It is all about Eris and the Invisible Pink Unicorn (BBHH) for me. The FSM is just like the cake...

(July 25, 2009 at 11:17 am)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: It is all about Eris and the Invisible Pink Unicorn (BBHH) for me. The FSM is just like the cake...

Then you are a heretic.

(July 25, 2009 at 5:13 pm)leo-rcc Wrote:

(July 25, 2009 at 11:17 am)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: It is all about Eris and the Invisible Pink Unicorn (BBHH) for me. The FSM is just like the cake...

Then you are a heretic.

Leo, my vacuum cleaner will know what to do with His Noodly Appendage, with or without the sauce, if he ever will have the guts to show himself on my carpet. So if you have really thought about Pascal's Wager it is not wise to openly suggest my vacuum cleaner is anything less than non-contingent actuality.

(July 26, 2009 at 2:27 am)Purple Rabbit Wrote: Leo, my vacuum cleaner will know what to do with His Noodly Appendage, with or without the sauce, if he ever will have the guts to show himself on my carpet. So if you have really thought about Pascal's Wager it is not wise to openly suggest my vacuum cleaner is anything less than non-contingent actuality.

Just one squirt of his noodlynes' sauce and your pathetic little vacuum deity his motor will short out. Repent your transgression now, before you end up in the hell with the flat american beer and the strippers with STD's.

The FSM couldn't even FIND the Invisible Pink Unicorn (BBHH) and lo the vacuum shall be struck down by her loveliness (BBHH), who knows their weakness...

She will tie knots in the cord!

She is sneaky though, and will allow mortals to ascribe her actions to other fallicious manifestations of deity or even something as simple as a poltergeist.

I defend my premises with epistemology, pure actuality, electrostatic discharge, and tasty beer goodness. You might claim argumentum ad ridiculouso, but that is because you simply don't understand my argument!

Rhizo

*is so distracted by such an interestingly awesome conversation, that he falls off his seat when reaching for his popcorn behind him*

I understood Katrina to mean that the conflicts she is worried about between her husband and her parents stem from the fact that her parents think she's still a believer. In other words, her parents might feel the child should have a religious upbringing, thinking that their daughter is still a believer who wants the same thing, and presenting what they think is a united front against the less-than-believing husband.

Anyway, hi there Katrina, and welcome to the forums.