(not poland, you use a capital for writing a country names you uneducated troglodyte

that don't see >> that doesn't see (Don't is short for do not)
pharagraphes >> paragraphs

If you're going to nitpick his grammar then at least get your spelling and grammar sorted.

Now that we've got the juvenile crap sorted out...

If you want people to respect your opinions, cut out the insults. Having flicked through the last few pages of this discussion, I've noticed that you've criticised other people for using insults in their arguments, which is pretty hypocritical as in your last post you've used no less than six.

@Tupac: A Troglodyte is a caveman.

lolol, id love to see a vid of someone explaining what a Troglodyte is to Tupac

"Dinosaurs are anything living in the past" - T Rex on Warlight

So my definition was correct.

Not really interested in the main topic itself, but...:

The advancement of humanity was noticeable in it's whole history and the one made in those times was actually very little compared to the development made in those "dark ages" and the times that ocurred after this time period.

That's actually false from economical/sociological/scientific point of view since indeed middle-ages have been very slow in terms of improvement of quality of average life for example. Would you please clarify what is that development in "dark ages"?

That's why democracy and all other "developments" of antique greece were quite bad for humanity. Democracy as a reign of fools (like you) and chaos

I'm happy to inform you that democracy in ancient Greece was something far different from our modern democracy. The fact that the scale was usually one city, democracy in ancient times was far more direct when it comes to how the decisions were elected.

there is no correlation between these things. (...) It was not due to Christianity that was well accepted for houndreds of years.

The fall of Roman Empire created a vacuum in terms of political power. That power has dispersed between many countries and the church. The existence of church has influenced Europe far greater than anything else in those times. Stating there was no correlation is at best silly.

With the renaissance and the birth of Machiavelli there is related the birth of liberalism - the reason of regress of whole modern western world.

Since you don't want to discuss it I'll only briefly mention that statement. It baffles me why you mention Machiavelli and liberalism in one sentence. Since the sentence was so short, I don't really know what to make of it since it can be interpreted in a lot of different ways, I suggest being more clear in the future (jumping from renaissance, to machiavelli, to modern day liberalism discussion is not adviceable).

Your argument that I might be biased because I live in Poland (not poland, you use a capital for writing a country names you uneducated troglodyte - I believe this is one of the examples of your pettiness due to our view differences which is pathetic) is kinda weak, because I don't have to be a Catholic myself. Generalisations are in general UNLOGICAL unless you will investigate every Pole which you obviously haven't done. This is not a surprise once again to me as you managed to prove yourself as a failure of a person that have any idea about what is he talking about.

It might be a generalisation, but since I'm also a Pole, I'm going to say it is well-founded. Many of our right-winged nationalists sound a lot like you, many of our devoted catholics sound much like you and stating the fact that among comparable countries in central Europe we are one of the more catholic-influenced is not really rocket science.

In fact, there is no homosexual behavior in nature observed.

Source please, that sounds not true.


Please, if you use the words "logic" a lot in your posts, try to set a higher standard when it comes to writing posts. I really do not want Poles to have a bad reputation here.

Holy shit Hohenzollern. Somebody should check if there is a FOX-News anchor missing.
You claimed I used an ad hominem argument, let us see what you did there:

I am glad that you resigned of using the word "logic" as you are far from the person that have any clue about what it can possibly mean. Maybe you will do your homework one time.

You started right with a Personal Attack fallacy twice.

You again prove that you have completely no idea about what are you talking about.

Followed by a Factual Error fallacy

All this, as I said already, pseudointelectual babble is a false.

Creatively here is a Appeal to tradition fallacy

I am not sure if you are twisting fact deliberately or you just lack the basic knowledge about history.

I see no reason to mention that there was some kind of an develpoment in antique times because it is not related with the topic of this discussion, but you are probably mentioning that not because it is really a valid point or argument but just because it would make the acceptance of this pervertion as a reasonable thing.

That is a Strawman Fallacy.

The advancement of humanity was noticeable in it's whole history and the one made in those times was actually very little compared to the development made in those "dark ages" and the times that ocurred after this time period.

Again, Strawman Fallacy.

You are simply brainwashed and you believe in the myths of how bad dark ages was and that the Christanity is responsible for everything that bad happend in those times.

That was a real triple strike: Ad hominem fallacy, Personal Attack fallacy, strawman fallacy.

It doesn't makes me wonder why you never came up with the idea that there can be something wrong with this kind of a world view if you believe that opinion is logical!

Here we go again: strawman fallacy.

You need to educate yourself before you will embarass yourself once more with your very little knowledge.

This is getting old, Personal Attack fallacy.

That's why democracy and all other "developments" of antique greece were quite bad for humanity.

Another Factual Error fallacy.

Democracy as a reign of fools (like you) and chaos, homosexuality that treaded the morality of people and made their societies weak

Oh shit, Personal Attack Fallacy and Factual Error Fallacy.

Greece quickly fallen to Romans that after some time adapted their views (homosexuality for example) and followed them.

sigh , Factual Error, Strawman Fallacy.

The dark times you mentioned didn't happen due to Christanity and that it found homosexuality as something wrong and as a sin. This is what you seem to say and what is completely ridiculous. Again, there is no correlation between these things.

Strawman Fallacy, Factual Error fallacy.

Christianity was well adapted in whole Europe long before the fall of Roman Empire which resulted in the dark times, not the existence of Christianity itself

Guess what? Factual Error fallacy.

Now we need to answer the question of why Roman Empire have fallen. I will leave you with this mistery. Small tip for you: It was not due to Christianity that was well accepted for houndreds of years.

Hey something new, Red Herring fallacy.

... - the reason of regress of whole modern western world.

Factual Error fallacy.

Your argument that I might be biased because I live in Poland (not poland, you use a capital for writing a country names you uneducated troglodyte - I believe this is one of the examples of your pettiness due to our view differences which is pathetic) is kinda weak, because I don't have to be a Catholic myself.Generalisations are in general UNLOGICAL unless you will investigate every Pole which you obviously haven't done.

if we ignore the Personal Attack fallacy in the brackets, you are correct for once. Congratulations, I myself might have used an "ignoring the common cause" fallacy. Even though thats debatable.

This is not a surprise once again to me as you managed to prove yourself as a failure of a person that have any idea about what is he talking about.

An on goes the Personal Attack fallacy.

"Homosexuality is not a perversion" - It is not just because you have said that?

A burden of proof fallacy, accompanied by another strawman fallacy.

It is an artifical behavior that was putted into peoples heads by the indoctrination that also managed to take over your weak mind.

Yawn, a Factual Error fallacy.

So homosexuality is not definitely natural and everything that you managed to write in the last pharagraphes is just a worthless nonsense.

You go on with your Factual Error fallacy.

This also means that your weak ad personam arguments at the end of your pathetic post are also invalid.

A Poisoning the well fallacy, Two wrongs make one Right fallacy.


I really wanted to debate with you, but it seems there is nothing substantial of you to contribute.
Come back when you actually learned to debate.

Oh look. An LGBT argument... One comment I'd like to make, and maybe yall will shut up:

You can have whatever opinions you like. Some of us think it's right, some of us think it's wrong. But maybe, just maybe, we should all keep our opinions to ourselves, and let PEOPLE choose. Is it our right to say who should love who? We're trying to live in a free world. Is restricting what people can believe, and who people can love the right way to do that? Why can't we all just accept that we're different from one another? Maybe I'm living an idealistic fantasy, but it really shouldn't be that hard to get rid of bias. Be it towards Gays and Lesbians, other Religions, or towards Race, or even just basic appearance. Can't we all just be a little more tolerant. I'm not saying we all have to be friends, but maybe stop throwing around the excessive hate. Let people choose.

props to my handsonfire for doing something little of us have the patience to do

Homosexuality is a crime in some countries: That is a FACT. It's not a premise, it's a fact. Whether you agree or not gay marriage is illegal in some parts of the world. You're making a mountain out of a mole-hill.

maybe this depends on the language. In german there is still a different between a crime and a violation of law, which means that crimes are also violations and abuses not yet sentenced by law. Let me try it again with hopefully very easy words: There is nothing wrong with LGBT. If you assert something else, please explain it.

Secondly, LGBTs are not a race.

and you dont have a clue what racism means...

Edited 3/16/2015 23:35:52

More than 2000 years ago, humanity made a leap in civilisation. It advanced culturally, technically, medically, philosophically, scientifically etc. This all happened in ancient greece, under polytheism.


True true but the religion didn't really influence any of this.

With the fall of the Roman Empire and the adoption of Christianity as the main ideology in Europe, many of these advancements were forgotten or reverted.

Rome adopted christianity 100 years before its fall. May I remind you that 1 reason rome fell was do to polytheism invaders so the knowledge being lost is due to them. Not Christian rome. After wards they themselves adopted christianity and had to restart civilization.



It needed the greek antiquity a second time, after the fall of byzantium and the resulting spread of ancient greek knowledge to the italian city states that Europe would find its way out of these dark times again. This process was called Renaissance, which means the rebirth. And the rebirth is the rebirth of antiquity. So with your lack of knowledge and incoherent babble you are the only one that looks silly here.

As stated the polytheism greek religion didn't really have anything to do with advancement.



That's why democracy and all other "developments" of antique Greece were quite bad for humanity. Democracy as a reign of fools (like you) and chaos, homosexuality that treaded the morality of people and made their societies weak. Greece quickly fallen to Romans that after some time adapted their views (homosexuality for example) and followed them.

Democracy was made to oppose a power drunk government lead by a tyrant or a few tyrants. Greece made many developments for mankind that helped everybody. Don't label all their developments as "bad for humanity"

Also how do I do the slanted word thing you guys do instead of putting quotations marks? Does it work on tablit?

read the bottom of this page

Also gay ACTS are natural in nature. Sex etc

But they don't love each other in a gay way.

I'm on a tablit it doesn't show up on here. But I know what your talking about thanks :)

True true but the religion didn't really influence any of this.

I didnt mean to take up the cudgels for polytheism or religion in general. It was the mere ABSENCE of a strong monotheist religion that didnt prevent the greek antiquity to flourish as it did. Under the monotheism Catholic Church, all authority was centralized at an institution that only had the conservation of its own power in mind.
In greek antiquity religion wasnt centralized like that, you had various gods and therefore various authorities, enabling a much greater pluralism in belief which enabled a greater freedom of thought. Since the gods of the greek were always quarreling among themselves, there was no way to fully satisfy all of them at the same time.

Rome adopted christianity 100 years before its fall. May I remind you that 1 reason rome fell was do to polytheism invaders so the knowledge being lost is due to them. Not Christian rome. After wards they themselves adopted christianity and had to restart civilization.

The Roman empire did adopt Christianity in an effort to halt its downfall. It was no coincidence. Centuries of decadence left it in decline and it was hoped that adopting Christianity could stop that process by uniting its people under one central identity. In this process, various religious cults of the Roman Empire found its way into Christianity, to ease its acceptance by the local populace.
That is why Catholicism is so full of Pagan rituals and sacraments.

I didnt mean to take up the cudgels for polytheism or religion in general. It was the mere ABSENCE of a strong monotheist religion that didnt prevent the greek antiquity to flourish as it did. Under the monotheism Catholic Church, all authority was centralized at an institution that only had the conservation of its own power in mind.
In greek antiquity religion wasnt centralized like that, you had various gods and therefore various authorities, enabling a much greater pluralism in belief which enabled a greater freedom of thought. Since the gods of the greek were always quarreling among themselves, there was no way to fully satisfy all of them at the same time.


Greece was at war with its self all the time. The gods quarreling with each other gave some support for the wars. Also do to the down fall of the Golden age (most of the wars wernt do to religion. They just used the gods as a rally and to justify some things.)


The Roman empire did adopt Christianity in an effort to halt its downfall. It was no coincidence. Centuries of decadence left it in decline and it was hoped that adopting Christianity could stop that process by uniting its people under one central identity. In this process, various religious cults of the Roman Empire found its way into Christianity, to ease its acceptance by the local populace.
That is why Catholicism is so full of Pagan rituals and sacraments.



They adopted christianity because most of the citizens were becoming christian. So keeping christianity as a crime would imprison many people. So it wasn't exactly to prevent their downfall. But It did unite.


Catholicism is influenced by the Roman cults.

Vestal Virgins=nuns

Pontifix Maximus=Pope

and you dont have a clue what racism means...

Racism is the belief that one RACE is superior to another. However gays are not a race. Caucasians are a race, African Americans are a race, Asians are a race. You can get even more specific if you want. Sexual orientation is not an ethnicity however. Straight people are not a race anymore than gays or bisexuals are.

Come on now Ranek, if you're going to demonize your enemy at-least get your terminology right.

Yet the common denominator of homophobia, sexism and racism is intolerance. They all have a high comorbidity within the same intolerant personality disorder.

Edited 3/17/2015 01:38:16

This is exhausting. Racism has not much to do with races, then rather with social groups. The jews arent a race either. Racism consists of prejudice and discrimination based in social perceptions of biological differences. It is meant to prove superiority by condemning and debase social minorities, that dont fit in the superior ideology. you can also call it xenophobia, if you prefer that. It is exactly what you are doing by stating homosexuality is a crime (and before you tell me again, that it is a crime in several countries, have a look at my former explanation...).

Everyone will have there own opinion on this and nothing Lawlz can say will change that, But that goes two ways, What right do any of you have to decide the morals and ethics of others?
There is no such thing as a right or wrong opinion and there is no such thing as right or wrong ethics so respect others choices in their beliefs and perhaps just perhaps they will respect yours.

Edited 3/17/2015 03:56:19

HOLY F'ING SH**. YOU GUYS ARE EURO-CENTRIC AS HELL!

Genghis Khan the Nomadic Civilization Representative here to explain to you all about the Dark Ages and the Renaissance! 2 Things that didn't really exist, and because they didn't really exist or happen, they're pretty irrelevant to anything and everything!

The Dark Ages (or Early Middle Ages, whatever) occured due to the collapse of the Western Roman Empire and ensuing power vacuum. Without anybody to take orders from anymore, the barbarous invaders and other likes had to set up shop and get the ball rolling again! The Church was a recognized symbol in Europe, and thus a lot of the rising powers came to respect and praise the Catholic Church and its power rose steadily and exponentially off and on. Over time, humanity stagnated in technological advancement as plagues were everywhere, wars ran amok and feudalism was magically imported from Japan! Somehow. Don't ask.

However, after a thousand years of this BS to glorious Europa, an awesomeness wave of a shift from awesome hair to awesome shirt came about and a bunch of stunning architecture, revived literature and new knowledge from the old antiquity came about and spurred a Renaissance, literally a rebirth!

And thus, Humanity advanced once more into a triumph, having slowly become wary of the Church and preparing things for Europe to become a dominant power. Except not.

The Dark Ages were only really dark for Europe. Meanwhile, China and other cultures of the like in the modern-day Middle East, North Africa and notably the Americas rose about and came to be. In Arabia especially, the quality of peoples' life was booming. Knowledge was increasing, and some soothsayers say that they actually nurtured and fostered our modern-day numerals system! (1234567890, so much better than I,II,III,IV,V,VI,VII,VIII,IX,X! Whew...)

Now, even if the Dark Ages were only in Europe, the Dark Ages still happened right? Wrong!
When Rome took over Europe, most of the wealth was coming to Rome and regional capitals and urban areas. That's it. Most people who were rural were just the peasants who were a foundation for the wealthy and the Legions. Life was pretty cruddy. But then, wait for it, the Huns (okay a whole bunch of other barbarians too) rode in with fancy horses skills and steppes language and barbarian meal etiquette and ghetto bows and Seaxes and etc. and they're all "Oh cool, liberation from a tyrant! Yay! Go freedom train, go!". Except no. Barbarians were already integrated, assimilated and added a cultural portion to the Roman Empire, and what it meant to be Roman was liberalized and misconstrued every day. The Roman Auxiliaries are the best way to express this: The Barbarians they had just fought were now literally fighting for them. Dafuq?

Barbarians were never AT the gates. Barbarians were the people INSIDE the gates! The Barbarian invasions were just a formalization of the fact.
I must say though, you people are very, very biased Rome lovers! What did Rome do besides... okay, I guess I can understand why you like them, but Greece? Why the hell would you like them? They're just a bunch of crackpot theorists who fight each other all the time for no reason! Compare that to an Empire of religious freedom, regional autonomy that is the Achaemenids of Persia. I'd love to be Ephialtes; he was right to betray Leo.

But I digress.

Now you're saying, " But Genghis, what about Leonardo Da Vinci! My butt buddy, my soul mate and my 50 Shades of Grey fantasy affair rape! ".



Long story short, only rich people got to see half the stuff the Renaissance brought out, peasants barely noticed a difference besides " Hey, we're not at war as much " and most of the Renaissance stuff was outdated compared to the stuff the Eastern world was pumping out. Also, the Renaissance was still pretty bad. Remember my horde? (refer to my earlier picture)

With Renaissance and Dark Age misconceptions out of the way, time for some cold hard truths:

Don't tell your kids what to believe. Offer them different viewpoints and let them decide. Or better yet, let them find out on their own.
Now, pretend everybody alive is your kids.

And finally, don't be an asshole c*** munch. Don't tell people their lifestyle is wrong unless they personally, in your face, infringe upon your beliefs. This means that this entire flame war should be rendered null because it is just people using all caps and thinking up nasty insults behind a computer. Let me just tell you where this discussion goes, where every other discussion like it has gone, and where every discussion like it in the future will go: