Desrt Eagle Airsoft In Green And Crome

1-1 = 0 3 000 + 999 999 = 1

The gods are many unique and divided. Our gods are legions but they are strong because they are united.

is what I want to say.

It is clear that monotheism is an illusion: there has never been so many gods unique to war against each other. Never have so many different truths that spit in the face one another in a continuing conflict towards universality. These people wanted to impose their only god, "three-in-one formula Empowered" ... These are the chosen people of god creator all things, yet very selective ... And even those who have found their book as their only god, their prophet ... And yet it evokes is the outline of the major current STD (STD: Monotheism Traditionalist Seriously, © Kami) . That's not counting with Akhenaten and his sun eclipse all others, the Assyrians and their national god conqueror Nabonidus and his moon god who was suddenly piqued supremacy the Sassanian Zoroastrianism and fussy, and so on and not ripe. There were Joshua and divine election of his people by the "God of hosts." Then there was Constantine and his three-in-a new formula, Justinian and his intolerance heavy cohort of popes and church. Muhammad and Allah, for the vast fortunes of warriors and Arab merchants, holy wars, crusades, heresy, witch hunts and, frankly, is it necessary to continue the list?

All for that final, monotheism is just what a great dirty trick. There is not one, but gods of unique. Their problem? Because they are unique, precisely. They are all alone. The poor. What should be said that in fact it is a single god, and that the differences of men have nothing to do with it. But this does not explain why God constantly restrained himself, in a remake of the schizophrenic Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Why each of these gods unique claims to ultimate truth. Recognize the difference between representation (of human origin and always questionable) and the power itself is a first step toward intelligence. But there's a catch: what only God Almighty allegedly let his son, his servants, his followers, and other defendants divine power, crashing so heavily? Or it does nothing to carrer and as some have thought, with Epicureanism, he is a god so transcendent that he has no part in things, does not conflict with the world. Genre, he broke to create the world for a week and he did not wake up from her Sunday off. In this case, theism or atheism, who cares what does that make?

"And God saw that it had made a mistake ..."

Precisely: what does it matter? The gods, anyway, are powers, and their representation is significant only for men who seek to understand and address these ratings. Indeed, believe in them or not has no suspicion of importance, and I think if we stopped believing in a god, this is not that it would precipitate the world into chaos. He was already running fine without it come that we should imagine feeding the gods of our sheep and our prayers. And it is a pagan who speaks to you.

Do not talk about something does not deprive the existence of a thing. Romeo, if he had another name, would still be Romeo and Juliet would love it for what it is and not because it is the Capulet clan or clan Montaigu. Similarly, the representation of a god can change the power it is hardly changed. Lightning is lightning, whether wielded by Zeus, Taranis or Percy Jackson. And with regard to morality is a matter for men, men, gods have little impact in there except when it comes to embody an abstract idea which plays its role in human morality . Otherwise, again, lightning, just like love, illness and death in the rough, have no morals.

"It is not a god either because of a tormented man."
His son Hephaestus Hera - Iliad, XXI.

The problem is that when you have to worry about the human order and morality that is supposed to underlie the, one feels the need for a god, at least one, that is the guarantor of the corporation. Which would justify the same time, the meaning of life, projecting beyond death judgments of good and evil, two concepts that are subjective as a fart in the water. This leads to the invention of hello, the famous wager of existence: I was put on the fact that there is a hello and I line my life, I did not conform with the hope that no. I j'fais The second challenge, needless to say ... Which, surprisingly, does not prevent me from having a moral. The difference is that I realize before my peers, those species with two legs of fanatics called "human" and not to the gods with whom the relationship can not be that of a servant asshole towards his master, nor that of a penitent eaten guilt before a paternal figure as ready to forgive his nimble hands.

All this, to settle a little into the heart and forget the details, however important the story leads to monotheism. A people or a group of humans is a deity of its own and chooses to honor in particular, I see it, especially since it is a logical one little pagan ... Until we say that this god is the only true universal power, in truth, j'vous'd say ... There j'commence find it insulting. Genre: you are all idiots, it's our god is good. At what time were asked the question whether the entire mess pantheons of the human world there was only one correct answer (yeah, apart from 42), that it will always remain a mystery to me. I think we especially wanted to impose an answer to which had never asked the question and others have responded "Oh yeah, that's not true ..."
thing led to another, each pulling the cover itself: my god is good, it's not mine, not mine ... then: "There is only one God and it is I who knows him best." While there, the guy in dress, in front, he took his book and worry glue binding a shot in the eye. This is the beginning of the holy war. Because a war that can be holy (sisi). I have never found it very hygienic, such as confessionals, but after all, I've never set foot in one or the other.

"They forgot to put the PQ ..."
Confessional Tastavy the rectory.

short, monotheism is the great answer to a big question that nobody ever asked, but who knew very well agree with all the evidence "legal" small business people. As humans are diverse and made various representations, a variety of legal and business various gods unique (or the only god, if you will) are more numerous than universal.

each his gods and hippos are well kept ...

They are cons all agree on one point: bumpkins (Latin pagani , pagans) who have complete outfits of gods, all at once diverse, varied, anywhere, any time, for everything and for nothing, like a department store where the man pushes the cadi of religion and uses the pantheons shelves before going to the fund pay offerings, all these bumpkins therefore, are morons primitive. I tend to think at first sight between the lambda pushing his cart and pay lots of different books and the character chi-rho, which uses a single book to hit the other, the cretin primitive is not always who you think ... But again, this is a matter point of view. It is subjective (with the pet in the water and all that).
Yet bumpkins polytheists have something in common. They have more or less aware of diversity and have more or less accepted by birth. They more or less conscious choice, plurality and difference. They agree that their divergent representations of deities does not really matter the reality of them. What all this is to humanize, to be more easily anthropised affordable, at bottom lightning, carried by Zeus or Taranis, it is always better lightning and not drag in the neighborhood when you see the flash the device. The Pagan has an empirical knowledge of divinity, he does not expect that the reveals, at least the heathen today. Believe it or not is a false question. The question is "how we think of the gods?". And we will do deals. But every choice is a thing of their own, particular, individual, who commits the pagan lambda and not the entire universe. And in terms of morality, we see that with other humanoids. After the unity of this diversity appears, and we can say that the gods are legion, but they are more united than the gods themselves unique.

PS: I is speaking in a rather simplistic and a bit too personal. But shit, I have the right, this is my blog. Still, if that can give you to cogitate on it perfectissime.

"And the royal archer Apollo replied

- Poseidon who shakes the earth, you would call me insane if I was fighting against you for the wretched men that a greening days similar to leaves, and eat the fruits of the earth, and soon wither and die. not fight, and let them fight among themselves. "
Iliad, XXI

Herpes Genitalis Chest

Is there a lawyer at the zoo?

"I have rights!" I demand to see my lawyer! "

Man is an animal (Homo sapiens sapiens egocentricus ). Its relationship to members of its species are complex, but still work, what people may say, a pet fashion: love, sexuality, fear, hatred, violence, sadness, jealousy and possessiveness, it's all animal. Yet, while it tends last few millennia, to be codified, intellectualized, that is to say slowly headed by the notion of morality, which stems, perhaps, the right, if not religion. With regard to other animal species ... and although the question remains open: should we or not included in this law, an expression of moral knowing why, you first have to get the animal from a "thing" to animated object , to that person, individual? See what I read this morning on the subject here .

You have the right to remain silent.
All you will bark will be used against you!

It I think a matter of great honor, but again badly put. Again, "man is the measure of all things." The only optical animals, the only alternative that he proposes to move from the state of affairs common to that person recognizes the feelings and resentments, is to calibrate with respect to man, legally at that! This is not the first time. In the Middle Ages, being dragged to court pigs when they were guilty of eating on the ground that another owner. Or so we thought the dog had bitten, when one does not burn for witchcraft neighbor's goat. Prior to the outfall, there a goat. That justice should recognize the role of animals in the games due to effects that lead the world in my opinion reasonable. After all, the dog that bit is actually the one who hurt the worst. But is it one that has caused? For the dog that bites or has rabies, and must therefore be regarded as a sick or was attacked. When we say "attacked" is located ideally in terms of interpretation of the dog. What he sees as an assault, whereas the point of view of human bite, we simply want to scratch her behind the ear.

Will he have the right to social security?

It is the problem: the man who wants to measure everything and that brings the world to this interpretation of anthropocentrism - "cosmic egoism" as I often say to yourself - do not want to to understand how animals think. Because supposedly, the animal does not think (thank you ...). Aristotle and Descartes But the animal thinks, with its own logic, instincts, reflexes, which are not quite ours but are not so distant as it admits that we, through our own animal nature. At its height, the dog, but also Dragonfly or beaver backhoe has its own cognitive functioning, responsive and sensitive. So instead of reducing everything to oneself and to evaluate the animal as a function of the human right, we should take full account of ethology, that is to say, the understanding of lifestyle and mental functioning of animals. Of each animal. We then include, for example, we do not have a dog. It fits into its modes of operation and representation of the world: the master is actually the leader of the pack, feeder, protector and / or protected, etc.. When a rat you peed on it, it does not insult you - because according to ethics, law and human rights, urinate on others is synonymous with insulting and reprehensible lack of hygiene of some point in the face - the rat urine which includes, for fun and smells so significantly, the individual to his "clan" his "family". Justice should take this into account, right?

The right to strike?

What about "cattle" from the farm? I just read a very interesting theories about the origins of farming - appeared in the Neolithic. For example, the hunter following the herds of wild goats (the first animal domesticated in the Near East after the dog) accustomed to their life cycles, their lifestyle, and then he ends up "merge" its own way of life with theirs and that the two species associate together, man becoming the one who keeps goats and can play on their own needs, before using and take milk, meat, wool and others. Somehow, ethology have preceded domestication. We did not include the animal mode of human life, we learned of the animal and we adapted. On the other hand, the most frightening beasts, those that do not hunt for food but we try to defend themselves, have become objects of representation magical, religious image, and finally incarnation of the divine power of life and death (Taurus, in particular, but also birds of prey, scorpions, vultures, etc.). The animal, vis-à-vis the man, friend, partner (whether you eat or not) or the enemy, one that represents all the dangers of life, even more "mystical". Today, when we drove the consciousness of the divine power, to strengthen this anthropocentrism, then a beast, she closes that's it, that one does not understand himself as an animal , which is believed to have been so important in the light of nature that when something strikes us and destroying us (sickness, cataclysm, etc.) we say "why?" implied "but why we could not do anything against that?" As it seems that man is above nature and can monitor all ... Today, it is difficult to say that the animal can be just another animal species, as to be in relationship with him is to understand the codes and natural functions, which can not be the operate as a common "resource" without de facto destroys the sense of morality. It is believed to rise from the status of the animal when it builds a morality, but when subjected to the animal dislikes undergo self, destroys the idea of morality because they fell below him ... Capito?

And the Geneva Conventions?

Wonder if the animal rights is like asking if the frog can turn into a cow. It's silly, deeply. One must ask if we can in our relationship with animals, consider what he expresses himself. And we adapt ourselves, from this, instead of doing everything as if each animal could adapt to us. But even if we revise our concepts and philosophies of cosmic selfish to remember that basically, we are all beasts.

Your papers and those of the vehicle, sir.


[click on the predator highways;)]

Listerine Pocketpaks Adverse Effects

Ut omnis aetas Opteo aei terram Levemir

can be upset by the death of someone we knew virtually no. It's official, it happens.

I recently learned the death of one of my teachers, time - very short - when I was studying at the University of Caen. Yves Moderan "left light", as the Latins say, July 1, 2010 Paris. His sudden death occurred while he was vice president of the jury of the aggregation of history.

Moderan Yves was an eminent specialist in the history of Roman Africa, especially in the era of the late Roman Empire, the Moors, the Vandals, the Africana provincia of Cyprian and Tertullian, that of Christian Carthage, between Jupiter Hammon and Allah, between antiquity and declining am-called Middle Ages the so-called obscure. The Maghreb at the Antique, with its old stones, its Roman and French colonists that must obliterate the comparison cursed, his olive trees and wheat fed and Rome Much of the Mediterranean for centuries, its emperors, its Bishops, Donatists and its vessels, its barbaric and temples Punic, Greek, Roman, his ...

I have not followed many courses offered by Yves Moderan, but I keep a vivid memory. I remember his brilliant demonstration of that session around a stele inscriptions where Berber is made Roman Emperor, with multiple readings, with the fussy intellectual journey that makes the beauty of the historical profession, such as stroke Brush the beauty in the artist's gesture. But I also remember the professor who, like a Dumbledore - a comparison ready to smile - the silvery beard and sparkling eyes, defended the values of his mode of teaching, conducting his scholarly research and teaching staff with verve and humanity. Close to its students, as evidenced by themselves again, it was open to everything and everyone, curious, dynamic, passionate and exciting, and his memory for me is that so few have seen and heard very moving.

I think back now, facing what is only memoria, that I owe to this man among others. Because yes, despite the lack of time and spirit m'aient related to Yves Moderan, he brought me a lot. His lectures on Roman Africa of late antiquity, when I was working specifically on Greek religion, Anatolia, much earlier in history, though further east, however, gave me the want to know more about the last days of antiquity, and so I am piqued curiosity, and gradually open to the Roman Empire, at a time later, wanting to do with the modest Moderan application that is mine in my Greco-Roman Anatolia late antiquity. I remember coming back home after one of his classes and have pondered my window, late afternoon in a blue-orange, on what I loved history, the type of historian that I wanted to be on the research I wanted to lead. I remember myself a little inflamed, imagining him as deploy an audience passionate about all my paths investigator, transcribe my old stones, the cry "Sinking of Antiquity", defending the facts as Documents show me, send a taste of ancient history and yet so near, that it does not deal with machetes of ideology but with the tweezers of the scientist, a good glass of humanity the other hand.

Yves Moderan has a place in my life that has never, nobody, not even me until now, have suspected. It is sad that this is after this great loss that I knew it, because I could never reciprocate. Although, like him, I owe to my elders, I could perhaps one day pass it on to young shoots. I hope so. For now, I collect myself, I ponder, as the day I was returning from a history course at dusk. Yves Moderan that is past, but the sun continues to shine.

If you want to know more about the master, I invite you to read the moving tribute colleagues at the University Caen .