Some of us live in a world based on illogical thinking lol..... (and no I'm not talking about religious faith)
yeah I know, I detest it.
Is having faith that a friend will back you up in a time of need illogical? (just testing the waters)
unless they have done it before yes, it is illogical to expect such an outcome unless you have a reason to.
Here's where the term "blind faith" comes in.
Just because someone has been there before doesn't mean they will be there again. Thing is you can never really know for sure. Does that mean we should never believe in anything unless we can know 100% for sure it will work?
You shouldn't believe in things without reason, however even if you have a reason the reason can be faulty.
So your saying you can believe in something if you have a reason even if that reason could be faulty? even if the reason can't be used to prove what will happen?
If the reason is logical, then by all means.
I'm interested, what's the process you go through to prove something to be logical?
Some of us live in a world based on illogical thinking lol..... (and no I'm not talking about religious faith)
yeah I know, I detest it.
Is having faith that a friend will back you up in a time of need illogical? (just testing the waters)
unless they have done it before yes, it is illogical to expect such an outcome unless you have a reason to.
Here's where the term "blind faith" comes in.
Just because someone has been there before doesn't mean they will be there again. Thing is you can never really know for sure. Does that mean we should never believe in anything unless we can know 100% for sure it will work?
You shouldn't believe in things without reason, however even if you have a reason the reason can be faulty.
So your saying you can believe in something if you have a reason even if that reason could be faulty? even if the reason can't be used to prove what will happen?
If the reason is logical, then by all means.
I'm interested, what's the process you go through to prove something to be logical?
Some of us live in a world based on illogical thinking lol..... (and no I'm not talking about religious faith)
yeah I know, I detest it.
Is having faith that a friend will back you up in a time of need illogical? (just testing the waters)
unless they have done it before yes, it is illogical to expect such an outcome unless you have a reason to.
Here's where the term "blind faith" comes in.
Just because someone has been there before doesn't mean they will be there again. Thing is you can never really know for sure. Does that mean we should never believe in anything unless we can know 100% for sure it will work?
You shouldn't believe in things without reason, however even if you have a reason the reason can be faulty.
So your saying you can believe in something if you have a reason even if that reason could be faulty? even if the reason can't be used to prove what will happen?
If the reason is logical, then by all means.
I'm interested, what's the process you go through to prove something to be logical?
Some of us live in a world based on illogical thinking lol..... (and no I'm not talking about religious faith)
yeah I know, I detest it.
Is having faith that a friend will back you up in a time of need illogical? (just testing the waters)
unless they have done it before yes, it is illogical to expect such an outcome unless you have a reason to.
Here's where the term "blind faith" comes in.
Just because someone has been there before doesn't mean they will be there again. Thing is you can never really know for sure. Does that mean we should never believe in anything unless we can know 100% for sure it will work?
You shouldn't believe in things without reason, however even if you have a reason the reason can be faulty.
So your saying you can believe in something if you have a reason even if that reason could be faulty? even if the reason can't be used to prove what will happen?
If the reason is logical, then by all means.
I'm interested, what's the process you go through to prove something to be logical?
Jetackuu's Method™
Do I agree?
Yes: It's logical.
No: It's illogical.
no there's plenty of logical things I don't agree with, nice try though.
basically put, logic is the first step, and a lot of issues in the world like to forget that step.
Some of us live in a world based on illogical thinking lol..... (and no I'm not talking about religious faith)
yeah I know, I detest it.
Is having faith that a friend will back you up in a time of need illogical? (just testing the waters)
unless they have done it before yes, it is illogical to expect such an outcome unless you have a reason to.
Here's where the term "blind faith" comes in.
Just because someone has been there before doesn't mean they will be there again. Thing is you can never really know for sure. Does that mean we should never believe in anything unless we can know 100% for sure it will work?
You shouldn't believe in things without reason, however even if you have a reason the reason can be faulty.
So your saying you can believe in something if you have a reason even if that reason could be faulty? even if the reason can't be used to prove what will happen?
If the reason is logical, then by all means.
I'm interested, what's the process you go through to prove something to be logical?
science.
That's your answer? Really?
you have a problem with science?
On some levels yes, mostly no though. It was more of my disappointment in your answer I expected more. It was a let down.
Some of us live in a world based on illogical thinking lol..... (and no I'm not talking about religious faith)
yeah I know, I detest it.
Is having faith that a friend will back you up in a time of need illogical? (just testing the waters)
unless they have done it before yes, it is illogical to expect such an outcome unless you have a reason to.
Here's where the term "blind faith" comes in.
Just because someone has been there before doesn't mean they will be there again. Thing is you can never really know for sure. Does that mean we should never believe in anything unless we can know 100% for sure it will work?
You shouldn't believe in things without reason, however even if you have a reason the reason can be faulty.
So your saying you can believe in something if you have a reason even if that reason could be faulty? even if the reason can't be used to prove what will happen?
If the reason is logical, then by all means.
I'm interested, what's the process you go through to prove something to be logical?
science.
That's your answer? Really?
you have a problem with science?
On some levels yes, mostly no though. It was more of my disappointment in your answer I expected more. It was a let down.
I'm tired, and why do you have a problem with the scientific method?
it's not a "yes, or no" question, it's a loaded question full of *** and I've given it more of a dignified response than it deserves, so *** off.
How is it a loaded question?
You are just saying that because you don't want to accept the fact that I'm right.
Do you believe that a lack of belief isn't a belief?
How is that a loaded question?
No, I do not believe that a lack of belief isn't a belief.
Yes, I do believe that a lack of belief isn't a belief.
You are just saying it's loaded because you are full of it.
You bring "reality" into the equation unnecessarily.
It's an easy question to answer unless you can't give straight answers.
considering it's a part of reality and you're questioning if I believe in something that's part of reality.
Do you believe that a lack of belief isn't a belief?
is akin to asking
do you believe that 1+2=3
everyone knows the answer, there's no need to question it.
So you do in fact believe that 1+2=3?
What if you replace that with believing in the lack of belief isn't a belief that gets you right back to square one, with a simple yes/no question.
you say it's loaded as a distraction when it's not loaded at all, ti's as simple as you said.
1+2=3
You just are dodging it because you don't want to openly admit you are an illogical hypocrite.
Way late in posting this but you don't bang a child just cause you cant get the adault you want (for those thinking priests only do this for lack of being married). You bang a child only when you are sexually attracted to a child. The rest of us jack/jill off when we cant get laid by the object of our desire, we don't go molesting children. Rape is not about ejaculation its about power and control. Same kinda issue. It's not that the rapists is just really horny, but cant find a willing partner, it's that the rapist is attracted to the act of rape and the power/control. The priests molesting children dont bang alter boys cause they aren't married and having sex with their wives, they do it becuse they get turned on by alter boys the same way you get turned on when you see (insert whatever peeks your ultimate sexual interest).
The fact that the catholic church attempts to cover up the crime rather than casting the offenders from them and assisting in prosecutions is what causes the church/religion to be a target.
Not that they should 'cover up' any child molestation they can't 'cast them out' either. The Catholic doctrine would to be to forgive the priests after they have repented for their sins. I'm not saying that they should go without punishment or anything, 20+ years in prison would serve them right. Also, being a priest doesn't mean they have superhuman morals or anything, they're normal people just like me and you and are just as likely to be a rapist as your doctor is.
A Catholic priest, facing criminal charges and a lawsuit alleging that he sexually abused a teenage boy, is now charged with attempting to hire someone to kill the youth, authorities said Tuesday.
