adios

What is an "intellectual sounding excuse", anyway? Mongtastic!

I think it's important to understand what people are capable of. It sounds like I may have seen the same one described; numbing, gut-wrenching, can't really describe how bad it was to watch. I don't think you have to actually sit through a video of torture to understand what some people are capable of. I agree with Spongebob in that if I knew what a link ocntained and it was of extreme cruelty/murder/violence I would choose not to watch it. I agree, that's just an intellectual sounding excuse for an urge to see horrific things. I don't watch these videos at all, they make me sick. Em, no it's not, cheers for the judgement, though.

And the number of fucking nutcases that sit and watch it out of morbid curiosity!! Best wank I ever had tbh.

I think it's important to understand what people are capable of. It sounds like I may have seen the same one described; numbing, gut-wrenching, can't really describe how bad it was to watch.

The Thick of It, worth a look?

I hope he's all right, seems a top bloke, bet he'd rather be doing that job and taking the risk than pretty much anything else, though. I like all of the presenters and think Top Gear and Extras are top-notch. I'm not sure everyone in the UK realise how lucky they are with the quality of the BBC.

The odd looking fashion obsessed one out of Mighty Boosh. Does he have Tourette's?

Aye, sorry again for losing it a bit. I went over the top because I'd explained a complex issue in a couple of paragraphs when, as I said, it really needed a book (single words to encompass entire religions ffs!). I then felt that what you were picking at wasn't "de big oideas", but more inane things. For example "battle" is not the most outrageous metaphor in a thread about muslims, wrapping up a paragraph discussing the potential dominance of Catholicism over the other religions. Given that you're one of the few people on here who follows me when I go off on one, when you decided to highlight that I felt you were fighting the argument on all fronts, as opposed to giving it a fair whack. You do come across like you have a real issue with organised religion (as I do too) and are maybe more unwilling than usual to give this an objective once over. I don't expect or even want to change anyone's mind, but you wanted to know why I had this view and I put it as succinctly as I possibly could without spending too much time on it, I'm quite happy for it to be taken apart, just not at that level. You're most likely right about your faith in humanity, I would be hard pressed to find anyone with less faith than me.

Because miniature Nigerians are hilarious.

VLC Media Player

The fact that all societies, some of them independently, have created very similar things suggests that it can not just have come from nowhere, by chance, and become deep seeded. What is your understanding of evolutionary psychology? Have you been drinking, because you're coming across like an obnoxious arsehole, to be honest. I was trying to give you some credit.

Have you been drinking?

That the issue's maybe slightly more complex than that.

2.4 children with utter anarchy is also not useful to humanity.

Proper parenting! I'm pro-choice, it should be in a parents arsenal, but a last straw. I agree about the frustration bit.

Choose life.

Don't be sick, blokes are only allowed ogle their sister's breasts when they're heavily pregnant.

Best? As in some sort of Sky One's Top 10 best ways to drug a donkey into bed, best? No. You can read it in context above.

He's no Eddie Murphy.

It actually started due to Alex and PokerPants questioning my assertion that religion was still necessary and that Catholicism may be the best of a bad bunch, in response to you saying organised religion had outlived its usefulness and was redundant.

Wasn't me. They're fucking weirdos, that's about as deep as any sociological debate needs to go on the subject of the French. Regarding what you say above, I certainly think it's possible, but what if we're wrong, what if we are born different enough that a portion of society will never be capable of what seems to straight forward to us? I see rational people every day get frustrated (myself included) at people who seem to be indoctrinated in foolishness, we never learn, what if they can't either?

If you ant absolute truths you should try Christianity. Seriously though, I've breezed over a topic that requires at least one volume to discuss properly and not even given it a re-read, despite that I'm fairly sure I haven't said anything wrong, though some of it is obviously open for long debate. What bits do you not agree with in particular? (Why am I asking this when I need to not get into this?)

Well, the burden of proof is obviously on me here, at some point I may provide it, but it's a biggie, so please don't hold your breath, with the possible exception of Leazes. I agree with both of you in principal, but I believe that in reality what all rational people want will take generations to achieve, and even then will most likely be a compromise.

As much as I don't like organised religion and realise there are plenty of us who don't require it, I am convinced there is still a significant number who do need a "higher power", whether it be a bogeyman or just a belief system that helps them avoid the chasm that is the reality of their own death. I don't know whether it's genetic or merely deeply rooted, but the fact that it seems to be deeply rooted in all societies suggests its at least partially the former. In any case it's not going away overnight. So we have to deal with the current reality that society's evolution needs to include some form of organised religion, one which should gradually fade to common sense, respect and reason. As to which religion? I don't know enough about all of them to make a full judgement, but it has to be a major one for practical reasons. Muslimism is obviously archaic and unenlightened even by the standards of organised religion, Judaism, possibly the most enlightened but very insular, I like the intropspection of Buddhism, but was quite disappointed to find its sense of community seemed a bit lacking, I haven't a clue about Hinduism other than to name some of its better known deities, I'd probably have more luck comparing S Club 7 to these other religions. Christianity is very evolved, has rationality and some semblance of philosophical thought, but don't even talk to me about these bat-shit crazy US varieties. I picked Catholicism in spite of its obvious problems just because it might be big enough to win the battle, in an ideal world, I agree, Church of England could well be the best choice, or Catharism? Just so it's clear where I stand, no member of the CoE or Islam ever tried to rape members of my community in the arse. I'm not a fan of RobW infallibility, let alone the Papal Bulls. I don't personally like organised religion, but reckon plenty still need it. Blah, blah, piddle; I hope that made enough sense to answer both Bob l'Eponge and Alex.

I'll explain it later, I'm not getting drawn into a long discussion when I've got other things I need to do. If I've misrepresented myself on here to the point where you assume I'd say something like that without being able to back it up, fair enough, otherwise, shut it, you arrogant sod.