Disengage the transmission? I have something that does that. Its called a clutch, and all the cars worth driving have them.
I want to live in your world where a commute to work wouldn't involve, literally, thousands of clutch operations. For that kind of drive...I'll take my auto.
Power brakes would still work with the engine off and car in gear, since the engine is being turned by the wheels and is producing vacuum.
Many modern vehicles do not use engine vacuum for power brakes anymore. They use hydraulic pressure provided by the power steering pump. While this too will still turn if the motor is being turned by the wheels, there will come a point rather quickly as the engine decelerates where you're going to get an overly firm pedal and a very stiff steering wheel.
Umm... to be honest, no, I can't think of a country right now where it is so terribly easy to ruffle feathers. Seriously, some of the crap that gets people all fired up in the US would not even make people turn their head in any other country.
Religion? Hell, even in ITALY you can't get people so worked up over it.
Creationism? Please, anyone mentioning it anywhere outside the US would be looked at as if he's some kind of idiot for believing in that fairy tale.
Guns? Yeah, have 'em or don't. Next... not so in the US, "from my dead, cold hands"... are you nuts? Who gives a shit about a gun?
Clinton's blowjob. So he had a blowjob... "But he lied!" Erh... DUH, he's a politician! "But... TO CONGRESS!" So he lied to a bunch of other politicians... "UNDER OATH!" Yeah, we got that part, again, HE IS A POLITICIAN. He lies. That what he does. Get over it. Fuck, he was still 10 times a better prez than anything we had or anything that came after.
And let me not start about people pointedly pointing out that the US is a Republic and not a Democracy. That always gives me the giggles, considering that it's a cleptocratic plutocracy, at best.
Silly Americans. All, not taking their overlord rain of shit sitting down. What's wrong with us? Why can't we just be good little subjects!?
I bank with a small credit union.
Hell, I even WORK for a mid-cap bank, and I'm reluctant to do business with them, and they're below the Chase/BoA radar.
Lucien Crowder can't be assed by all this silly democracy business, and just wants an authoritarian regime to just do it instead.
Color me unsurprised. Every time a leftist can't get what they want through the "accepted" channels, they stamp their feet and call for more government to force it down people's throats. Kinda like Obamacare.
I've never understood why math/science/programming geeks are stereotypically bad at spelling (or language in general). It should be about the same kind of attention to detail in both cases. You know how disastrous it can be to miss a quotation mark in a programming language, yet you don't care about "its" vs. "it's"? Of course, the latter is not disastrous in the same way, but for a lot of people such mistakes will break the flow of reading, as well as giving an impression of generally sloppy thinking.
Compilers toss errors
Spellcheck sometimes does
The chalkboard never does
and there's text messaging where no one seems to give a shit what you type. It's a fun little cryptomystery to solve!
Hit the nail on the head. Humanities CLASSES might be a good addendum to a degree program that has the potential to earn an actual salary, but entire humanities degree programs are just the university taking advantage of kid's and their parents.
Harvard needs to fire some professors for insubordination. It's good for everyone, really. Lot's of baristas now have a chance to make good on their Masters and PhDs because there are open tenure slots.
Women are overwhelmingly the victims of domestic abuse.
Says the reality denialist.
The stats, however, don't bare that out. However, finding stats that even mention men is difficult, so I don't fault you too much.
To be perfectly clear: We can accept that our gender differences
Your entire well written post fails here. Leftists CANNOT accept this. At all. We are all identical meatsacks in their minds (*install sexual hardware blinders now*). Well when it's convenient anyway. All the other times we're unique snowflakes.
The misogynists will always have an argument because they're working from an unshakable personal assumption that they are superior because of their gender. There's really no point pandering to them since they'll just writch to another argument.
Is that kind of like the equalist's unshakeable personal assumption that we're all identical meatsacks (except the parts that aren't identical)? There's really no point in pandering to them since they'll just writch to another argument.
p>That doesn't mean, however, that you can't have a charity that focuses on one gender or race, or an organization focused on one gender (e.g. girl scouts or boy scouts);
Yes it does, and your chosen example proves it: Boy Scouts are now unisex (because girls pitched a fit), but the girl scouts are still all female.
Conclusion: no one gives a shit about the white male. Any and all transgressions against him are fine.
It took you this long to understand that when you try to treat people differently because you don't like the way they act even though it's not affecting you, it makes you a shitheel? Because that's what we're actually talking about here, if we stay on topic. Eich gave money to an organization which spends that money trying to prevent some people from living like other people even though it really doesn't affect them in any way. If he doesn't want a reputation as a would-be oppressor, then he has the option to not fund oppression.
No, it didn't take me "this long" because I'm STILL not there. I do not believe in the moral superiority of equality. Equality is an unenforceable farce, and a moving target to boot.
Make whatever convoluted case or slippery slope argument you want, Adam and Steve getting married has zero actual effect on anyone else.
the protections of marriage are an incentive to procreate. When you let Adam and Steve marry, you DO effect other people as you've now extended the identical incentive to not procreate. You hurt the next generation. You create a scenario were if all married couples now procreate at replacement rates, society as a whole doesn't replace itself because you have couples who, because they're explicitly homosexual, CANNOT procreate. You're unfairly burdening straight couples with keeping the social security/economic growth ponzi scheme going. Granted, the Baby Boomers in power have conclusively proven that they're willing to sell every future generation down the river if it benefits them.
Right. This is also a reason not to hire anyone gay, or put a black woman in charge of a firm which caters to a more conservative crowd or operates out of a privileged white suburb, or what have you. It could legitimately harm your business.
Companies add minorities to their boards all the time, even in conservative areas, because the leftist screeam-machine is influential enough to force all companies to waste resources on PR campaigns like diversity.
Why is it OK to have a hate campaign against Eich and what he believed in?
because being a bigot does not get you moral relativism? and it does not give you a free pass to just 'believe what you want'. because the active suppression of others' rights is not OK in anyone's book?
does that answer your question?
In other words: leftists believe themselves to always have the moral high ground becuase there is no more superior moral than equality, and everyone else is just subhuman shit that needs to change their views, and until they do they deserve no quarter.
Understood.
The modern left (I don't even use the term "liberal" any more, since liberty isn't in it)
Is THAT what they're claiming now, that liberal stems from liberty? That's a new one. I always thought it came from their stance that they can "read-in" whatever they want (ergo a liberal enterpretation) into the constitution.
Mozilla lost a great technically minded CEO who could have done some good things for the organization; which IMHO badly needs strong leadship right now.
Why because a bunch of the rabble could not deal with someone not sharing their opinions. Honestly I don't think anyone supporting same sex marriage supports equality at all. Government should not recognize ANY marriage. If you get married that should be entirely between you, your God(s), who ever else attends where you warship, and that's it.
It should not be your boss's business, nor the state's nor any courts. Government recognizing marrige does nothing but create a special class of people (married people), and there is no reason they should get the special treatment they do.
As far as children go, both biological parents should be considered to have parental rights and responsibilities, unless the father isn't known and nobody comes forward for in some reasonable time frame.
Everyone should be entitled to name someone (anyone) they wish to specify to share anything that exists as a spousal benefit today or those benefits should be withdrawn. I don't think anyone should have to file a tax return, but as long as we have tax returns EVERYONE should have to file individually.
So will I continue to vote against so called marriage equality; you bet I will because the last thing I want to see is the expansion of what is already a special class which should not exist in secular society.
You do realize such level-headed thinking clearly places you in with us "homophobic idiots" and, should you ever garner enough power to be noteworthy, the twitter slacktivists will now shit down your neck, right?
I feel that Mr.Eich was compelled to resign not by his employer, but by the GLBT community. They exerted political pressure which would have impacted the Mozilla organization, and Mr. Eich made a personal decision to shield the organization from that political pressure.
GLBT organizations have a perfect right to express their opinions, and even to use political and economic pressure to achieve their desired ends. The Mozilla foundation acted correctly in not bowing directly to this pressure. Mr. Eich acted both correctly and even (some might say) with noble altruism in resigning.
Understand the causes of actions - if you insist on placing blame, place it where it belongs. Mr. Eich was forced out by the GLBT community over his support for a bill which directly contradicted their political agenda. Their actions were within what is considered to be acceptable, and resulted in Mr. Eich sustaining a personal loss for his open support of a bill he obviously believes in. I don't think anybody here behaved badly or did anything wrong; but I believe that all involved should now be judged by their actions and their roles in this drama.
Ok, cool. So how do I boycott the GLBT community to show my distaste? Wait, I can't cause such badthink, that makes me a hatemonger!!
There's no outrage because he's changed his position (or, possibly, as other commenters have said, he had that position all along and merely claimed he was against equal marriage because that was the political thing to do).
Eich was given the opportunity to recant, but he didn't, strongly implying that this is still the thing that he believes.
Because there's nothing more that people want in a leader than someone spineless when the pressure is on...
Slashdot Mirror
When is that ever a desirable result for the government's interest(stability, rule of law)?
You seem pretty sure that stability, rule of law is the government's interest. Is it? Or is it re-election, campaign finance?
Disengage the transmission? I have something that does that. Its called a clutch, and all the cars worth driving have them.
I want to live in your world where a commute to work wouldn't involve, literally, thousands of clutch operations. For that kind of drive...I'll take my auto.
my weekend toy can keep it's manual.
Power brakes would still work with the engine off and car in gear, since the engine is being turned by the wheels and is producing vacuum.
Many modern vehicles do not use engine vacuum for power brakes anymore. They use hydraulic pressure provided by the power steering pump. While this too will still turn if the motor is being turned by the wheels, there will come a point rather quickly as the engine decelerates where you're going to get an overly firm pedal and a very stiff steering wheel.
Umm... to be honest, no, I can't think of a country right now where it is so terribly easy to ruffle feathers. Seriously, some of the crap that gets people all fired up in the US would not even make people turn their head in any other country. Religion? Hell, even in ITALY you can't get people so worked up over it. Creationism? Please, anyone mentioning it anywhere outside the US would be looked at as if he's some kind of idiot for believing in that fairy tale. Guns? Yeah, have 'em or don't. Next... not so in the US, "from my dead, cold hands"... are you nuts? Who gives a shit about a gun? Clinton's blowjob. So he had a blowjob... "But he lied!" Erh... DUH, he's a politician! "But ... TO CONGRESS!" So he lied to a bunch of other politicians... "UNDER OATH!" Yeah, we got that part, again, HE IS A POLITICIAN. He lies. That what he does. Get over it. Fuck, he was still 10 times a better prez than anything we had or anything that came after.
And let me not start about people pointedly pointing out that the US is a Republic and not a Democracy. That always gives me the giggles, considering that it's a cleptocratic plutocracy, at best.
Silly Americans. All, not taking their overlord rain of shit sitting down. What's wrong with us? Why can't we just be good little subjects!?
I bank with a small credit union. Hell, I even WORK for a mid-cap bank, and I'm reluctant to do business with them, and they're below the Chase/BoA radar.
Lucien Crowder can't be assed by all this silly democracy business, and just wants an authoritarian regime to just do it instead. Color me unsurprised. Every time a leftist can't get what they want through the "accepted" channels, they stamp their feet and call for more government to force it down people's throats. Kinda like Obamacare.
But if we fetishize it at the expense of the humanities, we won't get what we want (a stronger, more dynamic society that helps everyone).
Who is this "we" that wants that, and when did they decide it was the university's mission to provide?
I've never understood why math/science/programming geeks are stereotypically bad at spelling (or language in general). It should be about the same kind of attention to detail in both cases. You know how disastrous it can be to miss a quotation mark in a programming language, yet you don't care about "its" vs. "it's"? Of course, the latter is not disastrous in the same way, but for a lot of people such mistakes will break the flow of reading, as well as giving an impression of generally sloppy thinking.
Compilers toss errors
Spellcheck sometimes does
The chalkboard never does
and there's text messaging where no one seems to give a shit what you type. It's a fun little cryptomystery to solve!
Hard to eat on a Humanities degree salary.
Hit the nail on the head. Humanities CLASSES might be a good addendum to a degree program that has the potential to earn an actual salary, but entire humanities degree programs are just the university taking advantage of kid's and their parents.
Maybe that's the thing the OP is missing: EVERY user is actually subsidizing these phones, not just the purchaser?
Harvard needs to fire some professors for insubordination. It's good for everyone, really. Lot's of baristas now have a chance to make good on their Masters and PhDs because there are open tenure slots.
Says the reality denialist. The stats, however, don't bare that out. However, finding stats that even mention men is difficult, so I don't fault you too much.
To be perfectly clear: We can accept that our gender differences
Your entire well written post fails here. Leftists CANNOT accept this. At all. We are all identical meatsacks in their minds (*install sexual hardware blinders now*). Well when it's convenient anyway. All the other times we're unique snowflakes.
The misogynists will always have an argument because they're working from an unshakable personal assumption that they are superior because of their gender. There's really no point pandering to them since they'll just writch to another argument.
Is that kind of like the equalist's unshakeable personal assumption that we're all identical meatsacks (except the parts that aren't identical)? There's really no point in pandering to them since they'll just writch to another argument.
p>That doesn't mean, however, that you can't have a charity that focuses on one gender or race, or an organization focused on one gender (e.g. girl scouts or boy scouts);
Yes it does, and your chosen example proves it: Boy Scouts are now unisex (because girls pitched a fit), but the girl scouts are still all female. Conclusion: no one gives a shit about the white male. Any and all transgressions against him are fine.
How is this not sex discrimination? Or does the US not have such laws against discriminating based on gender?
The powers that be turn a blind eye to discrimination if it benefits a minority.
It took you this long to understand that when you try to treat people differently because you don't like the way they act even though it's not affecting you, it makes you a shitheel? Because that's what we're actually talking about here, if we stay on topic. Eich gave money to an organization which spends that money trying to prevent some people from living like other people even though it really doesn't affect them in any way. If he doesn't want a reputation as a would-be oppressor, then he has the option to not fund oppression.
No, it didn't take me "this long" because I'm STILL not there. I do not believe in the moral superiority of equality. Equality is an unenforceable farce, and a moving target to boot.
Make whatever convoluted case or slippery slope argument you want, Adam and Steve getting married has zero actual effect on anyone else.
the protections of marriage are an incentive to procreate. When you let Adam and Steve marry, you DO effect other people as you've now extended the identical incentive to not procreate. You hurt the next generation. You create a scenario were if all married couples now procreate at replacement rates, society as a whole doesn't replace itself because you have couples who, because they're explicitly homosexual, CANNOT procreate. You're unfairly burdening straight couples with keeping the social security/economic growth ponzi scheme going. Granted, the Baby Boomers in power have conclusively proven that they're willing to sell every future generation down the river if it benefits them.
There's an old saying . . . "Four boxes to use in defense of freedom. Soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order."
Since the screaming left owns the first 3, and has made the final prohibitively expensive, I have no other choice but to just enjoy the decline
Right. This is also a reason not to hire anyone gay, or put a black woman in charge of a firm which caters to a more conservative crowd or operates out of a privileged white suburb, or what have you. It could legitimately harm your business.
Companies add minorities to their boards all the time, even in conservative areas, because the leftist screeam-machine is influential enough to force all companies to waste resources on PR campaigns like diversity.
Why is it OK to have a hate campaign against Eich and what he believed in?
because being a bigot does not get you moral relativism? and it does not give you a free pass to just 'believe what you want'. because the active suppression of others' rights is not OK in anyone's book?
does that answer your question?
In other words: leftists believe themselves to always have the moral high ground becuase there is no more superior moral than equality, and everyone else is just subhuman shit that needs to change their views, and until they do they deserve no quarter. Understood.
The modern left (I don't even use the term "liberal" any more, since liberty isn't in it)
Is THAT what they're claiming now, that liberal stems from liberty? That's a new one. I always thought it came from their stance that they can "read-in" whatever they want (ergo a liberal enterpretation) into the constitution.
Mozilla lost a great technically minded CEO who could have done some good things for the organization; which IMHO badly needs strong leadship right now.
Why because a bunch of the rabble could not deal with someone not sharing their opinions. Honestly I don't think anyone supporting same sex marriage supports equality at all. Government should not recognize ANY marriage. If you get married that should be entirely between you, your God(s), who ever else attends where you warship, and that's it.
It should not be your boss's business, nor the state's nor any courts. Government recognizing marrige does nothing but create a special class of people (married people), and there is no reason they should get the special treatment they do.
As far as children go, both biological parents should be considered to have parental rights and responsibilities, unless the father isn't known and nobody comes forward for in some reasonable time frame.
Everyone should be entitled to name someone (anyone) they wish to specify to share anything that exists as a spousal benefit today or those benefits should be withdrawn. I don't think anyone should have to file a tax return, but as long as we have tax returns EVERYONE should have to file individually.
So will I continue to vote against so called marriage equality; you bet I will because the last thing I want to see is the expansion of what is already a special class which should not exist in secular society.
You do realize such level-headed thinking clearly places you in with us "homophobic idiots" and, should you ever garner enough power to be noteworthy, the twitter slacktivists will now shit down your neck, right?
I feel that Mr.Eich was compelled to resign not by his employer, but by the GLBT community. They exerted political pressure which would have impacted the Mozilla organization, and Mr. Eich made a personal decision to shield the organization from that political pressure.
GLBT organizations have a perfect right to express their opinions, and even to use political and economic pressure to achieve their desired ends. The Mozilla foundation acted correctly in not bowing directly to this pressure. Mr. Eich acted both correctly and even (some might say) with noble altruism in resigning.
Understand the causes of actions - if you insist on placing blame, place it where it belongs. Mr. Eich was forced out by the GLBT community over his support for a bill which directly contradicted their political agenda. Their actions were within what is considered to be acceptable, and resulted in Mr. Eich sustaining a personal loss for his open support of a bill he obviously believes in. I don't think anybody here behaved badly or did anything wrong; but I believe that all involved should now be judged by their actions and their roles in this drama.
Ok, cool. So how do I boycott the GLBT community to show my distaste? Wait, I can't cause such badthink, that makes me a hatemonger!!
There's no outrage because he's changed his position (or, possibly, as other commenters have said, he had that position all along and merely claimed he was against equal marriage because that was the political thing to do).
Eich was given the opportunity to recant, but he didn't, strongly implying that this is still the thing that he believes.
Because there's nothing more that people want in a leader than someone spineless when the pressure is on...