I know just being picky, but no one doubts that climate change is behind changes in climate. I don't think anyone doubts climate change. Now perhaps some doubt anthropogenic climate change, technically this summary doesn't mention that.
Odd, I personally know several people who deny that greenhousw warming exists. And many more on line.
So our Carbon Dioxide and Methane is somehow different?
And if is a matter of not believing puny humans could do this, just think of it a all of the sequestered Carbon being re-released at one time. Whether done by us, or volcanos, it's the same Gas. And unless the greenhouse effect doesn't exist, which we are lucky it does, elsewise we would probably not be alive, then it's a mighty steep hill the deniers have to climb, they have to deny the physics, then applty a new theory.
But Nye is correct, it's changing. The 4 steps of denial go as such:
1. Deny the problem completely - it doesn't exist, It's a liberal plot
2. Deny that the activities of humans have anything to do with it - That's liberal hogwash
3. Deny we can do anything about it - Liberals just don't understand how small we are in the world
4. Say yes, there's a problem, yes, it's our fault, but theose damn liberals made us spend so much money fighting them on this - we don't have enough money left to do anything about it - Gawdammed Liberals anyhow.
In any event, it's liberal's fault.
Michael Mann is an Asshole" just doesn't serve to refute basic physics any more.
but the religious bluenoses that are pushing this silly law might want to think about permitting the drag queen to use a stall in the ladies room and put his makeup back on over there instead.
As for surgical transgender persons -- how they hell is anybody going to ever tell? Seriously! Are we supposed to grab the short dumpy person who looks like they MIGHT be XX and check his prick to see if it is surgically created? Are we going to jam a speculum up into the vagina of a tallish woman with broad shoulders who looks like she MIGHT be an XY to see if there is actually a cervix up there, or do an adam's apple check on their throat with a biopsy to ensure that it isn't cancer or a thyroid problem?
Funny you should mention that. sexual assault was once attempted as a law in Virginia, where if a woman was considering an abortion, teh Doctor would have to by law, jam a vaginal probe inside her. Here's the vaginal probe, apparently just what gawd wants. http://www.politicususa.com/20...
Completely medically unnecessary, and you think that a woman wants this? Coercion, duress, ram the 2 foot long dingus up her vagina. The very definition of sexual assualt rape. Fortunately people who were not clinically insane managed to discard it, but the answer to your question is there are probably swords of gawd in North Carolina who would find inspecting people's genitals and assigning them which restroom they are allowed to enter as a fine occupation.
Until they see this young lady.....https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Mock
I'm trying to imagine sending her into a men's room. Of course, no one would ever think she was once a guy.
That woman was never ever meant to be a guy.
And the gawd's armor people of North Carolina would also discover a lot of interesting things with universal peen vagygy inspections. Where does one draw the line? There are people of ambiguous genitals on both genders. There is an entire range from Johnny Wad Holmes to micropenis to women with larger clitorises than the smallest penises, and some folks that are so ambiguous that no one could know.
As for what Jesus preached, it is important to remember that fundamentalist Christians take most of their ideas from the old Testament, and seem to think that the Sermon on the mount was the result of Jesus hanging out with too many liberals, who drugged him and made him say all that commie crap. Which is why they invented "Supply Side Jesus." Who would like to help the poor, but the stockholders are keeping him busy.
Do as we do in Australia: public buildings (and private buildings that are a public place) have male toilets, female toilets, and single person unisex disabled / parents room style toilets
Sure that would work. It's not even that difficult to implement. And we have that a lot of placed in the north. But as with so many things here in America, when dealing with fundamentalist Christians, all is not as it seems.
These folks are stuck in Leviticus, and would really like to kill gays and transgenders as they are told to in the good book.
But that's where they are at, this rest room fracus is just a smokescreen. Most Americans couldn't care less, but the loudmouths can't get what they want, so they have to settle for harassment.
And I'm wondering how the holy and apostolic state of North Carolina is going to make this person: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... use the men's room. Of course, she's got two strikes against her - transgender and African/Hawaiian mix.
Why not? According to the newly-passed law, I can deny services to people who's religious beliefs do not agree with mine. It seems like the people of NC think that's okay...
By the way, the other side of this coin is just that. They pass these laws, with absolutely no thought that they lay the foundation for their own discrimination.
Religion, like art, becomes hard to define at some level. And if I want to refuse fundamentalist christians service, I have the right to deprive them of their rights. and under these ridiculous laws, it allows discrimination as a right.
I live in Illinois where people can use the bathroom of the gender they identify with, for years now.
There have been ZERO issues. It's simply not a problem. The folks who want to assault women tend to be misogynists who would NEVER disguise themselves as "transgender" because
1. They consider women to be inferior.
2. They're homophobes and transphobes.as well.
Adding one for you.
3. a man who is going into a woman's restroom to assault ladies is already fucking doing that, without any transgender laws.
I'd mod you up for pointing out the obvious if I had mod points, but pointing out the obvious to the oblivious never works. Scenario a) is an XY who identifies as female using a female bathroom, and feeling more comfortable, but at the expense of all the other female users of the bathroom feeling uncomfortable for a variety of reasons
I'd bet a month's salary that you've already used a rest room at the same time as a trensgender person.
If the bathroom you use does not matter (i.e. a unisex bathroom is fine), then what is the problem with using a same sex bathroom?
I know I am not a Republican, but I never ever think of sex at the same time as thinking of the toilet.
Your argument is just an extension of the concept of if we allow gay people to marry, we'll have to allow people to marry horses and dogs.
I think the problem is that the religious have run roughshod over everyone else, like in my small pennsylvania town in the 1960's everyone had to drive 15 miles to the next town over to get a Sunday paper, because it was illegal to have a store open on Sunday, and even the paperboys were prevented form working. Why? If you worked on Sunday, you were going to hell. And even if your religion didn't hold that, well - The town council were all Catholics, so fuck you if you had a different opinion.
Now today, at my preumably liberal University, there are special accommodations for those for whom nudity in a locker room is somehow going to likewise send you to hell.
And you know - that's fine. Someone has a belief, even if I think it's stupid - no problem. We try to accommodate
Now if we told the guy "We can't accommodate you because it's too expensive to build you a separate shower with a curtain so no one sees your peen...
And you see the difference? Probably not, you're still worried about sex in bathrooms.
There is obviously ways of taking care of our wimminfolk to make certain they don't see a peen in a potty. And that leave the people with confused peens to go to the restroom as well.
Hell, lotsa folk at the tractor pull or mud buggy race.... "Hold the kid ears, agnes, this is a shocker!" do their business in the same gaddameed Porta-Potty!
And if some sick fuck is using a restroom as a way to get some mud for his (or her - or some indeterminate somethingorother) then you give them the same treatment as Family Values politician Larry "Wide Stance" Craig.
when paypal pulls out of india where LGBT groups are routinely abused (and not just made to feel uncomfortable because people are mean!!!!) ill believe them
this is a publicity stunt and if they really cared about what they claim they would close up shop in india, china, and other countries with bad human rights abuses.
PayPal is not an Indian company. If they tried to openly subvert the Indian State, they'd be out on their ass.
We're not too keen on how India treats their women either - although they seem to be making great strides in enforcing decency on department store dummies.
Because the peopel who want to impose their beliefs on othes are just a minority of loud assholes, most Americans simply don't give a dman about other peopels sex lives, and would prefer th loud assholes would just go bak to handling snakes,
Looks like I should have paid more attention in spelling class.
Because the peopel who want to impose their beliefs on othes are just a minority of loud assholes, most Americans simply don't give a dman about other peopels sex lives, and would prefer th loud assholes would just go bak to handling snakes,
If LGBT is a choice or a lifestyle and thus not deserving of any protected status, then nor is religion
Religion is spelled out as protected in the constitution; this is similar to the rights to your beliefs.
Religion is protected, Specific religious beliefs beliefs are not.
But let's say that it is well and good and God's will that the Good Christian people of North Carolina not be forced to do business with teh LGTB abomination in Gawds eyes.
Now it is set forth that good Christians are allowed to invoke their will.
God is pleased. his people are now fulfilling his will by not renting to Arabs. Apparently
The same with Palestinians to Jews.
Allah is pleased that the rules are being followed. Apparently
Finally, and as god or Allah wills, perhaps the good Christians shall set upon these abominations? After all, it is his will, and his direct command as per Leviticus
20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
LGBT is interesting, But it's not a race of people; It is a new phenomenon, proving it artificial: it is a behavior, a choice, and a lifestyle, and has no merit deserving protected class status, when that status infringes upon the religious rights of other people to decline personally-rendered professional services.
Christianity is interesting. But it's not a race of people. It's a new phenomenon, proving it artificial. It is a behavior, a choice, a lifestyle and has no merit deserving protected class status,. when that status infringes upon the secular rights of other people ro decline personally rendered professional services.
Fixed that for you!
As Paypal has just done. See how your ideas work?
Be carefull religious bigots, as ye hand out, ye shall receive.
It isn't critical how I park my car, and when I pull my car out of my garage there's nothing on the floor when I back out.
And there is the achilles heel of this system In order to achieve any kind of efficiency the transformer connection must be made, and made closely - otherwise you just have an inductor in the floor, and another on the bottom of the car, and warm up the garage.
The electrical physics here is exceedingly simple. yeah, it's a transformer. Where this is going to fail is getting those two inductors close enough. My guess is that they will have some docking mechanism, perhaps a V groove, coupled with grooves or pipes ala an automatic car wash, so you have no choice where you are parking or if we want to get really fancy, an X-Y table under the garage floor that seeks out the inductor on the car to move charger plate close enough.
Or we could drive in, hop out and plug it in
We sometimes go to a lot of trouble and make a lot of work to save a little work.
Sure, it will take an hour and 26 minutes to charge that same battery to the same 80% BUT when you have to connect to a supercharger it can take up to 60 seconds to plug in and unplug! Wireless is obviously better then.
PowerShell ain't Bash. It's like Bash's insane first cousin, the one who keeps his urine in the fridge and has a name for all the spiders in his attic.
Hell, I was all ready to mod that insightful. I mean, yeah it's funny, but after trying out PowerShell, the only thing you are guilty of is going easy on it.
I've never met anyone who majored in gender studies but I do know a ton of women that go into feel good majors that are vital to society and help people but unfortunately don't pay well.
And that is not even bad. If the accumulation of money is the measure of happiness or success, perhaps, but if having an actual purpose to help others is the measure, who has done better?
Anyone should be able to go into any field they wish. This doesn't mena that there will be no gender differences in the fields.
If the ratio of women to men at your university is so low, aren't you interested to know why? Didn't you see the previous articles about Google et. al. trying to help more women to study those things?
It was apparently a tech college, not a university.
But to the side foray here, after doing a fair bit of work while at a university aimed at increasing the number of women in tech fields, I've become convinced that the real answer is that women tend to be attracted to other fields. And there isn't much more to it than that. Sexism exists in all fields, whether it is business, or whether it is in nursing, or public schools. It just does. It would be really really good to get rid of it, but many of the voices today declaring it don't really want to get rid of it.
In the meantime, if we want a perfect gender mix in all fields, it will take government intervention of deciding what field a person will go into, in order to acheive that goal. Once you are chosen by your aptitudes, that is your future.
But it is interesting that the patriarchy has now put a stranglhold on computer personal assistants.
Having one of the assistants mentioned in the article, Siri, let's look at it to se if I need to check my priveliges.
Language choices: Quite a few I chose English, because that is my base language.
Voice: I can choose between Accents - American, Australian, or British.
hmm, that's a little interesting. As a 'murrican, there are many accents here. And certainly a lot of British accents.
Gender: Male or Female - What the hell? So what's the problem here?
By the way, I chose female because I found it more legible. I don't even think of Siri as male or female. I have no desire to have sex with my phone, so I don't assign it gender based on that.
Battles should always be chosen carefully. In the case of my multiple option phone personal assistant as a symbol of male privilege, it is a battle of such stupidity, such baseless inanity, that it ends up having the exact opposite effect than intended. When I can control the language, accent and gender of my assistant, how do I check my patriarchy privileges?
Oh, please, please take this one on - I really want your view.
p>Not nearly as environmentally destructive as fossil fuels. Have you have been to coal country? Have you seen what coal mines do to the land?
Ooh, ooh, that reminds me, I've yet to get any takers on showing just what coal mining does to an area. In the earlier days, before socialist regulations, a company would come into an area, rip it to shreads, - next comes the awesome part! They'd declare bankruptcy, and (usually a relative) would start a new company. It was so sweet! Profit!
Then again, the land they ruined is not good for much of anything any more. The fishermen don't come to fish in the vinegar ph streams any more. No one seems to want to come after I tell them they have to sign a waiver because you never know where you'll fall off a hundred foot highwall. And don't drink the orange water!
You are no different than every other childless person who knows more about having children than people who actually have children. You won't believe that, but that is part of the proof.
Sigh. I you mistakenly believe that just because you have hundreds of hours of experience with a handful of specific children only you can know anything about raising children in general. Parents are experts on their children.
Hell, I was a hockey coach and president of a youth sports league. As in hundred of children.
They do not necessarily know more about raising other children than a childless person does. If the childless person had more exposure to different types of kids then they would be more knowledgeable in general to a parent's specific knowledge.
Well, you are conversing with a fellow who knows both. But the difference between my child and all of the others is marked. to me. Just like the other people's children are different - to them.
Plus there are some really bad parents out there. Having kids didn't make them experts.
And there are people without children who would be crappy parents. And there are people who think they are great parents that some others think are crappy. ANd the people they think are crappy think they are crappy. Some people beat their children, some don't. The statement isn't dealing with that.
But assuming that a person loves their children and wants them to grow up to be successful, probably most parents are not bad. Some may become overprotective, but then we are back to the hwo's crappy mode.
If I might be gushy, a normal parent loves their children. Not in the way they love their spouse, but love nonetheless. Powerfully. As noted, it isn't thee love they have for their spouse. But in the abstract, when I dealt with all the other people's children, I might say I loved them all - although as you might expect, a number were annoying shits. But It wouldn't be anything like the love a person has for their own children. And therein lies the difference. It's a hellava bond.
And if you don't see or understand that there can be that difference, can be that exceptional bond, there isn't any convincing you.
Here in the US, if it a totally bogus case like "bikini pics of your wife" or "blah blah... feet" then you don't actually need a lawyer.
You knpw what they call a guy in a divorce case who doesn't think he needs a lawyer?
flat assed broke.
You might even get some money... paid by the other party's lawyer for bringing a case without cause.
You do know that many people in divorce cases do every damn thing they can do to fuck with each other, and not in the fun sorta way. You think that say, in an arena where it is typical for one spouse to completely untruthfully declare that the other was sexually abusing the children wouldn't just love to say that the blah blah facebook post wasn't done without consent? That's kinda sweet, but doesn't appreciate the bitter unbridled vindictiveness of some people.
Except for climate science, where any question of the alleged "Consensus" is heresy suitable for burning at the stake.
So how many people have been burnt at the stake for being a denier?
Now if you mean simple ridicule, hell yeah, just that same as people who believe that the earth was created in 4004 b.c.e, or that all life was created at once in it's present form.
Or that the earth is flat.
You are entitled to your own beliefs. You are not entitled to your own facts. It is getting very difficult to be a denier these days without joinng the camp of the others I just posted. When even Exxon confirms the physics - even if they lied about them, when even the patron saint of the deniers and his one time discrepancies becoming in line with the other data and him as co-author of an article saying just that - there isn't much room left on that limb of denial you are perched on.
What is it you have left? Calling Michael Mann an asshole? Sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling neener, neener, I can't HEAR YOUUUUU!
Not much, is it? Michael Mann isn't an asshole, and the laws of physics don't care how loud you yell. Carry on.
Wrong. Scientists are happy to admit when they are wrong. Descartes' scientific method relies on setting up an enquiry that can be falsified.
What is more, it is seriously enjoyable finding out that you were wrong. It's alittle hard to explain, but every time I'm proven wrong, it gets me all that closer to being right.
I'm not asking an adult for their password, I'm telling my kid that they don't have a choice but to share their password with me. Trust is not a given, especially with a child who is going to push the boundaries to know their place.
The fact that you can't differentiate parental duties from asking a different adult for their password/passcode is a huge psychological deficiency.
I don't find it surprising that you have an expectation of being lied to, and not testing facts to ensure boundaries are established.
Actually, you do know that a lot of parents keep parenting duties long after their children become the arbitrary adult age don't you?
And as far as your apparent knowledge that your child will only ever have an email address pre approved and password known by you, is charming, but public libraries, friends computers, and all manner of other methods are available to work around your rules.
Were you actually a teenager who never ever stepped outside of the boundaries set by your parents? You would be one of the only ones.
It really isn't being all that sneaky anyhow. Just an attempt at a little independence. It's just a child trying to become an adult, something that today's parents are fighting tooth and nail against for some reason. That's those boundaries you fear. And it isn't good for the children either, they tend to not be very happy, and cannot make a decision without Mommy and Daddy's guidance.
One of the happiest moments in my life was when I became an actual adult. As I recall vividly, childhood really stunk. Today's parenting style of never-ending childhood rules would be a nightmare for me, and I don't think it is working out for the permanent children it produces all that well either.
Slashdot Mirror
I know just being picky, but no one doubts that climate change is behind changes in climate. I don't think anyone doubts climate change. Now perhaps some doubt anthropogenic climate change, technically this summary doesn't mention that.
Odd, I personally know several people who deny that greenhousw warming exists. And many more on line.
So our Carbon Dioxide and Methane is somehow different?
And if is a matter of not believing puny humans could do this, just think of it a all of the sequestered Carbon being re-released at one time. Whether done by us, or volcanos, it's the same Gas. And unless the greenhouse effect doesn't exist, which we are lucky it does, elsewise we would probably not be alive, then it's a mighty steep hill the deniers have to climb, they have to deny the physics, then applty a new theory.
But Nye is correct, it's changing. The 4 steps of denial go as such: 1. Deny the problem completely - it doesn't exist, It's a liberal plot
2. Deny that the activities of humans have anything to do with it - That's liberal hogwash 3. Deny we can do anything about it - Liberals just don't understand how small we are in the world
4. Say yes, there's a problem, yes, it's our fault, but theose damn liberals made us spend so much money fighting them on this - we don't have enough money left to do anything about it - Gawdammed Liberals anyhow.
In any event, it's liberal's fault. Michael Mann is an Asshole" just doesn't serve to refute basic physics any more.
but the religious bluenoses that are pushing this silly law might want to think about permitting the drag queen to use a stall in the ladies room and put his makeup back on over there instead.
As for surgical transgender persons -- how they hell is anybody going to ever tell? Seriously! Are we supposed to grab the short dumpy person who looks like they MIGHT be XX and check his prick to see if it is surgically created? Are we going to jam a speculum up into the vagina of a tallish woman with broad shoulders who looks like she MIGHT be an XY to see if there is actually a cervix up there, or do an adam's apple check on their throat with a biopsy to ensure that it isn't cancer or a thyroid problem?
Funny you should mention that. sexual assault was once attempted as a law in Virginia, where if a woman was considering an abortion, teh Doctor would have to by law, jam a vaginal probe inside her. Here's the vaginal probe, apparently just what gawd wants. http://www.politicususa.com/20...
Completely medically unnecessary, and you think that a woman wants this? Coercion, duress, ram the 2 foot long dingus up her vagina. The very definition of sexual assualt rape. Fortunately people who were not clinically insane managed to discard it, but the answer to your question is there are probably swords of gawd in North Carolina who would find inspecting people's genitals and assigning them which restroom they are allowed to enter as a fine occupation.
Until they see this young lady.....https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Mock
I'm trying to imagine sending her into a men's room. Of course, no one would ever think she was once a guy.
That woman was never ever meant to be a guy.
And the gawd's armor people of North Carolina would also discover a lot of interesting things with universal peen vagygy inspections. Where does one draw the line? There are people of ambiguous genitals on both genders. There is an entire range from Johnny Wad Holmes to micropenis to women with larger clitorises than the smallest penises, and some folks that are so ambiguous that no one could know.
As for what Jesus preached, it is important to remember that fundamentalist Christians take most of their ideas from the old Testament, and seem to think that the Sermon on the mount was the result of Jesus hanging out with too many liberals, who drugged him and made him say all that commie crap. Which is why they invented "Supply Side Jesus." Who would like to help the poor, but the stockholders are keeping him busy.
Do as we do in Australia: public buildings (and private buildings that are a public place) have male toilets, female toilets, and single person unisex disabled / parents room style toilets
Sure that would work. It's not even that difficult to implement. And we have that a lot of placed in the north. But as with so many things here in America, when dealing with fundamentalist Christians, all is not as it seems. These folks are stuck in Leviticus, and would really like to kill gays and transgenders as they are told to in the good book.
Here's a fellow who was instrumental in crafting Uganda's Kill the homos bill: http://www.deathandtaxesmag.co...
oddly enough from the north.
He also says gays caused the great flood.
But that's where they are at, this rest room fracus is just a smokescreen. Most Americans couldn't care less, but the loudmouths can't get what they want, so they have to settle for harassment.
And I'm wondering how the holy and apostolic state of North Carolina is going to make this person: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... use the men's room. Of course, she's got two strikes against her - transgender and African/Hawaiian mix.
Why not? According to the newly-passed law, I can deny services to people who's religious beliefs do not agree with mine. It seems like the people of NC think that's okay...
By the way, the other side of this coin is just that. They pass these laws, with absolutely no thought that they lay the foundation for their own discrimination.
Religion, like art, becomes hard to define at some level. And if I want to refuse fundamentalist christians service, I have the right to deprive them of their rights. and under these ridiculous laws, it allows discrimination as a right.
I live in Illinois where people can use the bathroom of the gender they identify with, for years now.
There have been ZERO issues. It's simply not a problem. The folks who want to assault women tend to be misogynists who would NEVER disguise themselves as "transgender" because
1. They consider women to be inferior. 2. They're homophobes and transphobes.as well.
Adding one for you.
3. a man who is going into a woman's restroom to assault ladies is already fucking doing that, without any transgender laws.
I'd mod you up for pointing out the obvious if I had mod points, but pointing out the obvious to the oblivious never works. Scenario a) is an XY who identifies as female using a female bathroom, and feeling more comfortable, but at the expense of all the other female users of the bathroom feeling uncomfortable for a variety of reasons
I'd bet a month's salary that you've already used a rest room at the same time as a trensgender person.
If the bathroom you use does not matter (i.e. a unisex bathroom is fine), then what is the problem with using a same sex bathroom?
I know I am not a Republican, but I never ever think of sex at the same time as thinking of the toilet.
Your argument is just an extension of the concept of if we allow gay people to marry, we'll have to allow people to marry horses and dogs.
I think the problem is that the religious have run roughshod over everyone else, like in my small pennsylvania town in the 1960's everyone had to drive 15 miles to the next town over to get a Sunday paper, because it was illegal to have a store open on Sunday, and even the paperboys were prevented form working. Why? If you worked on Sunday, you were going to hell. And even if your religion didn't hold that, well - The town council were all Catholics, so fuck you if you had a different opinion.
Now today, at my preumably liberal University, there are special accommodations for those for whom nudity in a locker room is somehow going to likewise send you to hell.
And you know - that's fine. Someone has a belief, even if I think it's stupid - no problem. We try to accommodate
Now if we told the guy "We can't accommodate you because it's too expensive to build you a separate shower with a curtain so no one sees your peen...
And you see the difference? Probably not, you're still worried about sex in bathrooms.
There is obviously ways of taking care of our wimminfolk to make certain they don't see a peen in a potty. And that leave the people with confused peens to go to the restroom as well.
Hell, lotsa folk at the tractor pull or mud buggy race.... "Hold the kid ears, agnes, this is a shocker!" do their business in the same gaddameed Porta-Potty! And if some sick fuck is using a restroom as a way to get some mud for his (or her - or some indeterminate somethingorother) then you give them the same treatment as Family Values politician Larry "Wide Stance" Craig.
when paypal pulls out of india where LGBT groups are routinely abused (and not just made to feel uncomfortable because people are mean!!!!) ill believe them this is a publicity stunt and if they really cared about what they claim they would close up shop in india, china, and other countries with bad human rights abuses.
PayPal is not an Indian company. If they tried to openly subvert the Indian State, they'd be out on their ass.
We're not too keen on how India treats their women either - although they seem to be making great strides in enforcing decency on department store dummies.
Because the peopel who want to impose their beliefs on othes are just a minority of loud assholes, most Americans simply don't give a dman about other peopels sex lives, and would prefer th loud assholes would just go bak to handling snakes,
Looks like I should have paid more attention in spelling class.
What corporation isn't a whore?
PayPal as per this story? The NFL? http://www.washingtonexaminer....
Arizona came close to losing the Super Bowl - heck that might have been 15 dollars of profit...
Georgia
http://www.breitbart.com/sport...
Indiana: http://www.indystar.com/story/...
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03...
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/...
Ther are many more.
Because the peopel who want to impose their beliefs on othes are just a minority of loud assholes, most Americans simply don't give a dman about other peopels sex lives, and would prefer th loud assholes would just go bak to handling snakes,
If LGBT is a choice or a lifestyle and thus not deserving of any protected status, then nor is religion
Religion is spelled out as protected in the constitution; this is similar to the rights to your beliefs.
Religion is protected, Specific religious beliefs beliefs are not.
But let's say that it is well and good and God's will that the Good Christian people of North Carolina not be forced to do business with teh LGTB abomination in Gawds eyes.
Now it is set forth that good Christians are allowed to invoke their will.
http://www.haaretz.com/israel-...
God is pleased. his people are now fulfilling his will by not renting to Arabs. Apparently
The same with Palestinians to Jews.
Allah is pleased that the rules are being followed. Apparently
Finally, and as god or Allah wills, perhaps the good Christians shall set upon these abominations? After all, it is his will, and his direct command as per Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
Preposterous you say?
http://www.alternet.org/story/...
The only reason why the religious right isn't killing them here is because we don't allow them to kill them.
And if you wonder why people are opposed to you folks - don't wonder.
LGBT is interesting, But it's not a race of people; It is a new phenomenon, proving it artificial: it is a behavior, a choice, and a lifestyle, and has no merit deserving protected class status, when that status infringes upon the religious rights of other people to decline personally-rendered professional services.
Christianity is interesting. But it's not a race of people. It's a new phenomenon, proving it artificial. It is a behavior, a choice, a lifestyle and has no merit deserving protected class status,. when that status infringes upon the secular rights of other people ro decline personally rendered professional services.
Fixed that for you!
As Paypal has just done. See how your ideas work?
Be carefull religious bigots, as ye hand out, ye shall receive.
I'm going to move to North Carolina, open up a bible store selling the King James version, and refuse to sell to Christians.
It isn't critical how I park my car, and when I pull my car out of my garage there's nothing on the floor when I back out.
And there is the achilles heel of this system In order to achieve any kind of efficiency the transformer connection must be made, and made closely - otherwise you just have an inductor in the floor, and another on the bottom of the car, and warm up the garage.
The electrical physics here is exceedingly simple. yeah, it's a transformer. Where this is going to fail is getting those two inductors close enough. My guess is that they will have some docking mechanism, perhaps a V groove, coupled with grooves or pipes ala an automatic car wash, so you have no choice where you are parking or if we want to get really fancy, an X-Y table under the garage floor that seeks out the inductor on the car to move charger plate close enough.
Or we could drive in, hop out and plug it in We sometimes go to a lot of trouble and make a lot of work to save a little work.
Sure, it will take an hour and 26 minutes to charge that same battery to the same 80% BUT when you have to connect to a supercharger it can take up to 60 seconds to plug in and unplug! Wireless is obviously better then.
We need a insightful sarcasm mod.
PowerShell ain't Bash. It's like Bash's insane first cousin, the one who keeps his urine in the fridge and has a name for all the spiders in his attic.
Hell, I was all ready to mod that insightful. I mean, yeah it's funny, but after trying out PowerShell, the only thing you are guilty of is going easy on it.
I've never met anyone who majored in gender studies but I do know a ton of women that go into feel good majors that are vital to society and help people but unfortunately don't pay well.
And that is not even bad. If the accumulation of money is the measure of happiness or success, perhaps, but if having an actual purpose to help others is the measure, who has done better?
Anyone should be able to go into any field they wish. This doesn't mena that there will be no gender differences in the fields.
If the ratio of women to men at your university is so low, aren't you interested to know why? Didn't you see the previous articles about Google et. al. trying to help more women to study those things?
It was apparently a tech college, not a university.
But to the side foray here, after doing a fair bit of work while at a university aimed at increasing the number of women in tech fields, I've become convinced that the real answer is that women tend to be attracted to other fields. And there isn't much more to it than that. Sexism exists in all fields, whether it is business, or whether it is in nursing, or public schools. It just does. It would be really really good to get rid of it, but many of the voices today declaring it don't really want to get rid of it.
In the meantime, if we want a perfect gender mix in all fields, it will take government intervention of deciding what field a person will go into, in order to acheive that goal. Once you are chosen by your aptitudes, that is your future.
But it is interesting that the patriarchy has now put a stranglhold on computer personal assistants.
Having one of the assistants mentioned in the article, Siri, let's look at it to se if I need to check my priveliges.
Language choices: Quite a few I chose English, because that is my base language.
Voice: I can choose between Accents - American, Australian, or British.
hmm, that's a little interesting. As a 'murrican, there are many accents here. And certainly a lot of British accents.
Gender: Male or Female - What the hell? So what's the problem here?
By the way, I chose female because I found it more legible. I don't even think of Siri as male or female. I have no desire to have sex with my phone, so I don't assign it gender based on that.
Battles should always be chosen carefully. In the case of my multiple option phone personal assistant as a symbol of male privilege, it is a battle of such stupidity, such baseless inanity, that it ends up having the exact opposite effect than intended. When I can control the language, accent and gender of my assistant, how do I check my patriarchy privileges?
Oh, please, please take this one on - I really want your view.
p>Not nearly as environmentally destructive as fossil fuels. Have you have been to coal country? Have you seen what coal mines do to the land?
Ooh, ooh, that reminds me, I've yet to get any takers on showing just what coal mining does to an area. In the earlier days, before socialist regulations, a company would come into an area, rip it to shreads, - next comes the awesome part! They'd declare bankruptcy, and (usually a relative) would start a new company. It was so sweet! Profit!
Then again, the land they ruined is not good for much of anything any more. The fishermen don't come to fish in the vinegar ph streams any more. No one seems to want to come after I tell them they have to sign a waiver because you never know where you'll fall off a hundred foot highwall. And don't drink the orange water!
You are no different than every other childless person who knows more about having children than people who actually have children. You won't believe that, but that is part of the proof.
Sigh. I you mistakenly believe that just because you have hundreds of hours of experience with a handful of specific children only you can know anything about raising children in general. Parents are experts on their children.
Hell, I was a hockey coach and president of a youth sports league. As in hundred of children.
They do not necessarily know more about raising other children than a childless person does. If the childless person had more exposure to different types of kids then they would be more knowledgeable in general to a parent's specific knowledge.
Well, you are conversing with a fellow who knows both. But the difference between my child and all of the others is marked. to me. Just like the other people's children are different - to them.
Plus there are some really bad parents out there. Having kids didn't make them experts.
And there are people without children who would be crappy parents. And there are people who think they are great parents that some others think are crappy. ANd the people they think are crappy think they are crappy. Some people beat their children, some don't. The statement isn't dealing with that.
But assuming that a person loves their children and wants them to grow up to be successful, probably most parents are not bad. Some may become overprotective, but then we are back to the hwo's crappy mode.
If I might be gushy, a normal parent loves their children. Not in the way they love their spouse, but love nonetheless. Powerfully. As noted, it isn't thee love they have for their spouse. But in the abstract, when I dealt with all the other people's children, I might say I loved them all - although as you might expect, a number were annoying shits. But It wouldn't be anything like the love a person has for their own children. And therein lies the difference. It's a hellava bond.
And if you don't see or understand that there can be that difference, can be that exceptional bond, there isn't any convincing you.
Here in the US, if it a totally bogus case like "bikini pics of your wife" or "blah blah ... feet" then you don't actually need a lawyer.
You knpw what they call a guy in a divorce case who doesn't think he needs a lawyer?
flat assed broke.
You might even get some money... paid by the other party's lawyer for bringing a case without cause.
You do know that many people in divorce cases do every damn thing they can do to fuck with each other, and not in the fun sorta way. You think that say, in an arena where it is typical for one spouse to completely untruthfully declare that the other was sexually abusing the children wouldn't just love to say that the blah blah facebook post wasn't done without consent? That's kinda sweet, but doesn't appreciate the bitter unbridled vindictiveness of some people.
Except for climate science, where any question of the alleged "Consensus" is heresy suitable for burning at the stake.
That only happens if you ignore the existing evidence, and bring none of your own.
Tobacco doesn't cause cancer either. As the Simpsons prove, it is Democrats https://www.youtube.com/watch?... (at 1:38 mark)
Except for climate science, where any question of the alleged "Consensus" is heresy suitable for burning at the stake.
So how many people have been burnt at the stake for being a denier?
Now if you mean simple ridicule, hell yeah, just that same as people who believe that the earth was created in 4004 b.c.e, or that all life was created at once in it's present form.
Or that the earth is flat.
You are entitled to your own beliefs. You are not entitled to your own facts. It is getting very difficult to be a denier these days without joinng the camp of the others I just posted. When even Exxon confirms the physics - even if they lied about them, when even the patron saint of the deniers and his one time discrepancies becoming in line with the other data and him as co-author of an article saying just that - there isn't much room left on that limb of denial you are perched on.
What is it you have left? Calling Michael Mann an asshole? Sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling neener, neener, I can't HEAR YOUUUUU!
Not much, is it? Michael Mann isn't an asshole, and the laws of physics don't care how loud you yell. Carry on.
Wrong. Scientists are happy to admit when they are wrong. Descartes' scientific method relies on setting up an enquiry that can be falsified.
What is more, it is seriously enjoyable finding out that you were wrong. It's alittle hard to explain, but every time I'm proven wrong, it gets me all that closer to being right.
I'm not asking an adult for their password, I'm telling my kid that they don't have a choice but to share their password with me. Trust is not a given, especially with a child who is going to push the boundaries to know their place.
The fact that you can't differentiate parental duties from asking a different adult for their password/passcode is a huge psychological deficiency.
I don't find it surprising that you have an expectation of being lied to, and not testing facts to ensure boundaries are established.
Actually, you do know that a lot of parents keep parenting duties long after their children become the arbitrary adult age don't you?
And as far as your apparent knowledge that your child will only ever have an email address pre approved and password known by you, is charming, but public libraries, friends computers, and all manner of other methods are available to work around your rules.
Were you actually a teenager who never ever stepped outside of the boundaries set by your parents? You would be one of the only ones.
It really isn't being all that sneaky anyhow. Just an attempt at a little independence. It's just a child trying to become an adult, something that today's parents are fighting tooth and nail against for some reason. That's those boundaries you fear. And it isn't good for the children either, they tend to not be very happy, and cannot make a decision without Mommy and Daddy's guidance.
One of the happiest moments in my life was when I became an actual adult. As I recall vividly, childhood really stunk. Today's parenting style of never-ending childhood rules would be a nightmare for me, and I don't think it is working out for the permanent children it produces all that well either.