Controversial Opinions on Life

[The Ozzman]

Quantum mechanics is pseudo-religious bullshit and isn't good science.

wat

People in western civilization are continuously discouraged from becoming adults. It is now considered statutory rape for an 18 year old to have consensual sex with a 17 year old. Obama's healthcare law allows for people to stay on their parent's insurance until they are 26. It used to be, in America, when you turned 16, you could drive a car. Now, in many states, you have to be 18. It is becoming less socially acceptable to have children before age 30. I could go on and on...

Which states make it to where you can't drive a car until you're 18? That seems very fucking ridiculous.

I don't want children until after I'm 30 because I want to get all the bullshit out of my system before I think about taking care of a child.

edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver's_license_in_the_United_States

When were these laws changed? I got my license at 17.5 in Ohio, but this was also in 2001..

 

[Vimana]

Like you don't continue in the standard schooling without a certain level of aptitude.

I think that's a bad idea. There are lots of smart people that don't do well in school. Screening like that could prevent some smart minds from getting to good places.

 

[Dak]

I don't want children until after I'm 30 because I want to get all the bullshit out of my system before I think about taking care of a child.

Trust me on this, you want as much energy as you can get when dealing with the first few months. The older you get the harder it is. You will have one and then say "fuck this".

 

[The Ozzman]

Meh, I'm bordering on not having children right now but that will change with the right person probably.

 

[Dak]

This is pretty accurate lol.

 

[Saparmurat_Niyazov]

I am curious as to what "holistic medicine" Sap considers bullshit. People are discouraged from becoming adults because children are easily led around by the nose and distracted by flashing lights and loud noises.

Chiropractics, for one.
And yes, that is a good reason why so many people don't develop emotionally and intellectually.

wat

In general, it makes sense, but it seems that the research and theorems are getting more speculative. I'm just saying I'd like to see a lot less brainstorming and a lot more hard science.

Which states make it to where you can't drive a car until you're 18? That seems very fucking ridiculous.

I don't want children until after I'm 30 because I want to get all the bullshit out of my system before I think about taking care of a child.

edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver's_license_in_the_United_States

When were these laws changed? I got my license at 17.5 in Ohio, but this was also in 2001..

I meant full, unrestricted license. That's 19 states by my count, which would count as "many" in my book.
I got married and became a stepfather at 25 and had my daughter when I was 29. A lot of friends and acquaintances, it seemed to me, implied that I was making a bad decision. I think only the individual knows when they are done "sewing their wild oats", as they said in the Eddie Murphy classic Coming To America :Spin:; the right to time to settle down should not be tied to a numeric age. This of course is only true to a point; high schoolers have no business having kids.

 

[Tonka Time]

All drugs need to be legalized....immediately
Sometimes hard science requires hard drugs.

People shouldn't have children until they are able to finance it and/or care for the child properly.

The existence of dieties can not and will never be disproved in this life/consciousness.
To say "this is what said dietie wills" is to be a fool.

 

[Zephyrus]

The burden is not on us to disprove them.

 

[Vimana]

People shouldn't have children until their biggest concern is how well they will raise them.

 

[Dak]

I am amused by people who attempt or feel the need to "prove" their deity. Assuming a deity exists, it can speak for itself.

Edit: Vimana is correct. Providing food/shelter/clothing/love/discipline is all that is needed. Too many people think they need to have the perfect baby room with the matching furniture and the college fund started or some bullshit.

 

[Vimana]

I read this book that apparently gives a good rational argument for the existence of God, but it was just rehashing the argument of "God exists because most cultures had gods!" It sucked so much. People need to stop trying to rationalize their faith.

 

[Saparmurat_Niyazov]

I am amused by people who attempt or feel the need to "prove" their diety. Assuming a diety exists, it can speak for itself.

Edit: Vimana is correct. Providing food/shelter/clothing/love/discipline is all that is needed. Too many people think they need to have the perfect baby room with the matching furniture and the college fund started or some bullshit.

So are you admitting that even though you firmly believe in God that you may be wrong?
And again, you are correct (in regards to parenthood). I agree with you too much lately.

I read this book that apparently gives a good rational argument for the existence of God, but it was just rehashing the argument of "God exists because most cultures had gods!" It sucked so much. People need to stop trying to rationalize their faith.

Was it by Carl Gustav Jung, Mircea Eliade, E.E. Evans-Pritchard, or Clifford Geertz?

 

[Tonka Time]

The burden is not on us to disprove them.

Very true.

Nor is it to prove them.

I was going to also say it is impossible to prove in this life, but I assume if a "god" exists and wants to be known it would be quite possible.

Basically any man who holds any belief about god/gods as fact either rejecting or accepting is imo wrong in doing so. And by "as fact" I guess I mean more along the lines of impossing the thought on others or stating it as a fact in debates. In the end it's all man-made ideas about things that aren't man-made.

This is all leaning more towards when introducing other people into the equation. If someone holds something as fact, there really isnt anything wrong with it until it comes to using the idea to affect others.

 

[Dak]

So are you admitting that even though you firmly believe in God that you may be wrong?

No, I feel like a deity "revealed" himself to me (no homo ) so therefore I do not consider it possible that I am wrong. My point was that it is not possible to "prove" the existence of a deity, so the "Christian Apologetics" etc. out there are wasting their time.

If you believe in a deity, but don't think it can/will speak for itself/reveal itself, why do you even believe in it yourself? Because assuming that, you would merely have been taking someone's word for the whole thing.

It's no wonder people can religion hop, or jump in and out of it. They are being argued in, for lack of a better way to put it. If you get argued in, you can get argued out.

Edit: Not to mention being argued into any religion would require a complete abandonment of logic.....

 

[Tonka Time]

No, I feel like a diety "revealed" himself to me (no homo ) so therefore I do not consider it possible that I am wrong. My point was that it is not possible to "prove" the existence of a diety...

This.

I just chose the word disprove instead. I feel it is more "widely correct" for lack of better words.

 

[Saparmurat_Niyazov]

No, I feel like a deity "revealed" himself to me (no homo ) so therefore I do not consider it possible that I am wrong. My point was that it is not possible to "prove" the existence of a deity, so the "Christian Apologetics" etc. out there are wasting their time.

If you believe in a deity, but don't think it can/will speak for itself/reveal itself, why do you even believe in it yourself? Because assuming that, you would merely have been taking someone's word for the whole thing.

It's no wonder people can religion hop, or jump in and out of it. They are being argued in, for lack of a better way to put it. If you get argued in, you can get argued out.

Edit: Not to mention being argued into any religion would require a complete abandonment of logic.....

You're a lot more of a rational thinker than a lot of other religious folks, but how can you be certain that your "revelation" isn't possibly a misinterpretation or a delusion? I guess I am convinced that there is no god because I have never witnessed anything I would call divine, and I understand how everything I have ever seen happen (outside of certain human behaviors) can be explained by logic, reason, and hard evidence.

 

[Dak]

Well it is not possible to do either. As I said before, assuming the existence of a deity, it would be quite capable if it so chose to prove itself. So we must either conclude it doesn't exist, or choses not to prove itself in a broad manner at this time.

You're a lot more of a rational thinker than a lot of other religious folks, but how can you be certain that your "revelation" isn't possibly a misinterpretation or a delusion? I guess I am convinced that there is no god because I have never witnessed anything I would call divine, and I understand how everything I have ever seen happen (outside of certain human behaviors) can be explained by logic, reason, and hard evidence.

I had this discussion with some agnostic friends and my response is "Well when you know you know, and if you don't, there's certainly nothing I can tell you". It's certainly nothing but anecdotal, and that's sure as hell not admissible.

Edit: Could it be a delusion? Well I assume that's a possibility, but unless my life turns into a flaming wreckage due to my beliefs, I have no reason to care, do I?

Edit#2: It can't be a misinterpretation, because assuming I was "contacted", why would said divine thing go through the trouble of reaching out to me and then allow the misinterpretation? That would seem rather dumb.

 

[Saparmurat_Niyazov]

Well obviously, there are certain things that no one can be convinced of, and the pious and skeptical are clearly the hardest to sway.

 

[Dak]

See my edits regarding the other questions.

I get most annoyed now with certain devout Baptist family members who still think they can "prove" their beliefs. We also disagree on many things in and about the Bible, so I generally can't even have "religious" discussions with my religious family members .

 

[Tonka Time]

I personally have no set religous belief. I take in what I see from every viewpoint. I believe in God. I use christian words for this God because I was brought up Lutheran. I am not a christian.
I believe in ultimate good(what I call God) and ultimate evil(What I call Satan). Good and Evil can not be taught, only experienced or "felt". This is what makes it different from right and wrong, correct and incorrect. This seems to be where I disagree with religions. But I still see the role they play in the big picture.
If it exists, I accept it and wish it the best whatever it's best is. So in a way "May sadness be its saddest, good be great, shit be its shittiest,..."
I accept and support evil because I believe it is a tool of good.
I accept and support good because I believe it can be used for evil.
I believe this creates balance, and ultimately my "knowledge" of this has caused peace within myself.

The knowledge of good and evil. Which, in the bible, is the fruit that god commands not to be eaten.
There is a god and a devil within us all. And the microcosm affects the macrocosm, and vice versa.


As for this life: The answer to life is death. The answer to death is birth. This is True.
(People always seem to ask "What is the answer to life?" To which I must ask "Why?")
Because this is true I believe existence is endless.
Life is a refinery, refining humans and enriching thier potential.
So "How is one supposed to live?" However the fuck you want