i think you know you're logic is flawed. any fool can see that a gun is a device whose purpose is to kill.
Your logic is flawed. Many people have defended themself by having a firearm, of course hardly anyone ever hears about that because it doesn't fit in wih people's idea that firearms are only bad, yet they neglect to mention many people are killed by knives, vehicles, and other things.
I think the confusion arises out of the following two facts that are non-contradictory:
1. the gun was invented to make holes in living beings 2. guns are tools that can be used for self-defense
Just like martial arts are referred to as "war arts," and consist of learning how to punch, kick, grapple, break, etc., and yet they are most commonly applied by your average Tom, Dick, or Harriet as a means of self-empowerment so that the practitioner feels safe enough to NOT commit violence. Before I started Hapkido, if I was in a situation where I thought someone might try and kill me, I was aware that to feel safe after the initial attack, I would have to kill the person. Now I feel much safer, which will allow me to control myself more.
I'm currently listening to Jello Biafra'sIn the Grip of Official Treason, and it's chilling. He shouts very well, and he's very optimistic, but boy howdy does he paint a bleak picture. And well, too.
I'm at the part where he talks about the efforts of the Democrats to keep 3rd parties off the ballots, the concession of a rigged vote by the Democrats, the refusal to listen to the black caucus after the Florida 2000 thing.
If we could add an entry for "none of the above" to every election ballot, I bet that choice would win almost every race, because of the general level of disgust we have for our elected officials.
Yeah, see above. It's not going to happen. Instant run-off voting would work alarmingly well (it works for the Aussies), and people would feel less like slaves to a choice between Kerry (*hack*) or Bush (*spittle*). But again, it's not going to happen.
My voting policy, when I don't have a candidate, is to vote for 3rd parties. Failing that, vote for democrats. When there's no political affiliation, vote for the black person. If there are no black people, vote for the woman. If they're both women, don't vote. I feel mildly slimy about the democrat part.
But yeah. There are plenty of things you can do to avoid cancer. But I'm not going to tell you what they are. Because you won't do them anyway. I don't.
Either that or it just means their own film industry is abysmal.
Sister Act 2 2 Fast, 2 Furious Bring in On (2?) You got served Eragon The Santa Clause 3 Will Smith movies (except, of course, Wild Wild West. That was fantastic) Josh Hartnett movies Ben Affleck movies (Daredevil! He's blind!!! BUT HE CAN SEE!!!) Ashton F. Kutcher (the f stands for Fucking) Scary Movie 3 Not Another Teen Movie American Pie 4 Mission Impossible 3 was the worst movie I've seen in forever
And I've seen lots of good foreign movies. I'd rather the industry slow down a little, and stop trying to sell me monkey shit in a bag and call it a movie.
You cannot say that we have a generally high cultural level with a straight face.
Maybe you should come to the US and compare.:-)
I think the "high cultural level" thing is more like a culture's awareness of other cultures, no necessarily being haute couture. In Mexico, I discover that even among the lower classes, there's a cultural awareness that people don't have in the US (in general). Living in another country really stabilizes and centralizes your opinion on your own country. If you hate it, you'll like it more, and if you like it, you'll hate it more. If you think all the people are crazy, you'll probably want to go back and visit those crazy bastards after a few years, because it turns out you're crazy, too.:-)
The real reason why bilinguals live longer is because they don't have to work as hard to make a living.
Oh, shut the hell up. The vast majority of the population of the world has a tendency to know some English (as a second language). There are many many many of them who have taken the time and been talented enough to learn it fluently. And plenty of those are commonly referred to as wetbacks, are the victims of police brutality, and are abused by the US system.
I live in St Petersburg, FL, and there are tons of Hispanic people in Tampa (just across the bay), with the population growing in St Pete. I know so many bilingual people who can't get a job because they speak English with an accent. I know a 45-year old doctor (a cardiologist specializing in congenital defects) from Venezuela who is attending nursing school because he can't attend the 9 years of training necessary for him to practice in the US, and he can't get a job anywhere that doesn't treat him like a migrant worker, because he fucks up his tenses, and enunciates incorrectly. Oh, and he's been working at USF making fucking 16k a year (a fucking cardiologist!) for 8 months being promised benefits for 4. Oh, and his wife is a cancer survivor and needs to be scanned and he can't afford it. OH YEAH, his fucking daughter has some disease I can't pronounce, and has to go to special school.
Let the comments about how it looks just like an avatar from Quake/UT/Halo/etc begin.
I'm just now getting around to playing Half-Life 2 (the shame!), and I was thinking how if having completely armoured abusive police is fun on a tiny little screen, it must be way cooler in real life! Speaking of which:
I, for one, welcome our not so much new, rather more highly armoured overlords.
The only thing I have to say in defense of saying that users are stupid is that "Users" are "Stupid." This doesn't mean people are stupid. It means USERS are stupid.
For example, I used to work as a cashier in a health food store, and there was an express lane. The sign said:
EXPRESS LANE 10 ITEMS OR LESS 10AM - 2PM
People would not be able to read the whole sign. And I mean normal people. And I noticed that I myself exhibit cattle-like behavior while shopping. So my guiding principle in supermarket design? Shoppers are cattle.
I'm a tech guy (hello, nice to meet you), and I click dialogs all the damn time without reading them. I push buttons without understanding what's going to happen (when I come across one, that is). I got a S-E w800i cell phone, and it asked me a question I didn't understand, so I randomly chose the answer (50% chance of getting it right, no?), and ended up forwarding all my calls to someone all afternoon.
if investing in the evil company (for little direct benefit to the company by the way) you could do 25% more really good things...
I don't know why they don't just decide to be a little less agressive in terms of growth. Yes, they can do "more" if they invest in high-growth sectors that are debatably evil, but why not, if you are a charitable organization, use the same level of scrutiny for investments as you presumably do for the charity side?
The place where the They Can Do More argument falls flat is when investing in an oil company that exploits developing nations you're actively trying to help, you create a conflict of interest. In this example, you would look at the land essentially stolen from indigenous people, the pollutants spewed right into the air right over long-standing communities, and the wholesale of murder of brown people who speak in clicks and hums when necessary, and compare that to what you're trying to accomplish. If your investment proactively causes cancer in babies, fucking quit it.
Quit it, quit it, quit it.
I mean, they have $30 billion dollars, right? Why not just relax about the growth of the fund just a wee teeny bit, and face investment as a sort of social program as well. They could be funding GOOD people doing GOOD things, and they could get money back to boot. And then they wouldn't be a bunch of fat fucking hypocrites.
Not that there's anything wrong with being a hypocrite, other than the obvious, of course. The point is that good investment is a social program to be proud of, so why not have an organization you can be proud of? I'm sure there are plenty of volunteers who would offer investment plans that would be much kinder and beneficial to the world.
I ended up with an MDG laptop when I was working on it for a client who stiffed me for several hundred dollars. I can't comment on the craplets, because I ended up reinstalling windows, but it was a steaming pile of crap with a battery that lasted less than 2 minutes.
And the freaking processor fan never, ever, ever stopped.
The timing seems more than a little suspicious though, doesn't it? Hmm...
I think if Apple was trying to muscle the iPhone away from me, I'd suspiciously come out with the iCockBlock and follow it up with a reverse triple suplex, too. I think it's all the more admirable if they are in fact coming with this product just beat Apple to the punch. It shows remarkable business sense, and big balls. And in the words of a great man, "I like big balls."
I'm not one to orthography-Nazi up a place, but how are we going to fool the noobs into thinking we're better than them with editors overlooking such blatant typos as the above?
I block known malicious ad servers and pop ups via hosts, but the ethics of blocking all ads is questionable/debatable. Are you willing to pay for access to info? Because otherwise, somebody's got to be covering costs. I hate ad farm adverts, though.
You're talking about a *justification for doing this*, e.g. the cost is worth the benefit.
More or less. I'm showing that NBA player vs Doctor is not always as simple as that. I'm merely, in this case, suggesting we not shoot a pay-per-view horse in the face before you inspect its teeth, to maul an otherwise inapplicable saying.
Something I left out of my previous post was that it may well be advisable that no ads appear on any entry pages (pages providing "objective" information), only on listings and search results. And at the bottom, not at the top. And have text denoting the ads that won't blend in with the background on poorly balanced monitors. Etc, etc.
So why move on to advertising when it carries a cost to the very character, the essense, of the Wiki?
I just advise against well-seasoned reactionary policy. Not saying you're wrong. Your sentence slips right past the premise that advertising by its definition will cost the character of the Wiki, though, and while I don't disagree that perversion by advertising is the overwhelming trend, that one baby/bathwater metaphor would totally apply right here.
I feel kind of like a douche, because I'm arguing the famous I-Have-No-Opinion opinion. But hey,/.ers can't be choosers.
Advertising inherently trivialises its surroundings.
First, we're on/.--scroll to the top of the page, and tell me what you see. Arguably, we are not in the 75% of people who can't tell the difference between ads and content on the web, but there's a tasteful way of doing it. You could:
a) have a red box around all the ads b) have a less intrusive box with a header reading "Log In to optionally disable advertising" c) as someone else suggested, have a LINK to relevant ads, rather than the ads themselves, greatly reducing revenue, but it's better than nothing
Dikembe Mutombo moved to the US to practice medicine to go back to the Congo to provide health care for his people. In college, NBA scouts gave him good offers if he chose to play basketball, so he gave up medicine, got into the NBA, and has contributed large sums of money and time to people in developing nations worldwide. He opened a volunteer medical center in his native Congo. Now, the NBA is driven by pimps, whores, and let's not forget a love of the game, but because of Dikembe, those pimps and whores have benefited many many people.
An ethical dilemma, no doubt. But let's not write off the pimps and whores just yet.;-)
We already are using prisoners to feed our people. Pigs are kept in pig-sized boxes. Cattle get fed iron-poor diets to make their meat tender and are kept with their faces tied right up against a fence so they can't turn around. They're so weak, they get dragged wherever they need to go, mostly to slaughter. Chickens get their beaks cut off so they don't peck each other and themselves to death because they're strapped down in chicken-sized boxes.
We tried putting human DNA into pigs so they'd be leaner, but it produced genetic abnormalities we couldn't work around. We've tried feeding animals to animals, but it caused mad cow disease. All of the current practices are still pretty disgusting. We feed the cows rBGH, which causes them to have infections in their udders, causing there to be mucous and pus in our lovely pasteurized, homogenized milk. That's not to mention all the other disgusting things they pump into our animals to keep them alive. Even organic "free-range" cattle are allowed to be kept in a cage during "production" periods of their life, or anytime they're producing milk.
Meat is somehow less and less appealing to me, and I think that on top of the ethical problem we have of breeding living beings that only see the light of the sun on the way to slaughter is really inhuman. Imagine a life inside a box, malnourished, with no human contact. Imagine doing this to someone. It's freaking wrong. To me, the invasion of these animal's genetics is yet a deeper invasion on the wretched masses.
Plus, from an environmental standpoint, each step in the food chain only retains something like 50% (I can't remember the actual number) of the sun's energy from the previous step. Consuming less meat is good for the environment, since the more steps you remove yourself from the actual energy absorption, the more inefficient you get.
that what is considered core Buddhist beliefs are generally pretty nice. But just the same way that there are inhumane christian beliefs there are inhumane buddhist beliefs. It doesn't take much for a brain to malfunction, and there are over 6 billion of them. Plus, take into account group conciousness, which tends to be far more volatile in certain situations, and you have a low level of predictability about how all people will interpret what is (or should be) an internally applied practice.
I only was refuting your claim that everyone "except buddhists" is f-ed up. I think the small amount of core integration people feel they need before they classify themselves as religious or spiritual belies the idea the "good christian" or "good buddhist" meme.
YES! The solution IS education. And you are in SERIOUS need of one. If googling "china religion government" qualifies as an education, you're spot on. Which makes me question what type of education you have. You're right about China, though. I rescind my statement about China. Please accept 'Cambodia' in place of 'China': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state-establi shed_religions#Buddhist_states
And the fact that China's secular/atheist proves my point about atheists. Thank you for broadening my horizons.
Go fuck yourself. The fact that you don't know that I've tried on numerous occasions and failed shows how little you know about me.
Slashdot Mirror
Heh I'm so happy I didn't have parents like you when I was a wee lad myself.
Give me your MySpace password. NOW.
I mean it.
Don't make me call your father.
i think you know you're logic is flawed. any fool can see that a gun is a device whose purpose is to kill.
Your logic is flawed. Many people have defended themself by having a firearm, of course hardly anyone ever hears about that because it doesn't fit in wih people's idea that firearms are only bad, yet they neglect to mention many people are killed by knives, vehicles, and other things.
I think the confusion arises out of the following two facts that are non-contradictory:
1. the gun was invented to make holes in living beings
2. guns are tools that can be used for self-defense
Just like martial arts are referred to as "war arts," and consist of learning how to punch, kick, grapple, break, etc., and yet they are most commonly applied by your average Tom, Dick, or Harriet as a means of self-empowerment so that the practitioner feels safe enough to NOT commit violence. Before I started Hapkido, if I was in a situation where I thought someone might try and kill me, I was aware that to feel safe after the initial attack, I would have to kill the person. Now I feel much safer, which will allow me to control myself more.
at the park on her phone. it was fucking creepy!
I'm currently listening to Jello Biafra's In the Grip of Official Treason, and it's chilling. He shouts very well, and he's very optimistic, but boy howdy does he paint a bleak picture. And well, too.
I'm at the part where he talks about the efforts of the Democrats to keep 3rd parties off the ballots, the concession of a rigged vote by the Democrats, the refusal to listen to the black caucus after the Florida 2000 thing.
If we could add an entry for "none of the above" to every election ballot, I bet that choice would win almost every race, because of the general level of disgust we have for our elected officials.
Yeah, see above. It's not going to happen. Instant run-off voting would work alarmingly well (it works for the Aussies), and people would feel less like slaves to a choice between Kerry (*hack*) or Bush (*spittle*). But again, it's not going to happen.
My voting policy, when I don't have a candidate, is to vote for 3rd parties. Failing that, vote for democrats. When there's no political affiliation, vote for the black person. If there are no black people, vote for the woman. If they're both women, don't vote. I feel mildly slimy about the democrat part.
With certain exceptions (e.g., things you can't control, like some forms of cancer, mental illness, etc)
;-)
You shouldn't sit in front of the microwave, and you should learn another language.
But yeah. There are plenty of things you can do to avoid cancer. But I'm not going to tell you what they are. Because you won't do them anyway. I don't.
Either that or it just means their own film industry is abysmal.
Sister Act 2
2 Fast, 2 Furious
Bring in On (2?)
You got served
Eragon
The Santa Clause 3
Will Smith movies (except, of course, Wild Wild West. That was fantastic)
Josh Hartnett movies
Ben Affleck movies (Daredevil! He's blind!!! BUT HE CAN SEE!!!)
Ashton F. Kutcher (the f stands for Fucking)
Scary Movie 3
Not Another Teen Movie
American Pie 4
Mission Impossible 3 was the worst movie I've seen in forever
And I've seen lots of good foreign movies. I'd rather the industry slow down a little, and stop trying to sell me monkey shit in a bag and call it a movie.
You cannot say that we have a generally high cultural level with a straight face.
:-)
:-)
Maybe you should come to the US and compare.
I think the "high cultural level" thing is more like a culture's awareness of other cultures, no necessarily being haute couture. In Mexico, I discover that even among the lower classes, there's a cultural awareness that people don't have in the US (in general). Living in another country really stabilizes and centralizes your opinion on your own country. If you hate it, you'll like it more, and if you like it, you'll hate it more. If you think all the people are crazy, you'll probably want to go back and visit those crazy bastards after a few years, because it turns out you're crazy, too.
How do you say "All your base are belong to us," in Japanese?
The real reason why bilinguals live longer is because they don't have to work as hard to make a living.
Oh, shut the hell up. The vast majority of the population of the world has a tendency to know some English (as a second language). There are many many many of them who have taken the time and been talented enough to learn it fluently. And plenty of those are commonly referred to as wetbacks, are the victims of police brutality, and are abused by the US system.
I live in St Petersburg, FL, and there are tons of Hispanic people in Tampa (just across the bay), with the population growing in St Pete. I know so many bilingual people who can't get a job because they speak English with an accent. I know a 45-year old doctor (a cardiologist specializing in congenital defects) from Venezuela who is attending nursing school because he can't attend the 9 years of training necessary for him to practice in the US, and he can't get a job anywhere that doesn't treat him like a migrant worker, because he fucks up his tenses, and enunciates incorrectly. Oh, and he's been working at USF making fucking 16k a year (a fucking cardiologist!) for 8 months being promised benefits for 4. Oh, and his wife is a cancer survivor and needs to be scanned and he can't afford it. OH YEAH, his fucking daughter has some disease I can't pronounce, and has to go to special school.
Yay for being bilingual.
Let the comments about how it looks just like an avatar from Quake/UT/Halo/etc begin.
I'm just now getting around to playing Half-Life 2 (the shame!), and I was thinking how if having completely armoured abusive police is fun on a tiny little screen, it must be way cooler in real life! Speaking of which:
I, for one, welcome our not so much new, rather more highly armoured overlords.
The only thing I have to say in defense of saying that users are stupid is that "Users" are "Stupid." This doesn't mean people are stupid. It means USERS are stupid.
For example, I used to work as a cashier in a health food store, and there was an express lane. The sign said:
EXPRESS LANE
10 ITEMS OR LESS
10AM - 2PM
People would not be able to read the whole sign. And I mean normal people. And I noticed that I myself exhibit cattle-like behavior while shopping. So my guiding principle in supermarket design? Shoppers are cattle.
I'm a tech guy (hello, nice to meet you), and I click dialogs all the damn time without reading them. I push buttons without understanding what's going to happen (when I come across one, that is). I got a S-E w800i cell phone, and it asked me a question I didn't understand, so I randomly chose the answer (50% chance of getting it right, no?), and ended up forwarding all my calls to someone all afternoon.
Users are fucking stupid. Shut up.
if investing in the evil company (for little direct benefit to the company by the way) you could do 25% more really good things...
I don't know why they don't just decide to be a little less agressive in terms of growth. Yes, they can do "more" if they invest in high-growth sectors that are debatably evil, but why not, if you are a charitable organization, use the same level of scrutiny for investments as you presumably do for the charity side?
The place where the They Can Do More argument falls flat is when investing in an oil company that exploits developing nations you're actively trying to help, you create a conflict of interest. In this example, you would look at the land essentially stolen from indigenous people, the pollutants spewed right into the air right over long-standing communities, and the wholesale of murder of brown people who speak in clicks and hums when necessary, and compare that to what you're trying to accomplish. If your investment proactively causes cancer in babies, fucking quit it.
Quit it, quit it, quit it.
I mean, they have $30 billion dollars, right? Why not just relax about the growth of the fund just a wee teeny bit, and face investment as a sort of social program as well. They could be funding GOOD people doing GOOD things, and they could get money back to boot. And then they wouldn't be a bunch of fat fucking hypocrites.
Not that there's anything wrong with being a hypocrite, other than the obvious, of course. The point is that good investment is a social program to be proud of, so why not have an organization you can be proud of? I'm sure there are plenty of volunteers who would offer investment plans that would be much kinder and beneficial to the world.
I ended up with an MDG laptop when I was working on it for a client who stiffed me for several hundred dollars. I can't comment on the craplets, because I ended up reinstalling windows, but it was a steaming pile of crap with a battery that lasted less than 2 minutes.
And the freaking processor fan never, ever, ever stopped.
The timing seems more than a little suspicious though, doesn't it? Hmm...
I think if Apple was trying to muscle the iPhone away from me, I'd suspiciously come out with the iCockBlock and follow it up with a reverse triple suplex, too. I think it's all the more admirable if they are in fact coming with this product just beat Apple to the punch. It shows remarkable business sense, and big balls. And in the words of a great man, "I like big balls."
Marucs Ranum notes taht...
I'm not one to orthography-Nazi up a place, but how are we going to fool the noobs into thinking we're better than them with editors overlooking such blatant typos as the above?
"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."
George w Bush, Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000
Actually, he was just disclosing his sexual proclivities:
"If this were a Dick-Tater Ship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the Dick-Tater."
--George W Bush, Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000
Oh well, we are still using wheels in our cars so... maybe it's not so surprising after all.
My car uses an inclined plane, and jet thrusters. My other car is a hamster ball.
But really, the CAR is moving. So you're going to have to have some moving parts to help reduce friction.
Well, an empty space. I block adverts.
/.ers can't be choosers.
I block known malicious ad servers and pop ups via hosts, but the ethics of blocking all ads is questionable/debatable. Are you willing to pay for access to info? Because otherwise, somebody's got to be covering costs. I hate ad farm adverts, though.
You're talking about a *justification for doing this*, e.g. the cost is worth the benefit.
More or less. I'm showing that NBA player vs Doctor is not always as simple as that. I'm merely, in this case, suggesting we not shoot a pay-per-view horse in the face before you inspect its teeth, to maul an otherwise inapplicable saying.
Something I left out of my previous post was that it may well be advisable that no ads appear on any entry pages (pages providing "objective" information), only on listings and search results. And at the bottom, not at the top. And have text denoting the ads that won't blend in with the background on poorly balanced monitors. Etc, etc.
So why move on to advertising when it carries a cost to the very character, the essense, of the Wiki?
I just advise against well-seasoned reactionary policy. Not saying you're wrong. Your sentence slips right past the premise that advertising by its definition will cost the character of the Wiki, though, and while I don't disagree that perversion by advertising is the overwhelming trend, that one baby/bathwater metaphor would totally apply right here.
I feel kind of like a douche, because I'm arguing the famous I-Have-No-Opinion opinion. But hey,
Speak for yourself. I'll crawl out, from under my rock, now.
...too late...
Must...refrain...from mentioning...gratuitous....aaGGHHH!!!....commas.
*breathes heavily*
Advertising inherently trivialises its surroundings.
/.--scroll to the top of the page, and tell me what you see. Arguably, we are not in the 75% of people who can't tell the difference between ads and content on the web, but there's a tasteful way of doing it. You could:
;-)
First, we're on
a) have a red box around all the ads
b) have a less intrusive box with a header reading "Log In to optionally disable advertising"
c) as someone else suggested, have a LINK to relevant ads, rather than the ads themselves, greatly reducing revenue, but it's better than nothing
Dikembe Mutombo moved to the US to practice medicine to go back to the Congo to provide health care for his people. In college, NBA scouts gave him good offers if he chose to play basketball, so he gave up medicine, got into the NBA, and has contributed large sums of money and time to people in developing nations worldwide. He opened a volunteer medical center in his native Congo. Now, the NBA is driven by pimps, whores, and let's not forget a love of the game, but because of Dikembe, those pimps and whores have benefited many many people.
An ethical dilemma, no doubt. But let's not write off the pimps and whores just yet.
We already are using prisoners to feed our people. Pigs are kept in pig-sized boxes. Cattle get fed iron-poor diets to make their meat tender and are kept with their faces tied right up against a fence so they can't turn around. They're so weak, they get dragged wherever they need to go, mostly to slaughter. Chickens get their beaks cut off so they don't peck each other and themselves to death because they're strapped down in chicken-sized boxes.
We tried putting human DNA into pigs so they'd be leaner, but it produced genetic abnormalities we couldn't work around. We've tried feeding animals to animals, but it caused mad cow disease. All of the current practices are still pretty disgusting. We feed the cows rBGH, which causes them to have infections in their udders, causing there to be mucous and pus in our lovely pasteurized, homogenized milk. That's not to mention all the other disgusting things they pump into our animals to keep them alive. Even organic "free-range" cattle are allowed to be kept in a cage during "production" periods of their life, or anytime they're producing milk.
Meat is somehow less and less appealing to me, and I think that on top of the ethical problem we have of breeding living beings that only see the light of the sun on the way to slaughter is really inhuman. Imagine a life inside a box, malnourished, with no human contact. Imagine doing this to someone. It's freaking wrong. To me, the invasion of these animal's genetics is yet a deeper invasion on the wretched masses.
Plus, from an environmental standpoint, each step in the food chain only retains something like 50% (I can't remember the actual number) of the sun's energy from the previous step. Consuming less meat is good for the environment, since the more steps you remove yourself from the actual energy absorption, the more inefficient you get.
But that's just my $0.74
Unless you're in China or Australia or New Zealand. Then it's the one on the right.
and found that the average password was 6.4 characters long."
Mine is 6.7 characters long, so there.
that what is considered core Buddhist beliefs are generally pretty nice. But just the same way that there are inhumane christian beliefs there are inhumane buddhist beliefs. It doesn't take much for a brain to malfunction, and there are over 6 billion of them. Plus, take into account group conciousness, which tends to be far more volatile in certain situations, and you have a low level of predictability about how all people will interpret what is (or should be) an internally applied practice.
I only was refuting your claim that everyone "except buddhists" is f-ed up. I think the small amount of core integration people feel they need before they classify themselves as religious or spiritual belies the idea the "good christian" or "good buddhist" meme.
YES! The solution IS education. And you are in SERIOUS need of one.i shed_religions#Buddhist_states
If googling "china religion government" qualifies as an education, you're spot on. Which makes me question what type of education you have. You're right about China, though. I rescind my statement about China. Please accept 'Cambodia' in place of 'China':
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state-establ
And the fact that China's secular/atheist proves my point about atheists. Thank you for broadening my horizons.
Go fuck yourself.
The fact that you don't know that I've tried on numerous occasions and failed shows how little you know about me.
-OR-
YOU fuck me. It was your idea.