Umm if total energy of output is less than total energy of input then it is hardly perpetual motion.
If the thing gets a total of say 100 units of energy in unusable chicken-shit, and then converts it into 60 units of usable oil then it is quite possible that the extra 40 units power the process.
A perfect example is the create of "courriel" instead of just incorporating "email" in the language. Email is totally foreign to French in origin, and in ethymology is so far from everything known that they decided not to use it. Instead they combined "courrier"(mail) and "electronique" to create the corresponding word.
So what you are saying is France combined "mail" and "electronic" to make the oh so glorious courriel instead of the backwards American way of combining "electronic" and "mail" to make the horrible "e-mail".
Not to mention what happened to my computer when I put a defective usb flash drive in.
Drive got real hot and now my computer thinks I have 4 usb hard drives installed permanently. (One for each slot) It seems the id number for that drive was burned onto my usb ports.
Frankly I agree with you. Education in the South (at least in my state) is failing fast. I was lucky in that I went to a private school instead of the underfunded and overmanaged public system. (By overmanaged I'm refering to the Board of Education who all bought new cars two years ago out of the school system's money.) Alabama needs a huge boot to the ass on pretty much every political front.
Too many of the people in government claim to be Christians and are given a blank check by misled churches to do whatever they say is the moral issue d'jour. These people are the pharisees and false prophets that the Bible speaks of. They lead far many people astray. These are the people who support the DoMA, and think that issues of faith should be set into secular law. The laws of God will be enforced by God when he returns. It is not a Christian's place to judge the unbelievers.
I went off on a tangent there. I apologize. I feel strongly about that though.
Some good points, but mostly irrelivant to my point of Christians not accepting people actively engaging in homosexual activity in the church.
As for IMAO I can only say "Its funny. Laugh!" It pokes fun at the stereotypes of both political parties. The best stuff is in the In my world section which paints George Bush as a blundering moron, Rumsfeld as a war hungry serial killer, and Howard Dean as a Hulk like rage fueled force of destruction among other things. Or read his essay on why we should nuke the moonIts a good read I recommend it. Political satire at its best.
So long as they continue to indulge their desires you can not help them. What do you expect people to do? Duct tape a taser to them to shock them when they get near another guy?
You can't help them until they are ready to accept your help. When they reject your help there is nothing you can do for them other that tell them that they have somewhere to go when they are willing to accept your help.
A number of good points. I wish it was possible to have some studies done without people on both sides shouting at each other. From the statistics I've seen homosexual men make up from 65 to 80 percent of HIV cases in the US depending on where you get your data. Now I'll admit that corrolation does not equal causation, but from a purely rational point of view it is a risky behavior (or at least an indication of other risky behaviors)
As to them going back in the closet no I don't want them to go back in the closet. I want them to stop. I know it isn't going to happen while this world exists though. I do love the GBLT people. They are made in God's image just as I am. They are fallen just as I am.
I do not however support their actions. I will not do anything to stop them because it is not my place to judge them. I believe that when the time comes that they will be judged by God. I do not want them to suffer so I speak out to them to change. Other than that I do nothing against them.
However if they claim to follow my relgion, and join my church then it is my place to judge whether they are willing to accept the restrictions that my church places on its members. This is not discrimination. It is a set of restrictions placed on everyone who wants to be in my church. If you want to play baseball you must agree that if you miss the ball three times you strike out. If you want to be a member my church you can not continue to commit homosexuality (Or in the "MSMs" case adultry and homosexuality, same rules for both BTW).
You seem to think my personal decision to follow my faith's teachings is less valid than your decision to choose your mate. That seems to me to be a bit hypocritical.
As for God not hating. Through our actions we left him. He hates the sins that we commit even though he loves us. Notice that my post said "Things god hates" and followed with actions, not the people who do those actions.
In any case I appreciate you debating me without resorting to blatant attacks on my beliefs as one of your post siblings did. I personally do hope you become a believer, and stop your sinful ways, but that is just my general world-view. I'm not going to preach at you however. You have chosen a dangerous path so be careful out there.
And here is an article focusing on the reasons for the high divorce rate in the Bible belt. Spoiler: Red States are under-educated.
Thats a bit of a troll and it isn't even held up by the link. It mentions low incomes and Protestants that don't estrange divorced people, but nothing about lack of education.
I admit the "nuclear family" thing was a bit vague. I had to run off to work. I'll clarify what I meant.
I was taking the nuclear family to be a mother, a father, and siblings. This may or may not extend over multiple generations and expand into Aunts, Uncles, ect.
By stable I was refering to its capacity to produce well adjusted offspring. The fact that the number of these families is decreasing only reinforces my arguement. (Note that I do not place sole blame on homosexuality for the breakdown of the family. It's merely another symptom of it.)
I'll admit that there is not much study invested in the children of homosexual parents. (Quite possibly because the various special interest groups would crush any such study no matter which side it came out in favor of.) However the fact remains that homosexuals are naturally non-reproductive couplings.
Other then that the only thing I can argue is that while being raised by homosexual parents may be better for children than say, being raised in a government run orphanage, it is definatly not as good as the traditional stable family model. (Which is sadly becoming more and more of a rare thing.)
As for your other point. In my post I at no time attacked any group of people. I mentioned a homosexual in the abstract for an example of how my religion instructs me to deal with one. I'm sorry if it seemed as an attack to you. However it is quite statistically correct.
Jesus hung out with the worst of the worst *unbelievers*. They are unbelievers and so are not expected to behave as Christians should.
Yes the church should love and help others, but they should not support them in their sin. If you know someone is addicted to drugs you are not helping them by driving them over to their dealer.
Homosexuality is a choice. People can say "I was born this way" all they want, but that doesn't change the fact that they choose to indulge their desires. Christianity is about acting in a way contrary to your fallen nature and setting yourself apart from things that would lead you away from God.
If the person was to come to you honestly seeking help overcoming their sin then that is a completely different story. Then you can help them because they have made the commitment to change.
Otherwise you are just hurting the church as a whole as well as the individual. I know this from personal experience. My church fell into the trap of universal acceptance until it was torn apart by the internal strife caused by the people we knew only professed to be Christians for the benefits the church provided.
You just can't be a member of a church that views that as a sin.
By the teachings of the Bible the only judgement a Christian should give is expulsion from the church. (After a few attempts to get the person to mend their ways.) Many tend to forget this.
My position is if a homosexual does not profess to be a believer then there is no reason for me to say anything to him about it. If someone professes to be a Christian, and a homosexual then I am to have nothing to do with him until such time as he repents.
My personal view of sin is that it comes in two forms. 1. The things God hates 2. Things that are harmful to you
The only things that I see that fall under the first category are Blasphemy, Idolatry, and doing harm to others.
Homosexuality falls under the second category. It disrupts the nuclear family which is proven as the most stable arrangement for raising children. Also it is a prime vector of disease spread. Seventy five percent of the spread of AIDS is caused by ten percent of the the population who have sex with multible partners. A large portion of that ten percent are homosexuals.
Yes because its impossible to play a video game without looking at the controller.
When you first start playing you have this instinct to jerk the controller from side to side as you play because you are trying to move the sprite on screen.
After a while you move it completely by hitting the correct buttons. If you play it enough you don't even have to think of the keystrokes, you can just imagine the move in your head and your hands will hit the right keys.
This wouldn't be much different except that you wouldn't have to actually move your fingers.
First you map the movement of the mechanical hand to your own hand movements. After awhile you focus on not moving your own hand when the mechanical one moves. Pretty soon you can move each of them seperately.
I went through this very process learning to cross and uncross my eyes when I went to therapy for my lazy eye when I was a kid.
In my day humanoid robots had to lift their legs uphill in the now both ways. That is if you had legs. My best friend got along fine with a set of wheels.
These modern robots and their "gravity assisted walking". How Dreadful.
The Fed does tons of research on banks before they approve them. If they don't like the structure of your charter or if you don't do enough business they will simply deny you out of hand.
Slashdot Mirror
If not they would probally have to use their shit wiping hand. (Yes Islam specifies how you wipe your ass. And people say the Bible is strange.)
Umm if total energy of output is less than total energy of input then it is hardly perpetual motion.
If the thing gets a total of say 100 units of energy in unusable chicken-shit, and then converts it into 60 units of usable oil then it is quite possible that the extra 40 units power the process.
In Soviet Russia History writes old people.
OMG Dud! Lyten up! Eye Speil prefeclly phyn!
So what you are saying is France combined "mail" and "electronic" to make the oh so glorious courriel instead of the backwards American way of combining "electronic" and "mail" to make the horrible "e-mail".
American english and English english were actually divided on purpose by Webster. (possibly so he could make money on dictionary sales)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_English#Dif
Not to mention what happened to my computer when I put a defective usb flash drive in.
Drive got real hot and now my computer thinks I have 4 usb hard drives installed permanently. (One for each slot) It seems the id number for that drive was burned onto my usb ports.
Ah good.
Frankly I agree with you. Education in the South (at least in my state) is failing fast. I was lucky in that I went to a private school instead of the underfunded and overmanaged public system. (By overmanaged I'm refering to the Board of Education who all bought new cars two years ago out of the school system's money.) Alabama needs a huge boot to the ass on pretty much every political front.
Too many of the people in government claim to be Christians and are given a blank check by misled churches to do whatever they say is the moral issue d'jour. These people are the pharisees and false prophets that the Bible speaks of. They lead far many people astray. These are the people who support the DoMA, and think that issues of faith should be set into secular law. The laws of God will be enforced by God when he returns. It is not a Christian's place to judge the unbelievers.
I went off on a tangent there. I apologize. I feel strongly about that though.
Some good points, but mostly irrelivant to my point of Christians not accepting people actively engaging in homosexual activity in the church.
As for IMAO I can only say "Its funny. Laugh!"
It pokes fun at the stereotypes of both political parties.
The best stuff is in the In my world section which paints George Bush as a blundering moron, Rumsfeld as a war hungry serial killer, and Howard Dean as a Hulk like rage fueled force of destruction among other things. Or read his essay on why we should nuke the moonIts a good read I recommend it. Political satire at its best.
Which I pointed out in my first post.
So long as they continue to indulge their desires you can not help them. What do you expect people to do? Duct tape a taser to them to shock them when they get near another guy?
You can't help them until they are ready to accept your help. When they reject your help there is nothing you can do for them other that tell them that they have somewhere to go when they are willing to accept your help.
In search engines accuracy is rewarded. (Discounting of course the whole sponsered link situation)
In political research supporting the people who hired you's position is rewarded.
A number of good points. I wish it was possible to have some studies done without people on both sides shouting at each other. From the statistics I've seen homosexual men make up from 65 to 80 percent of HIV cases in the US depending on where you get your data. Now I'll admit that corrolation does not equal causation, but from a purely rational point of view it is a risky behavior (or at least an indication of other risky behaviors)
As to them going back in the closet no I don't want them to go back in the closet. I want them to stop. I know it isn't going to happen while this world exists though. I do love the GBLT people. They are made in God's image just as I am. They are fallen just as I am.
I do not however support their actions. I will not do anything to stop them because it is not my place to judge them. I believe that when the time comes that they will be judged by God. I do not want them to suffer so I speak out to them to change. Other than that I do nothing against them.
However if they claim to follow my relgion, and join my church then it is my place to judge whether they are willing to accept the restrictions that my church places on its members. This is not discrimination. It is a set of restrictions placed on everyone who wants to be in my church. If you want to play baseball you must agree that if you miss the ball three times you strike out. If you want to be a member my church you can not continue to commit homosexuality (Or in the "MSMs" case adultry and homosexuality, same rules for both BTW).
You seem to think my personal decision to follow my faith's teachings is less valid than your decision to choose your mate. That seems to me to be a bit hypocritical.
As for God not hating. Through our actions we left him. He hates the sins that we commit even though he loves us. Notice that my post said "Things god hates" and followed with actions, not the people who do those actions.
In any case I appreciate you debating me without resorting to blatant attacks on my beliefs as one of your post siblings did. I personally do hope you become a believer, and stop your sinful ways, but that is just my general world-view. I'm not going to preach at you however. You have chosen a dangerous path so be careful out there.
Thats a bit of a troll and it isn't even held up by the link. It mentions low incomes and Protestants that don't estrange divorced people, but nothing about lack of education.
Did you link the wrong article?
I admit the "nuclear family" thing was a bit vague. I had to run off to work. I'll clarify what I meant.
I was taking the nuclear family to be a mother, a father, and siblings. This may or may not extend over multiple generations and expand into Aunts, Uncles, ect.
By stable I was refering to its capacity to produce well adjusted offspring. The fact that the number of these families is decreasing only reinforces my arguement. (Note that I do not place sole blame on homosexuality for the breakdown of the family. It's merely another symptom of it.)
I'll admit that there is not much study invested in the children of homosexual parents. (Quite possibly because the various special interest groups would crush any such study no matter which side it came out in favor of.) However the fact remains that homosexuals are naturally non-reproductive couplings.
. asp?Idnr=207
Other then that the only thing I can argue is that while being raised by homosexual parents may be better for children than say, being raised in a government run orphanage, it is definatly not as good as the traditional stable family model. (Which is sadly becoming more and more of a rare thing.)
As for your other point. In my post I at no time attacked any group of people. I mentioned a homosexual in the abstract for an example of how my religion instructs me to deal with one. I'm sorry if it seemed as an attack to you. However it is quite statistically correct.
http://www.homosexuellt.com/infosida/show_article
http://aids.about.com/blUS3.htm
Jesus hung out with the worst of the worst *unbelievers*. They are unbelievers and so are not expected to behave as Christians should.
Yes the church should love and help others, but they should not support them in their sin. If you know someone is addicted to drugs you are not helping them by driving them over to their dealer.
Homosexuality is a choice. People can say "I was born this way" all they want, but that doesn't change the fact that they choose to indulge their desires. Christianity is about acting in a way contrary to your fallen nature and setting yourself apart from things that would lead you away from God.
If the person was to come to you honestly seeking help overcoming their sin then that is a completely different story. Then you can help them because they have made the commitment to change.
Otherwise you are just hurting the church as a whole as well as the individual. I know this from personal experience. My church fell into the trap of universal acceptance until it was torn apart by
the internal strife caused by the people we knew only professed to be Christians for the benefits the church provided.
You can be a Christian and a Homosexual.
You just can't be a member of a church that views that as a sin.
By the teachings of the Bible the only judgement a Christian should give is expulsion from the church. (After a few attempts to get the person to mend their ways.) Many tend to forget this.
My position is if a homosexual does not profess to be a believer then there is no reason for me to say anything to him about it. If someone professes to be a Christian, and a homosexual then I am to have nothing to do with him until such time as he repents.
My personal view of sin is that it comes in two forms.
1. The things God hates
2. Things that are harmful to you
The only things that I see that fall under the first category are Blasphemy, Idolatry, and doing harm to others.
Homosexuality falls under the second category. It disrupts the nuclear family which is proven as the most stable arrangement for raising children. Also it is a prime vector of disease spread. Seventy five percent of the spread of AIDS is caused by ten percent of the the population who have sex with multible partners. A large portion of that ten percent are homosexuals.
Yes because its impossible to play a video game without looking at the controller.
When you first start playing you have this instinct to jerk the controller from side to side as you play because you are trying to move the sprite on screen.
After a while you move it completely by hitting the correct buttons. If you play it enough you don't even have to think of the keystrokes, you can just imagine the move in your head and your hands will hit the right keys.
This wouldn't be much different except that you wouldn't have to actually move your fingers.
First you map the movement of the mechanical hand to your own hand movements. After awhile you focus on not moving your own hand when the mechanical one moves. Pretty soon you can move each of them seperately.
I went through this very process learning to cross and uncross my eyes when I went to therapy for my lazy eye when I was a kid.
Unless you put a giant pile of research grants in the room. Global Warming is big money.
A lot of people think Americans are arrogant.
That isn't true.
Its just that we are so much better than everyone else that its hard to tell the difference.
(Kidding)
At least we don't have this type of confusion in Birmingham.
Google most likely.
http://www.google.com/search?q=plutonium+refining
In my day humanoid robots had to lift their legs uphill in the now both ways. That is if you had legs. My best friend got along fine with a set of wheels.
These modern robots and their "gravity assisted walking". How Dreadful.
Sincerly
Cee Threepio
Depends on the type of violet, but the important thing here is for it to rhyme with you.
Its just a scam. He will grab your money and run.
The Fed does tons of research on banks before they approve them. If they don't like the structure of your charter or if you don't do enough business they will simply deny you out of hand.
I think that roses are #FF0000 violets are #0000FF would be more geeky.