wenglund

I am not attempting to defend Trump's behavior or whatever may or may not have been said by so-called "stooges" around him. Nor am I attempting to paint him as a virtuous guy. .Nothing I have said can reasonably suggest that I have. Instead, my interest is in accuracy and fairness. Again, all Trump admitted to was uninvited kissing. If that is a jail-able offense, then a whole lot of grandparents, uncles, and aunts are in a world of trouble. While I think all accusation warrant investigation, the fact that there have been a rash of fake rape charges over the last decade or so, and false rape culture narratives promoted, particularly give the plausible political motivations, the investigation deserves to go both ways. Until the investigations are completed, and a fair trial given, our system of jurisprudence advises we view the accused as innocent until proven guilty. You, of course, are free to do otherwise. And, in regards to the "p" word, if you read the transcript, he wasn't "bragging." Rather, he was answering a question with a general observation about "stars" in relation to women who are star-struck. Now, you can leverage all this into a soap-box full of rash judgments and harsh moral indignation, but you run the risk of being judges in like manner. To each their own. Thanks, Wade Englund

Do you not understand the relationship between crime and violence? If you don't, then check out the stats for and studies on violent crimes. Yes, there are peer-reviewed articles by John Paul Wright. . For a list of over 50, along with his impressive credential, see here: http://cech.uc.edu/content/dam/cech/programs/criminaljustice/Docs/Vitaes/wrightww.pdf Do you question the raw data from the DOJ or the BJS? As indicated in Wikipedia, " Behavioural genetics is highly interdisciplinary, using methods and techniques from biology, neuroscience, genetics, epigenetics, ethology, psychology, and statistics. Psychiatric genetics, epigenetic research on behaviour, and genetic research in neuroscience are related subfields within behavioural genetics." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioural_genetics. So, geneticist would only be one of a number of disciplines that could speak authoritatively on the general topic of behavioral genetics. Criminologists can also speak authoritatively on the subcategory of criminal behavior and genetics. Regarding identifying a specific gene or set of genes, it isn't important, However, I doubt that even you would question the higher rates of violence among those with XY chromosomes vs those with XX. Nevertheless, violent crimes have been linked to at least two genes: MAOA and CDH13: https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/10/29/genes-linked-to-violent-crime-but-can-they-explain-criminal-behavior/ and http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-29760212 Of course it doesn't upset me to see black people in Church,? Why would it? In fact, the question confuses me since we are all of God's children. In other words, we ought not think in terms of black and white,but as brothers and sisters in the gospel. Thanks, Wade Englund

Not in any words. Please don't put words in my mouth. Thanks, Wade Englund-

Who said anything about supremacy? I know I didn't. Facts are facts. Don't be afraid of them. They can actually be very helpful. I see, though, that Godwin's law is still alive and not-so-well on the internet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law Thanks, Wade Englund

Try Googling John Paul Wright on crime studies. You will find plenty of peer reviewed reading material for the next year or so. There is a plethora of other authoritative studies, including https://www.scribd.com/doc/305240780/The-Color-of-Crime https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=922 If you need more, I can provide them. Thanks, Wade Englund

It would be as irrational were Christians to ascribe pathological lying and rampant corruption to atheism because most atheists voted for Hillary. It is non-sequitur in several ways. Thanks, Wade Englund

I hope the bewildered icon isn't an indication of science denial. Thanks, Wade Englund

Where have I done that? Thanks, Wade Englund

No, I didn't read the article. Nor did I say that I had. And, no, I didn't miss the point. I simply brought some science into the equation. If you watch the entire video I linked to you will learn that genetics/race is/are demonstrably the prevailing factors explaining crime and violence. The reason liberals are statistically more prone to violence is because leftist political philosophy tends to attract more violent races. In other words, scientifically, you are incorrect. Violence is not evenly distributed between the Left and Right or across the human spectrum. There are huge disparities and clustering. As for blame, evolution may bear some responsibility. I hope this helps. Thanks, Wade Englund-

That would be a remarkably irrational conclusion. The atheists I know tend not to be that idiotic. So, I find it very hard to believe. Thanks, Wade Englund

For the record, the only thing he confessed to was kissing without asking ("Just kissing"). Here is the transcript: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/08/us/donald-trump-tape-transcript.html?_r=0: Are you saying that kissing is jail-able sexual assault?

Would it be fair to say that the god (higher power) that is within most atheist is statism? Thanks, -Wade Englund-

...and thus God is within all of us "genetically." We all bear his image and likeness. The created will always bear the mark of the creator. Thanks, Wade Englund

Here is some science on the question: Thanks, Wade Englund

Again, not that it matters much, I am not sure you understood my question. I wasn't speaking of multiple moons, but of one moon with varied or different "degrees" of glory through the course of its phases, and one sun with varied or different degrees of glory with its flares. Is it possible that the word "glorieY could apply to bothe general categories as well as subcategories or arrays within the general categories? Isn't one of the great values of analogies is that they don't lend themselves to exactitude and dogma, thus allowing for flexibility and broadening of perspective? Thanks, Wade

It would fundamentally violate the 1st Amendment. Thanks, Wade Englund

Not that it is vitally important for us to know in mortality, but doesn't the moon, itself, differ in glory over the course of its phases? Doesn't the sun also differ in glory with its flares?

Right. Mountains in particular were metaphors for temples in the scriptures (see in particular Isaiah 2:2). But, don't forget the most important temples of all (1 Cor 6:19 and Jn 2:21)

I don't share your harsh judgement of the man or of his supporters (I happen to be one), but I agree somewhat with your point that the inauguration performance by the Choir isn't an endorsement of the candidate or party (the MTC has performed for both parties), but a goodwill mission. If anything, it is a gracious acceptance of the constitutional process, and sets an excellent example for us all. Thanks, Wade Englund