MSS - 2 October 2011 - Part 1 - venomfangx, raycomfort and the question of race
Top Comments
All Comments (124)
-
Regardign the not sharing thoughts on the website- it just shows you how fuck-tarded religion makes people. I mean, wouldnt you WANT to learn new stuff? Wouldnt you WANT to further your intellect. See thinking is prohibited in christianity or any other religions. Lets say theism for clarity.
Why would people want to be more intelligent?? And to think people find this attractive in religion. It makes me realise just how unevolved the religious truely are. Broken genes.
-
HAHAHA. We joos want our coontry back. So true. I hate racists.
-
Define "Pro-Life." Ray Comfort obviously isn't pro-life, but what is your stance?
-
Re the portion of the show about Ray Comfort's anti-abortion video. I am in the minority being both an atheist and "pro-life". I would love to see a Magic Sandwich show episode that discussed the morality of abortion from a rational secular humanist perspective. It's sad and depressing that idiots like Ray Comfort are the face of pro-life. I would like the opportunity to have a rational discussion on the matter without appeal to theistic arguments.
-
Has anyone considered the ramifications of Impalement?
-
@adafuns But a great deal of the time that is why they are fighting and they admit. Different sects of the same religion or different religions all killing each other in the name of their god. One tribe or nation that think they are better than the other tribe or nation etc. Look at Ireland in the past or the Shiites vs Sunnis in the middle east.
-
@christo930 "There is no such thing as a contract where only 1 side signs (in this case it would be VFX)."
What?? Shawn didn't "sign" either. Oral contracts are enforcible WITHOUT signatures. You know that.
And show me where any contract law says the other party has to be there when the oral offer is made. Whether the offer arrives by video or by registered mail, it is a contract, and is binding when the receiving party agrees to it by doing as stipulated.
-
If your meaning is that there is no contract because the other parties were not in his presence or had nothing to gain from the arrangement, that is wrong too. There only has to be "consideration" - essentially a legitimate reason to enter the arrangement. The donors effectively activated the proposed contract by taking Shawn up on his offer: his continued YT "ministry" in exchange for their financial support.
-
@christo930 "a video set to public viewing can not be construed as a contract".
WRONG.
Oral contracts rarely have video evidence to prove the nature of the contract, yet oral contracts are often enforced based on less evidence (such as the credibility of the parties, subsequent communications records, etc). The fact that an oral contract is videotaped does not void invalidate it. It REINFORCES it as evidence of the terms.
Oral contracts generally only need to be specific and unambiguous.
@christo930
In his video VFX asked for money and said that anything over $500 per month would be donated to SKH. He collected more than $500 in the first month, therefore everything over $500 was collected on behalf of SKH and rightfully belongs to them.
TheRationalizer 4 months ago 5
HOLY SHIT THE FUCKING RAPTOR WAS SLEEPING!!!
WhereIsReligion 4 months ago 4