A Rena vs Anti Debate

[Anti Hacker]

haha, well that's a load of crap. Every man knows women are always right. I often find myself considering my own gender the inferior one.

Women are gaining more and more recognition in society. That is not to say that men and women are the same - they're not. There are differences which cause the two genders to act in different ways. As the male role becomes more and more automated I guess lots of guys decide to be 'macho'.

God is an idea, an idea which does exist but only in the minds of misled men. Religion is the "opium of the people" - Karl Marx.

This means that those who are at the top of society use it to justify their means, and those at the bottom use it to believe in the next life they will be rewarded. Both uses are backwards because both uses promote a state of non-revolution. People remain static.

What with all the pollitical correctness these days, I'd say many women have it easier than men (at least where I love, I can't generalise my experience onto the entire world obviously)

And the only abominations on this planet are those who would kill over an idea. And idea which is false and gives them corrupted powers.

[K_I_R_E_E_K]

Women are gaining more and more recognition in society. That is not to say that men and women are the same - they're not. There are differences which cause the two genders to act in different ways. As the male role becomes more and more automated I guess lots of guys decide to be 'macho'.
.

imagine a football game and the refery is a women, men after doing something wrong even if they get the penaly like a red card they will chose the words wisely in order not to hurt the women......

and why is nomercy so mean.....

[Anti Hacker]

imagine a footballgame

There's your first problem, football sucks! but yes I see your point.

[Rena]

Men and women will never be at the exact same level, differences, albeit minor ones, are always shown no matter what it is you choose to look at. In the same vein though, I don't think the whole idea of feminism helps the matter very much.

Macho guys are just stupid. It's not really a good characteristic to have these days. Just because you're big enough to beat the crapola out of somebody, doesn't mean you're instantly desirable to the fairer sex. It's more that if you're able to pick fights, and do so often, it makes it less likely you'll be coming home to dinner with the wife and kids, and more likely the wife and kids will be visiting you in the hospital watching you drink beef through a straw.

God is less of an idea, and more of something like a forced system. Parents tend to throw religion upon their children at an early age, and that is what they shall believe, as they are young and know no better. Unfortunately this train of thought filters through them and into their children, and the children after that, and carries on. Religious thoughts of that format are as much of a disease as the common cold, except these diseases cannot be gotten rid of without a hell of a lot of effort.

People don't remain static as such. They move, but they move in cycles, so they always return to the original position. You'll notice that if you try to discuss theology with somebody who does not share your views, they will usually push and push their opinions upon you, insisting they are correct, while you are not, and dismissing your views with things sometimes as weak as 'That's not what the Bible says'.

Killing over an idea is not always an abomination. It can sometimes save lives, but that does not happen often. Usually it's just a poor man's crusade against something they find unsightly and wish to remove from their sight. However, they find it impossible to simply turn away an cast their eyes from that which sickens them. No, they feel the need to assault the thing they hate, simply because it is different.

[Anti Hacker]

Killing to save lives is a false statement. If no one killed, no one would need ultimate saving in that way.

Systems are ideas, just ones which control people or other elements

Cycles are arguably static. They only appear to have motion because we exist within 'linear time'.

[Rena]

No matter how many times people try to deny it, a cycle is always never-ending. A controlling system, however, is sometimes made in the interests of the foolish masses. However, since they themselves do not know truly what they want, the system will not hold for long. Killing to save lives ... Almost like shooting yourself to prevent your suicide.

[Anti Hacker]

Good - see now we're refining the argument we are building.

Things which never end can be static, and contrary to what you have said cycles end. All the time. You can run a cycle a finite number of times - it is possible.

Controlling systems can sometimes endure because people don't know what they want.

You always know when authority is afraid because it lets murdurers roam the streets killing heretics whilst people who simply have "alternative" ideas are executed.

No regime can last, because regimes are weak to the type of revolution which caused them to come to power in the first place.

People only do 'something' when the pain of doing nothing out-weighs the pain of action. So never fear, never feel society is on a dwonward trend. Once that line is crossed as it always will be - people will act.

[Rena]

Unfortunately, it will always be a reaction, as opposed to taking initiative.

Yes, cycles can end, but on a larger scale you may see similarities which mean the cycle has not so much ended, as temporarily paused itself.

Controlling systems can sometimes endure, but if the people do not know what it is they want, then the system can easily fall victim to that. Indecisiveness can kill off a well-written system easily.

Regimes, like most governmental powers, rely primarily on the people. Whether it be by scare tactics, shock tactics, or any other form, it is imperitive they keep the masses content, because an angry mob will bring the downfall of even the most well-trained soldiers in the world, as the mob has an advantage the soldiers can never grasp.

They have something they believe in fervently, and that is what they fight for.

[Anti Hacker]

In which case maybe even things which appear not to be cycles in any way - may be part of larger cycles? But since this view does not seem grounded on anything I think it's safe to assume that some cycles do end.

If a system is built on what the people want and they 'control' themselves, that can endure for a very long time. However, in a sense that is not even control.

*yawn* I think we're almost done here. Pleasant debating with ye, even though ostensibly we are arguing the very same points.

[Rena]

It's been a lot of fun. I haven't found anyone I've been able to actively hold a civilized debate with for a long time, that didn't end in 'ur wrong lol'.