LOL. How so. Homosexuals were hanged until the 1860s, then imprisoned. You had to be a member of the Church of England to reach any position of importance in the empire. Britain was an empire stretching over a quarter of the globe, built through these megacorps, and violently repressing people by tens and hundreds of millions. Women had no right to property, or vote, or anything. Blacks were just barely out of slavery: it was abolished in the 1830s. Male suffrage was not even universal before that, even for free men. The working class had 0 protection and their lives were generally in squalor. Social mobility was non existent, the "commoners" who rose up were related by blood to the nobility already the majority of the time. Functional illiteracy was incredibly high, children died in droves in the first four years of their lives, and a majority of London's working class women were at least part time prostituting for subsistance. Take off the pink colored glasses, will you, it was only good if you were rich, white, straight and male.
Except these codes are sometimes necessary. You clearly have no idea what laws do if you think all there is to it is the criminal code, which is a small and relatively simple section of laws. "IANAL" in this case seems to be "and I don't even have a clue what laws do" - a budget is a law, for one.
Suggesting a corporation engage in an all-out trade embargo is suggesting it acts as a government (more than it already does: most corporations ARE governments). Clearly americans haven't learned their lesson when they overthrew the East India company if some of them still think enabling a megacorp is somehow going to be good for anyone.
Chrome doesn't use anything that is as cross-platform as XUL, its elements (esp. the engine; yes it's webkit but it's not the exact same version of webkit everywhere) are more local.
No actually, ARPAnet is dod research, the protocols in the internet are all open and have people from a lot of countries working of them. The US also has no power to pull a plug, only 24% of the major DNS servers are american, if the US wants to get out of the world, they will be the only ones to suffer.
You refuted nothing, there was not massive collective oppression against anti-gay activists, it was isolated incidents. By comparison, the LDS church actively and proudly mobilized.
That's not a threat, it just makes more marriage! This is obviously better and the sanctity of marriage is thus preserved by it happening often. The founder of the episcopalian church, for one, would be glad, along with his wife Catherine of Aragon, his wife Anne Boleyn, his wife Jane Seymour, his wife Anne of Cleves, his wife Catherine Howard and his wife Catherine Parr...
correction - "everything to lose, nothing to gain" Keep your empty "I'm not against gays" - you're supporting the people who would deny them personhood, you're no ally of gays if you can't see them and stop defending the right of the majority to oppress the minority.
You, sir, are the cowardly few men who allow evil to take hold because you're concerned about the evil doers' rights. You're handwringing like a moron because you have nothing to lose: you're the Winstons of this world, the kind of people who reads 1984 and can't understand that the main character is not the hero, he's the bourgeois faux-revolutionary who is unable to leave his fucking comfort aside to truly fight.
That one weird belief includes denying personhood to a category of people. Homophobia and antisemitism are closer than antisemitism and not liking bigots.
It's funny how the homophobes are getting top modding while stuff like this gets "omg flamebait". But what can you expect from a bunch of cowardly neckbeards.
The right that was being taken away, for one, did not cause any wrong. Idiot. Also you cherrypicked a handful of incidents none of which are categorizable as vioolence; considering the violence queers still face daily in America, getting spray painted or their house egged is the least they deserve if they're too cowardly to stand up for your beliefs in front of the people you're trying to take away the rights from.
You obviously have not followed Phelps lately, a lot of people make it a show of pride to be hated by him personally because his loons can do nothing but hope somebody will lose it and then his litter of inbred lawyers will sue, which everybody is aware of...
So nothing has changed since the revolution, the tories are still cowering and unable to have the courage of their convictions, while trying to keep everyone down and in the past and trampling the right of people to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness. It's a petition, not a ballot. In fact that it can be used to put measures on the ballot is all the more reason that it shouldn't be anonymous unless there was another system defeating their purpose: i.e. registration of petition signers. If you don't have the courage to take away other people's rights (and no you don't have the right to oppress, trample or suppress a minority while imposing your lifestyle on them), you shouldn't be allowed to try.
Not wanting to hire blacks or mexicans is more akin to not wanting to hire gays: you people are funny though pretending homophobes are oppressed, as opposed to in power in half the Union and enough of a power block in the rest to significantly block a lot of their rights.
Slashdot Mirror
LOL.
How so. Homosexuals were hanged until the 1860s, then imprisoned. You had to be a member of the Church of England to reach any position of importance in the empire. Britain was an empire stretching over a quarter of the globe, built through these megacorps, and violently repressing people by tens and hundreds of millions. Women had no right to property, or vote, or anything. Blacks were just barely out of slavery: it was abolished in the 1830s. Male suffrage was not even universal before that, even for free men. The working class had 0 protection and their lives were generally in squalor. Social mobility was non existent, the "commoners" who rose up were related by blood to the nobility already the majority of the time. Functional illiteracy was incredibly high, children died in droves in the first four years of their lives, and a majority of London's working class women were at least part time prostituting for subsistance.
Take off the pink colored glasses, will you, it was only good if you were rich, white, straight and male.
Apart from ridiculous hyperbole and poor comparisons, do you have anything to substantiate the point.
Except these codes are sometimes necessary. You clearly have no idea what laws do if you think all there is to it is the criminal code, which is a small and relatively simple section of laws. "IANAL" in this case seems to be "and I don't even have a clue what laws do" - a budget is a law, for one.
"Return"?
When has it ever been. Government sponsored megacorporations and enclosing commons is not libertarian.
Suggesting a corporation engage in an all-out trade embargo is suggesting it acts as a government (more than it already does: most corporations ARE governments). Clearly americans haven't learned their lesson when they overthrew the East India company if some of them still think enabling a megacorp is somehow going to be good for anyone.
Considering the tone in the comments this was oddly ontopic actually.
Chrome doesn't use anything that is as cross-platform as XUL, its elements (esp. the engine; yes it's webkit but it's not the exact same version of webkit everywhere) are more local.
So IE8 is still beta?
Your ridiculous whining has nothing to do with standards, or with activex.
No actually, ARPAnet is dod research, the protocols in the internet are all open and have people from a lot of countries working of them. The US also has no power to pull a plug, only 24% of the major DNS servers are american, if the US wants to get out of the world, they will be the only ones to suffer.
Handguns are totally going to secure your free speech rights against... rifles-armed people...
Fetch me my brown pants.
You refuted nothing, there was not massive collective oppression against anti-gay activists, it was isolated incidents. By comparison, the LDS church actively and proudly mobilized.
That's not a threat, it just makes more marriage! This is obviously better and the sanctity of marriage is thus preserved by it happening often. The founder of the episcopalian church, for one, would be glad, along with his wife Catherine of Aragon, his wife Anne Boleyn, his wife Jane Seymour, his wife Anne of Cleves, his wife Catherine Howard and his wife Catherine Parr...
mod up, people!
correction - "everything to lose, nothing to gain"
Keep your empty "I'm not against gays" - you're supporting the people who would deny them personhood, you're no ally of gays if you can't see them and stop defending the right of the majority to oppress the minority.
You, sir, are the cowardly few men who allow evil to take hold because you're concerned about the evil doers' rights. You're handwringing like a moron because you have nothing to lose: you're the Winstons of this world, the kind of people who reads 1984 and can't understand that the main character is not the hero, he's the bourgeois faux-revolutionary who is unable to leave his fucking comfort aside to truly fight.
That one weird belief includes denying personhood to a category of people. Homophobia and antisemitism are closer than antisemitism and not liking bigots.
It's funny how the homophobes are getting top modding while stuff like this gets "omg flamebait". But what can you expect from a bunch of cowardly neckbeards.
Modders, get your tags right: this might have been a flamebait, but no way this was a troll.
I'm not sure I follow.
You could just have ended the comment there.
Also, it's not violence. You're the kind of moron who thinks because they've been shut in their home for a day they know what Anne Frank went through.
The right that was being taken away, for one, did not cause any wrong. Idiot.
Also you cherrypicked a handful of incidents none of which are categorizable as vioolence; considering the violence queers still face daily in America, getting spray painted or their house egged is the least they deserve if they're too cowardly to stand up for your beliefs in front of the people you're trying to take away the rights from.
You obviously have not followed Phelps lately, a lot of people make it a show of pride to be hated by him personally because his loons can do nothing but hope somebody will lose it and then his litter of inbred lawyers will sue, which everybody is aware of...
So nothing has changed since the revolution, the tories are still cowering and unable to have the courage of their convictions, while trying to keep everyone down and in the past and trampling the right of people to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness.
It's a petition, not a ballot. In fact that it can be used to put measures on the ballot is all the more reason that it shouldn't be anonymous unless there was another system defeating their purpose: i.e. registration of petition signers. If you don't have the courage to take away other people's rights (and no you don't have the right to oppress, trample or suppress a minority while imposing your lifestyle on them), you shouldn't be allowed to try.
lol, coward - go back to your rentboy
Not wanting to hire blacks or mexicans is more akin to not wanting to hire gays: you people are funny though pretending homophobes are oppressed, as opposed to in power in half the Union and enough of a power block in the rest to significantly block a lot of their rights.