newb? been here a long time as well as O-live back in the day, just deserves a comment once in a while
Why? I assume you understand the chemistry required to make even the most simple living single cell organism from methane, ammonia and carbon dioxide? I also assume you can explain the physics (complying with the second law of thermodynamics) of where the energy came from that was released by the "big bang". I also assume you can explain the where the soul, unique to humans, comes from; or alternatively, if there is no should and it is just the manifestation of a series of chemical reactions and interactions, then why do we put people in jail because they naturally respond to chemical signals and have not true ability to reason. Three simple questions. When you can explain those using evidence then I guess you can laugh at people that believe the stories in the Bible.
I agree that world views all have some level of arbitrariness (how you navigate between conservative or liberal views, as one example, has a lot to do with your personality and what values you're exposed to growing up). I'd simply draw a distinction between views that we can reason about (even if our goals are "arbitrary"--what I want to see in the world isn't necessarily what you do--once we have goals, our principles can logically lead toward such goals) and views that we can't (a belief that something is true that doesn't follow from, or towards, anything we actually observe). I'm not saying we necessarily shouldn't have any of the latter, but I think there is a difference in the "arbitrariness" of each.
Personal insult JK though. Now that I see people getting away with legit racism I don't even know what flies here anymore. I think the personal insult rule only applies when someone takes exception to the insult. As long as nobody mentions the elephant in the room (in this case a racist comment) then there is no problem with it. Only once the elephant knocks a lamp over do people feel like action needs to be taken.
I haven't been around a lot lately, so maybe I just don't know an obvious reference you're making but--have you reported the racism you're referring to (either with the Report function, or just PMing a moderator)? Possibly it just wasn't seen? I don't think racism is supposed to fly here.
This forum is pretty much filled to the brim with authoritarian fascists who harbor ridiculously racist and sexist ideologies that would have gotten them in trouble in the 1980's, let alone the 2010's. Why do you think I left the first time?
False equivalence much? One does not need to have answers to those questions to know that many stories of the bible (and all other religious texts) didn't happen. I do not need to have a complete understanding of the universe to know that Jesus was not born to a virgin. As to your final question - are you really saying that the fact we imprison people is proof of a soul? I'm not sure if we have souls or not, but whether or not they exist doesn't have anything to do with justice and imprisonment. And the existence of souls doesn't support Christianity.
We think alike. If Meyers wants to change how fans think of and treat him, if given the chance he should come to a teammate's defense and clock Green with everything he's got. Instant fan favorite. #teamofdestiny
That would just prove my point, and I'm hoping it doesn't have to be like that. Of course it's also possible I'm being overly sensitive and the comment is not actually perceived as racist by others.
My point is that everybody has faith in something. Many pretend that their beliefs are true because they are supported by science, but they have no clue as to the truth of that belief. I just think it is hypocritical to call the virgin birth impossible when you cannot explain any number of other natural phenomena, but take them on faith. It's your right to laugh at whatever you want, but don't pass on the fallacy that stories in the Bible can't possibly be true, when you believe many other things which also cannot be proven to be true (or worse, you don't think about them at all). My bottom line is just lay off the Christian put downs unless you are ready to back up your position. In the end I would much rather talk Blazers with you.
As to Nurkic, . . . If he is fully healthy, then no doubt he plays from game 1 on. But, if he is questionable, do you: 1) try him in game 1 hoping you can catch them overconfident and steal home court advantage? 2) keep him out until game 2 and see if you can catch them on the rebound after a likely Blazer loss in game 1? 3) rest him up until game three, hoping you can maybe get lucky in game 1 or 2, or save your best until you start on your home court? In the end I would guess it mostly is just on how he feels, but I do wonder if there is any strategy behind the scenes.
The games are so far apart, I'd pick option 3 and give him and extra week and a Willis Reed moment to feed off of. He's young and lives on emotions.
I don't understand your point. A moderator has to see it to address it. If they just didn't happen to read that post, no matter how flagrant the racism is, it can't be addressed. Unless your point is that moderator action shouldn't be necessary at all. I'm sympathetic to that perspective, but there are people who don't think racism is a bad thing or believe that anything short of using the n-word isn't racism.
He will play, but it wont be announced until just be for game time and it would be foolish to announce any sooner. Why tip our hat to GSW?
There was the implication that myself as I am wasn't good enough and it wouldn't be until I 'worked on it' and starting thinking along the same wavelength as Nik. If you don't see that then maybe he didn't intend it as a insult to me then.
I think we're talking about a particular situation here, not an ordinary day to day situation. Nurkic came to the Blazers not in very good shape. Now he has been off for 2-3 weeks so he is probably in worse shape. I believe that a player is more likely to get injured when he is not conditioned and does not have maximum muscle tone. I understand that everyone wants to see him out there battling the Warriors. But, now that he is motivated, doesn't it make sense to rest him a little bit more and then go into a really strong off-season program so he is really ready to go next season?
