That want the laws changed to "Any human can marry any other human, except people who are related too closely or unless you are already married or one of you are below a certain age."
I can't find anything immediately disagreeable about that statement.
Why is it such a stretch to also say "And you can't marry someone of the same sex?"
Because there's no basis for such a law.
The incest laws I can understand - and the polygamy laws just make it easier to argue against marriage in the first place. But why deny Fred marrying Shaggy while allowing Fred to marry Daphne? What's the basis of that denial?
A set of laws that work for a society of heterosexuals do not necessarily work for a group of homosexuals.
I think the only people who can decisively answer that are the homosexuals themselves. And they want the same set of laws - to allow to adults who love each other to get married.
I can't stand people that play on semantics to make an argument.
You cannot participate in a discussion (argument) unless all parties agree on the meaning of both premises (whether either premise is right or wrong is immaterial).
Semantics: The branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning.
Therefore if you do not apply semantics to your argument, you have lost before you open your mouth.
Home Depot maintains summer/winter hours, it's not that difficult. Bin collections are by day not by time. Don't know about you but bin collections around here are "whenever they get around to your road", not at a specific hour. I used to live in the UK where trains had summer and winter schedules anyway, all published on one sheet for that line.
I can't see it being any easier to change the clocks than it would be to just do stuff at different times, if that's what you wanted to do. Mandated changes only serve to piss everyone off, let business and the voters decide when things happen locally.
That's the German constitution though. Has no effect outside Germany and so cannot be a fundamental human right - just a fundamental German right. Also, who gets to define "dignity"? Can I end my life in a dignified way if there is no other choice? Not in Germany I can't.
There are no fundamental right, no inviolable rights. There are rights bestowed upon us by societies, but not all societies agree on any single aspect of what is a fundamental or inviolable right. Therefore there is no such thing as a fundamental or inviolable human right.
Innate Rights are something which no legitimate government may strip from you; in very rare circumstances Freedoms must be curtailed to protect other's Innate Rights, but these are limited in scope (i.e. you aren't allowed to experiment with radioactive isotopes in your basement or aren't supposed to yell fire in a crowded theater) by definition.
In which case, you have no innate right to life in the US. The (legitimate) government can strip you of your right to life and sentence you to death, carrying through with the execution.
Personal anecdotal evidence suggests otherwise. In 10 years at a corporate headquarters of one of the largest corporations in the world... only one instance of fraud was found, and that by a low level manager.
Wow, I'm honestly surprised they haven't let you go already for making waves, but I suppose since it sounds like it doesn't happen that often at the company you're employed at, it's probably taking them longer to build a solid documentation case against you.
Where I work, I get written up if I do not report a SOX compliance issue that I come across. We have employees whose sole job is to ensure SOX compliance within the company, and it's not seen as "making waves" it's seen as making sure the company is compliant with government legislation that would otherwise shut the company down PDQ.
Slashdot Mirror
Got $14M, don't care.
That want the laws changed to "Any human can marry any other human, except people who are related too closely or unless you are already married or one of you are below a certain age."
I can't find anything immediately disagreeable about that statement.
Why is it such a stretch to also say "And you can't marry someone of the same sex?"
Because there's no basis for such a law.
The incest laws I can understand - and the polygamy laws just make it easier to argue against marriage in the first place. But why deny Fred marrying Shaggy while allowing Fred to marry Daphne? What's the basis of that denial?
A set of laws that work for a society of heterosexuals do not necessarily work for a group of homosexuals.
I think the only people who can decisively answer that are the homosexuals themselves. And they want the same set of laws - to allow to adults who love each other to get married.
So much wrong crammed into one post...
Semantics is not about re-defining words, it's the complete opposite.
The fact you think all north america (sic) has the same set of laws just makes me shake my head in disbelief.
Just because something is fact does not make it right. If you can't understand that, I'll gladly invoke Godwin as a demonstration.
For example they have the right to marry what ever woman they want.
Miss Sarah Brown would disagree with you, as would I.
I'd just wait for the fourScorder myself. The fivecorder probably won't be out until the year after anyway.
Silly person. It's going to the be "fourCorder S"
I can't stand people that play on semantics to make an argument.
You cannot participate in a discussion (argument) unless all parties agree on the meaning of both premises (whether either premise is right or wrong is immaterial).
Semantics: The branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning.
Therefore if you do not apply semantics to your argument, you have lost before you open your mouth.
Hybrid car shows both ICE and Electric Motor properties.
Wait, Facebook is demanding their applicants give up their Facebook passwords? Fucking bastards!
Amazon isn't a corner shop food store that takes cash - is my point.
20 years ago you walked into a store, bought a loaf of bread with cash - and afterwards the store could not trace that transaction back to you.
Wait - 20 years ago some corporate bod knew that Mr Smith of 23 Acacia Avenue bought hamburger buns? I think not.
Home Depot maintains summer/winter hours, it's not that difficult. Bin collections are by day not by time. Don't know about you but bin collections around here are "whenever they get around to your road", not at a specific hour. I used to live in the UK where trains had summer and winter schedules anyway, all published on one sheet for that line.
I can't see it being any easier to change the clocks than it would be to just do stuff at different times, if that's what you wanted to do. Mandated changes only serve to piss everyone off, let business and the voters decide when things happen locally.
Seeing as we're ruling out the sunshine and therefore moonlight, all that's left is the boogie.
That's the German constitution though. Has no effect outside Germany and so cannot be a fundamental human right - just a fundamental German right. Also, who gets to define "dignity"? Can I end my life in a dignified way if there is no other choice? Not in Germany I can't.
There are no fundamental right, no inviolable rights. There are rights bestowed upon us by societies, but not all societies agree on any single aspect of what is a fundamental or inviolable right. Therefore there is no such thing as a fundamental or inviolable human right.
Is it? Please elaborate.
That which all accept needs no preservation.
There aint no such thang.
Innate Rights are something which no legitimate government may strip from you; in very rare circumstances Freedoms must be curtailed to protect other's Innate Rights, but these are limited in scope (i.e. you aren't allowed to experiment with radioactive isotopes in your basement or aren't supposed to yell fire in a crowded theater) by definition.
In which case, you have no innate right to life in the US. The (legitimate) government can strip you of your right to life and sentence you to death, carrying through with the execution.
Maybe you would, but my principles are worth way more than $12,000
Could you at least come up with a year for that time?
I don't think that's true. If MLK had written the speech, and then read it out, a transcription would be a copy of a previously copyrighted work.
At least that's how I see it, but I may be wrong.
You obviously don't work in IT. :)
Rule 1. Don't trust the users.
Personal anecdotal evidence suggests otherwise. In 10 years at a corporate headquarters of one of the largest corporations in the world ... only one instance of fraud was found, and that by a low level manager.
Wow, I'm honestly surprised they haven't let you go already for making waves, but I suppose since it sounds like it doesn't happen that often at the company you're employed at, it's probably taking them longer to build a solid documentation case against you.
Where I work, I get written up if I do not report a SOX compliance issue that I come across. We have employees whose sole job is to ensure SOX compliance within the company, and it's not seen as "making waves" it's seen as making sure the company is compliant with government legislation that would otherwise shut the company down PDQ.
Published text isn't slander, it's libel.