It is a good question, one that really needs to be addressed within the Christian community. There are so called "fundamentalists" within the Christian faith who cannot even hold true to our core beliefs. I do believe homosexuality is a sin, but I'm not going to go say hateful things to them because I would just be a hypocrite not to mention a dick. I do believe that homosexuality is a sin, however I believe to job of the government is to protect others from injustices done to them by others. While I don't morally agree with gay marriage I do not think it is harmful to others and I see no good reason why it should not be allowed.
If I spelled something wrong sorry I have better things to do than read over this 5x
I do agree that problems would still exist, however communication between different countries would be much simpler. The world's economy would be much more efficient as previous language barriers would not be present. The elimination of and social barrier will not solve all problems, but they could solve some.
(if anything I have typed is unclear, please comment I have atrocious grammar)
I agree I found this article about it online, many boys are inherently disadvantaged by the way school is taught nowadays. However, if boys are taught properly I feel they can excel just as well as females do in academics.
Here is a question why use a population that there is such a smaller amount of, mice and other creatures used in experiment are very standardized, and are much more available than pedophiles, I mean does anyone know how many pedophiles we have in prison?
No the government should not pay for post secondary education. Where will they get this money huh? It costs a lot of money to go to college. The only thing I would support is academic scholarships based on merit, then people that are less fortunate financially, can be rewarded for their hard work and endeavors in high school.
No I believe that no one believes that God will answer prayers, not because they do not believe he is capable of doing so, rather they may feel unworthy and this doubt would probably cause God not to grant a prayer. (Its a stretch... but whatever)
Well I guess one difference between the two movies would be that in the story of MLK there is a big difference in whether or not a black or white man fought for civil rights. I do see you point though, I would never see a white guy in a story about an African folktale, actually that would be a really awkward moment for everyone watching the movie... I guess part of it is that some people believe we own blacks for our past actions against them. Personally I feel that I only owe the people I wronged something, and am in no way responsible for my ancestors actions. I see your frustration with the choice of a black person in a story about people that are white(in historical references).
Whether or not a young person agrees with a point of view they should question it and find why they believe what they do, or find they believe something else. The questioning of authority does not always mean disrespect, but rather growth, these moments should be encouraged and if an adult has an explanation they should give it. Failure to answer the youth's questions about authority leads to mistrust and feelings of superiority (naturally I would assume a failure to give a direct answer means the person has no good reason).
LOL I already addressed that, besides you can't win a war if the whole world hates you for your decision(that is a diplomatic loss), and I doubt any country will risk a nuclear winter in an attempt to win a war against the world(I do not see another way a country could dominate all the other countries), I hope no one is that irrational. Good provocation, by putting words in my mouth, when I specified otherwise.
Well you could also argue that the only rule in warfare is winning. Personally I think if one group expresses unwillingness to abide by the rules of engagement then I feel we should do the same. Before anyone goes so you advocate using human bombs, or some crap like that, no I don't, but I don't see why we should act overly sincere, or pretend war is some sort of violent game. War is war, and it is very ugly, and some people cannot come to terms with the fact they have lost, so terrorism is just another form of an already horrifying subject.
I feel that it is sad that obesity is such a problem in our society, but government control is not the correct response. Some people can eat burger and fries every day and not gain a pound while to others having dessert or red meats is going wild. People should regulate their own weight or natural selection will take care of them (heartless you say, why should 2/3 of the population have to suffer for 1/3 of the population's inability to control themselves).
I agree with you if the reason that he was chosen as an actor for the movie was diversification then I support this, I do not support favoritism of any kind, I think the world should be based solely on merit (that'll be the day). If he was chosen because the movie company believed his acting would fit the role well then good for him, I wish him well, even though technically it is very incorrect.
I feel that many teenagers should be trusted until they prove otherwise. However, to some kids I know no parents would mean no reason to work hard. I feel that there are teenagers capable of making their own decisions, however many are not ready. I feel that it is a parents job to prepare their kids to make these decisions, but some are not ready so I will take the side that risks the least amount of people and say no, teens cannot be wholly trusted to make their own decisions. (I'm sorry if my argument is unclear or something else please tell me and I'll address specific questions)
No, if you don't believe that God will answer your prayers, then why will he? I doubt whomever the God we are referring to rewards doubters by answering their prayers, especially with all the people who are saying he doesn't exist. And like I said I'm pretty sure if there is a God, God knows what is best for you and God might think it would be a better idea for you not to have some of the things you desire.
This post is really funny, can you tell me the most reliable unbiased book time for the time period it covers, it is the Bible, don't believe me look it up historians use it all of the time. Unlike Narnia the Bible actually has support of some sort, (I do acknowledge there may be points of dispute I am not an idiot) your comment about Narnia is foolish and shallow, however I do applaud your use of C.S. Lewis works to create a great amount of irony, so I guess I will up you a point for that...
Well if you look at the past white people don't feel as threatened for good reason, when have you last heard of a bunch of racist blacks beating white people up. Groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and other groups have been very blatant in expressing their opinions about "niggers" (for effect not meant to offend), so naturally they may be a tad bit more aggressive
Exactly this argument is whether or not black people (or African Americans, whichever floats your boat) are animals, and if this is what the question is asking then yes this is correct, they are part of the species Homo Sapiens as are all of us. Is this the type of animal we are referring to? I say this question is in need of some clarification, are we saying that black people are sub-human (wrong because they are the same species as us, see process of speciation in biology, we are the same species) or if black are part of the animal kingdom?
