Forum posts made by monocle

Topic The Gun Control Debate Thread.
Posted 29 Jul 2014 21:57

My guns haven't killed anyone.

Topic Boko Haram Abductions
Posted 07 May 2014 15:23

A quote from the other day - "If those girls had been oil wells (or white), they'd have been found and returned already."

Topic For you that voted for Obama...
Posted 05 May 2014 03:52

If you would like to know, the Defense budget of the United States is 19 % of the entire federal budget in Fiscal Year 2013. The total federal spending in Fiscal year was 3.5 trillion. Cuts have already been applied to the US Defense budget due to something called Sequestration, which required mandatory cuts (50% percent) to the defense budget.

Certain parts of the defense budget. Show me where the bottom line of the total defense budget was cut 50%.

The fact it's still a dangerous world doesn't mean we don't overspend on our military anyway. Hundreds of millions for fighter engines nobody wants. Cammo uniform travesties in the millions of dollars. We spent $1b more on air conditioning in Iraq and Aghansitan in 2010-11 than the entire NASA budget.

We have more aircraft carriers than all other navies in the world combined.

The list is very, very long. Trimming a few 10's of billions from the military would reduce US power by a negligible fraction, and completely end dozens of underfunding crises.

Topic For you that voted for Obama...
Posted 04 May 2014 19:36

I only chimed in because Non-Americans were commenting or implying that the Defense budget could afford to have a "few billions" cut from the annual budget.
And they're 100% right.

Topic What if Ukraine join NATO?
Posted 29 Apr 2014 04:24


and less of the 'cesspit of sin', you denigrate yourself as well as all other members here.

I practice irony.

So do you, albeit unintentionally.

Topic What if Ukraine join NATO?
Posted 28 Apr 2014 15:21

You may find that Matthew Henry's commentary helpful.

I may find prophecy to be bullshit.

In fact, I always have.

You didn't answer my question. What is a biblical end-timer like you doing in a cesspit of sin like Lush?

Topic What if Ukraine join NATO?
Posted 28 Apr 2014 04:37

Try Ezekiel 38

Try again.

Topic Should creationism be taught in schools?
Posted 27 Apr 2014 12:02

Religious studies should be a elective in high school. Dangerous idea to be sure but young people should a better crasp on religions practice of all sorts to eliminate the current ignorance that plagues of youth about other cultures.

Study _about_ religion (and comparative religion at that) is fine and I agree a useful cultural education. Study of a single religion-as-law would be indoctrination and has no place in public education.

Topic Should creationism be taught in schools?
Posted 27 Apr 2014 08:58

Then the question should be should religion be taught in school?

Comparative religion? History of religion? Sure.
Religious doctrine, or any one specific religion-as-law? No.

Topic Should creationism be taught in schools?
Posted 27 Apr 2014 08:01

Evolution was taught in science classes for a private Christian school, why can't it be the other way? At least for a week?
Because creationism is not science. It's really that simple.

Topic For you that voted for Obama...
Posted 27 Apr 2014 06:53

Actually the country IS on the brink of an economical collapse.

Should've stopped reading there. The 'taker' whinging after is old BS.

Topic For you that voted for Obama...
Posted 25 Apr 2014 17:41

You know, I took "Adolph Hitler should have won" to be, at first some sort of lame comment on the incompetence of American presidents. But now I'm beginning to wonder if baldkate actually wished the Nazis had won WWII. So, which is it baldkate? Are you merely ignorant of history, or are you a full-on NeoNazi?

Topic For you that voted for Obama...
Posted 25 Apr 2014 05:28

I see they have a Fox News feed in Dusseldorf, too.

Topic What if Ukraine join NATO?
Posted 25 Apr 2014 05:27

Probably off topic and almost certainly for another forum discussion but...........

Biblical end times prophesy alludes to Israel being involved in an 'end times' war against Islamic nations supported by armies from Russia and China.
"Biblical end times prophecy" has meant whatever is convenient to match the current world situation. Islam, Russia, China are inferred only from symbology in a book written with no more divine inspiration than L. Ron Hubbard. We've spent the last 3 or 4 generations in "end times". About time to wake up and realize we make the time we're in.

The curious thing is that Israel is only defended by European nations. The US is not involved at all.
That's pure BS. US aid to israel is immense.

The US is stepping back from it's role as World Cop
And about damn time.

and it is very weak financially. Its relations with Israel are also not as strong as they used to be. We live in interesting times....
The US could be much stronger financially, I agree. And relations with Israel could be better, but I hold Israel at least equally accountable for that.

One has to ask - what is a biblical end-timer doing on a smut website? Hastening Armageddon with the sins of the flesh?

Topic What if Ukraine join NATO?
Posted 24 Apr 2014 17:10

His lack of real action so far leads me to believe in the rumours circulating in 2012 that he hated America. A militarily weak and isolationist America is his real desire. Russia would not have dared to set foot in the Crimea under a Republican administration.

The whole "the President hates America" is some of the most moronic tripe to come out of the right this decade. A "militarily weak" America is a NeoCon fantasy. As for "Never under a Republican Administration" Bull. See South Ossetia War, 2008. Try not to swim in the Fox News cesspool so much.

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 10 Apr 2014 17:12

All your posts are the same! They all presuppose that you know what every other persons motive is, well I'm sorry but you don't.
Yours have quite the presupposition about me, and it's consistently incorrect. I don't presume to know what everyone else thinks. I know for a fact, however, that many (I never said or assumed all) prop 8 supporters were homophobes. And many (I never said or assumed all) supported it with the express intent of denying rights.

You seem hell bent on calling every single person that opposes your view a bigot
I'm not responsible for your laughable misinterpretation of my position.

Am I a bigot as well just because I can understand the view of others?
No. That was neither said nor implied. I think you're not a particularly good judge of the intent or meaning of others, though.

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 10 Apr 2014 03:47

Who mentioned fired? Although there does seem to be a prima facie case for constructive dismissal.
I'd love to see someone try. However, Eich wouldn't testify for them because he doesn't agree.

I'm talking about one religious group calling for a boycott. A few more join in and the snowball starts to roll.
Already done. There are several conservative/right winger pushes to do so, and they may have financial impact. It doesn't make them right, and it won't change Eich's decision or Mozilla's behavior which is motivated by their corporate philosophy, not fear of a group. This retaliation movement is based, fundamentally, on bigotry.

Social media also blows the clarion call and before you know it the protest is much bigger than the first.
And it exposes its own ridiculousness as well. You can already find
and others.

What's to be done?
Reverse the resignation?
How can you do that?

You don't reverse jack, because it wasn't wrong, and these jokers are the hypocrites.

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 09 Apr 2014 19:27

My biggest concern with the whole situation is, that the door has been opened for religious groups to scream discrimination.

They can scream until they're blue in the face, but it'd be for a lie. Eich wasn't fired for his beliefs. He wasn't fired at all.

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 09 Apr 2014 17:57

The only thing that he supported was the old definition of marriage, which has in place for thousands of years throughout the world.

To say that that was the whole intent of Prop 8 is disingenuous. Prop 8 did not have the sole intent of protecting a religious definition of marriage. Its intent was to deny rights to a segment of the population. And many of its supporters supported it for that specific reason.

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 09 Apr 2014 05:52

Proposition 8 was about the redefining of marriage and was in fact carried by 52% of the voters in California.
The equality issue was not the primary concern of the pro voters, it was the religious aspect.
I sincerely doubt that. But perhaps you have knowledge not in evidence.

He proved that he was inclusive in all aspects of equality except for the definition of what "marriage" is.
Not really. If he had, he'd still be CEO.

Balancing conflicting beliefs can be problematical.

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 09 Apr 2014 03:40

Eich was one of the executives that put together the Mozilla Code of Practice that ensures that same sex couples receive equal benefits as married couples.
It seems pretty strange that not one gay or lesbian Mozilla employee has come forward to complain about his attitude or behaviour.

Then he's exhibited two contrary behaviors, because Prop 8 would have denied those self-same benefits. And he still hasn't, to my knowledge withdrawn his support for it or legislation like it. It's his contrary actions I find strange. He could have completely deflected the criticism by saying he no longer supports legislation like prop 8 - even if he'd said out loud and in the open civil unions are fine with him. But he didn't, so he leaves people to conclude hey really aren't for him.
As well, a company isn't just about internal culture. It's about external perception as well, for good or ill.

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 08 Apr 2014 16:49

Freedom of speech keeps you out of prison. That's pretty much all it does.

It doesn't protect you from the consequences freedom of speech may bring.

Funny how so many people interpret it as, 'Say what you want without having to answer for it.'

Ding! Give the Lady a cigar. (I'll smoke it myself if you don't like 'em)

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 08 Apr 2014 16:46

So you are fine as long as everyone agrees with you.
I'm also pretty fine if they don't, as long as that disagreement is honest.

You are quite happy to take away free speech and freedom to practice religion as long as I, not you because you already have it, gain the right to marry.
I'm not happy at all when someone attributes to me opinions which I do not have, which you do here. Nowhere have I advocated the abridgment of free speech or freedom of religion.

That strikes me as being very singular society.
It's not singular at all when it's composed of your own straw men.

Marriage is not about equality! It's the legal benefits that go with it that is the issue. If a same sex union had the same legal standing as a marriage then that would satisfy the majority. It is usually religious beliefs that cause the problem with same sex "marriage". People see it as a religious ceremony, in the Catholic Church it is a sacrament.
I agree that the main freedom/rights issue are the legal benefits. The argument over "Marriage" is semantic and tangles in religion unnecessarily. However, there are those on both sides of the rights issue who absolutely do conflate the word as well. My interpretation of Prop 8 and its supporters is exactly that. They were anti gay marriage and against the legal benefits afforded that type of union for gay couples. Show me I'm wrong on that and I'll happily recant that opinion. Show me Eich was anti gay "marriage" but pro civil union and I'll likely change my opinion on the whole chain of events.

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 08 Apr 2014 15:23

About 30 years ago I had the unearned and thrilling opportunity to work with one of the great scientific minds of the 20th century for two weeks. He told me that a scientist will spend far more time and energy on seeking out information that disproves his or her theories than on information that supports them.

I must assume you are not a scientist.

You assume wrong.

What does Yagan think and say about same sex marriage now? What does Eich say now? My bet is they are not the same.

However, to be clear:
If Yagan hasn't publicly changed his stance, he's a hypocrite. If he has, he's evolved (like many others have) and he has every right to call others out for not evolving. If Eich hasn't changed his stance, he's remained true to himself, and to Mozilla. If he has, good for him.

It's interesting, too, your scientist friend is really half-right. Theories need to be challenged and tested and given as many opportunities as can be found for them to either fail _or_ succeed. That's how they survive, or evolve, or are discarded.

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 08 Apr 2014 15:19

However I would ask you to read the latest articles by Andrew Sullivan and Conor Friedsdorf, both of whom are pro gay marriage writers.

That'd be easier with a link or two.

"Entrenched" is an interesting descriptor. Yeah. I'm pretty entrenched that against the denial of equal rights in pretty much any form. Maybe there are more important battles. But that doesn't mean this was ignorable.

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 08 Apr 2014 05:37

It is a semantic paradox though.

I'll give you that.

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 08 Apr 2014 04:29

You still haven't said how the furour was hypocritical!
I don't think the protest against Eich was hypocritical. I think the backlash against it is.

Openness and inclusiveness, really? Is that as long as doesn't upset the tunnel visionaries?
Mozilla was designed to be an open software platform. The philosophy is core to the company.

Surely if you are open and inclusive then there is room for all. Are we to cross examine every board member of every public company on their personal views on matters, unconnected with the running of the company?
I think if they actively supported policies that went against core company philosophy, you, board member or client or customer, would want to know. As a customer, Id want to make an informed decision on whether to support such a company so I could vote with my feet. As a board member I'd want to know my company was fronted by someone consistent with the company's goals - and I would also be aware my customers _do_ vote with their feet.

Gay marriage isn't even legal in every State, he was not supporting an illegal act!
He was supporting the institutionalization of inequality, something Mozilla stands against.

As far as resigning or being forced out, we don't know the facts and maybe never will know all of them.
You're right, but you could easily get a different impression with all the cocksure right wingers wailing how he was 'forced out'.

What I do know is that he would still be in the job if the witch hunt hadn't arisen and that's what it was! A bullying, intollerant campaign that we are quick enough to denounce when they are aimed at us.
That's bull.
I think it's astonishing that "intolerance of intolerance" is considered a negative for even 5 seconds.
"Except for the fact he wants to deny equal rights to millions of people, he'd make a great CEO of a company founded on equal access."
Yeah, bull.

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 08 Apr 2014 03:32

Mozilla's core foundation, it's software philosophy is openness and inclusiveness. Prop 8 and its supporters stood for the opposite. It's easy math to show that support of one is inconsistent with support of the other. It's not the message Mozilla wants to broadcast. Eich chose to resign. He could have chosen not to and fought, but did not. This is not the action of someone "forced out". It's the action of someone who realized he's the wrong person for the job.

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 07 Apr 2014 20:10

So you are saying that the ensuing shitstorm on social media over his views on the rights of homosexuals to marry, based on a campaign contribution, had absolutely no bearing on his decision to resign as CEO of Mozilla? A shitstorm that was fueled by hypersensitivity? Not because of intolerance of his views whatsoever?

The shitstorm itself was an opportunity for him to demonstrate what he thought 5 years after his donation. He showed he thought the same - and therefore showed that his personal view wasn't in line with Mozilla's philosophy, so he wouldn't make a good head of company.

Hypersensitivity depends on your point of view. I think Prop 8 was a good definition of hypersensitivity in and of itself.

Topic Never tolerate the intolerant
Posted 07 Apr 2014 18:26

Eich did not resign due to the intolerance of anyone.