Sometimes there is no illusion.

56465416131 · 2日前

what a shit sub. And there's no illusion about that.

https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/4ir7mx/we_saw_donald_trump_at_the_zoo_yesterday/

and a photo of a parrot with the title "donald trump" gets frontpage also.

un fucking real.

56465416131 · 2日前

Multumesc pentru raspunsuri.

Nu stiu de ce au aparut, dar de exemplu e posibil sa apara tinand cont de combinatia de par scurt+fotbal+ prieten eventual. Mi se pare interesant de exemplu partea cu parul scurt (cine a facut-o, de ce, etc). Si cum ai ajuns sa preferi sa te joci cu baietii (nu erau fete, sau nu te intelegeai cu ele, ti-au reprosat ca esti baietoasa etc)

nu vad cu ce ar putea fi relevant dar fie ... Sunt mai mari decat mine , normal ca vorbeau despre baieti, dar cu mine nu prea pentru ca " sunt prea mica pentru asa ceva".Dupa ce am mai crescut au mai incercat sa vorbeasca cu mine despre baieti dar preferam sa evit subiectul.

Intrebasem de dezbracat/expunere pt ca molestare in sens mai larg poate sa cuprinda si o expunere mai pronuntata la imagistica sexuala (chiar daca nu e sex sau ceva intr un context sexual.

La televizor sa vezi asa ceva prin anii 90? Nu stiu ce televizor ai avut tu, dar eu nu-mi amintesc sa fi fost filme cu oameni complet dezbracati la TV pe vremea aceea. Nu, am vazut la primul meu "iubit". Pe la 16 ani.

Probabil nu, dar puteau sa fie casete VHS, unii aveau. E adevarat ca eu m am nascut mai tarziu dar imi amintesc de exemplu foarte clar cum pe la 7-8 ani era un spectacol de samba sau ceva la TV si era o tipa cu sanii goi sau doar cu sfarcurile acoperite si mi s-a facut foarte rusine, in sensul ca imi dadeam seama ca e ceva (chiar daca nu intelegeam ce inseamna sexul).

Eu iau in considerare sa imi fac dizertatia pe subiectul asta, daca vreun profesor accepta, din cauza asta incerc sa strang cat mai multe informatii. Dupa cum am zis, nu exclud sa fie si o componenta genetica, e greu de demonstrat si ca e si ca nu e (si in general e greu de demonstrat in psihologie ceva, dar partea cu molestarea e destul de solida dpmdv - adica nu toti, dar mai multi decat populatia generala), deasta tot ce pot face e sa pun cat mai multe intrebari.

56465416131 · 2日前

Uh, I was the one that said that it's a good thing that Christians ignore the OT. I'm the one saying that Muslims aren't bound by the literal words of their book.

And I was the one saying you don't understand how Christianity, Judaism or Islam works.

What you're thinking on the "ignoring" part is definitely on point for Judaism, they are the ones that have the OT as Holy Book but not the NT and they are ignoring some parts of OT. And they have some extra texts too. Which is good.

Christians don't actually ignore OT, through the dogma (of NT) they are not allowed to use certain parts of OT. That is a very significant difference. But to understand wholly how that works you have to actually read the NT (particularly the Gospels).

Muslims on the other hand have it within their dogma, they have no NT or other writings that allow them not to acknowledge/dismiss rulings in Quran and Hadith.

Religions aren't evil, people are.

Yeah, they are, as like any ideology. Buddhism for example is much less dangerous than Judaism or Islam. Janism too. There's also a very elegant argument made by Sam Harris that:

To call Islam a religion of peace is delusional. Jainism is a religion of peace – the crazier you get as a Jain, the less we have to worry about you. Jain extremists are paralyzed by their pacifism. The problem therefore is not religious extremism if your core beliefs are truly non-violent.

If you have two ideologies, one that says "always forgive" and the other that says "you should forgive him but it's not a problem if you kill him", would you consider both the same?

That aside, I read the chapter you posted. I still don't get it. It looks like he explicitly said he does not come to abolish the old law. He's come to "fulfill" it; that is, improve upon it? Complete it? Augment it? None of those imply "nullify".

It was not abolished, an abolishment would've meant for example that adultery is now a-ok (since the old rule was that it's not ok).

An abolishement of OT (rulings on punishment) for example is in the Story of the Adulteress: http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/the-fourfold-gospel/by-sections/the-story-of-the-adulteress.html

Where in the narrow sense stoning for adultery is forbidden (so it's definitely forbidden to stone an adulterer, as OT instructed) and in a wider sense (but you'd have to read the NT to understand) punishing is forbidden in general (especially when it comes to adultery considering the new rules are so restrictive, meaning that you should've never looked at a woman with lust so that you get to be able to judge her). And you combine that judge part with the fact that we are all acknowledged as sinners anyway so we can't judge.

So this part should explain your question on adultery and New Tesament.

New Tesament mostly removes the position of the punisher from the people and grants it to Jesus/God in Judgement day. Whereas Islam holds on to OT ways.

I've written more on Islam the other day, which i invite you to read (the whole convo with the other user, for some reason he deleted his posts but luckily i was quoting him when replying): apparently I can't post the link (worldnews censors it automatically and all my post gets removed), you have to check my posting history and I'll give you a pm too.

To understand the differences between religions you have to read the books. And to understand Islam you must also understand how Hadiths work (mostly the sunni Hadiths since they're ~90% of muslims).

56465416131 · 2日前

WTF?

dickbutt?

56465416131 · 2日前

Uh, I was the one that said that it's a good thing that Christians ignore the OT. I'm the one saying that Muslims aren't bound by the literal words of their book.

And I was the one saying you don't understand how Christianity, Judaism or Islam works.

What you're thinking on the "ignoring" part is definitely on point for Judaism, they are the ones that have the OT as Holy Book but not the NT and they are ignoring some parts of OT. And they have some extra texts too. Which is good.

Christians don't actually ignore OT, through the dogma (of NT) they are not allowed to use certain parts of OT. That is a very significant difference. But to understand wholly how that works you have to actually read the NT (particularly the Gospels).

Muslims on the other hand have it within their dogma, they have no NT or other writings that allow them not to acknowledge/dismiss rulings in Quran and Hadith.

Religions aren't evil, people are.

Yeah, they are, as like any ideology. Buddhism for example is much less dangerous than Judaism or Islam. Janism too. There's also a very elegant argument made by Sam Harris that:

To call Islam a religion of peace is delusional. Jainism is a religion of peace – the crazier you get as a Jain, the less we have to worry about you. Jain extremists are paralyzed by their pacifism. The problem therefore is not religious extremism if your core beliefs are truly non-violent.

If you have two ideologies, one that says "always forgive" and the other that says "you should forgive him but it's not a problem if you kill him", would you consider both the same?

That aside, I read the chapter you posted. I still don't get it. It looks like he explicitly said he does not come to abolish the old law. He's come to "fulfill" it; that is, improve upon it? Complete it? Augment it? None of those imply "nullify".

It was not abolished, an abolishment would've meant for example that adultery is now a-ok (since the old rule was that it's not ok).

An abolishement of OT (rulings on punishment) for example is in the Story of the Adulteress: http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/the-fourfold-gospel/by-sections/the-story-of-the-adulteress.html

Where in the narrow sense stoning for adultery is forbidden (so it's definitely forbidden to stone an adulterer, as OT instructed) and in a wider sense (but you'd have to read the NT to understand) punishing is forbidden in general (especially when it comes to adultery considering the new rules are so restrictive, meaning that you should've never looked at a woman with lust so that you get to be able to judge her). And you combine that judge part with the fact that we are all acknowledged as sinners anyway so we can't judge.

So this part should explain your question on adultery and New Tesament.

New Tesament mostly removes the position of the punisher from the people and grants it to Jesus/God in Judgement day. Whereas Islam holds on to OT ways.

I've written more on Islam the other day, which i invite you to read (the whole convo with the other user, for some reason he deleted his posts but luckily i was quoting him when replying): https://np.reddit.com/r/european/comments/4il9dh/so_i_came_here_for_european_related_stuff_and/d2z1xmn

To understand the differences between religions you have to read the books. And to understand Islam you must also understand how Hadiths work (mostly the sunni Hadiths since they're ~90% of muslims).

56465416131 · 3日前

A normalization and glorification of masturbation. So easy to program the masses into thinking "it's alright", "everyone is doing it", "it's impossible to control it".

56465416131 · 3日前

A normalization and glorification of masturbation. So easy to program the masses into thinking "it's alright", "everyone is doing it", "it's impossible to control it".

56465416131 · 3日前

Euroins

Tu chiar nu ai suflet?

56465416131 · 3日前

Se vor ridica in toata tara.

BA CA M-AS BUCURA.

56465416131 · 3日前

Cu siguranta este EXACT aceeasi situatie de acum cateva zile si este cazul sa facem un statement pertinent prin care sa atragem atentia asupra rasismului si inegalitatii sociale.

Incepe sjwismul si pe aici sa inteleg?

56465416131 · 3日前

Multumesc pentru raspunsuri, daca nu te deranjeaza as vrea sa te mai intreb niste lucruri. Dupa cum spuneam, nu exclud ca unele cazuri sa fie asa din nastere, eu la ce atrageam atentia e ca o parte disproportionat de mare de homosexuali au istoric de molestare (molestare nu inseamna neaparat contact sexual). Nu inseamna ca toti au.

Plus ca erau si ceva zvonuri legate de mine cum ca nu as fi chiar "normala" si asa le-am inchis gura.

De ce au aparut zvonurile astea si cine le-a lansat si cand (la ce varsta)? Radeau pe fata de tine? Aveau vreun motiv sa o faca? Inainte de a realiza ca iti place de fata respectiva, ai simtit ceva (orice) sexual? Surorile tale vorbeau mult de baieti, bateau apropouri sa iti faci prieten, ti se parea ca sunt foarte libertine etc? Le-ai vazut dezbracate mai mult etc?

Prima data când am văzut "sexul masculin" am ras. Arata așa ciudat ... Cu nici un baiat nu m-am simtit asa bine ca si cu o fata.

Ai vazut in sensul ca ai avut vreo experienta (cu baietii/prietenii) sau doar la televizor etc?

Eu as intreba multe, dar tu esti cea mai in masura sa vezi ce ar putea (daca e ceva, poate ca nu e) sa fi produs o schimbare.... repet, nu inseamna ca a fost, dar poti sa iti pui intrebari teoretice, ca un joc.

edit: nu era o gluma catre voi [homosexualii] era ceva ce as folosi cu oricine cu care ma contrazic daca aparea discutia cu fobiile. Pur si simplu s-a nimerit la tine.

56465416131 · 3日前

Nu e vorba de susținere sau acceptare, ci de căsătorie. O societate în care heterosexualii au toate drepturile pe care le au acum, minus dreptul de a se căsători, ar funcția la fel de bine, fără nicio problemă. În loc de căsătorie ar trăi în concubinaj, dar în rest nu s-ar schimba nimic.

De ce ar exista regula de casatorie exclusiv homosexuala daca nu pentru a servi un scop?

Ar fi vorba doar de o foaie de hârtie în minus, foaie pe care la noi homosexualii o doresc și ei...

Aici de contrazici singur, daca chiar nu prea conteaza casatoria si se poate si fara (conform exemplului tau), de ce o doresc homosexualii?

Nu cred, cred că spuneau exact invers.

Ce sa spuna invers? Spuneau acum 50/100/200 de ani ca sigur homosexualitatea o sa fie acceptata si legalizata?

Văd că ești obsedat de zoofilie :) și aluneci pe un slippery slope în care oamenii vor dori în masă să se căsătorească cu animale.

Exemplul a fost dat ca sa intelegi ca nu e nimic batut in cuie, deci asta cu slippery slope este cat se poate de valabila, nu doar un "logical fallacy".

Te rog citeste iar partea aia ca nu ai inteles.

Deci personale sterile/femeile la menopauză nu trebuie să aibă dreptul de a se căsători?

Observa cum din casatoria clasica poate iesi un copil. Din cea homosexuala nu.

Dă-mi un studiu peer reviewed, mai bine...

Sunt studii in link chiar foarte solide. Intra pe gen.lib.rus.ec/scimag/index.php da paste la titlu si ia varianta integrala sa citesti metodologie etc.

Oricum deja discutia da in penibil. Daca vrei sa fii Gica-contra, fa-o in continuare, dar nu te astepta sa iti mai raspund pentru ca e pierdere de timp pentru mine. Ai in link tot ce iti trebuie.

56465416131 · 3日前

Scuze de intarziere, am tot zis ca raspund si am amanat.

serios acum , pentru tine , intrebarea " ai futut o capra" e o figura de stil? Suna ca si cum m-ai face zoofila...

Era o gluma exagerata intentionat ca sa scot in evidenta ce am zis mai sus, faza cu leading question vis-a-vis de homofobie sau alti termeni care contin fobie. Adica atunci cand in loc sa spui ceva, ataci si il faci pe celalalt sa intre in defensiva. Inteleg ca tu poate nu ai avut ca intentie constienta sa ii ataci pe cei care se opun homosexualitatii si doar ai folosit termenul respectiv ca e la moda acum, ce incercam sa spun e ca in momentul in care il faci pe unul homofob sau islamofob etc automat imprimi sugestia ca orice parere ar avea impotriva ideei, argumentele sale sunt ilogice (fobia e o frica irationala).

Bun, am scris mai mult dar mi-a murit laptopul si nu mi s-a salvat. O sa fac doar un rezumat pentru ca e tarziu deja ..

Nasol, si eu am patit-o, e foarte enervant.

Eu am prins putin comunismul, sunt nascut in 87'

Multumesc pentru detalii, pentru mine e mai mult o curiozitate, si e interesant sa aflu mai multe (dar nu trebuie sa imi spui sau sa te simti interogata), de exemplu, din ce mi ai povestit tu, mi se pare interesant de centrat atentia pe perioada cu primii prieteni (ce relatii ai avut cu ei etc, relatia cu surorile, cum ai perceput initial sexualitatea, etc). Dar asta ai face-o cel mai bine la un psiholog, e mult de acoperit.

Pana atunci chiar nu cred ca m-am gandit la sex. Dar nici nu-mi amintesc .

Si aici mi se pare interesant deoarece e posibil sa fie mai mult in spate, varsta de 13-14 ani e destul de tarzie pt primele ganduri sexuale (desi nu e exclus, depinde de ce fel de prieteni ai avut, ce fel de familie, ce fel de reviste ai citit, ce fel de carti, ce fel de programe ai vazut etc).

Eu unul ma gandesc ca poate porni si ca o aparare daca vezi initial sexul masculin ca scarbos, infricosator etc, si aici tot experientele din copilarie trebuie urmarite.

Ce vreau sa spun, chestia cu sondarea asta poate merge foarte departe si sa nu duca neaparat la un raspuns, Nu exclud posibilitatea ca homosexualitatea sa fie o chestie genetica (dar si acolo mi se pare interesant de investigat istoria familiei).

Am facut si psihoterapie dar asta mai recent

E foarte bine, mie mi se pare ca psihoterapia ajuta oricum. Doar alea prea lungi gen psihanaliza clasica de ani de zile mi se pare cam exagerata.

Legat de religie, ce mi-ai dat acolo, in special linkul 2, nu ma contrazice, chiar imi da dreptate.

Metoda abstinenţei este categoric interzisă

Unii credincioşi care nu vor să apeleze la nici un fel de metodă de contraceţie, întreţin relaţii sexuale doar când sunt hotărâţi să conceapă un copil. În restul timpului, ei se abţin de la relaţii sexuale pentru a nu folosi metode de contraceţie pe care le consideră păcătoase. Dar, prin faptul că se lipsesc unul pe altul de datoria de soţi, ei aplică metoda de contraceţie care tocmai este categoric interzisă de Dumnezeu când zice:* (si urmeaza un citat in Corintinieni, pe care il dau eu in engleza ca e mai clar).

The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife. 5Do not deprive one another, except by mutual consent for a limited time, so you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again, so that Satan will not tempt you through your lack of self-control. …

Împlinirea nevoilor sexuale ale partenerului sau partenerei legământului de căsătorie este o datorie sfântă pe care o are fiecare soţie sau soţ. Dumnezeu a lăsat această relaţie pentru soţi să-şi exprime dragostea unul faţă de altul şi ca să-şi ofere bucurie. Dacă unul din soţi îl lipseşte pe celălalt de relaţia sexuală, în felul acesta îl expune deschis ispitelor Satanei. Dumnezeu interzice categoric aceasta. Iar dacă cineva care este căsătorit are un motiv serios pentru post şi rugăciune în care vrea să includă şi abstinenţa de la relaţii sexuale, o poate face doar prin bunul acord al soţiei şi invers. Şi aceasta pentru puţin timp. De fapt, apostolul Pavel spune că includerea abstinenţei de la relaţiile sexuale în post este o îngăduinţă şi nu este o poruncă, adică nu este obligator să te abţii de la relaţii sexuale cu soţul sau soţia când posteşti.

E vorba ca nu ai voie, ca crestin, sa nu indeplinesti nevoile sexuale ale partenerului prin abstinenta (adica sa nu faci sex deloc), decat daca e limitata ca timp. Ceea ce sugereaza clar ca sexul nu e doar pentru procreere.

Iar in linkul cu Arsenie Boca, e mai degraba o parere amestecata cu cultura vremii etc (foarte frumoasa de altfel, chestia cu "mai rarut ca e mai dragut", si evident diversi oameni vor avea diverse pareri, ceea ce zic eu e ca in textul Bibliei Crestine nu exista majoritatea restrictiilor pe care le-ai listat tu.

Si nici parerea Bisericii Ortodoxe nu e ca sexul e doar pentru procreere, dar il limiteaza in cadrul casniciei (ceea ce e si in Biblie) si adauga chestia cu postul - ceea ce am mai zis, e foarte discutabil.

Ce se intelege prin contraceptie este avortul.

56465416131 · 3日前

then the Bible isn't much better.

Have you actually read the Bible and the Quran AND the Hadiths (because you know, there's no such thing as Islam without the Hadiths).

And no, The Bible, because of the New Testament is loads better than the Quran and Hadiths, as another user mentioned here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/4indrq/londons_new_mayor_i_wont_be_able_to_visit_the_us/d2zu295

As for your Matthew 5:18 quotes, which I always see used by euphoric gentlemen, first the translation is accomplished/ fulfilled, that is Jesus comes to complete the Old Testament.

More importantly, if you want to smear something, it's best to use an out of context quote, as you did.

The problem is if you...you know... read the actual chaper of Matthew 5: http://biblehub.com/niv/matthew/5.htm

after the comment on fulfillment of laws, it literally goes on and lists them individually, exhaustively, adding a more restrictive element to each: murder, adultery, divorce, oaths, and more importantly, the last two elements, central to christianity: "turn the other cheek" and "love your enemies".

Sorry I ruined the "but all religions are LE EVIL" circlejerk.

56465416131 · 3日前

I have read it. I used to defend Muslims too before I read it.

Same here.

And wait till you get to the Hadiths (most people have no clue Hadiths are integral to Islam, there's no such thing as a muslim following Quran only - that's just quranists, an obscure sect persecuted by muslims for apostasy).

Hadiths are directly endorsed in Quran by referring to Mohammed as "excellent character".

56465416131 · 3日前

uk has some type Of law protecting free speech

lol, no it doesn't.

56465416131 · 3日前

Their sidebar lists /r/topmindsofreddit, a highly sjw/srs sub.

they also link to /r/islamophobia watch where apparently everything that is against Islam is islamophobic.

56465416131 · 3日前

It wasn't about that, there were obviously tensions between him and the rest. The point (how I saw it at least when I read /u/kingpink2 's comment) was how today people would call him an islamophobe for opposing islamists.

56465416131 · 3日前

You have been banned from /r/europe, /r/worldnews for islamophobia and bigotry and hate speech. Recite the Shahada and your ban might be lifted in 1000 days.

Wonder if the comment will be showing or not.

56465416131 · 4日前

Not just that, but a regional default too. Anyone with an european ip gets the sub in it's frontpage and subreddit tab even if he/she doesn't even have an account.

56465416131 · 4日前

110

unde n am stiut n am pus.

56465416131

トロフィーケース

本日のreddit gold目標額達成率