So you are saying that we need a good bombing so we can get new infrastructure? Kind of like burning down the house so you can collect the insurance and build a new one?
However, you can use it to surf the internet and get email. Just because it isn't the right plan for you doesn't mean it isn't a good option for rural people with no access to cable.
Isreal actually trains thier security to look for suspicious behavior instead of assuming everyone is a suspect. Profiling doesn't neccessarily mean "assume all blacks/arabs/hispanics/whater are guilty." I can also mean "the suspicious looking guy might be guilty so lets go talk to him." You will also notice that countries that are actually afraid of terrorist bombings don't have long lines outside security checkpoints because terrorists like to bomb the checkpoints. If you care about security you get everyone through the check point as quickly as possible. We just like harrassing innocent citizens.
If a woman is happy in her role as the obediant wife, who are we to tell her that life is wrong? If all parties involved consent to the relationship and enjoy it, why does that make her marginalized? My mother-in-law spent her entire life listening to people tell her "Why are you just a stay at home mom? You are so smart, you could do anything. Why are you with that man? You are so much better than him..." It broke her heart to hear people tell her that because the truth is that she loves her husband (even if he is an ass) and she loved taking care of the kids.
She told me that when her second child was a baby her husband was working night shifts and she would pack the infant up in the stroller and trudge the stroller up and down the unpaved road they lived on in the middle of New York winter. I would never have done that and you probably never would have either. Her children all grew up and now she takes care of her grandchildren. She wakes up at 4AM every morning so that the house is clean and the coffee ready when her husband wakes up.
It makes her happy to serve and it is her right to chose to serve. The only people she feels marginalized by are those who insist that she is better than the life she chose. I used to wonder how she managed to stay with her husband, but then I got to know her and realized that she is person and not just another marginalized woman. Freedom is about choice.
According to wikipedia the term has quite broad implications: Conservative Christianity. Perhaps you should be more precise about which sect you are referring to?
So if you are chistian and live in a rural area and have conservative views, you hate women? Good job not stereotyping.
Or did you mean to say "Rural Conservative Christian Assholes" are assholes and "Nice Rural Conservative Christians" are nice? At which point it doesn't really matter where they live or what their religious and political beleives are. You can find assholes in cities and as atheists. You can find them in the liberal camps and the conservative camps.
In my experiance, "liberal feminists" hate women more. My (female) boss told me that "eventually you need to cut the apron strings" because I didn't want to go on a buisness trip and leave my 4 month old baby. The democrats cater to people in her demographic, but that doesn't make the entire party anti-family.
How many families actually exist in the U.S. where the woman stays home barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen while the man works?
How many women (in the US) are actually denied jobs or education because they are women?
How many conservative, christian families (in the US) have women who bow to the every whim of their husband?
You are making up crap because you have been conditioned to beleive that concervative christians are evil and hate women. Open your eyes and actually look around at your friends and neighbors. You might be surprised. Yes, there are idiots, but they are a minority.
But isn't it the mark of a good leader to be able to delegate? Some of the proposed questions do not have simple answers and I would prefer a leader willing to take the time and effort to get his subordinates to research the question and provide him with good data before formulating policy answers. Or do you prefer politicians to randomly spout out the first thing that comes to mind as policy?
If we can't sling mud at people we disagree and call them religous, ignorant nutters who hate women and minorities or communist hippie nutters who want to destroy the America we have worked so hard for... Afterall, bucketizing people is what we do best. If one person who claims membership of a group does something bad, the entire group must be at fault.
Look no further than Penn State for a good example of how we lovingly lash out in defence of America and the Children and the Environment because the media told us to and it made good TV.
Treason is defined as betraying the current government. If you successfully overthrow the current government and establish yourself as the new government, then you are no longer a traitor but a patriot. I assure you that most tyrannical monarchs also believe that they rule in the best interest of the state. Both Stalin and Hitler believed that their actions were for the greater good. King George believed that the policy in the new world was for the good of England and consequently also in the best interests of the colonists.
The Rosenburgs believed that they were acting for the greater good by spying for the Russians. However, they were executed as traitors. If Russia had won the cold war, they would have been hailed as heroes- true patriots and even martyrs. However, the Russians lost and the American government did not undergo a radical regime change. Thus they get to be traitors. History is always written by the winners.
Having personally had my ass grabbed in the middle of a crowded class room at a major university, I can assure you that it is not necessary to be wearing a short skirt or be in a compromising, suggestive position to be groped. Even it was, strippers can dance around a poll mostly naked and not be groped. Laying on a beach in a bikini does not invite men to grope you. Bending over to pick something up does not give men permission to lay hands on you.
Slashdot Mirror
So you are saying that we need a good bombing so we can get new infrastructure? Kind of like burning down the house so you can collect the insurance and build a new one?
However, you can use it to surf the internet and get email. Just because it isn't the right plan for you doesn't mean it isn't a good option for rural people with no access to cable.
Isreal actually trains thier security to look for suspicious behavior instead of assuming everyone is a suspect. Profiling doesn't neccessarily mean "assume all blacks/arabs/hispanics/whater are guilty." I can also mean "the suspicious looking guy might be guilty so lets go talk to him." You will also notice that countries that are actually afraid of terrorist bombings don't have long lines outside security checkpoints because terrorists like to bomb the checkpoints. If you care about security you get everyone through the check point as quickly as possible. We just like harrassing innocent citizens.
If a woman is happy in her role as the obediant wife, who are we to tell her that life is wrong? If all parties involved consent to the relationship and enjoy it, why does that make her marginalized? My mother-in-law spent her entire life listening to people tell her "Why are you just a stay at home mom? You are so smart, you could do anything. Why are you with that man? You are so much better than him..." It broke her heart to hear people tell her that because the truth is that she loves her husband (even if he is an ass) and she loved taking care of the kids.
She told me that when her second child was a baby her husband was working night shifts and she would pack the infant up in the stroller and trudge the stroller up and down the unpaved road they lived on in the middle of New York winter. I would never have done that and you probably never would have either. Her children all grew up and now she takes care of her grandchildren. She wakes up at 4AM every morning so that the house is clean and the coffee ready when her husband wakes up.
It makes her happy to serve and it is her right to chose to serve. The only people she feels marginalized by are those who insist that she is better than the life she chose. I used to wonder how she managed to stay with her husband, but then I got to know her and realized that she is person and not just another marginalized woman. Freedom is about choice.
According to wikipedia the term has quite broad implications: Conservative Christianity. Perhaps you should be more precise about which sect you are referring to?
So if you are chistian and live in a rural area and have conservative views, you hate women? Good job not stereotyping.
Or did you mean to say "Rural Conservative Christian Assholes" are assholes and "Nice Rural Conservative Christians" are nice? At which point it doesn't really matter where they live or what their religious and political beleives are. You can find assholes in cities and as atheists. You can find them in the liberal camps and the conservative camps.
In my experiance, "liberal feminists" hate women more. My (female) boss told me that "eventually you need to cut the apron strings" because I didn't want to go on a buisness trip and leave my 4 month old baby. The democrats cater to people in her demographic, but that doesn't make the entire party anti-family.
How many families actually exist in the U.S. where the woman stays home barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen while the man works?
How many women (in the US) are actually denied jobs or education because they are women?
How many conservative, christian families (in the US) have women who bow to the every whim of their husband?
You are making up crap because you have been conditioned to beleive that concervative christians are evil and hate women. Open your eyes and actually look around at your friends and neighbors. You might be surprised. Yes, there are idiots, but they are a minority.
But isn't it the mark of a good leader to be able to delegate? Some of the proposed questions do not have simple answers and I would prefer a leader willing to take the time and effort to get his subordinates to research the question and provide him with good data before formulating policy answers. Or do you prefer politicians to randomly spout out the first thing that comes to mind as policy?
If we can't sling mud at people we disagree and call them religous, ignorant nutters who hate women and minorities or communist hippie nutters who want to destroy the America we have worked so hard for... Afterall, bucketizing people is what we do best. If one person who claims membership of a group does something bad, the entire group must be at fault.
Look no further than Penn State for a good example of how we lovingly lash out in defence of America and the Children and the Environment because the media told us to and it made good TV.
Is there a difference between family and individual?
Wouldn't it make god guilty of murder?
Ah but if the fetus is a life, then killing it interferes with the life of another person...
Teddy tried to run for president...
I suppose you have never held a newborn baby? They are very alert and attentive and have thoughts and feelings.
That's how things were priced back prior to the 19th century.
They tell you up front how long the trial is expected to last so you tell the court you can't make that committment during the selection process.
Wait... your telling me that if I want people to click on a link I need to produce a quality article? That's crazy talk.
Not yet. They are all moving towards IP, but they aren't there yet.
Wait.. politicians remember campaign promises after being elected? Since when?
Treason is defined as betraying the current government. If you successfully overthrow the current government and establish yourself as the new government, then you are no longer a traitor but a patriot. I assure you that most tyrannical monarchs also believe that they rule in the best interest of the state. Both Stalin and Hitler believed that their actions were for the greater good. King George believed that the policy in the new world was for the good of England and consequently also in the best interests of the colonists.
The Rosenburgs believed that they were acting for the greater good by spying for the Russians. However, they were executed as traitors. If Russia had won the cold war, they would have been hailed as heroes- true patriots and even martyrs. However, the Russians lost and the American government did not undergo a radical regime change. Thus they get to be traitors. History is always written by the winners.
The difference between treason and patriotism is winning.
Hey man... math is hard. Can I get a cookie or what?
1987 is still more than 20 years ago. It is also 25 years ago...
It worked for Stalin...
Having personally had my ass grabbed in the middle of a crowded class room at a major university, I can assure you that it is not necessary to be wearing a short skirt or be in a compromising, suggestive position to be groped. Even it was, strippers can dance around a poll mostly naked and not be groped. Laying on a beach in a bikini does not invite men to grope you. Bending over to pick something up does not give men permission to lay hands on you.