So when Paul quotes a command from Jesus you accept that authority (1 Cor 7), but reject the gospels as an accurate representation of what Jesus said? Or do you merely excise the bits of the New Testament that you don't like entirely? Tell me more: as a recent MA in church history I'm fascinated by the truly unusual.
“You have heard that it was said to those of old ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
The Christian argument is more subtle - the primary reason to oppose such images is 'objectification'; there isn't a Christian position on Age of Consent per se, the Christian objection is to fornication. IF the local culture is supportive and constructive about younger brides, then from first principles Christianity doesn't have a big objection. The raising of the Age of Consent in the UK and parts of the USA in the 19th century was a measure aimed at child prostitution.
The move to raise the Age of Consent in the 19th century in the UK and parts of the US came from a concern by Christians to prevent 12-15 year old prostitutes.
Overall there's no evidence that Christians are more sexually deviant - but inevitably given that we actually take morality seriously and people prefer to avoid the topic, we rightly get accused of hypocrisy when we do get caught. And Rome's insistence of clerical celibacy and their cover up of child abuse has been a disaster. But overall:
'It's far more fun to point your finger than recognise your own failings'...
The wires in the ground are mostly owned by the former Telecoms monopoly, but it has to allow ISPs to have boxes in its exchanges, as well as having to allow access to the network. The result is many ISPs competing effectively on price and service.
Given that most historic societies had ages of consent or 14 or less, this can be argued to be a classic piece of Western cultural imperialism. As a conservative Christian, I can argue that my faith makes the matter clear - asking ANYONE for a sexually explicit picture over the internet is clearly wrong according to Christian morality. What's your reason - other than 'everyone agrees it's wrong' (except they don't...).
Congratulations on buying into Christian morality. I have no problems with saying it is wrong - but for those who aren't Christian will struggle to condemn the behaviour, given than most societies had an age of consent of 14 or less (cf Socrates' Athens)...
Endemic in the idiot class who desperately need to believe themselves to be worthwhile. By contrast us geeks KNOW we are worthwhile, don't bother to indulge in fashion - and don't get any girl friends... So in Darwinian terms, slavery to fashion is probably a good strategy.
A woman has sued landlords for refusing to accept DSS tenants - i.e. people whose rent will be partly paid for by the taxpayer - on the grounds that this constitutes sex discrimination because it mainly affects women! https://www.theguardian.com/co...
To let the world know what they COULD do, without actually having a clear agenda this time. But if you are nasty to us when you are in office, your reelection is going to be... difficult. A wonderful example of plausible deniability!
VAT is an attempt to ensure that ALL economic activity in an economy is taxed and makes a contribution. The alternative approach - of charging a purchase tax that is not recoverable at each stage in a product's creation gives a massive advantage to big firms that are vertically integrated over those who have to pay the tax at each stage. Note of course that many firms produce goods that are both sold to final consumers and to other firms; suggesting they don't charge other firms merely encourages the creation of loopholes. The classic demonstration of the problem of this was in the late Roman Empire, where such a purchase tax was introduced, benefiting the wealthy with their integrated large estates, and squeezing the small scale producer.
So yes, VAT is the least worst solution. The ultimate purpose is that the final consumer pays the tax; the VAT mechanism of netting off VAT payments higher up is reduce the distortions in the system. Given that European countries want a purchase tax of 20-25%, they need to reduce the impact of its distortions.
Slashdot Mirror
Hitler's total death count - probably less than 12m.
Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot: pushing 30m - depending on how many of the famine deaths caused by government policies you want to include.
This is nuts; unless you are proposing to tax all private car usage, this is encouraging people to stay in THEIR cars.
Which means you have to book in advance - no street hailing - but totally matches the Uber ride style. It seems to work for us.
So when Paul quotes a command from Jesus you accept that authority (1 Cor 7), but reject the gospels as an accurate representation of what Jesus said? Or do you merely excise the bits of the New Testament that you don't like entirely? Tell me more: as a recent MA in church history I'm fascinated by the truly unusual.
Nice point, thank you: embarrass Apple into addressing the issue.
The interesting question is whether Apple has the right to demand the basis for the attacks from the vendor.
“You have heard that it was said to those of old ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
At least according to the description.
Please pass me the popcorn...
The Christian argument is more subtle - the primary reason to oppose such images is 'objectification'; there isn't a Christian position on Age of Consent per se, the Christian objection is to fornication. IF the local culture is supportive and constructive about younger brides, then from first principles Christianity doesn't have a big objection. The raising of the Age of Consent in the UK and parts of the USA in the 19th century was a measure aimed at child prostitution.
The move to raise the Age of Consent in the 19th century in the UK and parts of the US came from a concern by Christians to prevent 12-15 year old prostitutes.
Overall there's no evidence that Christians are more sexually deviant - but inevitably given that we actually take morality seriously and people prefer to avoid the topic, we rightly get accused of hypocrisy when we do get caught. And Rome's insistence of clerical celibacy and their cover up of child abuse has been a disaster. But overall:
'It's far more fun to point your finger than recognise your own failings'...
The wires in the ground are mostly owned by the former Telecoms monopoly, but it has to allow ISPs to have boxes in its exchanges, as well as having to allow access to the network. The result is many ISPs competing effectively on price and service.
Americans don't believe the rest of the world exists - you might give them a nasty surprise
Given that most historic societies had ages of consent or 14 or less, this can be argued to be a classic piece of Western cultural imperialism. As a conservative Christian, I can argue that my faith makes the matter clear - asking ANYONE for a sexually explicit picture over the internet is clearly wrong according to Christian morality. What's your reason - other than 'everyone agrees it's wrong' (except they don't...).
Congratulations on buying into Christian morality. I have no problems with saying it is wrong - but for those who aren't Christian will struggle to condemn the behaviour, given than most societies had an age of consent of 14 or less (cf Socrates' Athens)...
Endemic in the idiot class who desperately need to believe themselves to be worthwhile. By contrast us geeks KNOW we are worthwhile, don't bother to indulge in fashion - and don't get any girl friends... So in Darwinian terms, slavery to fashion is probably a good strategy.
Please read and note:
http://babylonbee.com/news/bee...
Surely you mean seeking to conclude!
Greetings from the house pedant...
A woman has sued landlords for refusing to accept DSS tenants - i.e. people whose rent will be partly paid for by the taxpayer - on the grounds that this constitutes sex discrimination because it mainly affects women! https://www.theguardian.com/co...
Really?
Where the aliens do something similar. You're assuming our level of knowledge and capability...
The central bank should still be subject to the same regulations.
To let the world know what they COULD do, without actually having a clear agenda this time. But if you are nasty to us when you are in office, your reelection is going to be... difficult. A wonderful example of plausible deniability!
Coming soon to a school near you? Household version also available...
VAT is an attempt to ensure that ALL economic activity in an economy is taxed and makes a contribution. The alternative approach - of charging a purchase tax that is not recoverable at each stage in a product's creation gives a massive advantage to big firms that are vertically integrated over those who have to pay the tax at each stage. Note of course that many firms produce goods that are both sold to final consumers and to other firms; suggesting they don't charge other firms merely encourages the creation of loopholes. The classic demonstration of the problem of this was in the late Roman Empire, where such a purchase tax was introduced, benefiting the wealthy with their integrated large estates, and squeezing the small scale producer.
So yes, VAT is the least worst solution. The ultimate purpose is that the final consumer pays the tax; the VAT mechanism of netting off VAT payments higher up is reduce the distortions in the system. Given that European countries want a purchase tax of 20-25%, they need to reduce the impact of its distortions.