Tyrphanax

Both hands on the keyboard, Zigs.

I'll put out a depressing album about you! *shakesfist*

Smelt.

Logically, this makes Frink a woman in the medical field.

Whatever.gs sounds like some obscure foreign website.

Anyway, Ender, I wasn't implying religious people are stupid; I know plenty of intelligent people from most of the major religions. I just don't understand why critical, free-thinking people would choose that route when you could go another route and be able to drink tea, too. The British have been drinking it for literally a billion years and they're alright chaps, mostly. It's just such an inconsequential thing to me; I mean, is God really going to be THAT mad at you for having a nice, hot cup of tea on a cold day? If he isn't, then why bother with the rule? If he is, then he sounds like a dick; because who gets mad over a cuppa?

Also: Could you take some tea leaves and chew on them?

It just seems odd to me for someone who is intelligent and critical to stop their line of critical questioning at, "Well, because that's what the book says." How would, say, a by-the-book Christian scientist reconcile their latent desire to know things about the Earth with the proven fact that the Earth is much older then the Bible says? And why would they even want or try to reconcile the two opposite lines of thought when one is obviously wrong? Why would someone deny the proven deliciousness of pork products when, in general, they have caused no spiritual harm to anyone over the centuries just because a book says so for really no reason? Doesn't God have better things to do than worry about who ate pork when he supposedly put it here in the first place? Isn't it kind of an un-God-like dick move (yes, I realize he is famous for dick moves) to do that?

I guess my point here is that tea ain't never hurt nobody. Give Tea A Chance.

*unsubscribes from Sluggo's posts*

CHEESE IT, GUYS! GAFFER'S HERE!

corellian77 said:

darth_ender said:

In response to Frink's inquiry, I'm sure I will take flak for this, but sometimes a person of faith acts on faith, even if they are not sure why.  Sometimes God simply wishes to test our obedience.  Looking at the kosher laws of the Old Testament, God did not mention how much cholesterol or the various parasites you might find in pork.  They simply obeyed because God wanted them to.  "Oh no!  Blind faith!"

More to follow soon...

Reading this made me want to chime in.  I think accepting something "on blind faith" simply because a religion advocates it is the first step down a potentially very dangerous and disturbing path.  When people forgo reason and common sense in the name of their religious beliefs, it opens the door to a whole host of questionable, and possibly terrible, acts.

Granted, abstaining from drinking coffee or tea is an innocuous rule to observe, and one with no societal repercussions.  But the same rationale of following a questionable rule on nothing more than faith could lead someone of another belief system to condemn others (e.g., homosexuals, people of other ethnicities) for no other reason than "our church/mosque/shrine/religious leader/religious text told us to."

Sorry for the rant, but I just find the observance of religious doctrine at the expense of logical thought a bit worrisome due to where it can potentially lead.

Yeah, this is another reason I'll never understand religion. Humans have been granted this pretty awesome brain that's far advanced over any other animal's brain, and yet they'd rather let an old book make their decisions for them.

I understand people don't like to think for themselves and make their own decisions because it's hard and can be scary and gives you a lot of responsibility for your actions and the outcome and whatnot, but damn; if you can't drink tea because a book says you shouldn't for really no reason other than "just because"... I mean, c'mon.

Also, I almost asked what Greeny asked, but thought I'd be a bit more tactful. =P

I don't want no scrubs.

I use an old towel, personally.

Intel or AMD?

CP3S said:

Tyrphanax said:

".bots" or "prac" ekil ,ekoj-ni moc.TO na si ti ,rehtar ;ti rof noitacifisslac tseb eht ton saw "emem" spahreP

!sdrawkcab ynnuf si "PANS OH" esuaceB

 

.oot eb dluohs ti kniht I ,yrroS .eb dluohs noisrev drawrof eht gniyas erew uoy thguoht I .eerga I .ekoj-ni moc.TO daerps ediw a eb ot hguone ynnuf si taht eno eht si ,daerht siht ni sdrawrof PANS HO tub ,daerht rehto yna in sdrawkcab PANS HO gnieB "OH SNAP" !won ti teg I kniht I ,hA

.tou derugif lla taht tog ew dalG !yltcaxE

I don't really care, I just feel as though it's expected.

I had to hum them, but they're totally the same. CRAZY.

IT'S LIKE POETRY!

Every sperm is sacred... <_<

This is getting off topic, though! Let's let Ender have his thread back!

WhatsMyName said:

This is alomost as bad as GL saying Jango Fett wasn't a Mandolorian.

Mandalorian*

But yeah. Lucas has two characters on screen that are connected with the Mandalorians, but aren't actually Mandalorian? What a useless device that is.

This is kind of a big failing of his, actually. He's claimed to be a merchandising genius, but he creates two characters that are visually very interesting and then he goes and kills them off in a movie or two's time.

I suppose that you could argue that it only adds to their mystique (which it obviously does) but then he lacks the conviction to stick with his original intent (which I guess is not very surprising) and then brings them back later on. Even though he's had nothing to do with Boba aside from saying he wouldn't have killed him had he known how popular he'd become. Not that that stopped the EU from going very long after ROTJ before they brought him back.

Granted, I believe Katie did most of the writing/conceptualization behind the Savage Oppress/Asajj Ventress storyline and thus probably shoulders the blame for Maul's return...

Nevertheless, I'm very interested to see how it plays out, but I am sure that those episodes will enter into my canon in the "Infinities" section. =P

I'm kind of shocked that Frink doesn't know of Boba Fett's survival, I gotta say.

I feel as though this is something magical and that I am a part of it.

I look forward eagerly to more news.

Warbler said:

Tyrphanax said:

Christianity.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (King James Version) 

28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

hmm, didn't read those verses before.  

Just about half of the rules in Deuteronomy are pretty whacky.

Christianity.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (King James Version) 

28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

Warbler said:

Tyrphanax said:

 I understand why people choose religion as their security blanket, but I will never understand why they choose religion as their security blanket.

huh?  I do not understand what you are saying here.   Do you or do you not understand why they choose religion as their security blanket?

 

What I was saying was that I understand from a psychological standpoint why people look for answers or purpose or whatever, but I have no idea why people choose lines of thought that also have utterly ridiculous caveats like "no coffee" or "no masturbation" or "you have to marry your rapist" or "no shaving" or any other number of crazy rules that all religions have.

I was just tying to imply such without being too inflammatory. But I guess that's defenestrated now!

Also, I feel this Flash file is appropriate: http://thebest404pageever.com/swf/Mormon_Jesus.swf

It's how I learned everything I know about Mormons.

Midnight_Trooper said:

Hey these are the points that really matter. LOL

Every school child knows;

When something is hard you work it out until you finish the job.

 

lol

Damn. Green is my favourite colour, and I like Christmas better than Halloween, but black and orange just pop. So that. Good one.

White chocolate or Dark chocolate?

Megablocks are the stupid younger brother of Legos.

I just hope Dave does a good job with it. So far he's done good work on the show and handled Lucas' dumb requests well.

What Frink said.