Damn, maybe I'm a seeker and not an atheist ?
The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 22, 2024, 8:11 pm
Thread Rating:
|
New Clinton email controversy
|
 (October 31, 2016 at 7:53 pm)abaris Wrote: But not anymore. For quite a long time actually, since he threw Bradley Mannings to the wolves and a lot of informants who's names he didn't black out when posting secret materials. What the fuck are you talking about? I'm with you on the redactions, but Manning is a completely different matter. Assange probably didn't even know Manning was his informant at that time. Yes he revealed his donor list when he certainly shouldn't have and that led to someone else preying on Manning, but honestly Manning was a very lonely person and she would have been outed by someone she confided in eventually. The donor list itself would not have incriminated Manning had she kept her mouth shut. Like I said, Assange knew her as a donor, not as a whistle blower, and may not have known she was the source of the cables.
For Religion & Health see:[/b][/size] Williams & Sternthal. (2007). Spirituality, religion and health: Evidence and research directions. Med. J. Aust., 186(10), S47-S50. -LINK
The WIN/Gallup End of Year Survey 2013 found the US was perceived to be the greatest threat to world peace by a huge margin, with 24% of respondents fearful of the US followed by: 8% for Pakistan, and 6% for China. This was followed by 5% each for: Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, North Korea. -LINK "That's disgusting. There were clean athletes out there that have had their whole careers ruined by people like Lance Armstrong who just bended thoughts to fit their circumstances. He didn't look up cheating because he wanted to stop, he wanted to justify what he was doing and to keep that continuing on." - Nicole Cooke  (October 31, 2016 at 7:46 pm)ReptilianPeon Wrote: And to add to what you just said A Theist, Donna has since left CNN because CNN is trying to cover their behinds. They know they are guilty of being a government/establishment mouthpiece (i.e. state run media outlet). They are clearly guilty of collusion with a Hilary's campaign and giving an unfair advantage to Hilary. Why would Donna leave CNN if she's not guilty? Reminds me of when Debbie left the DNC (because she was guilty). They are only sorry they got caught. They don't care that they are undermining democracy. The political system is definitely corrupt in that regard. The DNC, the news media and journalists, in collusion with the Clinton campaign, will stop at no hook & crook to get Hillary elected. The Clintons and their cohorts corrupted the Democratic Party far worse than William Tweed could have ever imagined.
"Inside every Liberal there's a Totalitarian screaming to get out"
![[Image: freddy_03.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=s25.postimg.org%2Fuq1y7aapr%2Ffreddy_03.jpg) Quote: JohnDG... Quote:It was an awful mistake to characterize based upon religion. I should not judge any theist that way, I must remember what I said in order to change. 
I'm curious, what exactly was in those emails? All I'm hearing is about how this server was hacked or something. Enlighten me.
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard P. Feynman
Pat Mustard
God! Theresa, I forgot me fecking trousers!  Religious Views: the Disc's first ligthning proof atheist (October 31, 2016 at 9:35 pm)abaris Wrote:(October 31, 2016 at 9:25 pm)Bella Morte Wrote: I'm pro-choice. The point at which you start saying no to abortions (with the important caveat that the life of the mother is still more important than the potential life of the foetus) is at the point where there's a reasonable chance of viability outside the womb. And that is still 24 weeks or so, the cut off point under UK legislation. Anything after that should need both the wishes of the mother and a genuine medical reason (and I consider suicidal ideation as genuine).
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home  (November 1, 2016 at 7:33 am)Tazzycorn Wrote:(October 31, 2016 at 9:35 pm)abaris Wrote: I'm also pro choice, but - depending on what late time means - I don't agree. There's a point when an organism seizes to be just a collection of cells and develops senses. That's where I draw the line outside of life threatening conditions. But depression/suicidal ideation can be treated. Would it really be wise to let a woman make a decision like that while she is not mentally/emotionally sound? What are the risks of the psychological trauma this would cause if she regrets her decision after getting well? Much like women who harm their babies while suffering PPD; we wouldn't consider those decisions that of a rational, psychologically healthy person.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.  (November 1, 2016 at 7:33 am)Tazzycorn Wrote: And that is still 24 weeks or so, the cut off point under UK legislation. Anything after that should need both the wishes of the mother and a genuine medical reason (and I consider suicidal ideation as genuine). Exactly the same in my country. There are medical reasons why this is the set period of time where it's allowed. After that there hahave to be medical reasons such as a threat to the mother's life. I agree with that solution. ![[Image: Bumper+Sticker+-+Asheville+-+Praise+Dog3.JPG]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-d-3rfdI7nG0%2FTerwtFyFXoI%2FAAAAAAAACak%2F7kFSmHeVrng%2Fs320%2FBumper%2BSticker%2B-%2BAsheville%2B-%2BPraise%2BDog3.JPG)
"Inside every Liberal there's a Totalitarian screaming to get out"
Quote: JohnDG... Quote:It was an awful mistake to characterize based upon religion. I should not judge any theist that way, I must remember what I said in order to change.  RE: New Clinton email controversy
November 1, 2016 at 9:16 am
(This post was last modified: November 1, 2016 at 9:17 am by vorlon13.)
Except for him being too classy for it, I could see Bernie Sanders wanting to poop in Brazile's mouth for her playing kingmaker for Hillary when that is absolutely NOT her job.
I wasn't a Bernie supporter, but dammit, I wanted a FAIR primary, and that didn't happen. And while I wouldn't expect Hillary to decline the question during the debate on grounds she was spoon fed the question beforehand, I only wouldn't expect that because if I did, I would be clinically insane. Also, heard a good discussion on Sirius, (might have been POTUS channel) about how Hillary can clean up all this mess without the stigma (and possible constitutional crisis) of pardoning herself after the inauguration by simply having Obama do it just prior to his leaving office. Of course, the one little fly in the ointment of a pardon is the explicit admission therewith the accusations were true. The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
 |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)
