Triple gods are notoriously hard to enumerate and the devil has so many alleged supernatural powers that he would be counted as a god in many interpretations.
...no. There is no sect of Christianity that counts the devil as a god. As for the trinity bit, all sects of christianity agree that it's still just one god. Some are trinitarian, some are unitarian, but even the trinitarians consider the three to be aspects, not separate entities.
In short, only some one who is not a Christian would claim there is more than one god in Christianity.
For good measure: No True Scotsman would be born in Moscow to Russian parents, either.
You are what is wrong with this country. Your response to Obama's treasonous betrayal of the country is to start playing party politics.
Are you seriously so stupid as to think you're doing anything other than enabling this shit? Is your point really that we shouldn't criticize Obama because Romney would have been worse? Really? Because that's what you're saying.
And none of you folks ever bother to mention that these policies were started by the GOP
I also tend not to remind people that water is wet or that the sky is blue because there is no reason to remind them. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO STARTED IT. What matters is who has the power to end it. Are you too stupid to see that? Are you so wrapped up in part politics that you actually think who started it matters now?
Open up the laptop and remove the wifi antenna (at least in mine you could remove it with a pair of scissors, but other models may require mucking with board).
Had Mitt won the presidency, I feel like a lot of these guys bitching about Obama would be standing right in line behind Mit
Go fuck yourself. You are the problem with this country. You think every criticism of your dear fuhrer is party-based. Here's a fucking clue: Every Romney voter I know LIKES these programs.
Aristotelian rhetoric (though I don't call it that, we do go over logos, ethos, and pathos ad nauseum) and logical fallacies. We cover deductive vs inductive logic and logical syllogisms as well. Deeper Epistemology (Empiricism vs Rationalism vs Skepticism, etc.) isn't covered in my English class.
Especially if you try to eat healthy. A McDouble is $1. Strawberries are currently $2.50/lbs.
Sure, but only one of them is food. PERIOD. FULL STOP. The other is poison.
It's also not hard to beat Taco Bell or McDonald's on a $/calorie basis. You don't actually know how to eat is the problem. You (and most people) have literally no freaking clue what should be in a meal. Who the hell eats a pound of strawberries in a sitting?
Even where I live (on a tiny island where ALL food is imported), a cooked meal costs me less than $2 (a McDouble, also imported, is $2.50).
Or you could learn to read and you'd realize that he actually agreed with the article.
The reason why your caloric intake is such as it is, why your burning efficiency is lower, or why you're less active and hence burn less are obviously quite a complex set of conditions
That's a perfect summation of the entire article. Where he disagrees is the claim that consumption is irrelevant because of this.
Can someone explain to me why "try and" seems to have become so popular?
favored over the latter for purely euphonic reasons.
It's easy to answer your question when you answered it yourself. Language (and grammar) is not, never has been, never will be logically constructed. Get over it.
Slashdot Mirror
Being a ward of the Bureau of Prisons is not the same as working for the fed.
Having been to both, I'd pick Vietnam any day. Foreigners at least are treated much better there, by everyone (not just the government).
Don't mention the war.
WAR!
What is it good for?
Triple gods are notoriously hard to enumerate and the devil has so many alleged supernatural powers that he would be counted as a god in many interpretations.
...no. There is no sect of Christianity that counts the devil as a god. As for the trinity bit, all sects of christianity agree that it's still just one god. Some are trinitarian, some are unitarian, but even the trinitarians consider the three to be aspects, not separate entities.
In short, only some one who is not a Christian would claim there is more than one god in Christianity.
For good measure: No True Scotsman would be born in Moscow to Russian parents, either.
You are what is wrong with this country. Your response to Obama's treasonous betrayal of the country is to start playing party politics.
Are you seriously so stupid as to think you're doing anything other than enabling this shit? Is your point really that we shouldn't criticize Obama because Romney would have been worse? Really? Because that's what you're saying.
And none of you folks ever bother to mention that these policies were started by the GOP
I also tend not to remind people that water is wet or that the sky is blue because there is no reason to remind them. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO STARTED IT. What matters is who has the power to end it. Are you too stupid to see that? Are you so wrapped up in part politics that you actually think who started it matters now?
THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IS WHO CAN END IT.
That is who we need to be yelling at.
You could also be accused of murder even if you were innocent. I'm sorry, did you have a point?
Open up the laptop and remove the wifi antenna (at least in mine you could remove it with a pair of scissors, but other models may require mucking with board).
Yes. That is obviously why I pointed out that it was actually illegal. Because I want it to be. OBVIOUSLY. /sarcasm
Any more stupid questions?
Speaking of looking things up: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Communist+Control+Act+of+1954&l=1
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Communist+Control+Act+of+1954&l=1
Not illegal any more than being atheist
Were you too busy smoking crack during history class in high school, or something?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Communist+Control+Act+of+1954&l=1
its expressed purpose the overthrow of the United States Constitution and government.
So...the same as the United States' Government's unexpressed purpose then?
You'd think they'd have seen the Communist Party as allies in that case...
being a communist is not a crime
At the time it was.
When an entire religion declares that non-members are subhuman kafirs who deserve death
Why are we talking about Afrikaner Calvinism?
If it makes you feel better, no one's brain releases endorphins during exercise. That's a myth: http://www.runnersworld.com/runners-stories/runners-high
Your therapist must be rich.
Welp, looks like I'm done ever supporting Humble again.
Had Mitt won the presidency, I feel like a lot of these guys bitching about Obama would be standing right in line behind Mit
Go fuck yourself. You are the problem with this country. You think every criticism of your dear fuhrer is party-based. Here's a fucking clue: Every Romney voter I know LIKES these programs.
Aristotelian rhetoric (though I don't call it that, we do go over logos, ethos, and pathos ad nauseum) and logical fallacies. We cover deductive vs inductive logic and logical syllogisms as well. Deeper Epistemology (Empiricism vs Rationalism vs Skepticism, etc.) isn't covered in my English class.
EVERY generation has had a better standard of life than its forebears
Utterly, demonstrably false.
Especially if you try to eat healthy. A McDouble is $1. Strawberries are currently $2.50/lbs.
Sure, but only one of them is food. PERIOD. FULL STOP. The other is poison.
It's also not hard to beat Taco Bell or McDonald's on a $/calorie basis. You don't actually know how to eat is the problem. You (and most people) have literally no freaking clue what should be in a meal. Who the hell eats a pound of strawberries in a sitting?
Even where I live (on a tiny island where ALL food is imported), a cooked meal costs me less than $2 (a McDouble, also imported, is $2.50).
the TV switch, the car switch, the refrigerator switch. After those switches disconnect electrical energy,
What the hell kind of car do you drive?
Or you could learn to read and you'd realize that he actually agreed with the article.
The reason why your caloric intake is such as it is, why your burning efficiency is lower, or why you're less active and hence burn less are obviously quite a complex set of conditions
That's a perfect summation of the entire article. Where he disagrees is the claim that consumption is irrelevant because of this.
Can someone explain to me why "try and" seems to have become so popular?
favored over the latter for purely euphonic reasons.
It's easy to answer your question when you answered it yourself. Language (and grammar) is not, never has been, never will be logically constructed. Get over it.
Nice to know my grandparents and greatgrandparents bled in WWII so fascists like you could still be in power. Oh wait...