Search results

No, but think about it, it is interesting to not just collate opinions but also to think for oneself. Islam started in a society that was 600 years more 'advanced' than christianity did. Sure, in itself it had less time to evolve, but the society it was generated in, had already evolved for 6...

That is a poor excuse for islam. Think about it, islam is 600 years younger than christianity, that also means it developed in a society that should be 6 centuries more advanced than christianity, yet it remains a religion that is very brutal in many respects. I have little hope that islam is...

Yes, problem is the way that religions get a free reign in democracy. You are entitled to believe whatever you like, but there is a fine line between believing LGBTQ is wrong, and acting upon it.

I think it also has to do with the incorrect notion that gay people don't reproduce. As religions want to dominate they think the more offspring that is part of that religion is produced the better. It is against their business... (The reality is that many gay people will reproduce).

I don't think that applies to the bible, it being the literal word of god. The bible can't even be literal, because the 4 evangelists do not tell the same story. Islam is different, there it is supposed to be the exact word from god. That is also the reason why there is so much more religious...

You mean like homosexuality or something? Even that exists in the animal kingdom. A lot is accepted, but it doesn't mean that nature stopped having an influence on people in general.

I think the reason for that is biology, which proves that we are in essence, still animals. A totally non-symmetric face for instance (not just a bit, because a normal face is not perfectly symmetric anyway) indicates bad genes. Nature makes us look for partners that are fit to produce good...

I am not lowering myself, I am assuming reality as it is. We have evolved, other animals evolved too. I think what makes the human space typical is that it is so versatile, we don't have the sharpest vision, nor are our other senses ever the best, but we did learn to adapt. I didn't say that...

The more animals are studied, the more examples are found of animals that reason, that can solve problems, and also invent tools. We are a lot less unique than we really think. Why would sexual attraction be totally different for humans than it is for other species? For instance, investigation...

I'm giving another example of the same attitude, an attitude of superiority, denying that in essence we are still animals, who eat, drink and mate. If as a species we would be a bit more modest, that would not be so bad for us.

You could see this more as realism. Part of the problem with mankind is that we see ourselves too much as 'different' from the rest of animals or even nature. This creates a feeling that we can do whatever we like, even destroy nature completely, because we are supposedly above that. Climate...

Or so we would like to believe.

Of course not everyone has the prettiest girlfriend / boyfriend. That is because it is a bit of supply / demand. If you are ugly as a man, you probably won't be able to get the most good-looking girls, unless they are after something else. Just look at the animal world, males will compete for...

Not really. For instance, a totally asymmetric face (a normal face is not L/R a perfect mirror) indicates bad genes. The ideal stereotype of a beautiful woman corresponds with a fertile, healthy woman. So those images are based on a natural form of gene selection.

True, but there were also women who hated being a house wife, and who were very happy that they could go out into the work life. It also made for many women who wanted a divorce to stay with their husband, because they were financially dependent.

I think for men who are not that handsome, it can make them very insecure. In the old days it was sufficient for them to have a good income to get the girl, now they can't rely on that anymore. They might even end up in a relationship where the girl earns more than him.

Well, I would probably think it's funny, and ask for clarifications.

I think a lot has changed since women started having jobs of their own. In the classic role model, women used to be housewives, so they were financially dependant on men. That meant it was interesting for them to not focus on looks too much, but on income. Now that both parties have jobs of...

Nah, I wouldn't settle for the toes. :ROFLMAO:

I don't know, is that any different from in the real world? When I was a lot younger, I had a colleague, he was good-looking, slim, did a lot of sports, the only thing against him was a slight stutter. Lots of girls were interested in him, and this was just at after-work parties, no dating sites...