fakeitormakeit2

I think the moderation line has been beaten to a pulp and there's little left to discuss. An imposed limit would be childish, one has to learn the management of one's own time. If they cannot manage the time they spend playing a video game, college will most be hell on earth for you. But to those who say if someone wants to play 60hours a day, minus exceptions such as recovering from disease/surgery/injury, there obviously is a problem there, which they themselves need to solve. Despite the often prevalent tendency towards Epicureanism, there is more to life then just happiness, especially derived from an alternate reality/fantasy [i.e. a video game]. The fulfillment of one's life based on their own time management is up to themselves however, and the occasional video game is good, but it has to be the person with the problem themselves who over comes their issue of time usage. Edit: But whoever said people who play video games too much are a waste of human life is an idiot, because human dignity is inalienable regardless of action. And its not like they're harming anyone else, sure they're using their time very poorly but to say they are a waste of human life is just obnoxious and obtuse.

Qathaffi should surrender now before he's blown to bits essentially. Any resistance is just going to prolong things, as its clear the West is going to make sure he can't use air power while the rebels move along the ground, it's only a matter of time before they get to Tripoli [with Western supplies no doubt]. One issue though will be to distinguish between Qathaffi forces' planes and tanks, and those that defected (like the 2 fighter jet pilots who defected to Malta). Whatever the short run, in the long run it will be a difficult development, with no doubt lots of growing pains on the part of the Libyan people.

I like the idea of the Veteran cape, max cape, everything-completed-cape but I don't like the concept of a 10's cape, that kind of diminishes the difficulty of getting an accomplishment cape by a lot.

This seems more like a theology thread then a religion thread.

Quite frankly I've never heard of Woox16 before yesterday. And not to be judgmental but I honestly don't know how someone who's 14 has played Runescape so much that they've maxed, aren't there better things to do at that age rather then logging weeks of time into playing a computer game?

First elite, after like four celtic knots, five compass clues, four scanning clues and two puzzles:

After getting a 3.5m reward from a lv1 clue, I received my first elite, which after much effort, global travel and time, it yielded a marvelous bounty: [hide=Elite Reward] -.-...[/hide]

Tie Her Down by Senses Fail

Just saying this: News around the world gets here, you just have to look for it or pay attention to the news. Mainly the latter. You mean the former? Lately Charley Sheen has gotten more air time then the Libyan situation and Japan. By the way, I thank Voltaire for the completely relevant and appropriate quote, which seems to just resonate with the American attitude: "It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets."

So I haven't played Runescape for the last 5 months because of Senior year, and now that it's starting to quiet down I decided to renew my membership. So the question is have I missed anything big in the last 5 months?

There will be one bad result of this added freedom. The Brotherhood will become acceptably mainstream, and Copts will be persecuted. Similar to the toppling of Saddam, who suffered most? The Christians. Why? Scapegoat for populist angst.

Then you'll be pleased to know none of the atheists in this thread are claiming, "There is no god." Lulz @ relativism. There either is a god or isn't, it isn't subjective. Now saying definitively that you know there is a god, or lack thereof, is a different story. However, to be a theist one does not have to eliminate the possibility that there could possibly be no god, any person with a brain has doubted the existence of a god, from your grandmother to Mother Teresa (supposedly confirmed in her letters). Existential questioning is a heavy component of Neo-Classical Theology. But an atheist, atheos, which literally means without god is a definitive affirmation of there being no god. So either people need to not as readily deem themselves atheists or watch the consistency of their claims. And to the Santa Claus post, see post above mine. Edit: And to everyone who keeps saying the Christian God is omnipotent and omniscient, I applaud you're promotion of eurocentric thought. The concept of a perfect God-being theology comes from Greek corrupts on Semitic concepts, which have been perpetuated by Western Christianity until about the 19th Century. See Whitehead, Process Theology, Weak Theology, Teilhard DeChardin, complexity-consciousness, etc. Perfect Being Theology is one of many belief systems. I like how people generalize an entire religion by one type of outdated theology, regardless of popularity.

I was speaking to a few older people who were born and lived in mostly Egypt, one lady and one man from Syria, and they were applauding the efforts of Tunisia and saying it was an inspiration to the Egyptian people. They said what the major Middle Eastern countries need is the younger populations to overthrow their despotic governments, such as the one in Tunis, and hopefully to follow: Cairo and Damascus. However, this will be a difficult process because the United States supports these long time leaders as they supposedly bring stability and what not. One of the reasons why Mubarak is in hot water is because he's seen as an American puppet. In the words of the Syrian man, "Good, Mubarak's balls are in the hands of Israel now."

Hasn't there been recent civil unrest since the Copts got pissed and started clashing with police for being targeted? And I like how Al Jazeera called the Muslim Brotherhood a political organization...

It's hard to articulate, but the idea I guess I'm trying to convey is when some girls press up against you feel like they're pressing up against your soul.

I think generalizations are one of the primary sources for disdain of religion. @ jjrox32, are you thinking of Islam that professes the Qu'ran is the word of God? Because the Catholic Church doesn't believe that and Catholics comprise about half of all the Christians in the world. Furthermore, I saw someone say along the lines that they believe God is like everything and more, etc., well that also has a place in Christian theology (which is called panentheism). In addition, there are rampant quoting of the Old Testament out of context and without the understanding the the Old Testament is "Old" for a reason, a distinguished older view of God which Jesus metaphorically set the Christians free from, which is rendered "complete" (i.e. no more). People who quote the Bible to disprove all of Christianity using a literal interpretation make the same mistake as fundamentalists, not to mention completely ignore historicity, the historio-critical method and textual criticism. In addition to those who think those with faith are superstitious because of actions such as divine intervention, it's already been discussed in various theologies such as Process Theology and Weak Theology. I could go on and on about misconceptions, but my point is, again, people generally fail to distinguish between theology and religion, which is a large, if not the entire, causation of miscommunication, disdain, etc.. [see Dr. Caputo's Philosophy and Theology]

It's interesting how people seem to conflate religion, faith and theology as one in the same. Not to get into semantics, but they're very distinct and I tend to think a lot of miscommunication between people, in terms of the beliefs, are derrida-ved (hehe pun) from not expressing them separately.

Ideally, this would be why canonization exists. A way to say "Hey, this is the kind of guy we should try to be like". Don't really need miracles for that. The requirement of miracles purportedly acts as a divine confirmation of the ability to a departed person to intercede because they have achieved heaven. The Eastern Churches (i.e. Eastern Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox) determine sainthood by gauging popular consensus. I'm not really a fan of the requirement of miracles, but I'm not the Prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints. I am a big fan of Pope Benedict XVI, however, as he's extremely intelligent and holds certain theological opinions that run against the grain. & @sees_all1 that's the problem, the general number of Catholics omit themselves from a proper understanding, so you have that group of old ladies in church who are like cultists haha. But seriously, it's a big issue, especially in terms of Marian devotion.

^ In the latest forms of Catholic theology, there isn't really such a notion as a direct "divine intervention", or at least divine intervention in a "coercive" manner (i.e. God tells cancer to go away) would not be consistent with them.

As someone theologically learned, I find the process of canonization, and the entire concept of a "saint", particularly misleading to the average Catholic. I do believe in the Communion of Saints and think the idea of deeming persons' lives worthy of imitation but it is also a bit dangerous faith-wise. It causes several confusions in terms of: (1) all those who have died and ascended to heaven are saints, regardless of official acknowledgment or veneration, but many put canonized saints on an entire different level from all other departed who could possibly be in heaven (2) the Church's declaration of sainthood has no bearing on the actuality of a person being a saint. Some tend to think that the Church assigns sainthood. The Church merely takes an educated guess through a system that has a couple mechanisms that act as filters. (3) the worst misconception of all is the notion of praying to a saint. The only being that should be prayed to is God. To pray to a saint to perform something as one would pray to God is simply polytheism in a different wrapping. Many people pray to saints in an almost cult-like manner to help them, assigning specific tasks associated with them, such as St. Anthony is patron of finding lost items, St. Michael as defender of police men and soldiers, etc.. This is an extremely icy path, as that's just as bad as having pantheon of gods with each one having a particular area they rule. One may pray with a saint in request so that that particular saint may use their merits to intercede on behalf of a cause, but the saint themselves have no ability to do anything. Such is like attributing holy powers to JPII, absolutely not, only God has "holy powers". This is becoming of increasing importance due to the rise of neoclassical [specifically Process] theology and the hypothesizing of God's power being exclusively persuasive in regards to interacting with different levels of complexity-consciousness, but that's an entirely different discussion in itself. That being said, I look forward to JPII's eventual canonization, as he truly deserves it. I just hope that Catholic priests, particularly bishops, do something to amend these vast misconceptions that may seem small but they make a huge difference in terms of consistency of the faith.

I know right! Same thing happened to me. I was a Cancer last year, I'm a Cancer this year. I like to read horoscopes because they're either so extremely vague they have to be true or they're just completely wrong haha

I find it interesting how my town has 0% black people. That explains why I never see any black people where I live.

Mark Zuckerberg developed online social networking, while Jullian Assange leaked a number of small scandals before publishing several hundred thousand state department communiques of no value whatsoever. Zuckerberg has been far more influential. I'm not into the whole online social networking thing, but uh, myspace came before facebook, didn't it? Yes but people would rather see pictures of their friends at the convenience of a click rather than know their government is being dishonest and its officials spying on and [cabbage] talking every other country.

That was quite the situation, my respect to the chairman.

My policy on mediation is if your ailment won't effect you seriously, you shouldn't take it. If you have a little bit of pain your first instinct should not be to run to the cabinet to grab some tylenol. Plus disorders such as AD/HD and ADD are triggers for prescriptions, regardless of their degree. I would go so far as to say even some children who don't even have such disorders are carelessly proscribed these medicines anyway by petition of their parents all because the parents never implemented a bit of discipline. I think medicines are too readily proscribed by doctors and too readily accepted by patients. As for my own experience, I took some kind of narcotic painkiller after I had a corrective surgery for a bone that broke and when it healed improperly it grew in a way it was impaling my foot. I took it once and I refused to take it again, I'd rather have the discomfort of the pain then be an extraordinary moron. I was light sensitive, dizzy, supposedly couldn't stop singing in Arabic and I tried to send my friend a text and when I looked at it the next day it was essentially "rjhfgrjkl;ghrje;qaghrej;kgherkpg". I would like to remain in control of how I act instead of be a zombie.