In other news... (humorous news items)

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

Choboman
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 10:54 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Choboman » Fri Nov 09, 2012 3:34 pm UTC

I'm a little confused. Having his sperm is meaningless unless they also have a woman willing to donate ova for fertilization and carry the result to term. Why would any woman volunteer for this? Will they use the kid's mom? That escalates the creepiness factor by another order of magnatude.

DSenette
Posts: 2418
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 8:08 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby DSenette » Fri Nov 09, 2012 3:35 pm UTC

induction wrote:
Iulus Cofield wrote:Parents of minors have the legal authority to make health care decisions for the minor, which would presumably include sperm/ova extraction.


Does this mean that the parents of a living 13-year-old boy should be able to extract his sperm against his will, and create a grandchild for themselves?

Also, does harvesting organs and fluids after death count as a healthcare decision?

yeah, this is the bit here.

parents (afaik) don't have the right to force a child to give a kidney to their sibling if their sibling needs a kidney. and even if they DO have the right, i think you'd have to be a pretty shady doctor to do the procedure.
The Righteous Hand Of Retribution
"The evaporation of 4 million who believe this crap would leave the world an instantly better place." ~Andre Codresu (re: "the Rapture")

User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Iulus Cofield » Fri Nov 09, 2012 3:37 pm UTC

induction wrote:
Iulus Cofield wrote:Parents of minors have the legal authority to make health care decisions for the minor, which would presumably include sperm/ova extraction.


Does this mean that the parents of a living 13-year-old boy should be able to extract his sperm against his will, and create a grandchild for themselves?

Also, does harvesting organs and fluids after death count as a healthcare decision?


Not so much should as can.

AvatarIII wrote:Clearly that is not true the world over though, Gunther von Hagens Plastination exhibits prove that.


Body worlds does not seize corpses of people who did not leave burial instructions

...
They belonged to people who declared during their lifetime that their bodies should be made available after their deaths for the qualification of physicians and the instruction of laypersons. Many donors underscore that by donating their body, they want to be useful to others even after their death.
...

User avatar
jestingrabbit
Factoids are just Datas that haven't grown up yet
Posts: 5967
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:50 pm UTC
Location: Sydney

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby jestingrabbit » Fri Nov 09, 2012 3:37 pm UTC

I think expecting perfect reason from grieving relatives is a bit much. A lot of people with children form the belief that they will be grandparents at some time (this is one of the reasons that some parents freak out when their kids are homosexual, their expectations are suddenly called into question).
ameretrifle wrote:Magic space feudalism is therefore a viable idea.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Nov 09, 2012 3:48 pm UTC

Choboman wrote:I'm a little confused. Having his sperm is meaningless unless they also have a woman willing to donate ova for fertilization and carry the result to term. Why would any woman volunteer for this? Will they use the kid's mom? That escalates the creepiness factor by another order of magnatude.


Yes...very, very creepy if that's the plan.

User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Iulus Cofield » Fri Nov 09, 2012 3:52 pm UTC

Uh...would that be covered by incest laws?

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Nov 09, 2012 4:20 pm UTC

I'm not sure it would. Many of those laws are written to apply to sex, not reproduction. I don't know that all the laws have been updated to cover the possibility of pregnancy without sex(and indeed, without one of the parties being alive). I wonder if it counts as necrophilia...

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Роберт » Fri Nov 09, 2012 4:25 pm UTC

Iulus Cofield wrote:Uh...would that be covered by incest laws?

I'm pretty sure women have given birth to their grandchildren before. Incest is about sex, not reproduction.
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Iulus Cofield » Fri Nov 09, 2012 4:30 pm UTC

I was more squicked by the suggestion of the donor egg coming from the mom, not the mom bearing the embryo.

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Роберт » Fri Nov 09, 2012 4:43 pm UTC

Iulus Cofield wrote:I was more squicked by the suggestion of the donor egg coming from the mom, not the mom bearing the embryo.

Right. Presumably they would buy some eggs?
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 1101
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Coyne » Sun Nov 11, 2012 6:26 am UTC

Iulus Cofield wrote:Parents of minors have the legal authority to make health care decisions for the minor, which would presumably include sperm/ova extraction.

I work in healthcare, not as a health provider, but we get some of this through organization training: This "right" of the parents is not without restriction, and cannot supersede decisions of the minor in some cases. There are many cases where the doctor has to ask a minor for informed decisions and we are told bluntly that the minor has a right to know what they wish about their care; and to have their decisions followed where they are reasonable.

They had a dramatized version of such a situation on "House", where a minor refused permission for her parents to be told of her pregnancy. The lead character weaseled out of it in his inimitable way, but a normal healthcare provider would be bound by the minor's decision unless it was a true danger to her, in which case the provider would have a duty to take it before a judge. Specifically, it would be a violation of law for the provider to tell the parents against the minor's wishes (unless, of course, the state actually has a law to the contrary).

Medical ethics are hard.
In all fairness...

User avatar
oxoiron
Posts: 1365
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:56 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby oxoiron » Mon Nov 12, 2012 9:36 pm UTC

A lot of ethics are hard.
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform (or pause and reflect)."-- Mark Twain
"There is not more dedicated criminal than a group of children."--addams

User avatar
Dason
Posts: 1311
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 7:06 am UTC
Location: ~/

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Dason » Mon Nov 12, 2012 9:56 pm UTC

oxoiron wrote:A lot of ethics are hard.

Not if you have the right book
Image
double epsilon = -.0000001;

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Dark567 » Tue Nov 13, 2012 6:32 am UTC

Australian wins suit against google, for displaying 'Defamatory results"

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense ... atory.html

Spoiler:
Today Google was forced to cough up more than $200,000 in damages this week to an Australian man who brought his shady search results to court.

Melbourne resident Milorad Trkulja was at a restaurant with his mother in the summer of 2004 when he got shot in the back by an unidentified hitman. The 62-year old music promoter survived the attack—but a Google search showed his online reputation didn’t have the same luck. A run of his name on Google Images bought up a Who’s Who of Melbourne’s Most Wanted, like alleged murderers, drug traffickers, mob bosses—not the type of impression you’d want to make before a first date. Even though the only link Trkulja had to Melbourne’s underworld was being a victim of an unsolved crime, in Google logic, he was showing up in the same places (i.e., local crime news coverage and sites that chronicle gang-related incidents) as these less than savory characters. According to Trkulja, this led people to conclude that he was also a criminal. It did so much damage to his reputation, he said, that one couple refused to sit next to him at a wedding.

After Google didn’t respond to Trkulja’s request to remove the images, the church elder sued the company for defamation. Google argued in court that as a search engine, it was merely disseminating material published by others, not publishing the material itself. As a Google spokesperson put it when I asked for comment, "Google’s search results are a reflection of the content and information that is available on the web. The sites in Google's search results are controlled by those sites' webmasters, not by Google.”

But the judges weren’t swayed by this argument and ruled in Trkulja’s favor. Judge David Beach, who presided over the case, didn’t think a search engine like Google is on par with a newspaper with a defamatory story, but instead put it in the same category as a library or a newsagent that sells said newspaper. Such organizations have been held accountable for defamation in Australia in the past.

Others have sued Google for search results before, such as Germany’s former “first lady” Bettina Wulff, who took issue with Autocomplete suggesting the word “prostitute” after her name, and Max Mosley, former Formula One head, who wasn’t happy to see “orgy” included with his results. But Google has typically taken a “hands-tied” approach to personal complaints over search results, taking changing search results only if legally ordered to do so—like in September, when a Brazilian court ordered the removal of a YouTube video criticizing a mayoral candidate.
According to Trkulja’s lawyers, this is the first time a search engine has been held accountable for defamation in the same way as traditional media, and they think it may lead to search engines responding a lot more swiftly if future complaints are raised. Especially if, like in the case of Trkulja, who as a music promoter depended on his online presence to attract future clients, you can prove that your search results are preventing you from getting a job.

Above the Law’s Christopher Danzig, however, fears that search-results-related defamation suits could diminish Google’s value for consumers, which he reflected on during the Mosley case. “Google is the gatekeeper for the online world we live in. It would be a completely unfeasible system if people could pick and choose, without a specific legal justification, what kinds of results to allow search engines to index. It is for the same reason news outlets will not remove stories just because someone doesn’t approve of the coverage. “

Of course, the irony of suing Google over a marred online reputation is that the barrage of court documents and media attention will end up immortalizing what you were so embarrassed about in the first place.


Do people not understand how a search engine works?
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Adacore » Tue Nov 13, 2012 6:58 am UTC

A thief stole the keys to the Tower of London.

Now, is it just me, or does that sound like the first scene in an elaborate heist movie to steal the crown jewels? Take the keys so they increase security and change the locks, then your inside man is the locksmith, or something...

User avatar
yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby yurell » Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:11 am UTC

cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?


Pronouns: Feminine pronouns please!

User avatar
Deva
Has suggestions for the murderers out there.
Posts: 2041
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 5:18 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Deva » Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:19 am UTC

Could not escape to Mexico or Canada. Steals jobs from honest, hardworking Mexicans/Canadians otherwise.
Changes its form depending on the observer.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7594
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Zamfir » Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:26 am UTC

The article says they broke in first, then stole the keys. UR doin it wrong? Also, no mention how the keys were centuries old foot-long brass keys with elaborately decorated beards, nor hightech laser gadgets stored in a metal suitcase. As a movie, I give it a c-.

It might still be rescued if there's also an access code which is only known to the queen and to a retired KGB officer turned mobster who got the code from a defector in the 1970s and who might be willing to part with in return for a specific painting, thus requiring a mini-heist while the movie builds up to the finale where it turns out the KGB officer has ratted them out to the authorities in return for a blind eye on his shady dealings on British ground and now they have to think on their feet and the heist goes completely different than expected except this was th plan all along!

User avatar
AvatarIII
Posts: 2098
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 12:28 pm UTC
Location: W.Sussex, UK

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby AvatarIII » Tue Nov 13, 2012 10:03 am UTC

Iulus Cofield wrote:
induction wrote:
Iulus Cofield wrote:Parents of minors have the legal authority to make health care decisions for the minor, which would presumably include sperm/ova extraction.


Does this mean that the parents of a living 13-year-old boy should be able to extract his sperm against his will, and create a grandchild for themselves?

Also, does harvesting organs and fluids after death count as a healthcare decision?


Not so much should as can.

AvatarIII wrote:Clearly that is not true the world over though, Gunther von Hagens Plastination exhibits prove that.


Body worlds does not seize corpses of people who did not leave burial instructions



Well I know that, but it proves there are ways around a law that states that a body has to be buried or cremated in a timely manner.

Edit:
Scientists communicate with vegetable.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:02 pm UTC



I endorse this happening.

Cmon, the red states form their own country? This could be hilarious.

User avatar
SlyReaper
inflatable
Posts: 8015
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:09 pm UTC
Location: Bristol, Old Blighty

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby SlyReaper » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:10 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:


I endorse this happening.

Cmon, the red states form their own country? This could be hilarious.

Reminds me of an Onion article the other day: Shrieking White-Hot Ball Of Rage a likely frontrunner for the 2016 Republican nomination.
Image
What would Baron Harkonnen do?

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1842
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby eran_rathan » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:13 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:


I endorse this happening.

Cmon, the red states form their own country? This could be hilarious.


I'm almost ok with this, except that I feel bad for everyone not wealthy white males stuck in said red states.
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Xeio » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:25 pm UTC

eran_rathan wrote:I'm almost ok with this, except that I feel bad for everyone not wealthy white males stuck in said red states.
Don't worry, they can self deport. ;)

User avatar
freezeblade
Posts: 1398
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:11 pm UTC
Location: Oakland

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby freezeblade » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:28 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Cmon, the red states form their own country? This could be hilarious.


I've been saying for years that the US should split into a few parts (people say I'm a terrist or something whenever I say that). I mean, the country is so split when it comes to ideologies, I think the only thing keeping us together is the shadow of manifest destiny. I mapped it out with a friend once, into 5 pieces, which seemed pretty good (and was the basis for a Tabletop RPG game we ran. I'll see if I can dig out that map we did.

Anyway. check this out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascadia_( ... e_movement). the northern west coast has been thinking of this for ages. I'd be for it if it included northern cali, sign me up!
Belial wrote:I am not even in the same country code as "the mood for this shit."

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby ahammel » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:29 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Cmon, the red states form their own country? This could be hilarious.

Good times?
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:32 pm UTC

Nah, situation's a little different now. We wouldn't necessarily have to fight over it...could just watch Texas and what not go it's own way.

Edit: That said, the idea of some hilarious match-ups in a civil war do amuse me. Say, religious luddites vs technological types. Or the 99%ers that were promising "class warfare" and never delivered. I suspect any such affair would be rather brief and one-sided.

User avatar
Nylonathatep
NOT Nyarlathotep
Posts: 720
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 3:06 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Nylonathatep » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:36 pm UTC

More election madness... MOARRRRR

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/11/13 ... ma-to-win/

Woman runs down husband because he failed to vote, letting Obama win

Holly Solomon, 28, was arrested after running over husband Daniel Solomon following a wild chase that left him pinned underneath the vehicle.

Daniel Solomon, 36, was in critical condition at a local hospital, but is expected to survive, Gilbert police spokesman Sergeant Jesse Sanger said.

Police said Daniel Solomon told them his wife became angry over his “lack of voter participation” in last Tuesday’s presidential election and believed her family would face hardship as a result of Obama winning another term.

Witnesses reported the argument broke out on Saturday morning in a parking lot and escalated. Mrs Solomon then chased her husband around the lot with the car, yelling at him as he tried to hide behind a light pole, police said. He was struck after attempting to flee to a nearby street.

Enokh
Posts: 473
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:55 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Enokh » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:40 pm UTC

In all fairness, if Obama hadn't won, she wouldn't have run him over, so she was right. So there!

None of these states will be seceding.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:42 pm UTC

Seems reasonable. After all, his one vote is the reason Obama is still in office. :lol:

I wonder what she'd do if she met someone who actually voted FOR Obama.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Xeio » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:45 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Seems reasonable. After all, his one vote is the reason Obama is still in office. :lol:

I wonder what she'd do if she met someone who actually voted FOR Obama.
In Arizona, no less. :mrgreen:

KrytenKoro
Posts: 1487
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:58 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby KrytenKoro » Tue Nov 13, 2012 9:09 pm UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:I'm also a little terrified/confused/baffled at the distinction they're making between wanting 'grandchildren' over 'children'.

Why is it important that they have children who are their children's children? Why not just have more children who are their children?

Charitably, the mother is probably past the reasonable age to bear a child, or has gotten her tubes tied or something.

Uncharitably, the parents just want to have a baby to visit them sometimes, but don't want to actually spare the expense to raise another child. The fact that their other son basically says "nuh-uh, leave me the hell out of your grandchildren fantasy" (instead of them saying "at least we still have the other kid") leads me to believe the second.
From the elegant yelling of this compelling dispute comes the ghastly suspicion my opposition's a fruit.

User avatar
buddy431
Posts: 446
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 5:21 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby buddy431 » Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:19 am UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Nah, situation's a little different now. We wouldn't necessarily have to fight over it...could just watch Texas and what not go it's own way.

Edit: That said, the idea of some hilarious match-ups in a civil war do amuse me. Say, religious luddites vs technological types. Or the 99%ers that were promising "class warfare" and never delivered. I suspect any such affair would be rather brief and one-sided.


Honestly, I don't understand why Lincoln didn't just let let them secede the first time. It's not like the South was a huge economic or strategic asset.

Anyway, Rick Perry has indicated that he believes in the greatness of our Union and nothing should be done to change it.
Gellert1984 wrote:Also, bomb president CIA al qaeda JFK twin towers jupiter moon martians [s]emtex.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10498
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:28 am UTC

buddy431 wrote:Honestly, I don't understand why Lincoln didn't just let let them secede the first time. It's not like the South was a huge economic or strategic asset.


Because if states seceded every time we elected a President many didn't like, this country would not exist.
Last edited by CorruptUser on Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:30 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

KrytenKoro
Posts: 1487
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:58 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby KrytenKoro » Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:28 am UTC

Honestly, I don't understand why Lincoln didn't just let let them secede the first time. It's not like the South was a huge economic or strategic asset.

'cause if the South was allowed to do it, every single state would do it when they felt pissed about some federal law, and they'd be back to how they were during the Articles of Confederation, or even further back...

and then Europe would swoop back in.

Edit: Ninja'd
From the elegant yelling of this compelling dispute comes the ghastly suspicion my opposition's a fruit.

User avatar
lutzj
Posts: 898
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:20 am UTC
Location: Ontario

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby lutzj » Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:27 am UTC

buddy431 wrote:It's not like the South was a huge economic or strategic asset.


In addition to what others have said, I don't think this is true at all. Cotton was losing ground to the industrial north by 1860 but still a massive economic force and, unlike manufactured products, a huge export market. The South represented a huge chunk of the US's population and landmass and controlled access to the Caribbean, the Mississippi, and the Southwest (which had only been recently taken from Mexico, was still quite autonomous, and was in many cases sympathetic to the Confederacy). Without the South, most American military and economic successes in the past 150 years become much more unlikely.
addams wrote:I'm not a bot.
That is what a bot would type.

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby bentheimmigrant » Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:09 am UTC

In addition to the additions above, the west was still basically up for grabs (ignoring, as is only natural when discussing US history, the indigenous peoples). So war between the two hypothetical countries was probably inevitable, as they'd both try to lay claim to it.
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7594
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Zamfir » Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:10 pm UTC

KrytenKoro wrote:
Honestly, I don't understand why Lincoln didn't just let let them secede the first time. It's not like the South was a huge economic or strategic asset.

'cause if the South was allowed to do it, every single state would do it when they felt pissed about some federal law, and they'd be back to how they were during the Articles of Confederation, or even further back...

and then Europe would swoop back in.

And then the current US would have ended up as a group of Canadas?

User avatar
emceng
Posts: 3167
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:38 pm UTC
Location: State of Hockey
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby emceng » Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:51 pm UTC

Also, Manifest Destiny. There was a whole lot of "this is the US's continent", and letting them go would screw that up. The US was land hungry, and giving up half your current area is bad for that.
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. - CS Lewis

User avatar
lutzj
Posts: 898
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:20 am UTC
Location: Ontario

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby lutzj » Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:41 pm UTC

Back on that actual news topic, such petitions have become quite popular, with several more states hitting the 25,000-signature threshold for White House review and something like 675,000 signatures across all 50 states. And then you also get the response-petitions: Austin and El Paso would like to secede from Texas if their state decides to secede from the Union; one group of Houstonians is requesting a special education program for mentally-impaired Texans to "eradicate their disease".
addams wrote:I'm not a bot.
That is what a bot would type.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10498
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:00 pm UTC

lutzj wrote:one group of Houstonians is requesting a special education program for mentally-impaired Texans to "eradicate their disease".


Nope, nothing Orwellian about that all. No parallels at all to anything horrific. Move along now.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 19 guests