Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Judged:

1

It aint necessarily so wrote:

<quoted text>
Bush doesn't get enough respect. Let's see if I can even that out a little here with this moral dilemma as an exercise in ethics. What would you do? This test only has one question. By giving your most honest answer, you will discover where you stand on the moral spectrum.
The test features a fictional situation, one in which you will have to make a difficult decision. Your answer should be spontaneous - given within a few seconds of reading the question.
Ready? Begin!
You're in New Orleans in 2005, and there is chaos everywhere around you caused by hurricane Katrina and the resultant flooding of major proportions. You are a photojournalist working for a major newspaper, caught in the middle of this great disaster. The situation is overwhelming, and you're trying to shoot career-making photos, as houses and people swirl around you, some disappearing under the water.
Then you see a man in the water fighting for his life, trying not to be swept away with the water and debris. You move closer. Somehow the man looks familiar. Suddenly, you know who it is ... it's George W. Bush! At the same time you notice that the raging waters are about to take him under, forever. I think that you're going to like where this is going.
You have two options. You can save him, or you can take the most dramatic photos of your career. You can save George W. Bush's life, or you can shoot a sure Pulitzer Prize winning photo of him dying.
Here's the dilemma: Color, or would you rather go with the classic simplicity and aesthetic value of black and white?

Judged:

1

1

1

Thinking wrote:

So you must reject all possibility of an afterlife.
<quoted text>

Epicurus wrote:

<quoted text>
The possibility of an afterlife is rejected in the same way one rejects his/her ablility to make themselves invisible.

Judged:

1

TheBlackSheep wrote:

<quoted text>
I guess I am rejecting my invisibility ability.

Judged:

3

3

3

nanoanomaly wrote:

<quoted text>BTW, who do you think had a hand in scrubbing your and truthist's posts?
>:)

Judged:

1

1

Redoran wrote:

<quoted text>
Maybe I misread your comments. SO --What do you do with a serial killer????? Your straight opinion as an anthropology major.

Judged:

1

Redoran wrote:

<quoted text>
Interesting. My wife owns a small gift store and cannot get any kind of health coverage in this great country. She wrote to every health provider and got either no, or negative responses, all because she has "preexisting conditions". Who can I vote for but Obama?????????? Answer that one!

Judged:

1

1

1

TheBlackSheep wrote:

<quoted text>
Life in prison must be worse than death. I know that I would rather be dead than locked in a hole, with the threat of being raped every night, for the rest of my life.
I do not believe that the death penalty deters crime, nor do we gain justice from it, we are simply protecting society, both physically and financially.

Judged:

1

1

1

It aint necessarily so wrote:

<quoted text>
Bush doesn't get enough respect. Let's see if I can even that out a little here with this moral dilemma as an exercise in ethics. What would you do? This test only has one question. By giving your most honest answer, you will discover where you stand on the moral spectrum.
The test features a fictional situation, one in which you will have to make a difficult decision. Your answer should be spontaneous - given within a few seconds of reading the question.
Ready? Begin!
You're in New Orleans in 2005, and there is chaos everywhere around you caused by hurricane Katrina and the resultant flooding of major proportions. You are a photojournalist working for a major newspaper, caught in the middle of this great disaster. The situation is overwhelming, and you're trying to shoot career-making photos, as houses and people swirl around you, some disappearing under the water.
Then you see a man in the water fighting for his life, trying not to be swept away with the water and debris. You move closer. Somehow the man looks familiar. Suddenly, you know who it is ... it's George W. Bush! At the same time you notice that the raging waters are about to take him under, forever. I think that you're going to like where this is going.
You have two options. You can save him, or you can take the most dramatic photos of your career. You can save George W. Bush's life, or you can shoot a sure Pulitzer Prize winning photo of him dying.
Here's the dilemma: Color, or would you rather go with the classic simplicity and aesthetic value of black and white?

Judged:

1

1

1

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
I'd also rather be dead than in prison.
So your vote for the death penalty is based on cost/benefit analysis? I think the plethora of appeals and costs actually makes the death penalty more expensive than just throwing them in some cell.

Judged:

1

1

1

Epicurus wrote:

<quoted text>
The possibility of an afterlife is rejected in the same way one rejects his/her ablility to make themselves invisible.

Judged:

1

1

1

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
That's terrible! How can they deny her?!? For one thing the US is a signatory to the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights - and the Right to Health Care is listed. So those companies are in violation of UN International Laws.
Clearly, allowing the market to choose it's customers in a bet to make money from their health outcomes is a bad idea.
You should vote for whoever will provide universal health care. If that's Obama, vote for him. Are you writing your congress?
If you get a state job, then you can include her on your insurance regardless of medical condition.

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
I'd also rather be dead than in prison.
So your vote for the death penalty is based on cost/benefit analysis? I think the plethora of appeals and costs actually makes the death penalty more expensive than just throwing them in some cell.

TheBlackSheep wrote:

<quoted text>
I would change the whole system around. First, you only have 30 days after the conviction.
If someone lied and caused an execution, they are executed; no 30 days.
No last meal, per se. PBJ's for the 30 days.
No TV, no smokes, no cards, no soda pop, no candy.
Must produce enough to offset your keep.
You want an education, you go to night school.
The list goes on.
What good is a person to society after being locked up for 5 years or more? A person, if they survive, learns that way of life; then to shove them out into society, is cruel to both.
Prisons, the way they are run now; imo, is cruel and unusual punishment.

Epicurus wrote:

<quoted text>
Fathom the Hypocrisy of a Government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen.

Judged:

1

ChristineM wrote:

<quoted text>
Considering you jumped in on a discussion about paedophilia in the catholic church I presume that you actually know what I meant to write but spite got the better of you, so typical. If you get your rocks off by highlighting my dyslexia every time I post an error then that’s fine by me, whatever turns you on, it just highlights how your narrow, bigoted and hateful god bothering mind works.
You thought no such thing, you are a lying and spiteful god botherer and one really sick and perverted moron aren’t you? You know you cannot fight it and it makes your belief treble in your heart (if you had one) so instead you revert to the old time religious favourite, spite. Well done for being so predictable.
Why would you want me to join any christian faith when there are people like you infesting it. They don’t need me, they should be capable of policing themselves but they prove they are incapable of even this basic task amongst their cult. They, the priest in question are supposed to be an example of how good christianity can be, such a pity they (and you) are unable to live up to that example and instead choose to ply their belief by molesting and raping children.
Such a turn on for you eh? You have already let it be known how much rape turns you on, now it seems that paedophilia has the same effect on you.

Judged:

1

1

It aint necessarily so wrote:

<quoted text>
Bush doesn't get enough respect. Let's see if I can even that out a little here with this moral dilemma as an exercise in ethics. What would you do? This test only has one question. By giving your most honest answer, you will discover where you stand on the moral spectrum.
The test features a fictional situation, one in which you will have to make a difficult decision. Your answer should be spontaneous - given within a few seconds of reading the question.
Ready? Begin!
You're in New Orleans in 2005, and there is chaos everywhere around you caused by hurricane Katrina and the resultant flooding of major proportions. You are a photojournalist working for a major newspaper, caught in the middle of this great disaster. The situation is overwhelming, and you're trying to shoot career-making photos, as houses and people swirl around you, some disappearing under the water.
Then you see a man in the water fighting for his life, trying not to be swept away with the water and debris. You move closer. Somehow the man looks familiar. Suddenly, you know who it is ... it's George W. Bush! At the same time you notice that the raging waters are about to take him under, forever. I think that you're going to like where this is going.
You have two options. You can save him, or you can take the most dramatic photos of your career. You can save George W. Bush's life, or you can shoot a sure Pulitzer Prize winning photo of him dying.
Here's the dilemma: Color, or would you rather go with the classic simplicity and aesthetic value of black and white?

Hedonist wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow, that's a real poser!
I could always go with color and still get some pretty good depth with B&W in the dark room. But shooting with B&W does give me such fast film speeds and depth that you just can't bring out in the dark room later. I would lean toward B&W, but it would also depend on the natural light available and the shot angle.

Cpt Jack Sparrow wrote:

perverts do what they do to satisfy thier animalistic selfish appetites. The surety of vengance has always been a powerfull deterant to such individuals, Who themselves are neither civil or curable!
let the punishment fit the Crime!
Put them down like a mad dog........ <quoted text>