For example, this essay by a gay man can be found on the BBC website
Boils down to "Well, I'm not going to do that. It feels weird..." He doesn't want it, great, but he even says that he's not against the idea, it's just "not for him." Good for him. I'm straight and marriage is "not for me," either. Even if I misread and he IS against the idea, his reason boils down to "I don't want it." Not legitimate.
He says takes issue with the insistence on "marriage" terminology, and the narcissism of the weddings, as opposed to "civil unions" and the like getting the same legal rights. (And then goes on to rant about "economically ignorant liberals" and tax breaks.)
From my limited understanding, the spectrum starts at "no attempt to hide it" and includes everything more "open" than that. I'm not sure, but I think it coincides with the term "out of the closet."
You didn't say "humans" made laws, you said that "society" makes them according with some "collective morality," a concept so utopian as to border on willful naivete. Morality and legality are utterly orthogonal concepts, and if law were to be limited only to that which is "collectively" accepted, "law libraries" could be replaced with "law post-it notes."
Are you sure Americans are anti-gay, and not just a country of a third of a billion people who have a handful of bad apples, a media system faking controversy to generate viewership, a slashdot reader who's forgotten what percentage of the internet is trolling, and a parochial political system pandering to margins to get voted in?
Your point about over-generalization is valid, but to be fair, it's far more than just "a handful of bad apples" when it can be reasonably leveled at, for example, 47% of voting-age people in the state of Florida (2008 election, 61.9% in favor of anti-gay marriage amendment out of 75.2% turnout).
The constitution is a law. We are the ones who create and uphold laws. We can change them if we think they are not up to our standards. As a society we don;t follow laws because they are laws. We make laws that reflect our collective morality.
And I bet you live in a post-scarcity society thanks to matter replicators, too.
If you're[sic] IQ is below 112, you cannot drive, you cannot breed, you cannot use google glass, become a cop, a senator, a judge, a president, etc...
Let the stupid die away and we'll all be better off:)
You do realize that IQ is a normalized measure with a mean set at 100 by nothing more than definition, right? As the "stupid die away", your IQ will drop as the average increases.
Bullshit. Spam is unsolicited bulk email. It has no requirement to be commercial -- claiming otherwise was just an old spammer excuse for why their particular shotblast "wasn't spam" -- and "off-topic" doesn't even make any goddamn sense.
It's not just right wing trolls. Moms, Dads, the Postman, the old lady down the block, everyone hates the Democrats. Don't feel bad though, they hate the Republicans and don't trust the Libertarians and righteously so.
Where the hell do you live, that your family and neighbors are all so keenly aware? Everywhere I've been, you have one big group of drooling idiots who treat their party like a friggin' sports team and never put any thought beyond what some PR drone tells them to think. I want to live where you live.
The spinkler system at my office has not put out a single fire. My smoke detector has not once detected smoke. My life insurance has not once payed out. The airbag in your car has not once inflated and safed your life. My helmet has not once protected my head from a crash.
Buy your own SmallFurryCreature's Terrorist-Repelling Rock today! Approved by the TSA!
This is a DSL provider, not cable (who do tend to make setting up the client side an utter pain), and I do know what I'm talking about. I've done it before, multiple times.
Slashdot Mirror
In the US, the married/unmarried divide is pretty small (within 5%) .
So... [Citation needed].
I don't suppose there's a transcript or video of that around you could point me to. I'm intrigued, and would love to hear what her logic *was*.
The fundamental principle of feminism is that woman are morally equal to men
What the hell does "morally equal" even mean?
For example, this essay by a gay man can be found on the BBC website
Boils down to "Well, I'm not going to do that. It feels weird..." He doesn't want it, great, but he even says that he's not against the idea, it's just "not for him." Good for him. I'm straight and marriage is "not for me," either. Even if I misread and he IS against the idea, his reason boils down to "I don't want it." Not legitimate.
And here is a blog by a gay man who disavows the gay marriage movement: http://nogaymarriage.wordpress...
He says takes issue with the insistence on "marriage" terminology, and the narcissism of the weddings, as opposed to "civil unions" and the like getting the same legal rights. (And then goes on to rant about "economically ignorant liberals" and tax breaks.)
Here is a site with lots of links on the subject: http://www.againstequality.org...
Complains about gay marriage "propaganda", not gay marriage.
When I'm sorting things in meatspace, I use a heap sort.
I throw all the shit into a heap, then pick out the good bits.
killall | god | sort > out.dat
I don't know about that. Discomfort with Glass seems to span across the Geek and Mundane populations, alike.
Unless the cultural divide in question is "Glassholes" and "Not Glassholes."
Nah, he could just be Australian.
From my limited understanding, the spectrum starts at "no attempt to hide it" and includes everything more "open" than that. I'm not sure, but I think it coincides with the term "out of the closet."
You didn't say "humans" made laws, you said that "society" makes them according with some "collective morality," a concept so utopian as to border on willful naivete. Morality and legality are utterly orthogonal concepts, and if law were to be limited only to that which is "collectively" accepted, "law libraries" could be replaced with "law post-it notes."
Well, duh.
Have you ever heard a legitimate (i.e. excluding religious) argument against gay marriage?
"Blithering idiot" is a prerequisite for this sort of discussion.
Are you sure Americans are anti-gay, and not just a country of a third of a billion people who have a handful of bad apples, a media system faking controversy to generate viewership, a slashdot reader who's forgotten what percentage of the internet is trolling, and a parochial political system pandering to margins to get voted in?
Your point about over-generalization is valid, but to be fair, it's far more than just "a handful of bad apples" when it can be reasonably leveled at, for example, 47% of voting-age people in the state of Florida (2008 election, 61.9% in favor of anti-gay marriage amendment out of 75.2% turnout).
The constitution is a law. We are the ones who create and uphold laws. We can change them if we think they are not up to our standards. As a society we don;t follow laws because they are laws. We make laws that reflect our collective morality.
And I bet you live in a post-scarcity society thanks to matter replicators, too.
Only if it's Shadowrun or Call of Cthulu. Those White Wolf pansies deserve to die in the gutter.
Huh. I didn't know that (that he was gay, not that being gay had fuckall to do with job performance).
Is Tim Cook gay? Or were you just being hypothetical?
Not sure if troll, or delicious irony...
If you're[sic] IQ is below 112, you cannot drive, you cannot breed, you cannot use google glass, become a cop, a senator, a judge, a president, etc...
Let the stupid die away and we'll all be better off :)
You do realize that IQ is a normalized measure with a mean set at 100 by nothing more than definition, right? As the "stupid die away", your IQ will drop as the average increases.
I'm sure China is gnawing their fingernails to the quick, worrying about the US Constitution.
So you've never seen the problem, except the one time you've seen the problem, and I must have subscribed to it?
Wow...
Bullshit. Spam is unsolicited bulk email. It has no requirement to be commercial -- claiming otherwise was just an old spammer excuse for why their particular shotblast "wasn't spam" -- and "off-topic" doesn't even make any goddamn sense.
And buttoned up with a cartooney, no less...
damn great news now hope that the mailing lists owners actually do something with a unsub command.... I've been having bad luck on that part
They've always have... they mark the addressed "confirmed live" and add it into their lists to sell onward.
It's not just right wing trolls. Moms, Dads, the Postman, the old lady down the block, everyone hates the Democrats. Don't feel bad though, they hate the Republicans and don't trust the Libertarians and righteously so.
Where the hell do you live, that your family and neighbors are all so keenly aware? Everywhere I've been, you have one big group of drooling idiots who treat their party like a friggin' sports team and never put any thought beyond what some PR drone tells them to think. I want to live where you live.
The spinkler system at my office has not put out a single fire. My smoke detector has not once detected smoke. My life insurance has not once payed out. The airbag in your car has not once inflated and safed your life. My helmet has not once protected my head from a crash.
Buy your own SmallFurryCreature's Terrorist-Repelling Rock today! Approved by the TSA!
Nowhere do I see where "we the people" are going to benefit from government intervention here.
Then you either lack the technical acumen to understand the issues at play here, or you have even weaker foresight than the average MBA.
This is a DSL provider, not cable (who do tend to make setting up the client side an utter pain), and I do know what I'm talking about. I've done it before, multiple times.