1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Shoveling Science

HeraldOfGalactus Wrote: 23 hours ago (7:01 PM)
Frekki, Could you please cite the source of the data that says 2014 wasn't the hottest year on record? Where are you getting your data? I'd like to analyze it for myself. If you're right, I'll gladly revise my statement. But a warming trend has been documented for over half a century. I don't think it matters how much humans have contributed to this warning. The extent to which man-made activity has is still debatable in my opinion. Changing climate has a serious impact on human society. And ignoring the issue isn't going to help us adapt appropriately to it. I'm not among those who think climate change is going to end the world. The planet has survived far worse mass extinctions. And every time there's an extinction, the gap is filled by a new glut of species that survive. That's just how evolution works. I believe that climate change deserves attention because understanding it means we can better adapt to it, ensuring that less people suffer and more people prosper.
In response to:

Shoveling Science

HeraldOfGalactus Wrote: 23 hours ago (6:57 PM)
What evidence is there that 2014 wasn't the hottest year on record? This is what measurements taken by satellites have indicated. Do you have any data at all to back up your claim? I'm open to being proven wrong, but just yelling at the top of your lungs that I'm wrong doesn't make it so.
In response to:

Shoveling Science

HeraldOfGalactus Wrote: 23 hours ago (6:56 PM)
Appeals to conspiracy are rarely logical. It's easy to check the facts with respect to global temperature. That's well within out technological capabilities. Why do you think there's some conspiracy regarding climate change anyways? This is what the data says. The world is getting warmer. Do you have any data to counter it? If you don't, then calling it a conspiracy is a lofty and irrational assumption.
The legal definition for irreparable harm is poorly defined when it comes to law. However, I think the case could be made in this context that there would be irreparable harm if same-sex marriage remains banned. It has to do with the benefits conferred to married couples by the state. These benefits include pensions, social security, medical care, and inheritence. Say someone in a same-sex relationship dies unexpectedly, leaving their partner without any of these benefits. There have been documented cases where this has occurred. Because of this pan, there would be harm imposed on the surviving partner that could not be undone. They can't get those benefits if their partner is dead by the time same-sex marriage is legal. This also becomes pressing when children are involved. Yes, same-sex couples can have children, either by adoption or by a doner in the case of lesbian couples. Absent the protections of marriage, as afforded by the state and offered through no other means, that child could be harmed when the surviving partner has none of the legal protections or resources with which to care for that child. That is harm that cannot be undone. So in this case, from a purely legal perspecive, the ban on same-sex marriage would constitute irreparable harm to same-sex couples. Marriage is an important institution. It helps solifiy and strengthen families. It should be encouraged and expanding it to same-sex couples can only help. Legalizing same-sex marriage does not change heterosexual marriage in any way. It just means more people can actually marry the person they want to marry. And when people marry someone they really love and actually want to marry, that's good for the relationship and for marriage as a whole. So from that perspective, same-sex marriage has far more benefits than any perceived costs.
I find it tragic that it takes something like a wounded 19-month-old infant to get people to realize that these drug war tactics do more harm than good. Is it really worth mutiliating an infant to prevent someone from smoking a joint or popping some pills? I think that is unacceptable collateral damage in a conflict that is simply failing on all fronts. These aren't foreign soldiers. These aren't spies. These are American citizens being attacked in their own home by the very authorities they're supposed to rely on. Due process is not something that should be thrown out the door just to a failing drug war.
I think this is an appropriate definition and one that could apply just as well to men. In the end, equality and reason should be the goal. Nothing is truly gained when one form of tyranny is exchanged for another.
In response to:

Shoveling Science

HeraldOfGalactus Wrote: Jan 29, 2015 9:03 AM
Beyond being a blatant ad hominum attack on Bill Nye, this article misses an important point. In a purely unscientific sense, Mr. Hunter is not seeing the forest from the trees. The snow storms we had this past week are just leaves. The tree itself tells a very different story. It's beyond dispute that the world is getting warmer. The year 2014 was the hottest year on record. Some parts of the world got cooler, but the world as a whole got warmer. And focusing in on the areas that didn't is missing the bigger picture. Mr. Nye makes a valid point about climate change. It can have an economic impact if we don't invest in managing it. This is not a problem that can be ignored, nor should it be.
Why do you say this nation is in such a woeful state? Crime is down to record lows. The rates of teen pregnancy, abortion, and sexual assault are down across the board. People today are generally more educated than they've ever been. Deviance on the whole is lower than it's been in half-a-century. How is that a bad sign for a nation? I think you're not seeing the forest from the trees here.
Such a law sounds far too reasonable to ever pass in most legislators, I'm afraid.
In response to:

Marriage on the Chopping Block?

HeraldOfGalactus Wrote: Jan 27, 2015 11:25 AM
You may be right, but whatever the standard might be, none of the opponents of same-sex marriage have been able to meet it in a courtroom.
1 - 10 Next