Southern_Man

Nope - Cheach Nope, The Old Codger. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

I doubt anything Ron Sider says is going to be predictive of actions or thoughts/beliefs for evangelicals as a whole. He has been a dissenting voice from many parts of the 'evangelical consensus' [a term I just coined] for a long time and has had very little success changing that consensus or gaining fellow adherents to his position. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Not divot (and I went and ate lunch and gave other people plenty of time to play. Skootz "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Good morning JohnMitchell!!!! I hope you guys have a fantastic time in Boston. I LOVE it there! Southern Man Bingo! Turtle "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

It is true. All the long-term serious runners I know (and as a distance runner myself I know a lot of them) will admit they do it partially for the mood balancing effects of running. Actual clinical studies show that exercise is just as effective as talk therapy or SSRIs in the treatment of mild to moderate depression. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

More people is good. I go w/ JohnMitchell "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Well, people like the Pope, who was complicit in covering up sex crimes and moving molesting priests from one parish to another. I believe that pope is dead. No, the current pope was very involved in those activities while he was a cardinal. Very well documented. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

nope Antifnsocial "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Well, people like the Pope, who was complicit in covering up sex crimes and moving molesting priests from one parish to another. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Okay, I guess I read your last response and not necessarily the whole thread. There are places that I have grown up and lived where there are quite a few people doing it. They are not doing it for fun in their backyard. They are doing it for profit and clearly find it worth their time. It's big business still in some places. I will say that I do not have any knowledge of anybody going blind from moonshine. I was not necessarily commenting on whether it was a larger or smaller business than during prohibition. I'm for legalization of narcotics. Just like moonshine, I am sure you will still have people trying to avoid government regulation and taxes but the overall illegality and violence may be reduced. There is a lot of cigarette smuggling where I live (transporting them from low-tax Virginia to higher tax northern states) as well. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Man, I wonder where some of you grew up and are living. There are a lot of places in this country where moonshining is still big business. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

I have a halal store here in town. I go to it on a semi-regular basis since it is the best place in town to buy tahini sauce. I also like the maftoul and other foods on offer there. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

There's a general feeling that his plans were never real. All his fuck ups, his delays, were nothing more than his way o keep money coming in from sponsors and advertising. There were also some possibly dubious statements he made that he had support from military that, apparently, were BS. And it's not really a anti French thing. Most of the criticism has come from France and French speaking individuals. Bingo. Some people figure if he was really serious about the attempt he might have made some efforts towards planning practical details, like, you know, having made some arrangement to get helium to the airport or something.; "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

~where is...WALT APPEL! I think he is being tortured in the dungeon. Nope, I'll see if Old Fart answers me again. I'll go with DD "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Nope, Going w/ Skootzie. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Vigil recommends turning off before placing your rig in your trunk due to air pressure variations: From the http://www.vigil.aero/faq: What are the recommendations when I travel in a moving vehicle (Train, Car, Bus...) ? Vigil is the most accurate AAD on the market. It becomes operational in a zone of 150ft/46m above or under takeoff level. To avoid unexpected firing, you must switch OFF your Vigil before traveling in a closed vehicle (boot or trunk) due to possible air pressure variation. However, there is no inconvenient to travel in an open vehicle at the drop zone altitude. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Certainly not what I understand about Fournier. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Isn't the short version of that advice known as, "they don't swell, they don't tell, and they are grateful as hell?" "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

I thought this thread was going to be about baby seals. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

I meet people through running groups, hiking groups, and other common interest groups. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

I do not donate an unlimited amount of money because, truth be told, my personal funds are very limited. I do donate a considerable amount more than $20 to some of those organizations although most of those donations go to operations not lobbying. Not sure how much total I would donate that would go to lobbying. Anyway, all of those organizations have membership bases full of people who agree with me about the rights and importance of skydivers, the environment, puppies, and retarded people. Not sure why I shouldn't be able to spend my funds to promote the things I agree with. Limiting my contributions is effectively limiting my speech. I do not seek to limit your first amendment rights, please do not seek to limit mine. *** I think matters of opinion are just that. However I would be for sever punishment for the people who mislead and misinform. I do believe there is a difference. If we do not do this the people with the least morals and ethics will be the people who will succeed. Simply because they will say any thing to get what they want. I don’t want to live in such a world that depravity is viewed as a vehicle for success. In theory I could agree with you here. I do not particularly like lying either. However as a practical matter it is exceedingly difficult to draw a line between a lie and an opinion in matters of politics and political debate because, often, nobody really knows what the consequences of a piece of legislation is going to be. Saying, for example, that Obama's health plan is going to gut Medicare could certainly be a lie. It might also be the truth. I think the best way to sort that out is through engagement in public discourse in the marketplace of ideas. That can be messy but is far preferable than some bureaucrat with the FEC or a judge deciding whose speech is allowed and whose isn't. Even after the 'Citizens United' ruling we still have far, far too many restrictions on political speech in this country. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Partially right, but it goes double if she takes skymama! "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

I know you do not consider corporations to be people. They are not people but they are groups of people. USPA is a corporation. Are you against USPA having the right to lobby? Are you against USPA having the right to run ads (not that we have the money, but in theory)? Are you against Greenpeace, the SPCA, and the ARC being able to advertise? If so, then why do you hate skydivers, the environment, puppies and retarded people? These are all corporations. Some of them have more money and some have less. All of them lobby. I belong to several of those organizations. Would you restrict my rights to speech just because I have banded together with other people of like interests in a common purpose? Would you ban all lying in politics? One person's lie is another person's political opinion. Who would get to enforce that? You? The founders were very clear that the antidote to incorrect speech was more speech, not more censorship by government entities. That is the way to tyranny! "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Congratulations, and yes, it is time for the official poll!!! "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Also, saying you are for free speech is extremely misleading and disingenuous. You are for free speech for some and against it for others. You are explicitly advocating restrictions on the speech of people and corporations (which are really just groups of people bundled together) because you disagree with the content of that speech. This is precisely the kind of censorship that the First Amendment is designed to protect against. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"