What the hell are you babbling about this time, Gribbler.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Police officers now considered offensive
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by giblets View PostGo ahead and enroll in an online university, just don't expect employers to take them seriouslyIt's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O
Comment
-
Go ahead and enroll in an online university, just don't expect employers to take them seriously
I agree there are lots of courses that could not be taught that way. However, there are plenty of courses that can.Scouse Git (2) La Fayette Adam Smith Solomwi and Loinburger will not be forgotten.
"Remember the night we broke the windows in this old house? This is what I wished for..."
2015 APOLYTON FANTASY FOOTBALL CHAMPION!
Comment
-
I think you're confusing an on-line university with a university that provides some classes on-line. The latter I don't have a problem with.It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O
Comment
-
All I referred to were online courses, not schools.Scouse Git (2) La Fayette Adam Smith Solomwi and Loinburger will not be forgotten.
"Remember the night we broke the windows in this old house? This is what I wished for..."
2015 APOLYTON FANTASY FOOTBALL CHAMPION!
Comment
-
Well you did say they were cheaper and most brick an mortar colleges still charge pretty high for on-line courses. But I don't want to put words in your mouth, so never mind.It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O
Comment
-
The courses themselves are much cheaper.Scouse Git (2) La Fayette Adam Smith Solomwi and Loinburger will not be forgotten.
"Remember the night we broke the windows in this old house? This is what I wished for..."
2015 APOLYTON FANTASY FOOTBALL CHAMPION!
Comment
-
When my daughter was in college a few years ago getting her masters, she said the on-line courses that her college offered weren't really much cheaper.
But then, that's just one example and I wouldn't guarantee that's what it generally is. But it was what I based my comment on. But again, never mind. My main point was that I don't take candidates from on-line universities seriously for employment purposes. If it was an on-line course from a brick and mortar college, yes, that would be different.It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O
Comment
-
I know this is bouncing back to an earlier conversation, but I have continued to see serious commentators (and very liberal people) have the same opinion as I voiced earlier in this thread. That the Democrats were seen to be too focused on gay rights and bathrooms and not on the needs of the working class and racial minorities.
The response seems to be that the working class and racial minorities are hypocrites and ugly for desiring more focus on their issues and not on gay rights/bathrooms/etc. As pointed out earlier here, is everything part of the culture war or nothing?
The past few days I have been thinking more and I think I have a response.
The fundaments rights that we claim serve as the secular basis of our law are life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness. I think it is obvious that pursuit of happiness is the least important of them, because the others are required for the pursuit of happiness and are also more specific and so easier to make value judgements of. So generally life, liberty and property are more important than pursuit of happiness. You can say that pursuit of happiness is the 'cultural' factor.
This is where racial civil rights and, for example, transgender civil rights (bathrooms) are different. That isn't to say that bathrooms are wrong, just that they are as important. They are 'pursuit of happiness' and not life or liberty or property, which are often the case for racial civil rights. That isn't to say that the LGBTQQ? community hasn't fought for life, liberty and property... just that those civil rights were mostly gained when the Court ruled that the sodomy laws were unconstitutional and so on. Bathrooms, and even gay marriage, are not issues of life, liberty or property.
I would argue that gay marriage is not primarily an issue of life, liberty or property while 'mixed race' marriages is, because mixed-race marriages were banned in the late 17th century during the initiation of chattel slavery in the US as a means of denying liberty and property to people of african ancestry. Additionally, in the law that ruled them unconstitutional the laws were still being used to deny people of african ancestry (and their children) property and liberty.
There were no similar laws, even the defence of marriage laws, that caused LGBTQQ? people to lose property and liberty. Additionally, it was not part of a system to remove liberty and property because while people of african ancestry have children of african ancestry, LGBTQQ? people do not generally have LGBTQQ? children.
So equivalence of the importance of the racial civil rights movement and the LGBTQQ? civil rights movement are false.
And I didn't even need to point out that LGBTQQ? people are much more privedlged then racial minority people.
JM
(I don't have time, but the working class issues are ones relating to property and so also more important, I would argue, then cultural pursuit of happiness issues.)
(I am not arguing entirely forgetting about cultural issues, just that they shouldn't have the spotlight continually and be prioritised)Jon Miller-
I AM.CANADIAN
GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.
Comment
-
For most "left behind" voters that voted for Trump probably think that gays and minorities have already won. (regardless of reality) Laws have been passed to protect their interests. So seeing the dems continually harping on those rights is meaningless to them, they're more interested in what's in it for them.It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jon Miller View PostThe fundaments rights that we claim serve as the secular basis of our law are life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness. I think it is obvious that pursuit of happiness is the least important of them, because the others are required for the pursuit of happiness and are also more specific and so easier to make value judgements of. So generally life, liberty and property are more important than pursuit of happiness. You can say that pursuit of happiness is the 'cultural' factor.
This is where racial civil rights and, for example, transgender civil rights (bathrooms) are different. That isn't to say that bathrooms are wrong, just that they are as important. They are 'pursuit of happiness' and not life or liberty or property, which are often the case for racial civil rights. That isn't to say that the LGBTQQ? community hasn't fought for life, liberty and property... just that those civil rights were mostly gained when the Court ruled that the sodomy laws were unconstitutional and so on. Bathrooms, and even gay marriage, are not issues of life, liberty or property.
Both can affect life, but we already have a safety net for economic hardship. It should be better, but the ironic thing is that a large portion of those who need it (low income white working class) are politically opposed to it.
To be clear, I am not making this argument, I think we have to restrict liberty in some ways... especially in cases where liberty is opposed to itself or life. But if we judge based on hierarchy of these principles, economic well-being (above subsistence) is lower on the ladder than Civil Rights.
Also, it's a false dichotomy. We can care about Civil Rights and helping out the poor. In many cases ... to do either, we have to do both because of the feedback between them.
Comment
-
Originally posted by giblets View PostMost states haven't passed laws to protect the interests of gay people, and the federal government has not.It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O
Comment
-
Originally posted by Aeson View PostBy your reasoning, we should care even less about people who lost their job than about Civil Rights. Civil Rights issues do negatively impact liberty, though some specific issues less than others. Losing your job is a result of liberty for the economy as a whole. Stopping people from losing their jobs would actually restrict liberty. As are trade tariffs, restrictions on hiring, punishments for relocating businesses, etc.
Both can affect life, but we already have a safety net for economic hardship. It should be better, but the ironic thing is that a large portion of those who need it (low income white working class) are politically opposed to it.
To be clear, I am not making this argument, I think we have to restrict liberty in some ways... especially in cases where liberty is opposed to itself or life. But if we judge based on hierarchy of these principles, economic well-being (above subsistence) is lower on the ladder than Civil Rights.
Also, it's a false dichotomy. We can care about Civil Rights and helping out the poor. In many cases ... to do either, we have to do both because of the feedback between them.
Using this definition of liberty, removing the anti-sodomy laws was protecing the liberty of LGBTQQ? people just like removing Jim Crow or the War on Drugs or slavery protects the liberty of blacks.
JMJon Miller-
I AM.CANADIAN
GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.
Comment
Comment