I think (I could be wrong) you misunderstand me. I was expanding by saying because of the overcrowding of prisons which in great part is due to the war-on-drugs, the resources in prisons will not accomplish the task of security, safety, and rehabilitation.
Ok.
As far as rehabilitation, every time there is an effective program, like giving prisoners an option to earn degrees, there's always a backlash, despite the fact such polit programs have been proven effective by a marked reduction in recidivism rates.
The US Public, as a whole, is rather mean-spirited. Rather than see the immates truly become rehabilitated, they'd rather see them suffer back on the streets with nothing to fall back on other than the very crime they were incarcerated for in the first place.
The real sad thing is that educating the inmates would also cost less than the current way of doing things in the long run; and even beyond that, would create new tax payers than tax lechers.
I personally find it frustrating. The real solutions would cost less and improve society in the long run, but society is dead sent against it. Go figure.
I agree, but with such a large amount of people in prison, the amount of funds to goto prisons get diluted. I'm not saying "throw more money at the problem," but with more money, you have more things you can do.
Throw more money? That's the problem. We need to throw LESS money at the problem, so states can go back to locking up JUST violent, dangerous types.
It's also very trivial to get charged with a violent offense, the sad reality is. Often police add on resisting arrest/misdemeanor assault on a police officer (in at least one jurisdiction I've lived in - DC - the crimes are the same) to just about any arrest where the person made any attempt at all to get away.
The ridiculous prison industrial system that exists also creates a culture where violence makes more sense. If you're risking going to prison for decades, life, or more, for a nonviolent offense, you might as well use violence to get away. After all, if you aren't rich enough to afford a lawyer, being a good person - or even being innocent - might not keep you out of prison.
Very true. I am told that police usually try to hit you with 2 charges, the second one usually "resisting arrest" or something else bogus, so they will have something on you to force you to plea bargain.
I may not have cited references, but I know what I know from (painful) personal experience. Cops just hate it when you expose the truth about them to the press. And you know what? I'd do it every darn time.
While I agree with the premise that "it's prison, it's not meant to be fun", I disagree with your "prisoners are all criminals so lets disregard their welfare" attitude.
In this day and age, where the legal definition of a criminal and the moral definition of one are so far divorced from one another, it really can't be taken for granted that prisoners deserve to be where they are. Remember, the RIAA wants jail time for college file sharers.
So, unless you've never shared a copyrighted song or movie with a friend, I'd lose the attitude.
Finally, someone who sees the reality of this situation! Most prisoners in the US are in for victimless crimes, false accusations, or failure to pay child support. Since most courts order child support at rates beyond what the guy can easily afford, it's no surprise they are such high default rates.
The US has a fine mess on its hands. Perhaps the economic downturn will bring some "reality" to the states so hell-bent on locking everyone up for the most inane reasons.
Regarding your second point, I suspect that part of the problem is that, while guards are supposed to be the ones enforcing the rules, the sad reality is that guards are often part of the problem. It's well known that much of the prison drug supply comes from guards selling to prisoners, so it's not much of a stretch to think that guards might be supplying cell phones to prisoners as well.
Whenever there's a market, a way will be found.
Actually, if they stopped locking people up for victimless crimes, this would be less of a problem! You thow someone in for a victimless "crime", and he gets educated to do real crime when he's released.
I agree. The issue with a lot of rules (especially rules that aren't laws, such as the ones mentionned above) is that they aren't enforced, and people don't seem to care about enforcing them. If there's a HUGE "No cellphone" sign in the theater, and someone is talking their ass off in front of me during a movie, and I politely (seriously) ask them to be a little more quiet (not even stop!), I get told to fuck off. If there's a no smoking sign in the bus stop's shelter and someone is smoking, and I ask them to take 2 steps outside of it (on a sunny day!), I'll also get told to mind my own business. And with all of these, if I tell the people in CHARGE of enforcing those rules, they'll ignore me.
Result? People ask for more laws, or for draconian measures, like the grandparent.
It's all in the attitude. It may be also that you dont' look "threatening" enough. I have the opposite problem. I'm a "teddy bear" at heart, but many don't see the "teddy" part. Usually a stern look is all that it takes, though I'm more afraid they may call the cops on me and claim that I was "harrassing" them. So usually I do nothing.
The answer is simple, anything gathered from the surrounding neighborhood by the prisons monitoring system wouldn't hold up in court because of how it was obtained.
It is still an invasion of privacy and a violation of federal wiretap laws.
Setup smaller receivers around the prison that for one, would let officers get the drop on anything inmates try to plan out, surely there's no wiretapping laws in prison considering phones are surely contraband
Umm, it's not that easy to wiretap cell phones over the air as you suggest. My understanding is that with GSM it requires very specialized (i.e: expensive) equipment and that with CDMA it may be nearly impossible for anyone who lacks the resources of the Federal Government.
A better idea would be to just retrofit the cell blocks with a Faraday cage. Of course that might pose a problem with the guards with radios -- so they'd probably need some sort of repeater system that only worked on the frequencies of whatever communications system they use.
Or just don't worry about it, sinc the vast majority of these calls are going to be to loved ones and family anyway.
Those really up to doing dealings of an illicit nature will find a way to do it, no matter what you do.
Wouldn't it make more sense to just monitor the airwaves in prison than outright block the signals ?
Setup smaller receivers around the prison that for one, would let officers get the drop on anything inmates try to plan out, surely there's no wiretapping laws in prison considering phones are surely contraband, and for two with a few smaller receivers they could at least triangulate the position down to a cell block and perform a shakedown.
I'm just worried about what is going to happen when inmates take over the prison, how is Bruce Willas supposed to communicate with the guys outside if they simply block the signals ?
Monitoring the airwaves might and definitely would pick up transmissions outside of the prison, unless the prison was faraday-shielded. And if it were, monitoring would become a moot issue anyway, since the cell phones would fail to function.
harsh attitude that does not take into account that most are in prison for victimless crimes. Only a fraction are in for what prisons are really there for -- criminals that hurt other people. Most are in because they had some drugs, or their spouse lied about being assulted, or because they could not pay the overburdensome child support.
Not all in jail are theives, robbers, and murderers, you know.
On the cell phone issue
I have first hand experience at this. A few years back, sometime after I has pissed off the local police by calling them liars on the front page of the local newspaper (and I had good reason to do this, but that's a story for another time!), they sought every reason to give me hell for years, including anything they could find to arrest me on.
So they found a nit to arrest me on -- some unpaid fine or some such -- and they were holding me pending release as soon as some friends could bring in the money I owned.
Alas, Bush was visiting that day and they needed the local police station for security operations. And so everyone they were holding had to be carted off to the state correctional facility. Fun stuff.
I has asked to use my cell phone so that I could make some calls to those trying to get me out, so that they would know where to go to get me out. It was a mad rush at that police station and many of the cops there looked very distracted and confused. Since I was polite to those who held me behind bars, they granted me this request.
They were so distracted they forgot they actually gave me my cell phone! Well, I decided to just slip it in my pocket and hang on to it.
When I arrived at the correctional facility, they knew that myself and the other guys were coming from the local police station, so they did not bother to "pat us down". It was simply a prisoner transfer. We were wearing our civilian clothes when we arrived, and they have this elaborate process of "processing" everyone. So into the waiting room we went. Before they put us in, they made us take off our coats and dump them in piles along a wall on the floor. Fortunately, I had thought to move my cell phone from my pants to my coat pocket en route to the facility, so I dropped my coat with cell phone nicely packed inside.
The other immates were, for the most part, behaving like civilized people. It was the prison facility that had a lot of bad attitude towards us. Hell, you'd think they were the criminals! There were cameras everywhere, and I noted the position of each and every one of them.
So, during the process, they put us into those horrid bright-orange jumpsuits, and back into the holding area. They would occasionally allow one or two of us out to make phone calls from the payphone on the wall. Though, you needed a special number to make any calls at all, and they would limit you to a minute or so. And they were very slective about whom they allowed to make phone calls, and not everyone got a chance.
So, I was allowed out to make a phone call and ask a question or two. After I was done, I watched all the personell and they all looked busy doing things and weren't watching me. I decided, what the hell -- I boldly strode over to where my coat was dumped on the floor, and in one swift move that would make any slight-of-hand magician proud, I swooped down and snatched the cell phone from my coat pocket without anyone noticing! 3 seconds afterwards, I was told to go back to the holding area, and I did.
I carefully noted the layout of the holding area, which had a very big window so the personell could see us, and there was also a camera. There were about 30 or so of us in that holding area. Ah, but there was a small area near the open toilet that the camera could not see and was not in the view of the guards. Perfect! I went to that area and made a couple of phone calls to those outside to tell them how to access my bank accounts to get the money to get me out of jail! Perfect!
Of course, other innmates noticed I had a cell phone, and immediatly I was "everyone's friend". They all began asking me if they could borrow my cell to call a girlfriend, a wife, or a mother. I was so moved by this I lent them this. I had them all stand, one at a time, in that same "sweet spot" whilst others stood watch.
Not one single person called to make a drug deal. Not one single person called to make a hit order. ALL called family, friends, loved ones, and the like. T
I am Authur Frame. I am 300 Years old, and I wish to die!
Seriously, I just turned 47, and brain as sharp as ever. My secret? Simple. I eat plant-based, non-processed foods, and avoid High Fructose Corn Suyrp like the plague!
Yep, I am Vegan gastromonically. I don't subscribe to Vegan Politics at all, though I will chide some carnivore friends of mine about the inconsistencies in their morality about caring for certain species of animals over others. They would never want to see a single hair harmed on dogs and cats, but have no problem with the slaughter of pigs, cows, and fowl.
One of the best ways to keep the brain sharp is to keep it active. Keep learning new stuff and doing new and novel things with your brain to keep those neurons firing! Use'em or loose'em!!!!!
Card takes it to the extreme that he believes its important enough that he would be willing to wage physical war to keep gays from getting married
Please provide a reference for where Card advocated any form of violence? I've seen a bunch of people in this thread claim such things, but I have yet to see a single example...you're not jumping onto the pile are you?
I dunno -- moving gays to leper colonies sounds pretty violent to me.
If the majority of Californians are against Gays and Lesbians having equal rights, I won't read any of their works, either!!!!
But to them it's not question of equal rights--Orson Scott Card makes exactly that argument--All men have the right to marry a woman. All women have the right to marry a man. Everyone has equal rights. (not saying I agree)
Of course, the real question is why would there be a restriction on gender-paring in the first place? Why go out of your way to check to see that the penis is paired off with a vagina instead of another penis? What have gonads got to do with it?
Besides that, they are really in denial about Gays and Lesbians being their own ethnic groups, which should enjoy the same rights as every other ethnic group. And they don't have to agree with it, but why should they stand in the way of it? I have yet to see a cogent argument come from the anti-gay crowd.
Then again, the US has always had a myopic view on the issues of gender and sexuality. My tranie son and I today was joking about what Card would think about transgendered people. I told him not to ever go there!!!!
Quite frankly, I don't get why anyone would care what Gays and Lesbians do. Why would it even matter one whit to any non-homosexual how Gays and Lesbians wish to live their lives? Why go out of your way to make a big stink? That's the part I don't get.
I don't know.
And while we're at it, we can also throw in why everyone is making such a big ado over half of Obama heritage whilst ignoring the other half. Or more importantly, what's that got to do with the job of being President in the first place. But I digress...
What did that Deltan say in Star Trek: TMP? "I would never dream of taking advantage of a sexually immature species..."
What is some great writer were a child-molester? Or a rapist? Or some other type of sicko? Are you to tell me you'd have absolutely no problem enjoying the writings or other creative works of such a monster?
Exactly. Pete Townsend--I don't know if he's a molester or not, but he had child porn. He's still a great musician. Plenty of others do drugs, etc--something I find unsavory and wrong on a moral level--I still like a lot of music--psychadelic even. You bring up Shockley--yeah, awful racist, doesn't bother me at all. Yeah, he may have been a horrible person, but that has not one iota of relevance to the good things he did, or transistors. I frankly find your musing that you might not have gone into computers had you known that utterly baffling.
There are plenty of murderers, racists, pedophiles, etc in the ranks of histories great. IMHO, You're doing yourself a great disservice if you hate everyone who did something you don't like, AND also hate everything they produced.
My point of view--Lots of people are bad people. Get over it.
Sure there are lots of bad people in the world. As far as Pete Townsend goes, his drug habit , if he had a drug habit -- only hurt himself, or not, as the case may be. I hold firmly that a person
should be able to do whatever he wants as long as he is not directly harming others.
I know that some of the members of Yes smoke, and while I despise smoking, that did not get in the way of me enjoying their wonderful music.
But let's say, for example, David Dukes, A Klu-Klux-Klan Imperial Wizard, wrote Ender's Game, and let's say you are a member of one of the groups the KKK would string up to a tree. You really expect me to believe you'd still have no problem enjoying that story, knowing full well the author of that story would no sooner kill you than a roach.
Ender's Game and the related works are a direct product of a bigot. And considering the depths of philosophical import that is behind Xenocide, I still have a hard time reconciling the fact that a bigoted mind wrote that. For sure Card should clearly see how crazy his own views about gays are. Alas, it shall forever remain a paradox.
Maybe it says more about your conception of the importance of opinions and what exactly a bigot is (and what the importance of labels like "bigot" are to you?) than anything else?
I use the word "bigot" for brevity; I could say, "A homophobic mindless vessel of belief that is otherwise brilliant", but that tends to be a mouthful.
When I read the writings of another, it's like sitting around a campfire listening to a story being told to me. If the story-teller had utter contempt for me, I would not feel comfortable sitting around that campfire with him. If you could sit at a campfire and enjoy a story from a man you knew would sooner squish you like a bug or have you sent off to a leper's colony, then you must be a very extraordinary person. Me, I'd want to get the hell away from that campfire!
As far as the Shockley issue, understand I was a rather *young* kid, like in 4th grade and earlier, when I began playing around with electronics. Had I been told the truth of the man behind the transistor at that age, it would've had a very powerful effect on me, and I am not sure what would've happened. It was a strange time for me -- dealing with social pressures to be a certain way instead of just being myself.
As for Charles Darwin, I still admire what he did with evolution, but I will no longer be spouting the "Darwin Fish" on my bumper anymore. Besides,it got eaten up by the Linux Shark.:-)
If you think that piece accurately reflects Card's views, you should do a little of your own research on original sources. Read what he actually wrote, without an additional layer of prejudice from someone that disagrees with him. You know, like you'd do for the words of a detractor of someone you agreed with.
I read exactly what he wrote in his essay -- at least as much as I could tolerate -- which is why I am disgusted with him. When I read his essay, I looked for his reasoning, his logic that justifies his stance -- and could find none.
If it were a case of "Red vs. Blue", I'd agree with you. Take the product as a separate item and if it is enjoyable on its own, forget that you may hold a different worldview than the author.
When it comes down to someone being a step away from Fred Philips land, I draw the line.
I REALLY don't want to get into the issue of gay marriage, but, but you characterizing people who don't believe that gay marriage is valid, or real, or should be legal--which includes even the majority of people in a very liberal state like California--as a step away from Fred Philips (Fred Phelps?) land, is probably close to as biased as Orson Scott Card is when he claims married homosexuals are playing dress up!
And if gay marriage is a central issue to you (and seemingly others in this thread) you absolutely should stop buying Orson Scott Card books. At the same time it frustrates me when this story is tagged "wingnut" before there were any comments, followed by threads like this one are hard for me to fathom. I guess I just have never run across an artist, actor, author, whatever whose views I found so odious that it would affect my enjoyment of their art, etc. Thanks for explaining your POV though.
If the majority of Californians are against Gays and Lesbians having equal rights, I won't read any of their works, either!!!!
Quite frankly, I don't get why anyone would care what Gays and Lesbians do. Why would it even matter one whit to any non-homosexual how Gays and Lesbians wish to live their lives? Why go out of your way to make a big stink? That's the part I don't get.
History Repeats Itself?
on
Ender in Exile
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I wonder if similar things were written back in the days of miscegenation?
I don't really get it... I mean ok, even if you really think he is a mega-douche, why stop reading his books? Does that really do anything positive?...?
Could you enjoy the artwork of, say, Hitler, knowing what a peta-douche he was?
What is some great writer were a child-molester? Or a rapist? Or some other type of sicko? Are you to tell me you'd have absolutely no problem enjoying the writings or other creative works of such a monster?
Hey, I tried to read one of Card's works since I found out how much of a homophobe he is. I simply could not get past the first page.
I mean, I can never enjoy the works of someone who hates me just for what I am -- or others just for what they are. Can't do it. Maybe you can. More power to ya.
When I was a kid, I loved playing around with transistors. Had I known about William Shockley at the time, my life may have been completely different. May not have gone into the computer field at all. Yet, transistors are not bigoted. And maturity allows me to enjoy transistors -- but just not the ones Shockley himself had his smelly little hands on!
But while many, many, many brilliant people have taken the transistor to incredible heights -- and ultra-tiny sizes! --, Ender's Game and the related works are a direct product of a bigot. And considering the depths of philosophical import that is behind Xenocide, I still have a hard time reconciling the fact that a bigoted mind wrote that. For sure Card should clearly see how crazy his own views about gays are. Alas, it shall forever remain a paradox.
Hitler, Stalin, and Ghengis Khan thinks differently than you, too!!!
Orson Scott Card is a homophobe!
on
Ender in Exile
·
· Score: 1
Card is a wonderful SF writer, and I enjoyed the first 3 in the Ender series. However, I later found out that not only is Orson Scott Card is a homophobe, but a rather nasty one, having written things like gays should be moved to Leper Colonies and the like.
Card is certainly entitled to his opinions. However, this ex-fan of his will never be able to read another word of his until he has a change of heart.
Why is it that such great minds like Orson Scott Card, William Shockley, and even Charles Darwin have to have a nasty bigoted side that sullies up what would otherwise be great accomplishments?
I'm more concerned about how Government will use "Web 2.0" to exact even more control over us than they do now. Government is not really interested in being "open", though it will throw us a few bones here and there just to keep us from rioting in the street.
Throughout recent history we have all witnessed countless ways Government has used technology against us all. Sometimes we can hold a few things back, like the Real ID Act; other times it slips us by, like the sneaky roving wiretap law the FBI managed to slip in.
What we need is less government, and that government must be truly accountable for its actions. The things the Bush Administration has done should land several indictments and at the very least an impeachment; but Bush & Co. will get away scott free with atrocities far, far, far worse than Clinton lying about his salacious personal affairs.
Until we have believable accountability, we will never have a government we can truly trust. Obama now represents the "Great Black Hope" for the country. Let's see what really happens.
Slashdot Mirror
I think (I could be wrong) you misunderstand me. I was expanding by saying because of the overcrowding of prisons which in great part is due to the war-on-drugs, the resources in prisons will not accomplish the task of security, safety, and rehabilitation.
Ok.
As far as rehabilitation, every time there is an effective program, like giving prisoners an option to earn degrees, there's always a backlash, despite the fact such polit programs have been proven effective by a marked reduction in recidivism rates.
The US Public, as a whole, is rather mean-spirited. Rather than see the immates truly become rehabilitated, they'd rather see them suffer back on the streets with nothing to fall back on other than the very crime they were incarcerated for in the first place.
The real sad thing is that educating the inmates would also cost less than the current way of doing things in the long run; and even beyond that, would create new tax payers than tax lechers.
I personally find it frustrating. The real solutions would cost less and improve society in the long run, but society is dead sent against it. Go figure.
and the moral of this story is ...
you can get anything you want
at alice's resuraunt.
Oh, gee, thanks. Now I've got that song stuck in my head now! :-)
I agree, but with such a large amount of people in prison, the amount of funds to goto prisons get diluted. I'm not saying "throw more money at the problem," but with more money, you have more things you can do.
Throw more money? That's the problem. We need to throw LESS money at the problem, so states can go back to locking up JUST violent, dangerous types.
It's also very trivial to get charged with a violent offense, the sad reality is. Often police add on resisting arrest/misdemeanor assault on a police officer (in at least one jurisdiction I've lived in - DC - the crimes are the same) to just about any arrest where the person made any attempt at all to get away.
The ridiculous prison industrial system that exists also creates a culture where violence makes more sense. If you're risking going to prison for decades, life, or more, for a nonviolent offense, you might as well use violence to get away. After all, if you aren't rich enough to afford a lawyer, being a good person - or even being innocent - might not keep you out of prison.
Very true. I am told that police usually try to hit you with 2 charges, the second one usually "resisting arrest" or something else bogus, so they will have something on you to force you to plea bargain.
I may not have cited references, but I know what I know from (painful) personal experience. Cops just hate it when you expose the truth about them to the press. And you know what? I'd do it every darn time.
I wasn't talking about personal experience :) I'm talking "in general", that is how things are in the western world.
Ah...
Well, there's lots to the "Western World". Many different countries, cultures, and degrees of coolness (and not-so-cool).
While I agree with the premise that "it's prison, it's not meant to be fun", I disagree with your "prisoners are all criminals so lets disregard their welfare" attitude.
In this day and age, where the legal definition of a criminal and the moral definition of one are so far divorced from one another, it really can't be taken for granted that prisoners deserve to be where they are. Remember, the RIAA wants jail time for college file sharers.
So, unless you've never shared a copyrighted song or movie with a friend, I'd lose the attitude.
Finally, someone who sees the reality of this situation! Most prisoners in the US are in for victimless crimes, false accusations, or failure to pay child support. Since most courts order child support at rates beyond what the guy can easily afford, it's no surprise they are such high default rates.
The US has a fine mess on its hands. Perhaps the economic downturn will bring some "reality" to the states so hell-bent on locking everyone up for the most inane reasons.
Regarding your second point, I suspect that part of the problem is that, while guards are supposed to be the ones enforcing the rules, the sad reality is that guards are often part of the problem. It's well known that much of the prison drug supply comes from guards selling to prisoners, so it's not much of a stretch to think that guards might be supplying cell phones to prisoners as well.
Whenever there's a market, a way will be found.
Actually, if they stopped locking people up for victimless crimes, this would be less of a problem! You thow someone in for a victimless "crime", and he gets educated to do real crime when he's released.
I agree. The issue with a lot of rules (especially rules that aren't laws, such as the ones mentionned above) is that they aren't enforced, and people don't seem to care about enforcing them. If there's a HUGE "No cellphone" sign in the theater, and someone is talking their ass off in front of me during a movie, and I politely (seriously) ask them to be a little more quiet (not even stop!), I get told to fuck off. If there's a no smoking sign in the bus stop's shelter and someone is smoking, and I ask them to take 2 steps outside of it (on a sunny day!), I'll also get told to mind my own business. And with all of these, if I tell the people in CHARGE of enforcing those rules, they'll ignore me.
Result? People ask for more laws, or for draconian measures, like the grandparent.
It's all in the attitude. It may be also that you dont' look "threatening" enough. I have the opposite problem. I'm a "teddy bear" at heart, but many don't see the "teddy" part. Usually a stern look is all that it takes, though I'm more afraid they may call the cops on me and claim that I was "harrassing" them. So usually I do nothing.
The answer is simple, anything gathered from the surrounding neighborhood by the prisons monitoring system wouldn't hold up in court because of how it was obtained.
It is still an invasion of privacy and a violation of federal wiretap laws.
Setup smaller receivers around the prison that for one, would let officers get the drop on anything inmates try to plan out, surely there's no wiretapping laws in prison considering phones are surely contraband
Umm, it's not that easy to wiretap cell phones over the air as you suggest. My understanding is that with GSM it requires very specialized (i.e: expensive) equipment and that with CDMA it may be nearly impossible for anyone who lacks the resources of the Federal Government.
A better idea would be to just retrofit the cell blocks with a Faraday cage. Of course that might pose a problem with the guards with radios -- so they'd probably need some sort of repeater system that only worked on the frequencies of whatever communications system they use.
Or just don't worry about it, sinc the vast majority of these calls are going to be to loved ones and family anyway.
Those really up to doing dealings of an illicit nature will find a way to do it, no matter what you do.
Wouldn't it make more sense to just monitor the airwaves in prison than outright block the signals ? Setup smaller receivers around the prison that for one, would let officers get the drop on anything inmates try to plan out, surely there's no wiretapping laws in prison considering phones are surely contraband, and for two with a few smaller receivers they could at least triangulate the position down to a cell block and perform a shakedown. I'm just worried about what is going to happen when inmates take over the prison, how is Bruce Willas supposed to communicate with the guys outside if they simply block the signals ?
Monitoring the airwaves might and definitely would pick up transmissions outside of the prison, unless the prison was faraday-shielded. And if it were, monitoring would become a moot issue anyway, since the cell phones would fail to function.
Not all in jail are theives, robbers, and murderers, you know.
I should go to jail for not catching my "has" when I should've put "had"! Off to grammar lockdown I go....
So they found a nit to arrest me on -- some unpaid fine or some such -- and they were holding me pending release as soon as some friends could bring in the money I owned.
Alas, Bush was visiting that day and they needed the local police station for security operations. And so everyone they were holding had to be carted off to the state correctional facility. Fun stuff.
I has asked to use my cell phone so that I could make some calls to those trying to get me out, so that they would know where to go to get me out. It was a mad rush at that police station and many of the cops there looked very distracted and confused. Since I was polite to those who held me behind bars, they granted me this request.
They were so distracted they forgot they actually gave me my cell phone! Well, I decided to just slip it in my pocket and hang on to it.
When I arrived at the correctional facility, they knew that myself and the other guys were coming from the local police station, so they did not bother to "pat us down". It was simply a prisoner transfer. We were wearing our civilian clothes when we arrived, and they have this elaborate process of "processing" everyone. So into the waiting room we went. Before they put us in, they made us take off our coats and dump them in piles along a wall on the floor. Fortunately, I had thought to move my cell phone from my pants to my coat pocket en route to the facility, so I dropped my coat with cell phone nicely packed inside.
The other immates were, for the most part, behaving like civilized people. It was the prison facility that had a lot of bad attitude towards us. Hell, you'd think they were the criminals! There were cameras everywhere, and I noted the position of each and every one of them.
So, during the process, they put us into those horrid bright-orange jumpsuits, and back into the holding area. They would occasionally allow one or two of us out to make phone calls from the payphone on the wall. Though, you needed a special number to make any calls at all, and they would limit you to a minute or so. And they were very slective about whom they allowed to make phone calls, and not everyone got a chance.
So, I was allowed out to make a phone call and ask a question or two. After I was done, I watched all the personell and they all looked busy doing things and weren't watching me. I decided, what the hell -- I boldly strode over to where my coat was dumped on the floor, and in one swift move that would make any slight-of-hand magician proud, I swooped down and snatched the cell phone from my coat pocket without anyone noticing! 3 seconds afterwards, I was told to go back to the holding area, and I did.
I carefully noted the layout of the holding area, which had a very big window so the personell could see us, and there was also a camera. There were about 30 or so of us in that holding area. Ah, but there was a small area near the open toilet that the camera could not see and was not in the view of the guards. Perfect! I went to that area and made a couple of phone calls to those outside to tell them how to access my bank accounts to get the money to get me out of jail! Perfect!
Of course, other innmates noticed I had a cell phone, and immediatly I was "everyone's friend". They all began asking me if they could borrow my cell to call a girlfriend, a wife, or a mother. I was so moved by this I lent them this. I had them all stand, one at a time, in that same "sweet spot" whilst others stood watch.
Not one single person called to make a drug deal. Not one single person called to make a hit order. ALL called family, friends, loved ones, and the like. T
Seriously, I just turned 47, and brain as sharp as ever. My secret? Simple. I eat plant-based, non-processed foods, and avoid High Fructose Corn Suyrp like the plague!
Yep, I am Vegan gastromonically. I don't subscribe to Vegan Politics at all, though I will chide some carnivore friends of mine about the inconsistencies in their morality about caring for certain species of animals over others. They would never want to see a single hair harmed on dogs and cats, but have no problem with the slaughter of pigs, cows, and fowl.
Read "The China Study" if you wish to know more.
One of the best ways to keep the brain sharp is to keep it active. Keep learning new stuff and doing new and novel things with your brain to keep those neurons firing! Use'em or loose'em!!!!!
Card takes it to the extreme that he believes its important enough that he would be willing to wage physical war to keep gays from getting married
Please provide a reference for where Card advocated any form of violence? I've seen a bunch of people in this thread claim such things, but I have yet to see a single example...you're not jumping onto the pile are you?
I dunno -- moving gays to leper colonies sounds pretty violent to me.
If the majority of Californians are against Gays and Lesbians having equal rights, I won't read any of their works, either!!!!
But to them it's not question of equal rights--Orson Scott Card makes exactly that argument--All men have the right to marry a woman. All women have the right to marry a man. Everyone has equal rights. (not saying I agree)
Of course, the real question is why would there be a restriction on gender-paring in the first place? Why go out of your way to check to see that the penis is paired off with a vagina instead of another penis? What have gonads got to do with it?
Besides that, they are really in denial about Gays and Lesbians being their own ethnic groups, which should enjoy the same rights as every other ethnic group. And they don't have to agree with it, but why should they stand in the way of it? I have yet to see a cogent argument come from the anti-gay crowd.
Then again, the US has always had a myopic view on the issues of gender and sexuality. My tranie son and I today was joking about what Card would think about transgendered people. I told him not to ever go there!!!!
Quite frankly, I don't get why anyone would care what Gays and Lesbians do. Why would it even matter one whit to any non-homosexual how Gays and Lesbians wish to live their lives? Why go out of your way to make a big stink? That's the part I don't get.
I don't know.
And while we're at it, we can also throw in why everyone is making such a big ado over half of Obama heritage whilst ignoring the other half. Or more importantly, what's that got to do with the job of being President in the first place. But I digress...
What did that Deltan say in Star Trek: TMP? "I would never dream of taking advantage of a sexually immature species..."
Yay, 3 replies for Godwin :-)
What is some great writer were a child-molester? Or a rapist? Or some other type of sicko? Are you to tell me you'd have absolutely no problem enjoying the writings or other creative works of such a monster?
Exactly. Pete Townsend--I don't know if he's a molester or not, but he had child porn. He's still a great musician. Plenty of others do drugs, etc--something I find unsavory and wrong on a moral level--I still like a lot of music--psychadelic even. You bring up Shockley--yeah, awful racist, doesn't bother me at all. Yeah, he may have been a horrible person, but that has not one iota of relevance to the good things he did, or transistors. I frankly find your musing that you might not have gone into computers had you known that utterly baffling.
There are plenty of murderers, racists, pedophiles, etc in the ranks of histories great. IMHO, You're doing yourself a great disservice if you hate everyone who did something you don't like, AND also hate everything they produced.
My point of view--Lots of people are bad people. Get over it.
Sure there are lots of bad people in the world. As far as Pete Townsend goes, his drug habit , if he had a drug habit -- only hurt himself, or not, as the case may be. I hold firmly that a person should be able to do whatever he wants as long as he is not directly harming others.
I know that some of the members of Yes smoke, and while I despise smoking, that did not get in the way of me enjoying their wonderful music.
But let's say, for example, David Dukes, A Klu-Klux-Klan Imperial Wizard, wrote Ender's Game, and let's say you are a member of one of the groups the KKK would string up to a tree. You really expect me to believe you'd still have no problem enjoying that story, knowing full well the author of that story would no sooner kill you than a roach.
Ender's Game and the related works are a direct product of a bigot. And considering the depths of philosophical import that is behind Xenocide, I still have a hard time reconciling the fact that a bigoted mind wrote that. For sure Card should clearly see how crazy his own views about gays are. Alas, it shall forever remain a paradox.
Maybe it says more about your conception of the importance of opinions and what exactly a bigot is (and what the importance of labels like "bigot" are to you?) than anything else?
I use the word "bigot" for brevity; I could say, "A homophobic mindless vessel of belief that is otherwise brilliant", but that tends to be a mouthful.
When I read the writings of another, it's like sitting around a campfire listening to a story being told to me. If the story-teller had utter contempt for me, I would not feel comfortable sitting around that campfire with him. If you could sit at a campfire and enjoy a story from a man you knew would sooner squish you like a bug or have you sent off to a leper's colony, then you must be a very extraordinary person. Me, I'd want to get the hell away from that campfire!
As far as the Shockley issue, understand I was a rather *young* kid, like in 4th grade and earlier, when I began playing around with electronics. Had I been told the truth of the man behind the transistor at that age, it would've had a very powerful effect on me, and I am not sure what would've happened. It was a strange time for me -- dealing with social pressures to be a certain way instead of just being myself.
As for Charles Darwin, I still admire what he did with evolution, but I will no longer be spouting the "Darwin Fish" on my bumper anymore. Besides,it got eaten up by the Linux Shark. :-)
If you think that piece accurately reflects Card's views, you should do a little of your own research on original sources. Read what he actually wrote, without an additional layer of prejudice from someone that disagrees with him. You know, like you'd do for the words of a detractor of someone you agreed with.
I read exactly what he wrote in his essay -- at least as much as I could tolerate -- which is why I am disgusted with him. When I read his essay, I looked for his reasoning, his logic that justifies his stance -- and could find none.
If it were a case of "Red vs. Blue", I'd agree with you. Take the product as a separate item and if it is enjoyable on its own, forget that you may hold a different worldview than the author.
When it comes down to someone being a step away from Fred Philips land, I draw the line.
I REALLY don't want to get into the issue of gay marriage, but, but you characterizing people who don't believe that gay marriage is valid, or real, or should be legal--which includes even the majority of people in a very liberal state like California--as a step away from Fred Philips (Fred Phelps?) land, is probably close to as biased as Orson Scott Card is when he claims married homosexuals are playing dress up!
And if gay marriage is a central issue to you (and seemingly others in this thread) you absolutely should stop buying Orson Scott Card books. At the same time it frustrates me when this story is tagged "wingnut" before there were any comments, followed by threads like this one are hard for me to fathom. I guess I just have never run across an artist, actor, author, whatever whose views I found so odious that it would affect my enjoyment of their art, etc. Thanks for explaining your POV though.
If the majority of Californians are against Gays and Lesbians having equal rights, I won't read any of their works, either!!!!
Quite frankly, I don't get why anyone would care what Gays and Lesbians do. Why would it even matter one whit to any non-homosexual how Gays and Lesbians wish to live their lives? Why go out of your way to make a big stink? That's the part I don't get.
I wonder if similar things were written back in the days of miscegenation?
I don't really get it... I mean ok, even if you really think he is a mega-douche, why stop reading his books? Does that really do anything positive? ...?
Could you enjoy the artwork of, say, Hitler, knowing what a peta-douche he was?
What is some great writer were a child-molester? Or a rapist? Or some other type of sicko? Are you to tell me you'd have absolutely no problem enjoying the writings or other creative works of such a monster?
Hey, I tried to read one of Card's works since I found out how much of a homophobe he is. I simply could not get past the first page.
I mean, I can never enjoy the works of someone who hates me just for what I am -- or others just for what they are. Can't do it. Maybe you can. More power to ya.
When I was a kid, I loved playing around with transistors. Had I known about William Shockley at the time, my life may have been completely different. May not have gone into the computer field at all. Yet, transistors are not bigoted. And maturity allows me to enjoy transistors -- but just not the ones Shockley himself had his smelly little hands on!
But while many, many, many brilliant people have taken the transistor to incredible heights -- and ultra-tiny sizes! --, Ender's Game and the related works are a direct product of a bigot. And considering the depths of philosophical import that is behind Xenocide, I still have a hard time reconciling the fact that a bigoted mind wrote that. For sure Card should clearly see how crazy his own views about gays are. Alas, it shall forever remain a paradox.
Hitler, Stalin, and Ghengis Khan thinks differently than you, too!!!
http://urlbit.us/e4v
Card is certainly entitled to his opinions. However, this ex-fan of his will never be able to read another word of his until he has a change of heart.
Why is it that such great minds like Orson Scott Card, William Shockley, and even Charles Darwin have to have a nasty bigoted side that sullies up what would otherwise be great accomplishments?
The world will never know.
Throughout recent history we have all witnessed countless ways Government has used technology against us all. Sometimes we can hold a few things back, like the Real ID Act; other times it slips us by, like the sneaky roving wiretap law the FBI managed to slip in.
What we need is less government, and that government must be truly accountable for its actions. The things the Bush Administration has done should land several indictments and at the very least an impeachment; but Bush & Co. will get away scott free with atrocities far, far, far worse than Clinton lying about his salacious personal affairs.
Until we have believable accountability, we will never have a government we can truly trust. Obama now represents the "Great Black Hope" for the country. Let's see what really happens.