I'm against it, like I am hydraulic fracturing. I've read that tar sands oil is even dirtier than conventional oil, that its extraction is very wasteful and intensive, the forests and habitat are of course put at risk, and there are HIGH risks of spills. More generally, money and time should be spent pursuing less destructive and greener energies, but battling the oil companies is obviously difficult and can only be done with an informed public.
Ahh, internet conspiracy sleuthing always produces good entertainment.
Advanced hardware and technology is one thing, and the USA outspends the rest of the world including Russia and China put together, but why it has to do with ET, little green men, or big bad Russians I'm not always sure. Might be a little bit of paranoia at play.
At least 4% of death row inmates are likely wrongly convicted.
This is also interesting since another study shows that in the USA the death penalty is on the decline. Quite a number of northern states have banned it, and in the rest it is exceedingly difficult to actually have it applied, so you have Texas, Oklahoma, and a couple of southern states, I think, that mainly use it. And we all know who dominates politics there:
That it is getting harder for states to purchase the chemicals used to execute prisoners means that we at minimum need an indefinite, comprehensive moratorium on capital punishment in the USA. And it is past time to have it ruled unconstitutional.
You know what I find ironic to the point that it's almost unbelievable about death penalty support in the USA? The really vocal supporters of it tend to be these anti-government ("Big Gubment") right wing folk. They fear Sharia Law might be coming, that death panels lurk somewhere in the pages of "Obamacare," that there are plots and conspiracies afoot, and so on. Then they turn around and say, "Yeah! Hang 'em!" I mean, it's baffling. Oklahoma and Texas are fantastic examples. So, I think it isn't really small government that they want, but rather oligarchy.
A geological company thinks they may possibly have found it in the Bay of Bengal, which is not within current search parameters. Still, it probably should be investigated. Why not? As many stories and counter stories as have come out, any substantial lead is worth a check.
It's a random piece of space junk, possibly an old satellite or part of one. The seat theory is interesting, but I can't really tell. A couple of the pictures look like it could possibly be some sort of high altitude aircraft as well.
It's a good question. Fundamentalism, literalism, or something like that would be a turn-off. Also, if a person's religion was most of their life, that would be a turn-off. I probably wouldn't respond well if I was expected to adopt some belief system, but otherwise, there's a type of person that is "religious but not spiritual," actually, and they tend to "go through the motions" with their faith or observe it out of routine. There is also the "spiritual but not religious," and neither one would bother me just so I wasn't expected to adopt it.
Most people sadly confuse faith with morals or a moral center, which is one of the reasons why some folks have religious tests, I think. Faith and a moral center are decidedly not dependent upon each other. That, or some folks use religion as a means to keep themselves together, so they really would want it in another person.
Granted, I'd prefer a non-believer because I've worked through those matters, but a person talking about God would not be a deal-ender for me, and the whole matter is really only one issue. I look at people holistically.
Absolutely not and view vigilante justice as regressive and uncivilized. No system is perfect, and I'd rather a guilty person go free than an innocent person be punished, if a choice between the two extremes were put to me. A posse or otherwise mob rule system would be awful beyond awful.
Star Trek for sure. Realistic stories for the most part in a sci-fi socio-political setting; I always enjoyed The Next Generation a great deal, although the original series is retro.
I think Christianity by a lot, but not fundamentalist Christianity - I think the majority is kind of a New Age Christianity or liberal Christianity (there is social pressure still in many parts of the West to believe in something). The West is pretty big, of course!
No. Psychic reading or fortune telling is an art. If it worked, and if there were such a "gift," I'd think psychics would be in like some elite class or something, because they'd just have knowledge the rest of us don't have. And I'd think they could do it in a controlled environment.
I wish I could be more specific, but there was an experiment done one time where a researcher took a study group, distributed horoscopes to everyone, polled everyone on how accurate the reading was, and many (forget the percentage) admitted that the reading was very accurate. It was a little more complicated than that, but that's the bottom line of what happened. Well, it turned out they all had the same reading. Great experiment! Love it.
One thing is for sure: the New Age stuff is more entertaining than conventional religion!
Honestly, I don't know if there's a God or not, although I doubt it. But I don't know.
What I don't follow, though, is how people can make all these claims about spirits and gods and so on. On what are those claims based?
Ultimately, I don't suppose it matters because it's no real threat to anyone. I just really, really try to get my head around it and run into too much illogic.
I agree! But I think they really don't see God as giving so little. They count ordinary things as blessings and view trials and conflicts in life as "mysteries" or maybe "tests."
Ehh, assuming that's serious, it's just plate tectonics, cold and warm fronts, and so on.
But if anyone believes that a god does that stuff, he or she should wonder about what kind of god would do that! Not one worthy of any admiration, that's for sure.
I think it often boils down to the fact that the mysteries of the physical world are not personal enough for a lot of people. Why not? Good question. How life evolves, how stars form, how they make elements all positively fascinate me, but a lot of folks for comfort need this idea that there's some force in the cosmos that cares about their wellbeing. That to me is what it comes down to. And it's why they all (New Age, spiritual, or conventionally religious) usually either bristle or become incensed about ideas of randomness or coincidence. There is a need for something personal.
Faiths serve societal and communal functions (a ton has been written about that) as well.
It gets better with every viewing. Lots in there about language, religion, myth, and the Saxon / Norman French cultural entanglement. It's actually hysterical.
Is there a moderator staff here? I'd ask if this is a problem.
I post on a couple political forums now and again that have an active, open moderator / admin crew. Trollish threads, duplicate account activity, and spam get taken care of pretty quickly.
Yes, the short answer being to provide not only social order but also to make sense of the world before sense existed (i.e., knowledge about organic, inorganic, and cosmic processes). Prehistoric humans clearly had rituals and myths and gods. A really interesting question is, did Neanderthals? It would be a remarkable archaeological find if so, even rudimentary ritual!
Wheat, vegetables, and something Mediterranean on a daily basis - I actually really like the stuff. Hummus with wheat bread / toast is an awesome snack, and the food generally sits very well on your stomach.
For dessert? Peanut butter pie (sometimes made with an oatmeal crust, which is amazing) or pecan pie. Coffee. I don't usually do dessert wines. I like certain dry reds.
Non-dessert pies around here would mostly be chicken pies - they're chicken baked in a pie with veggies or whatever you want to put in them, and they usually go with a potato. They're good!
It just empowered the very people we were trying to stop. And filled jails with non-violent offenders. I see a near perfect analogy in prohibition, at least with regard to marijuana.
memory_alpha Forum Posts (72)
Great experiment! Love it.
RE: An Eye For An Eye?
No. "An eye for an eye makes the world go blind."I oppose the death penalty, and more importantly it is estimated in the USA that as many as 4% of death row inmates are entirely innocent.
Do you have the right to defend yourself? Of course. That's different from revenge and mob justice.