I can only recommend to every woman to get the domain of the house back into her hands. It's a much better life than having to have a career, which in most of the times, is only a job. To run the household,

Thus, roles were defined by gender. And women really got the easier half. It was easier for both. It's also way easier for the man to have the woman having her tasks in housekeeping, since he has his outside

Planning a household is indeed a factual and practical matter. But when man and woman both work outside the household, housekeeping has become a "pay the rent/pay off the loan" affair. The couple,

God, by its very nature, is supernatural and science only deals with the natural world. Amen! ;)

because it's something your average Christian wouldn't agree with. The Bible is supposed to be the absolute true word of God, and the (one and only) right interpretation thereof is left in the hands of

Hello to you. Thank you for replying. I answer in parts. That's right. So, wouldn't you say then that it doesn't really make a difference if belief in God exists or not? And couldn't the exact same be

Insgesamt ist auch diese Thematik eine spalterische. Der Mensch soll sich selbst als Schädling und Störer auf Erden fühlen, weil was er isst, wie er liebt, wie er sich bewegt, wohin er geht, mit wem er

unless they have government regulations in place to keep would-be competitors from the entering the marketplace. I believe that since the financial crisis in 2008, people have been afraid that companies

No problem, I do not expect immediate response. Now, let me jump right in. It is no more reasonable to say that you "only" need to know about "life and the universe" than for me to

Making a virtue out of necessity is extremely satisfying. While you were describing the solution to your mistake, I kept thinking: "But what about the side seam? It's also the wrong way round."

theology doesn't offer anything in way of explaining what we observe in and about the cosmos It did, though. Since it was theologians who first opened the space to scientifically oriented questions about

Let me start with what you provided me with, last. I'll maybe come back to what else you said, later. As I perceive this debate, both discussants are "believers". Carrol believes that it has

A heartfelt thank you for this wonderful and rich commentary from your side. I am grateful that you are so active in addressing the issue and sharing your additions and views. I will definitely come back

Thank you, I appreciate your reply :) Well, if I'm sincere, I have the sneaking suspicion that he didn't have the slightest intention of responding to anyone about anything after hitting the publish button.

there is no assumption that there is a creator, we know for sure Language is a delicate matter. I would stick to say that I have faith in God and that I am Christian. Saying that I know for sure that there

Oh, better you have no doubt that I was genuinely interested in the rest of his text, which I read and digested it all in its integrity and that's precisely where my question came from. Otherwise, I wouldn't

If you believe in creationism, then it is not compatible with evolution and the big bang theory or? I would think it compatible. When I assume a creator, I know nothing about how exactly creation took

Yes, nihilism, like cynicism, is a consequence of rejecting truth or authority. It sometimes takes on such nasty features that I find it difficult to listen. A person who believes in nothing, who is

The tone of your scepticism casts a doubt on whether you even want an answer is what I meant. I can be wrong, hence my question to you. It is indeed difficult, also for me personally, to see 6000 years

I understand the story of Adam and Eve more as something to illustrate human consciousness (becoming aware of oneself). It deals with becoming a human being from a child to the transition to adulthood