*shits pants*

You either entertain an interesting and extreme personal philosophy or you just go to great lengths to conceal that you got something wrong. Anyway, you certainly will have very extensive arguments.

Has anyone mentioned 'Bad Religion' yet? :P

Actually it does. As this proves. If we're constantly tripping over each other's definitions then communication would become impossible. Especially when the words used to explain each definition may also have a different definition. It would be worse than learning a whole new language.

Okaayyy . . . Lets see what we can do with Rohan . . .=)

I'm not exactly a theist, though I'm pretty sure catholics don't really give a shape to God, regardless of that line about men being "created in his image". God is not the old beardy man you see on paintings.
To me, the Universe is so big and so complicated that I find it hard to believe we little specks of minuscule flesh and blood in this tiny mudball among the cosmos are the biggest thing out there. Hell, if scientists nowadays are thinking about multiverses and such, I find not believing in something greater than myself as difficult and irrational as believing in it. We simply have no evidence either way.

You know what the problem is? You're arguing about religion and Navagon and me are arguing about semantics. No wonder that there is no conclusion in sight.
Math rules are just as based on convenience and agreement as semantic rules. I mean, 1+1 is 2 and 0 and many other things depending on the system you use. As I said, you could make up your very own one in which it is 2344,991 and stick to that. But what would it get you, besides problems with doing maths with others? Same thing with assigning your own meaning to a word. It is not wrong ethically or boolean, but it greatly complicates communication.

Time for my immaturity to take place:
Your pussy is playing with my girlfriend....
Ew.

SORRY ! It won't happen again . . .=)

The problem I have with you Navagon, is that you keep defining "communication" to me, and here I am, agreeing with most of what you are saying. But that wasn't my point since the beginning.
Now, tell me, what did you do ? Did you try to build an argumentation based on your own experiences ? Did you try to convince me with your own knowledge. Absolutely not. That's absolutely not what you did. Instead, you totally "shortcut-ted" (if I may say) right there, the "communication", by throwing me the all mighty wikipedia in my face. And that, less than 2 minutes after our first exchange. Is that the way you build an argumentation ? By starting a "haha-look-at-my-random-link-that-proves-that-I-am-right" battle. Call me moron if you want, but that's not the way I debate.

My religion? The one the Lord and I worked out betwixt' ourselves.

what religion do i worship none for i am a god!
Unless you count my own religion then yes i do worship my own named after me urukdom.
I was drinking to much when i made up the name.
i go by many names and have many titles.
i am the lord of necromancers, lord of dance, prince of death,Lord of darkness,master of life and death,Leader of the dead,guide of the lost souls,King of the underworld,Master of hell,eater of life,the one who can't be named,Master of the magic arts, Master of the forge,Prince of fire,Lord of rebirth.
Just to name a few of my many names and titles.

my self

Christianity. Specifically, United Methodist.