The problem with this idea for policy is defining the point at which a company becomes dominant and what happens if they get there with closed proprietary systems that are not anti-competitive in nature when they are created...
There is no problem even in that case. There are close to a billion computers right now; and Microsoft software runs on well over 80% of them all.
And what if a company gains an 80% market share by offering a superior product and or a lower price? Dominance isn't a problem in and of itself, the problem is when the party that owns a dominate position abuses that position. Such as using anticompetitive practices, which MS does.
The protocols in use RIGHT NOW must be open for public access.
All protocols should be open, put into the public domain.
Something I have not seen mentioned yet is whether SCO needs to accrue an estimate of what they should be paying Novell - whether they have the cash or not, it needs to go on the books. Their current balance sheet does not reflect it, which is probably one reason why the company is still grossly overvalued at $4.72M.
From what I recall Novell asked the judge to create a trust the money Novell is owed, or claims to be owed, can be put into. But SCO argued it had the money and could pay if ordered.
Check your local code and power company. In some local areas, power sold back to the utility from co-generation, is to be metered and purchased at wholesale instead of retail. Running the meter backwards may be in violation of local policy. Check first.
Notice I said "Guerrilla", well "Guerilla". Guerrilla solar doesn't talk to the power company or let them know you hooked up the system. A second meter isn't added so the amount of energy contributed to the company isn't known. Instead as I said it causes the meter that's already there to spin backwards. By spinning it backwards you're only charged for the electricity from the company you use. It has nothing to do with net metering. The power company may never even know about it. Of course there's risks involved, such as repairmen being shocked. Net metering requires a method to disconnect a solar or other private system hooked up to the power company's cables.
Here is a typical grid tie inverter showing the lack of any way to provide power in the event of a utility outage. The requriement for anit-islanding will shut down this entire system in the event of a utility outage. There is no battery or critical load connection.
This can be a problem when power is still needed after, for whatever reason, the power company isn't able to deliver power however as a guerrilla is doing it "secretly" they could get by with an island. And as this is/. I bet there are some geeks and hackers here who would get into building an inverter that allows islanding.
He sized the system to never have a surplus. The idea of buying power retail and paying for a bi-directional installation (cogen) and selling at wholesale rates didn't make any sense.
Sounds like what he needs is Guerilla Solar Power. When using such a system the meter will spin backwards when it is producing more power than is needed.
How about a bicycle setup, with generator or alternator, battery, and laptop. Pedal the bike for a while, charge up the battery, then run the laptop off the 12 V RV battery just like you would if you were in a car, with an adapter.
A team of engineers with the IEEE did just this. This team setup a system whereby pedaling a bike powered a computer in a village that I believe was in Vietnam. Then for internet access they erected tower transceivers from where the access was provided to the village. Something like an hour's pedaling provided 2 hours for the computer.
Cool! I want an external small solar panel for my laptop. Since I travel a lot and charging sucks, a small solar panel for laptops would be nice. Or better - make the entire laptop casing made of photovoltaic cells. Added to that, I look forward to see pizoelectric crystals being implemented as well.
There are companies that make backpacks with solar panels: Voltaic Backpack.
Which is clearly not the context in which we are discussing it.
Ah, you can change the discussion but I can't?
If one has "faith" that a person will do some action (we can pretend that there is a "right" thing to do if that makes it easier for you to think about) then it is either based on one's observations of the past actions of that individual or it is based on wishful thinking. The latter I would argue is superstitious. In the former case the use of "faith" is a relic of the superstitious past and is basically a different word.
I gave a definition of one of my dictionaries' definitions and as I said previously it does not require any belief in any supernatural being. As for it being a relic from a superstitious past, it was used in this fashion later. From the "Online Etymology Dictionary":
faith
"c.1250, 'duty of fulfilling one's trust,' from O.Fr. feid, from L. fides 'trust, belief,' from root of fidere 'to trust,' from PIE base *bhidh-/*bhoidh- (cf. Gk. pistis; see bid). For sense evolution, see belief. Theological sense is from 1382; religions called faiths since c.1300. Faith-healer is from 1885."
Fact is is "faith" was used theologically after 32 years after it was first used and 50 years went by before being used in religion.
I don't know what carbon tax you're talking about, every one I've seen proposed it's the generator that pays it directly. Of course the end user eventually pays because the generator will raise prices. However it also gives both generators and end users motivation for finding ways to reduce emissions. Ultimately because it's the end user that creates the demand it should be end users who pays, or do you think those who aren't responsible should be made to pay?.
It works if you ignore that it has a poor energy/dollar ratio as compared to a wind turbine. Even if you ignore all other short comings of solar photovoltaic cells, you still won't get away from this simple fact. Wind power is cheaper. MUCH cheaper. Of course, on life cycle costs modern nuclear power plants are cheaper still, but I suspect you don't like those or won't believe me, so I'm using wind power instead. It doesn't really matter, the conclusion is still the same.
Wind is only more efficient than solar where there is good wind and where there's little if any direct sunlight. However like there's many places not appropriate for solar there are places not appropriate for wind either. Now what some who build Off the grid do is build a hybrid system and use both solar and wind, or another energy source. When the sun shines the solar pvs generate power and when the wind is blowing they do.
For laptops I'd rate it as simply stupid. A simple conservation of energy calculation against incoming insulation and the capacity of a Li-ion battery should make this obvious. Maybe if you are studying the ecology of a remote pacific Island or something, but for normal consumers it is just a waste of cash.
For a laptop I think these are a waste. You get a laptop because you want to be able to take it with you and use it on the road. However these solar systems aren't very portable. The only places I can think one would be useful is in remote locations where the person will be located at for a longer length of tyme.
With that said, solar PV *works* and works well, and is affordable now if you extrapolate probable electricity costs for a coupla decades into the future.
Today the typical payback period for solar systems is about 7 year, ie it takes 7 years to pay for the cost of the system, if sized properly. And most components are rated for service for 10 years or more. Build a solar system and a mortgage can pay for it. Because of the savings more and more mortgage lenders are offering higher mortgages as they know those getting them will save from a reduced power bill, if they have one at all.
One interesting anecdote about wind power in China is that an Australian company is selling more wind generation equipment to China this year than is currently installed in all of Australia.
From what I understand Southwestern Australia is a good location for wind farms.
The pollution problem in China is going to take a very long time to solve and I think one of the solutions they will try is small electric vehicles in some of the heavily polluted cities.
Within 10 years I wouldn't be surprised if China led the world in EVs. They have the resources and a hugh market.
As for compact flouros - those of you unlucky enough to live in cold places with only 110V mains are going to either have to put up with slow warm up times or not buy the cheap bulbs that work well for the rest of us.
Slow starts for CFLs don't really bother me. I never need the lights on immediately and prefer slow starters, those lights that are at full brightness as soon as they are turned off bother me. I prefer to allow my eyes to adjust.
I think you are right that the way to save energy is for large groups to do it with an economy of scale. In my opinion this is things like governments building decent transport systems and corporations housing their new factories and offices in buildings that require less energy to keep running. A few skylights, something like the soon to be released light pipes (similar to a really big bundle of fibre optic cables made of cheap plastic to pipe in sunlight and give you a skylight), insulation and even painting the roof white can make a big difference in large buildings.
True, of the energy used in the US half of it is used in buildings and most are built as energy hogs. Proper alignment of building sites, such as using pssive design and increasing insulation either by making it thicker or by increasing the R value reduce the amount of energy needed to heat and cool buildings. Switching to energy efficient lights can cut energy used for lighting by a lot, CFLs or compact florescent lights use a 1/4 of the power most incandescent lights do, and LED lights only use a tenth. Unfortunately current LED designs are only good for spot and not for area lighting. Using Sun Tunnels or Light tubes can reduce if not eliminate the need for lights during the day.
Full electric only makes sense when you want the pollution to occur somewhere else - expect the Chinese to produce something decent along those lines for that reason in the next few years good enough to silence those that mourn the ridiculously expensive EV1.
Actually there is a big possibility it won't happen in China. The Chinese government is wising up to the costs of environmental degradation. Because of pollution health care costs are rising and overdrawing water aquifers causes crop failures. They have been building the world's second largest dam, Three Gorges Dam. Unfortunately they forcibly removed more than a million people to build it and some valuable archaeological sites will be flooded. It's also partially responsible for driving the Baiji, pink, or Chinese River Dolphin extinct. Some people are starting to build wind farms though as well as solar power plants.
That wasn't another student, it was the teacher that did that, an authoritative figure.
I assumed as much. Regardless of whether it was student or teacher, that still qualifies as zealotry, and trying to force your way on other people, in my opinion. And most definitely abominable.
The thing is is once the foot's in the door it's easy to pry the door open. And zealots will do so such as Domionist and Reconstructionists They are the US's version of the Taliban and they have their feet in the door. Getting rid of the phrase "under god" in the pledge is a step in reducing their influence and power.
Perhaps you didn't see or experience yourself but I experienced as well as saw other children having a ruler forcibly applied to my and their hands in a public school because we refused to say the pledge with "under god".
That's abominable, but that isn't really a problem with the pledge, but with the zealots who feel the need to force their own way on people.
That wasn't another student, it was the teacher that did that, an authoritative figure.
I just want money for charity to be used as efficiently as possible, and don't have much faith in the bureaucracy to do it right, so any private organization getting the money is something I back.
I don't trust government, to be efficient or otherwise, and I'd prefer Civil Society and non profits, heck I have no problem with for profit businesses, helping people. But instead of the government giving the money to these organizations, I'd rather income tax be eliminated and allow people to do what they want with the money they work to earn. Let people decide for themselves who they will give their money to.
Where did you get the idea that "faith" in supernatural things is anything other than superstition.
Faith isn't just a belief in something supernatural. I just checked one of my dictionaries and one of the definitions they provide is belief a person will do the right thing. Personally I have faith some people will do whatever they want no matter who it effects or how it effects them.
Scenario one: The Jury contains Christians. I walk in, they offer a bible. I decline. They fall back to non-biblical swearing. The Christians are thinking... what?
Neither you nor anyone else can say definitively all jurors are Christians. but I would bet there are people of other faiths as well as those of no faith who serve on juries. Though I never did serve on a jury I have been called up twice for jury duty> I am Christians, but not in the way most people take being Christian means. If such a person did exist, then I believe he was a great teacher, much like others such as the Buddha, Lao Tzu, and Zoroaster.
There's no reason for it to be on there, but there's also no reason to take it off, since that would incur extra expense as the plates they use to print money were re-done.
There is no extra cost in removing "In God We Trust" from US currency. Take a look at some US money, both coins and bills have the year it was printed or coined, so the plates and molds used are changed yearly anyway. Also every bill has a serial number printed on it, a different one for each bill.
Similarly, why care about the pledge of allegiance? It's one small line, and you can omit it if you wish.
Perhaps you didn't see or experience yourself but I experienced as well as saw other children having a ruler forcibly applied to my and their hands in a public school because we refused to say the pledge with "under god". Me, I refused to say it because at that tyme I considered myself Buddhist. And some Christians refuse to say it because to them it's calling the Lord's name in vain, which is one of the 10 commandments.
I also don't have a problem with faith-based initiatives, simply because the idea is that the money is for charitable works.
There's a problem if those getting the money require those they help to have the same faith the organization has or if it is used to try to convert people to that faith.
The country's very oath invokes the Christian god. The pledge of allegiance
The phrase "under god" in the USA Pledge of Allegiance was only added to the pledge around 1959 while Ike was president.
The expectation in the courtroom is that I swear to god
You're not required to swear to "god" in a US court. If you aren't Christian or otherwise object to swearing on a bible they have to allow you some other sort of swearing in.
My own taxes are being directly funneled into "faith-based initiatives."
Yeap, King George has taxpayer dollars going to his faith based organizations. What's more, though I haven't verified it yet, is that only Judaic, Christian, and Muslim groups are given money. In 2004 Jim Towey, director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, "confirmed that no direct federal grants from his program had gone to a non-Christian religious group. This kind of religious favoritism is exactly what the Constitution's establishment clause was put in place to prevent."
I'm all for your religious scientists pursuing ID
Just don't try to have it taught in schools as a science, it's not.
Instead we're all yelling about how stupid religious people are (I'm not sure we're wrong, just saying it would be nice if that could be removed from the equation.)
ID is not and does not belong in science. And the only way religion belongs in public school, or gets taxpayer money, is if it's part of history ie what people have done in the name of their religion. Or as part of a humanities or philosophy class in which different religions are compared.
I always thought creationism and intelligent design were two different beliefs, where creationism is you believe exactly what the Bible says in Genesis and intelligent design is the Christian's answer to evolution? Sort of a mix between creationism and evolution? I may be wrong but I don't think it's as simple as saying "aka" to infer some sort of equality.
ID, intelligent design, is a simple attempt to dress up creationism as a science. Because Creationists have been unsuccessful in having creation taught in school, they added some pseudo science to it and are trying to have it taught as a science. However it fails a big part of what science is, it can't be tested and verified or proved wrong.
Inara: You have a strange sense of nobility, Captain. You'll lay a man out for implying I'm a whore, but you keep calling me one to my face.
Mal: I might not show respect for your job, but he didn't respect you. That's the difference.
Another one I like is where Mal says "it feels stronger".
If you are really open to other beliefs and facts, take a read here, but be warned -- not for the faint of heart, and you most certainly will lose some faith when you read that. Have a copy of your Bible ready...
Thanks for the link, now whenever some Bible thumper gets in my face I know just where to go to show how evil their "God" is.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with this idea for policy is defining the point at which a company becomes dominant and what happens if they get there with closed proprietary systems that are not anti-competitive in nature when they are created...
There is no problem even in that case. There are close to a billion computers right now; and Microsoft software runs on well over 80% of them all.
And what if a company gains an 80% market share by offering a superior product and or a lower price? Dominance isn't a problem in and of itself, the problem is when the party that owns a dominate position abuses that position. Such as using anticompetitive practices, which MS does.
The protocols in use RIGHT NOW must be open for public access.
All protocols should be open, put into the public domain.
Something I have not seen mentioned yet is whether SCO needs to accrue an estimate of what they should be paying Novell - whether they have the cash or not, it needs to go on the books. Their current balance sheet does not reflect it, which is probably one reason why the company is still grossly overvalued at $4.72M.
From what I recall Novell asked the judge to create a trust the money Novell is owed, or claims to be owed, can be put into. But SCO argued it had the money and could pay if ordered.
FalconI think the biggest worry I have now... which may actually be moot- is who ends up with SCO's assets and IP?
What assets and ip?
FalconCheck your local code and power company. In some local areas, power sold back to the utility from co-generation, is to be metered and purchased at wholesale instead of retail. Running the meter backwards may be in violation of local policy. Check first.
Notice I said "Guerrilla", well "Guerilla". Guerrilla solar doesn't talk to the power company or let them know you hooked up the system. A second meter isn't added so the amount of energy contributed to the company isn't known. Instead as I said it causes the meter that's already there to spin backwards. By spinning it backwards you're only charged for the electricity from the company you use. It has nothing to do with net metering. The power company may never even know about it. Of course there's risks involved, such as repairmen being shocked. Net metering requires a method to disconnect a solar or other private system hooked up to the power company's cables.
Here is a typical grid tie inverter showing the lack of any way to provide power in the event of a utility outage. The requriement for anit-islanding will shut down this entire system in the event of a utility outage. There is no battery or critical load connection.
This can be a problem when power is still needed after, for whatever reason, the power company isn't able to deliver power however as a guerrilla is doing it "secretly" they could get by with an island. And as this is /. I bet there are some geeks and hackers here who would get into building an inverter that allows islanding.
FalconHe sized the system to never have a surplus. The idea of buying power retail and paying for a bi-directional installation (cogen) and selling at wholesale rates didn't make any sense.
Sounds like what he needs is Guerilla Solar Power. When using such a system the meter will spin backwards when it is producing more power than is needed.
FalconHow about a bicycle setup, with generator or alternator, battery, and laptop. Pedal the bike for a while, charge up the battery, then run the laptop off the 12 V RV battery just like you would if you were in a car, with an adapter.
A team of engineers with the IEEE did just this. This team setup a system whereby pedaling a bike powered a computer in a village that I believe was in Vietnam. Then for internet access they erected tower transceivers from where the access was provided to the village. Something like an hour's pedaling provided 2 hours for the computer.
FalconCool! I want an external small solar panel for my laptop. Since I travel a lot and charging sucks, a small solar panel for laptops would be nice. Or better - make the entire laptop casing made of photovoltaic cells. Added to that, I look forward to see pizoelectric crystals being implemented as well.
There are companies that make backpacks with solar panels: Voltaic Backpack.
FalconWhich is clearly not the context in which we are discussing it.
Ah, you can change the discussion but I can't?
If one has "faith" that a person will do some action (we can pretend that there is a "right" thing to do if that makes it easier for you to think about) then it is either based on one's observations of the past actions of that individual or it is based on wishful thinking. The latter I would argue is superstitious. In the former case the use of "faith" is a relic of the superstitious past and is basically a different word.
I gave a definition of one of my dictionaries' definitions and as I said previously it does not require any belief in any supernatural being. As for it being a relic from a superstitious past, it was used in this fashion later. From the "Online Etymology Dictionary":
faith "c.1250, 'duty of fulfilling one's trust,' from O.Fr. feid, from L. fides 'trust, belief,' from root of fidere 'to trust,' from PIE base *bhidh-/*bhoidh- (cf. Gk. pistis; see bid). For sense evolution, see belief. Theological sense is from 1382; religions called faiths since c.1300. Faith-healer is from 1885."
Fact is is "faith" was used theologically after 32 years after it was first used and 50 years went by before being used in religion.
FalconScrew that, it isn't their carbon to tax me on it
I don't know what carbon tax you're talking about, every one I've seen proposed it's the generator that pays it directly. Of course the end user eventually pays because the generator will raise prices. However it also gives both generators and end users motivation for finding ways to reduce emissions. Ultimately because it's the end user that creates the demand it should be end users who pays, or do you think those who aren't responsible should be made to pay?.
FalconIt works if you ignore that it has a poor energy/dollar ratio as compared to a wind turbine. Even if you ignore all other short comings of solar photovoltaic cells, you still won't get away from this simple fact. Wind power is cheaper. MUCH cheaper. Of course, on life cycle costs modern nuclear power plants are cheaper still, but I suspect you don't like those or won't believe me, so I'm using wind power instead. It doesn't really matter, the conclusion is still the same.
Wind is only more efficient than solar where there is good wind and where there's little if any direct sunlight. However like there's many places not appropriate for solar there are places not appropriate for wind either. Now what some who build Off the grid do is build a hybrid system and use both solar and wind, or another energy source. When the sun shines the solar pvs generate power and when the wind is blowing they do.
For laptops I'd rate it as simply stupid. A simple conservation of energy calculation against incoming insulation and the capacity of a Li-ion battery should make this obvious. Maybe if you are studying the ecology of a remote pacific Island or something, but for normal consumers it is just a waste of cash.
For a laptop I think these are a waste. You get a laptop because you want to be able to take it with you and use it on the road. However these solar systems aren't very portable. The only places I can think one would be useful is in remote locations where the person will be located at for a longer length of tyme.
FalconWith that said, solar PV *works* and works well, and is affordable now if you extrapolate probable electricity costs for a coupla decades into the future.
Today the typical payback period for solar systems is about 7 year, ie it takes 7 years to pay for the cost of the system, if sized properly. And most components are rated for service for 10 years or more. Build a solar system and a mortgage can pay for it. Because of the savings more and more mortgage lenders are offering higher mortgages as they know those getting them will save from a reduced power bill, if they have one at all.
FalconOne interesting anecdote about wind power in China is that an Australian company is selling more wind generation equipment to China this year than is currently installed in all of Australia.
From what I understand Southwestern Australia is a good location for wind farms.
The pollution problem in China is going to take a very long time to solve and I think one of the solutions they will try is small electric vehicles in some of the heavily polluted cities.
Within 10 years I wouldn't be surprised if China led the world in EVs. They have the resources and a hugh market.
As for compact flouros - those of you unlucky enough to live in cold places with only 110V mains are going to either have to put up with slow warm up times or not buy the cheap bulbs that work well for the rest of us.
Slow starts for CFLs don't really bother me. I never need the lights on immediately and prefer slow starters, those lights that are at full brightness as soon as they are turned off bother me. I prefer to allow my eyes to adjust.
FalconChecking one of my dictionaries I see no definition saying faith is a possessive form of superstition. Neither does another one I have.
You have to much faith in your dictionaries.
And you have too much faith you can communicate without using definitions, or spelling, correctly.
FalconI think you are right that the way to save energy is for large groups to do it with an economy of scale. In my opinion this is things like governments building decent transport systems and corporations housing their new factories and offices in buildings that require less energy to keep running. A few skylights, something like the soon to be released light pipes (similar to a really big bundle of fibre optic cables made of cheap plastic to pipe in sunlight and give you a skylight), insulation and even painting the roof white can make a big difference in large buildings.
True, of the energy used in the US half of it is used in buildings and most are built as energy hogs. Proper alignment of building sites, such as using pssive design and increasing insulation either by making it thicker or by increasing the R value reduce the amount of energy needed to heat and cool buildings. Switching to energy efficient lights can cut energy used for lighting by a lot, CFLs or compact florescent lights use a 1/4 of the power most incandescent lights do, and LED lights only use a tenth. Unfortunately current LED designs are only good for spot and not for area lighting. Using Sun Tunnels or Light tubes can reduce if not eliminate the need for lights during the day.
Full electric only makes sense when you want the pollution to occur somewhere else - expect the Chinese to produce something decent along those lines for that reason in the next few years good enough to silence those that mourn the ridiculously expensive EV1.
Actually there is a big possibility it won't happen in China. The Chinese government is wising up to the costs of environmental degradation. Because of pollution health care costs are rising and overdrawing water aquifers causes crop failures. They have been building the world's second largest dam, Three Gorges Dam. Unfortunately they forcibly removed more than a million people to build it and some valuable archaeological sites will be flooded. It's also partially responsible for driving the Baiji, pink, or Chinese River Dolphin extinct. Some people are starting to build wind farms though as well as solar power plants.
Falconin sunlight.
Ah but if you can afford one of these solar power packs, you can also afford a hood or shader for a laptop as well.
FalconThat wasn't another student, it was the teacher that did that, an authoritative figure.
I assumed as much. Regardless of whether it was student or teacher, that still qualifies as zealotry, and trying to force your way on other people, in my opinion. And most definitely abominable.
The thing is is once the foot's in the door it's easy to pry the door open. And zealots will do so such as Domionist and Reconstructionists They are the US's version of the Taliban and they have their feet in the door. Getting rid of the phrase "under god" in the pledge is a step in reducing their influence and power.
FalconPerhaps you didn't see or experience yourself but I experienced as well as saw other children having a ruler forcibly applied to my and their hands in a public school because we refused to say the pledge with "under god".
That's abominable, but that isn't really a problem with the pledge, but with the zealots who feel the need to force their own way on people.
That wasn't another student, it was the teacher that did that, an authoritative figure.
I just want money for charity to be used as efficiently as possible, and don't have much faith in the bureaucracy to do it right, so any private organization getting the money is something I back.
I don't trust government, to be efficient or otherwise, and I'd prefer Civil Society and non profits, heck I have no problem with for profit businesses, helping people. But instead of the government giving the money to these organizations, I'd rather income tax be eliminated and allow people to do what they want with the money they work to earn. Let people decide for themselves who they will give their money to.
Falcon"Faith" is just the possesive form of the word superstition. It makes it sound more legitimate.
Checking one of my dictionaries I see no definition saying faith is a possessive form of superstition. Neither does another one I have.
FalconWhere did you get the idea that "faith" in supernatural things is anything other than superstition.
Faith isn't just a belief in something supernatural. I just checked one of my dictionaries and one of the definitions they provide is belief a person will do the right thing. Personally I have faith some people will do whatever they want no matter who it effects or how it effects them.
FalconScenario one: The Jury contains Christians. I walk in, they offer a bible. I decline. They fall back to non-biblical swearing. The Christians are thinking... what?
Neither you nor anyone else can say definitively all jurors are Christians. but I would bet there are people of other faiths as well as those of no faith who serve on juries. Though I never did serve on a jury I have been called up twice for jury duty> I am Christians, but not in the way most people take being Christian means. If such a person did exist, then I believe he was a great teacher, much like others such as the Buddha, Lao Tzu, and Zoroaster.
FalconThere's no reason for it to be on there, but there's also no reason to take it off, since that would incur extra expense as the plates they use to print money were re-done.
There is no extra cost in removing "In God We Trust" from US currency. Take a look at some US money, both coins and bills have the year it was printed or coined, so the plates and molds used are changed yearly anyway. Also every bill has a serial number printed on it, a different one for each bill.
Similarly, why care about the pledge of allegiance? It's one small line, and you can omit it if you wish.
Perhaps you didn't see or experience yourself but I experienced as well as saw other children having a ruler forcibly applied to my and their hands in a public school because we refused to say the pledge with "under god". Me, I refused to say it because at that tyme I considered myself Buddhist. And some Christians refuse to say it because to them it's calling the Lord's name in vain, which is one of the 10 commandments.
I also don't have a problem with faith-based initiatives, simply because the idea is that the money is for charitable works.
There's a problem if those getting the money require those they help to have the same faith the organization has or if it is used to try to convert people to that faith.
FalconThe country's very oath invokes the Christian god. The pledge of allegiance
The phrase "under god" in the USA Pledge of Allegiance was only added to the pledge around 1959 while Ike was president.
The expectation in the courtroom is that I swear to god
You're not required to swear to "god" in a US court. If you aren't Christian or otherwise object to swearing on a bible they have to allow you some other sort of swearing in.
My own taxes are being directly funneled into "faith-based initiatives."
Yeap, King George has taxpayer dollars going to his faith based organizations. What's more, though I haven't verified it yet, is that only Judaic, Christian, and Muslim groups are given money. In 2004 Jim Towey, director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, "confirmed that no direct federal grants from his program had gone to a non-Christian religious group. This kind of religious favoritism is exactly what the Constitution's establishment clause was put in place to prevent."
I'm all for your religious scientists pursuing ID
Just don't try to have it taught in schools as a science, it's not.
FalconInstead we're all yelling about how stupid religious people are (I'm not sure we're wrong, just saying it would be nice if that could be removed from the equation.)
ID is not and does not belong in science. And the only way religion belongs in public school, or gets taxpayer money, is if it's part of history ie what people have done in the name of their religion. Or as part of a humanities or philosophy class in which different religions are compared.
FalconI always thought creationism and intelligent design were two different beliefs, where creationism is you believe exactly what the Bible says in Genesis and intelligent design is the Christian's answer to evolution? Sort of a mix between creationism and evolution? I may be wrong but I don't think it's as simple as saying "aka" to infer some sort of equality.
ID, intelligent design, is a simple attempt to dress up creationism as a science. Because Creationists have been unsuccessful in having creation taught in school, they added some pseudo science to it and are trying to have it taught as a science. However it fails a big part of what science is, it can't be tested and verified or proved wrong.
FalconInara: You have a strange sense of nobility, Captain. You'll lay a man out for implying I'm a whore, but you keep calling me one to my face.
Mal: I might not show respect for your job, but he didn't respect you. That's the difference.
Another one I like is where Mal says "it feels stronger".
If you are really open to other beliefs and facts, take a read here, but be warned -- not for the faint of heart, and you most certainly will lose some faith when you read that. Have a copy of your Bible ready...
Thanks for the link, now whenever some Bible thumper gets in my face I know just where to go to show how evil their "God" is.
Falcon