Typically my ex GFs and I used a condom until we trusted each other enough to go for another contraceptive, which typically was The Pill. If she would have objected to this, for whatever reason, I would have been happy to keep using condoms. No sweat. Respect. Responsability, no problem. On the other hand, "forgetting" to take a pill, getting pregnant, not letting me know on time, not taking any other steps (morning after pill, whatever) wouldn't be very respectful either and would indeed piss me off.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
Columbus was probably much smarter than your average lad, otherwise he wouldn't have been able to undertake such a voyage.
He may have been much smarter than your average lad, but at the same time -if you pardon my French- Columbus was an arrogant idiot who went against the common (and correct) knowledge of those days by underestimating the circumference of the Earth by a factor of four. Afterwards he was hailed as the discoverer of America and blabla, but the matter of fact is that he would have drowned if it hadn't been for this random unpredicted piece of land (*) in the middle of the ocean.
(*) Actualy middle-agers made some predictions about undiscovered pieces of land that "should exist" based on some symmetry or whatever religious logic they used. This was not the case for America, though: Columbus really underestimated the voyage and thougt he had arrived in India. The fool!
For some vegans they equate dairy as rape
Only if it is still inside the cow.
Well I think that's part of what "respect" means - you don't push your own religious / atheist beliefs in someone else's face when you know they have a different viewpoint.
Publishing cartoons in a magazine one needs to buy in order to see them is not quite "pushing beliefs in someone else's face".
He doesn't say the killings were okay. He just says that people shouldn't mock other's religion. Which, first of all, makes sense since he is the fucking pope and secondly it may be good for his P.R. with the muslem community. If the other church leaders/imams/whatever are denouncing the satirical cartoons, what impression would Francis give by saying "oh well, no problem for me because I am far more forgiving than the Muslems". Sometimes one has to side a bit with the "competition" in order not to piss them off.
The elephant in the room is that Islam is fundamentally and irreconcilably offensive to Christians because they say Jesus was not the son of God. There is nothing more blasphemous than denying this fundamental tenant of Christianity.
No, the elephant in the room is that some muslems have a greater tendency than other religions to impose their beliefs onto others and telling them how to behave. Buddhist don't care what you do. Hindus only care about what other Hindus do. Jews aren't interested in the rest of the world because they are the "chosen people". Chinese -whatever religion they adhere to- typically also don't care too much for other people's behaviour. Some -and I am not saying this is a majority- muslems interfere with other people's business. This is significantly more annoying than their ideas about Jesus. Besides: why would Christians care about what Muslems think? According to that logic, they should be furious at the Jews, because those were the ones who crucified Jesus in the first place, yet no-one seems to care.
Without a sense of self preservation it won't 'feel' a need to defend itself.
I cannot agree with that, Dave.
I have a feeling that the politcos have a secret pact with the terrorists, or whoever is/are behind the terrorist movement, just so that they can get a terrorist or two carrying out a really despicable terrorist act, in the middle of a major Western city, something that generates MAXIMUM IMPACT, and the sheeples be of course be scared shitless
Occam would disagree. It is far more likely that some egomaniac fuck wants to immortalise himself by attacking a cartoon magazine, on his own. Your conspiracy theory, while not impossible, seems much less likely and unneeded. At least, if I was "in control", I would prefer other, more reliable methods. Or just wait. Terrorist attacks have been happening regularly, so why stage on of your own?
When I am laying on my death bed and someone says "you did all these useless things -- you could have directed your talent towards really useful stuff and made lots of money", I will honestly be able to say "They were not useless; they made me happy. And that is what gave my life meaning."
That is indeed the most important and hope I will be able to say the same (though probalbly I'll have regrets). Everyone should do as they please, and usefullness in itself is not a good measure of activity. That being said, I somewhat understand the original poster who was modded troll: why not do something -possibly equally useless- in the real world instead of this minecraft thing? Instead of simulating the Tour de France on a home-trainer, why not go out and cycle? Both are equally useful or useless, but one has more appeal than the other.
Back in the day, floppies were amazing [...] they basically worked and retained data very reliably.
Not by today's standards they didn't. Anything remotely important, I would put on at least two floppies. I still need to experience the first USB stick failure.
(Okay, okay, USB sticks may fail too, I know, but not nearly as often as floppies).
Nevertheless, I would expect that the chances of fucking up vinyl are lower, just because the intended audience is different than for CDs. Is that a valid assumption?