Poll of the Day > You can kill off one religion, two websites, three TV series, four bug species.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Zeus posted...

FrozenBananas posted...

WastelandCowboy posted...

darcandkharg31 posted...

Websites: Pornhub

The fuck is wrong with you?

Really? Guys are talking about killing Youtube and you're upset about Pornhub?

Pornhub>Youtube
---

pornhub is the new youtube
---

Islam

Twitter
Buzzfeed

Bob's Burgers
Tosh.o
Modern Family

Mosquitoes
Earwigs
Centipedes
Wasps
---

Islam

Twitter
Tumbler

Family Guy
Spongebob
Teen Titans Go!

Mosquito's
Bed Bugs
Fleas
Wasps

I actually only came here for the mosquito bit. Because **** MOSQUITO'S! They are the devil's pets and the cause of so much pain, suffering, and misery in the world, not just among humans but animals as well.
---

islam

the gamer
one of duckbear's things i guess

big bang theory
keeping up with the kardashians
idk some awful reality thing

mosquitos
bed bugs
ticks
torn between fleas, earwigs, and botflies.
---

I wouldn't get rid of any websites, shows or insects. But I would get rid of Abrahamism as my choice for religions.


---

Islam.

X360A, and I'd double-tap them just to be sure.

The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, can't think of a third.

Mosquitoes. Can't think of any other "bugs".

Moonjay posted...

Leave the bees alone! We literally need them and they ain't bothering nobody! Kill the wasps!

They have robobees so it's fine.
---

Atheism, the rest will correct itself naturally.

DirtBasedSoap posted...

lol @ all the edge lords picking Christianity. Could you possibly be more ignorant?

Yes. You could be picking Islam.
---

Bugmeat posted...

But I would get rid of Abrahamism as my choice for religions.

Again, not a religion.

ZBug_ posted...

DirtBasedSoap posted...

lol @ all the edge lords picking Christianity. Could you possibly be more ignorant?

Yes. You could be picking Islam.

Be careful, guys, you could cut yourself on that edge.
---

Zeus posted...

Bugmeat posted...

But I would get rid of Abrahamism as my choice for religions.

Again, not a religion.

ZBug_ posted...

DirtBasedSoap posted...

lol @ all the edge lords picking Christianity. Could you possibly be more ignorant?

Yes. You could be picking Islam.

Be careful, guys, you could cut yourself on that edge.

Abrahamism sure is, it is the foundation religion that all the offshoots are based from.

Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Catholicism. All the same bloody religion.
---

1. It depends if they would find a new religion or just become secular.
Christianity if they become secular, because I want it to stop influencing us politics so much. Islam if they find a new religion.

I don't really care about websites, but lets go with facebook and instagram for the lols

tv series, it would depend if they get a finale or not. If they do not get a finale.
Teen titans go
spongebob
e! news

If they get a finale
Simpsons
Family guy
South Park
It would be fun to see what replaces them.

Mosquitos
Deer ticks
wasps
and that's all I got. others I don't like provide too much environmentally, but these 3 are probably decently safe to remove.
---

Babbit55 posted...

Abrahamism sure is, it is the foundation religion that all the offshoots are based from.

Not how it works. It's like naming the US government when you're asked to name a politician.

slacker03150 posted...

1. It depends if they would find a new religion or just become secular.
Christianity if they become secular, because I want it to stop influencing us politics so much. Islam if they find a new religion.

"Oh, what a wonderful world it'd be if everybody who didn't think like me would start to think differently!" >_>
---

Zeus posted...

Oh, what a wonderful world it'd be if everybody who didn't think like me would start to think differently!" >_>

I don't care if they think like me, I just care if they try to impose their religions laws on me. I don't support the legal banning of drawings of Muhammed and I don't support a case of making gay marriage or abortion illegal if you have to mention sin or the Bible to do it.
---

Zeus posted...

Bugmeat posted...

But I would get rid of Abrahamism as my choice for religions.

Again, not a religion.

ZBug_ posted...

DirtBasedSoap posted...

lol @ all the edge lords picking Christianity. Could you possibly be more ignorant?

Yes. You could be picking Islam.

Be careful, guys, you could cut yourself on that edge.

Im edgy because I dont hate what the media wants me to? Okay.
If you (or anyone) honestly think theres a problem with the Islamic religion (moreso than other religions that is) than you are seriously ignorant.
Christianity is typically radically xenophobic. I havent seen a religious group that dumps on other religions more than Christianity.

Keep being a sheep tho
---

slacker03150 posted...

Zeus posted...

Oh, what a wonderful world it'd be if everybody who didn't think like me would start to think differently!" >_>

I don't care if they think like me, I just care if they try to impose their religions laws on me. I don't support the legal banning of drawings of Muhammed and I don't support a case of making gay marriage or abortion illegal if you have to mention sin or the Bible to do it.

It's literally no different than imposing restrictions based on any other belief. Religion isn't some exclusive class unto itself.

ZBug_ posted...

Im edgy because I dont hate what the media wants me to? Okay.

...he says despite hating Christianity, which the media (minus a few conservative outlets) tells him to hate while defending Islam which he defends. Now, let's see if the media can drink a glass of water while you talk.

ZBug_ posted...

If you (or anyone) honestly think theres a problem with the Islamic religion (moreso than other religions that is) than you are seriously ignorant.

I suppose it's just a coincidence that the most violent participants in any religion happen to followers of Islam? And that restrictions in Muslim-majority nations are far more onerous than other nations? Here there's backlash when transgenders aren't allowed to use the same bathroom, meanwhile even the more progressive Muslim nations are refusing to let transgenders into the country. But yeah, *clearly* Christianity is worse >_>

Not that I'm necessarily knocking their freedom to exercise their beliefs (at least in cases not involving murder), but I personally find many of the practices reprehensible.

ZBug_ posted...

Christianity is typically radically xenophobic. I havent seen a religious group that dumps on other religions more than Christianity.

...what? You haven't seen Islam, you're saying? Sounds kinda ignorant.
---

Zeus posted...

It's literally no different than imposing restrictions based on any other belief

Yes, which is why I prefer laws to be objective rather than subjective based on a belief. So I am ok if you are anti gay marriage based on the fact that it doesn't end in children as long as you are also against steril marriages.

But if you say marriage is between a man and a woman because God said so, you can go fuck yourself.
---

After thinking on it, I think I know what 3 TV shows I'll want gone (originally posted I didn't know):

Simpsons (it's been on way too long - it stopped being funny more than 10 years ago)
Anything with those damn Kardashians (seriously, to hell with those skanks)
The View (or rather, The Spew)
---

can i get rid of all the Abrahamic religions? they all count as 1 right?

idk all the websites are fine

i dont mind any tv shows existing, kinda wish game of thrones never existed tho so i can stop hearing "it's totally your type of show! you'd love it!"

i dont care that bugs exist.
---

slacker03150 posted...

Zeus posted...

It's literally no different than imposing restrictions based on any other belief

Yes, which is why I prefer laws to be objective rather than subjective based on a belief. So I am ok if you are anti gay marriage based on the fact that it doesn't end in children as long as you are also against steril marriages.

But if you say marriage is between a man and a woman because God said so, you can go fuck yourself.

...literally everything is based on a belief of some sort. The fact that you believe marriage should be between two members of the same sex is itself a belief.

The thing about marriage specifically is that it's a religious rite rather than just a domestic partnership and, by legislating that others have to observe it, you're compelling them to act against their faith which is even more intrusive.

ssj4supervegeta posted...

can i get rid of all the Abrahamic religions? they all count as 1 right?

No, they don't. Hence why you have to say "religions"
---

Zeus posted...

literally everything is based on a belief of some sort. The fact that you believe marriage should be between two members of the same sex is itself a belief.

Actually, it is an opinion. If marriage is going to exists and be between life mates who do not necessarily have to have children, there is no reason to discriminate against which life mates get to participate. But there is reason not to discriminate, besides the fact that it fosters a divide between citizens, being official life mates makes things like insurance and hospital visits easier. and that opinion is not deeply held. It can be swayed based on the argument, it is just that the opposition argument is shit because they don't make it without bringing up religion.

It is, however, an opinion based on the belief that our laws should be fair, as well as the belief that people follow different religions and our laws shouldn't be based on religion.

Zeus posted...

The thing about marriage specifically is that it's a religious rite rather than just a domestic partnership

Here is where I get to demonstrate that it is an opinion rather than a belief. If the argument is that marriage is a religious rite, then I agree same sex marriages should be between the couple and their religion, whether that involves gay marriage or not. On the other hand, while marriage also remains a legal status, it doesn't matter if it is a religious rite to some religions. We have made it a legal status and therefore the qualifications for participating can not be based on a religion as that would be unconstitutional.

Zeus posted...

by legislating that others have to observe it, you're compelling them to act against their faith which is even more intrusive.

I am not compelling them to act against their faith as I am not compelling them to get married to someone of the same sex. I am not even compelling them to participate in the ceremony beyond selling a product they already sell to the public. If they sell a service related to marriage, I respect their right to deny it.

However, legislating their religious belief compels people to act in that regard even if they do not follow that religion, (In which case I believe it is just as intrusive, not less so.) or if their religion does not ban it, or if it even has allowances for it then legislating it that way actually does compel them to go against their beliefs(which is as intrusive as it is the same thing).
---

The thing about marriage specifically is that it's a religious rite rather than just a domestic partnership

This is an old and stale topic, but I don't get how this can keep being pushed. Marriage and rites of marriage can be religious. They are not religious by default.
---

Mead posted...

Shinto - it seems benign but its tied to some very racist and downright xenophobic roots

Lol.
---

You'd be deranged to get rid of any other religion but Islam.

slacker03150 posted...

Actually, it is an opinion.

No, it's not.

slacker03150 posted...

If marriage is going to exists and be between life mates who do not necessarily have to have children, there is no reason to discriminate against which life mates get to participate.

An argument which doesn't even make sense at face value.

slacker03150 posted...

It can be swayed based on the argument, it is just that the opposition argument is shit because they don't make it without bringing up religion.

Maybe that has to do with the fact marriage is a religious rite...

slacker03150 posted...

Here is where I get to demonstrate that it is an opinion rather than a belief. If the argument is that marriage is a religious rite, then I agree same sex marriages should be between the couple and their religion, whether that involves gay marriage or not. On the other hand, while marriage also remains a legal status, it doesn't matter if it is a religious rite to some religions. We have made it a legal status and therefore the qualifications for participating can not be based on a religion as that would be unconstitutional.

Then have a separate legal recognition for domestic partnerships. Given that advocates are already trying to move away from the husband/wife verbiage, it would also make more sense.

slacker03150 posted...

I am not compelling them to act against their faith as I am not compelling them to get married to someone of the same sex. I am not even compelling them to participate in the ceremony beyond selling a product they already sell to the public. If they sell a service related to marriage, I respect their right to deny it.

However, legislating their religious belief compels people to act in that regard even if they do not follow that religion, (In which case I believe it is just as intrusive, not less so.) or if their religion does not ban it, or if it even has allowances for it then legislating it that way actually does compel them to go against their beliefs(which is as intrusive as it is the same thing).

Of course you aren't personally doing it, the government is. And, as the laws change, the intrusion will get increasingly worse. Right now it's illegal for for-profit businesses to refuse to officiate but, over time, those laws will almost certainly go after non-profits as well. That's in addition to already attacking people providing wedding services. And, quite frankly, half the reason it had to be *marriage* rather than any other word was that it enabled these kinds of attacks by militant advocates and profit-seeking opportunists.

Guide posted...

The thing about marriage specifically is that it's a religious rite rather than just a domestic partnership

This is an old and stale topic, but I don't get how this can keep being pushed. Marriage and rites of marriage can be religious. They are not religious by default.

Every (or nearly every) historical culture that recognized marriage as a ritual did so on some religious footing. There were other forms of partnership, but marriage itself was a religious rite.
---

4 days later Zeus bumps the topic to argue good fucking job dude

wtf is a red onion
---

No love for Islam lol
---

Every (or nearly every) historical culture that recognized marriage as a ritual did so on some religious footing. There were other forms of partnership, but marriage itself was a religious rite.

We also used to not wear shoes. We can still do that, but it's no longer the only way.

Also, there were same sex marriages as religious rites.
---

Zeus posted...

No, it's not.

https://writing.colostate.edu/guides/teaching/co300man/pop12d.cfm
Opinion is a judgement based on facts, a belief is a conviction based on faith, morals, or values.

Zeus posted...

An argument which doesn't even make sense at face value.

If you are going to have a contract between 2 people there is no reason to discriminate based on sex. If you want to base it on procreation, then you must base it on procreation and exclude those who do not, will not, or can not procreate.

Zeus posted...

Maybe that has to do with the fact marriage is a religious rite...

Then wipe all marriage from the law books. Because right now it is a legal status.

Zeus posted...

Then have a separate legal recognition for domestic partnerships. Given that advocates are already trying to move away from the husband/wife verbiage, it would also make more sense.

Marriage and domestic partnership can not be 2 seperate things, we have already witnessed a number of businesses refuse to recognize the two as the same thing. Separate but equal does not work, so the only option would be to make all marriage domestic partnerships. IF we did that we would spend a fortune rewriting laws and people would still call it marriage anyway, so it really only appeases the evangelicals. And even them it would probably piss off because they will want to be married, not domestic partners.

Zeus posted...

Of course you aren't personally doing it, the government is. And, as the laws change, the intrusion will get increasingly worse. Right now it's illegal for for-profit businesses to refuse to officiate but, over time, those laws will almost certainly go after non-profits as well. That's in addition to already attacking people providing wedding services. And, quite frankly, half the reason it had to be *marriage* rather than any other word was that it enabled these kinds of attacks by militant advocates and profit-seeking opportunists.

The government is forcing them to get gay married either. It is also not forcing them to have a job that deals with marriage. We have a constitutional separation of church and state, so the changes you are talking about would be illegal.

You are right about business who offer religious services currently being compelled to do so, but feel free to put forth a law with a legal argument making services different than products. Personally I don't care enough and have the belief that if they are offering to do work for pay, if someone pays them they should do work. If they have strong moral feelings against doing their job, maybe they should change jobs.

Zeus posted...

Every (or nearly every) historical culture that recognized marriage as a ritual did so on some religious footing. There were other forms of partnership, but marriage itself was a religious rite.

Early governments often had many connections with religions, but even if there was a religious part to marriage, there has always been a legal aspect to them as well, not exclusively religious.
http://www.womenintheancientworld.com/hammurabilawcode.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Ur-Nammu

Early egypt was unique that it didn't appear to be a lawful institution or a religious one. After about 26th dynasty things like marriage contracts started to pop up.
http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/marriage.htm
---

Scientology

Scarlet Clicks
Instagram
(Would've said BuxP but they already shut down)

Haven't watched TV in 10 years

Mosquitoes
Wasps
Ticks
Fleas

Satanism.

Pick any two seedy websites that focus on either beastiality, necrophilia or child porn.

I don't watch tv enough to know what's currently on right now but let's just end three random Disney Channel DCOMs and call it a day.

Wasps, mosquitoes, flies and fleas.

darcandkharg31 posted...

Websites: Pornhub

https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/49684793/you-done-lost-your-mind.jpg

EnvyFox posted...

Satanism.

Pick any two seedy websites that focus on either beastiality, necrophilia or child porn.

I don't watch tv enough to know what's currently on right now but let's just end three random Disney Channel DCOMs and call it a day.

Wasps, mosquitoes, flies and fleas.

darcandkharg31 posted...

Websites: Pornhub

https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/49684793/you-done-lost-your-mind.jpg

Satanism is related to Christianity.
---

Aw jeez. I knew someone would challenge my answer if I picked that. Why didn't I just go with Dudeism like I originally intended? >.<

Of course this site favors religions that promote killing to those that actually forbid it.
---