Comment Direct democracy works with any population (Score 1) 147
Works fine in Switzerland where they speak different languages. Compared to eg US democracy, it works brilliantly.
PS, much of the democracy is devolved.
Works fine in Switzerland where they speak different languages. Compared to eg US democracy, it works brilliantly.
PS, much of the democracy is devolved.
Apparently the "emergency" is that what they were doing was illegal
No. This is about ISPs retaining data, not the Govt. The reason they want it now is that ISPs are threatening to delete the data -- which would be a year's data plus however long it takes to pass this bill.
Not that it should be passed.
EU law IS UK law by virtue of the UK being in the EU.
Not defending this Bill but currently ISPs aren't obliged to do what the Home Secretary tells them.
And that comment followed one talking about mentally disabled people. Which was a class of people that were de-humanized and denied rights to
Yeah. In the 30s perhaps LOL
Even with the embryo question, there still is no evidence in his posts you responded to that he is "pretty anti-abortion".
Already gave you it
His very first post above is saying an embryo is a human being, and then he specifically states that a human embryo is Homo sapiens sapiens.
In his SECOND post. Clearly you're the kind of person referred to in the article too.
And you say you don't realize he is making a species argument.
Yes I assumed he was making a relevant point.
You post a scientific argument as if it is your belief, and defend it as if it is your belief, dismiss people who dispute what is apparently your belief, and now claim it wasn't your belief all along.
You are truly dumb.
My first two words on this whole article: "Science says..."
First sentence of my second comment: "We're not talking about my belief system, we're talking about "scientific doctrine""
Yet you presuppose I'm lying. Can't you read? Did you check and really can't read? Did you read it and have it not make it through the filters the article talks about?
Hilarious the irony of your behaviour in regards to this article.
Have a nice evening.
If you don't have that view, how do you justify your decision in Rockoon's case, when he never even specifically mentions the issue?
In his first comment Rockoon said: "This is what the left does. They de-humanize that which they want to restrict, steal, or deny rights to."
Note the last option can only really refer to fetuses and embryos.
Indeed, your other mistaken assumption is the same one he made: that by "human" I meant belonging to the species homo sapiens. I was actually talking more about the common understanding of human as 'being a person'.
Then you are either a perfect example of the claim in the article, and reject science because of personal beliefs, or you never contributed a thing to the discussion because you aren't replying to Rockoon's original post. My interpretation of the exchange between you and him would argue for the first choice there.
I wasn't aware Rockoon was making a species argument and if so, it was completely irrelevant to the abortion sub-debate anyway.
BTW, a human corpse is another example of the species homo sapiens.
Yes, just as a dead butterfly pinned in a collection is an example of its species. I was going to say that this does not change the discussion above in any way. But actually, it diminishes your argument, because a dead person has no brain activity at all, and your argument is based on brain ability.
Nope, you completely misread the thread. I already stated that wasn't my personal opinion.
Pace SuricouRaven's post, they'd have to be less intellectual than a tortoise.
There are probably a whole family of mites in my eyebrows that are ahead of even a one month old baby, never mind a 19 week fetus.
There is no scientific argument against abortion @19 weeks. Such arguments are faith-based -- that there is a soul and that abortion is the deprivation of life of that soul.
I have respect for that argument. I don't have respect for pseudoscientific arguments that a 19 week old fetus should have the same rights as a child.
you make a serious mistake is assuming people who agree with Rockoon's scientific basis are automatically anti-abortion.
Nope, I said nothing about anyone but Rockoon. Indeed, your other mistaken assumption is the same one he made: that by "human" I meant belonging to the species homo sapiens. I was actually talking more about the common understanding of human as 'being a person'.
BTW, a human corpse is another example of the species homo sapiens.
You seem pretty anti-abortionist. The article is telling me not to bother talking rationally with you.
True enough, pace Levitt & Dubner.
It would be a brave anthropologist who tried to figure out what traits were more likely to survive the 'threat' of abortion.
We're not talking about my belief system, we're talking about "scientific doctrine", or as I interpret it, scientific populism.
Also, severely mentally handicapped are perhaps 2 orders of magnitude ahead of 19 week old fetuses in terms of recognisable intelligence.
For what it's worth, I'm a centrist in my country (UK).
Science says fetuses don't have the brain capacity or structure to be even vaguely human until 20 weeks or so. Whether this is true or not is another matter.
Really?
That's just an indication of how much further we are from inner peace.
You're right, of course.
I was thinking the outside is more predictable, particularly if you keep opening the oven or someone invents a reliable monitor.
Neutrinos have bad breadth.
