user1991

No. They should all be legal. The state has no justification to tell you what you can and cannot do to yourself.

I don't get it. One could just say: If God is able but not willing to stop good, God is good. The quote makes a bit more sense in its original form. Epicurus said: Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? Also, as Socrates said; "Is what is moral commanded by God because it is moral, or is it moral because it is commanded by God?"

I am not going to get along with you. #-o Why? Because you want to control people's lives, spy on them, condemn homosexuality as immoral based on nothing but prejudice, bomb other peoples' countries while ignoring state sovereignty in the name of "freedom" and indirectly contribute to crime and poverty by saying, "You're on your own?" You're a fascist, no one should get along with you. Spoken like a true liberal, god you people are funny sometimes. The hypocrisy is astounding. Don't give me that crap about controlling. You want to control what we drive, what bulbs we use, what toilet paper we should use, what food we should eat, how much we should pay people, tax rates, talk radio content... the list goes on. All in the name of whatever the hell you believe in. You're actually right. Many liberals dismiss everything the right have to say (even libertarians) as being "fascist" when in actuality they're just as authoritarian as most of you. Maybe not the hardcore, suspending habeus corpus neo cons, but its pretty close. They just believe in different "freedoms." For example I believe in the freedom to take heroin and do whatever I want to my own body. I also think that you should be able to have a gun, especially if the state has guns. I don't think the state has justification for using force, and the burden of proof is on them to show that they have justification for their control. Although what car you drive is slightly different because if the roads are owned by the state, they have the right to say what you can and cannot drive on their roads etc, but I agree with you still.

Economic Left/Right: -3.38 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.67 Economically left or economically right I don't really care that much, just as long as you aren't an authoritarian I can get along with most people.

In the systems of law/education it is VITAL that we are rational. So when you have the religious trying to put scripture into the law, or using religious justifications for things such as "I think homosexuality should be illegal because it says so in the bible that it is a sin!" it is vital that they do not get their way. Also.. correlation doesn't equal causation. Provide me with some sources that suggest that it is a causal relationship please.

Point still stands that regardless of personal justification, marijuana exacerbates psychosis that may not have ever of surfaced in that person's life. And many people aren't educated of it either and some would have preferred not to take the risk if they knew about it. Especially those who now can't live normal lives and it now affects their family too. Wait so.. Because there is a risk of psychosis, that changes anything how..? If I choose to do weed, to myself, there is no justification for the state/majority to tell me that I can't. None. At all. I own my body. I did not consent to the government having control of my body, ever. The state telling you what you can and cannot do to yourself is tyranny. Even if it "affects" my family in some mental way, how am I imposing on their freedoms? It is not the role of government to be able to say these things. People just consider it normal because it has been like this all their lives yet to me it seems ridiculous the people think the government could or should have this much power. And look what happens when you start giving your government too much power - you get ridiculous ideas like nationwide censors under the guise of "stopping child porn" when in actuality most child porn is sent encrypted and/or through IRC channels etc. Isn't your government also mad on banning computer games that they deem "too violent" or something like that, even for adults?

It is pointless to talk of such a hypothetical drug because it doesn't exist, and if it did exist it would be some sort of mind control thing. If it is 100% going to happen, then yes you can equate the taking of the drug to the action itself, but again, such a drug doesn't exist/probably couldn't exist without some third party being involved. So the point still stands - the state/majority have no justification to tell you what you can and cannot do to your own body.

If our theories on quantum physics are correct then this is not true. Isn't one of the ideas that at the most basic level it is random?

Our brains. Who created our brains? My parents, and indirectly God. Indirectly? So all that stuff about God creating man in his own image is just bs then..? No. God created Adam in his image. God created Eve from Adam. They had children, and so on and so forth to present day. God created Adam. God created Eve from Adam. And this somehow negates the argument...? If God created Adam, and Eve came from Adam, "Eve" is directly dependent upon Adam (who God created) You keep insisting that we have a "choice".. I'm not arguing here that the future is determinable because if you look at the most prominent quantum theories it sort of seems as if there is some random element to it BUT at the same time.. God created EVERYTHING apparently, and choices come from the external, and our genetics, both of which God created. (every aspect of the external boils down to God's creation). Even if there was a totally random aspect to it, something inside us which was totally chaotic, according to you GOD created it. God created everything necessary for sin, and also created every single external situation, and our genetic makeup, and everything random, so our choices are directly dependent upon God's actions.. The constant repetition of the whole "we choose to do whatever" is getting annoying because you aren't taking my point. God is responsible for EVERYTHING that goes into a "choice". There is no part of a "choice" that is outside of God's influence because HE CREATED EVERYTHING.

But which part of *taking the drug* is imposing? All that is involved in the action of taking a drug is a drug and a person who governs himself. Their future actions are irrelevant. If someone owns their own body they have the right to do whatever they want to it. If they go on to kill someone, that is a different issue. There is no drug that has a guarantee that someone who takes it will impose on the freedoms of others.

Our brains. Who created our brains? My parents, and indirectly God. Indirectly? So all that stuff about God creating man in his own image is just bs then..?

No But at the same time, there should be no draft at all. It is totalitarian by its very nature.

Keeping it illegal pushes it underground, forces people who want to do it to associate with drug dealers who also deal harder stuff. In criminal trade there is no regulation, gangs fight for control of key shipment lines and dealing turf and there are countless deaths associated with this. Gangs fund other criminal operations with their main money source; drugs. Also, how does the state/majority have any justification to tell you what you can and cannot do to yourself? Sound argument I agree with you but at the same time you can't dismiss the fact the the world's mental instability will increase the more widely available it becomes. If you want to go give yourself schizophrenia/paranoia/anxiety that may not have otherwise surfaced then be my guest but the general public is at harm. To say that all schizophrenics are molesting, murderers is a stereotype but it'll definitely increase. If everyone could run around and do whatever they wanted, the world would be an ugly place. Why can't I go up and stab you if you annoy me and not get away with it? lol I'm not serious by the way. Because you would be imposing upon my freedoms. People are free to do what they want as long as they do not impose on the freedoms of others.

Free will is the ability to make a choice, decide b/w A or B. Knowing what can happen as a result of said choice does not take away the ability to make that choice and others following it. We still have free will. No, we do not. From our very first choice that we made we've only made a chain reaction of different choices. If he knows the result from one choice then he knows what the rest of our life is going to be like from the second we come out of the womb. If we make a choice, it opens up many other choices. We choose from them, and God knows what can happen from the various choices we make. He doesn't pre-determine our choices. It's only set in stone if you make it so. [/hide] Where do choices come from? Our brains. Who created our brains?

Free will is the ability to make a choice, decide b/w A or B. Knowing what can happen as a result of said choice does not take away the ability to make that choice and others following it. We still have free will. No, we do not. From our very first choice that we made we've only made a chain reaction of different choices. If he knows the result from one choice then he knows what the rest of our life is going to be like from the second we come out of the womb. If we make a choice, it opens up many other choices. We choose from them, and God knows what can happen from the various choices we make. He doesn't pre-determine our choices. It's only set in stone if you make it so. Where do choices come from?

Keeping it illegal pushes it underground, forces people who want to do it to associate with drug dealers who also deal harder stuff. In criminal trade there is no regulation, gangs fight for control of key shipment lines and dealing turf and there are countless deaths associated with this. Gangs fund other criminal operations with their main money source; drugs. Also, how does the state/majority have any justification to tell you what you can and cannot do to yourself?

Did God create everything? If God created everything, is he not responsible for the products of what he created? Do choices come from the genetic and our external experiences working together? Did God create everything that makes up our external experiences? Did God create our genetic makeups? Even if we "choose" to defy God, that doesn't matter because everything that goes into a "choice" was made by God. Everything that analyzes everything that goes into a choice (genetic) was made by God. God is responsible for "sin" even if we choose what we do. He is responsible for every single item that goes into the product of a choice. [/hide] That is where I disagree. He gave us the choice to do what we want. Just because he made us doesn't mean he should be responsible for everything we do. He doesn't want puppets. So he "gave" us the "choice" to do what we want.. doesn't that make him responsible for sin? Everything that goes into a "choice" is made by God.. Yes he made us able to choose for ourselves, but in a random fashion. He simply knows every possible outcome chosen by us. What goes into a choice? The combination of the genetic makeup of a person and their external experiences working on that makeup. God is responsible for both of these things.

Did God create everything? If God created everything, is he not responsible for the products of what he created? Do choices come from the genetic and our external experiences working together? Did God create everything that makes up our external experiences? Did God create our genetic makeups? Even if we "choose" to defy God, that doesn't matter because everything that goes into a "choice" was made by God. Everything that analyzes everything that goes into a choice (genetic) was made by God. God is responsible for "sin" even if we choose what we do. He is responsible for every single item that goes into the product of a choice. [/hide] That is where I disagree. He gave us the choice to do what we want. Just because he made us doesn't mean he should be responsible for everything we do. He doesn't want puppets. So he "gave" us the "choice" to do what we want.. doesn't that make him responsible for sin? Everything that goes into a "choice" is made by God..

Did God create everything? If God created everything, is he not responsible for the products of what he created? Do choices come from the genetic and our external experiences working together? Did God create everything that makes up our external experiences? Did God create our genetic makeups? Even if we "choose" to defy God, that doesn't matter because everything that goes into a "choice" was made by God. Everything that analyzes everything that goes into a choice (genetic) was made by God. God is responsible for "sin" even if we choose what we do. He is responsible for every single item that goes into the product of a choice.

No, but in a thread titled "Is God real post your thoughts!", it is sort of implied that debate/actual substance will be passed around here and there. It is not as if I'm trying to force my beliefs onto anyone or make them the law. We are in a thread specifically made to debate such things. I know that your belief in God is not open for debate and that's fine, but this thread it all about debating whether God exists or not. Granted there are a lot of religious people who say that their belief is based on something other than evidence, and yes it is pointless to debate them because by definition their beliefs won't change no matter what evidence is presented, but I'm debating for the people on the fence that may or may not read this and may be at a point where they are examining what they believe themselves.

Actually, it's atheism.about.com, which shows that the "atheism" part is simply a directory into which relevant subject matter (such as this) is rightly placed. We can all be sarcastic Lenticular. You are pretty good at it too. In fact, it's pretty much all you ever do these days.

Hey, I got a little one of those myself: [hide=]A theist on an internet forum posted a ridiculously disingenuous story that blatantly either never happened, or was exaggerated to a preposterous extent. In this story, he shows a professor, in a position of authority debating arguments about morality and God with his students. The theist, being a moron, strawmans the actual argument against objective morality, turning it into something easily defeatable. The "young" student (he emphasised young to again show us how stupid the professor must be) makes a series of irrelevant arguments concerning "cold" and "dark", proceeding to give a number of loaded questions that presuppose that "cold" and "dark" are actual physical things instead of simply properties of a system or lack thereof. By using the word "exist" he does this, and then when the professor proceeds to say "yes" he says, "no, they are just absences of something else." He then asks "does evil exist?", again presupposing with his chosen wording that "evil" refers to something physical instead of a concept or property of something arbitrary, the professor says "yes", and the stupid theist says "Ahah! Evil is the absence of God's presence in the hearts of man!", without ever addressing the 1) existence of this "God", again, God's existence is merely presupposed, 2) the phrase "hearts" of man doesn't actually mean anything concrete, and is used simply to reference some sort of vague moral compass, when in actuality "morality" comes from the genetic, and the external situations one occupies, and 3) How God could ever be absent from the "hearts of man". God is everywhere is he not? Unless by "God" you actually mean "self righteous moral certitude." and 4) if God is responsible for everything ever, including everything physical, and if everything happens because of something else, (this includes "choice" and "actions") how God is not responsible for everything we do (including sin). The professor then apparently "bows his head" (yes, because obviously a professor would not 1) want to examine the arguments closely before conceding his side, and 2) have the capacity to see through the terrible terrible arguments and rhetoric just thrown at him.) Then, he adds at the bottom that the young student was actually Albert Einstein (which it wasn't, in fact this story never even happened and is unfair both to Einsten as an intellectual and to the countless morons that actually believe it), as if simply because it was Albert Einstein this somehow proves his point without even the need to look at the content of the arguments. The person who posted this story then proceeded to kill himself after realising how much of a plague he is to the human species.[/hide]

Where does it say in the bible to treat women badly? JW The whole original sin thing has lead to contempt for women in Christianity for thousands of years, and it still continues pretty much to this day. This is the first I've heard about this women-hating thing. And besides, probably everyone in this world would have done the same thing she did. She was made perfect, in a perfect world, and still sinned. What? If God created everything, and her "sin" was the culmination of her experiences and her mental genetic framework, then God was in turn responsible for the sin. Choice! Seriously, how do you not get that?? She "chose" to do what she did because of her genetic makeup coupled with her experiences that have influenced her person. If God created everything, that includes everything responsible for her experiences, and obviously genetic makeup too, it follows that God is responsible for sin, even if we have "free will" every single choice we make stems from those two things which God is responsible for..

But god made her. Everything about her. So, naturally, any choice she made could be lead back to how she was created. One, that's a rational argument for something not based entirely on reason. Two, it's not even a very good logical argument. There's no "naturally" here. I have a child. I raise that child. Said child disobeys me and does something wrong. Is it my fault? The Bible is sexist primarily because it was written by males primarily for males. On rare occasions original sin is blamed on the weakness of Eve(though in my opinion any argument to that effect is BS), but in most cases you here of Adam as the origin of original sin. We are all "children of Adam" and obtain original sin that way. And the Bible may not equalize men and women, but to my knowledge it says nothing about treating women poorly. They are, for the most part, ignored. Put that in your pipe and smoke it for a while, I'm sure nothing I just said will be taken seriously anyway. It is not your fault because their experiences and their environment coupled with their genetic makeup would have led to that disobeying.. But God created everything apparently, so everything made of her experiences AND her genetic makeup is made by God.

Where does it say in the bible to treat women badly? JW The whole original sin thing has lead to contempt for women in Christianity for thousands of years, and it still continues pretty much to this day. This is the first I've heard about this women-hating thing. And besides, probably everyone in this world would have done the same thing she did. She was made perfect, in a perfect world, and still sinned. What? If God created everything, and her "sin" was the culmination of her experiences and her mental genetic framework, then God was in turn responsible for the sin.