I personally think this whole phenomenon is akin to other urban myths, like "Snapple supports slavery" and the ubiquitous Diet Coke/Pop Rocks myth. There's a few Youtube videos out there but it's far from widespread. The media just needs crap like this to peddle when the news is slow.
A couple isolated incidents across the world does not indicate any sort of growing trend.
Except it's much more than a couple isolated incidents, but lazy perusing of the internet would make you think that. Youtube has been ****canning those videos for a long time and as I mentioned earlier in the thread this is a 'game' that has been going on since 2010 on a documented level, so that's almost 4 years now. Hardly an urban myth.
No, they weren't right and they were pretty stupid about the entire thing.
A&E needs that family, not the other way around. They were already successful with their family business long before this show was ever conceived so the money they're pulling in is just icing on a cake they've already made themselves.
They've already come out and said many times that their show has a limited shelf life and whenever it ends it won't be something that they lose any sleep over, which shows the difference between people like them who aren't careerists and the fame obsessed reality tv types that actually need their shows to feel good about their place in life as well as put food on the table and pay the bills. That's a guy that the same day this suspension was handed down was at a church event praying for some woman with cancer:
So obviously it didn't bother him, nor since the family made their public statement saying they're in full support of their patriarch and currently in discussions with A&E about the future of the show as to whether it will even continue because of what A&E decided to do it shows that the family really has all the cards in this game, which anyone with a brain would have been able to tell you with even casual glances like the kind I've given to the show. They're not going to sellout their beliefs just to make sponsors or protestors happy, which is a great and incredibly moral stand to take.
A&E has everything to lose and judging from the ratings of pro gay shows not very much to gain. Big surprise there. When they decide to walk away from A&E and go elsewhere they'll be wishing they did differently, and I can hope that happens and that situations like this act as catalysts for not only further expressions of this regard but also the creation of channels and media entities which will not only safeguard it but also make no effort to censor or control it.
As to him mentioning his First Amendment rights it's not out of place at all. Freedom of speech is a right, the freedom to not be offended isn't. This is just another example of people feeling they need to silence anything or anyone who says something they disagree with, cut them out of whatever picture they're in and pretend that's moral and just. Sorry, the typical pro gay TV show or movie is full of snark, cynicism and venom towards traditional family and values as though its a personal mission to attack those structures so they've no room to cry foul when someone expresses a viewpoint which offends them. They don't have the right to be offended.
As to whether being gay is a choice, for some it is. The contention that it is purely genetical is stupid, it completely ignores people whose sexuality is as changeable as their wardrobe or those who are just sexual samplers on a willful and deliberate level above and beyond genetics. There's certainly people born that way and to whom it makes the most perfect sense but please, lets not act in a across the board manner there. The world is full of sexual tourists, followers of trends and those who frankly don't care who gets them off as long as they do.
Infraction for inappropriate language. - Blinking Spirit
That clause. I do not think it means what you think it means. Employment Divison, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith says the free exercise clause only counts if it's not neutrally enforced.
Otherwise, at the risk of Godwin's law, the World Church of the Creator could just ride through town, pass by every synagogue, and shoot anyone they saw, because it's their religion, dammit!
I think it means exactly what I think it means. And no law is created in the American Constitutional framework that allows for wanton shooting just because of religious views, that's an egregious and completely out of touch debasement of free exercise that has no moral alignment with the clause or the rest of the foundation it springs from. Ergo, anyone suggesting something like that under the umbrella of free exercise is a complete idiot and not even worth discussing this with.
That was really good, and also very nice of your opponent to play an infinite mana infinite Donate deck for you. Probably the one time a blue mage is going to accused of giving rather than taking, huzzah!
Chances are you'd never get a chance to use your gun and statistics say you'd more likely kill yourself with it....
So you do not think having drug treatment programs protect our citizens? Drug addicts commit less crimes when in recovery and it cost significantly less than perpetually paying a cop to arrest them.
Huh?
Haha, that Democrat State Congresswoman from Colorado said that, I think that's where she was from. I'm not going to engage in hubris here and say I could never be surprised because that's silly but I'm extra cautious when in public so the chances are more in my favor than not.
I'm a reasonably good shot and have Army training as well as civilian self defense training. I'm not going to shoot myself much to the dismay of some.
I'm probably the worst person in the world to try to pitch drug treatment programs to due to history with members of my immediate family so I'm not going to be cool with it, no. Moreover drug treatment programs were not the breadth and scope of where this discussion was going, when I'm talking abuse of assistance programs I'm talking about the types of programs that pay bills or provide cash/credit outright. I'm talking about quota/lineage systems like the ones mentioned in the thread.
To your Huh question I was poking fun at your devil's advocate reference recently, can't remember which thread it was in.
People shouldn't be surprised at the direction taken with these films, the LOTR trilogy had tons of omissions/additions that made it quite clear they were going for an "in spirit" version of the tales rather than "by the book" in a strict sense.
I'll see it but will cringe a few times and just block it out and enjoy it. Hmm, that sounds alot like my 2nd serious relationship. Maybe I won't see it, hahaha.
I'm personally against assistance programs altogether except the oldest one in history: the family.
Can we get rid of the cops and military that protect you?
EDIT: Love to hear you cry about getting robbed by the starving person who has resorted to crime becasue assistance programs no longer exist.
There's no starving person that is going to rob me unless they feel like getting shot and killed.
No we can't get rid of the police and military because unlike assistance programs those actually perform a service crucial to protecting the entire citizenry and nation.
In before you try to claim that assistance programs do the same. Your devil's advocate playbook is a bit thin but I'm sure it impresses the middle schoolers.
Yea, those dirty poors trying to get into colleges that us rich folk paid for. PLEASE call them uppity in your next post. I'm trying to complete FYGM bingo.
If you think it's a hammock, then you have no clue about the pittance they actually receive.
Oh. You're a crazy person who believes that a nation of 300+ million people doesn't need a federal government. Ok. Got it.
It is adorable. You should try it sometime.
Acting as though I have no sympathy for people is very shallow of you. I have enough to appreciate their plight, some of my family came up from that and actually some of them are still in it. I just don't have enough sympathy to let a system that is used and abused the way it is continue to exist in its currrent and of course ever expanding form.
I have more sympathy for the people who work hard, long and thankless hours and who don't ask for anything. In fact that's where 99% of my sympathy lies. The other 1% lies with the people who actually need it and try to reach the point of everyone else. I have 0% sympathy for scammers or the system that aids them.
I do have a clue about what they receive. I worked in banking for a very long time. I processed all sorts of government assistance checks, setup direct deposits for benefits, blah blah. The real kicker is the people who get credited assistance that doesn't even come to them. Rent payments, utilities, yada yada.
Up in the ivory tower it's hard to see these things. I don't know what if any experience you have in dealing with people and their money/assistance but you'll find that if it costs money in this country there's more than likely an assistance program, subsidy or nonprofit aid for it. Hammock analogy still applies.
That's why people like the Swiss are thinking of just outright paying everyone a flat amount each month, makes more fiscal sense than 11,968 different organizations and papers to process for everything. Here's some cash, shut up and go do whatever. Note that I'm not supporting their idea, just so you're sure. I have to say these things so you know.
No, I'm not a crazy person and I don't think that a nation of 300 million people needs 0 federal government. Nice jumping to conclusions there.
Uncle Sam is just too fat and bloated, pure and simple. He needs a steady diet to trim away his girth, he should be lean, mean, capable and most importantly limited in power and reach. But you read a few sentences of mine and think I'm a crazy person who believes in 0 government so welcome to reality, enjoy the stay.
Yes tear it down. Race based anything out the window. Let's see how many people actually believe in a so called post racial world.
It's not a few scammers, btw. The scammers show the loopholes on all levels not just racial and show the extent at which the system is/has been compromised. It's a reflection of the same you find in the tax code and the legal system, people figure out how to abuse it and pretend they're not. The fact that we've got people in the federal government doing it and enabling it only helps it continue.
If there's anything it should be pure economics, looking at peoples' income on all levels to determine what assistance if any they get. I'm personally against assistance programs altogether except the oldest one in history: the family. But such is the level of crybabyism in the world that such notions aren't feasible because there's too many people getting their wheels greased on this both at the top and bottom.
The idea of the safety net and of policies to help the disadvantaged was supposed to be a safety net, not a hammock. Chicanery and inertia have made it that though.
The above stated can also generally be applied to the federal government. Tear it down, minimize the bureaucracy, close the loopholes and avenues of corruption. It's detrimental to everything and everyone in the short and long term.
That system is pretty racist. Skin tone isn't the only factor that identifies a person with a social group, whether or not that social group's primary distinguishing characteristic is skin tone. There are white people in 'black' culture and black people in 'white culture', and the best way to determine what social group a person falls into is how they perceive themselves in the context of the culture they live in. Similarly, simply having a little bit of a racial or cultural characteristic does not qualify you for belonging in that group, either. The social group has to consider you part of them, too.
After all, a half-white, half-black person is 'black' in North America but 'White' in Africa. The skin tone doesn't change the two, but they belong to two different social groups in two different places based on their racial characteristics. Looking at a picture means very little.
This seems more pragmatic, but it quickly unravels as absurd.
How do you propose to assess whether a racial group "considers you part of them, too"? Are you going to take a random sample and do a poll? What would you tell the random sample about the person? And if they ask to see a photo? Ultimately, how is asking that group what race a person is any different from asking an admissions panel to resolve the same question?
Because you can't possibly believe that an honest-to-god question to the person themselves is going to be robust where college admissions and other opportunities are being doled out. Is there anyone in the world who believes that the Elizabeth Warren's of the world are entitled to their claim of being native americans, and entitled to affirmative action, just because they say so? I'd love to see a straight-faced argument supporting that idea.
There's no straight faced argument. When there's opportunities to claim assistance on any criteria people of no morals and less scruples are going to find a way to make it happen and the loose reins that people in charge are playing with this just encourages people to stretch the boundaries.
It'd be a boon for the family tree research business as suddenly everyone would want to know if their great great great great great great great grandparents were X racial group so they could 1/64th or whatever their way to freebies.
Would it be better for the community the hospital operates in if there was no hospitals? I mean a hospital providing health care but not abortions is clearly of no use. God forbid you have to go through the complicated procedure that is condom use or *GASP* stop having sex. What a bunch of tyrants these catholics are.
You know the Catholics are not under any obligation to provide health services they can stop funding such projects if the womans outrage would be bettered in such a way. I'm sure it is impossible to find a non catholic hospital in the US anyway. They clearly have the health care market cornered.
As someone who was raised Catholic and has a firm grasp of political science, there is a long history of comparativists saying that Catholicism is correlated with authoritarian regimes.
And the Catholic Church encourages people to have sex within the confines of marriage, and produce many babies. To the Church, condoms are the same as an abortion due to the Biblical story of Onan. But the Catholic Church is founded in Tertullian's idea that "every woman is an Eve," that it is the fault of womankind that humanity exists in pain. Is that the kind of hatred that you want in public health?
Has zero to do with hatred, nice mischaracterization there. Sanctity of life anyone? Bingo.
Catholics don't want to perform abortions, bottom line. Don't go to a Catholic Hospital if your goal is to have one.
People who are anti religious of course have no problem with attempting to dictate actions that go against religious beliefs because they just want what they want and could care less how important someones' beliefs are to them. A world full of Veruca Salts attempting to act morally outraged, hahahaha what a sham.
Messages should be the same regardless? Then how do you explain the difference between disaster warnings from emergency managers in non-tribal jurisdictions and tribal jurisdictions? In tribal jurisdictions there is an integration between the tribal LEPC/EM and elders. These are people who are the first Americans, and the way disasters are communicated are different than in non-tribal jurisdictions. Maybe we should use tribal jurisdictions as the model for how emergency managers across the country to use, and if anyone doesn't like it, tough.
And the idea that all messaging is the same across cultures is quite frankly false and Eurocentric. In African-American communities, you go to the churches. In Latino communities you appeal to the family and cultural authorities. We all have different experiences in this country, which is one of the strengths of the United States. You're asking to standardize the American experience, which is overly simplistic (again, gnostic worldviews and the similarity to communistic "Russification" of Central Asia).
What is the "American" nation, by the way?
Except this isn't a tribal nation, it's the United States of America, a Constitutional Republic based on the premise of rule of law. Tribal jurisdictions are irrelevant to this particular discussion, we base nothing on them.
My entire problem with this particular moment in the thread is the idea that there needs to be extra efforts made to communicate vital emergency/disaster information to people because of biases they acquired elsewhere and are unwilling to relinquish now that they're here. Talk about self fulfilling and self perpetuating prophecies.
No, lets add extra steps to the process requiring critical time, resources and effort to engage in. Real smart. You know, since seeing a disaster warning on tv from officials and appraising it as trustworthy or not is too much effort to make with no motive or interest to engage in.
Outside of emergency and disaster situations I really don't care if there's all these extra steps as long as it's not a big stretch to make it happen. But there's crunch time considerations that must be made and really no one has the time, energy or interest in engaging cultural insecurities when something serious is going on. It's at that point that uniformity is in everyones' best interest until the emergency has passed.
I am asking to standardize the American experience on things that there's really no need to have anything differently. This whole special snowflake tripe is fine on far too many things to layout here but in dealing with official communications especially the likes of disasters and other emergencies one uniform standard is best. As any soldier will tell you there is no chance for confusion when official actions of these kind are handled in known, predictable and easy to understand ways.
But of course we live in the special snowflake age, so people don't even know what those official actions are anymore. It's telling when communities do their monthly emergency air siren tests and you see people looking around wondering what the hell that sound is. Herp, derp, durp. Their cultural background must preclude them from learning those things too.
The American Nation? Um, that's pretty obvious. Not only the geographic boundaries but history, laws and traditions that comprise it. They're very important and should not be forsaken for any reason.
Not surprising at all, this is the federal government that thinks stuff like this is spot on:
Blizzard is out front saying they have no idea what everyone is talking about, just like Google, Microsoft and telecom companies said when leaks started showing they were giving information to the federal government. There's no point to trust them.
Most people are too stupid or oblivious to care so these types of actions will continue until the inevitable breaking point and then we'll see what happens.
While, homogenizing mental frameworks and collective attitudes is a nice notion, it's hardly realistic or applicable. We know from experience that you can't force reform or change on cultural or collective mindsets. If a society or community is going to change, it must happen internally. People tend to resist outside forces telling them to change. I think you're failing to understand that these people don't share the same kind of brain as you or I. Their experiences and cultural memes have fostered a distrust for government authority of any kind. This is not something you can simply say "oh, well they'll just have to change then." It's not that simple.
In your tornado example, we already know that the Latino population will not react to mainstream sources telling them to evacuate, but you have to do something to relocate this population. Letting them remain ignorant of a real danger and writing off any deaths in that population as "stupidity" is not ethically permissible. Not wanting people to die if there's something that can reasonably be done is not "coddling."
Actually I have the same kind of brain as them, as I don't trust the government either but that lack of trust on my part doesn't make me just blank out everything that is said by it, especially things said in times of crisis. Listen first then judge, it's funny that people are defending blind prejudice because it's against the government and it's minorities doing it.
I never said it'd be simple, I said it'd be necessary because that's part of the entire integration process and if we were serious about the integration process we wouldn't be dancing around cultural insecurities and allowing them to exist perpetually. At some point you have to let go of whatever the hell it is that's causing all of that, and if they're not willing to do so then the presentation of the hard reality of its necessity by having one solid uniform presentation on things is more than reasonable on this nations' behalf.
I know it must happen internally but as long as the choice is there NOT to change, then the appearance of things is that will be what is chosen. Otherwise what this country ends up doing is playing appeasement to sensibilities everytime something comes up and especially in moments of crisis that's the last thing that we can be doing and operate effectively.
Special treatment, accomodation or effort on their behalf is out of line. Continuity of message in a crisis especially one with a small window of time to act in means one voice, one message with updates as necessary. Not this BS of ok we've given our American message, now let's bring in the slew of minority representatives so they can actually trust what is said. It's stupid. If those people want to designate amongst themselves people in their own community to engage in this so difficult trust, then that'd be fine but bending over backwards to fluff up people who've made no effort to integrate and let go of the past they came here to escape is absurd.
Haha ethnically permissible, that's a good one.
Edit: Oops, read that last part wrong. It's still funny.
Except disaster preparedness is a LOCAL duty, not federal. It's not a federal problem until the mayor/county judge goes through the traditional channels until it reaches FEMA. It is the DUTY of local emergency managers to make damn sure that knowledge reaches people so they can get out of harm's way. And if it's a local response, it needs to be tailored to the local communities. Putting your fingers in your ears and telling people to become your idea of what an American should be is dangerous.
There are huge portions of people on the Texas Gulf Coast with people as Anglo as can be and their attitude when a hurricane the size of the Gulf of Mexico is barreling towards them is "I ain't leavin, ain't nobody gon' tell me what to do." That's a part of their culture. And those people need to be educated as much as Vietnamese shrimpers and Latinos, to save lives. You're asking for people to die because of ideological purity of what an American should be. Emergency managers' first goal should be to protect all residents facing a natural or technological hazard.
No, it's not dangerous at all. Messages should be the exact same regardless of who they're spoken to and what language they're spoken in. Funneling information to local organizations that help spread it is fine but that's really the extent of it, there should be a primary source and if secondary word of mouth or extra actions are taken in a non official capacity, that's fine.
No, I'm not asking people to die. You're not very smart. I'm asking that standardized and typical channels of crisis communication be listened to and accepted, which seems to be a cultural impossibility for some because of what they went through in the past and are unwilling to get over, mainly because they have no reason to with people like you advancing the "everyone has their own unique spokesperson so they feel safe and cozy in catastrophe" line.
Flame infraction. - Blinking Spirit
There's a reason that danger signs, signals, sirens and modes of communicating hazards are uniform: so they can be recognized by everyone. That's the premise under which I operate but I might be biased due to the fact that even if I have a problem with the government I'm able to make my own evaluation of what they're saying to determine if it's BS or not. I'm 40% Romanian and last I checked I didn't need some officially approved gypsy warning me about danger in order for me to accept it, and neither should anyone else. If you're that stubborn or dumb your life might be lost, people have been hurt or died for their refusal to change uncountable millions of times before so that'd be nothing new.
I'm not going to cry over that or feel any differently and it's important as a whole that continuity of message and its deliverance through official channels be maintained and that we get out of the business of identity politics and its hopscotch games.
Except it's much more than a couple isolated incidents, but lazy perusing of the internet would make you think that. Youtube has been ****canning those videos for a long time and as I mentioned earlier in the thread this is a 'game' that has been going on since 2010 on a documented level, so that's almost 4 years now. Hardly an urban myth.
A&E needs that family, not the other way around. They were already successful with their family business long before this show was ever conceived so the money they're pulling in is just icing on a cake they've already made themselves.
They've already come out and said many times that their show has a limited shelf life and whenever it ends it won't be something that they lose any sleep over, which shows the difference between people like them who aren't careerists and the fame obsessed reality tv types that actually need their shows to feel good about their place in life as well as put food on the table and pay the bills. That's a guy that the same day this suspension was handed down was at a church event praying for some woman with cancer:
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/12/19/cnn-exclusive-pastor-defends-duck-dynasty-star/
So obviously it didn't bother him, nor since the family made their public statement saying they're in full support of their patriarch and currently in discussions with A&E about the future of the show as to whether it will even continue because of what A&E decided to do it shows that the family really has all the cards in this game, which anyone with a brain would have been able to tell you with even casual glances like the kind I've given to the show. They're not going to sellout their beliefs just to make sponsors or protestors happy, which is a great and incredibly moral stand to take.
A&E has everything to lose and judging from the ratings of pro gay shows not very much to gain. Big surprise there. When they decide to walk away from A&E and go elsewhere they'll be wishing they did differently, and I can hope that happens and that situations like this act as catalysts for not only further expressions of this regard but also the creation of channels and media entities which will not only safeguard it but also make no effort to censor or control it.
As to him mentioning his First Amendment rights it's not out of place at all. Freedom of speech is a right, the freedom to not be offended isn't. This is just another example of people feeling they need to silence anything or anyone who says something they disagree with, cut them out of whatever picture they're in and pretend that's moral and just. Sorry, the typical pro gay TV show or movie is full of snark, cynicism and venom towards traditional family and values as though its a personal mission to attack those structures so they've no room to cry foul when someone expresses a viewpoint which offends them. They don't have the right to be offended.
As to whether being gay is a choice, for some it is. The contention that it is purely genetical is stupid, it completely ignores people whose sexuality is as changeable as their wardrobe or those who are just sexual samplers on a willful and deliberate level above and beyond genetics. There's certainly people born that way and to whom it makes the most perfect sense but please, lets not act in a across the board manner there. The world is full of sexual tourists, followers of trends and those who frankly don't care who gets them off as long as they do.
Infraction for inappropriate language. - Blinking Spirit
I think it means exactly what I think it means. And no law is created in the American Constitutional framework that allows for wanton shooting just because of religious views, that's an egregious and completely out of touch debasement of free exercise that has no moral alignment with the clause or the rest of the foundation it springs from. Ergo, anyone suggesting something like that under the umbrella of free exercise is a complete idiot and not even worth discussing this with.
Flaming infraction. - Blinking Spirit
Haha, that Democrat State Congresswoman from Colorado said that, I think that's where she was from. I'm not going to engage in hubris here and say I could never be surprised because that's silly but I'm extra cautious when in public so the chances are more in my favor than not.
I'm a reasonably good shot and have Army training as well as civilian self defense training. I'm not going to shoot myself much to the dismay of some.
I'm probably the worst person in the world to try to pitch drug treatment programs to due to history with members of my immediate family so I'm not going to be cool with it, no. Moreover drug treatment programs were not the breadth and scope of where this discussion was going, when I'm talking abuse of assistance programs I'm talking about the types of programs that pay bills or provide cash/credit outright. I'm talking about quota/lineage systems like the ones mentioned in the thread.
To your Huh question I was poking fun at your devil's advocate reference recently, can't remember which thread it was in.
I'll see it but will cringe a few times and just block it out and enjoy it. Hmm, that sounds alot like my 2nd serious relationship. Maybe I won't see it, hahaha.
There's no starving person that is going to rob me unless they feel like getting shot and killed.
No we can't get rid of the police and military because unlike assistance programs those actually perform a service crucial to protecting the entire citizenry and nation.
In before you try to claim that assistance programs do the same. Your devil's advocate playbook is a bit thin but I'm sure it impresses the middle schoolers.
It is adorable. You should try it sometime.
Acting as though I have no sympathy for people is very shallow of you. I have enough to appreciate their plight, some of my family came up from that and actually some of them are still in it. I just don't have enough sympathy to let a system that is used and abused the way it is continue to exist in its currrent and of course ever expanding form.
I have more sympathy for the people who work hard, long and thankless hours and who don't ask for anything. In fact that's where 99% of my sympathy lies. The other 1% lies with the people who actually need it and try to reach the point of everyone else. I have 0% sympathy for scammers or the system that aids them.
I do have a clue about what they receive. I worked in banking for a very long time. I processed all sorts of government assistance checks, setup direct deposits for benefits, blah blah. The real kicker is the people who get credited assistance that doesn't even come to them. Rent payments, utilities, yada yada.
Up in the ivory tower it's hard to see these things. I don't know what if any experience you have in dealing with people and their money/assistance but you'll find that if it costs money in this country there's more than likely an assistance program, subsidy or nonprofit aid for it. Hammock analogy still applies.
That's why people like the Swiss are thinking of just outright paying everyone a flat amount each month, makes more fiscal sense than 11,968 different organizations and papers to process for everything. Here's some cash, shut up and go do whatever. Note that I'm not supporting their idea, just so you're sure. I have to say these things so you know.
No, I'm not a crazy person and I don't think that a nation of 300 million people needs 0 federal government. Nice jumping to conclusions there.
Uncle Sam is just too fat and bloated, pure and simple. He needs a steady diet to trim away his girth, he should be lean, mean, capable and most importantly limited in power and reach. But you read a few sentences of mine and think I'm a crazy person who believes in 0 government so welcome to reality, enjoy the stay.
It's not a few scammers, btw. The scammers show the loopholes on all levels not just racial and show the extent at which the system is/has been compromised. It's a reflection of the same you find in the tax code and the legal system, people figure out how to abuse it and pretend they're not. The fact that we've got people in the federal government doing it and enabling it only helps it continue.
If there's anything it should be pure economics, looking at peoples' income on all levels to determine what assistance if any they get. I'm personally against assistance programs altogether except the oldest one in history: the family. But such is the level of crybabyism in the world that such notions aren't feasible because there's too many people getting their wheels greased on this both at the top and bottom.
The idea of the safety net and of policies to help the disadvantaged was supposed to be a safety net, not a hammock. Chicanery and inertia have made it that though.
The above stated can also generally be applied to the federal government. Tear it down, minimize the bureaucracy, close the loopholes and avenues of corruption. It's detrimental to everything and everyone in the short and long term.
There's no straight faced argument. When there's opportunities to claim assistance on any criteria people of no morals and less scruples are going to find a way to make it happen and the loose reins that people in charge are playing with this just encourages people to stretch the boundaries.
It'd be a boon for the family tree research business as suddenly everyone would want to know if their great great great great great great great grandparents were X racial group so they could 1/64th or whatever their way to freebies.
Has zero to do with hatred, nice mischaracterization there. Sanctity of life anyone? Bingo.
Catholics don't want to perform abortions, bottom line. Don't go to a Catholic Hospital if your goal is to have one.
People who are anti religious of course have no problem with attempting to dictate actions that go against religious beliefs because they just want what they want and could care less how important someones' beliefs are to them. A world full of Veruca Salts attempting to act morally outraged, hahahaha what a sham.
Except this isn't a tribal nation, it's the United States of America, a Constitutional Republic based on the premise of rule of law. Tribal jurisdictions are irrelevant to this particular discussion, we base nothing on them.
My entire problem with this particular moment in the thread is the idea that there needs to be extra efforts made to communicate vital emergency/disaster information to people because of biases they acquired elsewhere and are unwilling to relinquish now that they're here. Talk about self fulfilling and self perpetuating prophecies.
No, lets add extra steps to the process requiring critical time, resources and effort to engage in. Real smart. You know, since seeing a disaster warning on tv from officials and appraising it as trustworthy or not is too much effort to make with no motive or interest to engage in.
Outside of emergency and disaster situations I really don't care if there's all these extra steps as long as it's not a big stretch to make it happen. But there's crunch time considerations that must be made and really no one has the time, energy or interest in engaging cultural insecurities when something serious is going on. It's at that point that uniformity is in everyones' best interest until the emergency has passed.
I am asking to standardize the American experience on things that there's really no need to have anything differently. This whole special snowflake tripe is fine on far too many things to layout here but in dealing with official communications especially the likes of disasters and other emergencies one uniform standard is best. As any soldier will tell you there is no chance for confusion when official actions of these kind are handled in known, predictable and easy to understand ways.
But of course we live in the special snowflake age, so people don't even know what those official actions are anymore. It's telling when communities do their monthly emergency air siren tests and you see people looking around wondering what the hell that sound is. Herp, derp, durp. Their cultural background must preclude them from learning those things too.
The American Nation? Um, that's pretty obvious. Not only the geographic boundaries but history, laws and traditions that comprise it. They're very important and should not be forsaken for any reason.
Blizzard is out front saying they have no idea what everyone is talking about, just like Google, Microsoft and telecom companies said when leaks started showing they were giving information to the federal government. There's no point to trust them.
Most people are too stupid or oblivious to care so these types of actions will continue until the inevitable breaking point and then we'll see what happens.
Actually I have the same kind of brain as them, as I don't trust the government either but that lack of trust on my part doesn't make me just blank out everything that is said by it, especially things said in times of crisis. Listen first then judge, it's funny that people are defending blind prejudice because it's against the government and it's minorities doing it.
I never said it'd be simple, I said it'd be necessary because that's part of the entire integration process and if we were serious about the integration process we wouldn't be dancing around cultural insecurities and allowing them to exist perpetually. At some point you have to let go of whatever the hell it is that's causing all of that, and if they're not willing to do so then the presentation of the hard reality of its necessity by having one solid uniform presentation on things is more than reasonable on this nations' behalf.
I know it must happen internally but as long as the choice is there NOT to change, then the appearance of things is that will be what is chosen. Otherwise what this country ends up doing is playing appeasement to sensibilities everytime something comes up and especially in moments of crisis that's the last thing that we can be doing and operate effectively.
Special treatment, accomodation or effort on their behalf is out of line. Continuity of message in a crisis especially one with a small window of time to act in means one voice, one message with updates as necessary. Not this BS of ok we've given our American message, now let's bring in the slew of minority representatives so they can actually trust what is said. It's stupid. If those people want to designate amongst themselves people in their own community to engage in this so difficult trust, then that'd be fine but bending over backwards to fluff up people who've made no effort to integrate and let go of the past they came here to escape is absurd.
Haha ethnically permissible, that's a good one.
Edit: Oops, read that last part wrong. It's still funny.
No, it's not dangerous at all. Messages should be the exact same regardless of who they're spoken to and what language they're spoken in. Funneling information to local organizations that help spread it is fine but that's really the extent of it, there should be a primary source and if secondary word of mouth or extra actions are taken in a non official capacity, that's fine.
No, I'm not asking people to die. You're not very smart. I'm asking that standardized and typical channels of crisis communication be listened to and accepted, which seems to be a cultural impossibility for some because of what they went through in the past and are unwilling to get over, mainly because they have no reason to with people like you advancing the "everyone has their own unique spokesperson so they feel safe and cozy in catastrophe" line.
Flame infraction. - Blinking Spirit
There's a reason that danger signs, signals, sirens and modes of communicating hazards are uniform: so they can be recognized by everyone. That's the premise under which I operate but I might be biased due to the fact that even if I have a problem with the government I'm able to make my own evaluation of what they're saying to determine if it's BS or not. I'm 40% Romanian and last I checked I didn't need some officially approved gypsy warning me about danger in order for me to accept it, and neither should anyone else. If you're that stubborn or dumb your life might be lost, people have been hurt or died for their refusal to change uncountable millions of times before so that'd be nothing new.
I'm not going to cry over that or feel any differently and it's important as a whole that continuity of message and its deliverance through official channels be maintained and that we get out of the business of identity politics and its hopscotch games.