than someone arguing for the cleansing of billions of people.
User avatar #283 to #280 - captainprincess (03/27/2014) [-]
idunno I thought it was kind of implied
User avatar #13 to #12 - captainprincess (03/25/2014) [-]
He can if he wants who am I to stop him
User avatar #15 to #13 - ragingspacepanda (03/25/2014) [-]
it is just too extreme to have religious people executed for their beliefs... this is not the 1800's
User avatar #17 to #15 - captainprincess (03/25/2014) [-]
That's probably why I'm not in a position where I could have it done.
 Friends (0)