Son, I was raised LDS, I know the score there. I also know that although the tenets of the mormon faith don't necessarily preclude certain types of non-vanilla behavior, it doesn't preclude some people from being as strict and prude as the most extreme fundamentalists. Look at prop. 8 in cali. They were the driving force behind all the fear and homophobia in that debate. Yes, there are tolerant mormons, just like there are tolerant baptists and pentecostals. The very nature of having a large population with the same ideology forces those people into extreme positions in a kind of dogma arms race where people, not able to compete against members of an outside culture, begin to compete against each other to see who can be more conservative and dogmatic.
tl;dr
Some mormons are fuitcakes too, especially in Utah, don't mistake their deviance for acceptance by the wider culture.
So are you saying that healthy and stable relationships only exist in the median? I don't believe that to be the case. Some porn may be depraved, but it's not the porn's fault that people struggle with it, it's the peoples fault, regardless of the background. Blaming the addiction and not the addict is the whole reason that measures like this are undertaken. The vice is not at fault, the abusers are the issue, lets start making people be accountable for their actions.
I also think that they'd accomplish more by shipping the feminists that drive men to online porn in the first place off to an island.
So, I tend to agree with most of what you said except for this little bit. The largest consumer of internet pr0n in the US is the state of Utah where, if I'm not mistaken, they still try to burn feminists as witches. (ok that's a bit of hyperbole, but you get the point). The real driver of a lot of this is sexual repression and the vilification of sexual acts and deeds by puritanical d-bags that just want to make sure that you're as unhappy and unsatisfied as they are.
Other than that little bit, well said, this shit is by the book Orwellian.
And, they are stipping the tags from those sites as well so that in internal search will not show those sites either. You have to either see their content through a reblog or if you're following them.
How in the red-bleeding-fuck do you construe any kind of entitlement from my statement? Having worked with marketing departments I can say that in fact, they are more often than not a bunch of business major douche-bags with a very tenuous grasp of anything more than milking as much money from EVERY SINGLE PERSON THEY ENCOUNTER. I'm not saying anything about how i/we deserve anything. Fuck man get a grip.
All that shows is that humans have a capacity for compassion, which if you look at some of the horrible things we've done despite this capacity, makes so many things seem so much worse. There's more examples of animals being hunted to extinction than examples of animals being preserved due to exploitation.
Porn addiction is a real thing just like a lot of other habit forming activities, but seriously we don't blame the heroine or meth for a junkie becoming a junkie. I don't blame beer for someone being an alcoholic, I blame them for being a weak, simple, and pathetic human being, just like this dude is.
This is the exact opposite. Humans are selfish and self-serving like no other species can be. This is a direct result of natural selection. Your ancestors weren't the ones holding the door so people could get through, they were the ones trampling old women and children to get theirs first. More recently however, helplessness is a trait that is bred and perpetuated by a society that is ok with just accepting things as is without explanation.
"How did the universe get here? I dunno, God did it." What is more lazy and helpless than that? It's pretty thematic through out the whole ID debate. Acceptance in spite of investigation and evidence to the contrary. That is the epitome of a lazy and entitled attitude IMHO.
Besides, OSC's SF books have nothing to do with his views on a totally orthogonal societal issue. Boycotting the former because of the latter is called an ad hominem. Case in point, a lot of people enjoy Disney movies and Ford cars despite Walt Disney and Henry Ford being nasty antisemitic pro-nazi nutjobs.
By the same token, a lot of people don't support either of these companies for the exact same reason. It's their right to do so. A lot of people came unglued at the stuff the guy from Chik-fil-a said and boycotted the restaurant despite the fact that's not the default position of actual company, just one guy on top of it. It's people's right to boycott and famous people, if they are image conscious will keep their mouths shut so as not to trigger a boycott.
tl;dr
If you're going to do or say something that might piss people off, don't whine when you have pissed people off.
The problem is that there is always going to be someone that calls any war or anything military illegitimate.
I completely agree with the first part of your statement. No matter what action the military or government take, there will be detractors. I don't necessarily see this as a problem though. This would help the issue be seen from multiple angles. It is the core of scientific consensus. Dissenting opinions should be evaluated on the merit of the argument in the open and not behind closed doors where motives are suspect. The appearance of unregulated and unmitigated impropriety is an issue.
I think the ATF and FBI should hold a siege on their compound until they surrender their weapons and come out peacefully. Or just burn the fuckers to the ground like every other para-military organization in the country.
Being pedantic about punctuation doesn't actually validate your point, it just shows that you don't really have a good argument to back up your original statement of:
She wanted him jailed and she succeeded in her goal. So, therefore what she did wasn't stupid.
So pointing out that you incorrectly think I'm misusing quotes doesn't change that your original statement is:
1. a logical fallacy making it a non sequitur
2. Fucking stupid, and finally
3. You are making an assertion that the Friday video is not stupid because it made money is saying it's good because it's popular. Success =! stupid.
There are a lot of successful things that are stupid and a lot of stupid things that aren't successful, that does not mean that something that is not successful therefore it's stupid or vice versa. If you're not smart enough to figure that out then I just can't be any plainer.
All this, aside from the fact that stupid is a completely subjective thing in most ways except for in this instance because many of the assertions you have made a demonstrably stupid.
I'm quoting you when I put the quotes around it, sorry I guess that you're actually stupid so I have to point that out to you. By your logic, only popular things are good? Success does not make something good, smart, or not stupid, but apparently that point is completely lost on you.
Since I'm sure you don't know what it means I'll just point out to you that non sequitur means "does not follow" or "that idiotic statement you made doesn't make sense." Maybe you looked it up, maybe not but I thought I'd explain that to you. Logically, your sentence does not make sense. Doing something stupid and succeeding at it did not make the stupid thing you set out to do any less stupid. For example: "You ate the entire pile of dog shit, boy you sure showed us!" See, that was a stupid thing to do, and successfully completing it, doesn't mean it wasn't a stupid thing to do in the first place, therefore you completed something stupid successfully and viola, it was stupid thing to do. That's where your logic falls apart and that is why it's a non sequitur.
Holy shit retard, hyperbole much? News for you buddy, being gay isn't a bad thing, just like being black, white, or hispanic. If you want to hate people, feel free to do so, but don't think you're not going to have criticism. You're free to be an idiot, but I'm free to call you on it so there's that.
Slashdot Mirror
Son, I was raised LDS, I know the score there. I also know that although the tenets of the mormon faith don't necessarily preclude certain types of non-vanilla behavior, it doesn't preclude some people from being as strict and prude as the most extreme fundamentalists. Look at prop. 8 in cali. They were the driving force behind all the fear and homophobia in that debate. Yes, there are tolerant mormons, just like there are tolerant baptists and pentecostals. The very nature of having a large population with the same ideology forces those people into extreme positions in a kind of dogma arms race where people, not able to compete against members of an outside culture, begin to compete against each other to see who can be more conservative and dogmatic.
tl;dr
Some mormons are fuitcakes too, especially in Utah, don't mistake their deviance for acceptance by the wider culture.
So are you saying that healthy and stable relationships only exist in the median? I don't believe that to be the case. Some porn may be depraved, but it's not the porn's fault that people struggle with it, it's the peoples fault, regardless of the background. Blaming the addiction and not the addict is the whole reason that measures like this are undertaken. The vice is not at fault, the abusers are the issue, lets start making people be accountable for their actions.
Here you go
I also think that they'd accomplish more by shipping the feminists that drive men to online porn in the first place off to an island.
So, I tend to agree with most of what you said except for this little bit. The largest consumer of internet pr0n in the US is the state of Utah where, if I'm not mistaken, they still try to burn feminists as witches. (ok that's a bit of hyperbole, but you get the point). The real driver of a lot of this is sexual repression and the vilification of sexual acts and deeds by puritanical d-bags that just want to make sure that you're as unhappy and unsatisfied as they are.
Other than that little bit, well said, this shit is by the book Orwellian.
And, they are stipping the tags from those sites as well so that in internal search will not show those sites either. You have to either see their content through a reblog or if you're following them.
No, you're confusing what they do with what has been done to them.
How in the red-bleeding-fuck do you construe any kind of entitlement from my statement? Having worked with marketing departments I can say that in fact, they are more often than not a bunch of business major douche-bags with a very tenuous grasp of anything more than milking as much money from EVERY SINGLE PERSON THEY ENCOUNTER. I'm not saying anything about how i/we deserve anything. Fuck man get a grip.
Marketing departments are a bunch of assholes.
A tittle is the dot above a lower case "i" or "j", dipshit. My misspelling was intentional, you're just dumb.
All that shows is that humans have a capacity for compassion, which if you look at some of the horrible things we've done despite this capacity, makes so many things seem so much worse. There's more examples of animals being hunted to extinction than examples of animals being preserved due to exploitation.
Yes, I suppose you're correct. I should have phrased that more carefully.
Porn addiction is a real thing just like a lot of other habit forming activities, but seriously we don't blame the heroine or meth for a junkie becoming a junkie. I don't blame beer for someone being an alcoholic, I blame them for being a weak, simple, and pathetic human being, just like this dude is.
This is the exact opposite. Humans are selfish and self-serving like no other species can be. This is a direct result of natural selection. Your ancestors weren't the ones holding the door so people could get through, they were the ones trampling old women and children to get theirs first. More recently however, helplessness is a trait that is bred and perpetuated by a society that is ok with just accepting things as is without explanation.
"How did the universe get here? I dunno, God did it." What is more lazy and helpless than that? It's pretty thematic through out the whole ID debate. Acceptance in spite of investigation and evidence to the contrary. That is the epitome of a lazy and entitled attitude IMHO.
That being said, fuck yeah, bring on the tigers.
Usually one follows the other.
Funny, you're the only reasonable response and you're the only non ac in the thread yet...
Tolerance is condescension.
Besides, OSC's SF books have nothing to do with his views on a totally orthogonal societal issue. Boycotting the former because of the latter is called an ad hominem. Case in point, a lot of people enjoy Disney movies and Ford cars despite Walt Disney and Henry Ford being nasty antisemitic pro-nazi nutjobs.
By the same token, a lot of people don't support either of these companies for the exact same reason. It's their right to do so. A lot of people came unglued at the stuff the guy from Chik-fil-a said and boycotted the restaurant despite the fact that's not the default position of actual company, just one guy on top of it. It's people's right to boycott and famous people, if they are image conscious will keep their mouths shut so as not to trigger a boycott.
tl;dr
If you're going to do or say something that might piss people off, don't whine when you have pissed people off.
A lot have, and a lot more probably should be. Case in point.
The problem is that there is always going to be someone that calls any war or anything military illegitimate.
I completely agree with the first part of your statement. No matter what action the military or government take, there will be detractors. I don't necessarily see this as a problem though. This would help the issue be seen from multiple angles. It is the core of scientific consensus. Dissenting opinions should be evaluated on the merit of the argument in the open and not behind closed doors where motives are suspect. The appearance of unregulated and unmitigated impropriety is an issue.
I think the ATF and FBI should hold a siege on their compound until they surrender their weapons and come out peacefully. Or just burn the fuckers to the ground like every other para-military organization in the country.
I'll be a K-Mart, but I want my girlfriend to be a Bi-Mart.
Maybe it actually is.
She wanted him jailed and she succeeded in her goal. So, therefore what she did wasn't stupid.
So pointing out that you incorrectly think I'm misusing quotes doesn't change that your original statement is:
1. a logical fallacy making it a non sequitur
2. Fucking stupid, and finally
3. You are making an assertion that the Friday video is not stupid because it made money is saying it's good because it's popular. Success =! stupid.
There are a lot of successful things that are stupid and a lot of stupid things that aren't successful, that does not mean that something that is not successful therefore it's stupid or vice versa. If you're not smart enough to figure that out then I just can't be any plainer.
All this, aside from the fact that stupid is a completely subjective thing in most ways except for in this instance because many of the assertions you have made a demonstrably stupid.
I'm quoting you when I put the quotes around it, sorry I guess that you're actually stupid so I have to point that out to you. By your logic, only popular things are good? Success does not make something good, smart, or not stupid, but apparently that point is completely lost on you.
Since I'm sure you don't know what it means I'll just point out to you that non sequitur means "does not follow" or "that idiotic statement you made doesn't make sense." Maybe you looked it up, maybe not but I thought I'd explain that to you. Logically, your sentence does not make sense. Doing something stupid and succeeding at it did not make the stupid thing you set out to do any less stupid. For example: "You ate the entire pile of dog shit, boy you sure showed us!" See, that was a stupid thing to do, and successfully completing it, doesn't mean it wasn't a stupid thing to do in the first place, therefore you completed something stupid successfully and viola, it was stupid thing to do. That's where your logic falls apart and that is why it's a non sequitur.
Holy shit retard, hyperbole much? News for you buddy, being gay isn't a bad thing, just like being black, white, or hispanic. If you want to hate people, feel free to do so, but don't think you're not going to have criticism. You're free to be an idiot, but I'm free to call you on it so there's that.