Not necessarily true. even in the same religion there are controversies and contentions, and religion has been the spark of many wars and conflicts in the first place. religion is not the only thing that brings a sense of togetherness; many other communities do as well. though certain religions advocate peace, the actions of many zealous fanatics that cause disruptions are evidence of the hypocrisy. being void of religion would mean being void of an avenue for conflicts and differences.

Jagshemash! My name Borat Sagdiyev, I son of Asimbala Sagdiyev and Boltok the rapist. I like you, I like sex. Chenquieh.

Let's just say that if it could be charged, then every single other religion will have to be charged too. The past should be forgotten, and the crimes in the present are only committed by the minority which is not representative nor the epitome of the religion itself and what it advocates.

No doubt, these figures serve as a form of entertainment in many of our childhood days. However, the crux is whether the child has an unhealthy obsession with these paragons of virtue and the belief that it is inevitable that good will truimph over evil. Ultimately, kids are impressionable and they believe the things they are exposed to will reflect the reality of life. These figures can cause them to believe that it is granted that good will ultimately truimph over evil , which may, in extreme cases, cause them to take a backseat and be complacent, because they think all things will eventually be set right. Of course, these figures serve as mere entertainment to most of us bringing back memories of our childhood, but subconsciously each and every one of us has an ideal shaped from the exposure to all these fantasies. Whether that ideal is for good or for worse, pretty much depends on the content of these fantasies.

It's not a matter of considering. It's a fact. in terms of population at least, unless you are talking about power, rights etc.

It pretty much depends on the situation of the student.

If the student is eligible and has the ability to go overseas in a better institution to pursue his studies, why not? I would consider that a necessity since we should always aim to be the best of what we can be, and if the best option is to go overseas, then I would deem it as mandatory.

Of course, points like these could be refuted easily, but again it all depends on the circumstances of the student and his background. Education itself, for sure, is a necessity. Whether to go abroad or not, is highly Dependant on the cases we are looking at.

The world is having an increasingly greater emphasis on empiricism, science, and logic to solve many issues. It is this very science we believe in that is able to disprove religous "facts", uncover religous scandals, frauds and misdeeds. The media helps in being transparent to the public about these misdeeds and all. Through these, more people are understanding that what they used to worship (religion) may not be the absolute truth, and thus lose faith in it. Catholic priests groping young boys, monks indulging in sex and drugs behind that seemingly religous saffron facade, Muslim radicals in terrorism etc all serve to exacerbate the distrust people have towards religion. Therefore I would say the increasing power of science and the proliferation of the media are two primary factors behind the decline of religion and why people are viewing it as a deception altogether.

Of course, religion has its saving grace in the sense that it has provided us with ethics and constructed a moral framework for Man to progress. I would dare say Man by nature cannot run a fully functional society without some code of ethics to abide by. Science is pulling the shackles on many controversial issues like cloning and stem cell research which may have a devastating impact on Mankind.

Ironically it is this very science that Religion is controlling that is pulling it down, and also the religous figures themselves that are the harbingers of the downfall of religion.

We are in the assumption here that most people joining these debates are mature people. Sometimes, people need to get a point across with the intensity that many other words can't. In these cases, though not many, it is probably justifiable so.

For example,

It is wrong to eat another human being alive.

versus

It is fucking wrong to eat another human being alive.

Sometimes, swear words contain an intensity and emotion no other words can replace, although i would not contend that many times swear words are not used to get a point across but just for insults or being derogatory.

In the end, words are just words. I believe there is no such thing as offending people. just people choosing to be offended.

Batman is stupid because he wears a mask at night where no one can see him. Superman is also stupid because he flies around in his underpants in the daytime. Ultimately it is not a debate on which of these 2 are more super. Because eventually, Chuck Norris beats them all.

Batman is stupid because he wears a mask at night where no one can see him. Superman is also stupid because he flies around in his underpants in the daytime. Ultimately it is not a debate on which of these 2 are more super. Because eventually, Chuck Norris beats them all.