wetha
Joined 9 years ago
Joined 9 years ago
>That's a misleading analogy. Do you eat off your butt? If I got bird poo on my bare foot, I'd wipe it off in the dirt and move on. Most people shower every few days anyway. I don't care how clean my butt is, just as long as it doesn't smell and it doesn't itch.
I think this hits at the root of the disagreement. If I get bird poo on my bare foot, I am totally washing that off with water - i am not comfortable wiping it off with paper and then tracking that onto my hand/clothes. To each their own. I believe it is harder to get your butt not to stink or itch when just using paper. I use water/soap when possible, and fallback to paper when not, usually public washrooms - so I’m familiar with both, if that needs saying.
> (FYI, in English, a space is only used after end-of-sentence punctuation, not before. I've never understood why Indians consistently get this wrong.)
Interesting generalization. I haven’t seen too many Indians do that. But as long as you get the point the OP was trying to make.
Disclaimer: Am Indian.
It’s become fashionable to take potshots at Christianity, justified or otherwise.
From a post on internationalskeptics.com[1]
> British science historian Colin A. Russell, in "The Conflict of Science and Religion" (published in The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition: An Encyclopedia), refers to "the alleged opposition to James Young Simpson (1811-70) for his introduction of chloroform anesthesia in midwifery": Quote: Despite repeated claims of clerical harassment, the evidence is almost nonexistent. Insofar as there was any conflict, it was between the London and Edinburgh medical establishments or between obstetricians and surgeons. The origins of that myth may be located in an inadequately documented footnote in White[.]”
[1] http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t...
Sounds like exactly why Amazon is much better. They don’t put you on hold, and there’s no IVR menu to suffer through.
I know it’s easier said than done, but there should be active mitigation in place, rather than only monitoring.
This seems unjustified. Your statement assumes (a) Support systems in the community are run only by religious people. This implies (b) Non-religious people do not run any community programs.
Assuming (b) is true (which it may very well not be), the question that needs to be asked is, why do non-religious people and institutions not run more community programs. Not rail against the religious people who do.
Disclaimer: I am not American.
Why do we no longer have Renaissance men/women today, contributing to the sciences, philosophy and the arts? What did we lose?