the damaging aspects of atheism... consider the morality that atheism leads to... Ultimately survival of the fittest becomes the only morality becomes the only morality. Falwell and Sharpe are nothing compared to Stalin and Mao to say the least.
Wow. You seem to understand very little about the lack of the connection between morals and theism in general. It had been observed countless times that a belief in any deity does not, in of itself, provide the necessary environment for people to develop morals. In fact there are plenty of regions on this planet, right now, where religious fervour runs high, while morality is practically non existent. There are also countless examples right now where people lead perfectly moral and humble lives without any religious association.
Survival of the fittest was a napolionistic idal, a term coined by the political landscape of a time when human conquest was still something that is acceptable for civilized nations, who, by the way, identified themselves as christian.
Finally, neither Stalin (I should know, he murdered my people), nor Mao, did what they did in the name of atheism. What they did is what any power hungry, insane, insecure, sorry excuse for a cowardly human being would do, kill anything that moved if it startled them. This would include *any* space where people assemble to explore *any* type of idea, as it threatens their power. That religious places of assembly were targeted was a consequence of that fear. They would have done the same had they been association with a church. Hitler was, after all, a Catholic.
Posted too fast. It may not be overkill if you need the flexibility of some of drupals more popular modules such as views. It also leaves the door open to make something useful out of the basic site at the beggining.
Might not be over kill, we have some clients that constatnly harrass us this way. We block this based on budget, but more often than not we simply talk them out of stupidity. We are professionals, so we insist on being treated professionally by our clients. Granted, it's a bit different to have a structured team to handle this, but I doubt this should be different for a one man op either. Bottom line is that you cannot allow yourself to be walked over like a doormat. Unfortunately, unless this is strickly enforced, he will be.
If you do not wish to dig a hole for yourself, under no circumstances follow the parent's advice. Plan your site first, know what it will be doing, know the beginning and the end, and divide that into phases (feature a,b,c in phase 1, d,e,f in phase 2, etc...). It's called scope, and you need to keep it at bay if you wish to have a life outside of working constantly on that site. Absolutely think this through IN THE EARLY STAGES. You should not even touch a computer untill you know what you'll be doing, and what the end result is supposed to look like. Whiteboards are your friends, and paper makes a good aquaintence. Yes, as you develop you will have to adjust. This is minimised by, yet again, upfront planning. This will also help you resolve what platform to choose. If wordpress makes your life easier by supplying with just the right plugins, then go for it. Drupal has a few neat tools to cover a good 90% of use cases -- in my experience (Drupal favours the tool kit approach, so you build things out as you wish, rather than relying on packaged behaviour -- see views and panels for reference).
Depending on what you install as the distribution you're both right and wrong. It's true that the core distribution isn't very data ready, but it already comes with premade blogs and forums, for instance (personally the core implementation had never satisfied me, but it's there). If you grab an actual distribution fit for a purpose, you get much more out of the box.
The submissive are always in control. It's the nature of the beast. At the end, she got extactly what she wanted, didn't she? That said, no reason you can't enjoy it now, for it looks like you are comfortable in your new role. Good luck.
I think it's because of the stupid polarization, and the "are you with us or against us" mentality that is so simple to fall into. See, every-time I get entrapped into these arguments, it's almost always because I sense that with just a bit more thought process we can come to an understanding. Always disappointed though at the end. I can never imagine what it is that prevents people from thinking. I suppose it's because I lack the experience in that department, and so do you.
That existed, and evaporated as the bombing continued. The hand that fed them was bitten several times now. Doing the same thing over and over expecting different results is the definition of insanity.
Not "anything". That's stretching it a bit too far, don't you think? When your life-long experience does not, at all, line up with the claim, when the claim is clearly being blown out of proportion, and when this is done for nearly a century for political reasons that have nothing to do with scientific inquiry, it is incredibly difficult not to be numb to yet another peice of paper coming from that particular direction. What I want is not to be fed propoganda. I want not to be lied to and jailed by the people who take my tax dollars because they have a political agenda that has nothing to do with their job. Dude, all I *want* is fairness. I know... a pipe dream.
Looks like you're not reading the very links you were so fast to paste here. About the only thing you're proving is that reliable data on the subject is practically non-existant. Not surprising at all in light of American propoganda on the subject. I'm not throwing out a valid study because I don't like it. I'm throwing out an invalid, propaganda peddling write-up because the points it raises had been refuted for nearly a century, and it fails to raise any new ones.
A couple of things jump out right off the bat in the abstract. Self reported use, and the reliance on concentration of it in urine. THC remains in urine for a disproportionatly long time after its effects had run their course, thus is a poor indicator of current toxisity levels. Self reporting is as trustworty as my ability to tell time without a clock in front of me. Worse, the methods used seem to be for a completely different drug. If all drugs were the same we would not have a need for pharmasists, now would we? This "study" amounts to an official rubber stamp on propoganda rather than a search for truth.
Yes, we all know that these reports are comepletely trust-worthy, have nothing to do with propaganda, and most definately are ripe for accepting at face value. How far fetched it is to fabricate the vast majority of such a claim... Fuck... I'm not even dealing with a life or death situation myself, but regardless, the asshole at the other end has no problem transposing his imagined reality onto the world. There's something to be said for the human mind's suseptibility to hallucinations and delusions, no?
Perhaps you need to see it first hand. Get back to me when there's an expected average of how many busses will blow up annually in your area. Lets see, once that happens, how you'd like to respond.
Slashdot Mirror
Atheists, as a collective, do not preach.
Wow. You seem to understand very little about the lack of the connection between morals and theism in general. It had been observed countless times that a belief in any deity does not, in of itself, provide the necessary environment for people to develop morals. In fact there are plenty of regions on this planet, right now, where religious fervour runs high, while morality is practically non existent. There are also countless examples right now where people lead perfectly moral and humble lives without any religious association.
Survival of the fittest was a napolionistic idal, a term coined by the political landscape of a time when human conquest was still something that is acceptable for civilized nations, who, by the way, identified themselves as christian.
Finally, neither Stalin (I should know, he murdered my people), nor Mao, did what they did in the name of atheism. What they did is what any power hungry, insane, insecure, sorry excuse for a cowardly human being would do, kill anything that moved if it startled them. This would include *any* space where people assemble to explore *any* type of idea, as it threatens their power. That religious places of assembly were targeted was a consequence of that fear. They would have done the same had they been association with a church. Hitler was, after all, a Catholic.
Care to elaborate on this thought process?
Posted too fast. It may not be overkill if you need the flexibility of some of drupals more popular modules such as views. It also leaves the door open to make something useful out of the basic site at the beggining.
Might not be over kill, we have some clients that constatnly harrass us this way. We block this based on budget, but more often than not we simply talk them out of stupidity. We are professionals, so we insist on being treated professionally by our clients. Granted, it's a bit different to have a structured team to handle this, but I doubt this should be different for a one man op either. Bottom line is that you cannot allow yourself to be walked over like a doormat. Unfortunately, unless this is strickly enforced, he will be.
You may have missed the checkbox you need to set before going into production. nice try.
If you do not wish to dig a hole for yourself, under no circumstances follow the parent's advice. Plan your site first, know what it will be doing, know the beginning and the end, and divide that into phases (feature a,b,c in phase 1, d,e,f in phase 2, etc ...). It's called scope, and you need to keep it at bay if you wish to have a life outside of working constantly on that site. Absolutely think this through IN THE EARLY STAGES. You should not even touch a computer untill you know what you'll be doing, and what the end result is supposed to look like. Whiteboards are your friends, and paper makes a good aquaintence. Yes, as you develop you will have to adjust. This is minimised by, yet again, upfront planning. This will also help you resolve what platform to choose. If wordpress makes your life easier by supplying with just the right plugins, then go for it. Drupal has a few neat tools to cover a good 90% of use cases -- in my experience (Drupal favours the tool kit approach, so you build things out as you wish, rather than relying on packaged behaviour -- see views and panels for reference).
Depending on what you install as the distribution you're both right and wrong. It's true that the core distribution isn't very data ready, but it already comes with premade blogs and forums, for instance (personally the core implementation had never satisfied me, but it's there). If you grab an actual distribution fit for a purpose, you get much more out of the box.
The submissive are always in control. It's the nature of the beast. At the end, she got extactly what she wanted, didn't she? That said, no reason you can't enjoy it now, for it looks like you are comfortable in your new role. Good luck.
I think it's because of the stupid polarization, and the "are you with us or against us" mentality that is so simple to fall into. See, every-time I get entrapped into these arguments, it's almost always because I sense that with just a bit more thought process we can come to an understanding. Always disappointed though at the end. I can never imagine what it is that prevents people from thinking. I suppose it's because I lack the experience in that department, and so do you.
Why, thank you. I don't know what I would do if that particular mistake was not corrected for me.
Care to elaborate?
Swoosh?
Prey tell, which side of the globe are you on?
Interesting.
Let me ask you the same question....
Overrated? He's flat out _wrong_. Math is a language.
Take a chill pill, and look up the definition of the word language before your head explodes.
That existed, and evaporated as the bombing continued. The hand that fed them was bitten several times now. Doing the same thing over and over expecting different results is the definition of insanity.
Not "anything". That's stretching it a bit too far, don't you think? When your life-long experience does not, at all, line up with the claim, when the claim is clearly being blown out of proportion, and when this is done for nearly a century for political reasons that have nothing to do with scientific inquiry, it is incredibly difficult not to be numb to yet another peice of paper coming from that particular direction. What I want is not to be fed propoganda. I want not to be lied to and jailed by the people who take my tax dollars because they have a political agenda that has nothing to do with their job. Dude, all I *want* is fairness. I know... a pipe dream.
Looks like you're not reading the very links you were so fast to paste here. About the only thing you're proving is that reliable data on the subject is practically non-existant. Not surprising at all in light of American propoganda on the subject. I'm not throwing out a valid study because I don't like it. I'm throwing out an invalid, propaganda peddling write-up because the points it raises had been refuted for nearly a century, and it fails to raise any new ones.
A couple of things jump out right off the bat in the abstract. Self reported use, and the reliance on concentration of it in urine. THC remains in urine for a disproportionatly long time after its effects had run their course, thus is a poor indicator of current toxisity levels. Self reporting is as trustworty as my ability to tell time without a clock in front of me. Worse, the methods used seem to be for a completely different drug. If all drugs were the same we would not have a need for pharmasists, now would we? This "study" amounts to an official rubber stamp on propoganda rather than a search for truth.
I think this will fall on deaf ears, sadly.
Yes, and that reason is that people such as yourself love to repeat nonsensical, unverifiable BS, for some reason.
Yes, we all know that these reports are comepletely trust-worthy, have nothing to do with propaganda, and most definately are ripe for accepting at face value. How far fetched it is to fabricate the vast majority of such a claim... Fuck... I'm not even dealing with a life or death situation myself, but regardless, the asshole at the other end has no problem transposing his imagined reality onto the world. There's something to be said for the human mind's suseptibility to hallucinations and delusions, no?
Perhaps you need to see it first hand. Get back to me when there's an expected average of how many busses will blow up annually in your area. Lets see, once that happens, how you'd like to respond.