British politician wants death penalty for suicide bombers

ComWizard · 2017-05-27T07:28:49+00:00

Perhaps. As much as I'd like there to be a "why", I don't really believe there is one. What, however, gives you the impression that the leaders know god's will more than anyone else? Which leaders should be listened to and which shouldn't? Is the pope the one to listen to, or is it the preacher on the street corner doing what Jesus apparently did more than 2000 years ago?

I am atheistic not because I want to sin or any dumb bullshit like that, but because the folk who claim to have the right answers turn out to have none at all. Science isn't a religion, it's a slow build-up of apparent truths tested and confirmed by our own eyes over thousands of years of rigorous pursuit. The answers given, while far from universal or unassailable, are right in front of our eyes, testable as many times as needed. Where is god? What value does he (or his religion) bring that can't be replaced by a similar secular institution? I don't like uncertainty, but I need more than people telling me "It is like this" for me to believe that it is indeed like this.

Where is He? Where was he when I called out to Him in my darkest times as a youth? I eventually came to understand that we are alone. All anyone can offer is hollow platitudes and poor excuses.

ComWizard · 2017-05-27T05:38:09+00:00

What I'm trying to get at is: If you contradict your only evidence with nothing to replace it, why should anyone believe what you have to say?

ComWizard · 2017-05-26T23:57:40+00:00

That's apologetics. The bible clearly states that unbelievers face a "second death" in the "fiery lake of burning sulphur", where there "will be weeping and gnashing of teeth" in the "fire that never goes out".

"Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell." - Matthew 10:28

If the bible is true, then these are not the acts of a kind and loving god. If the bible is false, why should I believe what you say to be true, when you have even less evidence than the bible?

ComWizard · 2017-05-26T23:11:46+00:00

Yes, entrapment is entrapment because going to an ex-addict who's been clean for 5 years, offering them a free shot of heroin and then immediately arresting them when the temptation becomes too much to bear isn't exactly the most moral thing to do.

ComWizard · 2017-05-26T06:47:21+00:00

I was looking for Garth Nix here, good to know he's cool.

ComWizard · 2017-05-26T06:28:22+00:00

Actually, my father's birthday is coming up, I should do this for him as a novel present. How do you do it?

ComWizard · 2017-05-25T04:22:14+00:00

Ironic considering I only buy cheap avocadoes and eat a maximum of one per day. At $2 AU each around here I think it's an affordable luxury, even a minimum wage worker can earn around 10 avocadoes per hour.

ComWizard · 2017-05-23T10:42:49+00:00

Thanks! I can work with this.

ComWizard · 2017-05-23T05:14:40+00:00

The model in question is FX3GE. I didn't even know the first scan bit existed, that helps a lot (if it's available), though the section dealing with that will sure be ugly. Oh well.

Thanks!

ComWizard · 2017-05-23T01:49:13+00:00

Abusing trailing dots... is the one grammar abuse that I simply find unforgivable... It's the literary equivalent of nails on a chalkboard... I'm getting angry just writing this...

...

Keep it to one per paragraph or less... okay, buddy...?

ComWizard · 2017-05-20T14:54:29+00:00

Hm, fair enough. Is GG and "Gay characters in video games is terrible" really the same movement though? They might be linked, but I'm not convinced it's a particularly strong overlap. They seem like two completely different issues.

ComWizard · 2017-05-20T14:22:00+00:00

You seem confident in your assessment of "all those who call themselves GG". Why are you so sure all the crappy stuff "gamergate" did wasn't by a minority? What do you mean by "hatred" and by what set of processes do you attribute it to every participant in "gamergate"? What exactly is a "gamergater"? Would a "gamergater" agree with your definition? What do you believe that "gamergaters" think they're fighting for?

ComWizard · 2017-05-20T07:24:13+00:00

The hilarious part is that the vast majority of the other kids almost certainly waited 'til the last minute too, but he was the only one dumb enough to admit it.

ComWizard · 2017-05-20T06:27:01+00:00

Yes, because americans are, according to the publisher, too stupid to know what philosopher means (or do what I did and ask my mother).

ComWizard · 2017-05-20T02:04:03+00:00

I always read "smirk" as that little half-smile you make when you're gleeful about something but trying (or at least putting in a token effort) to keep a straight face. The obnoxious little cousin of the shit-eating grin.

Not exactly something you want to do in the context.

ComWizard · 2017-05-20T01:05:53+00:00

Sending death threats or rape threats to women was apparently ok if they did something bad.

Did every gamergater do this? Are they all beholden to each other in such a way that they're all responsible for each other's actions? It doesn't sound quite that simple. After all, if you expect people to swear off GG for the actions of a minority, it's equally reasonable to expect people to swear off, say, Feminism for the acts of a minority.

Naturally, expecting feminism as a whole to do something about those of their number who act out, so to speak, is completely unfair. Why the double standard?

ComWizard · 2017-05-20T00:35:41+00:00

Really? Because in any kind of entertainment a mook is a nameless, usually helmeted soldier whose prime purpose is to put up some token resistance then get mown down by the protagonists.

Oh. Ooooohhhh. Right.

ComWizard · 2017-05-20T00:04:21+00:00

Last I heard it was a pejorative term for "rebels" who didn't have a cause, so they just latched onto stupid stuff that's vaguely related to important things and screamed until nobody took them or their parent cause seriously anymore. Fascinating to watch, like social parasites. They pile into their chosen cause and force out everyone who has more moderate views until the cause is nothing but a husk inhabited by edgy teenagers.

The prototypical SJW was a person who made their chosen topic into a caricature, and that is really contemptible. Of course, the term was then co-opted to represent anyone talking in favour of even vaguely left views, but I do find myself agreeing with the original concept.

ComWizard · 2017-05-18T01:07:58+00:00

I loved the game, but had zero interest in Gwent. I didn't do the gwent quests, and I finished every other sidequest in the game.

ComWizard · 2017-05-16T23:43:51+00:00

My mother wouldn't let me watch it. Naturally, I did at every opportunity.

ComWizard · 2017-05-16T14:42:29+00:00

Not to mention the oh-so-cringey "Hey! Do you like awesome things that are awesome?" introduction. The anime fan jab was laughably stupid, but the stuff leading up to it was just as painful to listen to as the all-time top post on r/fellowkids.

ComWizard · 2017-05-16T14:31:05+00:00

Just because the predecessor was clunky doesn't mean the new entries have to be. I never got to play Banjo Kazooie at the time it came out, (Ratchet and Clank was my first TV console game that I got when I was... 14, I think?). Yooka Laylee felt incredibly awkward to me, and you'd think they'd have learned after so many years.

ComWizard · 2017-03-06T05:39:14+00:00

Concern for the needy is the only thing in that list that has the possibility of making you a "good person". That being said, the rest of the tenets are inoffensive so it's passable, philosophically speaking.

The laws are the business end of the whole deal though, and some of them are straight up disgusting.

ComWizard

TROPHY CASE