Ron

Or was Trump such a singularly dangerous POTUS that there was no choice other than to resist from within, collude with major media, and libel his supporters as literal White Supremacists?  I prefer the Democratic platform, but assuming that turnabout is fair play, can we expect any of it to happen? 

I'm thinking there should be a panel of filmmakers and critics who meet and provide a shortlist of films that gets voted on by the members of the relevant branch. That should improve the perceived quality of the choices, no?

Besides defense, policing, fire department, roads, education, public health, sanitation, consumer and worker protection, the courts, anti-monopoly regulation, and air traffic control, what has government ever done for us?

1. A world in which everyone is a secular humanist/unbeliever.

2. A world in which everyone is a strong believer in faith and governance is done strictly according to religious law as interpreted by clergy.

Guns are extremely hard to get here. It is one big "no carry zone." Therefore, shouldn't there be anarchy in the streets without armed citizens to help?

If you can make a gun, what is the point of screening purchasers anymore? I think ita time to address the culture of violence, the fear, the perceived need for lethal weapons to reduce violence.

This is a theoretical question, in reality I don't even like cleaning trout. The point is that the assertions of believers are impossible to ascertain as none of us is a mind-reader. Doesn't that mean that transparent, codified secular law is more practical and for that matter more ethical than religious motivations? Discuss!

As an adult, I don't ever ask for forgiveness. If I have done wrong, I apologize, I try to make amends, and I use the guilt and embarrassment as an motivation to avoid making that kind of mistake in the future. If the person I have harmed forgives me, that's great, but it is not appropriate to burden them with the job of making me feel relieved. It is on me, as a grownup, to accept what I did.

That makes sense, right?

So why would you ever ask a third party, let's say God, to forgive you? What for? That's baby stuff. Babies want to be forgiven. Adults deal.

And moreover, how can you respect people who need forgiveness for sins? How can you trust people who think that they have been magically purified by praying to their deity?

This truly baffles me. Can this be explained?

IMO, the gun control lobby and popular support for personal gun carry are here to stay in the USA. So if you can't ban them, can you at least make them less lethal while still providing the protection that gun advocates think they have?

i.e. Will we be setting phasers on stun any time in the foreseeable future?

...at Yahoo Answers?

I am.

In my world, it is taken for granted that women are fully human and not to blame them for the ills that befall men.

Apparently this is not close to being a universal belief!

Is this because we are on the interweb, where anonymous trolls reign, or because the culture of western Canada is so very different, or....? Thoughts?

I don't believe in things without evidence, particularly strange-sounding claims about supernatural powers, eternal life, worlds being created in under a week, and so on.

But I have no objection to deities, I just wish they would show themselves less ambiguously. A burning bush that spoke to us, perhaps while being interviewed on CNN or Al-Jazeera. That sort of thing.

Would you welcome proof of godhood, why or why not? Would you prefer one god or goddess over another? (I'm not sure I want to see, you know, Shiva or Kali... they are scary.)

As a preamble, I apologize to anyone who is offended by this because they have had, are having, want to have gender reassignment or for any other reason. I am not transphobic, at least I don't think I am.

My question has to do with the basis for wanting to be reassigned.

Transpeople say that they always knew that they had a gender identity that did not match their physique.

To me, this seems to be an issue of not conforming to gender roles; that if you want to do mannish/womanish things then you ought to be a man/woman externally.

Isn't that sexism? Isn't that, in a very real way, obeying old-fashioned binary gender norms?

What's wrong with being as femme or manly as you like, wearing what you like, calling yourself he or she as you like? NOTHING!

Why take hormones and/or surgeries that will probably impair your sensation? If ritual circumcision is wrong because it cuts healthy flesh, why would you cut your healthy flesh? To fit into 1950s gender norms?

Maybe this is naive, but I thought that if people cared enough about gender equality issues to read and write posts about the topic, that they would be in favour of studying the history, theory, and practice of these matters systematically; in short, that they would be feminists.

Apparently not!

But that's ok. To each their own. Debate and conversation and disagreement are healthy and productive ways of engaging each other.

What's your reason? The word "feminist" has too many negative associations? You find it threatening? You believe gender equality has already been solved and there is no point to discuss it? What is it?

Out of their principled disdain for government services provided to all citizens equally, paid for by taxes collected from all.