This is why you DON'T cut your education funding and allow parents to pull children out of school or allow kids to decide not to go. It's also a reason why we might want to continue education past your formative years, as you're a literal "crazy idiot" as a teenager due to the chemicals pumping in your veins. Yet, we're fairly good at memorization during this time and procedural types of learning (like apprenticeship for basically anything). Education is the greatest gift you can give your children no matter what you believe and, truly, if you listen to me let them form their own opinions and try to keep them NEUTRAL in stances on any subject (including even your own religion) as taking a side can injure development. If they do become sidetracked into an academic arena (math, science, English, or even sports) give them full support in these areas and let them know of possible opportunities for the present (if they excel, possibly a low level "advanced" book to help their thirst or a class if it can be found) and the future (such as jobs: fireman, astronaut, college, which college, classes to take, books to read).

Pre-adolescence is also a great time to be taught anything. It's also the time that you're the most susceptible to people forcing ANY opinion as "fact" and ANY "fact" as knowledge; experience, perhaps being a better way to teach at this age--along with below, finding a direction or what you excel at (yes, I know you may not now this till you're much older, due to how the brain sets itself up). Whether it be good or bad: religion, politics, abuse, swimming, dancing, sports, science, computers, etc... Pre-adolescence is perhaps the most important time in your life to get an idea for direction, as this helps you mitigate problems that you face during adolescence (stay on course). This is of course a luxury for some as self-discovery is not a perfect process and can as always be entirely, never found.

If you wait to learn in your twenties or after adolescence you begin to form extremely superior ideas and opinions that as a adolescent, due entirely to having a brain that isn't shit-canning itself at a lot of turns. Things that need to be memorized are better in these "primitive" years; but, like religion and learning to form an opinion that makes sense, this requires someone usually to be above normal intelligence at that age or for you to be in your twenties when the fog of hormones and neurotransmitters has cleared up and allowed you to maake FAR more rational decisions.

Unfortunately, we have a lot of people that formed their opinions early, to the point that they are nearly unchangeable. I don't necessarily blame them either, to some degree, as these issues that "stop" learning are ingrained into your neural-net and chemical-memory. To make these people understand something is a huge undertaking (which is why I usually provide the information, as the only person that can convince them at that point is themselves--BUT, STILL make sure to give them the information or they'll have no chance).

This is why you can tell Rush Limbaugh the truth till you're blue in the face, yet it won't help as he can't understand it, will actively deny himself of it, and he physically can't. The only way to get through to them is to literally know how their neurons have decided to arrange themselves. If you knew it might be a matter of approaching the matter via religion or it could be politics, science, etc... This is why sciences premise of allowing yourself to let go of previous, erronious, information is FUNDAMENTAL. If you can't do that as aperson, you'll be locked in a world you can't or hope, to understand.

BTW, if you're reading this and you have a thousand questions that need answering, yet you've tried and they do not make sense. Remember, that it's the physical layout of your brain that disrupts this ability to understand in some cases. Your brain physically changes when you can figure out something for the first time; sometimes called an epiphany. Try something easy and move from there. DON'T try the hard stuff first (which is why that works incredibly well for teaching people; only people with I.Q.s of 150+ are able to see something complex and know, fairly intrinsically, what needs to be done--or what opinion should be held...).

Some of this will sound preachy, and I guess it should. Some of this will sound simple and obvious, I hope it does. If it sounds particularly TOO preachy or TOO opinionated, "...don't tell me what to do with my kid...". Your kid is a human being like yourself and demands as much respect at age 3 as at 33. If you can't give them the breadth of width to leave them to learn untouched or with a balanced or neutral approach you will hurt them. They will also hurt you. You can disagree, but deep inside I think you understand what I mean by everything I've said here. AND if you don't try to figure out why you don't.

What you see in this video is seen by a VERY small minority of people as being "good" or "informed"; it's seen as the opposite. However, if you can approach this same situation knowing all of this, knowing the ways the mind can fool you into making you a fool, yet you can still find a unwaivering "faith" or truth. That is when you're free to share responsibly, but please tell this to adults or people that understand at your level. Otherwise, you're Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Michelle Backmann, Pat Robertson, etc...

/Kind of a long point, but I think I made it. Hopefully, not too much on the cheesy side and not to "anti-religious".

Just taking out all the context of what they're even talking about, it's amazing how retarded this "news" show is.. This is like two kids on a playground fighting over what Pokemon is better..

I expected Jerry Springer and the Undertaker to suddenly show up in the background and start throwing chairs around.

>> ^ctrlaltbleach:

^ I was just about to say that not only the recent housing market but I have known plenty of smart people who rent and plenty of stupid people who own property. Owning property does not mean anything.


Indeed. Though, I am starting to hold the position that voting shouldn't be a birth right. Being born isn't anything special either. It holds even less weight than property...any idiot can be born, even one who wants to use his voting powers to enrich himself at the cost of others. I have been trying to work out a system whereby you aren't commissioned into citizenship via birth, but some other means that requires some form of rational agreement. The model of Israel mandatory military service is close to the mindset of having to go through some citizenship initiation undertaking, though I don't think I would choice military as the sole means..or even primary means to obtain it is the direction I would want to go.

There is still a problem of what is the state of those whom haven't undertaken the process. I think that is a smaller problem to deal with, though, than the problem of people using the power in which was granted to them by just being popped out of a fetus. In other words, I think birth and death rights are a very arbitrary, irrational way for rights systems to be based on. It requires no choice to be born. Choices are the only thing we have.

I know not of this "Sleep" thing you speak of!

Let's see... (last night)

Start work at 8, end at 4
Get home 5, eat, lay out cook book til 10:30, Diablo til 12, sleep, Up at 6 repeat!

I also just bought and installed Diablo II on a second computer so I can run two at once. Not only does it provide more mule space, I can play with my kids who also both have an account and play with me. (only after homework is done). I currently play 8 different characters, one of each class. So any good drops never go to waste.

I also do all the cooking and volunteer two nights a week at a local youth group. On top of that, My wife wants me to start coming with her one night a week to play Badminton - you know, to get out of the house more

And yes, I'm sadly lacking in sleep ¦)

In reply to this comment by residue:
Holy mackerel! That's a hefty undertaking. I glanced through the Vernon ad, that's some pretty high quality work. I can't imagine making 15 of those a year (not to mention 2 versions of each). I'm with you about the loss of dual monitors in the home setting, I love my dualies at work and they are sorely missed at home

and I just noticed you've reinstalled diablo 2 as well?! Do you ever sleep??

I have the same problem with this video that I had with his TED talk. He still hasn't explained how exactly science is making these value judgments. All science can do is give us, through experimentation, raw data about the world we live in. After that, we need to interpret the data. At the end of the day, then, it is still people that are deciding whether something is morally right or wrong, not "science." The people looking at that data have their own subjective values and that's going to influence how they interpret the data.

Science is about empirically testing out hypotheses. Yet, Harris asked what value does wearing a burka have for human society and doesn't even seem to realize he's already made two value judgments (that wearing a burka has no value and that we shouldn't engage in activities that don't contribute to society) without having undertaking any empirical research to support his claims. If his answer to that is "it's obvious" then he's already defeated his own standpoint because science isn't answering the question of whether burkas are morally right or wrong, his a priori knowledge is. Stewart was right to throw that in his face--that for some people in certain circumstances it indeed might have value and that in fact that value is completely subjective.

(Just to be clear, I don't in any way, shape, or form believe requiring women to wear burkas is good, but I also don't kid myself into thinking that belief is based on any sort of objective empirical evidence).

>> ^BicycleRepairMan:

Fascinating, but not very plausible.. to make this, you'd have to collect several million earthlike planets from all over the galaxy, somehow tow them to this star, bring them all into the same, stable orbit, and then somehow splice them together, sort of like a stone arch falling into place. How you could keep gravity from pulling them together to form gas-giants or even small stars is yet another matter. overall, with superb planet-towing spaceships and all, I'd estimated the task to take several hundred million years and probably fail. I'd think I'd settle for populating the galaxy first.


I've read the whole series, many times and according to Niven the Ringworld was constructed as a filled shell. Planets, planetoids and asteroid belts from neighboring systems were broken down and through a never explained process, transmuted into a unique alloy called Scrith. That shell was then contoured like a bas-relief, bulges for oceans, depressions for mountains and filled with earth, water, oxygen, plants etc.. Still a massive undertaking to be sure, esp. at sub-light speeds but not as bad as assembling a giant jigsaw.

Sub-light speed technology is assumed as any civilization capable of FTL travel would find it far easier to terraform and inhabit existing worlds.

The problem I see here is that the video author is assuming that all the problems created are actually philosophical in nature. The big problem is the human mind and our nature.

We have been selected to first, fight or flight at any unknown variable. Second, evolution plays its core tenet: survival of the fittest (which has a part to play in all these examples). Third, you have resources--which in turn go back to number two. Lastly, reproduction comes into play.

Sillma and Crosswords touched on this. We have to figure out a solution to force a change in our predisposed evolution. Whether that be a biological or technological (or both) solution. What would any such society do about sociopaths? They, by definition, will not understand "being good".

I hope we can get to a semi-Utopian like society, but it will be a mammoth undertaking. The changes he talked about are far easier in comparison (physics and astronomy--oh, and since when was quantum mechanics not messy ). The Utopian change will require an upheaval at every facet of society: government, trade, religion, decisions, structural, biological, technological, industrial, etc...

/I'd like to live in a nice paradise, but this approach would require too much from the one source that made it in the first place.

>> ^gorillaman:

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:
>> ^jmd:
No, not a gay sport at all.

It would have to be a sport first.
More like a play.. where the actors only wear spandex and rhinestones

And that doesn't sound awesome to you?

If I were gay, maybe.. probably.. ..definitely.

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

>> ^jmd:
No, not a gay sport at all.

It would have to be a sport first.
More like a play.. where the actors only wear spandex and rhinestones

And that doesn't sound awesome to you?

With all due respect, there are alot of feelings and opinions being expressed here. I sought facts and found this that may be read in its entirety at

<http://www.redstate.com/jeffdunetz/2010/05/31/was-israels-boarding-of-the-gaza-flotilla-a-violation-of-international-law/>

I like facts, especially when legality is at issue.

<According to the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994:

SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT

Neutral merchant vessels

67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:

(a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture;

NOTE: the San Remo Manual is not a treaty, but considered by the ICRC to be reflective of customary law.

Also, on piracy: the definition of piracy under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, section 101, is clear that piracy can only occur where there are “illegal acts of violence or detention” that are “committed for private ends.” Israeli actions were legal under the law of armed conflict (as evidenced by the San Remo Manual) and in any event, were not committed for private ends. Anyone using the term piracy to describe the Israeli action is clearly not aware of international law on the subject.

Here’s the bottom Line:

* A maritime blockade is in effect off the coast of Gaza. Such blockade has been imposed, as Israel is currently in a state of armed conflict with the Hamas regime that controls Gaza, which has repeatedly bombed civilian targets in Israel with weapons that have been smuggled into Gaza via the sea.

* Maritime blockades are a legitimate and recognized measure under international law that may be implemented as part of an armed conflict at sea.

* A blockade may be imposed at sea, including in international waters, so long as it does not bar access to the ports and coasts of neutral States.

* The naval manuals of several western countries, including the US and England recognize the maritime blockade as an effective naval measure and set forth the various criteria that make a blockade valid, including the requirement of give due notice of the existence of the blockade.

* In this vein, it should be noted that Israel publicized the existence of the blockade and the precise coordinates of such by means of the accepted international professional maritime channels. Israel also provided appropriate notification to the affected governments and to the organizers of the Gaza protest flotilla. Moreover, in real time, the ships participating in the protest flotilla were warned repeatedly that a maritime blockade is in effect.

* Here, it should be noted that under customary law, knowledge of the blockade may be presumed once a blockade has been declared and appropriate notification has been granted, as above.

* Under international maritime law, when a maritime blockade is in effect, no boats can enter the blockaded area. That includes both civilian and enemy vessels.

* A State may take action to enforce a blockade. Any vessel that violates or attempts to violate a maritime blockade may be captured or even attacked under international law. The US Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations sets forth that a vessel is considered to be in attempt to breach a blockade from the time the vessel leaves its port with the intention of evading the blockade.

* Note that the protesters indicated their clear intention to violate the blockade by means of written and oral statements. Moreover, the route of these vessels indicated their clear intention to violate the blockade in violation of international law.

* Given the protesters explicit intention to violate the naval blockade, Israel exercised its right under international law to enforce the blockade. It should be noted that prior to undertaking enforcement measures, explicit warnings were relayed directly to the captains of the vessels, expressing Israel’s intent to exercise its right to enforce the blockade.

* Israel had attempted to take control of the vessels participating in the flotilla by peaceful means and in an orderly fashion in order to enforce the blockade. Given the large number of vessels participating in the flotilla, an operational decision was made to undertake measures to enforce the blockade a certain distance from the area of the blockade.

* Israeli personnel attempting to enforce the blockade were met with violence by the “protesters” and acted in self defense to fend off such attacks.>

Synopsis

For a nation that proudly declared it would leave no child behind, America continues to do so at alarming rates. Despite increased spending and politicians’ promises, our buckling public–education system, once the best in the world, routinely forsakes the education of millions of children. Oscar®—winning filmmaker Davis Guggenheim (AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH) reminds us that education “statistics” have names: Anthony, Francisco, Bianca, Daisy, and Emily, whose stories make up the engrossing foundation of WAITING FOR “SUPERMAN.” As he follows a handful of promising kids through a system that inhibits, rather than encourages, academic growth, Guggenheim undertakes an exhaustive review of public education, surveying “drop—out factories” and “academic sinkholes,” methodically dissecting the system and its seemingly intractable problems. However, embracing the belief that good teachers make good schools, Guggenheim offers hope by exploring innovative approaches taken by education reformers and charter schools that have—in reshaping the culture—refused to leave their students behind.

I quite like it. But I'll bet you dollars to donuts that it goes right over their heads. They are going to think you're really on their side.
>> ^enemycombatant:

Edit: Replaced Star Wars joke with my email sent to those individuals listed in the comments above. I wonder if I'll get any responses.
To: Itawamba Agricultural High School administrators and School Board members,
I just wanted to congratulate you on your response to Constance McMillen's request to attend her school prom. By holding a prom for the majority of the school class and a second separate but equal event for the members of the class with deformities (learning-based and sexuality-based) you undertake the noble goal of reviving the proud tradition of separate but equal applications to education in Mississippi. Clearly you would not allow Judge Glen Davidson's misinformed views of the law stop you from doing what you knew to be right. After all, the law is on your side, is it not? See Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896). Ultimately the community-wide coordination required to organize two events and keep the primary event secret from a select few is impressive is a strong testament to the character of Itawamba as a whole.

http://videosift.com/video/PUSCIFIER-the-undertaker-renholder-remix
HA!
/does the posted it first dance
it is good to know that i am not the only keenan/lohner fan.
i was feelin lonely.
loved the puscifier you posted.very awesome.

Edit: Replaced Star Wars joke with my email sent to those individuals listed in the comments above. I wonder if I'll get any responses.

To: Itawamba Agricultural High School administrators and School Board members,

I just wanted to congratulate you on your response to Constance McMillen's request to attend her school prom. By holding a prom for the majority of the school class and a second separate but equal event for the members of the class with deformities (learning-based and sexuality-based) you undertake the noble goal of reviving the proud tradition of separate but equal applications to education in Mississippi. Clearly you would not allow Judge Glen Davidson's misinformed views of the law stop you from doing what you knew to be right. After all, the law is on your side, is it not? See Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896). Ultimately the community-wide coordination required to organize two events and keep the primary event secret from a select few is impressive is a strong testament to the character of Itawamba as a whole.

What are we supposed to do? Play world police with sovereign nations?

When it comes to genocide, yes! The US is a signatory to the UN Convention on Genocide. It's leading article 1 reads: The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.
The US and all other signatories to this convention are obligated to act prevent acts of genocide.

What about the innocents the US has murdered in cold blood during the war in Iraq?

I thought we were talking about Afghanistan. Though for argument sake, removing Saddam has still saved more lives than the incompetently mismanaged occupation has cost.

Should that be considered an expected casualty during some elusive quest for peace?
You think war can be fought without spilling innocent blood? The question is what costs more innocent lives, American 'peace' with Saddam while he remains in power, or American war to remove him. The benefit of hindsight already answered that question before the invasion began.

You have the power of hindsight that allows you the self-assured ability to judge historic military scrimmages that lead to the winner's version of 'peace'.
I declared the inaction in Rwanda to be intolerable, no hindsight was needed for that observation. All external powers saw the genocide coming, and had their troops on the ground removing their citizens from the country within hours of the violence breaking out, and had their troops and civilians safely away never to return immediately after. The UN force on the ground knew the genocide was happening too, they used that knowledge to withdraw all but 400 peace keepers from the region as well. The blood on Clinton's hands for failing to stop the genocide has NOTHING to do with hindsight and everything to do with the decision to mind his own business and choosing 'peace' over war.