The Farce is that Human activity is solely responsible for the alleged "recent" changes in global temperature and the ice caps and the polar bears.. blah blah blah..

the earth does naturally go through multi-frequency cyclical variations in mean global temperature.

Look up Haq et al "Chronology of Fluctuating Sea Levels Since the Triassic", 1987.. that's a good place to start if you want to know something about it from a real scientific perspective.

false.. Science is about evidence and observation. Philosophy is interested in truth.

but your point is well put, otherwise. these otherwise well-meaning and rigorous scientists are more beholden to their ideology on this issue than they are to science..

So the Democrats aren't happy just spending our tax dollars (our debt actually) on buying votes from thru ACORN and the SEIU.. Now they're using our tax money (debt) to outright buy votes in the Senate..

Now, this is nothing new.. This goes on all the time, really.

What is new, however, is for the recently purchased Congressman or Senator to announce that the vote was bought and to divulge the amount for which she was purchased..

I guess this is the kind of transparency Obama was promising us..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/21/AR2009112102272_pf.html

save it for the zombie apocalypse.. that's what mine are for..

no, I get your point. I just think you're mistaken if you think that the government "option" or the government "approved" health insurance policies will not be subject to the government determinations as to what is and what is not effective medical care.

This breast cancer screening issue is just the first in what is sure to be a litany of similar recommendations for medical care and preventative medicine..

Didn't they say that prevention was cheaper and more effective than treating advanced illness? So why then come out and say that pre-screening is unnecessary and unnecessarily expensive, arguing, in effect that it does more harm than good?

whiskey tango foxtrot

"sharing office space" I use as a figure of speech.. I'm sure you're not so obtuse as not to realise that..

government panel is in charge of insuring millions of Americans..

government panel recommends that this practice or that is or isn't effective against one thing or the other.. what makes you think your government paid doctor is going to act counter to the recommendations of his/her employer (i.e. the government)??

what are the odds of that being the case when that panel shares office space with the "insurer"??

this "recommendation" is another line of evidence for there to be a buffer between the policy- (i.e. law-) maker and the insurer..

google "coca cola muslim"

interesting lecture given by "reverted" muslim Abdur Raheem Green

It's long, over an hour but it gives amazing insight into the midset of a segment of the muslim world

About 15 minutes in he begins talking about the war of ideologies between Islam and the West. Very telling.. One of Islam's more celebrated scholars talking about Islam being at war, at least, ideologically if not with arms, with the West.

listen near the end when he gives the "Are you a coca cola muslim" quiz wherein the respondent's binary/yes or no answer is designed to tell whether one is a true muslim or a "cocacola muslim".

The following is a sampling of some of the questions (and answers with their bearing on the question, "Are you a Coca Cola Muslim") that I found interesting:

Q: Do you think a man should have only one wife?

if yes, one point for being a cocacola muslim..

Q: Do you think of marriage as a match held together by love or a working relationship trying to build a better muslim nation?

If you think marriage is a lovey-dovey kind of affair, a big tic for being a cocacola muslim..

Q: Are you planning to have 2 or 3 kids at the most and give them the best or are you hoping for a footbal team?

If you are planning to have one, or two kids at the most and give them the best, you a re definitely in the cocacola muslim league, conquered by the West ideologically.

Q: Would you prefer to take a mortgage or be content with rent?

If you want to take a mortgage, give yourself 5, 10, 15 points for being a coca cola muslim

**************************************

in fact, I'll save you the trouble of finding it yourself and give you the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-lZ7BDrqAs

that's slave-talk.. We'll have none of that!

We own the government.. they're not our rulers; they're our employees..

in the case of baby killers and child molesters, I disagress.. put them in the pen with the general population..

they tend not to last too long.. why spend tax dollars on endless appeals and years of imprisonment.

let the cons kill them..

poor rapist..

he just needs to be rehabilitated..

someone should council him on the proper ways to interact with people..

that's all..

he's not really a bad person, just misunderstood..

we shouldn't be so quick to judge him..

besides, putting him in the criminal justice system will only make him worse.. wont help him at all..

we, as a society, should be more sensative to his needs as an individual..

poor fella..

Do you write Obama's speeches? Cuz that rhetoric sounds awfully familiar..

I guess no one wants to stand up and argue that the only possible way to affect health care reform in this country is to place an unconstitutional mandate on the American people and confiscate a vast swath of their (our) incomes.

That's gotta be the only way, right?

No other possibilities exist. huh?

Gotta launder more money through Washington and let the congress tell us when to brush our teeth and go to bed...

do you not understand the meaning of the word "allegation"?

Someone said they did. So in the minds of the people there (and yours as well apparently), it's true, regardless of whether it happened or not.

I honestly doubt that anyone burned a Q'ran..

It's just red meat to stir up more anti-American sentiment and get the people calling for jihad, which, no coincidentally, they are now doing..

So first you state (or at least agree with the statement) that laws ought not be based on biblical precedence and then you come at me with a biblical justification against capital punishment?

Does anyone else smell the hypocracy in this?

please.. pick which side of the fence you'd like to argue from.

The definition you copied and pasted from wherever (without citation, by the way) present several weaknesses inyour arguement.

First it does not incorporate justice, the moral foundation of all law. Vengance is not concerned with due process whereas Justice requires due process.

payment for criminality does not equate to retribution.

And Justice is not concerned with retribution.

Second it indicates that vengence is a style or type of punishment.

but just as all ducks are birds, though not all birds are ducks. Similarly though vengence is an exercise in punishment, not all punishments are exercises in vengence.

A parent does not punich a child out of a sense of vengence. The parent punishes the child out of the need to impress a sense of right and wrong.

I'm certain I'm not going to change your stance on this issue. You have something stuck in your head and that's that, as far as you're concerned. That's fine. Obstenence is your perogative

but you at least owe yourself the decency to operate with a modecum of intellectual honesty..

again.. there is a difference vengance and lawful punishment in the interest of justice regardless of your opinion to the contrary..

we were never neandertals.. there were common ancestor between the two species but that was a divergent limb of evolution.. that's been rather well documented.. Neandertal man was wiped out by homo sapiens. We did not evolve from them..

by your logic, the legitimacy of any exercise of punishment under the law would be nullified by your religious agruement..

so lets just stop enforcing law en toto and let there be chaos.

i guess whether or not it was a tragedy depends on perspective.

It doesn't say who the army was marching against though I'm guessing Egypt but if you were the nation, king, army, city on whom they were marching, I'd imagine you'd see it as a nothing less than salvation..

interesting article, though.. It'd be interesting to read more about this epsiode in history, what events surrounded it.. what motivated a persian king to march such a massive army into such adverse conditions, why the host took an alternative route

A) that's their business.. what difference does it make to you what relationship another has with his/her creator?

B) so go live in one of those states if you feel that strongly about it.. maybe you already do, in which case you're just billowing hot air and passing judgement on other. "Judge not, lest ye be judged"

C) We've already demonstrated the distinction between punishment and vengance.. there is a difference whether you choose to see it or not

Biblical Scholar, all of a sudden? probably not otherwise you would have capitalised "His"..

however, the arguement doesn't rest on religious grounds.

To take vengance is irrespective of due process.

To apply capital punishment (or any punishment) in this country is a matter of due process and applying the values of society codified into law. It's not an exercise in vengance. It's the ultimate step in carrying out justice..

You may find it objectionable. You may disagree with it. That doens't change the fact that the law of the land is that murder, of which he was tried and convicted, is punishable by death in the state where he committed the act..

except that due process is implicit in punishment under the law..

vengance is more of a human emotion, acting in rage or as a personal matter.

Punishment under the law is not murder, per se. It's the state acting on the behalf of the society at large, enforcing the values that are codified in law.

Vengance implies an individual acting on his own behalf and in his own interest, not that of the society..