Armyman25 posted:

I also caught a lot of flak for daring to suggest that to a layman Ahmed's clock looked close enough to an IED detonator or other home made explosive device to warrant action by a teacher. I never defended his arrest or the over reaction by the school authorities and police. It was fun watching the FTP crowd become reactionaries and defend a kid for being arrested for interfering with an officer (he wouldn't stop talking when the officer wanted), an incident which stemmed from the kid being told not to wear an NRA shirt by his band leader, even though the school district later determined the shirt did not violate the school's dress code.

quote:

Police determined that he had no malicious intent, and he was not charged with any crime.[10][14] Irving Police Chief Larry Boyd said that "the officers pretty quickly determined that they weren't investigating an explosive device", and that Mohammed was arrested over the prospect that it was a "hoax bomb".[15] Under Texas law, it is illegal to possess a "hoax bomb" with an intent to "make another believe that the hoax bomb is an explosive or incendiary device" or to "cause [an] alarm or reaction of any type by an official of a public safety agency or volunteer agency organized to deal with emergencies."[16] After releasing Mohamed, police continued to question his clock's purpose, saying, "He kept maintaining it was a clock, but there was no broader explanation."[5][17]

Some of Mohamed's teachers at Sam Houston middle school were surprised to learn that staff at the high school called police, as they have known Mohamed to bring more elaborate gizmos to their school.[7] His supporters have speculated that the questioning and subsequent transfer by police to a juvenile center exemplifies Islamophobia in the United States.

Armyman25 posted:

Re: abortion, I expressed a belief that humans start at conception. That said, I feel that banning abortion causes more problems than keeping it legal, since women are going to do it anyway, and I really don't care if they kill their unborn children. I look at it as the cost of doing business. Science hasn't determined the start of life, it just describes the process of reproduction and growth. Personhood or the question of when do we consider something a human is an abstract philosophical that science doesn't address. None of this has to do with religious beliefs.

quote:

Personhood proponents in Oklahoma sought to amend the state constitution to define personhood as beginning at conception. The state Supreme Court, citing the U.S. Supreme Court's 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, ruled in April 2012 that the proposed amendment was unconstitutional under the federal Constitution and blocked inclusion of the referendum question on the ballot.[57] In October 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the state Supreme Court's ruling

CommieGIR posted:

You have your stories reversed. Ahmed was directly arrested, and NOT in any way charged for interfering with the police officer.
The NRA kid was arrested FOR interfering with the police officer for not doing as he was told.

'Personhood' is strictly being pushed by Religious Fundamentalists, not Scientists, Philosophers, or Doctors legally.
Personhood arguments have been nothing more than an attempt by the Religious Right to charge women with murder for stillbirths.

Armyman25 posted:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...es_liberty.html

Armyman25 posted:

As far as personhood, Legal Personhood is a thing, Corporations have it and there are groups trying to get it for chimpanzees as well. Not to mention the concept of being legally competent to make decision, being of the age of majority. Really, there are all kinds of legal distinctions regarding age, legal culpability, and capacity.

CommieGIR posted:

This is not the same thing. This is why people told you to get out.


You argued for personhood at conception, you dingbat. So you are saying a zygote is legally competent to make decisions.

Armyman25 posted:

The US has had a somewhat sorted history on deciding who is and isn't a person.

CommieGIR posted:

You have your stories reversed. Ahmed was directly arrested, and NOT in any way charged for interfering with the police officer.

The NRA kid was arrested FOR interfering with the police officer for not doing as he was told.



'Personhood' is strictly being pushed by Religious Fundamentalists, not Scientists, Philosophers, or Doctors legally.


Personhood arguments have been nothing more than an attempt by the Religious Right to charge women with murder for stillbirths. All the groups pushing for referendums have been lead by Catholic or otherwise religious oriented groups.

There is no large group of philosophers pushing for personhood amendments. The argument that it begins at conception is nonsensical and is in direct contrast to the actual cycle of development, and an end run around Roe Vs. Wade.

Who What Now posted:

And the answer is "after birth".

Who What Now posted:

When someone becomes a person is the a pertinent question concerning abortion, though. And the answer is "after birth".


Fixed for clarity

Armyman25 posted:

Like, the day before I was born, I was not a person?

Armyman25 posted:

So, birth -1 day, not a person?

Like, the day before I was born, I was not a person?

quote:

Late term pregnancies that are terminated are almost universally done on wanted babies. Something has gone wrong with the pregnancy, the development of the baby, or the health of the mother. To intentionally describe procedures used at that time of grief for the family, as "bloody and inhumane", to go on and on about the decapitation or the extraction and not also talk about hydrocephalus, babies born without brains, or mothers on chemo acting to protect their own lives is disingenuous and harms women and their families. A doctor who is charged with the termination of a pregnancy, especially one that is problematic, should have every single medical option at her hands. The doctor, as an expert, should be the one deciding which procedure to use, not a legislature who writes single broad‐stroked laws to apply to all women, all pregnancies, and all situations. The D&X procedure, the one most targeted by the term "partial birth" is used on less than 1 in 1,000 late term abortions, but according to Dr. Hern, there are rare times when it is the single best option for the individual women in his care.

Armyman25 posted:

So, birth -1 day, not a person?

Like, the day before I was born, I was not a person?

Butch Cassidy posted:

Can we all at least agree that this thing is so batshit insane and "engineered" around such a hilarious concept that it wraps straight back around into pure ?

Butch Cassidy posted:

But he wasn't killed by a bear, wildlife attacks are uncommon in the first place, and a small caliber weapon in the hands of someone not practiced in its use is a hilariously poor choice to stop a dangerous game charge. That thing was stupid from conception.

Ddraig posted:

It's a rather insane concept but something that was actually done out of necessity, since one of the early cosmonauts, when they landed back in Russia, literally landed in the middle of nowhere. Chances are quite good a bear could have killed him before he managed to get somewhere safe.

So from then on they were kitted with a survival weapon that would be able to take down the local wildlife if they needed to. Seems like pretty sensible Russian problem-solving, really

quote:

The delay of 46 seconds caused the spacecraft to land 386 km from the intended landing zone, in the inhospitable forests of Upper Kama Upland, somewhere west of Solikamsk. Although flight controllers had no idea where the spacecraft had landed or whether Leonov and Belyayev had survived, the cosmonauts' families were told that they were resting after having been recovered. The two men were both familiar with the harsh climate and knew that bears and wolves, made aggressive by mating season, lived in the taiga; the spacecraft carried a pistol and "plenty of ammunition". Although aircraft quickly located the cosmonauts, the area was so heavily forested that helicopters could not land. Night arrived, the temperature dropped to −5 degrees Celsius (23 degrees Fahrenheit), and the spacecraft's hatch had been blown open by explosive bolts. Warm clothes and supplies were dropped and the cosmonauts spent a freezing night in the capsule or Sharik in Russian. Even worse, the electrical system completely malfunctioned so that the heater would not work, but the fans ran at full blast. A rescue party arrived on skis the next day as it was too risky to try an airlift from the site.[7][8] The advance party chopped wood and built a small log cabin and an enormous fire. After a more comfortable second night in the forest the cosmonauts skied to a waiting helicopter several kilometers away and flew first to Perm, then to Baikonur for their mission debriefing.

Ddraig posted:

I'd assume that the chances are good that most cosmonauts were taught basic stuff like this, mainly because they're a rather limited resource and quite costly to train so losing one to a bear/wolf attack, even on the offchance, is something they would like to avoid if at all possible.

Butch Cassidy posted:

Nevermind the "stock" being a compete gimmick. That the Russians decided against making more ammo for their space gun and instead opted to issue a Makarov should be a clue that there were unrealistic decisions made.

CommieGIR posted:

You have your stories reversed. Ahmed was directly arrested, and NOT in any way charged for interfering with the police officer.

The NRA kid was arrested FOR interfering with the police officer for not doing as he was told.



'Personhood' is strictly being pushed by Religious Fundamentalists, not Scientists, Philosophers, or Doctors legally.


Personhood arguments have been nothing more than an attempt by the Religious Right to charge women with murder for stillbirths. All the groups pushing for referendums have been lead by Catholic or otherwise religious oriented groups.

There is no large group of philosophers pushing for personhood amendments. The argument that it begins at conception is nonsensical and is in direct contrast to the actual cycle of development, and an end run around Roe Vs. Wade.

PCOS Bill posted:

Religion based philosophical thought is still philosophy, "Religious Fundamentalists" aren't philosophizing any less just because they've come to the opposite answer as you.

CommieGIR posted:

Theologically derived Philosophy is much different from, say, Philosophy of Science or other such things.

Plinkey posted:

I put my faith in gunlosophy.

CommieGIR posted:

"Can it be shot? Therefore, it MUST be shot."

Plinkey posted:

"I shoot, therefore I am"

CommieGIR posted:

Theologically derived Philosophy is much different from, say, Philosophy of Science or other such things.

CommieGIR posted:

"Am I shot? gently caress!"

PCOS Bill posted:

Yeah, theology comes from God. A nice solid basis.

CommieGIR posted:

I hear he was a fan of slavery and genocide. Obviously, we need to work these into philosophical basis for legislation.

PCOS Bill posted:

Some of His children don't follow His word as closely as others.

CommieGIR posted:

No True Scotsman called, they want their punchline back.

PCOS Bill posted:

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.

quote:

With respect to religion, the fallacy is well used, often even overused. Religious apologists will repeatedly try to use the No True Scotsman argument to distance themselves from more extreme or fundamentalist groups, but this does not prevent such extremists actually being religious - they themselves would certainly argue otherwise. Moderate Muslim leaders, for example, are well known for declaring Islamic extremists as "not true Muslims" as Islam is a "religion of peace." Similarly, moderate Christians, such as those in Europe, are sometimes aghast when viewing their fundamentalist counterparts in the US, immediately declaring them "not true Christians," even though they believe in the same God and get their belief system from the same book. Many of these statements stating that the extremists are not true believers are often used as a reaction against Guilt by Association. The No True Scotsman fallacy can also run the other way when it comes to extremism. Extremists will make a religious statement and when someone points out that there are many believers who don't believe the extremist's viewpoint, the moderates are deemed to be not true believers (ie: Christians who support gay marriage are not "real Christians" or Muslims who support women's rights are not "real Muslims"). Modern pagans do it all the time, perhaps even more than other religions, due to the fact that there is no agreed-on orthodoxy for the whole group, with some well-established practices in one setting being considered unpalatable in others. Silver Ravenwolf, one of the best selling "leaders" of neopagans, has done this with multiple ancient, well-established practices.

Ozmiander posted:

I love the argument that these crimes happened BECAUSE OF GUNS. Not because someone wanted to kill themself, others, etc.

Flowers For Algeria posted:

When a gun fires the bullet that ends a life, the gun is partly responsible for the death. Not guilty, because it is an inanimate object, but responsible. It is involved. It is the cause of the death. The death occurred because of the gun.

Flowers For Algeria posted:

Gun manufaturers hold their share of responsibility, of course, but I would divide the responsibility between all the links of the gunmaking chain according to the profit they derived from the sale of each gun.

At any rate - guns do kill people.

CommieGIR posted:

Ozmiander posted:

Aren't you done making a fool of yourself yet?

various cheeses posted:

Guns made me do it

CommieGIR posted:

Nah, thanks. Coming to D&D and then not understanding logical fallacies? Yeah, expect to get called.


Was it sexy?

Ozmiander posted:

Says the guy who claims suppressors don't reduce muzzle flash, lol.

CommieGIR posted:

CommieGIR posted:

I think I addressed my mistake somewhere in here...hmmm...

Oh right, I admitted I was wrong.

However, nice job assuming that because I made a mistake, my entire argument must be wrong. You're a D&D hero.