Slashdot Mirror

that happens also after the reassignm. (not talking just about dr. Money) not accepting reality is the problem here

This douche jumped in to the convo earlier putting words in people mouths

That's because trans people are treated like shit. Constantly.

Which Elia responds

maybe that's just a (legit) opinion, I still fail to see how that kind of invasive surgery on kids can b cherished

anyway it's months that in Italy school after school sneaks genderism lessons in without parents consent. Not cool

I 100% agree with you transpersons need access to treatment, but gender reassignment surgery is dangerous and I think someone should have to at least be a consenting adult before they make that decision. It's a huge decision that children shouldn't just make on a whim as it's a lifelong commitment. On top of that, the suicide rate of people that HAVE had gender reassignment doesn't look that much better to me than those that haven't had it. On the flip side, the ones that survive are more satisfied with their lives.

That said, Elia's issue was with Italian schools using some controversial teaching methods and encouraging children to have reassignment surgery, which was all done without parents knowing about it.

Which apparently made him a transphobic bigot. His opinion, IMHO, is not that hateful or off the wall.

This krainboltgreene guy though https://twitter.com/krainboltg..., I started looking at when I was trying to understand what was going on. Guy is a major asshole troll, he uses the same name and image on several platforms (G+, Twitter, GitHub) and is consonantly starting shit with people.

He shows up in the branching issue a few times to basically pick fights with anyone that's arguing against accepting the suggested CoC.

https://github.com/opal/opal/i...
https://github.com/opal/opal/i...
https://github.com/opal/opal/i...
https://github.com/opal/opal/i...
https://github.com/opal/opal/i...
https://github.com/opal/opal/i...

The conversation just continues to degrade with him. He spends a lot of time accusing people of not contributing to the Opal project, but he doesn't contribute either so I'm not sure why that should matter. One of his main projects seems to be a library that analyzes twitter conversations and determines how toxic it is https://github.com/socialkardi...

I almost think this guy is a parody account, because he fits exactly the type of person someone would say is an "SJW". White guy, acts like an asshole to other white guys, assumes anyone disagreeing with him is a white guy, obsessed with gender politics and incredibly quick to accuse people of being misogynists,

I think what he is saying is that children thrive better in a home with both biological parents than without one or both. This is also supported by the science too.

Whether 200 different people telling him what to do has an effect or not on them is beyond what was said. I'm also thinking that is ancillary to the point because the adverse effects of not having one or any biological parent in the home is so much worse.

Then you msut be blind. Europe is fast catching up with the US:

http://www.worldmag.com/2013/0...

A creationist must believe that G-d buried a lot of fossilized bones since science tells us that.
Actually, some creationists (Including Ham) claim that the fossils were created when Noah's flood killed off most of the world's creatures. And that the Grand Canyon was also created as those same floodwaters receeded.

> Yeah - try applying those bolded words to elections in the US and you're RAAACIST!!!!

Because you are. The idea that voter fraud is any real problem is just a clansman fantasy. That's not the real problem. The real problem is that voter turnout pathetically low.

The fact that a clansman like you wants to put barriers in front of those that want to encourage greater voter participation is the real problem.

More participation does more to negate the imagined harm of voter fraud then any other action you could take. It also doesn't require the intentional or unintentional disenfranchisement of any rightful voter.

Participation is the problem, not "fraud".

And you know this how? Because we currently verify voters?

The simple fact is that US elections can't pass UN standards for free and fair elections because we have NO WAY to prevent multiple voting.

Yet, even without looking, we still find voter fraud

A Democratic congressional candidate has dropped out of the race after her own party officials alleged she committed voter fraud.

Wendy Rosen, who was trying to unseat incumbent Republican Andy Harris in Maryland's 1st Congressional District, issued an apology to her supporters Monday while announcing her withdrawal, but she declined to admit any wrongdoing.

Yvette Lewis, head of the Democratic Party in Maryland, wrote a letter to state officials asking them for a full investigation after the party found Rosen voted in both Maryland and Florida for the 2006 general election and the 2008 presidential primaries.

What? A DEMOCRAT commited vote fraud?

Imagine that.

And you still have to explain why YOU are the racist playing the race card in order to prevent any method to "[e]nsure the integrity of the ballot through appropriate measures to prevent multiple voting or voting by those not entitled thereto".

WHY DO YOU SPOUT CRAP LIKE "prevent[ing] multiple voting or voting by those not entitled thereto" is RAAACIST"?!?!?!

Oh, yeah, you were told to. Way to regurgitate bile.

Since he's a fan of Ayn Rand he might as well be called Andrew Ryan.

Ruh Roh! Looks like the romance has ended.

Oh, what a difficult thing it must be, to be forced to reject a person's entire philosophy because of their atheism, which has nothing to do with said philosophy at all anyway. I do heartily enjoy watching him swallow that bitter pill, though.

While it's hard to say if these people had altruistic motives for committing suicide, I'm really tired of hearing them called "victims." They are not. Suicide is about the most selfish thing you can do.

Years ago the American press treated suicide as something dishonorable. After newspapers started taking a sympathetic tone, US suicide rates skyrocketed*. Let's stop pretending that suicide is noble. It isn't. It's cowardly and selfish when you do not want to face your reality. Millions of courageous people overcome horrible circumstances and better their world. Suicide "victims" just quit.

*Source FYI I haven't read that article in years, just remember the basic premise...

You're making the standard mistake when assessing the value of education. Your criticisms would be valid if all education was supposed to do was provide utility to companies.

Regardless of what education is "supposed to do", the fact is that the incentive for most people to pursue one is very much to demonstrate their utility to employers. Again, as you point out yourself, your employer didn't hire you for what you learned in school, he hired you because it "proved you could think".

The point here is that your employer used your education as a proxy for an aptitude test, he didn't hire you because you actually knew anything useful to him. The employer could just as easily have given aptitude or IQ tests himself, but unfortunately those leave them open to charges of "discrimination" if the subject matter isn't directly related to the job qualifications. Bryan Caplan and Charles Murray have both written some very good articles on the relationship between education and job qualification.

You are correct. WORLD Magazine had a good writeup on him. http://www.worldmag.com/articles/15856 (It's likely behind a paywall.)

Source, please. Most of the Christians I know or have read support research on stem cells from other sources, like umbilical cord blood. See for instance this article, which has nothing but good things to say about it: http://www.worldmag.com/articles/10284

Thanks, Dimensio.

The fact that you cheerfully admit that your posts contain verbatim quotes from this article, which you pass off as your own, is mind boggling. If you truly want to defend your beliefs, then at least have the decency to espouse your own views. I don't know if you're lazy or simply trolling, but your actions certainly cast doubt on both your sincerity and honesty.

Hey bud, copy and paste much?

http://www.worldmag.com/articles/11485

All I had to do was copy and paste one phrase into google with quotes.

The dark ages are a prime example. Societies turned their backs on logic in favor of mysticism and people were afraid to pursue knowledge lest they be labeled as heretics. It took a lot of bravery in those times to stand up for any ideas that ran contrary to the religious beliefs of the day.

Not at all. It is actually the Christian faith that led to science.

A few excerpts from an interview with Rodney Stark:

WORLD: How is Christianity unique in emphasizing the idea of progress?

STARK: The other great faiths either taught that the world is locked in endless cycles or that it is inevitably declining from a previous Golden Age. Only Christians believed that God's gift of reason made progress inevitable--theological as well as technical progress. Thus, Augustine (ca. 354-430) flatly asserted that through the application of reason we will gain an increasingly more accurate understanding of God, remarking that although there were "certain matters pertaining to the doctrine of salvation that we cannot yet grasp . . . one day we shall be able to do so."

Nor was the Christian belief in progress limited to theology. Augustine went on at length about the "wonderful--one might say stupefying--advances human industry has made" and attributed all this to the "unspeakable boon" that God has conferred upon His creation, a "rational nature." These views were repeated again and again through the centuries. Especially typical were these words preached by Fra Giordano in Florence in 1306: "Not all the arts have been found; we shall never see an end to finding them."

WORLD: But a lot of us learned that Europe fell into the "Dark Ages." How did that historical understanding originate, and what's wrong with it?

STARK: The Dark Ages have finally been recognized as a hoax perpetrated by anti-religious and bitterly anti-Catholic, 18th-century intellectuals who were determined to assert their cultural superiority and who boosted their claim by denigrating the Christian past--as Gibbon put it in The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, after Rome came the "triumph of barbarism and religion." In the past few years even encyclopedias and dictionaries have begun to acknowledge that it was all a lie, that the Dark Ages never were. This always should have been obvious since by the end of the so-called Dark Ages, European science and technology had far exceeded that of Rome and Greece, and all the rest of the world, for that matter.

WORLD: Could you be specific? What were some of the "Dark Ages" innovations that show the folly of considering Greek and Roman culture the apex of civilization until recent times?

STARK: How about the perfection and widespread use of waterwheels, windmills, and pumps, the invention of the compass, stirrups, the crossbow, canons, effective horse harnesses, eyeglasses, clocks, chimneys, violins, double-entry bookkeeping, and insurance? This list doesn't begin to do justice to this era that historians of science now refer to as an age of remarkable innovation and discovery.

You are wrong.

From http://www.worldmag.com/subscriber/displayarticle. cfm?id=11198
The Thomases' doctor recommended that he fertilize as many as 20 of Mrs. Thomas' eggs, ...
  He and his wife decided they would only fertilize as many eggs as they were willing to implant immediately. They fertilized five eggs. Three of them developed into embryos, and two of them thrived in Mrs. Thomas' uterus. Emma and Jacob Thomas were born Feb. 2, 2001.

What's it to you? Are you feeling cold in empathy? Or are you and your spouse volunteering to bring a few of them to term?

In the meantime, other are bringing them to term:
http://www.worldmag.com/subscriber/displayarticle. cfm?id=11198
In May, Mr. Bush held a press conference with 21 formerly frozen IVF embryos. The children on stage with him shed light on one of the last hopes for an unwanted embryo: adoption.

Hope for one or more of those frozen embryos may rest with Matt and Andrea Thomas, whose IVF twins Emma and Jacob are now 4. They are praying about expanding their family, and considering embryo adoption as a possibility.

> Do you know of any doctor practicing in-vitro fertilization without creating extra embryos
> that have no chance of ever being grown?

Adding to my previous post about this happening abroad, here's evidence of this in the US. From: http://www.worldmag.com/subscriber/displayarticle. cfm?id=11198
He and his wife decided they would only fertilize as many eggs as they were willing to implant immediately. They fertilized five eggs. Three of them developed into embryos, and two of them thrived in Mrs. Thomas' uterus. Emma and Jacob Thomas were born Feb. 2, 2001.

So there is no inevitablity about IVF creating 'extra-embryos-that-must-be-destroyed' - parents can override their doctor's preferences.

Of course, more advanced nations have no trouble whatsoever in keeping track of all their mammal population: One dog, one vote

Sorry, almost forgot...

The money Bill donates mostly comes back to him through his own pharma companies (which have a headlock on the AIDS vaccine in question) leaving him with cheap publicity - and if other groups are chipping in dollar-for-dollar or somesuch he might actually take out more than he puts in, too.

Meanwhile, his strong support for TRIPS legislation has prevented at least one other country from making and shipping cheap and effective AIDS vaccine to Africa. This not only multiplies the cost but also delays the introduction of a cure (and, BTW, condoms won't have a serious impact on the AIDS problem(s)).

So yes, since though his profit-maximising actions thousands of people continue to die every day (roughly one Detroit or one Sydney per year - that we account for) through the same taint of greed which has ploughed up the software industry, buggered many IT standards and seen virus writing become a popular sport for the last twenty or so years, I'd feel somewhat obliged to "wine and cry" about it.

Come out and post, Coward! I'll shred your arguments and invade your browser, you... you... Internet Exploder user. (-:

The violation of privacy comes where they are collecting and storing this information in the first place. In the story, the stores (and maybe the reporter) are trying to spin this as people objecting to giving out the information to the owner of the cards. This is absurd. Who would object to giving out information to those who already know it? The problem is they may use this information in questionable ways (like discriminatory pricing) or give it to people who shouldn't have it (such as the government--why should they know every little thing you buy? It can only lead to fascism.)

Take for example Ephedra. The FDA apparently banned it because some people are too stupid to read directions.[1] I'm sure there are countless people who use it correctly and get significant value in their lives because of it. the store's data collection gives them an easy way to find people who are stockpiling it.

(OT Rant:) The dumbfucks don't even care if someone might need a medication to function or even survive. At this point, the FDA probably kills and incapacitates more people than they save. Some people do have legitimate illnesses where certain drugs would help greatly. FDA bans them anyway. They won't even let you have it with a prescription! Why should power hungry bureaucrats be allowed to take away things which people absolutely need. They obviously don't care about those people, they just want to tell everyone what they can and can't have.

Now let's fast forward several months into the future. A lot of people have stockpiled Ephedra, and the FDA is pissed about it, so they manage to convince the DEA to try and find the "illegal drugs." (With how wacko the government is, I don't think this is far fetched.) So they subpoena all the grocery store chains with discount cards and have a big list of people who bought lots of the drug. They raid houses, destroy property, and arrest a bunch of people.

Do you really want the fascist out of control government agencies to be able to do this? Take away products and harass people just because a few are too incompetent to accept the risks and conseqences (or even read the label) for using a given product? Everything carries risks. What is this? Preschool? It isn't, and when you take something away, the people who need it will suffer. We should not just hand over tools which allow "teacher" to "keep us safe."

[1] I haven't followed this story too closely, but it does appear to be one of the many idiotic decisions made by the FDA. I chose it because it is big in the news right now.

In fact, people are more educated (if you are counting degrees) today than ever before. If you are talking about quality of education, I might agree.

First of all, there are a large number of translations of the Bible that are not copyrighted, and a good number of them are even available as E-texts. Secondly, the KJV/AV is actually quite faithful, and a truly remarkable academic achievement for its time. It's probably not a stretch to say that there had never been such a large distrubuted scholarly collaboration before, and precious few since. Especially given that the KJV translators had access to far fewer manuscripts than anyone today can easily access in any good library, they did a very impressive job.

The only "problem" is that many of the newer translations are copyrighted, although it's very important to recognize that those that are (justifiably) concerned about groups that intentionally corrupt the scriptures through deliberately incorrect translations resort to copyright to prevent corruption of the scripture just as the GPL resorts to copyright to prevent "corruption" of program source.

There have been several good articles on this in the past couple of years: some rather blatant misconduct, even by pagan standards, by Zondervan was one of the things that led to the new English Standard Version (ESV) translation, with the copyright carefully held to prevent abuses like the TNIV. Copyright cuts both ways, never forget that: A world with no copyrights would be a world with little to no academic integrity. (Not to mention the GPL would cease to exist...)

Here are a few links about this :
Overview of the ESV
How Zindervan and the IBS have engaged in outright lying and deception
How Zondervan has literally bullied Christian publishers that dare to speak out against it.
Susan Olasky's excellent cover story on the TNIV controversy.

There are more than a few lessons in there...

First of all, there are a large number of translations of the Bible that are not copyrighted, and a good number of them are even available as E-texts. Secondly, the KJV/AV is actually quite faithful, and a truly remarkable academic achievement for its time. It's probably not a stretch to say that there had never been such a large distrubuted scholarly collaboration before, and precious few since. Especially given that the KJV translators had access to far fewer manuscripts than anyone today can easily access in any good library, they did a very impressive job.

The only "problem" is that many of the newer translations are copyrighted, although it's very important to recognize that those that are (justifiably) concerned about groups that intentionally corrupt the scriptures through deliberately incorrect translations resort to copyright to prevent corruption of the scripture just as the GPL resorts to copyright to prevent "corruption" of program source.

There have been several good articles on this in the past couple of years: some rather blatant misconduct, even by pagan standards, by Zondervan was one of the things that led to the new English Standard Version (ESV) translation, with the copyright carefully held to prevent abuses like the TNIV. Copyright cuts both ways, never forget that: A world with no copyrights would be a world with little to no academic integrity. (Not to mention the GPL would cease to exist...)

Here are a few links about this :
Overview of the ESV
How Zindervan and the IBS have engaged in outright lying and deception
How Zondervan has literally bullied Christian publishers that dare to speak out against it.
Susan Olasky's excellent cover story on the TNIV controversy.

There are more than a few lessons in there...

First of all, there are a large number of translations of the Bible that are not copyrighted, and a good number of them are even available as E-texts. Secondly, the KJV/AV is actually quite faithful, and a truly remarkable academic achievement for its time. It's probably not a stretch to say that there had never been such a large distrubuted scholarly collaboration before, and precious few since. Especially given that the KJV translators had access to far fewer manuscripts than anyone today can easily access in any good library, they did a very impressive job.

The only "problem" is that many of the newer translations are copyrighted, although it's very important to recognize that those that are (justifiably) concerned about groups that intentionally corrupt the scriptures through deliberately incorrect translations resort to copyright to prevent corruption of the scripture just as the GPL resorts to copyright to prevent "corruption" of program source.

There have been several good articles on this in the past couple of years: some rather blatant misconduct, even by pagan standards, by Zondervan was one of the things that led to the new English Standard Version (ESV) translation, with the copyright carefully held to prevent abuses like the TNIV. Copyright cuts both ways, never forget that: A world with no copyrights would be a world with little to no academic integrity. (Not to mention the GPL would cease to exist...)

Here are a few links about this :
Overview of the ESV
How Zindervan and the IBS have engaged in outright lying and deception
How Zondervan has literally bullied Christian publishers that dare to speak out against it.
Susan Olasky's excellent cover story on the TNIV controversy.

There are more than a few lessons in there...

First of all, there are a large number of translations of the Bible that are not copyrighted, and a good number of them are even available as E-texts. Secondly, the KJV/AV is actually quite faithful, and a truly remarkable academic achievement for its time. It's probably not a stretch to say that there had never been such a large distrubuted scholarly collaboration before, and precious few since. Especially given that the KJV translators had access to far fewer manuscripts than anyone today can easily access in any good library, they did a very impressive job.

The only "problem" is that many of the newer translations are copyrighted, although it's very important to recognize that those that are (justifiably) concerned about groups that intentionally corrupt the scriptures through deliberately incorrect translations resort to copyright to prevent corruption of the scripture just as the GPL resorts to copyright to prevent "corruption" of program source.

There have been several good articles on this in the past couple of years: some rather blatant misconduct, even by pagan standards, by Zondervan was one of the things that led to the new English Standard Version (ESV) translation, with the copyright carefully held to prevent abuses like the TNIV. Copyright cuts both ways, never forget that: A world with no copyrights would be a world with little to no academic integrity. (Not to mention the GPL would cease to exist...)

Here are a few links about this :
Overview of the ESV
How Zindervan and the IBS have engaged in outright lying and deception
How Zondervan has literally bullied Christian publishers that dare to speak out against it.
Susan Olasky's excellent cover story on the TNIV controversy.

There are more than a few lessons in there...

This is why the whole stem cell thing is so important, and should not be constarined [sic] in the way it is (For those who object to it on moral grounds saying it encourages abortions, it doesn't. The abortion doctor who made sales pitches like that to pregant women would be shot on principle.)

These sales pitches aren't made to pregnant women. They're made to dissectionists. Pregnant women are not the only people who pay for the services of an abortion clinic. On the other end are the dissectionists who pay for the privilege of using the discarded "tissue". Here's a reference, though it's graphic in its descriptions.

And, for the record, I am pro-life, so no flames from pro-lifers on the stem cell stuff like last time.

I'd like a bit of clarification of what you mean by "pro-life". If you believe that a fertilized embryo is a person, deserving of all the respect due a person, then why would you believe that embryonic stem cell research should be unconstrained? If, instead, you mean stem cell research that does not involve the destruction of an embryo (placental, umbilical, etc.), then I can understand you. But if you believe that embryonic stem cell research should be unconstrained, that implies that you believe that embryos are not as deserving of life as a person. That doesn't fit any definition of pro-life that I know.

I would honestly like to know how you reconcile these.

As for the overall point of your article, completely mastery over all of medical science, I'd watch out for the moral implications of the journey. Using an extreme example to illustrate a point, the Nazi's medical experiments were trying to do exactly that. While on the road to medical mastery (which I agree is a worthwhile goal), you have to watch out how you go about it. Not all routes are desirable ones.

Yeah, but did you see that part where Legolas stabbed that orc with the arrow, and then nocked it and shot someone else with it?

LOL, Of course LOTR would be in the public domain so we would still get to see that. BUT, it wouldn't have the kind of "official" status that being authorised by Tolkiens estate gives it. The Tolkien estate treats old JRR quite well and there is no indication that he would have opposed the movie. I believe his thoughts on a movie of LOTR was that he wanted either artistic control or a boatload of money.

Unfortunately not all authors are so lucky. Take his friend C.S. Lewis - His publisher and estate want a new series of Narnia books purged of the chrisian alegory that was central to Lewis' works The have also attempted to influence (using their copyright protections) documentaries being done about Lewis to downplay his christianity. You can agree or disagree with the mans faith but ignoring it is like doing a documentary on Babe Ruth and downplaying or ignoring that he was a baseball player. It's a particularly outrageous irony since Lewis' works are filled with biting commentary and contempt for exactly the spirit that is motivating HarperCollins. I won't say that Lewis is turning over in his grave since he didn't believe that was his final destination. But unless emotions like exasperaation have been utterly purged in heaven I'm sure he has a few choice and characteristically biting and eloquent words he would like to share with his heirs.

I'm quite sure Tolkein wasn't Christian, but C.S. Lewis had read LotR and it drew him to christianity.

Also Tolkein considered his books "sub-creations", just as God created us in his image, we also have the desire to create things like books, and art.

There was a good article in World Magazine (christian mag) about the LotR series, C.S. Lewis, and Tolkein, as well as Christian views of the subject. Which I was quite pleased to discover an open mind on the subject. It was featured in this issue (reg req).

slightly offtopic rant: It really annoys me how so many Christians totally rip on Harry Potter and LotR when they really know nothing about it. I'm a Christian (Open minded too, don't attempt to tell me otherwise) and I really enjoy LotR, and I see no problem with it. It's not like I pray to Gandalf every night.

It just seems theres quite a few Christians that need to educate themselves instead of making snap judgements, and trying to force it upon people, including other Christians.

This is nonsense. Christianity is not banned in China.

Sorry, but it's your comment that seems to be rooted in nonsense. Christianity is indeed officially banned in China. House churches are outlawed, and only the decidedly non-Christian "Three Self" churches are allowed. Chinese prisons are, unfortunately, filled with those that tried to promote real Christian churches as an alternative. Those lucky enough to avoid prison find that they lose their jobs and "have no legal identity anymore" - a notable problem in a bureaucratic Communist society.

I recommend anyone interested in understanding the situation to read two things: First, this recent article about what's really going on with churches in China, and then, for the broader picture of why Communism and Christianity must be in opposition, the excellent book Witness, by the late former Communist Whittaker Chambers. (Just read the reviews, if nothing else - if you can possibly be open-minded about anything, they'll make you want to read the book, which is quite possibly the most influential autobiography of the past few centuries. Oh, and remember that the fall of the Soviet Union and the opening of KGB records proved Chambers absolutely truthful and correct.

IMHO, no one should be allowed to post any sort of opinion on Communism until they've read Witness. :-) But seriously, it's that important - give it a read...

I just sent a letter to World Magazine about this case in response to last week's "On-line Pirates walk the plank" article. World has, in my opinion, done a good job overall of reporting the facts. This one article, however read like a regurgitated press release from the MPAA. I took them to task on it.

I'm also in the process of writing letters to both candidtates for Florida District 15-- US House, Dave Weldon (R) and Patsy Kurth (D) for their take on this issue (as well as Dr. Wen Ho Lee). Similar letters will go to other candidates that I can vote on that will have a say after November (McCollum is running for Senate, replacing Connie Mack, for instance).

Anyhoo, what did your letter say?

Jeff