rehmwa

I think this caps a very productive week for you - congratulations ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Everyone - That really was my point; I was giving credit where credit is due to the national Republican machine for being more skilled and successful political operatives - both in election campaigns and in keeping the opposition (either in Congress or the White House) flummoxed. On the whole, they've got a better A game, most of the time, than the Dems do. I'm saying this from the perspective of a team fan that would like to fire my team's front office and coaching staff because the other guys keep eating their lunch. Though I'm sure Kelp's analysis certainly is trivial and clear to you guys. I'm sure an objective look would show both teams are very practiced. What's really sad is the level of discourse the two teams use. It's a real indicator that either the average customer is really juvenile, or they THINK the average customer is really juvenile. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

That's the single most repugnant piece of bullshit I have seen in this forum SWEET, that's really saying something. Some of us have lost family and close friends in Afghanistan. Rejoiced? You need to think before you say stupid fucking shit. read what I replied to and you'll either see you're out of line, or demonstrating my point however, if you are so caught up in your manufactured outrage, I'll explain - Billvon made a sweeping and false generalization, so, In Billvon's style, I highlighted his goofyness by doing the same thing but turning it around with an equally false and sweeping generalization, to something he objected to a few years ago ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

actually, it's less "sanctimonious and patronizing" than just the reversion to the stock speech. I take it as seriously as I would someone using "thee" and "thou" in their speech and just shut down since it's less like listening to someone's personal viewpoint and more just having to listen to something pre-recorded. It's really not pretty or convincing, and it comes across as brainwash, not thoughtful sharing. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

not to be confused with having both which would be confusing, and distracting ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

If you are only worried about violent cults, then I'm on your side. But this is just a general religion discussion - when the topic comes up I normally think of the everyday guy that has a belief and quietly lives a decent life. Apparently your default mode is guys that fly airplanes into buildings. I suspect my default is more representative than yours, but maybe not where you live. Unless you're just super sensitive and get offended if someone says "bless you" when you sneeze... "BLESS YOU? BLESS YOU?!!! Look you asshole, I don't need you pushing your myth down my throat and you creating freakin' laws to make people say 'bless you' after a sneeze. I'm just fine with 'guesundheit' THANK YOU VERY MUCH - Just keep your damn fantasies to yourself or I'll hit you in the shin with a small bat" though I would like to have a law to change the spelling to "ga zune hite" - that would nice you crack me up, Del. I don't know a single "born again" that's as religious as you are. Jakee and I are actually having a good discussion here, at least. Common ground with different reaction, but the common is easy enough to work from. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Books next of course. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

In further news, the head of Chinese security later acknowledged that burning unloaded guns would have been a better move and apologizes to any terrified canines that aren't still running away from the city. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

It's not the guns that's the issue. The picture looks like a couple kids that just don't know how to handle firearms in the first place. Perhaps the organization is just against "the posting of inappropriate content on Facebook, Twitter or any social media platform" when the members look like dumbasses. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

right, I think the reverse, and, actually, consider that the Reps are a bit inept at it and won't go places that the Dems are super comfy at (in reality, they are probably pretty equivalent, they've had decades to perfect and practice, and they both get to pick from about 50% of the available talent) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

What do you call an extremist? Muslim terrorists and abortion clinic bombers? Just any organized church with buildings and corrupt leadership? Missionaries that knock on your door? Your neighbor that goes to church every Sunday and prays at every meal? Your neighbor that churches every Sunday but that's about it, doesn't even talk about it really outside of church? The one friend that prays a little bit only when she's scared a bit? just want to know where you draw the line I'm not a fan of fanatics, but I'd only go with your anger with the first group (but you find them in non-religious organizations too). The 2nd is pretty much like any political group, corrupt company, the global warming leadership, etc etc etc (power attracts the corrupt - religion is only one face of that coin). The 3rd are annoying, but not people I mind too much (there are pretty much the counterpart to how you are really). The rest (even the 3rd though I'd prefer they become 'quietly religious') are the ones I consider don't deserve the vitriol or intolerance. I guess I'm 'apologizing' for them? Even if I don't share their beliefs, I don't think they have anything to apologize for (except for disturbing my dinner/movie), so that's a confusing accusation. Would you be pissed off at your wife if a placebo cured her of a life threatening illness? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

If you've read my posts, you know that's a non-starter with me. I don't claim there is anything usable as evidence for those that are truly faithful, just for those that need to shore up a weak belief with self delusion. I'm apathetic agnostic - don't know, don't care. As for Homer - I love those stories - much more exciting ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

sure, I agree with that and it's not inconsistent with my comment (they need to rationalize by claiming "subjectively defined proof" (a clear misnomer)- my opinion is they have very weak faith if they need to underpin it with subjective rationalization. But, that in itself doesn't make them any better or worse human beings. So I don't much care. though I would prefer they work on underpinning their "faith" rather than fool themselves by trying to prove the unprovable. heck, even question their belief if they like. whatever. It really would be cool to find an old boat like that - but it would still just prove that there was an old boat at one time..... I still like Wendy's post. Even if it's a mental response to taking a placebo that cured your wife of a life threatening sickness - why on earth would anyone try to convince her otherwise? However - whenever someone points to child birth, or a rainbow as "proof" of divinity - I still find it very difficult to not laugh right at their face. It's hard to accept that others are different and even if their coping doesn't work for me, I shouldn't begrudge them what works for them. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Oh those poor, persecuted, innocent believers! Give me a break. Religion is extremely harmful to human society and advancement as well as to the individual mind. It's basically child abuse to tell kids they are going to Hell unless they believe in an invisible sky daddy. People that finally want to stand up to the religious are not "bullies." It's usually the religious bullying the non-religious, not the other way around. Let's not get confused. I'm done tip toeing around the arrogantly delusional cultists all around me. Times are a-changin' folks. Get on the trolley or get left behind. my point is you guys talk past each other with zero attempt to agree to disagree, nothing more. then it's just nonsense semantics tantrums the victim card - apply liberally on any topic, any time, from any perspective. Much easier than understanding others, and quicker. and profitable in some cases. Do not swim for at least one hour after playing. Some oily staining has occurred in test subjects. Headache and nausea shown in 17% of users. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

So, we shouldn't argue with Ron because he's delusional and it's not fair on him to be pitted against clear minded people capable of rational argument? You're right, that's far less arrogant no, argue with Ron all you want - I think it makes you both happy But I think when the uber-faithful misuse use the word 'proof', they are really just expressing the depth of their belief. (thus misusing the word in terms of true "objective proof" (yes - "objective proof" should be a redundant phrase) - by definition, faith is pretty much subjective, so the term 'proof' is really non-starter) which means, to me, that the debates are pretty much just Ron talking to himself and you guys talking to yourselves ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

sure, but the tracking people I'm noting are within a 20 foot radius of him- so even if this is a later staged dump, it still doesn't look right you can see the base still intact there just above and to the right. would be a fun video to watch anyway. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

if religious types could just say what they mean without getting all formal and flowery, they'd likely not turn people off so quickly ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

If you claim that god is unproveable then you are already dismissing all but the vaguest, wishy-washy, new-age versions of god. Most versions of god through the ages (and many current versions that a huge amount of people still believe in) plunge their sticky fingers right into the middle of this reality, wiggle them around a bit and do many tangible, physical things that would leave tangible, physical evidence. Of course, you aren't stating the 'gods' are interfering, you are noting that the believers do all this stuff or take natural phenomenon and attribute it to their deities. I agree with that. Sometimes the results suck, sometimes they are quite positive. So judging the acts is what matters, the motivation is inconsequential, at least if they are from a faith that espouses cooperation and kindness (most of them). I claim that existence or not doesn't really matter. The fact that some take one side or the other matters in whether their beliefs make them a more or less decent person - some MUCH more decent and some MUCH less. I claim that 'faith' should be what it is defined as. Those that claim proof are delusional, those that dispute claims of proof are just dorks fighting a non-battle just to piss on the delusional. Bullies. Me? I don't much care as long as the believers and non-believers are good people (based on my subjective standards) and they don't get all stupid trying to shout down the other guys. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

that's a good answer - nor is it even a real question when you consider the subject of discussion I agree with that. If they are truly faithful, then they shouldn't feel the need to find proof or even comment on the idea of proof. But I consider that the same for atheists too. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I don't consider not lying to be "higher standard". I don't care if it's the POTUS, or just anybody I associate with. When we consider honesty to be a special and noble character trait only reserved for our leaders, then we really are in deep shit. We don't live in aristocracy. There shouldn't be higher and lower standards of character. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

It's not a strawman argument. Many Christians claim they have evidence that their God is real. So it's only makes sense to ask what is this evidence. In the end no evidence has ever been submitted. All their arguments assume that their God exists and therefore falls apart when approached with critical thinking. it absolutely is a strawman.. just because they set themselves up by claiming "PROOF!!" on matters of "faith" (or they are just ignorant enough to not really know the difference) doesn't mean you have to pretend to not know the difference yourself just get a few pokes in your last sentence about assumptions and critical thinking doesn't even apply in the subject - it's battling a question that isn't even answered....... As far as I'm concerned, any religious (not just christian) person that claims they have "proof" is just someone that is weak in their "faith" ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

See, this is true. And I find it really wierd. faith should really be their first position and their only position - and by definition that should be sufficient - for them the rest is weak rationalization however, for those asking for "proof" of what's unproveable, maybe if they stopped that strawman, then those insecure about their faith would stop trying to construct something to answer the question ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I'm ok with it, but it's a very serious role and you have to assign it to a very capable skydiver as well as one that's surrounded by the same (if your neighbor sinks out at the time, he could also burble that guy). Clearly, not maintaining levelness during the deployment is really poor execution of the task. I bet this happened FAST and the video is pretty cool. Lucky and skilled photographer to get that shot. The OTHER thing I don't like here - People are ALREADY tracking away. So clearly, having this guy dump in the group was unnecessary. A good track is supposed to have a lot of people putting out all their surface area for use in the track - (i.e., good trackers will slow down in their fall rate) - so if the dumper went low, it's even worse if everyone around him is laying it out going up relative to him......... (normally what happens here at this point is I find out this was organized by the best and had the best and I'm talking nonsense - I'm ok with that as long as they chime in so I can learn something good) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

actually, I do believe that, you've been on a fun roll lately - but I never pass up a chance for obtuse cynical ranting - and then I hug myself for the crapulence and glee it provides. Also - I think the thing about having something 'in common' with a candidate is pretty much just bunk. You have two things that matter - what are his positions, and do you believe he'll be able to work towards those positions. The in common business seems a waste of time and is just an appeal to short sighted people that want to just ASSUME someone like them will also vote just like them. HELL, that guy's a SKYDIVER, I better vote for him (because everybody here in speaker's corner is a skydiver, we must all think the same on important and subjective issues) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

In contrast to the many things Mitt Romney has in common with them... yep - if you ignore the cosmetic differences, and then, if you take those in the bolded groups and consider each one an individual with unique and valuable thoughts and insights instead of just some homogenous mass of a voting block. Why, people just might have to vote for the guy they agree with on the issues? CRAP! what a travesty!!!!!! ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants