How many hours per day do they take off the straight jacket and let you play on the internet?
You and I both know that a catering service is actually there at the wedding. But you are being to dense to remember that little bit.
Yes. Ugg. That's why I know that the outrage is not sincere. I mean, they might literally feel outraged. But not because they respect women or even because they respect Ivanka. If Ivanka was still a Democrat, they wouldn't care who was calling her that name.
You justify your position by taking the extreme, is man fundamentally good or evil?
On private property no, on public property maybe. I guess it depends on how hard the people who put it up try to claim December is all about their holiday.
Your distinction seems to be you like what you like, you don't like what you don't like. That just throws objective morality through a wall, down the stairs, and *then* out the window -- in front of an oncoming train.
Religion is not immune from fact, unfortunately for the religious.
It's not your job to make sure she's alright. That's HER job.
So where is the contemporary evidence? If he did all these miraculous things you would think that at least one person, probably many, would have had the ability to write down, or have written down, these great things while he was alive. Didn't happen. Had to wait many decades before anything was written about the man. So where is the preponderance of evidence?
As a man, I've never experienced giving birth to a child. But childbirth can be demonstrated to be real. Gods can't.
If you are reading the Bible to reaffirm your idea of a monster, just read the
The religious have been handing their balls to someone else since the beginning.
You are full of crap.
Bravo, Dan! Your a pretty smart atheist! Any chance I could convert you to christian universalism? Not that it matters...
Yes, I agree with a lot of what you wrote, especially aptly pointing out that calling logic a human "creation" implies a divorce from nature isn't entirely appropriate. After all, we are a species that is nature-itself, evolved. The logical systems we have "devised" are devised by organisms that embody the processes of nature itself. There is definitely a recursiveness at play that ties human logic to (our) nature (which is itself "of" nature, so speak).
But you did. An unsupported assertion on your part that is based entirely on your religious delusions. Science shows there was never a first man or woman.
I love when you throw in just one or two words I have to look up to figure out what they mean. Appreciate the learning opportunity. I've noted that is some of your other posts.
God forbid a guy consider his knowledge base wasn't enough to satisfy her....sure communication is essential however fundamentals aren't rocket science either fellas! THAT for me, goes to their inexperience, insensitivity, ignorance or more of an exclusively self serving nature.
I suppose you belong to the 99,99% of the Christians who ignore completely the name of their god!
I thought that no personal editorialising was allowed on BN posts if it isn?t an op/ed.
Lmao why is Leo crawling in all of his films.
Everyone pays taxes. The question is how much. You seem to be living in the fallacy that the only taxes are federal income taxes, which don't apply below a certain income.
As someone who loves mathematical proofs, I think Arnold is being overly-simplistic in distilling critical thinking and social interaction to the understanding of such proofs. Regarding the latter, social interaction provides that social function via stimulus/response in a social environment. It's really that simple.
Those televangelists have both the money and love of it.
You prove that they don't. You are the one who made the claim. The onus of proof is on you.
Ah, Infinite Monkey Theorem! I forgot about that. Although I still think it's improbable with infinite amount of time, I can see how it could create that glimmer of hope.
and the word NO? (saying it to you)
The words "I'd guess" do not constitute logical proof. Facts only. What you consider unimportant is another case of begging the question, not being able to show that he is not risen has never constituted proof that it is true he did not rise. As for those you say the ones who persecuted others were christians, how do you know that? The fact that christ rose does make their belief that He rose true. The idea that anything could have happened to the body is speculation, not science,and not fact. It is not a proof of anything.
Hey infa Lady.......Good Day to you.....