OrdercityWeb: I was having a discussion with a few friends yesterday. I told them emotions aside, intertribal marriages shouldn't be ENCOURAGED. .. Why? To preserve our culture, our identity is in our culture. I know alot of products of intertribal marriages that are torn between the question of identity. I once read where a lady from an intertribal marriage said her mom insisted she married her own tribe as against her dad's. In many intertribal homes there is this cultural neutrality, and many times there's a power play on the kids among the two in-laws. Even the bible doesn't encourage intertribal marriage, remeber the instructions Abraham gave to his servant and the fact that Jesus was sent to the jews ONLY initially. Have you wondered why the Chinese and Koreans do not marry outside their race, why do you think there is that cultural cohesion and reverence with them anywhere they go. ... My take is INTERTRIBAL MARRIAGES SHOULDN'T BE ENCOURAGED. What's your take? Please be factual and intelligent DO NOT APPEAL TO EMOTIONS.
**modified** Alot of people are saying "culture evolves". Yes cultures evolve. But fundamentals like identity remains same. Culture evolves. Identity doesn't. The fact that the Yorubas believe they descended from Oduduwa is UNIQUE TO THEM ALONE AND CAN NEVER EVER EVOLVE. THE MOMENT IT DOES WE HAVE LOST WHO WE ARE
vengertime: speak for yourself, yorubbers are unnecessarily hurt because they hate Goodluck Jonathan that's what Tinubu told them. Yorubbers displayed their backstabbing skills during the election. They're more comfortable with the Arewa than us. So it's easy to kick them to their long time masters. As for tension, keep calm it's only August, September nova reach them to talk of October.
RoyalUc: Watin you won use file and machate do? You dey go farm? I even dey ask as you go fit work for farm ; Jokes apart, don't get tired of preaching peace. That is what the world needs most now.
Bro, I'm tired. It's like humans are hard wired to hate. I tried to explain that love is the highest form of intelligence. Them no hear.
So the best thing is to buy better sharp and light machete make we dey butcher dey go.
Ranchhoddas: No it isn't. That is why research continues till tomorrow.
So why not look into other alternatives like ID? If you can't look at ID as an alternative It just shows you have faith in Evolution (Just like theists).
For me ID is more scientific while Evolution assumes toooooooo much. And calling assumptions fact makes if faith.
Ranchhoddas: Please read the thread. This was already published in 2005 by NOTABLE PALEONTOLOGIST Mary Schweitzer. His discovery was not new. In science when something is discovered, the next thing is to begin to make postulates which Mary Schweitzer did. Nothing is accepted as absolute truth in science until it is foolproof. You guy did not. He went and began to tell everyone that his discovery validates his beliefs. Very unscientific and he got fired. The University settled because it will be cheaper in the long run than a drawn out legal battle. Anyone who knows the American legal system will see that it was a prudent move. Do a Google search. Mark Armitage is a renowned pseudoscientist.
Hypocrisy at it's finest. So evolution is foolproof?
People only understand what they are 'taught' or what they perceive from the environment. No man is born with hatred. So bro., keep the caustic remark aside and join to preach and promote peace and togetherness. That's what humanity seems to be in need of now.
I'm tired of preaching love. Na to file machete remain now
blackweaver: Here my own take, I don't presume to know if evolution actually happened or not, I wasn't there after all. At the same time I believe we need to be careful not to look at things from a 1-sided point of view Personally I believe some of the points are looking at things from only one perspective. Perhaps under the current condition of the earth these facts hold true, but what if there was a time in the past when conditions were different and one or even all of those conditions could actually happen?
I like and support this particular point and believe that scientists might POSSIBLY be wrong about their radioactive dating methods, however I also believe we have to be careful not to make the same mistake we're accusing them of making: if in the past there was different kind of radioactive, solar, volcanic activity etc, isn't it possible that sometime in the past conditions could occur that no longer occur naturally on earth that could make those points listed by the OP possible? For instance, mutation; isn't it a potential form of adaptation? Say for instance, a particular mutation that might be seen as harmful under earth's present weather/atmospheric state might actually give an animal a biological edge under a different atmospheric/weather state, and if that state continues long enough, those with that mutation turn out to be the fittest. What's to say that humans as we are now were not a mutation some hundreds of thousands of years ago (assuming the world has been around that long)?
Well unless you don't believe in the existence of other planets, I think this argument should not even have been used at all. The moon hasn't been thoroughly been investigated, not to talk about Mars. You're even assuming that life on Mars has to be somewhat similar to life on earth. For all we know, "life forms" on Mars might be so different from earth that we might not recognise it at first, and even if there's no life on Mars, there are 6 more planets in our solar system and millions more in our galaxy alone. So to say that because you haven't detected life on Mars, there's no extraterrestial life is like saying that because you can't see any insect on a particular rock, there's no insect on any rock. It just doesn't follow.
I have made a number of points, and I don't claim to be right, I'm just saying that we have to be careful not to make the same mistake we're accusing the evolutionists of making i.e. assumptions based on the current state of things. The truth is that we don't know enough to be sure and we may never know enough as long as we live.
But you know something? Even if evolution did take place, it doesn't disprove the existence of God; for all we know, evolution is God's process of making things happen so at the end, whether or not evolution occurred doesn't really matter.
I'm waiting for the day evolution will be called what it is an HYPOTHESIS. How can you call evolution fact when it is not what it was 50 years ago.
Hate speech is speech which attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, or gender.
I am disappointed with Fayose with this step he's taken
hopefulLandlord: you sound like a novice to the moral argument
but let me add that if you say that you would be out there, raping and murdering, if not for the benevolent love of Jesus, then I say to you: "Please remain a Christian."
LightandDarkness: There is a mutual understanding to not go around killing people because it endangers everyone, it's not like humans are naturally averse to killing. We have just decided when it is or could be okay to kill-Death penalty, War, and Self-defence- and when it is not okay to kill-killing someone who annoys you, killing to steal, killing for pure pleasure. Furthermore I did not say there was no point to morals, I said objective morality does not exist.
Put your mutual understanding in your pocket. There is no wrong done to any human. All I want to do is kill everyone I see. All I want to rape every female since we are just molecules and have no purpose. If anyone asks me why I'm doing this. I'll ask him, we have no purpose and there's no wrong done. I just did what I felt like doing. If you can prove there's a purpose then I've been wrong.
LightandDarkness: Objective morals and values do not exist, morals, and values are determined by societies for their collective benefit. The things done in the name of gods or a god in different societies and civilizations like human sacrifice and ethnic cleansing shows that if objective morality does exist, it is not tied to any god, and also shows that morality is truly subjective as the things that are considered permissible to do or say in the name of a god vary across different societies.
So it means I can kill anyone and have no qualms about it. Because we are basically just animals? Because there's no point of morals.
chemystery: Theism deal with faith while atheism is concerned with fact. Faith is an instinct and intelligent people (atheists) are known to be better at rising above their instincts.
It takes more faith to believe in no creator than to believe in one.
Naijaguy12345: Jonathan stole public money, aboki policemen collect it, should be case close. If he had labour hard to get the money and paying property taxes, the flat won't be left unattended for that long. Nigerian police and stealing is like Biafra and the other powder.
Crime › Say No To Drugs. EXTREMELY GRAPHIC PHOTOS!!! by Horlufemi(op): 10:25pm On Aug 28, 2017
And this indicate that Nigeria is not practising a true democracy