If you are asked to solve for x:

x-1=7

Your first step wouldn’t be:
x-1 + (y^2 * 5y + 3) = 7 + (y^2 * 5y + 3)

Why complicate things for the sake of complicating things?

I have seen one documentary that combines Religion and Evolution. I wish I knew what it was called to reference it…it was on TV. It’s main message was that yes, humans evolved from ape, but eventually there became there “humans” that looked more human than ape but still thought like apes. They were still very primative. Then it suggests that God chose one of those the new born “humans” and gave them logic and reasoning. This human all of the sudden could plan things and strategize better than all the other humans. The female humans liked that this human seemed superior than all the rest and he had children with man different females. All of the offspring of this one human which they called “adam” possessed the same logic and strategic ability as their father.

That was the beginning of when humans took over the world. They suggested that it was God that gave that one sub-human his abilities to think on a higher level.

(apparently they were able to trace things back scientifically all the way to the first human how posessed this gene and we are all descendents of an african male)

I thought that documentary was interesting and had it PVR’d for a while but then when I switched to rogers from bell I lost it. What do you think about that documentary?

Hi Angela (and Sheryl)

It was with great pride that I read about Angela taking the Chicago
Tribune to task for their improper portrayal of women’s hockey with
their “Chrissy” Pronger poster.

I believe the poster was sexist in its ignorance if not its intent. I
also feel that Mike Kellams and the editors at the Tribune probably
meant no harm. I believe that Kellams accepting Angela’s challenge to
play one-on-one would be a great opportunity for everyone involved.
Kellams would likely be demolished and his humbling should go a long
way to prove he was just having some fun with the poster. Hopefully
it would also give him a lesson in gender stereotypes in sports and
reporting. It could also help out the girls at Angela’s hockey camp.

More details of my proposal can be found in my open letter to Mike
Kellams on my blog. Short and long URLs are below. I’ll do my best
to get this letter in the hands of reporters and fans.

http://bit.ly/befl80
http://noonespecial.ca/2010/06/chrissy-pronger-poster-sparks-controversy/

Cheers,

Hi there.

Let me start by saying I found the “Chrissy” Pronger poster mildly
amusing. It was also sexist. When comparing a man to a woman is
intended as an insult, it says far more about your attitudes towards
women than anything else.

I’m sure you meant no harm and it was all intended to be good-natured
fun. Mike Kellams comments on the issue (as reported here:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news?slug=ap-stanleycup-prongerposter )
would seem to indicate as much. As playful and innocent as it might
have been it was still sexist.

I found Angela Ruggiero’s criticisms valid (link above) and I feel
that Mike Kellams dismissal of her criticism did the Tribune a
disservice. Worse yet, his rejection of her challenge to play her
one-on-one was a lost opportunity for Mike and the Tribune to right a
wrong and generate some goodwill.

Freedom of speech and of the press do not mean you don’t have to
accept the consequences of what you say. As innocent as it may have
been intended, you goofed. Don’t dismiss the criticism, embrace it.
Learn from it. Accept the consequences.

Accept Ruggiero’s challenge and organize a three-on-three game of
shinny to raise money for charity. I vote proceeds to go Women’s
Sports Foundation (http://www.womenssportsfoundation.org/) or even
Ruggiero’s hockey school if it is a not-for-profit. It can be Mike
and two other members of the sports department (no ringers or hiring
Dane Phaneuf as a summer intern!) against Angela and maybe two of her
school’s students or instructors.

This should be a win-win situation. The Tribune gets to put a
positive spin on a divisive issue and gets a PR win by promoting
women’s hockey.

Yes, you’ll probably lose the game. Take it like a man. Maybe you’ll
be embarrassed. That’s fine. It’s all in good fun right? Here’s your
chance to prove your intentions. You deserve this so man up and take
your licks. Maybe you’ll learn about gender stereotypes in sports and
reporting. Assuming, of course, you have the balls.

http://bit.ly/befl80

Best regards,

Well, to begin with, there are probably as many different types of atheists as there are different types of Christians. Well, everyone does what they do their own way. Point is its tough to generalize. That said, the positions of an atheist and a religious person are not at all alike. Take the topic of death, atheists generally will list things that they know. “I will rot, maybe donate organs… maybe people will remember me. Maybe some will fondly think of me.” These things are fact and there’s no disputing them. This is knowledge and these are things we can all know will happen to us. Belief in heaven or hell is just that — a belief. It is specifically not fact and not knowledge. So the two positions are definitely not equal.

Take any issue: “______.” Ask, “what is ______?” Answer that question with knowledge, and you’ll come up with an answer everyone should be able to accept. Answer it with beliefs and the answer will be religious.