вторник, 16 юли 2019 г.

Bible Arguments 15

By DeYtH Banger

""No one has ever seen God."
—John 1:18
Many of my debate opponents agree with me that there is actually no evidence for a god. If there were, we would not be having the debate. No one would be asking, “Why is there something rather than nothing?” because there would be better ways to argue. If there were truly evidence for a god, they would put it on the table. By now someone should have won the Nobel Prize for pointing out such evidence."

- Dan Baker


"They simply assert that their god hypothesis (or presupposition, as some theists honestly phrase it) is the best explanation for our current lack of knowledge. This is an argument from ignorance, not evidence.
Granting the lack of evidence, some believers come back with the brilliant parry: “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” So there! Since we atheists cannot absolutely prove that their supernatural god does not exist, they can pretend to be justified in maintaining their belief in what might be true, what is true to them by faith or presupposition. But, then, since no one can prove to me that leprechauns do not exist, can I assert that they do? Look at a box of Lucky Charms! If the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, can you argue that I should stop believing in leprechauns? Of course you can. The absence of evidence is not proof of absence, but it is certainly evidence of absence. Absence is not a thing, but evidence of absence definitely is a thing. You can hold it in your hand."

- Dan Baker

"If something truly does not exist, the only possible evidence for its nonexistence would be the absence of evidence for its existence where we should expect it to be. Richard Dawkins points out in The God Delusion that “a universe with a God would look quite different from a universe without one.” So far, conducting a comprehensive scientific search of the structure of the universe—certainly more thorough than any bomb squad—the chart has come up empty. We have evidence that God does not exist. We don’t have proof, but it is safe to go back in the building Why are theists free to say leprechauns do not exist but atheists are not free to say the same about God? Well, because they believe in God and not in leprechauns. When Anselm concluded his famous ontological argument, thinking he had neatly proven the existence of God using mere words (which truly is something from nothing), he couldn’t resist making a prayer with a jab at us nonbelievers: “Why, then, has the fool said in his heart, there is no God (Psalms 14:1), since it is so evident, to a rational mind, that you do exist in the highest degree of all? Why, except that he is dull and a fool?”29 If anybody was dull, it was Anselm."

- Dan Baker

"I think most believers are kinder than Anselm and would never stoop to name-calling or hurl insults, like the bible does, in order to belittle opposition or score a rhetorical point against atheists. I think most honest believers who truly wrestle with definitions and assumptions can admit that we atheists are just as committed to clarity as they claim to be. We disagree, but disagreement is not a crime. If more believers would respect the motives of atheists, wouldn’t that be something, from nothing."

- Dan Baker

"The next day the lonely bird flies back over the sodden spot and sees that the anthill is gone. It glides further down the muddy riverbed and spots you, wandering alone, doing the only thing you know how to do, smelling around, moving some dirt. What if the bird were to yell down, “Stop it! It’s pointless. Your queen is dead. Nobody cares, don’t you see? You’re wasting your time. Nothing lasts forever.” Would you say, “Oh, sorry,” and just give up? Or would you say, “I am an ant. What else am I supposed to do?”
Would your life have meaning."

- Dan Baker

"If God is using us to convey a “meaning,” then who
is he talking to? Are people and ants just piano keys that God plays to amuse himself?
In the case of the dots on the canvas and the marchers in the band, we do know there was a human designer, but in the case of life itself we do not know that. In fact, we now know that life is the result of impersonal evolution and is not intelligently directed or designed at all. Since it looks designed—since natural selection utilizing randomness is not intuitively grasped by our minds—we (some of us) make the mistake of imagining there was an intelligent meaning behind it all."

- Dan Baker

"We don’t want to feel pointless. We want a stamp of approval, or a sense that our activities are directed by and pointing to something larger than ourselves. We don’t want to be mere dots on a canvas that could burn up, or ants that get washed away in a flash flood. We want to feel big, or a part of something bigger than just us, little us.
There is a silly scene in the movie Pee-wee’s Big Adventure where Pee-wee loses control and falls off his bicycle in front of a crowd of children. As he stands up he says, “I meant to do that.” That is very funny, but why? Because intention indicates meaning. It might also give dignity, depending on how you value bike-handling skills. What Pee-wee meant by “meant” (the meaning of meaning) was planning followed by intention followed by execution (hopefully followed by praise, or at least not ridicule). The humor in that scene comes from knowing that he was desperately trying to back engineer the process, saving face by making it appear that the accident was deliberate. He was attempting to instill meaning where there was none.."

- Dan Baker

"Every cell in your body contains “meaning” from your ancestors. (I put “meaning” in quotes because it is just information that is passed. It becomes meaning when we think about it.) Your ancestors were not talking directly to you, but like an artist, they created a product that speaks to the future..."

- Dan Baker


"The cosmos doesn’t care. A flash flood will destroy it all. There is no meaning to any of this.” Even if true, would they have stopped? Of course not. Humans do what humans do. My great-grandparents John and Angelita and Jack and Lizzie (from different diasporas) led meaningful lives, in both senses, from their point of view as well as mine. Even if they had had no grandchildren—and some people indeed lead meaningful childless lives by choice, enhancing and protecting the lives and genes of others—their life would have been their life, and that is beautiful all by itself…"

- Dan Baker

"We can indefinitely stack symbols upon symbols, concepts upon concepts, reaching up to an infinite God or down to nothingness, but it is all a trick of language. If it doesn’t ultimately refer to anything real, it is vacant vocabulary. “In the beginning was the Zord, and the Zord was with God, and the Zord was God,” the gnostic evangelistic John tells us in his first sentence. But what does that mean? A zord can be useful (like the word “word”), but only if it ultimately refers to something that actually exists—a referent to which the symbol of the symbol can point. At the end of the day an algebraic equation has to resolve to so many apples or kilometers, or it is just make-work. The “meaning of life” never resolves to anything real, but the “meaning in life” certainly does…"

- Dan Baker

"At that final point of our unavoidable destiny, there will be no Mockingzird in the Sky, no “Zord of God” calling down “I told you so.” It will all be over and forgotten—and since there will be no one left to do the forgetting, it will be truly unforgettable. Do you find that depressing? I find it exhilarating.
In the movie Annie Hall by Woody Allen, nine-year-old Alvy has stopped doing his homework, so his mother takes him to a psychiatrist who asks, “Why are you depressed, Alvy? “Well, the universe is everything,” Alvy says, “and if it’s expanding, someday it will break apart and that would be the end of everything! … What’s the point?”
“What has the universe got to do with it?” his mother asks. “You’re here in Brooklyn! Brooklyn is not expanding!”
Alvy and his mother are both right. There is no meaning in the cosmic picture, but there is meaning in the here and now. Here in Brooklyn.9 How do you feel about that? What can you do about it? You already know that your not-too-distant descendants will forget about you, or even if they don’t—even if you become astonishingly famous."

- Dan Baker

"Live your own life. If you are reasonable and kind, you will discover that meaning is not handed to you from on high; it emerges naturally from your own life-driven purpose."

- Dan Baker

Bible Arguments 14

By DeYtH Banger


"And if a nonbeliever replies honestly, “I don’t know why there is something rather than nothing,” believers will crow: “Aha! You don’t have an answer, and I do!” This is known as a “god of the gaps” argument, or an argument from ignorance. Any mystery can be “solved” without doing any work, simply by plugging the hole with magic.
But let’s be charitable and fair. On its face, the question is not necessarily religious. The motives of those who ask, “Why is there something rather than nothing?” may be honest and sincere, and even if not, that alone is no reason to dismiss their conclusion. Since something cannot come from nothing, their argument goes,…"

- Dan Baker

"If there is nothing, then there has to be something.
So, “can something come from nothing?” really means “can something come from something?” and that is a no-brainer. “Can something be what makes it different from what it is not?”
“Nothing” is just a word we use to identify absence. It is a concept, not a thing. The concept of absence can apply to things that are real as well as to things that are imaginary. The absence of Neanderthals and the absence of leprechauns arenot measured the same way, but they end up the same. Absence is absence.
Since “nothing” is a concept, and concepts are a result, not a cause, of a brain, asking if something can come from nothing is like asking if a brain can come from a thought it is thinking."

- Dan Baker

"Why do we assume that reality, unmanaged, collapses to nothingness? Is it like gravity? The path of least resistance? From whence comes the great power of the void? (And if the void has this power, then it has something.) Perhaps it is the other way around: the great power of matter and energy is holding back the void. “Nature abhors a vacuum,” Aristotle thought.
But that all seems pretty silly, because something/nothing is not a proper yin/yang. They are not balanced opposites of a composite whole. If they were, then zero would be the reciprocal for every other number and math would be meaningless. But one thing we do know—and if there were a god, he/she would know it too—is that something indeed does exist, so there is no argument. Reality has not decayed into nothingness, or remained in such a state, not in the natural world or the supernatural world (if there is such a place). In fact, if there were truly nothingness, there would be no reality at all, natural or supernatural. We are aware of the reality that something does exist. That’s what reality means. Whatever the Theory of Everything (TOE) turns out to be, there will come a point where we simply have to refer to a brute fact—perhaps strings or branes or quantum wave potential, or something else. That is exactly what theists do when they refer to their brute fact of…"

- Dan Baker

"Theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking thinks our entire universe, not just particles, has arisen from the void. “Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist,” Hawking writes. “It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."

- Dan Baker

"Therefore, nothing exists. Putting the two bad-grammar arguments together, we could prove that God is Utter Nothingness…"

- Dan Baker

"In the beginning there was nothing. God said, “Let there be light!” And there was light. There was still nothing, but you could see it a whole lot better.”
—Ellen DeGeneres20
Notice that when we ask “can something come from nothing?” we are playing a loaded game similar to “who caused the thunder?” We are swallowing the claim that something, anything, always has to “come from” something or someone else. If we do that, we are forced to look for a “what” or a “who.”
When we ask “can something come from nothing?” what do we mean by “come from”? I think there are two normal usages of that phrase: impersonal and personal. In ordinary usage, “comes from” means something physical and impersonal. A house “comes from” lumber or stone or building material. The lumber comes from trees, the stone from quarries, the bricks from mud, the nails and hardware from metal. A tree comes from a seed, the stone and metal comes from physical processes in the earth and the stars. And so on. These are all sufficient answers. So asking where the universe “came from” in that sense would be asking for the location of a huge quarry or forest of materials from which the construction materials…"

- Dan Baker

"…cause of its own existence and even the cause of the existence of God. (Not supernatural, but “naturalsuper.”) I have no reason to believe that contrived scenario, but it is no less fantastic than theism…"

- Dan Baker

"God is a spirit.
—John 4:24
There is no good reason to believe in a god, but if such a being exists, he also should ask himself, “Why am I here? Why is there a god instead of no god?” Most believers will claim that a god would never ask where it came from because a god is a great spirit outside of nature. The “great spirit” is above the law: you can’t haul in the king for questioning, they insist. A spirit, they say, unlike us physical creatures, can indeed exist without an explanation, timeless, causeless, not needing a frame of reference or context. They imagine that there are actually three states of existence: nothing, something, and spirit. It is spirit that mediates between nothing and something, they claim. Spirit can cause something to come from nothing. God was looking around one day, saying, “There is nothing, and I don’t like it, so I am going to turn nothing into something. Fiat lux ex nihilo. Lo, behold, now something exists!"

- Dan Baker

"A spirit, whatever it is, must be either something or nothing. If it is not something, it is nothing.
By the way, if God is defined as “a spirit,” then spirit is something that God is made of. So spirit is not God. It is something more basic, otherwise God could not be “a spirit.”
Some believers will reply that a spirit is indeed “something,” but it is not “something natural.” The question “can something come from nothing?” really means “can something natural come from nothing?” The supernatural or spiritual realm (which they have conjured out of nothing) is exempt from the question, they insist. Their three states of existence really are: nothing, nature, and spirit. We are natural creatures asking a natural question—a question about the entire notion and existence of “natural”—and the only sensible answer, they claim, must come from outside."

- Dan Baker

"If nothing comes from nothing, and if God came from nothing, then God is nothing.
Most believers insist that that is equivocating. We can’t compare God and the universe like that. God is a special case: he is great and personal and powerful and, unlike the impersonal lifeless universe, he has the ability to create himself. But how does that help their argument? If they say that “nothing comes from nothing” really means “nothing except God-who-is-great comes from nothing,” well there you go. They are back to question begging, inserting the conclusion into the premise. What could be a clearer example of circular logic? If you already believe in a god before you make the argument, then you don’t need the argument at all. It should be discarded. If believers agree that they don’t need the argument, but think that we atheists do—as a tool of evangelism—then they still need to convince us to embrace their “except God” qualification before we can get the argument off the ground, and if we did, we wouldn’t need the argument because we would no longer be atheists."

- Dan Baker

"He is the Creator. He is all-powerful. The king does not ask “who is above me?” God is “I am that I am” who needs no explanation.
But when believers say God is “big” and “powerful,” what do they mean? Those are words of dimension, force, and time. Can the word “big” mean something without measuring along dimensions? Can the word “power” be understood without plotting work across a span of time? If God is truly outside those dimensions, then what does it matter if he is called “big” and “powerful”? Those words have no meaning outside of the natural world, if it is possible to be “outside” of the natural world."

- Dan Baker

"We may as well say “God is bliphish and pomthical.” God talk is nonsensical. He is the holy iDot.
If God is truly outside of somethingness, he is nothing at all…"

- Dan Baker

"“Without God, We Are Nothing.” Pell was the Archbishop of Sydney. Today he is Number 3 at the Vatican, as the prefect of the Secretariat for the Economy, Pope Francis’s new finance ministry. If anyone is an expert in the faith, it would be “His Eminence Cardinal Pell.” (I couldn’t bring myself to use that title: he called me “Dan,” so I called him “George.”) During the debate, he used the word “spirit” and “spiritual” a number of times, so during cross examination, I asked him this question:
Dan: Can you define for us, using positive terms, what is a “spirit,” and how that would differ from nothing at all?
George: I just said that I can’t define “God,” but I can say something useful about “spirit.” I believe in the reality of love. I believe it’s a spiritual quality. I believe honor is something that is real. Disgrace is real. Forgiveness is real. Something spiritual is invisible, but sometimes it can be very powerful. The love of a husband and wife, the love between parents and children, they are probably the most important realities in many people’s lives. They are spiritual realities.
Dan: Let me follow up. I can define all of those things, like love, family, and feelings, in purely natural terms, as functions of an organism. But why were you not begging the question by saying that the definition of “spiritual” is love, which is spiritual? I want to know what it is. Does it occupy space? Does it occupy time? Does it have a weight? Can you measure it along a dimension? How would you know that your “spirit” is not just a concept as opposed to an actually existing thing in reality?
George: Well, you can’t measure a spirit. It is certainly not material. But the examples that I have given are very real and very powerful. Once there was an Australian poet who said that sometimes people can be at a concert and be like dogs at a concert. They hear every sound but have got no understanding of the music, because the music is something that is spiritual and beautiful and real. They can’t be reduced. They are connected with physical activities, but they can’t be reduced to those physical activities.
So I’m a dog, but I take that as a compliment. Notice that Pell said “spirit” is immaterial and invisible and can’t be measured, but it has power. Does he not know that power is measured materially? He sidestepped telling us what a “spirit” actually is. When believers are asked to define what “spirit” actually is—not to list synonyms like ghost, vision, or poltergeist; or attitudes like enthusiasm, love, emotion, or determination; but to describe the actual substance of the entity—they always define it by what it is not: intangible, noncorporeal, immaterial, ineffable, non-natural. (They might even say “the spirit is the ethereal essence.”) They never tell us anything positive. "

- Dan Baker

"Even if spirit does exist in some unknowable way—in spite of my impertinence in asking for a definition—what do believers mean when they say it is “outside” of nature? Exactly where is that? If a spirit is outside of nature, it still must be somewhere, in a region “beyond.” And that is still a place. Something might indeed be outside our own observable universe in the wider cosmos, but how can anything be outside of nature? Universes within the multiverse would certainly be outside of each other, but they would still be part of the natural cosmos. If we don’t have a coherent definition of “outside of nature,” then it is meaningless to suggest that that is where the spirit or supernatural exists.
Some think that to be outside of nature is to be in another dimension. But that is incoherent. Dimensions are used to measure natural things. Dimensions are what we mean when we say something is natural: the object occupies space and time, which are charted in four dimensions, at least. The amounts of space and time that an object occupies are measured along those dimensions compared to other objects, or the distance between other objects, which…"

- Dan Baker

"“Can something come from nothing?” might be unanswerable because it is unaskable. Logically, mathematically unaskable…"

- Dan Baker

"“What is s/0?” Don’t even try to reply. It is not a valid question.
The reason we cannot divide by zero—the reason it is a nonsensical question—is because “divide” means to “share.” It’s where we get the phrase “divvy up.” How can three children share twelve cookies? By giving four cookies to each child. But if you don’t have any children who want the cookies, then it makes no sense to talk about sharing the cookies. You can only share (divide) when you have a positive nonzero number of divisors (children). If the number of numerators (cookies) is negative, we are talking about sharing a debt, which is the same thing in obverse. If the number is zero, we can’t…"

- Dan Baker

"Ultimately, when the cause or source of the cosmos gets down to the simplest brute fact—when the divisor finally shrinks to one—the question will be “what is something divided by one?” The answer will be “itself.” Since believers think “God divided by one” is a valid question while “God divided by zero” is not, why do they not allow me to think the same of the cosmos?
There actually is a sneaky way to do an end run and “divide by zero” without causing a crash, and that is to divide zero by itself. This is a trick because we can’t actually divide by zero, and would never need to, but based on the axiom that any number divided by itself (n/n) is 1, we might logically (not mathematically) conclude that 0/0=1. This checks out because 1x0=0. So if 0/0=1, then “nothing from nothing” equals something. Something from nothing. If nothing truly existed (0/0), it would be something…"

- Dan Baker

Bible Arguments 13

By DeYtH Banger


"As comedian Bill Maher pointed out in one of his hilarious monologues,1 you can freeze a stem cell indefinitely, which is something you definitely cannot do with a baby. Even the bible, which equates life with breath, actually seems to agree with modern American law, which acknowledges that a human life begins at viability. I don’t know of any fundamentalists who add nine months to their age. But many believers, being religiously colorblind, can only conceive of “life” (a full person) as black or white, red or blue, all or nothing. Those of us who affirm a woman’s freedom to decide her own reproductive future equate a human life with personhood, seeing the earlier stages of development within a spectrum leading up to a precious baby whose arrival and existence we do cherish. Personhood is blue, while a zygote is red, with a prism in the middle."

- Dan Baker

"In the beginning was the Turtle. The Turtle was swimming across an endless body of water. One day it dove to the bottom and brought up a lump of mud. When the mud baked in the sun, it became dry land. The land expanded into a vast area where trees grew. One day the Rabbit started kicking a blood clot by one of the trees until it formed into a human being."

- Dan Baker

"Then I asked how many believed the creation myth of a later group of people, the Bronze Age Israelites, including the earth being created from a watery void, Adam being formed from the mud, Eve being taken from his rib, a talking snake, a talking donkey, a jealous genocidal war god named Yahweh (“my name is Jealous”), the Nile River turning to blood, and food falling from the sky. Most of the hands went up in that audience. They think the Turtle is false but the talking snake is true. They are polarized. They can’t see outside their own color.
All human groups have invented meaningful fables, but their fable is actual truth, they proclaim. The vast array of colorful creation myths collapses into “us versus them.” Truth versus lies. Some believers do appreciate the varieties of religious belief in anthropology; they just see them all as quaint but false, “out there,” while their belief is the one true faith. They can’t see themselves as part of the fabric, or their color as part of a spectrum, or their religion as having evolved from earlier antecedents. In the previous chapter, I talked about how law has ancestors, but the same is true with religion. If you can step back and see that your religion is just one cousin from a grandparent (as Christianity and Islam are descended mainly from Judaism), and also realize that the grandparent is a cousin to other religions descended from even earlier ancestors, you can perceive your faith not as a blunt stand-alone creation, but as a small part of a larger array. Your worldview becomes enriched. Gregory Riley does a nice job of illustrating the family tree (or branching river system) of world faiths in his book The River of God."

- Dan Baker

"Look at your own beliefs the same way you look at the beliefs of others: from a distance. If you can’t do that, you are religiously colorblind.
Think about ethics. Most of us, including believers, act as if we embrace situational ethics in our daily lives, but most religions teach that there are absolute moral laws that must be followed no matter what, by command of a dictator. For example, since the Ten Commandments prohibit bearing “false witness” against a neighbor, most Christians think it is always wrong to tell a lie. Not just wrong, but sinful—a character flaw. However, while it is true that honesty is generally a good principle for social harmony, telling a lie is not always immoral. We do have laws against perjury, false advertising, contractual misrepresentation, impersonating an officer, identity theft, and so on, but it is generally not illegal to tell a lie.
Suppose a woman came to your front door, bruised and bleeding, saying that her husband is trying to kill her. You take her into your home, tend to her wounds, give her a place to stay for a while. Later, her husband comes banging on your door, shouting, “Do you know where my wife is?!” What do you do? As a good moral person, do you tell him the truth? I think all of us know that in that particular situation, the most moral thing to do is lie to that man. Otherwise, we risk greater harm to the woman. Telling that lie is not a sin: it is a good act of which you should be proud. But some Christians have told me that although they would indeed lie to the husband, they would feel bad about it and would later ask God for forgiveness. In their polarized brains, telling a lie is always sinful. Morality is absolute. Such colorblind moral thinking influences all ethical issues with which society is struggling, including stem-cell research, birth control, abortion, gay marriage, doctor-assisted suicide, war, state-church seperation…"

- Dan Baker

"Suppose I break into the home of a loving Christian family. This mother, father, and two children are faithful church attenders who read the bible and pray every day. They are generous, good people who help others and witness for their faith in Jesus. I tie them up and shoot the dog. I drown their cat in the bathtub. Then I set the house on fire and they all die. When the police ask me, “Why did you do it?” I reply: “No reason. The Devil made me do it."

- Dan Baker

"In the biblical Book of Job we read about a good “blameless and upright” family man who was faithful in worship yet endured horrible torture at the hand of the God he loved. Satan, with God’s explicit permission, caused a huge wind to blow down a wall and kill Job’s ten children. All of his thousands of animals were killed. (The bible doesn’t say if he had a dog or a cat.) In Job 2:3 we find these words: “The LORD said to Satan, ‘Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man who fears God and turns away from evil. He still persists in his integrity, although you incited me against him, to destroy him for no reason.’” So the police ask God, “Why did you do it,” and God replies: “No reason. The Devil made me do it. Then I said to the audience, “Raise your hands if you think the God of the bible is a moral monster.” Less than half the hands shot up.
That is proof that hundreds of people in that room had eyes to see, but saw not. The same crime by two different actors for the same reason is judged morally wrong when committed by only one of the actors. This is a psychological bias induced by religion. It is “looking the other way,” deliberately excusing the actions of a family member or other person you admire or love. It is what allows ministers and priests to get away with abusing children right under the noses of their parishioners who can’t imagine their beloved leader would."

- Dan Baker

"Think about truth. Most fundamentalists demand that truth claims be absolute. In true polarized fashion, Jesus reportedly said, “All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.” Christians are required to think that any answer between the extremes comes from Satan!"

- Dan Baker

"Servetus was murdered because of the misplacement of a preposition. His view of the nature of God was a different hue from Calvin’s. Servetus had discovered that the New Testament does not actually teach the concept of the Trinity. (Hence, the birth of modern Unitarianism where the deity is not “God in three persons” but simply “one God.”) There is only one verse in the bible that explicitly mentions the triune nature of God in three persons: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” (1 John 5:7). This is known as the Johannine Comma, because, as Servetus learned, it did not appear in any preceding Greek manuscripts of the biblical text. That verse had been interpolated into the more recent Latin Vulgate translation by the Catholic Church. Servetus eagerly brought this textual and doctrinal error to Calvin’s attention, naively imagining he would welcome another opportunity to correct the fallacies of Catholicism."

- Dan Baker

"Fundamentalists have a desperate need to agree with each other 100 percent. To feel confident and unthreatened, the religiously colorblind need to know that all the members of their group are seeing the same color. “I appeal to you, brothers and sisters,” Paul wrote, “in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of…"

- Dan Baker

"Truth is not a thing. Truth is simply a measure of how well a statement matches reality. The only thing that can be true or false is a statement, a proposition. Reality is not truth: reality is reality. If the sky is blue and I say, “The sky is blue,” then there is a strong correspondence between my statement and reality, so my statement would be true. If I say, “The sky is orange with black polka dots,” there is a very low correspondence, so my statement would be false. Of course, the sky is always changing color (it is sometimes orange), and is dark during the night, so “the sky is blue” is a true statement that has to be qualified. It is not absolute…"

- Dan Banker

"You have magically turned faith into fact, water into wine.
Truth is rarely black and white. (I wanted to write “never black and white,” but that statement would be absolute. I need to allow that I might be wrong.) Forcing truth to be absolute is like making the rainbow a solid color, which is no rainbow at all.
The next time you talk with a true believer, remember that fundamentalists are religiously colorblind. That’s what it means to be a fundamentalist. That includes the founder of Christianity. Jesus, if he existed, called himself “the Truth,” and said, “He that is not with…"

- Dan Baker

Bible Arguments 12

By DeYtH Banger


"Our God is good, because he told us he is good. New Yorkers are evil because they are offending his holiness and corrupting our tribe. If you judge our Lenape Lord to be evil, then you are committing blasphemy."

- Dan Baker

"If we can’t judge God to be bad, then neither can we judge him to be good. To worship God is to judge God. If what look like “bad” actions of God might actually be good, then what look like “good” actions of God might actually be bad, and we are helpless to know the difference. When he tells us he is good, he might be lying, and if believers think he is not, they are judging him. If they can judge God, why can’t I? They say he is good by his decree. I say he is bad by his actions."

- Dan Baker

"The bible preaches a pessimistic view of human nature. “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.”28 There’s that intimidating word “glory.” Notice that biblical wrongdoing is connected not with real human suffering but with offending the deity. We are all bad: “All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.”29 We all deserve to die: “The wages of sin is death.”30 Notice here that death is not viewed as a natural event but as a punishment for the crime of not glorifying the deity. “As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive.”31 Without Jesus, we are all doomed."

- Dan Baker

"…the original sin transmitted to us through Adam. (I never thought of this when I was a preacher, but if “sin” is inherited, is it genetic?)
A humanistic view of human nature is neither negative nor positive. It is realistic and optimistic. We recognize that we all fall somewhere across a spectrum of characteristics and tendencies that are a mix of violence and empathy. Some will lean more toward “saint” and others toward “sinner,” but except for a few people at the far end of the curve who are truly mentally unhealthy, most of us are neither wholly “bad” nor wholly “good” by nature..."

- Dan Baker

"Unlike most believers, most humanists are optimistic about human nature. It’s not that we think we are perfect, or even perfectible, but that we can improve. Many individual genetic predispositions cannot be changed, or cannot be changed easily, but this does not mean that an individual cannot control his or her own actions in spite of those tendencies. This is where education, societal expectation, and humanistic law become useful."

- Dan Baker

"They are unusual. They are shocking. Most of us, fortunately, are somewhere in the middle of the bell curve and live our lives outside of the headlines. Think of a horrible story you have read in the newspaper or seen on television. When a mother does something unthinkable to her children or a husband brutalizes his wife, what do you think? When a criminal commits a heinous act, what do you
say? If you are like me, you say, “What an inhuman thing to do!” We assume that those violent acts reported in the headlines do not reflect basic human nature. We know we are normally kind, empathetic, altruistic, loving, and moral, and that is what makes headlines grab our attention. It is good that most people don’t make it to those headlines. It is only the extreme deviations from the norm that catch our attention, and they shock us because they are not representative of who we really are."

- Dan Baker

"If you are a believer, is that how you picture yourself? Are you desperately trying to restrain your malicious impulses? If you could get away with it, would you run around like a maniac, looting, destroying property, sexually assaulting, and causing bodily harm? Don’t you simply know that such behavior is a threat to survival? Most human beings who want a good life prefer less violence, less harm. Studies show that societies with less religion are better off,32…"

- Dan Baker

"We can choose to be moral. Instead of making morality a huge mystery, searching for an “absolute standard” or list of rules or external ethical imperative or purpose-driven motivation or other excuse to treat people nicely, why not simply choose to be reasonable, moral, and kind to others? Paraphrasing my Mom: “If you want to be a good person, then be a good person."

- Dan Baker

"Think about sexuality. The bible says that “God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27). It is assumed that Adam and Eve were heterosexual, because they were commanded to “replenish the earth.” Jesus made the same assumption: “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said ‘for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?” (This is also sexist, from the male point of view.) In the bible, anything outside of binary heterosexuality is condemned as an abomination. (See Leviticus 20:13, for example."

- Dan Baker


"Any identity that does not flip to one side of their toggle switch does not exist. This is a cultural color blindness resulting from religion, a failure to see the shades of reality we are looking at. Forcing homosexuals to live as heterosexuals is like me pretending that my garish red outfit was attractive. It is fitting that the gay community uses a rainbow as a symbol."

- Dan Baker

"Think about evolution. The bible says, “God made the beasts of the earth after their kind,” and creationists interpret this to mean each species was formed independently. All of life is flat, started at the same moment, existing side-by-side, nothing related. How boring! When you can learn to see the beauty of evolution, the interconnectedness of all living things springing from the same ancestor, it opens up a whole four-dimensional spectrum. We can see ourselves in stereo, in context, as cousins to the other apes, as more distant relatives to every other species on the planet."

- Dan Baker

"Richard Dawkins, in The Extended Phenotype, talks about this shift in perspective as we look at the natural world. He compares it to staring at a drawing of a Necker Cube, where your mind sees a box in one orientation and then surprisingly shifts to the other orientation. Nothing actually changes on the paper—it all happens in your mind—but it feels like something has changed. Two people can be looking at the same facts but “seeing” something entirely different. Fundamentalist creationists perceive a two-dimensional drawing with little depth or meaning, while evolutionary biologists see a three-
dimensional image, actually four-dimensional when you consider time."

- Dan Baker


"A human being, like the human race, appears on the stage as a full person, they imagine. Adam was formed as a grown man, not a boy, child, baby, or fetus. To the true believer, there is no such thing as a half-developed person, just like there can be no half-soul. It is black or white, absolute, colorless. While the gestating human actually moves through a spectrum of developmental stages—in many of which the human is indistinguishable from other mammals—the religious anti-abortionists view the whole scenario not as a process but as an instantly completed creation, all involving a fully human person. The sperm contacts the egg and Presto, “You” are created. A zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus is the same as a breathing baby in their polarized brains."

- Dan Baker

Bible Arguments 11

By DeYtH Banger


"“In a world without God,” Craig writes, “who is to say which values are right and which are wrong? Who is to judge that the values of Adolf Hitler are inferior to those of a saint? The concept of morality loses all meaning in a universe without God…. For in a universe without God, good and evil do not exist—there is only the bare valueless fact of existence, and there is no one to say you are right and I am wrong.”24 Well, yes there is, Bill. Hitler was wrong because he caused unnecessary harm. And many saints are wrong for the same reason."

- Dan Baker

"Genocide is a moral duty? How can Craig know that if it would be wrong to do something “in the absence of a divine command,” it is only the divine command that makes it right or wrong? Moral actions, according to Craig, are not determined by actual consequences in the real world: right and wrong come from the decree of the dictator, not from measuring actual harm.
Craig thinks God has a loftier view of what causes harm than we do, so he cannot be judged, but then he goes ahead and judges him…"

- Dan Baker

"God, then it is equally fatuous for us to defend him. It is not up to us to ask for reasons; it is only God who decides. (I’m sure you understand that by talking about “God,” I am not agreeing he exists. If I were to say that the Big Bad Wolf is a despicable character, you would know that I am talking about a literary invention, not a real person, who would be bad if he existed.) When humans are acting under God’s command, according to Craig, then nothing they do can be immoral. If God orders it, the massacre of innocent children is a good and holy act…"

- Dan Baker


"If I think my Dad or the president or the pope screwed up, I will say so. If I think the god character depicted in the bible acted like a monster, I have the freedom and the right to condemn such actions. To do less would be to abdicate moral responsibility.
Blasphemy is a moral impulse.
Blasphemy is insulting or attributing evil intentions to God, which I just did. It is clear why church leaders would invent such a crime. Blasphemy undermines their authority. The old joke that “blasphemy is a victimless crime” doesn’t go far enough. Blasphemy is no crime at all. It arises from healthy human judgment."

- Dan Baker

"“Shut up and don’t ask questions. God is good, good, good, no matter what you think. God said it, I believe it, and that settles it.” No matter what crimes he commands or commits, including gross genocide against human families unknowingly trespassing on his holy property, we are to pretend, against all we consider decent and moral, that “God is love."

- Dan Baker

Comedy: Words 6

By DeYtH Banger

It's a brilliant way… a brilliant end… think about it but fuck you… I am not interested into bumping up her energy emotions so to feel good… sorry you dear fuck.. AIN'T PLAYIN THIS GAME.

"Come On"

Yeah… we know your daddy issues with your mom… always come on..
 And come on… weak libido and never sure where insert the plug…. Just do not pull off this lousy trick on me.. okay?
Your problems… your thing!

"If a child loses their fingertip, it may sometimes grow back (nail, bone and all), though without a fingerprint."

"New Zealand will deny people residency visas if they have too high of a BMI. There have been documented cases of individuals being denied entry due to their weight."

I had just went to show and they were saying… be fun… be fucking fun guy… I AM GOING … I AM TRYIN… AND HE SAYS HAVE YOU STARTED… YES…
HE SAID DO THE FUCKING SAME ROUTINE

I hate when shit happens… my  girlfriend wanted in great fucking details about the whole fucking show… I AM LIKE NOBODY IS PAYING + NOBODY SAID MEMORIZE THE SET OKAY?
NOBODY DID THAT… NOBODY DID SAID THAT I HAVE SHIT WRITTEN DOWN AND I ALWAYS PLAY IT OFF… GO OVER THE EDGE BELOW THE SURFACE… COME ON… FOLLOW THE FUCKING MATERIAL

One homeless guy came and started talkimg to me…

He: Hey…hello
I am like I know what dude us here for and start rambling shit
Me: Believe in Jesus there is salvation
He: I know… so I am… here and I wanted
I know where this bullshitter us going and COME GUYS HE IS GUILTY AS CHARGE… HE CAME HE STARTED THE WHOLE THING… IT WASN'T ONE OF THOSE OF MY SPECIAL CASES WHERE I FUCK WITH PEOPLE FOR THE SAKE OF IT
Me: Yeah I got close …
He gets bit nervous…
He: So I wanted tell you I need food
Me: Yup… thanks I know that that's why I am going home thanking for caribg so much about me.
He: No… I mean I need money
Me: Yes I know… that  I need money… give me sone
He: I need money for fpod
Me: Oh you got food for me?

What I did was basical principle of deflecting shit… I USED HIS SHIT ONTO HIM

I tried sex blowjob I felt the teeth it was an awful unplesant experience. They want more and more I FUCKING FORGOT MY FUCKING TOOLS

JUDGING AND SLUT SHAMING NOWADAYS IS AWFUL BUT STILL BEING THAT GUY… IT'S THE GUY WHO GETS THE REWARDS PUSSIES… ASSES AND THE OTHER JUST WATCH… THAT'S THE DIFFERENCES… YOU ARE PARTICIPANT… AND OTHERS ARE SPECTATOR MODE


WHAT'S WOTH THE SAME JOKE… GO FUCK YOURSELF YOU WEAK MINDED FUCK


I have heard the gilf… which is with granny is without teeth blowjob and it's great… this bitch soon from deepthroat and deep fucking gonna get heart attack and you are fucking her from the pure levels of excitement.

70% of the reports of homosexuals have confessed that 50% of them have tried stabing atleast once their partner… which mean they have tried to pit the meat anal… but still looks like a perfect crime, kill but failing miserably.

Heterosexuals 8 partners have in their lifetime… because socially they suck as group of people and homos got between 20 and 106… I know that homis are deeply depressed fucks also probably socially bad creatures but if statistics  are right their are fucking winning this round 1 for homo and 0 for hetero... THIS HERE IS ABOUT THE NEW MARVEL SUPERHEROES!

Homosexuality… is sexual behavior which is repressed it can occur while on drugs or drunk in an orgy setting. We are talking alexactly about your fucking friends one of them is trying to be hetero failing home easily being that persona and secretly  wants to bend you over and fuck you.  THIS IS REPRESS HERO!

I don't know what's the fetish woth sucking a pipe 60% of you get gonorrhea... and 17 siphies… and probably few of you or most of you get fucked up and screw up black intestine which means you are 20 years old but your pants are like 80 years old fuck… pissed and poops in pants… NOTHING MORE THAN APPROVAL OF GOD
YOU ARE FUCKING PIECE OF SHIT!

"Homosexuals live unhealthy lifestyles, and have historically accounted for the bulk of syphilis, gonorrhea, Hepatitis B, the "gay bowel syndrome" (which attacks the intestinal tract), tuberculosis and cytomegalovirus (27).73% of psychiatrists say homosexuals are less happy than the average person, and of those psychiatrists, 70% say that the unhappiness is NOT due to social stigmatization (13).25-33% of homosexuals and lesbians are alcoholics (11)."

- Yeah… yeah I get it being a lesbian is role-play game… being a gay is game of nothing continueing genes and making your parents disappointed...

"SO MOM… I FEEL THE NEED SOMEBODY ELSE DICK TO BE AROUND MY MOUTH AND ASS AND DEFINETLY I LIKE MALES… FEMALES SUCK…"

You are unhappy nostly males mainly because you suck semen and puonsh of semen… As for lesbians probably playing with blackholes isn't as exciting As we think it is… once you got few holes… you get bored!

"50% of suicides can be attributed to homosexuals (10).Dr. Daniel Capron, a practicing psychiatrist, says, "Homosexuality by definition is not healthy and wholesome. The homosexual person, at best, will be unhappier and more unfulfilled than the sexually normal person" (10). For other psychiatrists who believe that homosexuality is wrong, please see National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality."

- FACTS YOU DEAR FUCKS WILL BEAT UP TO THE GROUND YOU CAN'T GO AGAINST FACTS YOU COULD GOT FEW DICKS BIT THE TRUTH THAT YOU ARE MORE SUICIDAL THAN EVER… GO SWALLOW THE PILL OF "I SUCK…"


неделя, 14 юли 2019 г.

Bible Arguments 10

By DeYtH Banger


"You might object that the appearance of animal morality is just a thoughtless expression of an automatic instinct and that we could also give numerous examples of animals not caring about each other. But we could say the same thing about humans."

- Dan Baker

"Some people break into tears when they see cruelty to animals, and if you are like my sister-in-law Suzan, you will break into a rage..."

- Dan Baker

"We have many instincts—some nurturing, some violent—and they often conflict with each other. But Freud did not think the Id was moral in itself. He thought it was something for the Ego and Superego to control..."

- Dan Baker

"Daniel Dennett, in Freedom Evolves, writes that it makes no difference whether our moral impulses are evolved or learned. “[T]he theory that explains morality … should be neutral with regard to whether our moral attitudes, habits, preferences, and proclivities are a product of genes or culture.”"

- Dan Baker

"…think “instinct” is purely biological or a learned habit, or a combination of the two, it comes down to the same goal: the minimization of harm to biological organisms
Craig Packer points out in his book Into Africa, that is because ‘we make it all up as we go along,’ whereas an ant has ‘every small instruction laid out in advance.’”13 Since none of the other animals have such a proportionately large and complicated brain, they are, as far as we know, unable to construct a formal moral philosophy, but this does not mean they lack altruism, empathy, or moral sentiments."

- Dan Baker

"We can think about other people thinking about us thinking about their thoughts. (This is sometimes called Theory of Mind.) We can deliberate, compare, anticipate, contrast, imagine, and prioritize. We can run “what if” scenarios. We can refrain from acting and wait for more information. (That is one of the functions of the frontal lobe, which checks our actions in social settings. It is what keeps you from burping loudly at a wedding or funeral, for example.) We can investigate, read, and ask for help. We can search our memories for consequences to similar situations, past lessons, previous mistakes."

- Dan Baker

"…of the Unconscious, show that very often we simply “know” what to do intuitively, without deliberation. A hunch can be a signal from your lower biological brain to your higher consciousness that something is wrong, though you can’t put it into words. Your “gut feeling” happens somewhere beneath your conscious awareness, but it is no less important than reason. Instincts are a huge advantage, but Gladwell and Gerzinger also give examples of gut feelings gone wrong. Animal instincts are valuable not because they are always right but because they were advantageous most of the time when they were being naturally selected. “I’m not a textbook player. I’m a gut player,” President George W. Bush told Bob Woodward about his disastrous decision to go to war in Iraq. Gut feelings can go horribly wrong sometimes—especially when they are prompted by religion rather than evidence—because they are firing in a different environment from which they originally evolved."

- Dan Baker

"Sometimes such actions result in two tragedies instead of one. Call for help. Don’t become a dead hero. Yet the fact that most of us have these automatic impulses to do good tells us something about our human nature.."

- Dan Baker

"Morality is not a code. It is a compass. A compass does not tell you where you are or where to go; it only shows you where north is. Think of north as the direction of less harm and south as more harm. If your actions are heading more to the north, then you are acting morally. Of course, you can’t always travel directly north—the terrain is often complicated and actions can conflict with each other, and you might have to detour east, west, or even south for a while—but if you intend your general path to go more northerly than southerly, your journey is moral. (No offense to my friends in Australia, Brazil, and South Africa! If you live below the equator, then head south."

- Dan Baker

"I]n no instance has a system in regard to religion been ever established, but for the purpose, as well as with the effect of its being made an instrument of intimidation, corruption, and delusion, for the support of depredation and oppression in the hands of governments.”"

- Dan Baker

"In his book The Moral Landscape, Sam Harris identifies the “well-being” of conscious creatures as the aim of morality. I think that is right. “Well-being” is perhaps a more positive way to characterize the harm principle, but it boils down to the same thing. All through Sam’s thoughtful book, when “well-being” is unpacked with real-life examples, they always involve the avoidance of some kind of harm or limitation. Well, you can’t be “well” if you are harmed."

- Dan Barker

"The third moral mind, on the right shoulder, is not located in dead ancestors or individual consciousness, but in the social agreements formed by the large tribe to which we belong. Remember that I am not suggesting that law is actually one of your own minds: in a democratic society, humanistic law is a result of a collective mind (including yours) that expresses itself as social expectation or obligation. Unless you live alone on one of the moons of Saturn, the laws you encounter come from somewhere other than your own conscious mind."

- Dan Barker

"They replace reason with faith. Reason shows us, for example, that there is nothing wrong with being gay, and if the bible says homosexuality is wrong, then the bible is wrong, not homosexuality. These people are free to have faith and live by their own rules. They are even welcome to try to persuade the rest of us to think like them, but in a secular society, they are not free to impose their theocratic beliefs on everyone else by law…"

- Dan Barker

"But I also know there are good reasons for the state to impose a law on how fast I drive on a road that is owned and used by all of us. I may not know all those reasons. They probably have to do with efficient traffic flow, public safety, and convenience. In the absence of a true emergency (such as rushing a heart attack victim to the hospital), I willingly surrender part of my moral decision-making to the collective mind of society..."

- Dan Barker

"What about stem-cell research, abortion rights, birth control, prostitution, polygamy, military draft, tax laws, nude beaches, animal leash laws, motorcycle helmet laws? What about laws based on religious principles? What sense does it make, for example, to outlaw same-sex marriage or a woman showing her face in public? Those religious laws are simply an attempt to legitimize primitive homophobia, sexism, and sectarian orthodoxy. A truly moral law would deal with such discrimination by aiming at the attackers, not the targets. When considering any law, I think we should simply ask, “What is the harm?” Bad laws increase harm. If following a law more often results in less harm, we can say it is a good law."

- Dan Barker

"I am going to break the law, and I want all of you to witness. The god of the bible, if he exists, is an evil, immoral, selfish, arrogant, jealous, brutal, bloodthirsty bully, and if he created hell, he can go to hell. I am not saying “God Damn It,” I am saying “Damn God.” There. I just broke the Third Commandment. I took the name of the Lord Your God in vain. Are you going to have me arrested for blasphemy…"

- Dan Barker

"Thomas Jefferson concluded that “Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.”20 It was originally a jumble of regional legal decisions based on common sense and precedent that roughly came together after a long evolution of trial and error. It is not based on written statutes but on the “survival of the fittest” ideas that had been naturally selected by experience. The prohibition of murder, for example, is (to this day in England) not based on “Thou shalt not kill” or any other statute, but on the legal decisions of ancestor judges amassed over time into a “common” understanding of how we should…"

- Dan Barker

"Look what happened with Harvard, originally a religious school founded by Calvinists to educate preachers (“dreading to leave an illiterate Ministry to the Churches”) that grew into a humanistic institution of liberal arts education. The seventeenth-century theocrats, at any rate, did not found the United States of America. It was a century and a half later when our actual founders, not wanting any part of the religious divisiveness of the earlier colonies, continued evolving into a secular democratic republic."

- Dan Barker

"The constitution arose naturally from a group of people struggling to be free of authority, not to submit to rules. American citizens are not subjects.22 We are a proudly rebellious people…"

- Dan Barker


"…In Losing Faith in Faith and Godless, I describe the shortcomings of theistic morality, which is based primarily on a might-makes-right mentality. With its threat of eternal torture, inept role models, and a cosmic dictator who is praise-hungry, angry, and violent, the bible offers an ethical system that reduces to the morality of a toddler who fears and flatters the father figure. In most religions, behavior is governed by rules, but in real life behavior should be governed by principles."

- Dan Barker

"…you don’t believe in God you have to be reminded of the punishment of the law? If you do believe in God you can simply say, “so help me, God,” and that is enough to warrant honesty. If you don’t believe in God, it is assumed you have less motive to tell the truth, the “pains and penalties of perjury” replacing the threat of “hell” to force you to be a good person."

- Dan Baker

Comedy: Words 5

By DeYtH Banger


We got people who get hard ons from blood poping out of vagina and nothong stops arousal than the moment you see the progress goes higher mainly because Emetophilia … is the moment you get arousal from vomit…

How somebody read the bible?
Oh great… it's a free book… easy acess but here is the thing bullshit.. come on… You talking with passionate about God.. How fucked up are you?
Bible sounds like it's the most traumatic story + it's written by various authors by itself … Self-serving bullshit story…. Also it's writen by a author out of a psychoward.
Imagine that you are somebody's wife… one day he decides to kill you and make you into soup to feed the homeless… that's what did a guy who thought of himself as Jesus.
She was sucking my wood of honor..
When God sees one of those anorexic weak man having sex he says:

"Haven't you died already yet…Come on motherfucker."

If you want to kill yourself… make it fun and memorable… we got merobilia and are you going to call me?

Does this guy still like me? - Females
Is the girl ready for fuck? - Male

Sex… sex… tits… boobs… asss….Sex… sex… tits… boobs… asss….
Sex… sex… tits… boobs… asss….Sex… sex… tits… boobs… asss….Sex… sex… tits… boobs… asss….Sex… sex… tits… boobs… asss…. - Male Society


So yup it's nothing more fun than to jump into a volcano full of lava, go fucking do it… ANOTHER FANTASTIC FOUR IS IN ABOUT TO COME… LAVA MEN… THE NEW MARVEL HERE AND DEFINETLY HUGE HOOK UP ON DELTA FORCE SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT MARVEL TEAM TO ME

There are and others way locking up yourself in the refrigerator..… WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MR. FREEZE RIGHT HERE!

Locking up yourself into a chimney… FUCKING SANTA CLAUS FREEZE MODE
Drinkings vats of beer.. YUP GO FOR IT… LOW DOEN THE FUCKING PAIN LOCK DOWN EMOTIONS… WORTHLESS PIECE OF ATTRACTION LIKE YOU IS LAST ON THE LIST OF MEMBERS TO STAY ALIVE

Killing yourself bty using retorts of broken glass… WE ARE TALKING ABOUT NEW MARVEL SHITTY HERO.. SHAZAM SHITTY CHARACTER… IRON FIST - HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT WRITTING DOWN FEW SUICIDE NOTES?


We talking about total resistance with persistence rule as first srep in this here suicide method boring down drills in your head. Strangulation of hair… COKE ON FUCKER AT LEAST ONCE TIME SUPRISE ME… REALLY YOUR LAST THING IS A TYPICAL CLICHE?
By exploding a stick of dynaminete in their mouth… WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE ROOTS OF "ALAH AKBAR" Ritual. Similar as the masturbating season.. depressed… and low calibrated fuck. By swallowibg underwear on the leash there is new kinda fetish walks in packages with death wish.
By walking in fromt of cars, train, subways, trucks and buses… WE ARE TALKING FULL TRAUNA ON + THIS FUCK REALLY TO CONFIDENT TO STAY ALIVE

God loves fucking around… the best argument for God if you are alive stop bullshitting others.
I am curious.. I lost my virginity and morbidly fucked up.


събота, 13 юли 2019 г.

Comedy: Rudimentary

by DeYtH Banger


Life sucks no lie about it... If Sherlock Holmes aka Elementary Watson it's all about discovery and mysteries and banging out as looner with company of prostitutes and paid women... then we go as far as M.D. House who has deeper inner issues... Right now comes the idea that life is not so hard it's easy... obsession, compussion that's life that's what's all about it.


"Vagina Sucking..."

- It's not a bad idea... it's not something which is something which good is more likely awful shit... I tried it... it's dry it's fucking dry... it's making my day awful. It shows the way life is... dry and horrible which is sheer symptom of depression. As for now I bother the corners of depression... there is deep... there is shallow... I mean you can play all day this game.


"Sex"

- I personally hope my mom does not catch me that I was in bed with a woman which I found on the street also... I had sex with a prostitutes it's just gets too far... it's not horrible idea. Jokes are ideas and stories which are made up in such way that people. I had sex once in pussy and in the butt... it was strange I felt like I am trying to stab somebody, but I fail and in this case... like all my moral things in my life... I can't stab... I can't kill myself... I can't kill people this here is just  fail and fail...

HUGE FAILURE


"Blowjobs... Eating Vagina"


- Yeah I saw this... I saw this... with teeth and with mouth making the same noises as in porn movies... it was great to see as realistic but the feeling was strange... I didn't felt any type of connection... Was it from the condom... was it from life sucks... or just playing safe and getting where I want is just another way of failing. I eat vagina... it wasn't tasty... it wasn't delicious... but still why porn movies make it as the most awesome thing.... I get there... put pants down... start "Touch her..."... remove clothes... get in the bed... and that's what's happening to going to a escort and what we can get out of this all shitty thing is that in life we all are naked.

"Porn"

- Sad and moral depress people get into this trap... people who  are curious but don't want to socially judged... people get there just are curious more and more... about genres types... and everything you get there... once... twice... Porn is all about connection... mental connection... not physical then eed of physicallity is pure levels of  obsession or that's how threat the freaks from the masses we create shows about freaks which just gone too far with curiousity.. when you are curious you can't go too far... you can go... but not too far... we call it social calibration.