Jump to content

Wertbag

Regular Member
  • Content Count

    1,162
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Wertbag last won the day on July 28

Wertbag had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

872 Outstanding

1 Follower

About Wertbag

  • Rank
    Apostate
  • Birthday 02/21/1977

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Auckland, NZ
  • Interests
    MMA, gaming
  • More About Me
    Married father of 2 from New Zealand

Previous Fields

  • Still have any Gods? If so, who or what?
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

2,478 profile views
  1. I disappeared for a few months and now don't have access to ToT either. I found the best answer is to post everything in Rants, then just preface everything with "A Christian once told me" so that its technically on subject...
  2. Its not as special as that. Firstly its not "all" people, for any item discussed there will be many (if not most) who remember the same thing the correct way. Usually the ones who remember it incorrectly do so because they were influenced. You have someone ask "Do you remember that time when..." and you remember enough of it for that to sound right, but upon digging deeper it turns out the person told you incorrectly. That is easily seen with song lyrics, where hearing them sung incorrectly but those lyrics stick in your head and you will sing that same song incorrectly for years to come.
  3. Whats the smell of blue? What does seven taste like?
  4. Its the old classic, God sacrifices Himself to HImself in order to forgive a law that He set and that He judges us for. There is no need for any blood sacrifice or magic rituals to cleanse anything. If God is all-powerful then He could make a solution without all the hoops to jump through. "The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son” (Ezek 18:20), and yet we are all apparently punished for Adam and Eve's original sin, a crime that we didn't commit
  5. If you add the numbers for Corona and Covid + 19 you get 71. My parents house is number 71, therefore they are part of the illuminati
  6. Belief is not a choice. I didn't choose to be atheist and I can't change my mind and choose to become religious. I would have to be convinced of whichever religion it was, having a basis in reality and being true. I wish such things were true, they offer many fuzzy warm feelings, but sadly its all imaginary. As such I can't be angry at god, as that is anger pointed at a dream, rage at the air. I can certainly be angry at the church and the people within the organisations, but never at the supernatural.
  7. There seems to be two levels of Mandela effect proponents. Most people laugh at it and see it as "Look how silly we are, we got something wrong". When taken in that way it is just a light hearted bit of fun. The second level are those who say they couldn't possibly be wrong, therefore the entire universe must be wrong in order for them to not be. There are some who believe reality has changed or time travel has occurred because it is easier to believe in supernatural events being the cause rather than our memories being poor.
  8. Talking to a Christian online and he said "Atheists are evil. They see religion is a crutch, helping people through life and providing support and yet they want to kick that out from under them. Some people need that support, some people find great benefit in it and yet on these discussion boards there are always atheists trying to destroy that positive energy in peoples lives." Initially this argument sounded quite reasonable but I could see several good reasons to fight against the idea of a crutch: - The Dumbo effect. People believe they need the crutch because they have never
  9. Certainly and that is one reason that I have trained in martial arts. The possibility of an unarmed confrontation does exist (I've been threatened by homeless people a couple of times, and I've stiff arm tackled a naked man fleeing from police (that was a weird day), but I've never actually ended up in a fight). Perhaps a handful of incidents in my 40 years, so I agree that it is a non-zero chance of confrontations occurring so I do take that into consideration. There is a big step up from unarmed confrontations to life and death confrontations, with such events being so rare as to not be w
  10. I hear this and it makes me sad that people live with such fear in their lives. Depending on where you live that fear may be quite justified. I'm very thankful I live somewhere where such fears are not a reality for life. I can walk the streets at night and feel safe. I can live without guns in my house and have no fear of being in a position where I need them. If I'm confronted by an angry person I can feel safe in the knowledge that they will not be carrying a gun. It is rare to ever be in a life or death situation, as the thing that usually makes situations life and death is the intro
  11. Debated by experts, but certainly that is a perfectly fine choice. Especially if you own a shotgun for any of the many tasks they can be used for (hunting, sports, pest control etc) then using the weapon you already have to defend your home makes sense. Whether it is better than a handgun is debatable. If you want a weapon to carry with you on a day to day basis, then have it available as home defense, then a handgun can do both roles. Having both weapons means higher cost and more training requirements. You also need to consider the less capable people, the unfit, single women, elderly et
  12. Right, its not a yes/no question, its a question of where you draw the line. So not a nuke, but a MOAB? Daisy cutter? Tomahawk? RPG? How much power is too much? You say "private militia" should have tanks, but does that mean any civilian should be allowed one if they can afford it? Should Joe Blogs be able to buy an artillery piece and have it pointed at the white house? With ranges of 70km it would be nigh on impossible to police. The call for complete parity takes you to some strange places with ridiculous power put in the hands of both the good and bad. Its not that c
  13. From the stats I could find there are between 20k-60k private militia members, people who may have received some basic level of training. How many of those would be willing to kill invaders or potentially other Americans if it came to that? So sure, the number is not zero, but the number is an insignificant force when compared to the military power the US already has. And really what is the argument here? That a foe will somehow overcome that worlds most powerful military force and therefore it will fall on civilians to take up arms and win where the professional soldiers could not?
  14. That's getting pretty fantastical... For an attack on America they would need to get passed the worlds most advanced and largest navy, passed the worlds largest and most advanced airforce, then handle the 1.3 million military personnel, before getting to the 450,000 National Guard troops... so sure, a conscription/resistance/gorilla force could be formed, but it seems pretty unnecessary at this point. In fact it could be quite negative, adding in hordes of civilians who have no squad training or tactics, no central command, limited weapon training and no body armour and then your military,
  15. What I'm saying is not to have no weapons, but to have the best weapon for the situation. In the case of riots you may want to defend yourself, your home or your business. In most cases the threat is enough without actually killing, so whether you had a shotgun, a handgun or an AR15 you have escalated the event to a life and death situation, with the hope the criminal will take flight. Defending yourself in an enclosed environment (house, shop etc) is better with a shorter weapon. If you then wish to exit the building and either conceal carry or safely holster when law enforcement arrive, a
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.