Submitters of Words's definitions
A word that, unfortunately, is now most often used as a euphemism for fat by heavy chicks. Which is a shame since a truly thick woman is undoubtedly a beautiful sight.
by Submitters of Words June 29, 2011
Get the Thick mug.Weird, obnoxious folks who find it suitable to blame almost 100% of the world's problems on "them jews".
They don't realize that while, yes, many Jews do indeed fulfill the stereotype of "greedy penny pinchers" ( I should know, i'm a jew and i live around them), rich jews did not get there by smoking pot all day. The jewish people historically have placed a heavy emphasis on hard work and education. So maybe if you stop yapping all day and criticizing us, and spend some more time reading up on stocks, you might get somewhere?
Jews are a convenient scapegoat since so many are well off. But they're wealthy for a reason. Did you know that the founder of Google, Sergey Brin, is Jewish? He's a very charitable man too, although this is less known since he prefers a low profile.
Jew haters should also know that while rich jews may often be greedy, so are rich Indians, rich blacks, and hell just rich people in general. It's a problem of the rich and of human nature, not jews.
They don't realize that while, yes, many Jews do indeed fulfill the stereotype of "greedy penny pinchers" ( I should know, i'm a jew and i live around them), rich jews did not get there by smoking pot all day. The jewish people historically have placed a heavy emphasis on hard work and education. So maybe if you stop yapping all day and criticizing us, and spend some more time reading up on stocks, you might get somewhere?
Jews are a convenient scapegoat since so many are well off. But they're wealthy for a reason. Did you know that the founder of Google, Sergey Brin, is Jewish? He's a very charitable man too, although this is less known since he prefers a low profile.
Jew haters should also know that while rich jews may often be greedy, so are rich Indians, rich blacks, and hell just rich people in general. It's a problem of the rich and of human nature, not jews.
Liberal Jew haters: They tie any form of judaism with radical zionism. Tend not to realize that the vast majority of Jews in the U.S. are extremely secular and are often some of the most liberal people around to boot. Also most american jews have very little if any connection with Israel.
Conservative Jew haters: They in turn are more prone to despise liberal, secular jews, especially for their perceived influence on Hollywood and the media. I won't lie, this image is probably more accurate. But it's still unfair to insult an entire religion for the actions of a few.
Lastly, the amount of judeophobia on this dictionary, is, frankly, disgusting. Just look up some of the definitions for "jew" or "jews" if you're skeptical of this.
Conservative Jew haters: They in turn are more prone to despise liberal, secular jews, especially for their perceived influence on Hollywood and the media. I won't lie, this image is probably more accurate. But it's still unfair to insult an entire religion for the actions of a few.
Lastly, the amount of judeophobia on this dictionary, is, frankly, disgusting. Just look up some of the definitions for "jew" or "jews" if you're skeptical of this.
by Submitters of Words July 7, 2011
Get the Jew Haters mug.Similar to the race card, but used by conservatives.
Something they tout as an answer to every single social issue in existence. Such reasoning is fallacious, however, because in actuality life is much more complicated..
Conservative: If people don't want babies, they shouldn't have sex. That way, abortion wouldn't even be necessary. Think, liberals, think! Personal responsibility, people!
Liberal/Moderate: Ok, so if abortion was banned, it's true that less people would have irresponsible sex, and there might be far fewer abortions. You're right on that one. But what about in cases of rape? You can't mount the "personal responsibility" defense there - people don't choose to get raped.
Conservative: Make abortion legal only in cases of rape then.
L/M: Well how are you supposed to know when the hell she's lying then? You'd be encouraging women to lie. Same problem as before, she just has to employ a different method of getting around it. How are you supposed to distinguish between the liars and the true victims?
Conservative: Polygraph.
L/M: In a perfect world, those things are fully reliable. But they're clearly not. Since we don't live in a perfect world, and polygraphs sometimes fail, we may as well legalize abortion considering that there are many cases where it's very necessary. Of course there are whores who will use it as birth control. But that's unavoidable.
Something they tout as an answer to every single social issue in existence. Such reasoning is fallacious, however, because in actuality life is much more complicated..
Conservative: If people don't want babies, they shouldn't have sex. That way, abortion wouldn't even be necessary. Think, liberals, think! Personal responsibility, people!
Liberal/Moderate: Ok, so if abortion was banned, it's true that less people would have irresponsible sex, and there might be far fewer abortions. You're right on that one. But what about in cases of rape? You can't mount the "personal responsibility" defense there - people don't choose to get raped.
Conservative: Make abortion legal only in cases of rape then.
L/M: Well how are you supposed to know when the hell she's lying then? You'd be encouraging women to lie. Same problem as before, she just has to employ a different method of getting around it. How are you supposed to distinguish between the liars and the true victims?
Conservative: Polygraph.
L/M: In a perfect world, those things are fully reliable. But they're clearly not. Since we don't live in a perfect world, and polygraphs sometimes fail, we may as well legalize abortion considering that there are many cases where it's very necessary. Of course there are whores who will use it as birth control. But that's unavoidable.
"personal responsibility card"
Personal responsibility is important but it doesn't take into account factors that are outside of the person's control. For instance, conservatives are operating under the assumption that welfare discourages the work ethic and personal responsibility. But what about people with Parkinson's, or similar diseases? What about valuable workers that have been laid off en masse by struggling companies and need aid to get that back on their feet? Are they necessarily lazy and lacking personal responsibility?
Personal responsibility is important but it doesn't take into account factors that are outside of the person's control. For instance, conservatives are operating under the assumption that welfare discourages the work ethic and personal responsibility. But what about people with Parkinson's, or similar diseases? What about valuable workers that have been laid off en masse by struggling companies and need aid to get that back on their feet? Are they necessarily lazy and lacking personal responsibility?
by Submitters of Words June 15, 2011
Get the Personal responsibility card mug.by Submitters of Words July 7, 2011
Get the Illiterate mug.Cool people who, unlike their fundamentalist counterparts, don't need to turn their backs on modern science to keep their faith alive
The famous Jewish philosopher Maimonides once said that if science conflicts with Scripture, then it must be Scripture we have misunderstood.
It's sad these words of wisdom died out so long ago
Since creationists are likely to disagree with the idea that modern science like evolution is sufficiently supported, I'll go ahead and quote the renowned biologist Douglas Futuyma,
"The statement that organisms have descended with modifications from common ancestors—the historical reality of evolution—is not a theory. It is a fact, as fully as the fact of the earth's revolution about the sun."
Theodosius Dobzhansky had this to say in his famous paper "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution",
"I am a creationist and an evolutionist. Evolution is God's, or Nature's method of creation. Creation is not an event that happened in 4004 BC; it is a process that began some 10 billion years ago and is still under way."
He also wrote,
"Does the evolutionary doctrine clash with religious faith? It does not. It is a blunder to mistake the Holy Scriptures for elementary textbooks of astronomy, geology, biology, and anthropology. Only if symbols are construed to mean what they are not intended to mean can there arise imaginary, insoluble conflicts. ...the blunder leads to blasphemy: the Creator is accused of systematic deceitfulness."
The famous Jewish philosopher Maimonides once said that if science conflicts with Scripture, then it must be Scripture we have misunderstood.
It's sad these words of wisdom died out so long ago
Since creationists are likely to disagree with the idea that modern science like evolution is sufficiently supported, I'll go ahead and quote the renowned biologist Douglas Futuyma,
"The statement that organisms have descended with modifications from common ancestors—the historical reality of evolution—is not a theory. It is a fact, as fully as the fact of the earth's revolution about the sun."
Theodosius Dobzhansky had this to say in his famous paper "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution",
"I am a creationist and an evolutionist. Evolution is God's, or Nature's method of creation. Creation is not an event that happened in 4004 BC; it is a process that began some 10 billion years ago and is still under way."
He also wrote,
"Does the evolutionary doctrine clash with religious faith? It does not. It is a blunder to mistake the Holy Scriptures for elementary textbooks of astronomy, geology, biology, and anthropology. Only if symbols are construed to mean what they are not intended to mean can there arise imaginary, insoluble conflicts. ...the blunder leads to blasphemy: the Creator is accused of systematic deceitfulness."
Liberal/progressive Christians do not believe in a deceiving God. They know that, considering the overwhelming amount of evidence for evolution, to deny it would be equivalent to denying the existence of ancient Rome or Greece.
by Submitters of Words November 25, 2011
Get the liberal/progressive christians mug.A person who lacks a belief in the existence of Santa
Most people above the ages of 6 or 7 years old, basically.
Most people above the ages of 6 or 7 years old, basically.
Most people are by default asantas, although I've met a few who believed well into their high school years!
by Submitters of Words April 18, 2011
Get the Asanta mug.by Submitters of Words July 11, 2011
Get the brunette bombshell mug.