You know the funny thing is that many of the same things being said above can also be said of the Democratic party.

I watched these kids grow up!

Funny story...

I was out for a walk yesterday and ran into a friend who was with her 4 year old grandson. She told me a funny thing he had said the other day.

The blueberries are everywhere in the store right now -- you haven't lived until you have had an Olympic Peninsula blueberry. Sorry, I digress.

Anyway, the little boy had a fistful of blueberries and said to his Momo, "The blueberries make me feel like Nanda. I want to flip!"

And then I turn on the Sift today, and there are my boys, right there on the front page! (They juggle too, by the way....)

Funny thing. It's election time in Holland and the planes are from two opposing political parties. The Socialist Party (SP) and the Christian Democrats (CDA)

As I said, if you want to msg me, we can discuss this further. I've posted many reasons why I said what I did, if you don't want to accept them at face value that's your choice.

>> ^VoodooV:

unless you can read minds or they specifically state "I downvote because I hate religion" you can't judge intent that way.
But you're missing the point. It matters not what topic you discuss, if you commit a logical fallacy, people won't respect you and guess what, they're more likely to downvote you here.
understanding and avoiding logical fallacies is like...debate and discourse 101.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy
Funny thing is, the article on fallacies is one of the few things that both Wikipedia and Conservapedia agree on, both articles appear accurate. Of course, Conservapedia's examples are radically different
What I see you (and bobknight) do a lot is commit the "appeal to belief" fallacy.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-belief.html
you can believe whatever you want to believe, but when you pass your belief off as fact in the public arena without anything to back it up, you lose any credibility you may have earned.
>> ^shinyblurry:
I gave proof in the thread, most notably the 18 discarded posts I have. I'm not going to debate religion with you here. If you want to debate me, then msg me and pick a topic.
>> ^VoodooV:
see here we go with more fallacies.
"People downvote for ideological reasons (they hate religion)"
This is an untrue statement. Unless you've developed some mind reading abilities that I'm not aware of, you simply cannot know why people downvote.
You forget the most simple reason of all: Religion has zero basis in fact and/or reason, therefore it has zero grounds to be treated with any authority. especially in matters of public government."
If you're going to claim they just do it because of hate, you better: 1) back that up with actual evidence and arguments. and 2) ask yourself the very simple question: "If they do hate religion, do they have a good reason why?"
I'd be willing to bet the kids molested by priests can think of a view VERY GOOD reasons's why.

unless you can read minds or they specifically state "I downvote because I hate religion" you can't judge intent that way.

But you're missing the point. It matters not what topic you discuss, if you commit a logical fallacy, people won't respect you and guess what, they're more likely to downvote you here.

understanding and avoiding logical fallacies is like...debate and discourse 101.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

Funny thing is, the article on fallacies is one of the few things that both Wikipedia and Conservapedia agree on, both articles appear accurate. Of course, Conservapedia's examples are radically different

What I see you (and bobknight) do a lot is commit the "appeal to belief" fallacy.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-belief.html

you can believe whatever you want to believe, but when you pass your belief off as fact in the public arena without anything to back it up, you lose any credibility you may have earned.

>> ^shinyblurry:

I gave proof in the thread, most notably the 18 discarded posts I have. I'm not going to debate religion with you here. If you want to debate me, then msg me and pick a topic.
>> ^VoodooV:
see here we go with more fallacies.
"People downvote for ideological reasons (they hate religion)"
This is an untrue statement. Unless you've developed some mind reading abilities that I'm not aware of, you simply cannot know why people downvote.
You forget the most simple reason of all: Religion has zero basis in fact and/or reason, therefore it has zero grounds to be treated with any authority. especially in matters of public government."
If you're going to claim they just do it because of hate, you better: 1) back that up with actual evidence and arguments. and 2) ask yourself the very simple question: "If they do hate religion, do they have a good reason why?"
I'd be willing to bet the kids molested by priests can think of a view VERY GOOD reasons's why.

The funny thing is, my 3 y/o son would have loved the purple, sparkly, dress/hat combo. I wouldn't have been able to peel it off of him.

Funny thing is I could barely follow along with what he was saying. >> ^alien_concept:

This is probably way funnier if you're British, haha. I loved it! promote

That's the funny thing about the law. It's written to protect but the subject of that protection seems to be shifting more towards the police and away from the reason they are purported to exist.

This is a great video worth watching http://videosift.com/video/TED-Stephen-Coleman-The-moral-dangers-of-non-lethal-weapons >> ^dag:

No excuse for this. I hope they get jail terms.

>> ^heathen:

>> ^Lolthien:
Anyone who voted for this needs to reconsider their direction in life. I can't tell if this is meant to be funny, or if it's a parody of comics from 1988.

I upvoted the video, please tell me more about how I should reconsider my direction in life.


See the life you have been living and how that has affected what you find funny? You may want to adjust to a modern lifestyle and shift your sense of humor accordingly.



Or not. Not really my business.



Seriously, unless this guy is being ironic, I could not find a single funny thing about it.

>> ^brycewi19:

Gotta ask, but can it be concluded that Iceland's actions with the banks and debt forgiveness is a direct correlation to their increase in GDP? Or are there other factors that this video is not including?


What other factors?

Iceland's biggest exports are aluminum and fish, which accounts for the majority of their GDP. Not exactly two dynamic growth powerhouses traditionally.

Some sifter's like to take shots at TYT (some not undeserved) but rarely back up the rhetoric with facts. All evidence points to the pulling the banks in to line and relieving the populace of massive debt burdens (freeing up cash to keep, for example, small businesses running employing people etc) as the major cause of a return to growth after the initial contraction.

You want to see a sort of pre-emptive version of this policy, look at Australia. We have a highly regulated and controlled banking environment and the government provided stimulus during the GFC. Our banks are not allowed to expose themselves to nearly the same level of risk that US or other banks are in deregulated markets. Now, in 2012, banks are taking record profits and the country didn't suffer nearly as badly as most of the rest of the developed world...

Funny thing about this urge to have few/no rules or punishment for banks and their executives, if you broke in to a store, robbed it and burned it to the ground, a republican would probably call for your head and more police to enforce that it doesn't happen again. So what happens when people do the same thing to the economy of a nation? They get rewarded with more money? Doesn't make sense to me.

Thanks, marinara!
In reply to this comment by marinara:
*promote

>> ^jqpublick:

Being a Canadian, I stand 100% behind her. We don't know for sure who made these calls (choke, cough cough, hack hack) but when we do find out (at least one riding is now going to have a re-election due to these calls) and when enough of the affected ridings get their fair shots at casting their votes, I for one hope the guilty parties go to jail for a long long time.
I live in one of the ridings that got these calls, and both my roommate and I received calls telling us to go to another polling station. I called Elections Canada and was informed that they do not make phone calls but that they had received an unusual number of complaints.


This happens every election cycle here in the US, though predominantly to the young, the poor and the minorities. There are over 120 new laws on the books here in the States restricting the voting rights of those folks, sending out mail saying you have to vote on x day. It happens every election year in this country and it's only going to get worse for one reason... The republican voting block is shrinking. Younger people, blacks, and especially Latinos, these groups are growing rapidly and vote democrat predominantly, so instead of trying to actually get these groups on board by supporting them, republicans do their best to restrict their ability to vote. It's why a number of states (mostly southern states) make it so you need a state ID to vote and make it extremely hard to get new IDs, especially in the inner cities. In some states you cant vote with a student ID, but you can with a gun license. Florida has a new state law that makes it illegal for groups to help people register to vote. How preposterous is that? This is all in the name of 'voter fraud'. Funny thing is, in the last several years there have been a total of five.. yes.. five.. cases of this that actually went to court in the entire United States. Whats really funny is that two of them were republicans who held an office. One was a secretary of state! (The person in each state tasked with making sure voting and elections go smoothly in essence.)

I feel bad for Canadians. Their government has essentially been paid off by the oil industry. They are making out like bandits up there and their beautiful country is being torn apart (both physically and socially) because of it.