"Actually, no...A child born in America to American citizens is born with citizenship"
Actually, pedant, they don't have to be born to US citizens.
Thank you for obscuring the point. Can you vote as a child? Then what influence do you have over any of the policies of the government that runs your life?
None, that's right. Hence, they aren't citizens. Technically they are, but you can keep your technicalities, I'm talking about reality.
"Actually, I know that to get a passport, you have to fill out a form that states that you're a US citizen"
Liar. No child has ever legally filled out any form for a passport, because YOUR PARENTS MUST DO IT FOR YOU. You cannot get a passport without your parents pernmission, nor can you legally sign a contract.
Don't be a dumbass, you know very well that simply having a passport does not make you a citizen. Why say something so stupid?
Children become citizens (in the US) when they turn 18, and are legally allowed to determine, through their vote, the future of the country.
"I left high school with more knowledge of calculus and physics than the teachers that taught the subjects"
I don't believe you. Frequently I hear this from students, but when pressed, they come up wanting. I'm sure you are in this category.
"Yes, schools punish you for independent thought, even if demonstrably correct"
No, you got punished because you didn't follow directions. And you punished yourself. If you are instructed to do something a certain way, do it that way. If you know another way, share it and get extra credit. My guess is you thought your ways were better, and you got the right answers, so you never bothered to learn the methods your teachers used. And you got poor grades as a result. Sounds like your fault to me, don't blame school because you lack the ability to accept instructions. Not for nothing, but part of school is learning how to follow routines.
"Maybe johnny doesn't want to learn plate techtonics? Why should he be forced to learn it?"
For the same reason that Johnny has to eat peas even though he doesn't like them. Children are exceedingly poor judges of what they "need" and what is good for them. How could a child possibly know what they will need in 20 years?
There is a reason kids don't pick their own bedtime, or what they eat at home.
"The problem with the current school system is that it assumes everyon learns the same way"
This betrays your lack of knowledge on the subject. Every student has an IEP where their learning tendencies are analyzed. Then accomodations are made to help the student, such as working in small groups, large print worksheets, spoken instructions instead of written, assignments broken into smaller sections etc. In fact there are 37 different accomodations that students can have on their IEP.
"but overall they will kknow and keep more knowlage and give them a chance to sample many diffrent type sof clsses if they so want to."
No, they'll be experts on body shop and PE, and not be able to make a resume, or calculate interest. Allowing students to avoid things they don't like is dumb, as it shows them that hard work and persevering through tough times isn't necessary.
"Why shouldn't Susie get too far ahead of Johnny?"
Because each class has one teacher, who needs to keep the class on pace. I can't teach chapter one to some of the class, chapter 3 to others, and chapter 5 to the rest. Explain to me how I would lecture, correct, and give examples on 3 different subjects in 75 minutes. Would I be expected to give a lecture, and help those students who are working on the first assignment at the same time? What about when I'm lecturing and there are also 2 assignments out. It is not possible in a class of 34.
No one attempts to make the students "advance their knowledge" at any rate other than what is comfortable for them.
No, I'm not an English teacher. Is that all you got out of my post? I make a small typo, and you're too pedantic to make an intelligent comment, but still find a way to address the typo.
"I'm amaized that a teacher would use a possive version"
Well, at least I didn't make 2 mistakes in the same sentence. Don't throw stones my non-spelling, typo making friend. God forbid you should actually respond to the message...
"What if they had spent that money on making kids want to go to school?"
Ok, let's hear some ideas. I'm a teacher, so I'll be ecstatic to get some help in this area. Before you begin though, understand that we're state mandated to provide instruction on specific topics in a specific timeframe. We also have to make sure that no one is left out of activities, or if they are, develop an alernative activity. We also have to make sure that Susie who takes one day to learn plate tectonics doesn't get too far ahead of Johnny who takes 4 days. We also...
I hope you see the point. School simply isn't fun most of the time. No matter how you slice it, some things are boring to teach and boring to learn. Couple this with restrictions on teaching techniques, budget problems, and over protective parents, and I'm amazed anything get's taught.
See, the problem is that you are talking about children. Children are not afforded the same privacy "rights" that adults get. In schools here children can be searched, their belongings can be searched, and their lockers can be searched, all without cause. Yes it has been affirmed over and over, because children ARE NOT citizens. Spout on all you want about "gross invasion of privacy" but it's not. These children simply don't have the same privacy rights as adults.
Ok, where? YOU give examples please, since they seem to be so abundant.
As far as the PATRIOT act, it's getting dialed back bit by bit, which is how our system here works. Someone does something foolish in the heat of the moment, and cooler heads eventually prevail.
The kind WE would use. The hydrogen you (and your link) are speaking of is INDUSTRIAL hydrogen production, which we don't use. That's used in the industrial processes it's created for.
And seriously, oil and natural gas the same? God damn man, don't bother replying, you've got no credibility at all any more. The same. Sure.
I love this, first insist that the hydrogen exploded, then state that it may have. Nice. Let's just do this thread a favor and admit that it's impossible to know for sure what happened.
Oh wait, you're all know-it-alls who've never been wrong about anything. Sorry, my bad.
"Currently hydrogen *does* involve sending money to totalitarian regimes, since we make it from oil"
Can't believe I forgot to address this. You really DON'T know what you're talking about.
Currently, the 2 main sources are natural gas (not oil like you said) and electrolysis. We also use wind, solar power, and biomass. NO significant amount of hydrogen is derived from oil. While there may be companies using oil, I am not aware of any. Not one. Look it up, and you'll see I'm right.
"Hydrogen tends to ignite *when* it leaks, not minutes later"
You've claimed this several times, but given no evidence as to why this is. Well? What is so special about hydrogen that makes it ignite "when" it leaks?
More importantly, hydrogen does dissipate quickly. Very quickly in fact, so much so that is EXTREMELY difficult to get a high enough concentration to ignite.
While I can appreciate the fact that your Dad used to worry about hydrogen more than other things at the plant, MY dad used to worry about getting a cold because he worked outside in the rain. Needless to say, he was wrong too.
Instead of making dubious (incorrect) pseudo-scientific claims, supported by anecdotes from a man who was more afraid of hydrogen than the highly corrosive, toxic, flammable chemicals that surrounded him, you should perhaps do some REAL research to learn just how wrong you are.
I agree with your statment about finding another job. They're not chained to the desk.
"Working more than 40 hours regularly without overtime is simply unacceptable"
This is wrong. Many jobs simply CAN'T be accomplished in 40 hours, because of logistics. If you know beforehand that you may be working more than 40 hours a week, negotiate appropriate compensation IN WRITING. If you take the job anyway and get worked too hard, you have no one to blame but yourself.
"Thus employees could have said no. If there we dismissed then that would be grounds for a law suit."
Not here in Florida it's not. Employers in Florida are allowed to fire you for any reason, a good reason, or NO reason. Don't believe me? Call an employment attorney in Fla and you'll see I'm right. Can you sue? Always, but you won't find a lawyer to take your case, and if you did you'd lose.
More importantly, you took the fucking job KNOWING that was the policy, so how the hell do you think you would be justified in whining about it after the fact?
"My point remains, you cannot defend something as being the opinion of a few extremists in a party when the party adopts it as its official platform"
in Texas. Texas is not only not representative of the ENTIRE UNITED STATES, but it is also NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ENTIRE REPUBLICAN PARTY, so stop trying to make it appear that it is.
More importantly, what makes you think that Republicans in Texas support this platform? How many of them do you think agree with EVERY single thing in it. Damn few I bet, which was the original point. Just because someone is Republican doesn't mean they agree with every party talking point. It doesn't work that way, and you know it. Perhaps they think that being a Republican and swallowing a few stupid ideas is better than what Democrats have to offer. Instead of dismissing them, perhaps the left should consider why that is. Maybe they are on the wrong side of a few things.
He DID name 2 people dumbass, he just ALSO named the Republican Party platform in texas.
As far as you "wonder why you can support a party that has this as its platform"what makes you think I do? Read every post in this thread, and you'll realize I NEVER said I supported Republicans. Stop putting words in my mouth.
"Anyway, what would an equally "whacko" left-wing policy be"
Off the top of my head, no immigration controls for one. Abortions without parental notification for another (why can you get an abortion in some places without calling mom, but you can't get a tattoo? Dumb)
"mentally retarded (or whatever the proper term is these days)"
Mentally retarded is still the term. It's a clinical term, just like emphysema or congestive heart failure. The attempts to attach a negative connotation have only worked with non-professionals, and are really pointless anyway.
You named 2 people. You don't think I could find examples of the left doing similarly ridiculous things? I read the Texas Republican Party's platform (someone posted a link a few weeks ago) and it DID have a few things that made me say "HUH?" but so what? Both sides have wackos, and as I said in my post don't judge based on extremes or you'll get the same in return, and what does that accomplish? Clearly it won't win the left an election.
Using an outside (foreign) perspective to gauge where the parties are is pointless. Everything you're saying may be true (I believe it is) but that's irrelevant. The standards for the US are set by the US, just as in Britain the standards are set by Britain. For example, an assertion that other countries are all WAYYYYYYYYY to the left is just as pointless. It's the standards the society itself uses, not what a group of outside observers think, that is useful for discussion.
"How could the Republicans possibly be *more* Rightwing?"
No gun control under any circumstances, no separation of church and state at all, no abortions ever for any reason, no gays ever for any reason, capital punishment for more types of offenses, etc. I think you get the point. And to all you out there chomping at the bit, don't attempt to lie and say that is the stance of the right these days. Those positions are held only by a few in the lunatic fringe, so don't judge the right by it's wackos unless you give the same treatment to the left.
It's exactly this kind of thinking that got Kerry defeated. The "right" isn't as far right as you think, and the "left" is much farther left than they are willing to admit (or maybe they don't realize it). Saying those who voted for Bush are "scared" is an attempt to dismiss their choice as ill informed. Stop doing that. It doesn't help get things done.
Slashdot Mirror
"Actually, no...A child born in America to American citizens is born with citizenship"
Actually, pedant, they don't have to be born to US citizens.
Thank you for obscuring the point. Can you vote as a child? Then what influence do you have over any of the policies of the government that runs your life?
None, that's right. Hence, they aren't citizens. Technically they are, but you can keep your technicalities, I'm talking about reality.
"Actually, I know that to get a passport, you have to fill out a form that states that you're a US citizen"
Liar. No child has ever legally filled out any form for a passport, because YOUR PARENTS MUST DO IT FOR YOU. You cannot get a passport without your parents pernmission, nor can you legally sign a contract.
Dumbass.
Don't be a dumbass, you know very well that simply having a passport does not make you a citizen. Why say something so stupid? Children become citizens (in the US) when they turn 18, and are legally allowed to determine, through their vote, the future of the country.
"I left high school with more knowledge of calculus and physics than the teachers that taught the subjects" I don't believe you. Frequently I hear this from students, but when pressed, they come up wanting. I'm sure you are in this category. "Yes, schools punish you for independent thought, even if demonstrably correct" No, you got punished because you didn't follow directions. And you punished yourself. If you are instructed to do something a certain way, do it that way. If you know another way, share it and get extra credit. My guess is you thought your ways were better, and you got the right answers, so you never bothered to learn the methods your teachers used. And you got poor grades as a result. Sounds like your fault to me, don't blame school because you lack the ability to accept instructions. Not for nothing, but part of school is learning how to follow routines.
"Maybe johnny doesn't want to learn plate techtonics? Why should he be forced to learn it?"
For the same reason that Johnny has to eat peas even though he doesn't like them. Children are exceedingly poor judges of what they "need" and what is good for them. How could a child possibly know what they will need in 20 years?
There is a reason kids don't pick their own bedtime, or what they eat at home.
"The problem with the current school system is that it assumes everyon learns the same way"
This betrays your lack of knowledge on the subject. Every student has an IEP where their learning tendencies are analyzed. Then accomodations are made to help the student, such as working in small groups, large print worksheets, spoken instructions instead of written, assignments broken into smaller sections etc. In fact there are 37 different accomodations that students can have on their IEP.
"but overall they will kknow and keep more knowlage and give them a chance to sample many diffrent type sof clsses if they so want to."
No, they'll be experts on body shop and PE, and not be able to make a resume, or calculate interest. Allowing students to avoid things they don't like is dumb, as it shows them that hard work and persevering through tough times isn't necessary.
"Why shouldn't Susie get too far ahead of Johnny?"
Because each class has one teacher, who needs to keep the class on pace. I can't teach chapter one to some of the class, chapter 3 to others, and chapter 5 to the rest. Explain to me how I would lecture, correct, and give examples on 3 different subjects in 75 minutes. Would I be expected to give a lecture, and help those students who are working on the first assignment at the same time? What about when I'm lecturing and there are also 2 assignments out. It is not possible in a class of 34.
No one attempts to make the students "advance their knowledge" at any rate other than what is comfortable for them.
No, I'm not an English teacher. Is that all you got out of my post? I make a small typo, and you're too pedantic to make an intelligent comment, but still find a way to address the typo.
Let's make sure I spell this right
FUCK YOU
Spellcheck that.
Well, since class starts at 9:15 (I posted at 8:24), and I use Slashdot to get ideas for class, I would say you're an idiot.
"I'm amaized that a teacher would use a possive version"
Well, at least I didn't make 2 mistakes in the same sentence. Don't throw stones my non-spelling, typo making friend. God forbid you should actually respond to the message...
"What if they had spent that money on making kids want to go to school?"
Ok, let's hear some ideas. I'm a teacher, so I'll be ecstatic to get some help in this area. Before you begin though, understand that we're state mandated to provide instruction on specific topics in a specific timeframe. We also have to make sure that no one is left out of activities, or if they are, develop an alernative activity. We also have to make sure that Susie who takes one day to learn plate tectonics doesn't get too far ahead of Johnny who takes 4 days. We also...
I hope you see the point. School simply isn't fun most of the time. No matter how you slice it, some things are boring to teach and boring to learn. Couple this with restrictions on teaching techniques, budget problems, and over protective parents, and I'm amazed anything get's taught.
See, the problem is that you are talking about children. Children are not afforded the same privacy "rights" that adults get. In schools here children can be searched, their belongings can be searched, and their lockers can be searched, all without cause. Yes it has been affirmed over and over, because children ARE NOT citizens. Spout on all you want about "gross invasion of privacy" but it's not. These children simply don't have the same privacy rights as adults.
Ok, where? YOU give examples please, since they seem to be so abundant.
As far as the PATRIOT act, it's getting dialed back bit by bit, which is how our system here works. Someone does something foolish in the heat of the moment, and cooler heads eventually prevail.
The kind WE would use. The hydrogen you (and your link) are speaking of is INDUSTRIAL hydrogen production, which we don't use. That's used in the industrial processes it's created for.
And seriously, oil and natural gas the same? God damn man, don't bother replying, you've got no credibility at all any more. The same. Sure.
"Actually, the hydrogren DID explode"
"The blowout was most likely the hydrogen"
I love this, first insist that the hydrogen exploded, then state that it may have. Nice. Let's just do this thread a favor and admit that it's impossible to know for sure what happened.
Oh wait, you're all know-it-alls who've never been wrong about anything. Sorry, my bad.
"Currently hydrogen *does* involve sending money to totalitarian regimes, since we make it from oil"
Can't believe I forgot to address this. You really DON'T know what you're talking about.
Currently, the 2 main sources are natural gas (not oil like you said) and electrolysis. We also use wind, solar power, and biomass. NO significant amount of hydrogen is derived from oil. While there may be companies using oil, I am not aware of any. Not one. Look it up, and you'll see I'm right.
"Hydrogen tends to ignite *when* it leaks, not minutes later"
You've claimed this several times, but given no evidence as to why this is. Well? What is so special about hydrogen that makes it ignite "when" it leaks?
More importantly, hydrogen does dissipate quickly. Very quickly in fact, so much so that is EXTREMELY difficult to get a high enough concentration to ignite.
While I can appreciate the fact that your Dad used to worry about hydrogen more than other things at the plant, MY dad used to worry about getting a cold because he worked outside in the rain. Needless to say, he was wrong too.
Instead of making dubious (incorrect) pseudo-scientific claims, supported by anecdotes from a man who was more afraid of hydrogen than the highly corrosive, toxic, flammable chemicals that surrounded him, you should perhaps do some REAL research to learn just how wrong you are.
I agree with your statment about finding another job. They're not chained to the desk.
"Working more than 40 hours regularly without overtime is simply unacceptable"
This is wrong. Many jobs simply CAN'T be accomplished in 40 hours, because of logistics. If you know beforehand that you may be working more than 40 hours a week, negotiate appropriate compensation IN WRITING. If you take the job anyway and get worked too hard, you have no one to blame but yourself.
"Thus employees could have said no. If there we dismissed then that would be grounds for a law suit."
Not here in Florida it's not. Employers in Florida are allowed to fire you for any reason, a good reason, or NO reason. Don't believe me? Call an employment attorney in Fla and you'll see I'm right. Can you sue? Always, but you won't find a lawyer to take your case, and if you did you'd lose.
More importantly, you took the fucking job KNOWING that was the policy, so how the hell do you think you would be justified in whining about it after the fact?
"My point remains, you cannot defend something as being the opinion of a few extremists in a party when the party adopts it as its official platform"
in Texas. Texas is not only not representative of the ENTIRE UNITED STATES, but it is also NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ENTIRE REPUBLICAN PARTY, so stop trying to make it appear that it is.
More importantly, what makes you think that Republicans in Texas support this platform? How many of them do you think agree with EVERY single thing in it. Damn few I bet, which was the original point. Just because someone is Republican doesn't mean they agree with every party talking point. It doesn't work that way, and you know it. Perhaps they think that being a Republican and swallowing a few stupid ideas is better than what Democrats have to offer. Instead of dismissing them, perhaps the left should consider why that is. Maybe they are on the wrong side of a few things.
He DID name 2 people dumbass, he just ALSO named the Republican Party platform in texas.
As far as you "wonder why you can support a party that has this as its platform"what makes you think I do? Read every post in this thread, and you'll realize I NEVER said I supported Republicans. Stop putting words in my mouth.
"Anyway, what would an equally "whacko" left-wing policy be"
Off the top of my head, no immigration controls for one. Abortions without parental notification for another (why can you get an abortion in some places without calling mom, but you can't get a tattoo? Dumb)
"Mentally retarded is still used by doctors, but social workers and other PC professions consider"
No we don't. As exactly the type of professional you describe, I can assure you that we still use Mentally retarded.
"mentally retarded (or whatever the proper term is these days)"
Mentally retarded is still the term. It's a clinical term, just like emphysema or congestive heart failure. The attempts to attach a negative connotation have only worked with non-professionals, and are really pointless anyway.
You named 2 people. You don't think I could find examples of the left doing similarly ridiculous things? I read the Texas Republican Party's platform (someone posted a link a few weeks ago) and it DID have a few things that made me say "HUH?" but so what? Both sides have wackos, and as I said in my post don't judge based on extremes or you'll get the same in return, and what does that accomplish? Clearly it won't win the left an election.
Using an outside (foreign) perspective to gauge where the parties are is pointless. Everything you're saying may be true (I believe it is) but that's irrelevant. The standards for the US are set by the US, just as in Britain the standards are set by Britain. For example, an assertion that other countries are all WAYYYYYYYYY to the left is just as pointless. It's the standards the society itself uses, not what a group of outside observers think, that is useful for discussion.
"How could the Republicans possibly be *more* Rightwing?"
No gun control under any circumstances, no separation of church and state at all, no abortions ever for any reason, no gays ever for any reason, capital punishment for more types of offenses, etc. I think you get the point. And to all you out there chomping at the bit, don't attempt to lie and say that is the stance of the right these days. Those positions are held only by a few in the lunatic fringe, so don't judge the right by it's wackos unless you give the same treatment to the left.
It's exactly this kind of thinking that got Kerry defeated. The "right" isn't as far right as you think, and the "left" is much farther left than they are willing to admit (or maybe they don't realize it). Saying those who voted for Bush are "scared" is an attempt to dismiss their choice as ill informed. Stop doing that. It doesn't help get things done.