God's will. Not mine. Rape is "God' s will" but homosexuality is my "choice." Talk about making shit up as you go along,. I know an autistic kid by the name of "God's Will". No joke. That's his legit name. He's actually very aggressive and will attack people for no reason Rape David lauterstei homosexuality
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (184)
[ 184 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
User avatar #37 - orangepikmin
Reply +117 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
I know an autistic kid by the name of "God's Will". No joke. That's his legit name. He's actually very aggressive and will attack people for no reason at all.


...





I laugh at everyone who has been attacked by God's Will.
#64 to #37 - bokkos
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Oh dear god it's too late for this
Oh dear god it's too late for this
User avatar #174 to #37 - slyve
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
I'm kinda wondering what kind of message his parents tried to send with that.

"Honey, our child was born with a mental disability..."
"Oh, let's call him "Gods Will, I'm sure he'll fit right in with the rest of those people!"
#55 to #37 - PuMan
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
I just got the biggest grin on my face :D
#71 - rrenierr
Reply +56 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
>rape the pope
>it's gods will, so he's not allowed to resist
>you're having sex with the pope
>gay sex
>pope is now gay
>pope gets hated by every christian for being gay
>he tells everyone god said being gay is OK
>homosexuality is not a problem anymore
>???
>profit?
#73 to #71 - RequieminMortis
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#160 to #71 - jimbobji
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
User avatar #74 to #71 - RequieminMortis
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Brilliant idea, except for one fatal flaw- only Catholics actually give a **** about what the Pope says.

So half the Christian population would still call homosexuality a sin.
User avatar #75 to #74 - vladhellsing
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
More than half, actually. There are over 30,000 different denominations of Christianity - some consider homosexuality a sin, some don't.
User avatar #78 to #75 - Ruspanic
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
There may be lots of denominations, but over half of all Christians are Catholic.
User avatar #79 to #78 - vladhellsing
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
But I said not all of the other half consider homosexuality a sin/abomination, so my point still stands.

Perhaps I should've said "less than half".
#137 to #74 - finni
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Implying that half of those Christians are against homosexuality. And don't forget about the non-Religious people who are against gay marriage. Don't believe they exist? Go to Finland
Implying that half of those Christians are against homosexuality. And don't forget about the non-Religious people who are against gay marriage. Don't believe they exist? Go to Finland
#196 to #137 - RequieminMortis
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
> implying that there's a possibility that the Christians who aren't anti-gay are anything more than a very small minority

And any non-religious person who is against homosexuality is a ******* moron who should never be taken seriously on anything, ever, because the only real excuse (poor one that it is) for being a homophobe is "-insert religious text her- says it's wrong".
#202 to #196 - finni
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
53 Percent of all Americans are Pro gay marriage. Most of them are Christians. Many Christians, and certainly in Europe, there are many who support gay marriage.

And if you're Conservative in values, that might mean that you think that marriage should be between a man and a woman cause that's natural.
#5 - raccination
Reply +53 123456789123345869
(10/27/2012) [-]
Its my choice if i want to rape someone
#47 to #5 - friendlysniff
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
User avatar #95 to #5 - turboderp
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
No it's god's will, therefore you are excused.
#12 - johnshepherd
Reply -37 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
No, the baby that is born from rape is God's will. That doesn't change the fact that rape is wrong.
#13 to #12 - johnshepherd
Reply -11 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Also, don't equate the two, rape involves violation of another person, homosexuality is still gravely wrong, but not quite on that level.
User avatar #23 to #13 - Rileto
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Ever think you were just stupid for believing everything you've ever been told. God is like Santa Claus for adults, not everybody is intelligent enough to figure out how completely illogical it really is. Btw not normally so blunt about religion but your little homosexuality remark took away all the ***** I give about you.
#26 to #23 - johnshepherd
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Please don't just create straw-men. If you want to have a discussion or debate on the subject, I am quite open to that, I actually enjoy it, but straw-man is a method that tends to remove most, if not all worth from a discussion.
User avatar #29 to #26 - Rileto
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
No debate needed, I quit believing in the ridiculous stories of the bible at the same time where I quit believing in all the other ridiculous things I've ever been told. I'm decided and I'm saying that theres no more reason for me to believe in flying people with wings and halos that report to some almighty being then there is to believe in flying reindeer or a fat costumed man with infinite presents.
#198 to #29 - johnshepherd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
So, in summary you make a straw man, without considering the true merits of an argument or belief and call other people stupid if they disagree even though you don't provide reasons that your belief is better?
User avatar #33 to #29 - patrickmiller
Reply -7 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
You know God is actually quite logical because no matter how hard man tries we can ever explain everything. God is the simplest solution to our hardest questions like where did everything come from, and in science quite often the most simple solution is the correct one.
User avatar #41 to #33 - shaneac
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
The way you described god made it seem like you use him as a lazy way to explain the unknown. "I don't know, therefore, god did it."
User avatar #61 to #33 - dirigiblequixote
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Google "God of the gaps" for proof as to why you're an imbecile.
#36 to #33 - anon id: 7d584efc
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
^ master troll right up here. i mad
WHEN THE **** HAS SCIENCE EVER USED THE SIMPLEST SOLUTION??? SERIOUSLY? GIVE ME ONE ******* TIME! religion is always the one that doesnt think and pops out the simplest most illogical solutions like: "its gods will" or "because the bible says so." where as science says things like string theory, or physics. saying "god is logical because i cant ******* think of something else" is without question THE WORST ARGUMENT EVER
User avatar #14 to #13 - godshandshake [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
lolok
User avatar #17 to #12 - TARDIS
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
But the baby is a product of rape, thus if the baby is God's will then the action that made it must also be.
#18 to #17 - johnshepherd
Reply -8 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Not quite. God can make good come from evil, but He never makes the evil happen.
User avatar #19 to #18 - TARDIS
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
If God created everything,
and if evil exists,
then God creaded evil.
#28 to #19 - heartlessrobot
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
This image has expired
TARDIS you are drunk. Talking about god and ****.
User avatar #27 to #19 - commontroll
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
God created what He created, but He made a creation that can create. He can bring light from the dark, but doesn't make the dark. He made light, but He didn't make the dark, just separated the two.
User avatar #39 to #27 - shaneac
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
If god didn't make the dark, who did?
User avatar #46 to #39 - commontroll
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Dark is simply the lack of light. So no light, means there's only darkness. Then again, does darkness exist if light has never existed?
User avatar #98 to #46 - turboderp
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Light doesn't exist. SInce it's a line for how dark something can get, but it can allways get brighter, light is just less dark.
User avatar #40 to #27 - shaneac
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
And since whoever created the dark must've existed before god created anything, does that make them as powerful, or more powerful, than god?
#42 to #40 - captnpl
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Dark doesn't exist, it is the absence of light.
User avatar #44 to #42 - shaneac
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
And technically light is the absence of dark
#45 to #44 - captnpl
Reply +7 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
No. Light can be created, measured, and manipulated.
#97 to #45 - turboderp
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#21 to #19 - johnshepherd
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Not correct. God did indeed create us, and we have free will, but God is not responsible for what men do. That'd be like saying that a man's great grandfather should be blamed because his great grandson did something wrong. Furthermore, God did create everything, but evil is the absence of goodness, not the presence of something else, and is thus not "created," but rather, is the result of destruction.
User avatar #54 to #21 - themastermorris
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
So why are we still being punished for Adam and Eve ******* up if we make our own mistakes
User avatar #102 to #21 - mrsockz
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
In the bible it says god created us in his image correct? Then people who are evil are also created in his image correct? Therefore god is both good and evil, so evil is not the absence of good they exists side by side and one cannot exist without the other. Furthermore it never says god gave the angels free will and if god created everything he created them as well so that means god created Lucifer to be "evil" to begin with. So if there was no god there would be no evil. So the only reason "good" exists is because we have evil.
#194 to #102 - johnshepherd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
It does say He created us in His image, but, that does not mean that he looks like us, it means that he gave us free will, and did not make us slave to our instincts like the animals tend to be. And no, evil does not "need" to exist. God did give the angels free will, He used it once to test them, specifically by drawing them away from full unity with Him, it was then that Lucifer chose to become evil because of pride. And no, good existed before evil, as evil is the absence of good. You cannot compare them to two sides of the same coin, as you seem to be doing, they are more akin to two polar opposites which will never meet, like darkness and light.
#56 to #21 - atheisthero
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Based off of the bible.
User avatar #30 to #21 - TARDIS
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
We could discuss the nature of good and evil for a century and still not come to an answer, so let us return to the issues at hand.

An event requires an action, for an event to be your will, the action must also be your will.
#31 to #30 - johnshepherd
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
True, however, for somebody to take a bad situation and try to make something good come of it does not make you responsible for the original action, only for trying to make good come of it.
User avatar #53 to #21 - roninpenguin
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
So you are saying that Man is more powerful than God because we can change his plan with our free will. Or if God did not create evil then Man is more powerful because he changed Gods plan and created evil with our free will. Or God just does not have a plan that way the randomness of our free will does nothing to it.

Either way, the child born of Rape is not a gift, it is just another way to torture the poor woman who is raped. The worst part is 31 states have laws that if the Rapist decides that he wants to have parental rights then the court is obligated to give them to him.
User avatar #20 to #12 - blashyrkh
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
You're either a terrible troll or a ******* idiot.
User avatar #65 to #12 - THISISNOTFUNNY
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
why is this thumbed down the same Us senator who said that "rape is God's will" also made the same comment as stated by johnsheperd.
#66 to #12 - bokkos
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
That awkward moment when someone you know intimately gets raped, and you have to reevaluate your entire world view.

I won't even apologize for doing it.
#58 to #12 - darkjustifier
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
I don't know what you're trying to say.
#63 to #12 - amandatoddd **User deleted account**
+2 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #35 to #12 - illegalartist
Reply +20 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
never seen anyone so dedicated to his stupidity.
User avatar #50 to #35 - fluffybunnyyellow
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Logged in just to thumb you up.
User avatar #195 to #50 - illegalartist
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
hahahahaha thanks man!
User avatar #69 - Skrufymunky
Reply +13 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
who the **** said rape is god's will? Any religious person knows that's complete ****. We all have free will. Raping someone just makes you an asshole...
User avatar #76 to #69 - vladhellsing
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Actually according to neuroscientists (and many philosophers & physicists before them) we don't have free will - it's just an illusion.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCofmZlC72g
User avatar #83 to #76 - vladhellsing
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
There's two Libertarians here, I see.
User avatar #86 to #83 - Ruspanic
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Oh wow, you can determine people's political ideologies by the fact that they thumbed you down. Brilliant.
User avatar #88 to #86 - vladhellsing
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Political? No, philosophical.

On the subject of Free Will there are two competing ideologies; Determinists and Libertarians, the former believing that everything is pre-determined (supported by physics & neuroscience) and the latter believing the contrary. There are also two in-betweeny positions (Compatibilists and Soft Deterinists) but those are the two 'ends of the scale', as it were.
User avatar #92 to #88 - Ruspanic
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Oh, that kind of libertarian.

There's also agnostics, you know. And apathetic agnostics, like me. Why does it matter whether or not we have free will? If we do, then we always have and nothing changes. If we don't, life goes on in the same way.

Look, I understand the determinist argument. All decisions result from the culmination of genetics (nature), experience (nurture) and circumstance, which means that regardless of how much control we think we have over our choices, ultimately because of what the past had made us we cannot make decisions any differently than we do. Or, put another way, all causal factors are in the past and thus unchangeable, therefore the future is inevitable and likewise unchangeable.
Or you could be a biological reductionist (I imagine that's where neuroscience comes in) and point to the fact that all thoughts are caused by chemical reactions in response to stimuli, and all human functions and behavior are centered in various parts of the physical brain.

It doesn't matter. The way I see it, whether free will exists depends on how you look at it. If you reduce everything to a series of physical and chemical chain reactions, then the concept of "free" will becomes meaningless. Or if you begin with the concept of free will, then all of determinism's causal factors are influences upon that will, and neuroscience merely explains the decision-making process on a microscopic level, which is of little practical use.

Because finding the objective "truth", if it exists, is practically impossible and useless, our beliefs on the matter should depend on the benefits they bring.
The beliefs we hold are themselves influences on our behavior. And I think as a society and as individuals we should maintain the belief in free will, because it helps preserve in our minds our drive for progress, our sense of personal responsibility, and our value for liberty.
User avatar #100 to #92 - vladhellsing
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Although there are those of us who care whether or not our beliefs are true and not just how they make us feel. I can believe that I can fly but if I threw myself off a building in the hopes of soaring to safety I'd just be laughed at.

That's not to say we shouldn't hold people responsible for their actions, because reward & retribution actually work. But to say that we should maintain the idea of free will simply because it makes people feel good and gives them a sense of liberty and purpose is nonsense; it's the same as clinging to a notion of God because without it our lives are meaningless, which is evidently not true.

Anyway, I only mentioned free will because I'm supposed to be writing two essays about it (as well as preparing a lesson on how we can use sniping games to subliminally facilitate the teaching of maths) and I keep getting distracted. I have no choice!
User avatar #199 to #100 - Ruspanic
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
My point was that in this case there is literally no way to know the truth, and that it's entirely possible an objective truth doesn't exist. It's like the chicken-and-egg conundrum. Chickens and eggs both exist, and chickens come from eggs and vice-versa, but is it possible to determine which one came first, and does it matter at all?
Likewise, decisions are based on an infinite number of outside factors, but does that mean free will doesn't exist, or is that just what we call free will?
The objective truth is indeterminable and more research will not bring us closer to it. The only thing we can affect is what we believe and how we react to it.

I will rephrase my point about benefits. A society that collectively believes in determinism runs the risk of letting crime go unpunished, allowing governments to oppress the populace, or losing all motivation for technological and societal progress. People must be treated as if they are living, thinking, and independent beings with rights, not as mere gears in the grand clockwork of the universe.

"There are those of us who care whether or not our beliefs are true."
If you care so much about the truth, perhaps you find it before you form a belief. If the truth is indeterminable one way or the other, there is no reason to take a stance on it.

(I've also left out the possibility that there is true randomness in the universe, which has not been definitively proven.)
User avatar #208 to #199 - vladhellsing
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/29/2012) [-]
Actually we know eggs came first: chickens - and indeed all birds - evolved from reptiles, which have been laying eggs for millions of years. And we can't affect our own beliefs or preferences. When did you decide to love chocolate? Or a particular genre of music, or a particular colour, or a particular time of the year. When did you choose to fall in love with someone? These are about as free a choice as you're ever going to make yet you can't trace them to ant conscious process. You don't even know what your next thought will be any more than you know how this sentence is going to end banana-flavoured potato chips. Now here's something that will bake your noodle: you know what bananas are, you know what potato chips are, you know that they come in many flavours and you know that banana flavoured things exist. The question is: were you free to think of banana-flavoured potato chips if I hadn't made that thought occur to you?

Does the fact that you didn't choose to love a specific genre of music make it any less valuable to you? Are you going to start hating jazz now (assuming you like jazz) simply because you didn't choose to enjoy it? Of course not, it makes no difference. You are psychologically pre-determined to like jazz and the only thing that's going to change that is if you undergo some sort of brain damage that affects your personality. That's not to say we can't change ourselves; some of us strive to become better mannered, better educated and more physically fit people. But when and/or why did we choose to make that effort? Why are we sometimes more motivated to go out for a run but other times too lazy and just feel like watching TV on the couch? Can we choose to be motivated or passionate about something? Try that now. Try becoming an avid fan of something you're not interested in. See how much you can lie to yourself.

Like I said before, lacking a belief in free will doesn't relinquish us of responsibility or make life less valuable. cont.
User avatar #209 to #208 - vladhellsing
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/29/2012) [-]
cont. If anything it makes us more compassionate beings to know that a mass murderer or serial killer isn't ultimately responsible for his actions or psychopathic state of mind. That doesn't mean we're going to let them roam around willy-nilly; we still have to lock them up for the good of society. But the fact that we can understand his destructive behaviour is the result of prior causes that have affected his mind means we'd be more inclined to help them recover. Say someone has a brain tumour in the specific region that controls behaviour and that's what's causing their murderous impulses. Wouldn't we want to fix that problem?

It also doesn't limit creativity or innovative ideas in the slightest. If we could all choose what to think or create then we'd be doing it non-stop (and some of us are). Nobody knows when the next inspiration will come up, nobody knows when they'll get the next best revolutionary idea - they just occur. On their own. That doesn't make artistic endeavours, technological breakthroughs or extraordinary feats any less incredible or valuable.

Back on the subject of beliefs and truth; you're right, we can't know anything for certain. But the way we get to the truth is by following the evidence, and (as I've hopefully aptly demonstrated) there is evidence to believe that free will is an illusion. I'm a Compatibilist myself; I don't believe that there is absolutely no such thing as free will I just believe it's a question of who's really in control. I just know that, whatever part of us is making decisions, it's not the conscious part that we identify as "ourselves".
User avatar #210 to #209 - Ruspanic
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/29/2012) [-]
The chicken-and-egg conundrum: okay, say it was a chicken egg.

Moving on: Okay, so if you can't literally choose to believe something (which is debatable- if you tell yourself something enough times you may eventually come to genuinely believe it), we can choose how we respond to our beliefs, and which beliefs should influence our actions. I think we should act as if we have free will.

I'm not saying it would be logical to modify our behavior based on whether or not we think we have free will, but I think that would be the likely outcome. For instance, people currently think of the criminal justice system in terms of punishing criminals (retribution, giving them what they deserve), and tend to overlook the societal necessity for criminal justice (deterrence, incapacitation, possibly rehabilitation in order to protect people). If everyone was a determinist, many people would think criminals aren't "really" responsible for their actions and would be tempted not to punish them at all because they don't "deserve" it, which would be a grievous error. I'm not saying we shouldn't consider extenuating circumstances or causal factors, but we still have to assume a conscious decision was made and hold the criminal responsible for it.
Also, many people will assume that if they don't really have control over their lives, there is no purpose in trying to better themselves or their society. They won't necessarily be less creative inherently, but the motivation for creativity and invention will likely decrease because of a sense of powerlessness and meaninglessness.
So insofar as beliefs affect behavior, society and individuals should assume the premise of free will in their daily existence.

"were you free to think of banana-flavoured potato chips if I hadn't made that thought occur to you? "
Yes, because I had the capacity and knowledge to think of that concept, and no, because I didn't. The truth is either nonexistent or not deducible, and in either case irrelevant.
#130 to #100 - anon id: c36918bb
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
I have to interject something here, because I can't idly sit back and watch someone as intelligent as yourself advocate and rationalize that philosophy. Yes, in truth it is simply a philosophy. I'm not saying that there is no scientific background for your claims (however, it is scarce), but to say that it's been "discovered" that we have no free will is total nonsense.

I have read many articles discussing this matter, and I've found that it often boils down to political, religious and/or philosophical agenda. Truly, it does. You see, there's a lot of research suggesting that the deterministic universe is impossible as well. Specifically, there is one field in physics that absolutely discredits determinism, namely quantum physics. The very nature of quantum physics is completely random; there is no pattern or system. If the very dynamics of the universe are non-deterministic, why would our lives be?

If one thing is certain about our existence, it's that the cosmos and us are undeniably intertwined. So if the cosmos adheres to a system that is the very opposite of deterministic, determinism carries no weight or meaning in our world. This is simply the objective, scientific truth.

There is also a philosophical aspect to determinism I find quite odious. If you are right, and we are all pilgrims on a meaningless voyage, then I must ask you: what is the point? Why should we strive to maintain values like dignity, respect, honor, compassion, loyalty and so on and so forth? There is no reason to love, because if we are supposed to love it will happen all on its own, and even if it doesn't, well then there was nothing we could have done to change that fact. Even if it does happen, it's artificial and fake; a depressing illusion that hints to the existence of a soul. I must say, your mentality beckons me into nihilism and darkness.

Without the idea of free will, we are all just a pathetic waste of protoplasm travelling through time without goals or direction.
User avatar #131 to #130 - goldenglimmer
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
And one more thing: "it's the same as clinging to a notion of God because without it our lives are meaningless, which is evidently not true."

The universe being deterministic, and our lives in fact carrying meaning and virtue, are two mutually exclusive ideas.

Why is it evident? What makes it so obvious that our existence is dignified; that our place in this world is justified and perhaps even, dare I say it, good? Certainly not the notion of determinism, for that only speaks to a nihilistic mentality, and enables the rationale that responsibility is an illusion, and that humanity is a lie.

Anon = me, just so you know you're not debating two people here, hehe :)
User avatar #157 to #131 - vladhellsing
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Did I stutter? I didn't say responsibility doesn't matter or that our lives carry no meaning, in fact quite the opposite. The fact that we have no control over our thoughts doesn't excuse our deeds or relinquish us of responsibility. Before you start speaking of 'humanity' we first have to define what being 'human' entails exactly.
User avatar #142 to #130 - vladhellsing
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
I never said it's been "discovered" that we have no free will, as if it's something new. Determinism has been around for centuries; Martin Luther was a hard determinist himself.

As for the quantum world being random, it's not. It seems random (what with particles popping in & out of existence at an alarming rate, sometimes appearing to be in multiple places simultaneously) but the fact that there is order in the universe and we are able to make predictions in the universe with incredible accuracy shows that the universe isn't random at all. The quantum world just seems random to us because a) our current technology and theories are only just barely scratching the surface of the quantum world and b) perhaps we are just too dumb as a species to figure it out (which is a discussion for another time).

As for determinism taking away meaning to life, I beg to differ. In fact I see it as quite the opposite. If the universe is random as you'd like to think then that would mean there's no purpose to our existence; after all, what's the point of asking "what's the point?" if there is no point to be had? But if the universe is pre-determined that means this is all going somewhere, that there is a point to it all, and I think it would be interesting to find out where.

Why should we strive for dignity, respect, love, creativity, ingenuity, etc? Because we have to; it's in our nature. Does that bother you? Fine, if you don't see a point then just give up. Try just laying in bed all day and see what happens. You can't; eventually you'll feel the urge to get up and do something, and resisting that urge will take more willpower than just going with the flow.

When I say "flow" I don't mean mainstream societal flow, I'm talking about cosmic flow - your own flow. Find your flow and go with it, that's how we discover meaning and make progress. By flowing into the unknown. (sorry if I sound too much like a hippie)
#124 to #83 - shitshitshit
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #72 to #69 - RequieminMortis
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
There's a considerable number of fundamentalist Christians who have said that getting pregnant from rape is "God's will". Not quite the same as saying the act of rape itself is God's will, but it's just as horrible and stupid.
User avatar #1 - supermegasherman
Reply +13 123456789123345869
(10/27/2012) [-]
k
#25 - Rileto
Reply +12 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
User avatar #84 - kingbrowser
Reply -9 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
This fag's all butt-hurt.
User avatar #117 to #84 - thebritishguy
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
butt hurt is just another word for annoyed, you just said "the homosexual is annoyed" which is correct, you just worded it differently
User avatar #90 to #84 - bitchplzzz
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
He sure is when his boyfriend comes along on wednesdays...
User avatar #43 - crazysexyhorse
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
But, what about gay rape?
User avatar #59 to #43 - vladhellsing
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
They cancel each other out.
User avatar #51 to #43 - demandsgayversion
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
Well that's just magical
#115 - thechosentroll
Reply +7 123456789123345869
(10/28/2012) [-]
This image has expired
Did his icecream say "OP"?