Skeptical

Without proper information being provided to the people, we will end up with more wars like Iraq, places like Guantanamo, and less and less freedom. Torture, murder and tyranny. Go Faux news! No one complains that reporters risk their lives in war zones: we value information. If I knew that publishing something that would upset the Fundies, I would publish it despite the death threats and assassination attempts, if the information was of value. Wikileaks would let me publish it without being identified, and bring it to much broader public attention.

Are you referring to their sources, or individuals who have committed crimes?

This post made me giggle deep down in places of my heart I rarely visit. I thus appreciate this. I also appreciate your appreciation for Freedom of the Press, ironic as it may be. I also wonder what's one's argument that supports Wiki Leaks, if Wikileaks posts material that endangers one's lives. If the source is revealed, even if only to WIkileaks, the informations is deleted.

The point isn't whether or not you think the information is important: when people get the news that they want, we get Faux News blasting Obama like this. I want information, not idiotic dribble being spoon-fed to me because I find it hard to think critically for myself. (If I sound bitter: my boss was watching Faux, and I really don't have much patience for slandering, xenophobic commie-haters, so the internet is being subjected to my rage.)

Julian Assange: founder of Wikileaks, and one awesome guy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange [hide][/hide]

English class in general. I absolutely love reading, but by the 50th hour of literary examination and after writing hundreds of pages of crap, I want to chuck the book straight in front of the nearest bus. I get the grade, but it feels like I've traded part of my intellectual dignity for it.

Yeah honestly, complete with mfws and trolls. It's like I'm really on 4chan. What I find funny about this Wikileaks thing is that so many people are aware of it and yet won't move a finger to figure out what's been hidden from them for years. Myself included, of course. That being said, I hope this will lead to more transparency, or at least push towards a better balance of transparency and secrecy. In everyone's defense, that much information is pretty daunting. I will read the parts that are pointed out, but I simply do not have the patience to trawl through that much. Long like Wikileaks!

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/julian_assange_why_the_world_needs_wikileaks.html Very interesting. Watching it as I type.

I forget where I saw this:

I never said that every Catholic supported the Nazis, or at any point implied that. I was simply adding more evidence to the pile against the Catholic Church. I would like to point out that you yourself made a dangerous generalization by assuming that every article included in the Guardian is worthless. We are discussing the Pope, and the Catholic Church, not it's adherents. Please Mask, I would appreciate your attention, since I will only post this once: I do not believe that all Catholics are Nazis/Evil/Hitler loving ovary haters. I do believe (and have shown evidence to the point) that the Catholic Church is ruled by a monstrous collection of pedophile-protecting, anti-semitic liars, who happen to wear dresses and hear voices, and have actually done a pretty good job of corrupting Christianity through their edicts and disastrous public relations skills. I still stand by my Wikipedia link; it supported my point that religion was used as a tool my the Nazis to control the masses, I have no idea what your problem with that is.

Probably, but they can also more easily direct government funds towards where it is required, instead of having to pander to groups like the Teabaggers, although I'm not sure how much of those dollars actually end up with the government, and not just in the pocket of the corporations, or corrupt officials. Hopefully Democracy will reach them quickly, but it's always interesting to see what a country would be like it if was run by engineers. (Stole that point from Adams)

You only feel that it's a pointless argument because I'm just as determined as you are: when you don't bring any real evidence to the fight, the world can turn to dust around us and I'll be sitting here waiting. The motivation of religion is to control the general populace: it is a convenient vessel to carry a useless form of morality. Why exactly is there such a focus on children? If there is any reasonable evidence at all for belief in the divine, why then could people not have it presented to them later in life? Religion would collapse if that actually occurred: no one in their right mind would believe any of it if it wasn't ground into their minds from birth, until the religion switch has been firmly installed. It's a brutal cycle, reminiscent of child abuse: I was abused by someone, so I shall abuse someone in turn. The means of religion is even simpler: they have prestige, power, acceptance, and stupidity to work with. How could they not be successful? When you tell someone that they can't marry someone they love, that another human being is not who they are (they're just lying, no one's actually gay) or fuel the hatred that homosexuals face the world over, then you're denying them their humanity. It's as simple as that. Oh, and while we're on the topic of the Catholic Church, I can also add their support of the Nazis: http://atheism.about.com/b/2006/05/24/the-catholic-church-in-nazi-germany-book-notes-pope-benedict-xvi.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany#Nazi_Attitudes_towards_Christianity I hold a church to a higher moral standard than, say, a hockey team. Why? Well, as far as I am aware, no Leaf or Wing has ever preached morality. Then again, the church usually just turns around and begins dehumanizing, lying to, and molesting people, so I'm really not sure where I'm going with this. You're right we can't judge an entire organization by its outliers: however, I have to say that the abuse has now occurred in such significant numbers that we're safe to criticize the Church as a whole, and to demand the prosecution of those who covered it up.

Ahh yes, bring up the corner cases to discredit the entire organization. Fantastic. An organization that protects the rapists and abusers of children from the law. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1311781/How-decent-Catholics-Pope-hid-child-abuse-calls-gays-evil.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/21/pope-benedict-xvi-catholicism An organization that has kept humanity in the dark for hundreds of years, twisted children's minds with lies about their sexuality, corrupted philosophy, killed, tortured, maimed and threatened those who dared to speak out against its evil idiocy, and created a sick partnership between the state and religion in many modern societies. This is normally the point at which they preach tolerance, before turning around to deny another person their humanity as a result of their sexual orientation.

People are having a much more difficult time justifying the blatant immorality of the Catholic Church: religious dogma, covering up child abuse, the child abuse itself... Hopefully a growing Western understanding of morality without religion will topple it.

The key word there being deny. Nobody is denying others freedom. I may have access to the wealth, freedom, and security of the country I live in - Others may not. Exactly how you can argue that you are not denying someone something, I have no idea. Yes.

Mongolian Grill is awesome. I made sausage subs. :thumbup:

Actually they shouldn't be that far off, but big players in the oil industry will do anything to keep generating that profit, the same reason why a drug that could cure many addictions is illegal as the pharmaceutical companies would lose large amounts of profit, and why hemp (a non-psychoactive member of the cannabis genus) is illegal to grow in the US, because the paper mill, cotton, pharmaceutical, and oil industries would all lose large amounts of profit. Wait, what? Corporate interests are a problem when they run a country? As long as corporations are allowed to run amok, there's really not much chance of serious environmental change.

I despise those who believe that they are somehow special, having merely happened to have been born into a certain country. "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness... but only if you're white and born here."

No it isn't. I think you'll find that, that definition only serves a purpose in movies. And besides, if no one counters my points ...? This forum is bonkers. I think that so far it has only been your opinion that none of your points have been countered. Some of the refutations provided seemed quite accurate to me.

We have not conquered nature: we have temporary control over it, and the ability to end the world if our insanity ever prevails. The modern world may have been paved over, sanitized, forests gone, rivers damned, mountains removed, and yet we now stand on the precipice of collapse. The evidence shows that we are racing down Hubbert's Peak, our acceleration driven by a suicidal desire to believe a finite resource can be stretched indefinitely. Our water is toxic, our air is poison to breathe, our trash coats the world, clog ecosystems, and our fertilizers turn waterways into massive algae farms. We're holding a metaphorical gun to our collective head, stockpiles of nuclear weapons capable of ending all life several times over, or a far slower and more painful death by ecological suicide. That's one path - not a descent, but a dead end: there simply is nothing that way, a dead end for everything that we know. The second path is that we live. Whether or not we want to make that life anything worth living is a decision that's being made now. Maybe vegetarianism is a component of the solution, maybe it's not. Will you ever manage to prevent people from eating meat? Never. It's pointless to try, simply because people's definition of freedom includes the choice of eating what they want to. So we take a different path: we can take down Big Oil, and we can stop ignoring profits above everything else. Choosing your battles is just as important as fighting them.

What exactly is in that?

I require an art credit for graduation, but my teacher is nuts. I spent about 10 hours on the first unit, did all the work, answered the questions, just what they wanted, nothing more: I expected something a bit better, but I got an 80. My friend, who is actually a very talented artist, spent easily ten times as long on every sketch, did a much better job answering the questions, and went way above and beyond the requirements in every way. He has an 88. Marking on ability would be fine if people weren't relying on the grades to get into university or college.

I had Canadian Pizza: it's mushroom, bacon and pepperoni. Doesn't seem very Canadian to me (no maple syrup) but it sure tastes awesome.