And that is why every "debate" on it starts with calling the GOP terrorists and racists.
It does seem to me that the "left" (i.e. the moderate right wing) in the United States uses "racism" as an accusation quite often.
But you truly think that the Republican party finds itself tarred as "terrorist"?
Perhaps you are talking about some other planet?
Or did you get used to typing and saying the word 50 times a day at anyone who isn't 100% in agreement with you, and it was used in error in your post above.
You really are shrieking balls of white hot fury aren't you?
You tea partiers should be careful with the accusations about reliance on the half-truth and half-understood terminology.
Investigate (from reliable sources ) how health care works in countries that have it, and you really must learn the meaning of the word "socialist" or you'll wear it out. Before long it won't even be a boo-word for your troops. anymore.
Do you think people don't get sick and die broke in the UK?
Do they go bankrupt because of unpayable medical expenses? So rare as to be unheard of.
If you want to get care with the unwashed masses then you get the bare minimum and still die anyway.
For every story about proton beam therapy being unavailable on the NHS I will give you another about a non investor-class person who saw a GP for free and thus found an illness earlier and was treated and cured at a lower overall cost.
(I mention cost, because to people like you $$ mean more than human life.)
Shall I give you a story?About being sent to a different hospital because the nearest one is "out of network"? How precisely does this maximise efficiency? The Holy Market (pbuh) brings 100% efficiency in all cases, does it not? Please help me understand.
It is difficult to tell with you people whether you actually believe that the insurance co.s exist to pay your bills. (To state it again for the willfully uninformed: They exist to maximise profit and deny your claim whenever possible.)
Or do you simply believe that poverty is its own punishment?
The trouble is, that even the poor are uniformly undeserving, you will reduce social mobility by providing so few ways out of poverty for children with potential.
You can't possibly be unaware of the response to such "spontaneous arrangement of molecules is too unlikely" statements.
But just in case:
The complexity did not arise spontaneously. Non creationists suggest that complexity that improved inclusive fitness was retained and thus preferentially found in the pool of offspring. So are all other characteristics that improve survival.
You are right, there are most certainly double standards in this area. Women are permitted to leer at inappropriately young men and it is harmless fun, but the sex reversed situation is a borderline sex-crime among some people.
You are wrong about 17 being underage. 16 is the age of consent in Britain, with stricter rules if an older person is in a "position of trust" (eg a teacher) over a 16 or 17 year old.
Is a TV talent contest judge in a postion of trust? I would hope not
“There is a currently consultation focusing on speed-limiting technology already fitted to HGVs and buses.
“Taking account of the results, the Commission will publish in the autumn a document by its technical experts which will no doubt refer to ISA among many other things.”
So how do they plan to mitigate accidents caused by tired and overworked drivers? Do they also plan to install heart monitors in case people have heart-attacks? Those happen. What about drunk drivers? What about steering and breaking faults. How many people die because of those?
Fucking bureaucrats.
Your position is that problems B, C, D, E and F exist, therefore problem A must not be addressed?
The problem with all those greenies.... throw their hands up get in the private jets that burn more feul in onme day then a family of four...
Do you have any evidence that people who are environmentally conscious are likely to own private jets?
Anecdotes about one person is not evidence.
Your dislike of people who say things you find inconvenient is painfully obvious.
Regarding the point of this article, your country produces an awful lot of unnecessary waste - easily the most per capita. But anyone suggesting that people produce less will be smeared as a communist greenwash faggot.(All those hilarious jokes about NPR canvas totes and "Portlandia made real")
At the moment, you find that it is better to export trash to another country across the ocean than to attempt to change your population's behaviour.
Looks like you won't be doing that much longer.
Many societies prevent marriage between mentally healthy adults because they are too closely related. (To prevent in-breeding, but also people have an ick-factor to this, and will draw the line at differing places. First cousin marriage is legal in some places, illegal in others)
A response to this could be that homosexual pairings will not result in in-bred offspring so the justification for restriction does not apply. But you can't claim that meaningful consent is the only generally accepted criterion. (Also, I couldn't marry my sister even if I volunteered to be castrated first. Though might be an indication of less than good mental health:-))
The first thing you need to get into your head is:
The "Free Market" is a myth. Like a frictionless bearing it is useful only in an elementary theory.
You don't get to choose if you have to pay rent and feed children and there are no other employers near you.
The difference between Unions and other organisations (powerful or otherwise) is that they are set up to operate in the worker's interest.
They are not flawless, but in the first place, their task is to protect workers from employer exploitation.
Better this than no-one to stand up to scum employers like McDonald's. Except it isn't really them it's just one little franchisee, and "the two are completely separate, your honour."
You must work in PR.
McDonald's has nothing to do with how people who work in McDonald's fast food outlets are paid???
Can you feel no cognitive dissonance?
Even assuming your premise is correct, you forget the public relations value.
Tesla will reward those customers who purchase their Model S car with apparently *free* access to fast charging facilities, for the lifetime of the car.
Sounds like a good deal to me, I bet you it will tip some people towards Tesla and away from BMW/Cadillac/Mercedes Benz.
It is not that uncommon to drive a long distance A to B and take a break on the way. Are there 4 people in your car? (Model S is a large car) Are there youngish children?
They will want toilet breaks, drinks, snacks.
If you do 3 long trips or so a year this could easily assuage fears about getting stuck, or having to hire something unfamiliar.
This offer makes them seem like a really cool company, and addresses the problem of people's largely misplaced range anxiety.
I note your admission that there exist "psuedo Muslims". By which you actually mean, non-fundamentalists who might self identify as Muslim to some extent or other. Your problem is that people like you will end up mistaking a "pseudo muslim" for a Fundamentalist religious fanatic and you will call for all of their elimination no matter what the facts are.
In fact I actually agree that Islam is a greater threat to what I'll need to call "Western Civilisation" than, for example Christianity. To give one example, Muslims are not the only ones who complain about their religious artefacts being "desecrated": see PZ Myers and Catholic communion wafers. BUT they are however vastly more likely to have members who will murder to gain revenge (see Theo van Gogh).
The closest we come in our views seems to be that Fundamentalist Islam is currently more dangerous than Fundamentalist Christianity. Agreed. Many others in this forum have pointed to matters such as some Christians prohibiting contraception and use of condoms as being a cause of spreading AIDS in Africa. You seem to be saying that not all religions are the same, rightly pointing the great many crimes and evils done in the name of Islam,
but insist that all Muslims are the same. Why the selective nuance? (As is favoured on internet forums, I will flag up your fallacy for you; "True Scotsman")
I presume you are an opponent of burning Qur'ans but recognize the right of Muslims to burn flags, each other, and us for some perceived injustice
You presume wrongly, my foam-flecked friend. I am a proponent of freedom of expression of all kinds, and I oppose special treatment to anyone based on their religion. One of the few libertarian "thin end of the wedge" arguments I actually agree with. (Actually, anyone who gets their knickers in a twist about flag burning is as stupid as someone who goes on a rampage cos someone burned a book there are millions of copies of.) Do you think Christian pastors burn non Christian holy books to bolster freedom of expression? Or might it be because it's the wrong kind of holy book?
How much of the AIDS epidemic in Africa is due to the Catholic Church's murderous attitude and bald-faced lies about condoms?
A very great deal of it. And this is good example of why not all Christians are the same. Most mainstream Protestants (in Britain at least) find Catholic teaching on sexuality to be at least stupid. The Anglican church in Britain has homosexual ordained vicars and bishops.
Saying that "they are all the same" is at the very least unnuanced, and in my opinion downright dangerous. It is demonising your opponent, one the things that religious people do (Inevitably, since non- or wrong-believers will not be saved).
Some believer in magic is telling us all to educate ourselves.Listen. The burden is on you. It's your religion. You want to improve your religion's image? Then convince other members of the Mohammed cult not to blow people up or cut off infidels heads or to stone people to death.
You are confusing a theological problem with a sociological one. The issue that concerns you as a non muslim is "Can or should I tar all Muslims with the same brush?" No you shouldn't, and your actions will actually worsen relations between different groups
FYI I am not a crypto theist of any description, but I can tell when someone is simply being prejudiced
Maybe you need an example closer to your own home: Are all Christians the same as Westboro Baptist? Is a Quaker or a Unitarian the same as a Fundamentalist Evangelical who uses biblical quotations to argue against homosexuality and "miscegenation"? Of course they are not, and it would be useful if those who thought they were the same made some effort.
The major problem with understanding Islam for Americans is that your media simply does not allow for the existence of anything extremist fundamentalists. Imagine a world where you were only told about the most lunatic fringe christians..
Slashdot Mirror
It does seem to me that the "left" (i.e. the moderate right wing) in the United States uses "racism" as an accusation quite often.
But you truly think that the Republican party finds itself tarred as "terrorist"? Perhaps you are talking about some other planet?
Or did you get used to typing and saying the word 50 times a day at anyone who isn't 100% in agreement with you, and it was used in error in your post above.
Investigate (from reliable sources ) how health care works in countries that have it, and you really must learn the meaning of the word "socialist" or you'll wear it out. Before long it won't even be a boo-word for your troops. anymore.
Spoken by someone who knows nothing whatsoever.
Do you think people don't get sick and die broke in the UK?
Do they go bankrupt because of unpayable medical expenses? So rare as to be unheard of.
If you want to get care with the unwashed masses then you get the bare minimum and still die anyway.
For every story about proton beam therapy being unavailable on the NHS I will give you another about a non investor-class person who saw a GP for free and thus found an illness earlier and was treated and cured at a lower overall cost.
(I mention cost, because to people like you $$ mean more than human life.)
Shall I give you a story?About being sent to a different hospital because the nearest one is "out of network"? How precisely does this maximise efficiency? The Holy Market (pbuh) brings 100% efficiency in all cases, does it not? Please help me understand.
It is difficult to tell with you people whether you actually believe that the insurance co.s exist to pay your bills. (To state it again for the willfully uninformed: They exist to maximise profit and deny your claim whenever possible.)
Or do you simply believe that poverty is its own punishment? The trouble is, that even the poor are uniformly undeserving, you will reduce social mobility by providing so few ways out of poverty for children with potential.
At whose request did they spy on Miranda?
I can imagine the cost of your current for-insurance-co.-profit system.
Will it be more expensive than that?
Your military recruits those of school age?
I mean it actively encourages them to join, rather than just under 18s are allowed to join up?
And judging by a previous reply, is legally entitled to contact info for all students?
You can't possibly be unaware of the response to such "spontaneous arrangement of molecules is too unlikely" statements.
But just in case:
The complexity did not arise spontaneously. Non creationists suggest that complexity that improved inclusive fitness was retained and thus preferentially found in the pool of offspring. So are all other characteristics that improve survival .
You are right, there are most certainly double standards in this area. Women are permitted to leer at inappropriately young men and it is harmless fun, but the sex reversed situation is a borderline sex-crime among some people.
You are wrong about 17 being underage. 16 is the age of consent in Britain, with stricter rules if an older person is in a "position of trust" (eg a teacher) over a 16 or 17 year old.
Is a TV talent contest judge in a postion of trust? I would hope not
relevant quote from EU spokesman:
“There is a currently consultation focusing on speed-limiting technology already fitted to HGVs and buses. “Taking account of the results, the Commission will publish in the autumn a document by its technical experts which will no doubt refer to ISA among many other things.”
Offtopic much?
So how do they plan to mitigate accidents caused by tired and overworked drivers? Do they also plan to install heart monitors in case people have heart-attacks? Those happen. What about drunk drivers? What about steering and breaking faults. How many people die because of those? Fucking bureaucrats.
Your position is that problems B, C, D, E and F exist, therefore problem A must not be addressed?
Quite right, I forgot Reuse!
The problem with all those greenies.... throw their hands up get in the private jets that burn more feul in onme day then a family of four...
Do you have any evidence that people who are environmentally conscious are likely to own private jets? Anecdotes about one person is not evidence. Your dislike of people who say things you find inconvenient is painfully obvious.
Regarding the point of this article, your country produces an awful lot of unnecessary waste - easily the most per capita. But anyone suggesting that people produce less will be smeared as a communist greenwash faggot.(All those hilarious jokes about NPR canvas totes and "Portlandia made real")
At the moment, you find that it is better to export trash to another country across the ocean than to attempt to change your population's behaviour. Looks like you won't be doing that much longer.
It's actually quite simple.
-Prevent -Reduce -Recycle -Burn
Many societies prevent marriage between mentally healthy adults because they are too closely related. (To prevent in-breeding, but also people have an ick-factor to this, and will draw the line at differing places. First cousin marriage is legal in some places, illegal in others) A response to this could be that homosexual pairings will not result in in-bred offspring so the justification for restriction does not apply. But you can't claim that meaningful consent is the only generally accepted criterion. (Also, I couldn't marry my sister even if I volunteered to be castrated first. Though might be an indication of less than good mental health :-))
The first thing you need to get into your head is: The "Free Market" is a myth. Like a frictionless bearing it is useful only in an elementary theory. You don't get to choose if you have to pay rent and feed children and there are no other employers near you.
The difference between Unions and other organisations (powerful or otherwise) is that they are set up to operate in the worker's interest. They are not flawless, but in the first place, their task is to protect workers from employer exploitation. Better this than no-one to stand up to scum employers like McDonald's. Except it isn't really them it's just one little franchisee, and "the two are completely separate, your honour."
You must work in PR. McDonald's has nothing to do with how people who work in McDonald's fast food outlets are paid??? Can you feel no cognitive dissonance?
Edison did not invent the light bulb. Stop believing your country's mythology. (Neither Did Swan)
Even assuming your premise is correct, you forget the public relations value. Tesla will reward those customers who purchase their Model S car with apparently *free* access to fast charging facilities, for the lifetime of the car. Sounds like a good deal to me, I bet you it will tip some people towards Tesla and away from BMW/Cadillac/Mercedes Benz. It is not that uncommon to drive a long distance A to B and take a break on the way. Are there 4 people in your car? (Model S is a large car) Are there youngish children? They will want toilet breaks, drinks, snacks. If you do 3 long trips or so a year this could easily assuage fears about getting stuck, or having to hire something unfamiliar. This offer makes them seem like a really cool company, and addresses the problem of people's largely misplaced range anxiety.
Surely you all know the habitable zone is exactly 20ft wide? Someone told me once, so I believed them
..and still seem 'moderate'
That is a good point.
parent desperately needs modding up, since you actually have a clue what you are talking about. (or maybe I just mean I agree with you)
I note your admission that there exist "psuedo Muslims".
By which you actually mean, non-fundamentalists who might self identify as Muslim to some extent or other.
Your problem is that people like you will end up mistaking a "pseudo muslim" for a Fundamentalist religious fanatic and you will call for all of their elimination no matter what the facts are.
In fact I actually agree that Islam is a greater threat to what I'll need to call "Western Civilisation" than, for example Christianity.
To give one example, Muslims are not the only ones who complain about their religious artefacts being "desecrated": see PZ Myers and Catholic communion wafers.
BUT they are however vastly more likely to have members who will murder to gain revenge (see Theo van Gogh).
The closest we come in our views seems to be that Fundamentalist Islam is currently more dangerous than Fundamentalist Christianity.
Agreed.
Many others in this forum have pointed to matters such as some Christians prohibiting contraception and use of condoms as being a cause of spreading AIDS in Africa.
You seem to be saying that not all religions are the same, rightly pointing the great many crimes and evils done in the name of Islam,
but insist that all Muslims are the same. Why the selective nuance?
(As is favoured on internet forums, I will flag up your fallacy for you; "True Scotsman")
I presume you are an opponent of burning Qur'ans but recognize the right of Muslims to burn flags, each other, and us for some perceived injustice
You presume wrongly, my foam-flecked friend. I am a proponent of freedom of expression of all kinds, and I oppose special treatment to anyone based on their religion. One of the few libertarian "thin end of the wedge" arguments I actually agree with.
(Actually, anyone who gets their knickers in a twist about flag burning is as stupid as someone who goes on a rampage cos someone burned a book there are millions of copies of.)
Do you think Christian pastors burn non Christian holy books to bolster freedom of expression? Or might it be because it's the wrong kind of holy book?
How much of the AIDS epidemic in Africa is due to the Catholic Church's murderous attitude and bald-faced lies about condoms?
A very great deal of it. And this is good example of why not all Christians are the same.
Most mainstream Protestants (in Britain at least) find Catholic teaching on sexuality to be at least stupid.
The Anglican church in Britain has homosexual ordained vicars and bishops.
Saying that "they are all the same" is at the very least unnuanced, and in my opinion downright dangerous. It is demonising your opponent, one the things that religious people do (Inevitably, since non- or wrong-believers will not be saved).
You are confusing a theological problem with a sociological one.
The issue that concerns you as a non muslim is "Can or should I tar all Muslims with the same brush?"
No you shouldn't, and your actions will actually worsen relations between different groups
FYI I am not a crypto theist of any description, but I can tell when someone is simply being prejudiced
Maybe you need an example closer to your own home:
Are all Christians the same as Westboro Baptist? Is a Quaker or a Unitarian the same as a Fundamentalist Evangelical who uses biblical quotations to argue against homosexuality and "miscegenation"?
Of course they are not, and it would be useful if those who thought they were the same made some effort.
The major problem with understanding Islam for Americans is that your media simply does not allow for the existence of anything extremist fundamentalists.
Imagine a world where you were only told about the most lunatic fringe christians..