Upload
Login or register

ichbinlecher

Last status update:
-
Date Signed Up:8/14/2011
Last Login:4/03/2016
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Content Thumbs: 2141 total,  2329 ,  188
Comment Thumbs: 1221 total,  1465 ,  244
Content Level Progress: 40% (40/100)
Level 121 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry → Level 122 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry
Comment Level Progress: 24% (24/100)
Level 212 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 213 Comments: Comedic Genius
Subscribers:0
Content Views:44075
Times Content Favorited:72 times
Total Comments Made:627
FJ Points:3364

latest user's comments

#83 - *you're, my apologies. 05/02/2013 on Oh Lawd Almighty 0
#78 - Well, your actually debating two opposing philosophical school…  [+] (3 new replies) 05/02/2013 on Oh Lawd Almighty +3
#125 - anon (05/02/2013) [-]
Lol.............

I've been on both sides of this. I was a Christian for most of my life. I took the bullshit, I ate the bullshit, I preached the bullshit. Then I finally realized it was bullshit. I'm not actually debating anything. Mostly just pointing out bullshit. I never claimed anything I said as "the right way". I basically said you're wrong. That's it.

You assume I'm not "open-minded" because I assume certain givens.... Awesome. Everything we know and say about "God" is written in an old book that is a contradiction with binding around it.

I'm not a "meta-thinker" because I've come to a conclusion over the years that religion is bullshit? I was told I was a "meta-thinker" for dropping religion in the first place....

Changing your beliefs is hard, especially when eternal damnation is in the consequences. But that's in your beliefs too. You don't have to burn in hell, but if you believe hard enough, you just might.
#231 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
It's not that I don't think you are open minded. In fact, I wouldn't desire that really - I am not either - my position won't be swayed here. But I am willing at all times to assume for sake of argument that my position is wrong, or to argue from another person's position. I think it is profitable to be able to do this, and to be willing to, since it lets you not dismiss any truth that may be hidden away in garbage.
#83 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
*you're, my apologies.
#65 - If I believed it 100%? Yes, of course. That is the thing, we…  [+] (5 new replies) 05/02/2013 on Oh Lawd Almighty +5
#71 - anon (05/02/2013) [-]
You don't like my usage of schizophrenia and fairy tales?

Fine... Auditory hallucination and fictional stories.

I can't talk on even/logical grounds if I feel I'm debating fact with fiction.
#78 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
Well, your actually debating two opposing philosophical schools. That is probably the first step to figuring out how to approach things. I know when I used to think that my way was provable fact, I had a hard time understanding why people were so dense they couldn't get it. It was only once I realized that I was standing on a slew of suppositions that I never bothered to question that I found out why people disagreed with me. We are starting with different givens, but when you accept them as fact you limit your ability to think the meta thoughts and understand the real point of contention and to even see what your "opponent" is saying.
#125 - anon (05/02/2013) [-]
Lol.............

I've been on both sides of this. I was a Christian for most of my life. I took the bullshit, I ate the bullshit, I preached the bullshit. Then I finally realized it was bullshit. I'm not actually debating anything. Mostly just pointing out bullshit. I never claimed anything I said as "the right way". I basically said you're wrong. That's it.

You assume I'm not "open-minded" because I assume certain givens.... Awesome. Everything we know and say about "God" is written in an old book that is a contradiction with binding around it.

I'm not a "meta-thinker" because I've come to a conclusion over the years that religion is bullshit? I was told I was a "meta-thinker" for dropping religion in the first place....

Changing your beliefs is hard, especially when eternal damnation is in the consequences. But that's in your beliefs too. You don't have to burn in hell, but if you believe hard enough, you just might.
#231 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
It's not that I don't think you are open minded. In fact, I wouldn't desire that really - I am not either - my position won't be swayed here. But I am willing at all times to assume for sake of argument that my position is wrong, or to argue from another person's position. I think it is profitable to be able to do this, and to be willing to, since it lets you not dismiss any truth that may be hidden away in garbage.
#83 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
*you're, my apologies.
#54 - I would like to draw attention to the word possible. WBC is a…  [+] (7 new replies) 05/02/2013 on Oh Lawd Almighty +6
#59 - anon (05/02/2013) [-]
Yes, of course.

However, if you believed 100% that a random person will be captured by Jabba the Hutt and cast into the Sarlacc pit for their crimes, would you warn them? Or would you keep your schizophrenic fairy tales to yourself?
#65 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
If I believed it 100%? Yes, of course. That is the thing, we are postulating right now in the hypothetical realm of "Pretend you believed x." There is precisely one action that can be taken in these scenarios if one wants to take the loving route.

Now, if I were to hate you for not believing that Jabba the Hut was going to come after you - then I wasn't truly acting out of love and compassion, was I?

Also, I would like to point out the systematic use of "poisoning the well" that you are using. Rather than even bother trying to talk on even grounds, you call my original post BS and then compare religion to schizophrenia and fairy tales. Why the fear of honest discussion with no mudslinging - it's not like this is a political race or anything.
#71 - anon (05/02/2013) [-]
You don't like my usage of schizophrenia and fairy tales?

Fine... Auditory hallucination and fictional stories.

I can't talk on even/logical grounds if I feel I'm debating fact with fiction.
#78 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
Well, your actually debating two opposing philosophical schools. That is probably the first step to figuring out how to approach things. I know when I used to think that my way was provable fact, I had a hard time understanding why people were so dense they couldn't get it. It was only once I realized that I was standing on a slew of suppositions that I never bothered to question that I found out why people disagreed with me. We are starting with different givens, but when you accept them as fact you limit your ability to think the meta thoughts and understand the real point of contention and to even see what your "opponent" is saying.
#125 - anon (05/02/2013) [-]
Lol.............

I've been on both sides of this. I was a Christian for most of my life. I took the bullshit, I ate the bullshit, I preached the bullshit. Then I finally realized it was bullshit. I'm not actually debating anything. Mostly just pointing out bullshit. I never claimed anything I said as "the right way". I basically said you're wrong. That's it.

You assume I'm not "open-minded" because I assume certain givens.... Awesome. Everything we know and say about "God" is written in an old book that is a contradiction with binding around it.

I'm not a "meta-thinker" because I've come to a conclusion over the years that religion is bullshit? I was told I was a "meta-thinker" for dropping religion in the first place....

Changing your beliefs is hard, especially when eternal damnation is in the consequences. But that's in your beliefs too. You don't have to burn in hell, but if you believe hard enough, you just might.
#231 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
It's not that I don't think you are open minded. In fact, I wouldn't desire that really - I am not either - my position won't be swayed here. But I am willing at all times to assume for sake of argument that my position is wrong, or to argue from another person's position. I think it is profitable to be able to do this, and to be willing to, since it lets you not dismiss any truth that may be hidden away in garbage.
#83 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
*you're, my apologies.
#11 - I sleep in a hammock every night (seriously, I have a hammock … 05/02/2013 on Hammocks in a nutshell 0
#185 - And it's why many women don't like comics/traditional gaming/v… 05/02/2013 on Wonder Woman FEELS +3
#180 - I am a man, I want to clarify that for my view to be understoo…  [+] (1 new reply) 05/02/2013 on Wonder Woman FEELS +4
#217 - anon (05/02/2013) [-]
This is one of the few intelligent comments on this post...thank you!
#43 - I am going to ask, why not believe in religion (by which, I su… 05/02/2013 on Oh Lawd Almighty +1
#40 - Yeah, the other I was talking about was the whole "hate t…  [+] (1 new reply) 05/02/2013 on Oh Lawd Almighty 0
User avatar
#42 - spikethepony (05/02/2013) [-]
.... Sir, I would like to hug you. Please hug your computer at this time to receive this hug.
#38 - I would like to point out that a Christian telling an atheist …  [+] (13 new replies) 05/02/2013 on Oh Lawd Almighty +10
#186 - walkingdisaster (05/02/2013) [-]
No. Just fucking no. If the Christian really cared about them, they would say stuff like "let me show you the way of of the lord" or something along those lines. I went to a catholic schools so many of my friends are catholic and post about god on facebook every day and whenever an argument arises they use phrases like I stated above, they never whip out the "you're going to hell" card because they're not pricks. When people say you're going to hell, it's meant to be in the negative way. Do not even try to fucking justify it, because that is exactly what it means and trying to make it look other wise is frankly pathetic.

Go ahead FJ, thumb me down because I'm not wrapping my lips around religion's dick. This place is just the antithesis of reddit. Instead of everyone getting butthurt over religion, they get butthurt over atheism. When will you people learn to take a fucking joke?
#222 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
I am sorry that I offended you. I honestly do talk about both because both are realities to me. I don't pull punches with my religion, I don't just take the easy to swallow stuff (opened myself up for a pun there, oh well).
#171 - aerosol (05/02/2013) [-]
Well spoken
User avatar
#139 - chezburgadominator (05/02/2013) [-]
I applaud you sir, for not loosing your cool while arguing with their ignorance. You made a very good point.
#52 - anon (05/02/2013) [-]
This is the biggest bunch of BS I've ever heard.

I guess the Christians throughout history were just loving everyone to death. With swords.
#54 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
I would like to draw attention to the word possible. WBC is a modern day example of a group that isn't loving (and more appropriate considering the difference in Christianity and Christendom) . But, pretend you wholeheartedly believed that unspeakable horror awaited someone if they didn't change something about themselves. If you loved that person, would you tell them so?
#59 - anon (05/02/2013) [-]
Yes, of course.

However, if you believed 100% that a random person will be captured by Jabba the Hutt and cast into the Sarlacc pit for their crimes, would you warn them? Or would you keep your schizophrenic fairy tales to yourself?
#65 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
If I believed it 100%? Yes, of course. That is the thing, we are postulating right now in the hypothetical realm of "Pretend you believed x." There is precisely one action that can be taken in these scenarios if one wants to take the loving route.

Now, if I were to hate you for not believing that Jabba the Hut was going to come after you - then I wasn't truly acting out of love and compassion, was I?

Also, I would like to point out the systematic use of "poisoning the well" that you are using. Rather than even bother trying to talk on even grounds, you call my original post BS and then compare religion to schizophrenia and fairy tales. Why the fear of honest discussion with no mudslinging - it's not like this is a political race or anything.
#71 - anon (05/02/2013) [-]
You don't like my usage of schizophrenia and fairy tales?

Fine... Auditory hallucination and fictional stories.

I can't talk on even/logical grounds if I feel I'm debating fact with fiction.
#78 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
Well, your actually debating two opposing philosophical schools. That is probably the first step to figuring out how to approach things. I know when I used to think that my way was provable fact, I had a hard time understanding why people were so dense they couldn't get it. It was only once I realized that I was standing on a slew of suppositions that I never bothered to question that I found out why people disagreed with me. We are starting with different givens, but when you accept them as fact you limit your ability to think the meta thoughts and understand the real point of contention and to even see what your "opponent" is saying.
#125 - anon (05/02/2013) [-]
Lol.............

I've been on both sides of this. I was a Christian for most of my life. I took the bullshit, I ate the bullshit, I preached the bullshit. Then I finally realized it was bullshit. I'm not actually debating anything. Mostly just pointing out bullshit. I never claimed anything I said as "the right way". I basically said you're wrong. That's it.

You assume I'm not "open-minded" because I assume certain givens.... Awesome. Everything we know and say about "God" is written in an old book that is a contradiction with binding around it.

I'm not a "meta-thinker" because I've come to a conclusion over the years that religion is bullshit? I was told I was a "meta-thinker" for dropping religion in the first place....

Changing your beliefs is hard, especially when eternal damnation is in the consequences. But that's in your beliefs too. You don't have to burn in hell, but if you believe hard enough, you just might.
#231 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
It's not that I don't think you are open minded. In fact, I wouldn't desire that really - I am not either - my position won't be swayed here. But I am willing at all times to assume for sake of argument that my position is wrong, or to argue from another person's position. I think it is profitable to be able to do this, and to be willing to, since it lets you not dismiss any truth that may be hidden away in garbage.
#83 - ichbinlecher (05/02/2013) [-]
*you're, my apologies.