Shotgun

Yep. "Mine" was a drive-thru wedding in Vegas, with some strange dude as our witness. (Can't say I had been planning that since I was four years old though. I spent most of my younger years thinking I never wanted to get married.)

What if consciousness continues for eternity? Then I'll find out what happens then.

What is the big stick for? (The one propped in the corner; I know what the other one is for. )

Yep. I find that consequences generally hold me responsible for my actions. And since I can't know what will happen after death (I suspect I will just decay and consciousness will be gone), I find it better to concern myself with the consequences I will experience while I am alive.

No, not the kind of coyote who smuggles people across the border. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100427/ap_on_re_us/us_governor_shoots_coyote

I don't know. When you talk about others not welcoming you and calling them "the enemy," it sure sounds like you're playing the victim. I think it's great that you have had the CSA going for so long, and that Christian skydivers are able to have a fellowship together. Perhaps a forum on that website (rather than a skydiving website) would be a better place for "discussing Christian fellowship" (beyond what is related to skydiving). I find Speaker's Corner an odd choice for this, since it is obvious to anyone who spends a little bit of time here that most come in here for argument or banter. (And since you provide a bit of that, I doubt that you are unwelcome here. ) Though I suppose SC is a good place to perpetuate the idea that Christians are always persecuted, since most in here seem to be non-Christian and will argue against it. And for the most part, I have respect for Christianity. The basic idea behind it seems to be one of goodwill toward others. And it has mostly grown with the times regarding civil rights. There is unfortunately still some bigotry in the teachings, but perhaps that will go away in a couple of generations.

From the list of Homeland Security Advisory Council Members who were sworn in with Kareem Shora is the "devout Baptist" Sonny Perdue. http://savannahnow.com/stories/012003/LOCXGRPerdueAGENDA.shtml That's just one example, but I'm sure there are plenty of new government officials who are devout . I don't see what the problem with that is, unless perhaps it's some extremist group, which doesn't seem to be the case here.

No, I don't think so. The key concept is the placement of responsibility for personal feelings. For example, do I feel bad because you say bad things about me? Or, do I feel bad because I don't know how to deal with what you say about me? Oh, OK. So if I am working at a place that is very discriminatory against women, and I claim that I have a problem because of the way they are treating me, then I am projecting. What I really should do is accept that my "problem" is being a woman and not expect others to take responsibility for that problem? Probably not much point in using this analogy, since you believe that homosexuality is a choice, and I do not. Actually I think that being a woman is as much of a choice (if not more so) than homosexuality, as I think it would be an easier "problem" to fix. (And I don't actually believe that being a woman or being homosexual is a "problem" for most.) Here, see if this helps. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection Not really. I was just wanting your opinion on that particular scenario.

I was reading more about this in the American Psychological Association's Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation, and I think it goes along with what they call "minority stress": They also warn that sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) are "unlikely to be successful and involve some risk of harm." They say that people who do want to undergo SOCE are usually people with "strongly conservative religious views that lead them to seek to change their sexual orientation." And then they say, "Thus, the appropriate application of affirmative therapeutic interventions for those who seek SOCE involves therapist acceptance, support, and understanding of clients and the facilitation of clients’ active coping, social support, and identity exploration and development, without imposing a specific sexual orientation identity outcome." Probably not too helpful to have a therapist who is reaffirming to them that homosexuality is wrong.

Well, god forbid we should have diversity in Homeland Security.

Yeah, that's pretty much how I feel about the OP. I don't think sexual preference entitles one to anything special either. But then I don't think anyone is trying to obtain anything "special" based on sexual preference.

That's not good.

No, I don't think so. The key concept is the placement of responsibility for personal feelings. For example, do I feel bad because you say bad things about me? Or, do I feel bad because I don't know how to deal with what you say about me? Oh, OK. So if I am working at a place that is very discriminatory against women, and I claim that I have a problem because of the way they are treating me, then I am projecting. What I really should do is accept that my "problem" is being a woman and not expect others to take responsibility for that problem? Probably not much point in using this analogy, since you believe that homosexuality is a choice, and I do not. Actually I think that being a woman is as much of a choice (if not more so) than homosexuality, as I think it would be an easier "problem" to fix. (And I don't actually believe that being a woman or being homosexual is a "problem" for most.)

Sort of like your "Christophobia" thread. Not quite, the Christophobia article was written by a Christian for Christian readers. The message was for Christians to take responsibility for themselves. OK. So if a gay person writes an article called "Homophobia" to encourage other gay people to take responsibility for themselves (while listing all of the ways that society is against them, as the Christophobia article did), would you call that projection?

Sort of like your "Christophobia" thread.

Men vs. Women - Sexism in our country has historically targeted women over men. Men make up the larger prison population, and they were probably sent there by more men than women. This doesn't necessarily mean that sexism does not exist in the system, but it seems less likely. Whites vs. Non-whites - Racism in our country has historically targeted non-whites over whites. Non-whites make up the larger prison population, and they were probably sent there by more whites than non-whites. This doesn't necessarily mean that racism does exist in the system, but it seems more likely.

Just make muffin tops a prison-able offense, and that will even out the gender bias. Maybe do away with some of the violent crime laws too, since those obviously serve no purpose other than to keep a lot of men incarcerated.

Not according to this. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/race.cfm Those statistics are only for homicide, not for all crime. I don't think it's possible to really know the statistics of whether one race commits more crime than another. The prison statistics don't necessarily reflect reality, since it could be the case that non-white people are more likely to get caught and convicted than white people are. For those who have been in prison a long time, there is a good chance that they were convicted by an all-white jury and at a time when racism was much stronger than today. And even today racism still exists, and juries are likely to be made up of mostly white people (I think), so I wouldn't be surprised if racism does play at least some part in the over-representation of minorities in the prison system.

Homosexuality was considered to be a treatable illness. Fortunately the APA is willing to correct the DSM when empirical evidence shows something to be incorrect.

The Fourth Kind?

First, I'll admit that I didn't read all 17 pages of the bill (just skimmed it)... But from what I did read, I didn't see anything that looked like it gave the police permission to stop people based on what they look like, if they're not doing anything wrong. Did I miss something? http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf

14 Billion years ago nothing in our universe existed. Something had to have happened to get us here where we find ourselves now. I don't know what existed 14 billion years ago, but I don't see any reason to think there was ever complete nothingness. And yes, a lot of things had to have happened to get us here, and I don't know what all of those things were. There are many things that I have no explanation for, but it doesn't work for me to just say that a supernatural being (which I also have no explanation for) must have created it.

Where did I refer to anything that could make something out of nothing? The belief that DNA, life , and everything else , "just happened." That's not the same as making something out of nothing.

??? Where did I refer to anything that could make something out of nothing?

Then quit your job and make way for somebody that needs to pay his mortgage. Seriously.