They've been doing this for years to catch child molester pervs. This is nothing new and is completely legal.
Have they been using the identity of real people to catch pervs? While I want the pervs off the streets, I'm not ok with them using someone's identity without that person's explicit permission.
If it's discrimination in favor of a minority, doesn't that make it affirmative action rather than discrimination?
Affirmative Action is sanctioned discrimination.
May be now some of those candidates would know what it means to be on the receiving end of racism and look with some sympathy and understanding when black, brown, yellow Americans complain about it.
I am mostly White (I am part Blackfoot, but you wouldn't know it looking at me). I grew up in Hawaii. Only 30% of my high school was White. All the best jobs were reserved for native Hawaiians (Whites earned 75 cents for every dollar earned by Hawaiians). Anyone who was at least 5% native Hawaiian had access to free private education (non-natives were ineligible to even apply). I had White friends who had to be taken off island in the middle of the night because of race-based death threats. Every school had a Kill Hauoli Day in which any White student would get the crap kicked out of them (it's been at least 30 years since a hauoli actually died). Remember that different places have different racial minorities.
Many states are "right to work" states, which actually means the opposite of what it sounds like. In those states, you can be fired for any reason or no reason, so long as if there is a reason, it is not an illegal one. That is, you cannot be fired based on your ethnicity, for example. (At least in theory.)
Utah is a "right to work" state (unions are outlawed by state constitution). However, it is our status as a "work at will" state which means that either party can sever the contract for any reason (or no reason!).
And "resources hog" is a relative term when desktops tend to now have 16GB+ memory and quad core 3ghz CPUs that are idle 24/7.
Where do you find reasonably priced desktops with 16+GB of RAM? From what I've seen, 8GB seems to be the norm for desktops.
I know a few couples that ended up going long term that met through text-based MUDS, MOOS, Sensi-Summinks, EWTOOs and EWTHREEs. They basically met with all text based profiles and messaging, and only afterwards did they have pics.
I was a member of eharmony.com for a year without any good results - they think having religion in common was enough to sustain a long lasting relationship. I went on two dates set up by that site. My wife was a member of ldssingles.com for a year without success. A mutual friend introduced us and we chatted for over a month before we exchanged photos. Over the course of 9 months we became romantically attracted to each other. Ten months later we had a fiancee visa, and got married 30 days after she got in country. Our relationship is going strong despite the challenges a newborn can present. From our experience, we got to know each other a lot more intimately than people dating off line because we couldn't spend our time making out or watching movies together.
"There's a joke among my sect. We are called Latter Day Saints (LDS)"
so you are a mormon?
Yes, I belong to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This is the largest sect within the Mormon denomination. I rarely call myself Mormon because most people can't distinguish between the various sects, and often confuse us with the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS) led by Warren Jeffs.
from the reading i'm doing on authoritarians (both followers and leaders), ONLY about 20% of xtians have ACTUALLY read the bible completely... only 20% who think that the received wisdom of THEIR GOD is worth actually READING, much less studying or seriously debating about it... isn't that odd ? ? ?
I'm among the Christians (you know that Christ in Greek begins with chi - often represented by x) who have read the entire canonized Bible. I have not read all the Apocrypha (not easily found in these parts). I question the value of the Song of Solomon, and skim over most of the genealogies. I tend to study by topic instead of cover to cover, but I complete the Bible every four years or so. I've read the Bible in both English (King James Version) and Portuguese (various translations based on the work of Joao Ferreira de Almeida). I do not speak Aramaic, Greek, or Latin, so I haven't approached translations in those languages. Studying in multiple languages gives excellent insight.
THEY proclaim it is the most important book in the his story of the universe, blah blah blah, but only about a fifth of them bother to read it...
There's a joke among my sect. We are called Latter Day Saints (LDS), so on multiple occasions our leaders have told us to be Latter Day Saints instead of Latter Day Aint's. Belonging to a particular sect means nothing if you don't study what that means and live the Gospel.
for some reason, whenever i see xtians and other religionists, the only thing i think their religion has done for them, is make them bigger liars and hypocrites than non-religious people; which i *thought* was the complete opposite of what was supposed to be the case...
Not everyone who follows a religion is a liar or hypocrite.
maybe of they read THE book a little closer... hee hee hee
Every country has good food - except for Finland, of course.
I LOVE pula!
What about debit cards that can be used like credit cards? What's the liability on those. My bank recently made a change and now all debit cards that are issued are Visa debit cards that have a valid Visa number, expiry date, and CCV/CSC and can be used in place of a credit card for online transactions, except that the money is pulled directly from my checking account. I really don't like this feature, but all their cards are like that now.
When you swipe a card, the merchant asks "Debit or credit?" if it's run as credit (often requiring a signature), then your liability is the same as a credit card. If you answered "debit" and provided a PIN, then your liability is the same as any other debit card.
Another poster correctly pointed out that the money is directly pulled from your checking account, so you will be minus that money while disputing the charges.
Again, it's not that anyone says that traditional marriages should cease, just trying to force everyone to recognize same sex couples as being as morally legitimate as heterosexual couples.
Or is it a passive aggressive message to remove rights from other people?
You can't take away what they've never had. Is it a right to have the government recognize your covenant with your significant other? You are legally free to cohabit with whomever you please. Heaven knows that lots of heterosexual couples live together (sinfully, in my view) without ever registering with the Church or government.
A few points... 1) The government does recognize marriage - or it wouldn't be a discussion.
Most people who oppose same-sex marriage are against using the same term for partnerships recognized by their religious organization and partnerships recognized by the government. I personally don't care what consenting adults do together (as long as they aren't otherwise breaking the law) as long as I retain the right to view it as sinful or wrong. My sect doesn't drink coffee, but I would never advocate that coffee be outlawed. I can still teach my children that our God doesn't approve while respecting the rights of others.
2) There are legal benefits associated with that recognition - taxes, inheritance, sickbed visitation rights, etc.
I would agree that most rights associated with government recognized partnerships should be extended. I have issues with same sex couples adopting children until we can see how such an arrangement might affect the child psychologically. I don't have the evidence one way or the other.
3) Separation of Church and State. If the government is going to impose religious views, there needs to be a constitutional amendment for it to be legal and they need to specify exactly which magic man in the sky they pick to decide the rules.
The language in our first amendment is that congress can't play favorites when it comes to religions. It does not say that members of government must be void of all religion. Our Declaration of Independence, Constitution, National Anthem, and Pledge of Allegiance all reference the Almighty. Our rights are described as "God-given", meaning we didn't get them from man. The government shouldn't dictate that I worship The Flying Spaghetti Monster any more than you worship the Christian God or declare all worship illegal.
Your sect being "against slavery in 1830" does not excuse you for being racists in 1970. Your "non-profit" TAX-EXEMPT status should be lost if yuou are breaking the laws.
We weren't breaking the law. Religious organizations get to decide who to allow into the ministry. The Jewish faith only allows those of the tribe of Levi to be Priests. Catholics only allow males to be Priests. People of all races and genders have always been afforded baptism in my sect.
What's your sect? Should I be allowed to discriminate against your people? Why not?
I belong to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We have already been discriminated against so much that your individual actions would be insignificant. We were driven from 3 states under gunpoint because of our religious views. Indeed, we left the US in order to find peace (what is now Utah was part of Mexico at the time). In Missouri, it was legal to kill Mormons until the 1970s. The federal government enacted laws infringing on our religion, going as far as sending the army to remove our duly elected territorial governor and confiscating all our land and assets. I think I know a bit about discrimination.
Did you CHOOSE to be heterosexual or were you born that way? Why do you think someone would "choose" to be gay?
That is irrelevant to my views. As a heterosexual male, I had to control my urges until I was married. Are you saying that homosexuals are unable to control their urges? I have homosexual friends who never married (don't want to live a lie) but have remained celibate in order to avoid sinning. If homosexuals want to have sex, let them; just let me teach my kids that it goes against God's will. Same as non-married heterosexuals who can't control themselves, right?
I think gay dudes are gross, but I don't think we should allow any group to be legally discriminated against on the basis of things they didn't have much choice in. Fat people are still fair game, for now, though.
Are psychopaths born that way? Are pyromaniacs born that way? Don't we all have an urge from time to time that would go against polite society?
And in case you want to pull some false DeMorgan's Equivalency BS, Why should my natural right to hunt and kill your heathen soulless sect members for sport be restrained if my equally un-disprovable religion says it should be allowed?
Your rights end when they infringe on the rights of others.
You presume to know what is morally proper and what is sinful based on nothing but unfounded assumptions and retreat to, at best, a "magic" book for your claims. You may not mean to be a racist or bigot, but you very clearly are by your own words. I am too, but at least I'm not trying to enshrine my hate in the trappings of law or a falsely superior morality.
I am not a racist. You would be hard pressed to find a more racially diverse family in the US. I don't judge based on race or ethnicity. My so-called bigotry only goes so far as to teach my family what our religion teaches is sinful or not. If you are so thin-skinned that me calling you a sinner offends you, then you have a problem.
Nope, no programming jobs for American programmers. America is only for MBAs and bureaucrats. Programmers are elsewhere. Americans who don't want to be team players in the farcical football game that is the American "workplace" must necessarily be homeless and destitute, because there are no real jobs in America, none at all. Real work is done in the Overseas, not in America, because America is the land of the worthless.
Last I looked at the map, Brazil was part of America.
Look idiot. Your son, as you say, is not even a month old, so you have no idea what you are talking about. You are entitled to your opinion, I suppose, but please just shut the fuck up. You are making the world a worse place for your child.
I'm the idiot when you can't even express yourself without resorting to gratuitous profanity? I'm the idiot for pointing out a counter example? I'm the idiot for not getting in a lather? I'm the idiot for not resorting to ad hominem?
It is not wrapped in a 'candy coating' and that is one of the really good things about it. It is gritty and thought provoking. Have you read it? Or are you speaking like so many of your religious ilk from the propaganda of your church?
Can you converse with people of an opposing viewpoint without reverting to strawmen and ad hominem attacks?
I admit to not having read the book, but I saw the movie. I say that The Golden Compass is candy coated because it uses literary devices which entice a young audience, such as talking animals. Kids get addicted before the gritty content shows itself for what it really is (the series culminates with killing God). My sect did not say anything specifically about the movie or book. I read online critics and decided to watch it myself.
Can you think for yourself? I think not from reading your comments. they do not belong here, in my opinion.
I have a brain. I am not a sheep. My Church teaches that it is not meet to be instructed in every circumstance, so we must learn to govern ourselves. We are taught that the glory of God is intelligence.
I suppose the Life of Brian is a blasphemous film?
I haven't seen the Life of Brian (it's not in any of the video rental places around here), but sounds hilarious as are most of the other Monty Python films.
Politics: A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage. -- Ambrose Bierce
