Just because SOME are that (and most in america are BECAUSE OF IT BEING ILLEGAL) not ALL are and i'm talking on a global scale. So please remove the stereotyping BS.
What about the morality of having sex with "Johns" when you know you have a communicable disease?
Having sex with ANYONE for ANY REASON when you know you have a communicable disease (a STD) is completely immoral - unless you warn them in advance, and then it's just stupid.
Prostitution is not synonymous with this situation
Is it moral to demand double the agreed-upon price, after the transaction, under threat of blabbing to the guy's wife?
No, that's extortion
Prostitution is not synonymous with this situation
Is it moral to take that money and spend it on drugs that you know were stolen from a pharmacy?
No
Prostitution is not synonymous with this situation
Are the pimps "moral?"
Depends on the definition of "pimps" - as we know them, No - they're petty gangsters
Prostitution is not synonymous with this situation
--------------------
What do ALL of these situations involve? Prostitution is not synonymous with this situation. You added SECONDARY CONSIDERATIONS - the prostitution isn't the immoral part of ANY of the situations above - it'st he SECONDARY CONSIDERATION YOU ADDED.
GTA is rated Mature +17, how are children supposed to be able to play the game? Yell at the parents who let them play violent games...
But! but but.... we cannot POSSIBLY make parents take responsibility for choosing what they kids can and cannot watch - imagine if they have to listen to their kid whining about not being allowed to play GTA at age 11!
Incorrect - you own A COPY of Mac OS/X - you have all property rights involved in owning ONE COPY of anything of which there are many copies - you can make non-infringing personal copies (IE backup copies, storage on different medium), you can sell it to someone else (as long as you destroy, or transfer with it, all of your backup copies), etc.
In reply to the grandparent post - sophistry or not it points out that your unversal statement "you MUST pirate" is invalid.
non-infringing duplications (backup copies for personal use, transfering it to one device to another for personal use) do not reduce income - DRM and legislation passed by corporate whores artificially inflates income.
Income from titles has been artificially inflated by means of corporate whores in congress passing laws in direct violation of 100+ years of IP precent and Fair Use rights to artificially inflate the income of their large donors.
This is why individual candidates, or parties, should be unable to receive gifts/spend their own money on campaigns - all viable candidates in a campaign should receive an equal ammount of money from a central fund for that campaign. (people could donate to the central fund) Whenever this idea comes up people attempt to scream "First ammendment!!1111one11" however - you don't have a first ammendment right to BUY your senator/congressmen because that's EXACTLY what you're doing: they pander do their donors and ignore those that didn't give them money.
I just undid my moderations in this thread to reply to your post
"that is more libertarian than left-liberal."
Anyone who uses the term "left-liberal" makes themself look like an idiot. Linus is no Libertarian (Big-L - as in the neoliberals/anarcho-capitalists who pretend to be libertarians) and RMS is no "left-liberal" as you attempt to stereotype it.
Linus is a smart man and Stallman has gone off the deep end. Keep your political name calling out of it.
Listen retard- you keep attacking a straw man argument that wasn't even what the fuck i was talking about but i guess you're too fucking mentally retarded to understand something i already repeated 15 times in one post
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT GULF WAR SYNDROME
You and your completely retarded inability to read or come out from behind the AC will not be receiving any more replies from me
You are pulling stuff straight out of your arse to construct a straw man!
No matter how many times you keep repeating your useless drivel, it isn't going to change the fact that DU is no more dangerous than the other chemicals, toxins, and heavy metals used in warfare.
I never said it was "more dangeruos" i said it was dangerous. No comparision to other chemicals for relative statements.
Your dismissal of the Gulf War Syndrome is nonsense, because THAT'S THE ONLY PLACE IT MATTERS
Baseless and FALSE assertion - unless you don't give shit about the citizens of countries we invade dealing with heavy metal poisonings, birth defects, cancers, etc.
And yet people manage to survive just fine in such a toxic environment. According to you THEY SHOULD ALL BE DEAD. They're not. If you think you know what you're talking about (which it is obvious you don't) EXPLAIN WHY THEY'RE LIVING HEALTHY LIVES.
Who's they, what are the radiological elements they're being exposed to - HOW are they being exposed, what is in their diet (because you know what you take in actually affects how dosages of things affect you - like taking iodine tablets to help protect the thyroid when you're exposed to radiation)
You call INHALING Radon to be EXTERNAL EXPOSURE? What kind of lunatic are you? The lung tissue is some of the softest, most vulnerable tissue in your ENTIRE BODY. Radiation in that area does far worse damage than anywhere else. And yet you just write off millions of people who INHALE this crap to be getting just "External Exposure"?!?
YOU WEREN'T ONLY TALKING ABOUT RADON
You're a loon. A nutcase. And you can't even read worth a damn. But keep on spouting your drivel. Go ahead. You'll just look stupider and stupider.
you're a FRACKING IDIOT with your STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS AND RED HERRRINGS
1) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome. 2) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome. 3) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome. 4) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome. 5) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome. 6) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome. 7) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome. 8) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome. 9) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome. 10) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome. 11) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome. 12) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome. 13) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome. 14) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome. 15) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
GET IT NOW MORON?
Furthermore I don't know where you live but here there was a lot of adverts warning about the dangers of radon.
You're also talking about EXTERNAL EXPOSURE doses TO THE SKIN - which of alpha radiation is HARMLESS.
pulverized into dust, inhaled/ingested - chemical effects (Which are WELL established), radiological effects IF inhaled/ingested
Alpha radiation is relatively harmless - but is dangerous if exposed internally (like through inhaling an alpha emitter), and uranium is also CHEMICALLY dangerous
DU is dangerous because it becomes pulverized into a Dust - also while i minimized alpha particles harmful effects they are rather harmful WHEN INHALED (the chemical properties are still more damaging)
Hey idiot - DU isn't dangerous because of it's radiological properties - it's dangerous as a powder/dust because of it's CHEMICAL properties - it is an [extremely] heavy metal.
It's chemical properties will kill you long long long before it's alpha radiation decay chain can touch you.
Good thing you chose to troll as an AC because otherwise everyone would know who you really are and "MORON" would become attached to your name.
A piece of paper stops alpha and beta radiation, the dead skin cells that make up the surface of your skin stop alpha and beta radiation - perhaps you need to look them [alpha/beta radiation] up again
blah blah more red herrings, ad hominems and false analogies and then you top it off with
Yes, I know it's not nearly the same thing as smoking, but it still fits in line with your warped view of reality.
Stop trying to redefine my view of reality to fit your pathetically weak arguments. By my "view of reality" farting is merely offensive, not toxic.
Either stop with the logical fallacies and especially the straw man arguments or STFU
You don't seem to understand the following concepts:
non-threshold toxicant/carcinogen (IE: exposure to 1 particle has measurable detrimental effect) PRICINPLE (IE: on principle alone you do not have the right to force me to participate in your habit by it's nommitigable area effects)
ad hominem, red herring, arg. ad. verecundiam in falicious case, arg. ad baculum, arg. ad ignoratium, false analogy, false dilema
learn to make an argument before you even attempt to talk to him
you do not have the right to FORCE ME to inhale your toxing cloud, anything else VALID OR NOT that you claim to be also toxic doesn't excuse you [oh there is another falicy to add to my above list].
Furthermore the science has NOT be disproven, please come up with a MEDICAL AUTHORITY that supercedes the list of authorities that i stated (let's start with the FDA and AMA).
You do not have the right to smoke, you have the right to chew, inject, swallow, drink, etc - but not to smoke because smoking creates and aerosol which others can take in against their will
Smoking is the ABUSE of a right, not a protected exercise of it
PS: Make sure you know your enemy before you attempt to call them a fascist.
Logical fallcies to commit logical fallcies for the win!
False analogy to attempt to construct a straw man!
Hint: A-1) you don't have a right to do business with them, A-2) you don't have a right not to have to travel to busiess, A-3) you don't have a right to not have to travel x-certain distance to do busiess B) they have a right to operate wherever they want with the correct zoning.
completely different from A) you DO have a right to not have others expose you to toxins against you will with B) smokers introducing people to non-threshold toxins and carcinogens INTO THE AIR and thereby exposing other people to them, against their will.
too cowardly to reply in a mature and timely manner.
Reliable source? i was unaware that the FDA and several other countries equilivents, the AMA, the WHO, and pretty much every respectable medical agency on the planet didn't qualify as reliable sources.
Wow what amazing things you learn from people who put their own addictions ahead of reality!
If i follow you, you have a good point. However several studies on things such as asthma point out that they have found some evidence of it being, at minimum, a respratory irritant and cause of asthma with no safety threshold.
Slashdot Mirror
You're stereotyping != reality.
Just because SOME are that (and most in america are BECAUSE OF IT BEING ILLEGAL) not ALL are and i'm talking on a global scale. So please remove the stereotyping BS.
What about the morality of having sex with "Johns" when you know you have a communicable disease?
Having sex with ANYONE for ANY REASON when you know you have a communicable disease (a STD) is completely immoral - unless you warn them in advance, and then it's just stupid.
Prostitution is not synonymous with this situation
Is it moral to demand double the agreed-upon price, after the transaction, under threat of blabbing to the guy's wife?
No, that's extortion
Prostitution is not synonymous with this situation
Is it moral to take that money and spend it on drugs that you know were stolen from a pharmacy?
No
Prostitution is not synonymous with this situation
Are the pimps "moral?"
Depends on the definition of "pimps" - as we know them, No - they're petty gangsters
Prostitution is not synonymous with this situation
--------------------
What do ALL of these situations involve? Prostitution is not synonymous with this situation. You added SECONDARY CONSIDERATIONS - the prostitution isn't the immoral part of ANY of the situations above - it'st he SECONDARY CONSIDERATION YOU ADDED.
Logic 100 pls.
GTA is rated Mature +17, how are children supposed to be able to play the game? Yell at the parents who let them play violent games...
But! but but.... we cannot POSSIBLY make parents take responsibility for choosing what they kids can and cannot watch - imagine if they have to listen to their kid whining about not being allowed to play GTA at age 11!
Nothing immoral about sex, nothing immoral about a free consentual business transaction
Sex isn't bad, prostitution isn't neccesarily a crime
/sigh
puritans.
Incorrect - you own A COPY of Mac OS/X - you have all property rights involved in owning ONE COPY of anything of which there are many copies - you can make non-infringing personal copies (IE backup copies, storage on different medium), you can sell it to someone else (as long as you destroy, or transfer with it, all of your backup copies), etc.
In reply to the grandparent post - sophistry or not it points out that your unversal statement "you MUST pirate" is invalid.
proof reading FTW :/ - IP precedent.. precedent...
non-infringing duplications (backup copies for personal use, transfering it to one device to another for personal use) do not reduce income - DRM and legislation passed by corporate whores artificially inflates income.
Income from titles has been artificially inflated by means of corporate whores in congress passing laws in direct violation of 100+ years of IP precent and Fair Use rights to artificially inflate the income of their large donors.
This is why individual candidates, or parties, should be unable to receive gifts/spend their own money on campaigns - all viable candidates in a campaign should receive an equal ammount of money from a central fund for that campaign. (people could donate to the central fund) Whenever this idea comes up people attempt to scream "First ammendment!!1111one11" however - you don't have a first ammendment right to BUY your senator/congressmen because that's EXACTLY what you're doing: they pander do their donors and ignore those that didn't give them money.
I just undid my moderations in this thread to reply to your post
"that is more libertarian than left-liberal."
Anyone who uses the term "left-liberal" makes themself look like an idiot. Linus is no Libertarian (Big-L - as in the neoliberals/anarcho-capitalists who pretend to be libertarians) and RMS is no "left-liberal" as you attempt to stereotype it.
Linus is a smart man and Stallman has gone off the deep end. Keep your political name calling out of it.
Listen retard- you keep attacking a straw man argument that wasn't even what the fuck i was talking about but i guess you're too fucking mentally retarded to understand something i already repeated 15 times in one post
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT GULF WAR SYNDROME
You and your completely retarded inability to read or come out from behind the AC will not be receiving any more replies from me
READING COMPREHENSION AGAIN!
You are pulling stuff straight out of your arse to construct a straw man!
No matter how many times you keep repeating your useless drivel, it isn't going to change the fact that DU is no more dangerous than the other chemicals, toxins, and heavy metals used in warfare.
I never said it was "more dangeruos" i said it was dangerous. No comparision to other chemicals for relative statements.
Your dismissal of the Gulf War Syndrome is nonsense, because THAT'S THE ONLY PLACE IT MATTERS
Baseless and FALSE assertion - unless you don't give shit about the citizens of countries we invade dealing with heavy metal poisonings, birth defects, cancers, etc.
And yet people manage to survive just fine in such a toxic environment. According to you THEY SHOULD ALL BE DEAD. They're not. If you think you know what you're talking about (which it is obvious you don't) EXPLAIN WHY THEY'RE LIVING HEALTHY LIVES.
Who's they, what are the radiological elements they're being exposed to - HOW are they being exposed, what is in their diet (because you know what you take in actually affects how dosages of things affect you - like taking iodine tablets to help protect the thyroid when you're exposed to radiation)
You call INHALING Radon to be EXTERNAL EXPOSURE? What kind of lunatic are you? The lung tissue is some of the softest, most vulnerable tissue in your ENTIRE BODY. Radiation in that area does far worse damage than anywhere else. And yet you just write off millions of people who INHALE this crap to be getting just "External Exposure"?!?
YOU WEREN'T ONLY TALKING ABOUT RADON
You're a loon. A nutcase. And you can't even read worth a damn. But keep on spouting your drivel. Go ahead. You'll just look stupider and stupider.
you're a FRACKING IDIOT with your STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS AND RED HERRRINGS
STOP HIDING BEHIND THE ANONYMOUS COWARD YOU PUSSY
Yet again READING COMPRENSION YOU MORON.
1) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
2) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
3) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
4) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
5) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
6) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
7) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
8) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
9) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
10) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
11) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
12) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
13) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
14) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
15) I wasn't talking about Gulf War Syndrome.
GET IT NOW MORON?
Furthermore I don't know where you live but here there was a lot of adverts warning about the dangers of radon.
You're also talking about EXTERNAL EXPOSURE doses TO THE SKIN - which of alpha radiation is HARMLESS.
LEARN TO READ
Again you have reading comprehension problems
pulverized into dust, inhaled/ingested - chemical effects (Which are WELL established), radiological effects IF inhaled/ingested
Alpha radiation is relatively harmless - but is dangerous if exposed internally (like through inhaling an alpha emitter), and uranium is also CHEMICALLY dangerous
READ MORE CAREFULLY
"All isotopes and compounds of uranium are toxic, teratogenic, and radioactive" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium#Precautions
Nice Cherry pick - i'm not singling it out i am singling out your off hand dismissal of it's dangers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_particle
"All isotopes and compounds of uranium are toxic, teratogenic, and radioactive" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium#Precautions
DU is dangerous because it becomes pulverized into a Dust - also while i minimized alpha particles harmful effects they are rather harmful WHEN INHALED (the chemical properties are still more damaging)
n tal_effects_of_depleted_uranium
Fact Check!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_and_environme
Hey idiot - DU isn't dangerous because of it's radiological properties - it's dangerous as a powder/dust because of it's CHEMICAL properties - it is an [extremely] heavy metal.
It's chemical properties will kill you long long long before it's alpha radiation decay chain can touch you.
Good thing you chose to troll as an AC because otherwise everyone would know who you really are and "MORON" would become attached to your name.
A piece of paper stops alpha and beta radiation, the dead skin cells that make up the surface of your skin stop alpha and beta radiation - perhaps you need to look them [alpha/beta radiation] up again
blah blah more red herrings, ad hominems and false analogies and then you top it off with
Yes, I know it's not nearly the same thing as smoking, but it still fits in line with your warped view of reality.
Stop trying to redefine my view of reality to fit your pathetically weak arguments. By my "view of reality" farting is merely offensive, not toxic.
Either stop with the logical fallacies and especially the straw man arguments or STFU
You don't seem to understand the following concepts:
non-threshold toxicant/carcinogen (IE: exposure to 1 particle has measurable detrimental effect)
PRICINPLE (IE: on principle alone you do not have the right to force me to participate in your habit by it's nommitigable area effects)
ad hominem, red herring, arg. ad. verecundiam in falicious case, arg. ad baculum, arg. ad ignoratium, false analogy, false dilema
learn to make an argument before you even attempt to talk to him
you do not have the right to FORCE ME to inhale your toxing cloud, anything else VALID OR NOT that you claim to be also toxic doesn't excuse you [oh there is another falicy to add to my above list].
Furthermore the science has NOT be disproven, please come up with a MEDICAL AUTHORITY that supercedes the list of authorities that i stated (let's start with the FDA and AMA).
You do not have the right to smoke, you have the right to chew, inject, swallow, drink, etc - but not to smoke because smoking creates and aerosol which others can take in against their will
Smoking is the ABUSE of a right, not a protected exercise of it
PS: Make sure you know your enemy before you attempt to call them a fascist.
Logical fallcies to commit logical fallcies for the win!
False analogy to attempt to construct a straw man!
Hint:
A-1) you don't have a right to do business with them,
A-2) you don't have a right not to have to travel to busiess,
A-3) you don't have a right to not have to travel x-certain distance to do busiess
B) they have a right to operate wherever they want with the correct zoning.
completely different from
A) you DO have a right to not have others expose you to toxins against you will
with
B) smokers introducing people to non-threshold toxins and carcinogens INTO THE AIR and thereby exposing other people to them, against their will.
too cowardly to reply in a mature and timely manner.
Reliable source? i was unaware that the FDA and several other countries equilivents, the AMA, the WHO, and pretty much every respectable medical agency on the planet didn't qualify as reliable sources.
Wow what amazing things you learn from people who put their own addictions ahead of reality!
The President is only giving stump speeches because it was previously leaked! You cannot remember one MONTH of history?
If i follow you, you have a good point. However several studies on things such as asthma point out that they have found some evidence of it being, at minimum, a respratory irritant and cause of asthma with no safety threshold.
agree with everything you said
here is a good example of an excellent reactor design: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor
Fuck you, i'm demanding my rights be respected not "that the world be bubblewrapped"
grow some balls and post without the anonymous coward tag asshat.
They are the one violating the rights of others by their lifestyle, my lifestyle does not violate the rights of others.
Pretty simple concept of you actually understand the difference between "rights" and "license"