Mohammed didn't even die in the fable; he goes to heaven on a winged horse. You don't need to read out of your agenda all the time.

you can just pick them up from the shell we have a bunch of alagator snappers out here in a tiny stream near my house we have one named tire because hes the size of a truck tire he wil just crawl up to the bank sit by you and look at you till you give him some of your bait then just sun while you fish i miss tire havent seen him in a while

Dude those fuckers if they really want too can reach their neck around and snap all the way back

not all the way back

ive been working there since i was 16... shhhhh

we do have sex ed
in grade 4 we see a imax impreg porno
i know its a sex ed film
but it triggered my creampie fetish for me

and in year 7 we put condoms on dildos
in year 10 we put condoms on dildos and watch a slideshow showin STDs

"Morals only apply to the context in which they are taught. So morals according to who? According to what doctrine?"

And here start the Problems. You can´t put on morals, who can have any meaning, an Copyright letter and say that or this Religion invented it.

"The Aztecs practiced human sacrifice. Do you think society thought it to be immoral?"

In which of my sentences did i gave the indications that ANY Religion has an Copyright on morals?

"Hindus and Buddhists have been exterminating each other in india for centuries now. Not to mention neither of those faiths have any kind of proselytism. Buddhists Monks in fact are known for isolating themselves from the rest of the world aren't they? This isn't about who did it first, it is about how it because widespread. Christianity is the only large faith with an active form of proselytism, virtually worldwide mission destinations."

1. Just like Christians and Muslims.
2. Proselytism is an 2 sided sword, it´s after all often violently in it´s process, causing one civilization to give up it´s ideas.
3. They are also respecting anyones beliefs and do not invade them.
4. Again, proselytism is often not an good think when we consider morals from an perspectiv of free will, be forcing your will onto other civilizations you go against this morals, from which you said are an deep part of said Religion.

"Ok, so you mean the Jews."

I mean all abrahamic religions. Each of them though they are the true one even though they pray to the same god, discriminaiting each other, killing each other, calling for war against each other. It´s not even an war between religions of different gods, it´s conflicts between religions who belief in the SAME god. Also calling the jews as absolut innocent is a bit to far taken, their were reasons many civilizations discriminaited them, alone for their inner working.

"Fucking greek civilization that is your argument? That's sad. I guess if we all want to aspire to be warring citystates that hate each other controlled by a handful or wealthy aristocrats..... You clearly don't understand my point, or why I made it. Nice try though."

Not like they had the first sort of Democracy or somethin~

"It's not about who was first, it's about who spread the most. No pagan cultures held beliefs of equality, especially for strangers. Christianity went around the world."

Is cancer good because it spreeds indefinetly regardless of what the Body Needs? No? Was it good what cristianity did? Invading in cultures and forcing their ideas open them for the sake of spreading? Questionble.

Also it is even more questionble that christianity did it on their own. After all europe was nations of EXPLORERS, the reason it went so far around the world was, because the europens went all around the world.

The vikings just raided or stayed at their home. No time to spread their religions in this raids i guess.

The greecs had already Problems uniting themself, not even considering spreading their beliefs to other lands.

The romans gods were wide spreaded all over europe befor christianity, why? because romans where spreaded all over europe.

Where germanic beliefs spreaded all over europe? Yes indeed, why? Because they travelled around europe and settled in many places all over it.

Theirfore it´s questionble if it was christinaity who spreaded itself, or if it was Europe spreading cristianity all over the world.

Or he has the drill in reverse.

or he's just a dink

"The ideas of racial equality, cultural understanding, and treat others how you would want to be treated are decidedly founded in Abrahamic religions."

Didn´t know the abrahamic religions have an Copyright on morals in General, you lern everyday something new~ The more you know. Notl ike they existed already in former religions befor them, hell forbid most likely existed befor the concept of Religion was thought of!

"I know someone is going to argue this point, but before the widespread growth of Christianity virtually every independent race and culture hated, slaughtered, and conquered those deemed inferior."

Not like they did the same, also how is that Copyright on abrhamaic religions again? Could have sworn Buddhists and Hindus did that first.

"The morality of acceptance within society became widespread because of religious doctrine, even if practiced by an atheist."

And they just needed 2000 years until we got to this fuckcumpster of Point? ... I would like to think it could have gone faster somehow.

"Every single person has thought at one time or another that they are "better" than someone else, it's human nature. The morals of religion were the first claiming that despite differences of action, opinion, race, creed, etc all people should be accepted and treated as equal"

Didn´t work out so fine the first 3750 years for the abrahamic Religion i guess...

"t all came from the fundamental Christian teachings that kings are no better than the poor and wretched"

> wtf
> seemingless never heard about the greek mythology, who had also gigantic influence in europe.
> mfw, the Titans and gods are often portrayed as manchilds, while the humans are portrayed as noble, so People would lern from the stupid mistakes of the gods.
> MFW many mythological foundations actuelly had Storys about that the king is not always just and right.

Again, Christian teachings are surely NOT the king of this, as they needed also again 1500 years befor that started to work.

Morals only apply to the context in which they are taught. So morals according to who? According to what doctrine?

The Aztecs practiced human sacrifice. Do you think society thought it to be immoral?

Hindus and Buddhists have been exterminating each other in india for centuries now. Not to mention neither of those faiths have any kind of proselytism. Buddhists Monks in fact are known for isolating themselves from the rest of the world aren't they? This isn't about who did it first, it is about how it because widespread. Christianity is the only large faith with an active form of proselytism, virtually worldwide mission destinations.

Yeah, our society as a whole needed thousands of years to be accepting of differences. We still aren't there yet. Basically it is only law and religion stopping most people from running amok.

>the first 3450 years...... Ok, so you mean the Jews. In all that time what race, creed, or group did the Jews oppress? seems like it worked fucking great, they didn't hurt anyone

Fucking greek civilization that is your argument? That's sad. I guess if we all want to aspire to be warring citystates that hate each other controlled by a handful or wealthy aristocrats..... You clearly don't understand my point, or why I made it. Nice try though.

It's not about who was first, it's about who spread the most. No pagan cultures held beliefs of equality, especially for strangers. Christianity went around the world.

"Morals only apply to the context in which they are taught. So morals according to who? According to what doctrine?"

And here start the Problems. You can´t put on morals, who can have any meaning, an Copyright letter and say that or this Religion invented it.

"The Aztecs practiced human sacrifice. Do you think society thought it to be immoral?"

In which of my sentences did i gave the indications that ANY Religion has an Copyright on morals?

"Hindus and Buddhists have been exterminating each other in india for centuries now. Not to mention neither of those faiths have any kind of proselytism. Buddhists Monks in fact are known for isolating themselves from the rest of the world aren't they? This isn't about who did it first, it is about how it because widespread. Christianity is the only large faith with an active form of proselytism, virtually worldwide mission destinations."

1. Just like Christians and Muslims.
2. Proselytism is an 2 sided sword, it´s after all often violently in it´s process, causing one civilization to give up it´s ideas.
3. They are also respecting anyones beliefs and do not invade them.
4. Again, proselytism is often not an good think when we consider morals from an perspectiv of free will, be forcing your will onto other civilizations you go against this morals, from which you said are an deep part of said Religion.

"Ok, so you mean the Jews."

I mean all abrahamic religions. Each of them though they are the true one even though they pray to the same god, discriminaiting each other, killing each other, calling for war against each other. It´s not even an war between religions of different gods, it´s conflicts between religions who belief in the SAME god. Also calling the jews as absolut innocent is a bit to far taken, their were reasons many civilizations discriminaited them, alone for their inner working.

"Fucking greek civilization that is your argument? That's sad. I guess if we all want to aspire to be warring citystates that hate each other controlled by a handful or wealthy aristocrats..... You clearly don't understand my point, or why I made it. Nice try though."

Not like they had the first sort of Democracy or somethin~

"It's not about who was first, it's about who spread the most. No pagan cultures held beliefs of equality, especially for strangers. Christianity went around the world."

Is cancer good because it spreeds indefinetly regardless of what the Body Needs? No? Was it good what cristianity did? Invading in cultures and forcing their ideas open them for the sake of spreading? Questionble.

Also it is even more questionble that christianity did it on their own. After all europe was nations of EXPLORERS, the reason it went so far around the world was, because the europens went all around the world.

The vikings just raided or stayed at their home. No time to spread their religions in this raids i guess.

The greecs had already Problems uniting themself, not even considering spreading their beliefs to other lands.

The romans gods were wide spreaded all over europe befor christianity, why? because romans where spreaded all over europe.

Where germanic beliefs spreaded all over europe? Yes indeed, why? Because they travelled around europe and settled in many places all over it.

Theirfore it´s questionble if it was christinaity who spreaded itself, or if it was Europe spreading cristianity all over the world.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule

>Golden Rule
>Abrahamic religions

What group or order has done more to spread the fundamentals of the golden rule around the globe? Not to mention that it basically only meant your neighbors, not the warring factions you were trying to conquer at the time. Unified, dude. Nothing else did it. The Abrahamics are the only ones that don't condemn non believers and whose code applies to all despite belief.
Or do you think the golden rule didn't have to apply to the slave trade? maybe slaves aren't real people.....

'' The morals of religion were the first claiming that despite differences of action, opinion, race, creed, etc all people should be accepted and treated as equal. ''

THIS IS TRUE. But, the aim in that was to UNITE and CONQUER together. If you cant / dont figure that out, you don't know shit, I'm sorry. Just look into Islam and how they got united so well at first, and got divided right after the first few caliphs.....

Also, you talked about the foundations of good moral obligations' origins, in society, and thats fair, BUT, think about American Natives man, or Amazonian - South American tribes they were mostly in harmony with each other, and with nature. They had no religious power centers anywhere. I think you get my point.

The fuck if they were... Native peoples in North America were some of the most brutal and warlike in the world. They measured themselves as men by things like stealing from another village, killing animals unarmed etc. That shit's a joke. Just because they live in nature doesn't mean they were peaceful. Ask General Custer about the peaceful tribes.

Are you referring to the South/Central American tribes who ripped peoples' hearts out as a sacrifice to the sun god or the North American marauding warrior tribes? The same marauding tribes who drove almost all American megafauna to extinction? I don't necessarily disagree with your main point, but it's a complete myth that New World tribes coexisted with each other and nature.

I said Amazonian, not Central Americas theres a fuckton of difference.

6 million practicioners too. I can see why they are the cause of the nearly worldwide accepted moral and ethics of toiday. Wait no I can't. Maybe they didn't unify and spread it around as much as Christianity or something.

Sure. Can you think of any other group or practice that spread this ideal worldwide to create what is today a basically universal code of morals and ethics? My bet is the Abrahamics with approx 4 billion votes worldwide.

Careful, hes probably gunna post this as content now

"Hurr Durr no one likes me LOL"

aw ok

im your friend <3

<3

<333

then this isn't for you

unless you have friends that post a lot

Na I don't have friends. I just wanted to reaffirm that fact with you especially.

Careful, hes probably gunna post this as content now

"Hurr Durr no one likes me LOL"

aw ok

im your friend <3

<3

<333

crazy how nature do dat

crazy how nature do dat

Except we cant see the rest of the tree

No need to see the top? Plenty of people have carvings made out of stumps and half stumps around here

If a tree is already dead, why not make use of it?

Maybe.
It's just I love seeing hypocrites defend themselves.
Utterly hilarious.

Merry christmas to you too, mister.

Missed a good show you did.

holy shit, it's still up?

dayum

why not both?
And action. Plot and Character development with matching action, in a Sci-Fi Space environment with good CGI in places where it s needed and practical effects where they are needed. Neil Blomkamp for the Special Effects.

Do this and you will create the best movie that was and will be ever made.

I would actually pay to see that.

I can smell the amateur on you.
Auto tuning is a fucking god send, I've never played an actual concert, but I'd imagine I'd want one if I do in the future.
You know how much time you waste tuning it yourself?

Almost no time. I play concerts at least once a month with my band. I change my strings 2-3 days before the show, stretch the fuck out of them, and play them for about 45 minutes to an hour. Once the show arrives, I don't go out of tune. You just need to know how to do it properly, instead of wasting time on a gimmick.

You'll still spend a shit ton of time letting it tune for you if you don't properly stretch the strings. Especially your G string (giggity).

m8 only real amateurs think it takes a long time to tune a fucking guitar...

7 years of playing guitar makes me an amateur...
Got it.

Implying it doesn't take talent to make music

>implying saving time on tuning is the same as not playing at all. I play drums and if I could never have to tune my heads by hand that would be a dream come true!