Because murder is murder.

Being a Godless soul that you are I don't expect you to understand.

I do agree these are messed up laws that put roadblocks into a woman's choice to murder their child. But law makers use what is available to them.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Smoke-Flame-Makers-of-Artisanal-Firewood

The Toast Maker has been added as a related post - related requested by Fantomas on that post.

Smoke & Flame: Makers of Artisanal Firewood has been added as a related post - related requested by Fantomas.

@enoch

No, no, no, man, I would never downvote something because the speaker held an opinion about a certain topic that I disagreed with. Rather, I downvoted this because the subtext of the video is clear: you don't have to listen to what SJWs say because they are self-important blowhards who were coddled as children. Doesn't matter what the argument is that they are proposing. They are SJWs and therefore their ideas cannot be worth listening to.

And more specifically, if you pay attention to the images he is showing as he narrates his stance: you don't have to listen to what Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn, etc. say about games (he's showing their pictures while decrying SJWs).

This is classic GamerGate tactics. Rather than actually debate the issues, which are the representation (or lack thereof) of women and other minorities in video games, he wants to dismiss the argument out of hand. You see it all the time in GamerGate supporter comments:

"Anita is a con artist looking to scam Kickstarter supporters out of their money."
"Anita is the feminist equivalent of a TV evangelist."
"Anita has hijacked feminism."
"Anita isn't even a real feminist."
"Anita's not really a gamer."

And so on.

They are desperate to get people to dismiss Anita's criticisms out of hand, mostly because even the most ardent haters can't deny there are problems with the representation of women and other minorities in ALL media, some of which are specific to video games.

It's all a big distraction from the issues. So what if everything GamerGate supporters allege is actually true? So what if she were stealing kickstarter money? So what if she is pushing some kind of feminist agenda in games? So what if she has appointed herself as a spokeperson for feminism?

Even if it were all true, the only important question is whether her arguments about the representation of women in games are valid and well-founded.

So, I downvoted this because essentially the author is advocating judging arguments on the basis of the arguer's reputation (for example, as an SJW) rather than on the merits of the argument itself. I see it as more blatant GamerGate propoganda trying to justify attacking the argument makers rather than dealing with the argument itself. Fuck that noise.

SJW is such a useless label at this point. It is now used purely as a cop out these days, a pejorative that supposedly gives you a free pass to ignore what someone is saying because clearly they are an coddled idiot (otherwise they wouldn't be an SJW).

I absolutely agree with you that justice, freedom of speech, freedom of dissent, etc. are important. And it is troubling that people in recent days are abusing the system to shut down dissenters. But this is the world we live in now and it really only reflects the political situation in Washington that has been going on nearly a decade now--lines drawn in the sand and ideas shouted down merely because they were spoken by someone on the wrong side of the line. I guess it isn't surprising that public debate is mirroring what we've been seeing in the capitol, only with the anonymity of the Internet allowing people to take it to a whole new level with doxxing, swatting, etc.

I don't get the rent-a-cop thing... in other similar videos where one or more folks are protesting silently or sitting in the audience with signs (e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-s2dm2AuUr0) uniformed police are asked by Trump to remove the trouble makers, or the disturbance is large enough that the police intervene and again, remove the troublemakers. Are these guys on the clock or are they off duty paid goons? The fat boy in the cowboy hat should have been arrested for his actions, no?

The brown shirt reference is well chosen. Don't know about others, but this is some scary shit, and the asshats that are following Chump have zero appreciation for both the freedom to vote and the responsibility to the country in doing so.

The scale of political correctness can only tip so far in 1 direction until it eventually flips back around 180 degrees quickly into the opposite direction.

Faux-feminism, thought, speech police then one day those faux feminist will wake up as part of some harem, not allowed to walk in front of their muslim master or speak, or be nothing but a baby maker. Homos slaughtered. And if you speak out you'll be called "racist".

political correctness is right on the edge of flipping back around 180 degrees in the extreme opposite direction if the morons keep pushing.

Kinda sorta, but it's pretty safe to assume that the gov has a finger in every pie somehow. I do think, however, that the inspiration for this latest move has come from the companies though, not the gov. China has never been shy with the stick over the years, I reckon it's the money makers that talked them around to letting the sheep herd themselves.

I'm confused - people are saying that Trump gets coverage so that the media group in question make more money (through bigger audiences). But what makes more money in the long run than a useful ally in a position of power?

A little bit naive to think that personal politics (of the owner, who chooses the editor, etc.) plays no part in media coverage. They don't call Rupert Murdoch a king maker for nothing, and it isn't like the Murdoch family has a list as long as my arm of shady dealings, bribery, corruption, etc.

The turkeys don't vote for christmas, and Murdoch isn't going to advertise for someone who believes in workers rights, equality and making sure huge multinationals pay their fair share of tax.

Exchange Murdoch for any billionaire media mogul you like - the Barclay brothers for example, also not very interested in equality and paying a fair share of tax. Yes it's sensationalism, but it's also powerful men using their influence to protect their interests. As the man in the video himself says.

Anyway, it worked for us over here - we got Jeremy Corbyn in despite the best efforts of every prominent news outlet. I'm not sure if America is ready for a bit socialism just yet, but the tide is changing in worldwide public opinion, i hope.

Nice, but the maker of this video should have checked some of the names and measurements.

These videos are pretty stupid. Geography is largely irrelevant to most people's lives and therefore qualifies as trivia. It's like asking someone how many bytes are in a kilobyte or how many bits are in a byte except that's actually relevant since knowing those things will help you see past the marketing BS of ISPs and hard drive makers.

Different people know different things and someone isn't automatically "stupid" because they don't know random facts that serve no purpose in their occupations or daily lives.

Do we not have a maker channel or some such?

Film makers are pretty good at manipulating me into not seeing any of their crap movies.

Yeah, but what is more interesting is to ask WHY there are takesies backsies.

And if as the tea maker you really understand that can happen, and don't let tea making become your biological imperative, and help stop the tea shaming that this society engages is, I'll repeat myself. Because it is an important point to really let land.

There will be much less takesies backsies if everyone slows down and really consents to drinking tea. (And much less forced tea drinking, where the guy doesn't even know he is forcing the tea drinking and can play all butt hurt -- she said she wanted tea!)

There are mentally disturbed people of both genders who get involved in tea drinking. Both genders need to be more careful about who they drink tea with, who they are alone with.

Only semantically. In reality, if you put their message out there because they killed people, you're rewarding them.
I'm not saying the authorities shouldn't investigate, and I'm not even saying that information shouldn't be used to inform policy makers, I'm saying the 'reasons' for the mass murders (and names of the mass murderers) should not be reported publicly, because reporting it gives incentive for the next guy with a message (or with a pathological need for 'fame') to use mass murder to spread it.