CdnFox

No, that is not rational. It is rational for a RELIGIOUS person who believes in THAT god to consider doing that. But it would be nuts for anyone else to consider it. this is what i mean by the arrogance and insisting your god is 100 percent confirmed real and everyone must believe in him. Nope. Which means that any opinion you have is useless, it's not based on reason or logic but on your erroneous belief that your imaginary friend and the voices in your head are automatically right and that nobody should dispute it. Whatever.

Other way around. They didn't like what they said, banned him from being at the school for the year, and then called 'tresspass' when he showed up for classes because he didn't accept their ban on his speech. So - arrest was last.

Sure kid

I know how to discuss just fine. The problem is you're not discussing, you're just repeating dumb things without actually address it. I gave you clear examples. Your best response is something along the lines of 'nuh uhhhh'. I point out you demand your bible is an actual factual document we should all follow and you reply with "no i dont, and it totally is". And you never actually address the issues. I point out why it costs more to have capital punishment, i produce documentation explianing it in detail and examples where it happens, and your best reply is to say "well i believe otherwise" and when you're asked WHY you believe that in the face of the evidence our answer is "well anyway god says we should". That's not much of a discussion. So when people are that thick i tend to just amuse myself by making fun of them. Try not being an ass - that might get you farther.

No, it is a statement of fact that has no basis in fact and it's rude and arrogant and insulting.

It absoutely is. Which is why you come across as unbelievably arrogant. I can choose whether or not i accept your demand of course. I do not. Sure - but that doesn't change the fact you demand it. Which makes you look like an ass. Then you get treated like an ass. Now you're complaining to me that you're getting treated like an ass. Kid - stop being an ass. I never claimed that. And here we get to the part where you've got to lie to try to make your point, If you have to lie to make a point then you don't have a very good point. And i'm told they make baby jesus cry. So there's that. What i said is you demand it be accepted. I never said i'm forced to. You're still being an ass.

As i've said that's not true - your statement of it as fact and demand that i accept it as such is arrogant. Especially in light of the fact you've already noted you can't offer any proof the bible is accurate or god exists. Let me try to show the difference in a way you might understand better. If you say: I believe a fetus is a human on the day of conception because my interpretation of my bible and my religious beliefs have convinced me that's the way it is. I have no other evidence but that's how i feel. Then that's not invalid. You're not claiming it as fact, you're not suggesting there aren't other interpretations - that's just how you 'feel'. That's fine. It acknowledges that others may feel differently but you feel this way. But what YOU do is this: Babies are humans from the moment of conception. The bible says so. End of story. That is rude, wrong thinking, arrogant, and foolish. That is NOT a fact, nor should anyone else take it as being a valid statement. In other words if you use your bible to justify anything OTHER than how YOU PERSONALLY feel towards something you're stepping over a line.

No that was the truth Sorry kiddo. You were being surpemely arrogant. And you were not presenting it as something you just believe you were stating it as fact

Evolution IS a fact. We can see it and replicate it. Cross species evolution is not as solid but it still is pretty well supported by the evidence and is our best hypothisis at this point. And as near as i remember it was taught that way when i was in school. If they're teaching kids that we have filled in all the gaps there and know it as absolute fact then yes, they shouldn't be teaching that. But you are even worse. You have less evidence of god yet demand he be accepted as fact as well. Soooo - maybe take the log from your eye before worrying about the spliter in anyone elses.

Proof does not have to be absolute to be proof per se. But as we saw, the logic and evidence you provided was disproven long before even I started studying. that is not accurate. In fact science and the scientific method can quite accurately predict and model things and does so all the time. And we have a lot of things that WERE there to look at, like the cosmic background radiation. For us it's like piecing together what happened in a plane crash - lots and lots of things to examine and a solid working knowledge of the physics and engineering, and you can usually come up with a pretty solid answer. There's video tape the event left behind all kinds of information like the CMB and such which shows us what happened. No it hasn't. At best you can say many don't think the original source was a singularity, but that's not surprising. it is universally agreed upon as to what happened less than a second after the big bang and for the next 16 billion years. No it doesn't. Causality only applies within the fabric of spacetime. Without that causality is not necessary. You're just having trouble thinking outside your limited understanding of the universe. You're asking the wrong question. We know the answer to that, as the universe cools the quantum fields form as part of space time and fluctuations in those fields cause the material, and we even know the order that the materials came into existance in. Matter is spontaneously formed and annihilated around us constantly. The REAL question is where did the matter GO? The formation of that material is constant as i said but is always accompanied by the formation of anti-matter as well and the two cancel each other almost instantly and the engery is returned to the quantum field. - sooooo why didn't that happen when our matter was being formed? Where did all the anti matter go that should have cancelled out the matter? There are theories but we know where matter comes from. Sorry kid - something can come from nothing. Don't confuse spacetime as the whole of existance. For example nothing can travel faster (or slower actually) than the speed of light. Yet the universe is expanding faster than the speed of light. Impossible yes? nope its possible. Once you understand the trick of it then it makes sense, Your problem is a lack of knoweldge. No causality only is a thing in space time. Sorry - once again this is a lack of knowledge

Hey ... hey... YOU give birth to a whole universe and see if YOU don't nap for a little while after too!

Man - this concept has been disproved so many times it isn't funny. Both in science and philosophy. Something does frequently come from nothing. Go study quantum physics for a short while and you'll realize that. Futher there's nothing that suggests that there was 'nothing' before the big bang. I'll save the philosophy for your next one which is basically the same. this is scientifically complete nonsense. We see complex interactions all the time with zero interaction with 'god'. In fact - we can explain precisely how things came to be the way it is today going back to about one millionth of a second or so after the big bang. There's no need for god to explain any of it - we KNOW it can happen just fine without him. In fact - the outcome was INEVITABLE given the input parameters. So it would have required god like powers to prevent it from happening. And further - Your argument is that nothing complex can just come into existence. But - that means god must have complexity, and if nothing complex can just come into existence without design then someone must have made god! He's very complex - he couldn't just have come into existence. Soooo either complex things CAN come into existence on their own OR you're worshiping a middleman. Intelligent design is one of the LEAST successful arguments for god. That one got trashed many many years ago. If your 'logic' is an example then what it really boils down to is self delusion. Not the same thing. There are tonnes of viable explanations. Did you think Christianity was the only religion with a creation myth? Those are all just as plausable. And frankly as i said science can explain it just fine without a god at all. And occam's razor suggests that means god LIKELY doesn't exist. Sorry - that's not proof. That's the kind of thing even first year scientists or philosophy students roll their eyes at. So - you couldn't prove it. Yet you demand i accept it. Guess you and the dinosaur boys have more in common than you thought

Sorry - watching excessive levels of dumb try to explain things is a little frustrating. Could you help out and be a bit smarter at all? God created nothing. Prove me wrong. You're no better than those who insist evolution is 'proven'.

Sure. Even I make mistakes sometimes It's pretty damn rare but i do, and when i do i own them. That's what men do. I've got no problem with that. What YOU do is pretend you never said it, cry like a baby, try to change the channel and generally flail about Which of us would you say handles that better? Is that based on the millions of dollars you've earned in the stock market? Oh... wait... Are you. I'll bet good money you're not even in the stock market and haven't got a clue about investing. Some of the things you said certainly point to that. So all we can say is that you're "smart enough" to look at things AFTER the fact and say "Now that i know what the stocks actually did, i can pick ones that did better than others". Yeah - thats everybody "genius". It's very easy after the fact. Unlike you, the investment genius with no investments A man who's "Smart enough" to get rich on the stock market as long as he gets to pick AFTER he sees what the stocks do LOLOLOL!!! 90 - 95 percent of investors lose money in the stock markets, depending who's stats you like. And i doubt you'd do better. Whereas the vast majority of people who bought bitcoin have made money and lots of it. The VAST majority. So - bottom line. PP was mostly right about crypto - it is an investment choice canadians should have and there's value in having access to it and regulation of it in the form of an exchange. And yes the BoC has royally screwed up. Oh - and i'm sorry it hurts your head to read so much.

It just isn't. "reason' is pretty well defined. It's simply a series of logical and rational facts and grounds that lead to a complete explanation of a conclusion or observable thing You can't just dump god in there like you've taken Deus ex Machina to some weird new level. As for your example.... Dude - that was the worst example ever. And so full of holes it isn't funny. First off - YOU ARE EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE PEOPLE WHO CLAIM SUCH THINGS!!! God is NOT observable - there is NOTHING in our universe that we can't explain without god - yet you INSIST IT"S FACT!!!! THAT IS MY PROBLEM with your arguments! Yet JUST like them YOU insist it's absolute fact. All you did is say how stupid it is for others to do exactly what you do!! Go smak yourself in the head with a bat and see if it helps! How do you not get that it's bad in one case and therefore ITS ALSO BAD IN YOURS?!?! Gad it's SO frustrating, it's like you've clutched on to religion as a security blanket so tight that it suffocated your brain.

Well not exactly. It's important to always divide healthcare into two parts - the provisioning and the funding. In Canada currently we mostly have gov't funding AND provisioning of health care. Which means when you're sick you go to a gov't owned hospital with gov't paid nurses and they'll use gov't owned equipment and medicine to treat you. In the states it's both private - you personally pay for a private hospital etc etc. In many countries with "public' healthcare the gov't only pays for the care, it doesn't pay for all the provisioning. It may pay for some, but most countries allow for private provisioning of health care with private facilities providing the services which are paid for out of the public purse. A gov't may not have 30 million kicking around to build a new hospital - BUT private individuals might get together and decide to build one and treat people and the gov't foots that bill. The benefit is that private facilities tend to run cheaper and more efficiently AND most of all private dollars tend to be MUCH faster and better at moving services where they're needed. We already have some of that. But a lot of our issues might go away if we leaned into that a little more.

The kind where voters make bad decisions.

Wow. I can't imagine why

https://nationalpost.com/news/ndp-vote-katie-telford-testify-interference Who whoooooo - so he could continue to back the libs be forever labelled as their lapdog OR he can turn on them but POSSIBLY paint himself into a corner where there's an election that he does not want right now. It'll be interesting to see which way he leaps. If he's smart he'll compel telford. But he does have to be very careful not to be cast as being 'anti chinese'

That's a absolute yes. Sure - you only agree with them if they carry a story that supports your echo chamber and gives you that nice confirmation bias glow. Otherwise they're just fake news you see. they absolutely do that. Remember the story about the christian boys who "assaulted' the first nations leader? Complete fabrication. Yes. A left wing dipshit. Nope - they were fearful of the backlash that advertisers were dropping as a result not wanting to be associated with their lies. And actually he resigned, they didn't even have the balls to fire him. Sure they do - i gave examples.

Wow - talk about spreading hate talk - so conservatives are inferior people as well Practically sub human to listen to you - all full of fear. Scared of every stranger they meet if i recall your other thread. Maybe something should be done about them? What were you saying about sounding like a nazi? As you sit here spouting lies to dehumanize people?

No i can read your lies just fine. Ahhhh so he's an accidental nazi. In the same way that thinking russia sucks isn't nazi propaganda. I mean, most people today think that. The nazis' may have held a similar belief (and did). But it's not nazi propaganda to speak out against russia today just because the nazi's did. THe right likes the jews. It's the left that hates the jews these days. And who was this person who 'recycled' this? And it's not the same theory. And Peterson explains in excruciating detail how he's come to his conclusions today. If there's one thing about the man, he always shows his work. So. What that means is you've been brainwashed into thinking that something that sort of sounds a little like what the nazi's sounded like sort of must therefore be nazi propaganda. The nazi's really pushed taking care of your parents in their old age as well. So... seniors facilites are nazi propaganda i supposed?

No i'm not. I've literally never said that once except as an obvious joke. Those are just the voices in your head talking to you. I said they weren't capitalists because their system incorporates too much state control and ownership. Jezuz - do you EVER say anything truthful? Sure it is. The workers control the means of production through the state. Badda bing badda boom. You didn't think that ALL the workers would actually DIRECTLY control ALL the means of production did you? Call a vote to determine if john over here can take the day off sick? Obviously not. So socialsm means someone managing the workers control. Now we're just talking about who. It certainly doesn't have to be democratic at all, in fact that would just get in the way. Like i said - in the end it's one of the big problems with socialism. Socialists have to pretend socialism is democratic because otherwise they'll have to admit the truth that it's essentially dictatorship by the elites which doesn't sound as good. No you're getting confused again, You're conflating the method of choosing representation with the type of economic model. Neither capitalism nor socalism actually requires democracy (in fact socialism doesn't work well with democracy) - but if you take democracy out of a democratic model then no, you don't have non democratic democracy. So no - it doesn't work with liberal democracy - if you take the democracy out then you've just got liberal dictatorship or oligarchy or whatever you replaced the democracy with.

Ohhh reeaaaally Kid - sorry the facts didn't fit your echo chamber but they all did pretty bad to one degree or another - wtih the s&p down about 20 percent and russel down 22, and that's the average. A lot of stocks within those markets did much worse. Sorry kid -you're bleating ain't getting you any closer. Actually i'm sure many lost more than that. Most people only have 4 or 5 stocks in tehir portfolio and it just takes one or two to tank for them to lose most of their wealth. But - at the end of the day they lost that money. There WAS a stock market crash. People dId suffer significant losses and as i've said i've seen people who lost up to 50 percent themselves. I'm sure there are people who lost more. And some who lost less but the vast majority of people lost. You don't even remember why you were arguing about this do you. You just think as long as you bleat like a goat with it's nuts in a gopher trap somehow you'll magically make a point some day. Unless they invest in an equity stock fund most people don't have money in a lot of different stocks. They have a few. But yes, sure - you're the only intelligent investor around. You know it all - that's why you're so filthy rich right? Right? Hellllooooooo.... And when i do it shows you're lying. Like that one the other day i posted where you said word for word what i claimed you did and you denied EVER saying for sure absolutely 100 percent LOL You just hope nobody will bother. And probably most don't or don't all the time. But i can tell from the 'respect' you get from others that people don't bother because they feel they already know you're not terribly honest. In most cases no - turns out to be worthless. Remember - the majority of investors wind up losing money in the stock market. MOST investors lose money. And it is because MOST stock is traded based on speculation. There's nothing holding up that value. Sorry. But that's why only about 5 - 10 percent actually make money at it. Oh noooo - fiancail report just came out and says we're going into a recession and your company will be severely impacted!! A run on the stock dropped the value by 30 percent!!! Happens. And you've lost all those retained earnings and may sell at a loss if you intend to sell - yet nothing changed. Sorry kiddo - you don't know how stocks work Bit coin is no different in any way than other currency, commodity or stock market investments, It's the same thing, except with a better performance record.

According to you ANY site that carries the story is a fake news site. So basically we're back to you being a dishonest person. Yes or no, was it a fox news story i posted? Your lefty media is even worse. But - in either case none of them actually just print a completely fake story. They may HORRENDOUSLY alter it - as cnn did when they edited the tape in the tavon martin case to make the caller sound racist., but to just fake an entire incident altogether? I mean - left wing journalist brian williams lied about his chopper being shot down but there WAS actually a war going on Your dismissal of this is just cheap and intellectually dishonest. We both know that.