Sad Christmas Story

Child 1:

Child is told about Santa Claus. Sees Santa Claus. Gets presents from
Santa Claus. Believes in Santa Claus. Eventually figures out the the
North Pole is in the ocean and that Santa doesn't have time to visit
every house in the world the same night. Stops believing. Still
enjoys Christmas.

Child 2:

Child is read Genesis. Believes it. Eventually, sees skeleton of
Lucy. Looks at pictures of galaxies as they were 13 billion years ago.
Learns about children with cancer, the Holocaust, tsunamis, murder,
rape, etc. Still believes that a loving God created all of this in six
days. Tries to get tax money invested in promoting his belief.
Perjures himself in federal court.

I'm gonna have to say that Child 2 has a learning disability.

Greg

Florian wrote:
I think you would find it difficult to be "in charge" while swinging

from a rope.

Ok, if i'd be lynched for such a change i'll revise my suggestion to say
that _I_ will gladly give up the 6 official scheduled holidays my company
gives me off each year in exchange for 5 or 6 additional floating holidays
to use as i please.

I like this idea. 5-6 sanctioned holidays (to keep the hoi polloi
placated), 5-6 (mandatory) floating holidays, and 40-50 vacation days.
If it's good enough for the President, it's good enough for America!

Shawn

I like this idea. 5-6 sanctioned holidays (to keep the hoi polloi
placated), 5-6 (mandatory) floating holidays, and 40-50 vacation days.
If it's good enough for the President, it's good enough for America!

Shawn's idea it the best! You've got my vote...

-Florian

Florian wrote:
I like this idea. 5-6 sanctioned holidays (to keep the hoi polloi
placated), 5-6 (mandatory) floating holidays, and 40-50 vacation days.
If it's good enough for the President, it's good enough for America!


Shawn's idea it the best! You've got my vote...

-Florian




But I think he did seriously undercount on the 40-50 :-)

"Shawn" sdotherecurry@bresnannextdotnet wrote in message
...
Florian wrote:
I think you would find it difficult to be "in charge" while swinging

from a rope.

Ok, if i'd be lynched for such a change i'll revise my suggestion to say
that _I_ will gladly give up the 6 official scheduled holidays my
company
gives me off each year in exchange for 5 or 6 additional floating
holidays
to use as i please.

I like this idea. 5-6 sanctioned holidays (to keep the hoi polloi
placated), 5-6 (mandatory) floating holidays, and 40-50 vacation days.
If it's good enough for the President, it's good enough for America!


That definitely would be nice but I'd take anything over our pathetic
standard 2 weeks of vacation in the USA.

Greg

Davoud:
I am /not/ going to discuss the likely fate of someone who tried to
abolish Columbus Day, as I don't want to be responsible for you waking
up screaming from your nightmares.

Florian:
Columbus Day isn't a holiday for the company i work for so i'm not sure what
you're talking about here.

Let's hope you never do know.

Davoud

--
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com

Davoud:
I think you would find it difficult to be "in charge" while swinging
from a rope.

Florian:
Ok, if i'd be lynched for such a change i'll revise my suggestion to say
that _I_ will gladly give up the 6 official scheduled holidays my company
gives me off each year in exchange for 5 or 6 additional floating holidays
to use as i please.

Ah, now that's very different.

I worked like that for years (1970-1994) in the U.S. Foreign Service
(Diplomatic Corps) overseas. Our de facto work schedule was 24/7/365.
As federal employees we were allowed federal holidays, however, and our
embassies are required to close -- or appear to be closed -- for
certain host-country holidays as well. There was the opportunity,
almost always, to work on a holiday holiday and trade it for another
day.

Such an arrangement is between you and your employer, and has nothing
to do with who's "in charge" in the larger sense.

Davoud

--
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com

A day for God is not equivalent to a day for the Earth.

wrote in message
ups.com...
Child 1:

Child is told about Santa Claus. Sees Santa Claus. Gets presents from
Santa Claus. Believes in Santa Claus. Eventually figures out the the
North Pole is in the ocean and that Santa doesn't have time to visit
every house in the world the same night. Stops believing. Still
enjoys Christmas.

Child 2:

Child is read Genesis. Believes it. Eventually, sees skeleton of
Lucy. Looks at pictures of galaxies as they were 13 billion years ago.
Learns about children with cancer, the Holocaust, tsunamis, murder,
rape, etc. Still believes that a loving God created all of this in six
days. Tries to get tax money invested in promoting his belief.
Perjures himself in federal court.

I'm gonna have to say that Child 2 has a learning disability.

Greg

On 12/25/2005 06:40 PM +0900, Stephen M. Zumbo wrote:

Evolution is visible around us daily; it's real.

Where is evolution visible daily? I see no examples of animals gradually
changing in complexity, from one distinct type into another. In fact, what

Homo sapiens sapiens (us) has shown a distinct trend toward smaller
molars and reduced physical robustness over the last 100,000 years, for
two very relevant examples.

Mutation, which classic evolution requires, in present experience has always
been negative and usually fatal i.e fruit flies have been mutated through

Not at all correct.

If evolution were actually happening, there should be many transitional
forms between species, both in the fossil record and "visible around us."
Evolutionists have no answer for this, except punctuated equilibrium,i.e.

And exactly what's wrong with punctuated equilibrium? it's based on
positive evidence, including extensive studies of both living and
extinct species (Eldredge and Gould 1972). If you wish to venture into
phyletic gradualism, you should understand that transformation need not
be even or slow. It need not involve most or all of the ancestral
population. Neither need it occur over most of all a species' geographic
range.

suddenly a new species appeared. Why not accept that they were suddenly
created by God then? That actually makes more sense, given an omniscient

It makes no sense whatsoever, given the abundant evidence to support an
evolutionary model.

trane
--
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Trane Francks Tokyo, Japan
// Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.

On 12/28/2005 11:30 AM +0900, Mij Adyaw wrote:
Good post Steven. This group also needs the Christian perspective.

I would disagree with that statement.

trane
--
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Trane Francks Tokyo, Japan
// Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.