The gospel of Thomas and other such gnostic writings were such an obvious frauds that I doubt the early church councils ever even considered whether they should be added to the canon.
> I'd be more afraid of how far the Supreme Court will set justice back.
Can't happen, since justice is defined by the pronouncements of the Supreme Court. The Court is Supreme, after all. We fear, love and trust in the Supreme pronouncements of the SCOTUS.
> They offer free services on the consumer facing side..
Yep. That's what we, the users, will buy. Me anyway. One wonders why classmates.com persist in their charge-the-consumer business model. Surely they are losing out to Facebook, Myspace, etc. big time. Classmates gets no money from me, and since it is useless otherwise, they get no traffic from me. They lose. Facebook rawks.
Me: "I don't think same-sex unions should be endorsed by the government." You: "People said the same thing about interracial marriages." Me: "So you think the government should approve of homosexual unions?" You: "Of course." Me: "People said the same thing about slavery."
Each individual of the group has the right to Free Speech, regardless of which group he may be a member of.
Homosexuals have the same right to marry (restricted to someone of the opposite sex) as any one else. Where is the discrimination?
To claim that disallowing same-sex marriage constitutes discrimination is to assert that the grouping of the people is what's being discriminated against, not the individuals themselves.
Individual rights? This is about rights for groups of people, no? Rather than, "each individual has the right to...", it's about "each grouping of two people has the right to..." Where else in the laws of our country do we extend civil rights to groupings of people rather than to the individuals of the groups?
Slashdot Mirror
The gospel of Thomas and other such gnostic writings were such an obvious frauds that I doubt the early church councils ever even considered whether they should be added to the canon.
You're confusing translation with interpretation.
> I'd be more afraid of how far the Supreme Court will set justice back.
Can't happen, since justice is defined by the pronouncements of the Supreme Court.
The Court is Supreme, after all.
We fear, love and trust in the Supreme pronouncements of the SCOTUS.
I'm all for foot-dragging when it comes to implementing repressive regimes.
> They offer free services on the consumer facing side..
Yep. That's what we, the users, will buy. Me anyway.
One wonders why classmates.com persist in their charge-the-consumer business model. Surely they are losing out to Facebook, Myspace, etc. big time. Classmates gets no money from me, and since it is useless otherwise, they get no traffic from me. They lose. Facebook rawks.
... that goes, "Bing!"
... from a nice observation window at The Restaurant at the End of California.
No, no, no... You do it like this!
Naw.. He was doing a Fibonacci sequence.
1) $35 .....
2) $70
3) $35 + $70 = $105
4) $70 + $105 = $170
5)
... don't add up.
I'm waiting for them to re-imagine Quark into a new TV series..
You can have mine.
Oh, wait...
..rabbit shit!"
"See, you're getting smarter already!"
It's because of his charisma.
Okay.
Here ya go.
You cn haz it.
You can haz it.
Me: "I don't think same-sex unions should be endorsed by the government."
You: "People said the same thing about interracial marriages."
Me: "So you think the government should approve of homosexual unions?"
You: "Of course."
Me: "People said the same thing about slavery."
Each individual of the group has the right to Free Speech, regardless of which group he may be a member of.
Homosexuals have the same right to marry (restricted to someone of the opposite sex) as any one else. Where is the discrimination?
To claim that disallowing same-sex marriage constitutes discrimination is to assert that the grouping of the people is what's being discriminated against, not the individuals themselves.
Individual rights?
This is about rights for groups of people, no?
Rather than, "each individual has the right to...", it's about "each grouping of two people has the right to..."
Where else in the laws of our country do we extend civil rights to groupings of people rather than to the individuals of the groups?
The IRS doesn't recognize same-sex marriage, regardless of whether the state you live in does.
> California is making itself a less desirable state to live in..
So, what's new?
No..
256^256 is correct.
That's aprox. 3.23 * 10^616
.. buy some Google Search Credits?
I mean, I wanna continue living my opulent Google Search intensive life, but I don't want to feel bad about it.
Please, someone sell me some indulgences.
> What we need is a different company in charge
> of receiving all these documents and keeping
> them securely as long as I want.
We have that. It's a little company called "Department of Homeland Security."