I agree. No one, I say again! NO ONE! has the right to inflict their ideas, good or bad, on another person. This is the basis for every religious persecution that has ever taken place, and is abhorrent.
Glad you?re enjoying TAD. We unintentionally made TA worse because their best commenters followed us here. We also benefited when NPR closed their comments. Some really great folks landed here from there.
It looks like many countries are aware of the dangers of religions. So they have wisely placed some restrictions on them. The question "would I fight for religious rights? My answer is I believe that people should have those rights. But I sure as hell wouldn't fight for them.
He asked a good question. But again, he didn't claim that all Christians/Muslims were immoral. He asked how they can be considered moral if they follow their respective holy books to the letter, considering these holy books are not moral books with good, moral guidelines. They're awful books with awful rules for an awful, barbaric time.
And? So what? Is it illegal to be facetious?
Samesies. I felt like the walking dead all day yesterday. Hopefully today is better.
Consciousness can be conceptualized as building on different levels. Self awareness, awareness of surroundings, awareness of nutrients or sunlight, subconsciousness, organic stimulus response, determination among potential alternatives or choices, informing of potentialities of Consciousness, maybe even systemic regulation and reconciliation of events within and of parameters. I do not see how mere substance could cumulate a storage of information (stored consciousness?) absent an expression of consciousness at some level. I do not say substance is consciousness, but I do not see how it could be expressed in ways that cumulate information in the complete absence of Consciousness.
Always here for you buddy.
True, we can both celebrate the NT books. :-)
You were invited, I wasn't. You were invited, weren't you? Or do you just like to crash bat mitzvahs. lol
It is decreasing according to every poll on the subject. Your attempt at mitigating it by using a "no true Scotsman" fallacy is noted.
If anyone is familiar with Jordan peterson, he is a great champion of freedom of speech and his views on hate speech are so eloquent. Having said that, he?s a nutbag and that?s about the only common ground I can find with him. But if you haven?t heard him speak of free speech, you should.
Yes, but you are using 'simplicity' in a very different way. The 'complexity' side of the ID evaluation, as I said before, is just about ruling out chance as a likely explanation.
the real version
Kelly. I think that in the nation I live in that is just not true.
You write like you forgot education... you got in the past.
Considering the way companies still stigmatize marijuana smokers by denying them employment, it doesnt surprise me some jobs dont get filled.
You are toxic Trumptard.
Actually, the truth associated with traditional journalism makes some conservative people uncomfortable because it conflicts with their beliefs.They then search for an alternative "news" source, eg, Fox or Limbaugh, that comports with their beliefs. It makes them feel better. Whether it is based in reality or not is irrelevant.