One article. :) I think that one article would be swamped by the number of fearful fortress articles. "Our religion is under attack!" "America will become a godless nation!" "Our country must repent before we fall!"
I'd say 1 on my end.
This is not "delusion". This is Creation by the Word of God.
I don't think the creed (alone) makes a religious difference. Many question are dogmatic interpretations of scripture. The RCC is the biggest Christian church, yet, in the US it is often not even considered Christian. (E.g. listed distinct from "Christian" in polls or statistics).
Ok well we clearly disagree.
"The Constitution of Spain is being rigged to renege on the promises made to Catalonia"
"A world without a single person in it is just a slightly different world. "
CBC got them at 6
All particles do, that's the basis of the many worlds hypothesis of quantum physics
scum saving life. i wish that was a thing.
You can not force Children to accept what is far above their comprehension. But you can take them a little bit at a time.
?...undermining this order....? is all our current President does.
True true..... It would be difficult to misinterpret that Cain killed able and that's not something we should do.... which would suggest that a "false prophet" would be justifying going against that.... including any "world view" that may come up on the scene to justify it.... That would just be "rotten fruit."
no big deal - pun intended XD
14 billion years is impossible to imagine or experience thus you don't believe in it. That's not up for debate. How about Cookoo birds? Do you believe in them?
She probably doesnt like people, but her husband is the exception. And he knows it too. So he may understand that even though she has a disdain towards the general masses she was able to see him and probably appreciates that. Also knows she is not going to change her stripes any time soon.
This just says there are openings. It doesn't say they are GOOD openings, as in they pay high enough to cover basics.
"Nice deflection, and a tired one that is regurgitated by almost all neo-atheists."
Is that so? Perhaps you might acquaint yourself with Luther's treatise, "On the Jews and Their Lies", wherein he argued that In the treatise, he argues that Jewish synagogues and schools be set on fire, their prayer books destroyed, rabbis forbidden to preach, homes burned, and property and money confiscated. They should be shown no mercy or kindness, afforded no legal protection, and "these poisonous envenomed worms" should be drafted into forced labor or expelled for all time. He also seems to advocate their murder, writing "[W]e are at fault in not slaying them".
There's nothing there for me to argue with. I accept that it is true that people believe as you describe that you do. Or at least that they say they do, and probably believe what they say.
It was not bigotry, but merely poor wording of the facts. It made the commission appear to have a prejudice, whether or not one existed.
He calls it "Winning"
Heh, guess that would be the case then. So he would have to refuse the heterosexual couple service because they're doing the gay couple a favour by placing the order?
But couldn't a layman, for instance, confuse General Nutrition Company (GNC) as a nutrition service?
I can't stand trophy hunting. It's disgusting. Killing an animal in self-defense or for food is one thing. Something tells me he had no intention of eating elephant for supper...
Our scientific efforts have not been exerted on proving that cancer exists, that is not the scientific exercise, we have known that cancer exists for thousands of years or since dead people were first cut up and inspected. What we do not know is if there is a "cure" for cancer that exists. After thousands of unsuccessful experimental trials, should we conclude that a "cure" does not exist, that these failures prove no cure exists?
?The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.?
You are incapable of explaining that two people of the same gender entering into a legal contract (marriage) harms anyone.
How about getting those industries in those depressed communities then. Let's start with Trump's clothing line made in 3rd world countries coming back and put it smack in the middle of Detroit. Win-win.
Two words: imperial system!
The "process and findings of scientific methods " renders information. You are saying that that information is true? I can agree with that. Experiments and studies that have shown the get the same results over and over, the information can be considered "true".