Continue with the inflictive insults as opposed to making some debatable argument.
Yes and the professor was paid by the atheists and agnostics of Italy. The guy has no credibility but if people like you want to believe in a wacky ?professor?, than enjoy your fantasy.
There is an obvious logical inconsistency in your philosophical doctrine. Why don't you join their survival and reproducing while living in the stone age? You enjoy the comfort of modern technology produced by many generations of scientists who lived for a purpose beyond their physical existence, and claim that you are not going to pay back for what you got free. Don't you think this attitude is somewhat parasitic?
Not if you're friends with someone.
I don?t think anyone cares ??????
Fo sho! I had a good one can?t find it now! Ugh??
So, this is an odd and somewhat nuanced case. It's not helped by the article's obvious pearl-clutching bias and insistence on identifying the woman as a man. The only other story I found related to the case came from the AP wire, which is actually about the attorney:
So are you saying that a person or a couple in the 22% tax bracket pay 22+% for healthcare? Or that someone in the 32% tax bracket pays 32+% for health care? LOL