It's because he sucks.
Funny it don?t sound like no anglush I never herd
You can assume my answer is unchanged from the original post and the many repeats of it I've given.
And yet I've neer one heard you be critical of your Aunty Kathy or little Turdeau. You supported them 100%, so of course your finger prints are on it.
Bury was nothing if it wasn?t an indicator of how far we?ve fallen. Why would an honorable people allow such an ethically bankrupt hatred manifest to occupy her highest office without so much as an attempt to call the POS out on its blatant lies.
It's not an open book quiz.
I like the humility of the answer. It makes a lot more sense than the paradigm of a spectrum offered by the OP.
People don't always value 'facts' over their feelings. that's not something unique whatsoever to the religious.
Did you really just imply that a human fetus is NOT living human tissue with a full compliment of human DNA? Really? Which part of that is wrong. . .?
Let?s are not luxury items, they are living things. And they are one of the few pleasures poor families enjoy- it would so incredibly wrong to only allow the rich to have pets.
Very well- and interestingly-expressed OP. O
Right?! OH LAWD!
Now, care to cite the law backing this up? Your opinion does not govern.
What is ?right way to live? is different for different people depending where they are in their spiritual evolution.
We already see the promising nature of dropping god it yields nothing but more unscrupulous opurtunist. And why should any individual break free from something enriching from within. The US hunted down and often murdered our spiritual leaders in our clans... stripped away our freedoms and granted it to others, men did that. And that god was the one who sent those to warns us long before the rest of the world was aware of us. We share enough in common to find a common thread. The old world drank deep into its own poison.
Wow. I had no idea.
See previous comment. If Jesus truly is God, nothing subjective about it.
the question wasn?t asking if reductionists are evolutionary fundamentalists. The question was asking if you agree that they are indeed evolutionary fundamentalists. In order to have an informed opinion about that, you need to know what evolutionary fundamentalism is, and calling reductionists anti-theists doesn?t change the definition of evolutionary fundamentalism. So your rant over the use of the word anti-theist was a straw man, and you haven?t demonstrated any knowledge of what Gould meant by evolutionary fundamentalism.
Our current government shows otherwise. Being civil, kind and patient with Trump cultists has gotten us nowhere.
That a great idea... just gotta fix it up so it looks like one of my ban meme's I know jmpzacp will love this one... Just posting as example :P
Or is it so they can buy larger homes and luxury cars??
But I guess it is ok for Sir Tainley to insult me huh? But not for me to respond to his insult. I get it. Double standards.
Elephants are extremely religious.
Which totally explains why there are so many opinions. ;^) [a wink
Under the Roman Empire slavery was legal and integral part of their economy. Christians had nothing to do with the existence of slavery.
That doesn't fit the God we know from the Bible. He is able to speak, and seems to have done so quite a bit. You are either making things up to fit your view, or are thinking of a different god.
I have to show you my new banning gif... lol...
Our president, the dotard.
Society is changing on that. Why should it be expected the guy asks anymore?