God is a Fake

[falcon9]

One more comment from me and I am out of this never-ending debate (??).

Hazzah! Although you keep saying that, (in order to get the last word?), I remain dubious of your claims.

  The comment you posted regarding my assertion that I am not a fundamentalist is made with an assumption that you know what goes on in my head. 

No, that is based almost entirely upon your posted remarks, (any assumptions would result from extrapolating that such remarks stem from what goes on in your head).

I have gone through this entire thread and other topics to which I have posted to see if I have posted anything that seems to show extremism on my part.  There is no "strict adherence to specific theological doctrines, combined with a vigorous attack on outside threats to their religious beliefs." 

So have I and have noted numerous specious quotes from others intended as 'countering attacks' against my questioning of religious beliefs, (along with this gem: Message ID: 499206 - posted by loulizlee in God is Fake thread: "Are you tired yet of saying the same things over and over again, Falcon?  I think we need to stop responding to your endless tirades to shut you up.  However, I look in every once in a while just to see if you have said anything different.  My guilty pleasure."

I am a Christian, not a fundamentalist - there is a difference. 

Either such xtian beliefs are open to interpretation and questioning or, they are not.  If they are, that's what I've been doing all along; questioning the inherent assumptions of such beliefs.  If they are not open to this, such are implicitly fundamentalist beliefs, (cannot be questioned).
 

I have made no "vigorous" attack on outside threats to my religious beliefs.

The description included the phrase "in combination", (not as a requirement of fundamentalism but, to encompass the full meaning of the term - which, btw, was originally a self-applied xtian label).  Be that as it may, the word "vigorous" is somewhat open to subjective interpretation in that what is effortless for some is vigorous for others.  For instance, I had interpreted your 'counter-quoting' responses to some of my posts as merely passive-aggressive, (rather than especially vigorous).  Whereas you've apparently interpreted my persistent consistency in questioning religious beliefs as "vigorous", (as can be seen below).

I believe that anyone can believe whatever they want to believe; my words are not going to change them. 

People can believe whatever they wish to, in their minds.  As soon as such beliefs leave those confines and meander out in a public forum, those who do not hold such beliefs have an equal opportunity to question or dissent with them, (whether such opposition and dissent is consider by believers to be "vigorous attacks" on those beliefs or not).
 

Most of my posts on this thread were an attempt to show that your "vigorous attacks" seem to indicate some sort of psychological problem. 

That's extremely ironic, considering that those who do not hold such beliefs have an equal opportunity to question or dissent with them, (whether such opposition and dissent is consider by believers to be "vigorous attacks" or a "psychological problem" on the part of skeptics).  Your imputing that questioning the superstitious beliefs of others is indicative of a "psychological problem" is itself, a "vigorous attack" and the irony of such a specious remark lies within the glaring fact that believing in something for which there is No attributible evidence is far more indicative a some "psychological problem" than questioning such.

I am not a psychologist, but there seems to be something lacking in your life that causes you to interminably attack anyone who disagrees with you, especially on one particular subject. 

Your mischaracterization of the situation is indicative of your thought processes; my questioning of such religious beliefs as are posted _initially by religious adherents_ in these forums are not attacking, they are 'counter-attacks' upon unsupported assertions made by religious adherents.  Some of those adherents have been quite vigorously attacking me, (and occasionally, the actual content of my questioning posts), because they disagree with my questioning their religious beliefs.  If you cannot see the inherent hypocrisy there, perhaps you have been 'blinded by the light.'

[Abrupt]

Gen 3:8 - "Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden."

Let's also add the next verse to strengthen the critics case: "But the LORD God called to the man, "Where are you?"
How could one hide from God? Why does God need to ask this question?

First, what Adam and Eve could have hid from is merely the visible and special manifestation of the Lord. As for God's seeming ignorance, anyone with children can recognize the utility of such questions. If a child is known to have broken a lamp, it is better to question the child than to simply accuse her. The former approach enables the child to take an active role in her wrong-doing, and allows for her to apologize.

The amount of assumption here and the attempt to relate the supernatural to the natural is bonkers. And the major problem still exists-- that is not what it says in the bible. Not to mention if we are to 'interpret' the lines, it just shows how utterly poor and vague it is written. This is a perfect example of a cop-out argument and shows that one can interpret the bible however one wants to if the original words contradict others. It is why I take issue with xtian sources-- they're constant irrational arguments that over-exaggerate or flat-out lie about the evidences they bring to the table.

I don't see this as a matter of interpretation, but instead as a matter of understanding.  Where you see it as a work of fiction that would have been meant to immerse the reader into the story, I see it as a revelation of events put in a form meant for me to be able to gain insight and understanding from.  When reading the above passages and those following I think about that mystery that is "free will" and even some of the challenges you yourself have put against it.  I think about physics involved in considering a fixed duration universe from an infinite existence perspective.  We can easily determine that the limit of such a comparative duration would indeed be approaching zero and that also gives me pause for speculation.  I think about it viewed sequentially and randomly (and what limits might be derived from uncertainty), about the rules/laws that would have to be adhered to in such a situation.  Information loss, causality, and many other cases that make me wonder if there is more information here than is readily apparent.

Even if you adopt your position that it was simply men, scholars of the day, writing a fictitious story, you must give them at least enough consideration in education and reason to be aware of the obvious questions that are often brought up.  Critical thinking isn't a new thing and some of the best cons of today are still simple alterations of those that have been around for ages, thus reminding us we are still much the same as what we always were.

Anyways just some thoughts I had on that one bit and didn't intend to interrupt the dialog you had going so please ignore if it is in the way.

[falcon9]

Gen 3:8 - 
The amount of assumption here and the attempt to relate the supernatural to the natural is bonkers. And the major problem still exists-- that is not what it says in the bible. Not to mention if we are to 'interpret' the lines, it just shows how utterly poor and vague it is written. This is a perfect example of a cop-out argument and shows that one can interpret the bible however one wants to if the original words contradict others. It is why I take issue with xtian sources-- they're constant irrational arguments that over-exaggerate or flat-out lie about the evidences they bring to the table.

I don't see this as a matter of interpretation, but instead as a matter of understanding. 

Such understandings are matters of interpretation though. Especially regarding biblical parables; religious adherents will often interpret these from a wholy, (pun intended), religious perspective, rather than more objectively.

Where you see it as a work of fiction that would have been meant to immerse the reader into the story, I see it as a revelation of events put in a form meant for me to be able to gain insight and understanding from.

Such insights and understanding as claimed are still interpretations, however. 
 

Even if you adopt your position that it was simply men, scholars of the day, writing a fictitious story, you must give them at least enough consideration in education and reason to be aware of the obvious questions that are often brought up.  Critical thinking isn't a new thing and some of the best cons of today are still simple alterations of those that have been around for ages, thus reminding us we are still much the same as what we always were.

Although it isn't possible to accurately determine the education levels or reasoning abilities of the various contributors to biblical 'books', much can be extrapolated from the content of what they've cobbled together, (and a high degree of education or ability to reason isn't apparent in that content).

Anyways just some thoughts I had on that one bit and didn't intend to interrupt the dialog you had going so please ignore if it is in the way.

You made a contributory post, not an interruption and that's well within the discussion part of debate + discuss.  No worries.

[jcribb16]

"Your simple denial in the face of evidence you posted which contradicts your denial.  That evidence consists of posts you made which adhere to unsubstantiated religious doctrines, beliefs and faith. Fundamentalism is the strict adherence to specific theological doctrines, combined with a vigorous attack on outside threats to their religious beliefs."  Falcon9

One more comment from me and I am out of this never-ending debate (??).  The comment you posted regarding my assertion that I am not a fundamentalist is made with an assumption that you know what goes on in my head.  I have gone through this entire thread and other topics to which I have posted to see if I have posted anything that seems to show extremism on my part.  There is no "strict adherence to specific theological doctrines, combined with a vigorous attack on outside threats to their religious beliefs."  I am a Christian, not a fundamentalist - there is a difference.  I have made no "vigorous" attack on outside threats to my religious beliefs.  I believe that anyone can believe whatever they want to believe; my words are not going to change them.  Most of my posts on this thread were an attempt to show that your "vigorous attacks" seem to indicate some sort of psychological problem.  I am not a psychologist, but there seems to be something lacking in your life that causes you to interminably attack anyone who disagrees with you, especially on one particular subject. 

Well said.

[falcon9]

One more comment from me and I am out of this never-ending debate (??).  

Well said.

On the contrary, that attempt to 'get in the last word' was very poorly "reasoned", (in that it lacked anything more than specious 'reasoning').  That another constrictive religious adherent would 'applaud' such irrationality is superficially-unsurprising.

[SherylsShado]

Quotes are from Falconer02:

Though I'm certain barbaric treatment will still happen, it will diminish if we can get the education out there.

I am an optimist.  I also know what many others have said/are saying and I do live in "reality".  The barbaric treatment will occur and will intensify right here in the US, and I think in the very near future.  I think things will happen that will be so horrible that no one would have thought it could happen to people living in the U.S.   

The flood. 

  The flood?  The righteous were spared.  Noah invited people to join him & his family on the Ark, no one wanted to.  No one believed God was going to destroy them...no one believed in God.   They were having too much fun laughing and making jokes--- until they realized they didn't know how to swim.  Some believe the story really happened, some don't.  The story was considered important enough, regardless, to be placed in the Bible.  There's also a verse that says 'But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.'---and there STILL doesn't seem to be very many people heeding the warning.  (I can see maybe 'missing the boat' the first time around...it's just stupid to miss it the 'second time'.)

Tread lightly. The amount of frauds and fakes out there are staggering though 

  I know there are alot of frauds & fakes.  (There are also alot of "unsolved mysteries"... .)  I don't really get into the "images of Jesus" on burnt toast, etc.  The footage of the "guy on a horse", I can't say for sure whether it was real or not.  My opinion (no facts, just my opinion) is that I think that was a "You Tube" video and the majority of them are fake.  It didn't seem like the "real deal" to me,  but I could be wrong.  The Bible warns of many false prophets in the end times and there surely is no shortage of them today.  Most of them do claim to "have or belong to a particular religion", and many of them are "screwed up" in the head.   I don't think any particular race, religion or group of people should have to lose their right to a freedom just because there are people that have gone off the "deep end" with their "misinterpretations".  If they are breaking the law, if they are hurting someone then they need to be dealt with.  Otherwise, I think "to each their own".

Though today I really have nothing against the well-being of the people who worship such things, I have major problems with their complete lack of reasoning skills since it can easily be dangerous and damage the common good.

I don't worship anything or anyone but God.  There's nothing wrong with my reasoning skills...except in the eyes of  "unbelievers".  Oh well,  no one can please everybody.    I don't belong to any particular religion (as I've stated before) and I have never said that I was a "christian fundamentalist".  These terms & assumptions seem to come from people that don't even know the meaning of the words but feel free to attach them to anyone that says they believe in God and consider themselves "christian".  Not every person that considers themselves to be "christian" even knows the true meaning of the word.  A person can call themselves a "christian" and still go to hell.  It's confusing and I think that's the way satan likes it.

  It comes down to grown adults still taking part in fantasy and trying to pass that along to the next generation.

But the fantasy games (Dungeons & Dragons, etc.) adults have passed along to the next generation are totally harmless...?

If your god wanted us to use our brains, he'd disappear

Someday He will...all His followers too.

It's happening already in developed nations- religion turning into simple and faint cultural memories.

In the Bible, whenever people decided to "remove God"-- God removed His blessing and His judgment fell.  Many of those people found themselves suffering and heavily burdened in bondage/slavery to their enemy.  I think the day  is coming when He will remove His blessing from the U.S. and Americans will be "owned" by the enemy, which goes back to the "barbaric treatment" at the top of this post. 

[jcribb16]

One more comment from me and I am out of this never-ending debate (??).  

Well said.

On the contrary, that attempt to 'get in the last word' was very poorly "reasoned", (in that it lacked anything more than specious 'reasoning').  That another constrictive religious adherent would 'applaud' such irrationality is superficially-unsurprising.

I do not care one iota what you have to say about my comment to her.  I spoke to her about her comment and don't need you dictating what my remarks mean or don't mean.  If I was debating the issue, fine.  I was merely replying with what I thought of her comment TO HER. Please mind your own business.  I'm tediously bored of and tired of your constant nagging and cutting down every little thing people may say. 

[SherylsShado]

I just wanted to throw my two cents in on this one real quick.  

Hey you...    Pop in more often & stay as long as you like ANYTIME, you've been missed...  

[falcon9]

Well said.

On the contrary, that attempt to 'get in the last word' was very poorly "reasoned", (in that it lacked anything more than specious 'reasoning').  That another constrictive religious adherent would 'applaud' such irrationality is superficially-unsurprising.

I do not care one iota what you have to say about my comment to her.

Whether you happen to "care" or not is irrelavent. This is the D+D forum and I 'debated' her comments.
 

I spoke to her about her comment and don't need you dictating what my remarks mean or don't mean.

I "dictated" nothing; I merely commented an opinion that your supportive remark bore no resemblance to the veracity of her statements and instead, supported irrational assertions, 9which was within nominal expectations, given your previous remarks).
 

If I was debating the issue, fine.  I was merely replying with what I thought of her comment TO HER.

Her comments were extremely debatable and I dissented.  That's well within the D+D subforum purpose.  Your vacuous "well-said" was superficial 'applause'.

Please mind your own business. 

Please cease attempting to "dictate" to me in I public forum.  Public comments made to public posts are not 'private business', apparently much to your chagrin.
 

I'm tediously bored of and tired of your constant nagging and cutting down every little thing people may say.[/b]  [/color]

Your boredom and tedium are of very little concern to me.  They add nothing to the subject at hand other than to implicit indicate your pettiness.  If you're bored, don't read what bores you, (weren't you going to put my posts on "ignore"?).  As for "nagging", that's your unsupported opinion, (and empty derrogatory remark).  The same applies to characterizing what you don't agree with, (reasoning), as "cutting down".  You demonstrate being bereft of rationality on a constant basis.

[falcon9]

I just wanted to throw my two cents in on this one real quick.  

Hey you...    Pop in more often & stay as long as you like ANYTIME, you've been missed...  

And yet, you snipped the major context of her reply so that you could avoid responding to it in a "debate + discussion" manner.  How curious.

[jcribb16]

Well said.

On the contrary, that attempt to 'get in the last word' was very poorly "reasoned", (in that it lacked anything more than specious 'reasoning').  That another constrictive religious adherent would 'applaud' such irrationality is superficially-unsurprising.

I do not care one iota what you have to say about my comment to her.

Whether you happen to "care" or not is irrelavent. This is the D+D forum and I 'debated' her comments.
 

I spoke to her about her comment and don't need you dictating what my remarks mean or don't mean.

I "dictated" nothing; I merely commented an opinion that your supportive remark bore no resemblance to the veracity of her statements and instead, supported irrational assertions, 9which was within nominal expectations, given your previous remarks).
 

If I was debating the issue, fine.  I was merely replying with what I thought of her comment TO HER.

Her comments were extremely debatable and I dissented.  That's well within the D+D subforum purpose.  Your vacuous "well-said" was superficial 'applause'.

Please mind your own business. 

Please cease attempting to "dictate" to me in I public forum.  Public comments made to public posts are not 'private business', apparently much to your chagrin.
 

I'm tediously bored of and tired of your constant nagging and cutting down every little thing people may say.[/b]  [/color]

Your boredom and tedium are of very little concern to me.  They add nothing to the subject at hand other than to implicit indicate your pettiness.  If you're bored, don't read what bores you, (weren't you going to put my posts on "ignore"?).  As for "nagging", that's your unsupported opinion, (and empty derrogatory remark).  The same applies to characterizing what you don't agree with, (reasoning), as "cutting down".  You demonstrate being bereft of rationality on a constant basis.

This is also a forum for people to give their opinions, sir.  If you don't like my opinion, fine, just say so. What you do, however, is disagree even with small comments to another poster.  Your opinions come from you with an air of superiority that only yours counts.  And you know something?  Your opinions are simply that - opinions.  Just as mine or others.  People are entitled to their opinions, as well.  You demonstrate what you accuse others of, as well as me, tonight, in that you act "bereft of rationality on a constant basis."  You have finally nailed it with describing yourself.

[falcon9]

The flood?  The righteous were spared. 

According to which dubious source, a "bible"?  Geological records contradict claims of a 'world-wide flood' and instead, partly support a much more localized event.  If such a "flood" were not widespread, many would have survived, (not just some arbitrarily-designated "righteous" ones).  

The Bible warns of many false prophets in the end times and there surely is no shortage of them today.

It's mildly amusing that a collection of religious documents "warns of many false prophets" while simultaneously being full of them itself.
 

Most of them do claim to "have or belong to a particular religion", and many of them are "screwed up" in the head.

Apparently, this is near to being a prerequisite of religious adherents.
   

I don't think any particular race, religion or group of people should have to lose their right to a freedom just because there are people that have gone off the "deep end" with their "misinterpretations". 

Presumably, this would include those particular groups or individuals who have "gone off the deep end with their" own specious religious "misinterpretations" as well.  If not, the inherent selective hypocrisy would be too obvious.

I don't worship anything or anyone but God.  There's nothing wrong with my reasoning skills...except in the eyes of  "unbelievers".

On the contrary, a self-professed belief in that for which no supporting evidence has ever been presented avoids basic reasoning altogether. No bland denial contradicts previous evidence which indicates severely selective "reasoning skills" at best and none, at worst. 

I don't belong to any particular religion (as I've stated before) and I have never said that I was a "christian fundamentalist".  These terms & assumptions seem to come from people that don't even know the meaning of the words but feel free to attach them to anyone that says they believe in God and consider themselves "christian". 

If it walks like a fundie and talks like a fundie, odds are that it's a fundie, (whether self-designated as one or not).  In broad, colloquial usage, a "fundamentalist" xtian is generally a 'bible-thumper', (one who quotes or refers to a 'bible' in an insubstantial attempt to support their religious beliefs - doctrinal references), and can also stridently object to dissent from those who don't share their religious beliefs in lieu of responding to the context of dissenting arguments, (that would be, attacking dissenters themselves).  Under such parameters, "Sheryls" qualifies as a xtian fundie, (notwithstanding any overt self-declarations of being either xtian or, fundamentalist).  

It's confusing and I think that's the way satan likes it.

It's not at all confusing to me, (even if you're not implying that I'm "satan" or, a 'satanist' - because I've never overtly claimed to be either).

[quote from Falconer02]  It comes down to grown adults still taking part in fantasy and trying to pass that along to the next generation.

But the fantasy games (Dungeons & Dragons, etc.) adults have passed along to the next generation are totally harmless...?

If your god wanted us to use our brains, he'd disappear

Someday He will...all His followers too.

There is no evidence to support such a claim.  This is not an example of "reasoning skills", it's an example of blind faith.

[falcon9]

This is also a forum for people to give their opinions, sir.  If you don't like my opinion, fine, just say so.

Whether I 'like' or 'dislike' your "opinions" is not relevant.  What is relevant to this point is that not all "opinions" are created equally.

What you do, however, is disagree even with small comments to another poster.

However, I didn't "disagree" with your vacuous 'applause' for anotehr poster; I disagreed with the content of that poster's comments.  You didn't bother refuting any of that and merely interjected an empty "well-said" comment.
 

Your opinions come from you with an air of superiority that only yours counts.  And you know something?

 
That would be a specious opinion, (one that has no basis in evidence other than your skewed perceptions, which are not evidence).  Nothing in my remarks inherently contained anything explicitly or, inplicitly inclusive of an "air of superiority" or, that only my viewpoint "counts", (since debating the viewpoints of others is encompassed by the "Debate+Discuss" subforum, dissenting points of view are to be expected).  Speciously attaching some unsupported 'perceptions' to dissenting viewpoints is irrational.

Your opinions are simply that - opinions.  Just as mine or others.  People are entitled to their opinions, as well. 

To reiterate and expand on my disagreement with that assertion; all "opinions" are not equal, (as your assertion directly implies).  Some are supported by evidence/a line of actual reasoning and some are presented sans any substantiating evidence.  Yes, people are free, (not "entitled"), to expressing either substantiated or, unsubstantiated "opinions".  So too are those with dissenting views as free to express such views, (even if others petulently insist that "opinions are simply that - opinions"; as if empty ones are the same as supported ones.

You demonstrate what you accuse others of, as well as me, tonight, in that you act "bereft of rationality on a constant basis."  You have finally nailed it with describing yourself.[/b][/color]

You have provided no evidence to support your accusatory claim, while there is a preponderance of posted evidence whose content contradicts it.  Therefore, your opinion-claim is specious and without merit.  It does provide some additional evidence supporting the "opinion" that you post in a manner largely bereft of rationality.

[Falconer02]

I am an optimist.  I also know what many others have said/are saying and I do live in "reality".  The barbaric treatment will occur and will intensify right here in the US, and I think in the very near future.  I think things will happen that will be so horrible that no one would have thought it could happen to people living in the U.S.  

These sentences coupled with your beliefs are easy contradictions. "I am an optimist(1) and realist(2), but I believe things are going to get much worse(1) but then my magical deity(2) will intervene and save me from the world that's gone to hell(1+2)."
 
The amount of contradictions here heavily outweigh the original message.

The flood?  The righteous were spared.  Noah invited people to join him & his family on the Ark, no one wanted to.  No one believed God was going to destroy them...no one believed in God.   They were having too much fun laughing and making jokes--- until they realized they didn't know how to swim.

Yep. Like the little kids and babies. They were definitely not righteous. It's easy to conclude that your god's a genocidal child-killer in this myth. Unless you believe that god already knew they'd grow up to be unrighteous/evil, and therefore you've contradicted these beliefs yet again by showing this god can't allow for freewill. The foundation of this belief system crumbles once more.

There are also alot of "unsolved mysteries"... Grin

*theme song stuck in head*

I don't think any particular race, religion or group of people should have to lose their right to a freedom just because there are people that have gone off the "deep end" with their "misinterpretations".

Until they start needlessly hurting or killing others just as they have countless times in the past. This is why I stress basic education before jumping into a belief system that implores magical thinking.

I don't worship anything or anyone but God.  There's nothing wrong with my reasoning skills...except in the eyes of  "unbelievers".

Well okay, but given the past posts by you in this thread, I am skeptical of this claim. Perhaps the rest of your post I'm quoting will set the record stra--

But the fantasy games (Dungeons & Dragons, etc.) adults have passed along to the next generation are totally harmless...?

Wai--wait...what?


What?


ugh...YES. DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS IS HARMLESS. THEY'RE NERDS. You seriously think players of a tabletop game that include weird dice and lego-men are harmful!? SERIOUSLY!?   This alone shows that your reasoning skills have major issues. Major issues. This is a prime example and anyone with an ounce of reason in their heads can see it. But don't let me explain why D+D is harmless-- let this comical nerd-critic explain the obvious fear-exploiting that you've fallen for.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMuzt5K4Fwg
3:00-4:50 (especially 4:34)
(probably not safe for work as there's a few swears in there)

And you know what? I've never played D+D in my life (a few of my friends do though-- perfectly fine individuals). But I have played video games based upon such games which are arguably more "evil" from a religious standpoint. The best part is- they're absolutely amazing! Epic pieces of art and storytelling. Skyrim, which came out last November, is one of the most amazing games I've ever played. And here I am, IRL, not doing anything pertaining to midieval/occult fantasy. I'm sorry...I think I gotta end the argument here if you seriously are that far behind on how the world spins.

[SherylsShado]

@falconer02

Yep. Like the little kids and babies. They were definitely not righteous.

"Actions & Consequences"...those people could have put their little kids/babies on the Ark,  they chose not to.  (Funny thought, the Ark was several years in the making.  People had children and these children grew up hearing their parents laughing about "Noah and the big boat...and the rain that was supposed to come".  These children grew up, had children and laughed with them about the same"...it resembles how generations have been laughing about the "return of Christ".)  Even though those little ones died as a consequence of their parents actions, I would think that they still went to Heaven just as the babies/children that still die today as a consequence of someone's actions... go to Heaven.  

This is why I stress basic education before jumping into a belief system that implores magical thinking.

 Many of them have basic education and some of the real "wierdo's" have even been considered by many to be "intelligent".  There are some "patterns" though that I think really should have the police keeping tabs on, one would be when a group of people decide to "cut themselves off" from everyone else.  People that do that usually have "mental issues" and so, (imo) a group that is encouraged to do that should be investigated.  (Ex: places like "Jonestown", compounds, communities...)

...I think I gotta end the argument here if you seriously are that far behind on how the world spins.

Not just "dungeons & dragons" but the majority of "role-playing" games, period.  (Dungeons & dragons was just what "broke the ice" compared to what's out these days).  I have spent a few minutes here and there on what has been considered to be "role-playing" games for children and it shocked me at the harm that is so openly available to young, impressionable children's minds these days.  It's one thing to have a harmless "role-playing" game where children take on the role of say, a certain animal to help them develop their creativity.  It's another when they are asked to write their own "chants & spells" to advance to the next level, when pre-teen girls are role-playing using their 'fantasy' characters to "play" out sex-scenes with pre-teen guys (and I know some of these kids are so addicted to this that they continue out the game when they e-mail each other.  They don't use each other's names, they don't have any other type of conversation, just all "role-playing"...all the time.  It's like they don't know their identities anymore, they always want to be some sort of "fantasy" being.   The few minutes worth that I observed was really obnoxious,they can't function to use their brain for anything else and it's clear they don't want to. Their parents don't have a "clue" how these kids are really spending their time.  These kids are living in a "fantasy world", and when reality bites...it's going to bite them hard.