georgerussia

There is a big difference between having no say, and having no ability to vote for harmful laws. Actually that's how the system works nowadays. The only difference is that those laws, even if signed, are struck down by the Supreme Court. Therefort wasting everyone's time and government money. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

The problem is that the groups makes dumb decisions, based on group member beliefs, for everyone - not just for the group members. This is what makes you no different than Taliban. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

The problem here is that you make "Master skydiver" as "someone who tried every discipline a little", there is no value of such a license. A "master skydiver" who can sitfly a little (and learned it just to get a rating) is still not safe to freefly with. Not to mention including every discipline is very broad - how about 2-3 hours of tunnel time requirement? This is useful experience as well. How about some BASE jumps? How about wingsuit aerobatics, rodeo? How about landing in the forest? But if you make "Master skydiver" as "someone who is expert in ALL the existing disciplines", I doubt we would ever find the one. If we take a "knows everything a little" approach, in my opinion it would mean almost nothing useful for his instructor status. If the instructor wants to teach RW, he'd better spend more time on RW skills instead of trying freeflying, wingsuits and swooping he just need to get a rating. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

I know a jumper (in miliraty) who jumped with a dummy reserve for a WEEK(!). This is not safety concern. This is stupidity concern. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Well, using your own logic you wish the USA was like your Taliban - the majority votes that women should cover their faces because some old religious book says so, and every woman must do it, including those who do not care about religious books. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

They are not dangerous nor complicated. They are just more difficult than daytime jumps. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

If you answered my question instead of discussing my person, it would be much more helpful to the discussion. I can even repeat it: could you prove that the "good thinks" you mentioned came directly from religion? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Looks like you mixed everything together. I can understand gear, freefall drift and spotting knowledge, as this is what jumper and others safety is based on. I can understand some proficiency in CRW, as unintentional CRW might happen without your wish. I see no reason to show some proficiency in both freeflying, advanced RW, swooping and high-performance canopies. How would it benefit the person only flies wingsuits, and does not care about RW, freefly or swoops? How useful is high-performance canopy for pilots who are not going to downsize - is it possible that after pull you instantly find yourself under Katana 120 instead of Spectre 210? So your 'master skydiver' would know a little of every discipline. What's "master" in it? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Steve, do you have any proof that charities that feed & clothe, hospitals, and orphanages came directly from religion? Or this is just your belief? Regatding "peace and comfort" - what's the difference with alcohol/drugs then? I still see nothing good which came directly from religion, and would not happen without it. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

I can remember several examples of science abuse in the name of Lord (religion). I cannot remember any example of religion abuse in the name of science. And your mentioning of nuclear waste is funny as well. Does the science teach that you need to produce nuclear waste to go to Heaven? Or people produce it in the name of science, not to satisfy their own needs, which are in most cases not related to science at all? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

It will not happen. If something never existed, there is no way to prove it does not exist. Try, for example, to prove that Flying Spahetti Monster does not exist. So this question is useless. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

No, Norvay. Still wanna "something in the middle"? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

That is close to that for you. But if you earn more, it would not. I'm still in 35% tax bracket, at least, and health insurance payment were less than 4% of what I paid in taxes. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Looks like standard I-wanna-be-holier-than-Thou mistake. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

I think I have made it clear several times: you should not be allowed to vote for laws, which purpose is to restrict (or force) others to doing something if the reason you want to restrict others is based only on your beliefs, and not on proven facts. I thought it is very simple logic; don't you understand it? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Do you have problems to figure why crusades, witch hunts, messing with progress in science, supporting slavery and banning interracial marriages on Creator's ground are bad? [Added explanation]: everyone, including atheists, is building buildings like orphanages, tolilets, and digging wells. It is not something only Christians do. However there were no atheist in witch hunts and events like that. Let me disappoint you - this is the other part of the coin. There is no way you could be a "doing only good" Christian. That's why I stopped contributing in 3 of 5 charities I contributed to, because they were pro-Christian. I made my position clear though. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Steve, you again mixing facts and beliefs. This sounds like an Arabic boy, who was taught by Muslim fanatics that his only purpose is to serve Allah, and the best way it is to kill non-Muslims. This boy would definitely say that after he had learned this, he became a better person, and got a purpose of life. Most likely his family and friends would say it too. But did he really become a "better" person in terms of common sense? I doubt it. I would disappoint you - a lot of people feel really worried when Christians start concerning about them. We all remember good old times, when Christians initiate crusades, killed a lot of their own people in witch hunts, halted the medicine and science progress, and a lot more. We remember newest history where judges enforce stupid laws on Christianity ground, and Christians tried to force our children to study Bible theories in schools. After all, what your concern means? It means that, as a good Christian, you need to teach others to follow Christ as well, so they won't go to hell. This means that your religion insists you to "teach" others to follow the same beliefs as you are, and this "teaching" is not restricted to anything, including lobbying the government. Please, do not be concerned about me. I'm not going to Heaven with you. Sure, crusaders and witch hunts did make your society better. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Steve, you did not change. You are still self-centered :) The main question Phil asked you was not related to you nor your archievements. It is basically the same question I asked you several times, but Phil has stated it much better. I'll repeat it for you: So, to say it short, you are spreading your beliefs just because you believe it is good. But you do not KNOW whether it is good or bad, and we have a lot of examples of Christianity spreading beliefs which were clearly harmful. So the question is, it is one thing if you are spreading "good". What if you are spreading "evil"? How could you prove you are not spreading "evil", and therefore should not be restricted doing it? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

This is possible. The question is, do you want to pay 60% of your income to government? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

while living in Alabama :) But the text is nice. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

The main problem with circumstantial evidence is obvious when you base your whole theory on it. If the evidence is proven to be invalid, it invalidates your whole theory. That's why circumstantial evidence would be accepted as a small, non-important part of theory, but cannot be really accepted as a base of a theory you base your life on. This is correct. However, the case here is dfferent. Is the whole history science based on Ceasar existense? No. Is the whole Ancient history based on Ceasar existense? No as well. What changes tomorrow if there is strong evidence proving that Ceasar did not exist, and all this circumstantial evidence was faked? A small piece of Ancient history would be corrected. Would it change lives for any major group of people? Nope. Now let's see the Jesus. The whole Christianity is based on Jesus existence and behaviour model. Therefore if tomorrow there is strong evidence proving that Jesus did not exist, and all this circumstantial evidence was faked, the whole Christianity will collapse. And it would definitely change lives for a lot of people. That's why circumstantial evidence could be used to prove that Ceasar exists, but cannot be used to prove that Jesus exists. There is a big difference between truth and what you believe to be truth. People used to believe in a lot of things they were sure is truth, which were not. Generally if you cannot prove it to somebody who does not share your beliefs, you cannot say that you found the truth. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

That's quite a good argument. However there is a big difference between history and any religion. The historians do not push their theories over everyone. They do not tell you how to live, or that you could change your life because some historic figure said so. [emphasis mine] Actually they do. While you may be from Russia, your info says you live in TX now. I grew up there. I had TX history throughout my schooling in the 60s & 70s. What is taught now is different than then. Well, my definition of "push" is slightly different, and I have explained it as "They do not tell you how to live, or that you could change your life because some historic figure said so". When was the last time you saw a historian coming to your home, or approaching you on a street just to tell you about Nero, and how His existence is going to change your life? The history should not change because of changes in political agenda. We had the same thing in Russia - first people said Stalin was genius, then he was a tyrant, then he was a "good for that time" dictator. None of those changes really affect history. The purpose of history is to tell you what the guy did, not how good or bad was what the guy did. A good historian, as a good history book, has to be neutral and non-emotional. And a lot of books really are, mostly there are teachers who make it sound emotional. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Make sure yours is not made in Kyrgizstan, they make fakes. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

The solution (not for everyone, unfortunately) is - don't go to divorce court in US. Or in England. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Where is "paid and was paid"? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *