At Reason.

God rest your soul, lady.

Just had an interesting discussion on Twitter. Subject topic came up, and I'm all, "If it's legal, why not?"
"Oh, this is absurd/illogical/fallacy/distraction," came the blowback from the "modern" marriage proponent.
I can't figure out why. Is it even incestuous, if the arrangement is biologically incapable of achieving anything in the way of offspring?
Just to refine my point, I was dead to the discussion at homosexuality. Once "anything goes" is fully legal, I'm not tracking any objections to whatever coupling/geometry/number/species feels good to all of the mucous membranes in question.

http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3608279&cid=43343403

Star Drek
Sweet, sweet colossal negative space wedgie.

Growing up as poor white trash, I figured there was some linear acquisition of wisdom with age, and all of the purportedly Really Smart People should be heeded because they had more degrees than a thermometer.
I'm kinda realizing that intellectual bluster != smarts. There are some really foolish people in circulation, making sloppy arguments all over the place.
My task is to avoid becoming that.

No cool points for whoever pulled this stunt => http://slashdot.org/~damn_registrars/journal/341567
The cool thing to do when you don't like somebody is ignore them. Thrashing somebody just fuels the martyr complex.
On the other hand, damn_registrars and I have managed to cease talking past each other, and at least be cordial. As a suggestion, whoever it is that's packing a flagpole woody for the dam_registrars should try to do likewise.

I bought a copy of Thomas Nagel's "Mind & Cosmos". Actually, I was motivated by Paul Rahe over at Ricochet. Interesting read from the outset.
Toss-offs like this worry me, though:

The value of our existence is ours to behold, or deny. In the grand scheme it doesn't matter one way or the other.

And not just because of the tendency toward solipsism. The desire to off-load all possibility of external judgement is both common to the human experience, and a source of Caligulas on those unhappy occasions when the anarcho-hedonist in question has access to power. I reply with a 'No'.

fellow napalm-flingers damn_registrars and fustakakrich might take interest in this Paul Rahe piece.

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/164371/
No real surprise to anyone who's read some Sowell.
But oh, we think we've "Progressed" past all those economic laws now.

Referencing this & this:
If life lacks a teleological point, then aren't you just arguing solipsism? How can you tell whether arguing on Slashdot is any different than barking like a dog?
I'll contend that the universe did come from somewhere, and has a point to it. I'll also contend that, irrespective of the drivel you spout, you behave as if the universe does, too.
So how 'bout we gird our loins and offer me a positive, consistent explanation of where we came from, why we're here, and where we're going. Fine. You reject the Jewish peasant carpenter as an explanation. Got it. It's on you; yours is a long and ignoble line of thought. But offer a superior replacement then, in your 'wisdom', please.
As a perfectly rational fellow, I should be pleased to discard any 'mythology' holding me back from achieving greatness as, say, an Opertating Thetan or something. Lay it out for me, bros.
Cheers,
Chris

Won't somebody explain to that tired old warhorse that nothing whatsoever happened in Benghazi?
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/mccain-massive-cover-benghazi-193426972--politics.html
Harry Reid is probably going to have to think about Senate discipline, and have McCain hauled out in an I-love-me jacket.
If McCain would just read damn_registrars, he could come to grips with his inner partisan hack, and just Let It Go.
Because #TheChildren

Looking at the /. ad: http://forms.embarcadero.com/forms/AMUSCA1212CodeRage7BjarneStroustrupReplay?CName=BSCR7&Audience=RADNU&Publisher=Google&Medium=Display&Asset=Event&_kk=c%2B%2B%20programming%20language&_kt=422ee6e6-7e62-4317-8fe7-47840d4f87e1&gclid=CKC2q6fGtrUCFZSf4AodrTAA2A
Please, somebody, get an image of the guy that doesn't look quite as socially mal-adapted, or off of some unsavory list!
The guy is an IT legend, whether or not you think C++ is a train wreck.

http://www.althouse.blogspot.com/2013/02/why-did-white-house-deceive-us-after.html
To answer her "Why did the White House deceive us?" question, my working assumption is that, for these megalomaniacs, truth is an historical artifact, and the people they claim to serve are just a vast side of beef to them.
This is not necessarily a partisan issue; and the real, dispassionate question to address is how we recover from these decades of collapse into an overly muscular Federal government.
Be prepared to run the SOTU speech backwards to find out what's really being said.

http://theothermccain.com/2013/02/05/will-jeb-bush-connect-with-tea-partiers-at-cpac/