Ignorance. . Ignorance
Upload
Login or register
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (108)
[ 108 comments ]
Anonymous comments allowed.
41 comments displayed.
#3 - nativninja
Reply +31
(06/30/2013) [-]
#9 - aboxoftoast
Reply +19
(06/30/2013) [-]
There isn't any actual evidence that reality exists either sooo...
what im trying to say is, philosophy is philosophy and science is science, try not to merge them and if someone has different beliefs than you just leave the topic alone
#57 to #9 - fellatio
Reply 0
(07/01/2013) [-]
cogito ergo sum bitches
#39 to #9 - chudboy
Reply +1
(07/01/2013) [-]
Reality can be summed up with this really "I think therefore I am". While it's not really evidence, it's widely believed that Reality is real. Any person who thinks reality isn't real, is just mentally Ill.
#66 to #39 - anon
Reply 0
(07/01/2013) [-]
(Or outnumbered by mentally ill people and actually able to see reality) O-O
Philosophy!
#22 - nightdude
Reply +15
(06/30/2013) [-]
k
#36 to #22 - defectivetoast
Reply +4
(07/01/2013) [-]
have the real deal
#10 - drfaust
Reply +9
(06/30/2013) [-]
"belief in fairy tales" != seeking spiritual understanding and a deeper faith-based meaning to humanity
#32 to #10 - corso
Reply -4
(07/01/2013) [-]
...By way of a book several thousand years old with rules that are utterly stupid if you actually read the thing.
#72 to #32 - masterboll
Reply 0
(07/01/2013) [-]
>are utterly stupid if you actually read the thing
>are utterly stupid
>if you actually read the thing

apparently i find it utterly stupid
#74 to #72 - corso
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
Glad to see we're all on board.
#76 to #74 - masterboll
Reply 0
(07/01/2013) [-]
i hope you know im being sarcastic

and i hope youre being sarcastic

because i think youre a faggot for assuming that everyone finds the rules stupid
#79 to #76 - corso
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
I'm saying if you had READ it, and thus all the rules you are supposed to follow, you'd find them stupid.

Because that's what they are. They were written thousands of years ago by sexist, racist dudes who were just fine with slavery and incest and having several 14 year old wives.
#86 to #79 - masterboll
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
>thousands of years ago by sexist, racist dudes who were just fine with slavery and incest and having several 14 year old wives

please elaborate
#87 to #86 - corso
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
If you need an elaboration on that, then you clearly haven't read it cover to cover.
#88 to #87 - masterboll
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
people translate the text in many ways, im asking for what made you believe that its been written by sexist, racist dudes who are fine with slavery and incest etc.

you cant expect me to agree with you if i dont see it the way you do
#89 to #88 - corso
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
Like the one where if a man rapes a woman, he must take her as a wife if anyone sees. And of course if he refuses, she's stoned to death.
#91 to #89 - masterboll
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
the only websites i can find this view of it is on the anti-islamic websites whereas other sources state that rape is forbidden in islamic laws

ill get back to you after if i can establish if its a misinterpretation of the text or if it really is openly promoting ungodly acts
#93 to #91 - corso
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days. - Deuteronomy 22:28-29
#97 to #93 - masterboll
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
again with the mistranslation

its giving instructions to a person on how to deal with a man who has managed to talk a virgin into sleeping with him

its doesnt necessarily mean "rape"
#98 to #97 - corso
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
Lay hold isn't the same as seduce.
#99 to #98 - masterboll
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
>implying that the Book of Deuteronomy was written in english
>implying that the original word couldnt have translated to anything other than "lay hold"
>implying that "lay hold" means "rape"
#100 to #99 - corso
Reply 0
(07/01/2013) [-]
And this is why it's impossible to argue with you people. We give you something from your book that doesn't make sense or is just plain stupid and ignorant, and instead of actually considering it you just "SMOKESCREEN, SMOKESCREEN, SO THE TRUTH CAN NOT BE SEEN"
#101 to #100 - masterboll
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
well if you had looked into the rest of the text instead of translations provided by anti-religion atheists then maybe you would have gotten some context with the quote

youre just as much of a stupid and ignorant **** as you make the religious out to be

holy books dont promote evil acts, which is why YOU should be questioning the information that youre given instead of blindly believing that religion promotes sexism, racism, slavery etc. because an atheist has told you so
#102 to #101 - corso
Reply 0
(07/01/2013) [-]
I didn't get it from an anti-religion place, I got it from the ******* "Holy book" on my desk.
#103 to #102 - masterboll
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
youre either really **** at translating or you simply dont have the ability to read something in context

you actually made me shovel through a heap of anti-religious ******** just so i could find out that you misinterpreted a bit of text
#106 to #103 - corso
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
Nice to see you ignored the one where I literally typed the whole thing. www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=P8tfuBIutLI&list=PLB962E39FF5D6A460#t=86s
#104 to #103 - corso
Reply -1
(07/01/2013) [-]
No, I didn't. I even typed exactly what it said.
#105 to #104 - masterboll
-1
(07/01/2013) [-]
because it totally said that "if a man rapes a woman, he must take her as a wife if anyone sees. And of course if he refuses, she's stoned to death"

nice to know how accurate your understanding of religion is
#4 - mcderper
Reply +8
(06/30/2013) [-]
#13 to #4 - godzillaeatslazers
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#27 - wafflecopper
Reply +5
(06/30/2013) [-]
and then this post shows up

People post crap like this on this website somehow expecting a master theologian to be on a godless sight like FJ (i love FJ) whereas he proceeds to stutter in disbelief at the epiphany of this one picture. This single picture which ends centuries of debate, and completely shatters the world's largest religion.

Feeling Euphoric yet OP?
#17 - teckemeier
Reply +5
(06/30/2013) [-]
#18 - masterboll
Reply +4
(06/30/2013) [-]
watch out,
we've got someone who knows science over here
#43 - anon
Reply 0
(07/01/2013) [-]
What of those scientist who still believe in God?
This quote was probably made by some athiest who shares the same one sided thinking that the westboro baptist church do.
#51 to #43 - anon
Reply 0
(07/01/2013) [-]
Albert Einstein was Christian...just saying
#55 to #51 - blakhawk
Reply +1
(07/01/2013) [-]
He was a jew that later became an atheist.
#45 to #43 - teoberry
Reply +3
(07/01/2013) [-]
inb4 people talk about only 8 percent of scientists believing in a God. That was a biased survey. They said a God that is present in our lives and answers prayers. If it was 'do you believe in a supremem higher creator', the answer would be a lot higher.
#46 to #45 - anon
Reply 0
(07/01/2013) [-]
statistics dont lie but liars like to use statistics
#33 - anon
Reply 0
(07/01/2013) [-]
People don't understand the atheism and religion argument. People have the right to believe what they believe even if it may not be likely. Many atheists come with the point that religion shouldn't be because it cannot be true. Religious people, believe it or not, don't care about what atheists think about their beliefs because they can believe in what they want.
#38 to #33 - chudboy
Reply +2
(07/01/2013) [-]
The problem is, when Religion influences laws, and what is taught by schools. You can't teach creationism in Schools, because what the believe is not based on fact. It is based of fact. While you teach Evolution, and the fact that the world is 4 billion years old, because those are facts, and have evidence and enough research to provide proof. That is what most Atheists like myself are against. They teach the wrong things, and then you become ignorant of actual facts and dismiss them.