The old testament, where polygamy is commonplace? Not much of a 'one man, one woman' thing there. The interpretation seems obvious: It's just an ancient way to describe the act of sex. It doesn't have any profound consequences.
The expression 'one flesh.' Doesn't have any deep spiritual meaning. It's used in 1 Corinthians 6 to refer to prostitution. It's just an ancient expression, in the same way we would refer to a couple 'sleeping together.' We don't mean actually sleeping, and everyone knows this, but it's not polite to directly say what it meant.
People like symbols. Erecting symbols is an easy way for a politician to win some votes with a targeted demographic. It shows he is on their side, but doesn't have to involve actually doing anything with a practical impact.
Because this is a standard contract that also has implications for taxation, inheritance, joint finances, benefits, immigration, and a load of other things that require government cooperation.
It's not really three great religions: The Jews are tiny in number. At the time of the founding of what would become the US there was a lot of religious conflict, all between different sects of Christianity. The Catholics hated the protestants,the protestants hated the catholics, the puritans hated everyone, and absolutely everyone hated the quakers.
The declaration cannot be superseded because it is not a legal document. It's just a popular pamphlet, intended to stir up some more revolutionary sentiment and throw a few choice insults back towards England to get things going.
You'd need to convince the president to nominate you first, and then congress gets to vote if they will approve you.
That's one reason it's very hard for a new judge to get selected towards the end of a president's second term: The opposing party won't approve anyone, as they know if they stall for time there's a fifty-fifty chance one of their own will be in office soon and can nominate someone more favorable to their own positions.
The nature of wireless networks in built-up areas makes them unmanagable. Try checking for APs in, say, central London. You can easily pick up fifty of them - all under different management. Impossible to coordinate.
The kickstarter-funded hoverboard scam uses rotating magnets instead. It needs a lot less power, but it also generates a lot less force for a given mass because your frequency is limited by the mechanical components: You can only spin things so fast before the bearings melt.
No, but it does enable cheap hover-tech. That has many practical applications. More efficient trains, super-long-life bearings, more efficient machinery... and hoverboards.
There is no theoretical reason that a room-temperature superconductor cannot exist. No-one has found a material with that property yet, but the possibility remains that one will be manufactured some day.
You can do it without superconductors too, by either having the board generate a very powerful high-frequency alternating field or having it spin around some permanent magnets very quickly, then placing it over a simple conductive surface. That works. It's still not very practical though, as the power requirements are just too great for such a size-critical platform. You get a bulky, heavy board that only runs for minutes before the batteries are exhausted.
It's only getting worse. Even some ISPs now have had to resort to NATing their customers. In a few more years you might not be able to get a public IP address unless you fork over the money for a business connection.
The POSIX compatibility is still there - just called 'Windows Services for Unix' now, and quite expanded with new essential utilities. I've never heard of anyone actually using it, but it's there.
The cosmetics and bathroom-products industries routinely describe water on their labels as 'aqua' to hide that a substantial part of the volume of their overprices luxury shampoo is just water and thickener.
Those bodies and the 'eat lots of sugar' instinct evolved in a world before industrial agriculture - when food was scarce and starvation a very real risk. The instincts say to eat as many carbs as possible whenever you get the chance so they can be stored as fat and used when the inevitable lean times come. Today there is never a food shortage for those living in the developed world - this mismatch between instinctual behavior and environment is responsible for the obesity problem.
Could we not link to the sort of site which also carries "The miracle that cured my son’s autism was in our kitchen" and "Elin Nordegren has Sex on the Beach in the Hamptons" on the front page?
"I have a feeling that Pope Francis is going to lend some of the Church's authority behind the upcoming United Nations goal for zero population growth."
Not a chance. It would cause too much conflict within the church - even the pope is bound by the need to maintain some form of unity. If he does want to lend support to such a goal, he would have to do so without speaking of it openly.
I've not even heard such a goal proposed before. The panic over population growth isn't as severe as it used to be, as it's becoming clear that population does eventually level off naturally.
The catholic church doesn't teach that sex is only for procreation. It teaches that procreation is a defining aspect of sex. Big difference. You're still allowed to enjoy sex all you want, so long as you have at least the possibility of procreation - but if you deliberately stop the procreative part from working then you are perverting sex into something unnatural, by taking away the purpose God intended it to naturally fulfill.
Or, in the Church's own words from the Humanae Vitae, "If they further reflect, they must also recognize that an act of mutual love which impairs the capacity to transmit life which God the Creator, through specific laws, has built into it, frustrates His design which constitutes the norm of marriage, and contradicts the will of the Author of life. Hence to use this divine gift while depriving it, even if only partially, of its meaning and purpose, is equally repugnant to the nature of man and of woman, and is consequently in opposition to the plan of God and His holy will."
The coerced solutions only get noticed when they go wrong. Look at some of the highly successful coerced solutions: Requiring seatbelts in cars, banning the use of CFCs as propellants and refrigerants, banning the use of lead compounds as fuel additives. All cases in which a destructive practice was ended not by voluntary changes, but by a government passing laws and declaring 'Stop doing that or we'll start throwing some executives in jail.'
Slashdot Mirror
The old testament, where polygamy is commonplace? Not much of a 'one man, one woman' thing there. The interpretation seems obvious: It's just an ancient way to describe the act of sex. It doesn't have any profound consequences.
The expression 'one flesh.' Doesn't have any deep spiritual meaning. It's used in 1 Corinthians 6 to refer to prostitution. It's just an ancient expression, in the same way we would refer to a couple 'sleeping together.' We don't mean actually sleeping, and everyone knows this, but it's not polite to directly say what it meant.
People like symbols. Erecting symbols is an easy way for a politician to win some votes with a targeted demographic. It shows he is on their side, but doesn't have to involve actually doing anything with a practical impact.
If the native americans had invented mass-production and industrial machinery first, they would have been just as destructive.
Most people worship a god that is just a reflection of themselves. You've just found a more direct route.
If Christians actually read their bible, polygamous marriage would have been legal from the beginning.
Because this is a standard contract that also has implications for taxation, inheritance, joint finances, benefits, immigration, and a load of other things that require government cooperation.
It's not really three great religions: The Jews are tiny in number. At the time of the founding of what would become the US there was a lot of religious conflict, all between different sects of Christianity. The Catholics hated the protestants,the protestants hated the catholics, the puritans hated everyone, and absolutely everyone hated the quakers.
The declaration cannot be superseded because it is not a legal document. It's just a popular pamphlet, intended to stir up some more revolutionary sentiment and throw a few choice insults back towards England to get things going.
You'd need to convince the president to nominate you first, and then congress gets to vote if they will approve you.
That's one reason it's very hard for a new judge to get selected towards the end of a president's second term: The opposing party won't approve anyone, as they know if they stall for time there's a fifty-fifty chance one of their own will be in office soon and can nominate someone more favorable to their own positions.
The nature of wireless networks in built-up areas makes them unmanagable. Try checking for APs in, say, central London. You can easily pick up fifty of them - all under different management. Impossible to coordinate.
The kickstarter-funded hoverboard scam uses rotating magnets instead. It needs a lot less power, but it also generates a lot less force for a given mass because your frequency is limited by the mechanical components: You can only spin things so fast before the bearings melt.
No, but it does enable cheap hover-tech. That has many practical applications. More efficient trains, super-long-life bearings, more efficient machinery... and hoverboards.
There is no theoretical reason that a room-temperature superconductor cannot exist. No-one has found a material with that property yet, but the possibility remains that one will be manufactured some day.
You can do it without superconductors too, by either having the board generate a very powerful high-frequency alternating field or having it spin around some permanent magnets very quickly, then placing it over a simple conductive surface. That works. It's still not very practical though, as the power requirements are just too great for such a size-critical platform. You get a bulky, heavy board that only runs for minutes before the batteries are exhausted.
It's only getting worse. Even some ISPs now have had to resort to NATing their customers. In a few more years you might not be able to get a public IP address unless you fork over the money for a business connection.
The POSIX compatibility is still there - just called 'Windows Services for Unix' now, and quite expanded with new essential utilities. I've never heard of anyone actually using it, but it's there.
The cosmetics and bathroom-products industries routinely describe water on their labels as 'aqua' to hide that a substantial part of the volume of their overprices luxury shampoo is just water and thickener.
It's also delicious and really, really cheap, so food manufacturers tend to use a great deal of it in everything they can.
Those bodies and the 'eat lots of sugar' instinct evolved in a world before industrial agriculture - when food was scarce and starvation a very real risk. The instincts say to eat as many carbs as possible whenever you get the chance so they can be stored as fat and used when the inevitable lean times come. Today there is never a food shortage for those living in the developed world - this mismatch between instinctual behavior and environment is responsible for the obesity problem.
Could we not link to the sort of site which also carries "The miracle that cured my son’s autism was in our kitchen" and "Elin Nordegren has Sex on the Beach in the Hamptons" on the front page?
Don't forget feeding the world: Artificial fertilizers have revolutionized agriculture.
"I have a feeling that Pope Francis is going to lend some of the Church's authority behind the upcoming United Nations goal for zero population growth."
Not a chance. It would cause too much conflict within the church - even the pope is bound by the need to maintain some form of unity. If he does want to lend support to such a goal, he would have to do so without speaking of it openly.
I've not even heard such a goal proposed before. The panic over population growth isn't as severe as it used to be, as it's becoming clear that population does eventually level off naturally.
The catholic church doesn't teach that sex is only for procreation. It teaches that procreation is a defining aspect of sex. Big difference. You're still allowed to enjoy sex all you want, so long as you have at least the possibility of procreation - but if you deliberately stop the procreative part from working then you are perverting sex into something unnatural, by taking away the purpose God intended it to naturally fulfill.
Or, in the Church's own words from the Humanae Vitae, "If they further reflect, they must also recognize that an act of mutual love which impairs the capacity to transmit life which God the Creator, through specific laws, has built into it, frustrates His design which constitutes the norm of marriage, and contradicts the will of the Author of life. Hence to use this divine gift while depriving it, even if only partially, of its meaning and purpose, is equally repugnant to the nature of man and of woman, and is consequently in opposition to the plan of God and His holy will."
The coerced solutions only get noticed when they go wrong. Look at some of the highly successful coerced solutions: Requiring seatbelts in cars, banning the use of CFCs as propellants and refrigerants, banning the use of lead compounds as fuel additives. All cases in which a destructive practice was ended not by voluntary changes, but by a government passing laws and declaring 'Stop doing that or we'll start throwing some executives in jail.'