would occur anywhere in the universe without invoking divine miracles. (Dr. Hugh Ross, PhD. Astrophyisist) Well, those odds are certainly better than the odds of it happening with divine miracles. Do you have the odds on that? VES
Whatever a "objectivist" is? Sounds like a made up term. Objectivism is a descriptive title for the philosophy of Ayn Rand. All words were "made up" at some point. It's not an organization, it's a philosophy of individualism. By it's nature, people who follow it must be atheists. There are plenty o
Cults call themselves Christians... But, they arn't. The Severely Mentally disturbed arn't nessecarily bad (it's a disease and it's through no fault of their own), but when they are mass murderers then they arn't christians. While you continue to lump me into the Humanist category (still de
But if there is no Moral absolute... As I said, if you want to learn that there is, read some Ayn Rand. If you don't want to learn that, don't. I will not be your teacher, and I won't try to indoctrinate you into my beliefs, as I'm sure you would like to
Humanists have won the following victories in recent decades: the elimination of the God-instituted death penalty I will only correct you once more about calling me a humanist. If you don't care to learn the differences between objectivism and generic huma
deleted because I was incorrect.
My apologies for the many spelling and grammatical errors contained in the first paragraph of my post above. If any of that needs clarification, please let me know. VES
What is to happen to our society when we legally recognize the supposed "right" of gays to marry? What will happen next? Beastiality? Pedophelia? Will the courts recognize these supposed "rights" too? "Oh," some might say, "That's not gonna happen! That's common sense!" No, because bestiality and pedoph
If one accepts that civil unions are the legal equals of marriages and are different in name only, then those fighting most vociferously for gay marriage are fighting for the word "marriage." It takes two to tango. While you suggest it's only gay people ar
No matter what we believe, it's a statement of faith... Evolution or creation? I personally believe there is no evidence to support evolution... Not accurate. One can base one's beliefs on facts and reality. Or, one can simply accept what is told to him/her. I'm not convinced by the evidence that ev
But, you cannot deny that the heritage of the United States has Judeo-Christian beliefs. No, you are right, I can't deny our government has been tainted by religion. That in and of itself says nothing. <T
Some better quotes to consider: "The clergy, by getting themselves established by law and ingrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and religious rights of man." --Thomas Jefferson Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. -Thomas Jeffers
Your joking right?? No, I'm pointing out the difference. You are the one that brought up the murder case suggesting that a LEGAL defense of self defense flew in the face of the concept "the law is the law." The law recognizes self defense as a legal def
Since this is and has been a defence that is sometimes accepted in court I guess you disagree? Yes, but the case is going to court to be tried by a judge. That's a major difference from the law enforcement officer just deciding not to arrest or charge her for the crime because he feels for her plight.
And as for the "ridiculous assertion" that you couldn't go 50 feet without stopping someones actually true, The "ridiculous assertion" is that you be required to stop someone every 50 feet, not that violations are or aren't committed every 50 feet. Read my quote again as that was what I said.
As a cop yourself I find it funny that you have NEVER used officer discretion when applying the law. As a cop yourself, I'm surprised that you leap to conclusions. I nev
I believe in applying the law when it serves a purpose. You see I have a little experience in this. I have been a police officer for 24 years now and still kicking. In fact I teach full time at the police academy now. I don't believe that laws should be used to further ones own interest. Or for that matter enforced to the letter
Association's stance in wanting it removed was anti-patriotic. Of course, another way to look at it is: America is a country that believes in the rule of law (or at least it used to). The homeowner was being anti-patriotic by ignoring the "law" of the association where he lived. Likewise, the associa
All I was meerly saying, Draginol..was that if enough people in the homestead wanted to change it, they could.. Apparently they haven't, so this is a moot point. VES
In many law circles they will tell you that the "spirt" of the law is as important as the "letter" of the law. And other law circles will tell you otherwise. This is because the "spirit" of the law can be a very subjective standard, if even a standard at all. That is why the proper crafting of the lit
"shouldn't" is term of certainty. I don't believe in natural certainty, only belief. Ahhh, that explains it. Perception is reality. No further explanation needed.... VES
Protecting one person's rights is generally thumbing your nose at someone else's. There's something to be said for a reasonable amount of majority rule. Which individual rights are in conflict here? Whose rights are being thumbed? This guy chose to live in a "majority rule" situation, the nei
This is why I would never live in a neighborhood with a neighborhood association. The idea that you can't put a flag pole you like in your front yard is ridiculous. Never the less, the man had a contractual obligation which he violated. If the sanctity of his property is that important to him, he should move elsewhere. VES
Of course I don't know basic human nature well enough to know who is more wrong, but I would like to believe that most people are, at least 'not-evil'... Well, I for one will assert that selfishness (which is basic human nature) is not evil. Selfishness is inherent with our instinct to stay alive. How
MAN...........THIS ARTICLE UPSETTED PEOPLE MORE THAN I THOUGHT IT WOULD!!! An odd observation. Was that your intent? VES
JoeUser Forums