[Alloy]

George Bush doesn't care about black people

Kanye West, is dat you?

[Vergo]

Man dont lose your time trying to reason with beasty. You'll never end. He's to closed minded to understand any logic. I'm out of this.

You were never in this to begin with. You didn't have a leg to stand on.

That English though, fuck man.

Hey take easy man. Engels is niet mijn moeder taal. Je bent gwn een klutzak man. Ik hoop dat je kan meer dan een taal spreken hoor. Net als ik kan.

[SmG Battlefire]

Man dont lose your time trying to reason with beasty. You'll never end. He's to closed minded to understand any logic. I'm out of this.

You were never in this to begin with. You didn't have a leg to stand on.

That English though, **** man.

Hey take easy man. Engels is niet mijn moeder taal. Je bent gwn een klutzak man. Ik hoop dat je kan meer dan een taal spreken hoor. Net als ik kan.

English? Nailed it.

[Beasty]

I sort of just stopped posting because upon further consideration, you guys were absolutely right as this whole thread and the topic in general has just been a cluster fuck of retardation and we should have just dropped it.

I don't hate anybody, so if anyone gets that idea, don't. If you've ever had an argument with me before, you know I get like that. I may not agree with you but I still love you guys. <3

[Beasty]

However, I did want to go into one post in particular.

Beasty, brush up on law. I even asked my AP US Government teacher if they have the right to do this and he said yes.

Correction, it depends on your jurisdiction. The legality of descrimiating against LGBT's is a matter of whether or not they are considered a protected group in your area. To everyone else, anti descrimination laws actually do apply in most instances to private sector enterprises as well. The difference here is that a Catholic school hiring a gay teacher may be allowed to descriminate under the protection of the idea of Bona Fide Occupational Qualification (BFOQ).

Oh and the parents are funding their kids education, if that teacher is still there they would take their kids out and probably the school has to shutdown due to no funding. Parents are doing the right thing, they are doing what they believe is best for their kids educationally as well as religiously. They believe in God and they don't believe in homosexuality, get over it.

And this is where the case of BFOQ starts to become muddied. As noted in Diaz v. Pan Am. World Airways, Inc., a lack of customer satisfaction isn't grounds to enact BFOQ, so now the question absolutely does become, "does being gay have an impact on the performance of the teachers occupation; that is can being gay affect his ability to teach?" That is the nature of this argument... given that LGBT is a recognized protected group in the schools area. Though whether or not that is the case may soon become moot, as Obama has been pressed before to sign into law federal recognition of LGBT as a protected group, which has received bipartisan support.

Religion have leeway and your argument about religion will take no effect, they can't prove to you that God can appear before you or he can turn a rock to a tree at this instant, but at the same time they can argue to you that there is no logical proof that God doesn't exist. They say because big bang theory, well then, wtf happens before that. GG m8s people actually believe they are evolved monkeys because 99% of over decillions of our DNAs are similar ---> that's a huge huge huge huge marginal error and other speicies of monkeys are still the same as they were when we were homo sapiens or neanderthals. So it's basically a stalemate and it comes down to what you really believe in and how you see the world and the future.

Holy fucking shit. I don't know what's more suprising, the fact that you bring up the Big Bang and Evolution out of nowhere, or your complete lack of understanding in regards to these topics and the logical fallacies utilized in those common rebuttals.

First of all, the Burden of proof lies on the one making a positive claim- Hitchen's Razor, "That which is asserted without evidence can be dissmissed without evidence". Saying "you can't prove X isn't true!" is not a valid statement.

The Big Bang theory does not even attempt to answer the question of what happened before matter formed, only what happened when it already had. This is the same as how Evolution does not attempt to explain the origin of Life but rather the origin of species, or the natural process of evolution by natural selection, which FYI is one of the most rigorously proven and almost self demonstrable theories in all of science. In case you were wondering, the scientific theiry dealing with the formation of life would be Abiogenesis.

To address another, almost retarded point you made, a) Homo Sapiens Sapiens were never Neanderthal's, neanderthal's were a seperate species of the Homo genus. b) no species can be the "same" as they were millions and millions of years ago, the reproductive process coupled with DNA mutation in the cell replication process ensures that the genetic makeup of any organism or group of organisms are always different. In terms of speciation, a species undergoes speciation (when the genetic variance between two organisms is so great they can no longer breed, they are said to be of a different species) due to environmental pressure. A species not facing heavy environmental pressures in favor of certain traits is likely not to speciate.

This is what you get for trying to get an education in school. It's 2015 m8, you have the universes largest library at your fingertips, don't let someone else tell you what, when, and how to read.

[SmG Battlefire]

Cluster of retardation. Does that include you? Or do you think you are always right and the most closed minded human being ever lived.

[Beasty]

Of course I'm always right. Even when I admit I was wrong, I was right in doing so. People see only what they want to see, and I'd be a fool if I thought I was an exception.

Think about it like this, how could I hold a position on anything if I didn't think that supposition was correct? It's the same for everyone. People know what they see with their own eyes.

But who sees what others see? That's the real question.

[Leaf]

Who sees what others see?
God? If a God exists I suppose.

[SmG Battlefire]

If only closed minds came with closed mouths.

[Beasty]

The question of whether or not God exists is a rediculious. God exists. He exists in every application, every invocation of his name. To he who giveth himself to the supposition of God, God lives in all things. To he who doest not, he simply doesn't. Nothing can be true, only applied. To argue what is true is to argue what is applied to everyone.

Therefore, thou should hate me, as a creature who come to slay your ignorances, and to spread my ideal in false sense of understanding. As you knoweth God, I knoweth Godlessness, and I intend to strip God's love of you. To the believer of God, Satan is quite literally God's adversary. And thus I am the devil. I have claimed no other thing. In fact, I took delight in my role- or doest thou think me a misnomer? Beasty, Satan, Shiver; why had you thought me of these names? Even in title, I am that which embodies cold and darkness; I am nothing save a murderer, wishing to kill your hapiness in name of mine own. But to he who reject the glasses which permit one to see God, I am light.

It most certainly is arrogant, but to live is itself arrogant. To walk the streets knowing your very presence effects the truths of another- to walk about another's house uninvited and to rearrange what rests upon his mantle. But it is a crime we are all guilty of, there is no escaping it, whether you pretend to respect every belief and enforce no ideology upon another, you are still guilty of changing anothers. One does not live inside a vaccum; the fool says to himself that he is not arrogant, but the wise says to himself that there is great importance in his arrogance. Without it, he would be dead.