Not from me, no. I tend to heavily invest in things that I like, if I sense that the company or producer behind it appreciates me as a customer and not as a wallet. I buy books from and donate to webcomics I like, I buy games after playing demos (if I like the game, naturally), and when I really get into something, I'll buy associated works like posters, toys, etc. just to fling more cash their way.

I view it as positive reinforcement towards a company that displays correct behavior. I've got enough money that I can afford to support the things that I like, in the hopes that the companies that make those things will be encouraged to make more things that I like.

If i'm getting screwed somehow, then i'm pretty fucking happy about it.

That's because you're not getting screwed. You're getting made sweet, passionate love to :P

Which is actually kind of the point. Treat your customers well, and the will (on average) treat you well back.

Playing D&D isn't what makes you a cool dad (though it definitely helps). Interacting with your teenage son on a regular basis is what makes you a cool dad. Being involved in his life, and in his friend's lives, that's what makes you a cool dad. Congratulations, you cracked the code! :)

When I first saw that sketch, I just thought it was typical (meaning: very funny) Python humor. But I've had several instances of "laughing so hard I almost passed out" in my life, which makes me wonder if a "killing joke" is actually possible.

One such incident involved an intentional outtake from the movie Serenity. If you've seen those, then you likely know which one I mean. I was left gasping for breath and my vision was graying out before I started to recover.

Actually... that made me curious enough to check Wikipedia while writing this. There are, apparently, a few known deaths attributed to heart failure brought on by excessive laughing. So much for laughter being the best medicine!

As a US citizen, I also find these practices unacceptable. The current mentality of complete control by our government has gotten entirely too far out of hand in this country. I vote my conscience in every election, and I write letters and am as politically active as I can be while still holding down a job, but there's only so much I can do when so many of my fellow Americans are bound and determined to allow our own government to undermine everything that our country is supposed to stand for.

Actions like this by the EU are pretty much the last hope I have of something may give the US the wake up call that we so desperately need. Unfortunately, with the US's current extremely confrontational attitude, the only reaction that I can see is a bunch of angry griping about how the rest of the world just better shut up and stay out of our business. Still, I applaud the EU and anyone else that refuses to tow the US-mandated line.

is Captain Mike Yates.

Seriously, though... a movie could be great, or it could be terrible, and I would be ok with either result. If it's good, then huzzah! I'll watch it and enjoy it. If it's terrible, then yay! We can ignore it as far as canon goes (like that terrible 80's thing... Paul McGann made a good Doctor, the Tardis set was awesome, the reinvented theme was ok... the rest sucked goat ass).

My big fear is that it will be kind of decent. Too good to ignore, but too bad to really energize the franchise.

But if this is going to be it's own continuity, then I guess do whatever you want, Hollywood. If I don't like it, I'll ignore it. Though, the influx of new Who fans who are only familiar with the movie(s) will be annoying to deal with. But that's life.

Yeah, they are a fun band to listen to, that's for sure. I saw them live just a couple nights ago (First Avenue, Minneapolis) and they were incredible. I've maybe seen technically better musicians, but these guys have a joy for playing that really comes across, and their songs are fun and interesting.

Plus it's mildly amusing to me when a fairly mellow song like "Birdhouse in your soul" causes the audience to just go WILD.

That would make that a double-abomination burger.

Sounds delicious :P

It's been quite a while since I read the Bible, but where in the actual text does it say that, as opposed to, say, that story being intended as evidence that true devotion to God should come before even the lives of your own family? Because, without any kind of qualification in the text, any kind of assumption like the one you stated is unsupported. As I recall (and, as I said, it's been a while since I read it so I could be wrong) there is nothing directly in the that story itself that supports the "doesn't require child sacrifice" stance.

You said rabbis and historians "since medieval times", which suggests that it took centuries of that story existing before people reached the conclusion that child sacrifice is not needed. If there is nothing in the Bible itself, or in writings that are contemporaneous with the Abraham and Isaac story that supports that stance, then I offer my hypothesis that people later on decided to interpret that story they way they wanted to, in a way which may not be what was originally intended by the original writer.

Which I would be fine accepting. Child sacrifice, or indeed human sacrifice in general, is completely abhorrent to me. If people decided to interpret this story from the Bible in a different way than what may have been intended, then that helps to renew my faith that people can be decent if they want to be.

Prove it.

Disobedience of God is a flaw. If they were unflawed, they would not have disobeyed God in the first place. Therefore, the "fall" could not have happened without the direct influence of God's will. Therefore, God willed the "fall" to happen and is directly responsible for all of our so-called "flaws".

If my reasoning is incorrect, please point out where I am wrong.