How about "nasty" does that exist?
Ok, since you seriously have a reading comprehension problem, I will type very slowly just for you.
PLEASE READ the article... the blonde girl in the pic is the VICTIM not the shooter...
It's like the wind. You don't see it, but you know it exists because you experience it.
All of my animals are spayed and neutered.
I'm having a hard time taking this article seriously, and it almost makes me a little angry. Its as if the authors have never actually participated in carbon dating since it has never been considered 100% accurate to the year. NEVER.
And you are supported because it is with the industrial revolution that the anti-slavery movement begins. Not to mention women no longer need to be subservient. And the men no longer have the excuse of having to escape or relax which is to use any intoxicant. Hence the three great campaigns that mark the early evangelicals which are called the liberal churches now. Because their message really did free humans for the first time. That mixed with a firm embrace of egalitarian ideals acting on the ideals of the enlightenment but now having a real method that worked.
OK, for starters, rule out all physically impossible interpretations. Stuff that we know is physically impossible now, was also physically impossible then. Therefore, nobody is pulling any fast ones when they convey a message involving talking snakes. Its a given that is a metaphor. From the author's standpoint, anyone who can not identify this stuff as metaphor, is simply not mature enough to understand the higher message intended. To immature folks, they are happy to pass it off as a child's myth, however. So let us move on from childish things and declare that any interpretation must be physically possible. Right?
You keep claiming there is a flaw despite the overcoming up as perfectly fine in court cases.
"If god could have existed forever then why couldn't the universe?"
Thousand Islands No?
Really Trump numbskull?
Whats the fsm budget look like this year? Any mega churches built yet? A growth in membership? How about charity?
But not flawed in the way you think it is. It has nothing to do with his rights being violated. It?s more of a procedural flaw. If they had prosecuted correctly the verdict would probably stand.
As old as the universe is, as big as it is, it was inevitable that life would start somewhere. We're the lucky ones.
Judging from her comment, she has already started to grow up, by deciding to leave her old "friends".
If it protects personal creative expression, they will.
2 There is the deist/pan(en)theist god which is as yet not disproved (and probably never will) and possibly some other I haven't heard of. All the other are internally inconsistent or incompatible with reality.
Show eveidence of that claim my tard friend.....based on yer silly past posts there is a large amount of doubt on that statement......sheesh...no one expects you tards to recognize they?re tards.
Gee, I don't know. I can't imagine it. I hit the jackpot with this one and am still in the gushy in love phase so I wouldn't look. I'm really nauseating right now, I know.
Without knowing what the Earth/Universe was like you have NO WAY of concluding that.
Seriously? As long as you remember that it was Roosevelt who had the Japanese rounded up...
Woulda been nice to have seen them put up a bit more of a fight. This is just pathetic. But I?m not complaining. Bye Lue. Bye ?bron. Lue fired by Lebron on Monday. Lebron gone July.
Cute belief. Odd that your most coherent moment is when you copy past something.
Sure it can be proved many different ways including archeology and every empire that took Israel into captivity has been proved and written about. Your ignorance of these things are no excuse.
What is this nonsense you're trying to disseminate? This is the Internet, please have some decency and class!
He should have said Housewares.
I've had some intense experiences in this regard with a woman who requested it. I think most guys don't know what they're doing, or they learned their cues from pr0n and are surprised that it's not successful.
So you admit that while you have no scientific credentals, you regard yourself as competent to go up against your intellectual betters, i.e., those with the qualifications you lack.
If it isn't for ten thousand years, nobody alive would be around for it.
The wedding cake is part of the event. Does that therefore mean that if the baker, who is morally opposed to adultery and thus refused to bake a cake to celebrate an adulterous relationship between a heterosexual couple, that he is anti-heterosexual? After all, according to some in your camp, merely baking a cake for a celebration does not constitute participation in that celebration. And since he's not really "participating", his motivation must be based entirely on animus toward heterosexuals if we follow this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion.