Search Results

I think that because people kinda overuse such words they've lost their meaning to me. I don't really let stuff like that bug me anymore. =P

Why? In one of my previous posts I addressed what I think of that opinion. I don't feel like re-posting it, so ya, read over that and argue with meh. This is less of a debate and more of someone making a point and everybody else just agreeing with it. XP

U BLIEVE N SUMTHIN I DUNT!!! THARFOR J00 ISH STOOPID!!!

Love your logic on this matter.

They are still evolving, they simply have taken different evolutionary paths than what you are comparing them to. Thus, the monkeys that you refer to in your post actually did evolve from a more primitive version of it. Even now, humans are still evolving constantly. It may not be in ways so extreme such as growing extra limbs and the like, but we are evolving.

I'd say more but I'm tired. =( Stupid work.

AU EHM JEE!

I think we have a winner.

Lawl, I have no idea what you just said, but I like the fact that it wasn't:

"LOL POST AND HAVE FUN!! READ TEH REWLZ!!! BAI!!!!"

I'm not going to speak for the people who take the Bible completely literally, but for the most part what I've been taught was that for the most part the Bible was all about lessons being taught and a meaning that you should look for behind the actual text.

If I'm not mistaken even the Pope went public with the fact that in all likelihood evolution did exist, and whether or not it did really didn't disprove any of the fundamentals of Christianity. The only thing evolution would really prove wrong is the theory of creationism, which - when you honestly think about it in relation to the scientific discoveries in favour of evolution - seems somewhat ******ed(for lack of a better word).

To be completely honest with you Zandyne, the only explanation I can offer you as to why Humans would have required the use of sand/mud/earth because God supposedly willed it so. That's pretty much the only evidence the Bible offers. So with regards to that question, "LULZ ITZ MAGIC!"

As for the lie thing, the fruit of that tree essentially represented the knowledge of right and wrong(if I remember correctly, which I probably don't), and thus what could have been meant by that would be that if you eat this sheeit then your existence, as you know it, will end.

All that being said, I believe in evolution. I'm pretty much an atheist, and I chose to say all that because I was bored.

LULZ K BAI NOW!

Hurray! My attention whoring paid off.

<3

I was kinda hoping that I'd get more than just mass messages from people looking to raise their post counts rather than actually welcome someone properly.

='(

I wasn't actually going to bring up the whole coat hanger thing, but if you wanna go there then alright. =P

If you make abortion illegal it's not going to stop the administering of it, just like making weed illegal hasn't stopped people from smoking up. It's just gonna make it harder to get one, and much more dangerous.

Perhaps they should be more strict when it comes to dealing with litter properly then. XD

The rape victim thing goes along with the everybody else. When most people say that only in the case of rape should it be allowed, it's often the case that when pressed they'll admit to meaning after the trial, and that the one who allegedly raped the victim is actually convicted of said rape. However, what if one who actually does rape someone gets a good lawyer and, as in the case of O.J., isn't actually convicted when they committed the act?

How about if the trial takes so long that in the end the person has the baby anyways because they weren't legally able to have the abortion and thus it defeats the purpose of that exception to begin with?

OR, say they actually do go through with only allowing abortion in the case of rape, but the girl can have an abortion pending trial. There would be an increase in false accusations, and the conviction of those that are possibly innocent just because somebody couldn't keep their legs closed and doesn't want to deal with what comes after.

What I'm basically saying is that if anybody wants to say that abortion should be allowed for only certain cases, that logic is kinda flawed and instead you should probably stick with choosing either abortion for all, or banning it altogether.

Also, justmeh = PRO LIFE FO' LYF!

That is all. XD

I think that it's the pro-life people that go out and protest this sort of thing that should face some sort of penalty. Some of their methods remind me more of propaganda than anything else. If one can choose to have intercourse whenever they see fit, they should be given the choice to deal with the aftermath accordingly. If not given the choice to begin with(as in the situation of rape) I believe that a woman should still be given the right to choose.

Well, are there any rules that aren't on most other forums that I should know about?

Don't spam, be nice, respect mods, swearing should be kept at a minimum, no pr0n, etc...

Again, I'm not really new to the idea of forums. ;)

Oh smoking, why must you be so damn cancer-licious, and yet so cool at the same time?

Seriously, I think the idea of banning smoking in public is a good one. I really hope that such a law will be enforced. I'm pretty much against the idea of smoking cigarettes. Then again, if it weren't for people smoking they would have never made Thank You For Smoking, which is a really good movie, and if you haven't watched it you should go do that now.

That is all.

The feeling of love is essentially a chemical reaction in the brain. That being said, it'd be kinda odd(to me at least) to deny that such a chemical reaction occurs.

Have I felt such a feeling? Yeap.

Did she feel the same way back? Yep.

Do I feel that way anymore? LOL Definitely not.

Now then, does the fact that I don't feel the same way anymore mean that I never felt that way at all? Does it make the way I felt any less valid then it was when I felt it? If I had come here and posted saying that I love her and I'm still with her would that have made my feelings anymore legitimate?

There, I have some questions for whoever posts next.

Uh, people talk about technology not helping people in the long run, but what about computers? We rely on them for nearly everything these days. The only reason I can interact with any of you, or even know that you exist is because of computers.

I believe that if you honestly want to bring movies into a discussion such as this, you'd have to acknowledge the fact that they're exaggerated in order to be at least mildly entertaining, while at the same time possibly teaching us some sort of lesson. That being said, I think that saying because of the fact that Haley Joel Osment made you sad is a reason to say that artificial intelligence is wrong.

I'm all for A.I., but I believe that we should stick to doing something a bit more within our grasps before we attempt that. Lower gas prices, then I'll worry about A.I. XD

More than likely something along the lines of, "LULZ OJ WINZ AGAIN!"

I wouldn't have had to go to work, and something involving Jessica Alba and Jessica Biel that I can't mention on this forum because I'd rather not get warned/banned when I only have like three posts. XD

Just because he was set free doesn't necessarily mean that he's innocent. Didn't he write that book not too long ago about how he would have done it, if he actually had. I think less that he's innocent, more that he just had a really good lawyer.

I'm actually somewhat surprised to see that somebody truly believes he didn't do it, but there are two votes in favour of his innocence. Wow.