Air Force Academy creates worship area for Pagans, Druids, and Wiccans

Faith writes:

quote:

---

I know that the true God won't tolerate that for long.

---

So when are you converting?You didn't think you worshipped the true god, did you?Oh, and please answer my question:Beetaratagang or clerendipity?Edited by Rrhain, : No reason given.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Faith writes:

quote:

---

The idea that the first amendment was ever meant to give space to anything OTHER than the Christian religion in this nation is something you and I are going to disagree on.

---

So we should round up all the Jews and get rid of them, right? It's a First Amendment thing, right? Jews have no right to exist in the United States, right? We're a Christian nation, not a Jewish one, right?Now, please answer my question:Beetaratagang or clerendipity?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Dr Adequate writes:

quote:

---

Women were not allowed to vote.

---

Indeed, but not because the Constitution specifically denied women the right to vote, per se.The closest to that is from the 14th Amendment: Note the assumption: Male voters. Reduction of the population count with regard to representational numbers is based upon male voters.Now, women were routinely denied the right to vote, but that was due to State laws, not Federal.The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, but the Wyoming Territory granted women the right to vote in 1869. In New Jersey, women were allowed to vote from 1790 to 1807, but had that right taken away.And then there's Utah. Utah granted women's suffrage in the hopes that they would vote down polygamy. When they didn't, they were disenfranchised.There was no reason women couldn't vote as far as the Constitution was concerned. Before the passage of the 19th Amendment, Colorado, Idaho, Utah, and Wyoming all granted women the right to vote.The reason why we needed the 19th Amendment had to do with States denying women the right to vote. The Federal government does not conduct elections. The States do. The Constitution defines eligibility requirements for candidates and the way the Executive and Legislative members are chosen from the votes, but it does not define the voting methods. That is a matter left to the States.Similarly with the 15th and 26th Amendments. There was no Constitutional provision to deny suffrage to those who weren't white or those who weren't 21 (age limits from the 14th Amendment notwithstanding). It's that the States wouldn't let them.Even today, though the Constitution specifically makes mention that suffrage cannot be denied to those 18 years of age or more, there's no reason that a State couldn't, on its own, extend that right to all citizens of all ages.Similarly, there is nothing preventing a State from saying that in order to vote, you must have a college degree.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Dr Adequate writes:

quote:

---

So far as I know, the first country to give women the right to vote was New Zealand

---

In the sense that it was universal, wasn't later rescinded, and was for an entire country, then New Zealand was the first, though other countries toyed around with it.For example, the Pitcairn Islands beat New Zealand by more than 50 years, but they were a British Territory, not an independent country.And then there was Franceville in the New Hebrides. They were the first to grant universal suffrage not only regardless of sex but also of race in 1889, four years before New Zealand, but they quickly lost their independence. They were, depending on how you look at it, in rebellion since there wasn't any functional government over them at the time. While Franceville allowed all to vote, only white males could hold office.Sweden has an interesting history. They're the first country to actually allow women to vote at all, but it was only granted to those who were members of the city guilds in 1718. That right was then taken away (for local elections in 1758 and then the general elections were rescinded in 1771). They then re-granted women the right to vote in 1862, but only in local elections.The Isle of Man (which is in a bizarre relationship with the British Crown...not exactly part of the United Kingdom, but still ruled by the Monarch) granted the vote to property-owning women in 1881.This isn't to take anything away from New Zealand. They certainly did it in the simplest way. They included not only women but also Maori women (though they couldn't hold office). South Australia follows the next year and surpasses New Zealand by not only allowing universal suffrage to women but also allows them to hold office in Parliament.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

subbie responds to me:

quote:

---

While you are correct that there is nothing in the Constitution expressly prohibiting such a requirement, I suspect that courts would likely strike any such requirement under reasoning similar to that in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections.

---

Hard to say. The decision declares the poll tax invalid because: The amount of money a person has certainly has no connection to their ability to "participate intelligently in the electoral process," but a case could be made that educational status of a person is. After all, the overwhelming majority of States disenfranchise the mentally disabled and convicted felons are also disenfranchised. That latter part was a huge part of the electoral mess in Florida around the 2000 election: The governor refused to allow parolee packets to contain a single sheet of paper that gave instructions on how they could have their voting rights restored.There are reasons that the courts claim to be legitimate with regard to why a person cannot vote that are not based upon age.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Buzsaw writes:

quote:

---

Why, Dr Adequate, have most door to door sales companies advocated dealing with the woman of the house?

---

Assuming you're not referring to a product that is targeted at women, it is because the woman of the house is the one who makes the buying decisions for the family. While men may earn more than women, women are the ones who determine how it gets spent. She is the one who usually has to buy the food, furnish the house, clothe the family, etc. She's the one who handles the finances and will make the decision as to what needs to be bought and when.There's a reason that the vast majority of men's underwear is bought by women. It isn't because they're wearing it themselves.Surely you didn't think advertisement is generally aimed at women because women are less competent than men, did you?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Buzsaw writes:

quote:

---

you should refute my facts before personal attacking and rating my message.

---

Nice try, but that's your responsibility. You're the one making the claim, therefore it is your burden of proof to justify it. You're the one saying that there is a mental difference between males and females and thus you are the one who needs to explain just how it is you know that.So far, you've only given one example: Advertisement is aimed at women. I just refuted that: It isn't because women are more likely to be persuaded by advertising but rather because she is the one who is going to make the decision. You don't advertise to the people who aren't going to buy your product.And I don't think you really want to look to the animal kingdom, either. For there it is the female that typically dominates. As a f'rinstance, it is the female lions who hunt for the pride.So what other justification do you have for your claim that women are less intellectually capable than men?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Buzsaw writes:

quote:

---

Why should such a verbal firestorm ensue because I take the traditional position?

---

Because it is a bigoted position. Surely you're not saying that because something is traditional that makes it good, are you?Slavery is traditional. It is only within the past couple hundred years that there was an effort made to do away with it. Are you saying this effort was misguided? That we should re-institute slavery because for some people, it is their "role" to be a slave?If so, are you willing to entertain the possibility that your role is to be my slave?And you do understand that your own religion is far less "traditional" than the one it was born from, yes? So if you can accept the fact that your new-fangled idea is better than the traditional one, why is it you are having such a hard time realizing that your traditional idea isn't nearly as good as the more recent one?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Coyote writes:

quote:

---

One might find that Old Man Coyote was here long before these upstart religions came about.

---

From what I understand, the oldest religion that is still practiced is Hinduism, but that is beside my point.Buzsaw is saying that all these "new" ideas like women being the equal to men go against "traditional" truths. But his own religion is a "new" idea that goes against the "traditional" truth. That's the entire reason that Jesus was getting into such trouble, if we are to believe the New Testament: He was preaching a new idea. Specifically, he was claiming that he was the son of god, which was absolute blasphemy, but the point still remains: He was something new.So if Buzsaw's own philosophy is based upon rejecting the old for a new covenant, one wonders why he is so averse to the concept. What is so threatening to his vision of how the world works by recognizing that women and men are not in a competition for dominance?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Buzsaw responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

So what other justification do you have for your claim that women are less intellectually capable than men?

---

​

That's not my position, Rrhain.

---

Have you forgotten that your words are still online? Message 219Message 220Message 208Now, you're surely going to complain that you then said: But where does this come from? What is the justification for claiming that women cannot perform any "role"?And, of course, you immediately follow that with: Message 221Let us not pretend that you aren't claiming that women are less intellectually capable than men. We are not stupid and it does not serve you to behave as if we are.

quote:

---

My position is the scientific one

---

No, it isn't. You need to justify this claim.

quote:

---

that the brain lobes of men and women are different

---

Indeed, but what you need to then justify is your claim that this means that women are "more emotional and easily persuaded." The fact that women are different from men doesn't mean they are incapable.

quote:

---

having different degrees of capabilities relative to some roles.

---

Where is your evidence? You certainly haven't shown any and all studies into it have been unable to demonstrate this claim. It is time for you to put up or shut up. There's a wonderful example here from the Olympics: Women are still not allowed to compete in the ski jumping competitions. Why? Because the IOC thinks that it is dangerous to a woman's reproductive organs to do so. Oh, the official reason is that there aren't enough women, but their own comments belie that as nothing more than politics. As the head of the International Ski Federation said: Any evidence to back it up? Of course not. They simply claim it to be so.And this depsite the fact that the world record holder for the very hill upon which they competed is held by a woman.People used to claim that women were physically incapable of running a marathon. We all know that's silly now. Surely you're not saying that there is anything different between the women who routinely run the marathon and the women of decades past, are you?But, of course, we're not talking about physical prowess, are we? So you're going to have to explain why it is you seem to think that women can't think as deeply and deftly as men. More women go to college in this country than men.

quote:

---

Though my wife would would admit that decision making and leadership role is not her forte, her memory and intuition is superior to mine.

​

Admittedly there are exceptions to my postion. A friend who's intelligence is below par wisely deligates the leadership role to his wife who's inteligence is normal.

---

This isn't a question about individuals. You do understand that there is more variation within the individual groups of men and women than there are between men and women, yes? You need to justify your claim that women are somehow "less" than men and thus not deserving of full equality in every aspect of life.

quote:

---

Logically no human entity would function efficiently having two equal presiding officers/presidents.

---

So how does the US do it? We have three co-equal branches of government.How did Rome do it with the triumvirate?How on earth do parents manage to do it with their children?

quote:

---

There's a logical reason governments, businesses or lodges would normally consider that option. Rarely would that arrangement work.

---

And yet, it happens all the time. There's a reason that business has this thing called a "partnership."

quote:

---

Why should the family unit be an exception.

---

It isn't. That's the point. Right at this moment, families are headed by equal partners and we find that those that follow this arrangement are stronger than those who try to have a dominant/submissive relationship. There's a reason that the evangelical Christians who have this "women must submit to the authority of the man" attitude have the highest divorce rate.

quote:

---

History attests to the fact that it does not work well by and large.

---

Exactly the opposite is true. When you have dicatorships, you destroy society. It is because we decentralized the system of government away from a single authority that we managed to advance beyond feudal systems.

quote:

---

The divorce rate and unrest in America's homes attests to the logic of my position.

---

(*chuckle*)You seem to forget that the divorce rate is highest among people who share your worldview. And not just slightly higher but dramatically so.The most stable relationships are among the "liberals" who feel that marriage is an equal partnership. And to drive that point home, same-sex relationships last longer than mixed-sex ones. How do you explain that?Edited by Rrhain, : Dropped a "n't." Put it back in.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Buzsaw responds to me:

quote:

---

the skyjumping quote is not from me.

---

I didn't say it was.

quote:

---

I don't know where you got it.

---

Then you clearly didn't read my post because right before I gave the quote, I indicated where it came from: If you aren't going to read the posts you're responding to, perhaps you shouldn't respond.

quote:

---

As for the rest of your stuff, you simply pshaw almost 6000 years of recorded human history relative to the genders and the role each play in human culture.

---

Huh? I ask you for evidence and all you can do is assert? Human culture has advanced significantly since we considered abandoning things like racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. Now, I don't think we've done away with them, not by a long shot. But life has become a great deal better than when there were slaves, women were treated as property, and gay people were killed.

quote:

---

Moderns are the odd people out and we're paying a price for it.

---

With longer lives, more stable relationships, better standards of living, greater literacy, greater education...exactly what is this "price" that you're talking about that was so dear it could not be paid? You didn't think you had a right to tell other people how to be happy, did you?Edited by Rrhain, : Fixed a formatting error.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.