Kuwaiti wants more sex slaves

Forums › Off topic › Kuwaiti wants more sex slaves

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

BDFL
43784 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Subscriber

Reply # 653455 10-Jul-2012 12:06
Interesting how even with all the evidence supporting evolution, there are people who rather believe in a creationism version without any evidence. Mauricio Freitas (Geekzone Admin, Devil's Advocate, my blog, technology disclosure, my tweets, Web Performance Optimization) Geekzone Price comparison \| Amazon Kindle order page \| How to get the best out of Geekzone \| New Zealand IT Jobs \| Geekzone News \| Jinglebugs

Kaos36

710 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 653459 10-Jul-2012 12:17
freitasm: Interesting how even with all the evidence supporting evolution, there are people who rather believe in a creationism version without any evidence. There is evidence its just that you do not understand. Charles Darwin did not want this theories to come out because he said himself they contained errors, besides his theories were not from him but from his grand father not that it matters. Worst Response To A Crisis: From a readers' Q and A column in TV GUIDE: "If we get involved in a nuclear war, would the electromagnetic pulses from exploding bombs damage my videotapes?"

gzt

3202 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

Reply # 653463 10-Jul-2012 12:20
Ok, this is a bit deep for a Wednesday morning, but it's late here and I have a plane to catch tomorrow ; ). She is suggesting that Kuwaiti men marry non-muslim prisoners of war instead of sexually abusing their domestic workers. She is acknowledging widespread sexual use and abuse of domestic servants. This is actually really radical for Kuwait - and there is more going on here than you might think. She is a sensationalist media personality in a conservatively governed and policed society. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/02/world/middleeast/02domestic.html?pagewanted=all think about it, thank me for the lols later.

1080p

987 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 653510 10-Jul-2012 13:23
Kaos36: freitasm: Interesting how even with all the evidence supporting evolution, there are people who rather believe in a creationism version without any evidence. There is evidence its just that you do not understand.? Charles Darwin did not want this theories to come out because he said himself they contained errors, besides his theories were not from him but from his grand father not that it matters. Take a read here and watch all your arguments for Creationism be undone. The article posted by OP is awesome. That woman sounds crazy. Workstation: Intel DH67CL ~ i5-2500 ~ 4GB Corsair RAM (x2) ~ Intel X25-M 80GB SSD Laptop: Dell Inspiron 1564 ~ i5-520M ~ 4.00GB RAM ~ 500GB SATA HDD ~ Win7 Home Premium x64 Common misconceptions.

John2010

532 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 653516 10-Jul-2012 13:55
freitasm: Interesting how even with all the evidence supporting evolution, there are people who rather believe in a creationism version without any evidence. And they then go on to quote selective snippets from Hoyle, completely out of context, as being supportive of their own views. Doing so only demonstrates how little they know about the man (and in the Kaotic one's case, how little they know of the difference between panspermia and evolution) as he was a steady-state adherent (in the face of all evidence whether physical or metaphysical), believed in evolution (he was a Darwinist), and an athiest. For anyone who knows anything at all of Hoyle's life, the concept of his having been a creationist is enough to send one into a kaotic giggling fit .

Regs

10100111001
3177 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 653521 10-Jul-2012 14:09
vinnieg: Kaos36: having said that its been done on both sides of the fence. King Solomon from the bible and the richest King back in that time had 700 wives and 300 concubines. But that was 2000+ yrs ago! Although the bible is almost completely fiction? Maybe in 2000 years people will view Harry Potter as fact? And say that start worshiping a glasses wearing kid, on a broomstick :) why not. there are people that believe L Ron Hubbards stories. Need help implementing Microsoft CRM? Give OA Systems a shout. Winners of CRM Solution of the Year at the 2010 Microsoft NZ Partner Awards

oxnsox

1508 posts

Uber Geek

Reply # 653561 10-Jul-2012 14:54
Kaos36:...snip...The chance of that is 1 in 1 with 40,000 zeros after it. That believing the first cells originated by chance is like believing a tornado could sweep through a junkyard filled with airplane parts and form a Boeing 747. (Fred Hoyle - Astronomer) :) Soo.... I've a better chance of winning Lotto than being created (or born-again). I might just put down my creationist book and pop down the shops for a Big-Wednesday ticket.

NonprayingMantis

3626 posts

Uber Geek

Reply # 653576 10-Jul-2012 15:10
Kaos36: vinnieg: Kaos36: having said that its been done on both sides of the fence. King Solomon from the bible and the richest King back in that time had 700 wives and 300 concubines. But that was 2000+ yrs ago! Although the bible is almost completely fiction? Maybe in 2000 years people will view Harry Potter as fact? And say that start worshiping a glasses wearing kid, on a broomstick :) Each to there own. You know there is proof that Solomon existed so did King David and many other kings, just because they're mention in a book such as the bible doesn't always mean its a fairy story. but i bet you believe that we all came from apes and life was created from a big bang outta know where and from that big bang the basics enzymes of life was created. The chance of that is 1 in 1 with 40,000 zeros after it. That believing the first cells originated by chance is like believing a tornado could sweep through a junkyard filled with airplane parts and form a Boeing 747. (Fred Hoyle - Astronomer) :) On the other hand believing that god had to send himself down to earth to save his own creation from his own wrath by dying on a cross for three days because a talking snake persuaded a rib-woman to eat some fruit makes complete sense.

IntegerIsNumber

804 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 653588 10-Jul-2012 15:34
Yike! Devaluing one being for the sake of her husband enjoyment is totally wrong. I felt sorry for those Kuwaiti's women.

vinnieg

2260 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Reply # 653594 10-Jul-2012 15:37
Kaos36: Each to there own. You know there is proof that Solomon existed so did King David and many other kings, just because they're mention in a book such as the bible doesn't always mean its a fairy story. but i bet you believe that we all came from apes and life was created from a big bang outta know where and from that big bang the basics enzymes of life was created. The chance of that is 1 in 1 with 40,000 zeros after it. That believing the first cells originated by chance is like believing a tornado could sweep through a junkyard filled with airplane parts and form a Boeing 747. (Fred Hoyle - Astronomer) :) I'd take away/add the following: - I think we aren't intelligent enough to know where life exists, or came from - The big bang theory is just that, a theory. Or a poorly devised TV show... - We share the closest 96% of our DNA with chimps, so it's much more likely than we came from chimps, rather than dust. As "Adam" was created from dust by "God". Since dust has no DNA, then there is no way "Adam" can be created from dust. Don't forget a few of Fred Hoyles other quotes though: "I purposely don't want to make God too remote--nothing like the awesome God of the ancient Hebrews--because I don't believe that concept is right, impressive as it may be." "There is no possibility, for example, of the eggs of birds passing safely through the atmosphere from space, so that birds must have arisen by evolution here on the Earth." - Guess that one probably blows out the Scientology theory too! As you said above though, just because we believe in different things, doesn't make us wrong. Because none of us know where we come from, how we exist, or why we exist. And we'll likely never know I have moved across the ditch. Now residing in Melbourne as a VOIP/Video Technical Trainer/Engineer.

Kaos36

710 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 653684 10-Jul-2012 18:31
1080p: Kaos36: freitasm: Interesting how even with all the evidence supporting evolution, there are people who rather believe in a creationism version without any evidence. There is evidence its just that you do not understand.? Charles Darwin did not want this theories to come out because he said himself they contained errors, besides his theories were not from him but from his grand father not that it matters. Take a read here and watch all your arguments for Creationism be undone. The article posted by OP is awesome. That woman sounds crazy. That link leads to rants from atheists. Hahaha, Mate i appreciate your offer but its like if i gave you a link to bible scripture and told you all your aguments for atheism be undone here. No point either ways. Worst Response To A Crisis: From a readers' Q and A column in TV GUIDE: "If we get involved in a nuclear war, would the electromagnetic pulses from exploding bombs damage my videotapes?"

Kaos36

710 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 653692 10-Jul-2012 18:41
vinnieg: Kaos36: Each to there own. You know there is proof that Solomon existed so did King David and many other kings, just because they're mention in a book such as the bible doesn't always mean its a fairy story. but i bet you believe that we all came from apes and life was created from a big bang outta know where and from that big bang the basics enzymes of life was created. The chance of that is 1 in 1 with 40,000 zeros after it. That believing the first cells originated by chance is like believing a tornado could sweep through a junkyard filled with airplane parts and form a Boeing 747. (Fred Hoyle - Astronomer) :) I'd take away/add the following: - I think we aren't intelligent enough to know where life exists, or came from - The big bang theory is just that, a theory. Or a poorly devised TV show... - We share the closest 96% of our DNA with chimps, so it's much more likely than we came from chimps, rather than dust. As "Adam" was created from dust by "God". Since dust has no DNA, then there is no way "Adam" can be created from dust. Don't forget a few of Fred Hoyles other quotes though: "I purposely don't want to make God too remote--nothing like the awesome God of the ancient Hebrews--because I don't believe that concept is right, impressive as it may be." "There is no possibility, for example, of the eggs of birds passing safely through the atmosphere from space, so that birds must have arisen by evolution here on the Earth." - Guess that one probably blows out the Scientology theory too! As you said above though, just because we believe in different things, doesn't make us wrong. Because none of us know where we come from, how we exist, or why we exist. And we'll likely never know quote Since dust has no DNA, then there is no way "Adam" can be created from dust. Human nature clouds our thinking, God is bigger than that. Do you really think the creator would need DNA first to create us? Worst Response To A Crisis: From a readers' Q and A column in TV GUIDE: "If we get involved in a nuclear war, would the electromagnetic pulses from exploding bombs damage my videotapes?"

Dratsab

1392 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 653710 10-Jul-2012 19:13
Where does it say Adam was created from dust? The only references I have ever seen (Genesis 26/27 - examples here and here) say "God said let us create mankind in our image..." I've heard at various times times people referring to "dust" and "basic materials" (which could be DNA) but not actually seen it myself. Having said that I'm not a superstitious person so don't generally bother myself with this, or any other, codified superstition. I do, however, find it quite interesting that in the referenced passages "God" speaks in the plural. EDIT: BTW - this all seems incredibly off-topic... :-) Chuck Norris has abolished the periodic table of elements. The only element he recognises is the element of surprise!

mjb

902 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 653730 10-Jul-2012 20:06
Religion is a crutch for people who can't accept the reality that there is actually no point to life other than to pro-create. Hey, don't get me wrong - it's fine if people to choose to believe in a higher being and whatever else that entails, I think that's just dandy. I just can't stand the ones that feel they must convert you to believe that too. Even worse are the ones that show "pity" as you shut the door telling them you're an atheist. contentsofsignaturemaysettleduringshipping

vinnieg

2260 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Reply # 653750 10-Jul-2012 20:36
Dratsab: Where does it say Adam was created from dust? The only references I have ever seen (Genesis 26/27 - examples here and here) say "God said let us create mankind in our image..." I've heard at various times times people referring to "dust" and "basic materials" (which could be DNA) but not actually seen it myself. Having said that I'm not a superstitious person so don't generally bother myself with this, or any other, codified superstition. I do, however, find it quite interesting that in the referenced passages "God" speaks in the plural. EDIT: BTW - this all seems incredibly off-topic... :-) Corinthians 15:47 The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. There are also several references to the first man being created of the earths dust, and his name being Adam I agree this has gone way off topic :) I was originally a Catholic, baptised, first holy communion, then commitment. But since being pushed a bit more, I've gone completely against it, and all other organised religions I have moved across the ditch. Now residing in Melbourne as a VOIP/Video Technical Trainer/Engineer.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4