I wonder how many of those 2.5 million inmates are actually guilty. Of those who ARE in fact guilty, I wonder many have actually committed acts of aggression.
I think Tony had a good point, but smelly girl misunderstood it. She obviously confused atheists with general skeptics. Atheists don't believe in God, but they can certainly believe in ESP, alien abduction, and lake monsters. Some atheists even believe in "spiritual" concepts, but they just don't attribute them to God.
There have been plenty of cases of people dying after a black magician "cursed" them, but skeptics actually have theories about that. They often believe that if a person has a strong enough belief in black magic, then it can have a psychological effect on them. On the other hand, believers argue that disbelief can actually ward off magic. As a Wiccan, I don't think either theory can suffice in all cases.
California is one step closer to fully enslaving kids. Public schools are great, except for two things. One, they're paid for by theft... I mean, taxes. Two, kids are kidnapped... I mean, required to attend.
Most of the people here who are actually in favor of this new law have portrayed all home-schooling parents as militant Christians and child molesters. Is it just me, or is that a wee-bit narrow-minded?
And Bean, I'm glad you care about child abuse as much as I do, but you have a poor way of showing it. One, you don't seem to mind that kids are FORCED to attend school. Two, don't confuse pedophiles with child molesters. Some of those kids you want to "defend" are actually the former. If you don't know what I mean, then read my website or my blog.
It's amazing that one person could make scientists re-think their views about other people. Perhaps if everybody in the world posted a YouTube video of their own routines, scientists would realize that people's behaviors can't be squashed into over-arching profiles, unless they're willing to have 6 billion of them.
As an agorist, these statistics really bother me. First of all, how many of these prisoners have actually committed acts of aggressions? For example, drug use isn't aggression, which means that the laws against drug use ARE acts of aggression.
Secondly, of those prisoners who HAVE committed acts of aggression, how many of their victims (or agents acting on their behalves) were allowed to determine the sentences of their aggressors?
Finally, of those who've committed acts of aggression, how many have received punishments greater than that of their original aggression? In other words, anything more than "an eye for an eye" is an act of aggression.
Perhaps more people should read The Ethics of Liberty by Murray Rothbard.
Here's something to help the housing prices: stop allowing people to "own" raw land! Property is (to a libertarian, anyway) defined as that which has been mixed with one's labor. By this definition, raw land CANNOT be property. Also, a person shouldn't need to get a license from the government to build their own house. The government does NOT own the land or the people!
People here keep mentioning that he's a white male, without any evidence to support the claim that those were factors in his success. That's racist and sexist!
There's two ways to help out the homeless.
1. Use your own time and money to help others. 2. Become a politician, commit massive amounts of theft (taxation), give a small fraction of it to welfare, and keep the rest for yourself.
Sadly, #2 is the choice of socialists. Theft is wrong, regardless of the wealth of your victim. Of course, it's easier for a socialist to steal than to actually EARN money. Meanwhile, plenty of good people get on welfare to help them get back on their feet, but if they try to actually get a job or start a business, they get their welfare revoked before they can earn a dime.
If you want to help the homeless, make lots of money and become a philanthropist. Just make sure the socialists aren't stealing your money and the corporatists aren't supporting your rich competitors.
What Tim said is pretty much in-line with what I blogged about today. Psychology is nothing more than a modern, "scientific" version of leech-craft and witch-hunting. Even the gathering of statistics is prone to bias, not to mention the conclusions drawn from them. If you look at psychological studies from periods in which there was lots of discrimination against women, blacks, gays, Jews, etc., you'll find that such biases were reflected in the results. It isn't any different today, except that there are different biases.
I don't like to use the term "hierarchy" when talking about a free market, in which the employer-employee relationship is voluntary and mutually beneficial. Of course, I've never seen a free market in my entire life.
I wouldn't put any stock in the results. You have the power to make your own choices, and they aren't predetermined by some test. Still, it's kinda amusing, but nothing more.
That "school" is nothing more than government-sanctioned child abuse. I'd love to see the students revolt, but I'd be afraid that those sick "teachers" would murder them.
There have been plenty of cases of people dying after a black magician "cursed" them, but skeptics actually have theories about that. They often believe that if a person has a strong enough belief in black magic, then it can have a psychological effect on them. On the other hand, believers argue that disbelief can actually ward off magic. As a Wiccan, I don't think either theory can suffice in all cases.
Most of the people here who are actually in favor of this new law have portrayed all home-schooling parents as militant Christians and child molesters. Is it just me, or is that a wee-bit narrow-minded?
And Bean, I'm glad you care about child abuse as much as I do, but you have a poor way of showing it. One, you don't seem to mind that kids are FORCED to attend school. Two, don't confuse pedophiles with child molesters. Some of those kids you want to "defend" are actually the former. If you don't know what I mean, then read my website or my blog.
As an agorist, these statistics really bother me. First of all, how many of these prisoners have actually committed acts of aggressions? For example, drug use isn't aggression, which means that the laws against drug use ARE acts of aggression.
Secondly, of those prisoners who HAVE committed acts of aggression, how many of their victims (or agents acting on their behalves) were allowed to determine the sentences of their aggressors?
Finally, of those who've committed acts of aggression, how many have received punishments greater than that of their original aggression? In other words, anything more than "an eye for an eye" is an act of aggression.
Perhaps more people should read The Ethics of Liberty by Murray Rothbard.
There's two ways to help out the homeless.
1. Use your own time and money to help others.
2. Become a politician, commit massive amounts of theft (taxation), give a small fraction of it to welfare, and keep the rest for yourself.
Sadly, #2 is the choice of socialists. Theft is wrong, regardless of the wealth of your victim. Of course, it's easier for a socialist to steal than to actually EARN money. Meanwhile, plenty of good people get on welfare to help them get back on their feet, but if they try to actually get a job or start a business, they get their welfare revoked before they can earn a dime.
If you want to help the homeless, make lots of money and become a philanthropist. Just make sure the socialists aren't stealing your money and the corporatists aren't supporting your rich competitors.
- Samuel Edward Konkin III, founder of agorism (1947 - 2004)
Personally, I like Thomas Paine's quote better. It's more poetic.