Lee

For No One Don't Let Me Down While My Guitar Gently Weeps Eleanor Rigby Happiness Is A Warm Gun are my favorites.

It comes down to a matter of whether you're a person of faith or not.? Religion cannot be proven nor can it be disproven. 896839[/snapback] Yes. I'm an agnostic for these reasons. You can't find evidence for or against God's existence. It's the ultimate paradox. 896882[/snapback] in all reality everyone is agnostic as noone has completely proven Gods existance. 897051[/snapback] Very untrue. One must believe it is impossible to prove God's existance or believe their isn't enough evidence of his existance to be an agnostic. Not everyone is agnostic. I, for one, am very strong in my Christian faith. 897451[/snapback] Actually that's not true. Your definition of agnosticism is slightly wrong. Acgnosticism has to do with *knowledge* of the existence of a god. An agnostic cannot prove or disprove a god's existence because they have no *knowledge*, only *beliefs*. Theists cannot prove or disprove a god's existence. Neither can atheists. They can believe that one does or doesn't exist, but they don't *know*. If they say they do, they are lying. Therefore, everyone is technically an agnostic. You don't have to believe it is impossible to prove or disprove, it IS impossible whether you believe it or not. To recap: Agnosticism = knowledge [A]Theism = belief

The Shawshank Redemption The Thin Red Line

Just to note, the course at NYU is a little different than how you are interpreting it. Here is the course description: Baseball has been called America?s game, and it captures the American progressive spirit in a special way. (Only in America would there be a game the object of which would be to bat a ball outside a playing field, with the result named ?going home.?) Still more, the game has revealed a capacity to grip individuals, families, and collections of friends in a way that transforms their experience of the mundane into something sublime?for some, a genuinely spiritual experience. This course examines baseball as a metaphor capable of producing such experiences. It uses both a set of readings illustrative of the metaphor (such as Kinsella?s The Iowa Baseball Confederacy) and a set of readings reflecting on the metaphor (such as Giamatti?s A Great and Glorious Game). These readings are discussed against a background of religion as a phenomenon (illustrated with texts such as Eliade?s The Sacred and the Profane). http://www.nyu.edu/gallatin/current/ba/cou...sciplinary.html (search for "Baseball as a Road to God"). Its point is not that baseball is a "religion"; it's that baseball, like many other things, because of its nature, may be capable of producing spiritual experiences. Think Field of Dreams. The course doesn't have anything to do with a baseball game being the result of divine intervention. Don't mean to argue, just want to clarify on that issue. I just have an extremely difficult time believing that anything in this world, baseball included, is the result of anything other than the factors that directly contribute to it. Words are just words. Agree to disagree.

Seriously, the results of a baseball game come from a lot of different factors, but those factors are all on the field and involve the people playing and coaching, as well as weather, lawn care, dirt, etc. I can sit here in front of my computer and say that so and so will pitch a perfect game, but if he doesn't, and you actually believe that the reason he doesn't is my fault because of a comment I made, that is ridiculous.

My schedule will look like: Monday: 10:40-12:35 ENG4110 (Nonfiction Cinema) Tuesday: 10:40-11:30 ENG3121 (History of Film) 11:45-1:40 AST1002 (Discover the Universe) 4:05-6:00 TPP3124 (Improv) 7:20-? ENG3121 (History of Film Screening) Wednesday 10:40-11:30 ENG4110 (Nonfiction Cinema) Thursday: 10:40-12:35 ENG3121 (History of Film) 12:50-1:40 AST1002 (Discover the Universe) 4:05-6:00 TPP3124 (Improv) 7:20-? ENG4110 (Nonfiction Cinema Screening) Friday: No class

Yeah, Jack is the only manager to use sac bunts with a man on first... Besides, I can't recall an overwhelming amount (except out of the pitcher's spot).

UF baby

Haha, I went to both Forest Glen and Coral Park... my name's Lee Hurwitz.

I graduated in '03.

CSHS baby...may have graduated, but still feel the rivalries. where in CS are you from? since youre not from Parkland I dont hate you as much. :-) 880961[/snapback] I went to CSHS too. You might remember my trash compactor satire video that played on the morning announcements in 2003. Or maybe not. I went to math states my junior year, our school sucked at math so anyone who wanted to go got to go. I went because it was in Orlando and there was a free trip included to Islands of Adventure. I failed all the math tests and went to a concert at House of Blues.

Steve Miller Band - The Joker "you're the cutest thing that I ever did see, I really love your peaches, wanna shake your tree" ?

Light one up...

I was raised Jewish, but I am an atheist. I am not saying that it is *impossible* for any god to exist, but I do find the concept rather unlikely and therefore do not believe that one does. I think people have a mistaken idea of what an atheist is, which is why it has a negative connotation that goes along with it. All an atheist is, is a person who is not a theist (which is a person who believes in any, not just the Christian, god). People also have a HUGE misunderstanding of what an "agnostic" is. The common idea of an agnostic is a person who doesn't know whether or not they believe in God. This person is an atheist. In order to be a theist, you have to positively assert that you believe in God. If you don't know whether you can positively assert that you believe in God, you are not a theist, therefore you are an a-theist ("a" being a prefix that means "without"-- atheism is "without theism"). When you can say "I believe in God" you then are a theist. Furthermore, theism and atheism have to do with beliefs. A theist believes in God. An atheist doesn't believe in God. Agnosticism does not pertain to beliefs, but it instead pertains to knowledge. An agnostic does not have knowledge of whether or not God exists. Therefore, everyone is an agnostic. Nobody, whether they claim to or not, actually 100% *knows* of God's existence... they can believe, they can have faith, but they do not have *knowledge*. So you can be an agnostic atheist (a person who doesn't know whether God exists but doesn't believe that he does) or an agnostic theist (a person who doesn't know whether God exists but believes that he does). I am always interested in religion threads. I am very open-minded in my views and love to hear people's opinions on the subject as well as explain answers to questions people have on my own. I do not bash or insult people's beliefs and just ask that they in turn do the same towards others.

I don't know what any of you are talking about, Gainesville during Summer B kicks ass... when I was up for Summer B my freshman year I was only sober 2 nights a week, I was out every other night.

I quite like smoking the resin actually, f*cks me up and takes a while to use up. Tastes kinda bad, but whatever.

We didn't lose anything, over the last two days the Marlins and Braves are both 2-0. It's back to pre-Wednesday level, at 3.5. Surmountable. 845459[/snapback] This is how it works.Each day is a new day.You don't go retro. We came in to today , July 7th 2005, 3 game behind in the WC race.At the end of the day, July 7th 2005, we are now 3 1/2 games behind. I just hate it when we seem to have to grind it out for victories just to keep pace. But to lose ground on a day where we not only win...but we win big.....drives me crazy We didn't lose any ground. One of today's games was a makeup of yesterday's game, so it's as if they played it yesterday and won and then played again today and won. We've been behind 3.5 through today.

I could never watch any Marlins game when I lived in Beaty. It went up to 44 or something. Thank god they finally upgraded the cable so people can get games now.

http://www.marlinbaseball.com/forums/index...showtopic=42734

If Conine can keep up what he is doing, I'd like to see him in the lineup consistently and perhaps, though strange, farther up. Lately he has been doing well at the plate, hitting a lot of singles and drawing walks. Until Castillo comes back, at least, would it be so crazy to see him in the 2-spot? If Pierre gets on base, Conine could advance him and perhaps get some RBI, then he'd be on base for the big guys. I dunno, worth a shot. I also like Hollyberry's idea of switching Gonz and Easley. Assuming Lowell is still out of the lineup, you'd have: Pierre CF Conine LF Delgado 1B Cabrera 3B LoDuca C Encarnacion RF Gonzalez SS Easley 2B P Maybe this is a horrible idea.

I was there, it was ridiculous. When someone shouted, "Stop reading!" he didn't even understand what they meant. He answered around every question and was obviously uncomfortable on the stage. What a jackass.

I'll be there with some friends.

OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'll probably go and I'll keep an eye out for you at Turlington.