?Impact

I understand that, at least at one time, some religious leaders were fairly involved in marriages. Having regular meetings with the engaged couple (perhaps in group sessions) and coaching them on marriage. That seems interesting in that some of the Priests leading these discussions were also inexperienced, as their vows prevented them from being married themselves. Has anyone participated in these sessions and can tell us what was discussed at them concerning submission, etc.?

Who care if he lies about his expenses? Did you seriously write that. Why do you have to be such an extreme partisan to cover up for him? I never said the trip was not legitimate, I just pointed out that he lied big time about the expenses. What other expenses was he lying about big time?

I certainly do believe in the Bible, just like I believe in Harry Potter. They are real, I can touch them, I can read them. It is the stories of the Bible I have problems with, not that are uninteresting or not enjoyable to read, simply that they do not reflect the reality of the universe. I was simply quoting a passage from the referenced piece of literature that seems at odds with your previous claim. If a woman is to submit to her husband, who is the "head of the wife", then that sounds very much like a woman being subject to the man in charge.

Sir Isaac Newton was a Fellow at the University of Cambridge, I suggest you do some research on the Blasphemy Act of 1697 to understand the iron fist the Church used to rule over England at the time. While it was not as bad as the Church of Rome and their torture and murder of previous scientists, it still forced him to conform. Newton was a product of his time. He certainly was a student of the Bible, but that does not provide insight into his beliefs. I suggest if Isaac Newton were alive today, you would have a far different impression of his beliefs.

I would put an evidence supported theory above a collection of children's fairy tales.

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. - Ephesians 5:22-23

I am all for providing support for contraception, although there are still many in our society that fight that. The real question is what does 'clear education' mean?

Yes, a truthful comparison would be nice to see. It might be difficult however as Harper has a tendency to inaccurately report details, for example claiming his trip to Saint Petersberg for the G20 incurred no airfare, hotel, or food costs.

Well you have managed to identify yourself with Trump by calling yourself a stable genius, should we hold you in the same regard?

No, Trudeau did not have to be told to pay. Depending on the trip, Harper took one of his children to the whole family. Trudeau the same. The fact you try to make the different demonstrates partisanship. The only real question about Trudeau's trip was if the Aga Khan could be considered a friend.

Lots of rocks in Africa, maybe you will catch on soon. --- Concerning creation scientists, this is the claim of that group: Since the beginning of modern science, creationists have strived to explain our world based on the unchanging laws of our Creator. If you look closely you will see that they are in fact not scientists and admit so in their own statement. They are not looking for evidence driven knowledge, but how they can jerry rig the evidence to fit their creationist mentality. The problem of course is every step of they way they become more and more absurd.

The only more lofty goal of human existence than making widgets, is counting widgets.

My only practical contribution to science is the analysis of geometrically non-linear structures. I shoveled rocks and claimed they were heavy.

Your opinion only. If you think that no benefit from the sale, as recently defined by the ethics commissioner, is more egregious than promoting racism, then you and I disagree.

Could you point out where she is mentioned in Motion 103? ...waiting ...waiting ...still waiting.

100% same situation, Trudeau reimbursed the commercial fare. I find it interesting that you quote the commercial fare for Harper and the fully loaded (security, etc.) cost for Trudeau.

He got all the important stuff (Hose can you see, rockets red glare, home of the brave). All the rest is filler.

Yes, official business like taking his son to a Leafs game.

There is nothing there except for whining that the creationists are not accepted in scientific circles

and an equally huge (huger? - Trumpspeak) number of Americans sought refuge in Canada. Those with parental connections, and bone spurs, were able to dodge the draft at home.

Science is about a structured discipline to finding answers, not speculation. Is the fossil 4,500 years old, 45,000, or 45,000,000? That would be one of the first questions that a scientist would ask. Not: Look, a waterfall - God Look a rainbow - God Look an eclipse - God

Yes, with his biting twitter comments like being a very stable genius.

Nowhere near as much as non liberals thrive on ad hominem attacks.

If the ship wasn't sinking, then taking to the lifeboats would be a foolish act. That is where evidence comes into play. Concerning the TItanic, you realize there were not enough lifeboats anyway. Despite all the other blunders that evening, even if all lifeboats were properly filled to capacity and didn't upend and sink, over half the crew & passengers would be dead anyway.

... that the orange juice was only symbolic of the plethora of lavish expenses she foisted on the taxpayer, yet we continually hear the drum beat from the ill informed that is what it was about.