@BoneRemake

True. But the difference is: about 10 years and the study of sociology. i.e. somewhat thoughtful input

These girls don't know or even care what created the "societal decay" which lead to an 80% drop-out rate at their school.

All they want is for blackies to speak more.. eligibly.

Maybe they'll grow up to solve some of those conditions, for now tho.. youtube.

That biological imperative to reproduce may be abhorrent, but it still lives pretty strong in some men and women. Monogamy isn't natural for everyone. Some folks just can't do it. To pretend otherwise leads to heartbreak. Let's be honest about it.

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/01/20/the-gingrich-question-cheating-vs-open-marriage/voters-prefer-newt-gingrichs-adultery-to-open-marriage

Not sure why you find a disconnect between anything I have said, so I don't know how to clarify. Perhaps we can discuss this on our profile page? If you can be more specific about what doesn't add up? I think I am logically consistent.



>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^bareboards2:
Cool. So move on, right? To argue against biology so stridently is tiresome.
AND keep on fighting to keep religion out of the laws.
AND keep on educating the general public that religion is a choice -- I often thought that the most strident anti-religion atheists are those who were most scarred by the worst aspects of it. That theirs is an emotional battle on behalf of those trapped in households where religion is presented as THE ONLY CHOICE. And if you aren't someone who has that "religion gene", that can be crazy making.
I love all the billboards that atheists are starting to put up. I see them as lifelines to children and adults who don't believe and feel shame. Like being homosexual -- if you are gay in a fundamentalist household, stay in the closet until you are an adult and then MOVE AWAY. It is the only rational choice.
First I don't believe to argue against religion is to argue against biology. Religion is an evolved sociological trait, rather than a strictly biological one. But even if that weren't true, there are any number of biological traits that, while potentially advantageous in a strictly evolutionary fashion, we regard as abhorrent. Males are genetically predisposed to copulate with as many females as they can, and to fight off rivals. Neither of these traits are well regarded in modern society.
I'm not quite sure what you're saying here, so apologies if I am misinterpreting you, but the first part of your post seems to contradict the second part. Could you clarify?

>> ^bareboards2:

Cool. So move on, right? To argue against biology so stridently is tiresome.
AND keep on fighting to keep religion out of the laws.
AND keep on educating the general public that religion is a choice -- I often thought that the most strident anti-religion atheists are those who were most scarred by the worst aspects of it. That theirs is an emotional battle on behalf of those trapped in households where religion is presented as THE ONLY CHOICE. And if you aren't someone who has that "religion gene", that can be crazy making.
I love all the billboards that atheists are starting to put up. I see them as lifelines to children and adults who don't believe and feel shame. Like being homosexual -- if you are gay in a fundamentalist household, stay in the closet until you are an adult and then MOVE AWAY. It is the only rational choice.

First I don't believe to argue against religion is to argue against biology. Religion is an evolved sociological trait, rather than a strictly biological one. But even if that weren't true, there are any number of biological traits that, while potentially advantageous in a strictly evolutionary fashion, we regard as abhorrent. Males are genetically predisposed to copulate with as many females as they can, and to fight off rivals. Neither of these traits are well regarded in modern society.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here, so apologies if I am misinterpreting you, but the first part of your post seems to contradict the second part. Could you clarify?

Don't see any obvious sociopaths in the group, just kids acting like kids, on a good day. It's when they're asked to share with a kid they don't like, or maybe siblings, when they can get fussy.

And yes, just about everything on here gets political somehow, which is another sociological experiment in itself.

>> ^spoco2:

>> ^Ryjkyj:
WTF, people are born with two half/completely whole sets of genitals are the time. I think the numbers for hermaphroditic birth are about one in a hundred, and the doctors and parents decide right then what gender the child is going to have. For better or worse, this happens all the time. It always amazes me that people act like this stuff is so new just because the person chooses their own gender later in life.

It's nowhere near as common as you think. 1 in 100 is ridiculously common... This german study found it to be '2 per 10,000 births with ambiguous genitalia per year in Germany. ',
So, no, it's not super common at all. Not to say it doesn't happen, but also what you're describing is a different thing to this. Gender association and having the deep feeling you are not the sex your body is, is a different thing to having ambiguous genitalia. Also... there are horrendous cases of babies having their sex chosen by doctors/parents in those cases and it being the opposite of what they identify with, and becoming horrendously unhappy people. Very sad.


Yeah, it's been a long time since I took that sociology class. 1 in 100 "differ from standard male or female" and 1 in 1000 have surgery to "normalize genital appearance".

http://www.isna.org/faq/frequency

Anyway, my point wasn't really that a gender change later in life is the same as an operation at birth. Merely that surgery "down there" occurs all the time. We act like the surgery is so uncommon when it's not. It's really just the changing of gender that most people have a problem with. But the point everyone misses is that this girl didn't change her gender... she's always felt she was a girl. She just simply had an operation that changed her physical appearance.

And just wait until the public finds out that she's a lesbian!

Germany's hitherto second largest political party, the SPD (Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschland) has finally developed a small laicistic wing. Religion is sociologically a very private matter for most people here, although with a societal overtone that the church is always right, and always present (I guess it's the same for Switzerland, only a bit more anti-muslim). Atheism has not yet hit German society as a matter of public discourse, like in the UK.
Here's hoping for a Germany in which the biggest party doesn't have the word "christian" in its fucking name.

In reply to this comment by hpqp:
Gah, hope she gets replaced soon.

There is much sociological truth in this video. When I walk home at night and there is a woman doing the same, I notice how she walks faster if in front of me, or slower if behind me. It is ok to be cautious, but, astoundingly, not every man is a rapist or child-molester.

Once I was lost in a part of town I did not know, at night, and 100m in front of me was a woman walking. I wanted to ask her directions without screaming over the distance, so I walk fast to catch up to her, and when I was close enough to ask "Excuse me?" she was half panicked, and even while I asked for directions she was still visibly afraid.

This cannot be a healthy state of mind, and I hope the slut-marches and such can ease these mindsets a little.

>> ^Skeeve:

cult [kuhlt]
noun
1. a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3. the object of such devotion.
4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5. Sociology . a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
6. a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.
7. the members of such a religion or sect.
Looks like they match all of the definitions of cult to me, and there is no mention of how numerous a group has to be. Unless @therealblankman disagrees, I think this fits in the cult channel.
>> ^xxovercastxx:
Hasidim may be fucking crazy, but they are way too numerous to be considered a cult.
nochannel religion travel fear controversy



Fine with the cult assignment. Though this particular group of crazy-ass Hasidim might disagree, from the outside looking in it seems to fit the definition.

cult [kuhlt]
noun
1. a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3. the object of such devotion.
4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5. Sociology . a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
6. a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.
7. the members of such a religion or sect.

Looks like they match all of the definitions of cult to me, and there is no mention of how numerous a group has to be. Unless @therealblankman disagrees, I think this fits in the *cult channel.
>> ^xxovercastxx:

Hasidim may be fucking crazy, but they are way too numerous to be considered a cult.
nochannel religion travel fear controversy

Regarding African Americans/blacks/whatever. It can easily be shown from a sociological perspective that they are unfairly targeted by law enforcement. It's not an opinion really but a fact. And might I point out, one that doesn't even take into account the predominantly white, white-collar criminals that cause things like our current financial crisis, and yet are never prosecuted, even without full protection of the law.

People stealing purses, selling drugs and pimping women are not the cause of society's ills. They are the effect.

@GenjiKilpatrick

Downvoted my comment before even hearing my explanation? Classy.

Anyone who thinks that the only reason religion still exists in the modern world is to explain the physical world around us is either grossly uninformed of the complex and well-documented web of sociological, psychological, economic, and political facets of religion or is grossly oversimplifying the situation. In either case "simpleton" would be an apt term to describe such a person.

Atheists convert for all sorts of reasons..it's actually fairly common and not hard to find. If you want a citation, you can check out this site called google and try putting in "2008 pewforum religion public life survey"

>> ^hpqp:
>> ^shinyblurry:
"According to one underreported 2008 U.S. Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life survey, 21 per cent of atheists expressed at least some certainty of belief in God or universal spirit, and 10 per cent admitted to praying on a weekly basis.
Nor should we be surprised to learn that more “than 20 per cent of atheist scientists consider themselves to be ‘spiritual,’ according to a Rice University study.” From the Religion News Service: “The findings, to be published in the June issue of the journal Sociology of Religion, are based on in-depth interviews with 275 natural and social scientists from 21 of the nation’s top research universities.” The two in ten study refers to atheist scientists who acknowledge their spirituality. Like Oscar Wilde’s deathbed conversion, this is an issue campaigning journalists are afraid to touch. Scratch beneath the surface, and you’ll find that all men make spiritual-sounding noises, from Catholics to self-styled New Atheists."
>> ^Drachen_Jager:
Umm, if he really was an Athiest, what was he doing praying in the first place?


Ha, you do well to bring Oscar Wilde's "conversion" as a comparison. So atheists "convert" when:
a) They win the lottery
b) They are dying of cerebral meningitis, pumped on morphine and semi-comatose
Sweet.
As for the rest: citation needed

>> ^shinyblurry:

"According to one underreported 2008 U.S. Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life survey, 21 per cent of atheists expressed at least some certainty of belief in God or universal spirit, and 10 per cent admitted to praying on a weekly basis.
Nor should we be surprised to learn that more “than 20 per cent of atheist scientists consider themselves to be ‘spiritual,’ according to a Rice University study.” From the Religion News Service: “The findings, to be published in the June issue of the journal Sociology of Religion, are based on in-depth interviews with 275 natural and social scientists from 21 of the nation’s top research universities.” The two in ten study refers to atheist scientists who acknowledge their spirituality. Like Oscar Wilde’s deathbed conversion, this is an issue campaigning journalists are afraid to touch. Scratch beneath the surface, and you’ll find that all men make spiritual-sounding noises, from Catholics to self-styled New Atheists."
>> ^Drachen_Jager:
Umm, if he really was an Athiest, what was he doing praying in the first place?



Ha, you do well to bring Oscar Wilde's "conversion" as a comparison. So atheists "convert" when:

a) They win the lottery
b) They are dying of cerebral meningitis, pumped on morphine and semi-comatose

Sweet.

As for the rest: *citation needed*

"According to one underreported 2008 U.S. Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life survey, 21 per cent of atheists expressed at least some certainty of belief in God or universal spirit, and 10 per cent admitted to praying on a weekly basis.

Nor should we be surprised to learn that more “than 20 per cent of atheist scientists consider themselves to be ‘spiritual,’ according to a Rice University study.” From the Religion News Service: “The findings, to be published in the June issue of the journal Sociology of Religion, are based on in-depth interviews with 275 natural and social scientists from 21 of the nation’s top research universities.” The two in ten study refers to atheist scientists who acknowledge their spirituality. Like Oscar Wilde’s deathbed conversion, this is an issue campaigning journalists are afraid to touch. Scratch beneath the surface, and you’ll find that all men make spiritual-sounding noises, from Catholics to self-styled New Atheists."

>> ^Drachen_Jager:
Umm, if he really was an Athiest, what was he doing praying in the first place?

Whoa. Intense.

I didn't know that the "famous hacker" actually turned Manning in. Says to me that the hacking subculture isn't monolithic -- which is just human nature.

http://videosift.com/video/Conformity-scientific-and-sociological-insight Really worth a look.

I also find it ... fitting, that Bush's disastrous invasion of Iraq led to spreading our forces too thin, led to a drop in recruitment, led to keeping an unstable Manning, which led to this huge security breach.

It all comes back to that, doesn't it? Bush was a disaster of a president.