> EliteInternetWarrior wrote:

> > Chris_Balsz wrote:

> I can't think of one damn thing Republicans want that Colin Powell wants, mainly because colin powell hasn't named one.  He wants abortion legal, higher taxes, bigger government, an idle military, and Barack Obama in the White House. 

I want lower taxes, less government, a ban on socialism, abortion outlawed, ass kicked overseas, and some decent hardline conservative as president.  I guess I should join the Communist party and piss in their beer.

Yeah, I would want to impose my morals on others too.

Land of the free and all that.

yep, alot of nazi's in the right wing

right now, AMD's Phenom II are the best choice for a gaming computer. AMD also make processors that are superior in some super computers and mobile devices...

i didnt mention matrix, he did

also, not caring about "why" is very unscientific of you, thats what scientists always afk, why does this happen.

could be anything receiving stimulus from anything that our mind interprets as reality could even by our mind stimulating our mind.

"But the reason I gave is a good reason to prefer scientific models over religious models, in general."

agreed

"Who cares why he does."

why is very important.

"Just because there is no way to prove that we are not actually in the matrix"

you're regressing more, i already explained to you how the concept isnt contral on something intelligent purposely deceiving us.

"You always fall back to this sensory discussion because all of your other arguments are so weak."

i fall back to it, because you contradict yourself on the base lvl, i cant reason with someone who doesnt make any sense. now answer the question, and maybe you'll learn something about yourself.  if you believe there is no proof that anything we sense exists, why do you believe it exists?

"Of course I can't prove this."

so there is no proof that what you sense really exists. so why do you believe what you sense to exist?

"FFS, follow the link."
i did and i didnt see any proof.

"hahaha, you draw very long conlusions based upon nothing. Once again I should not be surprised about this. Lets go through this. avo: "I think we interpret things correctly" econ: "you never said that before" avo: "you are an idiot". Unbelieveable."

you skipped the previous statement you made. econ "You base your beliefs on nice feelings on the inside and some twisted version of reality in which our brain's probably don't interpret the universe around us correctly...."

"You dodged a great many questions I made throughout this thread"

i didnt dodge a single question; btw, nice job regressing to a kindergarden style argument; "you didnt, so i dont have to"

"Please, show me where you proved that 250 schools (in one country of 4 million people) being rifle with molestation is in line (or as you somehow delued yourself to, lower than) with the national/international average. Show me where you illustrated that two-thirds of high-level priests covering up the molestation is in line with national/international average for, say, school head masters/deans. NO WHERE near two-thirds of head masters/deans have had to even deal with this problem, let alone cover it up."

thats not what your sources proved. your sources proved there were accusations, not criminals. next your gonna say every muslim accused of being a terrorist, must be a terrorist and police agencies are just covering them up.

"
I understand it fine." apparently you dont, because you were claiming i beleived stuff that i dont.

"BS."

ok, where is the proof anything you sense is real?

"Again, two-thirds of the high-ranked priests in the study I quoted above covered up abuse. "

again, it was an accusation of abuse, not abuse. again; its like claiming every muslim reported as a terrorist must be one, and the police are covering it up.

"but now since the 90's people are starting to get the courage to come forward. Not just choir boys but women in society as well. Please tell me, does that seem like a plausable explanation to you?"

im not talking about from the 1600's im talking about there was a specific time, where it became big news and was in almost every news report. and almost all the accusations came at that time.  so no, what you just said does not account for that.

"
You haven't said that before."

i havent said the opposite, you just assumed thats what i beleived. idiot.

> Econ wrote:

> Nice way to get out of providing any back up supporting information. I'm going to say that next time someone challenges me to provide some.

it is, good thing im not shallow enough to use it that way. i havent provided sources for ic in years, because i simply dont care about trying to convince some idiot that already has his mind up. and while its fun talking to an idiot, just like its fun talking to a dog, it isnt fun looking up sites.

> Econ wrote:

> % of accusations is going to reflect % of guilty boy-rapers. I spent a few minutes to find something to back up what Im saying, your turn to provide some kind of research to back up your claims.

that is so false. with the negative press, not only are there going to be more accusations of innocent priests, but the juries and judges would be biased against them. if the media, which in turn means the society, is blaming an entire group for something, there are going to be tons of innocent people in that group that become victims. the lack of convictions, which is what makes their insurance cheaper, despite the bias against them, shows how many of them are innocent.

i could provide a source exemplifying 99% of the priests, and it wouldnt mean anything to you. theres no point in me doing in work, except for you to be able to stroke you're ego that you got someone of my intelligence to do work for you.

you can look at where its the worst in the world and say thats not below average, or you can look at the whole picture, and notice it is below average. it is cheaper to ensure a catholic school, because insurance companies, greedy capitalists keep record of that type of thing and notice it happens less often there.

also, 250 schools over what period of time?

"independent of the identity of God"

i dont think many religions believe that.

"Where does this come into it?!?!"

isnt it obvious? how do we get someone who is paralized, cant speak, hear, see, or talk to do what you and xeno want EVERYONE in the world to be able to do, EARN all their essential needs.