tvashtarkatena

SO YOUZ A UNION MAN. N HEUH AH ALLUS PEGGED YOU FOA SUTHUN MAN. DOEN PAY DAT JAYBEE NO MINE BIG MAN. WE BLACK FOLK DOEN NEEDS NO SKOOLIN CUZ WE JIS PRISON BOUN ANEWAYZ.

Whoa Coppertop!

Translation: let public schools in poorer districts die on the vine rather than fund and fix them properly. Randian Fuck the Poor Policy #467. Not that I don't think you believe your own bullshit, Jay. I think you actually do, so there's that. What in God's name do you know about the public school system anyway? How do you know its so fucked and 'beyond repair'? Now on to the'whites and asians and indians' remark...yup...the real root of your message: WEZE GOTS TA GIT 'WAY FUM DEM CULLUDZ, N VOUCHUHZ N CHAHTUHZ BE DA WAY TA DO IT!

It's always more expensive and less efficient to reinvent the wheel with a huge infrastructure like public education than to improve the wheel you've got. It's a non-starter from the gitgo IMO. Why split our forces to tackle the problem? Must be some other reason(s) other than better education. Hmmmm.

One man's 'principled' is another's 'ideological'. You'd think prisons wouldn't be a money maker, either. They are.

Gay weed lover's meeting this Sat, otherwise we'd consider it. What else to do until the snowpack shapes up?

To aforementioned hydropel, changing socks, inserts, etc - merino wool if ur not using em already

Down one chain saw but up one ice climbing partner , obwan, although when u see me flail up a lead u might wish you still had the saw instead.

Dumb troll from a smart guy, speaking of using a classic Fox tactic. Did i say i was against private bidness? Im against profit being the primary motive for primary govt functions like defense n education...and health care, for that matter. Im also against creating an expensive, parallel systems rather than fixing the one weve got. One of the biggest problems with public education is too many expensive layers of admin that syphon a fixed cash pie from what we need most: teachers. Im against paying for religious indoctrination of chillunz. I went to catholic school...and me Da paid for it out of pocket. Finally, im against hiding bad public policy under the guise of 'helping speshul needs kids' or whatev. Is that a bit clearer for ya?

Did some research. Charter schools are backed by two special interest groups: private bidnesses wanting to cash in on privatization of state funded education N bust another union while they're at it, and d Kristians, who bait and switched the unpopular 'voucher' movement for the better sounding 'charter' program. Its typical Rfuck skulduggery n buggery, as usual. Scam. Vote no. On a different note, ive spoken about gay weed n free speech at a number of high schools, and have been impressed by the intelligence and engagement of teachers and students.

I have exactly as much doubt that god is not a human invention as I have that the tooth fairy is not a human invention. Atheism is a belief that god is a human invention, not the other way around. I have an enormous body of historical evidence to indicate that this is, in fact, the case. and no credible evidence to the contrary. So yes, I can 'prove' that god is a human invention...to myself. I cannot, of course, convince one who relies on faith to make that call, any more than I milk a male tiger. This isn't preaching, it's simply stating a point of view. Feeling something is proof of nothing. I've felt that someone loved me who actually didn't, and I've felt that someone didn't love me who actually did. I felt both quite profoundly, but no amount of intensity made either reality. Feeling is internal brain chemistry, nothing more.

I was merely demonstrating to the thread some of Einstein's thoughts on the matter, which are in opposition to the "facts" brought up by one of the participants. Breathe. Breathe yourself. The comment clearly wasn't directed at you, but at the poster who altered Einstein's beliefs to bolster his own opinion.

I'm going to pray to one of my personal gods, now: water. Is there a more beautiful and frightening substance in the universe? Time for a little lap swim meditation.

I used to run every day at lunch with a devout Christian. We debated religion, of course. One day he said "You know, a lot of people get caught up in the literal truth of the Bible and whatnot, and miss the higher truth contained in it." Another time he said "You know, I pray for you." Knowing him pretty well at that point, I knew his was a message of unselfish, unprejudiced love, of wishing the best for me within the template of his beliefs, not an admonishment for my lack of faith. His god would have watched out for me during such a downhill ride without prejudice. His god wasn't a fucking asshole, because he wasn't a fucking asshole. His god was all inclusive. He was killed with his son when his light plane ran into a mountain in the Sierras several years back. Since god is essentially a blank slate, we make him out to be who we want. Born Agains, Catholics, atheists, whatev - in the end we all choose to buy into a set of beliefs, values, and actions or not. We're not 'bound' by anything in this regard. It's always a choice. Some of us take responsibility for making that choice, others don't. I don't pray during or after near misses, and I've had a few. Oh, being the old Catholic, I 'joke pray' sometimes. Last time I was running for a plane I joke prayed like a motherfucker (it was still on the tarmac, thanks to United's reliably horrible on time performance). I do recognize that I owe a karmic debt, however, and try to pay up when I can.

It's easier to resurrect a dead man's thoughts in your image than breath life into your own.

You're wrong on that. He probably did believe in "god" (really more of a Spinoza's sort of god by most accounts of his private letters, rather than a traditional deist-type personal god) but he certainly never said that E=MC2 was proof of it. And even if he HAD said it, so what? What if he said chocolate was better than vanilla, is it? Citing Einstein seems to be a popular way to avoid independent though. "Well, even Einstein agreed with me...." -- really just another form of religion. The most common argument in favor of denying same sex couples marriage equality is that "30 something states also have such laws" and that "marriage equality has never won when subjected to a popular vote". In other words, get with the herd and stop thinking for yourself. A classic Kristian mentality, and a tactic when you really don't have anything else. The same argument, back in the day, was made for maintaining slavery and denying women the right to vote...by guess who? Kristian groups. Inconveniently, we have this set of principles called the Bill of Rights which was designed to prevent exactly this kind of unjust tyranny of the majority. That's why the Defense of Marriage Act has had its ass handed to it 7 out of 7 times in federal court so far. It'll most likely go to SCOTUS next, which will be hard pressed to overturn seven previous rulings. Ie, as with Intelligent Design, the Kristians most likely have fucked themselves by overreaching, yet again. Seriously, Kristians, who invited you to the civil ceremony? Fuck off. PS Einstein was doggedly wrong regarding quantum physics throughout most of his life. Even smart guys win some and lose some.

Since Rob had the gall to inject some actual decent information into this soul-sucker, I'll add some more recommended theological reading: The Evolution of God (Robert Wright): An excellent treatise on the historical evolution of religion and morality, whereby the author concludes that both have been trending, in the aggregate, towards a better future for human understanding and tolerance. Wright describes himself as an agnostic, but the richness of his beliefs defy such simplistic categorization. He is an incredible scholar - the real deal. Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism (Susan Jacoby) A less sanguine treatise on the role of religion in America, and how it has roadblocked the creation of a truly egalitarian liberal (in the broader historical sense) society. Jacoby is a raging atheist and a lot of fun to read, but reportedly not as fun as Patrick O'brien. These two books will both enlighten you and help with your insomnia, depending on where you are in the read. It would be great if Kristians, on occasion, put their Bibles down and read something with some actual research and original thought being it, but the movement doesn't exactly encourage such behavior when denial of the soul, which many followers understandably interpret as even questioning the nature of the soul, is a mortal sin that can never be forgiven. They might, then, realize how parroted, canned and cliche their 'scientific' arguments really are. And BTW, I wish 17th century philosophers would quit plagiarizing my thought experiments.

Last time I went to Static I drove to the TH. Times have changed. As Mr. Brooks teaches us, you can effortlessly pull alder, cedar, and hemlock seedlings out like weeds after a good rain, up to about an inch caliper in some cases. Makes cleaning up a trail SO much easier.

All I can say is DO NOT GET IN FRONT OF DAVID YOUNT WHEN HE'S GOT A CHAIN SAW. The man is a trail clearing tour de force. Thanks for a great day in some interesting weather and an uninterrupted 10 hours nights sleep afterwards. I've never kilt so many trees in one day before.

I would recommend taking a logic 101 class. Your 'can't prove a negative' is exactly the argument Bone uses to support his various conspiracy theories. It's the logic used to support ALL conspiracy theories, in fact. Unfortunately, it violates one of the most basic tenets of logic. Hence, the Tooth Fairy comments. Anyway, this is getting repetitive, and I include myself in that. I think I'll go off and play doctor with my favorite local goddess.

I enjoy a good debate. I'm enjoying myself right now. If you grew up the way I did, this would be a healthy norm. Different styles make the world a more interesting place. Sure, I get tired of hearing the same old atheism=faith, blah blah arguments from folks who simply don't understand the philosophy. Believers can't imagine not believing, and I dont' blame them for that - it can be a roughy at first, so they extrude it through a template they're familiar with so they believe they've digested it. Its a human thing. The best argument I've ever seen for the existence of God was a scene from a Bollywood film where a beautiful Indian women is singing a love song to her god. The deep feeling she conveyed, the pure, uncut beauty, was transcendent. So different from the mean spirited Kristianity so popular today in our own culture, and so much more moving. I didn't run off and become a Hindu, but my life was a little better after having experienced that.

Obviously, I aint no rocket surgeon but I'm not hedging my bets. Rather, I am relying on a force that has already proven and manifested itself in my own personal experience. You can give me all the data points, chinese proverbs, etc, but it won't change my own personal experience. Again, if you can PROVE that God is not real and never touched any human life, then it would indeed be a lie. As for you, your supposed to continue being the almighty here on CC, condemning and belittling anyone that disagrees with your "facts". You can't be wrong, ever. That seems just as delusional as the nut jobs that believe God exists. I'd say this has a lot more to do with the inner workings of your personality and self esteem than my or anyone else's postings here, but hey, that's just a theory. No, after observing your words and deeds, I don't respect you too much, but I wouldn't generalize that to anyone else here. I presented some of my beliefs and thought experiments. Go nuts with them or not. Not really my issue. My only issue with Kristians is their attempt to force their beliefs on others through the rule of law, as I've clearly. My belief that their belief's are kooky is an opinion, something we're all entitled to.

1) I don't get definitions for words from the Bible. It get them from the dictionary. 2) Who says matter is eternal? Since man doesn't have a clue about the actual nature of time itself, it would be impossible to make that statement with any scientific credibility. 3) The word 'creation' need not have a religious meaning, simply because current translations of the Bible employ it. See #1. I just 'created' a huge steaming pile. Proof of the divine? 4) Most pseudoscience statements such yours this spring from a lack of basic knowledge about the actual science referenced. Yours is no exception.

Islam is the 'truest' God centric religion in the world. There is zero credible evidence that Christ existed, on the contrary, he's most likely a recycled Osiris-style myth - common as dirt for the time. Mojo is, at least, an actual historical figure. I don't know about the God part, but at least the Muslims have that to hang their headgear on. Philosophically, though, Islam is as bankrupt as any other 'chosen one' idea. Hinduism is way closer to the mark as far as how the universe actually works. You've got your builders, you've got your destroyers - the light, the dark, whatever. It's all really one thing.

Um...because it's a lie? What, I'm supposed to 'hedge my bets' by bullshitting myself? What a great way to make life more meaningless. Another Buddhist tenet it to seek truth. Not really an American thing in this land of maximized self-interest, I realize. One does not always profit by it.