Well not really, I can have a negative opinion of religion overall while being liberal and not caring or minding one bit about what people do with their lives, it's theirs not mine

Original post by 7rance

Having freedom isn't about doing what you want, it's about doing what you ought to.

By that same token, what you see as "free" and happy could through another person's eyes be seen as captivity and sadness. Much like the saying goes, one mans food is another mans poison.

You say they'll miss out on "life experiences" because of their faith, but that too implies that these life experiences have a shared opinion of necessity. Even then, a shared opinion is a still an opinion.

Not a single person alive today truly knows what's right and what's wrong, each have their own interpretations. When you say "overall" could you be referring to siding with the majority? Anything agreed upon in majority does not make it right nor wrong.

If a religion never existed, we wouldn't know how things would pan out, it's left up to imagination and through that we can never really tell whose imagination actually occupies any credibility. So you saying people would turn to X and Y is pointless because no one would really know how things would pan out.

Read the above

Guessing you're religious. You have a rather biased opinion.
As someone who was previously religious and now have no faith I can see both sides of the story and I'm speaking my own opinions freely. You've never not been religious and you can't really speak for yourself in that scenario...

Religion is outright backwards and limiting in my opinion. But you have your own and thats great, but why discuss it with essays?

Reply 290

Kajsajbas

Original post by rxns_00

Well not really, I can have a negative opinion of religion overall while being liberal and not caring or minding one bit about what people do with their lives, it's theirs not mine

Read the above

Guessing you're religious. You have a rather biased opinion.
As someone who was previously religious and now have no faith I can see both sides of the story and I'm speaking my own opinions freely. You've never not been religious and you can't really speak for yourself in that scenario...

Religion is outright backwards and limiting in my opinion. But you have your own and thats great, but why discuss it with essays?

Whatttt? No I'm not religious. I was brought up with no religion but was taught to respect all religions equally. If I had a religion it'd be all of them. I'm spiritual I'm just saying religion has purpose.
So excuse me but you can't assume what I am and what I'm not.
I see both sides too, but more equally that you do. I am not biased. You are.

Reply 291

rxns_00

Original post by Kajsajbas

Um but I wasn't talking to you... I was talking to the other person I quoted lol?

Reply 292

High Stakes

Original post by Ua3142

Cars - lets start the biking revolution!

Original post by Wolfram Alpha

We'd see a great reduction in pollution levels but I don't know if everyone would be willing to resort to bicycles.

Biking is fun and much healthier. :colone:

Reply 293

Kajsajbas

Original post by rxns_00

Um but I wasn't talking to you... I was talking to the other person I quoted lol?

Oh I got confused by the read above

Reply 294

7rance

Original post by rxns_00

Instead of taking guesses you could just ask me rather than proceeding to tell me what I could have and could have never been and what I can and can't say for myself.

I never even stated my opinion and whilst I do have an opinion you make it seem as though it opposes yours.

No matter how many adjectives you place in front of the word opinion, At the end of the day, positive opinion/negative opinion/neutral opinion, it's still an "opinion".

Each have their own and I think we should all just respect that without seeking to describe them with adjectives.

As for discussing with essays, why not?

Reply 295

Dheorl

Original post by jonathanemptage

with Russia being so aggressive and North Korea testing long range rockets and the very real possibility that they have or are developing nuclear weapons if we were to disarm they would have no deterrent not too attack while I don't like the fact we need them it would be a big problem for national security if we got rid of them.

North Korea wouldn't have anywhere near enough that we couldn't shoot them all down. We'd then flatten them with a targeted air campaign and a ground invasion by the South. There would be much, much fewer civilian casualties, no fallout etc.

Reply 296

rxns_00

Original post by 7rance

Don't discuss it with essays if you don't even address what I say to you...

You literally ignore every point I mention. I suppose my guesses were correct too lol

And once again what are you talking about adjectives about opinions? I was talking about the opinions and views I hold, and when saying I have a negative opinion I was saying I can hold an opinion against religion in general yet can still accept people do what they want and they can be religious if they like

Reply 297

bluhbluhbuh

Religion.

Plenty of others have already said it, i've nothing against religious people (my mums very religious and i love the hell out of her (heh, excuse pun)) but religion is taken so far people are willing to kill over it. Nobody should die for what they believe, and having a group of people under one belief system take it too far for those who don't share the same belief is doing more harm than good atm.

(when i said people, i meant normal people, not psychopaths. they aren't normal)

But then again, man and womankind (mankind more than womankind ye, fite me) will always find something to kill over. Human nature folks

Reply 298

7rance

Original post by rxns_00

If that's what it takes to float your boat, so may it be.

Reply 299

PTMalewski

Original post by Wolfram Alpha

If nuclear weapons were eradicated North Korea would not be able to develop nuclear weapons nor would Russia appear to be so dangerous.

Actually, strategic nuclear weapons are what assures peace beetwen superpower countries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction

And speaking of Russia, Russia is not agressive. Of course, there is some danger because of Russian collective character and post-Soviet politicians taking care of youth education in this country, but actually Russia acts more legit than USA, because Russia is the weaker and UN is a very good organization for them, to win many of their interests.

Ukrainian war is pretty much West's fault. I mean
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_abroad
is not any secret, neither the Russian fleet base at Crimea was not any secret. Their army backed from Germany to eastern boarders of Ukraine and Belarussia, they lost a large radar installations in Ukraine, they have only 140 million people and decresing, largely obsolete army and they are sitting on vast natuarl resources. What did you expect them to do? To lose control over Ukrainian government and risking their fleet base in Crimea, which would cause strategic danger to their west-southern flank, and discredit the Russian president in eyes of his nation, for letting the West to do whatever it wants iside the Near abroad? No way!