Correct, clue updated.

Fight, I guess... American faith healers :rolleyes:

Ah, well noticed :P New record? Most likes on a forum game - Guess the User (run by @GoldRock2) - 31

Cool story, bro.

Though I get your logic, that's unfortunately an incorrect answer.

Well done :P Correct - clue updated.

Correct, clue updated.

Has to be Red Alert.

Serpuhov, IMO.

Correct answer :P Clue updated.

Interesting perspective, it seems it might hold some truth ^_^ I've never heard about articles with religious evidence which have been censored; by all means, provide me with some evidence which says so. I'm interested to know more about the issue you've raised :P Though historically, it has been science that has been censored, and not the other way round. I'm afraid I find that allusion very condescending. To say that your understanding of my own point is better than mine without even backing such a strong statement up is borderline arrogant. I agree that it was something you didn't necessarily say. I disagree that you did not imply such a statement, for you assumed that your understanding was greater than mine. I disagree that it was uncalled for. But this is unproductive, so let us move on from our patronising statements of before. Yes, I am mainly referring to Judaism, though most other religions do imply such a concept at some point in their own scriptures. I never said that religion makes humans selfish. What I said was that as humans are selfish, they generally tend to follow or apply religion in a selfish way (at least to some extent). Breathing in germs does not kill them. As for consuming plants/animals, I do so because it is a natural food chain process, not because I disregard the importance of animal or plant life. And your question is interesting - yes, I would save the drowning human being. Why? Not because I think the puppy's life is any less important, but because as a fellow human being, I would instinctively try to preseve my own species first and foremost. Maybe we are 'chosen people' in the sense that we have been given the luxury of free will, and that we have higher intelligence by far as a species than others do, but I do not think we are 'chosen' in terms of being the most important life forms. All life is important to the Earth's ecosystem - let's not forget that we weren't the first life to roam this world. The Earth could feasibly support life without our existence, whereas we depend on the Earth and other life for sustenance and development. I agree completely with the first point here - well phrased! As for the second, I do not know where I did so, and I apologise if I did. Please point out where I wrote anything which deemed religious people as less intelligent, so I can correct/remove it. Well, I stand by what I said - your comment on my lack of understanding originally put yourself in a bad light. I did not have to do what has already been done. However (and this is a big however), I have grown to respect you since your first post. I believe you have shown thoughtfulness and respect in your later responses, and so I hope to do the same in return. You are really very good at phrasing your points, even though English may not be your first language - if only I could speak a second language so well (I have a long way to go before I can)! :) I also agree with your advice, and will take it into account when posting here. You have most certainly gone further than saying "you don't understand", and it's great you did so. I hope we can continue to have a constructive discussion, and I apologise unreservedly for anything offensive I have said before; thanks for your detailed response!

Read it out loud, guys ;)

Record denied - the current record is 201, but it only counts registered users, not guests. Looks legitimate to me - record accepted, unless Arch or others on the judging committee think otherwise. Record accepted, I would assume (though the record holder will now be insetad of your main) :P Though he may not have all of those jobs now, he submitted and set that record previously. For example, a man can hold the 100m world record; even when he gets older and can no longer run at such a speed, if his time he previously attained remains the fastest, he retains the record.

First :P (EDIT) Awesome idea! I suspect the players might win again.

Correct! Clue updated.

OK then. See you.

Actually, the point is that you should stop waiting for your 'sad terrible end', and get on with living life and helping to make the world a better place, rather than living for death and anything which might follow. Though I agree that just because something is easy to believe in, it doesn't make it wrong, I'm not sure how relevant that particular point is, and I actually thought SonofDeath's post provided an excellent argument.

OK, fair enough. My own point was that though morality may not be necessarily God-given in any way (in our view at least), religion/philosophy as topics can still offer valuable contributions to the subject of morality as a whole. Well, if saying "You do not really understand what you wrote my friend. :) " isn't alluding to your greater understanding than me of a point I myself raised, then I don't know what is. Yes, it does. Because human beings are inherently selfish in nature. I have yet to hear of a religion which actually points out that if God exists, maybe we're not God's most important creation, and that all life could be considered equal... but that, of course, would mean swallowing our pride, which wouldn't go down well. "Because surely we must be God's chosen people, and the most important things on Earth!" Not to mention that it is statistically very unlikely that the Earth is the only planet which could ever support life in the entire universe (since the universe is so big and contains so many planets), and that science has shown that actually, we orbit the Sun, and not the other way round... so the Earth cannot possibly be the centre of the universe. Yes, I do, actually. You see, I'm rather well versed in English, and do happen to know a fair amount about religion. Thank you for the *patronising* question... You also gave no evidence to support the claim made in your first post; hence, your post practically elicited a patronising response. I guess it's good that you've gone a bit further than saying "you don't understand" now... Hopefully, our discussion can become more constructive as it progresses ^_^

Mhmm. Purpose could be defined as why we are here, or what we are to do now we are here - that's where the confusion lies. Achilles1233, for example, argues that there is no real purpose as to why we are here. Thanks for clarifying how you meant that; interesting stuff, and well phrased.

Correct, clue updated.

That is really not clear enough - if my goal is to survive, should I sacfrifice my own life to save the lives of others (an example)? Again, the argument that less violence is better is a bit too general to be applied to every single situation - what happens when a robber is killed during an escapade? Should the policeman be cast out of society for causing violence, especially if the robber's raid was otherwise peaceful? I think that though science is great at explaining how we came to be, it doesn't offer all the answers, and it should not be seen to do so. Philosophy remains invaluable. Mr. Einstein was right in saying that religion without science is blind, and science without religion is lame, regardless of belief in God or not. The fact that so many different, historically-separated cultures have come up with an idea of a God is at least notable in itself as psychologically important. A well-reasoned reply; I agree with the points you raise in the first paragraph. As for purpose, your view seems interesting - so if you live in a hateful society, you would bring hate to others? Just trying to understand how you meant that :P Oh of course, because all theists are infinitely more intelligent and enlightened than non-believers or 'kafirs'. Well, I told my teacher that I did 100 pages for some homework, but I was too scared to bring it in because it would be too good. Sorry, but unless we're able to see such evidence, that is a very weak argument. "There's evidence that creation is absolutely right except I can't show it to you because [insert excuse here]" is not going to convinve me any time soon.

You know I meant that as an example... Nick, just stop. I do not wish to take part in a flame war, for that is against the rules. Good day to you sir. ________ Back on-topic. P.S. Please explain to me how this post breaks the rules through PM, if you think it does so.

You misunderstand me; possibly because I was not clear enough with my question. I do not mean we were created or exist for any particular purpose. But now we exist, how should we live our lives? What should we, as individuals and a people, aim for? Yes, I agree that it is most likely that there is no one 'purpose' behind our coming to exist, but now we do exist, we might as well contemplate what we should do with the skills evolution has offered us. For many, the topics of religion and philosophy (so not necessarily just theism, but also ideas such as humanism and spiritualism) offers some sensible answers to those questions, which science will never be able to do.

^This.

Your decision.