Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Atheism or agnosticism?Follow

#602 May 05 2011 at 5:07 PM Rating: Good
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
Nilatai wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

Sweetums wrote:

Strangely enough, none of your ire (save maybe a token amount) is directed towards men.


So I guess you missed the ENTIRE conversation on deadbeat dads huh?


Tell me where your view of deadbeat dads factors into your stance on abortion.
It was something about how deadbeat dads are in favour of abortion so abortion is bad.
Frankly, that seems like an ancillary distraction when he said he changed his views because of how he saw women acting.
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#603 May 05 2011 at 5:16 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,262 posts
Sweetums wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

Sweetums wrote:

Strangely enough, none of your ire (save maybe a token amount) is directed towards men.


So I guess you missed the ENTIRE conversation on deadbeat dads huh?


Tell me where your view of deadbeat dads factors into your stance on abortion.
It was something about how deadbeat dads are in favour of abortion so abortion is bad.
Frankly, that seems like an ancillary distraction when he said he changed his views because of how he saw women acting.
I had to look up what ancillary meant. But yes, I agree.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#604 May 05 2011 at 5:18 PM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
Nilatai wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

Sweetums wrote:

Strangely enough, none of your ire (save maybe a token amount) is directed towards men.


So I guess you missed the ENTIRE conversation on deadbeat dads huh?


Tell me where your view of deadbeat dads factors into your stance on abortion.
It was something about how deadbeat dads are in favour of abortion so abortion is bad.
Frankly, that seems like an ancillary distraction when he said he changed his views because of how he saw women acting.
I had to look up what ancillary meant. But yes, I agree.
As a child, I was locked in a cage with only a dictionary to keep me company.
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#605 May 05 2011 at 5:19 PM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
Nilatai wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

Sweetums wrote:

Strangely enough, none of your ire (save maybe a token amount) is directed towards men.


So I guess you missed the ENTIRE conversation on deadbeat dads huh?


Tell me where your view of deadbeat dads factors into your stance on abortion.
It was something about how deadbeat dads are in favour of abortion so abortion is bad.
Frankly, that seems like an ancillary distraction when he said he changed his views because of how he saw women acting.
I had to look up what ancillary meant. But yes, I agree.


I'm still reeling from "vituperative." Smiley: confused
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#606 May 05 2011 at 5:19 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,262 posts
Sweetums wrote:
As a child, I was locked in a cage with only a dictionary to keep me company.
I had that, but with the Encyclopaedia Britannica. It's why I'm so awesome at pub quizzes.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#607 May 05 2011 at 5:30 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,674 posts
Quote:
Oooh, I am dying to hear your explanations, especially "social skills". go...
I don't feel like going back to search for the thread but it involves female co-workers of yours.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#608 May 05 2011 at 6:03 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,939 posts
Nilatai wrote:
Did I not explain how the 24 week mark isn't arbitrary?


No, you only stated that it wasn't. You stating that it isn't arbitrary doesn't make not arbitrary. If that weren't the case, we wouldn't have debates with late-term abortions. All 9 months are part of the person's life. The only difference is, some people are more comfortable ceasing growth at different stages of life than others.

So, what's the difference between 24 weeks and 24 weeks and 2 days?

Nilatai wrote:
You mean like, if we found fossil rabbits in the pre-Cambrian? Well no, that would completely debunk the whole thing. The fact would cease to be fact and the theory would break down.


Exactly!!!

You went into my next question. So, you agree that although a fact may become more factual with more information, any new unaligned information discredits the previous "fact" as no longer being a fact.

Now, don't forget what you said, I'm moving onto "Scientific Theory" now.

Do you agree with the definition that I quoted that Scientific theories are "constructed to explain, predict, and master phenomena"?
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#609 May 05 2011 at 6:06 PM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
Before something is elevated to a theory, it generally requires a huge body of evidence (we call these "facts"). If it's not there, we call it a "hypothesis."

This isn't even high school science.

Edited, May 5th 2011 7:07pm by Sweetums
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#610 May 05 2011 at 6:22 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,262 posts
Almalieque wrote:
No, you only stated that it wasn't. You stating that it isn't arbitrary doesn't make not arbitrary. If that weren't the case, we wouldn't have debates with late-term abortions. All 9 months are part of the person's life. The only difference is, some people are more comfortable ceasing growth at different stages of life than others.

So, what's the difference between 24 weeks and 24 weeks and 2 days?
The foetus has a slightly better chance of survival at 24 weeks and 2 days?

Look, before week 24, the foetus has no realistic chance of survival if a premature birth occurs. Look, check this graph. This is why the cut off is 24 weeks. Before 24 weeks, it is not a viable life form in it's own right. Afterwards, it is. Relatively speaking.



Almalieque wrote:
Exactly!!!

You went into my next question. So, you agree that although a fact may become more factual with more information, any new unaligned information discredits the previous "fact" as no longer being a fact.
No I gave you a for instance that would actually discredit the fact. Like, unequivocally discredit the fact. Other unaligned information can be used to narrow down the margin of error we associate with that fact, and give us new facts to work iwith.

Almalieque wrote:
Now, don't forget what you said, I'm moving onto "Scientific Theory" now.
Right!

Almalieque wrote:
Do you agree with the definition that I quoted that Scientific theories are "constructed to explain, predict, and master phenomena"?
Yes, because that's what I said about 3 posts ago.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#611 May 05 2011 at 6:23 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,262 posts
Sweetums wrote:
Before something is elevated to a theory, it generally requires a huge body of evidence (we call these "facts"). If it's not there, we call it a "hypothesis."

This isn't even high school science.

Edited, May 5th 2011 7:07pm by Sweetums
Stop **** in my cheerios, I want to see where (or where he thinks) he's going with this. ;)
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#612 May 05 2011 at 6:28 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,939 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Quote:
Oooh, I am dying to hear your explanations, especially "social skills". go...
I don't feel like going back to search for the thread but it involves female co-workers of yours.


If it were recently, the only thing I remember is their views on joint bank accounts. I brought up a thread about my female co-workers who all had their own bank accounts as opposed to joint bank accounts. My belief was/is that I'm not against having separate bank accounts, but I do think it's important to have at least one joint account. I'm not quite sure how that degrades women.

What about marriage? What did I say about marriage that degrades women?

I just find it funny for a person who's friends are all females to be considered to degrade women. You really just have no idea. You know that really nice guy who the girl wants to talk about ALL of their problems with, even when they have a significant other and he gets stuck in the "friend zone"? Yea, that happens to me a lot. "The nice guy always finish last" is my life motto.

Girls like talking to me because I always listen to what they have to say no matter what it is and I usually tell them how it is from my stand point. Further more, they feel comfortable around me as I have proven my self-control. It maybe just my luck, but the people I know, i.e. the pregnant female at work I was talking about, have some pretty effed up issues. I can probably write a book on sob-stories.

Point: There's nothing you can say to convince me that I think bad of women. The number one advice I get from all of my female friends is "Don't let girls use you". Matter of fact, I was told that today in a facebook message.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#613 May 05 2011 at 6:35 PM Rating: Good
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Quote:
Oooh, I am dying to hear your explanations, especially "social skills". go...
I don't feel like going back to search for the thread but it involves female co-workers of yours.


I just find it funny for a person who's friends are all females to be considered to degrade women.
Do you think these are necessarily mutually exclusive? Plus, I never explicitly said "degrade," which implies action.

Quote:
You really just have no idea. You know that really nice guy who the girl wants to talk about ALL of their problems with, even when they have a significant other and he gets stuck in the "friend zone"? Yea, that happens to me a lot. "The nice guy always finish last" is my life motto.

If you have a problem with being "stuck" as friends, why don't you tell her? Using terms like "friend zone" and "nice guy" isn't really convincing me of your point.

Edited, May 5th 2011 7:36pm by Sweetums
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#614 May 05 2011 at 6:42 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,939 posts
Sweetums wrote:
Before something is elevated to a theory, it generally requires a huge body of evidence (we call these "facts"). If it's not there, we call it a "hypothesis."

This isn't even high school science.


No one is denying that.

Nilatai wrote:
The foetus has a slightly better chance of survival at 24 weeks and 2 days?

Look, before week 24, the foetus has no realistic chance of survival if a premature birth occurs. Look, check this graph. This is why the cut off is 24 weeks. Before 24 weeks, it is not a viable life form in it's own right. Afterwards, it is. Relatively speaking.



So, in other words, that slight difference isn't anything significant, where the increase of survivability, is the same amount of decrease at 23 weeks and 5 days.

In any case, if there's almost no chance of survival, why are women having abortions prior to 24 weeks? You said earlier that if it were known that the baby wouldn't survive then the woman wouldn't have an abortion. Now you're claiming that the survival rate is really low prior to 24 weeks, so it's ok to have abortions. Well, if women wouldn't have an abortion if they knew the fetus wouldn't survive, wouldn't that mean abortions should only happen AFTER the 24 weeks when you know for sure it will survive or not? Why kick a man when he's down?

Nilatai wrote:
No I gave you a for instance that would actually discredit the fact. Like, unequivocally discredit the fact. Other unaligned information can be used to narrow down the margin of error we associate with that fact, and give us new facts to work iwith.


Let me clarify this before I move on then. That is partially what I meant by "although a fact may become more factual with more information".

What's an example of a fact having a margin of error reduced? I interpreted a fact as being objectively true. In other words, any margin of error is taking away the validity of that fact.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#615 May 05 2011 at 6:44 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,457 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
I have the potential to play in the NBA. Ergo, I am an NBA player, and am entitled to all of the compensation typically provided to an NBA player.


That's a pretty bad analogy though. It's not the same kind of potential. A more correct analogy is that you will be an NBA player unless something prevents it. Not "might be", but "will be". So you've got the skills to play, and you're in the draft and it's clear you will be getting a multi-million dollar contract, and then the day before learning what team you're going to play on, someone deliberately amputates both your legs, ruining your career.

You'd certainly be able to sue that person for the money you would have earned if they hadn't done what they did, right?

That's more analogous to what an abortion is. If that fetus would not result in a living person with the full rights as such, you would not have needed to have an abortion, right? Thus, we can argue that by choosing to abort you are choosing to prevent that living person from being born. It's not really about "well, maybe this thing had a tiny chance to become a person with rights". It's always about killing something that would have had rights had you not acted.


I just feel that if we're going to talk about responsibility, we ought not to lie to ourselves about what we're really doing.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#616 May 05 2011 at 7:07 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,262 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
The foetus has a slightly better chance of survival at 24 weeks and 2 days?

Look, before week 24, the foetus has no realistic chance of survival if a premature birth occurs. Look, check this graph. This is why the cut off is 24 weeks. Before 24 weeks, it is not a viable life form in it's own right. Afterwards, it is. Relatively speaking.



So, in other words, that slight difference isn't anything significant, where the increase of survivability, is the same amount of decrease at 23 weeks and 5 days.

In any case, if there's almost no chance of survival, why are women having abortions prior to 24 weeks? You said earlier that if it were known that the baby wouldn't survive then the woman wouldn't have an abortion. Now you're claiming that the survival rate is really low prior to 24 weeks, so it's ok to have abortions. Well, if women wouldn't have an abortion if they knew the fetus wouldn't survive, wouldn't that mean abortions should only happen AFTER the 24 weeks when you know for sure it will survive or not? Why kick a man when he's down?
What are you babbling about? See the bolded section, it's important. An abortion essentially amounts to a forced premature birth. Expulsion of the foetus from the uterus. Viability refers to how likely a foetus is to survive outside of the uterus at that stage of pregnancy. Before 24 weeks the viability is negligible.

If you want to really get into a viability discussion, lets talk about what happens at 12 weeks. Prior to the 12 week mark, there is approximately a 50% chance of spontaneous abortion (miscarriage). After 12 weeks, if you're still pregnant it will probably go the term. This is one of the reasons my friend, who is a nurse, decided not to tell her family about her pregnancy until this point.

Now, that being said, the foetus after 12 weeks, regardless of it's probability of reaching full development significantly increasing, it is still not viable outside of the Uterus. This is why 24 weeks is significant!

Do you understand what I am telling you?



Almalieque wrote:
Let me clarify this before I move on then. That is partially what I meant by "although a fact may become more factual with more information".

What's an example of a fact having a margin of error reduced? I interpreted a fact as being objectively true. In other words, any margin of error is taking away the validity of that fact.
A fact is a fact is a fact unless it is completely discredited by new information.

Okay, there is the fact that there is Gravity, yes? Using his knowledge of gravity, Newton successfully plotted the orbits of the planets around the Sun. He managed this despite not knowing what gravity actually is or what mass does to space. We had to wait for Einstein to find out the fact that mass curves space. This new fact helped Einstein to build upon Newton's theories and hypotheses. We can now, more accurately predict the orbits of celestial bodies. New facts, less margin of error, old facts still intact.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#617 May 05 2011 at 7:08 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
8,939 posts
Gbaji wrote:

I just feel that if we're going to talk about responsibility, we ought not to lie to ourselves about what we're really doing.


My point exactly.

Nilatai, I'll reply to you tomorrow. Allegory, I'm going to sleep...

Edited, May 6th 2011 3:09am by Almalieque
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#618 May 05 2011 at 7:22 PM Rating: Good
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
gbaji wrote:
It's always about killing something that would have had rights had you not acted.
Would have, but doesn't now? Glad to hear your pro-choice support.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#619 May 05 2011 at 8:19 PM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
gbaji wrote:
Eske Esquire wrote:
I have the potential to play in the NBA. Ergo, I am an NBA player, and am entitled to all of the compensation typically provided to an NBA player.


That's a pretty bad analogy though. It's not the same kind of potential. A more correct analogy is that you will be an NBA player unless something prevents it. Not "might be", but "will be". So you've got the skills to play, and you're in the draft and it's clear you will be getting a multi-million dollar contract, and then the day before learning what team you're going to play on, someone deliberately amputates both your legs, ruining your career.

You'd certainly be able to sue that person for the money you would have earned if they hadn't done what they did, right?

That's more analogous to what an abortion is. If that fetus would not result in a living person with the full rights as such, you would not have needed to have an abortion, right? Thus, we can argue that by choosing to abort you are choosing to prevent that living person from being born. It's not really about "well, maybe this thing had a tiny chance to become a person with rights". It's always about killing something that would have had rights had you not acted.


I just feel that if we're going to talk about responsibility, we ought not to lie to ourselves about what we're really doing.


Smiley: lol

No, gbaji. Just no. That's not the point I was trying to make. It was much more basic than that.

But look, I'm not getting dragged into a proxy debate in the hell-hole of a thread.


Edited, May 5th 2011 10:21pm by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#620 May 05 2011 at 8:36 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
5,159 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Ahhh.. Here I thought that you were arguing objectively. I see now you're just emotionally lashing out of me because of your general dislike of me. You're just babbling stuff to hear yourself talk. The simple fact that you claim that Comp Sci is 100% irrelevant in a discussion of proofs and theories is evident enough of your idiocy.

The fact that you keep referring to proofs in this context is laughable. Nothing in the physical sciences is proven. That is a thing which does not happen outside of mathematics. Despite being told this again and again you insist on pretending that it is not the case. Theories in the physical sciences are built on empirical evidence, which has fucking nothing to do with either field you (claim to have) studied. It's not "emotional lashing out". It comes from a deep-seated knowledge of how mathematics and computer science work, and a recognition of how hard, physical sciences work, and it is that latter understanding which you lack. The fact that you've gotten your panties all in a twist because somebody on this forum knows more in your (alleged) respective fields than you is not my problem.

Edited, May 5th 2011 9:37pm by Majivo
#621 May 05 2011 at 8:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
11,929 posts
gbaji wrote:
That's a pretty bad analogy though.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Smiley: laugh

Kettle, pot, nice to meetcha!
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#622 May 05 2011 at 9:08 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,262 posts
Majivo wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Ahhh.. Here I thought that you were arguing objectively. I see now you're just emotionally lashing out of me because of your general dislike of me. You're just babbling stuff to hear yourself talk. The simple fact that you claim that Comp Sci is 100% irrelevant in a discussion of proofs and theories is evident enough of your idiocy.

The fact that you keep referring to proofs in this context is laughable. Nothing in the physical sciences is proven. That is a thing which does not happen outside of mathematics. Despite being told this again and again you insist on pretending that it is not the case. Theories in the physical sciences are built on empirical evidence, which has fucking nothing to do with either field you (claim to have) studied. It's not "emotional lashing out". It comes from a deep-seated knowledge of how mathematics and computer science work, and a recognition of how hard, physical sciences work, and it is that latter understanding which you lack. The fact that you've gotten your panties all in a twist because somebody on this forum knows more in your (alleged) respective fields than you is not my problem.

Edited, May 5th 2011 9:37pm by Majivo
I wouldn't bother, Majivo. If I've not gotten through to him by now no one will.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#623 May 05 2011 at 9:23 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
5,159 posts
You aren't even supposed to be arguing with him. You're supposed to be trying to get him to leave through inaction.

Me, I'm just out to belittle him and make him recognize his betters. He'll never admit it, but I'm sure it gets to him. Look at the sheer effort he puts into it.
#624 May 05 2011 at 9:24 PM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,635 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Uhhh.. no. A sperm by itself will not turn into a person, so until that is able to happen, you have no argument. Those conditions of a fetus are natural without any need of assistance from you or anyone. If you leave it alone, it will grow. It may die, but it still is growing towards a human. A sperm will never do that. Give it up.


So, once one sperm fertilizes one egg, they will become a human being without need of assistance form me or anyone? If everyone just leaves it alone, it grows all by itself? Want to rethink that...?

Almalieque wrote:
First of all, I feel bad for you to think that you would wish that you were dead just because your parents would say that. Anyway, my point is that you made an emotional attachment to that clunk of cells and thought about you. Your argument differentiates the first forms of life with human life, saying it's ok to have abortions because it isn't a person. Under your logic, you shouldn't be hurt because they weren't talking about YOU, but the parasite that turned into you.

Of course that's stupid, because you know that clunk of cells WAS you and by removing it, it's removing your existence. We don't make that separation in everyday life, only when someone is arguing for abortion.


But... I didn't. I just told you that if I had parents sh*tty enough to tell me as I was growing up that they wish they had aborted me, then I would've rather been aborted. Regardless, I'll ask my pregnant co-worker to have a meaningful conversation with her fetus tomorrow and find out what it feels about... well, anything. Something tells me that it won't be much of a conversation, but you seem to be implying that a fetus will be sad and hurt if the woman aborts it.

Interesting.

Almalieque wrote:
You said that isn't just done when it's done, but it is. I was referencing to the action, not any emotions.


And I was talking about everything, not just the action. I'm being more logical, and more realistic than you are.

Almalieque wrote:
And that's not based on anything but your emotional attachment to the right to have an abortion.


No. It's actually based on any number of things, many of which have already been pointed out to you. I do find it interesting, however, that in your defense of yourself, in trying to explain just how wonderful you are and how much you respect women, you managed to blame women on your being single. Interesting, that. It certainly can't be some flaw in yourself, it's got to be just that "good guys finish last." Certainly....

Edited, May 5th 2011 10:25pm by Belkira
#625 May 05 2011 at 9:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,281 posts
The bottom line is they think Alma's too weird.
#626 May 05 2011 at 10:19 PM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
Only weird people think they are the sole support system for someone, and that they're special for listening to their friends' problems. It's pretty much the bare minimum. Only weird people think that relationships don't have times where you want to vent about your partner being an occasional jerk. Only weird people will secretly castigate a friend in an actual abusive relationship, rather than empathize with a horrible situation where they need your love more than ever. Only weird people would ever say that they're "stuck" as friends. If you find friendship so repressive, it might be a sign to reevaluate you priorities.

That is, unless they're offended that women have the nerve to take their friendship at face value.

____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#627 May 05 2011 at 10:31 PM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
Sweetums wrote:
Only weird people think they are the sole support system for someone, and that they're special for listening to their friends' problems. It's pretty much the bare minimum. Only weird people think that relationships don't have times where you want to vent about your partner being an occasional jerk. Only weird people will secretly castigate a friend in an actual abusive relationship, rather than empathize with a horrible situation where they need your love more than ever. Only weird people would ever say that they're "stuck" as friends. If you find friendship so repressive, it might be a sign to reevaluate you priorities.

That is, unless they're offended that women have the nerve to take their friendship at face value.



Pretty much.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#628 May 06 2011 at 12:07 AM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
Man, I just can't stop thinking about that post. It's practically dripping with contempt. There's a reason I generally can't stand self-described "nice guys."

For one, I don't basically call my friends fucked up. "Effed up issues?" Really? Would you say that to her face? With absolute sincerity?

I don't refer to my friends in the detached, almost objectifying manner you seem to employ. "Pregnant female?" That's something you call an animal in a biology textbook.

I could probably write a book full of "sob stories", too. Anyone who has the most perfunctory relationship with another human being can do that. Well, I respect my friends enough to not label their problems (I'm sorry. "Effed up issues."), in such a dismissive manner, so I can't really say I relate.

I could also write about how I drove over 2000 miles in less than two days to help an old friend escape a miserable situation.

I could write about following a friend home after she had the nerve to stay out past 8:00 on a Saturday night without her boyfriend's permission. He had an unlicensed handgun, and the man loathed me. The only transgression I had committed was being there before he was. I'm not kidding; he would seriously try to keep her from seeing me because he thought she would cheat on him with me. He's explicitly said this.

If you aren't willing to stick your neck out for these women, and only pay lip service to their troubles while judging them behind their backs, you're only deluding yourself if you think these women are your friends. They're your source of validation.
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#629 May 06 2011 at 5:03 AM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,281 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:


That is exactly the way it went with my older son's father. And that's why we're no longer together.
#630 May 06 2011 at 5:29 AM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,262 posts
Sweetums wrote:
I don't refer to my friends in the detached, almost objectifying manner you seem to employ. "Pregnant female?" That's something you call an animal in a biology textbook.
I always liked the word "gravida". :3
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#631 May 06 2011 at 5:38 AM Rating: Good
Supreme Lionator
*****
14,174 posts
Man, none of my friends have any problems at all.

I know what you're thinking: 'oh man this kavekk guy what a weiro and how insensitive too no wonder no one ever tells him about their problems'. That's a very clever thought, person, excepting that it's secretly stupid. Y'see, I've got my friends under 24 hour surveillance and they just don't have any problems!

So, as you can see, I'm perfectly normal.

Edited, May 6th 2011 11:38am by Kavekk
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#632Almalieque, Posted: May 06 2011 at 5:54 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Majivo,
#633 May 06 2011 at 6:11 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,674 posts
Quote:
You responded that I was stupid in all sciences because that's a subset of my overall stupidity.
He's just pointing out facts. Very relevant facts.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#634 May 06 2011 at 6:14 AM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
11,929 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Only weird people think they are the sole support system for someone, and that they're special for listening to their friends' problems. It's pretty much the bare minimum. Only weird people think that relationships don't have times where you want to vent about your partner being an occasional jerk. Only weird people will secretly castigate a friend in an actual abusive relationship, rather than empathize with a horrible situation where they need your love more than ever. Only weird people would ever say that they're "stuck" as friends. If you find friendship so repressive, it might be a sign to reevaluate you priorities.

That is, unless they're offended that women have the nerve to take their friendship at face value.



Pretty much.


Oh gosh, this is exactly the relationship my friend is in. They've been dating for over two years though and he's proposing soon. I've told him my thoughts and asked if he's sure, but... ah well, I hope it turns out better than Nad's situation did! Smiley: oyvey

Edit: I, on the other hand, tend to get into hook ups and then turn them into long-term relationships that usually end when one party is more attached or invested than the other. Hoping I broke the streak with this one Smiley: smile

Edited, May 6th 2011 8:18am by LockeColeMA
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#635 May 06 2011 at 6:19 AM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,262 posts
Almalieque wrote:
You're right, I completely overlooked the bold section.

You said that a woman wouldn't have an abortion if she knew the fetus would die, so wouldn't it make sense to only have an abortion AFTER there is high probability that the fetus will live? It is completely arbitrary based on people's emotions. People feel comfortable saying "Well it probably was going to die anyway", but when the probability of death decreases, people feel less comfortable.
...

I said an abortion would be redundant if the foetus was guaranteed to die. What's your point? How does that relate even remotely to what I said about the viability of the foetus outside of the uterus?

People don't say "Well it was probably going to die any way", they say it is not a viable life form in it's own right, which is a true statement. I can't explain this to you any more than I already have. You're starting to **** me off now, are you deliberately trying to be a troll? Or are you just fucking functionally retarded?




Almalieque wrote:
There was no error on the fact "gravity exists". The "margin of error" was with the surrounding statements of the fact "gravity exists"

Then your question was redundant. What's your point? Are you trying to play semantics?
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#636 May 06 2011 at 6:23 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,939 posts
Belkira wrote:
So, once one sperm fertilizes one egg, they will become a human being without need of assistance form me or anyone? If everyone just leaves it alone, it grows all by itself? Want to rethink that...?


I think that you don't even believe that stupidity. I'll give you credit to be smarter than that. "They" represents a sperm and an egg, not just a sperm. A sperm WILL NEVER grow into a child, never..

Belkira wrote:

But... I didn't. I just told you that if I had parents sh*tty enough to tell me as I was growing up that they wish they had aborted me, then I would've rather been aborted. Regardless, I'll ask my pregnant co-worker to have a meaningful conversation with her fetus tomorrow and find out what it feels about... well, anything. Something tells me that it won't be much of a conversation, but you seem to be implying that a fetus will be sad and hurt if the woman aborts it.

Interesting.


Are you purposely missing the point? You said your parents would be "sh!tty" if they told you that, why is that? Why would you care? They weren't talking about YOU, they were talking about a parasite, a tape worm. Why is there emotional attachment to that sentence?

Belkira wrote:
And I was talking about everything, not just the action. I'm being more logical, and more realistic than you are.


If this conversation were over everything, then you would have a point.

Belkira wrote:
No. It's actually based on any number of things, many of which have already been pointed out to you. I do find it interesting, however, that in your defense of yourself, in trying to explain just how wonderful you are and how much you respect women, you managed to blame women on your being single. Interesting, that. It certainly can't be some flaw in yourself, it's got to be just that "good guys finish last." Certainly....


Your entire argument is based on emotion. Your main argument is that you a woman shouldn't be FORCED to carry a child, but changes when a child gets a certain age. That doesn't make sense. There is no logic behind that because you're still forcing the woman to carry the child.

I don't blame women for being single. I could very well have a girlfriend right now or even be married, but I'm not going to have a "trophy wife" just to say that I'm married. There's nothing wrong with these girls, but they aren't what I want in a wife. So, that's a very nice try, but failure as always.

Oh, by the way, I didn't create the slogan "nice guys finish last", I just know it exists. By your statement, it seems that you don't quite understand it.

Sweetums wrote:
Man, I just can't stop thinking about that post. It's practically dripping with contempt. There's a reason I generally can't stand self-described "nice guys."

For one, I don't basically call my friends **** up. "Effed up issues?" Really? Would you say that to her face? With absolute sincerity?

I don't refer to my friends in the detached, almost objectifying manner you seem to employ. "Pregnant female?" That's something you call an animal in a biology textbook.

I could probably write a book full of "sob stories", too. Anyone who has the most perfunctory relationship with another human being can do that. Well, I respect my friends enough to not label their problems (I'm sorry. "Effed up issues."), in such a dismissive manner, so I can't really say I relate.

I could also write about how I drove over 2000 miles in less than two days to help an old friend escape a miserable situation.

I could write about following a friend home after she had the nerve to stay out past 8:00 on a Saturday night without her boyfriend's permission. He had an unlicensed handgun, and the man loathed me. The only transgression I had committed was being there before he was. I'm not kidding; he would seriously try to keep her from seeing me because he thought she would cheat on him with me. He's explicitly said this.

If you aren't willing to stick your neck out for these women, and only pay lip service to their troubles while judging them behind their backs, you're only deluding yourself if you think these women are your friends. They're your source of validation.


1. What's your reason to hate "nice guys". I'm not self-described, I just acknowledge it. It's actually a flaw of being "too nice". Trust me, being in the Army, "nice" isn't always a good thing. That has always been feedback from people.

2. I said their issues were "effed up", not them. There is a HUGE difference in the two. Stuff happens to people, good or bad. That doesn't make you a bad person. Yes, I do tell them that, it's not like they don't already know. I often tell other stories that I think is worse than theirs just to show that it isn't the end of the world.

3. This is the freakin Internet, you don't know her. I said "pregnant woman", because that's how she was referenced earlier. If that offends you, then you my friend have some serious effed up issues as well.

4. I might have used different terms to represent their problems, but it doesn't change the fact that I'm always there.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#637 May 06 2011 at 6:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,674 posts
Quote:
then you my friend have some serious effed up issues
So, this is what you classify as friends? A bunch of people who want you gone, constantly arguing with you and calling you stupid. Explains your opinion on friends quite well.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#638 May 06 2011 at 6:29 AM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
11,929 posts
Almalieque wrote:
1. What's your reason to hate "nice guys". I'm not self-described, I just acknowledge it. It's actually a flaw of being "too nice". Trust me, being in the Army, "nice" isn't always a good thing. That has always been feedback from people.

Unless I misunderstand, I think Sweetums disliked the self-martyring "nice guys," who use their "niceness" as an excuse to "finish last." As a "nice guy" myself, I can tell you if you're finishing last you're probably going for the wrong girls. Especially if you're being nice to a girl and expecting anything other than friendship. Pro-tip: If the only way you can get with a girl is by being her emotional crutch, keep her as a friend and find a different girl to date. You can't be a nice guy if you're feeling bitter - you're just lying about your true intentions.

Edited, May 6th 2011 8:30am by LockeColeMA
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#639 May 06 2011 at 6:34 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,674 posts
Needs more insult, Locke.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#640 May 06 2011 at 6:39 AM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
11,929 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Needs more insult, Locke.


Also, Alma's a... er... what's a good insult I've heard recently...

Oh!

Alma's dumb as a pet rock Smiley: grin
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#641 May 06 2011 at 7:05 AM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
Look, Alma, I can't help it if you're too egocentric to be capable the slightest inkling of self reflection and empathy. That's only something a professional can help. Bring what you wrote to a psychiatrist, or even a therapist. You can probably easily find resources as a military member. Bring in what you wrote, verbatim. Listen to their honest assessment. It might agree with you, it might agree with me, it might be completely different!

I would never even refer to my friends issues as @#%^ed up. I don't call their problems "sob stories." I respect the fact that some things will upset them, and that unhappiness is not a zero sum game.

The fact that this is so opaque to you has nothing to do with any kind of false reading on my part, but with your own inadequacies to even begin to withhold your contempt and examine the language you choose. This does not mean you literally hate your friends. Whether you're fully cognizant of it or not, this is something you need a trained outside observer to help you get through, because your view of what women owe you for basic kindness really does seem a bit skewed. You don't lose out when someone "only" wants to be your friend. I've been there. I know that it stings when a friend rejects you. I don't feel that I lost out by not eventually being in a relationship with her. I don't feel that I finished last, just in a different place.

Friends will be there after a relationship fails. They're going to be the ones picking up the pieces. Friendship is precious, and if you really do view them as friends, you owe it to them to examine some of your latent hostility. This doesn't make you a bad person.

Your choice of words may not have been deliberate, but they certainly reflect a lot about your attitudes, because you're either too socially unaware to realize what crosses the line, or you just don't care. I sincerely hope it isn't the latter. Honestly think about what you wrote, and where it could have come from.

I'm quite serious about a mental health professional. It doesn't mean you're crazy. Everyone could use it from time to time.


I probably started changing the tone from hostile to more empathetic because I am coming up on math and prescription amphetamines


Edited, May 6th 2011 9:04am by Sweetums
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#642 May 06 2011 at 7:22 AM Rating: Good
***
2,069 posts
LockeColeMA wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Needs more insult, Locke.


Also, Alma's a... er... what's a good insult I've heard recently...

Oh!

Alma's dumb as a pet rock Smiley: grin


Yes! Bringing back the world's most adorable burn!
____________________________
http://www.marriageissogay.com/

Song of the day:
May 26, 2011 -- Transplants
#643 May 06 2011 at 7:25 AM Rating: Good
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
LockeColeMA wrote:
Alma's dumb as a pet rock Smiley: grin

Cite that sh;t, ****
Ailitardif wrote:
Yes! Bringing back the world's most adorable burn!

Not found in How To Make Friends and Influence People.

Edited, May 6th 2011 8:26am by MoebiusLord
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#644 May 06 2011 at 7:56 AM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,635 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Belkira wrote:
So, once one sperm fertilizes one egg, they will become a human being without need of assistance form me or anyone? If everyone just leaves it alone, it grows all by itself? Want to rethink that...?


I think that you don't even believe that stupidity. I'll give you credit to be smarter than that. "They" represents a sperm and an egg, not just a sperm. A sperm WILL NEVER grow into a child, never..


Want to try answering the question now? A fertilized egg will turn into a human being without any help from me or anyone? That leaving it completely alone it will grow all by itself?

Almalieque wrote:
Are you purposely missing the point? You said your parents would be "sh!tty" if they told you that, why is that? Why would you care? They weren't talking about YOU, they were talking about a parasite, a tape worm. Why is there emotional attachment to that sentence?


Because I love my parents and I expect love and kindness from them in return. If they had me and kept me and treated me like sh*t, then I wouldn't have a very good life, then, would I?

Oh, I get your "point." It's tenuous at best. You seem to be completely missing mine, however.

Almalieque wrote:
Your entire argument is based on emotion. Your main argument is that you a woman shouldn't be FORCED to carry a child, but changes when a child gets a certain age. That doesn't make sense. There is no logic behind that because you're still forcing the woman to carry the child.


That was amended. I realized what I said was inaccurate.

Almalieque wrote:
I don't blame women for being single. I could very well have a girlfriend right now or even be married, but I'm not going to have a "trophy wife" just to say that I'm married. There's nothing wrong with these girls, but they aren't what I want in a wife. So, that's a very nice try, but failure as always.


Sure, Alma. Whatever you say.

Almalieque wrote:
Oh, by the way, I didn't create the slogan "nice guys finish last", I just know it exists. By your statement, it seems that you don't quite understand it.


No, I understand that. I have heard that expression many, many times. Mostly from guys who are **** off that a girl they like is not attracted to them and they want to blame her for it.

Edited, May 6th 2011 8:56am by Belkira
#645 May 06 2011 at 8:00 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,674 posts
I always assumed "nice guys finish last" was coined for business and just carried over to sex. Is it the other way around?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#646 May 06 2011 at 8:00 AM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
Belkira wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
I don't blame women for being single. I could very well have a girlfriend right now or even be married, but I'm not going to have a "trophy wife" just to say that I'm married. There's nothing wrong with these girls, but they aren't what I want in a wife. So, that's a very nice try, but failure as always.


Sure, Alma. Whatever you say.


Smiley: lol

He's such a classic type. You could pinpoint how he is with relationships just from his posting mannerisms, right down to the self-delusion.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#647 May 06 2011 at 8:02 AM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,635 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
I always assumed "nice guys finish last" was coined for business and just carried over to sex. Is it the other way around?


According to lolWiki, neither.

Quote:
A common aphorism is that "nice guys finish last."[3] The phrase is attributed to baseball manager Leo Durocher in 1939,[4] though Durocher was originally referring to the opposing team rather than to male/female relationship dynamics. The full quote is, "Take a look at them. They're all nice guys, but they'll finish last. Nice guys. Finish last."[5]
#648 May 06 2011 at 8:03 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I could be a wizard right now if I wanted to.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#649 May 06 2011 at 8:04 AM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I could be a wizard right now if I wanted to.
You put on your robe and wizard hat...
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#650 May 06 2011 at 8:37 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
5,159 posts
Almalieque wrote:
You see the bold and underline? I admitted that was probably the case.

No, if you had truly admitted that, you would quit telling people to "prove" things to you. You'd quit insisting that your (alleged) experience with computer science, which has absolutely no crossover with any of the physical sciences whatsoever, is somehow relevant because it has the word "science" in it. You've done neither of these things, ergo you've admitted nothing, largely owing to the fact that you are a moron.
#651 May 06 2011 at 8:48 AM Rating: Good
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
Computer science is pretty much applied discrete mathematics. There are no experiments in mathematics, only a progression of logic. It's why you can prove something is mathematically impossible, but you can't definitively prove something is scientifically impossible (although there might be a very large body of evidence that would suggest it).

Science uses mathematical models to describe phenomena in a quantitative fashion, but it really has little to do with formal proofs.


Edited, May 6th 2011 9:52am by Sweetums
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 56 All times are in CDT