Absolutely.. Just pointing out that we should be equally skeptical of self-proclaimed skeptics.
Documented by whom? Plenty of people claim "documented" when they're really just pulling stuff out of their ass.
Does not matter what you did or didn't do- for all you know, the guy he really wants is standing behind you. By hitting the ground, you clear his field of fire.
When they say "stop, I just want to talk" they mean "lay down face down on the ground with your hands behind your back"
Come to think of it, that's damn good advice no matter what color you are.
Haven't we heard this story line a few times before?
Not at all, given the role sacrifice played out in Jewish theology and tradition.
But you've got the description wrong. Sin and Virtue are habits. If you have enough habits of Virtue to survive in Heaven, then you get to go there (eventually). If you don't, you get the booby prize of Hell, because you wouldn't be able to live in Heaven anyway.
Maybe 20 page, there were a LOT of flashbacks.
I think you missed the point.
Somebody had reused a human brain as a ship AI. After the crew died (there is some indication it was disease, not old age- Dr. Calvin in her death scene did not look old and still had color to her hair, despite there being nobody around left to be vain for) he foolishly asked to be left turned on, and eventually the amnesia circuits started to degrade, bringing back his human memories- which is why he created the robot body for himself, and why, after he had recovered those memories, he agreed with you and committed suicide (rather spectacularly- running the ship into a sun?)
I somehow missed that in Advanced C class in 1992, thanks. I'll have to try it.
"In comparison to Obama, perhaps."
I was thinking more in comparison to Pope Leo XIII.
"However if you want to champion that idea, then it leaves another question. If Reagan was not conservative, then we have never had a conservative president - why is that?"
Because the basic idea of America, individual liberty, is an idea that is more progressively liberal than anything anybody else in the world has ever tried.
"Why is it that in 200+ years of our country we have never had a conservative president, and why would that be a good idea now? "
I'm not sure, after 200+ years of liberalism, if civilization is still even possible. A conservative president would be a step back towards civilization, but I don't see any God first, country second royalists running, do you?
"We have certainly never had a socialist president in this country, and we cannot convince enough people that it would be a good idea to try it."
True as far as it goes, but I personally see little to no difference between a centralized capitalistic economy and socialism. Both are liberal ideas, not conservative ones.
"Why would a conservative president be a good idea if none of the presidents who have met previously standing meanings of conservative were adequately conservative to meet the new meaning?"
Because when the experiment is a failure, you need to replace it with something else.
Reagan was a free market liberal.
++i is allowed by your compiler? What does that compile to?
"Hint- those "States" - a specific set of states (as in verifiable, unlike your Christendom) - agreed to a Constitution that defined the United States as a single Republic (again verifiable, unlike your vague group of doubleplusgood true Scotsman). Common parlance refers to that as single country."
Yes, just as the countries of Christendom were supposed to abide by Canon Law (when they didn't, it caused wars). Common parlance leads to common thinking, and is not fit for uncommon human beings.
"No, I don't see what you did there. I make claims that can be verified (see above, we know what the US is, which states it's made of, what it has done). You're just being contrarian."
The only thing that counts in the long run, is the long run. I'm being meta, not contrarian. Learn the difference if you want to debate online, but since you've just identified yourself as a newbie with no actual debating skills, I'm done.