Article 1.
* All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2.
* Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3.
* Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4.
* No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5.
* No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6.
* Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7.
* All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8.
* Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9.
* No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10.
* Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11.
* (1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
* (2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Article 12.
* No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 13.
* (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
* (2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Article 14.
* (1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
* (2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 15.
* (1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
* (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Article 16.
* (1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
* (2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
* (3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article 17.
* (1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
* (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Article 18.
* Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.
* Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20.
* (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
* (2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21.
* (1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
* (2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
* (3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Article 22.
* Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Article 23.
* (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
* (2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
* (3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
* (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 24.
* Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25.
* (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
* (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26.
* (1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
* (2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
* (3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

Article 27.
* (1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
* (2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Article 28.
* Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Article 29.
* (1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
* (2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
* (3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30.
* Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

- http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

the thing about "personal responsibility", is that it is used in very misleading, and brainwashed ways

the brainwashed way is the whole "you shouldn't have had a kid if you can't afford it" schpeel...

first, its moronic because it reduces the subject to $ figures... raising a child goes WELL beyond money, let alone the questions posed morally and on the scale of society itself... should only the rich (and yes, its expensive to have a child, outrageous actually, in the US... i'm not talking about the cost of feeding/clothing/education/etc... simply the procedures up to and including birth, let alone any issues that may arise afterwards both in mother and child - glad I live in a country where this is covered socially, and that I more than happily contribute to - our future isn't regulated to have/have nots)

second, as part of a society, do you feel you have a personal responsibility to it? or other members of it (irrespective of your opinion as to whether or not a particular person is "contributing" or not)? do other's in your society have a personal responsibility in regards to you?... the debate in the US literally ALWAYS boils down to someone arguing "personal responsibility" yet assuming none in regards to the society they "LOVE SO MUCH" and "WOULD DIE FOR"... that, or that if you give people handouts, that's all they'd ever want; they'd never strive

WELL, that is EXACTLY describing the situation of your (and I mean YOU, yes YOU) parent's raising you... did they keep all the receipts and calculate the interest you owe on top regarding food they fed you, education they paid for, etc? are they sending collectors yet?

better yet, can you honestly say you have no drive or ambitions in life because of being raised like this (as is the general norm)?

it provides a foundation, a base from which to launch... its two swimmers racing, one with something to push off of, and the other starting with nothing to push off of... sure the outcome isn't decided completely... but you can make a REALLY accurate guess as to who has the better chance to win... no one is throwing them a dragline while they are swimming... its just the start of the race

if you had a family member who got ill, would you help them? if the swimmer got cramps and couldn't stay afloat would you want someone to pull their head up above the water?

why this doesn't translate from being a staple of family life, to society should make most American's go "hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm"

the honest truth... it is GREED
both personal GREED of the average citizen not wanting to spend a cent on a fellow citizen
and corporate GREED... they see social programs and free health care as either a pool of money they don't got but WANT or robbery from them... and they lobby and basically buy off politicians through campaign financing and lucrative job offers post office... meanwhile you are sold that this is in the interests of your freedom... when really all you are being sold is the freedom to be F_CKED

Government is there to protect the INTERESTS of it's citizens, not it's CORPORATIONS (most of whom are multinational btw)... and it's failing Americans... mainly because Americans are failing themselves... they'd rather drink the kool-aid than question what's in it... they'd rather get worked up about side issues that really only affect their life MINIMALLY (mainly because of religion) rather than care about issues that do... and they like to bite people who question the status quo... why? because WE'RE NUMBER ONE!!!! USA USA USA. (despite the OVERWHELMING evidence to the contrary)

its really elementary logic to deduce that a society that tries to elevate itself by uplifting all members of that society (or as many as possible) will have a better survival chance than a society where all individuals horde and fight over resources... i mean, which one do you think leads to feudal style systems? really?

Your description of a teacher's job is like me describing my current IT job as such: "Really, all I do is work with the same technology products. I just Read The F'ing Manual and install the stuff."

That would be a pretty ignorant way of looking at my current job.

You have never taught in a public school. First off, a teacher who reads directly out of the textbook day in and day out is a crappy teacher. Even the crappy teachers I worked with didn't just pick up the book and read what was in there, and assign the exercises at the end of the chapter. You also live in this wonderful fantasy world where the students arrive in your classroom, like perfect brain sponges, and they'll just magically hear what you say, or read the textbook, and magically, they overcome their various learning disabilities, weaknesses in various types of intelligence, distractions in life, and just ...

POOF! THEY LEARN AUTOMAGICALLY!

Not to mention a teacher's role is not simply to teach facts and information. A teacher's role is also to help inspire students to want to learn and do more well beyond the classroom. Those are the teachers students remember for the rest of their lives. I can still name you my favorite teachers from elementary, middle, high school, and college. I remember specific lessons from each one that really spoke to me. I became a history teacher because of my high school history teacher, Claire Tilton, who still teaches to this day, and she's still unbelievable at her job, but she's "just a high school teacher" I guess to you.

I wouldn't be where I am today without those teachers. And those teachers did more than just inspire me; I knew probably a dozen or so people who did 180's and loved history after being in Ms. Tilton's class.

It's one thing to know the subject matter; it's a whole other thing to be able to help another human being who is struggling to understand it learn it, or motivate a completely disinterested human into wanting to learn about it. If you think that people who can do this are a dime a dozen, I don't know what to tell you. I think we end up losing a lot of talented teachers who do inspire because society doesn't value education as it should.

>> ^chilaxe:

@heropsycho
You're certainly right on some elements, but I think there are a number of facets to this issue.
We can probably test the difficult of a job by looking at who can and who can't do that job. Most teachers, like Matt Damon's mom standing next to him, probably can't do particularly cognitively complex jobs like that of a $125k per year software engineer. I took a class in the education & child development department of my college, and I was surprised by how easy the subject matter was relative to classes in e.g. the sciences.
She probably teaches the same (or at least similar) middle school or high school subjects every year, and her primary job (AFAIK) is to follow the instructions in the teacher's edition textbook on a relatively simple subject matter that can be understood by teenagers. Her primary job is not to innovate technologically or come up with a new business strategy to outsmart ruthless competitors; it's to follow instructions.
That's a really different job from something like writing 50 page technical specifications documents, and salaries tend to be proportional to the cognitive complexity required, since anyone can do cognitively simple jobs, but only a limited number of people can do cognitively complex jobs.

Oh you don't like how they try to use personality tests, GPA, and the infamous "career day" to help kids decide? I'm still not sure what I could stand to do for the rest of my life, and that's mainly because everything they tried to tell me was not helpful and everything you look into is not what people claim it to be.

Which I view as a failing of colleges, since young people are paying money to go into things they only have a very vague notion of and unless their parents or a close relative do the job, no one is going to provide them with straight answers in a vast majority of the time. Assuming they even consider what careers to ask about or what questions to ask about said careers.

I hold it up as proof that colleges at this time are there to get people in and out of programs while milking them for as much as possible, but don't actually take the time to evaluate that their programs provide the building blocks the student would need to follow the job path they THINK they want. The colleges don't care if the students presumptions are wrong.

I also view elementary to high school as bypassing a lot of common knowledge, common sense, life skills, etc things kids should learn. Like electric safety and basic repairs, basic automotive/mechanic/tool usage, cooking/laundry basics, and probably the most important of all nutrition and exercise. You see people on the news having heatstroke and everything else because they don't drink enough fluids or don't realize that not sweating is a really bad thing. Plus proper stretching and all that. I mean I remember them having wood working classes, and it didn't even focus on things you might actually run into that you could repair on your own without having some major equipment.

Education is great, but too many people come out of high school and college with a lot of knowledge, no applicable skills to a field, and almost no rudimentary skills to speak of. And this isn't saying they should be trained for jobs, this is saying they have enough of a common life skill set that they can at least somewhat measure what is required in positions. Right now, everyone claims they can do everything and they really know very little.

But Im with you there on the TNG DNA job matching.....wish we had it. No politics, nepotism, and what not to throw a wrench into everything.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^chilaxe:
@NetRunner 'everyone who qualifies for college should go for free.'
Just what we need, more lazy, talentless graduates with a heart-warming "culture studies" or "environmental studies" degree working for minimum wage at Starbucks.
I have too many friends to count who got useless college degrees and now, ten years later, are still doing nothing with their lives.

So free choice didn't make people lead full and productive lives? Imagine that.
Snark aside, I don't really see why more scholarships would change things. I'm not talking about making college compulsory, I'm talking about taking monetary cost out of the equation when discussing whether you go or not.
Remember that episode of ST:TNG where all the kids on the Enterprise got kidnapped by an alien race, and they did tests on their DNA, and then told them what their career would be and immediately put them to work? They were fun professions too, like musician, sculptor, engineer, etc.
I sometimes think I would've personally preferred that to having to figure out in my teenage years what kind of career would appeal to me, acquire the skills and training required by that career, and then find a job. It seems like our education system should expend a greater effort on that, rather than just presenting kids with ever-larger menus of classes to take and degrees to earn.

>> ^jimnms:

There are a lot of shitty teachers out there. I can count on one hand how many good teachers I had through elementary and high school. Things changed in college, for better and worse. There were more good teachers than shitty ones, but the shitty teachers were shittier.

In my experience I didn't have even one bad teacher. ! went to 6 differrent schools grade 1-12 and had dozens of teachers in college. All great teachers!!! in my experience 100% of teachers are great. I also think that almost all of them were underpaid.


The solution to getting fewer shitty teachers is to value teachers more, not less!

There are a lot of shitty teachers out there. I can count on one hand how many good teachers I had through elementary and high school. Things changed in college, for better and worse. There were more good teachers than shitty ones, but the shitty teachers were shittier.

It's attacking others like a cross between an elementary school bully or a overzealous used car salesman is what it is. And that crap isn't criticism; it's name calling.

OK, so you agree then that:

The earth is on average on a warming trend.
CO2 is in fact a greenhouse gas.
CO2 levels are increasing.

You just don't believe humans are causing any of the above, correct?

FYI, I didn't say the consensus opinion is always right. If the consensus opinion is based on solid science and fact, then it tends to be correct. Good scientific theories are produced by solid experiments, data I just want to be clear I'm not saying that human induced climate change is a scientific law. I'm saying it's a theory, one based on mounting evidence that supports it. I'm perfectly willing to suggest that the theory is not 100% correct, or could end up proven to be false altogether. I do not have a vested interest to a preconceived outcome.

But the evidence is increasingly overwhelming that it is occurring, and it is caused by humans. I don't need this issue to underscore a core believe of mine that free markets left unchecked do societies severe damage. I've already got hundreds of examples of that. (Unsafe working conditions, child labor, unsafe to consume goods, massive banking fraud, environmental damage other than climate change, unlivable wages, just to name a few)


>> ^quantumushroom:

LOL, you don't try to limit personal attacks. You call Obama "Obummer", "His Earness", various derivatives from the falsehood that he was born in Kenya, etc. You also label people liberals, when in truth, they're moderates, or even moderate Republican, and you suggest having liberal beliefs is somehow innately bad instead of something you disagree with only. You're not fooling anybody.
Only you can fool yourself. Since I don't know HIS EARNESS personally, it's not a personal attack on ODUMBO. Any real leader (or pretend leader) should expect criticism. I have my own standards for who is a liberal and who is Kenyan, and don't expect anyone else to give a crap.

So, I'm just gonna point out once again that your claim that the science behind human contributing climate change is fake, yet you did not identify which part of the theory is false. You immediately launched into a political discussion about giving up rights, etc.
Since you offered: "(You're saying) CO2 increases are not due to human activity?"
That's right. There's no solid objective evidence that man-made industrial activity has a direct, notable effect on climate. Weather is weather and there's nothing puny humans can do about it. For now.
BTW, you do realize that conflicting scientific theories don't make other theories incorrect, right?
Nor do they make the "consensus" opinion correct by brute majority.
You of course have a vested interest due to your desperate clinging belief that capitalist systems and policies are the only right ones to follow, and it's virtually impossible to deal with the problem of human induced climate change with that philosophy.

It's like you're finally figuring out what the alarmists are trying to do! It's all about control and has nothing to do with 'saving the earth'.
Therefore, you flat refuse to look objectively at the data we have, which the majority of it suggests human induced climate change.
This idea had its moment in the sun. It failed. Public opinion is against the alarmists. Capitalism works, socialism "kind of" works until if flops (Greece).
The climate heretic has spoken.

>> ^shagen454:

My understanding of physics, as elementary as it may be (I earned a C+) - the car being hit on the left side would push the car to the right like you said. The driver would have to correct the direction but it looks like he/she over-corrected. I dunno, I've never been clipped from behind going that fast.
>> ^P1ggy:
The asshole car clipped the car on the right in the back left corner. It pushed the back slightly out to the right which effectively put that car into a left hand turn. It did not do it on purpose.
>> ^shagen454:
Why did the other car turn in? Was he trying to hit the oncoming asshole car, thereby making the accident much worse? Anyway, upvote for amazing title.




I'm sorry to inform you that your C+ was well deserved ;-)

The car was in fact hit on the left side. but it would only go to the right if it had been hit on the front left side. since the moron had hit the other car on the back left side he effectively turned it to the left. This is a technique trained and used i.e. by security personell for stopping especially front wheel drive cars. basically you just "turn" the car.

Take a model car, put your finger on top and push it forwards. no with your other hand push the back end to the right. result: car goes left. quod erat demonstrandum as my phyics teacher used to note :-)

My understanding of physics, as elementary as it may be (I earned a C+) - the car being hit on the left side would push the car to the right like you said. The driver would have to correct the direction but it looks like he/she over-corrected. I dunno, I've never been clipped from behind going that fast.

>> ^P1ggy:

The asshole car clipped the car on the right in the back left corner. It pushed the back slightly out to the right which effectively put that car into a left hand turn. It did not do it on purpose.
>> ^shagen454:
Why did the other car turn in? Was he trying to hit the oncoming asshole car, thereby making the accident much worse? Anyway, upvote for amazing title.

So they ran the pledge of allegiance as it was originally written. Good on them. "Under god" was added in the late 50's. When my father was in elementary school, he didn't have to say "under god". I think we should go back to the original way of doing things.

Sarah Palin was right and what you learned in elementary school was wrong. So you know-it-alls need to STFU.

Oh Quantum... deflect much?

I don't remember seeing anyone suggest a comparison between her and Obama prior to your post. I believe that everyone was assessing her performance against, say... a sanitation technician or perhaps an elementary school child. You know, the common folk.

But since you brought it up... There is a huge difference between someone making a mistake due to their ignorance of culture, or geography, or even just having a plain old brain fart. But when you take the time to ramble on with complete ignorance about a well known historical event of which you obviously have no idea, as Sarah clearly did here, and try to pass it off as if you are conducting a lesson or saying something profound... well that is just a combination of ego and stupidity.

To give her the benefit of the doubt, perhaps she was just trying too hard, doesn't know how to check herself and found herself 10 words into a sentence with no idea how she got there or how to finish it up without sounding like an idiot... and she ended up sounding like an idiot.

Regardless, I am tired of Sarah Palin and I hope that one day she gets left behind by the world of politics and personality and we never have to experience her flavor of nonsense again. Sarah Palin, reduced to a footnote in the political history of the country as a person that did nothing, changed nothing, knew nothing

As an artist and a painter, there is nothing new here that I didn't already know or understand.
I had hoped he would zoom in more and identify the bonding precess of the latex particles.

Different types of paints bond differently. (oil, water colours, latex, acrylic, gouache, egg)

Acrylic is quite different than most paints as once the medium evaporates and the pigment binds, it cannot be redissolved.Once the barrier between the pigment particles is removed, the pigments bond to one another to become a larger particle, on and on until the paint is dry and the particles form one large piece of solid plastic - never again to be separated.

Water Colours have no binders in them at all so once the water evaporates, the pigment just drys on the paper. Re-introducing water again will lift the pigment again as the process starts over. (minus pigment particles that get caught in the tooth of the paper.)

Oil paints stick together in linseed oil and are bonded by the linseed. It causes a strong bond but oil paint can be dissolved again using the right solvents. A varnish is used not to adhere (or fix) the pigment but to both hide linseed imperfections and to protect the paint surface from scratches.

Latex paint is a rubber (unlike plastic acrylics) and the process for the drying is different again. Anyone ever watch a foam rubber pour?

With all the differences, this video gives a rather slim and elementary vision of what is going on. It's more a document of evaporation more than anything as we watch the water dissipate and leave the pigment behind to stack on itself.

I would really like to have seen the actual pigments bonding with each other. I would also have liked to have seen different paints in comparison.

Jefferson was a gentleman, a scholar and a deep thinker.

He would be appalled by you, not me. He would be appalled at the mountain being made out of this molehill, when there are true mountains to be tackled.

Not that either of us really can speak for the man.


>> ^cosmovitelli:

So what about the uneducated British troops sent to put down the illegal colonial rebellion over, as you put it "expensive tea"? Blue collar hardworking guys right? Should have just bent over and taken it because they had badges?
It is bad luck for them, as for the British soldiers, that those whose will they have pledged to violently enforce make tyrannical and demented proclamations. But the most elementary understanding of Jefferson, and the fundamental basis for the US constitution, absolutely precludes meek subservience to tyranny.
A few more gutless masochists like you in Boston and you would be singing God save the Queen, and crowing about how great the staus Quo is. Or whatever mental contortions you had to perform to avoid growing a pair.
As for causing a disrespectful commotion at the memorial to a father of free expression, are you really blaming people silently jigging over people violently attacking others??
No offense but if you'd spouted that shit to Jefferson he'd have knocked you the fuck out.
>> ^bareboards2:
This is the very definition of dehumanization. To tell a hardworking blue collar worker that they are a tool of the state, instead of recognizing that they are understandably pissed off at a bunch of folks who aren't following specific directions?
There is a vid on the sift interviewing cannibals on how they justified eating a fellow human being.
This is the modern world equivalent of that cannibal saying the sorcerer wasn't human, so it was okay to kill and eat him.