NationStates Jolt Archive

Some stats from Playboy.

Time Served
Average sentence a murder would get if the victim is:
Umemployed: 9.3 years
A prior violent offender: 9.6 years
Under 12 years old: 11.4 years
A black man: 11.6 years
A white man: 14.7 years
A black woman: 17.1 years
Over 65: 18.6 years
A white woman: 19.0 years

Outrageous Fortunes of War
As reparations for "lost profits" due to the ongoing conflict, Iraq has paid:
$18 million to Halliburton
$3.8 million to Pepsi
$2.6 million to Nestle
$1.6 million to Shell
$321,000 to KFC
$189,000 to Toys "R" Us

Church and State
38% of Americans wouldn't vote for a well-qualified Muslim for president.
52% wouldn't vote for a well-qualified Atheist for president.

That should spark some debate.

The people who would normally dispute your statistics and engage in argument (?) will be frightened off by the Playboy reference in the thread title.

Wow.

I can only assume that women average longer sentences for murder because there are less cases of women murderers and where there are, the cases usually involve killing children. But that does not really explain the data.

The women are the victim. All the data is concerning the victim, not the murderer.

Why so many years for the old people?

*runs out to get a job*

Aw hell, as a hetero female, I'm one of the few people who actually does read it primarily for the articles. It has some great ones. People shouldn't be scared off by it. Great interveiws too.

As for the stats, they only confirm my opinions on the judicial system and the reason we're in Iraq.

id vote for an atheist president

The women are the victim. All the data is concerning the victim, not the murderer.
Yeah, I saw that right before I read your reply. My bad.

You know, it kind of makes sense that more people would elect a Muslim person as President as opposed to an atheist. I know I would. To me, an atheist is more likely to ban religions and I am about the right to believe in whatever you want.

Playboy has articles?? :p

Playboy is more than tits and vaginas.

Yeah, I saw that right before I read your reply. My bad.

You know, it kind of makes sense that more people would elect a Muslim person as President as opposed to an atheist. I know I would. To me, an atheist is more likely to ban religions and I am about the right to believe in whatever you want.

Wouldn't an atheist be more likely to go 'believe whatever you want, but don't push it on others/keep it the hell out of the legal/education system'?

Afterall, it's not *our* belief system that says stuff about the 'correct' religion or the 'one true' god, or anything like that. Personally, as an atheist, I can't think of any reason I'd want to ban religion...

But then, I'd rather commit ritualistic seppuku than be president in America currently, so it's all good.

Yeah, I saw that right before I read your reply. My bad.

You know, it kind of makes sense that more people would elect a Muslim person as President as opposed to an atheist. I know I would. To me, an atheist is more likely to ban religions and I am about the right to believe in whatever you want.


I'm Atheist, and i have a lot of atheist friends, and I don't think any of them, and I kno I wouldn't ban religion. I am all about the right to believe in whatever you want, I just don't choose to believe in God

I don't completely understand the "lost profits" part- are those companies suing the brand new govt. of Iraq? How did something like KFC lose profits from the war, and why the hell should Iraq pay for it?

I'm Atheist, and i have a lot of atheist friends, and I don't think any of them, and I kno I wouldn't ban religion. I am all about the right to believe in whatever you want, I just don't choose to believe in God

I'm agnostic, but I second that.

Wouldn't an atheist be more likely to go 'believe whatever you want, but don't push it on others/keep it the hell out of the legal/education system'?

Afterall, it's not *our* belief system that says stuff about the 'correct' religion or the 'one true' god, or anything like that. Personally, as an atheist, I can't think of any reason I'd want to ban religion...

But then, I'd rather commit ritualistic seppuku than be president in America currently, so it's all good.

I'll second that, too! :p

What kinda murder are we talkin' about? Vol. MS, Invol. MS., 1st degree murder, or 2nd degree murder?

I know very few atheists that would care to ban religion. On the other hand, I've seen plenty of Muslims and tons of Christians that would make everyone live in a theocracy of their choice.

Some stats from Playboy.

Time Served
Average sentence a murder would get if the victim is:
Umemployed: 9.3 years
A prior violent offender: 9.6 years
Under 12 years old: 11.4 years
A black man: 11.6 years
A white man: 14.7 years
A black woman: 17.1 years
Over 65: 18.6 years
A white woman: 19.0 years

Outrageous Fortunes of War
As reparations for "lost profits" due to the ongoing conflict, Iraq has paid:
$18 million to Halliburton
$3.8 million to Pepsi
$2.6 million to Nestle
$1.6 million to Shell
$321,000 to KFC
$189,000 to Toys "R" Us

Church and State
38% of Americans wouldn't vote for a well-qualified Muslim for president.
52% wouldn't vote for a well-qualified Atheist for president.

That should spark some debate.


This just goes to show how ignorant much of America is, namely the Southern states.

I know very few atheists that would care to ban religion. On the other hand, I've seen plenty of Muslims and tons of Christians that would make everyone live in a theocracy of their choice.

Such as Roman Catholics, you can believe whatever you want, as long as I agree with it

You guys might be different but a lot of atheists I have met think religion should be banned and think it is the most evil thing ever created. And a lot of them look down upon believers, almost as if they were inferior.

An agnostic would be the most open-minded

You guys might be different but a lot of atheists I have met think religion should be banned and think it is the most evil thing ever created. And a lot of them look down upon believers, almost as if they were inferior.

An agnostic would be the most open-mindedTell your friends I called them 'Religious Atheists.'

Personally I think religion is a little silly, but hardly to the extent to wish it illegal. Everybody should have the right to make up their own mind about why we're here or where we came from. Some of my religious friends get great comfort from their beliefs, it'd be cruel to deny people that. Besides, I think reality shows are a lot more silly, but I don't advocate banning them. I just don't watch them.

Tell your friends I called them 'Religious Atheists.'
They would love that :)

You guys might be different but a lot of atheists I have met think religion should be banned and think it is the most evil thing ever created. And a lot of them look down upon believers, almost as if they were inferior.

No, no. As an athiest I think religion can be quite beautiful, inspiring some of the most astounding artwork ever seen.

Institutionalized religion, you know, the religions that become part of the state? That is fucking evil. As soon as some 'leader' starts saying his laws come from god, watch the fuck out.

No worries though, when I'm declared Supreme Hegemon of the world, all religions will be legal and tax free. However I'm gonna ban Christmas themed music in stores. Bloody annoying.

This just goes to show how ignorant much of America is, namely the Southern states.

God, I am so tired of people generalizing the South. Christ, just cause we have a few nutjobs doesn't mean were all that way.

However I'm gonna ban Christmas themed music in stores. Bloody annoying.
All hail the Supreme Hegemon! :D

You guys might be different but a lot of atheists I have met think religion should be banned and think it is the most evil thing ever created. And a lot of them look down upon believers, almost as if they were inferior.

An agnostic would be the most open-minded

What the hell is an agnostic anyways? Is it like Deism, you believe there is a god but your not sure? Totally lost on that one.

What the hell is an agnostic anyways? Is it like Deism, you believe there is a god but your not sure? Totally lost on that one.
Agnosticism is often confused with atheitism but they are not the same. An agnostic is unsure whether a god exists or ir any religion is right. I suppose it is the same as being a deist.

God, I am so tired of people generalizing the South. Christ, just cause we have a few nutjobs doesn't mean were all that way.that would be fine if you didn't keep voting them into office

Agnosticism is often confused with atheitism but they are not the same. An agnostic is unsure whether a god exists or ir any religion is right. I suppose it is the same as being a deist.

I've encountered that confusion in the past, example:

Me: "I'm an atheist."

Them: "You're not sure that god exists?"

Me: "No, I'm an atheist, I don't believe in a supreme being."

Them: "But you believe in a cosmic consciousness?"

Me: "No, I'm an A-T-H-E-I-S-T."

I've started identifying myself as a radical atheist recently. I've noticed that the same confusion no longer occurs.

A deist believes there is a supernatural force of some sort that created life. They just don't subscibe to the idea that it fits the image of any particuliar religion. An agnostic says they don't know what happened, and don't think it is knowable.

An agnostic is unsure whether a god exists or ir any religion is right. I suppose it is the same as being a deist.

Oh, yeah. You gotta look for a better definition than that. It makes it sound like you are some sort of rudderless boat, wanderring, forlorn, looking for something to worship.

If you want that something to be me, fine. I'll accept your adulation.

This is what my dictionary says:

Main Entry: de·ism
Pronunciation: 'dE-"i-z&m, 'dA-
Function: noun
Usage: often capitalized
: a movement or system of thought advocating natural religion, emphasizing morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the Creator with the laws of the universe
- de·ist /'dE-ist, 'dA-/ noun, often capitalized
- de·is·tic /dE-'is-tik, dA-/ adjective
- de·is·ti·cal /-ti-k&l/ adjective
- de·is·ti·cal·ly /-ti-k(&-)lE/ adverb

2 entries found for agnostic.
To select an entry, click on it.
agnostic[1,noun]agnostic[2,adjective]

Main Entry: 1ag·nos·tic
Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g-
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know -- more at KNOW
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
- ag·nos·ti·cism /-t&-"si-z&m/ noun

A deist believes there is a supernatural force of some sort that created life. They just don't subscibe to the idea that it fits the image of any particuliar religion. An agnostic says they don't know what happened, and don't think it is knowable.

I like that definition of agnostic a hell of a lot better. An out and out admission that they don't know. Rarely does one ever encounter a similar case of humility.

Question though, how does an agnostic develop a moral code?

Playboy is more than tits and vaginas.

admittingly its been a while since I have picked up a Playboy (as my wife gets insecure about such things) I don't remember ever seeing vaginas in it... thats more of a Penthouse thing

I miss the cartoons a lot though, and some of the best writers in America have written articles or short stories or novel excerpts for the magazine (Roots first appeared there, so did stories from Asimov, Arthur C Clarke, and articles from Hunter S Thompson and many others)

ok, I miss looking at the pictures too

that would be fine if you didn't keep voting them into office

Who are you referring to? Bush maybe? 'Cause last I checked he's from Texas and Texas is very different than the rest of the South. Trust me, I lived there for 6 yrs. Texas is almost it's own friggin' country. Plus the Prez's approval rate right now is 57% which to means that the majority of the country doesn't view him as a nutjob, though that may change the next time the wind blows.

I like that definition of agnostic a hell of a lot better. An out and out admission that they don't know. Rarely does one ever encounter a similar case of humility.

Question though, how does an agnostic develop a moral code?

Ethics do not require a religious basis (ever hear of the Greek Stoics?), but it does help it seems.

I wouldn't vote for an Athiest because frankly I want the President to feel responsible to some higher power but thats just me

Oh, yeah. You gotta look for a better definition than that. It makes it sound like you are some sort of rudderless boat, wanderring, forlorn, looking for something to worship.

If you want that something to be me, fine. I'll accept your adulation.
Only if you read it that way. My definition was the simplified version. In fact, I see little difference in the meanings that both me and Bitchkitten gave.

I've encountered that confusion in the past, example:

Me: "I'm an atheist."

Them: "You're not sure that god exists?"

Me: "No, I'm an atheist, I don't believe in a supreme being."

Them: "But you believe in a cosmic consciousness?"

Me: "No, I'm an A-T-H-E-I-S-T."

I've started identifying myself as a radical atheist recently. I've noticed that the same confusion no longer occurs.


My brother to lady inviting him to her church: No thanks, I'm an atheist.

Lady: Aren't you afraid of going to hell?

Brother: No, I'm an atheist.

Lady: But aren't you afraid of going to hell?

Brother: No, I'm an ATHEIST. Look, lets say there's a tribe in South America that believes the Oogey-Boogey man will come get you if you don't light a bonfire in front of your door every night. Do you light a bonfire in front of your door every night?

Lady: Of course not!

Brother: Aren't you afraid the Oogey-Boogey man will come get you?

I still don't think she got it. :rolleyes:

My brother to lady inviting him to her church: No thanks, I'm an atheist.

Lady: Aren't you afraid of going to hell?

Brother: No, I'm an atheist.

Lady: But aren't you afraid of going to hell?

Brother: No, I'm an ATHEIST. Look, lets say there's a tribe in South America that believes the Oogey-Boogey man will come get you if you don't light a bonfire in front of your door every night. Do you light a bonfire in front of your door every night?

Lady: Of course not!

Brother: Aren't you afraid the Oogey-Boogey man will come get you?

I still don't think she got it. :rolleyes:


Yeah, uber-religious types generally don't quite understand the whole atheist thing

I like that definition of agnostic a hell of a lot better. An out and out admission that they don't know. Rarely does one ever encounter a similar case of humility.

Question though, how does an agnostic develop a moral code?

You can believe something is wrong without having a higher power tell you that. I was raised with firm beliefs of right and wrong and both my parents are atheists. I just belive harming someone is wrong, unless there are extenuating cicumstances. Like they plan you harm or you can't reasonably avoid it.

BTW, by uber-relgious types, i mean people that wake you up at 5 in the morning to tell you that you're going to hell and such

The question is actually a valid one. "I'm an atheist, I don't believe there is a god."
"You're not scared of going to hell?"
"No I don't believe in hell"
"Ah, but if hell does truly exist and your an atheist your kind of stuck aren't you"
"Uh yeah"
"So, you're not the least bit your worried your wrong?"
"Nope"
"Whats 6 x 9?"
"54"
"Its 42 in Base 13, you thought you were right huh?"

Only if you read it that way. My definition was the simplified version. In fact, I see little difference in the meanings that both me and Bitchkitten gave.

And if you'd read my response to bitchkitten you'd see that I read her post and acknowledged her post.

Back to the question I asked her: as an atheist I've always been puzzled that by agnostics and ethics. The theists have an easy time, they just read some book to tell them what to think, and most of the books agree about what is good and bad anyways. Atheists believe that morality can be arrived at through reason.

How do agnostics get there?

what if everyone goes to hell except the atheists?

My brother to lady inviting him to her church: No thanks, I'm an atheist.

Lady: Aren't you afraid of going to hell?

Brother: No, I'm an atheist.

Lady: But aren't you afraid of going to hell?

Brother: No, I'm an ATHEIST. Look, lets say there's a tribe in South America that believes the Oogey-Boogey man will come get you if you don't light a bonfire in front of your door every night. Do you light a bonfire in front of your door every night?

Lady: Of course not!

Brother: Aren't you afraid the Oogey-Boogey man will come get you?

I still don't think she got it. :rolleyes:

ROFL!! I usually don't have conversations with the uber religious types, they're easily avoidable in Toronto, but if I'm ever stuck in a similar conversation again I'll remember that one.

The question is actually a valid one. "I'm an atheist, I don't believe there is a god."
"You're not scared of going to hell?"
"No I don't believe in hell"
"Ah, but if hell does truly exist and your an atheist your kind of stuck aren't you"
"Uh yeah"
"So, you're not the least bit your worried your wrong?"
"Nope"
"Whats 6 x 9?"
"54"
"Its 42 in Base 13, you thought you were right huh?"

So I should believe in god not out of any religious conviction, but purely to avoid going to hell? That strikes me as completely insincere, not to mention gutless.

So I should believe in god not out of any religious conviction, but purely to avoid going to hell? That strikes me as completely insincere, not to mention gutless.
no kidding, besides in some religions you'd probably end up giong to hell anyway for not being truely sincere to your religion

The question is actually a valid one. "I'm an atheist, I don't believe there is a god."
"You're not scared of going to hell?"
"No I don't believe in hell"
"Ah, but if hell does truly exist and your an atheist your kind of stuck aren't you"
"Uh yeah"
"So, you're not the least bit your worried your wrong?"
"Nope"
"Whats 6 x 9?"
"54"
"Its 42 in Base 13, you thought you were right huh?"

.... but it's STILL 54. Just because '6 x 9' can equal more than one thing doesn't mean that you're only correct if you believe it equals one of them.

Unless you're saying everyone should believe in EVERY god that they hear of, because otherwise they risk being punished in the afterlife.

Hell, even if they did that they'd risk going to hell, since so many gods say 'if you believe in any god other than me you're going to hell whether you worship me or not'.

Realistically, if there's any god at all, the majority of people are going to get screwed over in the afterlife. More people will be better off if there's no god at all.

So I should believe in god not out of any religious conviction, but purely to avoid going to hell? That strikes me as completely insincere, not to mention gutless.

It is insincere and completely gutless yes. It has nothing to do with whether you should believe in god or not, but whether you should fear hell. Even one who is a true religious atheist would fear the possibility of hell.

.... but it's STILL 54. Just because '6 x 9' can equal more than one thing doesn't mean that you're only correct if you believe it equals one of them.

Unless you're saying everyone should believe in EVERY god that they hear of, because otherwise they risk being punished in the afterlife.

Hell, even if they did that they'd risk going to hell, since so many gods say 'if you believe in any god other than me you're going to hell whether you worship me or not'.

Realistically, if there's any god at all, the majority of people are going to get screwed over in the afterlife. More people will be better off if there's no god at all.

I like the way Narnia worked. Good actions dedicated to the wrong God still go to the right god, whatever name you choose to address it to. Bad actions dedicated to God still go to the Devil, whatever name you wished to address. I don't believe in the idea that God will smite good men who said the wrong name in prayer. I refuse to believe it, still I can fear that I am wrong.

It is insincere and completely gutless yes. It has nothing to do with whether you should believe in god or not, but whether you should fear hell. Even one who is a true religious atheist would fear the possibility of hell..

What the fuck are you talking about? I'm an A-T-H-E-I-S-T, ergo, I don't believe in any of that god/devil/heaven/hell bullshit. Why should I fear any of it. Religious atheist is a nonsensical term that was used earlier on this thread to denote an agnostic.



I like the way Narnia worked. Good actions dedicated to the wrong God still go to the right god, whatever name you choose to address it to. Bad actions dedicated to God still go to the Devil, whatever name you wished to address. I don't believe in the idea that God will smite good men who said the wrong name in prayer. I refuse to believe it, still I can fear that I am wrong.

So our morality and religious belief should be based on the construct of a fantasy world? I'm usually not this harsh when arguing with theists but could you devote a bit of brain matter to at least trying to string togethor an intelligent argument, rather than appallingly witless sound bites?

As far as I can get from your collected statements is that I should believe in god because I should be afraid of burning in hell. And, even if I believe in the wrong god it's okay as long as I'm good. Since any good actions will go to god (whatever the fuck that last sentence means, do they get poker chips?)

Is that a sound summary?

I like the way Narnia worked. Good actions dedicated to the wrong God still go to the right god, whatever name you choose to address it to. Bad actions dedicated to God still go to the Devil, whatever name you wished to address. I don't believe in the idea that God will smite good men who said the wrong name in prayer. I refuse to believe it, still I can fear that I am wrong.

Well. I don't believe in the idea that God will smite good men who simply don't believe in gods, but who do good things for the sake of doing good things, not because they want to score some eternal brownie points.

And I don't fear what I can't change. It's not particularly healthy, but it works for me.

This is fantastic. I put up stats about Atheism, Racism and Sexism, and Iraq. I knew that the debating would get far too dramatic for my tastes, so I did it as sort of an experiment. From those three completely different topics, the thread instantly went into a atheist validation thread. Homosexuality came up somehow, from I don't know where.

This result is not far from what I expected, but I thought that the Iraqi stats would cause a little bit of a detour, little did I know the detour would be homosexuality. Anyways, carry on, you zealots. ;)

The question is actually a valid one. "I'm an atheist, I don't believe there is a god."
"You're not scared of going to hell?"
"No I don't believe in hell"
"Ah, but if hell does truly exist and your an atheist your kind of stuck aren't you"
"Uh yeah"
"So, you're not the least bit your worried your wrong?"
"Nope"
"Whats 6 x 9?"
"54"
"Its 42 in Base 13, you thought you were right huh?"

Fifty-four in any base is still fifty-four. In base 13, it's written 42. In base fifty-four, it's written 10. In base pi, it's a number with an infinite number of digits.

But it still represents the same number of objects, no matter what base you represent it in. Different notations do not change it, they merely represent it in different ways.

Who are you referring to? Bush maybe? 'Cause last I checked he's from Texas and Texas is very different than the rest of the South. Trust me, I lived there for 6 yrs. Texas is almost it's own friggin' country. Plus the Prez's approval rate right now is 57% which to means that the majority of the country doesn't view him as a nutjob, though that may change the next time the wind blows.

Dubya is not a Texan. He's a yankee carpetbagger.

This is fantastic. I put up stats about Atheism, Racism and Sexism, and Iraq. I knew that the debating would get far too dramatic for my tastes, so I did it as sort of an experiment. From those three completely different topics, the thread instantly went into a atheist validation thread. Homosexuality came up somehow, from I don't know where.

This result is not far from what I expected, but I thought that the Iraqi stats would cause a little bit of a detour, little did I know the detour would be homosexuality. Anyways, carry on, you zealots. ;)
yeah well you know, some of us actually looked at this thread in the hope of finding the usual.. ah.. stats.. that playboy would concern itself with.

bugger

Fifty-four in any base is still fifty-four. In base 13, it's written 42. In base fifty-four, it's written 10. In base pi, it's a number with an infinite number of digits.

But it still represents the same number of objects, no matter what base you represent it in. Different notations do not change it, they merely represent it in different ways.
how about representing 54 in whichever African language only has representations for 1, 2 and many? Would it be the same then?

What the fuck are you talking about? I'm an A-T-H-E-I-S-T, ergo, I don't believe in any of that god/devil/heaven/hell bullshit. Why should I fear any of it. Religious atheist is a nonsensical term that was used earlier on this thread to denote an agnostic.

Its hardly a nonsensical term. To be a true Atheist requires a firm belief and faith. That to me makes it religious. An agnostic is non-religious. He has no belief nor faith, he just doesn't know.

So our morality and religious belief should be based on the construct of a fantasy world? I'm usually not this harsh when arguing with theists but could you devote a bit of brain matter to at least trying to string togethor an intelligent argument, rather than appallingly witless sound bites?

Err you are aware that the construct of Narnia's religion/ philosophy is purely symbols and philosophy of Christianity right?

As far as I can get from your collected statements is that I should believe in god because I should be afraid of burning in hell. And, even if I believe in the wrong god it's okay as long as I'm good. Since any good actions will go to god (whatever the fuck that last sentence means, do they get poker chips?)

Seeing as I am not trying to convince anyone to believe in God... No.

Is that a sound summary?

No its an idiotic summary that shows your lack of comprehension abilities.

The correct summary would be: "Even one who truly believes the floor is sturdy should fear if it is not"

I like sound bytes.

This is fantastic. I put up stats about Atheism, Racism and Sexism, and Iraq. I knew that the debating would get far too dramatic for my tastes, so I did it as sort of an experiment. From those three completely different topics, the thread instantly went into a atheist validation thread. Homosexuality came up somehow, from I don't know where.

This result is not far from what I expected, but I thought that the Iraqi stats would cause a little bit of a detour, little did I know the detour would be homosexuality. Anyways, carry on, you zealots. ;)

I liked the thread at first, my prediction about the fundies staying away (second post) was accurate and I was enjoying myself. Then the god boy showed up.

Sticking around to see how (if?) he responds.

yeah well you know, some of us actually looked at this thread in the hope of finding the usual.. ah.. stats.. that playboy would concern itself with.

bugger

Miss March Playmate Data Sheet:

Name: Jillian Grace
Bust: 36
Waist: 24
Hips: 36
Height: 5'5"
Weights: 117lbs
Home: Washington, MO

How is that for you?

Fifty-four in any base is still fifty-four. In base 13, it's written 42. In base fifty-four, it's written 10. In base pi, it's a number with an infinite number of digits.

But it still represents the same number of objects, no matter what base you represent it in. Different notations do not change it, they merely represent it in different ways.

Natuarlly, but it still served its allegorical point.

Miss March Playmate Data Sheet:

Name: Jillian Grace
Bust: 36
Waist: 24
Hips: 36
Height: 5'5"
Weights: 117lbs
Home: Washington, MO

How is that for you?
woohaa, less debating, more google :D

Haw haw, change 2645 decimal into hex.
(early mornings have destroyed my usually sophisticated wit)

Salvondia, methinks Afgh. is waiting on your response to being called godboy. Doubt that would make a good film.. Opening this week "GodBoy"

Nah, hell version much better

Seeing as I am not trying to convince anyone to believe in God... No.

I like sound bytes.

Shifting the goal posts, eh? Oh, well coulda been intelligent. And soundbites are only good if they are sound and something you can bite into - also known as heuristic.

Outrageous Fortunes of War
As reparations for "lost profits" due to the ongoing conflict, Iraq has paid:
$18 million to Halliburton
$3.8 million to Pepsi
$2.6 million to Nestle
$1.6 million to Shell
$321,000 to KFC
$189,000 to Toys "R" Us


And who's payng the Iraqis?
And how is it Iraq's fault they lost money?
Especially KFC, Pepsi, Nestle and Toy "R" Us?

I knew before we even went over there, Halliburton would make some bucks. They did last time. When Cheney advised Bush Sr. to go there, he'd been employed by Halliburton before. When Clinton came in Cheney went back to Halliburton. Then he advised another foray into Iraq when Dubya hired him on as VP. You can bet after his term is up he'll be back to running Halliburton. :gundge:

Shifting the goal posts, eh? Oh, well coulda been intelligent. And soundbites are only good if they are sound and something you can bite into - also known as heuristic.

Uh no I'm not shifting the goal posts. Go read the post a few more times. You've clearly demonstrated yourself as an idiot though. All of my posts have stressed that even someone who firmly believes something should still have some fear for the consequences of if he is wrong.

I'm atheist and I'd ban religions - in government and schools that is.
I'm not paying my taxes for schools to spread what I consider to be lies and hatred. If people want their kids to learn a religion they can pay for it themselves. Instead of RE I'd have social responsibility classes, which would teach morality and how to respect people and the environment without the need for religious dogma.

Its hardly a nonsensical term. To be a true Atheist requires a firm belief and faith. That to me makes it religious. An agnostic is non-religious. He has no belief nor faith, he just doesn't know.Depends on whether you mean 'hard' or 'soft' athiesm as to whether 'belief and faith' is involved. The 'hard' kind is essentially a conviction that there is no God (athe-ism => {noGod}-belief) the 'soft' kind can be the absence of belief (a-theism => no-{GodBelief}) and wouldn't really deny the presence of a God, but certainly wouldn't let the possibility affect them.

Admitedly there's often confusion between the soft kind ("I really have no interest in believing there's a God") and the anti-theistic end of agnosticism ("In the absence of proof, or possibility of proof, of God(s) I'm not specifically believing in Him/Them") which is why I usually identify myself as half-way between Agnostic and Atheist. I hover around the apathetic end of athiesm (when it comes to personal spirituality, i.e. I don't let it affect me, and don't get peeved by 'religious' activities) though may appear rabidly hard-Atheist when in discussions due to (seemingly) having more arguments with Theists than Atheists over the terms...


Oh, and there's no way that either catagory of Atheist can be bothered by Hell. They either vehemently believe it does not exist (in its Christian form certainly and in most other forms probably) or really have no considerations about its existance and dismiss the idea as irrelevant. And yet however much they (/we) may believe in nihilism an overwhelming majority (thank $Deity, where $Deity might be "Fate") still leave good lives and probably don't tend to murder/rape/steal more, significantly or actually, than an equivalent population from the religious communities. ("There's always a nutter or two...")

An Agnostic may (depending on their location in the multi-dimensional spectrum) believe in the possibility of Hell and act to ward against it but, especially if they are multi-denominationally Agnostic, they might work on a 'general' Hell-avoidance strategy rather than taking up 'the' religion's practices for the sake of avoiding that one's after-life retribution arena... If anything, I'd say that such people are probably the most productive members of the community. Slightly less chance (than the intrinsically miniscule chance) of being anti-social, and a lot less 'preaching' and anti-social religious intolerance that you can get from a small (but significant) part of the atheist and theist populations, respectively. (That's a generalisation... There are many more 'nice' people in both camps, but you notice the extremities/odd-balls more.)

Ethics do not require a religious basis (ever hear of the Greek Stoics?), but it does help it seems.

I wouldn't vote for an Athiest because frankly I want the President to feel responsible to some higher power but thats just me

I would rather the president be answerable to the nation's people first and before all. Therefore, I would rather an atheist.

I think some others here are interested in different "raw" data in Playboy.

You know, it kind of makes sense that more people would elect a Muslim person as President as opposed to an atheist. I know I would. To me, an atheist is more likely to ban religions and I am about the right to believe in whatever you want.remember, to an atheist, God-belief and Santa-belief are equally valid. an atheist leader is no more likely to ban belief in God than he would be to ban belief in Santa.

Playboy is more than tits and vaginas.


Well, not really vagina, just teasers. Oh and air brushed bodies as well. It's not even proper jacking material. Give me Hustler anyday!

Some stats from Playboy.

Time Served
Average sentence a murder would get if the victim is:
Umemployed: 9.3 years
A prior violent offender: 9.6 years
Under 12 years old: 11.4 years
A black man: 11.6 years
A white man: 14.7 years
A black woman: 17.1 years
Over 65: 18.6 years
A white woman: 19.0 years


What if the victim was an unemployed white woman? ;)

Atheists still have a conscience to answer to and reason with when making choices, rather than a theist's God. An atheist would make an equally good president as a muslim, a christian or whatever.

Having said that, it's incredible how religious people in the USA seem to be compared to the UK, where most of the nation subscribes to no religion (except of course for celebrating Christmas, but then it's a commercial event).

Atheists would be the best leaders definitely.

They believe there is only one life, so make the most of it and respect it.
They do not believe in any ancient religious dogma that has no place in the modern world.
They have a far higher moral code than religious people because they believe in doing the right thing - for the sake of doing the right thing, not because they may go to hell.
They don't believe a guilty conscience can be absolved with a few hail Marys.

Obviously there are psycho atheists as well, but there are psycho religious fanatics who think they are doing the work of the lord and use it to produce fever pitch mass hysteria *cough*Bush*cough*.

Playboy is more than tits and vaginas.
Too true. There's also asses.

Obviously there are psycho atheists as well, but there are psycho religious fanatics who think they are doing the work of the lord and use it to produce fever pitch mass hysteria *cough*Bush*cough*.Actually, is it not said that the last people who should be leaders are the ones that want to be in power? I reckon that self-selection biases towards the psychos of all pursuasions... :)

(That said, I feel more comfortable with the idea of a secular state without prejudice against (any) religion than a religious one that tolerates the 'godless' and 'wrong-tracked'. If you'll excuse the loaded words...)

Actually, is it not said that the last people who should be leaders are the ones that want to be in power? I reckon that self-selection biases towards the psychos of all pursuasions... :)

(That said, I feel more comfortable with the idea of a secular state without prejudice against (any) religion than a religious one that tolerates the 'godless' and 'wrong-tracked'. If you'll excuse the loaded words...)

I absolutely agree.
There ought to be a way for the government system to weed out the megalomaniacs in favour of people who will accept leadership from the support of their fellow party members, rather than seek leadership using money and rhetoric.
I think the British election system is better than the American one for this reason.

Quick pedantic point - the true definition of an agnostic according to my interpretation of Huxley, who 'invented' the term, isn't necessarily saying 'we can never know' just that we dont have sufficient evidence to know yet (it's very strongly linked to religion but i believe can be used in wider contexts as well)

And if you'd read my response to bitchkitten you'd see that I read her post and acknowledged her post.

Back to the question I asked her: as an atheist I've always been puzzled that by agnostics and ethics. The theists have an easy time, they just read some book to tell them what to think, and most of the books agree about what is good and bad anyways. Atheists believe that morality can be arrived at through reason.

How do agnostics get there?

The beauty of agnosticism is that you can come to conclusions for such issues in any way you want. Perhaps you believe that there is an ingrained sense of morality that people are born with, perhaps you believe that morality is subjective and formed by the society you live in - a general consensus formed over time.
My own beliefs comprise a mixture of the two, whcih is think you'll find is a rather common stance (on any issue) with us agnostics :P