Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
  • Locked thread
Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


WeaponGradeSadness posted:

Right, it does get murky, but--correct me if I'm wrong, somebody--my impression from Balkan goons in the Mladic GBS thread is that it all originated after WWII, with the Serbian belief that Bosnian Muslims were Nazi collaborators. The Kashmir conflict is over control of Kashmir with some religious overtones. The Tamil conflict didn't have anything at all to do with religion, it was on ethnic lines--although the Tamil Tigers did try to push Muslims out of the north, it was because they thought the Muslims, as a group, supported the Sri Lankan government, not specifically because they were a different religion. The Middle East conflict can be laid more at the feet of European colonialism than Islam. Same goes for the other conflicts Dawkins mentions: religion is a component, and saying it isn't would be dishonest, but so would calling the conflicts religious in nature when it's only partly so.

Although I think everyone can agree that D'Souza's point on this issue lost all credibility when he made a bunch of poo poo up about Hitler

It shouldn't have any credibility from the get-go. He's seeking to imply that a conflict can only be because of atheism or religion. Therefore if the conflict isn't due to religious differences it must obviously be because of atheists.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


It took me a few moments to realize that that was referring to the procedure of fracking and not some strange replacement for "loving".

Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


The other 50% are marginalized and kept too stupid and poor by those that get the government assistance.

The original 50% are the companies/rich

Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


Gee, I wonder what happens when you compare how much they paid versus how much of the total income they make. I BET there's a correlation. But maybe that's just crazy talk.

Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


I'm still giggling about the "Needed Investment Capital" phrase.

Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


You're forgetting the radroach problem.

Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


nm posted:

So the birth certificate and long form wasn't enough. Now they want the "vault" certificate.
Birthers are like creationists, every time they get the proof they demand, they make up a new thing they need. I suspect if you did a poll, there'd be a lot of cross-over.

Vault-Tec, a name you can trust!

Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


Deleuzionist posted:

Who's the old lion in this ridiculous thing? LBJ?

Reagan of course. It's ALWAYS Reagan.

Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


Amarkov posted:

No, that's it. There's a fairly common talking point that cultures who permit "sexual deviancy" (whatever the commentator thinks that means) start decaying and get their country destroyed.

What, are you trying to imply that they instead fell because of internal weaknesses caused by an ineffectual government, idle populace, and a ruined economy brought about by an over-privileged few?

Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


Punishable by death, of course.

Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


Helsing posted:

Honestly if I were pro-life I'm sure I'd be frustrated at the clever sloganeering lying behind the term "pro-choice". I'm sure that the vaguely progressive connotation the word holds is part of why the pro-abortion movement adopted it so widely.

The real issue with that column is that he's begging the question. The reason a pro-choice person is comfortable with abortion is because they don't think the fetus is a living organism. Thus it has no rights. In a case where there aren't two living entities with competing claims to a right, there's no reason not to accept a woman's right to choose what happens to her own body. Hence if you don't think that the fetus is a person then of course the only relevant question is what you are personally choosing to do with your body.

Except you would also have to be blind about what YOUR term implies about the other side.

Being called Anti-Choice is not only accurate (They don't want it to be a choice) but also a lot better than being called Anti-Life, which isn't accurate (They don't want ALL babies aborted).

Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


I was going to type this out, but my brain tried to escape so I'm just going to attach it. From a friend of a friend on FB.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


Mo_Steel posted:

Which is why we need more stringent voter ID laws. The very idea that fraud in whatever insignificant amount could possibly occur means it's better to disenfranchise some voters just in case.

If we disenfranchise all of the voters then there will be no more fraud.

The only acceptable ID in the future is a stock portfolio.

Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


VideoTapir posted:

"Obama’s fantasy: War’s over, if we say so"

Only registered members can see post attachments!

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Taerkar
Dec 7, 2002

I would always rather be happy than dignified


Orange Devil posted:

Canadian anarchists, not quite as accomplished as Serbian anarchists.

You say that, but when's the last time you've seen an Archduke in Canada?

  • Locked thread