Nightingale

Happy Holidays, Roy!

Well, from what they wrote, it seems like they don't have an issue with going to war in general; they just have an issue with this war, the reasons for it, and the way it's been handled.

I do . Most people in the US aren't familiar with the intact male anatomy and thus don't appreciate what is lost. Either way, it still works the same. If it's parent preference for a cosmetic look, then so be it. Last time I checked they made every other life altering decision for the child for quite a while. Cosmetic surgery that is non-corrective should be the child's choice (at an appropriate age), not the parents'. A doctor wouldn't think of giving a healthy infant a nose job... why do they find it appropriate to chop off part of his penis just to make it "look better"? Such a personal decision should be left to the person actually affected by the decision.

That is a really beautiful editorial. I think I'd like Christianity a lot better if more Christians shared Jay Bakker's attitude.

Soft-tissue injuries can be really tricky, and, like others have said, can show up days/weeks after the incident. Or, the driver could be faking it. You don't know. Being able or not able to walk is a pretty easy thing to spot, though... I'd bet if she's faking that a PI could get a great photo of her at the grocery store. I'm not sure what state you're in, but I know that in California, with a rear-end collision, there's almost always an excessive speed violation, because if the car in front of you is stopped, your only safe speed is zero. (my brother has gotten four such tickets...you'd think he'd learn). That cop may not be as "full of shit" as you think.

Theories never become facts. They're theories. Theories are not just fuzzy, uncertain ideas that are a step on the path towards becoming facts. A theory is not a fact, and a fact is not a theory. A fact is an observation, something that can be seen to be true or false with little or no interpretation. A theory is a conceptual framework that explains existing observations and predicts new ones.

You're welcome. I guess you could say that I participate in a small way... I don't celebrate christmas in the religious sense, although most of my family does, so I go over to grandma's and enjoy my time with my family. The day doesn't hold any significance for me beyond getting to see my entire family all in one place, and they'd consider it an insult if I didn't come to see them just because the party happened to be held on a religious holiday. We don't exchange gifts.

No, of course it wouldn't offend them if I wished them merry christmas, but I'd like to wish them something that actually applies to them. So, I go with Happy Holidays.

holiday (from the Etymology Dictionary) -haligdæg, from halig "holy" + dæg "day;" in 14c. meaning both "religious festival" and "day of recreation," but pronunciation and sense diverged 16c. So, when you wish someone a happy holiday, you're either wishing them a happy holy day, or a happy fun day. I tend to use "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" because I have many friends who aren't christian, and Happy Holidays works for everyone, whether they're celebrating Christmas, Hanukkah or Yule. I'm not buying three different sets of cards.

A hero is someone who fully understands the potential consequences of doing the right thing, and then does it anyway.

IMO, yes, partially. Especially with the older generation of priests. An adult is always responsible for his actions, but in many ways the church is responsible for shaping the thoughts that prompt those actions. 50+ years ago, when someone intended to enter the priesthood, they were sent to seminary, often straight out of elementary school. Sexuality was never discussed, as it was assumed that it would be a non-issue. There was no exposure to women and no chance to develop a healthy sexual identity, no chance to learn to form relationships with the opposite sex. During a boy/young man's most sexually formative years, he was isolated among his own gender and told to focus on prayer. Those boys were never given any kind of appropriate outlet for sexual desire, and human beings are sexual creatures; those desires are bound to surface one way or another. Because of the archaic sexual policies that, as Billvon explained, are based on inheritance issues centuries ago, the catholic church has been a haven for pedophiles. Because priests are supposed to be celibate, nobody questions why they fail to form adult partnerships. The newer generation of priests aren't placed in the older seminary situation as often, but because of the expectation that priests shouldn't form relationships with women, it makes the priesthood attractive to people who don't want those kinds of relationships and don't want to justify why. So, while I think that now, the church doesn't have much of a hand in creating pedophiles, they've created an atmosphere that's extremely attractive to them... no expectation of adult relationships and exposure to children while in a position of trust. There are many, many priests out there who are passionate about the priesthood and try to be the best priests they can be, but the office of priest itself has been sullied by those who have used it to harm children. The role of a priest needs to be altered so that the priesthood doesn't require the environment that makes it so attractive to pedophiles. As long as the priesthood requires celibacy, the church is going to have issues.

He was probably talking about the stone that forms the base of lady liberty on the Ile de Cygnus (isle of the swans) in the Seine River. It's a 1/4 replica of our statue of liberty. If you're going to france then anyway, one of the river seine boat tour guides might know all about the statue. Also, if the restaurant itself is that tasty and interesting, I'd bet it would be listed in the Rick Steves "Through the Back Door" guide to France or Paris. Might be best to start there, because those guidebooks are fabulous for travel anyway. The Ireland one rescued us several times when getting to a town and having no clue where to stay for the night or find food. You could even try contacting the nice people at www.ricksteves.com and asking them.

Uh oh. Can open. Worms everywhere.

(((HUGS))) So glad it looks like he's going to be okay. Lots of good wishes from me, the cats, the chinchillas, and the fish.

So, could they show up with a dog barking at your house and use that as probable cause? In response to another post, I said 'especially the poor and uneducated' because they lack the means to defend themselves in court. Rich dumb people can hire smart lawyers. Solution - don't even open your door. Without a warrant, they have no recourse. IIRC, searching a vehicle requires reasonable suspicion, whereas searching a residence requires probable cause. The standard is a lot higher. To search a home, you need a warrant, permission, or specific circumstances. While a dog alert may provide probable cause [United States v Sokolow (490 U.S. 1 (1988) U. S. Supreme Court.], without the right circumstances justifying a warrantless search of the home, they'd still need to get a warrant.

Best thing I ever did was stay busy. I scheduled myself for some kind of class/activity every single night. I had irish dance or karate every night, and I was just too damn tired to dwell on things. After a few months, it occurred to me that I hadn't even thought about the guy in weeks. If you can't exercise, find something else. Go to the movies (avoid romantic comedies). Go to the theatre. Go to poetry readings. Volunteer to work on a special project. Find out of the community colleges are offering anything interesting... Just get off your tail and out of the house and stay busy.

It's kind of like so many in the "Theory of Evolution is indisputable" camp, who are quick to label anyone who questions their theory as a creationist nut job. It's about defending your beliefs. Scientists question evolution constantly, every single time they're presented with new evidence, new fossils, etc. So far, every single time, the theory has stood up to the questioning. The entire scientific method is about questioning. Honestly, a scientist would be thrilled to prove evolution wrong, because that would mean his name would be remembered forever. The thing is... nobody's been able to do that yet, no matter how hard they try. The same can certainly not be said for creationism.

I've never understood why it is that creationists believe they prove creationism right by trying (unsuccessfully) to prove evolution wrong. It's not an "If not A then B" type of thing.

Well, I did specify California in my next sentence, but I guess I was a little unclear that I was talking about CA in my first sentence too.

That's my point. The girl in the coffeehouse was treating her religion as a checklist instead of as a guide for living. Go to church... check spread word to others... check accept jesus as lord... check accept jesus as savior... check ask forgiveness... check go to heaven... check.

Nope. You pay for the ticket AND for traffic school, and the ticket doesn't go on your record. It's pretty much a second chance, and if you don't get another ticket in 18 months (in California), you can go to traffic school again after that if you get another one. If you get a ticket on your record, your insurance company finds out, and the increase in rates usually is much more than the cost of traffic school. I've got a ticket that I'm going to court for on Monday. I can't do traffic school because Orange County requires you to go to the county approved CHP traffic school, and the traffic schools are scheduled at the same time as my bar review classes. so... If the cop doesn't show up, case dismissed. If the cop does show up, I'm going to beg the judge to allow me to take traffic school in march (after the bar). There's really no reason for him to deny this, so it's what will probably happen. If the judge won't let me delay traffic school that long, I ask for a two week continuance to prepare my defense, and find out if I can do a trial by written declaration instead of a court appearance.

Um... I'd have to vote for pretty much anything on Fox recently... most notably "Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire"

Personally, I see spirituality as personal faith, and religion as all the rituals and trimmings that people attach to their faith. I think that oftentimes people become overly focused on the ritual (religion) and forget entirely about the meaning (spirituality). Religious rituals enable some people to feel righteous even if they're doing awful things. Religion, to some people, provides a checklist of "do this and enjoy the afterlife". Without spirituality/faith, simply going through the motions accomplishes nothing except allowing the person to feel better. Example: (a conversation I overheard in a coffeehouse a few weeks ago) I'm not sure what was said between these two before I sat down at the table behind them, but this is approximately what was said while I was there... Girl 1: But to get to heaven, you need to be saved, like me. Girl 2: But how can you possibly be saved if you're sleeping with your sister's husband? What about the whole sanctity of marriage thing? Girl 1: (shrug) Christians are forgiven. Girl 2: Doesn't that mean you're supposed to stop? Girl 1: As long as I've accepted Jesus as my personal lord and savior, I'm saved and forgiven. At this point, I took my coffee and left.

I didn't say you said he was stupid or blind. I said he would have been stupid and blind if he had followed the course of action you think he should have.

Or, the Pope recognized the story for what it was: a creation myth from a people who, at the time, had no better explanation. Genesis is part of the history and mythology of the Jewish people, and belongs in the old testament. There are a lot of things in the bible that are recognized by Christians to be symbolic or fable-like rather than absolute truth (otherwise you wouldn't be eating cheeseburgers and would be killing anyone who doesn't believe as you do). Recognizing that the value of the bible lies in its moral direction rather than it's historical accuracy, in the face of overwhelming evidence, the Pope simply took the logical step and included the Genesis creation myth in the symbolic category rather than the literal. It would be pretty stupid and blind of him to do otherwise, and, while JPII was many things, stupid and blind he was not. He saw what really important about the bible and turned the Catholic church towards that rather than miring the church in arguments better suited to the time of Galileo.