Great point with the technical incorrectness that the 10 Commandments are the exclusive property of Christianity.
Perhaps this is more to the point: the 10 Commandments statue was specifically intended to establish Christianity as the preferred religion of the land, to the exclusion of other religions, even those which also use the 10 Commandments themselves; and it is this intent to establish Christianity as the preferred religion, coupled the the actual implementation of the statue, which constitutes a Constitutional violation via the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
The 4th Commandment orders us to close up shop on Saturday. I claim that is "definitely in opposition to public good".
Anyway practically the entire list is irrelevant nonsense. Don't murder and don't steal? Yeah no shit we didn't need Moses to carve it into stone for us. In no way are our laws premised on that list, not even close, our laws are based on good sense and fairness (and greed and corruption).
I recently used Chase Bank "QuickPay". It took six days for the money to get from my account (at a different bank) to the Chase account.
So, six days is "quick" when the world is run by people like the people who run Chase. I could have literally driven the money across six states, and back again, ten times in the amount of time it took two banks to subtract a number from one account and add it to the second.
USAA is like a credit union, in that they aren't a bunch of motherfucking bloodsucking assholes like every other bank I can think of; but structurally it is a bank.
Yeah okay, but what does the law have to do with it? Aren't we currently discussing a news item about private medical records that were released outside of where they were supposed to be?
I've always thought that email should be delivered from account to account according to a network of trust. For you to send me an email, I must trust you, or there must be a chain of trust between us.
This wouldn't be as hard to implement as it sounds because major players like Google and Yahoo can 'trust' eachother. It's not like we would each individually have to maintain compicated and changing trust connections -- although we could if we wanted to. Your IP can establish 'trust' with a 'trust clearinghouse' maybe. And if someone violates the trust, then you break that part of the trust chain and the messages don't get delivered.
So if I ever receive a spam message, I could check the chain of trust which brought me that message and figure out what link in the chain failed to be trustworthy. I would disconnect that link, and I wouldn't get any more spam from that source. Mix in crowdsourcing and suddenly it becomes practically impossible to get spam out of your mailserver.
It would be possible for email deliverers to do this today. When Google, for instance, notices that practically all emails coming from a certain source are spam, why don't they disallow that source? I know, I know, that's sort of what spamhaus is, and sometimes providers do stuff like that, but it's not consistent enough to be effective.
One person can use a ridiculously outsized amount of healthcare, but it's practically impossible for one person to use a ridiculously outsized amount of public transportation.
Christianity, the religion, isn't *causing* those people to be evil torturers. Rather, being evil causes them to torture, and also causes them to think Christianity is morally acceptable.
I must have misunderstood the article when it said he was "wanted for questioning" instead of "extradition for trial". Questioning can be done via Skype. Forgive my American ignorance -- does "questioning" mean "trial" in Denmark? Here in America it means this:
QUESTIONING verb [ with obj. ] ask questions of (someone), esp. in an official context: four men were being questioned about the killings
Thanks for your help answering my questions -- or should I say, "thanks for your help trying me for a crime"?
Okay but does Denmark not have telephones? email? iChat? Skype?
Also I'm an American, does Denmark have the right against self incrimination like we do? It would be a waste of money to ship him 300 miles for him to just say nothing and get shipped back.
Every country is a colony where indigenous people were all but wiped out. The only difference is that the USA began in the memorable past. Before Europeans arrived, the natives washed over each other with waves of genocide and interbreeding although it is true that the Europeans were better at it than the untechnological former residents.
Ever heard of the Clovis people? Let's assume they were "first" -- well then there were several waves of genocide between the Clovis and the Puritans.
But anyway, I wasn't trying to make the USA out to be an average country I was merely using it as my standard of judging homogeneity.
I don't actually know for certain but I imagine that the US army has ample missiles that can be launched with 30 seconds notice and targeted to a point once it's already in the air. If we can't send a missile to any location in the US in 15 minutes, I'd be surprised.
The head of state is the head of the church. That is literally the definition of theocracy. UK is a theocracy.
All these monarchies have unelected heads of state. We can have different opinions I guess, but in my opinion "democracy" strictly implies that you elect the head of state.
I know this sounds dismissive but the majority party of the House was specifically elected to do nothing. "Nothing" is the policy agenda of a large minority of the voting public, those forming the base of the conservative half of the electorate.
Slashdot Mirror
Great point with the technical incorrectness that the 10 Commandments are the exclusive property of Christianity.
Perhaps this is more to the point: the 10 Commandments statue was specifically intended to establish Christianity as the preferred religion of the land, to the exclusion of other religions, even those which also use the 10 Commandments themselves; and it is this intent to establish Christianity as the preferred religion, coupled the the actual implementation of the statue, which constitutes a Constitutional violation via the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
As soon as gays and lesbians can have children without scientific intervention
Through Jesus all things are possible. If you open your heart to Him, you will believe.
The 4th Commandment orders us to close up shop on Saturday. I claim that is "definitely in opposition to public good".
Anyway practically the entire list is irrelevant nonsense. Don't murder and don't steal? Yeah no shit we didn't need Moses to carve it into stone for us. In no way are our laws premised on that list, not even close, our laws are based on good sense and fairness (and greed and corruption).
I recently used Chase Bank "QuickPay". It took six days for the money to get from my account (at a different bank) to the Chase account.
So, six days is "quick" when the world is run by people like the people who run Chase. I could have literally driven the money across six states, and back again, ten times in the amount of time it took two banks to subtract a number from one account and add it to the second.
I'd call it bad for the rich and good for the poor -- by which I mean, I'd call it good.
USAA is like a credit union, in that they aren't a bunch of motherfucking bloodsucking assholes like every other bank I can think of; but structurally it is a bank.
That kind of reasoning might not work with them, because Jesus.
Yeah okay, but what does the law have to do with it? Aren't we currently discussing a news item about private medical records that were released outside of where they were supposed to be?
Yeah but it makes sense that people would be the most proud of the best country.
If there is hope, it lies in the proles.
I've always thought that email should be delivered from account to account according to a network of trust. For you to send me an email, I must trust you, or there must be a chain of trust between us.
This wouldn't be as hard to implement as it sounds because major players like Google and Yahoo can 'trust' eachother. It's not like we would each individually have to maintain compicated and changing trust connections -- although we could if we wanted to. Your IP can establish 'trust' with a 'trust clearinghouse' maybe. And if someone violates the trust, then you break that part of the trust chain and the messages don't get delivered.
So if I ever receive a spam message, I could check the chain of trust which brought me that message and figure out what link in the chain failed to be trustworthy. I would disconnect that link, and I wouldn't get any more spam from that source. Mix in crowdsourcing and suddenly it becomes practically impossible to get spam out of your mailserver.
It would be possible for email deliverers to do this today. When Google, for instance, notices that practically all emails coming from a certain source are spam, why don't they disallow that source? I know, I know, that's sort of what spamhaus is, and sometimes providers do stuff like that, but it's not consistent enough to be effective.
One person can use a ridiculously outsized amount of healthcare, but it's practically impossible for one person to use a ridiculously outsized amount of public transportation.
Yeah they looked into it but it turns out that Jesus was against it so the conservatives wouldn't support it.
Technically, suicide isn't illegal; attempted suicide is illegal. It is famously the only such crime.
But your point withstands my pedantry.
1.) euthanasia is a political question
2.) billionaires own politics
3.) that's what the fuck billionaires have to do with this
Christianity, the religion, isn't *causing* those people to be evil torturers. Rather, being evil causes them to torture, and also causes them to think Christianity is morally acceptable.
Yes, it makes sense to Jesus, apparently.
I must have misunderstood the article when it said he was "wanted for questioning" instead of "extradition for trial". Questioning can be done via Skype. Forgive my American ignorance -- does "questioning" mean "trial" in Denmark? Here in America it means this:
QUESTIONING verb [ with obj. ]
ask questions of (someone), esp. in an official context: four men were being questioned about the killings
Thanks for your help answering my questions -- or should I say, "thanks for your help trying me for a crime"?
Okay but does Denmark not have telephones? email? iChat? Skype?
Also I'm an American, does Denmark have the right against self incrimination like we do? It would be a waste of money to ship him 300 miles for him to just say nothing and get shipped back.
Media isn't the messenger, it's the message-maker. The messenger is the newsstand operator, and nobody blames that guy.
When media pushes a bullshit message, it's their fault and we are right to assign them blame. This is such a case.
Driving at 70mph is high speed. Colliding with debris is a collision. I'm not sure what you meant when you said otherwise.
Every country is a colony where indigenous people were all but wiped out. The only difference is that the USA began in the memorable past. Before Europeans arrived, the natives washed over each other with waves of genocide and interbreeding although it is true that the Europeans were better at it than the untechnological former residents.
Ever heard of the Clovis people? Let's assume they were "first" -- well then there were several waves of genocide between the Clovis and the Puritans.
But anyway, I wasn't trying to make the USA out to be an average country I was merely using it as my standard of judging homogeneity.
I don't actually know for certain but I imagine that the US army has ample missiles that can be launched with 30 seconds notice and targeted to a point once it's already in the air. If we can't send a missile to any location in the US in 15 minutes, I'd be surprised.
The head of state is the head of the church. That is literally the definition of theocracy. UK is a theocracy.
All these monarchies have unelected heads of state. We can have different opinions I guess, but in my opinion "democracy" strictly implies that you elect the head of state.
I know this sounds dismissive but the majority party of the House was specifically elected to do nothing. "Nothing" is the policy agenda of a large minority of the voting public, those forming the base of the conservative half of the electorate.