Liberalistic philosphies

I have seen liberalist scientists make fools of themselves time and time again.

1.I have herd them say that one animal will mimic another animal in order to fool a predidtor. They went on to say that it was nature to lie.

2.I have herd them say that we are just mamals, and a buck will mate with any doe of breeding age. This is reasoning for playerism??? Is this reasoning to legally accept poligamy???

3.I have herd them say that the only thing wrong with sleeping with family members is getting them pregnant. So there is nothing wrong with you if you cannot find love outside of the family???

Why are they so deluted in their thinking? It’s the idea that ,“If it makes you happy then do it. As long as it doesn’t hurt others.” Then this proposes the idea that, “if one person can do it, then it proves it’s normal, and anyone can do it.” So by their logic, a player that needs several women at any given time to keep him happy, has found happiness. And ignore the fact that it takes several women to fill the void of the love of one woman. What about the fact that sex outside of love is only limited by what you are willing to try. For sexual lusts is 100% mental, and that is why people can have fetishes of shoes and other inanimate objects. So the liberalist reply to this is we need to keep a supply of people your own age to limit lusts to what is physically available. Otherwize liberalists would be all over the idea that a man can raise a boy and give him a marital relationship at the same time. We don’t even want to bring in the fact that, people that are attracted to extreamly younger people, do so because they can imagine them as they want. They are attracted to things about the younger, but don’t really love them. Why can’t we admit this fact? Because it cannot be proven. But it can be proven that since sex is 100% mental, that a child can learn to like sex with an adult. So we have a bias system of brainwashing according to the facts we are willing to allow people to look at. Why isn’t this extreamity of child pron going to happen??? Because of preconcieved social standards created by religious fanatics.

If I can show one case that defys psychological beliefs, then I proved this belief wrong. And proved that there is deeper reasoning to the cause and affect against social standards.

The idea is that homosexuality is caused by the body. That means people are born with physical receptors toward the same sex. These recpetors have nothing to do with pharamones or estrogine or testosterone, because this has been proven to be the same in homosexuals and straits. The complexity of the brain cannot be caused by any one gene, so we cannot find one gene that is predominatly homosexual. Yet we can find the obesity gene and anorexia gene and a gene that makes people prone to adrinaline or anger. Yet it’s never been found that there is a homosexual gene. So the liberalist stance is to proclaim homosexuality trumps religious beliefs, even though there is no proof. Yet any fact about God is mere propaganda. Did you know it’s been proven that couples that pray together, statistcally have more intamate relationships. Yet this has no bearing to show that religion works??? I guess this is why I consider liberalists scum when debating them. I guess this is why satanism and liberalism share most all the same beliefs.

A fact… One estrogine + one estrogine equals 2 times the estrogine in a relationship. One estrogin + one testosterone equals out for the most part. An obvious fact that holds no value in our scientific comunity. Obviously this country is full of ases who only see what suits their needs.

Thats why satanic liberalists will say that people only do good toward others because of the selfish benifit of making them feel like they did something. Why else would people only be willing to throw money at the situation and not do something about it. They choose to belittle acts of kindness in order to not worry about it. They want people to think self centardness is the way of life.

If they have matter and anti matter that if combined would equal zero.

also…Space and time are a side effect of matter. Saying that matter effects or causes the exsistance of space and time. also saying that without matter there would be no space and time.

Then we see that the human exsistance is so far advanced then any other species, that the soul must be what makes us so far advanced.

We start to see that the human body might be a conditioned capsle for reading the soul. We actual do use 100% of our brain as a reciever. That the mere idea of the soul is proof of the soul,… for an organic robot wouldn’t have any need to dream up such abstract ideas from reality. That our artistic perception of life is so far abstract to the math of chemical reactions, that this abstract effect on reality is because of a hidden factor that trumps most all of the brain.

That the human soul is neither male nor female. Our bodies are conditioned toward certain aspects of life that plays a role toward each other. That marital love allows us to see beyond our bodies, and into the soul. That maybe life was created for just this purpose.

Your disagreeing morally with science…

And you’re pulling random theories out of the air without saying who, specifically made them. And you have a considerable amount of typos. Don’t expect too many responses.

anyway…

Basically, you think that you, with your superdeeduper knowledge-o-meter can tell someone else what is right and wrong. You’re trying to morally challenge science. And your thing about the soul is just stupid. You didn’t explain why an “organic robot” couldn’t think abstractly. Even if there was a soul, it would just be a part of the mind. And if someone thinks they like something, they do. They may not like it for “legitimate” reasons, but they do.

WHAT! MY SWEET ZOMBIE JESUS… Phil27of79 has said something that actually makes sense, “…people that are attracted to extremely younger people, do so because they can imagine them as they want.” We are truly living in the end times. Well thank the undead baby of God; he didn’t make sense with the rest of his post. So…

That’s not correct. Just because one can do an action does not make it normal. Before I go any further the definition of normal has to be defined, so let’s just assume it means the average of a given group. If you are take America as our group and masturbating into shoes as our behavior I think we can safely say that that action isn’t normal to the average American. But that’s all I am willing to say, I’m not going to presume the act of dumping your load into a nice pair of Sketchers is morally wrong. Why? Well because I agree with the claim you mentioned. It is known as John Stuart Mill’s Harm Principle, “The only part of the conduct of anyone, for which he is answerable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his body and mind, the individual is sovereign.” I await anxiously to hear your argument against this proposition.

Next…

Nope that’s not correct, because you are talking about beliefs. For example I could prove everything you’ve said in this post wrong and you would still hold your NewAge Christian beliefs. I imagine you meant to say psychological theory or hypothesis. This is true to an extent, but because your dealing with “objective” subjects you would be required to submit research data.

This is a simplification… What you are talking about is most likely an obesity phenotype. A phenotype is determined by multiple genes and influenced by environmental factors.

What!?

Science as a whole deduces that something occuring in nature is natural. It makes no moral or ethical claims whatsoever. Only individuals, and dumb ones at that, can deduce that if science observes, for example, ‘humans are mammals’ it means science somehow endorses polygomy.

Another homophobe strikes.

Do you realize that Julius Caesar was known as every man’s wife and every woman’s husband. Also, many gays have made huge contributions to humanity and to many democratic war efforts. Geez, I keep forgetting the guy’s name who broke the Nazi Enigma Code. He eventually comitted suicide because of the laws against homosexuality in the UK. A loss to humanity.

Also, most of these claims are not valid. Much research is being done regarding the possible causes of homosexuality. Think for a minute, who really would want to be homosexual and deal with the bigotry they face. Most want to fit in, but simply are not attracted to members of the opposite sex.

Now, I will be accused of being a liberal ass.

By the time Turing killed himself he’d already helped us win the war and developed the logic that led to the computer being developed, so I wouldn’t agree that his death was a loss, but I take your general point…

“Do you realize that Julius Caesar was known as every man’s wife and every woman’s husband.”

Yeah, that sounds good!

He helped us win the war and killed himself as he was a gay social outcast. I consider this a great loss to humanity.

Chuckle, this is a direct first person source of the man. I was not being clever.

My point was moreso that he’ll be remembered (and is) for his accomplishments, he made something of his life despite the problems of his sexuality and to me I see his life as successful and a contribution. I suppose we’re talking about different things…

It sounds as though you would wish to put all liberalists in one column. when there are many different columns of liberals. It compares tosaying that all christians are Catholic or all Republicans are hard core conservatives. It simply does not wash that way. You are taking an extremists view it tends to close ones mind to different views.

Is it wrong that I normally don’t read replies? They are usally dribble taking thought out of content because I didn’t say it with a lawyered mind. Their lack of understanding is because they don’t really want to understand. So I’ll rehash in order to further capture the idea I wish to portray…

Perception of the facts is up to the reader. Perception of life is up to the soul. Physical perception of life enters first. A wacked brain equals a wacked perception of life. Yet a wacked soul equals a twisted perception of life through a normal brain.

The fact is anything is possiable. A soul can even be trained to enjoy killing. The brain washing technick is cause and effect. Teaching people to look at half the facts in order to only see the good in killing. Just like this people are taught by a twisted society to enjoy promiscuity. They have a caloused soul and need more to replace the love of a single spouce. The soul can be saticfied with love and no sex. But the mind of a player needs sex in order to want to deal with the opposite sex. They are in fact mentally homosexual. The only time they talk to the opposite sex is with a sadisticlly learned set of actions that works in gettiung the woman to bed. After that the only stimulation they get from the opposite sex is felt in a selfish mannor. It reminds me of the dogs feeding off the dogs. Yet this is just philosphy leaned from studding why God is right. A different angle of attack that gives me a more unique perspective.

Did you know that someone who views sex as an expression of love will be able to look at the most beautiful person, and not think about them sexually??? This is because they realize they don’t love this person, and the sex isn’t as fullfilling as sex with someone they have built a spiritual connection to. Yet sex out of love is only limited by what you are willing to try. These social standards we have now are widdled away from a very christian perspective. Yet without religion, their would be moral anarchey.

Why do I see what I see? Why does this give you the mentality to think I’m a nut? The answer to both questions is very simular. My IQ isn’t the answer. My mental stability isn’t the answer. It’s an understanding that God is real because I have felt God. For you to say God isn’t real is to say that I am crazy. Only one of us is right. I assume that I’m more right then you.

Did you know that liberalism will set up a police state? Republicans hold more to the ideas of our constitution. Hence they are called conservatives. But liberalists and democrates have gone as far as to try and illegalize bullets. We can own guns but can’t shoot them??? Well I see we have a problem, but this isn’t a gun problem but a drug problem. I’ll bet that 90% of violent crimes are commited by alcaholics and drug addicts. Now G Britten is trying to illegalize knives with points… That’s what we call putting a band aid on the problem, and quite ignorring it. As for republicans, this issue relys more on the free will issue that God proclaimed. We have to freely choose to follow God,… and in the same instance goodness. This is the only way to a good society. All I can do is educate people on the truth. After all they educate people on lies.

Now when society reaches a point that they openly condemn Christians. Then I bet the armagedon will start. As of right now, we just ignore any facts that sound religious, and facts that are anti-religious are merely science. a half assed science that creates facts off of the facts we are allowed to admit.

It’s amazing that teaching one estrogine + one estrogine equals biasness toward estrogine is a sure fire way to get a law suit. Yet it’s not proven either way. So I guess the game really is condemn the christians and call all others eantrapanures.

imagine,… all they do is widdle away christian beliefs,… all for the added benifit of psychics and scientific blunders in the name of figureing it out (like how they’d use DNA recombination to help make a perfect society). This will make a better society. Yet with the moral anarchey they provide,… a police state is needed to keep people in check.

Wow. Harsh.

Do you know how pathetic liberalists tend to be? I can already predict their respoces to my post.

Here’s the first… But what about the patriot act creating a police state??? Did you really think a president is going to cause grounds for a police state with forien affairs??? No this is to protect us from foreiners. Now think about this instead of jumping on the paranoia bandwagon. How would you do the patriot act??? It’s very simple… You allow the police more leway in getting evidence against people suspected in crimes against national security. Yet they still have to have proof of the crimes. The first retort by a liberalist is that this gives us power to fabricate evidence. Well,… isn’t it just as easy now? Especially with the power the people that use the patriot act already had.

Ya want to know what’s funny? Get on the mailing list for the republicans and democrates. It’s not hard,… just do it by e-mail. You’ll see what side of our political spectrum lives in paranoia, and wants people to draw negative conclusions. Since we liberalistically eliminated ethics in polotics, the only fact we teach about trash talking is to say that it works. We don’t want to understand how it makes more and more people dislike all poloticians. That would take the common sence of basic morals to understand this.

what about liberalistic movements around the globe. They often use tactics to brainwash children with limiting perspective toward what they teach in school. They even when as far as to make it illegal for christians to speak their mind in canada,… for you cannot say anything anti-homosexual in public in canada.

What about america where they limit perspective to a religious void in school. So anything that’s anti-religious is good. And thought toward proving religious values is stifled and beat down.

Just because liberalists don’t want to get organized on any realistic front, doesn’t mean they cannot be called out for idiotic claims. Did you know one of the most effective way to get people for abortion is saying the child is better off dead because their is bad parents out there. Well how are these parents going to become better parents if you allow them to hide from the problem preaching your perfect just the way you are,… you don’t have to try to be a better person.

liberalists have to blame somebody for their problems. So they blame christians. Let me hear one of their half-baked ideas of how they blame christians for the divorce rate,… and how this justifies extra-marital relationships. Let me hear how christians cause homosexuals to act like the opposite sex with their strict gender roles. (like estrogine and tesosterone play absolutly no role in causeing someone to act straight). Let me hear how liberalists blame christians for war. If there is something wrong in society there are two reasons why,… God knows everything and wants it to be this way,… and christians have had too much of a monopolizing control on the evolution of society.

Did you know the most effective tool homosexuals have to gaining acceptance is getting men to realise that if they love seeing two women together, they better accept gay males too. Yet what do you love better, one dollar or two. Well if you marry two women, you’ll see how the man will overcompensate by limiting the interaction with two women. Obviously their agenda is to get people to live in a fatacy about the possiabilities, and not focus on established facts promoting religion. Like how they assume everyone who listens to God is halucanating because their is no established facts to make us believe in God. And the paranoia of disproving every case of miricles lives in only stating possiablilities and not the facts.

phil, you and your 78 friends deeply amuses and saddens me; every word you speak is a tragicomedy in its own right.

bab·ble

v. tr.
To utter rapidly and indistinctly.
To blurt out impulsively; disclose without careful consideration.