Skip to main content

RE: Give or take a hundred years ago

Tell me, Dedo, what you think this quote means:

"I am not in this world..."

RE: Give or take a hundred years ago

Written by a former federal attorney...?

Did he get disbarred for writing essays like a 13 year old, not knowing the difference between 'cause' and 'correlation' and for logical fallacy? And then of course, there are the blatant contradictions.

There may be some interesting and relevant information in there, but it's so poorly written it would be very difficult to find, even for me as a native English speaker with some experience in reading and writing academic essays.

I actually only read about a third of it, it was so poorly written and difficult to make sense of.

Would you like me to attempt to go through it with you as an exercise in sifting through the shit to find accurate information?

RE: Me in my bathroom. You're welcome.

That was really rather hypnotic.

I liked all the changes in perspective, the static images mixed in with the moving, or static images from a moving perspective.

I liked your choice of background music, especially when mixed with the video noises. I'm hearing impaired, but the noises I could hear were delightful, focussed and mindful.

And it made me laugh when you put the deoderant back and nudge the toiletry next to it back in it's rightful place. There was so much balance in everything, nicely introduced by the scales, I've just realised. laugh

RE: France Closes Mosque As Radical Imam Defended Jihad, Incited Hatred Towards Christians Gays And Jews

I didn't claim it wasn't reported as news, Willy.

I didn't even challenge the decision to close the mosque.

I'd be happy if every institution were investigated and maybe suspended if there was evidence of inciting discrimination, or hatred.

It's just that includes the Daily Mail for the way this news has been reported.

PS. How old do I have to be before you recognise that I'm a woman, not a girl?

RE: France Closes Mosque As Radical Imam Defended Jihad, Incited Hatred Towards Christians Gays And Jews

A recent convert to Islam who is an Imam...?

Is that implied time frame of progresson usual, even for a theology graduate?

I suspect there is more to this story than meets the eye.

It's inappropriate if dodgy extremism is being inaccurately presented as mainstream Islamic culture, or practise.

Perhaps the Daily Mail should be shut down for sixth months for it's radicalising preaching, too.

RE: Stage Clothes...

"tie-died shirts."

Is that where the expression 'dressed to kill' comes from? giggle

RE: Merry Christmas or whatever you want me to say

We make pretty good dinners, as well.

Merry nondenomenational pagan festival to you, Pat. wave

RE: Watches..

“Punctuality is the virtue of the bored.”

It means the people who arrive on time don't have busy, exciting lives that make them late.

RE: Merry Christmas or whatever you want me to say

Well, I catered for 5,000 hungry people with minimal impact upon the environment, including the finest wine made from roof run-off.

It was particularly chilled given no mothers were labelled as prostitutes, nor stoned for kissng Santa.

It is, after all, a celebration of Jesus' birth, that liberal, loony left, feminazi hippy who advocated non-discriminatory and inclusive practises.

Call me old fashioned.

RE: Happy Modraniht everyone

A splendid nondenominational pagan festival to you, too. wave

RE: Gift giving this holiday season...

If she already has more than she needs, how about an Oxfam gift?

|1&Nr=AND(product.active:1,NOT(sku.listPrice:0.000000))&No=0

10 years old is a good age for appreciating a gift like this. It could have a massive impact on her life perspective.

I think I might do this next year for my grandchildren.

RE: Christmas Eve is coming up!

Hello, lcbr. wave

RE: Christmas Eve is coming up!

We did both, German Christmas on the Eve and Englsh Christmas on the 25th.

And just to make it thoroughly multi-cultural, our treat for Christmas Eve was a Chinese take away meal. dunno laugh

We'd have two meals between the four of us with a bad English prawn cocktail for starters, a naff German Christmas carol record playing and candles in the front room (used for guests and special occasions only) of our council house...and we thought we were landed gentry. laugh

RE: Any Body?

From Bentlee's cited link:

"He would point out how even after years they didn't grow mould because apparently there weren't even enough nutrients in it for microbes."

rolling on the floor laughing rolling on the floor laughing rolling on the floor laughing

There is a hilarious novel by Terry Pratchett and Niel Gaiman (I can't remember the title) where four of the characters are updated versions of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

The horseman (or biker in this time frame) known as 'Famine' is the CEO of a multibillion dollar fast food chain. The wickedness and destructiveness comes from the idea that the more people consume, the more they become malnourished; the fatter they get, the more they starve.

RE: Any Body?

I have never eaten a McD and never will.

Just walking within 100 yards of an outlet and getting suffocated by the cloying smell of stale oil and chemicals is enough to know that it's not really food.

When people eat that kind of non-food it's because they have become acclimatised to it, like when people consume sugar they lose the ability to detect the sweetness of carrots.

There is no way in ths world your cooking could possibly be worse McD. Not even my mum's cooking is worse than McD. laugh

I predict, once you've seduced your Giant with your culinary talents, he'll get a hankering for a McD and either spit it out straight away, or regret eating it, never to be hankered for again. It'll taste rank after a diet of real, fresh food.

His pallet just needs educating that's all, and who better to do that than you?

RE: Hey, hey, he's one Monkee...

Yes, we had the Monkees here in the UK.

I watched them in the 70's on Saturday morning's. It was part of a package designed to keep kids quiet, so parents weren't woken up at stupid o'clock on their day off. laugh

RE: New Zealand to ban smoking

Clearly, I misunderstood "...to completely phase out smoking in the island nation by 2025."

RE: New Zealand to ban smoking

Hmmm, that sounds a bit harsh given that nicotine is addictive and the withdrawal can be nasty, including anxiety and depression.

I agree in principal that it would be better if no one smoked, just that there may be negative repercussions in such drastic prohibition.

The approach might be slow here in the UK, but it seems to be working.

RE: Eggnog Ice Cream

Naww, bless. applause

RE: Collateral Damage: be careful what you wish for...

*gasps*

How cynical of you, Kal. The thought never entered my mind. angel

RE: Collateral Damage: be careful what you wish for...

Correction: hiding your profile makes everything, including your pic go grey. You have to put the faceless pic as primary to go faceless when you're hidden.

RE: Collateral Damage: be careful what you wish for...

If you are suspended from posting (CS jail) your profile will still appear as normal and you can still use other faciltes like private mail.

Hiding your profile means that your profile pic becomes grey and faceless, likewise your user name appears grey, rather than pink, or blue.

I think if you are banned, or cancel your profile, your profile and username disappear. If your blogs are around, you get the author 'unknown' thing.

I suspect certain members have only had their posting privileges suspended and have hidden their profiles. I'm pretty sure Crypt has done that before, I can't see Jim hanging around if he can't post and Bo is just using one of his other profiles.

I'm sorry to see Jim caught up in this. I find his C&P reports informative. I don't know why people complain about him reproducing stuff - at least he's not making stuff up, or lying through his teeth. If people can't cope, why read his blogs?

I didn't read Bo's stuff. I definitely couldn't handle that shit. laugh

RE: ORBITUARY

Spelling error of the year, eh? laugh

RE: Supreme Court to hear Mississippi abortion case that could overturn Roe v. Wade

Conrad, abortion is not permissable up to the moment of birth without limitation.

Although 'personhood', or recognising the 'child in utero' as a member of the species homosapien has implications for the 14th Amendment (born, or naturalised US citizens) and abortion laws, there is the argument of a woman's consent to abortion in the human rights balancing act when comparing a medical termination and the limited offenses covered by the Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004.

Again, these are ethical issues which should be revisited as their context changes over time, but a part of that is because we must recognise that they are complex and multi-facetted.

Over-simplification and emotional judgement are ineffective means of protecting anyone, born, or unborn. Quite the opposite, in fact.

RE: Supreme Court to hear Mississippi abortion case that could overturn Roe v. Wade

That's funny. laugh

Let me explain: the 14th Amendment has a 'right to privacy' clause.

A 'right to privacy' doesn't mean that US citizens have the right to a lock on the bathroom door. It's legal and somewhat archaic meaning is that US citizens have 'autonomy', the right, or condition of self-governance.

Originally it centred around the emancipation of African American people, emancipation being 'the fact or process of being set free from legal, social, or political restrictions'.

It means that all people who are 'born, or naturalised in the United States' have the right to their own opinions, beliefs and to a certain extent actions. Everyone can chose their own religion, language, customs, who they want to marry, who they want to vote for, etc. These are private, autonomous matters.

However, these rights come with certain universal conditions of law because we must balance one person's rights against another's: every 'born, or naturalised US citizen' has 'equal protection under the laws'.

This means, for example, I may have the opinion that you should fall off the edge of a cliff, but I may not threaten you with it, or help you along with it, because that would be an infringement of your autonomy, or liberty.

Roe vs Wade argued that the right to 'privacy', the right to an opinion, or self-governance, included the right for women to make choices about their own bodies, including abortion. Although unborn children, strictly speakng, are not 'born, or naturalised US citizens' and therefore have no human rights under the 14th Amendment, it was recognised that the balance of one person's rights (the woman) should have limits where it infringes upon the rights of another (the foetus).

The original Roe vs Wade balance, or compromise was based upon the 'three trimesters of pregnancy' where a woman had total autonomy within the first three months (abortion on demand). In the second trimester the government required 'reasonable health regulations' and in the third abortion could be prohibited entirely unless the pregnancy threatened the health or life of the mother. Later the three trimester balancing act was abandoned in favour of the viabilty of the foetus.

As these were Supreme Court rulings, my understanding is that they were universal across the States. Texas introducing the 'heartbeat' law was unconstitutional because it should have been taken back to the the Supreme Court and any new ruling likewise unversally applied.

When abortion rights are argued, what we are actually doing is adressing the balance between the right of the woman and the foetus. It would be unconstitutional to allow women to die agonising deaths for want of terminating an ectopic pregnancy, for example. Likewise it would be an infringement of her right to privacy, autonomy and liberty to force her to terminate an ectopic pregnancy.

So, go and argue it out in the Supreme Court. It is only right and proper that ethical issues are revisited as their context changes over time. As technology has advanced and premature babies are surviving from earlier gestational stages, the context of foetal viabilty has altered.

Having said that, the practicalities that I and Mic outlined above will be taken into account. Likewise, the issue of forcing one person's religious, or other beliefs/opinions on another will be subject to scrutiny. I doubt very much that the heartbeat criterion will gain any traction as a result and there is a risk that abortion laws could be expanded.

It would perhaps be more ethical, practical and effective at reducing the incidence of abortion if issues like living wages, affordable childcare, free medical care, free and readily available contraception, adequate welfare, etc. were argued out in the Supreme Court.

RE: RIP Tate Myre - You are a hero

RE: RIP Tate Myre - You are a hero

You're confusing mental illness and an insanity plea, SA.

Somebody can be mentally ill and premeditate a crime, but an insanty plea has a high threshhold involving a lack of awareness of wrong-doing at the time of the crime.

I agree with you, however, in as much as being mentally ill is not a crime, nor the primary cause of the crime.

We have security measures in schools after the Dunblane massacre in 1996 which was perpetrated by an adult. Gates are now locked and there are keypad locks on school buildings. I've not heard of school shooting drills.

Prior to Dunblane, our only other school shooting was in 1850.

There was a college incident earlier this year where two teachers sustained relatively minor knife wounds tackling a student who waved a gun about in one hand and held a knife in the other, shouting for other students to run away.

We have plenty of mentally ill school students and people in the general population, but very few guns, or mass shootings, ergo the issue is opportunity, not mental illness.

RE: RIP Tate Myre - You are a hero

Okay, I didn't realise mentally ill children couldn't get there hands on the wealth of guns you have in the US.

So, what did this mentally ill child shoot the other children with? Depression?

RE: RIP Tate Myre - You are a hero

How many more children have to die before you do something about your gun laws?

RE: Supreme Court to hear Mississippi abortion case that could overturn Roe v. Wade

Hello, Shawn.

Assuming you don't think women should be forced to have an abortion if their health is in danger, they are raped, or there is no hope for the baby's quality of life, I'm glad to see that, at least in some circumstances, you have a pro choice stance.

Now let's look at those circumstances:

How do you propose eligibilty for the rape criterion is established, given it's unlikely that a rape is going to be corroborated? Do you seek a lengthy trial and guilty verdict, or take women at their word? If you go for (rarely successful unless the woman is also murdered) trial, the bairn will be nigh on weaned before the abortion right is granted. The necessity of a trial effectively means a woman has no right to an abortion in rape cases.

If you take a woman at her word, you effectively have abortion on demand. If someone is desperate enough, lying about being attacked down a dark alley by an unknown assailant is easy enough.

In the case of a woman's life being in danger, who gets to decide acceptable, or otherwise risk? If you include mental health issues like suicidal ideation, do yu take a woman at her word, or do you wait for her to have a go, (or two if she's unsuccessful the first time) for proof? If you take women at their word, you effectively have abortion on demand here as well.

Lastly, the criterion of no hope: who gets to predict from foetal information that the future child, or adult will have no quality of life? How do you establish those legal and ethical boundaries to encompass all individual circumstances, or opinions about quality of life? Are you expecting a diagnosis of 'very dire' to work on a practical level?

And do you really think that women only get pregnant if they don't use contraception, or act recklessly? If you do, you're woefully ignorant about sex.

If somehow Roe vs Wade is overturned in a way that works on a practical level, what do you suggest is also enacted into law to protect the children who are born as a result? Quality of life includes that children's needs are met emotionally, financially (food, shelter, clothing, etc), medically, educationally, etc. If you demand that children are born whatever the parental circumstances, why should you get to turn your back on those children when they suffer the consequences of your choice?

This is a list of blog comments created by jac_the_gripper.

We use cookies to ensure that you have the best experience possible on our website. Read Our Privacy Policy Here