secularmerlin

I don't get to wear the magic fertility underwear.  

Do you know how plea bargains work? When you plea guilty, it is getting executions off the table much of the time. Generally you save everyone’s time and take life in prison.

So where on earth are you getting that I want “to just execute everyone”?

I asked God for the wisdom to know whether the book of Mormon was the real deal or not.  

How? I opened my mouth and prayed to God. 

I don’t think the rate of false convictions would go down. I think less murderers would avoid jail time since the burden of proof is high for criminal cases 

Should be deleted.

It would depend on the proportion that are actually guilty vs not. Also, pleas save a lot of court time and money.

That happens when you think you have no cause to own the land 

Would therefore suggest that it's normal behaviour.

So when was that?

Certainly wasn't just a few hundred years ago, in the land mass now known as the U.S.A.

That is not the current reality. We spend millions of dollars on executions once court costs and appeals are taken into account

So get rid of the court cases and appeals.  Make executions cheaper.

 If it is not your problem when other people are starving to death why would it be your problem if people are murdering each other?

Because I might get murdered.

 I mean even if it happens close to your house. Just get a good security system or move to a better neighborhood. 

Not going to prevent murder.  Murderers don't care about social security systems.

Stop trying to steal twenty dollars that isn't yours to kill someone who isn't doing anything that is your problem?

They might come over here and kill me if they have a history with murder.  I don't want them killing me.

I'm taking the risk.

Workers should invest more.

I would get help from a church, not from the government.  The church operates using funds obtained through means as consensual as religion it's self.  The government forces you to pay money to them.  Homeless people can use private churches all they want; using the government is theft.

Jeff Bezos never colonized.  He didn't exploit anyone, otherwise he couldn't get his business so successful.

Most people don't work minimum wage jobs.

Lets say you make $60/year

If this was the case, then Jeff Bezos would have comparably rich sibilings

Blacks tend to be less sucessful because they aim for different things than whites.  Females tend to be less sucessful because they tend to aim for different things than men.

As an investor, I don't want to give my money to strangers.  That's like forcing you to give money to kids in Africa.

The wage is mutually consensual.  If you want more money, find a better job.

You need to contribute to society for society to give you something in return. 

Jeff Bezos contributes way more to society than a nurse (nurse make a lot as well).  Jeff Bezos's company sells tens of millions of products to people every single day.  A nurse may help out 5 people in a day.

Other people starving isn't my problem and it isn't yours. 

irrespective of how rich they are.

It's not arbitrary.  People that contribute more to others get more money from those others.  Jeff Bezos gets money from you when you buy something on Amazon at a cheaper price than what the store offers for the same product.

You said that the death penalty is not effective because it didn’t lower homicide rates and should thus be gotten rid of. I am saying that measuring based on the homicide rate is too narrow in scope because the policy has wide-reaching effects.

Labor doesn't get stolen.  It is exchanged at a mutually agreed rate.

However, you are a thief if you give other people's money away.

In order for capitalism to function, you must benefit your society in order to get paid. 

I'm sensing an F... maybe a name?... Fred? Fiona? No? It doesn't have to be a name... maybe something happened in February? They died in February? or uh... their birthday? No? Your birthday? Maybe F for Friday? No?!?! Damn, I usually get it by now. Uhhh... were they a father? Anyone's father? Did they have a father?

You know what, nevermind... How about an M? Sensing an M now...

For instance, it makes defendants more willing to plead guilty to get that off the table.

1) I believe there are times when eye for an eye is acceptable.

2) I don't want to spend a mere penny to help a murderer out, and I don't want to force taxpayers to pay the bill for keeping a parasitic murderer alive.

Because your arguments are Marxian. You're following a rock, who cannot even, and never did run a lemonade stand; perhaps the bare bones of capitalism. Follow who has already achieved, and copy their style, not Marx. Think, and do like them, not Marx. You may not even be aware of who Marx is. Burnham doesn't, either, so why is he a role model? He's a kid who found a candy store.

The unintended consequence is what causes society to improve.

If you think capitalism sucks, sell your computer, sell everything you own, and give the money to the poor if you really don't care about money.

There is little evidence that confirms that the death penalty reduces or increases the homicide rate.

I agree, but I also believe we need to have birth control, and avenues for plenty of sex of consenting adults and consenting teenagers ---again massive efforts to prevent births--- because we have systemically operational problems for the amount of people on Earth.

We have problem with the religous fundamentalitist types believing it is a sin for humans  to not be allow unfettered amount of humans births on Earth, while destroying the evironmental systems that sustain human existence on Earth vs, a rational, logical common sense  birth control policy that is in consideration of the ecology that sustains humans existence on Earth.

Humans are too smart for their britches and to greedy and dumb to implement balance operational procedures to keep us from destroying the ecology that sustains us.

It is commonly asserted that gender and sex occupy different spheres. Whilst the term sex refers to biological attributes, gender is often said to be a social construct of which is in the mind. If this were the case, then why couldn’t one just change their mind? It sounds silly, but if gender has no bearing on physical biology and concerns only one's mind, surely it is easier to just change your mind. At this stage, ideologists usually say “no but XY&Z studies show that trans people have XY&Z similarities to their chosen gender”, which completely misses the point, as referencing studies conducted on the physical body no longer deals with gender, it has moved the conversation onto the realms of biology. 

Picture the following. Since my childhood, I have always said that I am a native African (disclaimer I am not black). I have always felt “wrong”, in that my mind does not coincide with my body. For some reason, I just feel black. No doubt some of you hard core liberals would be halting at this scenario. What exactly does it mean to feel black? Am I being racist? Not at all, I have the exact same question as you do. How can one feel that they are black? Surely, the only way to know how it feels like to be black is to be black? How can a non-African possibly assert that they “feel” African without even being African? How would they know what the sensation is like? How would they know that what they feel are the feelings black people? Again, if you think that I am treading on the line of racism, I am only employing the ideology of transgendered people. My question is this. How can a cis-gender man know that what they are feeling is the sensation of being a women? This seems impossible without a point of comparison, that is, experiencing being a woman.

aforementioned, the term sex is scientifically precise. he distinction between male and females rely on the genotype of the somatic cells. Simply, those who possess somatic cells with XX genotypes are female, and those with XY are male.  Thus, the notion of “sex” is reducible to facts grounded in the physical world.  

It could be argued that intersex people can’t coherently align with either “male” or “female” which could seem problematic for this position. However, it is a misconception that intersex are neither male nor female; let’s examine the types of intersex:

i)                46, XX DSD

This is where the person possesses the chromosomes of a woman, but the external genitalia appears male.  Obviously, one with this form of intersex can still be deemed female. 

 

ii)               46, XY DSD

Identical to XX intersex, except one is male. 

 

iii)             46, XX ovotesticular DSD

Here is where more of a compelling argument can be made; as a person with this form is born with both ovarian and testicular tissue; and can even have both XX and XY chromosomes. However, per the definition of sexes provided, the genotype only applies to “somatic cells” which do not include reproductive cells. 

 

iv)             Sex chromosome DSD

This is where a male or a female is born with either an extra or missing X chromosome. Regardless, one that still has a Y chromosome is denoted as male. 

 On the othehand, the term gender is irreducible to physical facts. Gender is reliant on social and cultural factors when determining whether one is male, female or other. These factors are wholly unquantifiable and subjective. How can one distinguish themselves as absolutely “male”, “female” or “other” using subjective factors with it actually having coherent value? To say that something is “more X”, “less X”, “X but not Y” one needs to *demonstrate a method with which he/she/other can determine the value of X*.  

 

In science, observations are reducible; for example, if we were to analyse the temperature of a closed system, we would find that temperature is actually reducible to the vibration of particles. Thus, temperature supervenes on grounded empirical axioms (law of thermodynamics).  Temperature equates to a B-Property supervening on the A-Property that is particle vibration. Indeed, to talk of the temperature of a system being 0 degrees and not 100 degrees is coherent as temperature is reducible to a quantifiable measurement grounded in the physical world.

The issue here is it is impossible for “male”, “female” or “other” to supervene on “social” or “cultural” factors as *these factors are not reducible to any fact about the physical world*. Thus, to distinguish whether one is male, or female, or other, without any scientific (i.e biological) supervenience is absurd.  Since sex supervenes on the empirical state of one’s somatic cells, it successfully supervenes on a grounded, quantifiable property. Thus, one can coherently make the distinction of “male” or “female” using the “sex” field.

As mentioned above, the term sex is sufficient in explaining our understanding of biology without the need for gender. Thus, the term gender is a mere ontological burden, of which Occam's razor does not allow. Why postulate the term gender, when sex sufficiently covers the field. 

The thing which transgender ideologists do is that they create the term gender and assert that it takes precedence over the biologically grounded term, sex. However, if this is accepted, this can be done to any field of identification. Take the example I used above, that is, a genetically non-African asserting that they are in fact black. At the current stage, there is no construct version for the term race, but let’s postulate the term “rase”. Unlike it’s cousin, “rase” is not based on biology, it is completely in the mind and has no bearing on one's physical build. Would it then be sensible for me to assert that I, from this point on deny the factual term race, and opt to identify myself through rase. Also, I want everyone else to buy into this term rase, and pretend that I am whatever race that I want to be, PS not doing so denies me of my humanity. 

Yep.

That's what happened back in the day.

People thought and cared differently.

Some still do.

Scroll backwards, and where do you stop worrying about the impact of social development?

Europeans were ready to jump on the opportunity that Columbus provided unlike Leif Erikkson.

Since the conversion from the gold standard to floating exchange rates, supply and demand determine currency value more than ever, but governments set those policies. 

Capitalism has no power to print money. Governments do.

For example, Israelis and palestinians, many Israelis (not all) believe they have a right to kill a bunch of innocents if there are terrorists around, and the palestinians believe they are being murdered by Israelis (not all) so they attack the Israelis, by eye for an eye law, this would never end.

Rape is wrong

no one deserves the death penalty no matter the crime.

Eye for an eye is immoral and inhumane.

Murderers deserve the death penalty, even if your a republican who murders liberals for being pro choice.

Not saying he was the only one but the severity of it all in the short burst he and his crewmembers did it is 'up there' with the most barbaric ways to colonialise.