I know "liberal" leaves a bad taste in your mouth, but they don't deserve that label. Call them by their name: Democrats, as in the people who created Jim Crowe laws and voted against the Civil Rights Act. Don't call them liberal.
You mean people who are all dead now? Those democrats? What do they have to do with the current democrats/liberals/whatever?
You should know very well that more justifications have been proposed than "it's gross". You may have good arguments against those justifications but what you have presented here is a pretty pathetic straw-man.
And yet, all opposition so far has come down basically to "it's gross," whether it's a gut reaction, a learned behavior, or their religion says it is (usually all three). All of the logical arguments have been inconsistent enough to be easily shot down.
At the time, the California constitution's equal treatment clauses meant that a state ban on gay marriage was not legally supportable. Judges ruled as such, and that's why Prop 8 was a state constitutional amendment, not a regular proposition, directive, or law.
According the online Etymology Dictionary, "liberal" stems from Latin liber, meaning free (for a man). What did -that- mean? Essentially, something which was liber was "suitable for a free man," or gentleman, which is why "liberal arts" are titled to that -- arts for a gentleman as opposed to a tradesman. The middle ages saw some interesting definitions for liberal, both positive (selfless, noble, abundant) and negative (unrestrained, extravagant). It attained it's more current definition during the Enlightenment, meaning "free from prejudice, tolerant."
Oh, I'd ban tax incentives for non-gay marriage too.
If you like him/her, live with him/her, fuck him/her, just don't make me fucking pay for it.
That's fine, as long as we're consistent. Many of the anti-gay-marriage arguments introduce inconsistencies (like claiming "Marriage should be about having children" as an excuse to ban gay marriage while doing nothing about marriages of elderly couples, infertile couples, or people who refuse to have children).
Oh god, that would be a disaster. He's really not funny; he doesn't know how to deliver a joke. He comes across as the high school bully who believes whole-heartedly in what he says, really DOES hate everyone, and doesn't have the skill to hide it (unlike, say, Daniel Tosh).
You don't know what a Lefty is. He's to the right of all the countries in Europe.
Or, some countries in Europe are way to the left of the rest of the world. Europeans can criticize Americans for feeling like they're representative of the world, which is a fair point, but don't let Europeans fall into the same trap.
Well, it costs me money if they get tax breaks as a result. My overall share of the tax burden has to rise to cover that reduced tax income from them.
So the impact is not 0.
Yet a frequent argument against gay marriage is that gay people are still free to marry a woman and live in a straight relationship (sham or not). The only way gay marriage would impact you economically is if we came from a system where gay people would not be allowed to marry anyone of any gender.
In California prop 8 was overturned basically due to a loophole; the governor's refused to defend the law in court.
California's Prop 8 was overturned because it was ruled (rightly/wrongly) in federal court as being unconstitutional under the US Constitution Amendment 14, which is why a state constitutional amendment can be considered "unconstitutional." The state refused to appeal or fight that ruling.
First, other states have been drafting laws against gay marriage intended precisely to avoid similar legal problems.
Those states are in trouble as well, as they may also run afoul of the 14th amendment.
The real question here is whether the states can define marriage, and if so how the federal government can handle multiple definitions of marriage as it also has a stake in marriage benefits.
Yes, that's it. The pro-gay side is just as bigoted as the anti-gay side. They oppose opposite -sex marriage, beat up and spit on straights, refuse to rent apartments to them, ban them from churches, and call them morally depraved. Oh wait, no they don't.
Actually, they do all those things. They even have an epithet for them: breeders.
That's an extremely small minority, and is like saying that white people like lynching black folks (or like saying straight people like to lynch gay people for that matter). Don't tar an entire group of people for a couple bad actors. I'm a gay person and I've been around many gay/bi/etc people through much of my adult life, and I've only ever known one person who used that epithet.
Do you think you could explain those concepts to the French IT sites I've dealt with instead?
People willing to work night shifts aren't as common as you might think, and IT sites usually don't need "shifts" at night. There's a big difference between the support a hospital needs to offer and the work that an IT site needs to do at night.
I never understand why the most insightful comments about the topic at hand, the one that actually sheds some light on the topic by someone who might know a little about it, is always at the bottom of a thread on/.
Thinking about something takes some time. A quick one-off comment that takes a moment to send out, those will be at the top in descending-order time.
Sweden is one data point. Greece also has strong worker rights and high taxes. It is hardly an automatic recipe for prosperity.
Greece also has an amazingly high amount of tax evasion. In the mid-2000s, half of Greeks did not pay the taxes owed. It is so ingrained in Greek culture that efforts to crack down on tax evasion have had muddling results.
Then there's a little problem of bribery and corruption, similarly institutionalized in the culture.
So the 'evidence' is someone who doesn't like the program in the first place, scratching his head and saying I don't believe you could sign up that many people that close to a deadline.
It's almost like he didn't believe that there was a huge embarrassing failure in the system six months ago that the feds made a 'tech surge' (lol) to correct. Or that no one realized that everyone would wait and planned for lots of late signups.
To reach 7.1 million, sign-ups had to rocket up by 67% in just one month. That's astounding enough.
A very very large number of people, myself included, tend to wait until the last minute to do things, especially if it's not something they particularly want to do. Especially if it's something they don't especially NEED right now, and will have to pay by the month for.
Just ask the IRS for a graph of how many people self-file their taxes in April as opposed to Jan/Feb. At least there there is the motivation for getting a refund earlier. There may be some people who have conditions that need to be treated now, but I'm willing to bet that the list of healthier people who never got insurance is much larger.
And the letter from Austria arrived the day before. Germany's annexation of Austria is quite interesting due to the number of parallels with the Crimea situation. Hitler made a speech saying that Germany would tolerate the 'suppression' of millions of ethnic Germans living in Austria. Germany considered Austria as belonging to Germany, land that Germany lost after World War I. A government coup in Austria facilitated a shift of government policy towards Germany. And -after- the Germans annexed Austria, they held a referendum in Austria where 99.7% of Austrian voters voted for German annexation. Any of this sound familiar?
The big difference so far is that in Ukraine, the coup resulted in more distant relations with Russia, while in Austria the coup installed Nazi sympathizers who paved the way for annexation.
Hello! Homosexual here. While we might snicker and say that bare-chested riding is so gay... it really isn't. Sure, many gay folks are attracted to aspects of the macho-man ethos, but I wouldn't say believing in that ethos means he's gay or even a repressed homosexual.
Slashdot Mirror
I know "liberal" leaves a bad taste in your mouth, but they don't deserve that label. Call them by their name: Democrats, as in the people who created Jim Crowe laws and voted against the Civil Rights Act. Don't call them liberal.
You mean people who are all dead now? Those democrats? What do they have to do with the current democrats/liberals/whatever?
You should know very well that more justifications have been proposed than "it's gross". You may have good arguments against those justifications but what you have presented here is a pretty pathetic straw-man.
And yet, all opposition so far has come down basically to "it's gross," whether it's a gut reaction, a learned behavior, or their religion says it is (usually all three).
All of the logical arguments have been inconsistent enough to be easily shot down.
Prop 8 was about undoing judicial activism.
At the time, the California constitution's equal treatment clauses meant that a state ban on gay marriage was not legally supportable. Judges ruled as such, and that's why Prop 8 was a state constitutional amendment, not a regular proposition, directive, or law.
According the online Etymology Dictionary, "liberal" stems from Latin liber, meaning free (for a man). What did -that- mean? Essentially, something which was liber was "suitable for a free man," or gentleman, which is why "liberal arts" are titled to that -- arts for a gentleman as opposed to a tradesman. The middle ages saw some interesting definitions for liberal, both positive (selfless, noble, abundant) and negative (unrestrained, extravagant). It attained it's more current definition during the Enlightenment, meaning "free from prejudice, tolerant."
Oh, I'd ban tax incentives for non-gay marriage too.
If you like him/her, live with him/her, fuck him/her, just don't make me fucking pay for it.
That's fine, as long as we're consistent. Many of the anti-gay-marriage arguments introduce inconsistencies (like claiming "Marriage should be about having children" as an excuse to ban gay marriage while doing nothing about marriages of elderly couples, infertile couples, or people who refuse to have children).
Or give it to Anthony Jeselnik
Oh god, that would be a disaster. He's really not funny; he doesn't know how to deliver a joke. He comes across as the high school bully who believes whole-heartedly in what he says, really DOES hate everyone, and doesn't have the skill to hide it (unlike, say, Daniel Tosh).
Letterman used to be funny. Now he's just a grouchy old man. At least when Bob Hope stopped being funny, he was still a joyful old man.
I feel that Letterman is a far better interviewer than he is a comedian. We'll see how Colbert interviews once he sheds his satire personality.
Colbert is also criticizing the Nobel people
I think that's pretty fair regardless -- the Nobels are a joke outside of the hard sciences.
You don't know what a Lefty is. He's to the right of all the countries in Europe.
Or, some countries in Europe are way to the left of the rest of the world. Europeans can criticize Americans for feeling like they're representative of the world, which is a fair point, but don't let Europeans fall into the same trap.
Well, it costs me money if they get tax breaks as a result. My overall share of the tax burden has to rise to cover that reduced tax income from them.
So the impact is not 0.
Yet a frequent argument against gay marriage is that gay people are still free to marry a woman and live in a straight relationship (sham or not).
The only way gay marriage would impact you economically is if we came from a system where gay people would not be allowed to marry anyone of any gender.
I wish I hadn't already commented on this thread when I have mod points. This is too enlightening to leave at Score: 0.
Regardless of what some advocacy organization says [...]
Like The Washington Post and ABC News [washingtonpost.com]?
Are they journalists? Well then they're likely super-leftist too.
(I'm not even sure how I would tag this post. A combination of super-cynical and sarcastic?)
In California prop 8 was overturned basically due to a loophole; the governor's refused to defend the law in court.
California's Prop 8 was overturned because it was ruled (rightly/wrongly) in federal court as being unconstitutional under the US Constitution Amendment 14, which is why a state constitutional amendment can be considered "unconstitutional." The state refused to appeal or fight that ruling.
First, other states have been drafting laws against gay marriage intended precisely to avoid similar legal problems.
Those states are in trouble as well, as they may also run afoul of the 14th amendment.
The real question here is whether the states can define marriage, and if so how the federal government can handle multiple definitions of marriage as it also has a stake in marriage benefits.
Yes, that's it. The pro-gay side is just as bigoted as the anti-gay side. They oppose opposite -sex marriage, beat up and spit on straights, refuse to rent apartments to them, ban them from churches, and call them morally depraved. Oh wait, no they don't.
Actually, they do all those things. They even have an epithet for them: breeders.
That's an extremely small minority, and is like saying that white people like lynching black folks (or like saying straight people like to lynch gay people for that matter). Don't tar an entire group of people for a couple bad actors.
I'm a gay person and I've been around many gay/bi/etc people through much of my adult life, and I've only ever known one person who used that epithet.
Do you think you could explain those concepts to the French IT sites I've dealt with instead?
People willing to work night shifts aren't as common as you might think, and IT sites usually don't need "shifts" at night. There's a big difference between the support a hospital needs to offer and the work that an IT site needs to do at night.
I never understand why the most insightful comments about the topic at hand, the one that actually sheds some light on the topic by someone who might know a little about it, is always at the bottom of a thread on /.
Thinking about something takes some time. A quick one-off comment that takes a moment to send out, those will be at the top in descending-order time.
Your chances of living a rich and fulfilling life take a sharp downturn if you're the one laid off.
Sweden is one data point. Greece also has strong worker rights and high taxes. It is hardly an automatic recipe for prosperity.
Greece also has an amazingly high amount of tax evasion. In the mid-2000s, half of Greeks did not pay the taxes owed. It is so ingrained in Greek culture that efforts to crack down on tax evasion have had muddling results.
Then there's a little problem of bribery and corruption, similarly institutionalized in the culture.
So the 'evidence' is someone who doesn't like the program in the first place, scratching his head and saying I don't believe you could sign up that many people that close to a deadline.
It's almost like he didn't believe that there was a huge embarrassing failure in the system six months ago that the feds made a 'tech surge' (lol) to correct.
Or that no one realized that everyone would wait and planned for lots of late signups.
To reach 7.1 million, sign-ups had to rocket up by 67% in just one month. That's astounding enough.
A very very large number of people, myself included, tend to wait until the last minute to do things, especially if it's not something they particularly want to do. Especially if it's something they don't especially NEED right now, and will have to pay by the month for.
Just ask the IRS for a graph of how many people self-file their taxes in April as opposed to Jan/Feb. At least there there is the motivation for getting a refund earlier. There may be some people who have conditions that need to be treated now, but I'm willing to bet that the list of healthier people who never got insurance is much larger.
President Obama personally signed up for health care 4 million times to pump up the numbers.
You heard it here first, I hope. Seems like an "At Midnight" sort of joke.
If I get my hands on the asshat who's been poaching my unicorns there'll be hell to pay.
I'm pretty sure that Lord Voldemort, and he's already been done in (spoiler alert).
I've got Poland on line 1, Belgium on line 2..
He forgot Poland!
And the letter from Austria arrived the day before.
Germany's annexation of Austria is quite interesting due to the number of parallels with the Crimea situation. Hitler made a speech saying that Germany would tolerate the 'suppression' of millions of ethnic Germans living in Austria. Germany considered Austria as belonging to Germany, land that Germany lost after World War I. A government coup in Austria facilitated a shift of government policy towards Germany. And -after- the Germans annexed Austria, they held a referendum in Austria where 99.7% of Austrian voters voted for German annexation. Any of this sound familiar?
The big difference so far is that in Ukraine, the coup resulted in more distant relations with Russia, while in Austria the coup installed Nazi sympathizers who paved the way for annexation.
Hello! Homosexual here. While we might snicker and say that bare-chested riding is so gay... it really isn't. Sure, many gay folks are attracted to aspects of the macho-man ethos, but I wouldn't say believing in that ethos means he's gay or even a repressed homosexual.
Fuck you too. If you want to be modded up, say something worth modding up.