I'm replying so late that it probably won't be read, but check your facts on Norway. As far as I can tell it was occupied continually until the end of the war, without being liberated until Germany surrendered.

What happens when someone can't afford to pay the toll? Denying someone the right to relieve themselves for an extended period can be akin to torture.

I read those comments too and am very disappointed at my compatriots for some of them. You're right about the witchhunt. In my other comment here I felt the need to include a token anti-child-porn remark precisely to redirect the witchhunt elsewhere. I shouldn't have had to. I wasn't playing devil's advocate for child porn, but by defending anything that's even remotely juxtaposed with that topic is a dangerous game because far too many people jump to conclusions. "Why do you want molesters and paedophiles to roam free? Are you one of them? You're either with us or against us!" A false dichotomy.

I am astonished and outraged at the story you linked about words on a page. I had heard about the drawing one before on /.. I am extremely disappointed with people who can't see that these cases are tantamount to convictions for thoughtcrime. There weren't any real victims. Granted, I don't condone the behaviour of these guys, but that does not give us the right to punish them for an idea. You cannot equate an idea that is not acted upon to a crime. It does not matter what the idea is. I am ashamed that this happened in my country.

From the linked article: "He must also provide a DNA sample for inclusion in a national criminal database and register as a sex offender for 20 years." For reading a book. Or technically just for possessing the book. I realize that this guy had a previous charge for possessing real (presumably) child porn, but that is irrelevant in assessing the criminality of the more recent conviction for possessing the stories. If a writer creates a story in which someone commits murder, is the writer (and their readership) just as good as a murderer? Of course not, and for some reason we have no problem accepting this kind of literature. In fact, it's commonplace. As soon as the topic of the fiction shifts to something uncomfortable and verging on taboo to even mention, it's as if our brains turn off and we can no longer see the situation for what it is.

That takes care of comparing fiction to fiction with different topics. To further illustrate the point, let's now consider fiction to nonfiction with a similar topic. If the author this time describes a historical event that involved the rape of children, for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_Nanking_(book) (a best seller nonetheless), are they just as good as child rapists? Once again the answer is obviously no. The works of fiction may have different intents than the factual account, but it is irrelevant. What matters is that they are all words on a page and that should not constitute a crime.

It's Saturday night; I've got no date, a two liter bottle of Shasta, and my all-Rush mix tape... let's rock

I'm a civil engineer you insensitive clod! I have no idea why you singled out that profession as an example, but I laughed. Fortunately, I too see myself as a renaissance man, with a wide variety of interests and a passion for learning in general. Unfortunately, this can be a hindrance because it delays my progress in developing technical skills in this field. While I "waste" countless hours delving into philosophy and history, for example, I watch as my peers advance their careers and net worth, leaving me "behind". I like to envision a future in which my hard work at becoming a generalist pays off. As others have pointed out in this thread, it can be downright difficult to get a job when employers place such emphasis on your academic credentials and years of experience doing x, where x is the specific task they want you, a specialist, for. I sacrifice the opportunity to specialize and thus make myself more attractive to these employers by being a generalist.

With only a resume/CV or even an interview it's difficult to convey that you're really worth it with your broader knowledge base. For a lot of jobs I'm probably not worth it for the employer if all they want is a specialist-drone who won't rock the status quo with any radical ideas. Right now I'm hoping some cronyism works out for me to get started and gain some relevant experience, because all that philosophy and history sure isn't helping me get a job right now.

The more I think about it, the more I realize that the indeterminate skill set of the renaissance man, or the more politically correct renaissance person, makes them suited for work as administrators, managers, politicians, and military commanders. Maybe if I rack up 40 years of experience I can be an admiral, but it sure feels difficult starting as a graduate with nearly zero. Culture of entitlement taught me that Cadet Kirk gets to be Captain after saving Earth in Star Trek XI; I can't help but be a little disappointed! Sarcasm aside, I agree that being a specialist is boring for an entire career.

I wasn't thinking of this when I posted earlier, but I can relate to that. I had to prove ancestry to get Metis status. It turns out I'm the last generation eligible for status (unless I had kids with someone who has more recent native ancestry); I am detached from my full-blood native ancestors by six generations.

In practice I hardly identify with this group at all, except in principle to defend the native position whenever I catch someone making unfair and disparaging comments about them. It's interesting that a slight against a group I am only technically a part of evokes such a response, even though the group would probably view me as an outsider. I suppose there really is an intrinsic drive for humans to protect and propagate their own kin. It may be multigenerational racism, but it's natural, so we can hardly allow ourselves to get caught up on that fact.

After further thought on the matter, I will concede a counterexample. If an adopted child's genetics cause them to be sufficiently physically different to be deemed a visible minority in the culture they are raised in, then there will be separation between the child and the ethnicity. The two won't fully identify with each other. It may not seem like a noble trait of humanity, but we associate more closely with things that are as much alike us as possible, even when the differences are superficial. It's sort of an innate racism.

I think the point of "does your culture have a genetic component?" was that any kid can be raised in any cultural setting independent of their genes (Unless we're talking about some genetic predisposition to a disability that prevents one from engaging in some cultural activities, but we're not. That'd be quibbling.). How exactly do your two ethnic groups have a genetic component? An ethnicity is simply a group of people who identify with one another for whatever reason. To an adopted child, the culture they are raised in is just as real and something to identify with as if they were naturally born to the parents who raised them.

If it's so simple then why is yours wrong?

The same Captain who was promoted straight up from Cadet without even graduating from the academy? What a wonderful role model of entitlement.

A South Korean corvette was just sunk too. Maybe this IS the beginning of the end.

Natural selection more or less explains this, as well as almost any other phenomenon (biologically based or not) you can think of.

Missing option: Universal Darwinism

It's too old a civ. With entrenched culture like that (the Kong Miao, the forbidden city, the wall, etc.) the artist will hardly make a dent. Besides, I'm pretty sure that the "revolution mod" option is turned on for this game. Think of the revolts! For now, demand the resources as tribute an risk the "-1 you made an arrogant demand".

Death by snu snu.