Educate them, give them the ability to make their own decision. I doubt that at age 4 and 6, either of them have that ability.
As a parent, you have a responsibility to impress upon your children at least some form of morality. That means imparting to them a set of beliefs and values that you have that may not be shared by other people.
I'm disturbed by this new trend that seems to promote the idea that it's not my right to raise my children in any way I see fit.
Make bon-bons. 50% peanut butter, 50% plaster of paris. It sets in their digestive tract and they starve to death. Works great. And some would say that they get the death they deserve.
My skin has grown thicker over the years. And as a result, I'm largely immune to the mosquitoes in the chicago area. Mosquitoes make three attempts to bite, then look for another victim if unsuccessful. So they simply aren't successful at biting me. But the opposite is true for my wife. Anyone who stands next to her will be temporarily immune to mosquitoes as they choose to bite her instead. We can go for a walk at night, she'll have a dozen bites. I'll have zero.
Maybe we should consider renting out my wife for outdoor parties... (not those kind of parties)
There does seem to be a cultural difference with this, and I think it comes down to the education system.
And THIS, everyone, is why you can't just look at wages when considering outsourcing. Western higher education stresses theory, problem solving, and learning how to learn. Eastern education is about memorization and regurgitation.
That's what we usually do here in Canada. Unless it gets really busy because inevitably someone in the "walking lane" will be a dick(or bitch lets not be gender exclusive here) stand still and back up the entire system which basically screws the whole line up for a while.
I live in chicago. I take a commuter train downtown every day and walk about a mile to the office. I made a decision a few years ago to never be in a hurry again. I don't care if I'm late. I don't care if I miss a train. I generally leave earlier and it fixes 99% of these problems anyway. But if I screw up and I'm late, I don't care. If that's all it takes to get me fired, I'm better off. I don't speed. I don't honk at people when they don't immediately go at a green light. And I stop and stand on escalators and movable walkways. (although I try to stay out of peoples way) Why? Because modern human life in cities sucks.
We're not meant to be constantly running from the lion all day. We're meant to chase our food for an hour or two, then spend the rest of our time around the fire with our friends and family.
One day soon, when I've had enough, and maybe when this rural outsourcing thing picks up some steam, I'm going to leave the city and move somewhere rural where I can get 10 acres and grow my own food, keep livestock. I'll work from home. I'll throw out my alarm clock. And I'll actually begin to enjoy life again.
Eat real food. Get real exercise. Slow your life down. Focus on your friends and family.
It is domestic conservative and religious organizations that are poisoning the American spirit and sapping the will to learn from the people.
I'm a Christian. Specifically, I'm a member of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. My grandfather was also a (southern) Baptist Minister. There may be specific fringe religious people out there expressing political views and trying to advance some agenda, but I'm certainly not. And I don't know any other Christian who is either. This includes church elders. They may be trying to protect their freedoms with regard to certain politically touchy subjects, like for example whether a 16 year old can get an abortion or contraceptives without parents hearing about it. But that's very different from claiming that they're sapping the will to learn from the people.
My kids are attending the private Christian school (K through 8) associated with my church. You may be shocked to hear that they're being taught about evolution in science class, and Christianity in religion class.
Christians are definitely against police-state tendencies and are pro-freedom. The last thing we want is the government coming down on Christian schools and churches.
It doesn't take a fundamentalist to claim that all of the Bible is the inspired word of God. I would claim that anyone who thinks that any part of it isn't the word of God isn't really a Christian.
Oh, please. Get over this nonsensical idea that there is such a thing as "the Bible's take" on any subject. Romans, Deuteronomy and Leviticus were written by different people with different agendas at different times to different audiences in different contexts.
Even most mainstream Christian scholars will tell you that.
Those same mainstream Christian scholars will also tell you that all of those works were inspired by the Holy Spirit, and therefore, all are the word of God.
I'm already above $20K, and not even through the list.
Due to our government's policies, the dollar has lost 50% of its value over the last decade or so. Since I'm making, on average, the same actual dollar amount for a bill rate that I was 10 years ago, if you do the math, my government and the bankers that control it have stolen around $500,000 from me in purchasing power.:-/
I'm not an anarchist. We definitely need some of the services a government provides. But I think on the whole, we're all getting the shaft.
it would be great if we all made $150K a year. now enunciate the real world plan in which that is possible
thought so
all you have is wish fulfillment fantasy, not valid social commentary
i actually consider myself quite liberal and have voted Democratic all my life. but when it comes to unions, i see only a bloated historical anachronism that does more harm than good
I agree that there are serious problems with unions these days. But we have a bigger problem. $150k a year sounds like a lot to you only because no one you know is making that much. What if everyone were making $150k a year? It wouldn't sound like that much to you. And people making $300k a year would be making a huge amount of money.
But forget about actual numbers. They're meaningless. What you should really be looking at is purchasing power. How many hours do you have to work to pay for dinner? Or for a car? Union workers making $150k a year have the same purchasing power your grandparents had in their normal jobs. But you've been shafted, shafted by large corporations who have siphoned off what used to be your purchasing power (standard of living) and redirected it into their pockets. In short, they got richer and you got poorer.
Labor unions, as dysfunctional as they are, have been fighting the same thing you should be fighting. There's a reason large corporations hate labor unions, even when they're not out of control. And it's because they prevent them from doing what's been done to you.
Is it really so crazy to think that we should all have that level of purchasing power? It happened in this country once before didn't it? Why couldn't it happen again? Is the world really so different? Oh, that's right, it's because we have to compete globally or some other excuse used to placate the masses while their purchasing power is further eroded.
Do you know what this country really needs right now? Inflation. Wage inflation specifically.
additionally, no one can afford to manufacture anything here anymore because of union mandated salary levels, so everything is now done in chinese sweatshops. a committed anti-corporatist would respond it is the corporatists who drive jobs out of the country, not the unions. to which i would respond that that is easy to say, until you actually have to buy the goods with the sticker shock attached to them just so a union member can have lavish benefits and upper middle class salaries well beyond yours
You're repeating the standard conservative (I hesitate to say republican these days) ideology. And it's not without merit. But I think everyone has it backwards. I don't think union workers are over-paid. I think the rest of us are under-paid. When a government official says that inflation is low and that it's a good thing, they mean wage inflation. Wages have been stagnant here for more than a decade. Maybe, just maybe, the unions have it right. The difference is that they have had the power to prevent the wage stagnation for their members that the rest of us have been powerless to stop. And for that I blame the corporatists. So when you look at the cost of something made in america and feel sticker shock, maybe it's because you're not making enough, and the value of the dollar has been eroded.
You feel like you're making more than your parents and grand-parents did, because the absolute number is higher. But in terms of purchasing power, you're making much less. Those union workers we like to complain about are actually living the way our grandparents did. This is the real reason for your sticker shock. Do they deserve to live like us? Or do we deserve to live like them?
This is not correct...There are plenty of companies that want local in-house developers.
I think the OP is dead-on correct. The problem isn't that there are no entry-level jobs, it's that there are nowhere near enough entry-level jobs for the number of available developers here in the US. This situation was created artificially with the H1b visa program and outsourcing. This has a huge downward pressure on salaries. If you push the salary for an entry-level developer low enough, no one* will pursue those degrees for the same reason people aren't going into science. It's human nature to use your abilities to make the best life you can make for yourself. Translation: people chase money.
If the obvious happens and there really is a shortage of people getting CS degrees because it's not worth the $100k in student loan debt anymore, the lie will literally become truth. And they'll just allow in more H1s. End result: exactly what the OP said.
* No one who isn't a die-hard developer doing it for the love of software development. And those people truly are rare.
Autistic or Asperger-types would be treated like crooks simply because eye contact is too overwhelming for them.
It's worse than this. (I have AS) People tell me I look angry all the time when I'm not even close to angry. Then when I'm actually angry, people are completely blind-sided by it not being able in the slightest to tell that I was getting angry. A lot of people with AS have their facial expressions disconnected from their emotions. Some show the wrong emotions sometimes or all the time. Others never show anything at all and always look neutral. Some have a perpetual smile or frown.
I'm not sure if this means that they would always SPOT me, or never. Either way, I don't like it.
There is a second benefit to our rulers. The more "rich people" and "poor people" see each other as adversaries the more our politicians can play both sides against one another to entrench their power. It's classic divide-and-conquer.
I think you're almost right. It's more like this: The more white people and black people (or citizens vs illegals, or democrats vs republicans, etc) see each other as adversaries, the more our politicians continue can accept money from the rich, and divert our attention from the real problem, which is the transfer wealth from the poor to the rich and the subsequent enslavement of the poor.
That never happened. Christianity never learned anything, in fact they lost control as a result of not learning and adapting. They were thrown out of governments for good and lost the power to enforce their ways on the rest of us. Give Christianity back the power they had a in the dark ages and in a decade or two "peaceful" and "tolerant" Christians will be burning heathens on crosses in the name of their lord. If you have any doubts about that keep in mind how with the tiny bit of power left in hands of Vatican they systematically and on a global scale sexually abuse innocent children, silence the victims, protect the culprits and still consider themselves righteous. Then imagine what would happen if church had unlimited powers
There's so many things wrong with this I don't know where to begin. First of all, Protestants don't have anything to do with the vatican. We had just as much trouble with them as everyone else. This was the whole reason for the protestant reformation. Are there any and have there ever been any protestant theocracies? I can't think of any.
In spite of all of the problems the catholic church has had, you can't blame the sexual abuse on their power. The cover-up was obviously enabled by their power. But it's silly to argue that all these priests are running around molesting children because the church empowers them to do these things. I would argue that the molestations are caused by two things. First, not allowing priests to marry, I think, makes them a bit loopy. Second, iirc, the catholic church used to encourage people who had deviant urges to become priests. The idea for this was that a life of celibacy was preferable to molesting children or being in a homosexual relationship. Of course, if the priests act on those urges, the end result is far worse for everyone else.
Next, why do you believe that christians today are exactly the same as christians from 200 or 300 years ago? Hasn't everyone changed over time? Something like ergot poisoning might look like demon possession to someone from 300 years ago, christian or not. BUt today, sensibilities are different. It's ridiculous to look at the behavior of christians from 100s of years ago and claim that christians today would act exactly the same way today if we just give them the slightest chance. If this were true, why aren't we burning people at the stake now? We don't need control of the government for that. How about blowing up abortion clinics? A few have been blown up, but why not 100s or 1000s? What I see with those is mostly peaceful protest, something that's supposed to be allowed.
The reason there are relatively few terrorist Christian militias or individual Christianterrorists is fear of harsh repercussions, specifically prosecution by the state.
Believe me, if something were to happen that made christians feel like we had to respond in a military or self-defensive fashion, none of us would fear the government in the slightest. History is full of christians standing up to the government to defend their faith and going to their death for it. And there would be no shortage of similarly minded christians today.
Because there was a chance that it could make the situation worse. They were trying things first that if they went wrong would not make the problem worse.
I guess I'm a little more cynical than this. I assumed they were trying things that would cost them the least money first.
My grandfather was really "out there" as christians go. He forbade his kids (my father included) from saying words like "heck" or "darn" because when you say that, you mean the other word.
I think he was nuts. Profanity is something that's a part of the language. People are going to use it no matter how much you complain. So it's silly to get all upset about it. I've taught my kids not to abuse profanity (with varying degrees of success). Mainly because spewing profanity makes you look like an uneducated dolt.
But turning it into some huge no-no and making a big deal out of it only leads to kids wanting to use it more so they can be "bad". It's like the drinking age. If you stop people from drinking until they're 21, they do it anyway, and maybe go a little crazy on their 21st birthday. Remove the stigma of being "bad" and no one cares about it anymore.
I'm far more concerned with the nudity, violence, child-targeted advertising, mindless "culture", and raw stupidity. But I don't care what they put on tv. Almost none of it is worth watching anyway. So we simply don't have cable.
I have a simple solution for this. I don't have a facebook account. Maybe I'm old or something (39), but I just don't feel he need to use something like this to communicate with anyone. I have a myspace account I created to communicate with a certain hard-to-find person who used only that. I think I've checked 3 "emails" on that site. I have no profile to speak of and haven't logged on in months. I do have a linked-in account that I don't use also.
I don't think any of this has hurt me one bit. I heard on a (christian!) radio show the other day that you have to get on to the social network bandwagon if you want to be competitive in today's job market. How? Why does it matter? Who's going to see my facebook page and give me a job? To me it just seems like a complete waste of time at best, and something that can come back to haunt me at worst.
Lately, I've been calling it "bookface" mainly to irritate my teenage kids, but also to show my disdain for these things. Maybe I'll start calling it "facepalm".
How can I experience absence of God in Hell, since God created everything, including Satan and Hell?
(I'm a christian)
I've always heard it described as separation from the presence of God. I've also always heard it taught that this is the worst thing about Hell, worse than whatever punishments might be dolled out there. Notice that hell is also different from the lake of fire and the bottomless pit.
I'm not exactly sure (I think no one is) what all this means in a practical sense. I think we're either not meant to understand it, or incapable of understanding it. But I think that it's fair to assume that whatever imagery there is has been provided to us in a way that we can understand. There's more to the nature of God, Heaven, and Hell than what's been given to us in the Bible.
Victims my ass. Religionists started persecuting people as soon as they landed at Plymouth Rock. They couldn't wait to start burning women who looked funny at their husbands because they must be witches if they're not kissing their pious asses. You think for a minute that if they thought they could get away with it they wouldn't start putting homosexuals on a rotisserie? It's only because the secular members of society have drawn a few lines in the sand that they're not stoning women for adultery or having abortions and chopping off heads right here in the good old Christian USA.
Don't mistake the religion for the people. History is full of people from all over the planet practicing all sorts of religions doing horrible things to other people. This is the nature of humanity, not the nature of religion or christianity. If people did horrible things in the name of God, then the problem was with the people, not with God.
I'm a christian and have been to the church services of probably half a dozen different denominations and investigated others. I can assure you, no one, except for maybe some crazy fringe group, wants to burn witches or homosexuals at the stake. What's generally taught today is "hate the sin, not the sinner", although I agree that this often leads to christians (and muslims to be fair) being harsh on certain groups of people. In deed, if we're to save people from their sin and keep them out of hell, then it make sense to keep them here as long as possible to talk them out of it. It's hardly productive to kill them.
It's hardly sensible to write off christianity as a whole because some corrupt people used it to further their corrupt goals. If you want a car analogy, it's like refusing to ride in a car because someone somewhere once used it as a getaway car.
Slashdot Mirror
Educate them, give them the ability to make their own decision. I doubt that at age 4 and 6, either of them have that ability.
As a parent, you have a responsibility to impress upon your children at least some form of morality. That means imparting to them a set of beliefs and values that you have that may not be shared by other people.
I'm disturbed by this new trend that seems to promote the idea that it's not my right to raise my children in any way I see fit.
Make bon-bons. 50% peanut butter, 50% plaster of paris. It sets in their digestive tract and they starve to death. Works great. And some would say that they get the death they deserve.
My skin has grown thicker over the years. And as a result, I'm largely immune to the mosquitoes in the chicago area. Mosquitoes make three attempts to bite, then look for another victim if unsuccessful. So they simply aren't successful at biting me. But the opposite is true for my wife. Anyone who stands next to her will be temporarily immune to mosquitoes as they choose to bite her instead. We can go for a walk at night, she'll have a dozen bites. I'll have zero.
Maybe we should consider renting out my wife for outdoor parties... (not those kind of parties)
There does seem to be a cultural difference with this, and I think it comes down to the education system.
And THIS, everyone, is why you can't just look at wages when considering outsourcing. Western higher education stresses theory, problem solving, and learning how to learn. Eastern education is about memorization and regurgitation.
That's what we usually do here in Canada. Unless it gets really busy because inevitably someone in the "walking lane" will be a dick(or bitch lets not be gender exclusive here) stand still and back up the entire system which basically screws the whole line up for a while.
I live in chicago. I take a commuter train downtown every day and walk about a mile to the office. I made a decision a few years ago to never be in a hurry again. I don't care if I'm late. I don't care if I miss a train. I generally leave earlier and it fixes 99% of these problems anyway. But if I screw up and I'm late, I don't care. If that's all it takes to get me fired, I'm better off. I don't speed. I don't honk at people when they don't immediately go at a green light. And I stop and stand on escalators and movable walkways. (although I try to stay out of peoples way) Why? Because modern human life in cities sucks.
We're not meant to be constantly running from the lion all day. We're meant to chase our food for an hour or two, then spend the rest of our time around the fire with our friends and family.
One day soon, when I've had enough, and maybe when this rural outsourcing thing picks up some steam, I'm going to leave the city and move somewhere rural where I can get 10 acres and grow my own food, keep livestock. I'll work from home. I'll throw out my alarm clock. And I'll actually begin to enjoy life again.
Eat real food. Get real exercise. Slow your life down. Focus on your friends and family.
It is domestic conservative and religious organizations that are poisoning the American spirit and sapping the will to learn from the people.
I'm a Christian. Specifically, I'm a member of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. My grandfather was also a (southern) Baptist Minister. There may be specific fringe religious people out there expressing political views and trying to advance some agenda, but I'm certainly not. And I don't know any other Christian who is either. This includes church elders. They may be trying to protect their freedoms with regard to certain politically touchy subjects, like for example whether a 16 year old can get an abortion or contraceptives without parents hearing about it. But that's very different from claiming that they're sapping the will to learn from the people.
My kids are attending the private Christian school (K through 8) associated with my church. You may be shocked to hear that they're being taught about evolution in science class, and Christianity in religion class.
Christians are definitely against police-state tendencies and are pro-freedom. The last thing we want is the government coming down on Christian schools and churches.
bart > cat food
cat: cannot open food
It doesn't take a fundamentalist to claim that all of the Bible is the inspired word of God. I would claim that anyone who thinks that any part of it isn't the word of God isn't really a Christian.
Oh, please. Get over this nonsensical idea that there is such a thing as "the Bible's take" on any subject. Romans, Deuteronomy and Leviticus were written by different people with different agendas at different times to different audiences in different contexts.
Even most mainstream Christian scholars will tell you that.
Those same mainstream Christian scholars will also tell you that all of those works were inspired by the Holy Spirit, and therefore, all are the word of God.
I'm already above $20K, and not even through the list.
Due to our government's policies, the dollar has lost 50% of its value over the last decade or so. Since I'm making, on average, the same actual dollar amount for a bill rate that I was 10 years ago, if you do the math, my government and the bankers that control it have stolen around $500,000 from me in purchasing power. :-/
I'm not an anarchist. We definitely need some of the services a government provides. But I think on the whole, we're all getting the shaft.
it would be great if we all made $150K a year. now enunciate the real world plan in which that is possible
thought so
all you have is wish fulfillment fantasy, not valid social commentary
i actually consider myself quite liberal and have voted Democratic all my life. but when it comes to unions, i see only a bloated historical anachronism that does more harm than good
I agree that there are serious problems with unions these days. But we have a bigger problem. $150k a year sounds like a lot to you only because no one you know is making that much. What if everyone were making $150k a year? It wouldn't sound like that much to you. And people making $300k a year would be making a huge amount of money.
But forget about actual numbers. They're meaningless. What you should really be looking at is purchasing power. How many hours do you have to work to pay for dinner? Or for a car? Union workers making $150k a year have the same purchasing power your grandparents had in their normal jobs. But you've been shafted, shafted by large corporations who have siphoned off what used to be your purchasing power (standard of living) and redirected it into their pockets. In short, they got richer and you got poorer.
Labor unions, as dysfunctional as they are, have been fighting the same thing you should be fighting. There's a reason large corporations hate labor unions, even when they're not out of control. And it's because they prevent them from doing what's been done to you.
Is it really so crazy to think that we should all have that level of purchasing power? It happened in this country once before didn't it? Why couldn't it happen again? Is the world really so different? Oh, that's right, it's because we have to compete globally or some other excuse used to placate the masses while their purchasing power is further eroded.
Do you know what this country really needs right now? Inflation. Wage inflation specifically.
additionally, no one can afford to manufacture anything here anymore because of union mandated salary levels, so everything is now done in chinese sweatshops. a committed anti-corporatist would respond it is the corporatists who drive jobs out of the country, not the unions. to which i would respond that that is easy to say, until you actually have to buy the goods with the sticker shock attached to them just so a union member can have lavish benefits and upper middle class salaries well beyond yours
You're repeating the standard conservative (I hesitate to say republican these days) ideology. And it's not without merit. But I think everyone has it backwards. I don't think union workers are over-paid. I think the rest of us are under-paid. When a government official says that inflation is low and that it's a good thing, they mean wage inflation. Wages have been stagnant here for more than a decade. Maybe, just maybe, the unions have it right. The difference is that they have had the power to prevent the wage stagnation for their members that the rest of us have been powerless to stop. And for that I blame the corporatists. So when you look at the cost of something made in america and feel sticker shock, maybe it's because you're not making enough, and the value of the dollar has been eroded.
You feel like you're making more than your parents and grand-parents did, because the absolute number is higher. But in terms of purchasing power, you're making much less. Those union workers we like to complain about are actually living the way our grandparents did. This is the real reason for your sticker shock. Do they deserve to live like us? Or do we deserve to live like them?
This is not correct...There are plenty of companies that want local in-house developers.
I think the OP is dead-on correct. The problem isn't that there are no entry-level jobs, it's that there are nowhere near enough entry-level jobs for the number of available developers here in the US. This situation was created artificially with the H1b visa program and outsourcing. This has a huge downward pressure on salaries. If you push the salary for an entry-level developer low enough, no one* will pursue those degrees for the same reason people aren't going into science. It's human nature to use your abilities to make the best life you can make for yourself. Translation: people chase money.
If the obvious happens and there really is a shortage of people getting CS degrees because it's not worth the $100k in student loan debt anymore, the lie will literally become truth. And they'll just allow in more H1s. End result: exactly what the OP said.
* No one who isn't a die-hard developer doing it for the love of software development. And those people truly are rare.
Autistic or Asperger-types would be treated like crooks simply because eye contact is too overwhelming for them.
It's worse than this. (I have AS) People tell me I look angry all the time when I'm not even close to angry. Then when I'm actually angry, people are completely blind-sided by it not being able in the slightest to tell that I was getting angry. A lot of people with AS have their facial expressions disconnected from their emotions. Some show the wrong emotions sometimes or all the time. Others never show anything at all and always look neutral. Some have a perpetual smile or frown.
I'm not sure if this means that they would always SPOT me, or never. Either way, I don't like it.
There is a second benefit to our rulers. The more "rich people" and "poor people" see each other as adversaries the more our politicians can play both sides against one another to entrench their power. It's classic divide-and-conquer.
I think you're almost right. It's more like this: The more white people and black people (or citizens vs illegals, or democrats vs republicans, etc) see each other as adversaries, the more our politicians continue can accept money from the rich, and divert our attention from the real problem, which is the transfer wealth from the poor to the rich and the subsequent enslavement of the poor.
(I'm a christian)
That never happened. Christianity never learned anything, in fact they lost control as a result of not learning and adapting. They were thrown out of governments for good and lost the power to enforce their ways on the rest of us. Give Christianity back the power they had a in the dark ages and in a decade or two "peaceful" and "tolerant" Christians will be burning heathens on crosses in the name of their lord. If you have any doubts about that keep in mind how with the tiny bit of power left in hands of Vatican they systematically and on a global scale sexually abuse innocent children, silence the victims, protect the culprits and still consider themselves righteous. Then imagine what would happen if church had unlimited powers
There's so many things wrong with this I don't know where to begin. First of all, Protestants don't have anything to do with the vatican. We had just as much trouble with them as everyone else. This was the whole reason for the protestant reformation. Are there any and have there ever been any protestant theocracies? I can't think of any.
In spite of all of the problems the catholic church has had, you can't blame the sexual abuse on their power. The cover-up was obviously enabled by their power. But it's silly to argue that all these priests are running around molesting children because the church empowers them to do these things. I would argue that the molestations are caused by two things. First, not allowing priests to marry, I think, makes them a bit loopy. Second, iirc, the catholic church used to encourage people who had deviant urges to become priests. The idea for this was that a life of celibacy was preferable to molesting children or being in a homosexual relationship. Of course, if the priests act on those urges, the end result is far worse for everyone else.
Next, why do you believe that christians today are exactly the same as christians from 200 or 300 years ago? Hasn't everyone changed over time? Something like ergot poisoning might look like demon possession to someone from 300 years ago, christian or not. BUt today, sensibilities are different. It's ridiculous to look at the behavior of christians from 100s of years ago and claim that christians today would act exactly the same way today if we just give them the slightest chance. If this were true, why aren't we burning people at the stake now? We don't need control of the government for that. How about blowing up abortion clinics? A few have been blown up, but why not 100s or 1000s? What I see with those is mostly peaceful protest, something that's supposed to be allowed.
The reason there are relatively few terrorist Christian militias or individual Christian terrorists is fear of harsh repercussions, specifically prosecution by the state.
Believe me, if something were to happen that made christians feel like we had to respond in a military or self-defensive fashion, none of us would fear the government in the slightest. History is full of christians standing up to the government to defend their faith and going to their death for it. And there would be no shortage of similarly minded christians today.
Because there was a chance that it could make the situation worse. They were trying things first that if they went wrong would not make the problem worse.
I guess I'm a little more cynical than this. I assumed they were trying things that would cost them the least money first.
Heaven forbid you imply a naughty word.
(disclaimer: i'm a christian)
My grandfather was really "out there" as christians go. He forbade his kids (my father included) from saying words like "heck" or "darn" because when you say that, you mean the other word.
I think he was nuts. Profanity is something that's a part of the language. People are going to use it no matter how much you complain. So it's silly to get all upset about it. I've taught my kids not to abuse profanity (with varying degrees of success). Mainly because spewing profanity makes you look like an uneducated dolt.
But turning it into some huge no-no and making a big deal out of it only leads to kids wanting to use it more so they can be "bad". It's like the drinking age. If you stop people from drinking until they're 21, they do it anyway, and maybe go a little crazy on their 21st birthday. Remove the stigma of being "bad" and no one cares about it anymore.
I'm far more concerned with the nudity, violence, child-targeted advertising, mindless "culture", and raw stupidity. But I don't care what they put on tv. Almost none of it is worth watching anyway. So we simply don't have cable.
I have a simple solution for this. I don't have a facebook account. Maybe I'm old or something (39), but I just don't feel he need to use something like this to communicate with anyone. I have a myspace account I created to communicate with a certain hard-to-find person who used only that. I think I've checked 3 "emails" on that site. I have no profile to speak of and haven't logged on in months. I do have a linked-in account that I don't use also.
I don't think any of this has hurt me one bit. I heard on a (christian!) radio show the other day that you have to get on to the social network bandwagon if you want to be competitive in today's job market. How? Why does it matter? Who's going to see my facebook page and give me a job? To me it just seems like a complete waste of time at best, and something that can come back to haunt me at worst.
Lately, I've been calling it "bookface" mainly to irritate my teenage kids, but also to show my disdain for these things. Maybe I'll start calling it "facepalm".
Laser chopsticks suck. They keep cooking your sushi before you can get it to your mouth.
How can I experience absence of God in Hell, since God created everything, including Satan and Hell?
(I'm a christian)
I've always heard it described as separation from the presence of God. I've also always heard it taught that this is the worst thing about Hell, worse than whatever punishments might be dolled out there. Notice that hell is also different from the lake of fire and the bottomless pit.
I'm not exactly sure (I think no one is) what all this means in a practical sense. I think we're either not meant to understand it, or incapable of understanding it. But I think that it's fair to assume that whatever imagery there is has been provided to us in a way that we can understand. There's more to the nature of God, Heaven, and Hell than what's been given to us in the Bible.
I don't know how you quit from emacs.
kill -9 from another shell window.
Victims my ass. Religionists started persecuting people as soon as they landed at Plymouth Rock. They couldn't wait to start burning women who looked funny at their husbands because they must be witches if they're not kissing their pious asses. You think for a minute that if they thought they could get away with it they wouldn't start putting homosexuals on a rotisserie? It's only because the secular members of society have drawn a few lines in the sand that they're not stoning women for adultery or having abortions and chopping off heads right here in the good old Christian USA.
Don't mistake the religion for the people. History is full of people from all over the planet practicing all sorts of religions doing horrible things to other people. This is the nature of humanity, not the nature of religion or christianity. If people did horrible things in the name of God, then the problem was with the people, not with God.
I'm a christian and have been to the church services of probably half a dozen different denominations and investigated others. I can assure you, no one, except for maybe some crazy fringe group, wants to burn witches or homosexuals at the stake. What's generally taught today is "hate the sin, not the sinner", although I agree that this often leads to christians (and muslims to be fair) being harsh on certain groups of people. In deed, if we're to save people from their sin and keep them out of hell, then it make sense to keep them here as long as possible to talk them out of it. It's hardly productive to kill them.
It's hardly sensible to write off christianity as a whole because some corrupt people used it to further their corrupt goals. If you want a car analogy, it's like refusing to ride in a car because someone somewhere once used it as a getaway car.
And this is different from any other Phone, or indeed software of any kind because..?
Asking a question by putting the first half of the answer in someone else's mouth is annoying because...
Seriously, this is rude and makes you sound like an arrogant ass. Please stop it.
I was thinking Mirelurks! Make sure you shoot them in the face.