You only say that because he doesn't fit in with your view of Christianity. However, a large portion of American Christians view him as a paragon of Christianity.
True, most of it seems to be pandering for votes and not actually living according to Jesusian teachings, but most Catholics I've ever encountered aren't the most virtuous (in the Christian sense of the word) of folks and I wouldn't say they're not Christians.
Since the dominant political power of the Middle Ages determined was the approximate date of birth of their God, which fantastically turned a monotheism into a triotheism.
Well, I'd be careful with quoting John, as his account makes claims that the others do not (The Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word became Flesh...), a lot of which he would have no factual basis for writing, unless God told him. To be fair, if somebody told you that God had them write about somebody that was with God from the beginning but never actually mentioned as such in Biblical accounts, don't you think you might call them a loony?
Now you might claim that this isn't a reason to throw out all of his claims, and I won't say it is. Those that can be corroborated should be considered. Those that can't should be tossed aside as the rubbish they most likely are.
Anyway, Messiah doesn't mean God. Also, like any scripture Matthew 11:27 can be interpreted however the hell you want, and there's also the fact that this was written after Jesus died, so you've got the problem of memory not serving all that well. I can remember quotes from shows amazingly well, and then watch the show, and find I'd only gotten some of the words right, and not even the meaning. So the quote doesn't mean a whole lot.
And the whole Liar, Lunatic, Lord argument is flawed because it assumes that the Bible is a) the literal word of God b) untouched by political motives, which we can all agree the Church certainly wasn't.
Frankly, I don't see what use it is if you are a pathetic masturbator. Really, porn is some boring stuff, and looking at the same porn over again is even more boring. What would you do with a gigabyte of porn, disregarding the other 499?
Definitely. I find this was true in High School, and in my current surrogate High School, Northwest Missouri State. I'm just hoping that wherever I manage to get to next year will be the kind that's stimulating and using the old tricks to squeeze out an A without wasting thoughts on the class will be a thing of the past.
Perhaps he didn't do that, but it was the work of later authors to fit him into a prophecy? If Jesus were the kind of guy his teachings suggest he was, then he wouldn't have made any claims to deity. At least I don't think he would have. Interestingly, he didn't make claims to deity, it was Paul that did most of that for him.
Well, if somebody set to stop you shows up at the computer that's being broken into aren't they likely to pull the network cable, or shut down the daemon?
What's interesting is that in June that year all of the fleet was ordered out of Pearl Harbor and war-darkened. My grandfather was on Wake Island (and unlike what Christopher Walken said in Pulp Fiction, he did not die), and he says everybody was confused as hell when they heard the fleet had been destroyed because it wouldn't make sense to put all of your ships back when you knew there were plans of an air raid.
I personally have a tough time believing that it was less than deliberate, intended to outrage the country.
Even more offtopic than before, but I thought you might find it interesting.
Not really. They knew they could disable us for 6 months, but were counting on being able to strengthen their position at that time. They did a fantastic job, but couldn't compete with the industrial might of the US (especially one propagandized into working like mad) without the petroleum they were expecting to be able to squeeze out of Indonesia. And anyway, by the end they were desperate, and the second bomb was unnecessary (and it's even been speculated that the first may have been, as well).
Also, your argument falls through a bit when you notice that this time it was not a country but a rather amorphous organization with cells inside our own country as well as dozens of friendly countries. Nukes would not affect them, they would merely outrage the entire world at us.
Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again
on
Tsunami Satellite Images
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
But my point is that international law means dick. The USA continuously flouts it. The only use it has is justifying the West's desires to go to war with smaller countries.
For example, when the Japanese destroyed most of the Russian Navy in a surprise Sunday Morning attack, the British praised it as a brilliant tactical move. When they did the *exact* same thing to the US, the British called it cowardly, and nowadays would call it illegal. But that doesn't mean a thing to anybody but the citizenry that is supposed to be mobilized one way or another.
Summary: International Law is made to be enforced and broken at the convenience of those powerful enough to do so. It does not actually apply to war.
He brings up a valid point. If we're to take everything seriously, we'd really be a constantly depressed bunch of people. When you can't affect something yourself, one of the best things to do, in my experience, is laugh it off and try to forget about it. It sounds heartless, but the world doesn't stop every time something bad happens. It just wouldn't make sense.
(However, in this situation, if you could aid the victims of this disaster, I would encourage you to do so, but that doesn't mean weep daily for them. You need to go about your lives.)
I don't know about you, but if I'm going to be taking on a country that's far more powerful than I am, I'm not going to give them the preparation time that comes with a war declaration. I don't necessarily approve of war tactics, but to call a war illegal or say it's not a war because it doesn't follow certain rules is silly. (As a corollary, Abu Ghraib was an acceptable war tactic in that it *was a war tactic*. The only thing that could make a war tactic unacceptable is if the perpetrating country's citizenry protest and force an end to such tactics. But violating international conventions of war is commonplace, because in reality, they mean nothing.)
People think we've moved on to a better era, but they're still the same fights, but with more machines and public delusion as to what a war is.
Now I for one don't approve of the War on Terror, because to me it's very much like a war on drugs: it wastes money to combat something that can never be defeated. (Not to mention it's more an opportunity to propagandize than anything else.)
If I understand it, think of using a GUI tool. It's fantastically easy to hit delete and fuck everything up on accident.
If you have write permissions, you can't just remove a file. You'll have to actively corrupt it, and that takes malicious intent and (a log of time || an exploit program), not a slipped finger.
If I'm going to give a standard user (that needs to use the computer for more than reading email) permissions, I'm going to give them write, but not delete permissions. (With a trash folder that is automagically emptied after a reasonable amount of time for them to miss something.)
However, in POSIX, I believe the two are synonyms (i.e. you've got rwx, and w seems to be the only one that makes sense to allow deletions), and that seems to be the point the grandparent was making.
If there's one way surefire to kill even a mediocre joke, it's explaining it before someone has shown enough interest to not know what the fuck you're talking about.
I agree. While you didn't mention it specifically, I can't stand that schools have to teach reading and arithmetic through 8th grade (and sometimes higehr) as part of a normal curriculum. That is the parent's job, not the school's.
As far as the "No Child Gets Ahead Act" goes, you're giving it too much credit by implying that it simply screws over the smart kids, while that's not the case. It screws over everybody ~equally. (At least at the same school. The rich schools will hold out longer before being fucked by it.)
The Act hurts the kids in the dead center of the bell curve (learning styles, not intelligence, don't get upset by the use of a bell curve, it's pretty damn accurate) as much as anyone. Because of the constantly increasing standards (AYP), teachers have to teach words and definitions that students can regurgitate. This kills any creativity a teacher might be able to add to a class because they just don't have time. So when it comes time for a student to actually use the knowledge that was shoved down his or her throat, they'll be limited to textbook cases, and when it's worded differently they're fucked.
Also, in order to increase test scores, money is being diverted from gifted programs, which is often the only environment in which the "gifted" students can work, because the regular teachers aren't equipped to deal with students that approach things differently. This puts those students at a severe disadvantage.
Special needs students get fucked because they're expected to perform at grade level as determined by a test, not the evaulation of a teacher that's been working with them for at least a year.
It's not just No Child Gets Ahead, it's just Fuck the Children with Rakes.
Shut the fuck up, make sense, and stop acting persecuted.
What do you mean by what goes around comes around? I was arguing against sabatoge. It doesn't make sense, as the workers will end up out of work, and the consumers will get shoddy products. I'm not seeing your point.
People are worth respect, companies are not. Companies are groups of people and should only have rights to that extent. I was not defending the company's practices, merely indicating that sabotage is not a good idea when compared to complaining, suing or quitting.
Also, I'm what I'd call a liberal, as well. So shut up, nobody's persecuting you. But maybe people like you who just make ignorant comments and no actual arguments are what give us a bad name. So here's a hint: read what you're responding to, and understand it. If you don't understand it, ask, don't make inane comments.
This was Douglass Adams's idea. This was one bit he made clear before he died.
Anyway, what good are stories if you're compelled to stay consistent? Adams certainly felt no compulsion, hence the five book trilogy, as well as the changed story in every medium.
I find the inconsistencies funny as they add to the confusion as people talk about Hitchhiker's Guide. Maybe that's just me.
Slashdot Mirror
You only say that because he doesn't fit in with your view of Christianity. However, a large portion of American Christians view him as a paragon of Christianity.
True, most of it seems to be pandering for votes and not actually living according to Jesusian teachings, but most Catholics I've ever encountered aren't the most virtuous (in the Christian sense of the word) of folks and I wouldn't say they're not Christians.
...but does it explain where the dolphins went?
Actually, it's their frequency that's lower. Wavelength is therefore greater.
"If I were a black-hat planning to exploit this vulnerability, I'd put a remote control program like Back Orifice" You misspelled script-kiddie.
p.s. What year is it? ok, years since what? ;)
Since the dominant political power of the Middle Ages determined was the approximate date of birth of their God, which fantastically turned a monotheism into a triotheism.
Well, I'd be careful with quoting John, as his account makes claims that the others do not (The Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word became Flesh...), a lot of which he would have no factual basis for writing, unless God told him. To be fair, if somebody told you that God had them write about somebody that was with God from the beginning but never actually mentioned as such in Biblical accounts, don't you think you might call them a loony?
Now you might claim that this isn't a reason to throw out all of his claims, and I won't say it is. Those that can be corroborated should be considered. Those that can't should be tossed aside as the rubbish they most likely are.
Anyway, Messiah doesn't mean God. Also, like any scripture Matthew 11:27 can be interpreted however the hell you want, and there's also the fact that this was written after Jesus died, so you've got the problem of memory not serving all that well. I can remember quotes from shows amazingly well, and then watch the show, and find I'd only gotten some of the words right, and not even the meaning. So the quote doesn't mean a whole lot.
And the whole Liar, Lunatic, Lord argument is flawed because it assumes that the Bible is a) the literal word of God b) untouched by political motives, which we can all agree the Church certainly wasn't.
Frankly, I don't see what use it is if you are a pathetic masturbator. Really, porn is some boring stuff, and looking at the same porn over again is even more boring. What would you do with a gigabyte of porn, disregarding the other 499?
Definitely. I find this was true in High School, and in my current surrogate High School, Northwest Missouri State. I'm just hoping that wherever I manage to get to next year will be the kind that's stimulating and using the old tricks to squeeze out an A without wasting thoughts on the class will be a thing of the past.
Perhaps he didn't do that, but it was the work of later authors to fit him into a prophecy? If Jesus were the kind of guy his teachings suggest he was, then he wouldn't have made any claims to deity. At least I don't think he would have. Interestingly, he didn't make claims to deity, it was Paul that did most of that for him.
Well, if somebody set to stop you shows up at the computer that's being broken into aren't they likely to pull the network cable, or shut down the daemon?
What's interesting is that in June that year all of the fleet was ordered out of Pearl Harbor and war-darkened. My grandfather was on Wake Island (and unlike what Christopher Walken said in Pulp Fiction, he did not die), and he says everybody was confused as hell when they heard the fleet had been destroyed because it wouldn't make sense to put all of your ships back when you knew there were plans of an air raid. I personally have a tough time believing that it was less than deliberate, intended to outrage the country. Even more offtopic than before, but I thought you might find it interesting.
Not really. They knew they could disable us for 6 months, but were counting on being able to strengthen their position at that time. They did a fantastic job, but couldn't compete with the industrial might of the US (especially one propagandized into working like mad) without the petroleum they were expecting to be able to squeeze out of Indonesia. And anyway, by the end they were desperate, and the second bomb was unnecessary (and it's even been speculated that the first may have been, as well).
Also, your argument falls through a bit when you notice that this time it was not a country but a rather amorphous organization with cells inside our own country as well as dozens of friendly countries. Nukes would not affect them, they would merely outrage the entire world at us.
But my point is that international law means dick. The USA continuously flouts it. The only use it has is justifying the West's desires to go to war with smaller countries.
For example, when the Japanese destroyed most of the Russian Navy in a surprise Sunday Morning attack, the British praised it as a brilliant tactical move. When they did the *exact* same thing to the US, the British called it cowardly, and nowadays would call it illegal. But that doesn't mean a thing to anybody but the citizenry that is supposed to be mobilized one way or another.
Summary: International Law is made to be enforced and broken at the convenience of those powerful enough to do so. It does not actually apply to war.
He brings up a valid point. If we're to take everything seriously, we'd really be a constantly depressed bunch of people. When you can't affect something yourself, one of the best things to do, in my experience, is laugh it off and try to forget about it. It sounds heartless, but the world doesn't stop every time something bad happens. It just wouldn't make sense.
(However, in this situation, if you could aid the victims of this disaster, I would encourage you to do so, but that doesn't mean weep daily for them. You need to go about your lives.)
I don't know about you, but if I'm going to be taking on a country that's far more powerful than I am, I'm not going to give them the preparation time that comes with a war declaration. I don't necessarily approve of war tactics, but to call a war illegal or say it's not a war because it doesn't follow certain rules is silly. (As a corollary, Abu Ghraib was an acceptable war tactic in that it *was a war tactic*. The only thing that could make a war tactic unacceptable is if the perpetrating country's citizenry protest and force an end to such tactics. But violating international conventions of war is commonplace, because in reality, they mean nothing.)
People think we've moved on to a better era, but they're still the same fights, but with more machines and public delusion as to what a war is.
Now I for one don't approve of the War on Terror, because to me it's very much like a war on drugs: it wastes money to combat something that can never be defeated. (Not to mention it's more an opportunity to propagandize than anything else.)
Please understand that Fox news does not represent the majority of us.
If I understand it, think of using a GUI tool. It's fantastically easy to hit delete and fuck everything up on accident.
If you have write permissions, you can't just remove a file. You'll have to actively corrupt it, and that takes malicious intent and (a log of time || an exploit program), not a slipped finger.
If I'm going to give a standard user (that needs to use the computer for more than reading email) permissions, I'm going to give them write, but not delete permissions. (With a trash folder that is automagically emptied after a reasonable amount of time for them to miss something.)
However, in POSIX, I believe the two are synonyms (i.e. you've got rwx, and w seems to be the only one that makes sense to allow deletions), and that seems to be the point the grandparent was making.
If there's one way surefire to kill even a mediocre joke, it's explaining it before someone has shown enough interest to not know what the fuck you're talking about.
I agree. While you didn't mention it specifically, I can't stand that schools have to teach reading and arithmetic through 8th grade (and sometimes higehr) as part of a normal curriculum. That is the parent's job, not the school's.
As far as the "No Child Gets Ahead Act" goes, you're giving it too much credit by implying that it simply screws over the smart kids, while that's not the case. It screws over everybody ~equally. (At least at the same school. The rich schools will hold out longer before being fucked by it.)
The Act hurts the kids in the dead center of the bell curve (learning styles, not intelligence, don't get upset by the use of a bell curve, it's pretty damn accurate) as much as anyone. Because of the constantly increasing standards (AYP), teachers have to teach words and definitions that students can regurgitate. This kills any creativity a teacher might be able to add to a class because they just don't have time. So when it comes time for a student to actually use the knowledge that was shoved down his or her throat, they'll be limited to textbook cases, and when it's worded differently they're fucked.
Also, in order to increase test scores, money is being diverted from gifted programs, which is often the only environment in which the "gifted" students can work, because the regular teachers aren't equipped to deal with students that approach things differently. This puts those students at a severe disadvantage.
Special needs students get fucked because they're expected to perform at grade level as determined by a test, not the evaulation of a teacher that's been working with them for at least a year.
It's not just No Child Gets Ahead, it's just Fuck the Children with Rakes.
Same platform, more subtle tactic.
"anything created by man will always have defects."
As opposed to that made by code monkeys?
Or Java.
...
import useless.package.*;
public static void main(String[] args)
{
Article wikiArticle = new Article();
Monkeys millionMonkeys = new Monkeys(1000000);
while(!wikiArticle.isShakespeare())
millionMonkeys.write(wikiArticle);
}
Now all we gotta do is let this badboy run and let the garbage collection do its
+++ATH
NO CARRIER
Shut the fuck up, make sense, and stop acting persecuted.
What do you mean by what goes around comes around? I was arguing against sabatoge. It doesn't make sense, as the workers will end up out of work, and the consumers will get shoddy products. I'm not seeing your point.
People are worth respect, companies are not. Companies are groups of people and should only have rights to that extent. I was not defending the company's practices, merely indicating that sabotage is not a good idea when compared to complaining, suing or quitting.
Also, I'm what I'd call a liberal, as well. So shut up, nobody's persecuting you. But maybe people like you who just make ignorant comments and no actual arguments are what give us a bad name. So here's a hint: read what you're responding to, and understand it. If you don't understand it, ask, don't make inane comments.
This was Douglass Adams's idea. This was one bit he made clear before he died.
Anyway, what good are stories if you're compelled to stay consistent? Adams certainly felt no compulsion, hence the five book trilogy, as well as the changed story in every medium.
I find the inconsistencies funny as they add to the confusion as people talk about Hitchhiker's Guide. Maybe that's just me.