Kirk blAug

Some folks believe in a god which is entirely consistent with the laws of nature which govern us. I believe in this 'god', but I do not call that a god. I call that idea the laws of nature which govern us. Some of which we understand at this point, some of which we do not, but all of which are understandable in some manner of thinking. Some folk believe in a god which is entirely consistent with the good will of humanity. I believe in this 'god', but I do not call this idea a god. I call this idea goodwill, humanism, or some thing that appears to our conscious to be an act of kindness. I do not claim certainty in knowing whether this is a part of what some might call 'free will' or a display of cause and effect or something in between. I just call it goodwill, humanism, act of kindness in an attempt to relate the notion to others in discourse. Some folks believe in a god which is consistent with a series of scripture that what written by dessert people during a

Apparently the UN convention on the Rights of the Child aims to state basic rights that children are allowed by virtue of their own individual existence. However, it shall not be ratified in the United States if so called "pro-family" organizations have anything to say. They want to make sure that children are seen as property of the parents, subject to all the backwards thinking that comes with that responsibility. From the Harvard Humanist Community Project : The text of the treaty itself covers a lot of freedoms such as freedom of thought, conscience, religion, opinion, and expression, as well as more concrete things like the rights to health care and an education.  Unfortunately, objections like those at ParentalRights.org have prevented this treaty from ratification in United States (the only other nation to similarly refuse is Somalia).  What could a “pro-family” parental rights group possibly have against this?  Fancy that, they made a list of their objections [in thei