no, i don't believe that. i mean that. perhaps reading comprehension should be a topic of discussion. lol. what's that? a personal attack from me? ah hell, who's perfect, huh?

good point. suppose you're standing between the geographical north pole and the magnetic north pole, somewhere in extreme northern canada or wherever. would you follow your compass south to get to warmer climes in miami?

btw, jb, the compass has never pointed directly true north from all points on the planet. not in the sixty two years you've lived nor ever.

precisely my point, jeannie. cameras are not necessarily reliable "to fairly assess what actually happend." we keep bowing to the judgement of an individual.

a compass will always point to MAGNETIC north, conrad. not to TRUE north. in fact a magnetic compass is all but useless for navigating the extreme northern latitudes. with the invention of gps and other lrn systems, the mag compass is pretty much useless anywhere anymore.

hey, being the poor loser that i am, i'll play golf with anybody i think i can beat. could care less about seeing eye to eye politically, religiously or anything else.


hmmmmmmm. got me thinkin'. one, being able to count the number of times i've played eighteen holes on one hand, i'm a terrible golfer. two, the contrarian that i am, i see very few things eye to eye with anyone. maybe i'll look into those solo freeclimbing lessons and i'll take up scaling virtical granite cliffs like el capitan in yosemite without ropes. prolly safer, ya think?

seems to me that the only way to be fair to all religions in doing that would be that prayer from every religion on the planet would have to take place in these government venues. and even then where is the fairness for the secular folks who actually see religious dogma as harmful to humanity? the only way for government to fairly treat all religious belief fairly is to keep religion entirely out of government. that is precisely what the establsihment clause is meant to do. EXCLUDE religion from government.

yourself and creativesoul are far from the first people to call my opinions pointless, jeannie. what would be a first would be my saying to anybody that there opinion is pointless. but then i'm not you or creativesoul or any of the other people who judge mine or anybody elses opinions as pointless, invalid, moronic, dumb or many other adjectives that convey very negatively. but if you think that saying my opinion is pointless somehow addresses the topic of discussion, be my guest because frankly i could care less whether or not you'd be interested in anything i have to say if that's your attitude. i didn't think it was. now i know. but fear not, i'm questioning my newfound knowledge as i type this. sheesh. i just might be wrong about you. ya think? lol.

ah. in that case i guess australia would no longer be down under. lol.

not necessarily. take nfl instant replay calls for instance. oftentimes several cameras show different views of a play yet the officials see the films and decide that the camera views are inconclusive so the call on the play stands. the official that made the original call could be right, could be wrong but because the film does not show conclusively either way the ruling is that he was right. of course he still might very well have been wrong but there is nothing to suggest that he was. the call stands, the game goes on with nobody knowing absolutely what really happened. but i'll guarandamntee ya that both teams will differ on the call.

great then. nothing further as i've given it what i see as it's just do. now i suppose we can debate individual just do, huh? lol.

but i don't base my philosophy on what i find in the dictionary. i simply said that the word supposition has nothing to do with belief. actually i can't say that i have a philosopy. just a dictionary that explains an accepted meaning of words. oh, a number of other books too but nothing philisophical. i simply say what i mean, mean what i say. quite simple really.

why would i make the statement that i did not read anything that suggest mh mentioned or implied christianity? well, simply because i did not read anything that mh mentioned or implied christianity. like these easy questions.

i believe nothing, jeanie. my experience is that i've read nothing to indicate that christianity was mentioned or implied by mh.

okay fine. googled, 'definition of supposition'. no mention of belief. no, i'm not about to click on every link.

false belief according to whom. i might say that genesis is a demonstrably false belief being that there is much evidence to suggest the big bang as an alternative explanation for the creation of the visible universe. and yet many feel that their belief in creation does indeed constitute adequat grounds for genesis being justified based solely on that belief.

they may or may not have felt justified in their own minds. none were justified in my mind.

it was a group of individuals with like minded ideas that made the event happen. even so, once the particular law was innacted, many will see the law as unjust.



nope.

typed it into yahoo search. no mention of belief. google isn't a toolbar of mine but i'll go with dictionary definition nonetheless.

typed it into yahoo search. no mention of belief. google isn't a toolbar of mine but i'll go with dictionary definition nonetheless.

well i only know what i experienced at the one concert of his i attended. actually it wasn't just his concer, charley daniels and a couple other country stars whose names escape me, were performing too. but when he made the comment several black folks got up and left. i would have but i really wanted to see charley daniels sing 'the devil went down to georgia.' lol.