Wether it is dragging your kid in front of an army recruiting station to protests the war, or dragging them to this sort of garbage, or setting them down in the mosque to preach hatred... kids should not be used to spread the ideologies of their parents.

That being said, I don't think they should be relating the existence of a few camps like this as being the sole reason that number of Christian's is rising, or its popularity.

And, when it comes to being "inflexible" on the issue of homosexuality... well, that's being a little one sided (You don't see too many homosexuals "bending" on the issue.) Not that I support the evangelicals... I just don't like any reporting that uses an example to prove their point, while neglecting to mention that it also destroys their stance as well.

1zin1,

Ummm... what kind of traffic is illegal in the air? I mean... what are you specifically speaking of? The fact that it was flying?

Even with all following the same rules and laws, this type of ACCIDENT could happen without fault to either.

Reporting flight plans with the FAA and reporting drop points are a little different. And, when not flying in a traffic control area (where drops also occur), it is an accident waiting to happen.

When someone is flying a single engine prop plane, he's looking for air traffic of a much LARGER size than a human dropping from above him.

Watch it again, if anyone had prior notice to what was happening, it was the jumper, and he did exactly what he could do, try to stop himself by use of his cute. There was not a lot a pilot could have done in that situation with the amount of time given.

While it might LOOK like the plan was heading for him, you must remember that it was the skydiver who was falling towards the plane.

Benjee,

Please, don't get the wrong idea; I am not promoting preaching anything.

But, to think that the bible is devoid of historical facts, is a little... wrong. It is full of historical information. Remove the "theological" from it, and it is slap FULL of history.

Again, I am NOT supporting the indoctrination of youth into believing that Jesus was the son of God or anything.

But, the fact remains that those beliefs ARE a large part of the history of the USA. Just as we were taught (in history class) of the different gods of the Greek, Roman, and Egyptian civilizations... why not at least study what is most definatly part of our own?

Sortta' funny how he uses someones misunderstanding of the bible to come to the conclusion that god is imaginary.

That's like me using the narrators misunderstanding that "God" and "Allah" are different entities, to conclude that God does exist.

Ok... I am ashamed to admit it, but I found this DVD in a shop here in China and it was an impulse buy...

Very VERY strange.

Well, he does have a point. A lot of people speak of "separation of church and state", but there is nothing whatsoever that legislates this. The constitution never says a thing in regards to the way in which people throw around "Separation of church and state".

The idea behind the amendment was to keep the government out of religous activities, not for the government to keep the idea of religon out of the lives of people. Seriously, we are not talking about forced indoctrination.

But, I do believe there should be an option to teach and take this class for whoever wants. As long as there is no prostylizing, there should not be a problem in teaching the bible.

I don't know one person who has gone through public school in the US who has not had some sort of lesson on the Greek, Roman, and Egyptian dieties. Why not teach the Bible in the same way?

Do people actually believe that the general population has such a low IQ as to think they cannot form their own views, just as most have done with those Greek/Roman/Egyptian dieties? I don't see a lot of Americans running around worshiping Zeus or Anubis...

We do not see the ACLU trying to throw away Greek, Roman, and Egyptian history, why then do people wish to throw away such an obvious part of American history.

I'm not trying to start a theological fight, just an educational one. I see no need for the complete abandonment of something that does play a major part in the history of the majority of Americans (regardless of their current beliefs).

Snake, if I can call you Snake

Hey, I never said it was not wrong, to the contrary, I am saying IT IS WRONG. I just cannot stand to hear things like this vid. Trying to justify being wrong, by vilifying where your money WOULD go AFTER you buy it, is meaningless.

People get upset about companies doing things all the time... they just don't use their products. They do not sit back and STEAL their products and claim to be justified.

Some guy does not like TEXACO and the way they do business. What does he do? He does not use TEXACO products. Fine, I understand and will support that person in his actions. However, to use the reasons he dislikes TEXACO, as an excuse to walk in and fill his car without paying? That's just re-tarded.

I don't claim to be morally right; I don't claim to be better than anyone. I am WRONG in downloading MP3's and buying pirated DVD's. While I think my excuse may be more VALID than "I do it because the companies are screwing the artists", I do not say I am "Right" in what I am doing. (I live in China; I blame the insane Chinese locked Yuan value. 99.9999% of everything here is pirated, even when you try to by the real stuff. It’s hard for a Chinese person to think about paying a few month’s salary for a CD. I hate to admit it, but piracy is my friend in China. It IS wrong.)

And COBOLT, let's be honest, we know exactly what they are talking about in this video. We are not talking about people sitting there making copies off of their own lawfully purchased CD's and being arrested.

But, again, my point is this... people should stop trying to use the age old playground logic of "Well HEEEEE did it!" to justify bad behavior. I don't care if the RIAA has midget slaves, pressing out CD's with their A$-$es while being prodded by those elephant trainers in a previous video. The definition of stealing does not change according to WHAT you are stealing.

I don't care too much for what George Bush does... I'm pretty sure my but-t would be in jail if I stole his car.

And remember, we don't football sex bowling, until you pizza.

Well, that's a rather simplistic way to think about this.

And, if this person is going to point out that the artists are making "pennies", are they not going to take their example a step further and show that by copying, you are taking those "pennies" out of the hands of the artists?

Comparing the copying of songs to the copying of a swing is insane.

When you are making a copy of a song, it is that song, not a "version" of the song. So, in reality, that "copied swing" is more like recording your own version of the song, or karaoke. When you copy a song, it is like going into the store and taking that "swing" without paying.

People can use this "Robin Hood" excuse all they wish, the fact is, they ARE stealing. Movies, music, money, it is all the same thing.

Make the people you are stealing from, seem like evil demons, and make yourself feel better. But the bottom line is this... YOU are not the artist. So, where your money goes, makes no difference in your actions. What if the artist got 100% of the earnings from recordings? Would your actions magically turn into a crime then? How would you justify your actions?

I don't particularly like Bill Gates... does that mean I should be able to go in and steal Windows? I think not. I don't particularly like IBM, does that mean I should be able to steal a laptop? I think not.

Look, I live in China, I download music and buy pirated DVD's constantly. I have my reasons (and far better reasons than most), but I don't try to project my wrongdoings onto others.

I'm not being hypocritical, I'm not saying "Don't do it", I am simply saying "Get a backbone and admit it is wrong to take something without paying for it." Hell, our parents taught us that a long time ago... let's give them credit, shall we?

I just kept humming "The Hustle" while watching this... hehe. Shake it baby.

Daphne, that's not fair... how well can someone dance to Tom Jones "It's Not Unusual"? hehe He always cracked me up when he danced to that.

I have a SLIGHT problem with the part of the supposed .38 to the chest.
Sorry, but he would have gone to the ground... period.

He was using what he called a "Level 2A" vest. This is the the second least effective vest made. It is rated for slower velocity 9mm and .357's. Of course the .38 is moving pretty slow at about 800fps, but we are still talking about absorbing a lot of force.

Even had he used sure footing, his body position was in no way set for the actual forces he would have felt. Regardless of dropping the gun, the velocity and force would have knocked him over. Legs spread, torso bent backwards, head leaning back, arms close together in front of him... stand like that and see if someone can't push you over with a good nudge from the front.

I've seen men brought to tears with shots from less force. A .38 to the chest, in that way, there is no way he would have been thinking "Oh, gotta remember to run over and pick up the gun." The reaction would have been closer to his reaction from the taser gun. He WOULD have been on his butt in some severe pain.

Vests do not make you immune from the pain, they simply stop the projectile from ripping flesh while exerting the same forces over a larger area.

There used to be a video going around of a reporter who shot himself with a .22 while wearing a vest. I LOVED that video, because it shows how stupid people can be, in their understanding of vests.

Big bowl of Honeycombs... footy pajama's... and Syd & Marty. My childhood.

I look at the last angle of the slow-mo and say "clean". He saw the QB coming and went down for a block, prior to (or exactly when) the QB starting in on his "slide". It's easy to take a slow-mo and think of it as real time, but it's not reality.

Yes, thin out the surplus population of morons with nothing better to do.