Clearer indeed. I just have some difficulty seeing bigotry and lying as philosophical convictions. The former comes across to me as an atavistic social attitude not remotely describable as "philosophical," and the latter simply seems like immorality (or amorality -- more likely in Murdoch's case).
It should have stayed there.
dropping extracurricular activities like sports or other things that might keep them up late isn't going to help them get into college.
If jesus existed, he was only a teacher of a certain philosophy that to some appears to have a basis in Buddhism. Buddhism predates christianity by about 500 years.
We seem to agree more than not, with our primary disagreement being whether or not parsonage tax exemptions violate the Establishment Clause. I realize you don't agree with me, but I'm certainly not moving any goalposts. You final comment is odd, since it was you who claimed that in order to show that the Establishment Clause has been violated, I need to show that the state targets one group over another.
You are giving me your opinion. I am jus telling you what the case is based off of. What the key arguments are. Thats all im doing.
That?s why, to answer your question.
Which workers are specifically being excluded? What victimized group are you specifically referring to? Racial minorities, marginalized groups with sexual proclivities outside the mainstream, women, or all the above? Perhaps employers seek the best possible candidate for the job they need done and those who are "excluded" just don't have any marketable, desired skills for the job(s) they are applying for. You'd have to be much more specific, however, because I can only speculate at this point as to what exactly you're trying to say.
China could fairly be called Christianophobic but as a government policy position, this is a whole different topic. This OP is saying that critics of individual Christians or doctrine are afraid. That is nonsense.
My use of the word 'Ark' is metaphorical, by which I mean I hope to live right on through the end of this era into the next.
I have to agree with Atomsk on this. Americans just simply lack the bargaining power. As he gives evidence to in his post.
No problem. That one just irks me. ;-)
well, just wait and Si' :) LOL!!!
I somehow don't think you understood what it meant.
LOL, that was an impression of you you double talking, narcissistic, bigoted moron.
Yes, it is what this particular decision is about: The Colorado Civil Rights Commission displayed, in the Supreme Court's opinion, outright animus toward the baker's sincerely held religious beliefs. This was separate from the ruling that religious belief does not get you an exemption from antidiscrimination laws.
Me either. I'm not sure how to do that special character between the 'L' and the 'ki'. :P
One bombing in 1984 by a deranged man can hardly be considered the norm!!
Then what did cause the higher temperatures in 1934 and during the medieval warm period?
if so that's stupid. When are women going to be held responsible for their own actions? If the genders were reversed a woman would never be convicted of such a thing
"...isolation long enough eventually leaves the sub reproductively isolated."
You said there are many in history who have advocated the same thing.
This is called a publicity-stunt and ironically, the man is the victim here.
Huh? What do you mean?
So why are the lefty?s so freaked out about it?
I git cornfused with long lists... Am I mentioned in there some where? If so which one...
This is rich.Love to see where this goes.
I very rarely drink these days, but there are lots of drinks that can hide the taste of alcohol (Beware!).
protecting american's interests should have ALWAYS been a staple of a US president... the fact that, bush sr, clinton, bush jr, obama did nothing about this in the past shows you the character of Trump...