It was much less the Roman Catholic Church that was killing people, more like the Roman Empire. While they are almost the same thing, there are differences, since RCC and Rome were tied together. But the Roman Empire wasn't always Christian, and yet was just as deadly against those that were in disagreement. Remember the whole thing about the one guy hung on a cross? Romans!
You are not actually helping the case of Muslims with your post. You actually make the case that Muslims are terrorists, even to other muslims.
And short of IRA and Brittain being at war over "religion" (sort of by proxy), you'd be hard press to see the Roman Catholics waring with Lutherans or Baptists. Or Buddists waring with Taoists.
If you look at a map, with active conflicts, you can bet that Islam is involved on one side or the other and come out ahead... by a long shot.
Slippery Slopes are logical falacies in that they do not "prove" anything. However, slippery slopes are real and are applied in all sorts of areas, just not everywhere univerally. Until people are willing to say it, we remain in danger.
The most famous of slippery slopes is found in the phrase "At first they came for _______, and I wasn't a ________".
This is why we need a 2nd Amendment, to tell the DHS person to "get off my boat". It isn't for any other reason. The second Amendment insures we can protect the others. Plain and simple.
How much is death worth? Nothing, or priceless (basically the same thing). You make the payoff more expensive than the repairs and all of that goes away. BUT then you have a basis for giving a cost, which then gives Government the power to regulate should the car company negate to fix it.
There is a law firm out there right now, advertising Table saws that don't have a new "system" in place that can save thousands of lost fingers and other body damage. Do we mandate the new system be installed on ALL table saws because a few idiots don't know how to operate a table saw safely? I mean table saws have been around forever, do we change our liability laws simply because technology CAN make something safer than it was before?
Right now, people have the CHOICE of what kind of table saw to buy, whether they want the system or not, do we change that with a law?
I don't know, do you ever question the constant "crisis mongering" that is going on in Washington these days. I mean the world is going to end if you listen the likes of Obama, Reid and Pelosi, and (R) want to eat babies and kill puppies, starve grandma and polute the world, rape women and dolphins, all because Obama is getting the sequestration he asked for.
You see, it is all how you look at things and whether or not you like the (D) or (R) better to start. I mean if NDAA happened under GWB, you bet the leftwingnut branch of the DNC party would be going crazy over it (rightfully so). But as it stands it is "meh, at least he's not GWB". I don't get it.
"better to prevent negative externalities than to pay off the afflicted bystanders afterwards."
Do you even measure the cost of "prevent negative extenalities" vs "pay off afflicted bystanders"? If it cost $3 to prevent something and only $1 to pay off instead, would it not be better to charge the $1 than the $3?
I am of the opinion, that bad things are going to happen. Period. We cannot prevent all bad things from happening through laws, policies and regulations. And trying to, ends up being worse for everyone. We have to be able to accept that "shit happens" and deal with the shit that happens rather than trying to prevent all shit in the first place.
The contrary (liberal) view is that "government is the only solution" is equally bad, for the exact same reason.
A truly free market CAN sort out a great deal. Keeping a market free is Government's role. However do-gooding people (both D and R), create all sorts of laws and policies that are contrary to a truly free marketplace. In these cases, Government interference is just as bad as a market that is not truly free. In fact, I would suggest that unnecessary government interference and not free are the exact same problem.
This is not to say that we should live in a anarchistic state, where there is no government oversight, because that doesn't work eitther. The correct balance is that we create laws to punish people who do bad things. We must also realize that we cannot prevent BAD THINGS (tm) from happening. This means we stop trying to protect people from themselves, because that affects people who don't need to be micro managed by tyranical governments.
Look, I never said that porn should be or shouldn't be legal. All I said was it wasn't art. Making a movie a cell mytosis isn't art either. Me saying something isn't art doesn't really equate to "banning", except to demented people.
Then why do people insist that if THEY call it "art" it must be "art". And if I call it "Not Art", I'm a douche bag wanting to "censor" "free speech" ?
You can't say "art" is 100% subjective, and then say something is "art" with any sort of difinitive statements.
To me, art is easily defined this way: Requires skill, finese, aesthetics, flair, talent and nuance.
The sad thing is, by lowering the bar on what "art" is, we devalue the true works of art. And we are diminished for it.
"loud and large lobby of anti wind, anti solar and anti electric car types"
The most hypocritical of them are left wing psuedo-greenies. They are all for "green energy" until it impacts them and then they are the most vocal "anti wind" (harm the birds, bad view etc) anti solar(toxic Manufacturing) and anit electric car (won't approve any grid improvements due to environmental concerns).
While I don't agree with most of the hype of green energy types, I actually admire Ed Begley Jr for actually living the way he preaches.
Look, I'm all for "green" energy, and would love to make it work. However until costs comes down, and we are allowed to build the infrastructure for it without big fights with "environmental groups", I support the "everything" plan (coal, NG, Oil, Solar, Nuclear, Wind, Ocean etc). I support building the US as Energy Neutral, where we don't have to send money and troops to support (or fight) pety dictators in unstable regions. Let the rest of the world deal with them for a change.
Not authoritarian people are "right wing". Both the Left and the right tend toward authoritarian rules, where government dictates rule over liberties. The problem with most of these people (both left and right) is that they don't see the problem with their version of authoritarian rule. Obama is authoritarian, but he is not "right wing" by any stretch of the imagination.
Two people doing it in front of a camera is no more "art" than me sitting at my computer typing... in front of a camera is "art". We need to redefine what "art" is in the age of ubiquitous cameras.
I can see it now, the Sherrif's officers who beat Rodney King... "Performance Art"... because it was done on camera!
The undead have been with us for a long time already. However, they are mostly in congress. I mean, have you looked at Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnel lately?
Politicians are part of the problem, thinking that we can legislate all sorts of things and put up road blocks to change. By making it difficult to get through the endless series of red tape, agencies and other petty dictators that just get in the way, government is the problem. This is what my (R) and (D) friends fail realize, as they keep voting for more government, then complaining about the results.
Typical Scenerio: X is a problem, we must do something, this is something therefore it must be done. It doesn't matter what the X is, nobody stops to think long enough to ask the question, why must we do anything to solve X. Perhaps X is just something we should live with, because the solution might just be worse than the problem.
Take the High Speed Rail system in California, nobody asked "what problem is this solving" because there are plenty of alternatives available (air, slow train, car). SO what does High Speed Rail system solve? I need to go from SF to LA, I can fly, or drive. HSR doesn't solve the problems of flight (still need to rent a car) nor solves the problem of speed, as it would probably take 1/2 the time of driving, and twice as long as flying. Does the Huge expense, we can hardly afford, really solving a problem? Or is it more of a "make work" project for the Unions. Or worse, a "feel good" project designed to illicit emotional response, to garner power among the elite ruling class. Yet, Gavin was a huge proponent of the HSR.
No, the best thing Government can do is simply get out of the way of normal business, and go after the bad guys who do wrong. One cannot stop bad things from happening, al we can do is punish those who are criminals.
What gets me, is why have a bulky touch friendly device for data input, when a lighter one with connectivity where you need it, tied to a back end database is much easier and with HTML 5, easier to make compliant with multiple types of devices and OSes?
Touch UI is great for content viewing, but sucks for content creation. For data input, give me a keyboard and mouse, and a well designed UI. Touch is almost useless on anything like a normal desktop screen (14"), and content creation on small screens is painful.
" Every time you blinked you'd have to prove to yourself that the whole universe hadn't just been switched off and then instantaneously recreated itself."
I thought the universal sign of universe reset was Deja Vu.
Until we get some sort of faster than light mode of communication or travel, it is unlikely that we will find life outside of our solar system any time soon. And since E=MC2 is more or less accurate the top "speed" is C, we are not going to see any evidence of life outside of our galaxy. Thus we will only be able to "guess" that there is life outside our system(s) through statistical guestimations. The real problem is, that we cannot fully know how special (or not) we really are in the Universe. And that is unlikely to change anytime soon.
So people stating that they "believe" in Extra Terrestrial Life is exactly the same as believing in invisible man in the sky. Our testing capabilities are not sufficient to prove (or disprove) existence of EITHER kind of Invisible men in the sky.
Slashdot Mirror
It was much less the Roman Catholic Church that was killing people, more like the Roman Empire. While they are almost the same thing, there are differences, since RCC and Rome were tied together. But the Roman Empire wasn't always Christian, and yet was just as deadly against those that were in disagreement. Remember the whole thing about the one guy hung on a cross? Romans!
Right, because those are the only two options. /sarcasm Typical Liberal offering up False Dicodomy logic. I see this so often it isn't even funny.
You are not actually helping the case of Muslims with your post. You actually make the case that Muslims are terrorists, even to other muslims.
And short of IRA and Brittain being at war over "religion" (sort of by proxy), you'd be hard press to see the Roman Catholics waring with Lutherans or Baptists. Or Buddists waring with Taoists.
If you look at a map, with active conflicts, you can bet that Islam is involved on one side or the other and come out ahead ... by a long shot.
"Are you proposing that when the customs thug takes your boat, you should shoot them and drive it off into the sunset?"
Hell yeah. Well almost. How about telling the DHS person to ... "Get the fuck off my boat", backed up by a gun?
Slippery Slopes are logical falacies in that they do not "prove" anything. However, slippery slopes are real and are applied in all sorts of areas, just not everywhere univerally. Until people are willing to say it, we remain in danger.
The most famous of slippery slopes is found in the phrase "At first they came for _______, and I wasn't a ________".
This is why we need a 2nd Amendment, to tell the DHS person to "get off my boat". It isn't for any other reason. The second Amendment insures we can protect the others. Plain and simple.
"The right to free speech is not being infringed. Only the definition of what is speech"
Now, how does that look?
How much is death worth? Nothing, or priceless (basically the same thing). You make the payoff more expensive than the repairs and all of that goes away. BUT then you have a basis for giving a cost, which then gives Government the power to regulate should the car company negate to fix it.
There is a law firm out there right now, advertising Table saws that don't have a new "system" in place that can save thousands of lost fingers and other body damage. Do we mandate the new system be installed on ALL table saws because a few idiots don't know how to operate a table saw safely? I mean table saws have been around forever, do we change our liability laws simply because technology CAN make something safer than it was before?
Right now, people have the CHOICE of what kind of table saw to buy, whether they want the system or not, do we change that with a law?
I don't know, do you ever question the constant "crisis mongering" that is going on in Washington these days. I mean the world is going to end if you listen the likes of Obama, Reid and Pelosi, and (R) want to eat babies and kill puppies, starve grandma and polute the world, rape women and dolphins, all because Obama is getting the sequestration he asked for.
You see, it is all how you look at things and whether or not you like the (D) or (R) better to start. I mean if NDAA happened under GWB, you bet the leftwingnut branch of the DNC party would be going crazy over it (rightfully so). But as it stands it is "meh, at least he's not GWB". I don't get it.
"better to prevent negative externalities than to pay off the afflicted bystanders afterwards."
Do you even measure the cost of "prevent negative extenalities" vs "pay off afflicted bystanders"? If it cost $3 to prevent something and only $1 to pay off instead, would it not be better to charge the $1 than the $3?
I am of the opinion, that bad things are going to happen. Period. We cannot prevent all bad things from happening through laws, policies and regulations. And trying to, ends up being worse for everyone. We have to be able to accept that "shit happens" and deal with the shit that happens rather than trying to prevent all shit in the first place.
The contrary (liberal) view is that "government is the only solution" is equally bad, for the exact same reason.
A truly free market CAN sort out a great deal. Keeping a market free is Government's role. However do-gooding people (both D and R), create all sorts of laws and policies that are contrary to a truly free marketplace. In these cases, Government interference is just as bad as a market that is not truly free. In fact, I would suggest that unnecessary government interference and not free are the exact same problem.
This is not to say that we should live in a anarchistic state, where there is no government oversight, because that doesn't work eitther. The correct balance is that we create laws to punish people who do bad things. We must also realize that we cannot prevent BAD THINGS (tm) from happening. This means we stop trying to protect people from themselves, because that affects people who don't need to be micro managed by tyranical governments.
First application for this as a "game" has got to be #ingress for sure.
So, you're already being tracked, and you object being tracked more? I am still missing something here.
Or they will come up with a new password Scheme that is completely insecure.
Old Password: password
New Password: password19 (todays date)
Tomorrow ....
Old Password: password19
New Password: password20
that way, I can have 28-31 different passwords every month, without having to remember any one in particular.
Look, I never said that porn should be or shouldn't be legal. All I said was it wasn't art. Making a movie a cell mytosis isn't art either. Me saying something isn't art doesn't really equate to "banning", except to demented people.
Then why do people insist that if THEY call it "art" it must be "art". And if I call it "Not Art", I'm a douche bag wanting to "censor" "free speech" ?
You can't say "art" is 100% subjective, and then say something is "art" with any sort of difinitive statements.
To me, art is easily defined this way: Requires skill, finese, aesthetics, flair, talent and nuance.
The sad thing is, by lowering the bar on what "art" is, we devalue the true works of art. And we are diminished for it.
" yes governments do try to stifle citizens they feel threatened by"
FTFY
"loud and large lobby of anti wind, anti solar and anti electric car types"
The most hypocritical of them are left wing psuedo-greenies. They are all for "green energy" until it impacts them and then they are the most vocal "anti wind" (harm the birds, bad view etc) anti solar(toxic Manufacturing) and anit electric car (won't approve any grid improvements due to environmental concerns).
While I don't agree with most of the hype of green energy types, I actually admire Ed Begley Jr for actually living the way he preaches.
Look, I'm all for "green" energy, and would love to make it work. However until costs comes down, and we are allowed to build the infrastructure for it without big fights with "environmental groups", I support the "everything" plan (coal, NG, Oil, Solar, Nuclear, Wind, Ocean etc). I support building the US as Energy Neutral, where we don't have to send money and troops to support (or fight) pety dictators in unstable regions. Let the rest of the world deal with them for a change.
Not authoritarian people are "right wing". Both the Left and the right tend toward authoritarian rules, where government dictates rule over liberties. The problem with most of these people (both left and right) is that they don't see the problem with their version of authoritarian rule. Obama is authoritarian, but he is not "right wing" by any stretch of the imagination.
Two people doing it in front of a camera is no more "art" than me sitting at my computer typing ... in front of a camera is "art". We need to redefine what "art" is in the age of ubiquitous cameras.
I can see it now, the Sherrif's officers who beat Rodney King ... "Performance Art" ... because it was done on camera!
The undead have been with us for a long time already. However, they are mostly in congress. I mean, have you looked at Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnel lately?
Politicians are part of the problem, thinking that we can legislate all sorts of things and put up road blocks to change. By making it difficult to get through the endless series of red tape, agencies and other petty dictators that just get in the way, government is the problem. This is what my (R) and (D) friends fail realize, as they keep voting for more government, then complaining about the results.
Typical Scenerio: X is a problem, we must do something, this is something therefore it must be done. It doesn't matter what the X is, nobody stops to think long enough to ask the question, why must we do anything to solve X. Perhaps X is just something we should live with, because the solution might just be worse than the problem.
Take the High Speed Rail system in California, nobody asked "what problem is this solving" because there are plenty of alternatives available (air, slow train, car). SO what does High Speed Rail system solve? I need to go from SF to LA, I can fly, or drive. HSR doesn't solve the problems of flight (still need to rent a car) nor solves the problem of speed, as it would probably take 1/2 the time of driving, and twice as long as flying. Does the Huge expense, we can hardly afford, really solving a problem? Or is it more of a "make work" project for the Unions. Or worse, a "feel good" project designed to illicit emotional response, to garner power among the elite ruling class. Yet, Gavin was a huge proponent of the HSR.
No, the best thing Government can do is simply get out of the way of normal business, and go after the bad guys who do wrong. One cannot stop bad things from happening, al we can do is punish those who are criminals.
And ... because you believe that, so must everyone else?
What gets me, is why have a bulky touch friendly device for data input, when a lighter one with connectivity where you need it, tied to a back end database is much easier and with HTML 5, easier to make compliant with multiple types of devices and OSes?
Touch UI is great for content viewing, but sucks for content creation. For data input, give me a keyboard and mouse, and a well designed UI. Touch is almost useless on anything like a normal desktop screen (14"), and content creation on small screens is painful.
" Every time you blinked you'd have to prove to yourself that the whole universe hadn't just been switched off and then instantaneously recreated itself."
I thought the universal sign of universe reset was Deja Vu.
Until we get some sort of faster than light mode of communication or travel, it is unlikely that we will find life outside of our solar system any time soon. And since E=MC2 is more or less accurate the top "speed" is C, we are not going to see any evidence of life outside of our galaxy. Thus we will only be able to "guess" that there is life outside our system(s) through statistical guestimations. The real problem is, that we cannot fully know how special (or not) we really are in the Universe. And that is unlikely to change anytime soon.
So people stating that they "believe" in Extra Terrestrial Life is exactly the same as believing in invisible man in the sky. Our testing capabilities are not sufficient to prove (or disprove) existence of EITHER kind of Invisible men in the sky.