Not hate. An over-used term that makes huge assumptions. Do research for yourself, first, rather than expecting others to do it for you.
Not hate. An over-used term that makes huge assumptions. Do research for yourself, first, rather than expecting others to do it for you.
I once said that media - once known as "the press" at a time when media was only print technoogy - was once complimented being the only private industry given mention in the Constitution, and the compliment went to their swelled heads, and that the swelling has only expanded with time. I've been given confirmation, again, that the swelled-head syndrome is alive and causing greater trauma than ever. With regard to the Nancy Guthrie "disappearance" [it seems there are some in the media not yet willing to call it kidnapping], I watched a TV journalist maintain that the investigation, and their reporting of it, would improve if the Pima County Sheriff would hold daily news conferences, and just moments later claimed that Pima County as huge with a population of about 2M people, and that crime was prevalent. So, does this smartass journalist really think law enforcement has the time to hold daily news conferences? She thinks her journalism should be spoon-fed? Whatever happened to her own investigative diligence? Covid-caused laziness?
Rather than be truly creative, Democrats play with language by re-definition of current words to cope with concepts they despise:
Abortion: Always was a termination of pregnancy, but needed to be a sufficiently laundered word to replace what it really is; a kill-two-birds-with-one-stone: death penalty.
Sanctuary: as originally intended, this was a consecrated, religious space where people could hide from responsibility. It is now re-defined as a place for illegal aliens to avoid due process.
Due process: The act of crossing a sovereign boundary with legitimate illegitimacy.
Reproductive right: used to launder the first word above, abortion, so that it, too, being a two-bird-for-one-shot approach, can sound caring, when, in fact, there is nothing about "abortion" that is "reproductive."
Planned Parenthood: similar to the above, the alternate of the above distasteful is another coded smudge of language because nothing about abortion is "parental."
HQ: newly dubbed "Head Quarters" by Kamalala where, so she thinks, she gives head a brand new polish so her "constituents" forget her dismal performance in '24, not to mention in '19, when she quit running to run away before she had head to Iowa.
Yes, and his observation also applied to climate change fanaticism, as well as over-popuoltion claims, even when first criticized by Thomas
Malthus in an essay in the late 1790s when world pop was estimated to be 1B.
Nope, the slide into the present condition began when Democrats had the What House, the House and the Senate during all 4 years of his term, 77- 81: Jimmy Carpetbagger
with a design degree and 40+ years of experience with full color printing, I will claim the greater academic superiority on the matter: 0-100%, depending on screen tint yielding color intensity - as I've said all along. Attempting application of unrelated logic to a practical technology, you end up like AlGore: saddled with an unfortunate, inconvenient truth: "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble; it's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain.
Believe as you will. I'm done.
Congress decided it had to be a more-than-equal branch, and the judicial became radicalized
Senate filibuster is not applied on 100% of legislative activity. Exceptions are: budget reconciliation bills, executive and judicial nominations, special fast-track legislation
I think it's more an uncertainty of how they want to be seen.
...but that line maybe's a bit blurry.
Yes, it is, and that is primarily due to
a smoothie containing 1 pear 1 apple 1 banana and 1 kumquat was a mixture of 100% pear, 100% apple,100% banana and 100% kumquat.
Your words; every one of them. And if your smoothie does, indeed, contain the entirety of a pear, apple, banana, and kumquat, then what percentage of each fruit is missing from the smoothie according to your math? All of each one; 100% of each. You're right, it is simple math, but printing-wise, you are failing to grasp meaning. Color printing is done by screen-tint. The best print that is most easily identified using the process is newsprint, which is typically just black ink, but the Sunday comics, for example, you see in full color, and looking at it through a magnifying glass, you see the cyan, magenta, yellow and black dots which, collectively, give you a color image; the more of one of the pure colors, the more a particular field is going to be of that color rather than a blend of different colored dots. If the printing is going to be 100% cyan, for example, there are no dots of separate color - it's a solid field of cyan only. That is what is meant by percentage of color use for each color.
It is true the LDS is not accepted as a typical Christian denomination.
By whose claim? No one but anyone wanting merit of their own by the claim. And that is ill-gotten alleged gain by anyone making derogatory claim against others. We stand upon our own merit, only, before the judgment bar of God, the Judge of all the Quickened and the Dead, and that is all that will stand for us. "But, Father, look a that guy!" will curry no favor with Him in our own pleading. The ancient Egyptians knew this well, and is recited over and over again in their numerous "books" of the Spells of Coming Forth by Day" [aka The Book of the Dead] of pleading before Osiris, and they had no knowledge of Christ. It was and is a universal principal for all people of every stripe. As I claim Christ as my sole Savior and Redeemer, I am therefore a Christian, period, worlds without end.
Personal attack is the first in the line of losing arguments. I would have thought by now you realized that fact. No other response is necessary but this: We did not call ourselves Mormons; that was hung on us by others due to the Book of Mormon, which title page declares itself to be "... to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations..." so as for your erred claim that we are not Christians, or that Baptists lack any claim of being so, is manifestly misapplied criticism. You may malign Joseph Smith all you wish; personal attack on him, or any other person or organization to the alleged benefit of yourself, is, as well, a losing argument. Stand on your own merit, and no one or nothing else.
Exodus 20 is the source of the Ten Commandments given to the Israelites [not just Jews, as many interpret, now, but the entire House of Israel. After all, Moses, himself, was of the House of Levi, not Judah] by God through Moses. Verses 2 & 3 contain the topic of the first commandment, the whole of which is "I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me." [Holy Bible [KJV] Exodus 20: 2, 3]
The first sentence is a reminder of their present condition of freedom from bondage in Egypt by the direct intervention of "I Am" to take them out of Egypt to restore their freedom. But the second sentence is a critical description, and it ought to be understood in its context of the Israelites having "...no other gods before me."
Does this mean there are no other gods in existence but him, or that none should have greater allegiance by the Israelites [or, by extension, anybody else] than to him? I suggest the latter, and such is by no means a claim that there are no other gods, but that, among them, he, "I Am," [for that is the name of him he gave to Moses] is to be given their greatest allegiance and adoration. Therefore, there is not a single god, as some allege, but multiple gods, of whom "I Am" is the greatest. Polytheism, then, is the proper adoration of man, among whom there is a "greatest" among them, and that but one should be the "master" of them all, but that others do have purpose. Purpose, for example, that one should be the Savior and Redeemer of all mankind, i.e., Jesus the Christ, or that still another should serve as a Comforter, and a testator of truth, the Holy Spirit. And we will fond, in time, that still others have still other functions of necessity for us, but, again, only one "master" and "Father."
Your list appears to be exclusively Christian, as if no other religion is splintered in factions.
Of course they are, but none seem as splintered as Christianity, of which I am part. Within ten years, by observation of Pew Research, Christianity will be taken over by Islam as the world's largest religion by population, if not by frequent devotees in attendance at regular worship services. Christ was prophesied by Isaiah as the "Prince of Peace" [Isa 9: 6], but we've made of him the Prince of Pieces. Time for us to think maybe we do not have our finger on the pulse.
I'm wondering why some of y'all are constantly changing your avatar? I've held the same one since joining DA 7 years ago, with one brief exception, about a year later, but went back to the original.
His profile lists many unknowns.
Thus, afraid of a shadow.
That's painting, not printing. Let's keep our processes in their separate corners, yeah?
No, there are 435 members of the House along with the correctly identified 100 members of the Senate. "Congress" is both chambers. And why they cannot pass legislation is for the reason I already gave: they try to be DOJ with continuous investigation. Their "invenstigative" work is for a defined purpose; to aid in appropriate legislation. So says the Supreme Court, and they are correct. There entire Article I is all about Congress and their duties. Investigation is a very limited task, but it seems to be all that interests them ever since Nixon, and then Clinton [who was targeted because of Nixon to even the score], and now Trump. Right now, Congress is obsessed with indecency, and that has derailed them entirely. Time for all to climb out of their petty obsessions for which we should not be paying them.
The Republican primary season of 24 was a crystal example of obncession. They were all obsessed with Trump, the elephant not even in the room in all their debates, and they even took an oath to ignore Trump, but not a single one ofd them could keep the oath, and many Democrats today are equally obsessed with him and cannot ignore him. It's a total clown show with which many of y'all are equally obsessed.
Ignore the man.
It is not necessary to quote yourself, and is rude to quote someone else without identification of them. Don't take credit when not deserved,
Oh, and the Salem witch trials as well.
That's an inconvenient truth. You've squared the circle well.
Why make people angrier?
Because people are easily led by the terror in their own shadows - kind of like Sidewalker's new avatar
Congress can rule to change the outcome.
Yes, Congress can try. If they concentrated on legislation rather than trying to be DOJ, they might get it right the first time out more often. As it is, for issues such as voting, for example, they've made more amendments [8 of the 27, at present] on that subject than any other, and still do not have it right. They are the weakest of the three branches of government because they are misguided on their core responsibility: legislation. One would think they would be about improving that observation.
Right about now is when
I tell you your avatar sends a message that while you're a deer in the headlights running for your life, you make the attempt to scare yourself and everyone else by a shadow.
Not working.
You're both opposing 120 years of known printing science, but go ahead and believe your collective fantasy of 50% max of any given color. Printing in color is an up to four-color process [potentially five colors if white is a necessary printed color] using a percentage of 0 to 100% of one to all four colors, C, M, Y, K, in order to print up to 17M separate colors, and not just a maximum of 50%. You're both thinking either in terms of the quantity of ink used for a particular print job, or that the printing job is printed by running the paper a single run through the press to complete the job in all four [or five, or even more if realistic metallic colored are needed for a print job]. In that instance, printing 100,000 color brochures for advertising will use more ink than a job printing 50,000 of the same brochure. No, each color is a separate run through the press, assuring that each run, the paper is run through the press with the exact alignment assured in each run. Have neither of you ever watched a printing press in operation? Didn't y'all ever take field trips in school? This is not rocket science, but it seems to have escaped y'all nonetheless.
No, the FACE Act makes a clear distinction that those who oppose use of any clinic [not just abortion] that they cannot impede people who use them, and to prevent those who would attempt to prevent people from assembly at a religious service but disrupting that service. didn't read the statute, 18 U.S. Code § 248, did you?
Your #1 is an empty post, declaring that confirned atheists are, themselves, empty of social excellence. Yes, some are, but I know more believers that are empty than I do atheists. I am a solid believer in God, accept Christ as my Savior and Redeemer, and believe in the supremacy of our republic/democracy of the USA. I grew up in LA where I knew many of my friends parents, including UClA professors who were solid atheists, but also solid citizens who cared about community, and even accepted people solidly tied to their religion, but just did not, themselves, accept religion. Two of my best friends are atheists, and I'd rather spend time with them that some zealots I know who claim they are "saved," but treat the confessional like a turnstile. Nope, that's not my brand of repentance, which ought to be a change of heart, not merely an admission of being weak and expect temptation to overrule them.
Did you read the text of the FACE Act I posted? Doesn't say there must be "insurection" [ 18 U.S.C. § 2383 ]. Just says the president must invoke the FACE Act. And what tariffs have to do with that is beyond me. Stay on point.
Some may cite Hebrews 10; 25, as a "rule" to attend church, but while that verse speaks to "assembling together" it also speaks to "exhorting one another," and that can be done just as well by outreach on one anothers' homes.