"You write so poorly..." "Your post is worded so well..."
So which is it?:-)
I did not call you ignorant for being Christian, but for displaying a limited world view. Let me respond first to the crux of your ignorance:
"Okay, fine, I can accept that you're an atheist, and you believe there's nothing wrong with porn.""
Here and at several other points in your post, you're trying to put ALL atheists into one big category where everyone thinks exactly the same, has the same morals and so on. To add insult to injury, you group people by what they *don't* believe in. That shows that your mindset is rather limited and you think only in caricatures.
Do you honestly believe that just because I agree with someone about religion, I'm going to agree about everything else too?
Really?
Do you agree with all religious people? Do you support gay marriage? Or not? Either way, you'll find religious people who disagree with you.
Sure, it's easy to go "Ick, naked people. WRONG!" I used to have such a view myself, until I grew up and found out that female sexual drive goes asymptotically to zero as they get settled into the relationship. And mine doesn't. Porn gives a nice release that all concerned parties (including the wife) are comfortable with. Maybe I should follow your Christian leaders who are caught with gay prostitutes? No thanks.
Ohh, wait... the prostitute-banging Christian leaders with millions of followers don't represent YOUR Christianity, right? Look who's suddenly able to differentiate now.
Do a little search for "porn use by Christians" and educate yourself a bit, OK?
And the gist of my post was that it's perfectly possible for someone with other views on religion to have rigid morals. If you've never met such people, your social circle is truly limited.
You carry this limitation into point 1 where you conflate a country's government, culture and its people. The Chinese culture is 5000 years old, the current government only 1/100 of that. The USA is a secular nation (as confirmed by the US Constitution). Most of the people, like in China, are religious. What's the contradiction, mac?
Then point 2: I could have phrased it better: persecution is not Christian-specific. But Catholics aren't Christians to begin with. Things like idol-worship is explicitly prohibited by the Bible.
Point 3: are you honestly unable to differentiate between a poster on Slashdot and the entire Chinese government?:-)
Point 4: your religion should not be obsessed with *my* sexuality
Now I know that I'm a little confrontational in how I phrase my opinion, but please don't let that stop you from deepening your world view.
"Those aren't exactly 'religions' in the way that you or I would consider the term..." Okay, so in your world view, Buddhism isn't a religion?
As I understand, the Chinese have a very rich and diverse set of supernatural belief systems. You may or may not call every single one of them a "religion" per se, but if it involves supernatural entities, it sure as hell isn't atheism (or rather: naturalism/existentialism).
That's just bending reality to suit your argument.
You have yet to disprove the 14% figure I cited.
"As for erroneous presumptions, it may be that your own presumptions could merely be one interpretation of the subjective reality that you live in, and you're denying that any other interpretation could exist."
Contradiction in terms.
If we only have subjective reality to work with and no objective ways to measure the validity of any claim, then you cannot possibly call anything I say erroneous.
The real reason you are against objectivity is that your supernatural views can ONLY be "true" in a situation where you have diminished the difference between "true" and "false". However you twist it, it's a very weak and subjective argument you're defending.
Oh, and the majority of all religious people in the world think that your specific religious views are wrong and will likely land you in Hell. Why not tell them that they're ignorant too, while you're at it?
"It was the excuse that China used to march in and take over: we're liberating the workers from the chains of superstitious belief." My point exactly: why do you think they're encouraging Han Chinese to go live there? And how about Taiwan? Also for religious reasons? No, of course not. It's all about territorial control.
"A little learning goes a long way in curing ignorance." I find it amusing that you continue to tell me that *I* am ignorant, while almost everything you say confirms MY points:-)
I stand by my claim that the poster is ignorant and made strong claims based on nothing more than erroneous presumptions. Exactly what part of my response do you disagree with? Everything you say fits very well:
1. You yourself claim that the stereotype about Christians among Chinese is positive, not negative.
2. "The rest of China" is predominantly religious, not atheist. Feel free to verify that fact yourself.
3. You point out various types of religious persecution that aren't against Christians at all. So using terms like "anti-Christian" is highly misleading.
4. Nice to drag Tibetans into this: it has to do with territorial and ethnic control and very little with religion. Then again, aren't all "religious fights" essentially political ones?
Wow, that is the most ignorant piece of drivel I've read on the internet all day. I will take a few moments out of my otherwise busy schedule to explain why you come across as completely ignorant:
1. The sixth commandment is "thou shalt not kill" -- how does it apply?
2. The USA isn't a Christian nation. It's a nation where the majority consider themselves to be part of the minority of "real" Christians. Oh, and they love pornography as it's a billion dollar business.
3. Christianity does not have a monopoly on rigid morals. It's the old "atheists don't have morals" bullshit that theists use because they think that projecting their own opinions onto an imaginary being elevates those opinions. It doesn't. It just makes it harder for yourself to adjust false views.
4. Take a mere 60 seconds out of your busy schedule to look at the religious beliefs among Chinese. Just use google or whatever. Only 14% of Chinese consider themselves to be atheists. About the same percentage as in the USA.
5. Don't even try the persecution angle or equate "not Christian" with "anti-Christian".
6. Who the fuck are YOU to tell us about their philosophical points or even pretend for a second that yours is superior in any way. Fix your own world model so that you CAN comprehend things, rather than making your own ignorance of other cultures into some absolute reference point.
7. Porn is not wrong. It's just not a topic that us 99% of healthy males bring up in conversation. On occasion, I want to see a video of a woman (or two women) enjoying themselves (no males!). They are fine with it. My wife is fine with it. So get the fuck out of my fantasy, you pervert.
Actually, I happily and respectfully welcome such a thing. Freedom of speech extends to people of all cultures, not just our own. Anything less is hypocrisy.
BTW, they have a "draw the holocaust" day as a response. Tasteless? Yes. Pointless? Yes. Their right? Also yes.
"He's saying that the church may not be perfect,..."
That's like saying "a prostitute may not be a virgin...":-)
"The Catholic church may not be perfect, but it doesn't attempt to be evil either."
I disagree with you on several points:
1. They claim to speak ON BEHALF OF the creator of the universe. So logically, they are expected to be as close to perfection as possible. And yet, they are not any more "perfect" as any random bloke on the street.
2. They preach impossible, impractical and downright unethical morals... and yet, their organization is PROVEN to not even be able to live up to the most basic moral of "don't rape children or allow it to happen".
3. Protecting people who rape children IS an act of evil. No two ways about it, sorry.
4. It may or may not WANT to do evil, but it surely attempts to get control in every possible way. See Ireland, Africa and much of South American as examples.
I am tired of the "but.. context!" excuse to make fiction look like fact, fools like wise men and horrific child molesters like victims of circumstance.
Ah, but what you don't fully realize is that we're actually on the same side. As a European, the same interest groups who try to screw me (not personally though) also try to screw you. It's a common enemy.
Isn't this *exactly* what we want? Let the next generation get first-hand generation of the worse sides of copyright law. THEY are the ones who will tip the balance to actually change things as the older generation is phased out.
I hope they will remember this incident very well in their future careers.
For more than a decade, effort was done to *weaken* the domestic talent at developing themselves or helping (causing) to harden the existing infrastructure.
1. Needing more developers: more jobs for skilled programmers, which is *good* 2. More developer systems: negligible compared to server farm reduction. 3. Javascript client-side: already being optimized (see Chrome stories)
Slashdot Mirror
They want a segregated society based on gender.
We don't.
"You write so poorly..."
"Your post is worded so well..."
So which is it? :-)
I did not call you ignorant for being Christian, but for displaying a limited world view. Let me respond first to the crux of your ignorance:
"Okay, fine, I can accept that you're an atheist, and you believe there's nothing wrong with porn.""
Here and at several other points in your post, you're trying to put ALL atheists into one big category where everyone thinks exactly the same, has the same morals and so on. To add insult to injury, you group people by what they *don't* believe in. That shows that your mindset is rather limited and you think only in caricatures.
Do you honestly believe that just because I agree with someone about religion, I'm going to agree about everything else too?
Really?
Do you agree with all religious people? Do you support gay marriage? Or not? Either way, you'll find religious people who disagree with you.
Sure, it's easy to go "Ick, naked people. WRONG!" I used to have such a view myself, until I grew up and found out that female sexual drive goes asymptotically to zero as they get settled into the relationship. And mine doesn't. Porn gives a nice release that all concerned parties (including the wife) are comfortable with. Maybe I should follow your Christian leaders who are caught with gay prostitutes? No thanks.
Ohh, wait... the prostitute-banging Christian leaders with millions of followers don't represent YOUR Christianity, right? Look who's suddenly able to differentiate now.
Do a little search for "porn use by Christians" and educate yourself a bit, OK?
And the gist of my post was that it's perfectly possible for someone with other views on religion to have rigid morals. If you've never met such people, your social circle is truly limited.
You carry this limitation into point 1 where you conflate a country's government, culture and its people. The Chinese culture is 5000 years old, the current government only 1/100 of that. The USA is a secular nation (as confirmed by the US Constitution). Most of the people, like in China, are religious. What's the contradiction, mac?
Then point 2: I could have phrased it better: persecution is not Christian-specific. But Catholics aren't Christians to begin with. Things like idol-worship is explicitly prohibited by the Bible.
Point 3: are you honestly unable to differentiate between a poster on Slashdot and the entire Chinese government? :-)
Point 4: your religion should not be obsessed with *my* sexuality
Now I know that I'm a little confrontational in how I phrase my opinion, but please don't let that stop you from deepening your world view.
"As a Buddhist, allow me to say that right there is some ignorant bullshit."
I found that notion ignorant as well: some people appear to think that if you don't follow their specific religion, you are unable to have any morals.
That's not just ignorant, it's dangerous.
"As usual, the true situation is more complicated in real life than the simplistic parodies that people like to believe."
These are the wisest words I've read all day. Maybe even all week.
Thank you.
Funniest thing I've read all day.
Thank you for the clarification and interesting piece of information.
I stand corrected.
"Those aren't exactly 'religions' in the way that you or I would consider the term..."
Okay, so in your world view, Buddhism isn't a religion?
As I understand, the Chinese have a very rich and diverse set of supernatural belief systems. You may or may not call every single one of them a "religion" per se, but if it involves supernatural entities, it sure as hell isn't atheism (or rather: naturalism/existentialism).
That's just bending reality to suit your argument.
You have yet to disprove the 14% figure I cited.
"As for erroneous presumptions, it may be that your own presumptions could merely be one interpretation of the subjective reality that you live in, and you're denying that any other interpretation could exist."
Contradiction in terms.
If we only have subjective reality to work with and no objective ways to measure the validity of any claim, then you cannot possibly call anything I say erroneous.
The real reason you are against objectivity is that your supernatural views can ONLY be "true" in a situation where you have diminished the difference between "true" and "false". However you twist it, it's a very weak and subjective argument you're defending.
Oh, and the majority of all religious people in the world think that your specific religious views are wrong and will likely land you in Hell. Why not tell them that they're ignorant too, while you're at it?
"It was the excuse that China used to march in and take over: we're liberating the workers from the chains of superstitious belief."
My point exactly: why do you think they're encouraging Han Chinese to go live there? And how about Taiwan? Also for religious reasons? No, of course not. It's all about territorial control.
"A little learning goes a long way in curing ignorance." :-)
I find it amusing that you continue to tell me that *I* am ignorant, while almost everything you say confirms MY points
Maybe you should take your own advice?
I stand by my claim that the poster is ignorant and made strong claims based on nothing more than erroneous presumptions. Exactly what part of my response do you disagree with? Everything you say fits very well:
1. You yourself claim that the stereotype about Christians among Chinese is positive, not negative.
2. "The rest of China" is predominantly religious, not atheist. Feel free to verify that fact yourself.
3. You point out various types of religious persecution that aren't against Christians at all. So using terms like "anti-Christian" is highly misleading.
4. Nice to drag Tibetans into this: it has to do with territorial and ethnic control and very little with religion. Then again, aren't all "religious fights" essentially political ones?
So no, I'm not going to stop doing "it".
Wow, that is the most ignorant piece of drivel I've read on the internet all day. I will take a few moments out of my otherwise busy schedule to explain why you come across as completely ignorant:
1. The sixth commandment is "thou shalt not kill" -- how does it apply?
2. The USA isn't a Christian nation. It's a nation where the majority consider themselves to be part of the minority of "real" Christians. Oh, and they love pornography as it's a billion dollar business.
3. Christianity does not have a monopoly on rigid morals. It's the old "atheists don't have morals" bullshit that theists use because they think that projecting their own opinions onto an imaginary being elevates those opinions. It doesn't. It just makes it harder for yourself to adjust false views.
4. Take a mere 60 seconds out of your busy schedule to look at the religious beliefs among Chinese. Just use google or whatever. Only 14% of Chinese consider themselves to be atheists. About the same percentage as in the USA.
5. Don't even try the persecution angle or equate "not Christian" with "anti-Christian".
6. Who the fuck are YOU to tell us about their philosophical points or even pretend for a second that yours is superior in any way. Fix your own world model so that you CAN comprehend things, rather than making your own ignorance of other cultures into some absolute reference point.
7. Porn is not wrong. It's just not a topic that us 99% of healthy males bring up in conversation. On occasion, I want to see a video of a woman (or two women) enjoying themselves (no males!). They are fine with it. My wife is fine with it. So get the fuck out of my fantasy, you pervert.
Dear AC: that is a brilliant observation.
Actually, I happily and respectfully welcome such a thing. Freedom of speech extends to people of all cultures, not just our own. Anything less is hypocrisy.
BTW, they have a "draw the holocaust" day as a response. Tasteless? Yes. Pointless? Yes. Their right? Also yes.
"He's saying that the church may not be perfect, ..."
That's like saying "a prostitute may not be a virgin..." :-)
"The Catholic church may not be perfect, but it doesn't attempt to be evil either."
I disagree with you on several points:
1. They claim to speak ON BEHALF OF the creator of the universe. So logically, they are expected to be as close to perfection as possible. And yet, they are not any more "perfect" as any random bloke on the street.
2. They preach impossible, impractical and downright unethical morals... and yet, their organization is PROVEN to not even be able to live up to the most basic moral of "don't rape children or allow it to happen".
3. Protecting people who rape children IS an act of evil. No two ways about it, sorry.
4. It may or may not WANT to do evil, but it surely attempts to get control in every possible way. See Ireland, Africa and much of South American as examples.
1. Irrelevant in rational debate.
2. Agreed.
3. Qualitative and false argument.
4. Spare me the sexual innuendo.
5. Yeah, whatever.
Do you comprehend that child molestation is a wrong that FAR exceeds "unpleasant"?
So what are you trying to say exactly?
I am tired of the "but.. context!" excuse to make fiction look like fact, fools like wise men and horrific child molesters like victims of circumstance.
Okay, let's do a little test.
When you know that someone under your responsibility molests children, what do you do:
1. Cover everything up, do NOT report said molester to police AND make sure he can work with children again in the future.
2. Report molester to police and do everything in your power to help victims and make sure there are no more victims.
If you've picked option #2, then congratulations, you're wiser than the pope!
So the leader of the organization with the filthiest possible secrets speaks out against transparency.
Okay, no surprise there...
The priority of the catholic church is the catholic church. Not God. Not innocent children. Not you.
Ah, but what you don't fully realize is that we're actually on the same side. As a European, the same interest groups who try to screw me (not personally though) also try to screw you. It's a common enemy.
Isn't this *exactly* what we want? Let the next generation get first-hand generation of the worse sides of copyright law. THEY are the ones who will tip the balance to actually change things as the older generation is phased out.
I hope they will remember this incident very well in their future careers.
Too little, too late.
For more than a decade, effort was done to *weaken* the domestic talent at developing themselves or helping (causing) to harden the existing infrastructure.
Sure, he should pay a fine.
One in the order of, say, $675, not $675000.
... for never hearing about the Streisand effect. I've never heard of the guy before.
So, in my opinion Alan Grayson *is* nuts, just for a different reason :-)
Considering a minimum cost per server in the range of $500-1000, 2500 servers equal between 1.25 and 2.5 million dollars...
That's certainly a budget for which you could get some C++ programmers... ?
Very true: they are are big contributor to projects like memcache.
Ah, but these points are not hard to counter.
1. Needing more developers: more jobs for skilled programmers, which is *good*
2. More developer systems: negligible compared to server farm reduction.
3. Javascript client-side: already being optimized (see Chrome stories)