I've been seeing this for at least five years. First, tasting was the preferred method. Now it seems some serious spammers have an 'in' with a registrar, where by the time I get to looking up the whois, the domain is gone and no longer registered. Not even the previous whois is available.
I can't imagine that allowing someone to register a domain for a few days or even less, and then deleting all trace of the registration, is permitted by ICANN, but they haven't been able to police registrars very well at all for a decade now. Between the obvious front-running, search scanning, and tasting scams, most registrars are just plain shady. A pox on them all. It's gotten to the point that when someone asks me to look up a domain to see if it's available, I tell them to make the decision, and I will try to register it for them. For a while now, EVERY domain I've checked on was available when I looked it up, and minutes later it was gone.
I'm not the dullest turnip to fall off the truck last night. Front-runnng is a scam. Disposable domains are not new. This article is at least 5-6 years late.
And it didn't take long to see a flaw in the study's argument, and a greater flaw in the application in the article, transcript really.
If you are presented with a set of 'facts' that later turnes out to be inaccurate, the article seemed to take the view that you should reconsider the arguement you were making and change your opinion. Sounds resonable. It is not.
A specific issue in the transcript: violence related to illegal immigration on the Arizona border. After debunking (correctly) the reports of beheadings, they go on to challenge the veracity of otehr claims, such as kidnappings in Phoenix and drug trafficing across the border. In fact, they seem to be claiming that none of these 'facts' are accurate, and cite other facts to dispute the amount or frequency of kidnappings, etc. Actually, no, they just claim that there are statistics that disprove increases and higher than usual levels of the problems being cited by those who claim that immigratin-related violence is a problem.
This is a mistake on their part. Kidnappings may be decreasing, drug trade across the border may not be as much, there may not be any beheadings on the U.S. side of the border. But to claim there are no immigraiton-related problems along the Arizona - Mexico border is ludicrous. If that's their argument, that having disproved some facts, that we should change our mind about other facts, well, no wonder people are claiming that we are just ignoring the reality down here in AZ.
We are not. There is plenty of trouble along the border, and even further inland, related to illegal immigration.
I understand the real possibility that people (even me) will ignore corrections and contrary evidence to cling to their claims. Consider the possibility here that, despite a few mistaken 'facts', there is indeed a problem. Just because there isn't as much smoke as you told the 911 operator, it doesn't mean there's NO fire.
As an aside, this is more of the campaign to discredit the anti-illegal-immigration crowd. Keep it up. You are losing, and your increasing attempts seem to be failing, and bringing more attention to the problem, which results in even more unanimity among citizens. This is a problem that needs to be addressed.
Ordinarily, we don't hear about shielding, certainly not about a titanium tank to shield those electrtonics. Crap, they should have welded some A-10 cockpit tubs together...
Is this because NASA is using some COTS electronics on this mission? In the 'old days', we saw hardened electronics being used. Or is it a unique mission requirement, beyond what the old probes did?
So this is the beginning of the contest for better algorithms (ignoring how ee measure if they are better, since no one's found the data they are looking for in the first place), and then of course a new round of analyzing the data again.
- Issue call for better algorithms.
- Reprocess the data.
- Find nothing.
- Must be the algorithm.
- Repeat.
SETI will never die. It will just question its assumptions.
Most batteries lose capacity as temperature drops. Lead-acid batteries lose a LOT of their capacity below freezing - tip; if your battery is *nearly* dead and the temp is below freezing, AND your car is not one of those that loses its mind when the battery is taken out, take that cold battery out and bring it inside. An hour at room temperature (assuming you paid the oil bill) will give it a big kick in the pants. You will be amazed, and you will get to the store to buy a new one. Or to work.
I suspect even lithium batteries lose a lot in cold temperatures. Me? If I were living in the Northeast again, I would be looking to drive a turbo diesel. Dual batteries, and a series/parallel switch for those really cold mornings. And maybe a block heater, though my old 1960-something diesel Land Rover never needed one. Surely that new TDI will do fine.
In Arizona, batteries will only suffer from 112-degree days, when it's more like 150 in the parking lot. Lead-aid batteries just get burnt up. Sucks.
I can't imagine why you would excuse illegal behavior from humans of one longitude, and not from another longitude.
Actually, I can't imagine why you think I'm at all concerned about where these humans come from. Indeed, they don't all come from one place. It's not about WHERE they are coming from, it's about HOW they are coming here.
Are you that dense, you don't get it? Illegal is illegal for a reason. If you don't like Federal immigration law, change it.
Really. We go through a LOT of trouble to secure air tansport, turn people away at apriports, even at border crossings at every longitude of the U.S., and you think because they WALK over the border it should be excused?
"most effective form of military action is motivated people defending their own land against a foreign invader"
Um, actually, I want my military to not merely engage in an 'effective form or military action'.. I want them to accomplish their mission.
For the U.S., this is not accomplished by defending our land against a foreign invader. It is accomplished by preventing the mounting of an invasion at all. We are blessed with two borders of oceans, and a friendly nation to our north, leaving only a relatively small southern border to face any likely invasion from at all. Our most obvious military opponents would have to use missles and bombers to attack us directly. Our less obvious but no less real attackers use insurgent tactics, and have have sporadic but significant results. We took the fight to them largely, though the TSA is our last line of defense, and the most prominent to most citizens.
Of course, we are in fact being attacked at our southern border. When we realize the magnitude of that assault, we'll need to do a much better job of repelling the assault. This will take some time, and will be unpopular at first.
When I'm looking for something to buy locally, like a car or whatever, if I see the word 'hella' in the description, I tend to move on and ignore the item, and the poster. Most always (ok, only 95% of the time) posters who use 'hella' to describe their item are either outright liars, fakes, or too dumb to know what is wrong with their stuff. Especially when it comes to buying import cars, 'hella' is your clue they riced it out and forgot to put oil in it the last time they changed the filter, or overheated it cause they were too dumb to replace a hose and drove it another 12 miles home with the temp gauge pinned to 'H' and smoke billowing out the hood. This also afflicts those who are selling their beat-to-crap-dropped-on-the-pavement notebook, or table saw, or cell phone. Or other phrases that translate into "might need (fill in with the expensive repair option)".
If I never see that word again, I will be happy. I know it started out cute and all, but now around here it's just shorthand for 'l0ser'.
"Another study in 2007 showed that men who took two-hour walks in a forest over two days had a 50-percent spike in levels of natural killer cells, and a third study found an increase in white blood cells that lasted for a week in women exposed to phytoncides in forest air."
Um, so these walks resulted in increases in 'natural killer cells', increase in white blood cells, and this is good?
I thought increases in white blood cell count would be a sign of an immune response. As in a reaction to a sensed infection or harmful object/etc. This is good?
Mind you, I always *do* feel better wieh I have a chance to walk in the woods. But I'm highly allergic to white pine pollen, and have been since before I was 5, and before I was exposed to air conditioning. It's genetic for me. Same with some other plants. But in the main, I'm not allergic to the woods, beyond breaking out in welts if I roll around in the meadow grass or kneel down in pine needles, or push my way through the brush and scratch my skin on any of dozens of species of leaves.
And I still love the woods, and go out any chance I get. In Arizona, in the high desert, this is not often.
Yeah, walks in the woods result in increased white blood cell counts. That must be good for you, it's all natural!
I did not reference incidents from the 1980s. That's merely two decades. But since Christian missionaries have been visiting India, they have been opposed, and that opposition sometimes takes the form of violence, even to the point of their deaths.
India is by no means unique or the worst offender in this, by any measure. But you are determined to either minimize my statements, or explain them away as insignificant. On both counts, I understand, but you are trying too hard and losing the fight on the facts.
I was born in Bangor, Maine. Among my hometown's claims to fame, the death of an entirely innocent young man, a good kid, who was thrown off a bridge to his death merely because he was gay. In the 70s, I took to wearing bandannas around my neck, just cause I thought it was cool. I was mistaken for gay from time to time. I also did some club DJ'ing, and that enhanced the impression. I didn't get much crap really, but I know how it could have gotten out of hand. Charlie Howard really paid with his life because he was just a kid, and hadn't learned to watch his behavior in certain situations. Frankly, he should not have to.
So why is it so difficult for you to accept the truth about India? It's an imperfect place, like Bangor Maine, but India is much, much better than many nations, and I do not condemn it for its flaws. Certainly it is much, much more tolerant than most of the Middle East.
"You are obviously unaware of the ground realities and do not know how the pastors 'educate' others about inferiority of other religions and to hate people who do not bow down to Christian ideology."
Some Christian pastors do, indeed. This is regrettable. But my pastor, for one, does not. You cannot judge a philosophy by its abuse.
"In their effort to get as many converts as possible they regularly insult others and often 'buy' converts by giving economic incentives to accept Christianity."
I'm unaware of this, but I would not be surprised that it happens. Again, I would not be in a church that did this, nor support them.
"I agree that Christians are victims of physical violence in India, you should also recognize that they are perpetrators of emotional and ideological violence and hate throughout the world."
And here you continue to make the blanket assertion that 'Christians' are 'perpetrators of emotional and ideological violence and hate throughout the world.' Yes, some do, I am afraid. The majority? Hardly. Is it taught as a basic tenet of Christianity? Nope.
Again, I know my posts may seem to some to indict all of India as guilty of violence against Christians. You seem to have taken that tack in reverse, and so far explicitly.
You are correct, sir. One does not negate the other, does it?
However, it continues to be dangerous to be a Christian in some parts of India, and has been for decades. Do you dispute that? And on a continuous basis.
It's a common tactic of the government to accuse Christian groups of aiding militants, and a tactic of other religious groups to accuse Christians of all manner of atrocities, including forced conversions and terrorism.
To be fair, India has seen a fair amount of this, directed at other groups as well. Christians are not the primary target.
I'm not at all certain that the BBC is an impartial reporter in this. They have an excellent reputation for reporting what they are told.
"1. I dont agree with your portrayal of Hindus and Muslims in bad light and imply that Christianity is better."
I didn't imply that Christianity is any better than any other religion. I pointed out, in response to a previous challenge, that Hindus and Muslims do in fact kill Christians because of their faith. It's a fact. I'm afraid there are Christians that kill others because of matters of belief also. I did not state nor intend to imply that ALL Hindus or Muslims kill, nor that they do so for matters of faith, not exclusively Christians. But a very small minority of Hindus and Muslims in Indonesia and India do in fact kill others because they oppose their religions.
"2. India is not unsafe, violent and discriminating as your initial post mentions."
And I did not state this, not did the examples I presented state this either. But there are some regions of India in particular that are dangerous for Christians, as my examples illustrate. Actually I find India an exemplary nation, one that overwhelmingly embraces diversity and tolerance, and is thriving because of it. Not perfect, but then no one claims it is.
"Before, you cite articles of violence and compare with the west, keep in mind it is a big country in a dangerous neighborhood [pakistan, china, burma, bangladesh, srilanka,...]."
I actually presented an example of persecution in Bangladesh. But the U.S. is a big country in a dangerous neighborhood. We have real enemies that will attack us if they can. And for some of them, not all, religion is the driving factor. Some just want what we have. Others see us as a threat. The motive is not so important as the intention. Do you care WHY the bully wants your lunch money? Or WHY he is beating you to a pulp?
"3. Religion is not as good as it seems. I grew up in a multi-religious neighborhood, studied in a Christian school and have seen some bad times arise from religious issues. But have yet to see any significant good done. Keeping aside the intangible after life promises, there are not many benefits of it."
I think this ignores the many religiuously inspired individuals and missions that have brought aid to the world. Mother Teresa, for example. And in India, no less. I, for one, and humbled by her example.
"4. And as you rightly mention in your later post, it is a small percentage of the overall population that is committing these acts of violence. And the acts of violence speaks of something against the individuals involved and not the religions and not the countries. The point I want to make is that all religions have these kinds of nut jobs. And all countries have these nut jobs. The level of persecution depends on the local culture."
Agreed. Even those who would claim to have NO religion can include a few nutjobs. The level of persecution depends more, I think, on the intensity of the individual.
I'm pretty much expecting most of you out there to find some way to deny the statements I made. Persecution is ugly, and no one wants to admit it exists. I think partly because none of us want to admit we stand by and do nothing. I do not point it out as if I am a victim. I am blessed beyond my deserving, just to live in America. Most of the rest of the worldl struggles just to survive. I complain I have to pay so much to play video games on my phone.
You shouldn't be too surprised. The mainstream media chooses its stories carefully, and the result is that you ahve to dig deeper than CNN or MSNBC (or Fox, yes) to get either balanced reporting or comprehensive coverage of any issue.
That journalists have opinions is not a problem. That they let their opinions dictate what they write is unfortunate.
Slashdot has no pretense of fairness or lack of bias. Like any such boards, it is a product of its users. And most Americans are oblivious to so very much in the world, and I am no exception. There is much injustice and cruelty in the world that I am blissfully unaware of, indeed much in the U.S.
Hang in there. You are not alone, and not in the wrong.
Oh. When you put it that way, you fail. How do you know MY beliefs are not based on fact?
You know nothing of my personal faith. Ask, and I will tell you. Don't ask, and cling to your own for dear life. Forbid that there may be something else out there that is real and true.
Why are you so threatened by my claim that Christians are persecuted? I didn't state or imply that ONLY Christians are persecuted so. That's your spin.
ps - Buddhists have been known to pursecute Christians in Indonesia. In India, it is a very small minority of Hindus and Muslims that are conducting the most violent persecution. Most Indians are entirely tolerant and love freedom.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been seeing this for at least five years. First, tasting was the preferred method. Now it seems some serious spammers have an 'in' with a registrar, where by the time I get to looking up the whois, the domain is gone and no longer registered. Not even the previous whois is available.
I can't imagine that allowing someone to register a domain for a few days or even less, and then deleting all trace of the registration, is permitted by ICANN, but they haven't been able to police registrars very well at all for a decade now. Between the obvious front-running, search scanning, and tasting scams, most registrars are just plain shady. A pox on them all. It's gotten to the point that when someone asks me to look up a domain to see if it's available, I tell them to make the decision, and I will try to register it for them. For a while now, EVERY domain I've checked on was available when I looked it up, and minutes later it was gone.
I'm not the dullest turnip to fall off the truck last night. Front-runnng is a scam. Disposable domains are not new. This article is at least 5-6 years late.
So it's not the transit, it's the orbiting.
Jupiter sounds like fun.
Unique as compared to Pioneer, Voyager, or the Mars Rovers?
And it didn't take long to see a flaw in the study's argument, and a greater flaw in the application in the article, transcript really.
If you are presented with a set of 'facts' that later turnes out to be inaccurate, the article seemed to take the view that you should reconsider the arguement you were making and change your opinion. Sounds resonable. It is not.
A specific issue in the transcript: violence related to illegal immigration on the Arizona border. After debunking (correctly) the reports of beheadings, they go on to challenge the veracity of otehr claims, such as kidnappings in Phoenix and drug trafficing across the border. In fact, they seem to be claiming that none of these 'facts' are accurate, and cite other facts to dispute the amount or frequency of kidnappings, etc. Actually, no, they just claim that there are statistics that disprove increases and higher than usual levels of the problems being cited by those who claim that immigratin-related violence is a problem.
This is a mistake on their part. Kidnappings may be decreasing, drug trade across the border may not be as much, there may not be any beheadings on the U.S. side of the border. But to claim there are no immigraiton-related problems along the Arizona - Mexico border is ludicrous. If that's their argument, that having disproved some facts, that we should change our mind about other facts, well, no wonder people are claiming that we are just ignoring the reality down here in AZ.
We are not. There is plenty of trouble along the border, and even further inland, related to illegal immigration.
I understand the real possibility that people (even me) will ignore corrections and contrary evidence to cling to their claims. Consider the possibility here that, despite a few mistaken 'facts', there is indeed a problem. Just because there isn't as much smoke as you told the 911 operator, it doesn't mean there's NO fire.
As an aside, this is more of the campaign to discredit the anti-illegal-immigration crowd. Keep it up. You are losing, and your increasing attempts seem to be failing, and bringing more attention to the problem, which results in even more unanimity among citizens. This is a problem that needs to be addressed.
Ordinarily, we don't hear about shielding, certainly not about a titanium tank to shield those electrtonics. Crap, they should have welded some A-10 cockpit tubs together...
Is this because NASA is using some COTS electronics on this mission? In the 'old days', we saw hardened electronics being used. Or is it a unique mission requirement, beyond what the old probes did?
"Remember all this the next time a record label says they're trying to protect musicians' revenue."
I haven't thought that labels were trying to protect musicians' ANYTHING since 1972. And it wasn't true before that.
Um, did you want the Avatar experience, or the Minority Report experience? You switched movies on me there...
So this is the beginning of the contest for better algorithms (ignoring how ee measure if they are better, since no one's found the data they are looking for in the first place), and then of course a new round of analyzing the data again.
- Issue call for better algorithms.
- Reprocess the data.
- Find nothing.
- Must be the algorithm.
- Repeat.
SETI will never die. It will just question its assumptions.
Feh.
If one teacher can screw up an entire generation, that's one heck of a teacher!
Most batteries lose capacity as temperature drops. Lead-acid batteries lose a LOT of their capacity below freezing - tip; if your battery is *nearly* dead and the temp is below freezing, AND your car is not one of those that loses its mind when the battery is taken out, take that cold battery out and bring it inside. An hour at room temperature (assuming you paid the oil bill) will give it a big kick in the pants. You will be amazed, and you will get to the store to buy a new one. Or to work.
I suspect even lithium batteries lose a lot in cold temperatures. Me? If I were living in the Northeast again, I would be looking to drive a turbo diesel. Dual batteries, and a series/parallel switch for those really cold mornings. And maybe a block heater, though my old 1960-something diesel Land Rover never needed one. Surely that new TDI will do fine.
In Arizona, batteries will only suffer from 112-degree days, when it's more like 150 in the parking lot. Lead-aid batteries just get burnt up. Sucks.
I can't imagine why you would excuse illegal behavior from humans of one longitude, and not from another longitude.
Actually, I can't imagine why you think I'm at all concerned about where these humans come from. Indeed, they don't all come from one place. It's not about WHERE they are coming from, it's about HOW they are coming here.
Are you that dense, you don't get it? Illegal is illegal for a reason. If you don't like Federal immigration law, change it.
Really. We go through a LOT of trouble to secure air tansport, turn people away at apriports, even at border crossings at every longitude of the U.S., and you think because they WALK over the border it should be excused?
And don't deny me my opinion, either.
"most effective form of military action is motivated people defending their own land against a foreign invader"
Um, actually, I want my military to not merely engage in an 'effective form or military action'.. I want them to accomplish their mission.
For the U.S., this is not accomplished by defending our land against a foreign invader. It is accomplished by preventing the mounting of an invasion at all. We are blessed with two borders of oceans, and a friendly nation to our north, leaving only a relatively small southern border to face any likely invasion from at all. Our most obvious military opponents would have to use missles and bombers to attack us directly. Our less obvious but no less real attackers use insurgent tactics, and have have sporadic but significant results. We took the fight to them largely, though the TSA is our last line of defense, and the most prominent to most citizens.
Of course, we are in fact being attacked at our southern border. When we realize the magnitude of that assault, we'll need to do a much better job of repelling the assault. This will take some time, and will be unpopular at first.
When I'm looking for something to buy locally, like a car or whatever, if I see the word 'hella' in the description, I tend to move on and ignore the item, and the poster. Most always (ok, only 95% of the time) posters who use 'hella' to describe their item are either outright liars, fakes, or too dumb to know what is wrong with their stuff. Especially when it comes to buying import cars, 'hella' is your clue they riced it out and forgot to put oil in it the last time they changed the filter, or overheated it cause they were too dumb to replace a hose and drove it another 12 miles home with the temp gauge pinned to 'H' and smoke billowing out the hood. This also afflicts those who are selling their beat-to-crap-dropped-on-the-pavement notebook, or table saw, or cell phone. Or other phrases that translate into "might need (fill in with the expensive repair option)".
If I never see that word again, I will be happy. I know it started out cute and all, but now around here it's just shorthand for 'l0ser'.
"Another study in 2007 showed that men who took two-hour walks in a forest over two days had a 50-percent spike in levels of natural killer cells, and a third study found an increase in white blood cells that lasted for a week in women exposed to phytoncides in forest air."
Um, so these walks resulted in increases in 'natural killer cells', increase in white blood cells, and this is good?
I thought increases in white blood cell count would be a sign of an immune response. As in a reaction to a sensed infection or harmful object/etc. This is good?
Mind you, I always *do* feel better wieh I have a chance to walk in the woods. But I'm highly allergic to white pine pollen, and have been since before I was 5, and before I was exposed to air conditioning. It's genetic for me. Same with some other plants. But in the main, I'm not allergic to the woods, beyond breaking out in welts if I roll around in the meadow grass or kneel down in pine needles, or push my way through the brush and scratch my skin on any of dozens of species of leaves.
And I still love the woods, and go out any chance I get. In Arizona, in the high desert, this is not often.
Yeah, walks in the woods result in increased white blood cell counts. That must be good for you, it's all natural!
I did not reference incidents from the 1980s. That's merely two decades. But since Christian missionaries have been visiting India, they have been opposed, and that opposition sometimes takes the form of violence, even to the point of their deaths.
India is by no means unique or the worst offender in this, by any measure. But you are determined to either minimize my statements, or explain them away as insignificant. On both counts, I understand, but you are trying too hard and losing the fight on the facts.
I was born in Bangor, Maine. Among my hometown's claims to fame, the death of an entirely innocent young man, a good kid, who was thrown off a bridge to his death merely because he was gay. In the 70s, I took to wearing bandannas around my neck, just cause I thought it was cool. I was mistaken for gay from time to time. I also did some club DJ'ing, and that enhanced the impression. I didn't get much crap really, but I know how it could have gotten out of hand. Charlie Howard really paid with his life because he was just a kid, and hadn't learned to watch his behavior in certain situations. Frankly, he should not have to.
So why is it so difficult for you to accept the truth about India? It's an imperfect place, like Bangor Maine, but India is much, much better than many nations, and I do not condemn it for its flaws. Certainly it is much, much more tolerant than most of the Middle East.
"You are obviously unaware of the ground realities and do not know how the pastors 'educate' others about inferiority of other religions and to hate people who do not bow down to Christian ideology."
Some Christian pastors do, indeed. This is regrettable. But my pastor, for one, does not. You cannot judge a philosophy by its abuse.
"In their effort to get as many converts as possible they regularly insult others and often 'buy' converts by giving economic incentives to accept Christianity."
I'm unaware of this, but I would not be surprised that it happens. Again, I would not be in a church that did this, nor support them.
"I agree that Christians are victims of physical violence in India, you should also recognize that they are perpetrators of emotional and ideological violence and hate throughout the world."
And here you continue to make the blanket assertion that 'Christians' are 'perpetrators of emotional and ideological violence and hate throughout the world.' Yes, some do, I am afraid. The majority? Hardly. Is it taught as a basic tenet of Christianity? Nope.
Again, I know my posts may seem to some to indict all of India as guilty of violence against Christians. You seem to have taken that tack in reverse, and so far explicitly.
You are correct, sir. One does not negate the other, does it?
However, it continues to be dangerous to be a Christian in some parts of India, and has been for decades. Do you dispute that? And on a continuous basis.
By dangerous, I mean at the risk of your life.
One report from 2008.
I guess that's pretty ancient in today's world. If it was last done in 1020, I wouldn't have bothered you.
Perhaps you should read my previous posts?
It's a common tactic of the government to accuse Christian groups of aiding militants, and a tactic of other religious groups to accuse Christians of all manner of atrocities, including forced conversions and terrorism.
To be fair, India has seen a fair amount of this, directed at other groups as well. Christians are not the primary target.
I'm not at all certain that the BBC is an impartial reporter in this. They have an excellent reputation for reporting what they are told.
Some examples of blind tests, purporting there is no difference. None.
"1. I dont agree with your portrayal of Hindus and Muslims in bad light and imply that Christianity is better."
I didn't imply that Christianity is any better than any other religion. I pointed out, in response to a previous challenge, that Hindus and Muslims do in fact kill Christians because of their faith. It's a fact. I'm afraid there are Christians that kill others because of matters of belief also. I did not state nor intend to imply that ALL Hindus or Muslims kill, nor that they do so for matters of faith, not exclusively Christians. But a very small minority of Hindus and Muslims in Indonesia and India do in fact kill others because they oppose their religions.
"2. India is not unsafe, violent and discriminating as your initial post mentions."
And I did not state this, not did the examples I presented state this either. But there are some regions of India in particular that are dangerous for Christians, as my examples illustrate. Actually I find India an exemplary nation, one that overwhelmingly embraces diversity and tolerance, and is thriving because of it. Not perfect, but then no one claims it is.
"Before, you cite articles of violence and compare with the west, keep in mind it is a big country in a dangerous neighborhood [pakistan, china, burma, bangladesh, srilanka,...]."
I actually presented an example of persecution in Bangladesh. But the U.S. is a big country in a dangerous neighborhood. We have real enemies that will attack us if they can. And for some of them, not all, religion is the driving factor. Some just want what we have. Others see us as a threat. The motive is not so important as the intention. Do you care WHY the bully wants your lunch money? Or WHY he is beating you to a pulp?
"3. Religion is not as good as it seems. I grew up in a multi-religious neighborhood, studied in a Christian school and have seen some bad times arise from religious issues. But have yet to see any significant good done. Keeping aside the intangible after life promises, there are not many benefits of it."
I think this ignores the many religiuously inspired individuals and missions that have brought aid to the world. Mother Teresa, for example. And in India, no less. I, for one, and humbled by her example.
"4. And as you rightly mention in your later post, it is a small percentage of the overall population that is committing these acts of violence. And the acts of violence speaks of something against the individuals involved and not the religions and not the countries. The point I want to make is that all religions have these kinds of nut jobs. And all countries have these nut jobs. The level of persecution depends on the local culture."
Agreed. Even those who would claim to have NO religion can include a few nutjobs. The level of persecution depends more, I think, on the intensity of the individual.
I'm pretty much expecting most of you out there to find some way to deny the statements I made. Persecution is ugly, and no one wants to admit it exists. I think partly because none of us want to admit we stand by and do nothing. I do not point it out as if I am a victim. I am blessed beyond my deserving, just to live in America. Most of the rest of the worldl struggles just to survive. I complain I have to pay so much to play video games on my phone.
You shouldn't be too surprised. The mainstream media chooses its stories carefully, and the result is that you ahve to dig deeper than CNN or MSNBC (or Fox, yes) to get either balanced reporting or comprehensive coverage of any issue.
That journalists have opinions is not a problem. That they let their opinions dictate what they write is unfortunate.
Slashdot has no pretense of fairness or lack of bias. Like any such boards, it is a product of its users. And most Americans are oblivious to so very much in the world, and I am no exception. There is much injustice and cruelty in the world that I am blissfully unaware of, indeed much in the U.S.
Hang in there. You are not alone, and not in the wrong.
What are you going on about? Did you even read my post?
Oh. When you put it that way, you fail. How do you know MY beliefs are not based on fact?
You know nothing of my personal faith. Ask, and I will tell you. Don't ask, and cling to your own for dear life. Forbid that there may be something else out there that is real and true.
Why are you so threatened by my claim that Christians are persecuted? I didn't state or imply that ONLY Christians are persecuted so. That's your spin.
ps - Buddhists have been known to pursecute Christians in Indonesia. In India, it is a very small minority of Hindus and Muslims that are conducting the most violent persecution. Most Indians are entirely tolerant and love freedom.