First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Testy Subjects
6203 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 2/3/08
205 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / Canada.
Offline
Posted 2/3/08

tobydiah wrote:


PandaOrgii wrote:


tobydiah wrote:

I forget the name of the book I read since I've read way too many books. Anyway, they have this word called "grocking". It's to be or experience someone. It's the ultimate sign of intimacy, respect, and remembrance to someone that dies. A close friend or loved one eats a part of them to take in parts of their body. Basically their cells, memories, soul, etc. They will live on in you when you grock them. This is a bit weird but I wouldn't mind if my best friend grocked a piece of me after I died. Not my wife and children though. It just feels too weird.

There's a famous Japanese psychopath who murdered and ate a female student he had a crush on while he was studying overseas. (I think in Denmark) After they caught him, they tried him as insane and transferred him to Japan since he was a Japanese citizen. For some reason, paperwork doesn't match up between the two countries with some policies so they had to let him go. So there is a Japanese murderer/cannibal who lives in Japan. And he is a semi-celebrity. He's even been in porn flicks because of his fame.


So I'm assuming he pleaded guilty on the account that he's tried as insane?

That's fucked up. Have to love the Japanese. ~


Yea. He plead guilty by insanity. He couldn't really get out of it. Cops got a warrant to his place and found her body or what was remaining in a freezer. I forget exactly but he was cooking pieces of her up each day like steak for meals. Some white chick interviewed him in the streets of Japan and she asked him if the thought of eating her ran through his mind. He said that he was thinking of what she tasted like and wanted to. So yea... justice has been served?


That's so fucking stupid. That would have not been tolerated in North America.

I love the 'justice has been served-' Pun... ~
Posted 2/3/08

Runshushu wrote:

lol w/e this is going nowhere and it's funny how a no body is trying to act taugh on the internet so have fun talking with yourself


just stop replying back to her. then it'll stop
950 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / San Antonio, Texas
Offline
Posted 2/3/08

PandaOrgii wrote:


tobydiah wrote:


PandaOrgii wrote:


tobydiah wrote:

I forget the name of the book I read since I've read way too many books. Anyway, they have this word called "grocking". It's to be or experience someone. It's the ultimate sign of intimacy, respect, and remembrance to someone that dies. A close friend or loved one eats a part of them to take in parts of their body. Basically their cells, memories, soul, etc. They will live on in you when you grock them. This is a bit weird but I wouldn't mind if my best friend grocked a piece of me after I died. Not my wife and children though. It just feels too weird.

There's a famous Japanese psychopath who murdered and ate a female student he had a crush on while he was studying overseas. (I think in Denmark) After they caught him, they tried him as insane and transferred him to Japan since he was a Japanese citizen. For some reason, paperwork doesn't match up between the two countries with some policies so they had to let him go. So there is a Japanese murderer/cannibal who lives in Japan. And he is a semi-celebrity. He's even been in porn flicks because of his fame.


So I'm assuming he pleaded guilty on the account that he's tried as insane?

That's fucked up. Have to love the Japanese. ~


Yea. He plead guilty by insanity. He couldn't really get out of it. Cops got a warrant to his place and found her body or what was remaining in a freezer. I forget exactly but he was cooking pieces of her up each day like steak for meals. Some white chick interviewed him in the streets of Japan and she asked him if the thought of eating her ran through his mind. He said that he was thinking of what she tasted like and wanted to. So yea... justice has been served?


That's so fucking stupid. That would have not been tolerated in North America.

I love the 'justice has been served-' Pun... ~


I disagree.... There was a man in Houston who punched his baby daughter in the crotch, threw her in the freezer for a set amount of time and decided to throw her in the microwave. He blamed it on the Devil and pleaded insanity... Guess what? He's not in jail , hes in the looney bin. People can get away with many things in American by saying they were taken over by some sort of Devil or pleading insanity, much like any other place.
7716 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
77 / M / Florida, US
Offline
Posted 2/3/08

notabigdeal wrote:



So, who won?
205 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / Canada.
Offline
Posted 2/3/08

Tsukiyomi2021 wrote:


PandaOrgii wrote:


tobydiah wrote:


PandaOrgii wrote:


tobydiah wrote:

I forget the name of the book I read since I've read way too many books. Anyway, they have this word called "grocking". It's to be or experience someone. It's the ultimate sign of intimacy, respect, and remembrance to someone that dies. A close friend or loved one eats a part of them to take in parts of their body. Basically their cells, memories, soul, etc. They will live on in you when you grock them. This is a bit weird but I wouldn't mind if my best friend grocked a piece of me after I died. Not my wife and children though. It just feels too weird.

There's a famous Japanese psychopath who murdered and ate a female student he had a crush on while he was studying overseas. (I think in Denmark) After they caught him, they tried him as insane and transferred him to Japan since he was a Japanese citizen. For some reason, paperwork doesn't match up between the two countries with some policies so they had to let him go. So there is a Japanese murderer/cannibal who lives in Japan. And he is a semi-celebrity. He's even been in porn flicks because of his fame.


So I'm assuming he pleaded guilty on the account that he's tried as insane?

That's fucked up. Have to love the Japanese. ~


Yea. He plead guilty by insanity. He couldn't really get out of it. Cops got a warrant to his place and found her body or what was remaining in a freezer. I forget exactly but he was cooking pieces of her up each day like steak for meals. Some white chick interviewed him in the streets of Japan and she asked him if the thought of eating her ran through his mind. He said that he was thinking of what she tasted like and wanted to. So yea... justice has been served?


That's so fucking stupid. That would have not been tolerated in North America.

I love the 'justice has been served-' Pun... ~


I disagree.... There was a man in Houston who punched his baby daughter in the crotch, threw her in the freezer for a set amount of time and decided to throw her in the microwave. He blamed it on the Devil and pleaded insanity... Guess what? He's not in jail , hes in the looney bin. People can get away with many things in American by saying they were taken over by some sort of Devil or pleading insanity, much like any other place.


At least HE was actually put into the looney bin. The Japanese dude was busy signing autographs and being interviewed.

Regardless, that's sick. I think they should toughen their laws on pleeing for mental insanity in a murder trial. ~
6203 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 2/3/08

tobydiah wrote:


notabigdeal wrote:



So, who won?


The peoples declare n_n303 the winnar, but you may want to reskim through the thread and think otherwise.

For the sake of Contribution, I hate the fact that most people bout theological ideals in the matters of politics, economy, common affairs, and social justice and then try to impose said beliefs in the nonbeleivers. One of the more common examples is bring Catholicism is such arguements Take for example, politics: "Oh hey the government is wrong and corrupt, because God says that we're supposed fair with the world, shouldn't we be helping Country X, and not trade with Country Y because Country X is an ally too and we shouldn't avoid them just because Country Y provides more benefits" Well the first rule of thumb in politics is that it IS corrupt and WILL remain corrupt, theres no stopping it and there sure as hell is no way of changing it. Be glad that the government of your country tries to provide you in what way they can, and that you're not in a position that is prone to mortality. Economics wise: "Hey why not dissolve all means of social class? After all, aren't all humans equal in the eyes of God?" You don't want a social class? Go live in a communistic country. See how easy it is to be equal amongst others and how much you won't like it. We try and be fair in economics by giving donations when and where we can, its helpful enough too anyway. Common affairs: "Hey I just read this precept of the Bible the other day, and it says homosexuality is wrong. Why are you still supporting it if God says its wrong?" Well, if you delved more deeply in Christianity, God also entitled everyone with free will, and you have no right to change what they believe. Last but not least social justice:"You have no right to punish and kill a murderer. God is the only true judge and those murderers are entitled to their rights as well" You want murderers to live? people who are derived of all good conscience and are very prone to destroying you and your family? Why not ask the justice department to make a complete halt in capital punishment and release all the prisoners so that all hell can break loose just because "they were entitled to their rights". Through this you would also suppose that you want God to be the one true ruler in government. So you wouldn't want a separation of Church and state? See how far that ideal would push forth without being the subject of total corruption, descrimination and greed. Its like asking for a modern day crusade.

Its a very brief draft of my biased bullshit, and I'll probably revise it when I can to make it seem more equal and fairly opinionated, but Goddamn its 2:00 am. I just wanted to make a long shit short-- Church=/=state. Bringing religion into governmental issues is just asking for quick rebuttal and rejection, at least imo. I'm glad you're a proud believer of Christianity or any other religion, but don't go shoving morals down everyones throats, because you won't know if they conform to a said religion or not.
7716 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
77 / M / Florida, US
Offline
Posted 2/3/08

notabigdeal wrote:

The peoples declare n_n303 the winnar, but you may want to reskim through the thread and think otherwise.

For the sake of Contribution, I hate the fact that most people bout theological ideals in the matters of politics, economy, common affairs, and social justice and then try to impose said beliefs in the nonbeleivers. One of the more common examples is bring Catholicism is such arguements Take for example, politics: "Oh hey the government is wrong and corrupt, because God says that we're supposed fair with the world, shouldn't we be helping Country X, and not trade with Country Y because Country X is an ally too and we shouldn't avoid them just because Country Y provides more benefits" Well the first rule of thumb in politics is that it IS corrupt and WILL remain corrupt, theres no stopping it and there sure as hell is no way of changing it. Be glad that the government of your country tries to provide you in what way they can, and that you're not in a position that is prone to mortality. Economics wise: "Hey why not dissolve all means of social class? After all, aren't all humans equal in the eyes of God?" You don't want a social class? Go live in a communistic country. See how easy it is to be equal amongst others and how much you won't like it. We try and be fair in economics by giving donations when and where we can, its helpful enough too anyway. Common affairs: "Hey I just read this precept of the Bible the other day, and it says homosexuality is wrong. Why are you still supporting it if God says its wrong?" Well, if you delved more deeply in Christianity, God also entitled everyone with free will, and you have no right to change what they believe. Last but not least social justice:"You have no right to punish and kill a murderer. God is the only true judge and those murderers are entitled to their rights as well" You want murderers to live? people who are derived of all good conscience and are very prone to destroying you and your family? Why not ask the justice department to make a complete halt in capital punishment and release all the prisoners so that all hell can break loose just because "they were entitled to their rights". Through this you would also suppose that you want God to be the one true ruler in government. So you wouldn't want a separation of Church and state? See how far that ideal would push forth without being the subject of total corruption, descrimination and greed. Its like asking for a modern day crusade.

Its a very brief draft of my biased bullshit, and I'll probably revise it when I can to make it seem more equal and fairly opinionated, but Goddamn its 2:00 am. I just wanted to make a long shit short-- Church=/=state. Bringing religion into governmental issues is just asking for quick rebuttal and rejection, at least imo. I'm glad you're a proud believer of Christianity or any other religion, but don't go shoving morals down everyones throats, because you won't know if they conform to a said religion or not.


Keep this in mind that forums and discussion tools are made for expressing your thoughts, opinions, as well as to engage debate/differences. I can't disprove your ideas since we all have our own ideas on everything. But I do think it's incorrect or illogical to not think it right for the people to argue some issues. You mentioned that you don't like the fact that some people mention or suggest ideas that are very illogical in your view. You can completely disagree with their belief or argument. But this being a discussion thread, I don't think it's right to not want or keep anyone from expressing their views. Having no religious affiliation, I understand that it's annoying to debate a topic through or other means when someone else is supporting their arguments with religion and faith. However, isn't that considered a form of believing something? Just the way we believe in science, philosophy, history, math etc. You don't have to engage a person with a religious support unless you really want to and look for information in their bible to debate it. Or if you find convincing arguments with what they said. If not, another religious person can argue their viewpoint with their shared religious beliefs. As long as someone forms a serious comment, I'll respect it to some degree regardless of how stupid it might seem to me. I mean... forum threads aren't made for non-religious people. It's made for everyone so that we can get a wide variety of answers.
682 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / F / wishfully JAPAN
Offline
Posted 2/3/08

PandaOrgii wrote:


Tsukiyomi2021 wrote:


PandaOrgii wrote:


tobydiah wrote:


PandaOrgii wrote:


tobydiah wrote:

I forget the name of the book I read since I've read way too many books. Anyway, they have this word called "grocking". It's to be or experience someone. It's the ultimate sign of intimacy, respect, and remembrance to someone that dies. A close friend or loved one eats a part of them to take in parts of their body. Basically their cells, memories, soul, etc. They will live on in you when you grock them. This is a bit weird but I wouldn't mind if my best friend grocked a piece of me after I died. Not my wife and children though. It just feels too weird.

There's a famous Japanese psychopath who murdered and ate a female student he had a crush on while he was studying overseas. (I think in Denmark) After they caught him, they tried him as insane and transferred him to Japan since he was a Japanese citizen. For some reason, paperwork doesn't match up between the two countries with some policies so they had to let him go. So there is a Japanese murderer/cannibal who lives in Japan. And he is a semi-celebrity. He's even been in porn flicks because of his fame.


So I'm assuming he pleaded guilty on the account that he's tried as insane?

That's fucked up. Have to love the Japanese. ~


Yea. He plead guilty by insanity. He couldn't really get out of it. Cops got a warrant to his place and found her body or what was remaining in a freezer. I forget exactly but he was cooking pieces of her up each day like steak for meals. Some white chick interviewed him in the streets of Japan and she asked him if the thought of eating her ran through his mind. He said that he was thinking of what she tasted like and wanted to. So yea... justice has been served?


That's so fucking stupid. That would have not been tolerated in North America.

I love the 'justice has been served-' Pun... ~


I disagree.... There was a man in Houston who punched his baby daughter in the crotch, threw her in the freezer for a set amount of time and decided to throw her in the microwave. He blamed it on the Devil and pleaded insanity... Guess what? He's not in jail , hes in the looney bin. People can get away with many things in American by saying they were taken over by some sort of Devil or pleading insanity, much like any other place.


At least HE was actually put into the looney bin. The Japanese dude was busy signing autographs and being interviewed.

Regardless, that's sick. I think they should toughen their laws on pleeing for mental insanity in a murder trial. ~


you people are talking about Issei Sagawa right? the one who killed Renée Hartevelt?
2478 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / L.A.
Offline
Posted 2/4/08 , edited 7/13/12

Runshushu wrote:




Runshushu wrote:

yea when the teacher askes me to read i just look at her and say no then she goes come on i go no thank you then put ipod on


The funny part is that i'm in all ap classes smart one with 94 average so don't post crap liek you know me


welcome to being caught in a lie moron

oh and from what iv read of thsi topic hes just talking of the subjectivity of morals
6203 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 2/4/08

tobydiah wrote:


notabigdeal wrote:

The peoples declare n_n303 the winnar, but you may want to reskim through the thread and think otherwise.

For the sake of Contribution, I hate the fact that most people bout theological ideals in the matters of politics, economy, common affairs, and social justice and then try to impose said beliefs in the nonbeleivers. One of the more common examples is bring Catholicism is such arguements Take for example, politics: "Oh hey the government is wrong and corrupt, because God says that we're supposed fair with the world, shouldn't we be helping Country X, and not trade with Country Y because Country X is an ally too and we shouldn't avoid them just because Country Y provides more benefits" Well the first rule of thumb in politics is that it IS corrupt and WILL remain corrupt, theres no stopping it and there sure as hell is no way of changing it. Be glad that the government of your country tries to provide you in what way they can, and that you're not in a position that is prone to mortality. Economics wise: "Hey why not dissolve all means of social class? After all, aren't all humans equal in the eyes of God?" You don't want a social class? Go live in a communistic country. See how easy it is to be equal amongst others and how much you won't like it. We try and be fair in economics by giving donations when and where we can, its helpful enough too anyway. Common affairs: "Hey I just read this precept of the Bible the other day, and it says homosexuality is wrong. Why are you still supporting it if God says its wrong?" Well, if you delved more deeply in Christianity, God also entitled everyone with free will, and you have no right to change what they believe. Last but not least social justice:"You have no right to punish and kill a murderer. God is the only true judge and those murderers are entitled to their rights as well" You want murderers to live? people who are derived of all good conscience and are very prone to destroying you and your family? Why not ask the justice department to make a complete halt in capital punishment and release all the prisoners so that all hell can break loose just because "they were entitled to their rights". Through this you would also suppose that you want God to be the one true ruler in government. So you wouldn't want a separation of Church and state? See how far that ideal would push forth without being the subject of total corruption, descrimination and greed. Its like asking for a modern day crusade.

Its a very brief draft of my biased bullshit, and I'll probably revise it when I can to make it seem more equal and fairly opinionated, but Goddamn its 2:00 am. I just wanted to make a long shit short-- Church=/=state. Bringing religion into governmental issues is just asking for quick rebuttal and rejection, at least imo. I'm glad you're a proud believer of Christianity or any other religion, but don't go shoving morals down everyones throats, because you won't know if they conform to a said religion or not.


Keep this in mind that forums and discussion tools are made for expressing your thoughts, opinions, as well as to engage debate/differences. I can't disprove your ideas since we all have our own ideas on everything. But I do think it's incorrect or illogical to not think it right for the people to argue some issues. You mentioned that you don't like the fact that some people mention or suggest ideas that are very illogical in your view. You can completely disagree with their belief or argument. But this being a discussion thread, I don't think it's right to not want or keep anyone from expressing their views. Having no religious affiliation, I understand that it's annoying to debate a topic through or other means when someone else is supporting their arguments with religion and faith. However, isn't that considered a form of believing something? Just the way we believe in science, philosophy, history, math etc. You don't have to engage a person with a religious support unless you really want to and look for information in their bible to debate it. Or if you find convincing arguments with what they said. If not, another religious person can argue their viewpoint with their shared religious beliefs. As long as someone forms a serious comment, I'll respect it to some degree regardless of how stupid it might seem to me. I mean... forum threads aren't made for non-religious people. It's made for everyone so that we can get a wide variety of answers.


I try my best to respect the opinions of others. It’s just that I try to give a somewhat, more materialistic opinion for the sake of keeping a levelheaded debate, whilst not trying to contort affirmant beliefs of others. Its not that I don’t want it left out of discussion, its just that I hate when it is brought up, simply for the need to impose a hard-earned belief that some people will not conform to, and then the next thing I know its being shoved down my throat without the consent of me not being involved with such a belief. Theres no way of avoiding the event of bringing up religious values, and its to be expected. A much simpler “Hey I might have to disagree with that opinion. The fact being that it goes against certain regulations of my religion [etc.]” would be much appreciated especially from me, rather than the usual “HEY THAT’S WRONG! IT SAYS SO IN MY RELIGION[etc.]” which happens to tick me off really bad, but then again I guess that wouldn’t make it a debate. I try hard not to convince others to stray from what they believe in, unless of course, they try to impose on me first and make me stray from what I deem to be true. I don’t engage in most theological debates, I have no position in them to impose a certain belief or try to find ways to contradict opinions. But there will be times that I encounter in a political/economical debate someone who imposes a theological bout that is, somewhat, out of line in the discussion and in fact, out of question as to what they’re talking about. The reason being that I hate seeing theology being involved in governmental debate is for this one simple fact, and please hear me out and try not to misconstrue the true meaning of what I’m trying to bring in:



This statement is very blatant and is subject to much discrimination, but that’s how I see governmental and political arguments. I don’t limit this to the ethics of forum posting, I argue with people who try to attempt to corner me with morals and ideals in a non-theological debate, and nothing pisses me of more than imposing beliefs that I don’t necessarily want to partake in. But just because I don’t like it, doesn’t mean that I discourage bringing forth opinions. I encourage the engagement of bringing in open-minded opinions head on, and I encourage my opinions to be argued at. It’s the whole purpose debate. I abet open answers, its just that I hate some more than others.

[edit] Grammar Nazis, have mercy on my soul. Its 4:00am. I shall try to revise later
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.