Posts by chris
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
They'll still increase the drinking age to 20, because that's the only recommendation that looks good on paper
How does that look good on paper? One of the biggest problems with alcohol is that intoxicated people commit criminal acts. How will further criminalization of people who want to drink encourage responsibility?
Clearly the people on the button have absolutely no idea what they're doing. No idea, none whatsoever, and everyone else is happy to pay all 126 of them $100,000+ a year to be the idiots they are and represent the empty values they represent. Muttering "it could be we worse"
idea: remove the mystique.
-
What it didn't do was stop people using cannabis.
It may have stopped this guy, for a couple of hours.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/3630029/Detective-stunned-by-mans-P-confession
-
Me too, if I may. I believe a lot of counseling is done in this area. It seems to be a firmly held misconception.
-
Duran Duran had the Guinness Record for the loudest crowd at a concert.
a dubious honour for the band. I've always wondered how it would feel to be in a band like that, maintaining a career decades after releasing anything of note. I'd rather be in Duran Duran than say Nickelback, but either way it must become torturous dolling out the same tired hits year after year. I couldn't imagine a worse profession.
-
Many thanks for your thoughtful comments, Chris. May I politely disagree with your point 2 (above).
Certainly David (and I have strong doubts that I'd fit the criteria of religious;), you're more than welcome to, perhaps I didn't word it so well, however I feel the ideas that
~Religious belief is far and away the majority/power-holder position in the world
~and anti religious critique has been popularized
are mutually exclusive. The bible has sold up to 6 billion copies, and compared to Mao's anti religious Red Book (800-900 million,) Dicken's A Tale of Two Cities (a mere 200 million) it's unparalleled in popularity. But I'd argue that they are all popular, and have all been popularized.
The Beatles remain a powerhouse to this day depite;
Christianity will go. It will vanish and shrink… We're more popular than Jesus now—I don't know which will go first, rock and roll or Christianity."
And while it's easy to overlook the influence of this moment in history (and others like it) from our vantage point, we can't underestimate the popularity of this perspective.
With regards to
Religious belief is far and away the majority/power-holder position in the world
I think the modern consensually agreed perspective of what constitutes reality as presented by mainstream media holds far more sway in terms of our belief and is far more influenced by science than any religion. I see very little mention of God's causal influence on the weather report, and very little connection between the laws that now govern us and the Ten Commandments, despite the fact that people can still be imprisoned for adultery in South Korea. When we sing "God Defend New Zealand", we know "The USA Defend New Zealand"
I especially the latter half of your initial post which I totally agree with, ie for every bad ass who will misappropriate religious/political/ cultural beliefs for selfish reasons there are scores of good ones, I just always get a little queasy when I see the religious or religions under the gun, as I feel for the most part many are in an unenviable position,especially the Hare Krishna. and I do feel sorry for some old timers who have done more good in their life than I'll ever do, according to the gospel, only to have the world turn on them.
-
Nice, enjoy it Andin.
-
Not to shake any boobs here, but
The absolutism of this statement;
This is nothing to do with men.
Seems to conflict with the characterized motivation;
Briefly, this event was sparked by the comments of a senior Iranian cleric that;
It's not that I'm not in full support, merely that boobs for boob's sake trumps boobs for argument's sake. I hope it's warm enough and more importantly that there's no ill-timed earthquake to feed the ignorant minds, have fun!
-
What do I win?
My further respect.
-
The National Party officially formed in May 1936, but its roots go considerably further back. The party came about as the result of a merger between the United Party (known as the Liberal Party until 1927, except for a short period between 1925 and 1927 when it used the name "National Party") and the Reform Party. The United Party gained its main support from the cities, and drew upon businesses for money and upon middle class electors for votes, while the Reform Party had a rural base and received substantial support from farmers, who then formed a substantial proportion of the population.
Historically, the Liberal and Reform parties had competed against each other, but from 1931 until 1935 a coalition between the United and Reform parties held power in New Zealand. The coalition went into the 1935 election under the title of the "National Political Federation", a name adopted to indicate that the grouping intended to represent New Zealanders from all backgrounds (in contrast to the previous situation, where United served city-dwellers and Reform served farmers). However, because of the effects of the Great Depression and a perception that the existing coalition government had handled the situation poorly, the National Political Federation lost heavily in 1935 to the Labour Party, the rise of which had originally prompted the alliance.
A new party, called the New Zealand National Party, formed at a meeting held in Wellington on May 13 and 14, 1936. Erstwhile members of the United and Reform parties made up the bulk of the new party.
-
No he wasn't so young when this happened. So he went off and fought in the war with his son at the age of 37. He wasn't a kid like Ben's example, but it was the depression. The comparison is to highlight the fundamentalism.