Menu

Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Politics and Religion discussion.

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by lakim shabazz, Mar 15, 2011.

Share This Page

  1. criscros18

    criscros18 Banned

    • Messages: 203
    • Likes Received: 1
    btdubs I'm really not trying to shove anything down your throats, Im just putting up what I believe. You can believe whatever you want. If you chose to believe that when you die, you will reincarnate into a rock... Fine, whatever you think is logical... Really I just enjoy the debate...
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2012
  2. 2mor

    2mor Senior Member

    • Messages: 374
    • Likes Received: 0
    i dont believe anyone gets reincarnated as a stone.
    389886_286406764740078_255019854545436_806780_764302423_n.jpg
     
  3. 2mor

    2mor Senior Member

    • Messages: 374
    • Likes Received: 0
    and i dont know what happens when we die, noone does.
     
  4. thisisitrighthere

    thisisitrighthere New Member

    • Messages: 1
    • Likes Received: 0
    New Bill - Worse Than SOPA/PIPA
    ________________________________________
    This Bill Entitled "The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011" Is a Bill with overly broadened language that greatly threatens all of us. "under language approved 19 to 10 by a House committee, the firm that sells you Internet access would be required to track all of your Internet activity and save it for 18 months, along with your name, the address where you live, your bank account numbers, your credit card numbers, and IP addresses you've been assigned."



    Saurce
    Quote:
    Every right-thinking person abhors child pornography. To combat it, legislators have brought through committee a poorly conceived, over-broad Congressional bill, The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011. It is arguably the biggest threat to civil liberties now under consideration in the United States. The potential victims: everyone who uses the Internet.

    The good news? It hasn't gone before the full House yet.

    The bad news: it already made it through committee. And history shows that in times of moral panic, overly broad legislation has a way of becoming law. In fact, a particular moment comes to mind.

    In the early 20th Century, a different moral panic gripped the United States: a rural nation was rapidly moving to anonymous cities, sexual mores were changing, and Americans became convinced that an epidemic of white female slavery was sweeping the land. Thus a 1910 law that made it illegal to transport any person across state lines for prostitution "or for any other immoral purpose." Suddenly premarital sex and adultery had been criminalized, as scam artists would quickly figure out. "Women would lure male conventioneers across a state line, say from New York to Atlantic City, New Jersey," David Langum* explains, "and then threaten to expose them to the prosecutors for violation" unless paid off. Inveighing against the law, the New York Times noted that, though it was officially called the White Slave Traffic Act (aka The Mann Act), a more apt name would've been "the Encouragement of Blackmail Act."

    That name is what brought the anecdote back to me. A better name for the child pornography bill would be The Encouragement of Blackmail by Law Enforcement Act. At issue is how to catch child pornographers. It's too hard now, say the bill's backers, and I can sympathize. It's their solution that appalls me: under language approved 19 to 10 by a House committee, the firm that sells you Internet access would be required to track all of your Internet activity and save it for 18 months, along with your name, the address where you live, your bank account numbers, your credit card numbers, and IP addresses you've been assigned.

    Tracking the private daily behavior of everyone in order to help catch a small number of child criminals is itself the noxious practice of police states. Said an attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation: "The data retention mandate in this bill would treat every Internet user like a criminal and threaten the online privacy and free speech rights of every American." Even more troubling is what the government would need to do in order to access this trove of private information: ask for it.

    I kid you not -- that's it.

    As written, The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011 doesn't require that someone be under investigation on child pornography charges in order for police to access their Internet history -- being suspected of any crime is enough. (It may even be made available in civil matters like divorce trials or child custody battles.) Nor do police need probable cause to search this information. As Rep. James Sensenbrenner says, (R-Wisc.) "It poses numerous risks that well outweigh any benefits, and I'm not convinced it will contribute in a significant way to protecting children."

    Among those risks: blackmail.

    In Communist countries, where the ruling class routinely dug up embarrassing information on citizens as a bulwark against dissent, the secret police never dreamed of an information trove as perfect for targeting innocent people as a full Internet history. Phrases I've Googled in the course of researching this item include "moral panic about child pornography" and "blackmailing enemies with Internet history." For most people, it's easy enough to recall terms you've searched that could be taken out of context, and of course there are lots of Americans who do things online that are perfectly legal, but would be embarrassing if made public even with context: medical problems and adult pornography are only the beginning. How clueless do you have to be to mandate the creation of a huge database that includes that sort of information, especially in the age of Anonymous and Wikileaks? How naive do you have to be to give government unfettered access to it? Have the bill's 25 cosponsors never heard of J. Edgar Hoover?

    You'd thing that Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio), who claims on his Web site to be "an outspoken defender of individual privacy rights," wouldn't lend his name to this bill. But he co-sponsored it! You'd think that the Justice Department of Eric Holder, who is supposed to be friendly to civil libertarians, would oppose this bill. Just the opposite. And you'd think that lots of tea partiers, with all their talk about overzealous government and intrusions on private industry, would object.

    But they haven't.

    As Julian Sanchez recently wrote on a related subject, "In an era in which an unprecedented quantity of information about our daily activities is stored electronically and is retrievable with a mouse click, internal checks on the government's power to comb those digital databases are more important than ever... If we aren't willing to say enough is enough, our privacy will slip away one tweak at a time."
    Copy and paste
     
  5. criscros18

    criscros18 Banned

    • Messages: 203
    • Likes Received: 1
    I was using the rock as an example. But you say no one know what happens when we die. What if you're wrong, and there is a God. And he did come to earth, perform miracles, die for our sins, then rise again. What "hypothetically" would that mean to you??
     
  6. criscros18

    criscros18 Banned

    • Messages: 203
    • Likes Received: 1
    ... Wow that's vastly out of context. And completely dumb...
     
  7. 2mor

    2mor Senior Member

    • Messages: 374
    • Likes Received: 0
    What if you're wrong, and youve spent your whole life spreading lies and not enjoying yourself?
     
  8. criscros18

    criscros18 Banned

    • Messages: 203
    • Likes Received: 1
    Okay, for discussion sake. If I was wrong, and I died in my sleep then I would be content, yes id have died a virgin, never gotten drunk, or partied hard. But I would have lived as a "good" person. A moral, upright person, who I hope can be set as an example. And I'm content with that.I don't think that. Life is about enjoying yourself, but about making a difference, being a positive influence...

    BUT

    say that IM right, and YOU are wrong, and there is a god who will judge you based on your choice to believe in him?? Then I would be granted eternal life with God. Where would you go??

    So you see, either way it's a win win for me:exemplary person or eternal life. I someone puts aside the logic for just a moment to look at the benefits. Then its all worth it in the end.
     
  9. Carma7

    Carma7 Member

    • Messages: 46
    • Likes Received: 0
    if god wanted us to believe in him why dosnt he be like "yo im up here. believe in me!" plus Catholicism isn't even the oldest standing religion. Hinduism is the oldest religion today. also what your definition of moral and "good person" can be completely different than mine. in my eyes you could be a giant stuck up douche bag. if god exists, he should love everyone no matter what they believed in. there's no evidence that after you die you don't just rot in a hole. i think religion was just cooked up because people need something to look forward to.
     
  10. criscros18

    criscros18 Banned

    • Messages: 203
    • Likes Received: 1
    I think that in many ways God does yell "yo im up here. believe in me!!" have you ever looked up at the stars on a clear night. on a good night you can see billions of them. I cannot believe that all those stars started by an organism piggybacking on the back of a molecule. Sorry its so much easier for me to believe that there is a God who CREATED those billions of stars. Im NOT A CATHOlIC, im a baptist/non denominational. which isn't the oldest religion BY FAR. but the oldest doesnt necessarily mean the correct religion. get it?? Well my defenition of "good" and "moral" (because im a christian) means to try to be "like Christ" but that basically means that you put others ahead of yourself, that you don't think inwardly but love all people. There is a big difference between a person who tries to be good, and a person who is better than everyone else. thats just arrogant, and thats hypocritical. And you're completely right, God does love All people. John 3.16 says that God sent his son to die for all people, and whoever believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. God is just waiting for us to commit our lives to him. All it takes is just one prayer to commit yourself, and live forever...
     
  11. criscros18

    criscros18 Banned

    • Messages: 203
    • Likes Received: 1
    Even those religions which leave nothing to look forward to?? I.e. Atheism, Agnosticism, New Age. All religions teach that one of three things happen when we die. 1) Nothing. We die and our soul is just gone. 2)We are reincarnated, or become some sort of spirit/ghost. 3) We either go to heaven or hell. thats the options taught by every single religion. I think that if people wanted to create something to look forward, they could do a little better than religion. So I don't think that it was just "cooked up"
     
  12. 2mor

    2mor Senior Member

    • Messages: 374
    • Likes Received: 0
    Its also a win win for me, as i know all of this is bollocks, i live in sin, have a fucking great time, and never get judged.
     
  13. criscros18

    criscros18 Banned

    • Messages: 203
    • Likes Received: 1
    Unless I'm right, in which case you're screwed.
     
  14. extinct

    extinct Senior Member

    • Messages: 364
    • Likes Received: 0
    calling yourself as exemplary is a little stuck up... READ A BOOK BY THE RZA THE TAO OF WU.... tis' the truth
     
  15. criscros18

    criscros18 Banned

    • Messages: 203
    • Likes Received: 1
    I said i hope I can be considered exemplary.
     
  16. 2mor

    2mor Senior Member

    • Messages: 374
    • Likes Received: 0
    Look im not meaning to rip the piss out of all your beliefs, just dont be stating them as fact, as you know no more what happens when we die then i do.
     
  17. Tony

    Tony Elite Member

    • Messages: 7,335
    • Likes Received: 44
    what created god?
     
  18. lakim shabazz

    lakim shabazz Moderator

    • Messages: 2,172
    • Likes Received: 2
  19. criscros18

    criscros18 Banned

    • Messages: 203
    • Likes Received: 1
    You're right, I'm don't KNOW for certain but I have FAITH in what will
     
  20. criscros18

    criscros18 Banned

    • Messages: 203
    • Likes Received: 1
    Nobody, he "was, and is, and is to come" God is not bound by time, because time is a human concept used to track events. So I dint think god ever had a "beginning" or an "end" God is eternal