Wuzzums

I think it's advisable to not overload them with information lest they recoil from it. A foundation has to be made first. If someone that just found out about the theory of evolution hears something like "monkeys and humans have the same ancestor" they're just gonna dismiss it firsthand as ridiculous. For someone that hasn't listened to the "Bomb In The Brain" series will think that Stefan is just jumping to conclusions or trying to find someone to blame when he's talking to a caller about their issues. I myself had to first become and atheist before an anarchist. I think the books, including the "The Origin of War in Child Abuse", is the best place to start.

I don't know what's more stupid, his arguments or his shirts? At least he's keeping busy.

I disagree. Most war-related media is pro-war (be it movies, tv-shows, games, etc). They portray regular people surrounded by impossible odds that persevere through the power of courage, self-sacrifice and uhm... the american way. The soldiers are heroes of such caliber that epic legends will be written about them, in the form of high budgeted blockbusters. And who doesn't want to be a hero? Catch-22 is probably the most accurate portrayal of WW2 you will ever find. It's the funniest thing I have ever read but the catch is it's absolutely grounded in reality. It stops being funny when you picture yourself as one of the characters. Here's a quote: "The enemy is anybody who's going to get you killed, no matter which side he's on, and that includes Colonel Cathcart. And don't you forget that, because the longer you remember it, the longer you might live." It's ok to tell the truth if you make it funny, I guess. Another great piece of anti-war propaganda is the game Spec Ops: The Line. Much how the Call of Duty series the best recruitment ad ever made, Spec Ops: The Line is the exact antithesis of that. It's sold as just another war shooter but by the end you thank your lucky stars it's just a game. I enjoy a war movie as much as the next guy but so does "the enemy". And of course "the enemy" has to be portrayed always as evil. It's seldom men against men, it's usually men against evil men with no exceptions. Remember in Fury how much they established that germans killed women and children? Check out this speech from the ending of the war drama Band of Brothers. The enemy is told the exact same things we are told.

"I wanna know how they think that is a suitable toy for a child!" As outrageous as it may seem: the same way you found that toy suitable for a child. How do these people even managed to learn speech? I'm absolutely amazed, it's like a miracle.

Yes, because you will never see a pedophile with a kid. Brilliant piece of reasoning right there.

Hahaha. Oh man, that's hilarious; never a dull moment in a statist society. The whole story reminded me of this clip:

"Mercy for the guilty is cruelty to the innocent." - Adam Smith I didn't read the whole article but the whole thing is just a Catch-22 from my perspective. Anna, child from a broken marriage, eating disorders as a teenager, inclinations towards bodily harm, accuses her father. Either (A) she's telling the truth which makes the whole article disgusting or (B) she's lying which begs the question "Why?" Why would the loved daughter of a good man want to hurt him so bad? Either Tom's a rapist or he's such a bad parent that his own child saw it fit to exact some very cruel vengeance on him. Catch-22.

When dealing with a bully the way I'd solve the problem is by making it perfectly clear that I'll retaliate in the same manner if they persist. It worked for me when I was in school but, gosh, after reading "female" I'm now stumped. You said you have friends in the house, aren't they aware of the person's behavior? Maybe you're not the only one that's being assaulted. If other people are having similar experiences can't she just be asked to leave? If there's a landlord then it's in their best interest to kick such a person out of the household.

Feminism is so messed up right now it's insane. They spin everything as "victimizing women". Everything. Even other feminists: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fine_Young_Capitalists The movement literally turned into a South Park sketch:

The way I see it either the person is not interested in the subject or avoiding the subject, maybe because of a conflict of ideals. When someone's not interested the least they can do is listen. Trying to shove the topic into the conversation over and over again will just show a lack of empathy. And if the topic is being avoided it just shows to me how superficial a person is with their relationships. They're not even willing to offer the"agree to disagree" cop-out.

The example is self-defeating. I don't know the outcome of the game therefore I choose to go into the future to find out. Then me traveling back in time (which is impossible) will change the situation forever because introducing a new variable in a system changes the system completely. So let's assume the pre-timetravel self lives in a deterministic universe and watches a match. Pre-timetravel self goes into the future and finds out how the match ends. Post-timetravel self goes and takes the place of pre-timetravel self in the past => a variable has been changed in a deterministic universe => contradiction with the premise.

Another one:

I don't think there was ever a question whether psychopaths could feel empathy or not. The question was if they can develop a conscience through therapy. A lion is fully aware that his pray does not want to be eaten and will do anything to escape. Empathy here is just another tool for taking down the pray which is what a predator wants.

Whenever I think about the social "sciences" part of academia Noam Chomsky's words come to mind:

Attractive female. Full make-up. Stylized hair. Tight provocative clothes. It's the equivalent of a woman wearing cleavage on a date and then complaining that her date keeps staring at her breasts. Or a bodybuilder complaining how he can't fight proper clothes because his muscles are too big. Or Brad Pitt complaining how successful an actor he is. But nonetheless, even if I do agree that "have a nice day" is harassment beyond baring what am I supposed to get from this vid? That men should stop harassing and/or men should stop other men from harassing? I don't harass strangers on the street and I'm not responsible for the actions of strangers... so... Anyway, FunnyorDie made a parody, it's hilarious: http://www.funnyordie.com/articles/ebf5e34fc8/10-hours-of-walking-in-nyc-as-a-man

Feminism has gotten to a point where it's just self-limiting bigotry. It's funny when you think about it. It destroys the minds of its adherents and alienates everybody that's not a feminist or male. Thus the members are too stupid to figure out how to further the agenda and the people left that are able of furthering such an agenda don't want to have anything to do with it.

Speaking by chances alone, there's a better chance that there is an afterlife than there is not, regardless of the existence of god. Given that intelligent life can come into being, and that intelligent life is able to simulate other intelligent life in a simulated world, then it can also create an afterlife for the AI living in the simulation if it so chooses. And given that the simulated intelligence has every bit the capability to simulate their own intelligence, a simulation within a simulation ad infinitum, then there are vastly more simulated realities than real ones. By the same logic there's a better chance of there being a god, albeit a simulated one. It all makes for a great sci-fi plot: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0139809/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_47 And yes, I just spoiled that whole movie.

I agree that ideas do matter, but facts and reason matter more. When ideas are put forth people segregate depending on how they feel about them, or if it's in their own best interest, etc. It is often the case that people mistake preference for reason and/or fact. Only the people that value truth above all can truly recognize bad ideas from good ideas, and only they are the people that truly matter. Cenk's view: the fact that people prescribe to a bad idea it does not mean that they're bad. Sam's view: People that prescribe to a bad idea might become bad. Do bad people follow bad ideas or do bad ideas make people bad? It's a chicken and egg debate. Point is the bad idea of religion is here and it's a bad idea no matter how you look at it. The real question is why the bad idea is still not recognized as such by the vast majority of people.

"You see, Cpt. Picard is a far worse captain of the Enterprise because his fans are usually neckbeards." "But, Sam, I know a Cpt. Picard fan that isn't a neckbeard so you're being insensitive to the people that don't fall in your narrow view of the fanbase. And what are you implying with that anyway? That Cpt. Kirk is better because his hipster fans are better?" "I'm not saying that they're better but if I had to choose I'd go with hipsters. If someone declares themselves as a Picard fan I'll consider them a neckbeard till evidence to the contrary." "But anyway, good thing we're both Star Wars fans and couldn't care less about Star Trek, huh?" "Hahahahaha, indeed!" That's pretty much what I heard for 3h.

Destroying religion, specifically christianity, is one step in communist indoctrination. The atheist community does not offer a solution to religion, it offers an alternative.

As an atheist I can safely say that atheist does not mean smart. The fact that people get one thing right it does not mean that they get everything right. Smart people are usually atheists. I'll call myself an atheist, this way people will assume I'm also smart. Nerds are seen as cool in popular TV shows. I'll call myself a nerd, this way people will see how cool I am. X celebrity does X thing. I'll do X thing also, this way people will assume I'm just like X celebrity. Intellectuals use special jargon. I'll use my own special jargon too, this way others will see me as an intellectual. Popular tv hosts are liberals. I'll call myself a liberal too so people will laugh at my jokes. Fit people go to the gym. I'll go to the gym too, this way people will know how fit I am. You can go on and on. Just look whether people use a method and/or principle to arrive at conclusions. If not then you might as well debate a parrot.

I'm very sad to hear what has happened to you and I don't know what I could say that might help. We're all looking for someone to connect with and it seems to me that most people I see are playing some role with each other so they could at least live in the fantasy. However, if you connect with yourself you'll never feel lonely. You can be your own best company, this way every new relationship will be a plus and you'll never have anything missing if they happen to end.

Guys tease each other all the time. Actually I've never seen women tease each other, they do partake in the behavior except not with each other. I think it's a sign of knowing each other's boundaries or knowing each other very well. Sort of like a silent understanding of "I know that you know that I'm not being serious right now".

ADD is not a valid diagnosis for adults based on what the literature says. Therefore if someone diagnosed you with such a disorder then they're full of shit, again, based on psychiatric practice. Thus no need to cure yourself of a disease you can't have from a psychiatric standpoint using psychiatric medication. Second, if you have ADD why do you want to take Wellbutrin? Wellbutrin is an antidepressant, not indicated in ADD treatment.