I don't understand how you people who discuss politics ever know anything about who you vote for. You watch the same news as everyone else.

Do you really think you know better than others?

One of the great intellectual catastrophes of the modern world, and probably the harbinger of the ultimate doom of our civilisation, is the collapse in the distinction between 'compare to' and 'equate with'. We can reasonably compare almost anything to almost anything else, and how unfortunate that we can expect immediately to be confronted by some aggrieved outrage-peddler who imagines they have a right to find the comparison insulting.

It is a literal fact that any group of two or more people, or living things, or indeed most objects of any kind, will possess some internal differences. As a matter of certain truth, not subject to doubt, muslims share with rats and serial killers the trait that they evince diversity of behaviour and belief. This demonstrates the total banality of the 'but they're all different' argument. It's not for their differences that these groups are disliked.

That's probably enough of a lesson for one day, and certainly @oritteropo ought to know better. I don't want to take the trouble to argue deranged claims like 'there are muslims who don't believe in god', or tiresome diversions on how christians and other jews can be just as bad, or to debate the relative merits of various religiously mandated dress codes; but you are right about one thing @SDGundamX: I would much prefer that islamic violence and oppression were a harmless and overblown bogey, but ethics is not a children's game - these are real people, with real victims, and too many of both.

No, I'm basing it on the theory that farmers want to make money, and you don't do that by abusing the product.
Also, the theory that MOST farmers are in it because they love the animals, because there are WAY easier and more certain ways to make money than abusive ranching.
Of course, there are those freaks that want to abuse the animals, don't care about them, or are too dumb to know better, which is why I won't say 100%.

I would like to also point out that human circumcisions are done without anesthetic. Some level of pain infliction to prevent more pain and injury is acceptable....but by that be clear I'm not excusing the behavior in the video.

You certainly intentionally implied it.

And you always do this, discount people's actual experience and education in favor of bullshit hyperbole and made up 'facts' (normally called lies), and actually try to lambast people for thinking their real experience might represent reality, because you KNOW better (but you have zero experience to draw from, only propaganda and conjecture).

And so, unless YOU'VE been to every farm in the world (and I doubt you've been to one at all), by your standards, your opinion is irrelevant. Sorry, but in my world, actual lifelong experience trumps uninformed hyperbolic propaganda every single time.

Fortunately, Eric knows better.
Yours is an infantile way to argue, talking crap behind one's back to others rather than having a discussion.
Suck it.

The truth is one of the reasons I'm vegan is because I'm very worried about our own species. We only have one planet to live on, and and worrying about what we eat, and the methods to produce it have far reaching consequences, one of which is the death of a large amount of humans via global warming and the various environmental issues it sets off.

On a more personal scale I'm worried about peoples health. It's no secret that meat causes and encourages cancer, and all animal products cause a range of health issues which lead to death. There are around a million completely preventable deaths each year in the US alone. Not to mention quality of life issues. All of which could have been prevented, treated and even reversed on a proper plant based diet.

That's the beautiful thing that I have found with veganism, is that everybody wins. The people are thinner and healthier, the environment thrives, and no animals are harmed unnecessarily.

Here is a question for you. How will you explain to your son's children that there are no more fish in the ocean, why we have no jungles left? Because "you really like bacon" doesn't seem like a good answer all of a sudden

When you see what horrible things people did in the past, such as whaling, or seal beating, don't you think to yourself, why were they so blind, so greedy and selfish? They could have done things a lot differently. Perhaps they didn't know better, but we don't have that excuse anymore, because we are aware of what impact our choices have for everyone and everything on this planet.

Doing these things as a prelude to proselytizing means they aren't altruistic, they are a part of the indoctrination process. If your church does all these things without ever mentioning religion, asking for donations, or asking for those helped to volunteer, it is incredibly abnormal.

"You dont get to see those kinds of Christians because they don't call attention to themselves"
And yet, here you are calling attention to yourself (and them), so you proved your statement wrong by stating it publicly. Oops! ;-)

Churches are for profit institutions, why shouldn't they pay taxes? The Catholic church is a haven for pedophiles, why have it's assets not been seized under RICO statutes? Many other for profit companies donate food, shelter, and services, yet they also pay their share for the public services they enjoy. Why should it be different for an organization who's product is intangible and invisible?

There won't be an effort to exterminate Christians, there may well be an effort to exterminate Christianity, along with all other divisive religions. I hope I'm around to see it.

Once again I would ask, why do you question your god's clear wish that I (and others) not believe in him? Shirley, you don't think you know better than he/she, right? (that's right, I called you Shirley.) ;-)

Doing 100 good deeds and one incredibly evil deed makes one evil. No church in history has ever reached that level of goodness. Churches are evil. I hope that clears things up.

Maybe for the same reason they show the earth as about 32000 miles away from the sun, and Venus about 24000 miles away? Maybe for the same reason they show the Sun as about twice the diameter of Earth?
Just about everything about this video seems terribly wrong, including the insanely oversimplified, perfectly round orbits. The only thing even close to correct here is that Venus is about 2/3 the distance from the sun that Earth is.

It's pretty, but just SOOOO wrong in every way scientifically. I hate that. If they showed this in my science class, the rest of the day would be a discussion of all the falsehoods involved, and a severe lambasting of the teacher for presenting something so antithetical to teaching real science. This kind of 'fudging' of reality bothers me immensely, because I know many people don't know better and think it presents an honest, factual representation of reality, so it works to make them MORE ignorant.
Presenting lies or fantasy as scientific fact should be a crime, IMO, because it hurts us all in many ways every time it happens.

I'm not sure which tag this deserves....fail, debunked, lies, scifi, terrible, or WTF. It needs one of those though.

I'm tempted to downvote on principle alone.

If I didn't know better, I'd say they are playing the take-off footage in reverse so to make it look like a landing

Why do they land on water?

I find it insane that you are totally willing to ignore the adult officer STARTING the interaction by being a liar and a controlling dickhead by abusing his power by issuing illegal commands, but are going to continue to lambast the 15 year old kid who just won an argument with a douchebag liar because of his knowledge for being a bit excited about it.
Would it have been more adult and better if he took the high road the entire time, perhaps. Did he have a duty to be an exponentially better human being than the person who's ostensively trained and paid over $200000 a year to be a decent human being? Absolutely not. Lets start by encouraging those in authority that we pay to be civil to be civil, then we can move on to children who've been assaulted and insulted.

No, the presumption is that an officer that responds to complaints from people with lies and abuse (lying about your rights and the law is abuse when it comes from a law enforcement officer, so are illegal commands telling you to pass on the illegal command) is somehow wrong.
We have laws in place to balance the rights between all of us, and if officers can lie about them, ignore them, and make threats and insults when informed about them with impunity, we no longer have those rights. Period.
No, he's not being a jerk checking things out, he's being a jerk by telling them to leave and not ride when that's not the law and he has no right to tell them to do those things.
Yes, citizens who don't know better had every right to complain. The officer had a DUTY to know the law before trying to enforce it. He failed miserably. He's in the wrong.
He only backed off because the kid(s) obviously knew his rights, had he not known his rights, and appeared to know the exact statute they derived from, he would almost certainly have been removed illegally.
Once again, that's a failure of the officer, a failure to know the law he's trying to enforce. That's on him, not the children, it's his JOB to know the law, a job we pay him OVER $200000 a year to do incredibly poorly.

Adults are expected to be adults, not to act like younger, dumber children than the youngest and dumbest child they speak with. Police have a sworn DUTY to do so, and we pay them ridiculously well for it. 15 year old kids, they act like kids. The cop is the jerk, he started by lying, and illegally commanding, then when corrected becomes insulting and smarmy instantly. He should have simply asked them "what's that number again" and gone to his issued computer and looked it up, then returned and offered speeding tickets if they were still riding fast, and offered the correct number if they weren't, he should NOT have reacted as he did.

While we should be outraged by the idea that party leaders know better than the primary voters, Donald Trump is a powerful counter argument. I wouldn't be surprised if Republicans adopt a similar system after this disaster.

One reason it's not yet completely hopeless for Bernie is that superdelegates, even those who say they're "pledged" to one candidate can change their mind at any time. Superdelegates exist to override the will of the people, but the DNC knows that actually doing this would alienate voters.

"Do we still get it?"
Classic.

He's done. From now on, any time he thinks he knows better than her, she's just going to say "Remember Wheel Of Fortune?" and instantly win the argument.

oh bobby bobby bobby..
you should know better than to talk smack like that my boy.
you need to back that shit up son!

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/9/2/amy_goodman_two_democracy_now_producers

https://www.nlg.org/sites/default/files/RNC%20DNC%20Final%20Draft%20REV1.pdf

http://rnc08report.org/archive/361.shtml

http://www.prisonplanet.com/why-we-were-falsely-arrested.html

http://911blogger.com/news/2008-09-05/lockdown-st-paul-adam-turl-september-5-2008

still think it didnt happen at an RNC?
why you keep defending fascism only to be forced to eat humble pie eludes me.
you may be republican but those cocksuckers dont give two shits about you bobby boy.

not...one...bit.

Likewise.

You ought to know better than to believe the outrageous rebranding of censorship as something that can only be accomplished by government fiat, but in doing so you're ignoring real power structures that exist and giving free rein to regressives who want to sanitise and degrade our culture.

If it were a public figure or an elected official, I wouldn't have a problem at all with them being fired.

I'm not sure if that TED talk example fits exactly. She was a PR manager right? For someone in the PR biz, that was just monumentally stupid thing to say and someone in PR should know better so I find it hard to have sympathy for someone in that case.

But yeah, it's a blurry line to be sure. For me it's a very potent example of why direct democracy isn't always great and why it's a good thing that we elect individuals to make decisions for us to counter the mob with pitchforks mentality that large groups of people tend to have.

Could you imagine if we put EVERYTHING to a popular vote? Sure some things might become more progressive, but then crap like this would happen. Imagine if the decision to use the nuclear bomb was up to direct popular vote. Our planet would be an irradiated wasteland many times over.