There you go doing it again. I would not prefer to have my life if it means anyone had to die in my place. However, the same Bible that tells me to love my enemy and do good to them who hate me, also tells me to respect the governing authorities because God put them there. It doesn't say obey them. A paraphrasing of Romans 13:1-7; "Don't piss off the government because they'll kill you." I disagree with what my government started in Iraq. But saying that is all my God allows me to do. I can continue to support politicians that disagree with it and hopefully change it. I thank God we have a democracy, because without it, even that course would not be available.
Please, consider that the very people that you accuse may be the same people who are working for change. However, your prejudicial and unfounded discrimination just makes them want to give up. It makes them think, "What's the point? Even if I am successful, it will never be enough for these people."
Incidentally, you might want to read the post to which you are responding more closely next time. If you'll reread my post, you may notice I suggested you yell it. I didn't ask you why. It is important that you be heard. If you, and others like you, are not heard, then change will never happen.
<sarcasm>I do so love it when those outside of this extremist hellhole automatically assume that we're all Bush lovers who totally agree with everything that our government does and that we're all lazy, good-for-nothings. It really makes me want to agree with them.</sarcasm>
Democracy is never free of mistakes, but it is more likely to fix them more beneficially than other forms of government.
If you really wish to make us think about what we're doing, try asking us why even though greater 65% of us claim to be Christian, we seek to kill our enemies, which the teachings of Christ expressly condemn. Some of us here have been whispering this question because we fear for our lives. You, being on the outside, can yell it from the mountain tops without fear of reprisal.
So why don't you do that rather than assuming that we're all the same.
I thought it was pretty cool when the cleanup team managed to get Gordon into a closet and knock him over the head. It also made for a good transition to a different part of the game.
Yes, who cares if somebody makes some money off of OSS so long as the code is redistributed back to the community? Like with Tivo: if you want, you can build your own Tivo to their specifications and run their OS while only lacking the benefits of a subscription (showtimes). I realize that most people won't do that, but they have the freedom to do it. And GPL doesn't equal free; it equals freedom.
As far as "utopian communist state" is concerned, that is an oxymoron. You cannot have a utopia without everyone's consent. You can get very close, but as long as their is any dissent (voiced or suppressed) it is not a utopia. It is conceivable that communism could be a utopia if you had an altruistic ruling oligarchy. We've seen how likely that is. The most likely utopia is a socialist anarchy followed by a socialist democracy (US = Replubic not Democracy). The first is everyone agreeing to share resources and abide by the golden rule ("Do unto others..." not "He who makes..."). The second is the majority agreeing the share resources and abide by the majority's rules. Though, the second is just as likely to lead to a situation like Germany in 1935.
Slashdot Mirror
There you go doing it again. I would not prefer to have my life if it means anyone had to die in my place. However, the same Bible that tells me to love my enemy and do good to them who hate me, also tells me to respect the governing authorities because God put them there. It doesn't say obey them. A paraphrasing of Romans 13:1-7; "Don't piss off the government because they'll kill you." I disagree with what my government started in Iraq. But saying that is all my God allows me to do. I can continue to support politicians that disagree with it and hopefully change it. I thank God we have a democracy, because without it, even that course would not be available.
Please, consider that the very people that you accuse may be the same people who are working for change. However, your prejudicial and unfounded discrimination just makes them want to give up. It makes them think, "What's the point? Even if I am successful, it will never be enough for these people."
Incidentally, you might want to read the post to which you are responding more closely next time. If you'll reread my post, you may notice I suggested you yell it. I didn't ask you why. It is important that you be heard. If you, and others like you, are not heard, then change will never happen.
<sarcasm>I do so love it when those outside of this extremist hellhole automatically assume that we're all Bush lovers who totally agree with everything that our government does and that we're all lazy, good-for-nothings. It really makes me want to agree with them.</sarcasm>
Democracy is never free of mistakes, but it is more likely to fix them more beneficially than other forms of government.
If you really wish to make us think about what we're doing, try asking us why even though greater 65% of us claim to be Christian, we seek to kill our enemies, which the teachings of Christ expressly condemn. Some of us here have been whispering this question because we fear for our lives. You, being on the outside, can yell it from the mountain tops without fear of reprisal.
So why don't you do that rather than assuming that we're all the same.
Bill Gates and Microsoft? Ignorant of the ways a civil society and the basic tennats of law work?
Not Them!
(The word of the day, kiddies: Sarcasm.)
I thought it was pretty cool when the cleanup team managed to get Gordon into a closet and knock him over the head. It also made for a good transition to a different part of the game.
As far as "utopian communist state" is concerned, that is an oxymoron. You cannot have a utopia without everyone's consent. You can get very close, but as long as their is any dissent (voiced or suppressed) it is not a utopia. It is conceivable that communism could be a utopia if you had an altruistic ruling oligarchy. We've seen how likely that is. The most likely utopia is a socialist anarchy followed by a socialist democracy (US = Replubic not Democracy). The first is everyone agreeing to share resources and abide by the golden rule ("Do unto others..." not "He who makes..."). The second is the majority agreeing the share resources and abide by the majority's rules. Though, the second is just as likely to lead to a situation like Germany in 1935.