Topic: The road to the End of Religion: How sex will kill God - page 15. (Read 37219 times)
Sex and God are not in war with each other. So I don't see why the first will kill the second. Without sex there it will not be humanity and without humanity there it will be no sense to speak about God. Who will speak? and who will pray. The rocks or the water?
More about David Reimer's case and John Money's deception.
If Beliathon knows enough to source John Money, then it's hard to believe he doesn't know about this case. Again, I think Beliathon is just a character someone is using to troll. But this "gender is a social construct" lie is dangerous, far more dangerous than believing in mythical gods.
Quote
This was later expanded into a full-length book As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised as a Girl, in which Colapinto described how—contrary to Money's reports—when living as Brenda, Reimer did not identify as a girl. He was ostracized and bullied by peers, and neither frilly dresses (which he was forced to wear during frigid Winnipeg winters)[10] nor female hormones made him feel female. By the age of 13, Reimer was experiencing suicidal depression, and he told his parents he would take his own life if they made him see John Money again. In 1980, Reimer's parents told him the truth about his gender reassignment, following advice from Reimer's endocrinologist and psychiatrist. At 14, having been informed of his past by his father, Reimer decided to assume a male gender identity, calling himself David. By 1987, Reimer had undergone treatment to reverse the reassignment, including testosterone injections, a double mastectomy, and two phalloplasty operations. On September 22, 1990, he married Jane Fontaine and became a stepfather to her three children.
If Beliathon knows enough to source John Money, then it's hard to believe he doesn't know about this case. Again, I think Beliathon is just a character someone is using to troll. But this "gender is a social construct" lie is dangerous, far more dangerous than believing in mythical gods.
Too bad after your wanton destruction of social structures in #1 and #2, #3 is impossible, because science has already proven gender is not just a social construct.
Actually, modern Science has understood gender to be a social construct since sexologist John Money's pioneering work on sex and gender distinction in 1955.Of course, with all the racism, sexism, Islamophobia, and homophobia on this forum, it's clear half the fuckwits here are operating as if we're still in the late 40's.
People who want to be informed should read about the following case overseen by John Money:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer
Quote
David Peter Reimer (August 22, 1965 – May 5, 2004) was a Canadian man born biologically male but raised female following medical advice and intervention after his penis was accidentally destroyed during a botched circumcision in infancy.[1]
Psychologist John Money oversaw the case and reported the reassignment as successful and as evidence that gender identity is primarily learned. Academic sexologist Milton Diamond later reported that Reimer failed to identify as female since the age of 9 to 11,[2] and transitioned to living as a male at age 15. Well known in medical circles for years anonymously as the "John/Joan" case, Reimer later went public with his story to help discourage similar medical practices. He later committed suicide after suffering years of severe depression, financial instability, and a troubled marriage.
Psychologist John Money oversaw the case and reported the reassignment as successful and as evidence that gender identity is primarily learned. Academic sexologist Milton Diamond later reported that Reimer failed to identify as female since the age of 9 to 11,[2] and transitioned to living as a male at age 15. Well known in medical circles for years anonymously as the "John/Joan" case, Reimer later went public with his story to help discourage similar medical practices. He later committed suicide after suffering years of severe depression, financial instability, and a troubled marriage.
John Money lied about this case to support the conclusion he wanted to reach. Beliathon sees John Money's research as a reliable source of knowledge.
John Money lied about this case to support the conclusion he wanted to reach. Beliathon sees John Money's research as a reliable source of knowledge.
John Money lied about this case to support the conclusion he wanted to reach. Beliathon sees John Money's research as a reliable source of knowledge.
Seriously though guys, I'm right.
Well, you're certainly not right about Hitler being a capitalist, but I guess I already proved that.
I think belief in a god is irrational, but I'd be surprised if humans start becoming rational. Rationality isn't human nature. Many people who give up a belief in god simply replace the hole in their life with The State.
Specifically regarding sexuality, it's easy to imagine combining sexual permissiveness with a religion. Just because old religions concentrated on controlling sexuality doesn't mean new ones must.
Seriously though guys, I'm right. Although I do suspect some form of quasi-religion will survive into the next century, perhaps something along the lines of a Zen-Gnostic Church of the Sacred Orgasm. This organization would embrace everything that traditional religions reject, above all the eternal self-evident truth of embodied experience.
“Ignorance is king. Many would not profit by his abdication. Many enrich themselves by means of his dark monarchy. They are his Court, and in his name they defraud and govern, enrich themselves and perpetuate their power. Even literacy they fear, for the written word is another channel of communication that might cause their enemies to become united. Their weapons are keen-honed, and they use them with skill. They will press the battle upon the world when their interests are threatened, and the violence which follows will last until the structure of society as it now exists is leveled to rubble, and a new society emerges. I am sorry. But that is how I see it.”
― Walter M. Miller Jr., A Canticle for Leibowitz
“Ignorance is king. Many would not profit by his abdication. Many enrich themselves by means of his dark monarchy. They are his Court, and in his name they defraud and govern, enrich themselves and perpetuate their power. Even literacy they fear, for the written word is another channel of communication that might cause their enemies to become united. Their weapons are keen-honed, and they use them with skill. They will press the battle upon the world when their interests are threatened, and the violence which follows will last until the structure of society as it now exists is leveled to rubble, and a new society emerges. I am sorry. But that is how I see it.”
― Walter M. Miller Jr., A Canticle for Leibowitz
but my point was there are lots of legitimate reasons to question Bitcoin because of the obfuscation of its source (therefore nullifying his example).
This person doesn't understand bitcoin. Bitcoin is open-source transparent mathematics. There is no obfuscation, because the source is irrelevant. That's one of the most fundamental differences between Bitcoin and fiat! This is basic whitepaper shit - Bitcoin 101 - how the fuck could you be a legendary member and not know this? Did you buy that account? What a disgrace. That tears it man, you're going back on the ignore list for awhile.Newtonian physics would have gotten us to the moon whether or not we knew who Newton was. Just as Bitcoin will get us to the moon whether or not we ever find out who Satoshi Nakamoto is/was.
There you go again adopting my argument again as if it is your own then pretending I disagree with it. Your "debating skills" are pathetic and rely on a series of parlor tricks and emotional appeals.
That's precisely what political science is all about... the thing that Beliathon is doing. In the face of any and all obstacles, continue to shout, "I'm right, I'm right, I'm right; you're wrong, you're wrong, you're wrong," even if it doesn't make any sense.
but my point was there are lots of legitimate reasons to question Bitcoin because of the obfuscation of its source (therefore nullifying his example).
This person doesn't understand bitcoin. Bitcoin is open-source transparent mathematics. There is no obfuscation, because the source is irrelevant. That's one of the most fundamental differences between Bitcoin and fiat! This is basic whitepaper shit - Bitcoin 101 - how the fuck could you be a legendary member and not know this? Did you buy that account? What a disgrace. That tears it man, you're going back on the ignore list for awhile.Newtonian physics would have gotten us to the moon whether or not we knew who Newton was. Just as Bitcoin will get us to the moon whether or not we ever find out who Satoshi Nakamoto is/was.
There you go again adopting my argument again as if it is your own then pretending I disagree with it. Your "debating skills" are pathetic and rely on a series of parlor tricks and emotional appeals.
but my point was there are lots of legitimate reasons to question Bitcoin because of the obfuscation of its source (therefore nullifying his example).
This person doesn't understand bitcoin. Bitcoin is open-source transparent mathematics. There is no obfuscation, because the source is irrelevant. That's one of the most fundamental differences between Bitcoin and fiat! This is basic whitepaper shit - Bitcoin 101 - how the fuck could you be a legendary member and not know this? Did you buy that account? What a disgrace. That tears it man, you're going back on the ignore list for awhile.
Newtonian physics would have gotten us to the moon whether or not we knew who Newton was. Just as Bitcoin will get us to the moon whether or not we ever find out who Satoshi Nakamoto is/was.
A lot of people question the motives and origin of Bitcoin (and rightfully so). No one knows for a fact the true intent of the creation of Bitcoin because its source is obfuscated. For all we know we are using the next one world currency and playing right into the hands of the elite trying to create a cashless society.
You are the fool for believing for a second that there are no ulterior motives behind Bitcoin just because it has many beneficial properties. Then you go around telling yourself and others that you know, ever widening the sphere of ignorance of the general public while giving them a superior progressive illusion to grasp on to.
You are the fool for believing for a second that there are no ulterior motives behind Bitcoin just because it has many beneficial properties. Then you go around telling yourself and others that you know, ever widening the sphere of ignorance of the general public while giving them a superior progressive illusion to grasp on to.
Don't forget that the US Government can (and has) printed money whenever they want to. They could use said money to buy Bitcoin, and then wreck havoc with it, either inflating the price, or selling a lot for a cheap price....
My point would have included the government creating bitcoin because they know they can use the printed cash to crash whenever they want to. The end result could lead them to bringing in the one world money after they themselves crashed cryptos.
A lot of people question the motives and origin of Bitcoin (and rightfully so). No one knows for a fact the true intent of the creation of Bitcoin because its source is obfuscated. For all we know we are using the next one world currency and playing right into the hands of the elite trying to create a cashless society.
You are the fool for believing for a second that there are no ulterior motives behind Bitcoin just because it has many beneficial properties. Then you go around telling yourself and others that you know, ever widening the sphere of ignorance of the general public while giving them a superior progressive illusion to grasp on to.
You are the fool for believing for a second that there are no ulterior motives behind Bitcoin just because it has many beneficial properties. Then you go around telling yourself and others that you know, ever widening the sphere of ignorance of the general public while giving them a superior progressive illusion to grasp on to.
Don't forget that the US Government can (and has) printed money whenever they want to. They could use said money to buy Bitcoin, and then wreck havoc with it, either inflating the price, or selling a lot for a cheap price....
A lot of people question the motives and origin of Bitcoin (and rightfully so). No one knows for a fact the true intent of the creation of Bitcoin because its source is obfuscated. For all we know we are using the next one world currency and playing right into the hands of the elite trying to create a cashless society.
You are the fool for believing for a second that there are no ulterior motives behind Bitcoin just because it has many beneficial properties. Then you go around telling yourself and others that you know, ever widening the sphere of ignorance of the general public while giving them a superior progressive illusion to grasp on to.
You are the fool for believing for a second that there are no ulterior motives behind Bitcoin just because it has many beneficial properties. Then you go around telling yourself and others that you know, ever widening the sphere of ignorance of the general public while giving them a superior progressive illusion to grasp on to.
Don't forget that the US Government can (and has) printed money whenever they want to. They could use said money to buy Bitcoin, and then wreck havoc with it, either inflating the price, or selling a lot for a cheap price....
There is no such thing as good or bad information
So deception as a concept doesn't exist in your worldview? You just love taking every viewpoint to its outermost extreme don't you? Do you think this makes you sound like less of an extremist by purposely turning every argument into an extremist one? Extremism is a sign of low intelligence, because it means you are incapable of conceiving of anything that might exist between point A and point B, anything more complicated would not be able to be held in your mind for long or be understood.
I don't care if someone is trying to deceive me IF I KNOW THEY ARE TRYING TO DECEIVE ME, and I know what their end goals are. Just like full of shit politicians do nothing but lie, you can often interpret what the truth is by observing what they don't say, what they try to spin, and what they dance around. No piece of information is irrelevant, no matter how false, because it tells you something about the source at the very least.
Information is only useless if you fail to utilize it.
Information is worse than useless (counter-productive) when it's incorrect and you accept it as correct. The source of the information is almost more important than the information itself
The evidence strongly suggests that Satoshi Nakamoto would disagree.You can not appropriately utilize information if THERE IS NO CLEAR SOURCE.
Bitcoin has no clear source, yet here you are making a fool of yourself.Bitcoin is code, not a scientific study or a political rant. That's like saying if a machine showed up in my driveway that printed money, I would just trust it inherently. That would be pretty dumb. I don't know for sure what the machine does or why it was put there. Does it explode when I turn it on? Did a cop put it there hoping I would just start counterfeiting notes so he could bust me? There are a lot of potentials that anyone except people drifting thru life or following dogma as a true believer question.
Only after long and careful examination can you even begin to decipher any of this (as I have done with Bitcoin over many years). A lot of people question the motives and origin of Bitcoin (and rightfully so). No one knows for a fact the true intent of the creation of Bitcoin because its source is obfuscated. For all we know we are using the next one world currency and playing right into the hands of the elite trying to create a cashless society.
You are the fool for believing for a second that there are no ulterior motives behind Bitcoin just because it has many beneficial properties. Then you go around telling yourself and others that you know, ever widening the sphere of ignorance of the general public while giving them a superior progressive illusion to grasp on to because it feels good.
You can not appropriately utilize information if THERE IS NO CLEAR SOURCE.
Bitcoin has no clear source, yet here you are making a fool of yourself.If you haven't read "The Creature from Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffin, you probably - and the general public for certain - have no clear source about fiat either. Yet everybody uses it.
Yet people go to the doctor to get medicine, more than 99% of which is poison
Anyone who didn't already have this clown on ignore, this is your cue.There is no such thing as good or bad information
So deception as a concept doesn't exist in your worldview? Information is only useless if you fail to utilize it.
Information is worse than useless (counter-productive) when it's incorrect and you accept it as correct. 
The source of the information is almost more important than the information itself
The evidence strongly suggests that Satoshi Nakamoto would disagree.You can not appropriately utilize information if THERE IS NO CLEAR SOURCE.
Bitcoin has no clear source, yet here you are making a fool of yourself.See? Mark Twain and TECHSHARE are right. Information isn't the important thing. The important thing is how people understand and act upon the information that they receive. Too bad many people have an agenda of deceiving other people so that they disseminate information that they almost know other people are going to believe and act on, to their own harm and damage.
Yet people go to the doctor to get medicine, more than 99% of which is poison
Anyone who didn't already have this clowntard on ignore, this is your cue.There is no such thing as good or bad information
So deception as a concept doesn't exist in your worldview? Information is only useless if you fail to utilize it.
Information is worse than useless (counter-productive) when it's incorrect and you accept it as correct. The source of the information is almost more important than the information itself
The evidence strongly suggests that Satoshi Nakamoto would disagree.You can not appropriately utilize information if THERE IS NO CLEAR SOURCE.
Bitcoin has no clear source, yet here you are making a fool of yourself.
in these days tachnolgy is growing very fast people can do everything very easy and fast now they dont need god to help them because of it peoples are taking lots of stress about work and they want to do more and more and when they furstreated with it they want to make his mind calm and the onely thing they know to calm his mind is sex so they prefer sex more then god.
The internet, where everything you read is true!
Not at all. Cyberspace is a battlefield, and there is a war going on for your mind. Corporations pay armies of people to spread lies. One of their favorite lies is that the internet, which is beyond their control, is full of falsehood, while centrally controlled forms of media such as Television and Radio are full of truth. This is a big, fat, lie.The internet isn't just a threat to the corporate status quo, it's the beginning of the end for them, because of people like me.
Alright there Alex Jones. I get it, we are in a Prison Planet (TM).
Corporations as well as other organization do pay armies of people to spread lies, and now most of them work on the internet. I have been dealing with consensus management squads online since you have been crapping your nappies, back when all the sock puppets were manually done and they didn't have fancy scripts to manage them all.
There is no such thing as good or bad information, information is only useless if you fail to utilize it. You can not appropriately utilize information if THERE IS NO CLEAR SOURCE. The source of the information is almost more important than the information itself, because it indicates to you the potential end goals of the entity distributing said information.
You think the internet is uncontrolled? You are out of your mind. Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc., all your favorite social media platforms are censored and are used as tools to collect psychological profiles and political tendencies of all of its users as well as your actual physical social network of friends and associates. In my opinion the internet is still a threat to the status quo, but you are a little behind on the times. The establishment has made some very big strides putting the internet back in its box unfortunately, it is not a done deal by any means.
Are you sure you are giving yourself enough credit? I don't think you are. I think you should praise your sacrifices and globally impacting contributions some more.
a wonderful bleach product, that is being consumed and ingested all over the world, and is healing many from diseases that, at times, even the medical can't touch (or won't).
In this case, if a reader doesn't have personal experience, how does he know if the info is hearsay or not? The evidence in some cases suggests that the Wiki article is truth. However, there are loads of folks, many right in the States, who are claiming healing from a wide assortment of diseases/maladies. Simply reading the Wiki article doesn't give you the answer.
In this case, if a reader doesn't have personal experience, how does he know if the info is hearsay or not? The evidence in some cases suggests that the Wiki article is truth. However, there are loads of folks, many right in the States, who are claiming healing from a wide assortment of diseases/maladies. Simply reading the Wiki article doesn't give you the answer.
I've never drank bleach but I know it's a bad idea
jesus christ
Some people never drank coffee, either.
People naturally know it is a bad idea to ingest poison. Yet people go to the doctor to get medicine, more than 99% of which is poison, designed to elicit a reaction in the body.
Wake up and see that they are hiding the best poison from you, because it is so cheap that they can't make any money on it.
How clueless can some of you folks be!
a wonderful bleach product, that is being consumed and ingested all over the world, and is healing many from diseases that, at times, even the medical can't touch (or won't).
In this case, if a reader doesn't have personal experience, how does he know if the info is hearsay or not? The evidence in some cases suggests that the Wiki article is truth. However, there are loads of folks, many right in the States, who are claiming healing from a wide assortment of diseases/maladies. Simply reading the Wiki article doesn't give you the answer.
In this case, if a reader doesn't have personal experience, how does he know if the info is hearsay or not? The evidence in some cases suggests that the Wiki article is truth. However, there are loads of folks, many right in the States, who are claiming healing from a wide assortment of diseases/maladies. Simply reading the Wiki article doesn't give you the answer.
I've never drank bleach but I know it's a bad idea
jesus christ
The internet, where everything you read is true!
Not at all. Cyberspace is a battlefield, and there is a war going on for your mind. Corporations pay armies of people to spread lies. One of their favorite lies is that the internet, which is beyond their control, is full of falsehood, while centrally controlled forms of media such as Television and Radio are full of truth. This is a big, fat, lie.The internet isn't just a threat to the corporate status quo, it's the beginning of the end for them, because of people like me.
The Internet is NOT FULL of falsehood. It simply has tons of hearsay in it. If you don't know about a particular subject, how can you tell if the hearsay that you are reading on the Internet is the truth or not?
All that TECSHARE is asking is that you provide evidence that the things that you claim are not hearsay.
Wikipedia is a nice starting point to familiarize yourself about something. But since anyone can get into the position of editing Wiki pages, how does anyone know if it is not a troll and a liar doing the editing?
For example. At https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_Mineral_Supplement there is a whole lot of disinformation about a wonderful bleach product, that is being consumed and ingested all over the world, and is healing many from diseases that, at times, even the medical can't touch (or won't).
In this case, if a reader doesn't have personal experience, how does he know if the info is hearsay or not? The evidence in some cases suggests that the Wiki article is truth. However, there are loads of folks, many right in the States, who are claiming healing from a wide assortment of diseases/maladies. Simply reading the Wiki article doesn't give you the answer.
Jim Humble, the MMS bleach cure promoter, says that every time he and his people edit the Wiki article to show their experiences, someone else edits it back to suggest that they are lying. So, until we go elsewhere, the truth is in the experience of the person reading the Wiki article, not in the Wiki article itself.
Jump to: