Butters
-
Content
4,759 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never -
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by Butters
-
Generally, no; but in limited circumstances, yes. When the police take someone into physical custody who has impaired judgment, due to youth, or intoxication, or mental infirmity, or a combination thereof, they assume a responsibility to protect the person against anticipatable harm, including from himself. What I don't quite understand: why was this kid in the front seat of the police car? Why not locked in the typical police cruiser's back seat, which is "caged-in", no door or window handles, etc.? I don't get that. And I don't get why people want their freedoms but refuse the responsibilities that come with their freedom. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
God in general, as all religions are based on one god of many different names. Take your pick as all religions boil down to one belief that there is an all mighty, all knowing, all seeing deity that created everything and that this god has a plan for each and everyone of us. This is not the concept of God for all religions. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
So, you believe that authority should be responsible for protecting me from myself? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Existed! "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Does anyone else notice that when people on these forums deny the existence of God they are often denying the existence God based only on the Christian religion? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
This best describes my belief. At this time I believe nothing is absolute but I realize I do not have enough knowledge and thus I must continue to learn. (Minds are like parachutes, they work best when open.) "Agnostics claim either that it is not possible to have absolute or certain knowledge or, alternatively, that while certainty may be possible, they personally have no knowledge." Wikipedia "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Can't be done. many beliefs in God include the subset of belief that god wants them to convert others to the same belief. If you respect their belief and let them get on with it then they will not be respecting yours - if you force them to respect your belief you will be disrespecting theirs. Simply by stating that I am an atheist I am more or less telling all christian/ muslim/ hindu etc believers that they are wrong, and vice verca. F**ked if you do, F**ked if you don't. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Does it matter that people believed the world was flat? No, so long as people were respectful to each other over this belief and were allowed to study it. Does it matter if people believe there is (or isn't) a God? No, so long as people are respectful to each other over this belief and are allowed to study it. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Do you mean to say that the whole Christian concept of God is full of holes? There are other concepts of God. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Just because something cannot be explained does not mean the best explanation is God did it or any other supernatural explanation. It just means we don't understand it yet and it needs to be investigated. Agreed. "You must be the change you want to see in the world." Mahatma Gandhi If you do not want people to try to convert you then you should not try to convert other people. "One needs to be slow to form convictions, but once formed they must be defended against the heaviest odds." Mahatma Gandhi "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
I am an agnostic instead of an athiest because I can not currently understand using logic and reasoning why anything exists. (Anyone care to try to explain to me using logic and reasoning why anything exists?) Everyone should remember that there are still plenty of things in this world that can not or have not been explained by science or religion. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
How come they make 'em so much better-looking nowadays? They didn't make 'em like that when I was 18. I would suggest 21 instead of 18 (due to the change in the legal drinking age). "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Always pay attention to the relationship your girlfriend and her mother have. The better the relationship the more likely your girlfriend will act like her mother. (Just remember, you can use everything to your advantage. ) "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Litvinenko was a spy. Litvinenko was a defecter. Litvinenko was guilty of treason which is punishable by death. Russia sent a message. It does not matter when, it does not matter where, we will punish you and there is nothing anyone can do about it (because everyone knew Litvinenko was a spy and a defecter). "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
I understand people have the choice to believe or not believe in any religion but why does their belief have to be part of their oath? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Can I take my oath of office on "Green Eggs and Ham"?
-
Placebo Effect "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
First, the officer should ask the student to act appropriately. Second, the officer should use force (club, tazer, ...) on the student to make them act appropriately. Third, the officer should use deadly force (knife, gun, ...) on the student. It is as easy as 1, 2, 3. PS: This is obviously a joke. It disturbs me that people do not respect authority at that age and it disturbs me that authority is unable to handle people at the age without resorting to such levels of force. Why not make the authority take some classes in martial arts or something similar, make the parents take some classes in child raising, and punish the child. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Yes, it is different. However, you can place a spy you catch on trial, you can not place a spy who defects on trial. So you try, convict and execute the spy you catch and you convict and execute the spy that defects. I do not have any statistics but I would guess that the US has few if any defecters due to the living standards in the US. However, if a spy were to defect and take asylum in another country I would guess that it would be almost impossible to extradite that spy and place them on trial (and I doubt that the US would allow a spy who defects to remain alive due to the security risk). "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Yes, but I am talking about the motive for them to kill each other, not the motive for them to have guns. DARE didn't do anything to curb drugs over here. Are you saying Trident isn't going to do anything to curb guns over there? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Yes, it is a shady business. Defecting is considered treason which is punishable by death in many countries. PS: Take a look at US history and you will see that the US has executed plenty of spies. So yes, I can imagine if it was the US that was responsible for something like this and got caught. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
So that is what they look like with seats, walls, no duct-tape, ... "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
I don't see what the big deal is all about. He was a spy, a spy is going to get killed if they are caught or defect. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
People kill people with guns. Guns don't kill people, they are inanimate objects, they don't do anything. PS: Wouldn't it be better to go after the motive and not the weapon? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
I haven't gotten my issue yet, but I am looking forward to it.