Forum

Snusmumrikken wrote:
Not really, I can discuss it with my friends but I have concluded that people on vp are among the weakest individuals I have ever encountered which are emotionally broken if someone says something they read in a harsh tone although the tone might not even have been that, you can say something completely neutral and someone will be "this is an attack" and make a huge emotional scene about it and it can be about like literally fuck all so it's like "I like milk" and people are like bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah the cows!! oppressor!! murderer!! scum!!!!! and it's like lmao jesus fucking christ 

Alam wrote:
I don't that's an unpopular opinion, not even online. I mean, most people on earth are religious.

disintegration wrote:
hm, i think most people here aren't religious, maybe more in non western countries

Heaven wrote:
i just know u would go mental on twitter

Alam wrote:
There are plenty of western countries with a religious majority. only around 27% of people in the EU are atheists/non believers. That being said, you can be a believer and not be religious but I think it's safe to assume that's not the majority, correct me if I'm wrong.

Alam wrote:
There are plenty of western countries with a religious majority. only around 27% of people in the EU are atheists/non believers. That being said, you can be a believer and not be religious but I think it's safe to assume that's not the majority, correct me if I'm wrong.

Snusmumrikken wrote:
It depends on how you define religion, it's obviously not about believing in God because we do have religions which have no god, such as Buddhism. In high school my teacher argued that all humans are religious, but it depends on how you define it - humanists are religious in the sense that they have humanity in centre of their focus and all that, arguably people who worship the kardashians are religious, people who identify as atheistic is religious, they have taken an active stance on something they believe in and hold that as the truth - although there is no solid evidence for religions being "factual" or not, agnostics are also religious and so on 

mikkelrev wrote:
you cant judge someone on anything other than their actions

which id assume wouldnt be unpopular or even controversial bc its the only thing that makes SENSE, but i see yall talking. freaks

Alam wrote:
I'd argue that's a ridiculous way to define religion and there are plenty of other definitions that are more accurate in my opinion but I really can't be arsed getting in to this debate.

BEWAREARTEMIS wrote:
Wow, so this turned serious

Rowan wrote:
I cn onli think of th 1s thtll make ppl mad n im not in tht kinda mood 2day 

Snusmumrikken wrote:
hmmmm