anonymous

My answer was voted as best for a question, and I've gotten 12 email notices so far from Yahoo about it! Who do I contact to make it stop?

I'm talking about the band!

http://www.stereogum.com/archives/003149.html

I haven't seen you forever!!!

Can anyone recommend schools with a PhD program for Spanish? What are some possible careers I could pursue with said PhD?

I'm tired of being bummed sometimes, so I've decided to be awesome ALL THE TIME!!! YEAH!!!!! Who's with me?!!!! ROCK AND ROLL!!!!!

I love this guy! He has the best profile name ever!!!

She gives the best answers and she is awesome! Her friend LOVES2SHOP is awesome too! I'll give them both best answers any day! ROFL!!

I have to admit that I am not a firm believer in any religion, and I have my questions about God, but I don't understand how so many people can base their entire point of view on a website that is entirely based on an obvious presupposition. I guarantee that the arguments on that site will hold absolutely no water for someone of faith, so it really comes to no amazing conclusions. You all claim to be too intelligent to believe in God, but you're practically worshipping a silly website!

For example, an atheist might believe that there is no God, and that everything is a product of evolution. A Christian might believe that God created the earth, and that He has a plan for humanity. Obviously, each person believes that his/her point of view is the truth, but neither can be proven to the same extent that 2+2=4 can be proven. This is where my question lies: Can mankind progress to a common understanding that there is a difference between what is concretely factual, and what is personal belief? Is this understanding necessary for societal relations in the future? Is it worth working toward? What effect would it have on how we address disagreements? Please discuss...

For example, an atheist might believe that there is no God, and that everything is a product of evolution. A Christian might believe that God created the earth, and that He has a plan for humanity. Obviously, each person believes that his/her point of view is the truth, but neither can be proven to the same extent that 2+2=4 can be proven. This is where my question lies: Can mankind progress to a common understanding that there is a difference between what is concretely factual, and what is personal belief? Is this understanding necessary for societal relations in the future? Is it worth working toward? What effect would this understanding have on how we address disagreements? Please discuss...

Even on this website, the problem is strikingly apparent. If we are to have any hope for humanity and the Earth, we are going to have to learn to be more tolerant of those we disagree with. Any thoughts on how this might be possible? I am beginning to see Humanism in a new light: Not as something that contradicts faith-based beliefs, but as a necessary practice for EVERYONE to implement into their current belief-systems. I don't think it should replace peoples' beliefs, but compliment them. It seems like the only possible way for mankind to survive and live in some semblance of harmony! Thoughts? Please don't turn this into a rally. I'm looking for genuine contemplation and thoughtful ANSWERS. Thank you.

I'm not making it up. It is a philosophy that has been considered by many. I'm interested in learning more if anyone has any insight. If you practice it, please see my previous question:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ArY3M...

Thank you!

If so, how would you define your beliefs? How did you come to them?