What is your religion / spiritual belief?

[Xavos]

I think they are perverted because... They are.

I'm not going to reply to this entire thing, but this statement is entirely subjective. What is "sick" to someone is perfectly fine to another. Claiming facts on subjective matters is what starts arguments more often than not.

[ztk3snI]

I'm going to walk away from this thread now.

Just remember, I'm a scientific person. I restrict myself based on Islam (Halal and Haram foods, Praying 5 times a day), and accept it's basic message (There's but one god). But I'm not so foolhardy as to base everything on spirituality alone.

Science tries to ask all the questions.

Religion tries to answer all of them.

Of the two methods of approaching life, I prefer the first, but don't ignore the second.

[Venghze]

The "Culture Crash" will indeed happen, but as I've seen it, it happens because of stereotypes, nationalism or racism; rather than the values and views he has as a Muslim. I had few acquaintances and for me they were no different than the rest.

There are other situations as well. I have one specific in mind that happened to me: I live in Sweden. There, body contact is some kind of taboo it seems, and sitting down next to someone on a bench is seen as an act of ignorance and invasion of personal space. So this one time I was on the bus and this family from afghanistan comes aboard and sits down opposite to me. Their kid is a little wild and takes a jump, leaving a big muddy foot-print on my jeans. The dad of the family (know knowing a single word in swedish) excused himself as good as he could in english, took a napkin and tried to clean the stain from my leg. In the culture he was used to, that was just something you should do. If he had done that to an ethnic Swede they would have pulled away their leg asking what the f*ck he was doing. That's the kind of culture crashes I talk about.

Let's say no one guided him and he fell into temptation - tried drugs and became addicted. He enjoys it and want for it to be this way, but he doesn't know that this will eventually kill him. He might or not hurt surrounding people with his addiction, but I, for example, can't stand the thought that somebody kill himself like that. If I could, I would gladly interfere in his personal life, in his happy state, just to be sure he will have a better life, rather a life of a junkie. That why I see the need to guide people and not let them fall into such troubles.

Well, if he doesnt know how dangerous drugs are you should probably inform him. If he really wants to keep do it and doesnt care... well, I'd pity him, but not much I can do. However, must drug addicts that I know of wants to stop, and would appreciate help.

As I said, it's not the fandom itself that is sick and perverted. A sexual contact between humans, furries, dragons - prornography, alright. But when it goes into... Sexual act with gutting, limb tearing and etc. (You know what I mean) I think I can freely say so: "This is sick", rather: "In my opinion, this is sick". That is when it all started from. At this specific situation, I said: "It is perverted. It's true. Can really anybody say it's normal?". So I ask - must I say that it is my personal opinion, that that kind of porn is perverted and sick? And why should I see you as blind, stupid or ignorant because you don't follow the "true" path. We all are not ideal and we all have our flaws. A smoker can admit that smoking is a wrong thing, afterall. And if he smokes (Spends money to ruin his health) it's indeed not a good thing. But I will not say that he is a complete moron and so on... Let him enjoy the smoking; I would at least say that it's a wrong thing to do.

No, you cant freely say that, thats the whole point. You may think it is, but that doesnt mean that it actually is. It's a matter of personal opinion. Take me for example: I really disliked Xavos' links to clopfics and ponyporn (porn inspired by MLP). To me, it was like pedophilia because the ponies seem to be like 10-year-olds to me. So I asked him to stop sharing them in the chatroom etc, because I found it disturbing, to quote myself "because to me, its like pedophilia". Xavos on the other hand disagree with me and call them young adults, 17-18 years old, which puts the thing in a whole other view. Xavos would sure as hell had been pissed off if I had stated it like it WAS pedophilia, thereby calling him a pedobear. See what I mean?

1)In my opinion, Scar Symmetry without Christian Alvestam is just awfull; they even had to invite two vocalists to replace him.

2)Drugs are definitely the thing you should never be into; they were crush your life in the end.

I'm not familiar with #1, but I'd agree with #2. But as I said, if someone really wanna do it, there's not much we can do.

I love the clean art allot. Or a beautiful relationship if it comes to it, rather well... I mentioned that. But first of all, I came here to see how this community lives and to know more about the people here. I never regretted that.

Okay, I see. Well, the community sure is great ^,=,^

I would wish only the best for my child without forcing my believes into him. I would still guide him as I see right, but if he wants to believe in god - very well. I will just ask why he made such a decision.

I approve of this.

About my child wishing to watch dragon porn... Well can't imagine such situation, but if he already knows about it, I can't forbid that for him, because it's not damaging as smoking, for example. But he will definitely not see the "depths" of it, aswell as I will not allow him to have damaging health habbits as smoking, drinking and etc...

I dont think I could forbid my kid to do that, but I would do all I can to reason with him/her to make him/her stop.

Mmm... That goes into politics I think. And I have a completely different political position. And yes, I can never tell that my political position is the "truth".

Well, no matter how much I would like it to, it doesnt work all the way in politics. There need to be other restrictions as well.

Ah, those were rhetorical questions, Venghze. Anyways, that's a good education.

Oh... well, I couldnt be too sure x3

Very well, I understand what you mean.

No further comments on that then.

Under that freedom I implied free will, no restrictions, no rules - do whatever you wish, as long as you are happy and don't hurt anybody. Yes, I think it will lead to chaos in the end. And people might get corrupted, because they just get too much of freedom. Human being is vulnerable to temptations, thus I think there must be always a guidance and moral education for everybody. And simple parenting is not enough, because they may have their own ways or just leave the child to develop on his own.

Well, chaos and corruotion, that's what you have law enforcement for :p

Nothing is wrong with your way of living. I have my opinion why it might get bad and you can simply find why my way is bad. I just prefer another way of living.

No more comments on that either then.

Perhaps. But my list would be much longer and the education more... Inspiring? Let's say stronger. But not a brainwash - true values must be understood, not imposed by somebody.

I guess we have a different way to confront people... and a different way to spread our words and teach...

All had been said above. I told what I see as sick and perverted and told what kind of things I like in the community.

End of that story too then.

Well, I hardly can say that "depths" of the Gallery are perverted only in my opinion. I think they are perverted because... They are. Our imagination... I understand that people on this site are okay with those "depths", but don't they acknowledge that those things are nasty\sick? Some authors even place a warning, that this picture is "Sick", for example.

Xavos already responded to that for me:

I'm not going to reply to this entire thing, but this statement is entirely subjective. What is "sick" to someone is perfectly fine to another. Claiming facts on subjective matters is what starts arguments more often than not.

[Airduinec]

I see sexual contact as the need to reproduce, rather having fun or pleasure

But my tongue rots to call this love.

So you see sexual contact as purely a biological thing and yet believe in love. Science has yet to fully understand what 'love' is, but most of the studies so far put it as being nothing more than sex chemicals driving you to find a mate and reproduce – the biological need to procreate. So what matter is it that 'Herpy's depths', as you call them, differ from the norm of human instinct? Is the reason why you disapprove of such material truly 'love', something that is not intrinsctly biological or even neccesary for survival? Love is a fantasy – one in which many people believe. And it exists, at least in our minds. However, if you are going to take a strictly animalistic approach to sex then you should do away with the concept of love as well.

Because let Airduinec tell whatever he wants about "superiority complex", but he should learn that there is "Right and Wrong".

-sighs-

We all need guidance in our path of life, because without it we would be lost; thus there is a "true" path. Not everything is based on personal opinions only.

Can I find the "truth" in a book? The truth comes from awareness, understanding.

I live by my truth and you live by yours. But there is the common truth for everyone that will outlive us all.

But some situations does hold only one right path.

let aside spirituality for a moment.

You keep speaking as if this 'truth' is absolute and undeniable – that it can be realized by everyone and that it is the 'right path'. Now, I already addressed the fallacy of such an idea, so I won't anymore, but on the note of rejecting spirituality.. You say you are not spiritual, and yet you speak of this greater truth. Where does this truth come from? Is it not a spiritual guideline in and of itself? It seems that way.

A wise route is to guide and teach, but I don't claim to be the one who does it, because I have still much to learn. But what about you? You can possibly tell me what is wise and not? Your truth? I will neglect your gracious note of superiority complex then, Airduinec.
A honest question? Did my cheering comment to ztk3snI was really worth... Commenting on? Have it your way, but from your past actions you don't really seem to be the "honest" type.

I can tell you that it is not wise to patronize me, and that is what I did. It was not claiming that I am wise or anything of that sort; it was not my 'truth', it was simply a warning that it will not have make any progress with me as an individual or the subject as a whole. I respect you, and I expect respect in return. You have yet to give that.

Yes, an honest question, and yes, it was worth commenting on. If you are so aware of my 'past actions', as you claim, then you should also know that I choose very carefully when to get involved in debate and when to not. This happens to be a case where I felt it neccesary to do so.

I have not judged you yet by your views, because I know little about them. I did said that I acknowledge the truth and in this particular situation it's hard to me to say it's my personal opinion.

You're right, I have neglected my own opinion in the effort to stay 'neutral', as you say – in the same form that I illustrated earlier, and that is by removing myself from the subject material. The only thing that you know right now is that I disagree with your claims of there being an almighty truth or right and wrong to the world. I believe that every such judgment is entirely subjective. If you must have my opinions, however..


It is my opinion that you and everyone else should have the right to think and believe in what you want. It is my opinion that those beliefs should not be forced upon others. It is my opinion that every individual should respect one another for their differing beliefs, and that they should be happy for their human brother and sister in their differences as they are for their own. If we must go further..


I believe that sexuality should be embraced, not condemned, and that alternative interests are not in any case inheriently 'wrong'. I believe that the concepts of 'right and wrong' are in and of themselves naïve and untrue. And I believe that one's spirituality should be personal and kept to himself, as opposed to intergration with an organized religion.

This freedom let's people drown in corruption and lust.

(EDIT: Never mind this following part; you people are too fast for me.)

As Mr. Venghze stated, I would be interested to hear the details of how freedom drowns people in 'corruption and lust'.

[Erian Angelus]

*Sigh* I will make this shorter so I can respond to everything for today.
I read everything and took it to notice.

Just little bits:

I'm not familiar with #1

I choosed a Sweden Melodic Death\Progressive metal and thought you may be familiar with it. Oh well.

I'm not going to reply to this entire thing, but this statement is entirely subjective. What is "sick" to someone is perfectly fine to another. Claiming facts on subjective matters is what starts arguments more often than not.

Ofcourse, there is only handful of those, who will see it perfectly fine. And considering some authors warn of "sick" material that they create... Reasonable to me. But I understand what are you talking about.

So you see sexual contact as purely a biological thing and yet believe in love. Science has yet to fully understand what 'love' is, but most of the studies so far put it as being nothing more than sex chemicals driving you to find a mate and reproduce – the biological need to procreate. So what matter is it that 'Herpy's depths', as you call them, differ from the norm of human instinct? Is the reason why you disapprove of such material truly 'love', something that is not intrinsctly biological or even neccesary for survival? Love is a fantasy – one in which many people believe. And it exists, at least in our minds. However, if you are going to take a strictly animalistic approach to sex then you should do away with the concept of love as well.

I said that I see sexual contact more as a need to reproduce, rather pleasure. Thus love itself for me is at high value as a feeling. I don't need to have sex to know what "love" is. Where did I said sexual contact is purely biological thing? You had to add science, marvelous. And the sexual act required to reproduce differ greatly from the fun at "Herpy's depths". Oh and now I have an animalistic approach to sex! You got wrong everything as it seems. Or you just hear things as you wish. Sigh indeed.

You keep speaking as if this 'truth' is absolute and undeniable – that it can be realized by everyone and that it is the 'right path'. Now, I already addressed the fallacy of such an idea, so I won't anymore, but on the note of rejecting spirituality.. You say you are not spiritual, and yet you speak of this greater truth. Where does this truth come from? Is it not a spiritual guideline in and of itself? It seems that way.

Again, you exaggerate to no end. I said that there is a "truth" for us all and everyone can understand it. I don't preach with it or demand complying. (And reading further: I don't force it upon anybody)
You riped it out from context with the spirituality part. I said that we are all humans to Venghze, but as he claims to be an Otherkin, I moved the spirituatlity aside just for that moment.
Anyways, I don't see how spirituality has to do anything with moral code. It's mental guideline, Airduinec.

I can tell you that it is not wise to patronize me, and that is what I did. It was not claiming that I am wise or anything of that sort; it was not my 'truth', it was simply a warning that it will not have make any progress with me as an individual or the subject as a whole. I respect you, and I expect respect in return. You have yet to give that.

Agree on the first part. I don't ignore you even because all of this misunderstanding, if you haven't noticed. I do feel like I must start explaining from the very beginning, but I already sorted things out with Venghze.

Usefull experience indeed.

[Airduinec]

I said that I see sexual contact more as a need to reproduce, rather pleasure. Thus love itself for me is at high value as a feeling.

Love is as high a value as a feeling to you.. a feeling like pleasure, maybe?

Where did I said sexual contact is purely biological thing?

You said that you view it as a need to reproduce more than as a pleasurable activity, which implies a focus on biological need alone.

And the sexual act required to reproduce differ greatly from the fun at "Herpy's depths".

So then simply because you cannot reproduce with with pornography of a non-human species it is wrong?

Again, you exaggerate to no end. I said that there is a "truth" for us all and everyone can understand it. I don't preach with it or demand complying. (And reading further: I don't force it upon anybody)
You riped it out from context with the spirituality part. I said that we are all humans to Venghze, but as he claims to be an Otherkin, I moved the spirituatlity aside just for that moment.
Anyways, I don't see how spirituality has to do anything with moral code. It's mental guideline, Airduinec.

No, I exaggerate nothing. You're incorrect; this truth of yours everyone cannot understand because it is an opinion, not an absolute. In fact, I'd wager that the majority of the seven-billion plus people on this Earth would not understand such a 'truth', as they all have differing opinions. As for you preaching, I suppose that's a matter of how someone takes it, but it certainly came off that way to me in your original posts. It's the reason why I confronted the matter in the first place.

I wasn't taking the subject of spirituality out of context in the sense of using it against you, I was simply quoting you saying that you disregard it to question where your truth comes from. I could have done the same with your earlier comment on being Atheist. How do you not see how spirituality has anything to do with morals? A lot of religions and even lesser spiritual beliefs provide a set of do's and don't's in life.

You had to add science, marvelous.

Oh and now I have an animalistic approach to sex! You got wrong everything as it seems. Or you just hear things as you wish. Sigh indeed.

It's mental guideline, Airduinec.

I'm done with receiving your debate fallacies. You continue to provoke me whilst you yourself are unprovoked. You treat Mr. Venghze with respect while you talk down to me. Frankly, that's probably just because he's a moderator. I understand that not everyone has a background in actual debate and argumentation policy, but I try to show courtesy nonetheless. If you wish to ruin that gesture, be my guest; allow me to address you likewise.

You're ignorant. If you think for a moment that I am debating this for my own pleasure and that I choose to 'hear things as [I] wish', then you are a fool. I am not sure whether it is your cultural background, or your upbringing as a youth, but it is clear that you wish nothing more than to blindly cling to your own misconception and portray others (or at least me) as assholes. If I may bring my own fallacy into the picture, I understand that you have feelings for communism and, being a supporter of socialism, I am quite concerned that this portion of your perspective may be derived from such thoughts, especially with your words on education and its 'inspiration'. For whatever reason you seem to have a disposition against me even before this subject was discussed, what with my 'honesty' being questioned and whatnot. Honestly, it's pathetic; learn to practice what you preach - separate yourself from your opinions and try to become 'neutral'.

Of course I brought in science. Is that a terrible thing? And I didn't say you had an animalistic view on sex, I said that it was an animalistic approach - a biological approach. Quit the criminalization. Thanks for the lectures though, I enjoyed them.

Believe what what you want. No one will stop you. But it is not absolute, and no one will ever accept your opinion except fellow believers if you continue to portray it as the 'truth'. That's the real truth, Erian Angelus. Enjoy your slice of naivety; I will take my leave before I become more.. honest.

[Xavos]

Erian, Air's already pointed it out, but seriously try to tone down the condescending approach to your sentences, of particular note is "sigh indeed." I have a feeling condescending was not the intention but it would be very easy to think it was based off segments like that.

[Erian Angelus]

Erian, Air's already pointed it out, but seriously try to tone down the condescending approach to your sentences, of particular note is "sigh indeed." I have a feeling condescending was not the intention but it would be very easy to think it was based off segments like that.

My conversation with Airduinec is less than fruitful, because he either misleads my point or exaggerates it, coming to absolutely not suitable conclusions or add irrelevant things in this particular debate. I pointed out that he got me wrong and I explained what I ment, but he only went further into delusion. Since his little "relief" was placed - this is indeed going nowhere.

Well, I may sound like I am patronizing him, which, I agree, is not a good option. I didn't put a condescending approach in that particular sentence. I'm just ashonished how my point was made misplaced. I guess I sound patronizing. I can probably sound like that again, due to his "relief".

Love is as high a value as a feeling to you.. a feeling like pleasure, maybe?

I mentioned on this matter several times. And I made an explanation aswell. You still mislead my words.

I can only imagine now what love is to you. Pleasure? "Hands can give that pleasure". I am speaking about true happyness - when you have a very strong and great feeling towards somebody. Somebody, who always makes you happy and who is a big part of your life. On who you can trust completely and give the same back and so on... Ofcourse, that is how I see love, but it's definitely cannot be tied up with a word like "pleasure". Joy is a better word. Anyways, I told you: I don't need sexual contact to understand what is "love". You can call sexual contact as "making love", but I am speaking about the "sincere and pure" feeling towards somebody, rather sexual contact, which gives pleasure. Just to think on it: does sexual contact give happyness? I don't think so; pleasure - yes. And love gives you happyness.

You said that you view it as a need to reproduce more than as a pleasurable activity, which implies a focus on biological need alone.

Okay, okay... What if I say that sexual contact is only a need to reproduce in my opinion? Does that makes any difference for you? Sex is a pleasurable activity, but I see it more importantly as a way to reproduce and, further, raise children. Family is a value; not one of my highest ones, but I would consider building up a family; because it's indeed a value, not because I feel a biological need for it. All those speeches were about ideology, values; philosophy, to add. Your science is ill-timed in my opinion. Or perhaps your grip onto scientific explanations makes your view too narrowed to understand me.

So then simply because you cannot reproduce with with pornography of a non-human species it is wrong?

Again, you are on your own wave.
"So what matter is it that 'Herpy's depths', as you call them, differ from the norm of human instinct?"
You don't need to tear limbs and eat guts further to reproduce. By "Herpy's depths" I called that kind of pornography.

No, I exaggerate nothing. You're incorrect; this truth of yours everyone cannot understand because it is an opinion, not an absolute. In fact, I'd wager that the majority of the seven-billion plus people on this Earth would not understand such a 'truth', as they all have differing opinions. As for you preaching, I suppose that's a matter of how someone takes it, but it certainly came off that way to me in your original posts. It's the reason why I confronted the matter in the first place.

I wasn't taking the subject of spirituality out of context in the sense of using it against you, I was simply quoting you saying that you disregard it to question where your truth comes from. I could have done the same with your earlier comment on being Atheist. How do you not see how spirituality has anything to do with morals? A lot of religions and even lesser spiritual beliefs provide a set of do's and don't's in life.

I will not argue about can it be understandable or not - we've done on that. But how many times must I tell you that I don't preach of force my believes? I am greatly tired to telling this only to you again and again. I didn't came here to say, that you should follow my way, because it is the only right thing out there. I don't demand anything; see as you please. I came here, saying that I know what "truth" is in this particular situation. Let it sound ignorant - that will be my flaw; but I will still believe that gutting in pornography is sick and wrong. This can damage youth's mind and it is a fact. Let's say it's like a drug: we all know that it does damage and we consider it wrong. A junkie may say that it's cool, untill he will get the bad results. Vile pornography is damaging to children, for example; why we can't consider it all wrong? We may still watch it, because it does significantly less damage than drugs, but we should now allow our children to have bad "results". That what I called "truth". And once again, I will tell you that I don't impose my words to anybody.

Spirituality and morals... How to put it right... You don't steal because it's a rule in a bible; because your god will punish you? Or because you understand that stealing is wrong? I think that true values should be understood, rather aquired from fear or because they are the rules.

I'm done with receiving your debate fallacies. You continue to provoke me whilst you yourself are unprovoked. You treat Mr. Venghze with respect while you talk down to me. Frankly, that's probably just because he's a moderator. I understand that not everyone has a background in actual debate and argumentation policy, but I try to show courtesy nonetheless. If you wish to ruin that gesture, be my guest; allow me to address you likewise.

You're ignorant. If you think for a moment that I am debating this for my own pleasure and that I choose to 'hear things as [I] wish', then you are a fool. I am not sure whether it is your cultural background, or your upbringing as a youth, but it is clear that you wish nothing more than to blindly cling to your own misconception and portray others (or at least me) as assholes. If I may bring my own fallacy into the picture, I understand that you have feelings for communism and, being a supporter of socialism, I am quite concerned that this portion of your perspective may be derived from such thoughts, especially with your words on education and its 'inspiration'. For whatever reason you seem to have a disposition against me even before this subject was discussed, what with my 'honesty' being questioned and whatnot. Honestly, it's pathetic; learn to practice what you preach - separate yourself from your opinions and try to become 'neutral'.

Of course I brought in science. Is that a terrible thing? And I didn't say you had an animalistic view on sex, I said that it was an animalistic approach - a biological approach. Quit the criminalization. Thanks for the lectures though, I enjoyed them.

Have you not been provocative? Can you be sure? I encountered you several times before and you made misleadings in different threads aswell. From our conversation here, I see that you are fond of it.
You also told me that you choose very carefuly when to enter a debate or not. Alright. A guy entered this thread to say that in his religion it's a very bad thing to look into the Gallery. He tried to be careful, polite; he made sure that people will not understand him wrong; he respected us all. He even apologised after that. But you had to say a word to him, don't you? I said that I heard of your behaviour before. Not so "honest". I haven't said that you an asshole. I ment that you may wish to "strain" few. That's why I had a desposition to you at the start. You acted disrespectfuly to a person once (Didn't witnessed, heard that from the person); you had to say absolutely irrelevant commentary to a person at this thread; you once came into another thread and misleaded the point, because you thought as you wanted. You wanted respect from me and now calling me an ignorant and a fool. My motives are pathetic and so let those words exists. But are you showing respect to others and don't you "shovel" topics under your own views? If you remember it, I answered to you when you did that. And I answered to you only 2 times. This conversation is a third time of our encounter.

Ofcourse, you may expect retaliation from me, because of your insults; but do not worry, I am not that low for direct insults.

You treat Mr. Venghze with respect while you talk down to me. Frankly, that's probably just because he's a moderator

Oh let me get into that. I really do hate "suck-up".

First of all, I had a debate with Venghze like that one before he was a moderator. And the debate ended here absolutely the same way, how it ended some time ago. But ofcourse you don't know about that! Let's make worthwhile conclusions! I may be ignorant, but are you any better?
I don't strife to be friends with mods or I don't assent their words. I barely spoke with them; and I see them, and you, as human beings, moderator or not. But when it comes to their duty to give warnings, I try to comply.
Unlike yours, Venghze's answer was suprisingly respectful and disciplined; when I thought I was agressive to him and expected the same in return. But no, his words were pined to the topic and not to personal matters. And so the debate ended as it should.

You treat Mr. Venghze with respect while you talk down to me

Should I do an unworthy conclusion like you did? No, let it not be my flaw.

Enjoy your slice of naivety; I will take my leave before I become more.. honest.

Speaking about superiority complex!

"Move along, citizen..."

[Sandy]

Ok then, since I do not feel like adding my point of view on the discussion above, I will try to explain my own position towards both religion and spirituality, to reply directly to the question of this apparently very hot thread.

I will start with religion. I will say I have been baptized as a catolic christian, however I do not practice this faith even if I do go to church when necessary, to honor people I know that follow religious tradition of both marriage and funeral. My primary problem with any religion is the fact that, since it states ultimate truths and never just possibilities, it has always resulted in creating conflict with other religions for the purpose of establing a singual faith.

History has a great number of examples of how religion is imposed on people whose previous religious traditions are persecuted and banned. For instance a good example is the colonization of the Americas, and how the conquistadores and in particular catholic priests acted towards the natives. The medieval holy wars are another good example on how religion has always been a good excuse for justifying the killing of not only warriors, but also the murdering (and much worse, too) of innocents such as children, women and the elderly, and doing so in the "name of god".

It isn't fun to read how during the holy wars both the muslims and the christians were even worse than animals (go read some chronicles, you'll be surprised), and still thought that their actions would lead them to salvation as those wars were "commanded" by the "right" god. But I am digressing. This is to say that because a religion tells ultimate truths, all the ultimate truths of other religions must be wrong. I am not a religious person for this very reason. I do not follow a religion, however I do understand the advantages of one: the fact of resting the mind from the doubt that is caused by not believing in something ultimately, for instance.

Since any specific ultimate I could pick would happen to enter in contradiction that results in conflict with a holder of a different ultimate truth, I recognize religion as just another instrument of control with the purpose of establishing dominance and provoking justified violence, both verbal and physical, as I have explained before. Of course I haven't got anything against believers as long as they do not try to convert me or to question me, or try to make me think that their own view is better than someone else's or even mine.

Spiritually wise it's a different story. I do not "leave out" the possibility of both the existence of the creative force as an intelligent being and of the individual spirit. However I am also sure that I cannot be ultimately sure of their existence, because even if I have had experiences that could lead me to think there is a spirit and that we are all part of creation therefore of whatever wished it, my own thoughts are only opinions and are not made to make me or anyone else believe in them as "ultimates" or irrefutable facts.

I do believe though that there are obvious things in life that tell us when they are wrong, for example doing harm to others, but I think this occurrs simply out of that feeling called empathy. It is obvious that there are people that ignore empathy or are void of it or like doing harm and that is the reason why bad things happen on a regular basis, and the world looks so ruined and corrupted. Strangely, if this is so, it does seem that in nature there is an attraction/tendency towards actions/things that look/feel negative/unpure: for instance the fact of hurting someone during the sexual act may increase the sexual desire in someone.

Referring to the Herpy Dephts and talking for myself, I can tell out of personal experience that there is nothing wrong in imagining something bad in order to get positive/pleasurable results if this is limited to the context of the art/the imaginary or of a virtual reality. Just look at how all these people play videogames in which you do nothing but murder and they are such a great form of entertainment! It was the same with the romans and their colosseums, only that today we have learned how to confine these impulses within a place no one can get hurt.

Unfortunately bad things happen outside of these contexts which are bad, but are they bad in the eye of the person that commits them? And is or isn't this person part of the nature that makes everyone of us up? Mh.

So really, to resume my own beliefs after what I said. I do not think that evil is unpure or it is always sick, wrong or perverted. It can be as much as good can be unpure, sick, wrong or perverted (think of the inquisition if you want an example). Anyway, I try not to believe in anything and that is my belief.

Always question, never remove completely out of the equation something as much as putting it above everything else. Learning from listening, but still thinking on my own to then share my views without making them into facts but just opinions for everyone to see is my own way of approaching the subjects of this thread.

[Venghze]

Airduinec's part of the debate.

Erian's part of the debate.

Since the debate here has derailed from a religious debate to some personal issue between the two of you, I suggest you continue this over PM, and not in this thread.

Also Erian; our last debate (before this one) ended up in that we agreed to disagree. I guess this one ended up in something similar. Further of notice; even if the other person in the debate gets agressive, you shouldnt. The agressive debater is usually agressive because he is about to loose, so stay correct and watch him lower himself until he looses. Much more mature and effective way to rule debate ;3 But, what makes a good debater is especially never to step on someone else's toes, like saying "christianity is pointless and stupid". That makes people loose respect for you as you obviously are ignorant and doesnt respect people who disagree with you. Get what I want to say? So lets skip this "truth" thing. Every truth is an opinion unless scientifically proven otherwise.

1. Always respect your opponent.
2. There is nothing called the truth, if it's a subjective matter.
3. Always remember that you debate with and make statements of opinions. Choose your words well.
4. Always do a good research of the topic you are going to debate about.
5. Any statements you make should be backed up by scientifically proven tests and methods.
6. Never patronize your opponent. It will make you look ignorant and disrespectful.
7. Never insult your opponent. A debater using insults is a debater loosing his debate, and is desperately grasping for anything to bring down his opponent. Its disrespectful and immature.
8. Be sure to use correct language and grammar, since errors and be misinterpreted.
9. If you can't make your opponent fall back / loose, agree to disagree.
10. Remember, a good debater wins by making his opponent lose by himself. Crack his arguments. Bring forth proof against his claims. Best is if you can prove him to be lying, or even make him insult you (just dont be unnecessarily provocative, that is just as bad as insulting). When that happens, you have "won" the debate.

Example:
"So even though I brought all this proof and information that afro-americans are to at least 99% not rapists, you still stick to your opinion that, to quote yourself, all fucking niggers should die?"
"That's correct."
"I think that that speaks for itself. I think we agree to disagree on this matter."

In this example, you have punctured his arguments with proof, turned his own words against him and making him look like an ignorant retard in front of everyone watching. All by being 100% kind and respectful yourself. Instant win.

Sometimes, I love politics <3