mad4u689

I'm jewish too, and as much as it seems like we're a race, technically it's still a religion. Besides being jewish, what countries do your parents/gparents/ggparents date back to? Hmm, well, when most people use "Jewish" like that, they probably mean the ghettos of eastern europe :P I mean, i have an Iranian Jewish friend for example, and there are plenty of Safardic (sp?) jews out there, but often when people refer to their "Jewish culture" they refer to their ashkenazic background. :) And it makes sense, because the background was so interbred (i.e. ashkenazic jews only married other ashkenazic jews) that Jews are at higher or lower genetic predispositions to various diseases, etc, and have other genetic similarities. That said, my family's pretty much from the Jewish ghettos of Eastern Europe, until they had to leave there for America because they were, uhh, being killed (pogroms and stuff, way before WWII). So Russia, Poland, the former Czechoslovakia, Romania, Austria, Hungary, even a little bit of Dutch in me :P

:D My campus has a giant hill in the middle of it, which makes for... great fun :D In the spring and summer, we have rolling races to see who can make it down to the bottom while rolling first. Hilarity often ensues. In the winter... SLEDDING :D (or, more likely, cafeteria tray-ing)

Hahaha, that's fantastic :D I applaud your decision, wise one :D

You are a foul, ignorant bigot. Don't insult people just because they have a different opinion to you. AIDS was started amongst homosexual men, it is a fact. They caused it so what's with all this defence of them? :roll: Please read my explanation about why this is incorrect :)

hehe, thanks :D In terms of non-nudity incidents... let's see... some friends of mine and I painted a giant "Snakes on a Plane" banner and put it up over our main cafeteria last year, when the hype was big :D Also, exploring our illegal underground tunnels. Man... college = good times :D

Yeah, you have a point. I do agree that racial (as opposed to economic / social) affirmative action is overplayed. However, experience has led me to believe that race does play at least some (and sometimes significant) role. But I do agree that affirmative action should be based more on how you did GIVEN YOUR SITUATION, which is often more a result of economic factors than racial ones. :)

I'm not sure if university counts as school... but if so... I've done my fair share of "crazy" things. most of them seem to involve nudity... :P :D -driving a half hour to the beach at 7am in the morning after staying up all night playing Zelda with friends... to go SKINNY DIPPING :P :D - attending naked parties, complete with body paint - Streaking on our main green while people practice fire-spinning at night -Mudfighting in the moonlight after a big rainstorm Etc. and similar situations :oops:

I'm just arguing why skin color and race IS a meaningful aspect to having a diverse group of people :D I am not (at the moment) arguing that suffering hardships makes you automatically deserving of reward. Also, I don't know about you, but if you've ever sat in a lunchroom, do you notice that the black kids and the white kids tend to not sit together, in general? Maybe your school is an exception, which would be fantastic :D But this self-segregation is a large issue most places in the country, and if people are living in segregated (and thus separate) spheres, of course their experiences will be different.

Yeah, and, you know, acquiring it and stuff :P Definition of an acquisition... even if it's a "friendly" acquisition :D

Affirmative action does not just refer to racial affirmative action. A great deal of economic affirmative action is at play, too, as well as countless others I described in my previous post! However, being black DOES mean something compared to being white. Not inherently, not because of your genetic code - but given the same environment otherwise, a black individual and a white individual will be exposed to VERY DIFFERENT treatment by society, not always in direct ways. I heard a story about my mom's workplace. The woman in charge of choosing job applicants to interview tossed out the application of someone named "Latisha." My mom asked why, and the woman replied, with a look, that "Oh - John [their boss] wouldn't want me to bother with someone named Latisha." The woman blamed the boss, but the boss probably wouldn't have cared, and my mom remained silent. My mom was skeptical, but didn't say anything to the boss. Latisha never got interviewed. My mom told me this story, and I didn't do anything about it, either. Is this fair? No. Is this something that still happens in our society? Sadly, yes. This is just an example of the prejudice that confronts our society today and that causes someone black and someone white to have very different experiences, even if they grew up with economic privilege. Also, studies have found that at college, students of color performed just as well in an academic setting as did white students, despite affirmative action maybe having helped them get in.

The thing that makes me ad about this is that it's a marked change in direction for Google. We all know and love Google as the website that makes products better than its competitors do. Its features tend to be simpler, easier to use, more powerful, and more effective. Now, instead of marketing a better product, Google is going the route of all the other annoying corporations out there - just BUYING OUT its competitors, just for profit's sake. Is that the google we know and love? Not so much :(

His wish is that people would be accepting of EVERYTHING that includes killing people.. Homosexuality is no were near harmless, aids anyone? *cringe* I'm sorry, I know this is a nice happy thread and I shouldn't go off topic, but I can't let anything that ignorant and hurtful go on without responding :x AIDS is caused by a virus called HIV. HIV is spread through various means, all of which involve the exchange of bodily fluids. This means that HIV can be spread through mother-giving-birth-to-child, sharing drug needles, an improper blood transfusion, doing the "blood brothers" rite with a friend, vaginal intercourse, anal intercourse, oral sex, etc. Initially, AIDS turned up among gay men in metropolitan settings. Before much was known about AIDS and HIV, it spread quickly in these circles, because many of these gay men were promiscuous, and would engage in sexual activity with other gay men in the area. This was the first initial outbreak that the international community got so scared about. It could just have easily occurred in any type of sexually promiscuous social circle - it has nothing to do with the fact that the initial outbreak was among gay men in particular. Nowadays, of course, there has been sufficient tme that there is no one social circle taking the brunt of the outbreak. Being gay doesn't bring about AIDS; having sex with someone already infected with HIV and then being promiscuous brings about AIDS. Not all gay men are promiscuous, and these men aren't at a great risk for HIV. It's not a matter of being gay; it's a matter of engaging in high-risk activity. I hope that helps clarify the situation, and you learn from this :)

A college wouldn't admit half of its class one year as oboe players and have no other students who played instruments. Each year, an admissions committee tries to make up a class that is fairly diverse - in terms of race, ethnicity, and economic background, but also such factors as artistic and musical interests, leadership interests, sports interests, etc. A college is not obligated to admit every student that could succeed at and benefit from that college. If that were the case, even Harvard and Yale and Princeton would be overrun with far more students than they can handle! Instead, a college looks for students that will (a) succeed at and benefit from that college and (B) add something extra, something special, to the college. This something special could be being a star football player, or it could winning an Intel science award, or it could be bringing in a new perspective as an international student or as a student of color. In the end, the makeup of the student body will be more diverse as a result of these admissions efforts, and the college will be better as a result. From the perspective of the COLLEGE, this is good and fine. It is the perspective of the individual ("Ahh! I'm never going to get into college because I'm white! Not fair!") that causes complaints, but this reason, while sensical, is not a decent reason for policy change. ~~~ Another, different, perspective on affirmative action: There exist injustices committed in this country, and in every country. When two people are born, they are born into completely different circumstances, much of which is beyond their control. If they succeed and do outstandingly well WITHIN THEIR ENVIRONMENT, taking circumstances into account, shouldn't that be rewarded just as much? If an individual scores 1950 on the SATs in a school district where the average score is 800, shouldn't that be weighted just as heavily as someone who scores 2100 on the SATs in a school district where the average score is 1800? (This is similar to real life sample statistics). Shouldn't there be room for economic advancement? Do we really want social and economic stratification guaranteed by a policy that keeps down those who are already down?

I'm not going to get into arguments about specific posts, but I just want to say: Stereotyping all Muslims as "terrorists" is damaging. Stereotyping all Christians as "crazy fundamentalists" is damaging, too. People do "bad" things, but blaming their religion is about as sensible as blaming their skin color. After all, the correlation between parents' religious identity and child's religious identity is EXTREMELY high, according to social psychology research (I apologize, I couldn't quickly find any statistics at the moment.) The documentary sounds like an attack on a large group of people, which I think is rarely a very good idea. There may be exceptions, and of course I haven't seen the documentary, so I don't know.

Chris... lol :D I'd wish to be in a lasting relationship with someone I'm in love with. Ideally, we'd live together, and start a family, and always be in love, and it would be beautiful :D Corny, I know, but gosh, would that be nice :oops:

I'm "Mad" online, and I'm "Mad" in real life :D (It's short for Madeline)

Great. International disrest, here we come.

Thanks for posting, that was a good read :D

Mmm, I used to very much agree with you, before I got to college. However, now that I'm in college, I have to admit how much I've benefitted from going to a diverse campus and being bombarded with different perspectives. I've grown a lot as a person, and I don't think the effect would have been the same if there were more equally qualified, but upper middle class white students. The intention of affirmative action is two-fold: one, to make up for the (very real) inequalities in opportunity among different races and ethnicities, and two, to build a community where there is a diversity of opinion. The first intention is, I feel, more controversial than the latter. I haven't quite figured out how I feel about this first intention :)

I find much of advertising fascinating :D Especially when you know it's untrue, but somehow appealing anyway. and some of it humorous :) It rarely bothers me though :)

Yes, it is very repetitive. The first time I read the book it took me eight days, one of those days was just reading those 80 pages. Kind of hard to get through. I just finished the Fountainhead, and everytime I think of Howard Roark it makes me feel good :D Roarks speech at the end where he's defending himself, to me, is about 10 times better than Galt's speech. After about 20 pages of Galt's speech everything started sounding the same. On Atlas Shrugged vs. The Fountainhead: I think that Atlas Shrugged does a better job of accurately (and explicitly) defining Ayn Rand's philosophy... but The Fountainhead makes a better novel :D

Well-put and true. Anarchy is my ideal; however, I acknowledge that it is impossible in modern society, and thus economic and civil libertarianism (minus the huge defense obsession some libertarians have) is the best practical application of the ideal anarchy into society and government.

Because the official Runescape forums (of which I was a troll and an addict :D) were closed down... and tip.it was the best alternative. That was ages ago, when I still played RS. Now I just am hesitant to leave the community :D And/or have no life

I always start out intending to be nice. Sometimes it just doesn't quite work out as planned though :oops: Heat of the moment and all :oops: Ah well, I'm working on it :D

-The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde. GOSH YES :D Wow. Good literature feels so freaking good.