51. Russian woman put on trial in Dubai for drinking juice in public

Comment #254461 by SPS on September 25, 2008 at 5:33 pm

I wonder what the chances are of finding out this type of thing is against the law even if you were to 'brush up' on it before going there. It's not the type of action one would immediately associate with the violation of law.
Does anyone know how the potential punishment for violating this law in Dubai compares to the prescribed punishment recommended in the qu'ran?

I read another article recently at nytimes.com about the cultural diversity in Dubai and the lives of some of those who live there. A welcome read compared to the usual topics about muslim extremism:

Young and Arab in Land of Mosques and Bars

52. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254082 by SPS on September 25, 2008 at 10:11 am

There was a discussion about abortion a few months back on another thread. I posted this link to an article/essay by Michael Shermer, which I found relevant to the topic:
Fuzzy Logic & Fuzzy Life

My own attempt to make sense of it on that thread is here.

53. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250302 by SPS on September 19, 2008 at 10:28 am

I read this article today at Wired.com:

Conservatives Scare More Easily Than Liberals, Say Scientists

54. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #249969 by SPS on September 18, 2008 at 7:34 pm

Titania,
We need more comments like yours. Very much a breath of fresh air.

I don't think its a stretch to say that we tend to tolerate more from, and give the benefit of a doubt to, people we like and often agree with. The trick is extending this courtesy to others, regardless of what we currently think of them. Not always an easy thing to do, I admit.
I have little doubt that most people who post here are decent people. For some, it's a bit closer to the surface than in others.

Diacanu,

Take heart. 'This too shall pass', as the saying goes. Going forward is the important thing.

Goodnight.

55. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #249469 by SPS on September 18, 2008 at 7:20 am

Thought you guys might find this article interesting:

Italy's right to curb Islam with mosque law

56. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #248494 by SPS on September 16, 2008 at 10:21 am

I'm at work, so don't have much time.
Interesting comment, gb.
One word comes to mind: prevention.
See Cuban Missile Crisis.
It would be intersting to see how many times civilization has been preserved through aversion/prevention rather than conflict.
I've had the pleasure of meeting many former soldiers who were in WWII. They were some of the best people I've ever met, and though advanced in years, not one ever gave me the impression of having been a hellbent warmonger. Such people need to be preserved whenever possible.

57. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #247685 by SPS on September 14, 2008 at 7:47 pm

Making America Stupid

Hmm...

58. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #247152 by SPS on September 14, 2008 at 3:28 am

...you have a situation where the strong do as they will.

...we need to get away from that. It's merely that I recognise just how difficult that process is.

How about, oh I don't know, actually answering some of my questions? Such as, how are you going to defend those tiny islands of civilization when an Enemy actually exists?

...now is Islam, or is it not, a capital-e Enemy? And even more broadly, can you address the point that there always is an enemy, for the simple reason that there is always someone willing to use war and violence to get what they want?

59. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #247125 by SPS on September 14, 2008 at 2:25 am

Gb,
Strawman? If there is one, my apologies. I was simply commenting on what you portrayed as reality, not trying to make some analysis of Machiavelli.
And on a minor note, not that it's a big deal, but I've seen your post go through at least three substantial changes. Maybe throw in an 'edit' now and then.
Fanusi,
Threats need to be mitigated where they can, and dealt with when necessary, but when you are always seeking out enemies you make yourself one. Do you want to live in a world where this approach you suggest is the preferred means of resolving problems, even on an inter-personal level? And, yes, what we want is also a part of this reality you describe.

The most damaging of these, I think, is the idea that a moral principle can stand on it's own. It can't, it needs an entire social structure to maintain it, and lacking that, it will perish.

The strong crush the weak, and all are prey to chance.

60. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #247027 by SPS on September 13, 2008 at 8:09 pm

Goodnight all.

61. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #247026 by SPS on September 13, 2008 at 8:03 pm

GB,

In sum, I'm saying that perpetuating an attitude of 'we better get them before they get us', as an inevitable an ongoing mantra will eventually work against those who hold that mantra, because we have never allowed those who don't see things the 'correct' way to be seen as anything but enemies. When we allow for nothing other than this attitude, the same attitude can be used against 'us'. Attempting to 'purify', if you will, all attitudes by force or threat of force can be a position held by either side where destruction or the threat of it is seen as the way to bring all to the 'correct' side or be damned. This to me is a self-defeating cycle of thought.
I have yet to see how this attitude is separate in its actions from religious fanaticism.
As I indicated earlier, if violence is unavoidable, it should be the last option, not the first.

Edit:

On the other hand, let's remember Machiavelli's words, and try not to waste our time describing that which has never been seen nor known to exist in reality. If we currently hold an advantage, then let's keep it that way, and if there's any ass kicking going on we'll be doing it.

62. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #247014 by SPS on September 13, 2008 at 6:02 pm

This is the paradox I've been homing in on: regardles of whether or not those hideous tactics were justified, it is the kind of mind that was capable of employing them that made the survival of civilization possible.
_________________________________________________
Believe me, I'd love for you to be right, for there to be some way to avoid the eternal conflict. Unfortunately, there isn't, and believing that such a way exists only makes the inevitable conflict more terrible.
_________________________________________________
...honour-bound young people who will go out there and unleash merry hell on the enemies of your tribe, your city, your nation, your civilization. Ones who are willing to shoot the enemy in the head, or immolate entire neighbourhoods in phosphosphorus, or drop nuclear weapons.

Believe me, I'd love for you to be right, for there to be some way to avoid the eternal conflict.

63. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #246826 by SPS on September 13, 2008 at 10:37 am

While I think most people would agree that sometimes drastic measures are needed to preserve life, every possible measure should be taken before 'drastic measure' translates into taking lives.
In the scenario you present it appears to me that the priority for the preservation of life becomes instead the priority for the preservation of the 'code' to the exception of life.

64. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #246667 by SPS on September 12, 2008 at 6:15 pm

Convincing post, root:)
I don't mean to bring the whole gun thing back to life if no one wants to discuss it further, but if everyone can indulge me a little for this post.
One thing I don't think was covered enough in the gun/handgun discussion here is its comparison to other ways people are killed.
I believe the comparison was made with drunk driving, medical malpractice, and so on, but unless I'm mistaken there was little discussion about the consequence of the removal of handguns as compared to all the other examples given.
For instance, if handguns were removed from society, what consequence would it bring? Now what if medical doctors were removed? People slip, fall, and are killed in bathtubs, but we wouldn't think of banning bathtubs and that's because they have a usual use that has nothing to do with bringing harm to another. Sure, anything that has the potential to be deadly should be made safer if possible or alternatives found, but don't we balance a thing's usefulness to us with the consequence or risk it might bring by ridding ourselves of it? An argument can even be made for the benefits of 'responsible' alcohol consumption.
In addition, I had mentioned in a previous comment that an amnesty program could be offered. Those who want to turn in their guns could be paid a flat rate for each firearm turned in. This could be attempted in neighborhoods, cities, states, or nationwide. I know similar programs have been tried before. The money paid for each of these firearms could well save taxpayers many times what is paid for them if their removal results in a reduction of violent crime or murder, not only resulting in safer neighborhoods/society, but a reduction in the expense involved in housing those guilty of violent crimes for decades on end in prison. In areas where violent crimes by gun are more prevalent, a higher amount might be paid for turning in a firearm. Just throwing it out there.

65. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #246633 by SPS on September 12, 2008 at 3:52 pm

I don't know enough about Noam Chomsky to formulate a definite opinion of him, but what little I have seen/read of him gives the impression of a very thoughtful and knowledgeable person. I think it was Sam Harris who wrote in The End of Faith that Noam Chomsky is an 'exquisitely moral' person, though he took issue with a position of his as well.

66. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #246469 by SPS on September 12, 2008 at 10:40 am

Just read this about the ploy of appealing to the populace:

GOP Loves the Heartland To Death

Edit: Fixed link.

67. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #246078 by SPS on September 11, 2008 at 6:57 pm

Root, Frankus, Goldy,
Thanks for the follow up.
Twp,
Hope you're doing well. Take care.

Goodnight everyone.

68. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #246065 by SPS on September 11, 2008 at 6:39 pm

What a powerful symbol it would have been had a *World* flag been erected instead.

69. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245689 by SPS on September 11, 2008 at 10:11 am

Maybe I missed it. Has there been any speculation about what would happen if handguns were banned? What if there were an amnesty program offered to turn in any firearm in exchange for a flat rate paid for them?

70. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245444 by SPS on September 10, 2008 at 7:20 pm

It could be that the opposition to guns, specifically handguns, assault firearms, and the like, is because they stand as a representation as an enforcer, an arbiter of wills, giving its owner the option to easily bring to bear by its use a solution through finality. A person can look at a gun and be immediately aware that its bearer can have a distinct advantage that needn't come by reason or legitimacy, that there is an 'other' in mind for its use.
I am inclined to think that most lawfully owned guns are also responsibly owned. Whether certain types of gun ownership should be a right, I don't know. Insofar as people are able to choose their definition of 'rights', then the enacted choice could be seen as an expansion and enforcement of rights and freedom rather than a denial of it. Not in anyway meant to suggest that a majority will always be correct, or couldn't bring their own brand of tyranny.

71. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #245015 by SPS on September 10, 2008 at 5:00 am

Very interesting, Dispiracist. Thanks again for your comment.
Thanks for the compliment, hungarianelephant.
One of the reasons I come back to rd.net, almost daily, is to read the many exceptional comments by the posters here.

72. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #244903 by SPS on September 9, 2008 at 6:02 pm

Some interesting and admirable comments made lately. This post is an amalgam in response to the several dozen posts I just read, and isn't aimed at anyone particular.
Having grown up well below the poverty line, I knew quite a few people that were in my same predicament, and I can tell you that not only may opportunity, as it were, not be acted upon, but it may not be recognized at all, much less as a viable choice if and when it arrives. Demoralization within the middle and lower economic classes as a condition and guiding force in one's choices within that class should not be underestimated in my opinion. Dismissing those who miss opportunity as lazy or deserving of their lot does nothing to identify or remedy the cause of the problem, and equips those with that view with a ready excuse to exploit those labeled as such. It appears to me that 'opportunity' in a given economic system is always an 'or else' proposition, and doesn't necessarily guarantee that the individual's notion of 'rights' is respected. I understand that a free market system has been likened to natural selection, but there is no associated influence on any system that need be excluded from the natural selection process whether it be a 'free market' or otherwise. If we're to leave people's fate to the influences of a free market then how is social darwinism to be avoided? Should it only be tempered through the private voluntary action of the individual, or should all effected parties have a voice in the solution? If we temper its influence through socialized programs who is to decide the limits on those programs? Should it be decided by all effected parties and by those who would suffer the greatest detriment, or just by those who abide by the current workings of a system?
As far as providing solutions, that should be a group effort when possible, and identifying a problem can be equally important to finding a solution, and perhaps just as tricky.

73. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #244887 by SPS on September 9, 2008 at 4:31 pm

I read these quotes in a book I read recently, and think they may be relevant to the turn the thread has taken:

'Wonder each morning how you're going to hold on till evening, each Monday how you'll make it to Saturday. Reach home without the strength to do anything but watch TV, telling yourself you'll surely die an idiot...once a day, feel sick...Because you've traded your life for a living; fear that the rage mounting within you will die down in the end, that in the final analysis people are right when they say: "ah, you can get used to anything."
-Andre Gorz

'We can have democracy or we can have the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few. We cannot have both.'
-Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis

'That which we at present call laziness is, rather, the disgust which men [sic] feel over breaking their back for beggars' salaries and being, moreover, looked down upon and depreciated by the class which exploits them - while those who do nothing useful live like princes and are deferred to and respected by all.'
-Ricardo Flores Magon

74. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #244754 by SPS on September 9, 2008 at 12:20 pm

Scot,

And shouldn't a job's necessity/undesirability factor into that wage, and maybe be increased accordingly?

75. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #244679 by SPS on September 9, 2008 at 10:05 am

What I'm wondering is how does absolute morality allow for tolerance of others who don't share that morality, whether it comes by religion or otherwise, whether or not it allows for changing from one absolute to another, unless tolerance is part of that absolute?
Economic systems are an interest of mine, but something I'm still learning about. So, I'm interested in other's points of view.
Two systems I'm learning about that do contain socialist elements are
Economic Democracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_Democracy
and Participatory Economics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parecon
with a Q&A page here:
http://zmag.org/zparecon/zpareconfaq.htm
Aren't all systems operated by an imposition of governing rules? Ideally, agreed upon rules?

76. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #244524 by SPS on September 9, 2008 at 5:12 am

Thanks for taking the time to comment, Dispiracist. I invite anyone else to comment on any of the questions I posted above, if interested.

77. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #244405 by SPS on September 8, 2008 at 4:44 pm

Maybe this is a little late for the most recent line of discussion, but I wanted to ask those in support of capitalism, or anyone else, their views on a few questions I have. Assume an 'and why?' after most questions.
Do you believe class division to be a necessary and inevitable part of capitalism?
If so, do you believe its existence to be for the 'common good'?
If not, what solutions does capitalism offer?
Do you believe any variation of socialist ideals invariable leads to terrible consequence, and by what cause?
Do you believe any economic system to be immune from evolving?
Do you believe those who provide monetary capital should receive perpetual monetary return in some circumstances?
Do you associate a humanity of the future, say, a thousand years from now, still subscribing to free market principles?
I know these questions require a degree of speculation. Thanks.

Edited for syntax.

78. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #244097 by SPS on September 8, 2008 at 9:51 am

Came across this article by chance today:
To market, to market

79. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #243734 by SPS on September 7, 2008 at 7:57 am

mordacious1 #1075,

I agree. I would hope by now most people would not buy into these word tricks so easily. It's frustrating to think people are fooled again and again by the same tactic.

80. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #243614 by SPS on September 6, 2008 at 12:22 pm

I saw this article today on nytimes.com showing a graphic for the frequency of words used at the democrat and republican conventions:

The Words They Used

81. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #242936 by SPS on September 4, 2008 at 7:13 pm

I scored left-libertarian, pretty close to the dalai lama. Maybe they need more categories.
Having followed this thread off and on I wanted to offer some thoughts. I appreciate it when evidence is offered in support of a position, but I do sometimes question the dogged resolve in sticking to a position offered by the evidence givers on both sides of a debate, assuming most parties involved are willing to change their minds, and likely have changed their minds when new evidence comes to light. I can't help but think that a certain amount of personal preference is always involved despite the volume of evidence given in support of this thing or that. What's being offered as evidence isn't always on par with, say, a mathematical proof. Take this example of 'evidence' presented by theists:
'1) DNA is not merely a molecule with a pattern; it is a code, a language, and an information storage mechanism.
2) All codes are created by a conscious mind; there is no natural process known to science that creates coded information.
3) Therefore DNA was designed by a mind.'
The usefulness of the evidence in these thread debates, not necessarily the evidence itself, is often questionable, when it would be a full-time job to verify all the evidence given in any given active thread. One is almost forced to choose to either take certain 'evidence' on authority for sheer lack of time, energy, or interest, or dismiss resolution to most sides of a debate as inconclusive. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. It is disheartening though when a debate so often devolves into name calling or general ill-will against the opposing side, sometimes giving the impression that there is a roving verbal gang volleying insults from the favored side. That being said, there is usually something learned along the way.

82. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #242445 by SPS on September 3, 2008 at 5:50 pm

Good post, mordacious1.
There is sometimes a hair trigger on the animosity and personal attacks here, too, which, can both hinder an open exchange and put off those who might otherwise participate.
I read this article today on newscientist.com about Ms. Palin's view about the environment/climate change:
Will Palin's anti-environment stance be contagious?

83. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #242149 by SPS on September 3, 2008 at 12:27 pm

al-rawandi,

...I don't actually have a problem funding universal health care. I am willing to give up a portion of my money (wealth would be an overstatement) to help people live, even if they caused some of their own ills.

84. Genesis and the origin of the Origin of the species

Comment #239654 by SPS on August 30, 2008 at 6:20 am

It appears to be a recurring theme of religious apologists that scientific understanding is to be excluded if scientific understanding doesn't explain and precede every aspect of existence, somehow requiring an understanding and explanation of mechanism, else demanding that 'religious faith' and 'god-given' is the answer. And, then there's the other recurring theme, where, if there is a great deal of understanding through science with 'x' explaining 'y', the apologist will credit god for both. But, as far I know, existence always precedes understanding, understanding itself being subject to evolution.

85. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #237928 by SPS on August 27, 2008 at 12:19 pm

al-rawandi,

You make a good point, but I was speaking generally. I wouldn't dismiss anyone's opinion just because it's an opinion, especially if they are likely to be effected by a course of action, but I may weigh the opinion of someone generally considered knowledgeable in a particular field more heavily. For instance, if diplomacy with a foreign nation was my aim, I may weigh the opinion of a journalist who has lived in that country for decades more heavily than someone who has studied it from afar through books, etc. Another example may be that of opinion leading to questionable action by those who have a vested interest in a particular outcome, such as the recent push to have creationism, or 'alternative' explanations to evolution taught in a science classroom, justified by there being 'doubts' about evolution or labeling it 'only a theory'.

-Edit for spelling.

86. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #237854 by SPS on August 27, 2008 at 10:09 am

I agree that opinions should be expressed, and the right to do so is a vital part of freedom. However, transitioning from opinion to a course of action should be handled more carefully. If I were seeking medical treatment for a sick child, I may listen to the opinions of well-studied amateurs, but would likely defer to the options made available by professionals in the field. Confidence is fine, but the well-studied amateur, as well as the professional, should be open to the possibility that they are mistaken in their view, and the amateur, perhaps, much more likely to be so.

87. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #237284 by SPS on August 26, 2008 at 10:02 am

I think both sides of the reason, opinion, learning argument have valid points.
I do think there is a certain degree of humility necessary to effectively continue the learning process, as you are likely to find that you are wrong quite a lot along the way.

88. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236832 by SPS on August 25, 2008 at 12:18 pm

huzonfurst,

Of course the real solution to illegal immigration is for the government to enforce existing laws, but it refuses to do that in deference to large commercial interests who like having cheap labor to mercilessly exploit. The fascist pigs (always loved that term) then point to the squalid conditions in which the grossly underpaid workers live and blame it on them, since they aren't "like us (wink, wink)."

89. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236440 by SPS on August 24, 2008 at 3:45 pm

I've posted this quote before. Maybe it's appropriate for this thread...and I like it:

The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right...
- Judge Learned Hand

90. A Teacher on the Front Line as Faith and Science Clash

Comment #236401 by SPS on August 24, 2008 at 3:12 pm

I didn't care for or agree with his answer regarding the science vs. religion issue, but aside from that I thought Campbell did well in championing evolution in a challenging situation. Given his own religious views, the way he conveyed the science vs. religion issue was not ideal (though to him it was honest), it appears to have been an effective way of reaching some of the students who have religious objections to evolution.

-Slight edit for clarity.

91. A Teacher on the Front Line as Faith and Science Clash

Comment #236368 by SPS on August 24, 2008 at 2:37 pm

Read this yesterday. Nice article.

92. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236156 by SPS on August 24, 2008 at 10:02 am

Just another thought, about the emotional element, I suspect this thread, and any other, wouldn't go very far if we were indifferent or apathetic about a given subject. Emotion is motivation.

93. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236126 by SPS on August 24, 2008 at 9:27 am

What is to stop the religious interests of our respective countries from replacing 'muslim' with 'atheist' in regard to dealing with 'extremism' in some of these ideas that have been offered, and using Stalin, Hitler, China, etc., as justification? And, as far as an atheist running for political office, there are U.S. states with constitutions that 'require a religious test'
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_against_atheists ), though the Supreme Court decided in 1961 "that the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the federal Constitution override the state requirements".
As regards evidence and guilt, consider the follow scenario:
An engineer is kidnapped by an extremist group.
The engineer is required to transport a briefcase to a destination, and comply with all demands on threat of the killing of his/her family.
The engineer does not know the briefcase's contents.
The briefcase contains a bomb, which will be placed in the locker of a busy commuter terminal.
The engineer is caught before being able to comply with this order.
There is no evidence tracing the bomb back to an extremist group.
Prior to complying with the extremist group's demand, the engineer is required to videotape radical extremist rhetoric.
Would guilt be clear in this scenario?
Just a thought.

94. Kamikaze bacteria illustrate evolution of co-operation

Comment #236057 by SPS on August 24, 2008 at 5:30 am

Thanks, Steve. I have to say that I didn't see Richard's comment, but jumped to Joe's from the latest comments section on the main page. Sorry, Richard.

95. Kamikaze bacteria illustrate evolution of co-operation

Comment #236054 by SPS on August 24, 2008 at 5:18 am

Joe,

Please explain the confidence you have in knowing something that, to you, cannot be explained.

96. Pastor Rick's Test

Comment #233949 by SPS on August 20, 2008 at 4:21 pm

Here's an article about the Q&A by a christian on HuffingtonPost.com:

Obama vs. "Oh, Bomb 'Em" --Who's the Christian?

97. The best way to undermine the jihadists is to trigger a rebellion of Muslim women - and establish energy independence

Comment #226083 by SPS on August 7, 2008 at 5:14 pm

Someone once said something to the effect that women bring the 'civil' to 'civilization'.
I tend to agree.
I agree with the another poster's point stressing the importance of education, which should start with the right of free inquiry without fear of retribution. I'm hopeful that action taken through solidarity can bring positive change.

98. Embracing goodness, without God

Comment #223927 by SPS on August 3, 2008 at 6:30 pm

Ideally, I'd like to see 'atheist' replaced with 'person'.

99. A cast-iron case for a secular society

Comment #223759 by SPS on August 3, 2008 at 11:21 am

The Guardian could have gotten the title for this directly from the article:

The obliging Balls...

100. A third of Muslim students back killings

Comment #221827 by SPS on July 30, 2008 at 7:25 am

al-rawandi,

Thanks for your response.
I apologize if I'm not able to get back to you in a timely fashion. I work at a constant time deficit, and there is virtually no gap from one thing to the next, but I'm on a short break.
What concerns me is that the 'interest of the wealthy' is always the prevailing and growing force. I'm not sure we can always count on society beginning to object (though I hope we would), or that society at large will be at any great advantage to oppose the prevailing forces, or for that matter, society knowing there is something to object to in the first place. If it would happen as you describe, would this be cyclical, or would society call for permanent change?
As far as state ownership, the phrase itself doesn't sit well with me. I certainly think fairness is a reasonable and worthy goal.
Break over...more to come later, time permitting.