The Battle Bar, Our Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy

Originally posted by Zampanó
I'm not sure that is the case.

While this measure allows for the indication of same-sex couples in that paperwork, it does not declare any degree of approval or preference for such. Same sex couples exist. That's a fact of society today. Annoying gay couples with outdated paperwork isn't actually going to make them go away.

Given that the above is true, why should the passport paperwork be any less precise than it could be? It seems like the benefit of accurate information about the people moving between countries should outweigh the very small disincentive for gay people to adopt children:

The difference between "father" and "parent 1" on a passport form is not going to prevent a same-sex couple from adopting children. Your goal of discouraging such unions is not helped at all by the current state of affairs. On the other hand, noticing that someone's (adoptive) parents were of the same gender might be very helpful in predicting the actions of an international fugitive, if only as an extra datapoint for the profilers. You lose nothing by endorsing this change, but gain more resources for national security.

How can you oppose this?

Spoiler:
and why is this newsworthy?

UH red, that wasn't my insinuation at all. I do of course believe this to a degree but I haven't even alluded to it in these posts.

You're right. I displaced some of the lines of the article into your post, and then read way too far into it. Retracted and edited.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40989445/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/

Okay: for those of you that claim the majority of Muslims are NOT happy with bloodshed, how do you explain this rally and march of 50K people praising a man who murdered a governor who was supporting legislation that would have caused BLASPHEMY to cease to be a CAPITAL offense?

How can you see that, a massive march of people who support MURDER?

(especially the circumstances of the murder, showing they are all also happy with that woman being executed for speaking against an unprovable deity.)

notable:

People accused of blasphemy are often killed by extremists or spend significant amounts of time behind bars. In some cases, the charges border on the ridiculous: A man was recently held because he threw away a business card of someone whose first name is Muhammad.

The Karachi rally represented all major Muslim groups and sects in Pakistan's most populous city and was one of the few to bring together moderate and conservative Muslims. Police officer Irshad Sehar estimated 40,000 to 50,000 people attended.

Originally posted by truejedi
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40989445/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/

Okay: for those of you that claim the majority of Muslims are NOT happy with bloodshed, how do you explain this rally and march of 50K people praising a man who murdered a governor who was supporting legislation that would have caused BLASPHEMY to cease to be a CAPITAL offense?

How can you see that, a massive march of people who support MURDER?

(especially the circumstances of the murder, showing they are all also happy with that woman being executed for speaking against an unprovable deity.)

unprovable deity

heh

i didn't think there would be an explanation. Being wrong is a ***** sometimes.

Okay: for those of you that claim the majority of Muslims are NOT happy with bloodshed, how do you explain this rally and march of 50K people praising a man who murdered a governor who was supporting legislation that would have caused BLASPHEMY to cease to be a CAPITAL offense?

Pakistan has over 170 million inhabitants, almost all of which are Muslim. How exactly is 50k a 'majority' of that?

The Karachi rally represented all major Muslim groups and sects in Pakistan's most populous city and was one of the few to bring together moderate and conservative Muslims.

I find it amusing that someone can be so absolutely appalled that these people are following the rules of an ancient book, while following the rules of an ancient book.

I don't have to "explain" anything, because I seem to remember basing my argument around American muslims. The confounding factors of regional politics, poverty, and a historically anti-Western slant (to the point of utter ridiculousness) means that on a practical level, the behavior of Islam outside of an Enlightenment-descended society is completely irrelevant to my opinion of the religion. Even Islam outside of the Enlightenment's descendants (read: civilized countries) is on the whole not particularly violent; when was the last time you saw a report about terrorist bombings from Indonesia (the largest Muslim country)?

Originally posted by Zampanó
I find it amusing that someone can be so absolutely appalled that these people are following the rules of an ancient book, while following the rules of an ancient book.

To the point of violence. There is no comparison. None.

Eh RH does have a point about Muslims that came from an Enlightenment-descended society.

yeah enlightenment....

Though you will hear a lot of people try to talk about all the technological advances we have due to Islam... If they really were THAT advanced, what is there excuse now?

Originally posted by truejedi
yeah enlightenment....

Though you will hear a lot of people try to talk about all the technological advances we have due to Islam... If they really were THAT advanced, what is there excuse now?

We do. They were masters in science and medicine and what not. They just reverted back to their barbaric ways. It's hard to argue against RH's point.

Originally posted by truejedi
yeah enlightenment....

Though you will hear a lot of people try to talk about all the technological advances we have due to Islam... If they really were THAT advanced, what is there excuse now?

The scientific method has its roots in this period. So too does the American revolution, with its deference to "natural law." America, for all its faults, is the best and most successful example of Enlightenment ideals. Every time you slam the Middle East for not being American enough, take one step further back and realize just how lucky you are that you were born somewhere under the illumination of the Enlightenment.

We learned how to live together without murdering each other. Just last week we saw the peaceful and orderly transfer of power between ruling groups, and I'm not sure you realize just how awe-inspiring that is. The democrats weren't lined up and shot, and the death of a Senator, literally a ruler, was recognized as a tragedy by everyone, not just the losers. I think you need to be more grateful, and think for a moment just how blessed and lucky you are to live in America, the bastion of the Enlightenment. Look around. Here, at lest, we can disagree without killing each other. The people in other areas of the world without that luxury would be better served by your pity than your hatred. "I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you" -Matthew 5:44

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
We do. They were masters in science and medicine and what not. They just reverted back to their barbaric ways. It's hard to argue against RH's point.

DS understands. The Arab preservation of Aristotle while Europe was wallowing in its Dark Ages kept the spark alive; they paved the way for the Renaissance. Then, over the course of about a six hundred years of terrible, terrible circumstances Europe took the lead (that Enlightenment thing helped with this part) and started in on conquering the world. The cycle of poverty kicked in, and crushing famines (not to mention the fierce resistance to change and new learning that keeps half of their society from leaving the house) means that quite aside from the local religion, the region is a hellhole, and is going to be a hellhole.

Indonesia is predominately Muslim, and their society isn't inherently unstable. Your conclusion about the religion simply isn't backed by the facts. You've posted link after link about how shitty the Middle East is, but you haven't shown us anything that says that Islam, and not poverty and corruption and centuries of barbarism, is to blame.

You're wrong and your opinions are wrong and you should feel ashamed for thinking the way you do, truejedi.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/07/passport-applications-soon-gender-neutral/

This is just as sad as it gets.

Still not as stupid as when they eliminated the word "actress", though.

Originally posted by Zampanó
DS understands. The Arab preservation of Aristotle while Europe was wallowing in its Dark Ages kept the spark alive; they paved the way for the Renaissance. Then, over the course of about a six hundred years of terrible, terrible circumstances Europe took the lead (that Enlightenment thing helped with this part) and started in on conquering the world. The cycle of poverty kicked in, and crushing famines (not to mention the fierce resistance to change and new learning that keeps half of their society from leaving the house) means that quite aside from the local religion, the region is a hellhole, and is going to be a hellhole.

Indonesia is predominately Muslim, and their society isn't inherently unstable. Your conclusion about the religion simply isn't backed by the facts. You've posted link after link about how shitty the Middle East is, but you haven't shown us anything that says that Islam, and not poverty and corruption and centuries of barbarism, is to blame.

You're wrong and your opinions are wrong and you should feel ashamed for thinking the way you do, truejedi.

This is RN taking the high road of declaring victory. Because THAT means he's right.

I agree completely with your earlier point about American Islam. No problems between us there. We are lucky to have been born here, anyone who says they would rather live elsewhere (Sorry Lucien!) is kidding themselves, or just uninformed about either the destination or the departure point.

I do however believe the middle east IS a shithole because of the fact that they adhere to a murderous religion. If they had modernized like other religions (Christianity, Catholocism and Judiasm are obvious examples) they too could have moved beyond the "Killing everyone who doesn't agree with your made up deity" phase.

You say I have offered nothing putting the blame on Islam, and thats partially true, but not completely. Every link I have posted is specifically related to violence BASED on religion. I posted where Muslims attacked Christians outside their church, I posted were Christian Docters were killed and the lone Muslim doctor was left alive, and here I have posted a link where people are defending the murder of a man who was attempting to update archaic, religiously and verbally oppressive legislature.

There is clearly a link to religion, and for you to dismiss it out of hand and to offer me a "shame on you" as a repose demonstrates that you are keeping yourself PURPOSELY ignorant of happenings that don't agree with your own theory.

Originally posted by truejedi
(Sorry Lucien!)

You shoot seals? You probably are like the japanese.. for science, right? : )