1.) Do you really believe that you are supporting a free country when you are forcing people to violate their religious beliefs and conscience?
2.) If you believe in tolerance, why don't you just boycott and protest the business instead of forcing your views on an independent business?
3.) If you think the business is bigoted for not supporting a gay marriage then why are you giving them money? Even if you force them to deny their conscience and religion they still hold those beliefs and you are supporting them.
4.) There are thousands of places to buy flowers and cakes, why not just go to another place and leave the business alone? That way no one has to violate their religion and you get what you want too.
5.) You probably consider yourself to be open-minded, so let me ask you: Have you really considered the other side?
I'm not saying that Indiana's new law doesn't have problems, but I am asking you to consider that other people have rights and that in a free and democratic country we must accept that people should be allowed to make judgments freely; based on their conscience and religion, and that religious individuals have a right to have jobs in the public square without having to deny their conscience and religion.
I believe that we can live in a free country; that we can have a society in which every person, religious or not can freely express and live by their religious convictions in private and public, and that the majority opinion should not force anyone out of the public square so long as they are not hurting others.
The real question here is: Do you believe in having a free society or are you willing to give up on the idea of liberty?
Monday, 30 March 2015
Sunday, 29 March 2015
Ten most-centralized capitals
A central capital is an ideal one (at less of course it's in the desert or the arctic) but usually citizens prefer the capital to be close to the people not only in that they care about their citizens but also that they are reasonably visit-able. The following ten countries have the most centralized capitals:
Mexico City, Mexico. Mexico city was built in the same location as the capital of the Aztec empire; and that's for a good reason: Tenochtitlan was the best city for a center-capital.
Riyadh, Arabia. More than 80% of the Kingdom is desert which makes having a central capital difficult, and yet Riyadh is one of best positioned capitals, lying in-between the especially sacred cities of Mecca and Medina in the west and oil-wealthy cities by the Persian gulf in the east.
Jerusalem, Israel. King David choose an idle capital of the Kingdom of Israel back 3000 years ago and this day it remains a very central capital.
Madrid, Spain. Right on Spain--pretty much perfect.
Rome, Italy. The Romans choose the best place for a capital for sure. But it wasn't built in a day.
Brussels, Belgium. Dear Belgium, you may not be very popular but if nothing else at least you have a centralized capital--good for you.
Chisinau, Moldova. Your not number one, but at least your on the list.
Algiers, Algeria, In terms of being central geographically it fails but it is central in terms of where people actually live.
Abuja, Nigeria.
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Mexico City, Mexico. Mexico city was built in the same location as the capital of the Aztec empire; and that's for a good reason: Tenochtitlan was the best city for a center-capital.
Riyadh, Arabia. More than 80% of the Kingdom is desert which makes having a central capital difficult, and yet Riyadh is one of best positioned capitals, lying in-between the especially sacred cities of Mecca and Medina in the west and oil-wealthy cities by the Persian gulf in the east.
Jerusalem, Israel. King David choose an idle capital of the Kingdom of Israel back 3000 years ago and this day it remains a very central capital.
Madrid, Spain. Right on Spain--pretty much perfect.
Rome, Italy. The Romans choose the best place for a capital for sure. But it wasn't built in a day.
Brussels, Belgium. Dear Belgium, you may not be very popular but if nothing else at least you have a centralized capital--good for you.
Chisinau, Moldova. Your not number one, but at least your on the list.
Algiers, Algeria, In terms of being central geographically it fails but it is central in terms of where people actually live.
Abuja, Nigeria.
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Saturday, 28 March 2015
Ten most De-centralized capitals
Having a central capital has always been important: whether we're talking about an empire, kingdom or nation state. When a capital is far from close to the majority of country it's citizens tend to feel that the capital doesn't care for them as much as those closer. Here are ten of the worse capital locations in terms of how close they are to a central location within their country. (In no particular order.)
1.) Washington, America. Sure it made a lot of sense when there were thirteen colonies and contact with Europe was essential, but it's been three hundred years and this point the capital almost couldn't be more east.
2.) Ottawa, Canada. Ottawa made sense early in Canada's history because it was founded between the British-controlled Upper-Canada (in Ontario) and the French colonies in Lower Canada (In Quebec) but anyone whose looked at a map of Canada lately knows Canada has since expanded. It would get really awkward if Quebec separates. As of now Ottawa is very much over to the east (though not as bad as Washington.)
3.) London, England. Dear London, we know that your significant and all but Leeds would have made a lot more sense. As it stands London is very much in the south.
4.) Berlin , Germany. Way to north-east; what would the rest of Germany do if another country attacked from the east and took the capital months before they could invade the rest of Germany?
5.) Vilnius, Lithuania: Lithuania, I understand you like Belarus, but you've taken it too far: your capital is almost in another country! Come on Lithuania the capital belongs in the center!
6.) Moscow, Russia. In Russian we...are like the Americans?? Russia we all know you like to consider yourself part of Europe but come on 80% of yourself is east of Moscow!
7.) Beijing, China. Dear China, your regarding as a highly organized country who claims to be committed to be committed to your people's welfare. I tend to question your commitment when your capital is all the way in your north-east corner!
8.) Vientian, Laos. Laos' capital is so southern that it's hard to tell if it's in the right country--seriously.
9.) Canberra, Australia. What's that you thought it was Sidney? Nope. It's Canberra which is all the way in the south-east corner of Australia. Sydney would have been a better choice (but only a little better.)
10.) New Delhi, India. There are more people than in all of North America south of New Delhi in India. Enough said? It's to far north.
1.) Washington, America. Sure it made a lot of sense when there were thirteen colonies and contact with Europe was essential, but it's been three hundred years and this point the capital almost couldn't be more east.
2.) Ottawa, Canada. Ottawa made sense early in Canada's history because it was founded between the British-controlled Upper-Canada (in Ontario) and the French colonies in Lower Canada (In Quebec) but anyone whose looked at a map of Canada lately knows Canada has since expanded. It would get really awkward if Quebec separates. As of now Ottawa is very much over to the east (though not as bad as Washington.)
3.) London, England. Dear London, we know that your significant and all but Leeds would have made a lot more sense. As it stands London is very much in the south.
4.) Berlin , Germany. Way to north-east; what would the rest of Germany do if another country attacked from the east and took the capital months before they could invade the rest of Germany?
5.) Vilnius, Lithuania: Lithuania, I understand you like Belarus, but you've taken it too far: your capital is almost in another country! Come on Lithuania the capital belongs in the center!
6.) Moscow, Russia. In Russian we...are like the Americans?? Russia we all know you like to consider yourself part of Europe but come on 80% of yourself is east of Moscow!
7.) Beijing, China. Dear China, your regarding as a highly organized country who claims to be committed to be committed to your people's welfare. I tend to question your commitment when your capital is all the way in your north-east corner!
8.) Vientian, Laos. Laos' capital is so southern that it's hard to tell if it's in the right country--seriously.
9.) Canberra, Australia. What's that you thought it was Sidney? Nope. It's Canberra which is all the way in the south-east corner of Australia. Sydney would have been a better choice (but only a little better.)
10.) New Delhi, India. There are more people than in all of North America south of New Delhi in India. Enough said? It's to far north.
Saturday, 21 March 2015
Bible Archaeology Index
The following includes links to Bible-supporting historical evidence in chronological order.
2000 BC
1786 BC: Foreigners called the "Hykos" take control of Lower Egypt, which helps explain Exodus 1:6-10.
1500 BC
1446 BC: Wheels of Egypt found in the Gulf of Aqaba that would have been used during the time of the Exodus.
1446 BC: Mount Jabel al Lawz in north-western Arabia has significant evidence to the real Mt. Sinai.
1406 BC: The ruins of Hazor and Jericho provide support for the Conquest of Canaan.
1350 BC: Pharaoh Akhenaten insists that there is only one real God--Aten. It's plausible that he was influenced by Judaic monotheism (as he would have heard about the Exodus.)
Circa 1000 BC: People in the Middle East stop eating pork as Israel's influence grows in the region.
927 BC: Pharaoh Sheshonq I writes of attack on Israelite cities providing evidence of a powerful Kingdom and a downfall (which is why he would have chosen the time that time to invade.)
841 BC: Tel-Dan Stele provides evidence for Israel, and a Judean kingdom called "House of David,"
588 BC: Seals found in the City of David provide evidence of a plot to kill the prophet Jeremiah.
539 BC: The Cyrus Cylinder provides evidence of King Cyrus' liberation degree given in Ezra 1:1-4.
250 BC-68 AD: The Dead Scrolls were written and prove that the Oldest Testament hasn't been changed more than 2% in the last two thousand years. The major exception is the Book of Ester which wasn't found with the scrolls. It is also worth noting that some manuscripts were partially destroyed.
2000 BC
1786 BC: Foreigners called the "Hykos" take control of Lower Egypt, which helps explain Exodus 1:6-10.
1500 BC
1446 BC: Wheels of Egypt found in the Gulf of Aqaba that would have been used during the time of the Exodus.
1446 BC: Mount Jabel al Lawz in north-western Arabia has significant evidence to the real Mt. Sinai.
1406 BC: The ruins of Hazor and Jericho provide support for the Conquest of Canaan.
1350 BC: Pharaoh Akhenaten insists that there is only one real God--Aten. It's plausible that he was influenced by Judaic monotheism (as he would have heard about the Exodus.)
Circa 1000 BC: People in the Middle East stop eating pork as Israel's influence grows in the region.
927 BC: Pharaoh Sheshonq I writes of attack on Israelite cities providing evidence of a powerful Kingdom and a downfall (which is why he would have chosen the time that time to invade.)
841 BC: Tel-Dan Stele provides evidence for Israel, and a Judean kingdom called "House of David,"
588 BC: Seals found in the City of David provide evidence of a plot to kill the prophet Jeremiah.
539 BC: The Cyrus Cylinder provides evidence of King Cyrus' liberation degree given in Ezra 1:1-4.
525 BC: Archaeological proof
on Elephantine island in Egypt prove idolatrous Jews did
live in Egypt as Jeremiah 42 and 43 tells us.
500 BC250 BC-68 AD: The Dead Scrolls were written and prove that the Oldest Testament hasn't been changed more than 2% in the last two thousand years. The major exception is the Book of Ester which wasn't found with the scrolls. It is also worth noting that some manuscripts were partially destroyed.
Wednesday, 18 March 2015
Changes Between The Bible Series and its Sequel
1.) Mary
In The Bible Series Mary (the mother of Jesus) was played by the director's wife, Roma Downey. In AD (The sequel to The Bible Series) she's played by Greta Scacchi.
Roma as Mary, in The Bible Series. Greta as Mary in AD
2.) John becomes black.
In The Bible series John a close disciple of Jesus and brother of James (another close disciple) is a white man, but strangely in the sequel he is black. Ideally he would be Jewish (or at least middle-eastern.) It's kind of awkward if you think about because in The Bible Series they show him at the end of his life and yet in the sequel he's black. So he starts of white, then turns black but then by the ens of his life he's become white again...and lost his curly hair...strange.
He's John at the end of The Bible Series:
And here he is in AD:
3.) Mary Magdalene
The sequel really does change characters appearances: Take a look at Mary Magdalene in The Bible Series compared to in AD: The Bible Continues.
Amber Rose Revah
In The Bible Series Mary (the mother of Jesus) was played by the director's wife, Roma Downey. In AD (The sequel to The Bible Series) she's played by Greta Scacchi.
Roma as Mary, in The Bible Series. Greta as Mary in AD
2.) John becomes black.
In The Bible series John a close disciple of Jesus and brother of James (another close disciple) is a white man, but strangely in the sequel he is black. Ideally he would be Jewish (or at least middle-eastern.) It's kind of awkward if you think about because in The Bible Series they show him at the end of his life and yet in the sequel he's black. So he starts of white, then turns black but then by the ens of his life he's become white again...and lost his curly hair...strange.
He's John at the end of The Bible Series:
And here he is in AD:
 |
Babou Ceesay |
3.) Mary Magdalene
The sequel really does change characters appearances: Take a look at Mary Magdalene in The Bible Series compared to in AD: The Bible Continues.
Amber Rose Revah
 |
 |
Chipo Chung |
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)