Show me anyone who will say "I don't belong here because God is mentioned on my dollars" and I'll show you a loser. Guess it's up to us to be smarter than they were. To "see the light" and realise that it's just not worth the trouble. It won't be any easier because you seem to forget that people just don't give a ****. If you lived in America, or even if you planned to live there, would you back off or move out just because you disagree with your money? That, good sir, is what I'd find ridiculous. You seem to forget (you're pretty forgetful today, what's the matter?) that it's not an imaginary friend to some/many. Your argument is thus invalid. The religion or lack thereof that we as debators have is irrelevant (e.g. we're both atheists but I think "just leave the damn coins alone and go do something useful"). Allow me to make an analogy on something I haven't mentioned yet. We in Belgium still have a king. Hell, he even has a sword as part of his attire. Now people can be morons and call us primitive because we still have a sword-wielding king. Or they could use their brains and see that this protocol is a remnant of history and a part of our culture (granted, this is different). Culture can justify a lot of things. It can take away the discriminatory connotation to that sentence. When some non-Christian, be they Jewish, Buddhist or atheist comes up to you and says "yo mofo me no like yah dough dawg" you just go right ahead and say "Yeah, it's to remind us of those ol' days where we still had more people caring about God".
Is that a good enough reason to bother with such a triviality? The answer is no. Very well. I won't go into it. No it's not. Like I said, no Jew, Muslim or atheist is gonna is gonna get killed or hurt because "In God we trust" is printed on your dollar bills. And I think a majority of them wouldn't even care that it's printed. See, like I said, the ideology behind your idea is fine. It's just that you make a fuss over nothing. I don't think the hassle it would bring, however manageable, is gonna be worth the outcome.
I hate teenagers. Every single one of them. Immature brats.
No, that's just you being paranoid and trying to find hidden implied meanings where there aren't any. There's no real reason to change it either. How so? No it doesn't. I don't think it's gonna kill, injure or impair anyone by keeping that phrase on there. It's a puny detail. Being an atheist doesn't necessarily involve whining about everything containing the word God. If you really want to make a difference then soften people up for the idea itself instead of witch hunting remnants from the past. Actually I find it more than a bit ridiculous that you are offended by this. Then that motto is, according to Rho, discriminatory as well. Careful which comparisons you make when you're debating. You could also really care and make it a personal point to respect every religion and the lack thereof. Why would you need some large-scale symbolic deed (the erasure of a phrase that 99% of the Americans may not have read) to prove that you're pluralistic folks? Believe it or not but people don't tend to judge people by what's written on their dollar bills. When people fall over details like this it always makes me wonder where it's gonna end. Force everyone to exchange their old dollars for the new "pluralistic" kind? It sounds like too much of a hassle to satisfy only a minority of people to begin with, but we'll see what everyone else thinks. I'm not saying I'm against the idea. The philosophy behind it isn't half bad but in all honesty such a detail doesn't deserve this kind of attention. Whatever, kid. By all means continue your crusade against religion but try not to be a parody of yourself by stumbling over such trivial matters.
Actually...Yeah.
And yet, to the devoted Christian, they are equally real (albeit less tangible). This is where I question them.
The fact that Fruit Chan and Park Chan-Wook fled their respective countries and became Japanese is news to me. When did that happen again? Calling them "Japanese horror movies by Japanese horror directors" is horribly wrong (I'll disregard that you called them great while you have me doubting that you've even seen another film by any of them). Three Extremes was meant as a compilation of short Asian horror films, with the different nationalities of the directors being a critical point to the idea. Only Box is Japanese. Cut is Korean and Dumplings comes from Hong Kong. The same is true for the prequel (see below). The Wheel sucked...majorly so. Going Home was weird but in a good way. I've seen all of them and liked the majority of these (with the exception of, as stated, Wheel). By the way, while the American version is called "Three Extremes 2", the original was simply called "Three" and was chronologically the first to be released. [/smartarse]
This, I think. Leave too much time between two installments of the main plot and people may lose interest.
Guess again. See the AM/PM difference.
I'd say she's already been impregnated by a handful of people, judging from her BMI. We don't want to blow her up by stuffing another fetus in her. So let's not.
Correct. I don't think many people have given a sincere answer unless they're so desperate that they really want to have babies with someone they've never even seen before... ;)
Answer =/= serious sincere answer You have a lot to learn about the Spam Zone, kid.
