Jump to content

GRosado

Member
  • Posts

    190
  • Joined

Everything posted by GRosado

  1. It's one thing to say I'm comparing apples to oranges but it's another to show me how i am. It's very interesting to see how you took my hypothetical scenarios that I used to show that children make decisions independent of their parents & turn it on me & make me look like the bad guy. I never said that tossing children was right & when you use abusive to describe my statement I think you are falling into a sort of appeal to emotion fallacy with that by using a highly sensory word.
  2. Ok I'm gonna respond part by part so it'll take awhile cause I'm writing from my phone. I asked the question in a public forum but I think it's pretty clear that it was directed at him & I don't see how you could say the question was abusive I asked if he had done anything to make his father want to kick him out I didn't say that he had to have done something for his father to have done that. Also I get the feeling you are using the term abusive to represent my statement as an emotional trigger to make me look like I was in the wrong & abusive means engaging in or characterized by habitual violence and cruelty, my question wasn't violent or cruel. I totally agree & again on my part my question was set up for failure at the start. The way I see it is if your above 18 & you still live with your parents you need to respect them & their rules & if you don't then they can kick you out cause your legally an adult but before 18 is to me not necessarily immoral but vile. Now I assume when you say child you mean below 18, but not everything stems from the parents if they are over 18 then that's giving them a pass to blame their parents for everything. While the parents create the environment that doesn't dictate a child's life, for example Ted Bundy's parents provided a great environment for him & he still made bad decisions.
  3. Well I asked him not you but thank you for responding. It could be justified in self defense or in saving the person from oncoming danger. But my question applies to the that's too be kicked out of the house, I faultily included the tossing around. Also you said if the child created the scenario wouldn't it be the parents failings, isn't that fundamentally false? The child created the scenario not the parents. For instance the parents leave sharp objects on the floor & the child cuts his foot that is a scenario created by the parents that caused the child harm so that is there fault. Now let's say the child chooses to go outside when there is ice on the sidewalk to play & the parents told him they would prefer him to stay inside but he continues outside, slips & bruises himself. That is a scenario created by the child & it is his fault he got hurt. Also I'm sorry if that first line came off as a bit douchey, sometimes I write things that sound harsh but that wasn't my intention.
  4. Was there something you did to make him want to kick you out of the house & toss you around?
  5. The second question in the positive category isn't answerable with the choices you give
  6. The movie is very individualist anarchist & the ending was the best when it went into live action part.
  7. Yea in real life I'm a mix of introvert & extravert just depends on what social situation I'm in & I think that's how most people are.
  8. Very good point the personality test may shape us but it doesn't dictate us. I think personality tests fall under Know Thyself that's why I advocate for people taking it.
  9. My goodness he is absolutely blowing you all out of the water & it seems like the big dogs who usually are first to defend atheism have steered clear of this possibly cause of the immense empirical data James Redford has laid down. The ones who stay to defend are simply nitpicking small things about Christianity.
  10. I just saw that Stef made a video about the movie. I don't think kids will be able to digest Stefan's videos.
  11. A great movie that you should take the young in your family to see. It is also espouses Individualist Anarchism throughout. One thing that I remember was they said they had a peaceful open society & then a government was established & borders were drawn that angered many of the Legos. Aside from its political & philosophical undertones it was very funny at times & at others it was dry. All in all it was a great film & I recommend everyone watch it.
  12. Our government makes me laugh. They never follow the Golden Rule but expect everyone else to not do wrong to them.
  13. Yup, He was a real person but I have not read everything he said. But I will learn from that 3rd prescription
  14. Lmao you said you didn't assume but read your first sentence you are making an assumption. Anyway the conclusion I'm trying to get people to reach is that people shouldn't demonize any figure or ideology based off of its followers action.Also Seeing how this is getting nowhere & i don't feel like going back & forth im done posting.
  15. If someone doesn't believe Jesus was a real person they are historically illiterate. I did not make assumptions as to what he said being true, that is simply you assuming that I did. If we look at what Jesus said through historical lenses instead of religious lenses (I use religion as a substitute for mysticism just in this case, also we will ignore his claims to divinity & anything else he said that had to do with religion or following him for this case) it seems to me he didn't preach violence.
  16. Precisely I'm pretty sure Jesus wasn't arguing for violence as a means to achieving a goal. Definitely not asking anything about unicorns & leprechauns, is that considered under the false attribution fallacy.
  17. So if wars were fought in the name of libertarianism would you say libertarianism had caused more bad than good. You will dance around that so let me put it a different way, if wars were fought in the name of Stefan Molyneux would you then say that Stefan has caused more bad than good?
  18. Yes & No, if you answer the questions truthfully then you won't get something else & if you lie you could get something else
  19. Take the test Www.16personalities.com I am an INTJ
  20. This probably should've been posted on Self-Knowledge. I empathize with you same goes on with me & all the people I have interactions with.
  21. Disclaimer: I am not a Christian or theist but I don't like when people straw man the other side of the spectrum.In a strict sense Technology & Science are different but both are so intertwined that they enable each other to acheive their respective goals. You keep claiming that Christians are the reason innovation has slowed but if you weren't ignorant of history you would realize that it was The Papacy that held back advances which was a government body controlled by Christians who were hardly such simply research the Borgia popes & their successors (maybe Pope Julius). Your over generalizing & demonizing a whole demographic without actually providing the historical facts.The papacy wasn't anti science per se they just viewed scientific advances as challenging their authority over the people's worldview & secular power.Science hasn't completely disproved the possibility of a Deity it has only disproven the Christian concept of a deity. If you want to find some interesting arguments read & watch Dr. Gerald Schroeder an Israeli physicist.I won't disagree with you on that many Christians do flip flop on issues but I feel it is due to the people in charge of their doctrine who manipulate the bible to their benefit. One thing that I criticize Christians & theists for is their strong belief in personal intervention even though it frequently fails.
  22. Well he is being bombarded with questions most of them being biased attacks.
  23. My Results: Left:75% Right:25% http://en.sommer-sommer.com/braintest/?data=NzUsMjU=
  24. Bottom line is to exercise regularly & eat healthy meals
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.