I know the Eiffel Tower exists for 2 reasons:

1. I saw it in photos & videos, pre-photoshop era.

2. Many people have spoke of seeing it. But unlike a deity, where people always confuse a feeling they have as being something from god, the Eiffel Tower is an actual physical thing, and no faith is required to believe it's there. If anyone doesn't believe, they can check for themselves. That's doesn't work with "god".

As far as history books are concerned, this may shock you, but I am a bit skeptical about how certain events in history actually went down. I mean, as with any story, after it's been passed around a few times, it can become altered from it's original state. For example, how do we know that the events surrounding the Boston Tea Party happened EXACTLY as a history book claimed? There may be a lot of true points within, but how do we know things weren't altered for dramatic effect, or even that certain parts were omitted because maybe a certain person in power might not want the masses to know about it? Things happen like that all the time.

Deity_Slapper

Well put. You wrote out much more concisely what I was trying to say.

I am interested in others thoughts on religion, as long as they are not over zealous about it. While I do believe that everyone is entitled to believe whatever they like, I don't think that gives anyone the right to try and forcefeed it to anyone else. Personally, I will go on record as stating that I do not believe God. I do not believe that there is an invisible man that lives in the sky that simultaneously views and passes judgement over every single event that transpires throughout the universe.

Blind faith is an interesting concept, just not something I can logically buy into.

nobody has the right to tell anybody else what to do with their body. I have a child. I love him. More than anything. My pregnancy was very very bad. If I were to ever get pregnant again (which can't happen due to the severity of problems having him) I would abort in an instant. Losing my life to bring a child into the world does not really sound reasonable to me.

I love when people who are not in the circumstance, or even better are men who are not in the circumstance start preaching about what is right and wrong. Nobody but the woman in question has to live with the decision, so nobody else should have a say. Nobody. Not the government, not the father, not the church, not anybody.

I think Canada should be more worried about illegal americans. You know the ones that come here for the cheaper pharmaceuticals and the health care and things of that nature. Why would a Canadian want to illegally be in the US? It's not like an illegal anything can get a good job or anything. Maybe some farm job or dishwasher or something. Be serious, why would a Canadian leave an economically stable country where health care is covered, medicine is relatively inexpensive, taxes are lower, and crime is less to illegally be in the US. That makes absolutely no sense what so ever.

I just wrote a blog about this and it got me wondering about it. I carry a seperate rider for the gaming collection because of the value. Is it the same where you live, or do you just have house insurance with no rider. I have two arcade consoles as well as a very extensive collection of games/consoles/memoribilia etc.

I am wondering because while just about everyone has content insurance on their homes, have you ever sat down and actually figured out what it would cost to replace stuff if anything were to happen. Gaming collectors tend to commit large amounts of money to their hobby. Once you get past a specific dollar value you have to have a rider or you cannot get replacement value on your stuff.

For those of you with large collections, do you have it insured under seperate rider or not? If you don't, why not? If you do, do you have the same argument every year with your insurance provider about the value?