Johnny

Yantelope, nobody's going to go out and buy a book because you said so. We've explained to you how evolution works, could you please do the same and explain how your theory works? Not that you can. It's all bullshit, we all know it already. And you've already claimed evolution can't be disproved. Oh, incidentally: I didn't downvote any of your posts yet. Might go back and do that though, as it's already being assumed it's me.

What? No, what are you talking about. If evolution was wrong, it would be pretty simple to disprove it. There would be mountains of evidence showing that species do not slowly change over time (which is what evolution is).

You need to separate the terms "fact" and "theory". In science, a theory is a model used to explain the facts. For a scientific theory to stand it has to be able to withstand serious scrutiny (so-called peer review) from the scientific community. Evolution is a standing scientific theory which is not *fact*, but has stood up to decades upon decades of scrutiny. The scientific theory of evolution is not strictly speaking fact, but it is the model which all the facts support. It's not going to be completely disproved at this point, though some details of the theory are likely to be improved. Unless you want to believe that god is intentionally misleading us by making it look like it's true. In which case:

Are you serious? There's a very clear and important difference between teaching a personal belief and teaching something supported by facts. The image is making the point that you should not shove your personal beliefs, which is not based in evidence, down people's throats. At this point, arguing that evolution doesn't exist is a bit like arguing that the world is flat. You can see it in action every time you crossbreed two races or dogs, or every time a virus strain mutates.

Yep, sure, atheists are jerks when they make jokes such as this, but you make ignorant statements such as "atheists believe they are omniscient" and generally attack science because it doesn't follow your religion. Do you see how hypocritical this is?

Yes, it's punishing me by making sure the legit games don't work and the pirated games do, which leads to me not buying GFWL titles... You said smart, but to me it sounds retarded.

I've had everything from patches refusing to download, to the game kicking me out mid-session, to save games disappearing, and everything in between. The only times I've had it work without hitches is in pirated versions circumventing part or all of GFWL, amusingly enough.

I've said it before, but I'll pretty much not play a game if it has GFWL anymore. It's just causing way too many issues.

Oh? Well that's good. As I said, Swede here, not exactly up to date.

In regards to fox news, I can't claim to have a complete picture, but: I honestly don't care where Glenn Beck used to be. That's in the past. Right now he's making himself look like an ass on Fox, nowhere else. Also, I have not seen a single instance of Fox News reporting on anything relating to my country, Sweden, where they haven't skewed the story wildly to make us out as socialism taken to a ridiculous extreme. As for the rest of the ones mentioned, I don't have much of an opinion. They certainly seem more capable of reporting about scandinavia than Fox is. Not that that's an achievement.

A morrowind-based (particularly vvardenfell) expansion to Skyrim is pretty high on the list of things I want.

I'm pretty sure that's the point, it's ridiculous on purpouse.

That's pretty scummy of them, but Fox News is still pretty much run by rednecks. In all seriousness, there is no media source you should trust completely.

Stop playing devil's advocate and join us in our crusade.

Definitely. This is an anime thread, not a manga thread. Can't expect people in here to have read the mangas.

Made me laugh way too hard. Sorry. I just woke up. Punctuation, excel!

Two points: 1) I may not be a of expertise regarding psychology - if anyone here is, that'd be helpful - but just based off of listening to the people I know who are homosexuals, the way they describe their feelings for their chosen partner is pretty much identical to how the straight people I know describe their relationships. That suggests to me that it is the same on an emotional level. I think the only difference you can credibly argue is that they are physically two people of the same gender. I do not think there is any basis to judge that homosexual emotional connections are different from heterosexual ones. 2) I do not know why you think your definition of marriage is the original one. I've never seen a dictionary specifying that marriage is between a man or a woman, nor did I grow up in a community where the accepted definition is one where it has to be a heterosexual union.

If you're going to go into stuff like that, there are psychological differences between each and every one of us. One person might be diagnosed ADHD. Another person might be an ex-convict with a shaky past and heavy paranoia. Etc. etc. I do not think there are any noteworthy differences in the emotional connection between a homosexual and heterosexual couple, that are any larger than the differences you see between individual heterosexual couples. Unless you can point out exactly how homosexual couples are different psychologically, based on data, you're making a statement not worth the time of day. Newsflash: homosexuals have sex. I'm sorry, which part was the one that upset you, me explaining the term "leap of faith", or describing the christian faith as a faith? Yes, I am still a virgin at age 21. A variety of circumstances made me pretty indifferent to trying to find a girlfriend earlier in life, and I was never too interested in casual sex. Since those circumstances went away I have not met anyone interesting willing to start a relationship with me. That's life. Considering nearly all people have sex at some point in their lives, however, I find it extremely unlikely that I won't at some point. Now, for your accusation that there is nothing I don't hate, there seems to have been a misunderstanding. Though you are not to be found among them, there are plenty of things I don't hate. There are plenty of things and people I love. My dear friends (some of whom can be found on this very forum!) and my family are good examples. This feeling is mutual.

How is that a leap of faith? The amount of homosexuals in happy, loving relationships is reasonable evidence that homosexual relationships can foster deep emotional connections of the same kind heterosexual relationships can. You can not just claim that something is a leap of faith without backing it up. For something to be a leap of faith, it must be a claim made about a subject wherein we do not have data to determine the claim's correctness. For example, "there is a small tea pot orbiting around mars", or "there's a god and he thinks homosexual acts are bad."

I think the point was that kids was not so much the reason to get married as it was another wonderful thing she got out of the marriage.

You are however parts of international agreements and alliances which are in practice kind of world police