Total posts: 8,696
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
@Mharman
@badger
well it was my idea so I best I'd better join in
head's up, second vote
UNVOTE
VTL Badger
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
We probably just have to pick someone at random and lynch then. Hope for a CC in the process and behavioral tells
I'd prefer someone who promises to be unavailable.
For example, you and Mikal both promised unavailable at the top of the first game and both proved scum but neither have confirmed unavailability this game (perhaps assuming that was already stated). Badger promises unavailability this game though he made no such claim in the false start game.
Therefore, I like the idea of starting with badger.
Created:
Posted in:
Oromagi
===TOWN===================
Whiteflame
Pie
Earth
Greyparrot
Badger
Incel-Chud
Supadudz
Mikal
===SCUM===================
UVC
Supa (2/5) - Pie, Oro
Created:
Posted in:
Oromagi
############town#################
Whiteflame
Pie
Earth
Greyparrot
Incel-Chud
Supadudz
Mikal
Badger
Created:
Posted in:
Well, I don't get Showtime but I don't think I'd have been likely to watch if I did. If the thesis is just racism exists in America and this is just an edgy take on that thesis, well....fine but I think I've heard it.
A new documentary comes out on the Holocaust every year but once you've watched Shoah, you've pretty much got the narrative and the mere repetition becomes a little depressing. Same with racism in US.
Unless this doc has something really new to say I think I'll probably wait for one that does.
For example, I would like to see a doc about the Louisiana State Patrol, the pattern of racial violence committed by at least one Troop in that State and the current Governor's culpability in covering up those crimes. Something specific, something that's fixable in the short term seems more worthy of my attention than a general treatment of the problem.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
I think 100 years is probably too far out for useful speculation. Sci-Fi writers in 1930's-50's mostly thought we'd have robots and automated vehicles and colonies on Mars by now. At the present rate of change, I think we'd need to establish some assumptions before speculating. Climate is going to be a massive wildcard likely driving radical shifts in geopolitics.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
But it's curious, why do you think Americans are so ignorant about & detached from the rest of the world? Is it education? Media? Some sense of American centrism? US hegemony? Prosperity?
OBJECTION: Hasty generalization fallacy
Let's agree that DART is not a representative sampling and chud is distorting your analysis with excess drag.
Created:
Posted in:
There's no equality between the elites and the working truckers at all. They won't even talk to the working class they are so beneath them. There can be no egalitarianism in such an obvious caste system.
In fact, it would be a big fat lie to say that the 400 trucks blocking the roads, honking horns, beating up little old ladies, desecrating graves, committing arson, etc represents "working truckers." Working truckers are more vaccinated that the average Canadian population and are demanding that the government clear out these criminals interfering with their legitimate work and trade.
The largest trucker's organization in Canada issued a joint statement with the Federal Government reinforcing the use of vaccinations, along with other public health measures, to protect Canadian health care and to reduce COVID-19 risk. In the statement the CTA and the government committed to working together to respond supply chain constraints. The truckers cautioned the public that a "great number of protestors" have no connection to the trucking industry and "have a separate agenda beyond a disagreement over cross border vaccine requirements". The CTA announced they "do not support support and strongly disapprove of any protests on public roadways, highways, and bridges" and the disruption of the "motoring public on highways and commerce at the border".
In their February 7 statement, Teamsters Canada, representing more than 55,000 professional drivers, including approximately 15,000 long-haul truck drivers, of whom 90 per cent are vaccinated, said that the so-called "freedom convoy" are "delegitimiz[ing] the real concerns of most truck drivers today". The statement said that the convoy and "the despicable display of hate lead by the political Right and shamefully encouraged by elected conservative politicians does not reflect the values of Teamsters Canada."
As far as I can tell, none of the Freedom Convoy leadership is a professional trucker.
- James Bauder runs a fringe political website with 4 active members
- Pat KIng, co-founder of Wexit (that's Western Canada should secede from Canada)
- Tanya Gaw runs a Christian 5g conspiracy website
- Jason LaFace and Dave Steenburg are far right political organizers with an affection for the Nordic Skinhead movement
- Roman Didulo the "Queen of QAnon" is a social media influencer
- Tamara Lich was in charge of the fundraising but stood up to denounce the lawlessness and violence and called on the protestors to practice non-violent protest.
- Pat King now describes Lich having gone missing with Freedom Convoy funds.
It would be far more accurate to say that the 324,000 Canadian professional truckers stand with the Federal Government in urging these 400 fascists to shut the fuck up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Calling Stalin right-wing to push forth your wing is ridiculous. Stalin was left-wing, it's impossible to deny that his policies were based on left-wing communist/socialist ethos.
Stalin, by definition, was not Left wing:
Left-wing politics "support social equality and egalitarianism, often in opposition of social hierarchy. Left-wing politics typically involve a concern for those in society whom its adherents perceive as disadvantaged relative to others as well as a belief that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or abolished.
- did Stalin support social equality or did he create a Party member elite and a vast underclass with little or no civil rights?
- did Stalin support egalitarianism or did Stalin genocide 3.5 million Ukrainians, millions of Jews, 8 million Kulaks?
- Did Stalin oppose social hierarchies or did he live in gigantic fucking palaces while half the population starved?
Stalin, by definition, was not Communist:
Communism is "a philosophical, social, political, and economic ideology and movement whose goal is the establishment of a communist society, namely a socioeconomic order structured upon the ideas of common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money, and the state."
- did Russians own the USSR in common or was Stalin one of ten wealthiest men in history?
- did Stalin get rid of social classes or was the USSR heavily socially striated along ethnic and party membership lines ?
- did Stalin get rid of money or did the Soviets have the ruble?
- did Stalin eliminate state government or was he dictator of one of the most oppressive, aggressive, expansionist, totalitarian states in human history?
Stalin, by definition, was no Socialist:
Socialism is "a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole."
- did Russians as a people own or regulate the means of production, distribution, and exchange in the USSR or did Stalin own and regulate the means of production, distribution, and exchange in the USSR, murdering anybody who said otherwise?
Communism and Socialism by definition depend on a functioning democracy to represent the collective will of the people in the ownership and regulation of production, distribution, and exchange. If the people's will is not accurately represented than you don't have any kind of Socialism or Communism that Marx or Engels would be willing to respect- you just have another fucking dictator spouting a bunch of delusional lies.
Yes, American Republicans have spent decades miseducating the public about the meanings of these economic terms and the politics of Stalin but to understand history you need to go by the actual definitions of words and recognize the effect decades of political propaganda has had on your perspective.
Use your brain, not YouTube to define reality.
Created:
Posted in:
If there is one thing the Canadian truckers have proved without a doubt, it's that the left doesn't care about uneducated workers.
As if the Right ever has any plan for education except funding cuts. Canada has some of the cheapest and most widely available vocational and adult education programs anywhere and while its true the Canadian Right lacks the anti-intellectual bent of their southern neighbors, it is fair to say that the Canadian Left gets most of the credit for the many good options available to those truckers who possess the foresight to avail themselves of those options
The horse in Orwell's animal farm are the Canadian truckers.
That's right. Boxer the Horse was hard working but ignorant of the facts and blindly following the doctrines of Napoleon who Orwell used to represent Russian style autocrats like Putin and Trump. Let's recall that Orwell was a Liberal, Democratic-Socialist horrified by Stalin's right wing hijack of the Socialist movement in Russia.
All the leftists want to do is take the truckers out to the back of the barn for the final solution,
Actually, the pigs (autocrats) sold Boxer (workers) to the glue factory and bought some whiskey with the proceeds. Let's liken that to Trump and Cruz and DeSantis sending out mailers, demanding investigations of GoFundMe, etc but all the donations they're collecting on that issue go straight to their own campaigns and no money is donated to the truckers. In Trump's case, up to 70% of all funds donated go straight to Trump and not to any political organization whatsoever, per Trump's disclaimers.
Today's tyrants have forced a shift in definitions.
All tyrants are, by definition, absolute rulers. Left wingersare, by definition, primarily concerned with freedom and equality for all. By definition, there is no such thing as a left wing Tyrant. A left winger who becomes a tyrant is not left wing anymore, by definition. Left and Right wing refer to the political division made at the Tennis Court Oath in Paris at the outset of the French Revolution. Left Wing meant those legislators who prioritized human rights before property rights, Right Wing meant those legislators who prioritized property rights before human rights.
The definitions of words have specific meanings. Definitions do change slowly over time but they don't "shift" according to changes in the political wind. If you are trying to spot the liars, look for the people telling you that the definitions of words have shifted.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
->@oromagiWhat once was called Conservativism in the West has gone silent, afraid to ally with the Liberals and repelled by self-serving troglodytes running their parties.Who caused that?Conservatism failed to stop the massive illegal immigration that has taken jobs from working class citizens.Conservatism has failed to keep well paying jobs in America as free-trade has made American working class to compete with people making $2 an hour over seas.Conservatism has failed the working class in America from the dangers of neoliberalism.
Look around you, chud. The future belongs to the smart and adaptable. Americans don't need politicians who work to keep humans out in the fields and down in the mines. We need to educate and re-educate. We need Americans to ask "how can I help?" rather than Americans who say, "this little job is mine and I don't care how ineffective or nonproductive my contribution to the general welfare becomes over time I demand stability, even at the cost of future generations of Americans. This change is the fault of those who pushed too hard."
You may wish Conservatives had fought to preserve your rut but that rut would not be doing you or your country any favors. Adapt or die, says capitalism. Adapt or die, says history. Adapt or die, says evolution.
It's the fault of leftists who promote shit like normalization of pedophilia.
I'll remind you that almost all child sex abuse legislation in Western democracy was the result of legislation pursued by Liberal Feminists in the late 19th and 20th century. The overarching modern Federal law governing child sex abuse was written by Walter Mondale. Leftists have been working hard for more than a century to protect children from sex abuse. The right wing's legislative record on this issue is paltry at best. Child sex abuse is a Feminist issue and the right wing traditionally opposes most Feminist legislation.
We are getting to Weimer levels liberal filth. I wonder what happens when society reaches Weimer levels of filth and decadence?
Right wingers attack national capitols. Aren't you once again confirming here that Right wingers are consciously following Hitler's playbook?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mharman
maybe ask some of those people who ran on a platform promising to revive mafia just a few weeks ago.
Created:
Posted in:
The vaccine is neither safe nor effective. A drug that is so dangerous that it requires a licensed medical practitioner to administer it and then watch you for 30 minutes to make sure you don't die from an adverse reaction and is so ineffective that you can carry around the virus and still spread it around and kill all people around you shouldn't be mandated by a government official with zero medical training.
Let's apply the EXACT SAME logic to chemotherapy or anesthesia:
CHEMOTHERAPY is neither safe nor effective. A drug that is so dangerous that it requires a licensed medical practitioner to administer it and then watch you for {2 HOURS] to make sure you don't die from an adverse reaction and is so ineffective that you [STILL DIE of CANCER].
ANESTHESIA is neither safe nor effective. A drug that is so dangerous that it requires a licensed medical practitioner to administer it and then watch you for [THE DURATION] to make sure you don't die from an adverse reaction and is so ineffective that you [STILL HAVE PAIN AFTER SURGERY]
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
All of that is true, but a lot of is one offs; a lot of them are shouting at people wearing masks; or enforcing masks indoors. I was wearing my mask outside and got shouted for it, to which my response was that it was -20c and I’m wearing it because I can’t feel my cheeks any more.
Anecdotes, sure, but such anecdotes serve to illustrate how there is no Conservatism left in the people who call themselves Conservative. Ask yourself whether Ronald Reagan would side with the cops defending the Nation's capitol or the drunken bigots dancing on the the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and we know which side he'd take. Ask John McCain.... Ask Margaret Thatcher. What once was called Conservativism in the West has gone silent, afraid to ally with the Liberals and repelled by self-serving troglodytes running their parties.
Didn’t make it all the way down to parliament; but only a few blocks away; one point that has to be stressed is some of these horns are literally deafening. I feel for anyone living there.
Well, honking horns may be harassment but I consider that well within the realms of non-violent protest. Attacking Christian ladies while they're performing acts of charity just for wearing a mask should horrify any human worth breathing air. That's not politics that is just assholes doing crime.
It’s the typical reactionary paradigm. The world is changing, social hierarchies are changing; the economy is shifting,
The social hierarchies are shifting to favor the smart and flexible, as ever. COVID's a classic example.
"NPR looked at deaths per 100,000 people in roughly 3,000 counties across the U.S. from May 2021, the point at which vaccinations widely became available. People living in counties that went 60% or higher for Trump in November 2020 had 2.73 times the death rates of those that went for Biden. Counties with an even higher share of the vote for Trump saw higher COVID-19 mortality rates."
It's cruel but I am genuinely tempted to lean into this trend until Trumpism ceases to be a threat to American integrity.
All it would take for RCMP to come in and start cracking heads is someone to wave a “Give First Nations drinkable water” banner.
Here in Denver we have the Marade- one of the largest annual celebrations of MLK's birthday anywhere. One year, the neo-nazis and the KKK managed to schedule a protest on the State Capitol steps before the Marade reserved the day. 50 fascists dressed in all white or all black showed up with bullhorns and taunted the crowd of fifty thousand Maraders for about twenty minutes behind a wall of police and chain link fence, throwing rocks and bottles into the crowd. Then Russell Means and twenty Lakota braves from Pine Ridge sliced through the crowd, drumming and singing right up to the fence. Russell called the Grand Wizards and Gruppenfurhers (wink, wink, GP) over to the fence and although the crowd hushed and I could hear Means calmly speaking, I couldn't make out his words but whatever he said was incredibly effective. The Fascists went wild screaming and howling and pulling down the chainlink fence to get to Means but instead the angry crowd pressed in. All the police could do was rush the bloodied fascists into the Capitol for protection while the Lakota sang their home.
That is power and thugs only really respond to displays of power. The Klan never tried to hijack the Marade again.
Some First Nations communities have been under boiled water advisories for decades, the country engaged in cultural genocide where they are still digging up the bodies; if the issue they take with the Canadian government is not that, but the idea that they require you that a safe and effective vaccine in order to cross the border - then they have no concept of what freedom or oppression means.
When the city of BIsmark objected to proximity of the proposed Dakota Access Pipeline to their water supply the Army Corp of Engineer's solution was to move the pipeline downstream so that it only threatened Standing Rock Reservation's water. When the Native peoples defended their water supply by blocking the roads, Trumpists in the State Legislature introduced a bill immunizing motorists from running over protestors. I wonder how the Convoy would react to such a bill introduced in Ottawa today.
Created:
Posted in:
HONK!
Let's agree that the drunken fucktards
- spraypainting swastikas on the Canadian Flag and
- flying the American Confederate Flag and
- pissing on the National War Memorial and
- dancing on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and
- repeatedly calling cops racial slurs and
- mocking First Peoples with Flintstones jokes and
- assaulting little Christian ladies running food banks and
- stoning emergency medical technicians and
- setting fires to large residential buildings and
- blocking traffic to prevent hard-working truckers from delivering goods and
- publishing White Supremacist manifestos and
- receiving love and support from Trump and Cruz and QAnon
are the Fascists we lovers of democracy need to hate.
Created:
Posted in:
If "good faith" means these cheap tactics & emotional outbursts I keep seeing from you, I'll pass.
Thx, Yassine. I think I'll finish with an appeal to READERS regarding this exchange.
READERS, pls. note, Yassine:
- approached me with an inquiry regarding my religious beliefs but
- has moved on to promoting his religious beliefs.
- I did not ever inquire about Yassine's beliefs.
- claimed that he has good evidence for Mohammad's flight to heaven on the winged horse Baraq but
- has failed to provide any such evidence after three requests.
- dismissed a highly respected source as unreliable only because it did not support his claims
- repeatedly changes the subject instead of responding directly
- When I claimed that atheists in Mecca are not free to express their views
- offers to debate Freedom of Religion in EU is superior to Freedom of Religion in ME in lieu of response
- changes debate to Sharia vs. Secularism
- When I claimed that Hell is not compatible with a compassionate god
- tried to change unnecessary suffering to necessary suffering
- tried to bring Hitler in
- when I provided an English language definition for an English word, replied with a non-English religious definition
- It seems clear now that Yassine's pretense to be interested in my views was really just pretext for proselytization and no serious inquiry was ever intended.
- Yassine has challenged me to a number of debatable subjects
- I'm a little skeptical of the sincerity of such offers given the paucity of Yassine's debate record on this site, however
- I am open to possibility of such a challenge, particularly given that
- arguments in bad faith and with poor conduct are generally penalized by VOTERS on this site.
- Thx, Yassine!
- Yes to a future debate,
- No to any further religious instruction, pls.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
-->@oromagiInteresting point of view,Though animals rape, kill, torture, for their own amusement.
There's no doubt that animals kill but mostly for food, experience, increased territory, etc. I don't think I'd call what animals do murder, which is the ethical judgement we humans place on killing
Likewise, rape and torture include very human ethical judgements. I think calling what animals do rape or torture is anthropomorphization.
You'd say their lack of cognitive function, Limited Consciousness/Free Will/Responsibility,Frees them from evil?
I'd say their lack of cognitive function keeps them from developing an ethos, which is pre-requisite to evil. Evil must be an intentional infliction of unnecessary harm.
Though, humans may speak of a mountain as an evil place,If there are frequent deaths on it, accidents,I think that's the word in another use, maybe.
Yes, I am using EVIL in the more narrow sense, the religious sense of the word.
Created:
Posted in:
The governments in the modern Middle East also happen to be fashioned in Western style, secular democratic nation-states. Regardless, the proposed debate is freedom of religion in Islam vs. Secularism, not Christianity.
I think a good argument can be made that Tunisia and Israel qualify as democratic states in the Middle East. If you are suggesting that the realm of Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud qualifies as democratic in any proper sense of the term than I am suggesting that you are quite mistaken in your understanding of the term.
- The only delusion humans have is the denial of their powerlessness under God's absolute Will.
As I said to Wylted, the relationship between one's religious outlook and political outlook is undeniable. I'm an American Liberal- I don't do subjugation to alien superbeings very well.
It kinda sounds like you are making Christianity to be a fake religion.
So when I called all religions "obviously human artifacts," I guess you didn't understand my meaning. No kinda about it.
So you concede my point that even Paul put human love ahead of faith.- Take it up with the commentators.
No. The commentators didn't pretend to understand the meaning of that essentially Christian passage, you did. Take good faith responsibility for the claims you make here, please. No post-facto blaming of your sources shall earn you any credit with me.
Where should Hitler go then?
Are you reading what I write? I say several times that heaven and hell are unsupportable doctrines and you ask me which one gets Hitler? Argue my point or concede my point, it's not argument in good faith to proceed as if I had not addressed the question.
Sorry, but I would never consider another man's pain compensation for any loss- I don't see how any human pain might be restorative or remunerative and frankly, such an assertion seems childishly barbaric. Yuck.- This is an emotional barrage of childish rant. Grow up! If this is how you wish to defend your feelings, then go to a bar & rant. –
I see. I call your conception of benefiting from another man's pain childishly barbaric and you call me a child right back. I'm rubber, you're glue. Good argument. I guess you concede the barbaric part.
Human pain is indeed often restorative & remunerative, from one's own coming into life in pregnancy & birth. Restoration is, by design, painful, as is any prior transgression. A surgery restores one's peace, albeit painful.
Please don't change the subject. I argued that the infliction of unnecessary pain on others is never restorative or remunerative and so such an act refutes compassion. You reply with examples of necessary and voluntary pain (childbirth, surgery). Stay on point- prove that the infliction of unnecessary pain on others is a compassionate act or concede the point that a compassionate God would not manufacture eternal suffering and so a realm of eternal suffering disproves a compassionate God.
That's false. Atonement depends on reconciliation and restoration of the prior social state. Since eternal damnation denies any hope of reconciliation or restoration it can not, by definition, be considered atonement.
- No. Eternal damnation is for disbelievers who denied God & His Bounty ("Allah does not forgive associating others with Him 'in worship', but forgives anything else of whoever He wills."), for restoration of such transgression against God is unattainable, unlike other transgressions into His creations' boundaries, which are punished up to a point until the transgressor is cleansed. Also, God does whatever He pleases, there is no questioning what He does, else not God. God can punish His most devout slave, & reward His most arrogant creature. God can not transgress, for all things are within His sole right.
Again, you have failed to address my simple and direct point. If the damned have no hope of restoration then atonement is disproved. Once Allah sends you to hell, you are never coming back, right? Therefore, your argument that hell is atonement is disproved. Hell is the infliction of unnecessary punishment for forever and so by definition, inherently uncompassionate, unmerciful, and unforgiving- traits I find unworthy of any god.
That's false. Jeffrey Dahmer and another murderer were beaten to death with a barbell by a fellow murderer in incarceration. Execution implies a government sanction which Dahmer's brutal murder was not. I detect no compassion in the manner of Dahmer's death and while some victim's relatives might claim some profit by that cruelty I don't think experience ever really bears out such claims.- Aside from you missing the point, I'm waiting for the justification of "that's false".
That's perfectly clear. You were quite mistaken when you claimed Dahmer was executed, you were quite mistaken when you claimed Dahmer's bludgeoning was compassionate.
How exactly do you define compassion?
With a dictionary.
COMPASSION (noun):Deep awareness of the suffering of another, coupled with the wish to relieve it.
One cannot argue that when Allah inflicts eternal suffering on those who do not please him that he also has a wish to relieve that suffering because he is the sole source of that suffering, can relieve that suffering at will and yet continues to inflict that suffering.
You can have hell or a compassionate god but you can't have both.
It's not difficult. God denied humans paradise for seeking knowledge. He created a creature that was curious by nature and then punished that creature for expressing the characteristic God instilled. If God wanted perfect obedience, he should have made us perfectly obedient. To give us free will and then punish us (often eternally) for expressing that will (absent, it should be said, any authoritative instruction from God) is objectively sadistic.- Correction: 'God according to the Bible'.
That's no correction, the subject was the Christian God, remember? Why do I identify as Catholic, Christian, etc. Have you forgotten the topic that you initiated?
I don't have a problem with religion, per se. I just consider it an obviously human artifact- a series of explanations for phenomenon in the absence of more rigorous understanding.- You're not speaking of religion, you're speaking of Christianity.
That's false, I am obviously speaking of all religions.
Why do I have to abide by your assumptions?
You don't. You are the only one proselytizing here.
You're close to becoming Muslim.
All the less likely after this conversation.
Created:
Posted in:
- There is no harm in a third loss is there?
Ramshutu gets that prize, since he has reserved my 101st debate. But I'm sure we can debate something in the near future, provided you better demonstrate a capacity to argue in good faith.
Instead of expanding the subject, why not just present all of your hard, scientific evidence for the existence of winged horses in Seventh Century Arabia?- Maybe you can bring this up in our upcoming debate.
Another dodge. Are you standing by your claim that you have evidence that Mohammad flew to heaven on a winged horse? Yes or no?
Here is a report, therefore it's true' is not a valid argument in a debate about its very point of contention.
The Pew Report is well-established in the world of scholarship as the one of the most reliable sources on the subject of religion. Religion is one of Pew's particular research specialties. This particular report, their 10th in this series, studied year-to-year changes in 198 countries from 2007 to 2017. For studies in comparative religions, Pew is considered an essential source of data.
Also, there is no such thing as "objective analysis". You have to establish & defend the claim yourself, that freedom of religion in Europe is superior to that in the Middle East based on defined criteria.
I've made no such claim.
The Pew Report's defined criteria runs some 20 pages but is summed up as
"Good measurement entails the translation of abstract concepts (in this case, “restrictions on
religion”) into factual indicators. This translation requires indicators that satisfy several criteria.
First, they must be comprehensive, covering a broad range of facets of the issue, since no single
indicator, or even small set of indicators, could be expected to capture all the ways in which religion
might be restricted by government or in society. Moreover, individual indicators can be affected
by one-time events or temporary circumstances. The use of multiple indicators, therefore, helps
to ensure that a wide range of important manifestations of restrictions on religion are captured,
and also helps to minimize the impact of any single indicator on the overall score.
For the index of government restrictions on religion, creating a comprehensive measure began
with the identification by the Pew Forum’s research team of four main ways in which such
restrictions occur: (1) constitutional restrictions or restrictions based in national law or policy; (2)
restrictions imposed by government officials at any level, whether codified in law or not; (3) use
of force or coercion against religious groups by government agencies or their representatives;
and (4) government favoritism toward particular religious groups. In each of these four areas, the
research team developed multiple indicators, such as determining whether a country’s constitution
specifically provides for “freedom of religion,” or whether it establishes a favored religion or
religions. A total of 20 separate indicators make up the Government Restrictions Index.
For the measurement of social hostilities involving religion, the Pew Forum’s researchers identified
three principal ways in which social hostility toward religious groups is expressed: (1) crimes or
malicious acts motivated by religious hatred or bias; (2) public religious tensions that lead to
violence; and (3) religion-related terrorism and war. In each of these areas, multiple indicators
were devised to capture a wide range of hostilities, from individual malicious acts to mob violence
and nationwide armed conflict. A total of 13 indicators make up the Social Hostilities Index.
Second, accurate measurement requires that the multiple indicators used within each of the
two indexes be internally consistent. Though the indicators may focus on widely varying kinds
of restrictions on religion, all of them should work in tandem to identify meaningful levels of
restrictions. Put differently, countries with high levels of restrictions on religion will typically,
though not always, score higher on a given indicator than countries with lower levels of restrictions.
If an indicator does not follow this pattern, then it may be measuring something other than the
concept of restrictions on religion.
Third, good measures also are reliable. One aspect of reliability is the extent to which different
observers attempting to apply the set of indicators will get the same result. If two researchers
look at the same data sources and reach different conclusions about how a country should be
scored on a particular indicator, then the measure lacks reliability. Another aspect is the extent to
which the score on an indicator is consistent over time, assuming that the restriction itself has
not changed during that period. If a nation’s constitution and laws have not changed from one
year to the next, a reliable indicator of constitutional and legal restrictions on religion will yield the
same result in both years.
Finally, measures must be valid. Validity refers to the extent to which the measure captures the
abstract concept under examination – in this case, restrictions on religious beliefs and practices.
One way of assessing validity is to compare the results of the index with the views of experts. For
example, are countries that score very high on the Government Restrictions Index considered by
experts in the field to be the most restrictive nations? Conversely, do experts believe that certain
countries have a high level of restrictions even though the index indicates that the level is low?
Another method of assessment is to compare scores on the index with other quantitative indicators
of restrictions that appear to measure restrictions on religion but are not themselves included
in the index. As discussed below, the indexes correspond closely with expert assessments of
countries, and they correlate strongly with other indicators of government restrictions on religion
and social hostilities involving religion."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@badger
But you must never tease a weasel, not even once or twice.
The weasel does not like it and teasing is not nice!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
"I consider evil an entirely human artifact- there's no evidence of such corruption in the natural world."
EVIL in the narrow sense is an ethical judgement- it denotes an intentional infliction of unnecessary harm. Hurricanes and rockslides are not evil, even when people are harmed them because they are natural events within natural cycles. Plants and animals do no evil because they are instinctively performing adaptive behaviors. What makes a harm evil is a lack of necessity and an intentional choice. Only humans have the requisite ethical tools to delineate a choice as immoral. I know some people think of evil as an elemental or supernatural force but I see no evidence backing that theory. Most evil in the narrow sense seems to emerge from complex human systems (such as religions, oftentimes)- competing and conflicting ethical frameworks that subjugate one's instinctive moral code.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@badger
I swear you've called me badge before. Someone has. I didn't like it then and I don't like it now.
right, then. weasel it is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
-->@oromagi- Maybe we can have a debate on the miracles of the beloved Prophet Muhammed (pbuh). Care to incur your second loss?
I'm debating whiteflame now so you're too late to hand me my second loss. Instead of expanding the subject, why not just present all of your hard, scientific evidence for the existence of winged horses in Seventh Century Arabia?
There is a lot more freedom of religion in the Middle East than in any western country.
The Pew Report says otherwise;
There are major differences among regions as well as among countries when it comes to government restrictions on religion. On average, restrictions are highest in the Middle East North Africa, where the median score for the 20 countries (4.9) is considerably higher than for the 35 countries in the Americas (1.0), the region with the lowest median score. The 51 Asian and Pacific countries have a median score in the middle range (3.3), but this masks enormous variability within this large region. Several of the more populous Asian and Pacific countries have high levels of government restrictions. Indeed, the nearly 20 countries in the region with very high or high government restrictions on religion – including Iran, Uzbekistan, China, Burma, Malaysia, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Vietnam and India – account for more than half of the world’s population. On the other hand, some of the least restrictive governments are also found in the Asia-Pacific region; these include Japan, Taiwan and Australia.
Most objective analysis consistently ranks the Middle East as the least free region in the world for the practice of religion.
How about incurring your third loss in a debate about freedom of religion in Islam vs. Secularism?
Don't change the subject. I said that the Middle east lacked freedom of religion. Islam, at its inception at least, granted greater freedom for Christians and Jews and apostates within its realm than Christians granted non-Christians. Hell, there were still polytheists worshiping at the Kaaba at Islam's inception. The governments comprising the modern Middle East are objectively far less tolerant of alternative religious thought than government in Muhammed's time.
You see that beautiful act of comfort and compassion and human dignity- the heart of Christianity expressed in a moment and you ask "Why bother?" The answer is manifest to those with the eyes to see and the ears to hear and the brain to acknowledge the promise of heaven within humanity itself.
All humans are humanists- that is they prioritize human considerations before supernatural ones by nature. Some humans are more deluded about their humanism than others. Christianity is an essentially humanist reaction to Old Testament Judaism- fewer giants and unicorns and burning bushes, more good Samaritans and golden rules. Compare OT's "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth [powers surpassing man's understanding] to John's "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God. [human language being a uniquely human ability- god reduced from universal superforce to the product of the human tongue]. More than any religion that preceded Jesus, Christianity was primarily concerned with how humans treated other humans and let stories of evil snakes and burning bushes recede to an older testament.
- I don't have an opinion either way, I was referencing Biblical commentators.
So you concede my point that even Paul put human love ahead of faith.
I'm not even dodging, I'm asking for your justifications?
Eternal suffering is manifestly uncompassionate- it disallows forgiveness and inflict harms without any necessity.
Punishment of injustice is compassion to the oppressed in restitution,
Sorry, but I would never consider another man's pain compensation for any loss- I don't see how any human pain might be restorative or remunerative and frankly, such an assertion seems childishly barbaric. Yuck.
& to the oppressor in atonement.
That's false. Atonement depends on reconciliation and restoration of the prior social state. Since eternal damnation denies any hope of reconciliation or restoration it can not, by definition, be considered atonement.
Executing Jeffery Dahmer, albeit cruel, is in essence compassionate to his victims & to himself.
That's false. Jeffrey Dahmer and another murderer were beaten to death with a barbell by a fellow murderer in incarceration. Execution implies a government sanction which Dahmer's brutal murder was not. I detect no compassion in the manner of Dahmer's death and while some victim's relatives might claim some profit by that cruelty I don't think experience ever really bears out such claims.
That's quite the wordy statement. I'm not sure about your intent here.
It's not difficult. God denied humans paradise for seeking knowledge. He created a creature that was curious by nature and then punished that creature for expressing the characteristic God instilled. If God wanted perfect obedience, he should have made us perfectly obedient. To give us free will and then punish us (often eternally) for expressing that will (absent, it should be said, any authoritative instruction from God) is objectively sadistic.
Is your beef with religion the problem of evil thingy?
I don't have a problem with religion, per se. I just consider it an obviously human artifact- a series of explanations for phenomenon in the absence of more rigorous understanding. Likewise, I consider evil an entirely human artifact- there's no evidence of such corruption in the natural world.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
-->@oromagiI got ya IQ at 176.Anyway.....
When IQ figures out how to quantify wit, inspiration, and imagination then it can be called Intelligence quotient. Until then, let's call it EA- aptitude for engineering.
Your a Dumb Dumb. For thinking straightforward
If thinking straightforward is dumb I don't want to be smart.
Also magi.99 debates . I don't like 99.Hurry up Do one more or something.
Your wish is my command: https://www.debateart.com/debates/3305-oromagis-100th-debate-the-moderation-team-neglected-their-duty-to-fairly-supervise-the-first-dart-presidential-election-atwhiteflame
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
I’ll accept the descent into ad hom as your concession on arguments.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@badger
I'm going to have to /out here. I won't have time for this one, sorry.
c'mon badge. GP is depending on you.
Ten posts a day is all you need- you can crowd them in on the bus ride from your mistress to your wife
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
He merits your faith whether he is compassionate or not. Even if he were evil, he would merit it. You are merely human and cannot possibly comprehend his morality in any sane way.
Amazing, isn't it, how one's political ideology reflects one's one's theology?
You are arguing that Christians should submit to evil. Let's assume that if the devil has any competence at all, you are already enlisted in his ranks.
Hell is not a biblical concept,
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
And these shall go away into everlasting punishmentMatthew 25
I assume, you know how to get to heaven, but if you don't. Here you go
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
- But Jesus never claimed to be God's "one and only Son." The apostles and the first three generations of Christians, the Synoptic Gospels and St. Paul refer to Jesus as "a son of God" or "Son of God."
- "One and only Son of God" MONOGENES in Alexandrian Koine Greek, is John's latter-day assertion, four generations after Christ.
- So Jesus' pre--requisite for heaven is that you must feed the hungry, house the homeless, clothe the naked, nurse the sick, befriend the imprisoned, etc but John's only pre-requisite for heaven is simple belief?
- You can get children to believe in Santa Claus with little enough effort.
- I prefer Jesus' test to John's- it has the advantage of actually working toward practically improving life on earth (that is, making one's own heaven) and is a far more difficult thing to accomplish than just belief-
- Belief is easy.
- a three year old can believe what he's told to believe- there's not much accomplishment to it.
- The devil can just as easily and truthfully say, "I am a Son of God (which must be true) whoever believes in me shall not perish but have eternal life [suffering in Hell]
- Compassionate works are hard.
- An act of charity is far more difficult to corrupt than a mere credence
- And Jesus told us that it is hard to get to heaven.
- I prefer Jesus' version
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
Yes it is. Lack of evidence for one, does not entail lack of evidence for another..
So you are prepared to show evidence for Isra and Mi'raj- winged steeds climbing to heaven and all that?
Atheist priests in the Vatican... huh! Christianity is dying out into a shell religion.
No, that's just what Democracy looks like. Everybody's got a different idea. If Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion ever make it to the Middle East, you will suddenly discover that there have been atheists in the Masjid al-Haram all along.
Apparently... Why bother believe then!
You see that beautiful act of comfort and compassion and human dignity- the heart of Christianity expressed in a moment and you ask "Why bother?" The answer is manifest to those with the eyes to see and the ears to hear and the brain to acknowledge the promise of heaven within humanity itself.
When Paul says (beautifully) :For now we see through a glass, darkly;but then face to face:now I know in part;but then shall I know even as also I am known.And now abideth faith, hope, love, these three;but the greatest of these is love.Even Paul put love before faith.- Obviously he meant divine love.
Sorry, but that's absurd. So you think that when Paul says in the previous sentence "Love is patient, love is kind, it keeps no records of wrongs, etc" Paul is telling the Corinthians to be kind to God? to keep no record of God's wrongs against them? No, sorry. One of the most essential Christian passages and you've completely missed the mark.
What compassionate God would create a hell for his children or withhold a heaven? If God is compassionate than such realms must not exist. If God is not compassionate than he does not merit my faith.Why does a compassionate God imply non-existence of Heave & Hell?
You are dodging by answering a question with a question.
Answer the question: explain the compassion to be discovered in the creation of eternal suffering.
Explain the compassion of creating eternal paradise as a prize for winning a cruel game show called THIS MORTAL COIL.
If faith in God is contingent on compassion, doesn't that make God contingent on compassion, thus not actually God?
It could be put better but that's my argument, yes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
- Do you still believe in God or are you agnostic?
I'll accept agnosticism as well. I try not to swear too much allegiance to the labels of the intellectuals.
I'm really just asking about your faith in Christianity.
As I've said, my culture, my education, my ethical framework are inescapably Christian. But I do not trust any religious tenant as true without first being convinced by the evidence and so my faith is not Christian.
agree this applies to Biblical accounts, but it isn't true for the miracles of Prophet Muhammed (pbuh).
As if the evidence for one is any sounder than the evidence for another.
They'd probably excommunicate you if they find out you hold these beliefs...
Some popes, maybe but not this Pope. Both Francis and I were schooled by Jesuits, the modern Liberal society at the heart of the Age of Enlightenment and Democratic revolution. Jesuits promote the brotherhood of man and the importance of good works over the importance of strict adherence to doctrine. I think you'd be shocked how many openly atheist priests reside in the precincts of the Vatican.
Here is the Pope assuring a bereaved boy that his non-believing father would be welcomed in heaven: https://youtu.be/xL01jmT0MN4
I suppose that Francis is mostly OK with my conception of Catholicism and faith.
replaced thus by Pauline Christianity led by the Orthodox Church & the Catholic Church.
When Paul says (beautifully) :
For now we see through a glass, darkly;
but then face to face:
now I know in part;
but then shall I know even as also I am known.
And now abideth faith, hope, love, these three;
but the greatest of these is love.
Even Paul put love before faith.
Do you believe in Heaven & Hell?
What compassionate God would create a hell for his children or withhold a heaven? If God is compassionate than such realms must not exist. If God is not compassionate than he does not merit my faith.
I meant Catholicism, not your friends.
And still I have already answered.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
- Are you a secular catholic?
I'll accept that.
So you don't have conviction & trust in the truth of your faith?
I have absolute conviction and trust in the truth of my faith. Faith is a conviction in the absence of evidence. As I said before, all my faith is in friends and family and none is wasted on unprovable assertions about the origin and dominion of the universe by alien superbeing(s). I did not witness Moses part the Red Sea nor Muhammed's ascent to heaven nor Jesus' return from the dead and the testimonies I read of such events bear remarkable resemblance to hundreds of similar assertions in world literature that are easily dismissed as myth or fiction. While I find the subject an interesting and worthwhile study, I try not to pretend I know for a fact those claims I don't or can't know for a fact. I think the Sermon on the Mount is a terrific, concise ethical lesson to be admired. I think Jesus' resurrection is unlikely but also unimportant to the value of that lesson. I also suppose (without evidence) that the Jesus I read about in the Bible would have little problem with that outlook. I think Roman Catholicism and modern Western Christianity generally represents more of the philosophy of Paul and Augustine and rather misunderstands Jesus' thesis.
This doesn't sound good coming from a person of faith, friends more important than God! Damn! –
Absolutely and what's more my faith is greater because it is tested by everyday life. I put Jesus' second commandment forward as foundational for human society but I cannot love what I have never met and am not permitted to understand and so I set aside Jesus' first commandment as impracticable.
I meant, would you renounce your faith with sufficient incentive?
I have already answered no.
Created:
Posted in:
-->@oromagi- So it's about culture to you, not necessarily faith & devotion?
Little faith and poor devotion, yes.
What level of proof would you require to change your mind about your faith?
theophany
Hypothetically, would you give up your faith to secure a prodigious opportunity or spare yourself a great harm?
I have faith in my friends and family. I would sooner die for them then see them harmed for my benefit. I could not sell out my family and continue. So...I guess the answer is no.
If you mean could I pretend to be a Protestant or Muslim or deny my Roman Catholicism for a day for cash or increased safety, I think the answer is yes- past a certain value point.
Created:
Posted in:
What are your contentions against said Creed?
Lack of evidence.
What makes you hold on to Catholicism?
Born to it- think of it as my cultural inheritance. I may no got to church most Sundays anymore but most of the weddings and funeral I attend are at mass.
What would change your mind or convince you otherwise?
I could no more give up my Catholic heritage than my Irish heritage or my American Puritan heritage. It is a component of my being.
Created:
Posted in:
-->@oromagi- That would do it. Why are you a Catholic?
Born to it. I don't think any priest would consider my philosophy in accordance with the Apostle's Creed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
-->@oromagi- What changed?
I got older.
Created:
Posted in:
All areas that rank low on the economic freedom index. An index that ranks countries based on the amount of government over reach is present.
My point proved. The US is ranked 6th on that index and the first country with a population greater than Ohio. The greatest free nation on Earth and you give it zero credit.
I guess if we wait long enough murdering children becomes okay.
Firstly name a state that does not murder children and since you will fail at that endeavor you must rank states by how many children it kills. Once your collect that data it will be obvious to you that Liberal democracies murder far fewer children than any other from of govt.
I Don't need to go back to show the government being evil. I just picked the most disgusting example I could think of.
But anecdote is rarely informative. Don't you know how to do a comparative analysis?
Being the best in a world that is shit, is not good enough.
What a laughably useless outlook. Shit compared to what other world, I wonder? Here we are enjoying the greatest freedom and prosperity in the history of all known life in the universe and you'd happily burn it all to the ground because you think you can do better. I hope you forgive all known life in the universe if we are skeptical of your talents.
Not many if any have my style of thinking,
Because they died young of self-immolation, I suppose.
2 liberal candidates and 2 conservative ones.
Both Kerry and Obama made an effort to distance themselves from the label of Liberalism when running for national office. I think an argument can be made that McCain was a social conservative but to call Trump a conservative is just plain ignorant. There is no overlap between conservative principles and Trump's principles (which can be summed up in one word as : Trump).
That said, Liberalism and Conservativism are political philosophies that seldom align perfectly with the binary choice between political parties in an American national election. Voting for Kerry did not make you a liberal. Demonstrating an understanding and practice of Liberal principles is what makes you a liberal. Is ay again- you are no Liberal or Conservative by the common understanding of either of those philosophies. The fact that you can vote for Obama and Trump both demonstrates how little such votes represent some kind of consistent philosophy.
Created:
Posted in:
, I have seen the establishment hurt a lot of people.
But it is an absolute fact that the lack of establishment hurts far more. You're going back 30 years to find an example but without democratic institutions of law enforcement and civil justice you can find people getting hurt every 30 minutes- Syria, Somalia, Myanmar. Libya, Afghanistan, CAR, etc. You think so concretely that all you need is one 30 year old example to toss out the best example of government in human history rather than comparing results with any other form of government or lack thereof- "sooner be resolved than accurate" as I said of conservative thinking.
Created:
Posted in:
1.I don't like situations that are uncertain
5
2. I feel uncomfortable when I don't understand the reason why an event occurred in my life
5
3.When I am confused about an important issue, I feel very upset.
very upset about confusion over any import issue? 1
4.In most social conflicts, I can easily see which side is right and which is wrong.
2
5.I feel uncomfortable when someone's meaning or intention is unclear to me.
2
6. I'd rather know bad news than stay in a state of uncertainty.
6
please in a few words tell me your political leanings
American Liberal
and give me your total score of the above chart.
21
I am tainting my theory, by mentioning this, but I feel like conservatives on the site will generally have higher scores on these answers.
Not much of a theory. I accept as truism that conservatives would sooner be resolved than accurate or consistent. I'm not sure I'd call anybody on this site Conservative in the political sense.
I scored 23, and come pretty close to being a Paleoconservative
You are not a Conservative as that word is defined in any dictionary. I would characterize your political outlook as anarchist-in-ignorance. You are anti-establishment but your motivations are personal, not political or ideological or even thoughtful. I'd call that classic Trumpism.
On a 30 point scale between 6and 36 with 21 being the median I rate 21 and call myself Liberal, you rate 23 and call your Paleoconservative
I will tell you what it tests for later, assuming it isn't obvious by the types of questions asked
obv
Created:
Though I speak with the tongues
of men and of angels,
and have not love,
I am become as sounding brass,
or a tinkling cymbal.
And though I have the gift of prophecy,
and understand all mysteries,
and all knowledge;
and though I have all faith,
,so that I could remove mountains,
and have not love,
I am nothing.
And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor,
and though I give my body to be burned,
and have not love,
it profiteth me nothing.
Long suffereth long,
and is kind;
Love envieth not;
Love vaunteth not itself,
is not puffed up,
Doth not behave itself unseemly,
seeketh not her own,
is not easily provoked,
thinketh no evil;
Rejoiceth not in iniquity,
Rejoiceth not in iniquity,
but rejoiceth in the truth;
Beareth all things,
believeth all things,
hopeth all things,
endureth all things.
Love never faileth:
but whether there be prophecies,
they shall fail;
whether there be tongues,
they shall cease;
whether there be knowledge,
it shall vanish away.
For we know in part,
and we prophesy in part.
But when that which is perfect is come,
But when that which is perfect is come,
then that which is in part shall be done away.
When I was a child, I spake as a child,
When I was a child, I spake as a child,
I understood as a child,
I thought as a child:
but when I became a man,
I put away childish things.
For now we see through a glass, darkly;
but then face to face:
now I know in part;
but then shall I know even as also I am known.
And now abideth faith, hope, love, these three;
And now abideth faith, hope, love, these three;
but the greatest of these is love.
-Saint Paul the Apostle
Created:
Posted in:
I used to in favor of growing older. Now I am not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
What could explain the arrest of the woman?
Cops don’t arrest people much for fighting unless somebody goes to the hospital. The woman almost certainly had outstanding warrants.
Created:
Posted in:
What have you changed your mind about?
aging
Created:
Posted in:
So I walk into pizza hut
This is the part I believe.
Created:
Valentine
Not a red rose or a satin heart.
I give you an onion.
It is a moon wrapped in brown paper.
It promises light
like the careful undressing of love.
Here.
It will blind you with tears
like a lover.
It will make your reflection
a wobbling photo of grief.
I am trying to be truthful.
Not a cute card or a kissogram.
I give you an onion.
Its fierce kiss will stay on your lips,
possessive and faithful
as we are,
for as long as we are.
Take it.
Its platinum loops shrink to a wedding ring,
if you like.
Lethal.
Its scent will cling to your fingers,
cling to your knife.
-Carol Ann Duffy
Created:
“Funeral Blues”
Prevent the dog from barking with a juicy bone,
Silence the pianos and with muffled drum
Bring out the coffin, let the mourners come.
Let aeroplanes circle moaning overhead
Scribbling on the sky the message ‘He is Dead’.
Put crepe bows round the white necks of the public doves,
Let the traffic policemen wear black cotton gloves.
He was my North, my South, my East and West,
My working week and my Sunday rest,
My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
I thought that love would last forever: I was wrong.
The stars are not wanted now; put out every one,
Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun,
Pour away the ocean and sweep up the wood;
For nothing now can ever come to any good.
-WH Auden
Created:
Sonnet CXVI
Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments. Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove:
O, no! it is an ever-fixed mark,
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wandering bark,
Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken.
Love's not Time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
Within his bending sickle's compass come;
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.
If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
-William Shakespeare
Created:
Soneto XI
Tengo hambre de tu boca, de tu voz, de tu pelo
y por las calles voy sin nutrirme, callado,
no me sostiene el pan, el alba me desquicia,
busco el sonido líquido de tus pies en el día.
Estoy hambriento de tu risa resbalada,
de tus manos color de furioso granero,
tengo hambre de la pálida piedra de tus uñas,
quiero comer tu piel como una intacta almendra.
Quiero comer el rayo quemado en tu hermosura,
la nariz soberana del arrogante rostro,
quiero comer la sombra fugaz de tus pestañas
y hambriento vengo y voy olfateando el crepúsculo
buscándote, buscando tu corazón caliente
como un puma en la soledad de Quitratúe.
-Pablo Neruda
Created: