Don't think so. "Blow job" still finds plenty of dicks being sucked.
I only get pages of demotivationals

Don't think so. "Blow job" still finds plenty of dicks being sucked.
Plenty more Platinum games that are coming out (or are already out) on other consoles!
I'm gonna go play me some Vanquish now. GOOD LUCK PLAYING THAT ON YOUR WII U YOU STUPID KIDDY GAMERS.
I didn't say that DS gamers were kiddy, only Wii U ones. Why would you be so insulting to all those DS owners?A true Platinum fan would know better than to say something so silly. It means you missed out on Infinite Space by inference.
Infinite Space was brutal. Or I just sucked at it. Probably both.
Would buy a sequel though!
DEAD MAN I DEMAND YOU MAKE A THREAD IN OFF TOPIC ABOUT THIS
HOW DARE WE BE LUMPED IN WITH THE AMERICANS
WE ONLY DISLIKE SMALL BREASTS I THOUGHT
DEAD MAN I DEMAND YOU MAKE A THREAD IN OFF TOPIC ABOUT THIS
HOW DARE WE BE LUMPED IN WITH THE AMERICANS
WE ONLY DISLIKE SMALL BREASTS I THOUGHT
Also isn't it meant to be out within the next 8 weeks?
Unless that someone's beliefs infringe on other people, there's really no reason to challenge their beliefs. It can be invasive and even harmful, especially in circumstances where those beliefs are a coping mechanism for grief. I've seen idiots trying to follow Dawkins and seem to think that "challenging beliefs" equates to picking fights with people who want no fight. In the end though, its really not your business if people believe something else.Ehhh, I dont really think anyone should be using reddit as grounds to criticise someone by association. It comes off as equally intellectually hollow as it does when people say Dawkins is militant and agressive etc when he is one of the most cordial, polite debaters I've ever seen. They conflate his controversial attitude with being rude, when his whole point is to challenge the unspoken rule that you don't challenge someone's beliefs.
On a slightly related note, I don't get why its considered rude to challenge someone in polite terms. It's more than possible to have a pleasant, interesting and civil discussion of the matter and I manage to do so with all sorts of people. If they want to challenge my thoughts, go for it. I'm open to being convinced otherwise, but at the same time have enough confidence of my understanding of them that I don't feel threatened.
If someone challenging your beliefs upsets you (speaking generally here), then its time to re-evaluate just how strongly you hold to them and whether your anger at them being challenged is merely a sign of unacknowledged doubt.
tl;dr: ideas need to be discussed openly and politely, and it's easy to do so.
Unless its to do with videogames in which case fuck niceties.
I started watching Archer a few days ago. Its seriously fantastic.Decided to watch Archer instead
Best Archer ever
Also maybe I drank this scotch too quick?
![]()
Do you have safe search turned on?Google a porn stars name and count out how many pictures it takes to find one with nipples.
oooh, did you go to the Asia Pacific Triennials? I've been meaning to get over to GOMA, since the last one was really good.Am at art gallery. Not even raining. I am hungry, though.
Unless that someone's beliefs infringe on other people, there's really no reason to challenge their beliefs. It can be invasive and even harmful, especially in circumstances where those beliefs are a coping mechanism for grief. I've seen idiots trying to follow Dawkins and seem to think that "challenging beliefs" equates to picking fights with people who want no fight. In the end though, its really not your business if people believe something else.
.
I didn't say that DS gamers were kiddy, only Wii U ones. Why would you be so insulting to all those DS owners?
I don't see why religion gets a thoughtshield
I should have listened to you Stackboy, SSX is fucking incredible. Such a fantastic follow up to the IP. Just pure joy.
Even when I get my ass handed to me my face is covered in a shit eating grin and I am happy to replay again and again.
Once you get to grips with everything it is really hard to fault the gameplay. Controls are perfect. Music is fantastic!
EDIT: 1440x900 Shan?
Well if that's (bolded) the threshold, then all religions are ripe to be challenged.
I wasn't blaming him for anything (have I before?). I'm just saying some people I've met have idolized him and ended up being incredibly offensive. Dawkins himself I'll admit I'm not too keen on. He made some very good points when I saw him on qanda, but I do think he's also pretty obnoxious sometimes.Beyond that, there is nothing wrong with a contest or discussion of ideas. I already outlined it in a context of being civil, so I dont quite see what the problem would be. Again, you are blaming Dawkins for things he hasnt done.
As shan alluded to, it is afforded a bit of protection because people use it as a grief/coping mechanism. I'd argue its not entirely healthy but then not everyone is and some stories are helpful. I won't argue that point, nor would I try and convince someone that the only afterlife their dearly departed is experiencing is a worm's digestive tract.
But the same thoughtshield affords all sorts of dangerous ideas equal amounts of protection (homophobia, discrimination against all out-groups, anti-science propaganda and patriarchal dominance) and apparently it is rude to challenge those ideas?
Please.
Unless that someone's beliefs infringe on other people, there's really no reason to challenge their beliefs. It can be invasive and even harmful, especially in circumstances where those beliefs are a coping mechanism for grief. I've seen idiots trying to follow Dawkins and seem to think that "challenging beliefs" equates to picking fights with people who want no fight. In the end though, its really not your business if people believe something else.
All religions? Really? There is nothing inherently wrong with believing in a higher power. Religious institutions are a different matter, but individuals themselves aren't necessarily doing anything wrong. I've met many 'religious people' (a pretty vague term tbh) who, for example, have no problem with gay marriage, and many non religious people who are completely against it. I guess I just don't see what's wrong with people holding different views.
All religions? Really? There is nothing inherently wrong with believing in a higher power. Religious institutions are a different matter, but individuals themselves aren't necessarily doing anything wrong. I've met many 'religious people' (a pretty vague term tbh) who, for example, have no problem with gay marriage, and many non religious people who are completely against it. I guess I just don't see what's wrong with people holding different views.
I wasn't blaming him for anything (have I before?). I'm just saying some people I've met have idolized him and ended up being incredibly offensive. Dawkins himself I'll admit I'm not too keen on. He made some very good points when I saw him on qanda, but I do think he's also pretty obnoxious sometimes.
It depends on the circumstances obviously. You're putting words in my mouth. All of those things effect other people, and I definitely don't agree with letting shit like that slide. Is the belief that a big old man watches over you and you go live with him when you die necessarily harmful? I don't believe it is.
Dawkins himself I'll admit I'm not too keen on. He made some very good points when I saw him on qanda, but I do think he's also pretty obnoxious sometimes.
The difficulty is that people that ascribe to the same set of beliefs will not keep to their own business. Family first type Christians make it very difficult to not discuss Christianity in a way that will force people to defend themselves.
The problem is its often hard to distinguish the two, and an attack on someone's beliefs and lifestyle is often taken personally. I would also like to see these things debated, but there's a difference between that and harassing individuals who aren't doing anything harmful. What exactly is wrong with being religious?This is one topic where it absolutely can and should be adversarial, but only adversarial between ideas. Not people.
Did I ever say it was? I did not mean to put blame on him. I suppose that's just where my thought stream lead when you mentioned Dawkins. Apologies."Idiots trying to follow Dawkins" is typically lazy invective used to apportion blame to him for things he does not do. Atheism is not a creed, church or organisation. He is a biologist-slash-philosopher.
I agree. I have never said that I disagree.Religion meanwhile is a creed (or group of), and people following specific belief sets can be frequently harmful. The catholic church's stance on contraception is a notable one. The anti-homosexual societal pressure (no doubt contributing to too many suicides) is another.
Personal belief is fine, but when it has the power for societal impacts, it absolutely MUST be held to account.
I'm doing no such thing. I'm pointing out that your criticism of Dawkins is due to nothing he has done, and is more to do with the actions of people who agree with some of his ideas. Obviously they haven't seen or read enough of him, because he is painstakingly polite.
Fuck.
Fuck.
Read what I quoted. You were putting words in my mouth, and again in your most recent post insinuated a whole load of stuff that I don't actually agree with.
Unless that someone's beliefs infringe on other people, there's really no reason to challenge their beliefs. It can be invasive and even harmful, especially in circumstances where those beliefs are a coping mechanism for grief.
As shan alluded to, it is afforded a bit of protection because people use it as a grief/coping mechanism. I'd argue its not entirely healthy but then not everyone is and some stories are helpful. I won't argue that point, nor would I try and convince someone that the only afterlife their dearly departed is experiencing is a worm's digestive tract.
and I pointed out that it is often the case religious beliefs do start to impact on the lives of others.Unless that someone's beliefs infringe on other people
I can't stand Murray. But djokovic should make short work of him.
I knooooooowFuck.
On numerous occasions he has said that people having faith because it makes them feel good is one thing. Taking the teachings as an absolute truth is another thing entirely. Those who would believe that the Universe revolves around the Earth or that the Earth is flat would be challenged, even ridiculed today. Why should religious beliefs be any different?
Funny you didn't quote the part I was actually referring to:That's a pretty accurate representation of what you said (worms aside), all I did was extend the argument to say that my concern is the protection religion gets (in part for being a coping tool for some people) allows some of its more harmful traits to get a free ride.
As you said in the same breath and I pointed out that it is often the case religious beliefs do start to impact on the lives of others.
But the same thoughtshield affords all sorts of dangerous ideas equal amounts of protection (homophobia, discrimination against all out-groups, anti-science propaganda and patriarchal dominance) and apparently it is rude to challenge those ideas?
Please.
I just think everyone should be free to live their lives the way they see fit. Of course beliefs should be questioned if it leads to hatred and fear. Challenging someone over beliefs that cannot be proven either way is a bit more problematic than challenging someone over things that are proven false.
Funny you didn't quote the part I was actually referring to:
I don't know! Is that a rhetorical question?But (to repeat an example) a typical argument goes:
"I dont like gays they are the same as pedos" (I'm sure thats a direct quote of many bumpkins)
"How dare you say such a thing"
"ITS WHAT I BELIEVE YOU CANT TELL ME IM WRONG"
What can you possibly do to demonstrate to someone of that mindset that their worldview is not only wrong, but harmful?
Funny, neither did you.
Well, it'd be more accurate to say the idea of 'proof' is anathema to the idea itself
That's true. But gods or unicorns or kappas, if it makes them happy and doesn't hurt anyone I don't really care what they believe in.
That doesn't make any sense! I give up. I'm not keen on shitting up the thread further.
Shan, you're taking the questions personally.
My 'please' post was a response to jintor with a reference to your line, followed by a rant against nasty things done in the name of religion.
Well you were were pretty vague.
Sorry for ruining the thread.
You are not shitting up the thread. If you want to stop because you are getting piled on (sorry about that) that is understandable, but you are not thread shitting.
People just need to get used to the fact that since religious views impact on society, and there is a plurality of religions, there will need to be debate, at the very least, about what the proper role for religion is.
Mannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn Anathema is a pretty great band. Am I correct in remembering that someone in here saw them this year?Well, it'd be more accurate to say the idea of 'proof' is anathema to the idea itself
YOU'RE NOT RUINING THE THREADSorry for ruining the thread.
Ideally it should be a private thing, and nothing more. I suppose that's not very realistic though huh.