Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafesj

Post to this Thread - Printer Friendly - Home
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]


BS: Unfit for SCOTUS

Richard Bridge 08 Jun 15 - 01:07 PM
Greg F. 08 Jun 15 - 04:43 PM
GUEST,Pete from seven stars link 09 Jun 15 - 01:25 PM
Greg F. 09 Jun 15 - 03:10 PM
Richard Bridge 09 Jun 15 - 05:32 PM
Steve Shaw 09 Jun 15 - 06:08 PM
Joe Offer 09 Jun 15 - 06:49 PM
Greg F. 09 Jun 15 - 07:02 PM
Jeri 09 Jun 15 - 07:20 PM
Steve Shaw 09 Jun 15 - 08:11 PM
GUEST,# 09 Jun 15 - 11:23 PM
GUEST,Pete from seven stars link 10 Jun 15 - 02:52 PM
Richard Bridge 10 Jun 15 - 05:12 PM
olddude 10 Jun 15 - 05:21 PM
olddude 10 Jun 15 - 05:23 PM
olddude 10 Jun 15 - 05:26 PM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 10 Jun 15 - 05:37 PM
olddude 10 Jun 15 - 05:38 PM
olddude 10 Jun 15 - 06:10 PM
Steve Shaw 10 Jun 15 - 07:04 PM
Richard Bridge 11 Jun 15 - 09:25 AM
Richard Bridge 11 Jun 15 - 09:27 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 11 Jun 15 - 10:58 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 11 Jun 15 - 11:49 AM
Greg F. 11 Jun 15 - 11:49 AM
olddude 11 Jun 15 - 12:16 PM
GUEST,# 11 Jun 15 - 12:56 PM
Musket 11 Jun 15 - 01:04 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 11 Jun 15 - 01:15 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 11 Jun 15 - 01:16 PM
Greg F. 11 Jun 15 - 01:57 PM
Don Firth 11 Jun 15 - 02:20 PM
olddude 11 Jun 15 - 03:46 PM
olddude 11 Jun 15 - 03:50 PM
olddude 11 Jun 15 - 04:21 PM
Steve Shaw 11 Jun 15 - 04:41 PM
GUEST,# 11 Jun 15 - 05:31 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 11 Jun 15 - 05:40 PM
Musket 12 Jun 15 - 04:22 AM
Steve Shaw 12 Jun 15 - 05:41 AM
olddude 12 Jun 15 - 10:36 AM
olddude 12 Jun 15 - 10:59 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 12 Jun 15 - 11:58 AM
GUEST,gillymor 12 Jun 15 - 12:17 PM
olddude 12 Jun 15 - 12:43 PM
olddude 12 Jun 15 - 01:08 PM
Steve Shaw 12 Jun 15 - 01:21 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 12 Jun 15 - 03:39 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 12 Jun 15 - 03:43 PM
akenaton 12 Jun 15 - 03:52 PM

Share Thread
more
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:













Subject: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 Jun 15 - 01:07 PM

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/05/1390877/-Scalia-commencement-speech-Humans-have-been-around-for-at-least-some-5-000-yea


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Jun 15 - 04:43 PM

Scalia has always been an ass. No surprises here. But it could be worse -there's Thomas, perhaps the least qualified individual to ever sit on the Supreme Court.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link
Date: 09 Jun 15 - 01:25 PM

This sounds like a non story. I hope he is a bible believer, but even if he believes in the evolution story, there is nothing illogical in what he said, he might just be covering the bases. And to conclude that such a learned and experienced man is unfit for a post simply because he MIGHT not have the same religious bias as yourselves, strikes me as an unsound assessment .


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Jun 15 - 03:10 PM

Nothing about "religious bias" pete. Its about being able to think critically and differentiating fact from fantasy.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 09 Jun 15 - 05:32 PM

He appears to give credence to the idiotic fantasises of creationists. Such a mind has no place in ANY court.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jun 15 - 06:08 PM

There was a nice long piece in the Guardian today about Richard Dawkins. It reports that he once tweeted that religion is an organised licence to be acceptably stupid. Brilliant, and so accurate.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Jun 15 - 06:49 PM

But of course, the statement from Dawkins is universally true only if all religions are the same. Dawkins has an annoying tendency to make broad, dramatic, and rather witless condemnations that his fans find quite witty....

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Jun 15 - 07:02 PM

Unfortunately, Joe, these days its more often true than not. Take the Republican Party Presidential Candidates ..... PLEASE!

With apologies to Henny Youngman


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Jeri
Date: 09 Jun 15 - 07:20 PM

The problem is when these jerks start believing their personal religions should be universally accepted and religious rules should be treated as law. Supposedly, legislating according to religion isn't constitutional, but these guys don't understand the Constitution, or maybe they just think they're right and the Constitution is wrong. It's so frightening these days because every once in a while, they get away with their attacks.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jun 15 - 08:11 PM

But of course, the statement from Dawkins is universally true only if all religions are the same. Dawkins has an annoying tendency to make broad, dramatic, and rather witless condemnations that his fans find quite witty....

All religions are the same in that they share the common delusion that God exists. That unites religions far more than any contrived differences separate them. You would find Dawkins witless, wouldn't you. He would find you to be the perpetrator of a groundless and evidence-innocent myth that, worse still, you have no compunction in passing down to your children. I know which attitude I prefer.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,#
Date: 09 Jun 15 - 11:23 PM

Book of Installments 462: 139-43


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link
Date: 10 Jun 15 - 02:52 PM

Well, Richard and co, no one is going to accuse you of tolerance are they.   And if you think creation is a idiotic fantasy, I suggest you demonstrate it, instead of tossing around derogatory sound bites. What we had was a judge making a comment that was not even definitely creationist, but such is the evangelical fervour of the atheists here that they jump all over it........and then be complaining when theists respond !


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Jun 15 - 05:12 PM

Pete - there is no point in giving you facts - you fantasise. It has been demonstrated time and time again, and you come up with new fantasies.

No judge has any business giving credence to fantasies. Deciding the balance of probabilities is what a judge does all day, every day.

If he can't do that, he is not fit to be a judge.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: olddude
Date: 10 Jun 15 - 05:21 PM

Pete, my daddy always said we can't expect more from a pig then a grunt. It's always the same atheists spewing the same shit at anyone not buying in to their religion.. That is the religion of atheists. Gets old real quick


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: olddude
Date: 10 Jun 15 - 05:23 PM

Congress decides, not you but if you had your way a king would pick right


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: olddude
Date: 10 Jun 15 - 05:26 PM

All hail pope Dawkins


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 10 Jun 15 - 05:37 PM

well dan, I reckon that popes pronouncements are more eagerly devoured with great relish than francis'are.
are they intolerant, are they religiously antitheist ?.......is the pope a catholic !


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: olddude
Date: 10 Jun 15 - 05:38 PM

I understand that Richard is not a citizen so I will explain it slowly. The president recommends a candidate, Congress approves or doesn't. See that's how it works


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: olddude
Date: 10 Jun 15 - 06:10 PM

I used to feel really bad when Richard own countrymen would harass him. I figured it was bullying. Now I understand, an ass that just wants to pick fights is the bully. I know nothing of British politics. I could not tell you what a labor is or a bpn or anything else represents. But people decide by vote they are entitled to vote as they see it. People are entitled to believe what they want without harassment by him or anyone else.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 15 - 07:04 PM

Huh?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 09:25 AM

I said nothing about who picked judges who sat in SCOTUS. I pointed out that a "judge" who gave any credence to the idiocies of creationism demonstrated that he was intellectually incapable of making a proper decision.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 09:27 AM

And, incidentally, I did not criticise the fact that he had a religion - only that he gave comfort to the idiot creationists.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 10:58 AM

Freedom of religion, pal!
'So-called liberals' only like to cherry pick what they like, in regards to our Constitution....bullshit artist political wanks try to manipulate it, and some insanely inspired morons, try to redefine the vocabulary, and the definitions, just to promote their agendas, in the behalf of politically inspired liars, who are so corruptly bribed, by their 'owners'!
True story!

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 11:49 AM

so , Richard , it's ok to have a religion.......just as long as they don't believe what the book says , eh...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 11:49 AM

Gee, Goofus, don't you ever tire of vomiting the same assinine horseshit over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.....................................


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 12:16 PM

When people knock on my door be it for religion or for politics my response is the same. My beliefs and politics is personal. I don't thump my bible nor do I campaign. If Dawkins works for yo , I am happy for you. It doesn't work for me or my political views so don't try to convert me in every thread. You won't like my response


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,#
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 12:56 PM

At present, the Supreme Court of Canada is the only part of 'government' saving us from a totalitarian regime. The ruling Conservatives are batting zero after twelve challenges to either our Constitution (the BNA Act of 1867 which was finally patriated in 1982) or our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Without the courts we would be screwed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Musket
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 01:04 PM

Perhaps my belief is relevant after all?

I really do believe that believing in superstition and fairy stories, whilst leading to wonderful imagination perspectives and group hug syndrome (Which isn't a bad thing) also shows a lack of intelligence.

To insist on fantasy as credible is rather insulting at the intellectual level. Still, f=ma regardless of how much you ask your imaginary friend to interfere.

This story is of interest at one level. I support the right of people to believe in their particular sect and good luck to them. But rational people are subject to courts too and in The USA every bit as much as in more advanced societies, expect to be judged rationally.

Leave it at home. Don't pack it with your sandwiches and robe.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 01:15 PM

Greg F: "Gee, Goofus, don't you ever tire of

What?..That we have been corrupting our Constitution with hypocritical political agendas, masquerading as 'progress'????...or that we have religious freedom here??...even IF you don't agree with that particular religion??

YOU are the one spouting, and ,"..vomiting the same assinine horseshit over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over..."

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 01:16 PM

...and saying NOTHING!

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 01:57 PM

Well, Goofus, saying "nothing" is an appropriate way to deal with someone who vomits the same assinine horseshit over and over and over and over and...............

What would be the point of saying "something"?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 02:20 PM

Cut the village idiot a little slack, Greg. It's all he's got.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 03:46 PM

I feel the same way musket about your prophet Dawkins. Let us all kneeling to the gospel of the church of Dawkins. I don't see one thread where religious people are trying to convert anyone here. But a thousand of your bullshit atheist church conversation threads. You are the problem not me or Joe


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 03:50 PM

Let me say it again, Congress decides who is fit for the position. Not some foreigners with their own atheists church agenda


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 04:21 PM

I have no idea how one separates a liberal from a conservative. The major conservative rand paul is the only one who said the patriot act violates the bill of rights.. Go figure, I don't get it in a million years. Seems like everyone is mixed up lately


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 04:41 PM

Richard Dawkins is no prophet, he has not started a religion and he is not trying to convert you. In fact, he expects a good argument. Not one "atheist" here has ever tried to convert anyone. In fact, honest-to-goodness atheists all believe in freedom to believe whatever you want to believe. We're a cheerful and disparate ragbag mixture, without a boss in sight. You are arguing from an extremely uninformed position, olddude. It's far better to know thine enemy. In fact, if you read a book or two of Dawkins', you may well find that your true enemies are the authoritarian evangelisers of the Christian and Islamic faiths. It takes a bit of effort to get yourself into a position from which you can put the case from an informed standpoint. "It's Dawkins, I know bugger all about him and I hate him" simply doesn't cut it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,#
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 05:31 PM

"I have no idea how one separates a liberal from a conservative."

With a crowbar, Dan, with a crowbar.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Jun 15 - 05:40 PM

Good one!!! 'Guest #'. If they brought in a new sheriff into town, , they'd run into the hills like bandits......that is IF they couldn't 'buy off' the new sheriff!!

So far, all they've been doing, is playing different characters!....some times arguing AGAINST what they argued about, in 'their last exciting episode'!!!


GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Musket
Date: 12 Jun 15 - 04:22 AM

No prophets Dan. No worshipping a scientist either.

You know, if you can't see beyond following a belief as real rather than abstract comfort, don't assume lack of belief is just another belief.

f=ma

Today

Tomorrow

Regardless of prayer.

Normal people in The USA deserve better.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jun 15 - 05:41 AM

I do think that you can be a brilliant scientist as well as being a person of faith. Religious delusion can be compartmentalised and kept apart from scientific endeavour except at certain interfaces (the "when we found the Higgs Boson did it bring us nearer to God?" type of idiocy, for example). Most practising Christians I know are Christians on Sunday mornings but the same as everyone else the rest of the time.   But if you believe in creationism it means that you are far too easily hoodwinked by the evidence-free nonsense that the average believer, who might still least be making a valiant, yet ultimately fruitless, attempt to reconcile evolution with God, might be trying to avoid. If you're hoodwinked into ignoring vast bodies of evidence and harbouring the nonsense of creationism, you can't possibly be possessed of the sound enough mind required to officiate in a Supreme Court. You're a menace to society there, frankly. As for Congress deciding, well Congress is always so infallibly wise, isn't it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: olddude
Date: 12 Jun 15 - 10:36 AM

Musket sorry to go off on you, I get testy sometimes my friend. I am glad that it works for you guys


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: olddude
Date: 12 Jun 15 - 10:59 AM

I like musket, I will apologize to him. But Richard.. Go fuck yourself


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 12 Jun 15 - 11:58 AM

usual bluff and bluster from the evangelical atheists. we are not religious, say they , yet some judge, over the pond ,makes a passing remark about being here at least 5,000 yr , and he is attacked with religious fervour. and then they say they are not trying to convert anyone , but they seize any opportunity to hiss their venom ,and consider a judge unfit if he ...may...possibly...at a stretch...is declaring himself a biblical creationist ! in fact, if he does, he is more in line with observable , testable repeatable science. in all the threads they have started they have never been able to demonstrate microbes to men evolution. it is just an interpretation of data, a mindset at variance with both biblical revelation, and observational science. go ahead, prove me wrong, show me some evolution !.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,gillymor
Date: 12 Jun 15 - 12:17 PM

He's not some judge Pete, he's an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the USA. If it were you're country would you want to have a justice who promotes an "evangelical atheist" (your term) agenda on it's highest court?
Btw, Supreme Court justices are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: olddude
Date: 12 Jun 15 - 12:43 PM

Most everyone in the Congress or state government has some belief system. Still they uphold the law. People can and do separate the two as most feel it's personal. One only has to look at same sex marriage or rowe v Wade to see what I am saying is true. In this country your beliefs or non believe doesn't disqualify anyone unlike many other places on earth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: olddude
Date: 12 Jun 15 - 01:08 PM

And Richard, shove a broomstick up your ass and rotate.
(filling in for spaw)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jun 15 - 01:21 PM

I tried to make the distinction between those people of faith who try to accommodate science, that is the advancement of human knowledge via evidence, and those who wilfully deny overwhelming evidence in order to espouse a completely unsustainable, mad notion such as creationism. Judges are there to weigh evidence. A man who jettisons evidence in favour of the teachings of demented madmen is patently not fit to be a judge.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 Jun 15 - 03:39 PM

Steve Shaw: " If you're hoodwinked into ignoring vast bodies of evidence and harbouring the nonsense of creationism, you can't possibly be possessed of the sound enough mind required to officiate in a Supreme Court. You're a menace to society there, frankly. As for Congress deciding, well Congress is always so infallibly wise, isn't it?"

Steve Shaw: "I tried to make the distinction between those people of faith who try to accommodate science, that is the advancement of human knowledge via evidence, and those who wilfully deny overwhelming evidence in order to espouse a completely unsustainable, mad notion such as creationism."

I think you are the one who can't make the 'distinction'.....
Let's say it all began with a 'Big Bang'....and everything that came about, came from that 'Big Bang'.....and everything that came to be, consists of elements from the 'Big Bang'......(Fair enough?)........

Now if light, from which all things are made, and consist of suddenly came into being, as in 'Let there be Light'....and it just came into existence...isn't THAT a creation???????

Also, you might consider this:

John 1:3 "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. ..."
Acts 17: 28 "For in him we have life and motion and existence; as certain of your verse writers have said, For we are his offspring."

Now how else would you describe this for the common man to understand, given the times and limitations of the language??

Think about it.

....and this is consistent with other 'religions, AND the laws of physics.......(for what it's worth)
It is a shame that this has been reduced to rituals and 'Church politics of made made structures....(from which you have been bit, and alienated from the fuller meaning, of what people call 'God').

Fair enough????

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 Jun 15 - 03:43 PM

Oh..I forgot to mention...IF light suddenly came into existence, on a massive scale, would not that result in a 'Big Bang'?????

Yes, science of physics, AND the spiritual explanations, of the realms that we cannot see, ARE compatible.
It's is a shame that BOTH have been bastardized!

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Unfit for SCOTUS
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Jun 15 - 03:52 PM

Yes, light is indeed the life force......the sun is god.
My historical hero Aknaton Iknaton Akhenaton, observed this almost 4 thousand years ago....well before "science" came into existence.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate


Next Page

 


This Thread Is Closed.


Mudcat time: 3 March 1:33 PM EST

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.