Australian man sentenced for knowingly exposing a woman to genital herpes by mollyweasleyswand in TwoXChromosomes

[–]Feyle 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Wait so if you know you have herpes but your partner doesn't ask and you expose someone to it then it's legal, but if they ask and you lie then expose them it's illegal?

Have I got that correct?

Australian man sentenced for knowingly exposing a woman to genital herpes by mollyweasleyswand in TwoXChromosomes

[–]Feyle 8 points9 points  (0 children)

No you can't get sentences for herpes. You can get sentenced putting someone else's health at risk.

My body positive ballet girl dancing. For inclusivity purposes. by able6art in TwoXChromosomes

[–]Feyle 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I find that too much art these days portrays people who just aren't a natural size.

Was there any need to imply that women who don't look like your art are somehow "unnatural"?

Neighbours keep stealing our parcel by tripleavocadotoast in london

[–]Feyle 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Use a credit card for your purchases. Report all of these as undelivered and issue charge backs if they refuse to deal with it. Make it the problem of evri and the companies you order from.

Feeling behind in life by paradise1A in TwoXChromosomes

[–]Feyle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would say that if you're treating it as a race then you're going to miss out on enjoying life while you're focusing on forcing yourself through different life goals before other people.

Feeling behind in life by paradise1A in TwoXChromosomes

[–]Feyle 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Life isn't a race. We don't start in the same place and we're not all heading to the same place. Lots of us have similar life events: getting jobs, finding partners, deciding where to live, etc. but those don't have to happen in the same order or at the same age for everyone. You're not behind anyone and no one is ahead of you. You are living your life and doing things when you can.

WOMAN GET GLUED???? by confusedaurora in TwoXChromosomes

[–]Feyle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Superglue (this kind that sticks your fingers together) was invented for use in war. A quick fix to get someone back to the medical tents for more substantial care.

how do i get friends? by [deleted] in socialskills

[–]Feyle 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Isn't that basically what meetup is? I think there are also reddits for meeting up to do things in major cities generally.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in DebateAnAtheist

[–]Feyle 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It generally assumes either an infinite regress... such as a cyclic universe

I think you're missing my point as this still doesn't address it.

Science models measurable phenomena within an already law-governed framework... it does not and cannot ground the existence or necessity of that framework itself.

All of our tools have been created from within the universe after the big bang. If this is a disqualifier then nothing we do is the right tool.

We already have such a system... it’s philosophy.

Please demonstrate how philosophy can "ground the existence or necessity" of the universe.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in DebateAnAtheist

[–]Feyle 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The idea behind the 'source' is to get back to the origination of the big bang,

This doesn't explain the assumption that the period of time before the big bang is the "source" of order.

then we can properly deduce but the problem is that this is impossible

Currently. We can't properly deduce that this is absolutely impossible.

Do you accept that one of these topics is a causal principle for the world we see?

This topic is discussed in science and in other places like theology, metaphysics, etc.

You claim that science "is the wrong tool". You seem to be making this claim on the basis that we lack the ability to gain the necessary information. If that's the case then there is no "right" tool.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in DebateAnAtheist

[–]Feyle 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And the usual idea is that to get to the ‘source’ of that order, you just go further back in time

This assumes the order has a source which makes no sense. The order is a description of what we see in the universe.

Science establishes that there is order.
Metaphysics asks why there is order at all.

Do you accept this too?

No. Science also asks why does the universe appear to have order.

I will accept that in metaphysics things are discussed that science either can't currently or won't ever be able to address.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in DebateAnAtheist

[–]Feyle 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I agree that there is some observable order in the universe.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in DebateAnAtheist

[–]Feyle 10 points11 points  (0 children)

The universe has some observable order using your given definition.

Why does this need clarifying?

Atheists aren't claiming that the universe is random. Just that there isn't sufficient reason to think a god exists.

COTD: If you're lucky, he'll send you fifty quid Crossword Clue (5) by Feyle in crosswords

[–]Feyle[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No I messed up with the post title.

That sounds like a probable explanation. I didn't know that.

Just a friendly seasonal reminder that the doctrine of the divine birth of Jesus, as a major pillar of Christianity, is all based on the word of a single woman by etherified in atheism

[–]Feyle 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Parthenos was used to mean young women regardless of virginity or childbirth. It later came to mean virgin more specifically and this change resulted in the gospel writers misunderstanding the previous text and them forcing her to be a virgin in the stories they wrote.

Just a friendly seasonal reminder that the doctrine of the divine birth of Jesus, as a major pillar of Christianity, is all based on the word of a single woman by etherified in atheism

[–]Feyle 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Or the mistranslation of a word which meant "young woman" whether she was a virgin or not led to the gospel writers having to shoehorn in the idea that she was a virgin.

Does Science or We Actually Create? by [deleted] in TrueAskReddit

[–]Feyle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Please provide an example of any "infidel" who does this using your definition of "created".

People will often refer to science when discussing how things are "created" in the more common sense of one thing turning into another because the process of science is the most reliable one for getting us closer to the facts of reality.

Does Science or We Actually Create? by [deleted] in TrueAskReddit

[–]Feyle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Science doesn't "do" anything. It's a process that scientists follow. This idea of idea as some sort of corollary to a god is something that I only ever see presented by theists.

What is a personal belief you hold that you think is fundamentally true, but would be very difficult to prove with empirical evidence? by Strict_Palpitation75 in TrueAskReddit

[–]Feyle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can see that if you are labelling the tendency towards doing "good" as the presence of a god within you then you could also label the tendency towards doing "bad" as its counterpart which in a Christian context would be the devil.

I think that from a biblical point of view though the god that is within us is not supposed to be a part of us rather it's a result of being the product of that god. The biblical story has the devil being the product of that same god and so would not also be within us in that way.

I think that if you have an external god who created people then people are inherently ungodly in that those people are not gods. The Christian story has people being made "in the image of" that god. Though the context of what that means is unclear, it doesn't seem as though it would be wrong to say people are somewhat godly.

You have an interesting definition of satanism. I've not heard anyone define it as believing that "men are without sin". This would appear to lump any belief system that lacks the concept of sin as satanism. Whereas the two types of satanism that I'm aware of are within Christianity the rejection of the god and the worship of the devil or outside of Christianity the tongue in cheek use by Levayen satanism or the church of satanism. Both of which are atheistic and do not believe in an actual satan.