She will be tolerated and included when she accept the Truth. Good christians don't tolerate the devil or his lies.
This is a good example of why I don't pray; it only serves to piss somebody else off. Mud is accepting of all things, and requires no prayer. Mud just wants you to do the right thing. I think this PA legislator should be required to take a reMUDial course in not being as asshole.
I'm pretty sure you can get any sitting bunny to assume such a pose. Happy Easter
I've never heard any of your posing "bunny" stories.
Happy Easter.
One day I'll tell you about the ones I experimented with in the oven inducing varying levels of heat stroke. It was pretty traumatic, but strangely hypnotic to watch.
I'm pretty sure you can get any sitting bunny to assume such a pose. Happy Easter
I've never heard any of your posing "bunny" stories.
Happy Easter.
One day I'll tell you about the ones I experimented with in the oven inducing varying levels of heat stroke. It was pretty traumatic, but strangely hypnotic to watch.
That is NOT the kind of posing "bunny" I'm referring to, and either way - ewww!
So Quebec is banning the wearing of religious symbols by public workers. Sounds OK on the surface - no religious symbols no matter the religion; all equal and properly secular, right? Problem is, if we considered this like a discrimination issue would be viewed in the US, we'd clearly find "disparate impact." Meaning that a rule that looks non-discriminatory on its face has a greater impact on some groups than others. In this instance, for someone who might wear a cross as a piece of jewelry the rule is an annoyance - but a bit more than that if you're a Muslim or Hasidic Jew. So certainly the law could be seen as blatantly anti-Muslim - saying in effect, "let's all inconvenience ourselves slightly so as to keep the Muslims with bags over their heads out of the public workforce."
Does the rule include Blue Jays caps and those stupid berets the wannabe Frogs wear?
More seriously: I think the silliness of wearing religious symbols is equaled by the silliness of getting upset over the wearing of religious symbols. I just don't see how a turban makes one more devout or less of a public servant. So, I guess taken to its logical conclusion I would oppose this rule but support a rule tolerating mocking.
So Quebec is banning the wearing of religious symbols by public workers. Sounds OK on the surface - no religious symbols no matter the religion; all equal and properly secular, right? Problem is, if we considered this like a discrimination issue would be viewed in the US, we'd clearly find "disparate impact." Meaning that a rule that looks non-discriminatory on its face has a greater impact on some groups than others. In this instance, for someone who might wear a cross as a piece of jewelry the rule is an annoyance - but a bit more than that if you're a Muslim or Hasidic Jew. So certainly the law could be seen as blatantly anti-Muslim - saying in effect, "let's all inconvenience ourselves slightly so as to keep the Muslims with bags over their heads out of the public workforce."
What do you think?
I think it's stupid....a rule looking for a violator. I think they should stick with the separation of church and state, not go with something sticky like this that intertwines them. You know, you could make a yarmulke by cutting out the top center portion of virtually any baseball cap. ok
Exactly; it would start a vicious cycle of religious retribution and retaliation that would....well, never mind. We're there.
By the way, the best part of that photo above is not the big hair or glands, but the eyelashes on the headlight of the motorbike.
Exactly; it would start a vicious cycle of religious retribution and retaliation that would....well, never mind. We're there.
By the way, the best part of that photo above is not the big hair or glands, but the eyelashes on the headlight of the motorbike.
You are probably not the target customer , but that's some effective advertising.
Exactly; it would start a vicious cycle of religious retribution and retaliation that would....well, never mind. We're there.
By the way, the best part of that photo above is not the big hair or glands, but the eyelashes on the headlight of the motorbike.
You are probably not the target customer , but that's some effective advertising.
Yeah, I'm probably not the target; I don't dig fake tits, fake eyelashes, fake news, fake presidents, and fake religioso.
The best ads I know are the mayhem guy with Allstate; he's good
Could you wear a scarf on your head if you're not a Muslim? Or could you wear an anti-religious symbol, like an upside-down cross? If you wear body art, do you have to give an affidavit that you aren't a member of the Church of Body Modification? IMNVHO, they're creating a lot of problems that don't have to happen.
Could you wear a scarf on your head if you're not a Muslim? Or could you wear an anti-religious symbol, like an upside-down cross? If you wear body art, do you have to give an affidavit that you aren't a member of the Church of Body Modification? IMNVHO, they're creating a lot of problems that don't have to happen.
, but that's some effective advertising.
