divagreen

that was pretty bad

If sexual freedom is a target for government intervention, are there ethics to constraining the sexual freedom of others or must sexual control be left to individuals and their doctors privately?

Yes.

I always new I would be audited someday...

Bored, ydoa?

Hahahahahahhahahhahahhahahhahahhaha...very funny, Capn!

I mentioned in the Giffords Shooting thread that a recent opinion poll showed that most Americans disagreed that inflammatory language was behind the shooting, but felt that it is a problem in general. Well, more polls have been coming out, and what looked initially like bright news for the Sarah Palin camp is turning into something else entirely.

 

In short, the public doesn't approve of her reaction any more than it approves of liberals blaming her. People simply aren't buying what she's selling. I've seen several stories along these lines, which we can basically summarize as a rapidly-falling, lowest-yet approval rating for Palin.

 

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47772.html

 

I don't think the woman is stupid and I do think she's unfairly trashed sometimes, but my problem with her is that she's a walking two-wrongs-make-a-right argument. She dwells in the most partisan territory possible, not only condemning progressive policies, but actively engaged in declaring progressives/liberals to be stupid, detrimental, unpatriotic, and having no common ground whatsoever with conservatives. Can anyone even remotely imagine her sitting down at a table with Democrats and hammering out a compromise? Seriously?

 

In a nutshell, she's exactly the opposite of what I think mainstream conservatism should be about. Her partisanship undermines absolutely everything that I believe in.

 

My two bits, anyway. What do you think?

I agree.

But I don't think that extrapolating the arguments of your ideological opponents to obvious extremes is a good way to win a debate.

"Second Amendment remedies." <--------- Is not a metaphor and is not rhetoric.

I got a perfect score. How'd you do?

Show off.

I closed the window out before I had a chance to copy and paste the one hit I took. I am quite embarrassed that I stepped into such an erroneous and illogical misstep! I think I must have read the question wrong? *blushes*

I died in a dream once, too.

Not only did I die in my dream (I was murdered), but I came back to haunt my assailant as a ghost.

So that myth was debunked at twenty-three for me.

This is just an alternate view.

It is lengthy, though.

I haven't heard any arguments just random accusations. And I can't help you with that problem.

The burden of proof lies with you, since you are making the claim.

Here, try this.

I think I am rather speechless.

I have actually stayed in an Ashram in India run by a woman called Amma aka the hugging mama. That was by far the most awkward one, as it involved various meditation style events that they were desperate for us to attend, but we chose not to.

 

It turned out of course, that the inclusion factor here was designed more to get donations and turn us into long-term residents who would work their fields in return for accomodation and spiritual enlightenment. They also held us passports the whole time we were there and made it VERY difficult to get them back when we told them we wished to leave. They also locked us in our compound (their word) at night, so if there was a fire, we would burn to death.

 

I guess part of my discomfort also comes from the idea that by participating I am also somehow endorsing it. That's an extreme example with a borderline cult, but I get a similar feeling in more normal circumstances.

I do not understand as to why you would be allowed to or choose to stay at an ashram, if you were not seeking some form of enlightenment within the context of that religion.

It is not meant to be a hostel.

But with regards to the OP, I try to follow respectful customs of wherever I am staying...I still have to take off my shoes when I enter some people's houses. But if a situation came up, where I felt like it was impinging on my intrisinc values, (like, I would not participate in a KKK rally, "just to fit in") then I would make a graceful exit.

It is not so much as a question of causality as it is pathological function.

Note: This is not my area of expertise and welcome any corrections.

From my understanding, myelin leukemia produces an over-abundance of mutated white blood cells (along with regular white blood cells). This can indeed, cause leukopenia, as the number of functional white blood cells might be limited, depending upon the stage of the disease.

HIV is a virus that inhibits the production of T-cells (a type of white blood cell). What causes one disease to create an over-abundance, will cause another disease to produce a deficit.

I am having a hard time finding where both diseases were acute, at the same time. Usually the leukemia seems to be in remission. As was the case in the article provided by the OP and the one by me.

As I said before, I see justification for a search warrant, but none for arrest.

I wholeheartedly agree with this, Ydoa.

I have a bias concerning pedophilia in general, but I do, indeed, see that you are making an excellent distinction.

Form the article that you presented:

In a description of the book, the author framed it as an attempt "to make pedophile situations safer for those juveniles that find themselves involved in them, by establishing certain rules for these adults to follow.

 

"I hope to achieve this by appealing to the better nature of pedosexuals, with hope that their doing so will result in less hatred and perhaps liter (sic) sentences should they ever be caught," Greaves said.

I have not read the book, so I am not sure what the "establishing certain rules for these adults to follow" means...is the book written from a non-fiction perspective or is it fictional memoirs and was advertised as such?

Isn't pedophilia illegal? For a reason? (An obvious power differential comes to mind, as well as psychological impressionism.)

Here is a thought...maybe by putting this in the papers, they are opening windows for victims to step forth. (Power of sensationalism.) I find this kind of maneuvering intellectually appalling...but! And it is a big "but"...do the ends justify the means? I have thought so in the past at times, but now I am not so sure, so---------> going to recalibrate my moral compass.

Maybe because people like this will take it to the extreme and see it as a green light? Granted, the article is full of hyperbolic appeals to emotions but I really don't understand the backing of this.

I think any type of discussion like this involves a slippery slope of moral perspectives that many will fall on either side of a fine line...censorship is a hot button for some, pedophilia will be so for others.

I do not mean to prevaricate here, but I know which side of the mountain I fall on.

It will be interesting to see what happens with his arrest, since they have a warrant. They will most likely check his computer's history, unless he is careful. So if evidence is found of child pornography or whatever, would that shift the dynamics of the argument concerning censorship?

B)

What was the reason given for the arrest of the guy who was self publishing the pedophile book on Amazon? Is there any evidence that he actually molested any children or attempted to?

Could you provide a link, Ydoa?

I've no problem with what he said, I'd just like him to be more polite about it. Thanks.

And I would like you to stop posting from a position of victimhood, for like, five minutes. It tends to truncate the threads because then there is the expectation to tippy toe around your itty-biity huwt feewings, when the post was never about you in the first place as a poster, but directed towards your post.

I think that it is ridiculous to outlaw a plant. There is no processing involved at all, unlike hops. And I would be willing to bet that the addiction to pharmaceuticals is much higher than the addiction to marijuana.

The prohibition of marijuana, as has already been pointed out, was due to outdated governmental morality and a disinformation. It is time that this was reevaluated, IMO.

Taken from the OP's article...

Strangely enough, the diagnosis that most concerned Timothy Ray Brown in 2007 was acute myeloid leukemia. HIV has been increasingly thought of as a manageable disease, though certainly a terribly burdensome one.

I am still trying to wrap my brain around how a person can have leukemia and the HIV virus at the same time.

I did stumble on

this.

So you think the days of nation-versus-nation war are behind us, Marat?

i really think that you need to substantiate this question with some form of reasoning and plausibility...

Otherwise it might be misconstrued as a personal attack.

Book to read: The Zombie Survival Guide: Complete Protection from the Living Dead. (It is really funny. By the end of the book you will almost wish there was a zombie attack because you will feel so prepared.)

Thingy to build: The spud buster sounds fantastic, but only if you will post at least one youtube action video.

Hobby to start: Watching bread mold. I did this once accidentally. By the time I discovered it, I am pretty sure the mold civilization discovered aircraft.

Program to program: Something to do with zombies.

Book to write: "I Never Did Mind the Little Things: How to Stay Sane in an Insane World". The best way to teach is to live it...

I apologise that it has taken me so long to get to this..

To show you how smart I am Diva, what is a POE?

I think that the most intelligent thing one can do is ask for more information.

It used to apply just to conservative Christian fundamentalists, in short, it's often difficult to tell an "over the top" parody of a fundie, with the real thing. The term has expanded to the more secular of the extreme right as well.

From, "Poe's Law"

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Poe%27s_Law

Reception and usage

The use of the term is most common in the skeptical and science-based communities on Web 2.0. Many blogs, forums and wikis will often refer to the law when dealing with cranks of any stripe.

Poe's Collary:

“It is impossible for an act of Fundamentalism to be made that someone won't mistake for a parody.”

See also ---> Poe Paradox

The term was first used by RationalWiki editor and now respected blogger The Lay Scientist to describe an apparent paradox in the management of editing rights at Conservapedia:

"Any new member of the CP project who's not as Conservative as them is liable to be chucked out. However, any new member who is as Conservative as them is in serious danger of being called a parodist, and chucked out. Is this the first living example of a Poe Paradox?"

tell me what was his "erroneous conclusion"?

Pioneer wrote:

"I have listened to both conservative and liberal talk radio. There is a difference. The conservative talk shows tend to slant a little more toward fresh logic and argument, while the liberal tends to slant a little more toward emotional appeal."

Competing corporate media outlets aside, compare right-wing punditry and reportage with actual liberal talk radio to see which actually leans on "appeal to" fallacies and which discusses things in a reasoned and logical manner.

Try comparing Rush, et al with; NPR, Free Speech Radio or Democracy Now.

Erroneous conclusion as in: Slothful Induction.

I think that this is a lovely exchange between the musicians and the frontperson...smooooooooth.

Listen to the dynamics...it is amazing how tight a group can sound when they have not played within thirty years.

Since this is posted in the ethics section, I guess this is an exploration of the morality behind it?

OP, when you say "corporal punishment" do you mean striking with a belt or a spank on the butt with the hand?

At any rate...

Here is an article to start with...it is lengthy:

Effects of Corporal Punishment

Thinking about starting a thread entitled "The Science Forums Hall of Shame". This guy get's first entry for sure.

I would strongly NOT recommend this.

It just breeds a lot of negativity and leeks out over to other areas of the site. We are currently working on getting rid of our own hall of shame by hiding that particular subforum, but still allow for google searches that will be redirected to the main site.

On topic...

I simply don't get enough email (read, hardly any) from this site to contribute anything funny...but if I ever do at least I will have a place to post them, if I thought that it would be productive. But most likely I wouldn't. Emails are kind of private.

But it will be interesting to read what is sent to the junk mail of the staff official contact email on this site. I am dying to read what the spammers have sent!