 | | Re: Here's a scary one
|
|
(...) That's legitimate, IMO. Heck, if the sentence included some kind of "you may not withhold this information from prospective employers," then there's no problem with due process, either. It's analogous to the financial industry, many portions (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's a scary one
|
|
(...) Agree with the above, and further I don't support name-and-shame as a punishment mechanism unless it's imposed at the time of sentencing, but I do support the notion of being able to inquire "is this potential employee already convicted of (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's a scary one
|
|
(...) This is a tough conversation to have because, to some people, even suggesting that child molesters might not actually be the devil incarnate is tantamount to molesting children yourself. I've been in online forums with a decidedly left-leaning (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's a scary one
|
|
In the UK, we do not name-and-shame as it is recognised that it can force individuals underground instead of bringing them back into society. Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's a scary one
|
|
(...) I'm down with publishing convictions but accusations? Not so much. As it turns out maybe I'm biased, we had a recent situation where having the convictions published was a good thing as it got someone outed that really didn't need to be around (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Here's a scary one
|
|
In this article: (URL) is proposed that the government keep and publish a list of all accusations of child molestation. While the intent to make it easier to discover molesters is good, it has serious consequences for someone wrongly accused. (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts?
|
|
(...) It looks pretty darn real (although I'm not an EE so I can't tell). It smells legit as a page... although there are a couple of mysterious things. One, it's on a German domain (.de) and second, there are no other pages on the site. In fact, (...) (19 years ago, 16-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Thoughts?
|
|
What do we make of (URL) this?> Is this for real? I notice "LOL" in the address line, of course... Dave! Should this be FUT'ed to ot.geek? (19 years ago, 16-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Some segments of society feel that, but it has nothing to do with what I just said (though I suppose if you feel that I didn't qualify "romance" as only applying to females with me, I can understand the mistake). ;-) -->Bruce<-- (19 years ago, 14-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) I visited an MIT dorm once that had a unixex bathroom, with showers... You bring up an interesting and quaint "difference" between males and females. Culture hides the fact that females can have digestive outbursts just as males do, while (...) (19 years ago, 14-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) ...and speaking of fearing the left, when I visited a friend at his dorm at UC Berekeley, the bathrooms on his floor where unisex. I tell you, it ruins romance to have a girl into the stall next to you and...well, there is a point where too (...) (19 years ago, 14-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) This is why I fear the right - they will claim anything that offends their sensiblities is the "left", and it's all usually a smokescreen for saying, "I hate anything that is different from me." Blowing up bad taste into a cultural litmus test (...) (19 years ago, 14-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) This may be an unintentional misstatement of the facts. My impression is that an all-out ban on stem-cell research would receive massive support from the Right, but the Right realizes that it's a game of inches. First, ban government funding (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Frank has already given a (URL) discussion> of this objection, so I'll defer to him on this point. If the constraints of cost and space were somehow eliminated, would you object to the mandatory inclusion of a gender-neutral bathroom facility (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Not to steer it in a totally different direction, but I still just don't get that. It's not the act redefining that you object to (or, it SHOULDN'T be). Redefining "who's allowed to vote" or "which race can use this bathroom" I'll hope you'll (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) There you go, making bad impressions again. (...) Mine, too, to be honest. But my point was that notions of fashion-based gender differences have been mutable for at least centuries, and I intended the fops of old as examples of this. (...) (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) I am looking at this as a vision for the future that some influential people have, and I don't like it. (...) There doesn't have to be. (...) Hmm. I don't know. The vision of "hybrid-man" sounds narcissistic and selfish-- not generally known (...) (19 years ago, 11-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: More from REASON - A Nation of Liars (was Re: Supreme Court Rules Agains State Rights
|
|
(...) Nothing. It's not a complicated point at all... we're governed by liars (Clinton "didn't inhale" and Bush "never did it"... right!... I beleive that!), surrounded by liars, are liars ourselves, and it's due to this stupid prohibition, just (...) (19 years ago, 11-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: More from REASON - A Nation of Liars (was Re: Supreme Court Rules Agains State Rights
|
|
(...) If you lie about marijuana use, yeah, you are a liar. What's complicated about that? The libertarian in me says legalize marijuana, prostitution, drugs etc, but then I have to look at what kind of society would be the result. From where I'm (...) (19 years ago, 10-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) It's all how you look at it. The Right is against the Left redefining marriage. (...) Mainly the Right is against government funding for such research. Same with abortion. But yes, there is a moral component to it as well. (...) Prostitution, (...) (19 years ago, 10-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
