Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is NOT incumbent on the potential victims of asault to absent themselves from the scene, it is incumbent on the asaulter not to assault.
It is notte the responsibility of society to stop drinking water, it is the responsbility of the polluter to stop polluting the water.
It is not the obligaton of the rest of the drivers to avoid driving, but, rather, the responsibility of the incompetent driver to not drive, and hence not create accidients.
Can any of this "sink in" or is there too much Nicotine in the blook to make the absorption of wisdim possible. I suspect strongly the latter.
So file a lawsuit against this assault. See ya in court, bean.
Bring your toothbrush with ya, just in case.
The liberal bias in education is a serious problem in this country and I don't understand why people aren't more concerned about it. There is simply no way that 80% of teachers can be Democrats merely by accident. It's liberals hiring other liberals who then bring liberal values into the classroom to create more liberals. The ratio of liberal to conservative teachers has been increasing over time. So it is not just some natural tendency for liberals to want to be educators nor is it a tendency for liberals to be more educated - if either of those were the case you would see more liberals than conservatives as teachers, but you would see a steady state. You would not see the ratio steadily increasing over time. And one would think that integrity and principles would cause even liberals themselves to be concerned about this trend.
The liberal bias in education is a serious problem in this country and I don't understand why people aren't more concerned about it. There is simply no way that 80% of teachers can be Democrats merely by accident. It's liberals hiring other liberals who then bring liberal values into the classroom to create more liberals. The ratio of liberal to conservative teachers has been increasing over time. So it is not just some natural tendency for liberals to want to be educators nor is it a tendency for liberals to be more educated - if either of those were the case you would see more liberals than conservatives as teachers, but you would see a steady state. You would not see the ratio steadily increasing over time. And one would think that integrity and principles would cause even liberals themselves to be concerned about this trend.
You are absolutely correct. I however, for the record, resemble none of the above.
Last edited by Robin Rossi; 03-22-2013 at 06:46 PM..
Just to clarify, you are NOT referring to me as a "liberal" - right? I am a dedicated Conservative, dittohead, Sean and Mark Levin devotee. I have been pro-conservative, and anti-liberal since McGovern.
Some people see other issues in odd ways too, but just like my opposition to abortion is NOT to control women, but rather, to protect the unborn child, my oppositon to "public" smoking is NOT to control smokers, but to proect non-smokers. In both cases, some would scream like stuck pigs that the positons could be held only by control freaks, and it just isn't so.
No it wasn't a comment about you. It was just something that came to mind when the person I replied to said people who think a certain way probably had professors in school who thought the same way. The bias in education I think is a serious issue that isn't given enough importance. I would like to see conservative candidates make it more of an issue in campaigns so it would get some more awareness. How and what people are taught in school has a big impact on them as adults and I think conservatives are simply surrendering that whole sphere of influence to liberals. School should be nonpartisan for the students but it isn't. And education as a major and important career field should not be closed off to conservatives but in many fields it is.
And it is self-reinforcing. Advancement in education is heavily dependent upon publishing, and publishing is peer reviewed, and the peers are liberals. Schools use academic freedom, which was designed to promote a diversity of ideas, as a shield to protect the "freedom" to discriminate against conservative ideas. Etc. It's a snowball that already caused the liberal to conservative ratio to go from 1:1 to 4:1 and on some campuses to 8:1. Not addressing it is just making it worse. There are some individual fields, such as sociology, where voter registration shows 16 registered Democrats for every registered Republican. The people who study society itself are 16 to 1 Democrat - and then lo and behold they come out with studies saying low information voters tend to be conservatives, the more open minded a person is the more they tend to be liberal, etc. School administrators who have policies actively promoting racial diversity then say there is no need to have diversity of ideas. Excuse me? Isn't presenting a variety of ideas supposed to the cornerstone of higher education?
One egregious example - the president of Columbia University announced how deeply disappointed he was that his school had Ann Coulter coming to speak because she "appeals to the dark side of human nature" and got her speaking engagement cancelled - while they had the President of Iran, the one who says the holocaust never happened and calls America the Great Satan, give a speech without a peep from him.
Anyway,none of this is on topic for this thread - it's just a pet peeve of mine.
even though you make a whole lot of sense, nothing you say, will sink in, she is not listening, she doesn't care, she's right and that is all that matters...period. So, unfortunetly your words fall on deaf ears....
she takes her subject to a whole other end of the spectrum, be it logical or illogical, to prove her point...
Exaggerating Grossly, the cause and effects, which is typical
no matter what you say, tipping the scales on logic, she will always come back with a rebuttal...she has to have the last say....it's all about winning....she really doesn't care if your right or wrong...or inbetween, and besides, she is so black and white, she can't perceive anything else.
You simpy don't get it, probably willfully. Smokers NEVER jsut mind their own business. Rather, they spew their "business" into the air ofthers are breathing. Read that sentece slowly 6 times or so, until you finally "get it".
Is the guy shotting a gun in the air on New Years just "minding his own business"?
You'll never get it. Smokers think the operate in a vacum where nobody else is, or, perchance, think this effluent isn't the vile,l foul effluent everyone else knows it is. To you, it is wonderful. It stops your shakiing and calms your nerves. To everyone else it is discomfort to the point of pain. Don't you understand that?? Or do you just not care about others.
You deflected on my question about the noice from the unit next door.
Answer it directly, if you can.
I'll give you a big hint. YOu shouldn't have to beg or ask nicely not to have your rights proactively violated.
Smokers have to understand that in a conflict between their recreatonal drug use, and other people right not to be assaulted by toxic pollution, the right not to be assaulted is the clear "winner", and the law is realizing that smokers wouldn't respect others proactively, so laws are being crafted iand implemeted to protect the innocent (that would NOT be the smoker).
Now, if smokers would avail themselves of the already-existing option to get their drug fix in such a way as to NOT pollute the aire others have not only a right, but an absolute need to breathe, the issue would vanish, but sadly, the addict class refuses, by and large mandating the need for more and more protective legilsation to keep the effluent/polution (and that is what smokers produce), i.e. airborne sewerage, from asaulting others.
You bring it on yourself by abjectly refusing the proactively respect others. Your contemptuous, inflexible disregards for others is your stock in trade and your worste enemy.
Your right to stink up, poison-up the place, ends at the boundries of your place, but you refuse to accept that.
Smoking is legal. You are the one that needs to understand that. People can smoke any where they choose unless it is prohibited. So sorry that you don't like it but that is life.
Irf you would keep you stinking stench to your sktinking selves, nobody would oject, but you unleash it on everyone else. Are you capable of seeing that?
You haven't a shadow of a clue, do you. None, whatsoever. You utter the most idiotic posts I've read so far.
Here's a bit of a clue.
Why should innocent, non-offending people have to hide in their homes to avoid miscreants who spew pollution into the breathing-air (air in places people are, or are likely to be) at will.
Clue: They shouldn't.
OMG
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well said.
