DescentBB

snoopy

It is wayyyyy to early to be making assumptions like the one in that article/study based off the data we actually have. Agreed. Kepler can't even image a planet the size of Earth. There may be way more small, rocky bodies in habitable zones than we can imagine. I'll submit that you're both rejectin...

snoopy

link
New study indicates that the earth exists against the odds. Sort of seems to support the theory that its ability to support life isn't a matter of odds, after all.

snoopy

...or rather, "Trumptards" as I like to call them: "To the legions of Trumpbots , nothing he says or does will change their mind about him, so running an article that shows once again what a bald-faced hypocrite he is won't matter a whit. Still, it's amusing when Trump is caught with...

snoopy

tunnelcat wrote:What? We can't escape having to raise children again in heaven?

That's an interesting sentiment. Isn't raising children a valuable and honorable calling?

(I think you reflect a general sentiment that I notice in our culture.)

snoopy

We're just going to have to agree to disagree at this point. The NSA are state actors. agree State actors are required to afford First Amendment rights. Disagree - State law and the enforcement thereof are required to afford first amendment rights. State actors are required to afford fifth & fou...

snoopy

All the best parts of religious thinking is already embodied in humanism , which leaves out things like killing babies because your people are chosen by God. Surely you must anticipate how ironic I would find that statement in light of your position on abortion. (I don't want to turn this into anot...

snoopy

Express your argument as a cohesive whole - why is this surveillance a first amendment violation? Specifically, give me a statement for which any object would be a first amendment violation if it were accurately described by your statement - [object] is a first amendment violation because [exhausti...

snoopy

I’m implying you are not being honest to yourself about how hatred affects opinion and value. And if you deny your feelings about the Bible...that's even more denial on top of the other. Ha. My opinions were formed from skeptical inquiry, not emotion, though I will say the process of losing my fait...

snoopy

And... we're done here. I seem to find that more and more often people seem to want to simply dismiss religion as illogical and walk away to excuse the fact that their own opinions on the matter are quite illogical. When the topic is naturalism or technological advance, logic is king... when the top...

snoopy

Perfect execution. Resort to random Bible quotes to verify your position, which is exactly what everyone does, and is the whole reason why, as Krom says, you can use the Bible to justify anything — even terrorism. Thanks for proving my point (though you guys are so deluded you don't know you did it...

snoopy

vision wrote:Spin it some more!

You're welcome to refute my points.

snoopy

Specifically, which requirements would you still like me to address? Express your argument as a cohesive whole - why is this surveillance a first amendment violation? Specifically, give me a statement for which any object would be a first amendment violation if it were accurately described by your ...

snoopy

Jeff: Note that both of your newly linked cases strike down laws - which is one of my points - laws violate the first amendment, not activities. Please stop intentionally mispresenting my argument. If someone said that "mass surveillance violates the Fourth Amendment because it violates someone...

snoopy

The thing about the bible is that it is written in such a way that people can use it to justify pretty much anything. When people want to be violent, the bible justifies violence. When people want to be peaceful, the bible justifies peace. The bible is nothing but a tool, one which can be used for ...

snoopy

[the content of the Bible is] well understood, yes. no argument there. Let me refer you to: easy. one mans' interpretation of the bible is no more right than anothers. It's not like we're dealing with hard and fast facts. Said in reference to me calling vision's assertion a straw man. Vision attrib...

snoopy

It's not clear to me that recognizing chilling effects as First Amendment violations introduces any new major difficulties that didn't already exist to interpreting the First Amendment. For instance, to use your police officer in restaurant example, when I gave criteria such as whether the officer ...

snoopy

I don't see any reference to the fifth amendment in these decisions. The reason why the fourteenth amendment is invoked instead of the first is because the suits are against state governments, not the federal government. The first amendment does not restrict state governments directly except throug...

snoopy

nope. you can't take well known facts and twist them into supporting your side. You're still asking us to agree with you on the basis that your interpretation is right. And that is something I can never do. If the bible had provable, testable, and repeatable instances (like we know the location of ...

snoopy

And you are asking me to find something that you have already interpreted as not being there, so doing what you ask is simply a fools' errand.... No matter how you view it, it's simply interpretation, and more analogous to philosophy than history. Okay, I get the interpretation spin... but you're s...

snoopy

Either way, chilling effects that constitute a violation of the first amendment are now getting very qualified. I see the first amendment being about blocking laws that stifle speech... not about situations where you voluntarily censor your speech. I'm sorry that you don't think chilling effects ca...

snoopy

Okay... back to the uniformed police in the adjacent booth - I think you've said that does yield a chilling effect, and it would be caused by a government agent - does that represent a violation of the first amendment? It would depend greatly on context. For instance, if he were off duty and we jus...

snoopy

I'll take silence as having proven my point. Here's my bigger take on this: I think we created a new "wild wild west" in the internet - a place where the law had minimal reach... I draw this conclusion by watching warez servers, then Napster, then Bit torrent, then tor and the "dark n...

snoopy

How do you come to that conclusion? easy. one mans' interpretation of the bible is no more right than anothers. It's not like we're dealing with hard and fast facts. There's some room for interpretation... But you can't just make things up and attribute them to the Bible. You can certainly take som...

snoopy

Setting aside the question of errancy of the Bible... there is still a standard of application of proper scholarly method, which you're not employing. You can justify your straw man as you like, but it remains no less categorically a straw man. even then, that's a guess. not a strawman. How do you ...

snoopy

That's a gross misrepresentation of the message of the Bible as a whole. I'm sorry, your interpretation of a fictional work is not more or less valid than my interpretation of the same fictional work. There is no standard to base any claims on. Setting aside the question of errancy of the Bible... ...

snoopy

...you cannot follow Christ (both His teachings and His lived example) while committing acts of terrorism. I beg to differ. The entire Bible is a book of terrorism. Christianity thrives on the seed it plants in little kid's brains, that if they aren't good little boys and girls then the all-seeing,...

snoopy

now, I KNOW the source linked is biased, and don't agree with some of the obvious suppositions they are making, but I offer this link to show that, yes, there are some Christian terrorist organizers out there: http://aattp.org/christian-terrorist-josh-feuerstein-deletes-july-video-calling-for-chris...

snoopy

and if that lone gunman feels himself PART of a large and well-funded group, where are we then? Because, in both Colorado and in many ISIS-linked attacks, you essentially have the same phenomenon: the leadership gives over the top rhetoric, creates propaganda video, garners a bit of political suppo...

snoopy

Consider that you probably give away just as much of your privacy to Google and the likes. Google has a privacy policy telling me what information of mine they collect and how they use it, allowing me to make an informed decision as to what information I choose to give them. If they mishandle my in...

snoopy

tunnelcat wrote:

http://www.salon.com/2015/11/25/stephen ... new_level/

Yes, that answer to points of view that you disagree with is mockery.

snoopy

1) Using what other people can do as an intuition for what the government can do is misleading. The government has different rights than we do, in many ways more, in many ways fewer. For instance, just because my neighbor can financially support a religion doesn't mean the government can. So showin...

snoopy

Is a phone conversation private? Or is it taking place in public? In the vein of what I'm arguing, the transmission of the phone conversation over public lines isn't private. I know that flies in the face of precedent, but it would be the consistent position. Being in a public place does not automa...

snoopy

I don't think that's a good analogy - I'd say it's maybe more like you using a high power listening device to listen to my conversation discreetly from across the street, and the only reason I'm offended is because someone pointed out that you were listening in. It's only an invasion of privacy if ...

snoopy

Lol “turning our backs on the little kids” These people kill little kids! and you wish us to be essentially the same? As it is, you don't think WE'VE killed THOUSANDS of children since 2001? If so, I ask, "what rock are you living under?" It's far past time for us to be,once again, a mora...

snoopy

When you're arguing loudly with a family member you have no expectation of privacy . Why do we have an expectation of privacy in our internet activity? (At least our non-encrypted activity.) It's openly readable data passing through common-use pipes - how is it any different than yelling across the...

snoopy

this illustrates why, although I've always been leery of a lot of the Patriot Act, I have always been reluctant to simply call for it to be rescinded. We, the average citizens, have NO CLUE what the experts are seeing and picking up Calling them "experts" is rather generous of an honorifi...

snoopy

I guess time will only tell...

snoopy

Ferno wrote:you do have a law that protects your religion and gives you the freedom to practice it. It's in the constitution already.

Indeed, and I would quite like it to stay that way.

snoopy

to lose placement. For what it's worth, it appears to be a pretty dumb decision on the judge's part. As an "insider" in the system (though, a different state's system): 1. The foster parents have no case. They have zero rights as foster parents. Foster children get moved all the time on w...

snoopy

I keep my own beliefs to myself. I do not try to force others to live by or follow my personal beliefs, .... Christian proselytizing and meddling in politics is definitely forcing Christian beliefs on me when those beliefs are codified into laws that apply to everyone in this country regardless of ...

Search found 3193 matches