Probably need the money worse. It varies from church to church, obviously (and a lot of people don't know how to ask for money the right way)... but what I mean is that it is not in the nature of a UU to just automatically give 10% of their income to their church as some other religion might be able to get, which results in financial problems for a large number of them. If everyone in all UU churches DID give like that, then I suppose it would be possible for a church to make a profit.
I attend an ornate cathedral-style church and we are absolutely not for profit. We didn't build the building, so we don't get to choose the style, but it's pretty and it's expensive to maintain. We actually can't quite afford it as it is. Unitarian Universalism is not a tithing religion, though.
No, but that's why you start from proving guilt, not attempting to try the victim. There are ways to do one without the other (for example, not going after someone's sexual history unless it is somehow EXTREMELY relevant).
And no, it really isn't less stupid. The guy is trying to prove that we were better off when rich white men ruled the discourse and when feminists weren't allowed to speak (ignoring the fact, for a moment, than obviously not all professors are women or feminist or even liberal).
And I think you're missing something too: they may lose what they have, but what they had was significantly more than "a place to live" and "dinner on the table." It may be be unfortunate for them too, but they're noplace near starving. That is my point. In addition, if you make that much money, you should be putting some of it away.
Whether or not that's what it's looking for, that sounds like what it's looking for and that's what ultimately ends up happening. Whose fault that is, I don't know.
Go to a Vagina Monologues showing and watch when they say "if you or someone you know have been the victim of sexual abuse, please stand." It's generally a solid portion of the room. I personally have an ex who was raped, and know others who have been the victims of sexual abuse.
Trying to argue that the number of false accusations is even close to the number of real rapes (consider how many go unreported) is not doing anyone a favor and perpetuating a stupid sexist myth that women are out there just waiting to accuse people off rape so people shouldn't believe them. There's enough prejudice against women already; that shit simply isn't necessary.
Haven't you noticed how much more viciously people go after, say, a pretty woman walking in a dangerous area who's assaulted vs. a guy in a suit who looks like he has money getting robbed?
Or, what she said happened is exactly what happened. Or somewhere in the middle. The fact that idiots like you jump directly to "she's a ditzy bimbo, she was probably asking for it" or "what kind of person feels 'pressured' to have sex?" shows you why things are the way they are today.
It's very hard to amass that money/get to a position like that without stepping on a ton of people along the way. You know what the say about rich men and heaven. I'm not sure if they're saying that the type to get rich is the type not to go, or that money corrupts. Either way, yeah, I'm skeptical of millionaires. For one, how do you keep that much money at home when you know how many people are suffering? How do you vote/lobby as so many do for lower taxes for the rich? I personally could not, and I guess that's one reason I'll always be living on a normal-person wage.
Oh, and another reason: if you make 1000 times what the average middle class worker makes, you're alright when you're let go. I could make it 6 months without dipping into retirement, probably. If you can get fired from your job and say "eh, I'll go out on my sailboat for awhile" it's a very different experience, I'd say, even if it were embarrassing.
One out of every 6 women in America has been raped or had an attempted rape. If any of them will get close to you (maybe a family member), why don't you ask them what sort of easy time they had getting it prosecuted, if they decided to subject themselves to that.
Oh, and no, I guess it's not blaming the victim either to make the leap from "know people who have been raped" to "did you actually see it happen? I rest my case." Wow.
So, apparently, if a woman is attractive, she should stay in her home. I mean, rape is illegal and all of that, but she doesn't have to go outside and risk getting raped, so it's her choice. And, no, no one would say she was asking for it if she left her house looking good... but... I mean... what did she expect to have happen?
No, no one blames the victim anymore.
I personally enjoy going out and drinking too much in foreign cities. Should I expect to be raped?
All over this message board in this article. I don't know how "public" that is, but it's only because people are embarrassed, not because they don't think it (obviously, from reading these posts).
I know, shame on us for having an education and not being as bigoted and sexist as our predecessors. I mean, fuck, you can't even buy a good slave anymore, can you?
What, were you born yesterday? Are you really completely unaware of the fact that rape wasn't even really taken seriously until the last 50 years? There is a complete SOCIETAL bias towards men, and for years and years men went on doing whatever they pleased and getting away with it. But no, this is apparently a feminist power trip. I can't even believe the retarded things people are willing to post on the internet.
And suggesting that women routinely lie about rape and that it is some sort of feminist plot is "sexist asshole speak" for... umm... "I'm a sexist asshole."
I guess it's no surprise that men on Slashdot don't seem to have any human compassion for real live women, not having ever seen one up close.
This is some pretty unimpressive work on your part. You do realize that part of the reason it got to be this way is rape spent such a long time being a crime that you almost couldn't get someone convicted for. Women having real rights is still relatively new in our history, so I think it behooves us to not act like "problem solved" and go back to suspecting women are lying when they call rape. People lie all the time about all sorts of things. Hell, people lie and say "I didn't rape anyone." But to suggest that the way our judicial system is set up now is that a woman can go in and lie about rape and put someone in jail is false, as is trying to suggest that that's actually happening on any kind of noteworthy basis.
Slashdot Mirror
Probably need the money worse. It varies from church to church, obviously (and a lot of people don't know how to ask for money the right way)... but what I mean is that it is not in the nature of a UU to just automatically give 10% of their income to their church as some other religion might be able to get, which results in financial problems for a large number of them. If everyone in all UU churches DID give like that, then I suppose it would be possible for a church to make a profit.
I serve on the board and I am a signatory on the checks. I absolutely know where the money is going.
I attend an ornate cathedral-style church and we are absolutely not for profit. We didn't build the building, so we don't get to choose the style, but it's pretty and it's expensive to maintain. We actually can't quite afford it as it is. Unitarian Universalism is not a tithing religion, though.
Depends on the religion. That does not happen at my church.
No, but that's why you start from proving guilt, not attempting to try the victim. There are ways to do one without the other (for example, not going after someone's sexual history unless it is somehow EXTREMELY relevant).
And no, it really isn't less stupid. The guy is trying to prove that we were better off when rich white men ruled the discourse and when feminists weren't allowed to speak (ignoring the fact, for a moment, than obviously not all professors are women or feminist or even liberal).
And I think you're missing something too: they may lose what they have, but what they had was significantly more than "a place to live" and "dinner on the table." It may be be unfortunate for them too, but they're noplace near starving. That is my point. In addition, if you make that much money, you should be putting some of it away.
Whether or not that's what it's looking for, that sounds like what it's looking for and that's what ultimately ends up happening. Whose fault that is, I don't know.
Thanks, that was very well written, and was at least in part what I was having trouble articulating.
Oh, you mean giving people who blame the victims of sexual discrimination a hard time? Yeah, sounds awful to me.
My mom was thin when she was alive, but thanks for that excellent argument.
Oh please, it gets said every other article.
Go to a Vagina Monologues showing and watch when they say "if you or someone you know have been the victim of sexual abuse, please stand." It's generally a solid portion of the room. I personally have an ex who was raped, and know others who have been the victims of sexual abuse.
Trying to argue that the number of false accusations is even close to the number of real rapes (consider how many go unreported) is not doing anyone a favor and perpetuating a stupid sexist myth that women are out there just waiting to accuse people off rape so people shouldn't believe them. There's enough prejudice against women already; that shit simply isn't necessary.
Haven't you noticed how much more viciously people go after, say, a pretty woman walking in a dangerous area who's assaulted vs. a guy in a suit who looks like he has money getting robbed?
Or, what she said happened is exactly what happened. Or somewhere in the middle. The fact that idiots like you jump directly to "she's a ditzy bimbo, she was probably asking for it" or "what kind of person feels 'pressured' to have sex?" shows you why things are the way they are today.
Consent would be a good place to start. :)
Hey hivemind! I think this neuron over here is shot! Put in a work order.
It's very hard to amass that money/get to a position like that without stepping on a ton of people along the way. You know what the say about rich men and heaven. I'm not sure if they're saying that the type to get rich is the type not to go, or that money corrupts. Either way, yeah, I'm skeptical of millionaires. For one, how do you keep that much money at home when you know how many people are suffering? How do you vote/lobby as so many do for lower taxes for the rich? I personally could not, and I guess that's one reason I'll always be living on a normal-person wage.
Oh, and another reason: if you make 1000 times what the average middle class worker makes, you're alright when you're let go. I could make it 6 months without dipping into retirement, probably. If you can get fired from your job and say "eh, I'll go out on my sailboat for awhile" it's a very different experience, I'd say, even if it were embarrassing.
I really can't even believe the shit I've been reading here, David. Nice to know someone else has a brain (and a 3 digit ID to boot).
One out of every 6 women in America has been raped or had an attempted rape. If any of them will get close to you (maybe a family member), why don't you ask them what sort of easy time they had getting it prosecuted, if they decided to subject themselves to that.
Oh, and no, I guess it's not blaming the victim either to make the leap from "know people who have been raped" to "did you actually see it happen? I rest my case." Wow.
Wow, posting with his real username no less.
So, apparently, if a woman is attractive, she should stay in her home. I mean, rape is illegal and all of that, but she doesn't have to go outside and risk getting raped, so it's her choice. And, no, no one would say she was asking for it if she left her house looking good... but... I mean... what did she expect to have happen?
No, no one blames the victim anymore.
I personally enjoy going out and drinking too much in foreign cities. Should I expect to be raped?
All over this message board in this article. I don't know how "public" that is, but it's only because people are embarrassed, not because they don't think it (obviously, from reading these posts).
I know, shame on us for having an education and not being as bigoted and sexist as our predecessors. I mean, fuck, you can't even buy a good slave anymore, can you?
What, were you born yesterday? Are you really completely unaware of the fact that rape wasn't even really taken seriously until the last 50 years? There is a complete SOCIETAL bias towards men, and for years and years men went on doing whatever they pleased and getting away with it. But no, this is apparently a feminist power trip. I can't even believe the retarded things people are willing to post on the internet.
And suggesting that women routinely lie about rape and that it is some sort of feminist plot is "sexist asshole speak" for... umm... "I'm a sexist asshole."
I guess it's no surprise that men on Slashdot don't seem to have any human compassion for real live women, not having ever seen one up close.
(no, I'm not female, stand back please)
I'm sure that you know there's a difference between vetting the plaintiff's story and turning the plaintiff into a defendant.
This is some pretty unimpressive work on your part. You do realize that part of the reason it got to be this way is rape spent such a long time being a crime that you almost couldn't get someone convicted for. Women having real rights is still relatively new in our history, so I think it behooves us to not act like "problem solved" and go back to suspecting women are lying when they call rape. People lie all the time about all sorts of things. Hell, people lie and say "I didn't rape anyone." But to suggest that the way our judicial system is set up now is that a woman can go in and lie about rape and put someone in jail is false, as is trying to suggest that that's actually happening on any kind of noteworthy basis.