pajarito

Completely disagree. He made a wrong desision taking a human life in no-combat situation. He may have made the wrong decision at that time but the whole damn thing is a "combat situation." That doesn't get turned on or shut off while you're there.

Yup... A monumental amount.

Dec 25 is now the day set aside to celebrate the birth of Jesus. Its origins with reference to the time of year that was adopted take nothing from its meaning. No one knows the exact day that Jesus was born. That's beside the point. The Origins of Christmas The origins of Christmas go back to before the time of Christ when many ancient cultures celebrated the changing of the seasons. In the northern hemisphere in Europe, for example, the winter solstice, which was the shortest day of the year, occurs around Dec. 25th. These celebrations were based on the decline of winter. Since during winter animals were penned, people stayed in doors, crops didn't grow, etc., to know that winter was half over and on its way out was a time of celebration. In the ancient Roman system of religion, Saturn was the god of agriculture. Each year during the summer, the god Jupiter would force Saturn out of his dominant position in the heavenly realm and the days would begin to shorten. In the temple to Saturn in Rome, the feet of Saturn were then symbolically bound with chains until the winter solstice when the length of days began to increase. It was this winter solstice that was a time of celebration and exchange of gifts as the hardness of winter began to wane and the days grew longer. December 25th specifically coincided the day of the birth of the sun-god named Phyrgia a culture in the ancient Balkans. In the Roman Empire, by the time of Christ the winter festival was known as saturnalia. The Roman Church was unable to get rid of Saturnalia, so early in the 4th Century, they adopted the holiday and tried to convert it a Christian celebration of the Lord's birth. They called it the Feast of the Nativity. This custom has been part of western culture ever since. Christmas Oh yeah! MERRY CHRISTMAS!

I'm sure it was me. Kev and I don't agree on shit!

Right. It does sound rather offensive. "You fu%&ing Snogleflap!" They might get upset. Although, if you weren't concerned with their feelings, really the word could work for anyone with a detrimental lack of knowledge in any topic.

"Snogleflap"

I agree.

Neither can you deny it until you've understood the concept and decided against it. I agree with you.

Whoah. In a religious discussion I actually agree ith you (I think). Atheism can exist without Theism, right? (see my nonsensical post above) Well, in the real sense of the word (see my add above). They're just talking about "knowledge of", however, rather than "belief in" which is the proper definitions of the terms.

Sure, but that doesn't make Theism the basis for Atheism. What if you defined Atheism first, then Theism? Then you decided to be an Atheist. I don't know. Just seemed like an awkward statement. Edited to add: After further thought, I guess you're right. God is the concept. You can't "not" believe in the concept until you know what it is in the first place. Not that you believe it first, however (which is Theism).

Side note: How do you know for sure that Shakespeare really wrote that? Do you believe that he did?

True. I just thought it was still significant. He may not agree with my brand of religion, however at least on the point of the existence of God, we can both agree.

You've got to be a theist before you can become an atheist?

I don’t think that was the point. The basic belief in a Creator, however, is a very significant step. There is no foundation for growth in that direction until at least that is established in one's mind. No religion will stand or fall based on this guy's testimony. However, based on his reputation, I think it might be influential to some and positive for religion in general.

I agree with you on that part.

That's a stereotype.

I'm sure they haven't. Yahoo is a pretty big corp. I'm sure it doesn't mean they're snubbing us yet.

I'll bet he owned an SUV also. Those things kill too you know...

Christians have a right to holiday representation on Yahoo? Paul hates Christians? Germans are conspiring with the Jews and Yahoo to persecute Christians? They have the right to sell or advertise whatever they want. I think they are succumbing to the political correctness of the day, however and it's sad, IMO.

Probably (in the more extreme circumstances). Not really.

Then what is this talk about the obligation not to follow an illegal order? I agree that this guy signed up and we should send him back and he should face his punishment. I am asking out of clarification for myself. The war is not illegal. Good luck trying to get that through a court martial.

The soldier doesn’t get to make that kind of choice. He must go where he's told to go and fight who he's told to fight. In reference to legality of the war, the President, his administration, and the majority who voted him back in office all think the war was justified. So do all the countries in our coalition who are fighting alongside us. The soldier refusing to go after he’s already committed is in violation of military law. If a person objects for any reason with the policies or direction of the military, then that person aught not join and take the oath. He has that privilege given that we no longer have a draft.

I'm sure Saddam Hussein and the former Bathists think the war is illegal.

Oh...but it's used for much more than just pride in one's ancestry.

Civilians, women, and children are generally considered to be non-combatants. However, it's hard to tell many times when the enemy we're fighting now doesn't wear any type of uniform. As Ron said, non-combatants aren't legal to target and any order to do so would be illegal. It would be my responsibility not to follow it. However, as soon as that woman or young person picks up a weapon and threatens my life or the lives of any of my men, they become a combatant in that instant and would legally be treated as such.