You may put the worlds Irony and Hippocrates on this Thread.
First.
John Stewart has Hilariously pointed out that Dr. Bachman (Michelle Bachman's husband who try's to "cure" gay people.) Is a FLAMING HOMOSEXUAL. Jerry Seinfeld is quoted saying.... "He buys Brawny paper towel for the packaging." that is IRONY AND HIPPOCRATIC.
These can be from the news and from life exp.
*don't post a story if you have not learned what irony or Hippocratic means.*
What is this thread even about? Homosexuality, I guess. Though the OP seemed like it was going for something closer to the title: Anyway, just here to answer a question:
I wonder if that could be regarded as ironic in some way?
Strictly speaking it COULD be REGARDED as irony IN SOME WAY. But it could also be regarded as an African auger buzzard in some way. Lots of things are like lots of other things when you stack on that many qualifiers.
It is neither ironic nor buzzard in any practical way.
you shouldn't, this is why i don't debate religion, in my opinion religion is an invention of men, to impose the will of men. Why believe in a god that has no evidence apart from the famously unreliable words of famously stupid and uneducated barbarians
With all due respect I can say whatever the hell I please. People shouldn't believe in my opinion, to my mind they have absolutely no reason to. Having said this it's not like I have any desire to stop or mock those that do.
With all due respect I can say whatever the hell I please. People shouldn't believe in my opinion, to my mind they have absolutely no reason to. Having said this it's not like I have any desire to stop or mock those that do.
I do hate how the internet is not able to translate tone of voice or the way people from different countries speak.
You can't say others shouldn't believe
If we were talking face to face this would have came across as: You; meaning everyone who denies religion, can't understand why a person believes and can't dispute it from that point of view. i wasn't saying you weren't entitled to an opinion.
What i'm saying is: People who do not believe can't understand 100% why someone does believe (Regardless of being an ex-Christian) Just like people who do believe can never understand why people believe in evolution (Even if they're a new Christian)
What i'm saying is: People who do not believe can't understand 100% why someone does believe (Regardless of being an ex-Christian) Just like people who do believe can never understand why people believe in evolution (Even if they're a new Christian)
Because t takes to have complete faith to understand it. I have complete faith in my God. Others have complete faith in science. Even if a newly religious person believed a scientific theory before, they cannot have understood it fully if they turned to religion. Just as someone who strays from religion - they're faith lies with science.
I don't see how a lack of faith means a lack of understanding? I understand fully what faith entails, I had complete faith, I lost it, my faith does not lie with science per say, it is simply that I see no evidence for a god, if I see some evidence, my opinions change, i have full understanding of faith, i just don't have it myself
