Craig24

'Redskins' debate misses the larger point of white privilege

Apparently a small section is disappearing even as the entire thing has grown to a record size.

Massive Antarctic Ice Shelf Will Disappear in a Few Years according to NASA Thought I'd pass this along. Give up your Industrial Civilization now before it's too late. An Antarctic ice shelf roughly half the size of Rhode Island will disintegrate completely within the next few years, according to a NASA study released Thursday. .. The NASA study supports previous research suggesting that Antarctica’s ice shelves are melting at a rate much faster than previously anticipated. In March, research published in Science highlighted the accelerating loss of ice from most of Antarctica’s ice shelves. The melting was most pronounced in the West Antarctic, where losses increased by nearly 70 percent in the last decade. If all the ice that sits on the West Antarctic bedrock is allowed to flow into the ocean, global sea level could rise by nine feet — something that scientists don’t think is likely to happen, though they also aren’t sure how much grounded ice will eventually melt. That will be determined, they say, not only by how much the Earth warms, but by local conditions in Antarctica, including how wind patterns divert warm or cold water to various parts of the continent.

What do you want from me? Do you want me to say "blacks are suffering from slavery and discrimination, past and present". Ok, I'll say that. Now what?

That's precisely the problem 2046. That's is exactly what these people want. They want a people's republic of the US and will not stop until it's achieved. We will be called racist no matter what if after acknowledging these points above we start pontificating about the virtues of individualism and capitalism. It's a losing battle.

You haven't stated any facts. At the risk of being rude, BS. Factors beyond the control of the teachers (and many of the black students) are causing those students to underperform. You either do not want white teachers teaching black students or you dislike white people. It explains the accusation that white teachers literally attack minority students (and, NO, your anecdotal evidence of isolated attacks in the classroom are not convincing me. If you think my examples of exceptional black student performance represents an exception to the rule then apply your standard of evaluation to your own evidence. Special pleading doesn't work on this forum. We aren't that dumb.)

Education of Minority Children by Thomas Sowell A good article showing how successful our so called 'Eurocentric' education of minority students can be. More from the article:

What??????????????? You think white teachers are attacking their students?

Education racial gap wide as ever according to NAEP According to the graph in the article linked above, the average test scores are as follows: In math: Asian/Pacific Islander: 172 (#1) White: 162 (#2) In reading: White: 297 (#1) Asian/Pacific Islander: 296 (#2) The ave gap is: Asian/Pacific Islander: +4.5 over white The rest of the races fall behind both. Our system is apparently geared to Asians more than any other race. Care to dispute the numbers?

If the point is that certain "Christianistas" as softwareNerd is now calling them, want to protect discrimination against gays but not against other minorities, then the inconsistency of the "Christianistas" is the target of his criticism and your concern here is unfounded. Basically what we are dealing with is a subset of the religious right that wants a bakery to serve blacks and hispanics but not gays but they will not frame it that way. Instead they frame it as a form of protection for businesses that want to deny gays their service. Who are they fooling?

A documentary about Ayn Rand's life has been made: Ayn Rand: A Sense of Life

There are Objectivists resorting to actual violence in debates with Marxists?? Where!!!??? When!!!??? Should I get the popcorn?

Maybe we should just begin with the question: What must one do to obtain land and make it one's own property? Unless we know what you, Jon, thinks must be done with or to land before it qualifies as someone's property, I and everyone else runs the risk of debating a straw man. It's possible that your criteria covers every example of land ownership in existence and you are arguing against nothing or perhaps your criteria simply isn't broad enough to include legitimate land ownership in some cases.

I'm not sure I understand your reasoning. If we distinguish between humans and non humans (land qualifies as non human) and recognize humans as having rights because they are human (the rational animal), then making land property will never result in thinking you can also make humans property as well.

How is life a value intrinsically if the concept value refers to what you like or love (men can and do commit suicide.)?? You are operating with a wrong definition of the term value (at least according to Rand).

I think you have to value anything, including life, for it to be a value because, by definition, a value is what you desire and choose to gain or keep.

You are saying, in essence that what we can do to make an apple, some gold in the hills, and the air we breathe that makes it property cannot be done to land. Ok. That's interesting. What theory of property makes claimed land different from the picked apple, minded gold and breathed air??

In other words, life is a value apart from you or anyone else valuing it? How is that possible? What do you think a value is?

Theoretically, anyone using my land could be charged for it's use within reason but no one has to use my land if they cannot or will not pay me. They can leave me alone and stay off my land. That seems simple enough but you don't seem to get this.

Jon, It took several pages of replies in your "Owning Land?" thread to explain to you why you and George were incorrect.

Leonard Nimoy, Spock of 'Star Trek', Dies at 83 Live long and prosper in our memories.

I'm a bit confused. You raise the issue of an afterlife and then ask us if Ayn Rand lives on in our memories but you know very well that the religious concept of an afterlife has nothing to do with remembering those who have died. It is, instead, a reference to eternal souls that survive physical death. Also, you restrict the concept of Objectivism, limiting it to statements of facts about the world. Have you studied Objectivism? Do you really think it's just a list of facts about reality? It's a philosophy, a comprehensive view of existence, a theory of knowledge, a guide to moral action and an inspiration to achieve the highest possible to you. That sounds like a lot more than just some boring list of facts.

Story According to the story, a lesbian couple took their 4 month old baby to see a doctor that came highly recommended but when they arrived at the doctor's office, they were informed that the doctor in question would refuse service because of her religious opposition to homosexuality. Arrangements were made to have another doctor care for the baby. Predictably, this case will provoke a hostile reaction from liberals and calls for anti-discrimination laws to prevent this from happening to other same sex couples. Naturally, one can and should be critical of the doctor's irrational prejudice but how does one apply the principle of individual rights to these kinds of cases?

From the Galt speech: Do not say that you’re afraid to trust your mind because you know so little. Are you safer in surrendering to mystics and discarding the little that you know? Live and act within the limit of your knowledge and keep expanding it to the limit of your life. What you are calling faith in yourself to figure it out, Rand called trusting your mind to expand your knowledge. Rand took terms literally and in that sense you are equivocating.

Re-read your first reply to the thread (which by the way doesn't answer the OP's question.). You flat out say that a Buddhist monk is a parasite that does nothing but meditate and beg for rice. You leave zero room for the possibility that a Buddhist monk could be something other than someone who sits around doing nothing but meditating and begging for rice.