Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Who the Hell is Will?
All cleared up now, obviously.
I’ve never slept with a dirty girl in all my puff but I’ve had some raging doses of the clap. I’ll tell you this, the posh girl section of our nation’s great community must be riddled. It’s a disgrace. I blame the government.
I do see a hung parliament providing electoral reform in order to shore up a coalition government involving the Liberals.
I’m looking forward to it. I reckon Great Britain should always be a nation looking to further its own democracy. I just hope there’s some proper thought put into any new system and establishment interests are left firmly to one side. It has the possibilty of reinvigorating the country from the top down and paving a more enthused path into the future. Among these dark Satanic Mills and all that, eh?
What a load of indulgent tosh. Whatever happened to a stiff upper lip? I agree with Pete. She’s behaving like a loon. Someone ought to tell her. She’s dragging around a life sized cut out of her dead husband, for Bob Marley’s Spliff Tin’s sake.
No. Cannibalism isn’t wrong because of any of that stuff. It’s wrong because it necessarily hurts people who weren’t given the choice of whether they wanted to be hurt. That is, the cannibalised. This doesn’t apply to consensual sodomy. The reasoning is flawed.
No, I don’t think you are, (f), old girl.
The world’s main religions, that is Christianity, Islam, Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist (if we count their set of beliefs, basically the doubting of a revealed godhead, as a religion in itself), Hinduism and Chinese traditional religion, are all more or less mutually exclusive. That is, at least four out of those five must be fundamentally untrue. Incorrect. A load of old twaddle. At least four. They’re only the super-big religions. There must be hundreds, even thousands of religions that have existed or do exist. All but one of them, by the laws of logic, must be duff info. Logic does not preclude all of them being total codswallop. The chance that any one of them is the true religion must therefore be a fraction of one per cent.
That given, and not being a particular follower of any one of those religions, why would you lend any credence to any of their views when deciding on your stance on any given behaviour? It seems more sensible to make your own mind up.
It is true bumming doesn’t come without health risks but, that said, so do lots of things we fail to condemn. Like motor racing, for instance, or smoking or drinking. Generally, as long as we are certain everybody is acting in an informed manner and no-one is being coerced and it’s not hurting anyone else, we are happy to let people take their own risks. To most people, life without any risk is dull dull dull. We each have our vice. Or vices. Ahem.
As for nature, well, both homosexuality and sodomy* are both regularly observed in the natural world. How can something that happens in nature be unnatural? It doesn’t seem to make sense.
These musings lead me to take the view that there is no real problem with gayist, or any other kind of, bumming. Some people just like to get worked up about it. Issues, I suppose.
To be honest, Nemesis, I watched Gaz take quite a few digs just because people didn’t like his viewpoint before he responded in kind. I don’t say it often, but I agree with Cas. Leave him alone if you think he’s just being self-evidently silly. If you decide to be nasty, though, don’t start whining if you get some back.
@Bad Manners wrote:
@pikey wrote:
With regards to my old Tim chum’s original missive, I wouldn’t say that involving a conspiracy automatically invalidates any particular theory. After all, conspiracies have indeed happened. I believe, for example, that the United States engineered the Spanish-American War by arranging to have one of her own battleships crippled in a Cuban harbour. Then there was Hitler and the unfortunate business with the Reichstag. But, as always, the best thing to do when examining any theory is to apply Occam’s Razor and see if it still stands up.
Sure, but I think the examples you gave are still slightly different to the ones I mentioned in the opening post. I believe after studying both that the Moon Landing Conspiracy and 9/11 are slliced to pieces by Occam’s Razor.
Quite an interesting video here on You Tube. It tries to link the mindset of conspiracy theorists to those of a religous persuassion, but I found it quite interesting.
I agree, Manners, my old Tim chum. But I think it’s a mistake to judge all conspiracy theorists by the representations of the extreme fringe – in much the same way as I believe it’s a mistake to judge all religion by the representations of the extreme fringes. Have you ever happened upon The Lobster? Some of the stuff in there, while still classifiable as conspiracy theorising, is very good journalism, I reckon. Like many things, it’s a very fine line, I suppose.
