11 of 13
11
Shermer on the humanist movement, and on libertarianism
Posted: 26 January 2010 07:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 151 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1071
Joined  2007-06-20
asanta - 26 January 2010 03:56 PM

So what you are actually saying is “Stigmatize and punish the children who had no say in the situation in which they were born”.

No.  I did not say that.  This is the second time you have attempted to put words in my mouth. 

I don’t want to stigmatize the children.  I want society as a whole to stigmatize young single women who purposely want to go out and pump out several babies out of wedlock and the men who impregnate them.  I never even used the word “punish”, you tossed that in there.  The kids are already being punished by being brought up in a single parent family without a father.  That factor alone is a huge part of poverty.  Encouraging both men and women to raise their children together will help alleviate some poverty because when society says such a thing is no big deal you will see more of it.  When society starts to once again look down upon it (as it did in the past), then that will serve some deterrent to out of wedlock children and the poverty too many of them are raised in. 

And Obama did take his ever-present teleprompter with him to the 6th Grade class:

Obama6thGradeTeleprompter.jpg

The story now is that he needed it to talk to the press but not the kids.  Even if that is the case, that’s still pretty bad.  What kind of person takes a teleprompter to talk to the press?! 

Regardless, Obama’s dependency on the teleprompter is a matter of record.

 Signature 

There are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by the gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpation.

—James Madison

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 January 2010 07:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 152 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11

Tell just how is it possible to stigmatize the mother and father without stigmatizing and punishing the children??
Yes, the teleprompter was there for the press conference, not to talk to the sixth graders (which is the story being spread on the web). He likes using a teleprompter. So.What.
You would be surprised at just how poor some of the schools in this country are. My younger brother went to a school where the books were 10 years out of date, and they had about 50% of the books they needed. He had four books for his 6 classes, and was expected to find someone with the other books in order to do his home and school work. That is a lot to ask of a 10th grader. Even a motivated 10th grader. Imagine doing your work, and trying to find 3 other people who have copies of your missing books, but they are also looking for two, three or four people who have books that they need to get their work done. It is a wonder that anyone graduated from the school, much less went on to complete higher education.

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 January 2010 07:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 153 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
UlsterScots432 - 26 January 2010 04:36 PM

George, I was raised ‘poor’ (by American standards), too much detail to go into.  I am married to someone who grew up, literally, in hut home with mud floors. You do not have a clue what you are talking about.  I’ve been to the poorest areas of the United States (and worked on the Appalachia Service Project as a teen) and to the Middle East and South America.  Your responses are emotionally driven responses not based in fact.  The “poor” in the US that are fat, are not fat because they are going without food and their bodies are saving up fat or anything.  Poor, hungry people look like what you see in Haiti, South America, Africa—not the South Side of Chicago.  It frightens me to think that people like you are out arguing secularism or atheism to anyone, because you, like so many others on here, lack skepticism, repeat the party lines (the libs are always the ones with the talking points) and respond based with non-evidentiary nonsense , emotionally.  The people so oft described as “poor” in the United States are fat, overweight, obese, because they take in more calories than they expend, plain in simple.  That is how weight is largely determined (check out fitness websites if you want to argue ad nauseam about it).  Go to those boards and express your theories, anyone, on fiber, TV, computers, etc.

UlsterScots432,

By saying that fat people are fat because they eat more, you’ve explained nothing. You need to keep asking why they eat more. The drive to eat more is genetically determined and the heritability of obesity is the same as that of height. Once you accept that how much people eat is hardwired into them, you can begin to investigate why people, or different groups of people, differ in how much they desire to consume. I am sure you are aware of the fact that personal anecdotes such as ‘I was raised poor’ are probably not the best way to approach this problem.

The reason why poor people in Haiti are not obese like many poor people are in the U.S. is simply because people in Haiti don’t have enough food; and sure, they are probably more physically active as well. Now, let’s get back to evolution. Obesity can be a good thing, depending on the environment. If a person (and many of his ancestors) finds himself living under such circumstances where he gets to eat only once in a while, the fact that his body (and his mind) allows him to eat larger quantity of food at times when there is food, will enable him to survive the following famine.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 January 2010 08:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 154 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5508
Joined  2006-10-22

Quoting UlsterScot:

I seriously hope that some of the folks on here that have responded so emotionally and reflexively (with political correctness and liberalism) do not serve on juries.

  Just thought that I’d mention that I’ve served on a fair number of juries and in two cases I saw that the police lied.  On one, the officer described how the defendent merged unsafely in front of him at a specific place before the beginning of a local bridge.  When the defendent asked if the right lane ended so he was forced to merge, the officer said that it ended a quarter mile further along.  Since I had to drive home across that bridge I couldn’t help but see the situation.  The officer had clearly lied, and the defendant had told the truth.

In another case, an African American college student had just got of the bus from the local university and was talking with some high school friends one afternoon.  A police car told them to break it up and leave.  The kid said they were just talking and he questioned why they had to leave.  The officer got out ot the car, gave him a field sobriety test, then a breatholyzer which he passed, took him to the station where they ran a urine test which also showed no alcohol.  This was before drug testing was available, so he was arrested for being under the influence of drugs.  They disqualified a chemical engineer and a nurse, so when I was questioned, I said I sold paint (not really a lie, just a very general description of my function in my company).  A telephone company supervisor was also accepted because they didn’t learn that she had been a registered nurse.  Most of the jury was of the idea that “A policeman wouldn’t have any reason to lie.”  Fortunately we were able to show that there was no valid evidence presented so the kid was found not guilty. 

And, it’s interesting that you hope that juries would be made up of non-liberals.  Aren’t they supposed to be composed of a cross-section of the population?

Occam    
Wordpad

Edited to correct formatting and lost text.

[ Edited: 27 January 2010 11:11 AM by Occam ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 January 2010 09:06 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 155 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1071
Joined  2007-06-20
asanta - 26 January 2010 07:25 PM

Tell just how is it possible to stigmatize the mother and father without stigmatizing and punishing the children??

Coddling the parents and making excuse after excuse for them and not holding them accountable for their actions is doing more harm to the children than the approach I advocate.  Your approach may make you feel good, but so does heroin.  I recommend neither.  Your and my feelings don’t matter.  Giving it straight to people, even if it makes them feel bad, will have a better outcome for all involved.  Some feelings may be hurt, but to worry about something so trivial is to miss the larger picture.

 Signature 

There are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by the gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpation.

—James Madison

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 January 2010 09:33 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 156 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11

Women who are pregnant and do not receive adequate nutritional value from their food often exhibit pica behavior in order to fulfill those needs. The food most often ingested is clay dirt. When I care for patients at work who are obese, they are often malnourished diagnosed through blood tests) to some extent. This hampers the healing process, as well as the ability to fight off diseases. Just because someone is overeating (which can happen when your body is driving you to get more NOURISHMENT) doesn’t mean that what they are getting is adequate nutritionally.

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 January 2010 01:18 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 157 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6195
Joined  2006-12-20
UlsterScots432 - 26 January 2010 04:36 PM


Thank you for being one of the first people to disagree with a point that either of us have made, but to not respond reflexively with ridiculous accusations,

OK.

.  The people so oft described as “poor” in the United States are fat, overweight, obese, because they take in more calories than they expend, plain in simple.  That is how weight is largely determined (check out fitness websites if you want to argue ad nauseam about it).  Go to those boards and express your theories, anyone, on fiber, TV, computers, etc. 

As George has pointed out this is not interesting, we accept it as fact.

But we also accept that the reasons they are doing that are to do with their circumstances both internal and external and so in order for there to be change, there needs to be a change in circumstances either internal or external and that’s where the politics comes in.

Stephen

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 January 2010 03:49 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 158 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2423
Joined  2007-09-03
Occam - 26 January 2010 08:17 PM

Quoting UlsterScot:

I seriously hope that some of the folks on here that have responded so emotionally and reflexively (with political correctness and liberalism) do not serve on juries.

  Just thought that I’d mention that I’ve served on a fair number of juries and in two cases I saw that the police lied.  On one, the officer described how the defendent merged unsafely in front of him at a specific place before the beginning of a local bridge.  When the defendent asked if the right lane ended so he was forced to merge, the officer said that it ended a quarter mile further along.  Since I had to drive home across that bridge I couldn’t help but see the situation.  The officer had clearly lied, and the defendant had told the truth.

In another case, an African American college student had just got of the bus from the local university and was talking with some high school friends one afternoon.  A police car told them to break it up and leave.  The kid said they were just talking and he questioned why they had to leave.  The officer got out ot the car, gave him a field sobriety test, then a breatholyzer which he passed, took him to the station where they ran a urine test which also showed no alcohol.  This was before drug testing was available, so he was arrested for being under the influence of drugs.  They disqualified a chemical engineer and a nurse, so when I was questioned, I said I sold paint (not really a lie, just a very general description of my function in my company).  A telephone company supervisor was also accepted because they didn’t learn that she had been a registered nurse.  Most of the jury was of the idea that “A policeman wouldn’t have any reason to lie.”  Fortunately we were able to show that there was no valid evidence presented so the kid was found not guilty. 

And, it’s interesting that you hope that juries would be made up of non-liberals.  Aren’t they supposed to be composed of a cross-section of the population?

Occam    
Wordpad

Occam thanks for these examples. I’ve been called to jury duty many times, never even had my number drawn to be questioned.  sounds like I won’t get on anyway.  Why don’t they ask about education level…is that on the card you fill out?


Edited to correct formatting and lost text.

[ Edited: 27 January 2010 11:14 AM by Occam ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 January 2010 07:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 159 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1071
Joined  2007-06-20
Occam - 26 January 2010 08:17 PM

And, it’s interesting that you hope that juries would be made up of non-liberals.

I can’t speak for Ulster but I also can’t find where he said that.  Here is what he said:

I seriously hope that some of the folks on here that have responded so emotionally and reflexively(with political correctness and liberalism) do not serve on juries. [Emphasis added.] 

Occam - 26 January 2010 08:17 PM

Aren’t they supposed to be composed of a cross-section of the population?

No.  The 6th Amendment just says the jury has to be “impartial.”  Those who are emotional and reflexive (be they liberal, conservative, libertarian, etc.) would seem to make being impartial difficult.  You have to be like Spock.  grin  Think logically.

 Signature 

There are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by the gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpation.

—James Madison

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 January 2010 07:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 160 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
Rocinante - 27 January 2010 07:28 AM

You have to be like Spock.  grin

Or a psychopath.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 January 2010 09:25 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 161 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4574
Joined  2007-08-31
George - 27 January 2010 07:48 AM
Rocinante - 27 January 2010 07:28 AM

You have to be like Spock.  grin

Or a psychopath.

Underline again.

A person who says he thinks logically and is not led by emotions is deluding himself (or others). When he really does, he is psychopath. Find out what modern psychologists and neurologists have to say about the connection of intelligence and emotions… But usually the first is the case and the person ist mostly just hiding his egoistic motivations. (It normally turns out that his logic is pointing in the direction of his interests. It is so easy: logic tells us how ‘truth propagates’. It does not say what is true independent of some other truth.)

So, yes, I think most political libertarians (free market ideologists) are just preaching for their own richness. At when you are rich, it is easy to give away something sometimes (as Ulster and Rocinante say again and again), but behold it becomes structural to help our fellow humans! (The opposite of course is true too: the poors tend more to the left side of the spectrum, because it is in their interest.)

Jee, I think I’ve thrown open a door that was open already…

GdB

 Signature 

GdB

“The light is on, but there is nobody at home”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 January 2010 11:27 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 162 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5508
Joined  2006-10-22

Quoting Rocinante:

Quoting UlsterScot:

I seriously hope that some of the folks on here that have responded so emotionally and reflexively (with political correctness and liberalism) do not serve on juries. [Emphasis added.]

See, it makes quite a difference where we put our stresses.   

The 6th Amendment just says the jury has to be “impartial.”

  That’s what voir dire is supposed to be for.  The lawyers question the prospective jurors to eliminate those with bias.  I just didn’t want to see liberals not even be called, or to be tossed off because of their philosophy rather than any perceived bias.

Occam

[ Edited: 27 January 2010 11:29 AM by Occam ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 January 2010 01:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 163 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11

By logical extension, would you also stigmatize people who were speeding, got into an accident and suffered a traumatic brain injury? It was, after all, their fault. What about the jaywalker who is hit by a car and sustains hundreds of thousands of dollars in injuries. And the person who has kidney failure from inadequately treated high blood pressure and now needs dialysis, and a transplant, which will cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. All of these people are treated on the public dime if they have no insurance, or exceed the insurance caps. What about the people who decide to have children knowing that the carry genetic diseases that will require long term care (which again will be paid for by the public) such as Cystic Fibrosis, Sickle Cell Anemia,inheritable Muscular Dystrophies and Spinal Muscular Atrophies (SMA), Hemophilia, Adrenoleukodystrophy, and on and on.

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 January 2010 01:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 164 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11
Rocinante - 26 January 2010 07:03 PM

The story now is that he needed it to talk to the press but not the kids.  Even if that is the case, that’s still pretty bad.  What kind of person takes a teleprompter to talk to the press?! 

The TRUTH is that he used it to talk to the press.
Why would he use a teleprompter to talk to the press? Perhaps he had something important to say and wanted to make sure he covered all of the facts correctly and clearly.

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 January 2010 05:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 165 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5508
Joined  2006-10-22

I don’t see what the problem is with using a teleprompter.  Do you think all the radio pundits just pull all their information out of their heads when responding to interviewers or call-ins?  They have a staff who instantly pulls data and posts it on their moniter as needed.  For example, Sarah Palin would have fared much better had she done the same rather than coming up with off-the-cuff dumb answers.

Occam

Profile
 
 
   
11 of 13
11