TxHoops

To answer your question, I would guess most here don't. No seriously, they don't. Because somehow evolution couldn't be part of God's plan and there is no way a "day" in Genesis terms was not literally 24 hours.

Or that hillbilly republicans have DNA which makes it impossible for them to see the irony in calling others "low information voters"!

This case kind of fascinates me. If there it were two guys, my guess is that we would all be saying it is a clear case of self-defense - the one dude started it and the other dude finished it. But we don't have two guys and, like it or not, we do have a double standard in this country. A prime example is the student-teacher sexual relationships. When it is a male teacher, society wants that predator behind bars. When it's a female (especially when she's hot), we say "lucky kid." Maybe that's just the reality of the differences between the male and female but it is a double standard. With regard to this case, the law really doesn't make a gender distinction in self-defense The rule generally is (at least in Texas) that you can't use greater force than is necessary to defend oneself. This typically is the old "you don't bring a gun to a fist fight." Or, you stop hitting the guy when you've ended the threat (I.e., you don't keep pounding him until he's dead or comatose). Maybe the argument is that hitting a woman is always greater force than is necessary. And if I'm the prosecutor, I argue no force is necessary. You turn around and walk away. To be sure, this is a valid argument to me. Again though, if it were two guys, most juries have no problem with a guy returning a punch when he's been struck. For what it's worth, I come from the same school as GCMPats and baddog. I was raised that you never, ever, under any circumstances place your hands on a woman. I had a sister that took full advantage of this and would lay into me whenever she was mad, knowing full well I would never retaliate. In retrospect, it was a great test for me because I doubt I will ever have a greater urge than those formative years when I was having to play duck and run with her. I wouldn't incarcerate Johnson but he could use a healthy dose of probation and anger management. Expelling him from school seems kind of harsh. I wonder how many students at FSU were allowed to finish their education after an intoxication assault or even an intoxication manslaughter...

I'm have to agree with you then. Man's got a lot of wins not to at least be a finalist

Did Travis apply?

I actually figured that out. I just couldn't figure out what was being autocorrected!!

I never said it did. I said who I believed should be the front runner. As for the board, like most boards, their concern is that a candidate is qualified to teach and coach. (And not be riddled with baggage like a previous name mentioned.). They would defer, I would think (and especially in this case), to the AD or whomever makes the recommendation as to who would be the best coach. Sorry you didn't find my comment funny. As for Letterman, I am sure we both wish could have been paid like him to tell those unfunny jokes ;)

My mistake. Was still going off what had been said earlier.

Very personable and would be a great fit IMO. Has done a good job everywhere he's been, if not a great job. Which is why it seems he should be the overwhelming front runner of the 3 finalists. And supposedly, he may be the third choice. Smh. Sometimes it seems a broken clock is right twice a day more often than BISD.

Touché.

FIFY

Very good questions actually. I know little to nothing about the transracial issue so I will leave it alone. Not avoiding the issue but I have a very basic understanding of what that even is. The transgender issue would be very similar to the gay issue in my opinion. You hear quite offensive that someone has lived their lives identifying completely with the other sex. I believe most often sexual preference coincides with this. The pedophilia issue almost always stems from some childhood trauma, most often some sort of abuse, and very often the pedophile was molested. Dr. James Duncan in Beaumont has extensive experience in this field and I've read some of his reports. I would definitely separate these people from LGBTs. There is some support that certain people are "naturally" predisposed towards this, much like an alcoholic or a compulsive gambler. In other words, they have a predisposition that can be controlled. I have a hard time believing that pedophiles are born that way. And while I hope they can be rehabilitated, they would never get a chance to prove that around my children.

You two don't hurt yourselves trying to get a grasp of science. FoxNews and Rush will tell you all you need to know ;)

Going to be Coleman from what I hear. But definitely agree with you.

I'm no scientist either. But I completely get what you are saying and couldn't agree more. I think this was bullets' point as well.

We laugh and mock what we do not understand. It's okay, you know what they say is bliss ;)

riiiiiiiiiiiiiggggghhhht.

[Hidden Content] Interesting article. Of course, it is rooted in science which many of the hard core right almost view as evil. And, indubitably, the scientists on whose work it is based are likely no match for the geniuses on this forum.

Excellent post.

It's the SEC. They were merely following lead. Like steroid users in baseball. But it's usually the Ole Miss's who take the bullet.

​You never know. TJ had some offers one might think he would have taken instead of Lamar. He chose to stay at home and play with a program on the rise instead.

TJ Atwood committed to Lamar today. Big congrats to a great kid who has worked his tail off! And don't look now but Tic is methodically signing some great local talent. Lamar is on its way.

You don't believe I studied under Charlie Wright? That's a pretty random assertion for one to make out of the blue. But I can easily prove that one, obviously. One of my classmates (same law school class) was Michael Berry. He and I have many opposing viewpoints (obviously) but respect each other's opinions and remain friends. If you don't listen to him on the radio, you should start. He will provide you with many thoughts and arguments for you to regurgitate.

This is why you clearly do not understand the issue/discussion. One can be a Christian and believe in separation of church and state. There are many of us who do. On the other hand, there are Islamic countries who would support the opposite. Of course Madison was not "a (sic) anti-religious bigot." Although there is a lot of evidence suggesting he was more of a deist. But let's not get you more confused introducing that subject. In the meantime, keep mocking. Irony can be quite entertaining. ;)

You constantly put down the "present day liberal's" intellect. You know, those dummies from Harvard, Yale, etc. The most laughable part of this is your own posts which clearly demonstrate a lack of knowledge on issues where you mock other's understanding. Madison's writings are vast on the subject. In fact, he wanted much stronger language in the Constitution but settled on the verbiage which is contained in the final text. While you assert that liberals would not/could not understand Madison's position on the subject, I am convinced you are better suited to discuss "Green Eggs and Ham" than our Constitution.