Raf

Vile

Spare me the innocent indignation. You could have compared the lack of ISIL coverage to a thousand issues getting more coverage in the media today. Not only did you choose Ferguson as your point of comparison, you portrayed the Ferguson issue in such a way as to invalidate the claims made by the protesters. That has NOTHING to with the civilized world shrugging at ISIL. If you don't like the Ferguson protests, that's cool. No one is forcing you to agree with them. But what you actually said was that Ferguson is an invalid story that does not deserve the coverage it's getting, and using the heads of innocent children to illustrate that point. So vile and disgusting are kind words, compared to what's called for under the circumstances.

The validity of the cause inspiring the Ferguson protest is unrelated to ISIL beheading innocent children. I find it disgusting that anyone would hold their heads up to shame Ferguson protesters. Hypocrisy? How about a little decency?

I don't see how one injustice invalidates the quest for justice in an unrelated case. Not to pass any judgment on Officer Wilson, pro or con, but there's something flat out despicable about using the heads of innocent children to tell frustrated protesters concerned about an unrelated issue to sit down and shut up. Vile. Sorry.

Another modern example of "how convenient is that" ties into the post hoc ergo procter hoc fallacy (forgive any misspelling). How many people can cite a miracle that goes something like this: So-and-so got a diagnosis of severe fatal cornitearjerkititis. So we prayed for So-and-so. Next time So-and-so visited the hospital, all traces of the disease were gone! It's a miracle! The implication is that the prayer triggered action from God that led to the curing of the disease. Indeed, no other explanation is even entertained. To God be the glory, right? But what happens if you reverse the results? When my friend's wife was knocked down by a stroke, so many of us prayed for her. Prayed and prayed and prayed. And she died. Using the same logic as the previous example, I should be able to say that the prayers triggered God's intervention resulting in the woman's premature death, right? Oh, no? NOW it's a fallacy? NOW we seek alternative explanations? How convenient is that?

Going from memory, so might be slightly off: "I'm gonna play this city like a harp from hell!"

Oh. Ok. "Mistletoe can be deadly if you eat it." "A kiss can be deadlier, if you mean it."

Why did God command genocide?

I could see removing tax exempt status from churches IF those statuses are allowed to remain for particular good things the churches do. For example, a church that runs a food bank should be taxed, but the food bank itself should not. But I'm MORE inclined to leave it alone. *** Incidentally, I am sensitive to how easy it would be to become a one-note poster, and I'm trying not to do that. But on this thread with this topic, I think the following observation has a place: As long as we're in a country that is religiously free, cults cannot be prevented from forming. Not by law, anyway. As long as people believe in a god, they are susceptible to abuse from anyone believed to speak for that god. This is not to say atheists are not susceptible to abuse. It just wouldn't come from a religious cult, per se.

Genesis 9 gives the distinct impression that prior to the Flood, mankind did not eat meat. In reality, mankind has been eating meat for at least 1.5 million years (including man's ancestors: by the time we get to cro magnons about 35,000 years ago, meat is a major part of man's diet. Am I wrong about what Genesis says? If I'm right, this is a fairly obvious error.

I find it interesting that the interest in discussing the issue stops once it becomes clear that staying on topic will be enforced.

Wow.

Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring

Anna Paquin X-Men Hugh Jackman

What does Christine Hayes have to say that is of value to the Archaeology discussion? Are you actually going to answer a question and engage in a discussion this time? Interesting article by Christine Hayes regarding the Bible.

"When he comes through your door, unless you just-a want some more..."

Is this mashup or name that flick?

I pulled a "you guys" and listed the second movie first. So George, you actually have the FIRST movie title in mind.

You're up.

Cleaning Up The Town Saving the Day In the Name of Love

"I cannot make it blossom when it suits me nor make it bear fruit before its time." "But there are things we *can* control: I can control when the fruit will fall, I can control where to plant the seed: that is no illusion, Master!" "Ah, yes. But no matter what you do, that seed will grow to be a peach tree. You may wish for an apple or an orange, but you will get a peach." *** "The secret ingredient is... nothing!" "Huh?" "You heard me. Nothing! There is no secret ingredient." "Wait, wait... it's just plain old noodle soup? You don't add some kind of special sauce or something?" "Don't have to. To make something special you just have to believe it's special." "There is no secret ingredient..."

The Hunt for Red October ?

A student at a historically black college tries to get into a popular fraternity, tapping into an ongoing feud between lighter-skinned and darker-skinned students. One day, a millionaire businessman trying to show his son how important it is to get a formal education decides to enrol, causing a big splash.

On what basis do you declare/discern/judge/conclude God to be moral?

I didn't post for six days. I did not expect no one else to post for six days! For those "guests" who posted while I was taking a break, please check your email. You're welcome to rejoin us, provided you were really you. :)