could it be because our doctors have the skill to allow babies to be born that would be stillborn elsewhere, but then subsequently die from complications? This is a misleading statistic that doesn't take the whole picture into account.
It would be a huge undertaking, but I think it's a goal worth striving for.
Why? The masses are uninformed, easily swayed sheep without the time or resources necessary to properly investigate any given piece of legislation. not only that, but most of them wouldn't vote anyway.
I'm not saying a republic is perfect, but its still better than what a direct democracy would be.
Okay, first off, I agree with everything you've said here.
But why has it become so common these days to call people with different or even incorrect information "liars"? Isn't it enough to just call them wrong and point out why? Why attribute deliberate deception to them without any proof? All that does is foster hostility and blind them to the point you are trying to make.
The alcohol itself killed people when it was poisoned.
The people that die nowadays are killed by other *people* making poor decisions and abusing alcohol, not by the alcohol itself.
An important distinction, I think.
" I contacted customer service and they wanted me to disable this Windows thing and edit that registry whatever. No thanks. "
Let me get this straight, they actually told you how to fix the problem, and you're bitching anyway? If you can't handle tweaking some settings to get things to work right on occasion, clearly you just want a console.
IANAL, but two things:
1. Slander is spoken, Libel is written. (Yeah, I'm nitpicking. Sorry.)
2. "Ms. Sarah Phelps is the worst teacher I've ever met" is not a declaration of fact, but of opinion. Opinions (generally speaking) cannot, by defintion, be demonstrably true or false. By your own definition, defamation is only involved when untrue statements are made.
So basically, defamation laws have no relevance here. If she made a group called "Ms. Sarah Phelps hits her students" then they would have a fairly solid defamation case. Whether the school can punish her within its own system is a separate issue. I know if I made a "My boss is the worst boss ever" group on facebook, I could certainly expect to be fired.. but if he tried to sue me for defamation he'd get laughed out of court.
Let's be clear on our terminology and our hierarchy of relations. Catholicism isn't "different" from Christianity. Its a subset of the general Christian set of beliefs, and so are the various Protestant denominations.
They differ on specific beliefs and interpretations, but there's no one denomination that can be demonstrably proven to be more "Christian" than any other... If ANYTHING, Protestants broke off from the original Catholic church, making it the more fundamental one, but even that's ignoring the changes that the catholic church itself has gone through in its history.
Actually, far more creationists (Who usually don't even think to call themselves that) believe that God set the universe into motion and designed everything by the rules of science to work out in such a way that man would arise. I've never understood why people believe that intelligent design (lower case) and Evolution can't both be true..
That's a common problem with that model, fixable by a firmware upgrade. I had the same problem. Guess that doesn't help you much if you took it back, but still.
Wow so gang rape is legal now? I was under the impression that it was already a crime.. go figure. Wow, those bastards for not supporting something with an emotionally-charged name.
"The best way to describe him is to call him a very successful television troll. I don't think he really has a position."
A: He's been on the radio LONG before TV. Somehow people always overlook this and act like he came into being when he started on Fox News. Not really that important, but still.
B: You clearly never actually listen to him. He most certainly has a position that he believes in deeply, and isn't afraid to talk about it.
One example, years ago. Usually taken completely out of context.* That he has apologized for again and again. Everyone says stupid stuff sometimes, get over it.
*He was speaking more to the general atmosphere of uncertainty that was prevalent at the time. Did he actually believe Keith Ellison was a terrorist? was he actually suggesting that? NO. He was simply trying to explore the thoughts that lots of people were having in the back of their minds that no one wanted to be politically incorrect enough to voice. All that aside, it was a stupid move and a bad idea, which he admitted before AND after doing it.
Source? I don't think GB ever went into the whole birther thing, in fact I recall him saying that it was pointless and irreleveant, or somethign to that effect.
Oh, and one persons "facts" are another persons "misinformation". Beck is actually really good about citing facts and sources.
IANAP (I am not a Pope) but I believe that the Church views the human body as a Temple to god, and as such should not be desecrated or abused. Whether this governs his opinion in the matter, I don't know, but the body certainly isn't a "meat machine that holds the soul" to the Catholics.
Slashdot Mirror
So is mine, as well as my older brother, and neither of them are corrupt. -1 Troll? Sorry to break up your hate party with the truth.
could it be because our doctors have the skill to allow babies to be born that would be stillborn elsewhere, but then subsequently die from complications? This is a misleading statistic that doesn't take the whole picture into account.
Are you seriously, SERIOUSLY, trying to pin this on the bush administration? I am absolutely in awe.
You don't consider that to be a lot of broken promises? I would argue that even one broken promise is too many.
If that's seriously the best example you have, that Peter ALMOST killed someone, then that sorta proves his point right there.
Why? The masses are uninformed, easily swayed sheep without the time or resources necessary to properly investigate any given piece of legislation. not only that, but most of them wouldn't vote anyway. I'm not saying a republic is perfect, but its still better than what a direct democracy would be.
Incorrect.
This is exactly the problem with liberals. They have no distinction between voluntarily giving something and having something taken by force.
No, but its hard to prosecute people who've been dead for a while.
Okay, first off, I agree with everything you've said here. But why has it become so common these days to call people with different or even incorrect information "liars"? Isn't it enough to just call them wrong and point out why? Why attribute deliberate deception to them without any proof? All that does is foster hostility and blind them to the point you are trying to make.
The alcohol itself killed people when it was poisoned. The people that die nowadays are killed by other *people* making poor decisions and abusing alcohol, not by the alcohol itself. An important distinction, I think.
" I contacted customer service and they wanted me to disable this Windows thing and edit that registry whatever. No thanks. " Let me get this straight, they actually told you how to fix the problem, and you're bitching anyway? If you can't handle tweaking some settings to get things to work right on occasion, clearly you just want a console.
IANAL, but two things: 1. Slander is spoken, Libel is written. (Yeah, I'm nitpicking. Sorry.) 2. "Ms. Sarah Phelps is the worst teacher I've ever met" is not a declaration of fact, but of opinion. Opinions (generally speaking) cannot, by defintion, be demonstrably true or false. By your own definition, defamation is only involved when untrue statements are made. So basically, defamation laws have no relevance here. If she made a group called "Ms. Sarah Phelps hits her students" then they would have a fairly solid defamation case. Whether the school can punish her within its own system is a separate issue. I know if I made a "My boss is the worst boss ever" group on facebook, I could certainly expect to be fired.. but if he tried to sue me for defamation he'd get laughed out of court.
Men going to a club to look at girls? Inconceivable!
No, he's talking morality, you're talking equivocation.
Let's be clear on our terminology and our hierarchy of relations. Catholicism isn't "different" from Christianity. Its a subset of the general Christian set of beliefs, and so are the various Protestant denominations. They differ on specific beliefs and interpretations, but there's no one denomination that can be demonstrably proven to be more "Christian" than any other... If ANYTHING, Protestants broke off from the original Catholic church, making it the more fundamental one, but even that's ignoring the changes that the catholic church itself has gone through in its history.
Actually, far more creationists (Who usually don't even think to call themselves that) believe that God set the universe into motion and designed everything by the rules of science to work out in such a way that man would arise. I've never understood why people believe that intelligent design (lower case) and Evolution can't both be true..
That's a common problem with that model, fixable by a firmware upgrade. I had the same problem. Guess that doesn't help you much if you took it back, but still.
Freaked out? Or quietly had his lawyers contest it? Don't exaggerate.
Wow so gang rape is legal now? I was under the impression that it was already a crime.. go figure. Wow, those bastards for not supporting something with an emotionally-charged name.
"The best way to describe him is to call him a very successful television troll. I don't think he really has a position." A: He's been on the radio LONG before TV. Somehow people always overlook this and act like he came into being when he started on Fox News. Not really that important, but still. B: You clearly never actually listen to him. He most certainly has a position that he believes in deeply, and isn't afraid to talk about it.
One example, years ago. Usually taken completely out of context.* That he has apologized for again and again. Everyone says stupid stuff sometimes, get over it. *He was speaking more to the general atmosphere of uncertainty that was prevalent at the time. Did he actually believe Keith Ellison was a terrorist? was he actually suggesting that? NO. He was simply trying to explore the thoughts that lots of people were having in the back of their minds that no one wanted to be politically incorrect enough to voice. All that aside, it was a stupid move and a bad idea, which he admitted before AND after doing it.
IIRC, he didn't quit. His "contract was not renewed."
Source? I don't think GB ever went into the whole birther thing, in fact I recall him saying that it was pointless and irreleveant, or somethign to that effect. Oh, and one persons "facts" are another persons "misinformation". Beck is actually really good about citing facts and sources.
IANAP (I am not a Pope) but I believe that the Church views the human body as a Temple to god, and as such should not be desecrated or abused. Whether this governs his opinion in the matter, I don't know, but the body certainly isn't a "meat machine that holds the soul" to the Catholics.