The reason i know this to be fairly true is i've had friends in my life who actually have been or still are addicted to crystal meth, when they can't get it, they take Ritalin because according to them it has the exact same effects as street crystal meth! Why are kids given these pills?Is it true that Ritalin is basically like crystal methampetamine in a pill form?
it is not like crystal meth in the way you are thinking. ppl who have add/adhd have different brain chemistry than ppl who don't...ritalin calms them down and allows them to focus. same thing with coffee. when ppl who don't have add/adhd take add/adhd meds, their brain reacts differently to it, and it causes them to be even more hyper, like an effect that meth causes.
kids who truly have add/adhd are given these pills b/c they work. they have been approved by the board of medicine (or whatever it's called). ppl keep saying that too many parents are medicating instead of dealing with their behaviour, or that add/adhd isn't real...it is real, and i've seen ppl off their meds and it is not pretty. why would we medicate for other things, such as epilepsy to stop seizures, and not medicate ppl who have add/adhd so they can focus and be attentive, resulting in being able to pay attention in school and get better grades?Is it true that Ritalin is basically like crystal methampetamine in a pill form?
I don't know about crystal meth, but for ritalin, it's been given out like candy to anybody who says their kids move around too much. Many times it's the parent's lack of patience with active children. It's normal to have a child that runs everywhere, talks loud and climbs on things. But people nowadays look for answers in pills instead of using their heads. In many cases they should medicate the parents, not the children. My sister's had to take it (believe me, really had to, not a figment of my parents' imagination like many) and she's in her 30's and still has to take it. Giving a child ritalin should be a decision made on many factors and not just because parents (and teachers) like to get quiet time.
No, but it's close. I don't think that Ritalin is as destructive to the body as crystal meth, but I know people who do it to get high (which I frown upon) and I know people who do crystal meth and sometimes I can't tell them apart. I think that's why it's called the poor man's crack. Don't quote me on this though, I've never touched any of those drugs. Check out the link below, it's all about Ritalin abuse...
And I don't know why kids are given these drugs. Of course most kids can't pay attention in school, they're KIDS for crying out loud. I know some kids do need it, but I think most are given it because mommy and daddy thinks it'll help them do better in school, little do they know they're actually giving their kids a possible life-long drug addiction!
They are both stimulants. So I guess you could ALSO say that 'caffeine is basically meth in coffee-form.' But no, they are not 'the same' in their effects on the brain or behavior or addictive potential. [Assuming that Ritalin is used as prescribed.]
(Addicts who use Ritilin instead of meth use it in MUCH higher doses, and they usually grind it up and inject or snort it.)
It is similar but not the same. For this reason when they diagnosed my son with adhd I choose NOT to give him medication. I am trying different approaches bc I dont want my son to be on it. You said you have friends who do it. Okay so you know long term what a tweaker looks like, right? Now go and look at a 7 year old boy whos been on it for two years and I bet they look way differently. A tweaker tends to pick at thier face or thier face looks sunk in, it affects thier teeth, etc. A child on ritalin normally does loose some weight but does not have any of the other consequences......
Anywho- your friends just take it to help them coming down bc it 'sorta' feels like it but yeah like I said not the same....
I hate all these stupid medications for all these stupid ';disorders';. The moment a kid gets too hyper for the school or parents to know what to do with, they automatically start pumping them full of meds. It sickens me. As for the ';feeling'; that people get when they use it.... I wouldn't know. I've never used Crystal meth nor Ritalin, so I'm not educated on how it makes you feel. lol
By the way, your photo creeps me out. I lived in Wichita, KS when 'he' resurfaced. People were calling into work because they were too scared to leave their houses. It was a CREEPY few months until they finally caught him.
its speed alright
not crystal meth
but people grind it snort it
smoke it
kids are given these pills to addict them
so the fda will have drug dependant adults needing pills to handle their emotions and life stressors
its all a money making bizniz
Well if that is the case then the same can be said about Heroin because I know a few people who took Ritalin as a child and were hooked on Heroin later in life. I think it is because if a child is used to taking drugs then by default as an adult he still needs drugs.
Methylphenidate, not Methamphetamine.
C14 H19 N O2 compared to C10 H15 N
Definitely not the same.
its not the same chemically perhaps it gives them similar side effects like calming them down but its definitely not as strong as Meth lol.
Close, but no cigar. They are both amphetamines, though Ritalin is not addictive when used properly.
Not quite. It's an Amphetamine based drug, but not Meth-amphetamine. Which is why Meth abusers should not take it.
Some people need these pills to focus. Others just do dumb stuff. Not they are not the same.
NO
yep not a good thing for your child!
Friday, February 12, 2010
Why is it the older we get the harder it is to form true friends?
Because as we get older, we realize that true friends aren't just people you hang out with and have a good time with. They're the people who will tell you the truth every time whether you want to hear it or not because they care about you. They stick around when things get bad and help you through bad times.
Most of our friends when we're younger don't live up to that.Why is it the older we get the harder it is to form true friends?
because so many selfish people around, and look after their own needs only, besides having no company is better than bad company...Why is it the older we get the harder it is to form true friends?
There becomes a maturing stage . You need to be aware of your personnal needs and immediate family. They become your real friends ; plus they say there are more women in the world than men , but, you'll never see it in the real world. Safest route in adult life is follow the money and everything else will come.
Because you are better able to see what rats people are :-)
We are more careful of whom we chose as friends from learning of our mistakes of the kind of people we can trust and let into our lives
I think much of it is because, as adults we have adopted the idea of thinking too much. Kids just accept people no matter what. They are lovely little free spirits that don't judge people.
It is hard to form true friends because when people enter your life it is always about motives. It is our duty to decipher what that motive is. If we realize it and are able to nip it in the bud then we can actually find friends who possess the qualites of a real friend. People are very selfish and self-centered and if you find someone who can sacrificial then you have found a real friend. It seems the older we get the more selfish we get and then we are unable to create the bonds we need to create with real people. We have been hurt thru life so much and have hurt other people and then we no longer trust people the way that we should so we never really get a chance to bond as we should as we get older because we feel that people are ';out to get us'; so the speak. But if we stick to figuring out peoples motives then you will be able to create those lasting bonds. And last but not least, treat people the way you want to be treated because in life we all reap what we sow at one time or another. If we want a true friend, be a true friend to someone who needs one.
Most of our friends when we're younger don't live up to that.Why is it the older we get the harder it is to form true friends?
because so many selfish people around, and look after their own needs only, besides having no company is better than bad company...Why is it the older we get the harder it is to form true friends?
There becomes a maturing stage . You need to be aware of your personnal needs and immediate family. They become your real friends ; plus they say there are more women in the world than men , but, you'll never see it in the real world. Safest route in adult life is follow the money and everything else will come.
Because you are better able to see what rats people are :-)
We are more careful of whom we chose as friends from learning of our mistakes of the kind of people we can trust and let into our lives
I think much of it is because, as adults we have adopted the idea of thinking too much. Kids just accept people no matter what. They are lovely little free spirits that don't judge people.
It is hard to form true friends because when people enter your life it is always about motives. It is our duty to decipher what that motive is. If we realize it and are able to nip it in the bud then we can actually find friends who possess the qualites of a real friend. People are very selfish and self-centered and if you find someone who can sacrificial then you have found a real friend. It seems the older we get the more selfish we get and then we are unable to create the bonds we need to create with real people. We have been hurt thru life so much and have hurt other people and then we no longer trust people the way that we should so we never really get a chance to bond as we should as we get older because we feel that people are ';out to get us'; so the speak. But if we stick to figuring out peoples motives then you will be able to create those lasting bonds. And last but not least, treat people the way you want to be treated because in life we all reap what we sow at one time or another. If we want a true friend, be a true friend to someone who needs one.
Is it true that some people think our solar system was formed after a supernova?
I read on a website that it was because of heavy elements that are formed in the sun near the end of its life cycle. But our sun is to young to do this.Is it true that some people think our solar system was formed after a supernova?
Not all stars were born at the same time. The first stars formed after the Big Bang were composed mainly of hydrogen and helium. Life did not exist around these star systems. These (population 3) stars were massive and had short lives. When these stars died by supernova, they produced heavier elements and ejected them into space. As newer stars formed (population 2), they formed not only of hydrogen and helium, but of heavier elements as their nebula passed through the debris of the older stars. In fact, it may have helped cause the nebula to coallesce. The nebula that came to form our Sun (population 1) passed through not only population 3 debris but perhaps also some population 2 debris thus not just composed of hydrogen and helium but also of some of the heavier elements. Without these heavier elements, life would not be possible.
mark- maybe you should print up a religious response that you can put onto all astronomy questions in the same way that you post your carbon copy response to all alien/UFO questions.Is it true that some people think our solar system was formed after a supernova?
You're quite right, but our sun wasn't the supernova. The heavy elements were formed in previous generations of stars.
When massive stars explode as supernovas, they create heavy elements (iron, nickel, and heavier ones) in that explosion and expel those elements out into interstellar space. The clouds of dust and gas (and those heavy elements) start to collapse (often due to the shock waves of that same and other supernova) into the next generation of stars.
Our sun is theorized to be a third-generation star, formed after 2 ';waves'; of supernovas enriched the gas and dust in space with heavier elements.
Its those heavier elements that became the rocks of the planets in our system.
The material in the earth and other planets was formed in the deaths of other stars.
Yes, all the heavier elements like iron, gold, uranium, etc., could only have been produced in the intense temperature and pressure of an ancient supernova(s). Most of the elements in your own body were created that way. As Carl Sagan liked to say, ';We're all made of star stuff.';
God created the Universe people. period.
dont be arrogant to believe.
!!!
All of the elements came from inside dead stars. Everything originated from hydrogen and it takes the tremendous heat inside stars to fuse atoms together to create the other elements.
Yes, some people think that is true. And after lots of study I think that they might be correct.
it was... we have a lot of heavy elements on the earth including Uranium. these could only have been formed in a dying star. we are second maybe third or fourth generation. some of the heavier stars live brief (millions of years) lives.
yes scientist do believe the world started from the big bang
Not all stars were born at the same time. The first stars formed after the Big Bang were composed mainly of hydrogen and helium. Life did not exist around these star systems. These (population 3) stars were massive and had short lives. When these stars died by supernova, they produced heavier elements and ejected them into space. As newer stars formed (population 2), they formed not only of hydrogen and helium, but of heavier elements as their nebula passed through the debris of the older stars. In fact, it may have helped cause the nebula to coallesce. The nebula that came to form our Sun (population 1) passed through not only population 3 debris but perhaps also some population 2 debris thus not just composed of hydrogen and helium but also of some of the heavier elements. Without these heavier elements, life would not be possible.
mark- maybe you should print up a religious response that you can put onto all astronomy questions in the same way that you post your carbon copy response to all alien/UFO questions.Is it true that some people think our solar system was formed after a supernova?
You're quite right, but our sun wasn't the supernova. The heavy elements were formed in previous generations of stars.
When massive stars explode as supernovas, they create heavy elements (iron, nickel, and heavier ones) in that explosion and expel those elements out into interstellar space. The clouds of dust and gas (and those heavy elements) start to collapse (often due to the shock waves of that same and other supernova) into the next generation of stars.
Our sun is theorized to be a third-generation star, formed after 2 ';waves'; of supernovas enriched the gas and dust in space with heavier elements.
Its those heavier elements that became the rocks of the planets in our system.
The material in the earth and other planets was formed in the deaths of other stars.
Yes, all the heavier elements like iron, gold, uranium, etc., could only have been produced in the intense temperature and pressure of an ancient supernova(s). Most of the elements in your own body were created that way. As Carl Sagan liked to say, ';We're all made of star stuff.';
God created the Universe people. period.
dont be arrogant to believe.
!!!
All of the elements came from inside dead stars. Everything originated from hydrogen and it takes the tremendous heat inside stars to fuse atoms together to create the other elements.
Yes, some people think that is true. And after lots of study I think that they might be correct.
it was... we have a lot of heavy elements on the earth including Uranium. these could only have been formed in a dying star. we are second maybe third or fourth generation. some of the heavier stars live brief (millions of years) lives.
yes scientist do believe the world started from the big bang
True or false...? Reaction of an acid with a base usually forms a salt plus water.?
A base is the opposite of an acid. An alkali is a base that will dissolve in water.
In general terms:
Acid + Base = Salt + Water
If the base is a carbonate, then:
Acid + carbonate Base = Salt + Water + Carbon Dioxide
If the base is a reactive metal:
Acid + Reactive Metal = Salt + Hydrogen
Hope this helpsTrue or false...? Reaction of an acid with a base usually forms a salt plus water.?
true
In general terms:
Acid + Base = Salt + Water
If the base is a carbonate, then:
Acid + carbonate Base = Salt + Water + Carbon Dioxide
If the base is a reactive metal:
Acid + Reactive Metal = Salt + Hydrogen
Hope this helpsTrue or false...? Reaction of an acid with a base usually forms a salt plus water.?
true
Please give me Advice for true lucky lotto lottery free services form website?
I want to try my luck if any website is available in web bases please share me I want to try my luckPlease give me Advice for true lucky lotto lottery free services form website?
The Big Lotto
http://www.thebigbiglotto.com/index.php?鈥?/a>
You can buy tickets for any major western lottery onlinecash advance
The Big Lotto
http://www.thebigbiglotto.com/index.php?鈥?/a>
You can buy tickets for any major western lottery online
Hindus: Who is Indra in its true form ?
Is he just an unjust cruel, fighting head of Gods, as shown my Maxmullers %26amp; Co.
Or he has some deeper esoteric personalityHindus: Who is Indra in its true form ?
Indra is also a manifestation of ParaBrahman. He is also the king of the plane of another dimension called ';Swarga'; similar to heaven or Jannat.
In the Veda the name Indra was also used as the name of ParaBrahman called Parmeshwara the supreme God.
Idi Parmeshvarye Dhatu + ran prifix = Indra. So first meaning of Indra is Parmeshwara or God.
He is also a Dikpaala or Lokapala the protector of the directions called ';the east';.
From BrihatSamhita:-
Two arms, Vehicle is ';Eravata the elephant';, weapon is Vajra
From Vishnodharmottara Purana:-
Four arms, Vehicle is ';Eravata the elephant';, weapons and other arm positions are Lotus, Vajra, Ankusha and embracing Shachi(his wife) with his forth arm.
From BrihatSamhita and RoopMandana:-
Four arms, Vehicle is ';Eravata the elephant';, weapons and other arm positions are VardaMudra(giving blessings), Vajra, Ankusha and the vessel of water.
He is really the Vigorous manifestation of ParaBrahman.
Indra is also called YagyaPurush( the main reason of Yagya) of Yagya.
Coz he is the supreme God in the Sakar realm of ParaBrahman.
What is Vajra?
Vajra also called Srika, Hayshir and Trisandhi because it has three knots and thousands blades. It was prepared by Twashta to kill Vrittasura a Brahmin demon or BrahmRakshsas. It was made of the bones of Dadhichi that had later turned as hard as diomond and as solid as iron. That is why diamond is also called ';Vajra';.
Edit:-
Zuko, B'ful answer ! :)Hindus: Who is Indra in its true form ?
Indra - Characteristics
In art, Indra is depicted as a muscular, red man, sometimes with four very long arms.
Indra's weapon, which he used to kill Vritra, with the help of other gods), is the thunderbolt (Vajra), though he also uses a bow, a net and a hook. He rides a large, four-tusked albino elephant called Airavata. When portrayed having four arms, he has lances in two of his hands which resemble elephant goads. When he is shown to have two, he holds the Vajra and a bow (Masson-Oursel and Morin, 326).
Indra lives in Svarga in the clouds around Mt. Meru. Deceased warriors go to his hall after death, where they live without sadness, pain or fear. They watch the Apsaras and the Gandharvas dance, and play games. The gods of the elements, celestial sages, great kings and warriors enrich his court.
Indra - Relations with other gods
He is married to Indrani (whose father, Puloman, Indra killed), and is the father of Arjuna (by Kunti), Jayanta, Midhusa, Nilambara, Rbhus, Rsabha. Indra is also the father of Vali and Surya. He is attended to by the Maruts (and the Vasus), children of Diti and Rudra. Indra had murdered Diti's previous children, so she hoped her son would be more powerful than him and kept herself pregnant for a century, practicing magic to aid her fetal son. When Indra discovered this, he threw a thunderbolt at her and shattered the fetus into 7 or 49 parts; each part regenerated into a complete individual, and the parts grew into the Maruts, a group of storm gods, who are less powerful than Indra.
According to one belief, Indra pulled his father, Dyaus Pita, from the sky by the foot; he fell to his death; afterwards, Indra married his mother Prthivi, who supported the murder.
Zeus of Greece is very similar to Indra.
Indra - Stories about Indra
Indra is not a perfect being, and is ascribed with more human characteristics and vices than any other Vedic deity. Perhaps consequently, he also has the most hymns dedicated to him: 250 (Masson-Oursel and Morin, 326). A well-known story about Indra tells of a sin that he committed and how he was punished for it.
Indra had an affair with Ahalya, wife of Gautama Rishi. He was punished by Gautama with a curse that ten thousand phalluses would protrude of his body in a grotesque and vulgar display, and that his reign as king of gods would meet with disaster and catastrophe. Gautama later commuted the curse, upon the pleading of the gods of Heaven, to ten thousand eyes, instead of phalluses.
Due to this sin Indra's throne remains insecure forever. He is repeatedly humiliated by demonic kings like Ravana of Lanka, whose son Indrajit (whose name means victor over Indra) bound Indra in serpent nooses and dragged him across Lanka in a humiliating display. Ravana released Indra when Brahma convinced him to do so, but Indra, as the defeated, had to pay tribute and accept Ravana's supremacy. Indra realized the consequences of his sin, and was later avenged by the Avatara of Vishnu, Rama, who slew Ravana to deliver the three worlds from evil, as described in the epic Ramayana.
Vritra, an asura, stole all the water in the world and Indra drank much Soma to prepare himself for the battle with the huge serpent. He passed through Vritra's ninety-nine fortresses, slew the monster and brought water back to Earth.
In a later version of the story, Vritra was created by Tvashtri to get revenge for Indra's murder of his son, Trisiras, a pious Brahmin whose increase of power worried Indra. Vritra won the battle and swallowed Indra, but the other gods forced him to vomit Indra out. The battle continued and Indra fled. Vishnu and the rishis brokered a truce, and Indra swore he would not attack Vritra with anything made of metal, wood or stone, nor anything that was dry or wet, or during the day or the night. Indra used the foam from the waves of the ocean to kill him at twilight.
In yet another version, recounted in the Mahabharata, Vritra was a Brahmin who got hold of supernatural powers, went rogue and became a danger to the gods. Indra had to intervene, and slew him after a hard fight. A horrible goddess named Brāhmanahatya (personified sin of brahmin murder) came from the dead corpse of Vritra and pursued Indra, who hid inside a lotus flower. Indra went to Brahma and begged forgiveness for having killed a Brahmin.
';Vajrayudha'; which Indra possessed is believed to be prepared from backbone of a sage Dadhichi to kill Asuras.
Indra is God of lightning, king of Devas and head of Heaven
Personality wise he is golden in color and always drinking somras
Once Saint Gautam cursed him for having sex with his wife Ahalya so that his body is covered with 1000 vaginas and later the vaginas become 1000 eyes
Friend, i should say one thing, this Max mueller and other british scholars are cheaters! They were paid by British government, to show wrong info about, Hinduism!! Indra, is great, he was most worshipped by Vedic people, but many times, they gave wrong ideas about him! Indra and Rudra are similar, so you can't say he is cruel!
Shri Krishna says:
vedanam sama-vedo ’smi
devanam asmi vasavah
indriyanam manas casmi
bhutanam asmi cetana
Translation
Of the Vedas I am the Sama Veda; of the demigods I am Indra, the king of heaven; of the senses I am the mind; and in living beings I am the living force
Krishna himself, says that he is Indra. Then how can he be cruel?, There are some incidents, which shows that indra, used to rape wife's of Rishi's and sage's, but it was a play (leela)! When indra, wouldn't attack or do something wrong, then the creation would not go further,it would fall. Its all a play of, God-head!!
Edit:
Thanks Crimson! Nice answer guys!!
Maxmuller got it all wrong that he realized in his lost days almost on the death bed. Indra is the Lord of the heaven as he controls the heads of all the eight directions of the universe that enables people to reach heavenly abode.
In rig veda, it talk about Indra, But we worship Shiva and Krishna?
What is the connection here?
There is no Existence of Indra, It is all fabricated by man.
Trust you frist, then people - it is equally worship god
Oh, let us forget about old Maxmuller and Co.
You have all good answers, excellent! But I go with Mano, whose answer I really admire.
(No offense, Crimson and all you my dear friends!)
Or he has some deeper esoteric personalityHindus: Who is Indra in its true form ?
Indra is also a manifestation of ParaBrahman. He is also the king of the plane of another dimension called ';Swarga'; similar to heaven or Jannat.
In the Veda the name Indra was also used as the name of ParaBrahman called Parmeshwara the supreme God.
Idi Parmeshvarye Dhatu + ran prifix = Indra. So first meaning of Indra is Parmeshwara or God.
He is also a Dikpaala or Lokapala the protector of the directions called ';the east';.
From BrihatSamhita:-
Two arms, Vehicle is ';Eravata the elephant';, weapon is Vajra
From Vishnodharmottara Purana:-
Four arms, Vehicle is ';Eravata the elephant';, weapons and other arm positions are Lotus, Vajra, Ankusha and embracing Shachi(his wife) with his forth arm.
From BrihatSamhita and RoopMandana:-
Four arms, Vehicle is ';Eravata the elephant';, weapons and other arm positions are VardaMudra(giving blessings), Vajra, Ankusha and the vessel of water.
He is really the Vigorous manifestation of ParaBrahman.
Indra is also called YagyaPurush( the main reason of Yagya) of Yagya.
Coz he is the supreme God in the Sakar realm of ParaBrahman.
What is Vajra?
Vajra also called Srika, Hayshir and Trisandhi because it has three knots and thousands blades. It was prepared by Twashta to kill Vrittasura a Brahmin demon or BrahmRakshsas. It was made of the bones of Dadhichi that had later turned as hard as diomond and as solid as iron. That is why diamond is also called ';Vajra';.
Edit:-
Zuko, B'ful answer ! :)Hindus: Who is Indra in its true form ?
Indra - Characteristics
In art, Indra is depicted as a muscular, red man, sometimes with four very long arms.
Indra's weapon, which he used to kill Vritra, with the help of other gods), is the thunderbolt (Vajra), though he also uses a bow, a net and a hook. He rides a large, four-tusked albino elephant called Airavata. When portrayed having four arms, he has lances in two of his hands which resemble elephant goads. When he is shown to have two, he holds the Vajra and a bow (Masson-Oursel and Morin, 326).
Indra lives in Svarga in the clouds around Mt. Meru. Deceased warriors go to his hall after death, where they live without sadness, pain or fear. They watch the Apsaras and the Gandharvas dance, and play games. The gods of the elements, celestial sages, great kings and warriors enrich his court.
Indra - Relations with other gods
He is married to Indrani (whose father, Puloman, Indra killed), and is the father of Arjuna (by Kunti), Jayanta, Midhusa, Nilambara, Rbhus, Rsabha. Indra is also the father of Vali and Surya. He is attended to by the Maruts (and the Vasus), children of Diti and Rudra. Indra had murdered Diti's previous children, so she hoped her son would be more powerful than him and kept herself pregnant for a century, practicing magic to aid her fetal son. When Indra discovered this, he threw a thunderbolt at her and shattered the fetus into 7 or 49 parts; each part regenerated into a complete individual, and the parts grew into the Maruts, a group of storm gods, who are less powerful than Indra.
According to one belief, Indra pulled his father, Dyaus Pita, from the sky by the foot; he fell to his death; afterwards, Indra married his mother Prthivi, who supported the murder.
Zeus of Greece is very similar to Indra.
Indra - Stories about Indra
Indra is not a perfect being, and is ascribed with more human characteristics and vices than any other Vedic deity. Perhaps consequently, he also has the most hymns dedicated to him: 250 (Masson-Oursel and Morin, 326). A well-known story about Indra tells of a sin that he committed and how he was punished for it.
Indra had an affair with Ahalya, wife of Gautama Rishi. He was punished by Gautama with a curse that ten thousand phalluses would protrude of his body in a grotesque and vulgar display, and that his reign as king of gods would meet with disaster and catastrophe. Gautama later commuted the curse, upon the pleading of the gods of Heaven, to ten thousand eyes, instead of phalluses.
Due to this sin Indra's throne remains insecure forever. He is repeatedly humiliated by demonic kings like Ravana of Lanka, whose son Indrajit (whose name means victor over Indra) bound Indra in serpent nooses and dragged him across Lanka in a humiliating display. Ravana released Indra when Brahma convinced him to do so, but Indra, as the defeated, had to pay tribute and accept Ravana's supremacy. Indra realized the consequences of his sin, and was later avenged by the Avatara of Vishnu, Rama, who slew Ravana to deliver the three worlds from evil, as described in the epic Ramayana.
Vritra, an asura, stole all the water in the world and Indra drank much Soma to prepare himself for the battle with the huge serpent. He passed through Vritra's ninety-nine fortresses, slew the monster and brought water back to Earth.
In a later version of the story, Vritra was created by Tvashtri to get revenge for Indra's murder of his son, Trisiras, a pious Brahmin whose increase of power worried Indra. Vritra won the battle and swallowed Indra, but the other gods forced him to vomit Indra out. The battle continued and Indra fled. Vishnu and the rishis brokered a truce, and Indra swore he would not attack Vritra with anything made of metal, wood or stone, nor anything that was dry or wet, or during the day or the night. Indra used the foam from the waves of the ocean to kill him at twilight.
In yet another version, recounted in the Mahabharata, Vritra was a Brahmin who got hold of supernatural powers, went rogue and became a danger to the gods. Indra had to intervene, and slew him after a hard fight. A horrible goddess named Brāhmanahatya (personified sin of brahmin murder) came from the dead corpse of Vritra and pursued Indra, who hid inside a lotus flower. Indra went to Brahma and begged forgiveness for having killed a Brahmin.
';Vajrayudha'; which Indra possessed is believed to be prepared from backbone of a sage Dadhichi to kill Asuras.
Indra is God of lightning, king of Devas and head of Heaven
Personality wise he is golden in color and always drinking somras
Once Saint Gautam cursed him for having sex with his wife Ahalya so that his body is covered with 1000 vaginas and later the vaginas become 1000 eyes
Friend, i should say one thing, this Max mueller and other british scholars are cheaters! They were paid by British government, to show wrong info about, Hinduism!! Indra, is great, he was most worshipped by Vedic people, but many times, they gave wrong ideas about him! Indra and Rudra are similar, so you can't say he is cruel!
Shri Krishna says:
vedanam sama-vedo ’smi
devanam asmi vasavah
indriyanam manas casmi
bhutanam asmi cetana
Translation
Of the Vedas I am the Sama Veda; of the demigods I am Indra, the king of heaven; of the senses I am the mind; and in living beings I am the living force
Krishna himself, says that he is Indra. Then how can he be cruel?, There are some incidents, which shows that indra, used to rape wife's of Rishi's and sage's, but it was a play (leela)! When indra, wouldn't attack or do something wrong, then the creation would not go further,it would fall. Its all a play of, God-head!!
Edit:
Thanks Crimson! Nice answer guys!!
Maxmuller got it all wrong that he realized in his lost days almost on the death bed. Indra is the Lord of the heaven as he controls the heads of all the eight directions of the universe that enables people to reach heavenly abode.
In rig veda, it talk about Indra, But we worship Shiva and Krishna?
What is the connection here?
There is no Existence of Indra, It is all fabricated by man.
Trust you frist, then people - it is equally worship god
Oh, let us forget about old Maxmuller and Co.
You have all good answers, excellent! But I go with Mano, whose answer I really admire.
(No offense, Crimson and all you my dear friends!)
Online data entry form filling job are this true which is provided by company in paper adds?
we can earn sufficient money frome this data entry are this true or cheating?tell me.Online data entry form filling job are this true which is provided by company in paper adds?
';If a company requires initial payment from you in order to work for them, they are not legitimate.';
There are a few legitimate data entry companies but are not hiring and have large waiting lists (1-2yrs). The majority of data entry jobs you seen online are scams. A real company will want you to have skills inc fast typing, may want you to know MS Excel, and will usually ask that you have high speed internet. Once in a long while you may found one online on a job website but thats rare.
If you do an advanced search on yahoo, you will find previous answers, sometimes the info on these is good as the info they gave is likely to have been verified if the answer was voted as 'Best'.
';If a company requires initial payment from you in order to work for them, they are not legitimate.';
There are a few legitimate data entry companies but are not hiring and have large waiting lists (1-2yrs). The majority of data entry jobs you seen online are scams. A real company will want you to have skills inc fast typing, may want you to know MS Excel, and will usually ask that you have high speed internet. Once in a long while you may found one online on a job website but thats rare.
If you do an advanced search on yahoo, you will find previous answers, sometimes the info on these is good as the info they gave is likely to have been verified if the answer was voted as 'Best'.
Which statement is not true of the zygospore-forming fungi?
a. they are in the phylum Zygomycota
b. Ascospore are found in an ascus
c. Rhizopus is a representative genus
d. a zygospore is formed after fertilizationWhich statement is not true of the zygospore-forming fungi?
b. Ascospore are found in an ascus = This is NOT-TRUE
From = A Botanist
b. Ascospore are found in an ascus
c. Rhizopus is a representative genus
d. a zygospore is formed after fertilizationWhich statement is not true of the zygospore-forming fungi?
b. Ascospore are found in an ascus = This is NOT-TRUE
From = A Botanist
Is it true that humans are only form of life that make love face to face?
No, not really.
Many species ';face'; each other.Is it true that humans are only form of life that make love face to face?
NOT true, above poster! Many animal species have sex for fun. Look at a dog next time it humps your leg and tell me he's not having fun. They simply lack birth control, so it's mere coincidence they have offspring every time.Is it true that humans are only form of life that make love face to face?
dolphins and humans are the only life form that have se* for fun
dolphins make love belly to belly so i don't know if it counts
I don't.
The bonobo, or 'pygmy chimpanzee' makes love face-to-face. They are the most sex-oriented species on the planet, other than humans.
i dont think so. i know that humans are the only animals that make love for pleasure. every other animal makes love just strictly for reproducing
Going to test the theory out now down at the zoo.
No, it's not. But it 's a romantic idea.
Not True, I can Honestly say,I have been with a few good hearted cows in my time. So there Clever Dick!
Has someone else gotten hold of your keyboard as this is bordering on being a sensible question?
I have no idea!
Ahhhh.... I see, someone must have gotten hold of your organ then!?!?
Only humans and hedgehogs!
Except for sea cucumbers.
No, whales and dolphins do, and i think other aquatic mammals as well. This is one reason why some people believe our ancestors went through an aquatic phase.
Oh! So that's what you are supposed to do.............
Whales make love face to face, they have to, to inpregnate.
There is info and a pic, if you're chompin at the bit to see.
Most hermaphrodite creatures tend to';make love'; face to face, yet it's hard to define it as such, seeing as how they don't have traditional intercourse. You almost can't count a dolphin as making love- avg. ejaculation time 12 sec.
They are known to be very horny though, they've been caught dry humping sea turtles- no lie. Check out the factolas!
No....I think dolphins do....don't ask how I know this.
Did you mean
';Are humans the only form of life that makes love in every concievable position, includung face to face?';
There's a few mentioned here that do. Snakes do aswell.
Many species ';face'; each other.Is it true that humans are only form of life that make love face to face?
NOT true, above poster! Many animal species have sex for fun. Look at a dog next time it humps your leg and tell me he's not having fun. They simply lack birth control, so it's mere coincidence they have offspring every time.Is it true that humans are only form of life that make love face to face?
dolphins and humans are the only life form that have se* for fun
dolphins make love belly to belly so i don't know if it counts
I don't.
The bonobo, or 'pygmy chimpanzee' makes love face-to-face. They are the most sex-oriented species on the planet, other than humans.
i dont think so. i know that humans are the only animals that make love for pleasure. every other animal makes love just strictly for reproducing
Going to test the theory out now down at the zoo.
No, it's not. But it 's a romantic idea.
Not True, I can Honestly say,I have been with a few good hearted cows in my time. So there Clever Dick!
Has someone else gotten hold of your keyboard as this is bordering on being a sensible question?
I have no idea!
Ahhhh.... I see, someone must have gotten hold of your organ then!?!?
Only humans and hedgehogs!
Except for sea cucumbers.
No, whales and dolphins do, and i think other aquatic mammals as well. This is one reason why some people believe our ancestors went through an aquatic phase.
Oh! So that's what you are supposed to do.............
Whales make love face to face, they have to, to inpregnate.
There is info and a pic, if you're chompin at the bit to see.
Most hermaphrodite creatures tend to';make love'; face to face, yet it's hard to define it as such, seeing as how they don't have traditional intercourse. You almost can't count a dolphin as making love- avg. ejaculation time 12 sec.
They are known to be very horny though, they've been caught dry humping sea turtles- no lie. Check out the factolas!
No....I think dolphins do....don't ask how I know this.
Did you mean
';Are humans the only form of life that makes love in every concievable position, includung face to face?';
There's a few mentioned here that do. Snakes do aswell.
I have been told that I have cervical cancer and i should stop drinking any form of alcohol. Is this true?
I have been diagnosed with cervical cancer about one year ago and my GY NO told me to stop drinking to help cure the cancer. I am a young women who would like to know what i should do.I have been told that I have cervical cancer and i should stop drinking any form of alcohol. Is this true?
Well, not drinking isnt going to cure the cancer. However, drinking when you have cancer is not recommended, expecially if you are going through treatment. The alcohol can interact with the meds you are on, as well as just add complications as most meds used to treat cancer are pretty harsh on the body already.I have been told that I have cervical cancer and i should stop drinking any form of alcohol. Is this true?
Drinking doesn't cause cancer and not drinking won't cure it. However, alcohol may interfere with your chemotherapy's effectiveness, impair your general health, and otherwise cause undesirable consequences.
If you are in the habit of drinking, then I can understand why you may wish to continue given the emotional stress of your illness. However, you should consider the potential negative effects of alcohol and follow your doctor's advice to avoid it.
Defeating cancer needs to be your number one priority right now . . . so put down the drink.
Don't drink alcohol and listen to the doctor as they told you that for a reason. They went through seven years of training, so they know what they are talking about. Just don't drink it and find other nice drinks. Stay strong and fight it!! GOOD LUCK
Well, not drinking isnt going to cure the cancer. However, drinking when you have cancer is not recommended, expecially if you are going through treatment. The alcohol can interact with the meds you are on, as well as just add complications as most meds used to treat cancer are pretty harsh on the body already.I have been told that I have cervical cancer and i should stop drinking any form of alcohol. Is this true?
Drinking doesn't cause cancer and not drinking won't cure it. However, alcohol may interfere with your chemotherapy's effectiveness, impair your general health, and otherwise cause undesirable consequences.
If you are in the habit of drinking, then I can understand why you may wish to continue given the emotional stress of your illness. However, you should consider the potential negative effects of alcohol and follow your doctor's advice to avoid it.
Defeating cancer needs to be your number one priority right now . . . so put down the drink.
Don't drink alcohol and listen to the doctor as they told you that for a reason. They went through seven years of training, so they know what they are talking about. Just don't drink it and find other nice drinks. Stay strong and fight it!! GOOD LUCK
The ocean floor is as old as it was when the eart frist formed true or false?
Errr....kind of false. The surface is constantly being changed with plate tectonics and what was once ocean is now land and vice/versa. The plates slide over and under and, over the course of about 5 billion years it can't be the same.The ocean floor is as old as it was when the eart frist formed true or false?
FalseThe ocean floor is as old as it was when the eart frist formed true or false?
False. The oceanic crust is very new. It is newer than continental crust. It is being formed right now at spreading centers such as the mid-Atlantic ridge. This is one of the fundamental observations that support the theory of plate tectonics.
TRUE: The ocean floor is incredibly young were the tectonic plates meet and make new earth. New earth is being made all the time there, so TRUE because if you date the same 'earth' it ages, but the same AREA doesn't.
SO, IT NEVER AGED?....TIME DOESN'T EXIST DOWN THERE?......
FALSEcash advance
FalseThe ocean floor is as old as it was when the eart frist formed true or false?
False. The oceanic crust is very new. It is newer than continental crust. It is being formed right now at spreading centers such as the mid-Atlantic ridge. This is one of the fundamental observations that support the theory of plate tectonics.
TRUE: The ocean floor is incredibly young were the tectonic plates meet and make new earth. New earth is being made all the time there, so TRUE because if you date the same 'earth' it ages, but the same AREA doesn't.
SO, IT NEVER AGED?....TIME DOESN'T EXIST DOWN THERE?......
FALSE
Is it true that phospholipids form the core of all biological membranes?
trueIs it true that phospholipids form the core of all biological membranes?
Yes, the phospholipids are contained in every membrane. The phospholipids have two parts a hydrophobic and hydrophilic (water hating and water loving) part. The hydrophilic parts are on the outside of the membrane and the hydrophilic parts make up the inside, much like a wreath. There are some added proteins for various functions, and some cholesterol to maintain fluidity.Is it true that phospholipids form the core of all biological membranes?
Aye, 'tis true.
Yes, the phospholipids are contained in every membrane. The phospholipids have two parts a hydrophobic and hydrophilic (water hating and water loving) part. The hydrophilic parts are on the outside of the membrane and the hydrophilic parts make up the inside, much like a wreath. There are some added proteins for various functions, and some cholesterol to maintain fluidity.Is it true that phospholipids form the core of all biological membranes?
Aye, 'tis true.
Is it true that the silver surfer forms with dr.doom fantastic 4?
the new movie coming in june its the new fantastic 4 i want to know what the relationship with Dr. doom and silver surfer is do they merge or what do they do thats all i want to knowIs it true that the silver surfer forms with dr.doom fantastic 4?
I'm not really sure, but go to http://www.yahoo.com/movies then click on ';Coming Soon'; there you can read a brief summary of the new Fantastic Four.
I'm not really sure, but go to http://www.yahoo.com/movies then click on ';Coming Soon'; there you can read a brief summary of the new Fantastic Four.
Esters generally have a higher boiling point than the carboxylic acids from which they are formed? True/False?
False, the carboxylic acid group is more polar so it has a higher BP
Esters generally have a higher boiling point than the carboxylic acids from which they are formed? True/False?
False, the carboxylic acid group is more polar so it has a higher BP
Is it true that muay thai and the indian form of muay thai, adithada originated in africa?
could you guys help me find techniques of the african version if you find any. could you help me find adithada techniques?Is it true that muay thai and the indian form of muay thai, adithada originated in africa?
No.
Muay thai originated in Thailand, and adithada originated in Southern India, adithada is not the Indian version, it includes grappling and pressure points.
Good luck finding an African version, to my knowledge, there isn't one (I'm sure there are combat systems, but not one like the muay thai sport).Is it true that muay thai and the indian form of muay thai, adithada originated in africa?
Africa has many martial arts ZULU STICK FIGHTING ANGOLAN WRESTLING BANTU KICK FIGHTING no hands all kicks below the waist to name a few.They have some similaritys to other methods but doubt they have any influence as the AFRICAN arts developed by themselves after the great migrations by ancient peoples and primitive man out of africa.
Most cases if not all incidents of one country effecting another countrys martial arts came by way of trade and diplomatic relationships.
OKINAWA for instance in it's early developement was influenced by SIAM now called THAILAND and CHINA In later years 1700s to present time it was influenced strongly by CHINA and later by JAPAN and CHINA.
There are no records of AFRICA having trade missions or diplomatic relations with anyone.
Thailand
No.
Muay thai originated in Thailand, and adithada originated in Southern India, adithada is not the Indian version, it includes grappling and pressure points.
Good luck finding an African version, to my knowledge, there isn't one (I'm sure there are combat systems, but not one like the muay thai sport).Is it true that muay thai and the indian form of muay thai, adithada originated in africa?
Africa has many martial arts ZULU STICK FIGHTING ANGOLAN WRESTLING BANTU KICK FIGHTING no hands all kicks below the waist to name a few.They have some similaritys to other methods but doubt they have any influence as the AFRICAN arts developed by themselves after the great migrations by ancient peoples and primitive man out of africa.
Most cases if not all incidents of one country effecting another countrys martial arts came by way of trade and diplomatic relationships.
OKINAWA for instance in it's early developement was influenced by SIAM now called THAILAND and CHINA In later years 1700s to present time it was influenced strongly by CHINA and later by JAPAN and CHINA.
There are no records of AFRICA having trade missions or diplomatic relations with anyone.
Thailand
Is it true that the anime version of Air Gear is different form the manga version?
i just finished reading ch.87 of the manga
BQ: Do you like candy?Is it true that the anime version of Air Gear is different form the manga version?
Yachiru-chan~~
^_____^
YESH~
The anime is different, of course!
They generally are. %26gt;.%26gt;
[[ not gonna include spoilers~! %26gt;:O ]]
And the manga is a lot longer, since it's ongoing. The (completed, at 25 eps) anime pretty much follows the general timeline, and just cuts off in the middle of the manga timeline. But there ARE differences. %26gt;.%26gt;
For example:
';The anime has many differences from the manga, and the anime ends in an open ended way, just after Ikki has won in the Devil's 30-30. However, unlike the manga, Ikki does not go through training from Sora.';
-- from wikipedia
O.o';';';';'; Oops, that might have contained a bit of spoilers. Not much tho, hopefully...
BQ: Do you like candy?
xDD YESH~ Of course!
What is Yachiru-chan's favorite kind? =D
baibai~~Is it true that the anime version of Air Gear is different form the manga version?
Yeah,it's a little different.
And why yes,I do like me some candy.
x]
Heya~!
Well yes, they say so :P
u prefer air gear over bleach T~T
hehe:P
Cya~!
oo ya right .. yes me likes candy ^^
oo wait .. u changed ur avie .. super cute XDcash advance
BQ: Do you like candy?Is it true that the anime version of Air Gear is different form the manga version?
Yachiru-chan~~
^_____^
YESH~
The anime is different, of course!
They generally are. %26gt;.%26gt;
[[ not gonna include spoilers~! %26gt;:O ]]
And the manga is a lot longer, since it's ongoing. The (completed, at 25 eps) anime pretty much follows the general timeline, and just cuts off in the middle of the manga timeline. But there ARE differences. %26gt;.%26gt;
For example:
';The anime has many differences from the manga, and the anime ends in an open ended way, just after Ikki has won in the Devil's 30-30. However, unlike the manga, Ikki does not go through training from Sora.';
-- from wikipedia
O.o';';';';'; Oops, that might have contained a bit of spoilers. Not much tho, hopefully...
BQ: Do you like candy?
xDD YESH~ Of course!
What is Yachiru-chan's favorite kind? =D
baibai~~Is it true that the anime version of Air Gear is different form the manga version?
Yeah,it's a little different.
And why yes,I do like me some candy.
x]
Heya~!
Well yes, they say so :P
u prefer air gear over bleach T~T
hehe:P
Cya~!
oo ya right .. yes me likes candy ^^
oo wait .. u changed ur avie .. super cute XD
Is it true that aspirin is the best form of birth control?
I was told that all your lady has to do is hold it between her thighs.Is it true that aspirin is the best form of birth control?
Not in your case the aspirin will end up in your mouth. :)Is it true that aspirin is the best form of birth control?
Well, if you're holding an aspirin in between your legs and you never open them, then yes, it is. I also heard it was a nickel.
This is what doctors told women in the 1950s. Combine that with the term ';baby boomers'; and you have your answer.
... no...
... but thanks for playing!!!!!!!!! : )
That means keep your legs closed and don't have sex.. Abstinence is the best birth control .. YES
No. Picking your nose is.
not brushing your teeth for a few years will do the trick too.
Well the way I heard it is...you must hold it between your knees.
yes
Not in your case the aspirin will end up in your mouth. :)Is it true that aspirin is the best form of birth control?
Well, if you're holding an aspirin in between your legs and you never open them, then yes, it is. I also heard it was a nickel.
This is what doctors told women in the 1950s. Combine that with the term ';baby boomers'; and you have your answer.
... no...
... but thanks for playing!!!!!!!!! : )
That means keep your legs closed and don't have sex.. Abstinence is the best birth control .. YES
No. Picking your nose is.
not brushing your teeth for a few years will do the trick too.
Well the way I heard it is...you must hold it between your knees.
yes
Is it true that the blood form your period stops while underwater?
Absoutlely, 100% not true. Water can help with cramps and other symptoms related to your period, but it does not stop the blood flow. Use a tampon, and happy swimming!Is it true that the blood form your period stops while underwater?
NO, it DOES NOT STOP.
People only think their period stops because the water disperses the menstrual flow quickly, so it only LOOKS like it stops.
But the flow DOES still go into the water, which is why if you are in the water on your period you MUST wear a tampon.Is it true that the blood form your period stops while underwater?
its not that your peroid stops, the uterus reacts to the water. but if you are wearing a tampon the flow usually stays the same.goodluck;)michele
no,it just may seem like it bc the water dilutes it,
though water does ussually stop bleading but that is only if its a skin lesion, but since its so deep inside body so it cant stop it....
Um.... no.
NO! ABSOLUTLY NOT!!!! It will continue in the water! and when you sleep.
i have always found that it does if the water is on the cool side. make sure you just check when you get out.
no it just disspates really fast in other words you cant see it
no, it jsut dilutes it and doesnt really appear, unless you are bleeding heavily.
No...its not true. I just gets dilluted. You dont have to avoid the pool though. Just wear a tampon and change it every hour or so you are at the pool.
No big deal.
no .. because you can still get it in the pool
NO, it DOES NOT STOP.
People only think their period stops because the water disperses the menstrual flow quickly, so it only LOOKS like it stops.
But the flow DOES still go into the water, which is why if you are in the water on your period you MUST wear a tampon.Is it true that the blood form your period stops while underwater?
its not that your peroid stops, the uterus reacts to the water. but if you are wearing a tampon the flow usually stays the same.goodluck;)michele
no,it just may seem like it bc the water dilutes it,
though water does ussually stop bleading but that is only if its a skin lesion, but since its so deep inside body so it cant stop it....
Um.... no.
NO! ABSOLUTLY NOT!!!! It will continue in the water! and when you sleep.
i have always found that it does if the water is on the cool side. make sure you just check when you get out.
no it just disspates really fast in other words you cant see it
no, it jsut dilutes it and doesnt really appear, unless you are bleeding heavily.
No...its not true. I just gets dilluted. You dont have to avoid the pool though. Just wear a tampon and change it every hour or so you are at the pool.
No big deal.
no .. because you can still get it in the pool
Is it true that Christians Conservatives are going to work on forming their own 3rd party?
This is just a rumor I saw floating around on a few conservative and not so conservative message boards.
On the conservative message boards they were blaming McCain for not attacking on moral issues.
On the not so conservative message boards, they were blaming his choice of Palin and saying if went with a moderate he would have won.
What do you think?Is it true that Christians Conservatives are going to work on forming their own 3rd party?
That would be great. It's always easier when you can identify the Taliban.Is it true that Christians Conservatives are going to work on forming their own 3rd party?
The right-wing religious zealots of the Republican Party are a big part of the reason that John McCain lost this election.
They have enough numbers so that the Republicans need them but their views on creationism in the public schools, no right to choose an abortion in the case of even rape or incest, and their reluctance to have the government help anyone in need put them way outside the norms of the general electorate.
So if a Republican running for office doesn't cater to them, they lose. If they do cater to them, they lose.
I suspect that the right-wingers will be shocked to see just how far to the left the Republican party will move over the next two years or so. The party will have to appeal to more groups that are unattainable unless they drop the religious stuff.
It's either that or die! And there aren't enough right-wing religious conservatives to form their own party and win more than a few seats in the House and Senate. They would NEVER win the White House. (Now there's a scarry thought).
God's law does not supercede man's law in the United States and we can only ';pray'; that it stays that way.
Conservative Christians like myself have no one to blame excpet ourselves. We knew John McCain was a moderate but we allowed him to be nominated by not rallying behind a real conservative, but unfortunately we became divided between Romney and Huckabee. I don't see a thrid party forming unless the Republican really starts drifting left.
I think Palin was a mistake. Social conservatives are a minority. To win, a candidate has to reach out to the center, and Palin was feared and hated by the center. So she did well with the social conservative base, but she drove more educated fiscal conservatives into the arms of the Democrats. Lieberman, who McCain really wanted, would have been a much better choice.
well McCain was the moderate. Palin was the hard core conservative. so the big reason he chose Palin was to gain support with those christian conservatives.
Given their rationale on what happened in the election i'd say it isn't going to happen since they don't know anything about what they are complaining about.
oh, without a doubt
there is no question whatsoever...the christian far rights will break off and be the party of the surburban white older folks and anti-intellectuals.
the real republicans will be close to the center and reject the other party...
the republican party will no longer be a single party...they will split to neocons and moderates...even the top conservatives are saying that on both sides..some saying they need to go much further right, and others saying they must now gain the trust and vote of the young and urban voters...
dont expect to see another republican president for at least 16 years, perhaps more.
Well there is actually a group called the christian coalition and it basically already does the things that your thinking of. Why would you attack morals? that's not being an ethical speaker. but his choice of sarah palin deffinitly was not a good one. although it is the opposite of mccain she is not a intelligent speaker and her ideas are very dry and simplistic and plain. I think he lost only because since the economy crisis and the wars that the republicans have been the pres and a majority in the congress seats, so people think if they change the party the change the direction our country is going in.
Going to take too much money to make a real go at it against the existing 2 parties. There are plenty of 3rd parties that end up endorsing major party candidates. Unless they're running their own candidates, they'll never get anywhere. Don't look for it to happen quickly. They're just not that patient.
I disagree with the Palin argument, but would definately support a third party.....and a fourth and a fifth. There are too many differences in core values out there to be satisfied and adequately represented by the two existing parties. Parties have come and gone throughout our history. They were formed in response to the issues of the time in which they existed. It is time again.
I think it would be a good idea. The Republican party cant afford to keep associating themselves with the right wing christian conservatives. They will not be able to win another election if they do that. It is obvious that the majority of people are more to center.
Liberals hate Palin. Watch, I guarantee you they won't stop attacking her. There's a reason for that. She is a true conservative.
As for a 3rd party, no. Conservatives need to take control of the Republican party back from these so-called moderates.
I think that we have never seen the hell that we will in the next few years.
By the time Hussein is finished the Christians will be driven underground like rats.
What he doesn't know is that every time evil has tried to do this, it has always backfired.
Christians (and I am one) cannot bring themselves to agree on hardly ANYTHING enough for something like that to be successful, hence the numerous denominations. Besides that, Jesus is King of Kings, and you do not vote for a King.
I think that would be a great idea, they will stop voting republican and all be grouped up together... it would be great for us Democrats I say go for Yest proved to me that their aren't as many ideological nuts as I thought their were in this country
I'm a fiscal conservative and I'd rather get the neocons out of the GOP and keep the moral conservatives. At least they don't pretend to be something they aren't.
Republicans with their divisive politics ended up dividing their own party. Palin and Bush can't be the best ambassadors for Christians in this country.
When have religious conservatives and not so religious conservatives ever agreed on anything? The rumor you are seeing is probably a...Rumor!
If they're not, they should be. Rush said today that Conservatives didn't lose the election; they weren't even on the ballot!
I hope that they do. That will hopefully destroy that part of the Republican Party that has no business in politics.
Their will be talk but most reasonable people know the Republican party has no chance if it splits.
Ewww...I hope not.
The last thing we need is a bunch of Jesus freaks making decisions based on how they interpret the bible.
They don't need to, they already have one, its called The Republican party.
don't they already have the so called 'moral majority' ? where is ole jerry falwell these days ?
The pity-party
They won't win anything and will disband as fast as they form.
Doubtful. The numbers aren't there.
probaby.
probably.
They should.. So they can lose again, maybe they will ';get it'; the next time around.........
I bet the majority of Republicans would love for them to leave.
No Christians need to get on their knees more and convert more sinners
On the conservative message boards they were blaming McCain for not attacking on moral issues.
On the not so conservative message boards, they were blaming his choice of Palin and saying if went with a moderate he would have won.
What do you think?Is it true that Christians Conservatives are going to work on forming their own 3rd party?
That would be great. It's always easier when you can identify the Taliban.Is it true that Christians Conservatives are going to work on forming their own 3rd party?
The right-wing religious zealots of the Republican Party are a big part of the reason that John McCain lost this election.
They have enough numbers so that the Republicans need them but their views on creationism in the public schools, no right to choose an abortion in the case of even rape or incest, and their reluctance to have the government help anyone in need put them way outside the norms of the general electorate.
So if a Republican running for office doesn't cater to them, they lose. If they do cater to them, they lose.
I suspect that the right-wingers will be shocked to see just how far to the left the Republican party will move over the next two years or so. The party will have to appeal to more groups that are unattainable unless they drop the religious stuff.
It's either that or die! And there aren't enough right-wing religious conservatives to form their own party and win more than a few seats in the House and Senate. They would NEVER win the White House. (Now there's a scarry thought).
God's law does not supercede man's law in the United States and we can only ';pray'; that it stays that way.
Conservative Christians like myself have no one to blame excpet ourselves. We knew John McCain was a moderate but we allowed him to be nominated by not rallying behind a real conservative, but unfortunately we became divided between Romney and Huckabee. I don't see a thrid party forming unless the Republican really starts drifting left.
I think Palin was a mistake. Social conservatives are a minority. To win, a candidate has to reach out to the center, and Palin was feared and hated by the center. So she did well with the social conservative base, but she drove more educated fiscal conservatives into the arms of the Democrats. Lieberman, who McCain really wanted, would have been a much better choice.
well McCain was the moderate. Palin was the hard core conservative. so the big reason he chose Palin was to gain support with those christian conservatives.
Given their rationale on what happened in the election i'd say it isn't going to happen since they don't know anything about what they are complaining about.
oh, without a doubt
there is no question whatsoever...the christian far rights will break off and be the party of the surburban white older folks and anti-intellectuals.
the real republicans will be close to the center and reject the other party...
the republican party will no longer be a single party...they will split to neocons and moderates...even the top conservatives are saying that on both sides..some saying they need to go much further right, and others saying they must now gain the trust and vote of the young and urban voters...
dont expect to see another republican president for at least 16 years, perhaps more.
Well there is actually a group called the christian coalition and it basically already does the things that your thinking of. Why would you attack morals? that's not being an ethical speaker. but his choice of sarah palin deffinitly was not a good one. although it is the opposite of mccain she is not a intelligent speaker and her ideas are very dry and simplistic and plain. I think he lost only because since the economy crisis and the wars that the republicans have been the pres and a majority in the congress seats, so people think if they change the party the change the direction our country is going in.
Going to take too much money to make a real go at it against the existing 2 parties. There are plenty of 3rd parties that end up endorsing major party candidates. Unless they're running their own candidates, they'll never get anywhere. Don't look for it to happen quickly. They're just not that patient.
I disagree with the Palin argument, but would definately support a third party.....and a fourth and a fifth. There are too many differences in core values out there to be satisfied and adequately represented by the two existing parties. Parties have come and gone throughout our history. They were formed in response to the issues of the time in which they existed. It is time again.
I think it would be a good idea. The Republican party cant afford to keep associating themselves with the right wing christian conservatives. They will not be able to win another election if they do that. It is obvious that the majority of people are more to center.
Liberals hate Palin. Watch, I guarantee you they won't stop attacking her. There's a reason for that. She is a true conservative.
As for a 3rd party, no. Conservatives need to take control of the Republican party back from these so-called moderates.
I think that we have never seen the hell that we will in the next few years.
By the time Hussein is finished the Christians will be driven underground like rats.
What he doesn't know is that every time evil has tried to do this, it has always backfired.
Christians (and I am one) cannot bring themselves to agree on hardly ANYTHING enough for something like that to be successful, hence the numerous denominations. Besides that, Jesus is King of Kings, and you do not vote for a King.
I think that would be a great idea, they will stop voting republican and all be grouped up together... it would be great for us Democrats I say go for Yest proved to me that their aren't as many ideological nuts as I thought their were in this country
I'm a fiscal conservative and I'd rather get the neocons out of the GOP and keep the moral conservatives. At least they don't pretend to be something they aren't.
Republicans with their divisive politics ended up dividing their own party. Palin and Bush can't be the best ambassadors for Christians in this country.
When have religious conservatives and not so religious conservatives ever agreed on anything? The rumor you are seeing is probably a...Rumor!
If they're not, they should be. Rush said today that Conservatives didn't lose the election; they weren't even on the ballot!
I hope that they do. That will hopefully destroy that part of the Republican Party that has no business in politics.
Their will be talk but most reasonable people know the Republican party has no chance if it splits.
Ewww...I hope not.
The last thing we need is a bunch of Jesus freaks making decisions based on how they interpret the bible.
They don't need to, they already have one, its called The Republican party.
don't they already have the so called 'moral majority' ? where is ole jerry falwell these days ?
The pity-party
They won't win anything and will disband as fast as they form.
Doubtful. The numbers aren't there.
probaby.
probably.
They should.. So they can lose again, maybe they will ';get it'; the next time around.........
I bet the majority of Republicans would love for them to leave.
No Christians need to get on their knees more and convert more sinners
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)