Anecdotal evidence is more strong than statistical evidence as bad customer experiences matter more than good customer experiences. Discuss.

You tend to remember the bad? Like, the line you go in is always the slowest, because you don't remember as well the times you pick the fast line? Also, when you're in the slow line, you have more time to stew about it - when you're in the fast line you have less time to think about how lucky you are.

Also, back in prehistoric times, someone telling you, "Don't eat that! Org ate that and then he died!" might have more weight than, "Don't eat that! Org did a statistical study and concluded that you have a 5% higher chance of dying in the next five hours." (note - these are different Orgs.)

English can have its own censorship pitfalls, but at least I don't have to worry about someone telling me I have to teach the Bible alongside all that heathen literature.

For now. [link]

So, do the differences in the sects include using light bulbs instead of candles in their respective rituals?

Well, the candle people are just a bunch of freaks, they aren't real gnomists.

why would an Intelligent Design just muck around with single cell organisms for billions of years?

Quest for perfection.

Huh. You'd think someone all-knowing, all-perfect, etc., would get it right the first time.

If there is a chunk of kids who want to learn about the Bible in a literature context, I don't have a problem with it in a public school as long as it's an elective. It shouldn't be in order to graduate, you have to take this class and we teach the bible. I think the elective could count twoard the English requirement, though.

So, do the differences in the sects include using light bulbs instead of candles in their respective rituals?

Oh, DX, you just *had* to go there, didn't you?

Well, the candle people are just a bunch of freaks, they aren't real gnomists.

See, this is just part of the vast electric-loving conspiracy. They spread lies without a single shred of guilt.

that would assume our "right" equals what a divine being was after. Perhaps devine being likes the process.

At some point after Disney released Pocohantas and the Southern Baptists were boycotting Disney had one of several debates with Southern Baptist Minister Relative the Obnoxious. He was pissed at Disney for several reasons: they portrayed pagan religons in a positive light (Pocohantas), gay friendly, the purchase of Miramax, etc.

Somehow this segued into the discussion of evolution. He tried to convience me that evolution just wasn't possible, using the really stupid analog of bicycles and then he hit on fruit flies. Fruit flies have extremely short life spans! Fruit flies can't evolve their life spans are too short!

I didn't have an answer to that, so I switched back to "Why are you boycotting Disney and not other companies that are gay friendly?" Answer: Disney is the only one shaping impressionable minds.

Except this year I learned that fruit flies are used in experiments about evolution. I wish I had known that then, I just sucked at science so I could only argue the point so far and then my lack of knowledge got in the way.

I have nothing inherently against this:

The Bible class will be taught as a history or literature course elective. The teaching plan will be made available for the public to see before it is put into practice in the classroom.

Vasquez also added that the class is likely to focus on the Bible’s impact on America’s founding fathers. It will also instruct on the influence of the Bible in art and culture. Geography of Middle Eastern countries could also be taught.

Religious studies was mandatory in my high school (either from a believer's POV in J'ca, which was irritating, or comparatively in the UK, which was marvellous), and I think it's valuable. You don't get to tell me what to believe, but it's important for me to understand what the people around me believe. We studied creation tales, major figures, etc.

Hell, I have an otherwise well-educated teen cousin who thought Adam and Eve were Jesus' parents. It's an odd sort of educational avoidance, that.

If there is a chunk of kids who want to learn about the Bible in a literature context, I don't have a problem with it in a public school as long as it's an elective.

I read something about this (at least I think it's the same Texas school thing) - some people are complaining that it's only a fundementalist perspective that's being taught. Like, they're being taught that the bible is literaly true, the bible is more accurate than science, the US should have its laws based on the Bible, etc....