meh. I don't think that restaurants should allow anyone under 12 in their doors, no matter what they eat.

Problem solved.

Whenever they come near you, read the Rite of Exorcism to them. Do not stop reading or engage in conversation until they leave.

I am #3!









(by the way, I don't believe that classifying Thomas Paine as an anarchist is very accurate)

Fellatio With Beer

Popular Science offers a wide variety of articles delivered in approachable language.

W00T!! Got them all.

but it did take me 6 hours to figure out the charcoal

Hiya, you are pretty and would like to talk with you.

(sorry, just wanted to beat Fabo. )


HEY DARE!!

Yeah. I have been trying to get points 1 through 4 across to people I know. It is tough to get people to see that things that "sound" good are actually bad when you look at them more deeply.

I have pretty much given up trying to get people to see that they are selling their souls (and mine and my kids) for empty promises that can never pan out because at their core they are philosophically flawed.

I am afraid I would have to wash the sink before I used it.

Just as a point of reference. "Visiting" another country and "Immigrating illegally" are 2 completely different things.

I think it comes from the idea that "wisdom" is understanding through experience. The older you are... the more experience. Of course, there are some truly foolish older people who never learn from their experiences.

Younger people might be considered "wise beyond their years" meaning that they have the ability to distill understanding from the experience of others. Or, they simply might be astute and need fewer experiences to learn from than others.

Allow me to quote you completely.


Your first sentence is irrelevant. It matters not if we were attacked or not, we went to war (splitting semantic hairs over "conflict" or "war" is meaningless in this context).

Your second sentence admits that America has been in multiple wars "LATELY". Then you say America has never had a draft EXCEPT for Vietnam.

Had you read the article referenced, you would have recognized that from 1776 until 1973 the United States engaged in conscription at various times.

AND... (please read this part carefully)

Between 1940 and 1973 there was a draft in America whether or not there was a war.

I freely admit that your abuse of sentence structure and punctuation makes it difficult to understand your ideas; but I do give you the benefit of the doubt and try to make sure I understand exactly what you are writing.

Unfortunately, you have no such respect for the other writers in this thread. You use rants and insults in place of argument. Your concern is only to appear superior instead of understanding the issues presented from another's perspective.

And so, I have decided that instead of spending all my time trying to clarify the deliberate mischaracterizations and ill mannered dogma that you liter the thread with; I would simply allow you to play alone in the feces you have so amply cover the walls with.

Sorry Jane. You are wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_the_United_States

There has been conscription in the US military since the Revolutionary War. However, my examples were strictly limited to WWII and Vietnam.

But, since everything that I say seems to be contradicted without evidence the only prudent course of action that remains for me is to back out of this thread.

But before I go, I will take the liberty to interpret Adventure's answer for you since you seem to have misunderstood.

He stated:


Meaning that he joined the military for the reasons that he stated. He had options available to him had he chosen NOT to join the military. Those options were available to him through his connections and would have allowed him a lucrative career.

Meh. Just because someone e-mails you, you are not responsible for answering. If someone feels they want to, that's fine. But to imply that someone needs to spend their free time answering messages from people they have no intention of talking with seems a little too much.

I am not sure how Descartes answers questions for an atheist...

Meditation III: Concerning God, That He Exists
Descartes proposed that there are three types of ideas: Innate, Invented, and Adventitious. Innate ideas are and have always been within us, Fictitious or invented ideas come from our imagination, and Adventitious ideas come from experiences of the world. He argues that the idea of God is Innate and placed in us by God and he rejected the possibility that the idea of God is Invented or Adventitious.

Argument 1

Something cannot come from nothing.
The cause of an idea must have at least as much formal reality as the idea has objective reality.
I have in me an idea of God. This idea has infinite objective reality.
I cannot be the cause of this idea, since I am not an infinite and perfect being. I don't have enough formal reality. Only an infinite and perfect being could cause such an idea.
So God — a being with infinite formal reality — must exist (and be the source of my idea of God).
An absolutely perfect being is a good, benevolent being.
So God is benevolent.
So God would not deceive me and would not permit me to error without giving me a way to correct my errors.
Argument 2

I exist.
My existence must have a cause.
The cause must be either:
a) myself
b) my always having existed
c) my parents
d) something less perfect than God
e) God
4. Not a. If I had created myself, I would have made myself perfect.
5. Not b. This does not solve the problem. If I am a dependent being, I need to be continually sustained by another.
6. Not c. This leads to an infinite regress.
7. Not d. The idea of perfection that exists in me cannot have originated from a non-perfect being.
8. Therefore, e. God exists.
Descartes argued that he had a clear and distinct idea of God. In the same way that the cogito was self-evident, so too is the existence of God, as his perfect idea of a perfect being could not have been caused by anything less than a perfect being.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meditations_on_First_Philosophy

"Just remember, the fish stinks from the head down."
~Grandma

"He who controls the past controls the future.
He who controls the present controls the past."
~ Orwell

Why?

Yeah, this stuff is pretty scary and you didn't even mention Economic Warfare.

When a country owns enough of another country's debt, they can threaten to destroy their economy. The country whose debt is owned must capitulate to the demands of their "owners". We did it to England in the past, don't think China (who owns about half our debt) wouldn't do it to us.

Drinking can be very helpful in a lot of ways...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0rMkt3uB9c

LMAO! I can see where wearing a pent might be a bigger problem when some sheltered housewife maneuvers her cart close to you in the supermarket and whispers: "Can you see the future?" Or a group of teenage girls wants to know how to cast "A Love Spell".