Disclaimer: I am a Secular Humanist and so do not belive in God/god/gods.
That said, and arguing this point based on your comments alone (and ignoring my stated bias), would it not be possible for God to exist as a collection of individual beliefs? I think you have missed an option in your "Aquinas" argument. Just because "our own God dies with us" does not mean that there is no God, merely that God may exist within us all, individually in part, but as a whole as a sum of our individual manifestations.
Think of it as your belief (in God), as being a single cell of a larger organism. Cells die, cells are born/created. Just because one cell dies does not mean the whole being dies. Without belief, God is nothing (and so promptly vanishes in a puff of logic).
This is merely a thought experiement, and I'm still on my first coffee of the morning:)
is like expecting that declaring your city a "nuclear free zone" (and I've seen the signs at some cities' limits) will protect it in case of nuclear attack.
You have no idea why cities declared themselves "nuclear free zones", do you? So why use that argument if you have no idea what you are talking about?
I suggest you go off and read up on why cities (and countries) declare themselves to be "nuclear free zones".
And using this model, what if really talentless "artists" were given a lifestyle way beyond 99% of talented artists? Look at the top 40 today and tell me that they're all talented artists deserving of fame and fortune.
Nothing really to do with your comment, but it's a misconception that due to "illegal downloading" there are artists losing enough cash to notice a change in their lifestyle. Get big enough to worry about "illegal downloading" becoming a threat to your livelihood, and your main source of income is going to be marketing goods and tours (you know, when you have to continue to WORK for a living?)
IME the best oven/stove comes with gas burners for the pots and pans, and an electric convection oven.
If you have more interest in cooking than simply "Must. Eat. Something..." then you'll appreciate that having to wipe the occasional spill is a good price to pay for the flexibility of a gas burner. My wife is a semi-professional cook and much prefers gas to electic for pots and pans - but hates gas for the oven.
As with most things, it's down to the way you use the tools. Stoves often need hands on control minute by minute, whereas ovens need to be exactly the same temperature for longer periods of time.
Also, having lived in all-electric houses myself, if there's no hot water in the tank, you're SOL. With an instant gas heater though, that hot shower is always available:)
That's dealt with by determining such votes as "spoiled". Spoiled votes can be checked independently by all parties concerned, and if no determiniation can be made either way, then they remain "spoiled".
Some voters like to spoil their ballots by marking more than one box when only one box should be marked. That's a spoiled ballot right there. Doesn't count either way. (Why would they do this? Who knows. People are strange.)
Getting real people to count the paper votes by hand is quicker, cheaper and more democratic. It removes the possibility of error-by-computer. Yeah of course people make mistakes too, but you'd get that in a computer counted election IN ADDITION TO potential computer errors.
If you're dead set on making sure that a vote cast is a valid vote, then put vote checking machines in the booths, not vote counting machines. Leave the counting to real people, but I have no problem with a simple scanner that verifies whether a voter produced a "non-spoiled" vote. Maybe like:
Bob T. Voter: Is this vote valid? (pushes completed ballot paper under laser scanner) Scanner: BZZZT - yes, I can tell that your cross is within a box and that only one box has a cross. I did not record which box was crossed. BZZZT.
And the verifier need not be mandatory to allow for a citizen's right to spoil their own ballot paper.
I'm thinking of the IFPI vs Tele2 case in which the court decided that Tele2 should block access to the AllOfMp3 site.
I'm not familiar with the case, but wouldn't the court have decided that Tele2 could block access to the AllOfMp3 site, rather than should block access?
So here's an idea - why not torrent some global news services? If the Chinese people can download torrents, they have access to (relatively) uncensored news.
I say "relatively" as news programs are generally biased in some way, but it's a start, eh?
Those at the bottom of the list certainly do "have some interesting things to say", but you can't read their press. That's the point. They are not allowed to report on those interesting items. If you read their press all you get is "chocolate rations no longer to be reduced to twenty grammes!" or "we are winning the war on terror!"
Those at the top of the list are allowed to report more than anyone else. That sounds like something to be proud of. "Government does something suspect - we investigate" or "there's a scandal involving underhand payments made by the government to PR executives". That sort of reporting could lead to the voters actually thinking about whether to re-elect an incumbent government. Or do you think that's nothing to be proud of?
It must be odd to live in your world, where you make it sound like being threatened is a good thing.
And way to go with your moose/polar bear stereotype. That speaks volumes about your ability to embrace any "interesting things to say" another nation's media might have.
Slashdot Mirror
Whoa! I didn't expect that.
Disclaimer: I am a Secular Humanist and so do not belive in God/god/gods.
:)
That said, and arguing this point based on your comments alone (and ignoring my stated bias), would it not be possible for God to exist as a collection of individual beliefs? I think you have missed an option in your "Aquinas" argument. Just because "our own God dies with us" does not mean that there is no God, merely that God may exist within us all, individually in part, but as a whole as a sum of our individual manifestations.
Think of it as your belief (in God), as being a single cell of a larger organism. Cells die, cells are born/created. Just because one cell dies does not mean the whole being dies. Without belief, God is nothing (and so promptly vanishes in a puff of logic).
This is merely a thought experiement, and I'm still on my first coffee of the morning
And reading from a book = bad,
yet reading from a screen = good?
I never had a problem, then again I have been known to navigate in road rallys.
is like expecting that declaring your city a "nuclear free zone" (and I've seen the signs at some cities' limits) will protect it in case of nuclear attack.
You have no idea why cities declared themselves "nuclear free zones", do you? So why use that argument if you have no idea what you are talking about?
I suggest you go off and read up on why cities (and countries) declare themselves to be "nuclear free zones".
The first rule of + is that you do not talk about +
The root of the problem isn't that the politicians are stupid.
The main problem is that stupid people get voted into positions of power.
Blame the lazy electorate.
Your search - a product or service that doesn't compete with Google Enterprises - did not match any documents.
Suggestions:
Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
Try different keywords.
Try more general keywords.
Try fewer keywords.
But why on Earth (no pun intended) would we want to go to the moon?
...
Now, missions like Hubble I understand and support.
So ya wanna look into the cheerleader's bedroom window, but ya don't wanna get into the cheerleader's bedroom.
Back to the basement with you, nerd boy!
2 steps?
Um, less talented musicians?
And using this model, what if really talentless "artists" were given a lifestyle way beyond 99% of talented artists? Look at the top 40 today and tell me that they're all talented artists deserving of fame and fortune.
Nothing really to do with your comment, but it's a misconception that due to "illegal downloading" there are artists losing enough cash to notice a change in their lifestyle. Get big enough to worry about "illegal downloading" becoming a threat to your livelihood, and your main source of income is going to be marketing goods and tours (you know, when you have to continue to WORK for a living?)
IME the best oven/stove comes with gas burners for the pots and pans, and an electric convection oven.
..." then you'll appreciate that having to wipe the occasional spill is a good price to pay for the flexibility of a gas burner. My wife is a semi-professional cook and much prefers gas to electic for pots and pans - but hates gas for the oven.
:)
If you have more interest in cooking than simply "Must. Eat. Something
As with most things, it's down to the way you use the tools. Stoves often need hands on control minute by minute, whereas ovens need to be exactly the same temperature for longer periods of time.
Also, having lived in all-electric houses myself, if there's no hot water in the tank, you're SOL. With an instant gas heater though, that hot shower is always available
"Don't eat the sushi".
Fair enough. Consider me warned.
Apparently in the past six months the number of Steve Scherfs has increased three-fold.
That's dealt with by determining such votes as "spoiled". Spoiled votes can be checked independently by all parties concerned, and if no determiniation can be made either way, then they remain "spoiled".
Some voters like to spoil their ballots by marking more than one box when only one box should be marked. That's a spoiled ballot right there. Doesn't count either way. (Why would they do this? Who knows. People are strange.)
Getting real people to count the paper votes by hand is quicker, cheaper and more democratic. It removes the possibility of error-by-computer. Yeah of course people make mistakes too, but you'd get that in a computer counted election IN ADDITION TO potential computer errors.
If you're dead set on making sure that a vote cast is a valid vote, then put vote checking machines in the booths, not vote counting machines. Leave the counting to real people, but I have no problem with a simple scanner that verifies whether a voter produced a "non-spoiled" vote. Maybe like:
Bob T. Voter: Is this vote valid? (pushes completed ballot paper under laser scanner)
Scanner: BZZZT - yes, I can tell that your cross is within a box and that only one box has a cross. I did not record which box was crossed. BZZZT.
And the verifier need not be mandatory to allow for a citizen's right to spoil their own ballot paper.
In the red tape jungle of big business, you're more likely to get nothing from the bean counter, no money, no email.
Best way to CYA is to email your boss and ask that they contact the bean counter's boss.
If you can't pass the hot potato sideways, pass it upwards.
Honestly, what qualifies a newspaper cartoonist to advocate the political candidacy ...
You need qualifications to do that in the US?
Side note... nowhere in the Constitution are the words "God" or "Christ" or any equivalent word used. Nowhere.
Except at the end when the year is referred to as "the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven".
Who owns the copyright on the new Beatles album, "Love"? When does the copyright on that expire?
It's double glazed.
I'm thinking of the IFPI vs Tele2 case in which the court decided that Tele2 should block access to the AllOfMp3 site.
I'm not familiar with the case, but wouldn't the court have decided that Tele2 could block access to the AllOfMp3 site, rather than should block access?
So here's an idea - why not torrent some global news services? If the Chinese people can download torrents, they have access to (relatively) uncensored news.
I say "relatively" as news programs are generally biased in some way, but it's a start, eh?
No no no! For voting machines it's:
Dem Dem Dem, Rep, Dem, Rep, Independent, Rep, Dem, Rep.
Broken Record
Dude, what's one of those? Is it like a tape or something?
I'm really bothered by people who cry wolf by making outrageous, false claims
Mission Accomplished!
We found the weapons of mass destruction!
Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction!
We do not torture!
You don't understand this at all, do you?
Those at the bottom of the list certainly do "have some interesting things to say", but you can't read their press. That's the point. They are not allowed to report on those interesting items. If you read their press all you get is "chocolate rations no longer to be reduced to twenty grammes!" or "we are winning the war on terror!"
Those at the top of the list are allowed to report more than anyone else. That sounds like something to be proud of. "Government does something suspect - we investigate" or "there's a scandal involving underhand payments made by the government to PR executives". That sort of reporting could lead to the voters actually thinking about whether to re-elect an incumbent government. Or do you think that's nothing to be proud of?
It must be odd to live in your world, where you make it sound like being threatened is a good thing.
And way to go with your moose/polar bear stereotype. That speaks volumes about your ability to embrace any "interesting things to say" another nation's media might have.