Why do Western countries like Britain continue to allow these people to immigrate?
There are people in Britain that were born here, to non-Muslim families, that convert to Islam.
Although I think them idiots, if they want to fuck over their own lives, it's their choice. I'm not going to stop them. I certainly wouldn't agree with anybody suggesting they should be kicked out of the country because of their religious beliefs.
Thus the issue will exist whether we permit muslim immigrants or not. The issues around immigration are complex enough without throwing in religion; I can think of plenty of reasons to allow or deny an immigrant irrespective of their belief in pink unicorns.
Britain is surprisingly multi-cultural. It's a very strong culture too, and has historically benefitted from the foreign influences. I'd hate to lose that, become parochial and stop interacting with the world. Societies should change.
However, societies also shouldn't be forced to live under Sharia Law. So I'll fight (literally) to prevent that, but I wont fight the straw man of Islamic immigration because frankly, it's not the issue.
If we want to find resolutions to the abuse scandal, we have to bring the local bishops to account. If somehow the Pope is removed, it will not get rid of the problem. All it will do is make a few Atheists happy.
Except that this pope while as a bishop was responsible dealing with errant priests, and failed to expose and punish known child molesters.
As an atheist, removing the pope wont make me happy. Confiscating the Vatican and all Catholic owned properties worldwide and giving them to random people would make me happy.
Lets do to this money-making power grabbing scheme what it's been doing to entire nations for centuries.
ven government ministers and the senior civil servants in the relevant departments are now admitting in the lower profile stuff that copyright is no longer fit for purpose and much greater changes are going to be necessary. Reassuringly, they also seem to be reasonably clued up about the idea of alternative business models and not propping up the dinosaurs, too, but for now they still speak in guarded tones when they have a large audience.
I'm sorry, but the Digital Economy Bill pretty much proves that ministers (and the rest of parliament) have no fucking clue at all.
So a year after I buy a new laptop, Apple finally release a new macbook that's approximately equivalent spec. But also charge more than I paid a year ago.
I'd best stop telling people that Apple are price competitive if you want comparative quality components and an out-of-the-box Apple spec machine. They're just not a good buy for the hardware.
It's frustrating, I'm keen to give OSX a go - but no matter how much disposable income I have, there's always something else that's better value for my money.
I like to think that as a native English speaker, I'm allowed to be lazy and skip some of the rules.
After all, it's a living language and by changing how I use it, I can influence its future direction. It would be wrong of me to leave such an important contribution to the illiterate youth.
There's more action in five minutes of football than there is in an entire American Football match.
Strategy? Sure, maybe not so much of that in the match. But strategy happens over the season. In the match, there are constant tactical changes and battles.
Just because they're too subtle for you to realise doesn't mean they're not there. Just because someone has to write down the tactics in American Football doesn't make them strategies.
And the NFL players do indeed take harder hits than football players. But not harder than Rugby players, and they wear rather less padding. So don't try waving your testosterone fueled ego sports at us, it just makes you look insecure.
Surprisingly good film. It's one of those 'coming of age' flicks with a racial tension included and made for a very low budget in the UK.
The title leverages the name of an English footballer that has a degree of fame and to be fair does have the ability to bend in a cross better than pretty much any other player I've seen. Which if you don't follow football will mean as little as that lebron thing means to me.
If you've heard of Keira Knightley, she was the supporting actress in it. Which will no doubt merely increase your desire to find out it was a great porno...
Ironically I'd save a lot of money if I lost my licence - around £600/month. A large chunk of that would be fuel costs, but enforced lifestyle changes would save me a bundle too.
Quality of life on the other hand would collapse..
Never appealed to me. Had the chance when I was in Tijuana and declined.
Nothing to do with the donkey, the concept fascinates me. Everything to do with the impossibility of guaranteeing that the woman was doing it through unfettered choice.
I don't know whether there's much of a slave trade, sex slavery issue in Mexico, but since there's a massive issue in the UK I'm guessing Mexico isn't all roses. No way I'm funding that.
You must be too young to remember the days of people driving with a paper map covering the steering wheel, the dashboard and (occasionally) the passenger.
# If you start to feel sleepy find a safe place to stop (not the hard shoulder of a motorway) as soon as possible # Drinking 2 cups of coffee or other high caffeine drink and have a rest to allow time for the caffeine to kick in # Share the driving if possible # Opening the window or turning up the radio won't work # A short nap (no more than 15 minutes) is better than getting out of the car for a walk
Forget the cash amount; there's a 3 point penalty on your licence.
To put that in context, if you reach 12 points within a four year period you lose your driving licence.
As you can also get points for other activities (speeding, running down pedestrians, getting a blow-job while doing 80 in a bus lane), being caught using your phone is potentially a significant penalty.
It's the lack of enforcement that's the issue, not the outcome when caught.
China and India are the two obvious candidates. Russia aren't really in it, any attempt to really leverage the massive resource base and population would require a level of authoritarianism inconsistent with globalism. (That may yet continue to hold back the Chinese).
The real dark horses are the Brazilians. If they can sort out their internal crime and poverty issues, they really could go places.
Just as it is wrong for someone who is Pro-Creationism to call someone who is Pro-Evolution a moron who believes in fantasies, it is also wrong for the opposite to happen.
Why is it wrong to speak the truth? Creationists are morons that believe in fantasies.
I don't consider myself radical. I don't froth at the mouth and demand that people stop believing fairy tales. I am comfortable with people choosing to follow a set of religious dogma.
I also see a complete and total lack of evidence for creationism, and thus hold the opinion that anybody that believes in it must be a moron.
Or are you suggesting that it's wrong to point out the morons? Unfair on the mentally deficient, perhaps?
In reality, irrelevant; the voting last night was organised by party whips: MPs with the role of ensuring that party members vote on the party line.
The whips will track very carefully whether enough MPs are going to vote through the legislation they want or not, and if it looks like they might lose they merely encourage more MPs to vote.
Had a quorum been required, instead of 240 (or whatever it was) MPs voting, 340 would've been told to vote instead. The bill would still have passed.
The party whip system is one of the most broken aspects of the British parliamentary process.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do Western countries like Britain continue to allow these people to immigrate?
There are people in Britain that were born here, to non-Muslim families, that convert to Islam.
Although I think them idiots, if they want to fuck over their own lives, it's their choice. I'm not going to stop them. I certainly wouldn't agree with anybody suggesting they should be kicked out of the country because of their religious beliefs.
Thus the issue will exist whether we permit muslim immigrants or not. The issues around immigration are complex enough without throwing in religion; I can think of plenty of reasons to allow or deny an immigrant irrespective of their belief in pink unicorns.
Britain is surprisingly multi-cultural. It's a very strong culture too, and has historically benefitted from the foreign influences. I'd hate to lose that, become parochial and stop interacting with the world. Societies should change.
However, societies also shouldn't be forced to live under Sharia Law. So I'll fight (literally) to prevent that, but I wont fight the straw man of Islamic immigration because frankly, it's not the issue.
Jesus' body went to heaven after he died (after all that is in the Bible),
I believe the response has already been made:
plainly a crock of shit, if you aren't one of the faithful cultists
If we want to find resolutions to the abuse scandal, we have to bring the local bishops to account. If somehow the Pope is removed, it will not get rid of the problem. All it will do is make a few Atheists happy.
Except that this pope while as a bishop was responsible dealing with errant priests, and failed to expose and punish known child molesters.
As an atheist, removing the pope wont make me happy. Confiscating the Vatican and all Catholic owned properties worldwide and giving them to random people would make me happy.
Lets do to this money-making power grabbing scheme what it's been doing to entire nations for centuries.
Most religions do good
Most religions do evil. The Vatican is more evil than most.
PR? They didn't even both for centuries, it was easier to use fear, torture and money.
This is the one site I would recommend the n900 on. But only to the people willing to play with Linux at the command line level.
If Linux to you means Ubuntu, go Android.
ven government ministers and the senior civil servants in the relevant departments are now admitting in the lower profile stuff that copyright is no longer fit for purpose and much greater changes are going to be necessary. Reassuringly, they also seem to be reasonably clued up about the idea of alternative business models and not propping up the dinosaurs, too, but for now they still speak in guarded tones when they have a large audience.
I'm sorry, but the Digital Economy Bill pretty much proves that ministers (and the rest of parliament) have no fucking clue at all.
Damn, my ignorance is exposed. I shall have to research transgendered basketball players in more depth!
It's to do with the inevitable contortions if you don't get the feet nailed in properly.
So a year after I buy a new laptop, Apple finally release a new macbook that's approximately equivalent spec. But also charge more than I paid a year ago.
I'd best stop telling people that Apple are price competitive if you want comparative quality components and an out-of-the-box Apple spec machine. They're just not a good buy for the hardware.
It's frustrating, I'm keen to give OSX a go - but no matter how much disposable income I have, there's always something else that's better value for my money.
I like to think that as a native English speaker, I'm allowed to be lazy and skip some of the rules.
After all, it's a living language and by changing how I use it, I can influence its future direction. It would be wrong of me to leave such an important contribution to the illiterate youth.
There's more action in five minutes of football than there is in an entire American Football match.
Strategy? Sure, maybe not so much of that in the match. But strategy happens over the season. In the match, there are constant tactical changes and battles.
Just because they're too subtle for you to realise doesn't mean they're not there. Just because someone has to write down the tactics in American Football doesn't make them strategies.
And the NFL players do indeed take harder hits than football players. But not harder than Rugby players, and they wear rather less padding. So don't try waving your testosterone fueled ego sports at us, it just makes you look insecure.
Surprisingly good film. It's one of those 'coming of age' flicks with a racial tension included and made for a very low budget in the UK.
The title leverages the name of an English footballer that has a degree of fame and to be fair does have the ability to bend in a cross better than pretty much any other player I've seen. Which if you don't follow football will mean as little as that lebron thing means to me.
If you've heard of Keira Knightley, she was the supporting actress in it. Which will no doubt merely increase your desire to find out it was a great porno...
Yeah, but we have girls that play netball. Trust me, that's a win.
I've never heard of Lebron James or Peyton Manning.
I have heard of Kobe Bryant, and isn't Shaq O'Neal (however the fuck it's spelled) the one that cross-dresses?
Cross-dressing is about the only thing basketball players do that's of interest. Excellent game to play, terrible spectator sport.
as though viruses are going to jump between entire taxonomic KINGDOMS overnight
Be serious. Nobody's suggesting that.
It'd take millions, maybe billions of generations to evolve to that extent.
So not overnight, but possibly by next Thursday.
Ironically I'd save a lot of money if I lost my licence - around £600/month. A large chunk of that would be fuel costs, but enforced lifestyle changes would save me a bundle too.
Quality of life on the other hand would collapse..
A £60 fine (the current level) for speeding doesn't deter me. A £600 fine for speeding wouldn't deter me.
Losing my licence does deter me. Going over 100mph can lead to immediate loss of licence. That's pretty strong as a deterrent.
At which point of financial penalty does the fine become excessive? £6000? For going 5mph too fast?
Never appealed to me. Had the chance when I was in Tijuana and declined.
Nothing to do with the donkey, the concept fascinates me. Everything to do with the impossibility of guaranteeing that the woman was doing it through unfettered choice.
I don't know whether there's much of a slave trade, sex slavery issue in Mexico, but since there's a massive issue in the UK I'm guessing Mexico isn't all roses. No way I'm funding that.
If I have to answer a quick call while I'm driving, it is MUCH safer for me to
..stop the fucking car before you answer.
Which part of "Ignore the ringing phone" is so difficult?
You must be too young to remember the days of people driving with a paper map covering the steering wheel, the dashboard and (occasionally) the passenger.
# If you start to feel sleepy find a safe place to stop (not the hard shoulder of a motorway) as soon as possible
# Drinking 2 cups of coffee or other high caffeine drink and have a rest to allow time for the caffeine to kick in
# Share the driving if possible
# Opening the window or turning up the radio won't work
# A short nap (no more than 15 minutes) is better than getting out of the car for a walk
from http://www.dyfed-powys.police.uk/en/advice/roadsafety/driving/fatigue/ (the link Google takes you to if you hit "I'm feeling lucky" on a search for "police advice driving tired").
So yes, do the sensible fucking thing. Even the police agree.
Yea, that works. No sarcasm needed.
Forget the cash amount; there's a 3 point penalty on your licence.
To put that in context, if you reach 12 points within a four year period you lose your driving licence.
As you can also get points for other activities (speeding, running down pedestrians, getting a blow-job while doing 80 in a bus lane), being caught using your phone is potentially a significant penalty.
It's the lack of enforcement that's the issue, not the outcome when caught.
China and India are the two obvious candidates. Russia aren't really in it, any attempt to really leverage the massive resource base and population would require a level of authoritarianism inconsistent with globalism. (That may yet continue to hold back the Chinese).
The real dark horses are the Brazilians. If they can sort out their internal crime and poverty issues, they really could go places.
Just as it is wrong for someone who is Pro-Creationism to call someone who is Pro-Evolution a moron who believes in fantasies, it is also wrong for the opposite to happen.
Why is it wrong to speak the truth? Creationists are morons that believe in fantasies.
I don't consider myself radical. I don't froth at the mouth and demand that people stop believing fairy tales. I am comfortable with people choosing to follow a set of religious dogma.
I also see a complete and total lack of evidence for creationism, and thus hold the opinion that anybody that believes in it must be a moron.
Or are you suggesting that it's wrong to point out the morons? Unfair on the mentally deficient, perhaps?
In short, no, no quorum call.
In reality, irrelevant; the voting last night was organised by party whips: MPs with the role of ensuring that party members vote on the party line.
The whips will track very carefully whether enough MPs are going to vote through the legislation they want or not, and if it looks like they might lose they merely encourage more MPs to vote.
Had a quorum been required, instead of 240 (or whatever it was) MPs voting, 340 would've been told to vote instead. The bill would still have passed.
The party whip system is one of the most broken aspects of the British parliamentary process.