"Hey everyone, your marriage is now only recognized as a civil union by the United States. However, it is still recognized as a marriage by your church, your friends, your family, and your God."
Even if this is what you say, they will parse it as what I said. It's not that easy to quell the mob.
a marriage. Which is, by this time, almost a name-only thing. I am guessing it has similar arguments (the non-legalizing it) as not allowing polygamy and bestiality to be legal marriage unions. Except homosexuals can be domestic partners
Civil unions do not yet have all the rights afforded to "marriage", hence all the judges saying that it's discriminating against people based on sexual orientation not to let them marry.
I think it's discriminating against civil unions based on religious belief, but I have no legal authority, and heck, I think that consenting adults should be free to have more than one mate, as long as everyone involved is ok with it, so what do I know.
And btw, cats are legally property, so by the original meaning of marriage, you're already their husband. Where do you think the term "animal husbandry" came from? Marriage is taking the legal ownership of a woman, which was by then a special kind of cattle. So when people want to go back to the good old days of marriage, I look at them funny.
In reality, marriage under the law and marriage in a religious institution are different things with the same name. However, because many people do both things at once and because they don't distinguish between the two things, they get conflated.
But in reality the people who really really want gay marriage also want to gay marry in a church (they want what others have).
I don't get it. Of all the things going on in the World today, I don't get why this is such a hot issue. Actually, I don't get why folks are so opposed to it. It doesn't cause them any harm.
Sheep don't know why they're all running all of a sudden. They just run when the others run. That's how life works.
Seriously? Jesus, try not to be completely dense. Imagine for a second that you have polka-dot skin, and place you'd like to work for happens to be in Plaidlandia, where people with polka-dot skin are reviled and discriminatory laws are written into the books against them. Would you take the job in Plaidlandia?
If I were a business in plainlandia, I would tally up the number of potential hires who are polka-dotted and those who are polka-phobe and I would let the bottom line decide if it's worth investing into a legal fight against polka-phobia.
But if I were a business in plainlandia, I would also have a PR department telling me that it would be good to get some loud media attention for our Do No Evil motto the day after we just did a wee bit o' evil. Make sure all eyes are on our polka friendly demeanor, not our layoffs.
The Keanu rule of suitability is thus: Is there something wrong with the brain of the character? If so, then Keanu is perfectly suited to play the role.
For example: If the character has 80 gigs of memory hidden in his brain, or a giant gaping plug hole in the back of his skull, or he's a time traveling stoner, etc. Then Keanu plays that role to perfection.
IIRC, there was something wrong with Spikes' brain... post traumatic stress I think, so yeah, Keanu'll do fine.
Consequently, the presence of Methane doesn't say anything about the presence of life.
'Methane is quickly destroyed in the Martian atmosphere in a variety of ways, so our discovery of substantial plumes of methane in the northern hemisphere of Mars indicates some ongoing process is releasing the gas,'
Some people can't read the articles, others don't even read past the title.
Is that the kind of thing that stops working if you drop it from a plane? Because they have to do something very similar to dropping it from a plane in order to get it to mars, so if it can't be dropped from the sky without keeping on ticking, they probably won't bother lifting that all the way up the rocket.
Science doesn't investigate only those things which seem "likely." If we operated that way we'd be nowhere by now.
Coming from a background of ignorance, how "likely" would you think it was that a lump of some rare metal could be made to explode with the force of thousands of tons of TNT?
DARK MAGIC!!!! Burn the witch! She has poisoned our cattle and can summon the fires of hell with her lump of rare metal! Burn her!!!
Listen people! There is a very good reason this is on the/. main page, since this is a tech website, it is meant to spark conversation and be meaningful in a technology kind of way.
I swear to Superman, I actually thought about the symbolic meaning of the ouroboros as it relates to the theory of the ultimate universal collapse (as opposed to infinite expansion or a cyclical growth and contraction) while this thread was loading.
Little did I know that I'd already moved beyond the scope of the article before I even had a chance not to read it.
Do you know of an alternative method for determining if a congressman has understood the text of the bill he's voting on? If you think such a requirement (that is, ensuring that the bill is understood) is excessive, how else can we ensure that we are being represented by our elected officials?
Also, what do you make of the bill's other provisions about posting the full, final text online before a vote is called?
You give them the text, some time, and quiz them individually. If you want to know if they understood the text made available to them, you ask them questions that will prove that they have the information and the ability to process it.
As for posting the bill on line: W00t! Full disclosure, baby! But isn't that already the case? Those.gov sites have a lot of content...
if a judge dismissed exculpatory DNA evidence because the defense didn't procure a geneticist/scientist to testify
What you describe is not at all like the situation at hand. The question is: What if the prosecution wouldn't say how they matched the DNA, saying that was a secret.
What's to stop them from taking a sample of your DNA, putting it in a black box, and declaring that the device has fond you guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? You can't look at the box, how can you defend yourself from what they say it says?
Gore's huge on telling everybody else to downsize, to conserve--while it's great that he's buying some electricity from "green" sources, wouldn't having a smaller house be setting a better example?
Please quote him telling people he wants them to move to a smaller houses.
Or even better, stop trying to find ways to attack the messenger and listen to the message.
Forcing people to be present while someone reads something out loud does not mean that the content of the text is transferred to the brains of the audience. You can't force someone to pay attention to the droning monotone of a legal text read out loud.
And I'll BUY BUY BUY tomorrow... do you seriously think anything has fundamentally changed in Apple's business? It still remains to be seen.
The reality distortion field has been compromised!
What else do you think has been keeping the viruses at bay? Technology? NO! It was Steves' own convictions which overwhelmed the surrounding paradigm, but no more...
requires each bill to be read aloud in session before it can be voted on. This ensures that all congressmen voting on the bill will have heard its text
I was required to sit and listen to a lot of monotone reading of books in my education. I learned very little from that.
> Petric used his father's key to open a lockbox and remove a 9mm handgun
so what was the father (a pastor) doing with a gun in the first place?
whatever happened to "thou shalt not kill"? or was he planning on maybe clubbing burglars over the head with the stock of the gun when they entered the house?
You should check out the whole list of situation where The Lord Your God wants you to stone people to death with stones. Or maybe just go look at what he ordered to be done to the men, women, children and animals of Jericho.
Thou shalt not kill has a lot of exceptions... in the old testament.
What you want is "let he who is without sin throw the first stone", where Jesus said it was time to stop that rock throwing madness. JC is a lot mellower than his dad, you know.
Slashdot Mirror
I know at least two gay couples that would like to marry, and neither has any interest in doing so in a church.
The entire two gay couples you personally know are not in the "some" I mentioned? What a lovely and inconsequential anecdote.
And, in fairness, there's nothing wrong with them wanting to get married in a church.
I said they would get territorial, not that they would get fair.
No, it's like this:
"Hey everyone, your marriage is now only recognized as a civil union by the United States. However, it is still recognized as a marriage by your church, your friends, your family, and your God."
Even if this is what you say, they will parse it as what I said.
It's not that easy to quell the mob.
What about gifted orators?
I think we all know the cunning linguists' position in this.
a marriage. Which is, by this time, almost a name-only thing. I am guessing it has similar arguments (the non-legalizing it) as not allowing polygamy and bestiality to be legal marriage unions. Except homosexuals can be domestic partners
Civil unions do not yet have all the rights afforded to "marriage", hence all the judges saying that it's discriminating against people based on sexual orientation not to let them marry.
I think it's discriminating against civil unions based on religious belief, but I have no legal authority, and heck, I think that consenting adults should be free to have more than one mate, as long as everyone involved is ok with it, so what do I know.
And btw, cats are legally property, so by the original meaning of marriage, you're already their husband. Where do you think the term "animal husbandry" came from? Marriage is taking the legal ownership of a woman, which was by then a special kind of cattle. So when people want to go back to the good old days of marriage, I look at them funny.
The solution is easy! Don't recognize marriages at all.
Yeah. Easy.
"Hey everyone, your holy unions have all been nullified. Have a good day!"
That won't lead to a riot...
They get hung up on the word marriage.
In reality, marriage under the law and marriage in a religious institution are different things with the same name. However, because many people do both things at once and because they don't distinguish between the two things, they get conflated.
But in reality the people who really really want gay marriage also want to gay marry in a church (they want what others have).
And then things get territorial...
I don't get it. Of all the things going on in the World today, I don't get why this is such a hot issue. Actually, I don't get why folks are so opposed to it. It doesn't cause them any harm.
Sheep don't know why they're all running all of a sudden.
They just run when the others run. That's how life works.
The idea was to put yourself in the position of gay couples.
Which is probably what is grossing out everybody.
Well, 9/10th of everybody.
What you want if you wish to get people on your side is warm fuzzies, not gross outs.
Seriously? Jesus, try not to be completely dense. Imagine for a second that you have polka-dot skin, and place you'd like to work for happens to be in Plaidlandia, where people with polka-dot skin are reviled and discriminatory laws are written into the books against them. Would you take the job in Plaidlandia?
If I were a business in plainlandia, I would tally up the number of potential hires who are polka-dotted and those who are polka-phobe and I would let the bottom line decide if it's worth investing into a legal fight against polka-phobia.
But if I were a business in plainlandia, I would also have a PR department telling me that it would be good to get some loud media attention for our Do No Evil motto the day after we just did a wee bit o' evil. Make sure all eyes are on our polka friendly demeanor, not our layoffs.
Can anyone explain to me why good actors such as Heath Ledger die, OD, or whatever
You know how fucked up the Joker was? Heath wasn't faking it, he was letting his angst show.
Reeves is in no way suitable for this role.
The Keanu rule of suitability is thus: Is there something wrong with the brain of the character?
If so, then Keanu is perfectly suited to play the role.
For example: If the character has 80 gigs of memory hidden in his brain, or a giant gaping plug hole in the back of his skull, or he's a time traveling stoner, etc. Then Keanu plays that role to perfection.
IIRC, there was something wrong with Spikes' brain... post traumatic stress I think, so yeah, Keanu'll do fine.
Consequently, the presence of Methane doesn't say anything about the presence of life.
'Methane is quickly destroyed in the Martian atmosphere in a variety of ways, so our discovery of substantial plumes of methane in the northern hemisphere of Mars indicates some ongoing process is releasing the gas,'
Some people can't read the articles, others don't even read past the title.
Has any probe carried a mass spectrometer?
Is that the kind of thing that stops working if you drop it from a plane?
Because they have to do something very similar to dropping it from a plane in order to get it to mars, so if it can't be dropped from the sky without keeping on ticking, they probably won't bother lifting that all the way up the rocket.
Science doesn't investigate only those things which seem "likely." If we operated that way we'd be nowhere by now.
Coming from a background of ignorance, how "likely" would you think it was that a lump of some rare metal could be made to explode with the force of thousands of tons of TNT?
DARK MAGIC!!!! Burn the witch! She has poisoned our cattle and can summon the fires of hell with her lump of rare metal! Burn her!!!
over the eons it would have evolved, spread, and altered the Martian environment in ways easy to see.
What would you be looking for that would be easy to see?
Listen people! There is a very good reason this is on the /. main page, since this is a tech website, it is meant to spark conversation and be meaningful in a technology kind of way.
I swear to Superman, I actually thought about the symbolic meaning of the ouroboros as it relates to the theory of the ultimate universal collapse (as opposed to infinite expansion or a cyclical growth and contraction) while this thread was loading.
Little did I know that I'd already moved beyond the scope of the article before I even had a chance not to read it.
Do you know of an alternative method for determining if a congressman has understood the text of the bill he's voting on? If you think such a requirement (that is, ensuring that the bill is understood) is excessive, how else can we ensure that we are being represented by our elected officials?
Also, what do you make of the bill's other provisions about posting the full, final text online before a vote is called?
You give them the text, some time, and quiz them individually.
If you want to know if they understood the text made available to them, you ask them questions that will prove that they have the information and the ability to process it.
As for posting the bill on line: W00t! Full disclosure, baby! .gov sites have a lot of content...
But isn't that already the case? Those
if a judge dismissed exculpatory DNA evidence because the defense didn't procure a geneticist/scientist to testify
What you describe is not at all like the situation at hand. The question is: What if the prosecution wouldn't say how they matched the DNA, saying that was a secret.
What's to stop them from taking a sample of your DNA, putting it in a black box, and declaring that the device has fond you guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? You can't look at the box, how can you defend yourself from what they say it says?
South Carolina, did you elect a pack of retards
That's representative democracy for you!
Gore's huge on telling everybody else to downsize, to conserve--while it's great that he's buying some electricity from "green" sources, wouldn't having a smaller house be setting a better example?
Please quote him telling people he wants them to move to a smaller houses.
Or even better, stop trying to find ways to attack the messenger and listen to the message.
I don't understand what you are implying.
Forcing people to be present while someone reads something out loud does not mean that the content of the text is transferred to the brains of the audience. You can't force someone to pay attention to the droning monotone of a legal text read out loud.
And I'll BUY BUY BUY tomorrow... do you seriously think anything has fundamentally changed in Apple's business? It still remains to be seen.
The reality distortion field has been compromised!
What else do you think has been keeping the viruses at bay? Technology? NO! It was Steves' own convictions which overwhelmed the surrounding paradigm, but no more...
requires each bill to be read aloud in session before it can be voted on. This ensures that all congressmen voting on the bill will have heard its text
I was required to sit and listen to a lot of monotone reading of books in my education.
I learned very little from that.
> Petric used his father's key to open a lockbox and remove a 9mm handgun
so what was the father (a pastor) doing with a gun in the first place?
whatever happened to "thou shalt not kill"? or was he planning on maybe clubbing burglars over the head with the stock of the gun when they entered the house?
You should check out the whole list of situation where The Lord Your God wants you to stone people to death with stones.
Or maybe just go look at what he ordered to be done to the men, women, children and animals of Jericho.
Thou shalt not kill has a lot of exceptions... in the old testament.
What you want is "let he who is without sin throw the first stone", where Jesus said it was time to stop that rock throwing madness.
JC is a lot mellower than his dad, you know.
There is a reason why soldiers are armed with a gun, instead of a knife
They'd look stupid with their bayonet stuck to a knife?