Gloom and doom

[Murphie]

Re: Gloom and doom

If only there were a way to get said information.

[Takelli]

Re: Gloom and doom

I do agree with you gots that a lot gets passed with out a single word said to the majority of the public

People are stupid. And don't know a lot of what's going on. But they should. I try to pass it on as much as I can. Through faveboo, forums, and other social places. Even where I work. But, thats only if I can get information about it.

[Murphie]

Re: Gloom and doom

[ATTACH=CONFIG]24577[/ATTACH]

It did work that one time with SOPA. Well .. not anything occupy related.

I was referring more to occupy with that statement. I'll agree that it totally worked that one time with SOPA.

[cidbahamut]

Re: Gloom and doom

If it does get passed, wont people be pissed, and do something about it?

No. People are complacent and ignorant. They think they've defeated all the evils that threaten the internet by stomping out SOPA/PIPA, and that's just the ones who are aware of the internet. This thing could easily get passed through quietly, without fanfare and no one would be the wiser for it. People don't make a habit of keeping tabs on legislation unless they're part of a group devoted to doing exactly that.

Legislation gets passed all the time without the public knowing what's going on. It would not surprise me in the slightest to see this pass and for there to be minimal backlash.

But hey, I've got absolutely no faith in humanity so what do I know?

[Taskmage]

Re: Gloom and doom

The answer to cyber spionage, is cyber spionage.

Which has obviously been super effective.

It did work that one time with SOPA. Well .. not anything occupy related.

[Raydeus]

Re: Gloom and doom

The only way Occupy would ever work is if people actually went and got completely out of the system in droves.

But as it stands today Occupy is just target practice for riot police and much more likely to degrade into an armed conflict rather than the paradigm shift a real change would require.

So... yeah.

[Murphie]

Re: Gloom and doom

Which has obviously been super effective.

[Takelli]

Re: Gloom and doom

If it does get passed, wont people be pissed, and do something about it?

I think that if it does, there will be more occupy type of stuff going on.

[Raydeus]

Re: Gloom and doom

The answer to cyber spionage, is cyber spionage.




Aaaand embedding is broken again. <_<;

[Raydeus]

Re: Gloom and doom

For the lulz, and also because... really? Embedded videos now?

[Ketaru]

Re: Gloom and doom

the Homosexual Agendaâ„¢
...
I always wonder who exactly concocts terms like that.
...
Its only acceptable to be yourself within limits determined by other people and their arbitrary bullshit rules. We can't even properly discuss politics unless we see the apparent negatives in both sides. If others can't see your positives as positives, they are somehow instantly idiots even if they were pals just a moment ago.

You're right that, for the most part, we can't talk about politics without discussing the other side of the spectrum in the worst terms. If a Republican speaks up against abortion, they are immediately labeled an enemy of women. It's all rhetoric to rile up the party. And to me, that is probably the worst thing about politics right now (or perhaps it has always been). To somebody looking in, it all appears to be nothing more than a war of words. Are you in favor of the right of an unborn child to live? Or are you in favor of women having the right to choose what to do with their bodies? Are those immigrants illegal? Or are they undocumented? Obama Care or Affordable Care?

It all gets tiresome very quickly when you realize that a person's particular choice of wording is all part of the propaganda. In the end, both sides are actually saying the same thing. Just saying it differently. It all depends which buzz words hit home harder.

When it comes to the so-called "Homosexual Agenda", that is just to put a negative spin on the desire for LGB people to be treated with respect and dignity. By calling it an agenda, conservatives can paint a picture of activists infiltrating schools and sneaking pro-gay material into the media. Think of some video games that have recently begun acknowledging that gay people play video games too and should be given equivalent options like the opportunity to pick a same sex spouse in games like Fable, Skyrim, Mass Effect 3, or Star Wars: The Old Republic. That's all the "homosexual agenda". Most rational people will see it for what it is. Simply another option. But someone who is anti-gay will see even the option of it as forcing a political view onto them.

Never mind that such companies probably don't care much for politics as much as they do profit. And, if recent trends are any indicator, being in favor of gay equality is way more profitable than being anti-gay.

More strategic use of words, by the way, when it comes to that particular social issue. Pro-Family or Marriage Equality? I mean, trying to put the opposite spin on it doesn't sound nearly as good. Are you for Marriage Inequality or are you Anti-Family?

It was interesting to me to see people patting themselves on the back about their racial tolerance over the whole Treyvon shooting thing, then call Jenna Talackova an abomination in the same week. It tends to show how far we've not come.

Part of that is that transgender issues are never discussed in any significant way and is something that people don't even bother trying to wrap their heads around. Race is frequently discussed and we've had a lot of time to examine it. When it comes to the gay population, people are coming around to realize that they have gay people among their families, friends, neighbors, peers, and coworkers as more are willing to disclose their sexuality. But transgenderism? How many people have ever wrapped their heads around that one? To most of us, the idea that we can feel a disconnect between our mind and our actual bodies is alien. Surely, somebody who would want to take something they were born with and deform it is crazy.

The state appointed guardian of the consumers of our group home is transgender. I step back and, yes, it is a rather unusual. And yeah, she will never pass for a biological woman. And yeah, it is a mindset that I will never understand. But then, maybe it's not my place to try and understand it. She's trying to do something good for society and the fact that she's a Male-to-female transsexual isn't hurting anyone. Certainly not hurting me. I don't see why I ought to judge her.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Gloom and doom

First Bill O'Reilly defends Ellen Degeneres this, now this.

Jenna Talackova, Transgender Miss Universe Canada Finalist, Defended By Bill O'Reilly (VIDEO)

I still don't agree with him much, but it is nice to know he has a heart.

Well, sometimes.

Bill O'Reilly attacks video games -Destructoid

[Raydeus]

Re: Gloom and doom

This could be very interesting.

I just hope he doesn't get killed and that the US doesn't block it somehow. <_<;

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Gloom and doom

I think another part of the problem is that anyone and their mother can call themselves Christian if they claim to accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. They can tack on whatever crazy ideals they want to enforce to the name Jesus and they're still Christian. It's essentially become a label you can apply to a fake religion to validate it as real.

That's just religion , though. To me, there's faith and then there's religion. Faith is a belief, but religion is just politics. King James did a nice edit of the Bible, telling William Shakespeare to omit books of the Old Testament he didn't like but left all of the New Testament intact. Maybe because the book of Revelations had a warning about that sort of editing and James just figured to be safe they wouldn't touch any of it. But how much got taken out? What got lost in translation?

Just as an example there's a verse in the Old Testament about "Wives submit to your husbands" but funny how the other half of that verse always goes mission which is the inverse, "husbands submit to your wives." its about equality in marriage but male dominated churchs always pushed that first part. Its a political agenda, its social engineering. Its not really about what God wants, but for some people its about using God to get people to act how they'd like them too.

People use science the same fucking way. There are plenty of scientists willing to fudge the numbers or delete some findings if it gets them more funding and some bullshit for a politician to throw around. Climate change scientists have been caught doing it. And OMG Godwin's Law, Hitler twisted the works of Darwin and genetics to push his agendas long before he used the church to fall in line on the holocaust.

The thing about stuff like religion and science is that they used to be things people used to be allowed to have questions about. Questions about their existence, questions about how the world works. Sectors of these institutions don't allow for that anymore. I tend to feel sorry for the people that won't question science because its science, its the same as never questioning a preacher because he's the preacher. Science is about asking questions, a preacher is supposed to be a person I can go to with questions and not feel strange about asking them.

[Taskmage]

Re: Gloom and doom

7 Rules for Recording Police - Reason Magazine

Tangential to the topic but probably relevant to the people reading it.

---------- Post added at 05:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:21 PM ----------

I'm not sure I believe a whit of what this guy is saying, but in the interest of fairness and moderation, here it is.

Jack Goldsmith - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 04/04/12 - Video Clip | Comedy Central