Plainly you have never heard of a show called 'Jerry Springer'
"We — that is, physicists — don't really know why there's this imbalance, why the universe is made of matter." Only an expert can say 'I don't know.' with 1500 words. Great article nonetheless.
Your first problem is that there are no 75mph zones in Michigan. There is an I-75, which people often do 94 on around Detroit, and 69 on 96 is acceptable but 75 on any road in Michigan will get you a ticket since the speed limit on freeways in Michigan is 70mph.
It seemed to me that every time there was more than 1 idea in a question Watson's confidence in an answer plummeted. Watson may be able to solve simple straightforward inquiries, but we are a long way from a computer like Watson solving complex questions. (Reference Toronto, Museum of Picasso, Dorothy Parker, Wellingtons=White clothing)
Might have something to do with lousy reporting on what the app actually is.
[www.dailymail.co.uk]
followed by an abrupt over reaction in the other direction:[www.examiner.com]
Just an FYI:The 'Catholic church seal of approval' it got was simply an okay by the bishop where the app was created (Bishop of South Bend, IN) saying that any theology in it is without error. It is something any legit Catholic theological published work should have.
[www.dailymail.co.uk]
followed by an abrupt over reaction in the other direction:[www.examiner.com]
Just an FYI:The 'Catholic church seal of approval' it got was simply an okay by the bishop where the app was created (Bishop of South Bend, IN) saying that any theology in it is without error. It is something any legit Catholic theological published work should have.
I'd heart you, if I could just figure out what is going on with the commenting system...
@jgrnt1: Without some group imposing their beliefs there is no state. Politics involves individuals coming together and deciding what beliefs they will be governed by. Like, for example, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." They could have said, 'Congress shall make laws respecting an establishment of religion,' but their beliefs were that it should be otherwise
@mf679: Who said I was afraid of gays... ? All I am saying is that I don't believe homosexual relationships should have the same status in law as heterosexual marriage.
Here is a synopsis of how I believe regarding homosexual persons.
CCC 2357-8
[www.vatican.va]
Here is a synopsis of how I believe regarding homosexual persons.
CCC 2357-8
[www.vatican.va]
@RuckingFetard: I could hit ctrl+c and ctrl+v for my first post. I have not referenced the bible/koran/torah/any other religious text in any of my posts. Also, for the record I am a Catholic, so...
[www.ewtn.com]
and
Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church and handed himself over for her.
and finally Acts 11:9 'What God has made clean, you are not to call profane.'
Know your adversary before you proceed to pigeonhole him, Rucking Fetard...
[www.ewtn.com]
and
Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church and handed himself over for her.
and finally Acts 11:9 'What God has made clean, you are not to call profane.'
Know your adversary before you proceed to pigeonhole him, Rucking Fetard...
@freediverdude: Nope, try again. I said that a man and a woman come together to create children. Adoption and even IVF operate through the same principles. Arguments for or against IVF or single parent adoptions are different.
@The5thElephant:No I don't mind being a lone voice. [en.wikipedia.org]
Because sometimes a majority is wrong.
Because sometimes a majority is wrong.
@jgrnt1: On the contrary, I would argue to my last breath for you to express your views. I agree with everything you post short of one thing. Political activity is quite simply pushing ideas. In a legislature and at the ballot box ideas are put to the test. What has been said is then acted on.
Can you say as much for me as you have said for yourself. What if I told you that you have no right to push your beliefs on others. That your arguments have no right to be heard in schools or in legal system. When you say that my arguments have no rights in these places, you are saying that my speech has no rights in these places.
Yours do... but decisions must be made.
Can you say as much for me as you have said for yourself. What if I told you that you have no right to push your beliefs on others. That your arguments have no right to be heard in schools or in legal system. When you say that my arguments have no rights in these places, you are saying that my speech has no rights in these places.
Yours do... but decisions must be made.
@mf679: I am actually quite familiar with the case of David Reimer and Dr. Money and I believe it adds to my point. Men and women are different and doctors cannot simply change this underlying truth. The complementarity of men and women should be lauded not avoided.
I do try to avoid stereotyping people I disagree with, (*ehem* Brian Barrett *ehem* ) and I would like to think that I treat people fairly and listen to their arguments.
I do try to avoid stereotyping people I disagree with, (*ehem* Brian Barrett *ehem* ) and I would like to think that I treat people fairly and listen to their arguments.
@Arken: A gay man still has the right to marry a woman, and a gay woman still has the right to marry a man. They don't want to but the fact that the person is gay doesn't change them into some weird thing that is neither male nor female. The underlying rationale for marriage is the propagation and stable raising of children. Gay marriage simply doesn't work for this.
Nowhere does marriage require that the parties love one another, the law simply doesn't care (It helps, obviously, if they do love one another) It is the underlying type of relationship that the state wants to promote.
Nowhere does marriage require that the parties love one another, the law simply doesn't care (It helps, obviously, if they do love one another) It is the underlying type of relationship that the state wants to promote.
@Arken: Nope, again no grand difference. If you lose an arm you are still you. (not to trivialize the loss but...) If you lose both legs, still you. Another way to look at it is a man that has no arms or legs is still a man. Even John Bobbit is still a man. Losing an... appendage does not change identity
@Arken: Nope, can't believe it in good faith. There is no grand difference between the races. There are however differences between men and women.
@hymntook: & many above and below
[www.childwelfare.gov]
Start at why does the STATE support marriage. (What any individual religion or denomination does is not my concern. I don't care about theological arguments here. If Episcopalians want to bless gay unions that is their business) The STATE supports marriage with protections and, depending on the jurisdiction, makes it hard to get out of in order to create a stable environment to create and raise children to ensure the survival of the state.
As the cartoon so deftly reminds us. A man gets a woman pregnant. This is the ordinary way. Even in IVF. One man's sperm inseminates one woman' ovum. Heterosexual marriage is grounded in basic biology/7th grade health class science. Homosexual marriage is simply incapable of this and does not provide the home life between complementary human beings. Men and women are equal but they are not identical, they are complementary.
[www.childwelfare.gov]
Start at why does the STATE support marriage. (What any individual religion or denomination does is not my concern. I don't care about theological arguments here. If Episcopalians want to bless gay unions that is their business) The STATE supports marriage with protections and, depending on the jurisdiction, makes it hard to get out of in order to create a stable environment to create and raise children to ensure the survival of the state.
As the cartoon so deftly reminds us. A man gets a woman pregnant. This is the ordinary way. Even in IVF. One man's sperm inseminates one woman' ovum. Heterosexual marriage is grounded in basic biology/7th grade health class science. Homosexual marriage is simply incapable of this and does not provide the home life between complementary human beings. Men and women are equal but they are not identical, they are complementary.
@Arken: Murder is wrong. I will hold that view till the day I die. Does that make me a bigot for that belief. If you want to use the word bigot for any stubborn belief, then the word loses its punch.
Again the last sentence I wrote was that people in good faith can have different views on this subject.
I would bet that a good number of people over at NOM believe that those who hold that homosexual marriage should be legal hold that belief in good faith.
Words have connotative meanings as well.
And I don't believe that this man:
[www.princeton.edu]
came to his opinion without thought, consideration and examining the other's arguments.
Again the last sentence I wrote was that people in good faith can have different views on this subject.
I would bet that a good number of people over at NOM believe that those who hold that homosexual marriage should be legal hold that belief in good faith.
Words have connotative meanings as well.
And I don't believe that this man:
[www.princeton.edu]
came to his opinion without thought, consideration and examining the other's arguments.
So straight to the ad hominem. If the people at NOM are bigots then I am one too, then the 2.6 million people in my state who voted to ban it are bigots too. There are logical arguments, supported in science, as to why marriage ought to only be between a man and a woman.
People acting in good faith can have different views on this issue.
People acting in good faith can have different views on this issue.
@mados123: and don't forget... "Fire, oh the humanity."
