comment listing type:
Friends O' the Sift
Top New Comedy Videos by Vote
Subscribe
Top 15 Comedy Sifters of All Time
Top 15 Comedy Sifters of the Past Week
10. HenningKO
(121 votes)
12. furrycloud
(105 votes)
13. Darkhand
(95 votes)
15. Psychologic
(88 votes)
VideoSift Links
Anonymous: Let "The Complex" be sold at Amazon
Peter Schiff Schools Mainstream Econohacks on Great Depr.
Ship nearly capsizes on launch
agopo
Angry Korea Man? Automatic Kalishnikov Modernized?
??? Profit is from south park.
Caturday probably started on Something Awful or 4chan
In reply to this comment by agopo:
The avatar..
Your "Abuse power.. ????.. PROFIT!"-comment..
Do you happen to be an AKM-fan, too?!
Hitchens: Christianity is not imposed?
Whether Hitchens is right about Christianity being imposed or not, it still hasn't reached the point where people are Executed (physically speaking) for not believing in it.
350 years ago in both Europe and America, people were executed for heresy, immorality (in the eyes of the clergy), or suspicion of witchcraft. Jews were persecuted often by Christians throughout Europe for over a thousand years before the holocaust. Some large Muslim countries still behave in the manner that Europe did 400 years ago with respect to religious freedom and tolerance (the lack thereof).
Hitchens: Christianity is not imposed?
To say that God offers but does not FORCE would be a more correct statement than suggesting that He offers but does not impose.
Many, many Christians have historically and still do fail to understand this principle. One of the fundamental beliefs of Christianity is free will. Therefore, if they really understood scripture, they would realize that God would never, ever force someone to accept Christianity. He does, however, give commandments. To command and to force are very different things because we each have the choice to obey or disobey. Christians have often committed a very serious error in attempting to remove the God-given free will of people by forcing them into Christianity. I think that the God in which they believe would be extremely displeased with this behavior. Therefore, if Christianity is imposing and forceful, it is the fault and folly of Christians themselves, not Christianity.
I think that the first man was attempting to explain that God does not force (he said "impose" but I don't think that this is what he really meant), and Hitchens responded by talking about the imposing nature of Christians and Christianity, not God himself. Yes, he is right about Christians imposing and forcing Christianity, but he is not right about God doing so. To command and require is not, I believe, to force or impose. We still have the choice.
The threat of eternal torture in HELL is the most gruesome kind of force imaginable. Your entire argument rests upon the tiny consolation that in the biblical myths, God did not make humanity to be perfectly obedient robots.
The meaning of force used by Hitchens is duress, which can only exist relative to the violation of a being's preferences. If a being has no preferences, it cannot be under duress. Perfectly obedient automatons don't have to be forced to obey.
Charlie Rose interviews Stanford Law Prof, Lawrence Lessig
Tame tiger reveals its true nature.
>> ^jwray:
The sensationalized commentary was misleading.
So It can swing a 65 kilo doll around. Big deal. In a one on one fight for survival, a real live human would have a chance, with or without tools. If you can kick a football 70 yards, you can knock out a tiger. The obvious tactic would be to kick the shit out of it before it can even get in range to bite vital areas.
You really should do some research on the tactics a tiger uses to take down it's prey.
Kicking the shit out of it sounds like a great plan, with one small catch. You need to land those kicks, and plenty of them to win. All the while this cat is playing with you like a kitten with a sock. At the point that it gets tired and just jumps at your face, you better be ready to doge like a ninja or die like a chewtoy.
One good kick to the right part of the head could give it a terrible concussion, depending on what sort of shoes you're wearing. As bipedal primates, our kicks are much more agile and long-range than those of quadruped mammals. Tigers rely on stealth and striking from behind because of the ridiculously short range of their main weapon (the teeth). If you see it coming, you have a good chance. Humans are better at long-distance running, too, because we don't overheat as easily. A tiger can sprint faster than a human athlete for only a very short distance. And humans are much better than tigers at climbing trees, or picking up wood from the ground and using it as a weapon (which increases the difference between the tiger's strike range and your strike range). If it tries to pounce from 6 feet away, you have plenty of time to knock it sideways while it is in an unstable posture with only half of its limbs on the ground (its usual prey are quadrupeds whose limbs aren't well oriented to do such a defensive maneuver, and who couldn't turn quickly enough to maintain an orientation facing the tiger).
Ideas Worth Spreading: Hans Rosling's Gapminder
Carl Sagan: The Atom, Infinity, Googol and Googolplex
Carl Sagan: The Chemical Elements
Carl Sagan: The Chemical Elements
Tame tiger reveals its true nature.
So It can swing a 65 kilo doll around. Big deal. In a one on one fight for survival, a real live human would have a chance, with or without tools. If you can kick a football 70 yards, you can knock out a tiger. The obvious tactic would be to kick the shit out of it before it can even get in range to bite vital areas.
Atheist Billboards in Colorado
> http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/4797/answersbillboardnl8.jpg
What a load of bigoted bullshit, to exploit people's fear and ignorance and insinuate the evil presumption that morality consists only in doing the will of a tyrant, whatsoever that will directs.
"If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed." -- Albert Einstein.
Atheist Billboards in Colorado