the way global warming is going, all of your problems with cold temperatures will be historical about the time the gas goes to $40/ gallon and you have to switch to electric
"some people use the same term ("God") to describe very different things, rather than describing the same thing with different names"
and i am asking you to accept that this is the way it was, and always will be, and this cacophony is never going away, and you need to lose your discomfort with this ugly but inescapable status quo of humanity. unless you want to do away with free will and wage a crusade for cognitive conformity. which is obviously worse. and yes, i know, such a crusade for conformity is going on, in the name of religion. but fighting that crusade with a crusade of your own ("there is no god!") basically means you are just as wrong as everything you dislike about theism
if someone were so negative and stupid as to use god as justification to suicide bomb or murder abortion providers, then your argument is with stupid and negative people, not god
god is just a metaphor. in fact, your hostility to the idea of god is the same sort of irrationality that drives those who have to fight for the existence of god. the extremely intolerant atheist who insists on the destruction of theism is just as wrong as the religious fundamentalist who insists you believe as he believes: its the imposition of your will onto other people, which is more wrong than the existence or lack thereof a silly metaphorical idea. god can be interepreted a million different ways, so your argument is with certain wrong interpretations, including some interpretations that reject his or her existence but are still just as violent as a religious fundamentalist. belief in god or not does not define anything at all, its a red herring, a false pointless argument
just accept that people think differently about the world, and always will. whether or not their thinking includes the idea of a god holds no meaning, positive or negative, either way. in fact, if you waved a magic wand, and removed all the world's religions, new ones would spontaneously spring into being. why? because belief in god is a sociological and psychological phenomenon of human existence: it is never going away. you need to accept it, or you at war with mankind, not god. some day you will die. do you fight this ugly truth? or accept it? well, you also need to accept that belief in god, like sitting on the toilet every day, just happens. it does no good to accept an unbending fact of human reality
i am a nonbeliever. yet the idea of god doesn't threaten me, i'm perfectly at peace with it. i am completely beyond the argument, such that i am comfortable even calling myself a believer nowadays, deceitfully, mischievously, or just because i'm bored. with such contempt do i hold the whole debate about god's existence. it is such a colossal waste of time and thought. the root of the argument is about conformity, which is the real danger, whether for or against god
(all of the trolls disputing this statement to the contrary)
i also am able to carry on conversations about god with people who are very religious and possibly not so bright. even though i am not a believer, because i understand the symbolic interplay between the idea of god and the facts of the universe, then there is no cognitive dissonance going on in my head when i talk to them. i merely translate what they say into what i think i know, and i translate what i think i know into a literal framework about the idea of god when i talk to them. and everyone is talking about the same thing, and everyone happy
in fact, i said i was not a believer. but i believe in the universe and its laws. so, in effect, based on my definition of what god really is, i guess i am believer than too
so intelligent people who believe in god is not a contradiction. all that is happening is that intelligent people understand god less literally, and more metaphorically and deeply, such that at its root, their faith is no different than a positivist nonbeliever's humanism and understanding of the physical world
really, this is the truth: the debate about the existence of god/ not is a complete joke. everyone is simply arguing about the same thing
of course, those who are very literal and not so bright and are negativist about humanity use the idea of god as justification to murder abortion providers and become suicide bombers. but this isn't an argument against god, this is an argument against the negative and the stupid
your antipathy to my words cannot be separated from an antipathy towards anyone advocating for any positive cause, which is just odd. you don't mind my message, you seem to be angry at the idea i should say it, without proof of doing it i live in midtown manhattan dude, i don't own a car, if that means anything to you- as if it should mean anything to you apart from evaluating what i say independent of who says it?
why can't you evaluate my words on the substance of the message, and that alone. that's not a valid frame of reference for you? you apparently want to do the right thing, and then have absolute silence, as if evangelism for a good cause is wrong
i think you have some sort of hypersensitivity to the idea of "do as i say, not as i do". well ok. but you should have no antipathy to someone who says "do as i say, and as i do, which are the same thing". its almost like you assumed i was the former hypocrite. i am the latter, but even if i wasn't, who cares, on an internet forum? isn't the merit of my message the most valid thing to criticize or not?
finally, there's the realm of personal decision, and the realm of national policy making. both are important and valid avenues of discussion
so frankly, you're just bizarre, and i don't understand your priorities
the half below the bell curve never will, nor can you realistically expect them to, understand the world like stephen hawking
so you are going to have to put up with people anthropomorphizing and otherwise taking mental shortcuts to describe their world. the alternative: an iq test before you can have an opinion, is a worse option
we need to learn to accept that some people can only go with the simpleminded and the literal. not everyone is meant to be a great scientist and understand reality at a maximum of the humanly possible. for the simpletons then and their religious tomfoolery then, we need to have begrudging tolerance, and silence. don't worry about it so much, because the way it always has been and always will be
so you don't fund chavez in venezuela, salafists and wahhabi fundamentalism via saudi arabia, the destruction of our environment, lowered air quality, etc
you are part of the problem, every time you pull into a gas station. policy change on a national level is only half the solution. the other part of the solution is a personal decision all of us have to make to do what is right
don't let your next car be fueled by gasoline, for the sake of national security, and your environment. since militant muslim fundamentalism and petrodollar socialism is something that bothers the right, and environmental destruction and poor air quality something that bothers the left, then surely, this is something that both the left, and the right, can agree on, for once
imagine that: a monumental personal decision that both bush haters and obama haters can agree on
god is a metaphor, that some people need to take literally, because not everyone has the mind of stephen hawking, but they still need to understand the world, so mental shortcuts have to do
the whole hullabaloo over the existence of god is really silly, as soon as you realize that everyone has a different way of describing the same thing
i think you've been watching "resident evil" "alien" or "andromeda strain" too much and don't really have much epidemiology or biochemistry under your belt. those are pleasant fictional entertainments, but they ignore the economics of basic evolution and biology
a plague or a predator or a parasite is something a long time in the making, exquisitely crafted by evolution to its intended host. it is not something floating out there on mars or anywhere else that suddenly is able to take advantage of any plant or animal life on earth with sudden and voracious ability. out in space, life is trying its damnedest to survive things like radiation and starvation. things it wouldn't have to worry about on earth, but earth is not something it would be adapted to
life in space would be hermits, long hibernators, very tough and resilient and specializing in slow growth and long dormancy. life in space would be poor, weak, and asocial. it wouldn't know what to do with other sudden bountiful sources of life around it like on earth, because it would be in isolation for millions of years. it is entirely possible, like andromeda strain, that alien life has been raining down on us, forever. but it is quickly outcompeted by life right here, because life right here knows how to live here and compete against other life. alien space life meanwhile, would be poorly suited to such tasks, and quickly be killed. predators and disease and parasites are forms of life evolved in the raucous promiscuous environment of many different kinds of life around it for millions of years: the opposite environment of space
life in space has no time nor inclination to be a plague, nor preserve any such ability to do that, even if it somehow could, out there eking by in the cold and the empty. fish in caves quickly lose the ability to see through evolution, because evolution favors losing abilities that are expensive and provide no survival advantage. many times in natural history, birds have found isolated islands and promptly lost the ability to fly, becoming fat slow ground things that a predator from a large continent could easily and quickly dispatch. working wings are very expensive biologically, and only are useful in a high competition environment. likewise in space, where the most pressing issue might be radiation, cold, and starvation, the complex ability to be a plague or a predator or a parasite, is just too dang expensive to keep around, when there is no one else around. an ability to consume or infect other life would quickly degenerate and atrophy
on earth, for millions of years, life has been pitted against life and has been trying to be that plague you fear to the best of its ability. in other words, the best training ground for a plague is right here, all around you, not out in the cold of space or on some desiccated planet. out there, any form of life has no time nor ability to evolve to be able to do anything with something as exotic as us or anything else on earth. but exposed to us for millions of years? yes, then it is a threat. and that's exactly what you already have here on earth all around you
fear not mars. fear dhaka. fear taipei. fear moscow. a plague IS possible. it is breeding right now, maybe in your city, maybe in you. in terms of mother nature, our technological and agricultural advances have rendered humanity as a huge sudden recent population boom that, to the eyes of the rest of life on earth, is just a giant food source, winning a lottery ticket. all someone has to do is take advantage of us, and someone will take advantage of us, someday, somehow: influenza, SARS, bed bugs... its a relentless march of close calls, until there are no more close calls, but a direct hit instead. to the parasites and diseases, we are untapped riches. they've been working very hard via evolution to crack the code that will decimate us, and will continue to try hard to make us their food
but... then they will evolve into something less virulent. because to disease, it doesn't pay to kill your hosts so fast as
WELL. SAID. thank you sir. it identifies a weakness people have for cult of personalities, here on slashdot, in geek culture, and throughout history: dear hero is incapable of doing wrong
but it is entirely possible, no, it is most likely, that assange is doing great things by getting secrets out in the open that governments don't want people to know... AND the man has boundary issues and trangresses against a sexual partner's wishes
in fact, as a self-appointed pop psychology comment board expert (trademark/ patent pending), i would say his inability to recognize boundaries has made him both a hero (in the realm of state secrets), and a villain (in the bedroom), at the same time, with the same psychological root weakness/strength
assange has boundary issues. and this has both ennobled him, and degenerated him, in two different arenas of life
you can get the same pharmacological effect with a daily aspirin
without all the unwanted mental effects of alcohol
yes, some people want those mental effects, but one thing i've found out in my life is that drugs degrade life, they don't enhance it
people who chronically abuse drugs, any drug, including alcohol, and think that it enhances life are actually in some sort of pyschic pain, and the drugs blot out and remove that pain. in this way their lvies are "enhanced"
they are temporarily relieving that pain, but they'd be far better off coping with the pain, to get at its source, and nipping the problem in the bud. rather than carrying around a monkey on their backs their entire lives
as in, arts and crafts: in many ways, programming is an art form, not a science
and honestly, if you take exception to this description, i will go so far as to say you aren't a real programmer. you haven't pored over a piece of code, and, after cognitively digesting it, sat back and thought: "beautiful". that's an aesthetic description. because programming DOES have a genuine aesthetic component to it that really delineates the difference between a creative rock star and a code maintenance bureaucratic functionary
but what kind of art is it, cognitively speaking? and i would say: it is more like a being a movie director than being a musician
but people THINK of programmers like musicians, with a musician's career arc: you are a nobody, then you skyrocket to fame, then you fade and are a forgotten has-been doing greatest hits at the country fair: called in to adjust their COBOL from the 1980s
programmers should be thought of like movie directors, who can most certainly be a geniuses at a young age, like robert rodriguez, but don't really hit their prime until their 30s and 40s, like chris nolan, and are still valuable as greybeards making great stuff in their 60s and 70s, like martin scorsese. and the young hot shot movie directors might be glowing hot, flying by the seat of his pants with tiny production budgets and just his friends to help, like a young programmer fueled on soft drinks and potato chips at 3 am. but the older movie directors are sitting atop large multimillion dollar productions, with a giant staff of cinematographers and key grips and production assistants... more like commanding a battleship than a dinghy. in programmer terms: moving into management
so as for the prejudice of ageism in programming: maybe there is just something about a young supple mind that makes art that is exciting and electric. i mean i had to do a double take just now composing this comment: i described a good programmer as a rock star above. showing that even within my own way of thinking about programming, i am applying the false musician's metaphor for the artistry that is programming, when it is more like being a movie director
programmers are movie directors, not musicians. that's my metaphor and my message, even if i myself can't keep my story straight
you have your kids turn on chatroulette, and you do the same. if you don't see each other, and you're kids are still not mentally scarred, you bogosort until you find each other
the idea of bringing a boob to an innocent baby's mouth is obviously a severe injection of immorality into the family structure by people who have no consideration for a child's decency and psychological health. some people are just perverts, but why they can't do their perversions amongst themselves, why they have to drag an innocent darling child into their sleazy use of the human body by making a helpless infant suck on a boob... it really makes my blood boil at these decadent slime
Slashdot Mirror
which was my original point
lol
the way global warming is going, all of your problems with cold temperatures will be historical about the time the gas goes to $40/ gallon and you have to switch to electric
"some people use the same term ("God") to describe very different things, rather than describing the same thing with different names"
and i am asking you to accept that this is the way it was, and always will be, and this cacophony is never going away, and you need to lose your discomfort with this ugly but inescapable status quo of humanity. unless you want to do away with free will and wage a crusade for cognitive conformity. which is obviously worse. and yes, i know, such a crusade for conformity is going on, in the name of religion. but fighting that crusade with a crusade of your own ("there is no god!") basically means you are just as wrong as everything you dislike about theism
not to the idea god
if someone were so negative and stupid as to use god as justification to suicide bomb or murder abortion providers, then your argument is with stupid and negative people, not god
god is just a metaphor. in fact, your hostility to the idea of god is the same sort of irrationality that drives those who have to fight for the existence of god. the extremely intolerant atheist who insists on the destruction of theism is just as wrong as the religious fundamentalist who insists you believe as he believes: its the imposition of your will onto other people, which is more wrong than the existence or lack thereof a silly metaphorical idea. god can be interepreted a million different ways, so your argument is with certain wrong interpretations, including some interpretations that reject his or her existence but are still just as violent as a religious fundamentalist. belief in god or not does not define anything at all, its a red herring, a false pointless argument
just accept that people think differently about the world, and always will. whether or not their thinking includes the idea of a god holds no meaning, positive or negative, either way. in fact, if you waved a magic wand, and removed all the world's religions, new ones would spontaneously spring into being. why? because belief in god is a sociological and psychological phenomenon of human existence: it is never going away. you need to accept it, or you at war with mankind, not god. some day you will die. do you fight this ugly truth? or accept it? well, you also need to accept that belief in god, like sitting on the toilet every day, just happens. it does no good to accept an unbending fact of human reality
i am a nonbeliever. yet the idea of god doesn't threaten me, i'm perfectly at peace with it. i am completely beyond the argument, such that i am comfortable even calling myself a believer nowadays, deceitfully, mischievously, or just because i'm bored. with such contempt do i hold the whole debate about god's existence. it is such a colossal waste of time and thought. the root of the argument is about conformity, which is the real danger, whether for or against god
(all of the trolls disputing this statement to the contrary)
i also am able to carry on conversations about god with people who are very religious and possibly not so bright. even though i am not a believer, because i understand the symbolic interplay between the idea of god and the facts of the universe, then there is no cognitive dissonance going on in my head when i talk to them. i merely translate what they say into what i think i know, and i translate what i think i know into a literal framework about the idea of god when i talk to them. and everyone is talking about the same thing, and everyone happy
in fact, i said i was not a believer. but i believe in the universe and its laws. so, in effect, based on my definition of what god really is, i guess i am believer than too
so intelligent people who believe in god is not a contradiction. all that is happening is that intelligent people understand god less literally, and more metaphorically and deeply, such that at its root, their faith is no different than a positivist nonbeliever's humanism and understanding of the physical world
really, this is the truth: the debate about the existence of god/ not is a complete joke. everyone is simply arguing about the same thing
of course, those who are very literal and not so bright and are negativist about humanity use the idea of god as justification to murder abortion providers and become suicide bombers. but this isn't an argument against god, this is an argument against the negative and the stupid
and the middle class grows in brazil, india, china, consuming more
and as the petrol gets deeper and more expensive to dig up...
then consider the gas price shocks of a few years back to be a warning of far worse ahead
plan now, or allow me to pass you on your bike in my electric car
yes, gas is cheap now. its not going to stay that way, by anyone's calculations. consider yourself warned
to solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric, tidal, etc...
with absolutely no effect on the consumer, who doesn't have to know or care where the electricity comes from when he plugs his car in the wall
you don't irritate me, you mystify me
your antipathy to my words cannot be separated from an antipathy towards anyone advocating for any positive cause, which is just odd. you don't mind my message, you seem to be angry at the idea i should say it, without proof of doing it i live in midtown manhattan dude, i don't own a car, if that means anything to you- as if it should mean anything to you apart from evaluating what i say independent of who says it?
why can't you evaluate my words on the substance of the message, and that alone. that's not a valid frame of reference for you? you apparently want to do the right thing, and then have absolute silence, as if evangelism for a good cause is wrong
i think you have some sort of hypersensitivity to the idea of "do as i say, not as i do". well ok. but you should have no antipathy to someone who says "do as i say, and as i do, which are the same thing". its almost like you assumed i was the former hypocrite. i am the latter, but even if i wasn't, who cares, on an internet forum? isn't the merit of my message the most valid thing to criticize or not?
finally, there's the realm of personal decision, and the realm of national policy making. both are important and valid avenues of discussion
so frankly, you're just bizarre, and i don't understand your priorities
the half below the bell curve never will, nor can you realistically expect them to, understand the world like stephen hawking
so you are going to have to put up with people anthropomorphizing and otherwise taking mental shortcuts to describe their world. the alternative: an iq test before you can have an opinion, is a worse option
we need to learn to accept that some people can only go with the simpleminded and the literal. not everyone is meant to be a great scientist and understand reality at a maximum of the humanly possible. for the simpletons then and their religious tomfoolery then, we need to have begrudging tolerance, and silence. don't worry about it so much, because the way it always has been and always will be
so you don't fund chavez in venezuela, salafists and wahhabi fundamentalism via saudi arabia, the destruction of our environment, lowered air quality, etc
you are part of the problem, every time you pull into a gas station. policy change on a national level is only half the solution. the other part of the solution is a personal decision all of us have to make to do what is right
don't let your next car be fueled by gasoline, for the sake of national security, and your environment. since militant muslim fundamentalism and petrodollar socialism is something that bothers the right, and environmental destruction and poor air quality something that bothers the left, then surely, this is something that both the left, and the right, can agree on, for once
imagine that: a monumental personal decision that both bush haters and obama haters can agree on
no. more. gasoline. cars
for the sake of your country
god IS the laws of physics
god is a metaphor, that some people need to take literally, because not everyone has the mind of stephen hawking, but they still need to understand the world, so mental shortcuts have to do
the whole hullabaloo over the existence of god is really silly, as soon as you realize that everyone has a different way of describing the same thing
i think you've been watching "resident evil" "alien" or "andromeda strain" too much and don't really have much epidemiology or biochemistry under your belt. those are pleasant fictional entertainments, but they ignore the economics of basic evolution and biology
a plague or a predator or a parasite is something a long time in the making, exquisitely crafted by evolution to its intended host. it is not something floating out there on mars or anywhere else that suddenly is able to take advantage of any plant or animal life on earth with sudden and voracious ability. out in space, life is trying its damnedest to survive things like radiation and starvation. things it wouldn't have to worry about on earth, but earth is not something it would be adapted to
life in space would be hermits, long hibernators, very tough and resilient and specializing in slow growth and long dormancy. life in space would be poor, weak, and asocial. it wouldn't know what to do with other sudden bountiful sources of life around it like on earth, because it would be in isolation for millions of years. it is entirely possible, like andromeda strain, that alien life has been raining down on us, forever. but it is quickly outcompeted by life right here, because life right here knows how to live here and compete against other life. alien space life meanwhile, would be poorly suited to such tasks, and quickly be killed. predators and disease and parasites are forms of life evolved in the raucous promiscuous environment of many different kinds of life around it for millions of years: the opposite environment of space
life in space has no time nor inclination to be a plague, nor preserve any such ability to do that, even if it somehow could, out there eking by in the cold and the empty. fish in caves quickly lose the ability to see through evolution, because evolution favors losing abilities that are expensive and provide no survival advantage. many times in natural history, birds have found isolated islands and promptly lost the ability to fly, becoming fat slow ground things that a predator from a large continent could easily and quickly dispatch. working wings are very expensive biologically, and only are useful in a high competition environment. likewise in space, where the most pressing issue might be radiation, cold, and starvation, the complex ability to be a plague or a predator or a parasite, is just too dang expensive to keep around, when there is no one else around. an ability to consume or infect other life would quickly degenerate and atrophy
on earth, for millions of years, life has been pitted against life and has been trying to be that plague you fear to the best of its ability. in other words, the best training ground for a plague is right here, all around you, not out in the cold of space or on some desiccated planet. out there, any form of life has no time nor ability to evolve to be able to do anything with something as exotic as us or anything else on earth. but exposed to us for millions of years? yes, then it is a threat. and that's exactly what you already have here on earth all around you
fear not mars. fear dhaka. fear taipei. fear moscow. a plague IS possible. it is breeding right now, maybe in your city, maybe in you. in terms of mother nature, our technological and agricultural advances have rendered humanity as a huge sudden recent population boom that, to the eyes of the rest of life on earth, is just a giant food source, winning a lottery ticket. all someone has to do is take advantage of us, and someone will take advantage of us, someday, somehow: influenza, SARS, bed bugs... its a relentless march of close calls, until there are no more close calls, but a direct hit instead. to the parasites and diseases, we are untapped riches. they've been working very hard via evolution to crack the code that will decimate us, and will continue to try hard to make us their food
but... then they will evolve into something less virulent. because to disease, it doesn't pay to kill your hosts so fast as
what is his slashdot id?
WELL. SAID. thank you sir. it identifies a weakness people have for cult of personalities, here on slashdot, in geek culture, and throughout history: dear hero is incapable of doing wrong
but it is entirely possible, no, it is most likely, that assange is doing great things by getting secrets out in the open that governments don't want people to know... AND the man has boundary issues and trangresses against a sexual partner's wishes
in fact, as a self-appointed pop psychology comment board expert (trademark/ patent pending), i would say his inability to recognize boundaries has made him both a hero (in the realm of state secrets), and a villain (in the bedroom), at the same time, with the same psychological root weakness/strength
assange has boundary issues. and this has both ennobled him, and degenerated him, in two different arenas of life
you can get the same pharmacological effect with a daily aspirin
without all the unwanted mental effects of alcohol
yes, some people want those mental effects, but one thing i've found out in my life is that drugs degrade life, they don't enhance it
people who chronically abuse drugs, any drug, including alcohol, and think that it enhances life are actually in some sort of pyschic pain, and the drugs blot out and remove that pain. in this way their lvies are "enhanced"
they are temporarily relieving that pain, but they'd be far better off coping with the pain, to get at its source, and nipping the problem in the bud. rather than carrying around a monkey on their backs their entire lives
ROR
bunkers or caves usually ARE cool and don't swing radically up or down in temperature...
until you put a bunch of servers in them
then they heat up, and STAY hot, and are harder to cool than on the surface because there is nowhere to dissipate the heat
also: they are hard to get supplies to and build in, they have air quality issues, etc
yeah: they look really cool and they sound really cool, but in actual practicality, the idea of servers in caves or bunkers sucks
as in, arts and crafts: in many ways, programming is an art form, not a science
and honestly, if you take exception to this description, i will go so far as to say you aren't a real programmer. you haven't pored over a piece of code, and, after cognitively digesting it, sat back and thought: "beautiful". that's an aesthetic description. because programming DOES have a genuine aesthetic component to it that really delineates the difference between a creative rock star and a code maintenance bureaucratic functionary
but what kind of art is it, cognitively speaking? and i would say: it is more like a being a movie director than being a musician
but people THINK of programmers like musicians, with a musician's career arc: you are a nobody, then you skyrocket to fame, then you fade and are a forgotten has-been doing greatest hits at the country fair: called in to adjust their COBOL from the 1980s
programmers should be thought of like movie directors, who can most certainly be a geniuses at a young age, like robert rodriguez, but don't really hit their prime until their 30s and 40s, like chris nolan, and are still valuable as greybeards making great stuff in their 60s and 70s, like martin scorsese. and the young hot shot movie directors might be glowing hot, flying by the seat of his pants with tiny production budgets and just his friends to help, like a young programmer fueled on soft drinks and potato chips at 3 am. but the older movie directors are sitting atop large multimillion dollar productions, with a giant staff of cinematographers and key grips and production assistants... more like commanding a battleship than a dinghy. in programmer terms: moving into management
so as for the prejudice of ageism in programming: maybe there is just something about a young supple mind that makes art that is exciting and electric. i mean i had to do a double take just now composing this comment: i described a good programmer as a rock star above. showing that even within my own way of thinking about programming, i am applying the false musician's metaphor for the artistry that is programming, when it is more like being a movie director
programmers are movie directors, not musicians. that's my metaphor and my message, even if i myself can't keep my story straight
Lol that was pretty good
But talk about guerrilla marketing: advertise to 2-3 people at a time
you have your kids turn on chatroulette, and you do the same. if you don't see each other, and you're kids are still not mentally scarred, you bogosort until you find each other
who gave these walking incubators the right to vote!
{and here is where obvious parody dangerously approaches the reality of some people's thoughts, and so must be noted as parody}
that, on first meeting their innocent babies, some mothers actually bring their babies into close contact with their nasty sexual organs
what is wrong with these immoral perverts?
get it into your sleazy perverted minds you immoral cretins: breasts were not made to be exposed to innocent babies!
lol, that's hilarious
yes i'm kidding
the idea of bringing a boob to an innocent baby's mouth is obviously a severe injection of immorality into the family structure by people who have no consideration for a child's decency and psychological health. some people are just perverts, but why they can't do their perversions amongst themselves, why they have to drag an innocent darling child into their sleazy use of the human body by making a helpless infant suck on a boob... it really makes my blood boil at these decadent slime