How accurate is this email?

Another way to look at it is preserving the lives of sentient humans, and not allowing those lives to be irrevocably altered by that which has no sentience. That's consistent. Since condoms go on the penis, how is that not about physiology? Hey, great. If that was all that was on so-called "standardized" tests, they probably wouldn't be racist.But it's not. And so many of the supposedly-universal situations and examples are universal only to white people - which is what makes them racist.Did you know that, even in the 70's, IQ tests - supposedly designed to measure intelligence absent any culturally-confounding factors - used examples of bowling scoring to test intelligence? Absent any explanation of the rules of bowling, of course. Now, I'm a white guy from Minnesota, and even I don't know how to score bowling. Because I hate bowling. Can you imagine growing up in a community where nobody ever bowled, and then seeing that question on a test? How many points did you just lose from your putative "intelligence" because you weren't a white person from the suburbs? I think socialism works pretty well when all participants know each other pretty well. For instance, families are nearly universally socialist. Churches, too. Socialism is, in fact, one of the most common "emergent" economies at small scales. So to say it doesn't work is to ignore the myriad examples of socialism working just fine in a number of situations. You just don't think of them as "socialist", usually, but that's exactly what they are.

quote:

---

You think that Iran and North Korea have been trying to get hold of nuclear weaponry because of the invasion of Iraq? I'm not seeing the correlation. Can you connect the dots for me?

---

What did this have anything to do with what I posted?

quote:

---

By the Federal Government though?

---

Or here's an idea. How about people fund it themselves like every one else in the world has to do? The sole function of the government is to protect its citizens. Art doesn't factor in to that.

quote:

---

Call me old fashion, but I think schools should be going to an actual education. Its the job of parents to teach their kids about sex, not some fruitloop that I didn't give permission to.

---

Strawman. Just because some people spend less time with their kids than they like doesn't mean they can't take five minutes out of their day to learn about the birds and the bees. But this is besides the point. Schools are to foster academic learning, not learn about social ideas. If they are going to teach about social mores, then they could also teach how to have effective relationships, not how to place a piece of plastic on your penis. America is already woefully behind academically as it is. I think we need all of the alloted time going to learning.

---

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

What the hell are you talking about? The only countries in the world that don't have public funding for the arts are the dysfunctional countries that don't even have public funding for things like sewers and roads.Public funding for the arts is a feature of every modern, functional government I'm aware of. What on Earth are you talking about?

That should have been your first clue that we're not talking about biology.(The fact that this is not a science forum should have been your zeroth clue.)

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Sorry. I was unaware that males and females are not biological...which makes me wonder how they accomplish non-biological sex. That would seem kind of dull to me.”HM

From now on, only Dan Carroll gets to respond to Hoot Mon.No offense, Ringo.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

Like you weren't being pedantic? Like you're still not? Please, HM. I've got no problem with a little pedanticism, but don't act like it's beneath you even as you're doing it, ok? (And at least when I'm being pedantic, HM, I'm also being factual. No such luck for you.) Sure. Males donate sperm. Women carry offspring to term. In humans, anyway. Of course, male and female roles differ by species. (Billions of years? I think you'll find that sexual reproduction is a pretty recent, and still rare, development in organisms.)What does that have to do with gender roles, which is what we were talking about? Gosh, you mean like the vast majority of living things on Earth, which have no sex? I mean what are bacteria (in your world where there's only homosexuality and heterosexuality) if not tiny, microscopic, bathhouse buggerers?I have to ask - do you think about the things you write before you hit post? Or are you so convinced that the drivel you generate from your colossal ignorance about the natural world is so insightful that it merits absolutely no review? Have you gotten the point yet that we don't, for the most part, consider you the vast, shining mind in science matters that you apparently style yourself to be?Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.

Hey, no pedanticism, right, HM? We know how you hate to bite ankles, and all. Or something.

Then try to increase your awareness.The discussion of gender roles in this topic is about sociology (and possibly psychology).

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Do I get a neat title, like AdminMasochist or something?

---

"I know some of you are going to say 'I did look it up, and that's not true.' That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut."
-Stephen Colbert

Don't tell that to the countless millions of E. coli, conjugating lustily in your lower intestines. Here's a picture of such an orgy: ”HM Edited by Hoot Mon, : added photo

That's pretty gay, don't you think?

Not that I don't agree with you... scratch that I really don't agree with you. But you better be careful with what you are saying. After all, it's really up for debate whether a 5 day old newborn is sentient or not. My dogs are smarter... or rather act smarter than my 5 months old nephew.

We'll be sure to pull the plug on you in the event you lose consciousness. That aside, you do realize that even a fetus is sentient, (as if that were an argument for the cause). They are completely aware even if they don't yet possess the intellectual capacity to know where they are. But if you still want to assert this, when exactly does "sentience" develop in humans? Magically at birth? Then so is putting your shoes on by the same premise.Since you seem to agree that standardized tests are in fact "racist," can you explain to all of us what it is that makes it racist? Because I'm mystified at how such an argument ever formulated in the first place. This sounds like a legitimate grievance so long as they did not, in fact, explain the scoring system used in the game of bowling. This is an interesting topic and I'd like to go more in to detail on it. I'm gonna write up a thread on IQ when I'm done with this post. Love should be socialist, not an economy. Anyway, maybe I'll expound on that later, but I want to delve in to the IQ thread right now.

---

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

It comes down to this.Being against abortion is being in favor of forced birth.