Posts by Viviane

79

Death is not something to be feared!

by iconoclastic in

science can explain how of things, but it cannot explain why of certain things (for example, why did life arise from non-life and evolved from simpler creatures to more complex life forms only to die and disappear?

) so are the conflicted religions whose chief concern is in safeguarding each ones separate identity..

next option is to look for pearls among the stonesusing power of our own reason.

Viviane

Why then is it so harmful to speculate about something we cannot know for sure? It is part of being alive, and when you try to stamp out speculation about things that cannot be proven, you are trying to stamp out a part of our very being. I know an Org which likes to do that, and we escaped from it in part to enjoy freedom of thought and expression.

No one said anything about ending speculation. I also know know ab org that likes to pretend to things it can't and doesn't. What's your point?

Live and let live ffs, why are some people so bent on being 'right'?

Prerending ignorance is knowledge is dangerous.

79

Death is not something to be feared!

by iconoclastic in

science can explain how of things, but it cannot explain why of certain things (for example, why did life arise from non-life and evolved from simpler creatures to more complex life forms only to die and disappear?

) so are the conflicted religions whose chief concern is in safeguarding each ones separate identity..

next option is to look for pearls among the stonesusing power of our own reason.

Viviane

In science, "how" and "why" are the same question, "how". Your convoluted mess gets it wrong from the start.

175

Implications of gay marriage ruling

by Rattigan350 in

while many think that the ruling is good for the gays and their response is: how does that affect your marriage; then on the other side the religious people cry god and sinners.

but both are missing the forest through the trees.. the problem with the ruling is that which is discussed here so many times.

five unelected federal officials decided on policy for the whole country, running roughshod over every democratic principle.

Viviane

Exhibit A, Miss Viviane. Can you be any less hateful or vitriolic?

What an odd and wrong thing to say. I don't hate anyone nor am I bitter about anything (a key component of vitriol).

Perhaps you're confusing "doesn't suffer fools" with words you clearly didn't think about before you wrote them.

Viviane, feel free to spew hate or vitriol at me if you disagree.

Don't be melodramatic. Any response you get will purely be based on the quality of thought you've put into what you write next. I've no more desire or time to bother hating you or what you write than I do an ant.

Marriage would be little more than a contract between two (or more) consenting adults. The contract would spell out mostly the financial obligations as well as child custody in the event the marriage contract is dissolved.

Well, I don't hate it. You didn't think it through, however. Government, i.e. the state, is exactly who enforces contracts. When aarriage is dissolved today, there is typically a consent decree outlining child support, alimony, separation of property, etc., all enforced by the government. The initial marriage contract is recorded by the government. Government is the body that enforces and settled contracts via the court system.

Your argument makes as much sense as people saying they want the government out of their social security and Medicaid. By definition, the thing you want is logically impossible.

175

Implications of gay marriage ruling

by Rattigan350 in

while many think that the ruling is good for the gays and their response is: how does that affect your marriage; then on the other side the religious people cry god and sinners.

but both are missing the forest through the trees.. the problem with the ruling is that which is discussed here so many times.

five unelected federal officials decided on policy for the whole country, running roughshod over every democratic principle.

Viviane

The day Viviane has a friendly disposition and her posts aren't full of spite, sarcasm, and a bad attitude will be the day that the GB are finally honest and do away with the policy of shunning ex members, and muslims worldwide become peaceful. ie it'll never happen!

My my, fundies are so full of rage and wrong. It would be amusing if it weren't sad.

175

Implications of gay marriage ruling

by Rattigan350 in

while many think that the ruling is good for the gays and their response is: how does that affect your marriage; then on the other side the religious people cry god and sinners.

but both are missing the forest through the trees.. the problem with the ruling is that which is discussed here so many times.

five unelected federal officials decided on policy for the whole country, running roughshod over every democratic principle.

Viviane

No, humans cannot do anything they want.

For instance, we can't make you less judgemental or ignorant.

175

Implications of gay marriage ruling

by Rattigan350 in

while many think that the ruling is good for the gays and their response is: how does that affect your marriage; then on the other side the religious people cry god and sinners.

but both are missing the forest through the trees.. the problem with the ruling is that which is discussed here so many times.

five unelected federal officials decided on policy for the whole country, running roughshod over every democratic principle.

Viviane

And once again people who express a dissenting opinion on the gay marriage ruling is treated with disdain and like a pariah. I find the attitudes towards the dissenters appalling

So far, the dissent is based on either an utterly faulty understanding and willful ignorance of the history of marriage or upon a book that condones murder, slavery, misogyny, rape, genocide and racism that endorsed and commanded many different types of m

Why should I have anything BUT disdain for those opinions?

175

Implications of gay marriage ruling

by Rattigan350 in

while many think that the ruling is good for the gays and their response is: how does that affect your marriage; then on the other side the religious people cry god and sinners.

but both are missing the forest through the trees.. the problem with the ruling is that which is discussed here so many times.

five unelected federal officials decided on policy for the whole country, running roughshod over every democratic principle.

Viviane

I didn't think so.
Perhaps a joke would help improve your disposition?
What is the difference between a woman with PMS and a rabid pit bull?
Jewelry.
You are welcome,

Thank you. Now I know that you're more than willing to resort to misogyny when getting called out for asking a poorly thought out question with an obvious agenda. I now know everything I need to about out you, much like the guy that brags about rolling coal or the one with two rebel flags on his truck who says "I ain't racist, but...".

175

Implications of gay marriage ruling

by Rattigan350 in

while many think that the ruling is good for the gays and their response is: how does that affect your marriage; then on the other side the religious people cry god and sinners.

but both are missing the forest through the trees.. the problem with the ruling is that which is discussed here so many times.

five unelected federal officials decided on policy for the whole country, running roughshod over every democratic principle.

Viviane

But the gay marriage movement makes the government an integral part of their marriage by stating that they need to get permission to be married, just to get a name on a death certificate, as in one case. You mean he couldn't just go to his congressman and get help with that? That would be more personal and fulfilling.

Just for fun, you should try actually making sense one of these days. Or, you know, knowing what you're talking about. Or how government works.

175

Implications of gay marriage ruling

by Rattigan350 in

while many think that the ruling is good for the gays and their response is: how does that affect your marriage; then on the other side the religious people cry god and sinners.

but both are missing the forest through the trees.. the problem with the ruling is that which is discussed here so many times.

five unelected federal officials decided on policy for the whole country, running roughshod over every democratic principle.

Viviane

I posted an analysis and you call that whining and tedious? and I did not lose, America did

You posted a whine because you lost.

175

Implications of gay marriage ruling

by Rattigan350 in

while many think that the ruling is good for the gays and their response is: how does that affect your marriage; then on the other side the religious people cry god and sinners.

but both are missing the forest through the trees.. the problem with the ruling is that which is discussed here so many times.

five unelected federal officials decided on policy for the whole country, running roughshod over every democratic principle.

Viviane

I say that the constitution is for checks and balances and separation of powers there was none in that case.

OK. So you're just wrong a completely different way.

The petitioners in this case were not hurt by leaving things alone.

Still wrong....

Since it is split liberal v conservative, the ruling can not be taken seriously

And still wrong.