What's the most ridiculous things you've ever heard

>>8785368
Does anybody really think there's a woman heaven/hell?

It actually WAS Adam and Eve but in one person before Dog split them in half, making two sexes out of a hermaphrodite.
t. armchair talmudic scholar

>>8785378
I do desu, if they don't go to heaven with me I'm smuggling them then over the border.

>>8785413
>not being happy with trannies
Transphobic much!

>>8785412
Technically Lilith was Adam's first wife.
https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/lilith/

>>8785435
That's just satire, my man.
t. (advanced level scholar)

File: 1446784678143.gif (2MB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x300px

>>8785444
Explain

>>8785412
When I read Dog I thought this was going to be some native American or African creation myth.

>>8785451
Whatever the case may be, Adam being originally a sum of female and male parts is pretty much the rabbinical consensus that even the batshit insane Haredim acknowledge tbqh.

Also the Lilith myth is pretty much non-canon tbqh (it was written in the 9th century or so).

>>8785451
Just like the 7 circles of hell and the story about Lucifer being a neglected child, Lilith is also made up. There's no part in the bible that supported it.

>>8785524
>Just like the entire rest of the story, Lilith is also made up.
FTFY

>>8785368
>It actually was Adam and Steve, not Adam and Eve, women all go to hell
this is actually true, women burn in hell that's the place they all belong to

>>8785545
>ignores that we're talking about literature that's actually canon regardless if it's fiction or not
This is why people think atheists are the same as the other self-righteous retards.

>>8785609
>calling a blatant ripoff of Atenism "literature"

>>8785661
>disregarding a more influential book just because it has similarities with another religious doctrine
>has nothing to do with the original conversation
Stop being a retard.

>>8785368
I know of a few.
>My bf is okay with the open relationship we have with Jamal
>I'm good friends with a Muslim and I'm openly gay, explain that!
>Excuse me, but, where did you get the idea I was a pedophile? If a 7 year old non-binary kid wants to dress in skimpy clothes and dance around a stage for a crowd of adults to enjoy, zi should be able to!

>>8785702
>Have book compiled by multiple (some unnamed) authors over a thousand years spanning multiple languages compiled by priests who were the only ones capable of reading it and debated on in a closed council with closed records, and everything not approved stuffed into an eternally locked vault under one of the most esoterically-symbolic religious citadels in the history of the known world, including DIRECT alliterations to several known pagan deities and a statue to Apollyon the Destroyer.
>'The truth'
Anon...

>>8785714
You know, when you type things like 'kid dancing on stage in skimpy clothes', you're saying a lot more about you than you are about anyone watching the child, yes?

Because those clothes are only 'skimpy' when you're sexualizing the person you're looking at.

>>8785739
>There's something about this child's outfit I can quite agree with
>I know! There should be less of it!
>*Strips child down to underwear*
>Yes I definitely enjoy this more
>*someone complain that the reason you enjoy seeing the child in less clothing is because you're sexualizing them*
>Absurd! Just because I like seeing children wearing as little clothing as possible doesn't mean I'm sexualizing children!
>Alright Christina now wear this Victoria's secret baby underwear and start twerking

>>8785739
>those clothes are only 'skimpy' when you're sexualizing the person you're looking at
skimpy literally means "short and revealing". a tarp could be skimpy. a coat could be skimpy. clothes can be skimpy. it generally has a sexual meaning, but that's only because 99% of the time people talk about another's body is in reference to sexual attractiveness. it's like relating the word cock to penis. is that what it usually means? sure, but that's not the only context it's used in.
>source: have heard people use the word "skimpy" in like a hundred different non-sexual scenarios

>>8785702
>has similarities with
"s-sonichu is original, i s-swear!"

>>8785773
Doesn't sound like 'the child choosing his clothes' to me, sounds like your fantasy to satisfy your patriarchy-installed toxic need for 'righteous violence' to 'protect' 'whats yours'.

>>8785797
>sound like 'the child choosing his clothes' to me, sounds like your fantasy to satisfy your patriarchy-installed toxic need for 'righteous violence' to 'protect' 'whats yours'.
Probably because you're an anarcha feminist moron who unironically thinks that consumerism doesn't target children, and that mothers dressing up their children in consumeristic and sexualized manners is somehow the fault of men alone and not society as a whole.

Yes, I would rather not have children be raised to be irresponsible when they are younger and do drugs/have sex with whoever they want just because it makes a few assholes some money. Been there, done that, and it's a bad decision.

Trying to teach children to not make the mistakes you made when you were younger is not oppression, that's basic parenting.

>>8785849
>Trying to teach children to not make the mistakes you made when you were younger is not oppression, that's basic parenting.
To a degree it is, but it's not intentionally so. You learned what you know from going through dumb things. Stopping them from doing that will rob them of the chance to grow natively, leaving them vulnerable to ACTUAL predators. That aside, l agree with at least describing similarities in situations, but after that you're being harmful (within reason; obviously you don't need to let a child get hit by a car because you were hit by a car, I'm talking about experiential things).

'Irresponsible' is not a word to attach to dancing. It might be a word to attach to sex, but the child isn't being taught sex.

My contention is that this isn't an LGBT push, and you rightfully note that when you thrice mention the real culprit: CAPITALISM. Take your fight to where it belongs, we didn't do a thing with this.

And to the first line....no, obviously I'm not.

File: IMG_0708.jpg (39KB, 438x530px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 438x530px

>>8785739
The popular talking point is that only boys can be "sexualized", little girls are apparently innately sexual objects so it doesn't matter.

>>8785368

agp/hsts trans theory
best is all those autists buying into it

>>8785919
cuck

>>8785901
I'm...not sure what to take from that, what your purpose in stating it is, or what you're driving at. I'm not trying to be difficult - I seriously don't get it. Clarify, perhaps?

At face value, that sounds silly as hell to me. But it might be meant in some manner I'm not expecting, so...?

File: maxresdefault.jpg (54KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 1280x720px

>>8785926

>>8785931
I was assuming that the OP that you were responding to was talking about some little boy crossdressing.

>>8785727
>more texts about the bible being a collection of books
so?
>implying I said anything about the "Truth"
I said the bible is canon in a literary context. It's what the catholic church actually follows. The jews, catholics, and mormons have different books that they consider canon. I'm not saying it actually happened.

>inb4 writing another useless information about the religion that has nothing to do with the conversation
Again, atheists, stop being an insufferable asshole.

>>8785794
t. retard atheist who follows sonichu

>>8786068
t. retarded sonichu fan who things it's OC

j/k, retarded comic fans don't literally worship that crap.

>>8785368
Men are actually women.

>>8786161
Anon, Sonic's not real.

>>8786194
>can't read
Explains how you manage to buy holy books.

>>8785882
>You learned what you know from going through dumb things.
When I say
>Teach
I'm not implying a command authoritarian parenting style, the degree that children need to learn by experience and by recommendation depends on context and the child in question, my issue here is that society is no longer attempting to recommend or steer away children from vices in the name of a laizzes faire moral system of "anything goes" and general carpe diem. Driving that mindless consumerism down the throats of children is a societal problem, and inidirectly sexualizes children.

The sexualization of children occurs through Sex Ed classes being taught to younger and younger grades in public schools under the fallacious reasoning that small sporadic cases of children performing sexual acts on each other occurs when they are young. Most of this occurs due to , at best, children recreating what they see on tv, and at worst is an indication of previous molestation.

The problem here is that when you combine cultural carpe diem with the logic that small cases of sexual acts being re-created by children warrants younger sex Ed exposure, it definitely seems to be the sexualization of children. Whether or not this is intentional doesn't matter.

>>8785378
I think man hell and women heaven are the same place - having to deal with the other gender

>>8786575
So you're saying heaven for men is where all the women are trannies?

>>8786194
I'd like to make this my response to OP's question.

File: lol (2).gif (2MB, 500x280px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x280px

>>8785368
>bisexual people don't exist
>bisexual people are just closeted gay people
>bisexual people are just slutty straight people

same thread, like 2 messages apart, seriously, at least i see more and more "bisexuals are just straight sluts" argument, against bi men, women suffered that shit argument since years.

File: fsm_currency_highl.jpg (303KB, 800x808px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 800x808px

Ada and Eve were generally being cute, and Eve was all fine with that. Ada, however, was memed by a breeder, and swallowed the fruit. She became a horsedick futa, who then raped and wounded Eve. Infuriated by this profane act, God expelled the now impure two from the Garden, and made sure that they met their divinely justified consequences.

Eve was a victim, but the sin must be remembered. She and her daughters shall endure severe pain when they bear the results of blasphemy. Their wounds will bleed and never completely heal.

Ada was punished for the aggression. She was chained to a pair a balls, so that her mind never wanders away from the place of her sin. God then took away her beauty, so that with her knowledge of evil, she forever desires, but is never desired. Such a hideous, savage beast, Ada is no longer qualified to be called a "she". He thus became Adam, the first man.