Get TheBlaze

User Profile: Lucretius


Member Since: June 13, 2013


123 To page: Go
  • [1] August 21, 2014 at 3:46pm


    No I won’t and neither will you. You will be judged here on earth by your actions and your peers. But there is no evidence of any judgment after you have died.

    Again, unless you have any evidence. It seems though you are more concerned with threats than evidence.

  • [-1] August 21, 2014 at 2:32pm


    Lol, sounds gross.


    Nope, I don’t know that. I don’t believe in any gods. You got some evidence of one? I’m always up for learning things.

    Also, should mention that to your proctologist, cardiologist, immunologist…and whoever else. His name is Dr. Patel.

  • August 21, 2014 at 2:10pm


    Ah!! A voice of massive reason.

    Regardless of the Dawkins comment…what are your thoughts on this discussion that his comments have created.

    I would like to know your take.

  • [-2] August 21, 2014 at 1:57pm

    Like ebola

    Responses (2) +
  • [1] August 21, 2014 at 1:56pm

    I heard they sprinkled birds blood over him 7 times and then let the live bird go in an open field but then decided to go with the experimental drug next. They aren’t sure at this point which one worked.

    Leviticus 14

  • [-5] August 21, 2014 at 1:48pm


    “Hey KERES! Perhaps by the Grace of God?”

    Which one? Considering the demographics of medical doctors these days. Vishnu? Allah?

  • [-1] August 21, 2014 at 1:41pm

    Math is a terrible example to fluid philosophies and nuances of human morality.

  • [-1] August 21, 2014 at 1:40pm

    “If humans decide morality, then right and wrong are subject to whatever we decide at the moment, not what is actually right and what is actually wrong.”

    Ok, well then how do we find out what is right and wrong then if we don’t discover it? Teresa just pointed out that rape can even been moral as long as the circumstances are right and God approves. Where does it say in the laws and commandments in the bible that slavery is wrong? When slavery was in this country Christians were using the bible to argue for and against slavery…where does it objectively say that it is wrong from god?

    At a point in our history we decided that slavery was moral and as time passed and we gain more experience and information…it became immoral. It was always immoral in our eyes because we set the standard.

    “How can you say we got it wrong in the past if there is no higher a standard than our own?”
    Because of the standard we set now.

    “Wouldn’t those alive 100 years ago thought the same thing about gay marriage?”

    Yes, and they would say the same thing about blacks and women being able to vote? But again those are all examples of more individual consent, more freedom…murder is the restriction of those things. Can you give an example where our morality has changed to restrict the freedom and consent of individuals?

  • [-1] August 21, 2014 at 1:25pm

    Rape is ok if in the correct context.

    The answer was…no. Rape of a woman/child is not moral ESPECIALLY if they are unable to care for themselves. It wasn’t moral then and it’s not moral now. Luckily through years of introspection and thought we discovered the finer points of why raping the defenseless is immoral.

  • [-1] August 21, 2014 at 1:25pm


    “That would have been moral, in accordance with the Law of Moses”

    Ok, so it was moral then but not now? Who decided that and if God, could you site the scripture?

    “A woman could not care for herself at that time. ”

    Children can’t care for themselves. Is it ok to rape them and pay their parents? What evidence do you have that they were unable to care for themselves? If you look at tribes who still live a hunter gatherer life the women actually provide most of the food from foraging. They seem to do just find for the tribe even if the men don’t bring home any food that day.

    “Marrying the women he ruined, in that case, was absolutely the most moral thing to do out of the situation.”

    Ok, so slavery was moral too at the time right? When women weren’t allowed to vote that was moral up until the point that women had the mental capacity to vote?

    To be honest I’m a little taken aback…usually it is the theist that argues for objective morality but you are clearly saying that morality is arbitrary. I guess that means these practices which are still practiced almost identically in the Muslim world…are moral? The women of Afghanistan are unable to care for themselves so it is moral for a member of the Taliban to rape her and then marry her? I mean he did lay his claim.

  • [2] August 21, 2014 at 12:35pm

    “and giving God credit for saving his life during a press conference held Thursday.”

    What was he doing at Emory University Hospital then? Is that where God practices?

    Glad they are both ok and can go home to their families.

    Responses (1) +
  • August 21, 2014 at 12:17pm

    “I know of only one expert on this. I speak to Him every day. You should try it sometime.”

    Is he a medical professional?

    From a quick google search a fetus is the stage after the embryonic stage and before birth. Obviously we would call it a baby in social conversation the whole time.

  • [1] August 21, 2014 at 12:13pm

    Here is a test….

    “If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[c] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.”

    Dueteronmy 22:28-29

    Is this moral or immoral?

  • August 21, 2014 at 12:03pm

    Since Avenger is incapable of absorbing this paradigm I will make sure to only use colloquial terms when I speak to him…otherwise he seems to devolve into mindless babble about National socialism and eugenics.

    Either way HOLD it was a nice conversation while it lasted. And like I said it is a tough decision for the parents regardless of their faith and ideology. I wish it on no one.

  • August 21, 2014 at 12:02pm

    Sigh. Alright. See that HOLD? LOL. He keeps playing down to the fact that most laymen, like ourselves, and our understanding of medical terms when put in parallel to societal interactions are fuzzy or more appropriately different. Same as when a doctor is talking to a mother I doubt he uses the medical term fetus when talking about her baby. Does that mean it is not a fetus in medical terms? Of course not…what about the embryonic stage? I’m sure he is already calling it a baby by then too…because that is what is socially acceptable and quite frankly appropriate in that setting. We are not in that setting. I’m sure there are many examples of this you can think of that the terms the scientific/medical community use in practice but not in conversation with other people. This does not negate the terms nor does it preclude us from using both terms when discussing it in a forum such as this. If someone is unable to delineate the differences between a discussion in a forum, a medical lab, to a conversation with an expecting mother at Starbucks. That only shows 1) Their failing as a human being 2) They are trying to deceive because they are grasping at straws.

    Also, I do not have any political or ideological purposes. I was merely holding a conversation with you which I am sure you are well aware being that you are normal well-adjusted eukaryote…excuse me. Person.

  • August 21, 2014 at 11:34am

    How are we proving your point?

    If morality changes based on new information how is that evidence of a higher power who has handed down objective morals?

    Are you saying slavery is moral? Are you saying that we should never change our moral outlook on things? That the very things that the people who wrote the bible 2000 years ago thought were moral should be moral today?

    You keep bringing up us deciding that murder will be ok but all the changes in our morality have resulted in more freedom, consent, and protection for the individual, not less. Racial equality, gender equality, sexual equality, marriage equality…all the major social issues in the last 300 years have all eroded the control one group of people has over another. We do decide our morality as a society and what is most beneficial to the most people in our group to promulgate survival. What benefit to human flourishing and survival does murder have?

  • [-3] August 21, 2014 at 11:14am


    Prove you don’t believe in Odin.

  • August 21, 2014 at 11:10am

    must have removed JamesCrows comment…censorship

  • August 21, 2014 at 10:57am


    You don’t have to talk over me.

    I’m not an expert so I really don’t when a fetus becomes a baby or if there is even a delineation between the two. I think it would be prudent to talk to expert when it comes to that. But linguistically speaking in our society in a social situation when a woman is pregnant we call it a baby regardless of term. This is not an argument…you are playing word games with medical definitions and societal norms when the two cannot be intertwined…and as usual you’re being an a**hole about it.

    You’re argument is so weak you not only have to lean on emotion but deception.

  • [-1] August 21, 2014 at 10:49am


    “If humans decided something was immoral, then they can un-decide it.”

    Hmmm…but that is exactly what we see.

    You would consider Thomas Jefferson a fairly moral man for his time right? Well he owned other human beings as property. We decided that wasn’t so moral…and it is no longer moral in our society. It used to be moral that women and blacks couldn’t vote. We decided differently. We are currently in the process of deciding as a society that not giving homosexuals the same marital rights as heterosexuals is immoral. Throughout history this is exactly what we see…our notions of morality changing as new information comes in.

123 To page: Go