Message
Anonymous wrote:God is just a silly concept.
It obviously provides something to people--otherwise religous beliefs wouldn't be so viral. It's interesting though, that those numbers keep falling, at least in the developed world. Probably has a lot to do with other social outlets that have arisen in the last few decades. (TV, then internet, etc...)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I have been praying constantly through my cancer treatments. Some days it is all I have left.
Op here. I truly hope those prayers work. Much love and health to you.
Thank you. I am at the lowest point I have ever been in my life. The chemotherapy has been brutal and has left me with neuropathy. I have young children so I am trying to get through this. And yes I pray every day because sometimes I just don't think I can get through another minute. Thank you for you kindness.
I'm not religious, but hang in there. My mother went through a similar ordeal. As dark as things look right now, you can beat this thing, and come out the other side....
Two things: first, gift-giving should be met with a thank-you. Second, your child shouldn't be put into this position. You need to lay down the law with your parents and let them know in no uncertain terms that gifts have to be okayed by you from now on. You might also remind them that visiting their grandchild is not mandatory.
Boundaries.
Boundaries.
Anonymous wrote:Gross
I think you meant to say "Totally gay"...
Anonymous wrote:tipping is stupid
Mr Pink? C'mon, cough up a buck, you cheap bastard. I paid for your goddamned breakfast.
Anonymous wrote:Just a little more propaganda to pit the poor against the rich......
Yes, how dare you engage in Class Warfare! Now be a good little prole, and cough up 30% percent of your income in taxes so that Chester McMoneybags here can have a functioning banking/judicial infrastructure with which to extort an even more disproportionate share of the GDP.
We had a Topeak kid seat. On the rear. I'm a little leery about having my kid strapped to the bars in front of me. Don't want to ram him into anything. Also I think i would find it distracting. Could just be a matter of preference.
The pull-along trailer is pretty great, too. I likely would have bought that if space wasn't tight.
The pull-along trailer is pretty great, too. I likely would have bought that if space wasn't tight.
Anonymous wrote: Where else can I get paid 140K+ to implement poorly conceived IT projects of dubious value that the federal government is either unwilling or incapable of doing on its own?
Just want to note that the explosion in outsourcing government work to the private sector is a pure function of post-Reagan GOP policies. We've heard forty years of unrelenting anti-government propaganda in that direction, and it's worked. Huge bureaucracies are going to have some inefficiencies. The only thing less efficient is decoupling any other consideration but profit from the system.
Most government agencies are meritocracies to a great extent, and have a mandate to provide a public service. They answer to elected officials. They're not money-making ventures. Private contractors exist purely to extract wealth from the government. And that's a right-wing innovation.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Too old and you'll never see grandkids
This is not and never has been important to me. Much more important to have a lot of money in the bank and career well underway before I had kids.
Being rich is more important to you than meeting your grandkids?
It's DCUM. Pay attention! 8)
Who says DD is going to necessarily have grandkids?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We get it. You people hate Christians especially Catholics. In your ideal world you would have a country with no Christianity. This is sort of typical of the modern liberal, profess to be very tolerant and open minded except about things they disagree with. So go ahead and enjoy putting people of faith down and trying to force your view of morality down our throats while screaming tolerance.
You can call me a liberal, a libertarian, a progressive, or anything else you want, but let me be blunt: I think religious "laws", be they Christian, Muslim, Jewish or Buddhist, are irrational bulls--t. I believe our laws should be based on sound science, experience, maturity and logic and should be rationally directed to accomplish policies that improve the lives of every man, woman and child in this country, both today and in the future, in the least burdensome manner that can be accomplished. To me, restricting safe medical abortions will increase the number of unsafe, wire-hanger abortions in backrooms and alleys; restricting contraceptives and teaching abstinence-only sex-ed will result in unwanted children who cannot be adequately cared for. If you think abortions and contraceptives should be prohibited, because you are Catholic, Muslim, or Martian, you're an idiot. Am I being intolerant? I HOPE so, because I am tired of suffering fools and pandering to people whose minds are in the dark ages. Now, I know I have to "respect" your choices, and someday, when your daughter is in college and gets knocked up and has to drop out of school to care for the baby and ends up on food stamps because the only job she can get is on that pathetically inadequate minimum wage and she moves back to your home where your are living comfortably on your Social Security and your Medicare on your nice safe tree-lined street that my taxes paid for, on that day I will not complain that your daughter's and grandchild's futures were ruined or that you are all basically living off the sweat of my daily labor, but don't ever imagine that you made the right choices by following your religion's teachings or that you "deserve" my tolerance.
Bravo!
Agreed. Though I think you go off the rails when you start talking about some hypothetical religious daughter who gets "knocked up" and drops out of school. Much like contraception use among religious folks, rates of abortion aren't particularly correlated to religion. So it's just as likely that if this sexually active daughter gets pregnant, she'll get an abortion--whether she's religious or not. The difference is that she'll have no family support, and will likely be "shamed" for it--which is where you get all the "post-abortion trauma" or whatever the religious-right is calling it these days. Of course, the non-fundamentalist teen is less likely to get pregnant in the first place, since they're not usually given "abstinence training" or some other fantastical nonsense that has no effectiveness whatsoever.
Horny McPenisstuffer
Anonymous wrote:We are looking, and there's NOTHING on the market in our area except overpriced houses or properties with huge problems.
I think prices are really low, and sellers don't want to sell unless they absolutely need to, or are moving up to a larger house.
In our urban area, any good, well-priced house is snapped up, so there's nothing much available now.
We've been waiting and waiting for the spring market to break, but it's not happening. The realtors keep telling us there will be "lots" of houses in the market at the end of February, early March, but that has not happened yet.
You should wait for those non-overpriced houses with nothing wrong with them. Should be coming on the market, oh, any minute now.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We get it. You people hate Christians especially Catholics. In your ideal world you would have a country with no Christianity. This is sort of typical of the modern liberal, profess to be very tolerant and open minded except about things they disagree with. So go ahead and enjoy putting people of faith down and trying to force your view of morality down our throats while screaming tolerance.
Christians and Catholics are not the same thing. I am a Christian and proudly so. .
What do you mean by that? You don't think Catholics are Christian? Or were you distinguishing between Catholics and Protestants?
If you don't think Catholics are Christian, is there a specific denomination that's teaching you this?
Don't be obtuse. She's saying that that it's not automatic that a Christian is a Catholic. She is not saying that Catholics are NOT Christian.
Catholics consider themselves to be Christians, which is fine. Catholics simply do not represent all of Christianity. In my personal view, the current Catholic Church does not represent in many areas what I consider to be Christian values.
No, she did not say that at all. She said that Christians and Catholics are not the same thing. She clearly doesn't want her denomination to be lumped in with Catholics because she believes they do not deserve the same criticism.
Truthfully I think the OP is trying to make this an anti-Christian thing but it is clear that one Church is at the center of the recent debates.
[On the off-chance someone will respond--thought I'd fix the tags.]
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is a scholarly measure of concentrated poverty where even non-poor children suffer within a community. That percentage is 30%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_poverty
I know that when we were at our previuos school it was 70% and just overwhelmed the learning atmosphere and we had to leave. Unfortunately I think there are a lot of schools in DC that have well over 30%.
I hear you. But before now everyone turns their back on schools that are above that threshold please be sure you recognize that the poverty rate is not computed using the same data. I presume you're looking at "% free and reduced lunch" as a measure of how many children are poor in a DC public school. That's not the same measure used to compute poverty density in neighborhoods as discussed by the link you provide. Maybe if one were to consider just "free lunch" that would be more comparable but that data is not available on school profiles.
Interesting. I've been going off of the "low-income" numbers from http://www.greatschools.org/res/pdf/DC/DC_School_Chooser_2012-2013.pdf
I wonder how that's computed...