Mirage

Active Members
  • Content count

    548
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

998 Excellent

About Mirage

  • Rank
    Shhh... It's ok

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Wherever you want me to be
  • Interests
    League of Legends, Manga, Japanese Light Novels, Manhwa, Web Comics, Fantasy

Recent Profile Visitors

3,999 profile views
  1. Yeah nothing much has changed which is why none of the older crowd are still here. It's just the same questions from 2014 with new faces. Oh and the chat is broken.
  2. Damn that's a cynical view of the world you've got there. Most people aren't willing to share too much of their private life with others. You'll hear a lot more stories about people not being willing to wait simply because one person can date many people but typically only marries one. I'm sure there are people who were waiting but broke up for other reasons as well. Anyways. I think non-waiters can be with waiters. It may take some compromising but it's not like it's an impossible thing. You're going to be waiting a loooong time if you exclude all non-waiters.
  3. What's on your mind?

  4. Ask an Atheist!

    It's amazing, and surprisingly relevant to the discussion at hand.
  5. Using the same advice we've given you in your past five topics. Be confident, don't be a creep, don't be rude.
  6. "The One God Has for You" vs. Free Will

    In that case your life has been complete since I started the first thread in the gaming forum back in 2012. You're welcome.
  7. I've been here for about three years now and from memory I can only think of a handful of people who've been banned from the site. The reasons for these bans were: 1. Fanaticism I can think of two people who were banned for this. They were both religious fanatics and almost as soon as they joined the site they started threads and accused people of being unreligious or hypocritical. One was banned after a thread he made showed just how radical he was, while the other was completely crazy and got herself banned within about a day of arriving. 2. Being a creep As Queen said, if a guy (Or girl) is sending creepy pm's, making unwanted advances, or asking questions that shouldn't be asked and making other members uncomfortable they are usually shown the door. There have been a few people that I know of who've been banned for this. And a few more who were warned and reformed. These bans are a lot less noticeable than the others as some of the people who send creepy PM's never even bother to make a single forum post. They're like ghosts who must be exorcised by banhammer. 3. Being awkward as all fuck Being socially awkward is not a crime and it's rare for people to be kicked from the site for this. However there are two well known people (At the time anyways) who were banned because they could not seem to function normally on the site, no matter how many warnings were given. One would ramble on and on about drinking, the features and qualities he liked about ladies on the site, and amateur porn. The other would start random threads about things that were obviously going to be frowned upon in a community of waiters like polygamy and former rapists. Both were banned after many warnings and several weeks of attempts by the admins and other members of the community to reform them. 4. Being a dick Just like being awkward, being abbrasive is not enough to get you kicked from the site. The fact that I'm still here is proof of that. However if you constantly harass other members (It doesn't have to be creepy to be harassment), start fights simply for the sake of starting fights, and never make any friends here. Well you can't really complain when it's decided that you're unwanted in the community. I can only think of one or two people who've been banned for this and it's never been explicitly stated if being a dick was even the reason. But it can happen. So yeah. Those are the main reasons I've seen for bans over the course of my time here. The admins can feel free to correct me or add any other major reason they may use for banning people. But these are the ones I've noticed the most.
  8. Woah woah woah. Speak for yourself. Confident, independent, well-spoken women are very attractive to me. And what's with this hate on feminism? Also this is the Religious Topics forum, not the Christian forum. Christianity is not the only religion.
  9. The amount of pride you take in calling this young woman a slut is mind-boggling. Can we please stop calling someone who none of us have ever met a slut? The only description we've ever had of this girl is from an emotional high schooler who she just turned down. And yet you're all calling her a whore and a slut and telling those who defend her to suck it up because that's what she is. Until she gets to college and starts sleeping around she is neither and even if she does sleep around, why does it matter? She's not a slut for following an alternate lifestyle. No more than a waiter is a prude for following their own alternate lifestyle. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Posts like these are going to drive potential waiters away from the site and waiting. Acting like you have to be in a stable and committed relationship before even kissing someone or else you're a slut just drives more liberal waiters away. But given how their peers are acting maybe that's not such a bad thing. I don't really think we should have to explain political correctness to a 24 year old.
  10. Well I'm pretty sure neither of them are an egg so they seem pretty equally yolked to me. As for the rest of your post. Damn that's harsh. She's already told him it's her or the porn and now you want her to break up with him until he's "closer to the lord"? How will we know when his understanding of the lord is deep enough? When he stops watching porn? When he's overcome all earthly desires? When he is personally visited by the lord and embraced as a brother and an equal? I can agree that he should stop watching porn if it's negatively affecting his life. However saying that someone you don't know doesn't deserve or need a relationship until he's cultivated a "deeper relationship with the lord" just seems like punishing someone for doing something you don't agree with.
  11. "How Secular Family Values Stack Up"

    It's not that we don't want to believe in God. We don't believe in God. There is no God. He does not exist. We aren't a bunch of rebellious children pretending something we don't like doesn't exist. We're rational people who have looked at the facts and decided that there is no compelling evidence to believe that God exists. What is a "righteous religious person"? Is it someone who follows the teachings of their religion to the letter? Is it someone who follows the teachings of the Catholic Church without deviating? The problem with this argument is that the definition of what is a "righteous religious person" will be different depending on who you ask. If you ask a Muslim person then they may respond that it is someone who does their prayers, follows the teachings of the Qur'an, and observes Ramadan and other Islamic traditions. This will contrast with a Christian persons definition as they would feel no need to observe Islamic traditions such as Ramadan but instead believe in things such as communion and repentance. Meanwhile my own definition as an atheist would be that it is simply a religious person who lives righteously. However this definition would then be interpreted differently by different listeners depending on the listener's definition of what is "righteous". The reason that the article lumps together all religious people is because the only thing tying you all together is the fact that you are all religious. It doesn't matter which God you follow or which select teachings of that God that you believe are the right ones. You are all religious and thus you all have codes of morality that can be ascribed to religious people. You say that: "If we lump together righteous religious people with religious hypocrites, and compare that lump with secular people, like the article does, it's not surprising there's a lot of immorality in the religious lump." However why is there so much immorality in the religious lump and not as much in the secular lump? If you say that the immoral members of the religious lump aren't actually religious then we simply have a "No true Scotsman" problem on our hands as the ones who you declare to be not truly religious would then claim that your own interpretation of religion is wrong and that you are the one who is not truly religious. If on the other hand it is simply true that there are more immoral members in the religious group than the secular group than that means that religion is more likely to produce immoral people. This implies that while all humans are born with the capacity to become moral creatures, following the teachings of a God or religion lowers one's chances of becoming a moral creature. It was written by a secular author so of course it's going to judge people using a secular standard of morality as opposed to a religious one. However the Golden Rule is a standard of morality that is commonly found in religious moral codes. While the author does state that the Golden Rule is the standard of morality used by secular people and taught to the children of secular parents, given that it is a standard of morality found in most religions I would say that this article is not using a solely secular standard of morality to compare the two groups. I would argue instead that by living by the morals dictated by your God you are actually restricting yourself as a moral being. Morals and ethics are things that evolve through time. As the human race has evolved so too have our sense of morals and ethics. Only a few thousand years ago many cultures practiced the killing of infants who were unwanted due to either disability or gender. This was because of the difficulties and resources required when raising a child, many of whom would not live to adulthood anyways. As such it was difficult to justify raising a child who would not benefit the family or society and it was seen as morally acceptable to abandon the child in the wilderness to die of exposure or drown it and discard its body.1 Today we have the resources required to raise all children regardless of their condition and thus infanticide is widely condemned as immoral in modern societies. By constraining yourself to the moral code passed down by your God and his church you are restricting your growth as a moral entity in a way that a secular person is not. You are therefore unable to be as moral a being as a similar secular person could be. I would note that it is almost always a happier time when you are among friends or people who share your interests. I personally am far happier when I am not sitting on a hard pew after waking up early on a Sunday. 1Carrick, Paul. Medical Ethics in the Ancient World. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2001. 117.
  12. JHowe? You can't just arbitrarily declare that no liberal, left-wing woman will date you because you're a virgin. You're just deciding to quit before you even try while shifting the blame from yourself to the women who won't wait because "They're not the type". I am sure that there are women out there who would wait for a virgin if they loved him enough. We even have women on this site who are not virgins but are waiting. If you don't want to be alone you need to get out there and start dating, complaining that the girls you're attracted to won't wait isn't going to make you any less lonely.
  13. Not really, MaR posted that incest and pedophilia would be legal. Pedophilia definitely will not be legal and Welcome mentions it here with his line "Between consenting adults".
  14. Should Men Give Up Porn?

    It's alright man, you can get back to it now.
  15. Should Men Give Up Porn?

    How many showers did it take for you to come up with that?