Why do the God-haters persist?

[Uncensored2008]

That said, the rich would much rather invest in American companies and provide jobs to American consumers where they will sell their products to them and avoid the pitfalls of unstable governments and wars or whatnot.

Funniest post ever. Someone just lost all touch with reality.

Says the guy claiming that Obamunist stooge Jeff Immelt is a "Republican."

 

[Montrovant]

It would be more like saying that someone living in a radical Islamic fundamentalist country must be Islamic; that there cannot be atheists living in such a place.

Well, no... it wouldn't be like that at all because a country is not like a tribe. Whereas, a specific group is more like a tribe.

I don't know what term you would consider non-offensive if you don't like Native American. Although I wonder why you now put it in quotes and call it offensive when you've used it multiple times in the thread. American Indian? Indigenous people?

Just because I use it doesn't mean it's not offensive. Dickwad.

It's more respectful to use the tribal name if you know it, or if you are talking about all the tribes, indigenous people. My ancestors are not American and not Indians. They are also not "Natives of America" because the continent was here with my people long before it was ever known as America. Imagine if I came and took over your home, made you go live in the garden shed out back, then held lavish parties where I told my friends to pay their respects to you by patting you on the head and calling you Boss's House Natives? I don't imagine you'd find that endearing.

No, a country is not a tribe. However, you did not say none of the members of a particular tribe were atheist. You said, "There were no Atheist Native Americans". Since you have defined Native American in this context as the people indigenous to the continental US, that is certainly a country-sized area. Considering it contained a number of tribes in the period under discussion, it would be more difficult to make such a declaration than in a single country IMO.

If you find Native American offensive, fine. I'm not sure why the use of the name of a continent is an issue, but OK. But if you are going to use the term, I find it hard to care if you claim to find it offensive or not. I'm fine using indigenous people if you are.

 

[sealybobo]

Funniest post ever. Someone just lost all touch with reality.

He doesn't realize the 2007 Great Recession was a huge blow to the middle class and a huge victory for the rich. Probably done on purpose. For example the TARP bank bailout right when Bush left office. That was nothing more than the biggest bank robbery in world history. And he doesn't believe class warfare exists. It does and we're losing. And if we fight back we are called all kinds of names.

Anyways, back to the topic, because I believe religion has a lot to do with the stupidity and irrational side of humans, no doubt. Case in point, I was watching this documentary on PBS last night http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/27/u...chool-prayer-lawsuit.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

And the "christians" in these town hall meetings were so vile, angry, worked up, ready to kill for jesus. Honest to god, I fucking hate it when christians say don't just christianity by the people who represent it. Fuck that. What else do I have to go by? Why would I want to join their club?

Even when I was a "christian" I had what is called empathy which means I have the ability to put myself in other people's shoes. What if I were a muslim? What if I were an Atheist? This country is for everyone, so in any public institution, they can not favor one side over the other.

This girl was so courageous and she won! The Supreme Court ruled with her. Take that sign down. Go worship at church.

So, if god were provable/real, the Supreme Court would have ruled to keep god in schools. But because they know logically god is not something that can be proved, it should not be something that is forced on anyone. You can have faith, believe or hope there is a god but I think most of us know the gismys' of the world are just repeating a story they were told when they were too young and gullible to know better and now they are what we call brainwashed.

And sorry, but this nice sweet girl was not "hating god" but the christians sure were hating her. So much for you get to choose if you believe or not. Looks more like if you don't believe LETS BURN HER AT THE STAKE. You sooo know those people would have crucified her 400 years ago. Burned her to see if she was a witch. This is why religion has held on so long. In the past you couldn't call bullshit. Now we see the youth are waking up. Too smart to fall for it. Now watch this clip and tell me this girl is "evil". She is not.

Dumbass, the rich lost FAR MORE during the recession you fool.

You claim they have all the capital and investments and they have a lot.
ALL OF THOSE THINGS LOST 50% IN VALUE THEN.

Go enroll at a local community college in Econ and History 101.

Wake up fool.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/the-rich-get-richer-through-the-recovery/

Some 95% of 2009-2012 Income Gains Went to Wealthiest 1% - Real Time Economics - WSJ

Oh the poor rich

CEO pay up by 937% since 1978. That of the typical worker? 10.2% | Al Jazeera America

Things you'll never find out watching Fox or listening to Rush

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/15/opinion/ceo-pay-goes-up-up-and-away.html


Either you are rich and take me for a fool or you are an ignorant house slave content with being masters book licker.

 

[sealybobo]

It would be more like saying that someone living in a radical Islamic fundamentalist country must be Islamic; that there cannot be atheists living in such a place.

Well, no... it wouldn't be like that at all because a country is not like a tribe. Whereas, a specific group is more like a tribe.

I don't know what term you would consider non-offensive if you don't like Native American. Although I wonder why you now put it in quotes and call it offensive when you've used it multiple times in the thread. American Indian? Indigenous people?

Just because I use it doesn't mean it's not offensive. Dickwad.

It's more respectful to use the tribal name if you know it, or if you are talking about all the tribes, indigenous people. My ancestors are not American and not Indians. They are also not "Natives of America" because the continent was here with my people long before it was ever known as America. Imagine if I came and took over your home, made you go live in the garden shed out back, then held lavish parties where I told my friends to pay their respects to you by patting you on the head and calling you Boss's House Natives? I don't imagine you'd find that endearing.

No, a country is not a tribe. However, you did not say none of the members of a particular tribe were atheist. You said, "There were no Atheist Native Americans". Since you have defined Native American in this context as the people indigenous to the continental US, that is certainly a country-sized area. Considering it contained a number of tribes in the period under discussion, it would be more difficult to make such a declaration than in a single country IMO.

If you find Native American offensive, fine. I'm not sure why the use of the name of a continent is an issue, but OK. But if you are going to use the term, I find it hard to care if you claim to find it offensive or not. I'm fine using indigenous people if you are.

Wait stop! I want to give him that the Indians were god fearing people. That way we can add those scalpers to the list of murderous people who also believe in god. And not just murder them, TORTURE them.

Yes Boss, the Indians were all theists. I agree!

 

[Tuatara]

That said, the rich would much rather invest in American companies and provide jobs to American consumers where they will sell their products to them and avoid the pitfalls of unstable governments and wars or whatnot.

Funniest post ever. Someone just lost all touch with reality.

Says the guy claiming that Obamunist stooge Jeff Immelt is a "Republican."

Iwould like to point out the idiocy of this poster. I claimed Jeff Immelt was a republican. This poster argued because the man was hired by Obama that he must not be Republican and used this wikipedia link. I then told him to look at his own link which I will post here. Can anyone point out to him what it says about his political leanings. Anyone. Top right corner.

 

[sealybobo]

Funniest post ever. Someone just lost all touch with reality.

Says the guy claiming that Obamunist stooge Jeff Immelt is a "Republican."

Iwould like to point out the idiocy of this poster. I claimed Jeff Immelt was a republican. This poster argued because the man was hired by Obama that he must not be Republican and used this wikipedia link. I then told him to look at his own link which I will post here. Can anyone point out to him what it says about his political leanings. Anyone. Top right corner.

They throw a fit unless we appoint their guys, then insist those guys are "liberals" for working with Obama, meanwhile the GOP have obstructionists even within the Obama administration.

Did Bush appoint any liberals? Not a one.

 

[sealybobo]

That said, the rich would much rather invest in American companies and provide jobs to American consumers where they will sell their products to them and avoid the pitfalls of unstable governments and wars or whatnot.

Funniest post ever. Someone just lost all touch with reality.

Well I guess that depends on where your reality is. If you live in the reality where rich people gets some kind of sick pleasure out of making poor people suffer and don't want anyone to have money or economic prosperity, then yeah... I guess it does sound out of touch.

On the other hand, if you understand that most wealthy people are capitalists who want consumers to have money and spend money, and they would rather them do that here, where the generated economic commerce benefits our country instead of someone else's country, then my comment makes perfect sense.

You people have been so fucking brainwashed we're never going to get you back. We're going to end up having to shoot a bunch of you in the head before it's all said and done, because you're like rabid dogs. The propagandists have filled your mind with absolute shit, and you've bought every bit of it. Now you're invested, you've got years and years of this shit built up in your minds, and nothing is going to convince you otherwise. It doesn't even matter if it makes no rational sense, it's what you're going to believe.

Has no one ever taught you how wrong it is to apply a perceived stereotype to a whole entire group of people you do not know, and judge them on that basis? That virtually every social problem we've had in this country is based on that kind of bigoted ignorance? Rich people are not all one way, just like poor people are not all one way and middle class people are not all one way. Every person is different. I've known poor people who would just as soon step over your body as you're having a heart attack, to be the next in line at Wal-mart. I've also know rich people who give selflessly of their time and money to help those in need, to mentor to others and try to help them achieve a better life. But you all have ignorantly convinced yourselves that every rich person is the equivalent of Homer Simpson's boss.

I read this and thought of you: the erroneous contention that all atheists believe "God does not exist". We have to add that the intelligent atheist will acknowledge that there may, in fact, be "gods" that are unlike those described and worshipped by people through the many organized religions of this world.

The only difference between me and you is I don't believe there is one and you do.

I'm not saying there is no god. I'm saying I don't believe there is one. Certainly I don't believe the christians, muslims & jews.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Iwould like to point out the idiocy of this poster. I claimed Jeff Immelt was a republican. This poster argued because the man was hired by Obama that he must not be Republican and used this wikipedia link. I then told him to look at his own link which I will post here. Can anyone point out to him what it says about his political leanings. Anyone. Top right corner.

Retard, Immelt is an Obamunist stooge. Part of Obama's economic dream team, in charge of offshoring jobs to China...

 

[Uncensored2008]

They throw a fit unless we appoint their guys, then insist those guys are "liberals" for working with Obama, meanwhile the GOP have obstructionists even within the Obama administration.

Did Bush appoint any liberals? Not a one.

Immelt not only contributed heavily to Obama, his NBC network became part of the Obama team, openly campaigning for Obama in both elections.

 

[sealybobo]

They throw a fit unless we appoint their guys, then insist those guys are "liberals" for working with Obama, meanwhile the GOP have obstructionists even within the Obama administration.

Did Bush appoint any liberals? Not a one.

Immelt not only contributed heavily to Obama, his NBC network became part of the Obama team, openly campaigning for Obama in both elections.

This is just another great example of how the rich own/control both parties. Big deal he donated to Obama. Probably playing both sides of the fence. And since Citizens United, you have no idea how much this guy has donated and to whom.

And excuse me pal, but please don't tell us who is liberal and who is not. So now you guys are claiming that the CEO of GE one of the largest most powerful companies in the world is a liberal progressive? Is he starting a union at GE? How much more does he make than the average worker? Besides bribing, I mean donating to Obama, what else makes this guy a liberal progressive?

Immelt has a total five year compensation of $53.82 million, an income which ranked sixth among executives employed by US-based conglomerates.

Overall General Electric year end employment has dropped from 315,000 in 2002 to 307,000 in 2013

Another job creator?

As CEO of General Electric in 2007, Immelt earned a total compensation of $14,209,267

Stop trying to have CEO's run this county. Big difference in running a for profit company and a country. HUGE difference. First of all, a CEO wants to keep worker compensation low and his pay high. In a country, the government should want a balance. The government should protect the middle class and poor from the predatory corporatons who only care about profit.

I don't hate corporations for it. That's their job is to only care about profits. That's why we have a government. Everyone knows a game is no good without rules. Today the refs or government have been paid off to side with the corporations and not be fair to the workers of America. This has to change.

Romney was a CEO. Bain Capital sent thousands of jobs overseas. Bain made money tearing companies apart and bankrupting them. Not what America needs.

 

[sealybobo]

I see the antichristain bigotry is still rampant here.

Tapatalk

I notice no christians want to explain their fellow christians behavior in this town hall meeting where this very nice smart sweet atheist girl sued the school to take down the sign that said GOD. And the Supreme Court ruled in her favor because the Supreme Court decided that the sign they had up was favoring people who believe in god, specifically christians, and so needed to be taken down.

Why do we persist you guys ask? Because your imaginary friend has no place in our government. Government should be ruled by logic and science and facts not faith. And all those christians at the town hall need to realize this isn't their country. They share it with people who believe in other gods and even people who don't believe in any gods.

Did you watch it? Did you hear all the nasty things they said to her? What is it about the constitution they don't understand? And yet it is these very same people who say everything obama or the Federal government does is unconstitutional. But they don't seem to understand the whole concept of the wall between church and state.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/27/u...chool-prayer-lawsuit.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

[Boss]

Well, no... it wouldn't be like that at all because a country is not like a tribe. Whereas, a specific group is more like a tribe.



Just because I use it doesn't mean it's not offensive. Dickwad.

It's more respectful to use the tribal name if you know it, or if you are talking about all the tribes, indigenous people. My ancestors are not American and not Indians. They are also not "Natives of America" because the continent was here with my people long before it was ever known as America. Imagine if I came and took over your home, made you go live in the garden shed out back, then held lavish parties where I told my friends to pay their respects to you by patting you on the head and calling you Boss's House Natives? I don't imagine you'd find that endearing.

No, a country is not a tribe. However, you did not say none of the members of a particular tribe were atheist. You said, "There were no Atheist Native Americans". Since you have defined Native American in this context as the people indigenous to the continental US, that is certainly a country-sized area. Considering it contained a number of tribes in the period under discussion, it would be more difficult to make such a declaration than in a single country IMO.

If you find Native American offensive, fine. I'm not sure why the use of the name of a continent is an issue, but OK. But if you are going to use the term, I find it hard to care if you claim to find it offensive or not. I'm fine using indigenous people if you are.

Wait stop! I want to give him that the Indians were god fearing people. That way we can add those scalpers to the list of murderous people who also believe in god. And not just murder them, TORTURE them.

Yes Boss, the Indians were all theists. I agree!

Here we have an ignorant bigot responding to a post where it is made quite clear that "Indian" is an offensive term, yet he applies it twice with no regard. The ignorant one also mentions "scalping" which is a practice of removing the scalp of an enemy as a battle trophy. It originated in Eurasia prehistory. Scalping - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

However, you did not say none of the members of a particular tribe were atheist.

None of the members of a particular tribe were Atheists. None of the members of ANY tribe were Atheists. The concept of Atheism was unknown, unheard of, and would have been considered "bad medicine" and strongly rebuked.

Considering it contained a number of tribes in the period under discussion, it would be more difficult to make such a declaration than in a single country IMO.

Considering your opinion knows nothing of the cultures, it is irrelevant. You continue to try and imagine things as a European, as if no other culture exists. These people were different. Their lives were defined by the spirit. It wasn't a matter of conscious choice, it was just how things were. There was no "choose to not believe" in their culture, it did not exist. Where you view their spirituality as "faith and belief" they saw it as empirical truth. This was true for all the tribes, while they varied in some manner over details, they all universally held this cultural connection spiritually.

If you find Native American offensive, fine. I'm not sure why the use of the name of a continent is an issue, but OK.

I didn't say I found it offensive. I said some find it offensive and explained why. It's an issue because it wasn't your continent to name. It presupposes America was already here and these people were the "Natives" of it, and that is a lie. They were here LONG before America was here. But typical of arrogant Europeans, in your mind, America has always been America! And I don't have a problem with using Native American in conversation, it has become a commonly accepted term, but it's still an offensive term to many people.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Funniest post ever. Someone just lost all touch with reality.

Well I guess that depends on where your reality is. If you live in the reality where rich people gets some kind of sick pleasure out of making poor people suffer and don't want anyone to have money or economic prosperity, then yeah... I guess it does sound out of touch.

On the other hand, if you understand that most wealthy people are capitalists who want consumers to have money and spend money, and they would rather them do that here, where the generated economic commerce benefits our country instead of someone else's country, then my comment makes perfect sense.

You people have been so fucking brainwashed we're never going to get you back. We're going to end up having to shoot a bunch of you in the head before it's all said and done, because you're like rabid dogs. The propagandists have filled your mind with absolute shit, and you've bought every bit of it. Now you're invested, you've got years and years of this shit built up in your minds, and nothing is going to convince you otherwise. It doesn't even matter if it makes no rational sense, it's what you're going to believe.

Has no one ever taught you how wrong it is to apply a perceived stereotype to a whole entire group of people you do not know, and judge them on that basis? That virtually every social problem we've had in this country is based on that kind of bigoted ignorance? Rich people are not all one way, just like poor people are not all one way and middle class people are not all one way. Every person is different. I've known poor people who would just as soon step over your body as you're having a heart attack, to be the next in line at Wal-mart. I've also know rich people who give selflessly of their time and money to help those in need, to mentor to others and try to help them achieve a better life. But you all have ignorantly convinced yourselves that every rich person is the equivalent of Homer Simpson's boss.

I read this and thought of you: the erroneous contention that all atheists believe "God does not exist". We have to add that the intelligent atheist will acknowledge that there may, in fact, be "gods" that are unlike those described and worshipped by people through the many organized religions of this world.

The only difference between me and you is I don't believe there is one and you do.

I'm not saying there is no god. I'm saying I don't believe there is one. Certainly I don't believe the christians, muslims & jews.

of course atheists say that God does not exist, that's what makes them atheists.....if you have trouble admitting this, don't call yourself an atheist.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

I see the antichristain bigotry is still rampant here.

Tapatalk

I notice no christians want to explain their fellow christians behavior in this town hall meeting where this very nice smart sweet atheist girl sued the school to take down the sign that said GOD. And the Supreme Court ruled in her favor because the Supreme Court decided that the sign they had up was favoring people who believe in god, specifically christians, and so needed to be taken down.

Why do we persist you guys ask? Because your imaginary friend has no place in our government. Government should be ruled by logic and science and facts not faith. And all those christians at the town hall need to realize this isn't their country. They share it with people who believe in other gods and even people who don't believe in any gods.

Did you watch it? Did you hear all the nasty things they said to her? What is it about the constitution they don't understand? And yet it is these very same people who say everything obama or the Federal government does is unconstitutional. But they don't seem to understand the whole concept of the wall between church and state.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/27/u...chool-prayer-lawsuit.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

its a shame she felt the need to force her beliefs on all her neighbors.....but I understand the part about fearing her eyes would burn out of her head if she was required to walk near a printed prayer......you can't be too careful around incendiary things such as prayers.....

 

[Ina]

Those that hate any deity, hate themselves the most.

 

[PostmodernProph]

And all those christians at the town hall need to realize this isn't their country.

oh, were they from Kansas?....

 

[Uncensored2008]

This is just another great example of how the rich own/control both parties. Big deal he donated to Obama. Probably playing both sides of the fence. And since Citizens United, you have no idea how much this guy has donated and to whom.

And excuse me pal, but please don't tell us who is liberal and who is not. So now you guys are claiming that the CEO of GE one of the largest most powerful companies in the world is a liberal progressive? Is he starting a union at GE? How much more does he make than the average worker? Besides bribing, I mean donating to Obama, what else makes this guy a liberal progressive?

Immelt has a total five year compensation of $53.82 million, an income which ranked sixth among executives employed by US-based conglomerates.

Overall General Electric year end employment has dropped from 315,000 in 2002 to 307,000 in 2013

Another job creator?

As CEO of General Electric in 2007, Immelt earned a total compensation of $14,209,267

Stop trying to have CEO's run this county. Big difference in running a for profit company and a country. HUGE difference. First of all, a CEO wants to keep worker compensation low and his pay high. In a country, the government should want a balance. The government should protect the middle class and poor from the predatory corporatons who only care about profit.

I don't hate corporations for it. That's their job is to only care about profits. That's why we have a government. Everyone knows a game is no good without rules. Today the refs or government have been paid off to side with the corporations and not be fair to the workers of America. This has to change.

Romney was a CEO. Bain Capital sent thousands of jobs overseas. Bain made money tearing companies apart and bankrupting them. Not what America needs.

Immelt is a leftist totalitarian; just like Obama, just like you.

None of you have the slightest thing in common with liberals.

Liberals support Laissez Faire markets - do you?
Liberals support freedom of religion, even on sacred government ground - do you?
Liberals support freedom of speech, even when it is critical of Dear Leader - do you?

Of course not, you are a Khmer Rouge democrat, a leftist thug.

 

[Montrovant]

No, a country is not a tribe. However, you did not say none of the members of a particular tribe were atheist. You said, "There were no Atheist Native Americans". Since you have defined Native American in this context as the people indigenous to the continental US, that is certainly a country-sized area. Considering it contained a number of tribes in the period under discussion, it would be more difficult to make such a declaration than in a single country IMO.

If you find Native American offensive, fine. I'm not sure why the use of the name of a continent is an issue, but OK. But if you are going to use the term, I find it hard to care if you claim to find it offensive or not. I'm fine using indigenous people if you are.

Wait stop! I want to give him that the Indians were god fearing people. That way we can add those scalpers to the list of murderous people who also believe in god. And not just murder them, TORTURE them.

Yes Boss, the Indians were all theists. I agree!

Here we have an ignorant bigot responding to a post where it is made quite clear that "Indian" is an offensive term, yet he applies it twice with no regard. The ignorant one also mentions "scalping" which is a practice of removing the scalp of an enemy as a battle trophy. It originated in Eurasia prehistory. Scalping - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

However, you did not say none of the members of a particular tribe were atheist.

None of the members of a particular tribe were Atheists. None of the members of ANY tribe were Atheists. The concept of Atheism was unknown, unheard of, and would have been considered "bad medicine" and strongly rebuked.

Considering it contained a number of tribes in the period under discussion, it would be more difficult to make such a declaration than in a single country IMO.

Considering your opinion knows nothing of the cultures, it is irrelevant. You continue to try and imagine things as a European, as if no other culture exists. These people were different. Their lives were defined by the spirit. It wasn't a matter of conscious choice, it was just how things were. There was no "choose to not believe" in their culture, it did not exist. Where you view their spirituality as "faith and belief" they saw it as empirical truth. This was true for all the tribes, while they varied in some manner over details, they all universally held this cultural connection spiritually.

If you find Native American offensive, fine. I'm not sure why the use of the name of a continent is an issue, but OK.

I didn't say I found it offensive. I said some find it offensive and explained why. It's an issue because it wasn't your continent to name. It presupposes America was already here and these people were the "Natives" of it, and that is a lie. They were here LONG before America was here. But typical of arrogant Europeans, in your mind, America has always been America! And I don't have a problem with using Native American in conversation, it has become a commonly accepted term, but it's still an offensive term to many people.

This is what you said :

I have not studied about Mayans or Inuits, so I can't tell you about them. When I say "Native American" (an offensive term to some of us, btw) I am referring to the indigenous peoples of what is now considered the continental United States.

An offensive term to some of us. Us generally would include you. Is there a reason I should have assumed your use of the word us did not include you? At this point I'm assuming you meant that your ancestry is of the indigenous people, and some of them find it offensive, but not you.

As to choosing not to believe, I think that is actually a poor way to put it, even if it is common. I don't think most people consciously choose what to believe in regards to religion or spirituality. Regardless, the idea that every single one of the millions of people would agree with whatever their particular tribe believed seems asinine to me. You think you can speak to the beliefs of every individual amongst the millions that lived in the area of the continental US before European settlement. I think that is both arrogant and impossible. Clearly this is going nowhere and it's a sidetrack I really don't care much about.

 

[Boss]

An offensive term to some of us. Us generally would include you. Is there a reason I should have assumed your use of the word us did not include you? At this point I'm assuming you meant that your ancestry is of the indigenous people, and some of them find it offensive, but not you.

Why would you assume I meant myself? 'Some of us' does not generally include me. Some of us on this forum don't believe in God... does that include me? Did I say it did? I don't take offense to "Native American" but then, I also don't take offense to "Redskin" and actually find it to be more respectful. I just brought this up as a sidebar, just in case you weren't aware, as obviously you weren't.

As to choosing not to believe, I think that is actually a poor way to put it, even if it is common. I don't think most people consciously choose what to believe in regards to religion or spirituality.

Oh really? I'm genuinely interested in your explanation of this.

Regardless, the idea that every single one of the millions of people would agree with whatever their particular tribe believed seems asinine to me. You think you can speak to the beliefs of every individual amongst the millions that lived in the area of the continental US before European settlement. I think that is both arrogant and impossible. Clearly this is going nowhere and it's a sidetrack I really don't care much about.

I know it seems asinine to you, that has been made very clear. It seems that way because you are of European descent and understand western culture, where everything revolves around self. In this culture, we objectively determine what we choose to believe. In the Native American culture there was no choice of individual regarding the Great Spirit, it was a truth as apparent as their existence. I'm not being arrogant, I am stating a fact regarding their culture that is vastly different from the culture you are familiar with, and you don't understand it. This was not a matter of "faith" for them, as it is with western cultures.

 

[Slyhunter]

HEY!!! I DID MY DUTY, I GAVE YOU TRUTH,I GAVE YOU WARNING, if you want to chose hell . GO FOR IT!!! NO SKIN OFF MY NOSE!!!

Then stop already. I clearly chose hell over heaven with you.

YOU GOT IT!!! AND IT IS ALL YOUR CHOICE,NO ONE TO BLAME BUT YOURSELF!!! hell.

Heaven sounds boring. All those self righteous people preaching their brains off. Who would want that.