Damnit. Get the line right AC!

Don't believe in yourself, believe in the me that believes in you!

Realistically, you don't even need restrictions on traffic TO countries with outbreaks if you're being selective on which traffic you're permitting FROM the country. If you allow flights out for medical personnel who have been screened for infection the civilian traffic will dry up of its own accord. People aren't going to fly to Liberia to be stuck there. Some still may and catch a flight to Spain then hop over.

As far as I can tell, they're worried that restricting traffic to/from countries like Liberia will have an economic impact due to a lock down on exports from the outbreak countries. A country like Liberia makes most of its money from exports so halting exports would reduce the funds it would have to fight and recover from ebola. Additionally, the lower supply of goods may temporarily drive up the prices on some things.

I think it's all foolish though. There's no reason to restrict flights inbound to an outbreak countries so there's no reason that a restriction should impact the delivery of medical supplies and support personnel. The loss of income for an outbreak country due to restrictions on imports from that country shouldn't matter from a "handling and recovering" standpoints. It's in the world's interest to contain it so providing funds, supplies, and personnel to assist and outbreak country is a natural outcome.

Working for the good ol' golden arc, eh?

"I know ice sculpting and hedge art."

Sounds like a character for use in a gay porno.

$5m might be a sound starting point.

Which is true, the vast majority of the time. The Pope is only considered infallable when claiming ex cathedra which is almost exclusively used for the canonization of saints. There are fewer than 15 acknowledged papal statements that are considered ex cathedra and consequently infallable. It was a rhetorical question made from a flawed premise that ended at the right conclusion. That's of course discarding any sort of argument against papal infallibility made from within the Catholic Church or other Christian faiths.

However, as juancn stated, the philosophy of the church and faith is a deeply complicated matter that a few simple sentence cannot do justice. Terms rarely as blanket statements and are usually far more nuanced than people realize. Religious orders themselves have influenced things in various ways. The Jesuits have always been an interesting order to follow and it certainly doesn't hurt that Pope Francis is the first Jesuit elected to the Papacy.

I probably understand Christianity's structure better than most Christians and I don't consider myself a Christian but I probably don't understand it better than most priests or pastors who have dedicated their lives to studying the scripture.

I believe that most people with a rabid hatred of Christianity are driven to it by some negative experience involving a person acting as a Christian. I hold this belief because the arguments I see them consistently making do not make any sense if you've studied the structure of Christianity. They are frequently wrong and if you press them on it they tend to fall back towards it being the practitioners.

The following is written as a non-Christian who has studied and attempted to understand Christianity.

If all you want is to be a Christian then all you need is the New Testament. The Old Testament is for use in the study of Christianity for explaining the old order, explaining God, and providing the prophecies of the Messiah's coming.

Generally speaking, I disregard any arguments about Christians as soon as people start bringing up the Old Testament. They're latching on to what they believe are inconsistencies because they don't understand how the faith is structured. It's only useful as an argument against specific Christians who have previously invoked the Old Testament and I don't consider "The Bible says..." to be invoking the Old Testament.

The Jesuits are pretty awesome.

Papal infallibility is very rarely invoked outside of the canonization of saints. There's a handful that invoke infallibility with 11 officially recognized, through the entire existance of the church, but only the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary are well known. There are a set of conditions by which a statement by a Pope can be declared infallible. In general, unless the Pope says that it must be done by the whole church it's not considered infallible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...

If you want to argue about papal infallibility it's probably wise that you understand papal infallibility and ex cathedra before uttering idiotic statements like what I quoted.

Doesn't feature Jack Black, however if you us John Candy as a stand in for Jack Black it works.

They also tend to rely on condoms and other contraceptives rather than relying on knowing when to pull out in time.

Luxembourg isn't involved? How queer.