pianofrieak2

That's not entirely true. The bible says that every sin cuts off your relationship with God and so all are equal in that respect. However, saying that cheating on a test is as bad as raping and killing someone just seems illogical. Besides, God classifies sins. see proverbs. He talks about the 6 top worse and 7 bad but not quite as bad. If you want, I can look up the exact verse.

I would normally make this a poll, but seeing that there are all kinds of answers to this question, I figure that the best way is to just see what people's replies are. I would, however, ask that you reply BEFORE you look at anyone's answers. I'm trying to make this as straight-forward and lacking bias as possible. What do you think is the greatest sin? After you reply, please comment on others' answers. This can be really interesting since we come from all types of viewpoints. I'll tell you mine later in the game. Hehe.

Let's see if I can clarify the situation a little bit. The conservatives are people who are, oftentimes, agreeing with the bible and enforcing social rules which they believe to be correct. For instance, most "conservatives" are against gay marriage, embryonic stem cell research, abortion, etc. simply because they believe those to be murder or unnatural and wrong. Weezcake was right, however, in stating that the conservatives are oftentimes for less taxes and less government regulation. (See Ronald Reagan) The liberals are those who are very lax regarding social regulations. Abortion, stem cell research, gay marriage, etc. are all okay because the government "doesn't have a right" to regulate your lifestyle. However, they are also very pro-taxes. Liberals always raise taxes and have more governmental control over industries. (more money!) A big difference besides the social and economic policies is the welfare system. The conservatives are against much of the current welfare system. They claim it is very wasteful and impractical. And they are correct, for many in the welfare system are lazy and don't even try to get jobs. The liberals carry the opposite view and decrease military spending to spend it on welfare which results in more tax dollars to pay for the bureacracy and help the poorer classes. That's pretty much the difference. Any questions? Just ask.

I can't say that I"m surprised since I'm not. I thought most of the questions were pretty straight-forward and dealing with what religion you were. So in that respect, I think it was a good 54 question quiz. Satanism, alas, does not surprise me either. According to the Bible, Satan was the top angel but was overcome with pride and fell because pride is the greatest sin. How can you be prideful in the presence of a perfect and holy God? But, anyway, Satan was the master of pride and pride is only concerned with yourself. Bettering yourself, being hedonistic (only pleasures), etc. are perfectly in-line with what Satan teaches: You are God. Anyway, here are my results:

Why? Who cares what happens to society if your life is meaningless in the grand scheme of things? You'll be dead anyway, it's not like you will see the results of your actions or that those actions will matter for anyone else. Maybe you will, maybe you won't...

thats not right, you are thinking of it as a variable now. infinity-infinity=infinity. It really depends on your infinity, for we have different levels of infinity that are bigger than others. For instance, an infinite train of numberts (10, 20, 30, 40...) is bigger than the set of integers to infinity (1,2,3,4,5). Still, it's beside the point. Your meaning of life is dependent upon your viewpoint. If you believe we're just animals, then the meaning of life is to reproduce. But if you believe we're more than animals (specifically that we have eternal souls that are shaped in the image of God Himself), then the meaning changes entirely. Not only are we to live our daily lives honoring God, but we are called to do more: to actually take up our crosses and sacrifice all of ourselves for His purposes.

Dan Brown's "Angels and Demons" is a great book. One of the best I've read even though I disagreed with it. Those who say The Da Vinci Code was the best clearly haven't read this book. Honestly, I think Ted Dekker's the best author out there.

Uh, they do what they are supposed to? Condoms prevent pregnancy over 98% of the time if used correctly and consistently. They also stop the majority of STDs from spreading. Contrary to your claims, the media and Planned Parenthood have nothing to do with the issue of condom effectiveness. Do you have peer-reviewed clinical studies to back up your ridiculous statements? I suggest you refrain from posting such blatant falsehoods like the above without evidence. Whoa, you're taking what I said way too far. I never said that condoms don't work at all. Neither did I say that everything Planned Parenthood is false. Here's what I actually said. 1. The media hypes up all this use of condoms in order to make you THINK you're 100% safe from all STDs and pregnancies. 2. Condoms do NOT help against all STDs (HPV for instance) which they are told to. 3. It is a ridiculous claim to say that people use condoms effectively and when they're supposed to all of the time. In the article (if you read it), it said that in the inner city, condoms are used the right way only around 60% of the time. Don't be ridiculous in saying that condoms are the way to go since so few people use them correctly and all of the time. I realize that that isn't the condoms' fault, but don't be naive in thinking that condoms are the panacea of STDs. The best way to protect yourself is abstinence which is my, Astra's, and insane's point.

Embryonic stem cells are generally taken from a Blastocyst not foetuses. Basically it is a collection of 50-150 odd cells that are yet to be implanted into the lining of the uterus; before implantation you can't even test for pregnancy. If you want to simplify it, itÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s just a fertilised ovum. When life begins, when it depends on who wants to know and what criteria they use to consider life. I would say about the 3rd trimester since thatÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s when a foetus becomes self-aware, before which they are oblivious to their own existence; for other people that might be different, however thatÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s my take on it. A "fertilized ovum" has 4 basic differences between a toddler. 1. Size 2. Level of Development (in your case, self-awareness) 3. Environment 4. Degree of Dependency Do you agree with these 4? unknownmasterofnothing: Prove it to me please Anesthesia: As a Christian, I am allowed to take a more liberal view of religions. For instance, as C.S. Lewis pointed out, even though Christianity is the only true religion, (as in a math problem) other religions are much closer to the truth than others. Some bad answers are much closer to being right than others. If you're an atheist (which you are) you must agree that all religions are completely wrong and have no truth whatsoever (no after-life, no salvation, no heaven, no hell). Now who's narcissistic. Nadril: They don't just use aborted fetuses. They may use some, but aborted fetuses have to be kept frozen extremely quickly otherwise the blastocysts become useless. So that comment may be true, but using the word "only" is incomplete. Fubai: We are to care for the Earth as caretakers. I think your first description is most accurate, just because God made the Earth and plants and animals and doesn't want to see them wasted. It's His creation after all. Do we have a right to abuse it just because we feel like it? No. But can we use it for our enjoyment? Yes. I see your point about the ambiguity, but, really, in a perfect environment like Adam and Eve, if one is perfect, one will only use what one needs and will tend to the plants and animals as one's primary caretaker. That's how it's supposed to be run.

Was the test written in English? :P Lol jk. Actually, I've hard whites are going to be a minority in Texas in a few years if illegal immigrants keep coming over the border.

What did you eat today? Unless it was rocks then it was alive too. Actually, it was rocks. How'd you guess? :roll: Now, that was one of the dumbest comments I've seen. Let's see: 1. You can't murder plants or animals since murder is killing another human being. 2. According to the Bible, God GAVE us the plants and animals for our enjoyment. If we want to eat them, then we can go ahead and eat them. Let me and Tigra carry on our own conversation without you coming in and flaming everyone who disagrees with your viewpoint.

Condoms do not do anything close to what the media and planned parenthood portray. Here's a great news article to read about the uselessness of condoms in preventing HPV, an incurable STD infecting millions of adults and the leading cause of cervical cancer, being the second highest killer of women. http://www.massnews.com/past_issues/oth ... condon.htm Oddly enough, it was in the Massachusetts news. Here are some quotes:

Lol, let's talk. If you don't bnelieve that life begins at conception, when DOES life begin? The "cell" as you call it is rapidly growing inside the mother's womb. For all purposes, it is alive. I'm eager to hear what you say.

Yeah that might be true but promoting as a viable form of 'contraception' is silly. It's pretty clear from this thread and general statistics that it doesn't work in practice, so why should it be even discussed as if it does work? Exactly, thatÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s why the age is 16 not 11; it takes into consideration mental development. Social and Financial burdens shouldn't really factor into the equation if you are properly educated on how to prevent pregnancy. If someone really wants a baby they are going to have one regardless of their financial position. Sorry if it seems that I might be aggressive in my posts, I just tend to write a lot. Actually, I can think of 10 people at least that have verbalized their commitment to abstinence, and so has 2-3 other people on this board. Just because our society doesn't have an adequate self-control level doesn't mean we just say "oh, too bad, and here's a condom." And besides, one isn't psychologically ready at the age of 16 either. It's when they become an adult and learn how to take care of themselves when they're ready to BEGIN to try to take care of a baby.

I am familiar with parts of quantum mechanics but you lost me totally on Chapter two. 1. Quantum mechanics deals with how things move. Yes, it is completely based on statistical probability but that's only as current as our theory goes. 2. What is the ripple effect? I'm lost. 3. How do you explain quantum mechanics as properties of how we look at the world? How does my "thinking" or "looking" at something change what it really is? 4. Why do you think sentient thought actually changes matter? You're really big into mind-over-matter apparently.

Oh, I love cherry-coke icees! :) Although you can get a 40 oz. slurpee refill and save yourself 40% instead of getting a new cup every time. What a secret! Has anyone tried the new orange slurpees that 7-11 advertises? I haven't seen any 7-11 have it even though I see commercials on the tv all the time!

And? Those are the teens that need to stop having babies and so they are the ones that the solution has to work for. That's exactly why I described abstinence as pre-1950's - something that may have worked before but isn't suited to the youths of today. Don't be ridiculous. You're saying that because teens have no self-control, we should just let them act however they want and try to narrow the consequences. That's like saying if I have urges to kill somebody, I should just kill dogs and hope that my urges are momentarily satisfied. What if teenagers today have no self-control because they're primary role models, they're parents, have no self-control and they aren't taught to be responsible for their actions or even to have good behavior (for most schools are anti-gang instead of pro-working together)? Maybe that's why we have no self-control in today's culture.

Forcing someone to kill a life doesn't seem very nice to me. Saving money? Well, I'm against the whole welfare system we have today anyway. Not the idea but the process. Put up the baby for an adoption.

I also see nothing wrong with them. Embryonic stem cells are merely humans who haven't been born yet. They are alive, just like any human. Destroying them by the millions to possibly save (they have very few results compared to adult stem cells) a few thousand seems terribly unfair.

I'm sorry, but are you a complete idiot? Canada's healthcare is so cheap because everything is socialized. They're taxes are 3 times as much as ours in America (give or take because of how much you make). Besides, there have been so many problems with the wait-list... And about stem cells...You know, I've been wondering something. Why do you think killing millions of unborn babies worth saving a few thousand lives? Separation of church and state was first mentioned by Thomas Jefferson in a leter to the anabaptists who were being persecuted by Puritans (I think they were the Puritans). It was never mentioned in our Constitution, Bill of Rights, or any official document. And we're not complaining that they're taking God out of the government. We're complaining that they're taking God out of everywhere. I tend to think that it's foolish to save thousands at the expense of millions. I'm sorry, but why wouldn't we care? Aren't we all supposed to care for each other?

Falco and Luigi! W00t W00t

Your political compass Economic Left/Right: -0.75 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.62 Interesting. Me, like Astra, are most close to Pope John Paul. I really thought I'd be more libertarian, but oh well.

How true, Not. How true. However, this whole border thing is indeed a problem. If they want to come over, they should get here legally. When one talks about discrimination and all that, why doesn't the government just let companies hire the best people. Instead of making sure 30% is African-American or 20% Hispanic (I'm guessing on the percentages), just let companies hire the hardest workers. If they're black, so be it. If they're Hispanic, so be it. If they're white, so be it. Stop discriminating against Mexicans, blacks, or whites. Let the companies do what they want. Sorry for rambling, but back on topic. I think something that Bush is thinking is that if our borders are so bad that Mexicans can just walk over, then what about terrorists? They would just fly to Mexico and come in. Of course, if someone really wants to destroy something and have almost unlimited money, they're going to do it. But some of it is protecting us from terrorists, not just Mexicans who want to work for a construction company.

Pot kettle black... You should consider yourself lucky that I don't want to dish out personal attacks. How exactly am I posting pure BS? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_kill ... slamic_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_As ... az_Marhoni http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab#Deba ... ontroversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_of_ ... n_Pakistan http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/EN ... of=ENG-PAK http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_M ... c_violence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual ... e_Qur.27an or how about the quotes pianofreak posted? And you believe holocaust didn't happen? Typical. And don't kid yourself. Its your arguments have always been blank. omg again with the same bs, you barely even understand your opponments argument, yet you still talk about the subject as if you know it by heart. Stop the stereotyping! I'm sorry, but I'm confused. What exactly IS your argument? You seem to be arguing for tolerance, but his sources seem to show that he has support for his side. I'm sorry for not understanding. Please help me understand. US execution: The United States executes murderers and terrible criminals. At least, to the best of my knowledge. But few states even have the death penalty any more. And to the best of my knowledge, no teenagers get executed. They go to juvenile. Do you even know what you're talking about? Although Quer_Skulll brought up an interesting point with the civilized part and executions. Why do you think that civilized countries don't execute? Europe would consider themselves civilized, yet they euthenize. :-k I guess the problem is how you define "civilized".