ToriAllen

I want you to explain to me why I'm ignorant, or brainwashed, or whatever other terms atheists are so fond of, for believing in a higher power? Why is it so irrational to believe in God? I don't want you to give me quotes or websites or videos. I want you to explain in your own words using your own logical thoughts why I can not be an intelligent, well informed, self deciding, logical, rational, educated believer. Once you do that, then I'll discuss this issue with you further. Show me that you are a free thinker that isn't 'brainwashed' before you start pointing your finger at me. You can't call me brainwashed and not state one origional thought yourself. Get me? ;)

I think one of the biggest problems people have with buying CD's is that there may be one or two good songs on the CD and the rest is just 'filler crap'. I have known a few people that have downloaded music that didn't want the other 10 or 11 crappy songs they just wanted the one song. One of these individuals uses the downloading software to searchs for new groups and music that he would not have found through any other means (don't play it on the radio) and if he finds that he likes more than three of their songs he will go out and buy the whole CD. In some ways illegal downloading is making money for the music companies, but I have never heard anyone mention that.

When you bring private matters into the public, be it by website or just walking down the street in fetish wear, you are subjecting yourself to public scrutiny. You can't expect everyone to agree with or accept behavior and dress that is out of the ordinary. Most probably won't and getting upset and saying 'it's my choice' isn't going to change that. People like that can not be so blind as to not understand what they are doing is abnormal and that it is possible they will be chastised for it. Persoally, I like to be aware of all of the possible consequenses of my actions.

I don't think this has anything to do with 'sadistic tendencies'. It is not like anyone is causing real irreversible harm or pain. I think the problem lies in one word: Services. This is not a situation where a woman and her husband engage in S&M in the privacy of their own bedroom or dress up in costume for a night out on the town. If it was, I doubt this would have been an issue. She was offering 'services' and advertising the services. It is hard to claim privacy when you have set up a business offering and advertising S&M services. These services are as sexual in nature as 'massage parlors' that offer happy endings and 'escort' services that include sex. Both illegal here.

There is a difference in dressing a certain way and acting in a certain way. From what I understood she was not just pretentding it was halloween every night but actually engaging in sexual S&M type activities. Would that effect her abilities if she were a teacher, yeah. She can be the best teacher in the world, but if she is a bad example for the children, she should be fired. Childhood is too critical of a time in the developement of personality, values, and ideals too let just anyone around your kids. Not if the employer has good reason to sue. If a persons 'personal choice' effects the profits of the business they can certainly be fired. Especially when talking about illegal activities. Prostutution is illegal here and this is basically prostitution with a twist.

Right or wrong? I would think it would depend on what your day job is. If she was a school teacher then I could see how it would really be a problem as she would be an example for the children she is teaching. At the same time I can see how an employer may feel pressure no matter where she worked, or what her job is, to fire her in order to save the reputation of the establishment. Even if the employers personal feelings about the situation are that it doesn't really matter. If her actions will lose business then I'd fire her. You can't stand on principle and support something you think is no big deal if the people who are handing you money every month to take care of granny and grandpa are planning to take their business elsewhere. In other words, right and wrong doesn't matter. Money is the bottom line, and what you do outside of work hours matters when it effects that bottom line.

There is worse. This should really make you feel better... 11 year old giving birth where the 11 year olds mom is 22... Congrats and condolences.

Re: Hey, why don't we "LIBERATE" Burma? Didn't you know, we are supposed to mind our own business AND save all of the oppressed peoples of the world...ignore political ties and influences while simultaniously appeasing all of the world leaders and populations...pretend to be tolerant of other cultures and countries, when we aren't even tolerant of the differences in our own country...and, of-course, offer humanitarian aid to the countries that hate us while we encourage the problems of ignorance and poverty to fester in our own backyard.

Re: Hey, why don't we "LIBERATE" Burma? Now I'll have that damn song stuck in my head for the next two hours. Thanks.

Re: Hey, why don't we "LIBERATE" Burma? We stuck our nose in Iraq's business in order to eliminate a threat. How many UN sanctions has Burma ignored? How many viable threats toward the US have been made? In an ideal world the US could play Superman with every oppressed country in the world, but in a realistic one, we don't have the man power or the mentality to do that. If our culture was different and we weren't raising our kids to be pussies, then we might have the military numbers and support that would be needed to help out in Burma. As it is people were complaining that we divided our forces up too much just between Afganistan and Iraq. I'd love to hear what they would have to say if we divided them even more and went into Burma. You know we do help out in a lot of conflicts without actually going to war. We have at least a minor presence in most major conflicts. It might not be on the books and we might not send in large numbers of soldiers, but chances are, we are there.

Shot with what? Bow and arrow? I thought the general contention was that you didn't have a 'gun problem' over there.

I thought British road laws were strict in general. No eating or drinking while driving. No cell phones while driving. No picking your nose while driving... Is it really that much of a surprise that they would ban smoking while driving?

Yeah, I knew I'd make the list eventually. :rolleyes:

There would be no point in retrying him for the same thing because it has already been ruled on. The only suit they could bring against him for the loss of profit is the civil tort, and that wouldn't be worth it. As for him suing them, he can try but I can't see him winning anything. He was at least fired for good cause and he really wouldn't be very sympathetic to a jury.

San Fransicko has standards. I think the pictures provided by J5 say it best. Some things just aren't acceptable. Public safty is a major issue here. Just imagine the sexy display of true manhood walking down the streets. How could a guy man be expected to concentrate on the road with that going on? Not to mention the danger posed by allowing young impressionable children to see such a display...

Your mom never explained what she did for a living?

As stupid as this sounds, I think they charged him with the destruction of property/theft of the paperwork because it is a crime subject to jail time. I'm not certain but I think that might be the only 'crime' he committed. Because he did not steal the money that was lost by the post office, it was not a criminal act, but a tort. Torts are personal injury claims and can only recover damages (money). You can't squeeze blood from a turnip. If they filed a civil suit against him for the tort involving lost profits then they would end up spending more money on a law suit that would never be recovered on. I think that is right, but I'm not fully sure. In criminal court there can only be a conviction if there is a law against it. A lot of times courts rule in a way that goes against the conscience knowing that it will get the legislature moving on making or correcting a law.

It's hell. Not much time for anything else. There are some really interesting cases though, and some really sarcastic judges, so every once in a while, it is just really fun. There is a case about a haunted house where the judge really had fun with his wording. I might post the opinion later.

Denial. That is the usual way of dealing with facts that don't fit into the 'truth' they want to portray.

Can't we all just get along?

Somehow I knew this was coming. Where is the quote post?

One thought...Whose facts? What were people expecting? "We're a war loving country, and our ultimate goal is world domination. The first step in our goal is to eradicate the infidels and set up a one world religion. Step two..." It is also funny that our 'untrue' reporting of the events comes with videos. Theirs comes with some very convincing photographs though.

What does that mean anyway? I've always thought that was stupid. Just because some one 'recants' what they said out of pressure from others doesn't mean they no longer believe what they said. It seems really stupid. What purpose could it possibly serve? Wouldn't you rather know exactly where the weirdoes stand? Why make them lie so people will feel better. The blind, delusional idiots that make up a great deal of this country don't need to be confused like that... First of all, what the hell do you expect his answer would be to that question? I bet you are one of those people that would waste your one question to God on asking why the sky is blue. I believe that saying goes: If you’re not with us you are against us. There might be another lesser know one that goes: If you are a psychotic delusional dictator that hates America, then you're the bad guy.

Yea, more and more of the old gang showing up. Welcome to all new and old. Interest? And, just how would that work?

I just looked it up and it is beautiful. I also have Alaska on my list. Of course, there aren't many places that aren't on my list.