unable to believe things for which there is no evidence

Aaron wrote:

SamCogar wrote:

Aaron wrote:So basically you don't know if Mike's faith is based on fear or ignorance but it's definately one of the two, right!

Aaron, close your eyes for about 10 seconds, taking 5 or 6 deep breaths then open your eyes back up and read the following:...

Sam, I'm not trying to cram what I believe down your throat becasue honestly, I don't care if you believe or not. I really don't. I KNOW what I KNOW and your ranting and ravings aren't going to change that. At all.

And in the end, if you're right, then when I die, that's it. I go into a nothing and that's it. So what will the consquences of my faith be? Nothing, other them maybe it made me be a little bit better person then I otherwise would have been.

But if I'm right and you're wrong then when you die...

Cheers Sam.

LMAO!

That's hilarious. What if you and Sam are both wrong and the Muslims are "right"? What if the ancient Greeks were "right"?

You're too funny.

Stephanie wrote:

Aaron wrote:

SamCogar wrote:

Aaron wrote:So basically you don't know if Mike's faith is based on fear or ignorance but it's definately one of the two, right!

Aaron, close your eyes for about 10 seconds, taking 5 or 6 deep breaths then open your eyes back up and read the following:...

Sam, I'm not trying to cram what I believe down your throat becasue honestly, I don't care if you believe or not. I really don't. I KNOW what I KNOW and your ranting and ravings aren't going to change that. At all.

And in the end, if you're right, then when I die, that's it. I go into a nothing and that's it. So what will the consquences of my faith be? Nothing, other them maybe it made me be a little bit better person then I otherwise would have been.

But if I'm right and you're wrong then when you die...

Cheers Sam.

LMAO!

That's hilarious. What if you and Sam are both wrong and the Muslims are "right"? What if the ancient Greeks were "right"?

You're too funny.

If the Muslims are right then I'm good considering they base everything on how you lived your life on earth. Same thing with Buddahist and a few other religions so I'm covered there...

Oh yes, as your comments in another thread about vagina's clearly demonstrates, you are the epitome of virtue.

Stephanie wrote:Oh yes, as your comments in another thread about vagina's clearly demonstrates, you are the epitome of virtue.

My comments???

You really do have a comprehension problem, don't you Stephanie.

Go back, re-read the comment, then have your husband read it and explain it so that you understand that my comment was a remark directed at Ziggy's, not mine, for comparing a woman's vagina to a rental car.

I read it just fine, Aaron. Ziggy was explaining to you that women have a far greater sense of their worth, sexual and otherwise, than men do. Many men don't value women other than as sexual beings, a point that you highlighted with your comments.

Stephanie wrote:I read it just fine, Aaron. Ziggy was explaining to you that women have a far greater sense of their worth, sexual and otherwise, than men do. Many men don't value women other than as sexual beings, a point that you highlighted with your comments.

I agree with you Stephanie, 100%. I don't think Ziggy has any value or use for women other then as sexual objects. That might explain why he called all women whores. I would think you'd have a bit of a problem with that.

Stephanie, you need to do what Aaron told you to do a couple posts back- go back, re-read the comment, then have your husband read it, and then ask him to explain it.

Then hubby can explain to you that you and I don't have a clue about women and sexuality.

ziggy wrote:Stephanie, you need to do what Aaron told you to do a couple posts back- go back, re-read the comment, then have your husband read it, and then ask him to explain it.

Then hubby can explain to you that you and I don't have a clue about women and sexuality.

I would hope she does.

You on the other hand are the one that compared a prostitution to a rental car which was fine. But then you turned around and basically said all women knew "the worth of their sexuality as a valuable commodity..."

That sure sounds like you basicially said women 'sell' it to me, which is what I pointed out.

Sell it, trade it, barter it, loan it, or whatever- for emotional security, for physical security, for a short term sexual "fix", for financial security, for fatherhood of her children, for whatever it will bring that she either consciously or unconsciously wants.

The most foolish of women are wise about men. And the wisest of men will be fools about women.

Women are just working within the rules that the boys have created. Now you say you don't like the way the game is played. That's too bad, really.

Historically men have objectified women and treated them as little more than a package of sex organs who can cook, clean, and raise children. This has been the case throughout all of recorded history. Now here, in the USA and much of the Western world, women have made great strides in breaking through these stereotypes and accomplishing great things. Good for us!

Think about this, in this nation, black men who had been slaves were granted the right to vote decades before white women. What does that say to women about our worth?

I'm no Hillary Clinton fan, but think about the way she is discussed. Aaron talks about her thighs for crying out loud. This woman holds a law degree and has been a member of the US Senate for 8 years and he talks about how "hot" she is while I sit here and gag.

My point is, that the change in views most men have about women are only superficial. Most men still think of them as sex objects, playthings etc. Some of you are further evolved than others, but by and large women are sexual partners and mothers and little more to your average American male.

So why should anyone expect women will all of a sudden stop using their sexuality to their advantage? For thousands of years it has been the only thing men were interested in. We know, you know it, and most of us realize things really haven't changed all that much. Women are just using the only edge they have always been able to rely upon.

Aaron wrote:
And in the end, if you're right, then when I die, that's it. I go into a nothing and that's it. So what will the consquences of my faith be? Nothing, other them maybe it made me be a little bit better person then I otherwise would have been.

But if I'm right and you're wrong then when you die...

Cheers Sam.

Well now Aaron, does that mean that you now agree with part of my statement?

.

Stephanie wrote:Women are just working within the rules that the boys have created. Now you say you don't like the way the game is played. That's too bad, really.

Historically men have objectified women and treated them as little more than a package of sex organs who can cook, clean, and raise children. This has been the case throughout all of recorded history. Now here, in the USA and much of the Western world, women have made great strides in breaking through these stereotypes and accomplishing great things. Good for us!

Think about this, in this nation, black men who had been slaves were granted the right to vote decades before white women. What does that say to women about our worth?

I'm no Hillary Clinton fan, but think about the way she is discussed. Aaron talks about her thighs for crying out loud. This woman holds a law degree and has been a member of the US Senate for 8 years and he talks about how "hot" she is while I sit here and gag.

My point is, that the change in views most men have about women are only superficial. Most men still think of them as sex objects, playthings etc. Some of you are further evolved than others, but by and large women are sexual partners and mothers and little more to your average American male.

So why should anyone expect women will all of a sudden stop using their sexuality to their advantage? For thousands of years it has been the only thing men were interested in. We know, you know it, and most of us realize things really haven't changed all that much. Women are just using the only edge they have always been able to rely upon.

I don't need a woman to raise my kids thank you very much.

SamCogar wrote:

Aaron wrote:
And in the end, if you're right, then when I die, that's it. I go into a nothing and that's it. So what will the consquences of my faith be? Nothing, other them maybe it made me be a little bit better person then I otherwise would have been.

But if I'm right and you're wrong then when you die...

Cheers Sam.

Well now Aaron, does that mean that you now agree with part of my statement?

.

Nope Sam, not in the least. I believe what I believe which I don't try and push on anyone else. My response is a simple answer that I've used before when ask the same question... "But what if your wrong..."

I simply say then I was the best person I could be while I was alive.

As far as my time on this earth is concerned, is there really anything more I could ask for???

ziggy wrote:Sell it, trade it, barter it, loan it, or whatever- for emotional security, for physical security, for a short term sexual "fix", for financial security, for fatherhood of her children, for whatever it will bring that she either consciously or unconsciously wants.

The most foolish of women are wise about men. And the wisest of men will be fools about women.

Then I'm not a very wise man.

I don't need a woman to raise my kids thank you very much.

Ah, so now your children's mother is insignifcant. Did you breast feed them too?

I have a distinct memory of you telling us your sons spend part of their time with their mother, that you live in the same community etc. Either she is in their lives and contributes in raising them or she isn't.

Stephanie wrote:Oh yes, as your comments in another thread about vagina's clearly demonstrates, you are the epitome of virtue.

GEEEZE, I musta missed that one.

Anyway, I find this part of this thread quite amusing. Your all’s comments are full of inconsistencies and laced with your personal biases …….. and I will also add “half-truths”.

And what I mean by “half-truths” is when a trait is common among both sexes, …… males and females, ……. but said trait is only “pointed out” as being a characteristic of one or the other, but not both as it should be.

Aaron wrote:

Stephanie wrote:Ziggy was explaining to you that women have a far greater sense of their worth, sexual and otherwise, than men do. I don't agree with that statement no matter who said it.

Many men don't value women other than as sexual beings, a point that you highlighted with your comments. And I might add, .... Many women don't value men other than as a sexual beings. Women have just as many "affairs" as men do.

I agree with you Stephanie, 100%. I don't think Ziggy has any value or use for women other then as sexual objects. That might explain why he called all women whores. HA, white males seldom if ever refer to their "sexual object" as a hoar. Their use of said term is most always reserved for their EX-sexual object or a female that rejected them.

Now you all can "pick n' choose" examples from throughout human history to prove or justify your personal biases or to vent your hates and dislikes but the facts are, each person does what best suits their "needs and purpose" at any given time and that is because humans are:

symbiotic - refers to the intimate relationship between two organisms often resulting in mutualism (win-win), parasitism (win-lose), or commensalism (win-no harm).

And you gotta remember, symbiosis is not the same as "pair bonding" although there are rare cases of two humans engaging in said.

cheers

Stephanie wrote:

I don't need a woman to raise my kids thank you very much.

Ah, so now your children's mother is insignifcant. Did you breast feed them too?

I have a distinct memory of you telling us your sons spend part of their time with their mother, that you live in the same community etc. Either she is in their lives and contributes in raising them or she isn't.

Who said anything about other parents being insignifcant? Certainly not me.

I simpley stated that I don't need a woman to raise my kids. I didn't breast feed but then neither did she after the first. I got forumla, warmed it up and got up in the middle of the night and fed them, changed diapers and did everything for mine that you did for yours.

I think about the only way you could make the other parent insignifcant would be to remove the other parent complete from the childs life. Unlike many people, both me and my ex wife have realized that our children need BOTH their parents in their lifes. That still doesn't mean I need a woman to raise my kids.

Really I'm not surprised. You've been celibate for over 7 years. You probably don't need a woman for anything at all.

Stephanie wrote:Really I'm not surprised. You've been celibate for over 7 years. You probably don't need a woman for anything at all.

Apparently you missed that part as well so I'll try to explain it to you one more time.

In my 7 years of being single, I have come to the (admittedly jaded) conclusion that basically all women (at least all those in my age range) are pretty much the same. They're all looking for one of two things. Either someone to take care of them and the kids they had with another man or someone to father their own children because their clock is ticking. The vast majority weren't interest in my kids. In fact, many of them, once they found out I had kids, split faster then a supposedly dead beat dad.

I decided long ago that nothing was more important then my kids, I'm not interested in raising some other deadbeats kids and I'm certainly not interested in having more of my own, so I don't date a great deal, hence, no intimacy.

This lead me to discover that even in rural WV there is no shortage of women out there that are more then willing to be used for one thing and one thing only and quite honestly, I see no need to ever get married again.

And you want to know the best part Stephanie. Even though I've grown older, the women I use are all still pretty much the same age so I'm not dealing with the sags and droops...

Cheers

And you want to know the best part Stephanie. Even though I've grown older, the women I use are all still pretty much the same age so I'm not dealing with the sags and droops...

You admit to using women. Hmmmm..........

What's really sad is you don't even know what you're missing. I feel sorry for you.

Stephanie wrote:

And you want to know the best part Stephanie. Even though I've grown older, the women I use are all still pretty much the same age so I'm not dealing with the sags and droops...

You admit to using women. Hmmmm..........

What's really sad is you don't even know what you're missing. I feel sorry for you.

LOL...yeah, right. I suppose your ex doesn't know what he's missing either, huh.

You can save your pity because I'm not missing anything. What you think can only be given in a marriage or relationship, I have. I just choose to not sleep with the source what you think I'm missing.

The trade off is, I don't have to worry about hurting anyone's feelings, being accused of anything and I get to keep ALL of my money. Well, at least what the kids don't take.

There's also been no shortage of women willing to fulfill the other part of being a man either and I'm finding with some of the younger ones, that's all their looking for as well.

Ziggy had it right when he said women trade their sexuality. He was also right in what it inferred women are. They are, for the most part. They trade sex for someone to raise their kids because someone else won't. They trade it for a roof over their heads or a nicer car or for perceived security.

So tell me Stephanie, how does that make the vast majority of women any different from the women that trade it for money?

Aaron wrote:

SamCogar wrote:

Aaron wrote:
But if I'm right and you're wrong then when you die...

Well now Aaron, does that mean that you now agree with part of my statement?

Nope Sam, not in the least.

Then "if I'm wrong when I die" ........ WHAT, ...... Aaron, ...... tell me.

Aaron, face reality, ...... you statement "But if I'm right" implies a sense or feeling of fear on your part.

Your statement to me was a "WARNING" ....... and people only issue "warnings" whenever they think or know there is a possibility that something bad or discomforting will occur.

Aaron, Christianity started out teaching "hope and promises" of a better life in the "hereafter" and it garnered many converts because their lives under Roman rule was so bitter and unbearable. And they "believed" because it was their "only hope" of something better. And many took it so serious that they started committing infanticide, ….. killing their children, ….. thinking that if their children died it would solve two (2) of their children’s problems. One, they wouldn’t have to endure the “wrath of the Romans”, and two, they would not be capable of committing “a sin” …… and thus that would GUARANTEE them an automatic “ticket into Heaven”.

Well “DUH”, the “the wrath of the Romans” ceased in 312 AD when Constantine was Emperor and t’was sometime bout then the Church had to declare infanticide “a sin” and preached to the parents that they would “burn in Hell” if they did such an evil deed.

And thus, Constantine's Edict and the preaching of “fear, Hell fire and damnation” became the norm …… because it worked better at making them believers and garnering new converts than did the old message of "hope and promises".

And to this day, almost 1,700 years later, the "message" being preached by the Christians has remained basically the same ........ because it works.

And that "message of fear" has been nurtured into the minds of the children, ....... whether or not as adults, ....... they realize it or want to admit it.

cheers

SamCogar wrote:

Aaron wrote:

SamCogar wrote:

Aaron wrote:
But if I'm right and you're wrong then when you die...

Well now Aaron, does that mean that you now agree with part of my statement?

Nope Sam, not in the least.

Then "if I'm wrong when I die" ........ WHAT, ...... Aaron, ...... tell me.

Aaron, face reality, ...... you statement "But if I'm right" implies a sense or feeling of fear on your part.

No Sam my statement to you is nothing more then a concession to you because I'm not going to argue with you about it and I'm certainly not going to shove my beliefs down your throat.

It is merely an answer to the inevitable question of 'what if there is no after life?'. Instead of repeating my belief over and over again which will only lead to an argument, I merely say 'then I've been a good person and what am I out?'

So what am I out Sam, the pleasure of being a bad person and why is it SO important to you that I ‘come to my senses and realize what you think you know???

You can save your pity because I'm not missing anything. What you think can only be given in a marriage or relationship, I have. I just choose to not sleep with the source what you think I'm missing.

The trade off is, I don't have to worry about hurting anyone's feelings, being accused of anything and I get to keep ALL of my money. Well, at least what the kids don't take.

There's also been no shortage of women willing to fulfill the other part of being a man either and I'm finding with some of the younger ones, that's all their looking for as well.

Ziggy had it right when he said women trade their sexuality. He was also right in what it inferred women are. They are, for the most part. They trade sex for someone to raise their kids because someone else won't. They trade it for a roof over their heads or a nicer car or for perceived security.

So tell me Stephanie, how does that make the vast majority of women any different from the women that trade it for money?

You're missing far more than you know, I suspect because you never had it to begin with. You can't truly miss what you've never had, now can you?

I love all of my children with all of my heart and there is nothing and nobody more important to me than they are. I'm proud of my kids. The two middle ones are working really hard in school, getting good grades, preparing for their futures. The oldest is now a man. He supports himself and his daughter, is politically active and has an amazing circle of friends who would do anything for him. My youngest is a bright, articulate boy who loves learning and enjoys people. He's a trip, he'll tell you he's an artist now, but when he grows up he's going to be an entomologist.

I love them and I know they love me and I wouldn't trade a moment with them for anything. Still, I know I won't grow old with them. Two of them already left me. My daughter has told me repeatedly she wants to stay home with us and attend UC. She has no plans of leaving soon, but she'll go too. She'll meet some guy who won't be nearly good enough for her and start a family of her own one day. In a decade my baby will be old enough to drive a car and date girls. I hope he'll stay through college and beyond, but he is his father's son and my as well. We both left home by the age of 18.

When they're all gone I'll still have the best friend I've ever had right by my side. We'll have more time to do the things we enjoy doing together and hopefully I won't be too old to enjoy them.

I really need to start taking better care of myself. lol

You can sex anywhere, Aaron. You can get it for money, or for dinner & a movie. There sure are a lot of sexually aggressive women of all ages around who want nothing more than a physical relationship, or a one night stand and we all know there are plenty of guys out there willing to oblige. You're not telling me anything I don't already know.

What I'm telling you is you could have sex with every willing woman in the nation and none of it will compare to what my husband and I have. There is the love, of course, but I'm talking about something beyond even that. That's what you don't understand and that's why I feel sorry for you.

I'll bet my eye teeth Ziggy knows what I'm talking about, though. That's why I consider him to be a very lucky man. I consider him to be a wise man because he knows how fortunate he is.

Aaron wrote:
No Sam my statement to you is nothing more then a concession to you because I'm not going to argue with you about it and I'm certainly not going to shove my beliefs down your throat.

It is merely an answer to the inevitable question of 'what if there is no after life?'.

Aaron, I have never asked that question of you , ....... nor do I have a need to.

Aaron wrote:Instead of repeating my belief over and over again which will only lead to an argument, I merely say 'then I've been a good person and what am I out?'

So what am I out Sam, the pleasure of being a bad person .....

Aaron wrote:and why is it SO important to you that I ‘come to my senses and realize what you think you know???

Aaron, on page 1 of this string you asked, I told you, to wit:

SamCogar wrote:

Aaron wrote:

SamCogar wrote:That keeps the conversation on "friendly terms" ......... because it is not a "direct attack" of/on their ignorant beliefs.

Why are their beliefs "ignorant" Sam?

Ignorant - Ignorance is a lack of knowledge. Ignorance is also the state of being ignorant or uninformed. For example, "Bill lost the debate because he was ignorant of that subject. ...

"All religions are based on fear and ignorance."

And you have been denying what I told you ever since ...... and that "denial" is the only thing of interest to me because it is an accusation that I am in error about what I stated.

Aaron, I first learned about people's "religious beliefs" from a great teacher, ...... my Mother. She didn't "fool me" when I was about 4 - 6 years old .......... and you are not "fooling me" now, ........ OK.

I know the "whys, hows and what fors" concerning said beliefs because I have studied and thought about it for 60+ years.

Aaron, do you consciously know why you speak and think via the English language? Hell no you don't, ....... not consciously. As far as you know it is just a "natural thingy", ...... but in truth it is because that is the way you were nurtured to talk and think.

Do you consciously know why your belief or faith is that of the Christian religion? Why not the Muslim, Buddhist or some other religion? Did you convert from one of the others to Christianity or is Christianity just sorta kinda a "natural religion" you believe in?

Aaron, just how much do you actually know about the origins of the Christian religion?

If you only know what your parents, teachers, preachers or your Bible tells you ......... then you don't know very much and therefore you are basically ignorant of said origins.

cheers