I'm a Christian. If you had followed this little bit of discussion you would have known that, and you would have seen the distinctions I made between differing thoughts. Again, I'm a Christian. I'm also conservative. A likely candidate for one of these bigots huh? Well, I feel homosexuals ought to be allowed to marry and enjoy the privileges that holds. I feel abortion is ok. I believe in evolution, that it's factual science and apart of a greater natural order. So if anyone knows there are different beliefs amongst Christians, it would be I.
I'm sure some thought Ben Franklin was the Devil himself when he controlled lightning. Or a witch. I believe we were just coming out of this day and age of history.
Those don't nearly compare to the act of "creating life" as they put it. Or even worse, a "soulless life." These are their concerns.
Personally I'm a Christian -- conservative as well. This was in no way an attack on right wing Christians. Many other spirituals and Christians feel the same way about "creating life," and I admire them. But I feel differently. If this research can save lives, it's alright in my book. I'm not sure I want to see someone try to clone a full human though. That's kind of creepy.
Yeah, instead they're all homicidal. Right. My psychiatrist asks me about my supposed homicidal thoughts every visit, and I keep telling her that I don't have them. But I have a psychotic disorder, so apparently I'm lying to her. So much for your surmounting evidence about what goes on inside my head. I'm an incurable "crazy" after all. By the way, this article nails me solid. Bad memory, creative, highly sensitive about criticism, and yes psychotic. Makes me wonder if I have this gene or not. I inherited my condition from my Grandmother after all. Oh and the creative part diminished when I started taking the anti-psychotic. But of course correlation != causation. Can't argue against that argument, right?
I'm diagnosed with schizoeffective disorder. My symptoms grew increasingly the more I studied music, particularly Aural Skills. I never finished college, leaving with just over 100 hours behind me. My psychiatrist never discussed this with me. I know that I've lost interest in music since I started the anti-psychotic. I have a $3k classical guitar I haven't played seriously in over 2 years. With my bad memory, I've all but forgotten the memorized repertoire.
Furthermore, this article describes me with great accuracy. I have a psychotic disorder, poor memory, and I don't take criticism that well without putting some deep thought into it first -- for example I do better at online discussions rather than live discussions. One reason is I have horrendous verbal skills.
One of my internships involved installing free and open wireless access points around my university's small town. I always wondered if another student would be taking them all down in the future. Some things are just too good to be true. Although, I hear some homeless are making use of free access points in their own cities. Why would anyone want to take that away? I'm all for free internet, and enjoyed the internship, but something tells it's just not going to last.
The internet provides all sorts of dynamics in the music being played. Radio has "Phone in a request" once in a blue moon. This would literally kill music radio, as radio stations don't have a direct way to charge the listeners. Something tells me this is simply Pandora having a hissy fit over having to pay.
I'd still roll over and fall back to sleep; and never remember the alarm going off. The only things that ever remotely worked were my sister growing up and Sepultura's Ratamahatta. Part of the latter was my kitten going nuts when it went off.
Well, traditional colleges aren't there to prepare you for employment. They're there to teach you critical thinking skills, which many employers rightfully value. Although some courses and offices may be designed specifically to prepare you for employment -- such as a resume course, or your university's "career services" office.
Considering that, many institutes of learning and professors have broken away from the tradition. The traditional exam is feared by students, and many educators argue that they don't particularly do much for them. They are often seen as a necessary evil. That doesn't have to be the case, as I learned first hand from several courses during college. I've sat many untraditional exams, and I don't feel they made me any lesser of a student. While I forgot a lot of the material, I took in what was memorable. If a phone call triggers the memorable response, and I retain that knowledge for the rest of my life, I can't really say that the untraditional exam method proved a disadvantage. It's arguably more likely that I will make a memorable connection with this special question that I just can't seem to answer if I take a moment to A) Look at my (professor-allowed) cheat sheet that I personally prepared. B) Get a hint from the professor. C) Make a phone call to an upper classman. Or whatever the professor has allowed within the exam's rules. These are tools a student is allowed, and it is up to the student to use them wisely. That is where the critical thinking skills come in handy.
I think it's too much trouble to be any benefit to the class (It could disturb others with everyone running to the front of the room to get permission, then make the actual call), but it's not unlike allowing a cheat sheet in an exam. You can get the cheat sheet answers from friends before class. Granted you have to predict the questions, but in any well organized course work, that is usually not a problem. I wouldn't be the professor to incorporate this with the big "surprise" question though. You know, the one that comes from the textbook's footnotes that few students ever read. Sometimes it's for extra credit. Maybe the professor could explicitly exclude the extra credit question from the phone call rule. At any rate, I've had professors who would likely allow something like this. Of course I've had professors who would absolutely condemn such a notion. (Damnit, just let me bring a calculator. I've got a mild case of dyscalculia.)
Well, there are clear laws in place stating that no person is to be owned by another. That includes, but is not limited to, the government owning the people. Self-ownership may not be the perfect term to refer to my refusal to be apart of mandatory flu vaccines (Which many in government now support, including Obama, in the wake of the over-hyped H1N1 flu), but it's a lot clearer what I mean than when I say self-determination.
Los Angeles has been discussing banning fast food restaurants for a few years. Here's an older article. And here's some push back. The only reason I chose that as an example is I recently saw an article about the ban's latest progress. (I thought it was on Opposing Views, but I can't find it.) And it illustrates how the cost of American health care is turning into a battle over what I personally choose to consume -- my two points being mandatory (potentially deadly, poorly tested) vaccines, and a potential for mandatory abstinence from trans-fat, which I do choose to consume lightly.
Health freedom is almost as popular as freedom itself. Maybe I'll make this my sig.
Right. I wasn't suggesting that embryonic stem cells are obsolete. I have absolutely no background in biology, so I try not to say too much for fear of getting facts mixed up, but when the topic of embryonic stem cells is brought up, I do make it a point to note that these researchers have made a breakthrough with IPS cells. This is where the real medicine in practice will be, and eventually people won't be studying the embryonic stem cells quite as much. If I had to make a somewhat educated guess, I'd say the area of embryonic stem cells will remain in the research labs, not in actual medical practice, especially now that the cancer risk of IPS cells has been all but eliminated
This reminds me of a fellow student in one of my programming classes. I was working on my homework in the computer lab, left to use the restroom, came back and got back to work. Shortly after the other student asked if I could help him with his homework. I took one look at it and I knew without a doubt it was my homework, which he had mutilated in an attempt to make it his own (gibberish). Needless to say, I grabbed my things and went straight to the CS department's chair about the issue. If he hadn't asked for help, he and I both would have been dinged for plagiarism. I don't know what happened with the other student. He continued attending classes, so it must not have been too bad. I asked that he not be punished for it.
From my understanding, embryonic stem cells are not necessary any longer, and have issues of their own that make them undesirable in the long term. Also, as far as I understand, adult stem cells can be made to act like embryonic stem cells, and they don't have the biological (and moral) issues that accompany embryonic stem cells.
A researcher out of Japan named Yamanaka is performing what can only be termed as medical miracles. Something to read
So it's ok for powerful politicians to claim ownership over the masses? That's what is happening. Self ownership is an endangered concept, and will only lose its weight more as government claims more control over health care. Fast food? Too bad, government will ban it (they've already started in parts of the U.S.), claiming it raises health care costs. Black market food will become a reality.
Democracy is not a bad concept, and a true Republic where representatives actually represent the people, only improves on the concept. If you had your way, there would be one ruling party, no elections, no democracy. Kinda like Iran. That's where this so called mitigation leads, and guess what? The people won't stand for that (again, pointing towards Iran). Yeah, they're hard to get rid of. This is The People's Republic, and don't you forget that. This is our country, not just the politicians' corrupt or not. "Don't tread on me!" "A government which can give everything can take everything away." If the Republicans won't represent these concepts any longer, you can bet the people will. Freedom is very popular. No amount of government control will change that.
You claim 51% pissing on the corn flakes of the other 49% is a bad thing, while disregarding that it's much easier for a handful of politicians to be corrupt than the full 51%. Maybe your ideas would work if people didn't have the potential to be corrupt, but that's the way life works. The people keep the government in check, and for good reason. Today's expanding government is not maintainable. The future of America is less government, by attrition. We simply can't afford to keep going like this. We're about to lose our credit rating, which is a great step towards the true future of our children and grand-children. Government will be forced to shrink. We can't keep surviving these financial bubbles with a quick fix every time they're about to pop. More spending, and expanding government is not the answer. But it's the answer to your idea of government. Your idea of government can not be maintained indefinitely. The People's Republic can be.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a Christian. If you had followed this little bit of discussion you would have known that, and you would have seen the distinctions I made between differing thoughts. Again, I'm a Christian. I'm also conservative. A likely candidate for one of these bigots huh? Well, I feel homosexuals ought to be allowed to marry and enjoy the privileges that holds. I feel abortion is ok. I believe in evolution, that it's factual science and apart of a greater natural order. So if anyone knows there are different beliefs amongst Christians, it would be I.
I'm sure some thought Ben Franklin was the Devil himself when he controlled lightning. Or a witch. I believe we were just coming out of this day and age of history.
Those don't nearly compare to the act of "creating life" as they put it. Or even worse, a "soulless life." These are their concerns.
Personally I'm a Christian -- conservative as well. This was in no way an attack on right wing Christians. Many other spirituals and Christians feel the same way about "creating life," and I admire them. But I feel differently. If this research can save lives, it's alright in my book. I'm not sure I want to see someone try to clone a full human though. That's kind of creepy.
The problem is some spirituals, such as Christians, believe cloning is like playing God, and should be eschewed by all means.
Yeah, instead they're all homicidal. Right. My psychiatrist asks me about my supposed homicidal thoughts every visit, and I keep telling her that I don't have them. But I have a psychotic disorder, so apparently I'm lying to her. So much for your surmounting evidence about what goes on inside my head. I'm an incurable "crazy" after all. By the way, this article nails me solid. Bad memory, creative, highly sensitive about criticism, and yes psychotic. Makes me wonder if I have this gene or not. I inherited my condition from my Grandmother after all. Oh and the creative part diminished when I started taking the anti-psychotic. But of course correlation != causation. Can't argue against that argument, right?
I'm diagnosed with schizoeffective disorder. My symptoms grew increasingly the more I studied music, particularly Aural Skills. I never finished college, leaving with just over 100 hours behind me. My psychiatrist never discussed this with me. I know that I've lost interest in music since I started the anti-psychotic. I have a $3k classical guitar I haven't played seriously in over 2 years. With my bad memory, I've all but forgotten the memorized repertoire.
Furthermore, this article describes me with great accuracy. I have a psychotic disorder, poor memory, and I don't take criticism that well without putting some deep thought into it first -- for example I do better at online discussions rather than live discussions. One reason is I have horrendous verbal skills.
All the more reason to eschew eugenics.
One of my internships involved installing free and open wireless access points around my university's small town. I always wondered if another student would be taking them all down in the future. Some things are just too good to be true. Although, I hear some homeless are making use of free access points in their own cities. Why would anyone want to take that away? I'm all for free internet, and enjoyed the internship, but something tells it's just not going to last.
The internet provides all sorts of dynamics in the music being played. Radio has "Phone in a request" once in a blue moon. This would literally kill music radio, as radio stations don't have a direct way to charge the listeners. Something tells me this is simply Pandora having a hissy fit over having to pay.
The hard truth, but it's never appropriate to post.
Poorly written. I meant, while growing up, she could always get me up for school.
I'd still roll over and fall back to sleep; and never remember the alarm going off. The only things that ever remotely worked were my sister growing up and Sepultura's Ratamahatta. Part of the latter was my kitten going nuts when it went off.
Nevermind. The article finally loaded. It's music related.
The article seems to be dead. Is this merely music related, or does this include podcasts featuring only news? This is the first I've heard of this.
That's when the shit really starts to hit the fan.
Pun intended? lol
Well, traditional colleges aren't there to prepare you for employment. They're there to teach you critical thinking skills, which many employers rightfully value. Although some courses and offices may be designed specifically to prepare you for employment -- such as a resume course, or your university's "career services" office.
Considering that, many institutes of learning and professors have broken away from the tradition. The traditional exam is feared by students, and many educators argue that they don't particularly do much for them. They are often seen as a necessary evil. That doesn't have to be the case, as I learned first hand from several courses during college. I've sat many untraditional exams, and I don't feel they made me any lesser of a student. While I forgot a lot of the material, I took in what was memorable. If a phone call triggers the memorable response, and I retain that knowledge for the rest of my life, I can't really say that the untraditional exam method proved a disadvantage. It's arguably more likely that I will make a memorable connection with this special question that I just can't seem to answer if I take a moment to A) Look at my (professor-allowed) cheat sheet that I personally prepared. B) Get a hint from the professor. C) Make a phone call to an upper classman. Or whatever the professor has allowed within the exam's rules. These are tools a student is allowed, and it is up to the student to use them wisely. That is where the critical thinking skills come in handy.
I think it's too much trouble to be any benefit to the class (It could disturb others with everyone running to the front of the room to get permission, then make the actual call), but it's not unlike allowing a cheat sheet in an exam. You can get the cheat sheet answers from friends before class. Granted you have to predict the questions, but in any well organized course work, that is usually not a problem. I wouldn't be the professor to incorporate this with the big "surprise" question though. You know, the one that comes from the textbook's footnotes that few students ever read. Sometimes it's for extra credit. Maybe the professor could explicitly exclude the extra credit question from the phone call rule. At any rate, I've had professors who would likely allow something like this. Of course I've had professors who would absolutely condemn such a notion. (Damnit, just let me bring a calculator. I've got a mild case of dyscalculia.)
You're talking about the Model-T right? Granted with a little work, someone can fix those issues.
Well, there are clear laws in place stating that no person is to be owned by another. That includes, but is not limited to, the government owning the people. Self-ownership may not be the perfect term to refer to my refusal to be apart of mandatory flu vaccines (Which many in government now support, including Obama, in the wake of the over-hyped H1N1 flu), but it's a lot clearer what I mean than when I say self-determination.
Los Angeles has been discussing banning fast food restaurants for a few years. Here's an older article. And here's some push back. The only reason I chose that as an example is I recently saw an article about the ban's latest progress. (I thought it was on Opposing Views, but I can't find it.) And it illustrates how the cost of American health care is turning into a battle over what I personally choose to consume -- my two points being mandatory (potentially deadly, poorly tested) vaccines, and a potential for mandatory abstinence from trans-fat, which I do choose to consume lightly.
Health freedom is almost as popular as freedom itself. Maybe I'll make this my sig.
Soon to be mandatory for all politicians -- injections of Ron Paul's iPS cells.
Right. I wasn't suggesting that embryonic stem cells are obsolete. I have absolutely no background in biology, so I try not to say too much for fear of getting facts mixed up, but when the topic of embryonic stem cells is brought up, I do make it a point to note that these researchers have made a breakthrough with IPS cells. This is where the real medicine in practice will be, and eventually people won't be studying the embryonic stem cells quite as much. If I had to make a somewhat educated guess, I'd say the area of embryonic stem cells will remain in the research labs, not in actual medical practice, especially now that the cancer risk of IPS cells has been all but eliminated
This reminds me of a fellow student in one of my programming classes. I was working on my homework in the computer lab, left to use the restroom, came back and got back to work. Shortly after the other student asked if I could help him with his homework. I took one look at it and I knew without a doubt it was my homework, which he had mutilated in an attempt to make it his own (gibberish). Needless to say, I grabbed my things and went straight to the CS department's chair about the issue. If he hadn't asked for help, he and I both would have been dinged for plagiarism. I don't know what happened with the other student. He continued attending classes, so it must not have been too bad. I asked that he not be punished for it.
Here's a better, more recent article
From my understanding, embryonic stem cells are not necessary any longer, and have issues of their own that make them undesirable in the long term. Also, as far as I understand, adult stem cells can be made to act like embryonic stem cells, and they don't have the biological (and moral) issues that accompany embryonic stem cells.
A researcher out of Japan named Yamanaka is performing what can only be termed as medical miracles. Something to read
So it's ok for powerful politicians to claim ownership over the masses? That's what is happening. Self ownership is an endangered concept, and will only lose its weight more as government claims more control over health care. Fast food? Too bad, government will ban it (they've already started in parts of the U.S.), claiming it raises health care costs. Black market food will become a reality.
Democracy is not a bad concept, and a true Republic where representatives actually represent the people, only improves on the concept. If you had your way, there would be one ruling party, no elections, no democracy. Kinda like Iran. That's where this so called mitigation leads, and guess what? The people won't stand for that (again, pointing towards Iran). Yeah, they're hard to get rid of. This is The People's Republic, and don't you forget that. This is our country, not just the politicians' corrupt or not. "Don't tread on me!" "A government which can give everything can take everything away." If the Republicans won't represent these concepts any longer, you can bet the people will. Freedom is very popular. No amount of government control will change that.
You claim 51% pissing on the corn flakes of the other 49% is a bad thing, while disregarding that it's much easier for a handful of politicians to be corrupt than the full 51%. Maybe your ideas would work if people didn't have the potential to be corrupt, but that's the way life works. The people keep the government in check, and for good reason. Today's expanding government is not maintainable. The future of America is less government, by attrition. We simply can't afford to keep going like this. We're about to lose our credit rating, which is a great step towards the true future of our children and grand-children. Government will be forced to shrink. We can't keep surviving these financial bubbles with a quick fix every time they're about to pop. More spending, and expanding government is not the answer. But it's the answer to your idea of government. Your idea of government can not be maintained indefinitely. The People's Republic can be.