In that case, you should have no problem proving the existence of this god of yours and your and your Bible's conversance with the will, nature and acts of this god of yours.
Their prayers always
true, most Christians I meet strongly profess that they don't want to force others to follow their beliefs, which is mostly shown for the lie it is, when you starting discussing political positions. so they don't "tell" others... they attempt to force others through legislation.
"EI is a federal program."
I will. Promise. I just cannot right now.
She managed to get the ISA, an organisation that should be smarter than this, to command that poor sap to make a formal apology. For someone like her, the notoriety might be worth it. Honestly, people like her make the women's studies course itself look like a hateful and divisive topic in university.
Yep. But there are these two worlds and we are in one or the other.
so its very much like reality
That?s not the way that Orthodox Jews take it. They are very serious and have all sorts of prohibitions on what jews can do in regard to the law. But the law can not be enforced outside Israel and it cannot be enforced without a Temple. Even at its height it was near impossible to obtain a conviction for let?s say homosexuality. Their has never been a recorded case of the happening. Without the Temple, their has been no trial for to thousand years.
Morality is a theistic construction. People have long histories of developing social interactions and social transactions that work best for individuals and society, and systems of management for those who transgress from desired social norms. There needn't be anything godly about human behavior in the social environment.
Q1: In light of these remarkable claims, is it not reasonable/understandable that our blogger above would reject these religious notions because s/he sees them as "illogical and un-provable?" On the contrary, doesn?t our blogger ?deserve credit? for using our tool of logic in questioning their validity?
It's important to recognize that 'mentally ill' doesn't always infer "crazy". You can be "mentally ill" and still have an extreme level of competence at committing an atrocity.
Gotta love the ad hominem argument it always is effective in changing peoples' minds when you accuse them of being terrible people (please tell me you detect the sarcasm).
No! Shoot, maybe I wrote it wrong.
He had no reason to?
Now try actual reliable sources.
Yea, you do not know. Stop there.
even if you agree with him, why would you want a president who can pardon himself?
Enjoyed when they explained the cup and ball trick. Even with clear cups, it was impressive.
Well, it's a good thing for the owners that the sign doesn't say "No assholes allowed" because then the owners couldn't go into their own establishment.
Happy about what?
Those that mess up is unable to do that. The mess is just getting bigger.