You have been rightly modded flamebait, but I'll just point out that the the country is currently being run by a coalition of secular, liberal, nationalist parties. The Islamists suffered a massive defeat in the last general election in 2008.
Some women recant, not because a rape didn't happen, but because of the shit they'll have to face. Only 40% of rapes are even reported because women know they'll deal with all the usual shit (were you drinking, what were you wearing, did you smile at him -- which to people like you seems to mean 'she was asking for it')
This is a problem with your laws requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt that consent had not been given. The solution is to change the laws so that absence of consent is not required to be proven for a successful prosecution. If a woman accuses a man of rape, and it is able to be proven forensically that penetration happened, it should be enough for conviction of rape. Testimony of the victim would not be required and so the woman would not have to go through all that shit you talk about.
You're right, if the kids could afford better education, they're welcome to have it. But the thing is, kids can't afford anything. Kids have no money. It is the parents who are paying for the education. The kids haven't done anything to deserve it.
It's not about the identity. It's about the Slashdot scoring system. Posts by AC have a starting score of 0, so it would have low visibility until the post is modded up by a moderator. I say unfortunate because this means his message would have a high likelihood of being passed over.
I agree with your sentiments, and it's unfortunate that you chose to comment as AC. I mean, it's generally accepted as wrong to discriminate education based on race, or gender, or religion. But why is it okay to discriminate education based on wealth? Every child should have the same opportunity to education. No child should be have the privilege of better education just because he or she happen to be born to rich parents.
IANAL, but if the film is in the public domain, and someone takes it and enhances it and makes it available in HD, wouldn't they then hold the copyright to the new enhanced HD version?
Aren't there standardised tests for IQ? So if all the different groups take the same test with the same scoring system, doesn't that mean that an IQ of 100 in one group is also an IQ of 100 in another group?
Pray tell me how a father is supposed to bond with newborns. You do realise that babies sleep most of the time? And when they're awake they're too fragile for us to play with. And newborns are practically blind so it's not as if they can see us yet.
Not that I'm opposed to paternity leave. Any kind of paid leave if fine by me. But in terms of necessity, we only need a couple of days after delivery to facilitate the delivery, hospital admissions and discharge, and registration of the babies and such. But after mother and child is settled at home and all the registration stuff is done, there's not really much for the father to do at home during the day.
I use nano because for me it is the best text-mode "text editor". I use it to "edit text". Not for coding, which I guess is what you're talking about. For just "editing text", nano is the most user-friendly. There's no need for all those advanced features you mention when all I want to do is "edit text files". I'm talking about plain "text files", the kind that just have words and punctuation and none of the code tags or whatever that needs to be syntax highlighted. Just normal words in English or other language and none of the programming words that need to be auto-completed. You know what I mean?
How do we know it's not actually art imitating life? Maybe Orson Scott Card already had a theory of viruses being responsible for human intelligence, or he heard it from someone else. But OSC or his scientist friend didn't want to publicise the theory for fear of being called a quack, so OSC decided to put the theory in a book?
The evolutionists used to say that human intelligence could be explained by evolutionary process of natural selection, and they made no reference to viruses. Meaning previously they never said that viruses were required for human intelligence to appear. Now these people are saying that viruses were important to make us intelligent. Meaning that if it was not because of viruses then we not have evolved. So why did they say they had everything figured out? Were the evolutionists wrong previously? Were they lying? Are they lying now?
It is also interesting to note that nowadays retroviruses is one of the main vectors for performing genetic manipulation of cells. So if it is indeed proven that viruses were involved in creating human intelligence, can we discount any longer that humanity was created through genetic engineering?
Slashdot Mirror
You have been rightly modded flamebait, but I'll just point out that the the country is currently being run by a coalition of secular, liberal, nationalist parties. The Islamists suffered a massive defeat in the last general election in 2008.
Don't fornicate and you'll be safe.
Some women recant, not because a rape didn't happen, but because of the shit they'll have to face. Only 40% of rapes are even reported because women know they'll deal with all the usual shit (were you drinking, what were you wearing, did you smile at him -- which to people like you seems to mean 'she was asking for it')
This is a problem with your laws requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt that consent had not been given. The solution is to change the laws so that absence of consent is not required to be proven for a successful prosecution. If a woman accuses a man of rape, and it is able to be proven forensically that penetration happened, it should be enough for conviction of rape. Testimony of the victim would not be required and so the woman would not have to go through all that shit you talk about.
You're right, if the kids could afford better education, they're welcome to have it. But the thing is, kids can't afford anything. Kids have no money. It is the parents who are paying for the education. The kids haven't done anything to deserve it.
It's not about the identity. It's about the Slashdot scoring system. Posts by AC have a starting score of 0, so it would have low visibility until the post is modded up by a moderator. I say unfortunate because this means his message would have a high likelihood of being passed over.
I agree with your sentiments, and it's unfortunate that you chose to comment as AC. I mean, it's generally accepted as wrong to discriminate education based on race, or gender, or religion. But why is it okay to discriminate education based on wealth? Every child should have the same opportunity to education. No child should be have the privilege of better education just because he or she happen to be born to rich parents.
The pre-embryos are abominations. Just destroy them. Why do you people insist on making things so complicated?
You mean "Interstellar".
IANAL, but if the film is in the public domain, and someone takes it and enhances it and makes it available in HD, wouldn't they then hold the copyright to the new enhanced HD version?
Aren't there standardised tests for IQ? So if all the different groups take the same test with the same scoring system, doesn't that mean that an IQ of 100 in one group is also an IQ of 100 in another group?
Who else do you think should have that job?
Pray tell me how a father is supposed to bond with newborns. You do realise that babies sleep most of the time? And when they're awake they're too fragile for us to play with. And newborns are practically blind so it's not as if they can see us yet. Not that I'm opposed to paternity leave. Any kind of paid leave if fine by me. But in terms of necessity, we only need a couple of days after delivery to facilitate the delivery, hospital admissions and discharge, and registration of the babies and such. But after mother and child is settled at home and all the registration stuff is done, there's not really much for the father to do at home during the day.
So you're saying people are leaving their religion because they don't like the rules, not because they believe that the religion is false?
Please explain why men would want to spend time with our newborn kids.
Who says I have a holy book?
What's wrong with discouraging homosexual activities? Homosexual acts are wrong, aren't they?
I use nano because for me it is the best text-mode "text editor". I use it to "edit text". Not for coding, which I guess is what you're talking about. For just "editing text", nano is the most user-friendly. There's no need for all those advanced features you mention when all I want to do is "edit text files". I'm talking about plain "text files", the kind that just have words and punctuation and none of the code tags or whatever that needs to be syntax highlighted. Just normal words in English or other language and none of the programming words that need to be auto-completed. You know what I mean?
The first hit I got was "BBC News - India Uber taxi driver accused of Delhi rape".
If I'm faced with the death penalty, I would choose decapitation. It's the quickest and most painless method possible.
Just put the SIM card into another phone.
I don't get it. What's wrong with using traffic lights?
I would try to determine Step 2:
1. Discover a web site disclosing private data.
2. ???
3. PROFIT!
How do we know it's not actually art imitating life? Maybe Orson Scott Card already had a theory of viruses being responsible for human intelligence, or he heard it from someone else. But OSC or his scientist friend didn't want to publicise the theory for fear of being called a quack, so OSC decided to put the theory in a book?
The evolutionists used to say that human intelligence could be explained by evolutionary process of natural selection, and they made no reference to viruses. Meaning previously they never said that viruses were required for human intelligence to appear. Now these people are saying that viruses were important to make us intelligent. Meaning that if it was not because of viruses then we not have evolved. So why did they say they had everything figured out? Were the evolutionists wrong previously? Were they lying? Are they lying now?
It is also interesting to note that nowadays retroviruses is one of the main vectors for performing genetic manipulation of cells. So if it is indeed proven that viruses were involved in creating human intelligence, can we discount any longer that humanity was created through genetic engineering?
So this is what it's like to live in the Land of the Free. Fortunately we don't have that kind of problem here in the Third World.