In Biblical Christianity, our motivation to do good should not be about fear of punishment or hope of reward.
After accepting the gift of the payment of our sin debt, God asks us to love others as He loved us.
The motivation is love and gratitude. It's doing for others what's already been done for us, or as much as we can do toward that.
I hope you're right. I'm all for deregulation and hope the market can favor companies who don't throw the little guy under the bus. I hope that companies can keep companies accountable by exposing it.
You can't buy a chromecast, but you can buy pretty much any other brand or off-brand of competing device. Amazon is targeting Google, and did so first. The first time I remember the targeting is when Amazon refused to allow amazon video on the chromecast (which they still don't without quality-hampering workarounds.)
Google have been playing nice, but Amazon keeps hindering google's customer experience (Amazon video and Chromecast sales). While I don't like it, and it is hurting customers, I can't really blame Google for fighting back.
I Just hope the fight will be over soon.
Amazon has been singling out Google for a while, ever since they stopped selling the Chromecast. I have used a Chromecast and the cost is comparable to the FireTV stick which is why Amazon stopped selling it. Amazon did start the war. They still sell Apple TV, Roku and a bunch of off-brand Chromecast devices. Chromecast may have been the first cheap way to stream to your TV. It's always been ~$35. Google typically plays nice, but I see this as necessary since Google and Amazon may end up being the biggest tech companies on the block and Amazon has been excluding Google for a while.
You're right, number of neurons isn't the perfect measure of intelligence, but it seems it's moving the right direction. I would expect there's a greater correlation with intelligence and neuron count than with intelligence and brain size, although both likely give a good guess. I liked that raccoons have more neurons than a cat, although in the same size brain.
Sales taxes in Texas are higher, but only by a few percentage points (8.5 compared to 6 in WV) but the higher property taxes instead of income taxes seems to favor those less likely to have property, the lower class, and put the burden on the upper middle and upper classes who are more likely to own a home.
In the words of Far Field Productions, What's that mean? Personally, I see him as the lesser evil of two completely flawed candidates, but I have no idea what he's going to do.
Either,
1. He is the democrat that he's always been and duped the American public,
2. He's a far right crazy man who wants to ban people from our country based on religion and deport a significant portion of the people in this country
3. He's become conservative and said those things to get media coverage, and will be a sane conservative president
Who knows!
There is a presumptive right to life. Police and others must show why it was necessary, or they believed it necessary. Policemen have gone to jail for killing people.
Both sides advocate for the removal of choice, it's just which choices they feel are legitimate.
The left is more likely to remove the choice of gun ownership, the choice of who you can do business with, what size soda you can buy, or what you can say as a religious leader.
The right is more likely to remove the choice of whether you can kill your fetus or baby (depending on your viewpoint)
Whether abortion should be legal really comes down to a belief. When does a person become a person?
If you believe a person becomes a person when they exit their mother's womb, then you should have no problem with the term pro-abortion. If that's your belief, then you shouldn't even care if there are fewer abortions. It's just a medical procedure extracting unwanted cells from a woman's body.
If, however, you believe a person becomes a person before that, then under no circumstances, other than the certainty of making a choice between the mother's or the baby's life, should someone be allowed to kill the baby at that point.
I've heard people point to many tests to determine person-hood: viability, heartbeat, sensing pain, the ability to survive on it's own (which may not really happen well into childhood). It's really a question of when does a child obtain rights.
Personally, I find it unscientific and arbitrary to say a person becomes a person because they changed location.
Most of my computers are older, but I've had better success with Linux (new versions) over Windows finding drivers. I'm assuming that Windows had dropped the drivers, but I've had hardware (soundcards, NICs, etc.) that just work in Linux but Windows didn't see them.
As one who knows evolution happens but doesn't believe in evolution as is referenced in this article, I know evolution happens within a kind of animals. In my biology textbook I read of a lizard population in California which split and became two isolated populations which have become separate species. This is specialization and the formation of new species, I do not believe life came about from natural processes, and I do not believe that a lizard population will ever not be a lizard population.
Kjella, I really enjoyed your comment. You have much more understanding of the Christian worldview. The problem is that when you come at evidence with preconceived notions, which we all do, then evidence will be interpreted based on those preconceptions. If you believe that only natural explanations are valid, then you will interpret the evidence to support a natural answer. If, however, you believe that there is a God who exists outside of our space/time continuum, then the evidence will be used to construct a model reflecting such intervention.
Both creation and evolution advocates exercise faith in ideas they deem true, and will cut off people from the dialogue when they disagree. On the creation side, it happens when you discredit what we see as documentation passed from the creator. On the evolution side, it is when there is mention that it may not have been natural processes or that evolution does not extend past limits of kinds of animals.
I had a friend who did not believe in God posit this to his biology professor, that the evolution community, at least in behavior, acted just like a religion. There are unproven things taught as doctrine, and any who disagree with this doctrine will be excommunicated or removed from the community where consensus will be derived. He said his professor conceded that it was true, but that they were right so it was ok.
This is not reason vs religion, it's a battle of worldviews or presuppositions.
Where it seems to turn into evidence against the theory is when we find multiple examples of a particular animal with gaps on both sides. I believe Darwin even said he expected that over the next hundred years we would find a continuum of fossils. What we find is several of a particular type and then several of another type with a considerable leap in between. For example, I would expect that we would have T-Rex fossils (which we do) and a continuum of fossils evolutionarily precluding and following T-Rex. If we had only found one T-Rex fossil then it would not seem to argue against evolution. The more T-Rex fossils we find without finding any evolutionary ancestors or descendants, however, begins to point to the fact that they may not have existed.
The article didn't work but from reading the blurb above, it doesn't seem it separates the oxygen from hydrogen, but takes the oxygen trapped in the water like fish do. It's not something I've researched but I'm pretty sure fish don't separate the water molecules.
If you created a world be it a SIMs game, or a robot realm, you would have the right to define allowable behavior and destroy robots or remove characters from the SIM game or whatever you wanted. God created this one and He alone ultimately has the right to bring justice, all other justice is delegated (even when the rulers don't acknowledge this). This is why when Pilate asked Jesus, "Don't you know I have power to have you killed or released?" Jesus said, "You only have the power that was given you."
God is the authority and ultimately, He can do what He wants with His creation and He is just. That's including making the rules for His creation and deciding on a case by case basis when to impart mercy and grace.
I'm going to break from the God and the Bible are non-existent or evil motif and answer your question. 1 John 1:9 says, "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." This gives a pretty good indication of when we will receive forgiveness. When my son does something wrong, there are consequences. Sometimes, I show mercy and don't give the consequences. This pretty much never happens when he's making excuses, trying to say it's not that bad or it's someone else's fault. Mercy is normally imputed when there is penitence, which is what God wrote through John.
Usually, when they lie to me about it, the consequences become much more severe.
Slashdot Mirror
In Biblical Christianity, our motivation to do good should not be about fear of punishment or hope of reward. After accepting the gift of the payment of our sin debt, God asks us to love others as He loved us. The motivation is love and gratitude. It's doing for others what's already been done for us, or as much as we can do toward that.
I hope you're right. I'm all for deregulation and hope the market can favor companies who don't throw the little guy under the bus. I hope that companies can keep companies accountable by exposing it.
You can't buy a chromecast, but you can buy pretty much any other brand or off-brand of competing device. Amazon is targeting Google, and did so first. The first time I remember the targeting is when Amazon refused to allow amazon video on the chromecast (which they still don't without quality-hampering workarounds.)
Google have been playing nice, but Amazon keeps hindering google's customer experience (Amazon video and Chromecast sales). While I don't like it, and it is hurting customers, I can't really blame Google for fighting back.
I Just hope the fight will be over soon.
Amazon has been singling out Google for a while, ever since they stopped selling the Chromecast. I have used a Chromecast and the cost is comparable to the FireTV stick which is why Amazon stopped selling it. Amazon did start the war. They still sell Apple TV, Roku and a bunch of off-brand Chromecast devices. Chromecast may have been the first cheap way to stream to your TV. It's always been ~$35. Google typically plays nice, but I see this as necessary since Google and Amazon may end up being the biggest tech companies on the block and Amazon has been excluding Google for a while.
You're right, number of neurons isn't the perfect measure of intelligence, but it seems it's moving the right direction. I would expect there's a greater correlation with intelligence and neuron count than with intelligence and brain size, although both likely give a good guess. I liked that raccoons have more neurons than a cat, although in the same size brain.
Sales taxes in Texas are higher, but only by a few percentage points (8.5 compared to 6 in WV) but the higher property taxes instead of income taxes seems to favor those less likely to have property, the lower class, and put the burden on the upper middle and upper classes who are more likely to own a home.
It's interesting in a forum where people are so skeptical but put so much faith in smarter people.
In the words of Far Field Productions, What's that mean? Personally, I see him as the lesser evil of two completely flawed candidates, but I have no idea what he's going to do. Either, 1. He is the democrat that he's always been and duped the American public, 2. He's a far right crazy man who wants to ban people from our country based on religion and deport a significant portion of the people in this country 3. He's become conservative and said those things to get media coverage, and will be a sane conservative president Who knows!
There is a presumptive right to life. Police and others must show why it was necessary, or they believed it necessary. Policemen have gone to jail for killing people.
The left is more likely to remove the choice of gun ownership, the choice of who you can do business with, what size soda you can buy, or what you can say as a religious leader.
The right is more likely to remove the choice of whether you can kill your fetus or baby (depending on your viewpoint)
Whether abortion should be legal really comes down to a belief. When does a person become a person? If you believe a person becomes a person when they exit their mother's womb, then you should have no problem with the term pro-abortion. If that's your belief, then you shouldn't even care if there are fewer abortions. It's just a medical procedure extracting unwanted cells from a woman's body. If, however, you believe a person becomes a person before that, then under no circumstances, other than the certainty of making a choice between the mother's or the baby's life, should someone be allowed to kill the baby at that point.
I've heard people point to many tests to determine person-hood: viability, heartbeat, sensing pain, the ability to survive on it's own (which may not really happen well into childhood). It's really a question of when does a child obtain rights.
Personally, I find it unscientific and arbitrary to say a person becomes a person because they changed location.
It appears to me that the warrant system was to allow a judge to determine specific place and person to be searched or seized.
WooHoo
Thank you for being so anti-hate. It's unfortunate when people are hateful. Again, thanks for the loving sentiment.
Most of my computers are older, but I've had better success with Linux (new versions) over Windows finding drivers. I'm assuming that Windows had dropped the drivers, but I've had hardware (soundcards, NICs, etc.) that just work in Linux but Windows didn't see them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...
As one who knows evolution happens but doesn't believe in evolution as is referenced in this article, I know evolution happens within a kind of animals. In my biology textbook I read of a lizard population in California which split and became two isolated populations which have become separate species. This is specialization and the formation of new species, I do not believe life came about from natural processes, and I do not believe that a lizard population will ever not be a lizard population.
No, he didn't have the gun with him, he left it in Florida.
Kjella, I really enjoyed your comment. You have much more understanding of the Christian worldview. The problem is that when you come at evidence with preconceived notions, which we all do, then evidence will be interpreted based on those preconceptions. If you believe that only natural explanations are valid, then you will interpret the evidence to support a natural answer. If, however, you believe that there is a God who exists outside of our space/time continuum, then the evidence will be used to construct a model reflecting such intervention.
Both creation and evolution advocates exercise faith in ideas they deem true, and will cut off people from the dialogue when they disagree. On the creation side, it happens when you discredit what we see as documentation passed from the creator. On the evolution side, it is when there is mention that it may not have been natural processes or that evolution does not extend past limits of kinds of animals.
I had a friend who did not believe in God posit this to his biology professor, that the evolution community, at least in behavior, acted just like a religion. There are unproven things taught as doctrine, and any who disagree with this doctrine will be excommunicated or removed from the community where consensus will be derived. He said his professor conceded that it was true, but that they were right so it was ok.
This is not reason vs religion, it's a battle of worldviews or presuppositions.
Don't be so dense.
Is that an absolute?
Where it seems to turn into evidence against the theory is when we find multiple examples of a particular animal with gaps on both sides. I believe Darwin even said he expected that over the next hundred years we would find a continuum of fossils. What we find is several of a particular type and then several of another type with a considerable leap in between. For example, I would expect that we would have T-Rex fossils (which we do) and a continuum of fossils evolutionarily precluding and following T-Rex. If we had only found one T-Rex fossil then it would not seem to argue against evolution. The more T-Rex fossils we find without finding any evolutionary ancestors or descendants, however, begins to point to the fact that they may not have existed.
The article didn't work but from reading the blurb above, it doesn't seem it separates the oxygen from hydrogen, but takes the oxygen trapped in the water like fish do. It's not something I've researched but I'm pretty sure fish don't separate the water molecules.
If you created a world be it a SIMs game, or a robot realm, you would have the right to define allowable behavior and destroy robots or remove characters from the SIM game or whatever you wanted. God created this one and He alone ultimately has the right to bring justice, all other justice is delegated (even when the rulers don't acknowledge this). This is why when Pilate asked Jesus, "Don't you know I have power to have you killed or released?" Jesus said, "You only have the power that was given you." God is the authority and ultimately, He can do what He wants with His creation and He is just. That's including making the rules for His creation and deciding on a case by case basis when to impart mercy and grace.
I'm going to break from the God and the Bible are non-existent or evil motif and answer your question. 1 John 1:9 says, "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." This gives a pretty good indication of when we will receive forgiveness. When my son does something wrong, there are consequences. Sometimes, I show mercy and don't give the consequences. This pretty much never happens when he's making excuses, trying to say it's not that bad or it's someone else's fault. Mercy is normally imputed when there is penitence, which is what God wrote through John. Usually, when they lie to me about it, the consequences become much more severe.
It is funny, and I know funny. I'm a clownfish.