The Desgrassi Jr. High cast (sans the kid in the wheelchair) is not exactly filling me with confidence. Are they making a show to tell a good story--or to advance a very specific political/social agenda?
But I'll reserve judgement, out of respect for the Battlestar Galactica reboot, which I also expected to suck but which turned out great.
Telling racial jokes or using racial epitaphs don't necessarily make someone a racist (as the article seems to presume). It could just mean you have a dark sense of humor, or just use humor to make a social statement.
Were Chris Rock and Richard Pryor racists because they told black jokes and used the evil "N word"? Is someone a racist when they make a racial joke ironically? Are all of Mel Brooks movies racist and hateful because they included holocaust, racial, and Jewish jokes?
I do know one thing for sure, though. If you go looking for racism and bigotry, you'll always find it--whether it's actually there or not.
I am skeptical of the righties' effort to ensure free speech by restricting speech.
Shouting down those who disagree with you so they can't be heard, pulling fire alarms in the buildings where they're trying to speak, and threatening violence against anyone who supports them isn't "free speech." It's fascism.
A citizen should have every right to speak freely, but they should never be allowed to silence their opposition through violence and activities designed specifically to deny their opposition a venue to speak or to be heard. It's your right to speak, but it's not your right to stop me from speaking too.
It's sad that these laws are even necessary. There was a time when the left stood up for free speech. Now they oppose it. Liberals like me have been alienated by the modern SJW liberal movement, and it's why blue states are turning red.
You think that living in tiny hovel because your country is overpopulated makes you more cultured? I think you're confusing the English words "cultured" and "miserable."
Those three suspects WERE investigated and "looked into." What good does that do when you don't have the authority to arrest or deport them until they've actually committed an act of terrorism? It's not a crime to associate with terrorists, or be a terrorist sympathizer, or to espouse terrorist ideology. So what were these extra cops going to be able to do after their big investigation besides shrug their shoulders?
Even if you doubled the number of cops, you wouldn't be able to keep every suspected terrorist under surveillance 24/7. And since current human rights laws prevent you from even deporting them, much less imprisoning them, how would having more cops have helped?
Having more police wouldn't have helped if the police are powerless to arrest someone until they act, or even to deport a suspect if they're known to associate with terrorists and be sympathetic to them (as the three koran-thumpers in the last attack were).
It's not your "right" to stay in a country if you immigrate there and start engaging in terrorist activity or associating with known terrorists. A country should have every "right" to deport you for it, though. And it sounds like that's all May is asking for here.
That may be true. But in this case May is just looking for the ability to "deport foreign terrorist suspects back to their own countries." That hardly seems unreasonable to me. If you immigrate to my country and start engaging in terrorist activity (or associating with known terrorists) your invitation to stay should be rescinded.
I wonder why it is that now that it is no longer criminal to be gay and there are legal protections in place to protect people who are known to be gay from discrimination in some places, that more people would identify as gay.
As I said above, I'm pretty sure homosexuality wasn't considered criminal in the U.S. in 2012, yet the numbers have risen since then (according to that Gallup poll anyway).
I suppose the numbers went up when it stopped being considered criminal, and when it got less likely to get beaten up for being gay.
I'm pretty sure homosexuality wasn't considered criminal or more likely to get you beat up in the U.S. in 2012, yet the numbers have risen since then (according to that Gallup poll anyway).
Answer me this: Could you become gay if it become really, really, fashionable?
No, but I could certainly *pretend* to be gay if it got me a movie role, financial benefit, or significant social clout. I might even be able to convince *myself* that I'm gay if there was enough social pressure on me, or enough benefit to it.
Though the official line is that every gay person is born that way, the reality is that the percentage of people identifying as gay (or transgendered too) has been growing steadily since it became fashionable to be gay. See Kristen Stewart and any other number of celebrities who suddenly discover their gayness when their career starts to lag.
My apologies if it's politically incorrect to point that out.
Even better is the Echo Dot, $300 less than the Homepod and you can easily connect it to any decent bluetooth speaker for much better sound than the Homepod will provide.
Slashdot Mirror
The Desgrassi Jr. High cast (sans the kid in the wheelchair) is not exactly filling me with confidence. Are they making a show to tell a good story--or to advance a very specific political/social agenda?
But I'll reserve judgement, out of respect for the Battlestar Galactica reboot, which I also expected to suck but which turned out great.
...can't even see the tip of their own nose.
The only meaningful prediction you can make about the future is that it will be strange and unexpected.
Well, by liberal Silicon Valley rules, it will work like this:
If they criticize Christianity, then it's free speech
If they criticize Islam, then it's racism and hate speech.
Telling racial jokes or using racial epitaphs don't necessarily make someone a racist (as the article seems to presume). It could just mean you have a dark sense of humor, or just use humor to make a social statement.
Were Chris Rock and Richard Pryor racists because they told black jokes and used the evil "N word"? Is someone a racist when they make a racial joke ironically? Are all of Mel Brooks movies racist and hateful because they included holocaust, racial, and Jewish jokes?
I do know one thing for sure, though. If you go looking for racism and bigotry, you'll always find it--whether it's actually there or not.
She's a woman, she's experienced at leading a major corporation, and it just so happens that she's just become available.
I am skeptical of the righties' effort to ensure free speech by restricting speech.
Shouting down those who disagree with you so they can't be heard, pulling fire alarms in the buildings where they're trying to speak, and threatening violence against anyone who supports them isn't "free speech." It's fascism.
A citizen should have every right to speak freely, but they should never be allowed to silence their opposition through violence and activities designed specifically to deny their opposition a venue to speak or to be heard. It's your right to speak, but it's not your right to stop me from speaking too.
It's sad that these laws are even necessary. There was a time when the left stood up for free speech. Now they oppose it. Liberals like me have been alienated by the modern SJW liberal movement, and it's why blue states are turning red.
My love life should get an entire wing.
You think that living in tiny hovel because your country is overpopulated makes you more cultured? I think you're confusing the English words "cultured" and "miserable."
The real story here is the power, not the size of the box. Unless it's a portable console or a girlfriend, no one cares how small its box is.
You do realize what you're advocating is a guilty-without-trial option, right?
No, I'm advocating for a country's right to rescind the invitation for an immigrant to stay.
Those three suspects WERE investigated and "looked into." What good does that do when you don't have the authority to arrest or deport them until they've actually committed an act of terrorism? It's not a crime to associate with terrorists, or be a terrorist sympathizer, or to espouse terrorist ideology. So what were these extra cops going to be able to do after their big investigation besides shrug their shoulders?
Even if you doubled the number of cops, you wouldn't be able to keep every suspected terrorist under surveillance 24/7. And since current human rights laws prevent you from even deporting them, much less imprisoning them, how would having more cops have helped?
Exactly. More cops would have just been sitting around wishing they could arrest these wackjobs or even deport them.
Having more police wouldn't have helped if the police are powerless to arrest someone until they act, or even to deport a suspect if they're known to associate with terrorists and be sympathetic to them (as the three koran-thumpers in the last attack were).
It's not your "right" to stay in a country if you immigrate there and start engaging in terrorist activity or associating with known terrorists. A country should have every "right" to deport you for it, though. And it sounds like that's all May is asking for here.
That may be true. But in this case May is just looking for the ability to "deport foreign terrorist suspects back to their own countries." That hardly seems unreasonable to me. If you immigrate to my country and start engaging in terrorist activity (or associating with known terrorists) your invitation to stay should be rescinded.
Yeah, but try to end the scam, and Senators from every corn-growing state in the Union will scream bloody murder.
Yeah, but it is fun to drink.
That's probably for the best. Odds are that anyone growing weed couldn't plow a straight row anyway.
The difference between a dildo and a Tesla is that one is a prick and the other is driven by one.
I wonder why it is that now that it is no longer criminal to be gay and there are legal protections in place to protect people who are known to be gay from discrimination in some places, that more people would identify as gay.
As I said above, I'm pretty sure homosexuality wasn't considered criminal in the U.S. in 2012, yet the numbers have risen since then (according to that Gallup poll anyway).
Sorry to challenge the dogma.
Lol, being confronted with the truth makes you ANGRY, huh?
And The Dragon's Den was just a piss poor rip off of Money Tigers.
I suppose the numbers went up when it stopped being considered criminal, and when it got less likely to get beaten up for being gay.
I'm pretty sure homosexuality wasn't considered criminal or more likely to get you beat up in the U.S. in 2012, yet the numbers have risen since then (according to that Gallup poll anyway).
Answer me this: Could you become gay if it become really, really, fashionable?
No, but I could certainly *pretend* to be gay if it got me a movie role, financial benefit, or significant social clout. I might even be able to convince *myself* that I'm gay if there was enough social pressure on me, or enough benefit to it.
Though the official line is that every gay person is born that way, the reality is that the percentage of people identifying as gay (or transgendered too) has been growing steadily since it became fashionable to be gay. See Kristen Stewart and any other number of celebrities who suddenly discover their gayness when their career starts to lag.
My apologies if it's politically incorrect to point that out.
Even better is the Echo Dot, $300 less than the Homepod and you can easily connect it to any decent bluetooth speaker for much better sound than the Homepod will provide.