In what way is that failure of the analogy (no two things are perfectly analogus, if they were THEY WOULDN'T BE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS) affect the point that IT IS A SHITTY SET OF CRITERA?
IOW, what the fuck does "it isn't hard" have to do with "the government should make people do it."
I'm not saying that ADA necessarally shouldn't apply (it shouldn't, but that's not what I'm saying), just that the argument is crap.
Slashdot Mirror
In what way is that failure of the analogy (no two things are perfectly analogus, if they were THEY WOULDN'T BE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS) affect the point that IT IS A SHITTY SET OF CRITERA?
IOW, what the fuck does "it isn't hard" have to do with "the government should make people do it."
I'm not saying that ADA necessarally shouldn't apply (it shouldn't, but that's not what I'm saying), just that the argument is crap.
-D
There is no reason you can't let me crash on your sofa.
1. It's not like anyone is sleeping there already.
2. People let other people crash on there sofa all the time. It is not a big deal.
In short, this is a pretty piss-poor set of criteria to decide IF A COURT SHOULD COMPEL SOMEONE TO DO SOMETHING.
-Peter
HA! Debian is The One True Operating System!
apt-get reality!
-D