The basis of antiabortion legislation is the theory that abortion kills a human person.
This theory also has no bearing on the pro-choice decision in Roe V Wade.
If that premise is granted, such legislation is firmly grounded in law and reason.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. If that premise is granted, such legislation is, perhaps, well-intentioned. Such legislation is harmful and destroys our rights independent of that premise.
Why should any patient have the right to arbitrarily end the life of another?
Exactly. There are many situations in which it is acceptable to end the life of another person. Not arbitrarily. Legislation would make it arbitrary.
SCOTUS decided that state anti-abortion legislation used powers prohibited by the constitution to the states.
Whether or not you agree with their decision, their rationale certainly matches the constitution. Even if you are right, and the "Judges saw an opportunity to force their moral views", give them credit for knowing how to frame their argument correctly.
And I hope you really feel that way. But in my experience, when someone calls a judge an activist, they usually also disagree with the choice they've made, liberals & conservatives alike. And so when someone makes that complaint, I assume that they are either blind or deceptive.
So while Kerry wouldn't say anything in support, he would happily sit by while activist judges (of the sort he would be appointing) rammed it down our throats.
Activist judges.
Every time someone blames something on "activist judges" my estimate of their IQ goes down about 5 points.
When a judge strikes down a long-standing law because it violates the constitution of their state or country, is that activism? Is it bad?
But right now, we not only protect minority rights. We have minority rule. Why is that better? Our current system means that the majority loses rights. For example, in the 1920s, we lost the right to drink until drunk. Why is that ok?
While I would not advocate the abolition of the electoral college, I do not understand its defenders. Why do country folk need to be protected from city folk more than city folk need to be protected from country folk? The disproportionate representation of small populations was what gave us prohibition. I feel like that is a *very* indicative example of the danger posed by giving disproportionate power to the wide open spaces. Why is that ok?
Also, we liberals need to keep in mind that *both* candidates in 2000 gamed the electoral college. There are two ways to play:
get the small state bonuses
win states narrowly, lose by landslides
Bush did one, Gore did the other. With both games allowed, Bush barely won. If you take away *either* game, the other candidate wins by huge margins. If you take away both, Gore barely wins. To act like the electoral college is a travesty, or that Bush only won because of the small state bonuses, is an oversimplification. The election was really close.
So, whatever we change... I'm concerned that if the small state bonus is totally irrevocable, then making the presidential "more fair" without getting rid of the small state bonus, would result in way, way more power for conservatives.
I thought everyone's gripe is that ATi & nVidia don't open source their video drivers... because they are better than the existing open source drivers.
But don't we already have debian-free-qualifying GNU-hippy-pleasing drivers that run all ATi & nVidia cards? Don't we have drivers for every integrated graphics chipset?
Why would anyone care about the GNUness of the manufacturer's driver... if that manufacturer's driver were not better than the existing FS/OSS driver? If this guy builds his FPGA 2D card, won't all the FS/OSS people still run their ATI Rage 128 with their open source driver?
Idogeddit. Don't we already have open source drivers?
Story is out of date.
on
Replacing TCP?
·
· Score: 1, Funny
They've already published RFCs and had them approved. The internet is switching to Rateless Internet two weeks from next Wednesday, on November 10th. After that, no more TCP/IP.
He has violated the GPL in the case of PdfConv. He is distributing PdfConv, and up until recently was only distributing the source code for PDF2HTML. The changes to the front end were not incorporated in the tarball. The developers of PDF2HTML did not seem pleased.
According to his emails, it seems that he intends to distribute source code for CherryOS. We shall see. Has he distributed binaries to anyone yet? Whenever the "trial" starts, people will be able to request the source code.
Jon Stewart is a comedian. Success, for him, would be network late night talk. He is not a journalist. He has no journalistic training. He is not Jim Lehrer. What is wrong with a cable comedian screaming down the cable news guys? He is doing a responsible job as a comedian. His satire is already a better news show than crossfire.
IE caches files in all kinds of weird places in the filesystem that it never cleans out. These files are not visible from explorer or the command line. There was some outrage about it a few years ago. Google might be using these undeleted caches, rather than the official IE cache.
Slashdot Mirror
The decision in Roe V Wade does relate to whether abortion involves ending a potential life. So saying that there's no bearing is over strong.
This theory also has no bearing on the pro-choice decision in Roe V Wade.
I'm sorry, that's wrong.
The basis of antiabortion legislation is the theory that abortion kills a human person.
This theory also has no bearing on the pro-choice decision in Roe V Wade.
If that premise is granted, such legislation is firmly grounded in law and reason.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. If that premise is granted, such legislation is, perhaps, well-intentioned. Such legislation is harmful and destroys our rights independent of that premise.
Why should any patient have the right to arbitrarily end the life of another?
Exactly. There are many situations in which it is acceptable to end the life of another person. Not arbitrarily. Legislation would make it arbitrary.
Are you saying that babies are mistreated now because of of public law?
Kindof, yeah.
SCOTUS decided that state anti-abortion legislation used powers prohibited by the constitution to the states.
Whether or not you agree with their decision, their rationale certainly matches the constitution. Even if you are right, and the "Judges saw an opportunity to force their moral views", give them credit for knowing how to frame their argument correctly.
And I hope you really feel that way. But in my experience, when someone calls a judge an activist, they usually also disagree with the choice they've made, liberals & conservatives alike. And so when someone makes that complaint, I assume that they are either blind or deceptive.
So while Kerry wouldn't say anything in support, he would happily sit by while activist judges (of the sort he would be appointing) rammed it down our throats.
Activist judges.
Every time someone blames something on "activist judges" my estimate of their IQ goes down about 5 points.
When a judge strikes down a long-standing law because it violates the constitution of their state or country, is that activism? Is it bad?
What is this "local ISP" you speak of?
It's SBC or Comcast for broadband.
Maybe he didn't.
But if you do understand what "post-modern" means, then you'll be the first such person that I've ever met.
But right now, we not only protect minority rights. We have minority rule. Why is that better? Our current system means that the majority loses rights. For example, in the 1920s, we lost the right to drink until drunk. Why is that ok?
Also, we liberals need to keep in mind that *both* candidates in 2000 gamed the electoral college. There are two ways to play:Bush did one, Gore did the other. With both games allowed, Bush barely won. If you take away *either* game, the other candidate wins by huge margins. If you take away both, Gore barely wins. To act like the electoral college is a travesty, or that Bush only won because of the small state bonuses, is an oversimplification. The election was really close.
So, whatever we change... I'm concerned that if the small state bonus is totally irrevocable, then making the presidential "more fair" without getting rid of the small state bonus, would result in way, way more power for conservatives.
I thought everyone's gripe is that ATi & nVidia don't open source their video drivers... because they are better than the existing open source drivers.
But don't we already have debian-free-qualifying GNU-hippy-pleasing drivers that run all ATi & nVidia cards? Don't we have drivers for every integrated graphics chipset?
Why would anyone care about the GNUness of the manufacturer's driver... if that manufacturer's driver were not better than the existing FS/OSS driver? If this guy builds his FPGA 2D card, won't all the FS/OSS people still run their ATI Rage 128 with their open source driver?
Idogeddit. Don't we already have open source drivers?
What! Don't knock the Metreon! The Metreon rules! It's like living in the future (of 1998)!
Troll? Oh, come on. It's a *joke*.
They've already published RFCs and had them approved. The internet is switching to Rateless Internet two weeks from next Wednesday, on November 10th. After that, no more TCP/IP.
If you need extreme performance in small commercial site
Whu... if you need extreme performance, it isn't a small commercial site, now is it.
I was making a joke about phishing sites.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. citibank.com may work in Firefox, but citi-bank.com requires IE.
... as if that's a lot of money for a portable entertainment device. How much do you think an iPod costs?
A lot!
Heh. Funny to think that at one time, a transistor radio would be as ostentatious as the little white iPod headphones.
Of course there were no portable headphones.
Just saying.
He has violated the GPL in the case of PdfConv. He is distributing PdfConv, and up until recently was only distributing the source code for PDF2HTML. The changes to the front end were not incorporated in the tarball. The developers of PDF2HTML did not seem pleased.
According to his emails, it seems that he intends to distribute source code for CherryOS. We shall see. Has he distributed binaries to anyone yet? Whenever the "trial" starts, people will be able to request the source code.
I don't understand.
Jon Stewart is a comedian. Success, for him, would be network late night talk. He is not a journalist. He has no journalistic training. He is not Jim Lehrer. What is wrong with a cable comedian screaming down the cable news guys? He is doing a responsible job as a comedian. His satire is already a better news show than crossfire.
Right?
Check for yourself.
IE caches files in all kinds of weird places in the filesystem that it never cleans out. These files are not visible from explorer or the command line. There was some outrage about it a few years ago. Google might be using these undeleted caches, rather than the official IE cache.
Come on, who doesn't like a little gay porn every so often?
Right, guys?
Guys?