The Supreme Court needs to concerns itself with protecting the rights of the individual
Wrong. The supreme court needs to concern itself with judging based on the laws as written.
Congress needs to concern itself with protected the rights of the individual.
I think we need a fourth branch of the federal government. Every year one hundred citizens (two from each state) should be selected by lottery to form the veto branch. Each bill passed by congress must be presented and understood by the group, which can veto it with a two-thirds majority.
"Something's not right," Ferrara said. "One person that's a fluke. Two, that's strange. But several within a five minute period of time -- that's wrong."
Wait wait wait. So as long as a software bug only occurs for one or two people she knows, she will accept the bug in her voting machine for her elected officials!
I bet she would be outraged if they messed up her vote for American Idol.
Also, the comparison was between a 1992 vehicle and a 2011 vehicle. The emissions requirements are drastically different, and the design constraints imposed by the emissions requirements reduces fuel efficiency. The new Jeep may burn a big more gas, but it emits much less pollution.
All I am implying here is that if you have no problem with allowing two people to fill out paperwork to provide the same protections as marriage then you should have no problem allowing three people to fill out paperwork to provide the same protections as marriage, so long as they are all consenting adults.
It implies that I think petitioning for government expansion of the definition of marriage to include two men is similar to petitioning for government expansion of the definition of marriage to include two men and a woman.
For the requisite car analogy - I do not equate motorized bicycles with hovercraft, but petitioning to have them classified as motor vehicles for the purpose of traffic laws would be similar.
Happily married heterosexual male whose marriage won't be ruined by two guys or gals tying the knot, or by two guys and a gal or two gals and a guy or four guys or the entire adult population of Walla Walla, WA.
They are both related in that they are attempting to extend the traditional definition of marriage to include an arrangement between consenting adults not consisting of exactly one male and exactly one female.
Disclosure: I think the government should stop granting and recognizing marriages entirely and grant and recognize civil unions between any consenting adults who fill out the requisite paperwork. Then perhaps we can focus on more important issues.
Re:I thought JAVA was supposed to be crossplatform
on
Apple Deprecates Their JVM
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Binaries for the JVM are cross platform. The JVM itself is written for the platform. If you write a Java application and compile it on Windows, the compiled version will run on a JVM on Mac. But the Windows JVM will not run on a Mac.
I guess the ACLU was unsuccessful in setting up a branch office.
The same thing is going to happen in the US, ACLU or not. The bills are already written. They are just waiting for another 9/11 to they can ram them through.
People do not not use Opera because it does not have extensions. People do not use Opera because it does not have a particular set of features provided by extensions in another browser.
Slashdot Mirror
I do not see a black device. I see an empty hand and a shadow.
aptitude install sun-java6-source
When people stop being corrupt and when war stops being profitable.
Exactly.
Very few members of government define their own roles narrowly. People want more power.
Wrong. The supreme court needs to concern itself with judging based on the laws as written.
Congress needs to concern itself with protected the rights of the individual.
I think we need a fourth branch of the federal government. Every year one hundred citizens (two from each state) should be selected by lottery to form the veto branch. Each bill passed by congress must be presented and understood by the group, which can veto it with a two-thirds majority.
"Something's not right," Ferrara said. "One person that's a fluke. Two, that's strange. But several within a five minute period of time -- that's wrong."
Wait wait wait. So as long as a software bug only occurs for one or two people she knows, she will accept the bug in her voting machine for her elected officials!
I bet she would be outraged if they messed up her vote for American Idol.
Because the government gets to decide what is illegal.
Because most people do not care.
The Earth's gravity well is also specific to a moment in time, as Earth changes structure internally and it constantly pulls in matter.
Also, the comparison was between a 1992 vehicle and a 2011 vehicle. The emissions requirements are drastically different, and the design constraints imposed by the emissions requirements reduces fuel efficiency. The new Jeep may burn a big more gas, but it emits much less pollution.
All I am implying here is that if you have no problem with allowing two people to fill out paperwork to provide the same protections as marriage then you should have no problem allowing three people to fill out paperwork to provide the same protections as marriage, so long as they are all consenting adults.
I have no problem with either.
Another option: loopholes are there because the rich bribed government officials to put them there.
It implies that I think petitioning for government expansion of the definition of marriage to include two men is similar to petitioning for government expansion of the definition of marriage to include two men and a woman.
For the requisite car analogy - I do not equate motorized bicycles with hovercraft, but petitioning to have them classified as motor vehicles for the purpose of traffic laws would be similar.
What exactly am I ignorant of?
Signed,
Happily married heterosexual male whose marriage won't be ruined by two guys or gals tying the knot, or by two guys and a gal or two gals and a guy or four guys or the entire adult population of Walla Walla, WA.
They are both related in that they are attempting to extend the traditional definition of marriage to include an arrangement between consenting adults not consisting of exactly one male and exactly one female.
Disclosure: I think the government should stop granting and recognizing marriages entirely and grant and recognize civil unions between any consenting adults who fill out the requisite paperwork. Then perhaps we can focus on more important issues.
Maybe he is here for all the non-technical political articles.
The group marriage point still stands.
Binaries for the JVM are cross platform. The JVM itself is written for the platform. If you write a Java application and compile it on Windows, the compiled version will run on a JVM on Mac. But the Windows JVM will not run on a Mac.
The same thing is going to happen in the US, ACLU or not. The bills are already written. They are just waiting for another 9/11 to they can ram them through.
Sweden gave us ABBA.
Canada gave us Celine Dion.
The US gave us Hanson.
England gave us Coldplay.
Everybody is guilty of incredibly annoying but not quite bad enough to stay off the radio music.
How many customers would even notice if they got placed behind a NAT?
People do not not use Opera because it does not have extensions. People do not use Opera because it does not have a particular set of features provided by extensions in another browser.
Opera has been free for a while.
What is weird about the interface?
What is unusual about having the preferences in about:config?
The only think keeping me on Firefox instead of Opera is Tree Style Tabs.
Get a VPS in another country. Establish a VPN connection from your router to your VPS. Route all traffic from the open AP through the VPN.
Tuesday Boy is a difficult problem not because of the math behind it but because of the grammar in the question.