Read the rest of Ephesians 5 - don't just stop with the one verse that everyone likes to throw around. It's only a few more lines, so it won't take too much time.
A Christian, holding to the values espoused in the New Testament, sees women similarly.
If you're going to use the "wives submit to your husbands" line, I'll ask that you continue reading from there. The statement is given in the reverse as well. I don't see how anyone can make much of an issue that wives and husbands should submit to and serve one another in marriage.
I've never really understood these arguments against the Wii. I don't really care about the resolution - the games are fun. I've played 4 player Mario Kart without any issues (other than the difficulty of finding quality opponents). I don't care if Zelda also came out for the Gamecube - it was still a very good game. You're clearly missing the point of the Wii - it's no longer about the joystick and all the buttons, and that's why people are buying it. They don't care if it has the same stuff as the Gamecube or if the resolution is 480p - they want the Wiimote.
Regarding good games, you skipped over Super Mario Galaxy, but you have a decent point regarding the games - I want more non crappy games. Yes, I'm somewhat contradicting my first paragraph here, but there have been several good games for the console, enough to get me to buy it and enough to prove the point that the new controller is fun. Now, it just needs more of them.
You're right in that it is simple, but you're wrong about the solution. The solution is to find another job. It's important to stick to your morals and ethics and not just "do what you have to have to do to make a living".
But you have to realize that this is a fundamental human problem for every human being, regardless of status, class, intellect, or education, many of histories brightest minds were horribly wrong in enormous ways about other things. Look at Newton for instance and the amount he wrote concerning religion, etc.
What makes you so sure Newton was "horribly wrong" about religion?
The squeezing looks like someone might have one of those TVs that attempts to algorithmically fit a 4:3 image on a 16:9 screen. The blur in the forehead is a bit strange.
People who expect to get what was advertised to them and what they paid for are nothing but dirty rotten thieves, stealing from the pockets of poor, disadvantaged company directors the world over!
Interesting that you use the phrase "what they paid for" in defending people who are illegally downloading large volumes of copyrighted material.
all the candidates belong to Christian churches and claim to be "faithful". Yet this would imply they all believe in creationism, or that they are lying to get the religious vote.
I'm not sure why this has to be repeated so many times: Not all Christians believe in a literal 7 day creation. Quite a large number of them believe that God is the Creator, but that the Earth is quite old and that evolution takes place. Evolution and Creation are not contradictory. The only contradictory piece comes from a vocal minority who believe in a literal 7 day Creation.
In healthcare, and the ratio is 8 IT to 1000 employees. We've been as high as 12 IT to 1000 employees. 12 was better than 8, but we're doing fine with 8. The benefit is that we have *good* IT people. Stuff is done right and it's done right the first time.
I've had classes that required it. My favorite was an ethics class where the book was written by the professor and used those codes. The "content" was basically about 10 links per chapter to articles on other sites. But, you had to read and comment on the articles, so you needed to get at the links. So, an ethics professor devises some insanely lame scheme to make his students pay more for his ethics book. He wasn't amused when I pointed out the irony of this.
They have a new trick that's even better than revisions. They put a code in the book that gives you access to web content. The code is only good for one person, so you can't sell the book used because the person won't be able to get on the website.
While a majority may wish to have no cell phones on airplanes, it is no business of the government to pass a law regarding such a thing. If there were safety concerns, they could enter a say in the matter, but they have no business passing laws over a perceived desire for less chatter. This would get slammed in a court, so why should they even bother wasting our time and tax dollars?
I just sold my soul and gave $200 to AT&T, I'd really like to play with my iPhone.
And you're not even allowed to play with it by yourself without activation?
Try and tell me that the future wouldn't be darker with Apple at the helm than Microsoft... Just try.
I think the device you're looking for is called the iPod Touch. Pretty much the same thing, just without the phone part. Since AT&T is paying part of the purchase price for you, you need a contract to get that price concession. If you don't want phone service, then buy the Touch. You're not being screwed as hard as you seem to want to be screwed.
Scalia's decision is correct; I suggest you read it. Look at what the Founders had to say about arms in the hands of private citizens. The plain language is quite clear, as is the history.
I've read the decision. Again, I don't really have a side in this issue, I can largely see it both ways. I think the amendment itself is grossly outdated - a citizenry with handguns will simply be slaughtered by our current military technology anyway, so the ability to rise up really isn't there.
Alas, I'm an idealist. I can only hope that the world reaches a point where we simply don't use weapons anymore. It's pathetic that the species with the greatest intellect is the only one to insist on arming itself against itself.
Explain how it ignores the rules of English. It seems that it is providing the reason for the latter part. It's interesting that you quote the amendment without the first clause. I'm not of any particular side in this issue, I just find it odd that neither can see that the other has a valid point.
The iPod Touch updates cost money, whereas the iPhone updates don't. Reasoning is that the Touch revenue is recognized at time of sale, and iPhone revenue is spread over many months. One would expect nVidia to take the revenue when they sell the card, so if Apple are correct with their argument about adding functionality and the accounting, nVidia would need to charge.
The post was mostly in jest.
Slashdot Mirror
Read the rest of Ephesians 5 - don't just stop with the one verse that everyone likes to throw around. It's only a few more lines, so it won't take too much time.
If you're going to use the "wives submit to your husbands" line, I'll ask that you continue reading from there. The statement is given in the reverse as well. I don't see how anyone can make much of an issue that wives and husbands should submit to and serve one another in marriage.
Holy wow!
I've never really understood these arguments against the Wii. I don't really care about the resolution - the games are fun. I've played 4 player Mario Kart without any issues (other than the difficulty of finding quality opponents). I don't care if Zelda also came out for the Gamecube - it was still a very good game. You're clearly missing the point of the Wii - it's no longer about the joystick and all the buttons, and that's why people are buying it. They don't care if it has the same stuff as the Gamecube or if the resolution is 480p - they want the Wiimote.
Regarding good games, you skipped over Super Mario Galaxy, but you have a decent point regarding the games - I want more non crappy games. Yes, I'm somewhat contradicting my first paragraph here, but there have been several good games for the console, enough to get me to buy it and enough to prove the point that the new controller is fun. Now, it just needs more of them.
You're right in that it is simple, but you're wrong about the solution. The solution is to find another job. It's important to stick to your morals and ethics and not just "do what you have to have to do to make a living".
I'm not appealing to Newton's authority. I'm questioning the previous post's certainty about a subject that is rather uncertain.
What makes you so sure Newton was "horribly wrong" about religion?
The squeezing looks like someone might have one of those TVs that attempts to algorithmically fit a 4:3 image on a 16:9 screen. The blur in the forehead is a bit strange.
Interesting that you use the phrase "what they paid for" in defending people who are illegally downloading large volumes of copyrighted material.
I'm not sure why this has to be repeated so many times: Not all Christians believe in a literal 7 day creation. Quite a large number of them believe that God is the Creator, but that the Earth is quite old and that evolution takes place. Evolution and Creation are not contradictory. The only contradictory piece comes from a vocal minority who believe in a literal 7 day Creation.
In healthcare, and the ratio is 8 IT to 1000 employees. We've been as high as 12 IT to 1000 employees. 12 was better than 8, but we're doing fine with 8. The benefit is that we have *good* IT people. Stuff is done right and it's done right the first time.
I've had classes that required it. My favorite was an ethics class where the book was written by the professor and used those codes. The "content" was basically about 10 links per chapter to articles on other sites. But, you had to read and comment on the articles, so you needed to get at the links. So, an ethics professor devises some insanely lame scheme to make his students pay more for his ethics book. He wasn't amused when I pointed out the irony of this.
They have a new trick that's even better than revisions. They put a code in the book that gives you access to web content. The code is only good for one person, so you can't sell the book used because the person won't be able to get on the website.
And there's no shift key on the right side.
I agree. You should get married before doing that.
While a majority may wish to have no cell phones on airplanes, it is no business of the government to pass a law regarding such a thing. If there were safety concerns, they could enter a say in the matter, but they have no business passing laws over a perceived desire for less chatter. This would get slammed in a court, so why should they even bother wasting our time and tax dollars?
http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-service/additionalcharges/ I went on the AT&T website and found it in less than three minutes. Certainly not worth a diatribe on the front page of Slashdot.
The camera in the iPhone is so bad that it's basically worthless. You're not missing anything.
I think the device you're looking for is called the iPod Touch. Pretty much the same thing, just without the phone part. Since AT&T is paying part of the purchase price for you, you need a contract to get that price concession. If you don't want phone service, then buy the Touch. You're not being screwed as hard as you seem to want to be screwed.
I've read the decision. Again, I don't really have a side in this issue, I can largely see it both ways. I think the amendment itself is grossly outdated - a citizenry with handguns will simply be slaughtered by our current military technology anyway, so the ability to rise up really isn't there.
Alas, I'm an idealist. I can only hope that the world reaches a point where we simply don't use weapons anymore. It's pathetic that the species with the greatest intellect is the only one to insist on arming itself against itself.
There is a sign in Altanta:
Buckhead
Cumming
Dunwoody
Explain how it ignores the rules of English. It seems that it is providing the reason for the latter part. It's interesting that you quote the amendment without the first clause. I'm not of any particular side in this issue, I just find it odd that neither can see that the other has a valid point.
Are you implying that someone that disagrees with your opinion is intellectually dishonest?
The iPod Touch updates cost money, whereas the iPhone updates don't. Reasoning is that the Touch revenue is recognized at time of sale, and iPhone revenue is spread over many months. One would expect nVidia to take the revenue when they sell the card, so if Apple are correct with their argument about adding functionality and the accounting, nVidia would need to charge. The post was mostly in jest.
If they do, it'll cost $15 for the driver to enable this.