You know what else would prevent that? Abortions. So therefore we should obviously force these immigrants to have abortions.
If you want to prevent the spread of AIDS, give people condoms and education of how the stuff works. Given how much whining the Israeli right does about DEMOGRAPHIC BOMBS this is clearly just a racist campaign to prevent births within a minority. You know what they call campaigns to prevent births within a group?
They already give people condoms and education in Africa. Strangely, it doesn't seem to be working very well.
How would aborting children with AIDS not help prevent the spread of AIDS?
How are white males ever going to consider black lesbians their equal if black lesbians are given a free handicap by the state in order to help them get ahead, or at least achieve equality. How is someone supposed to achieve equality if they need help from the state to do so?
No, life is not easier for a black, deaf lesbian than it is for a white, straight hearing cisman. To make this claim in earnest is to know nothing about the lives of black people, of deaf people, of women or of homosexual people. That's a lot of minorities to know nothing about.
It likely won't be easier for such a person, but privilege doesn't work in an individual level. It may actually be that the black, deaf lesbian has it easier than the white, straight hearing cisman.
That's true, but it's not implied that you are rich or powerful when you say things like "life would be easier if I was X minority." Statements like that are about privilege or lack thereof granted to a class, not specific individuals.
This really ties into my original post. Who here has decided that black lesbians are more worthy of special treatment than white males, and how much more special treatment they get?
In America, we give a check to people with disabilities instead of executing them. That's fine, give the black deaf lesbian a check from the government. But beyond that, why should she get any more opportunity or special treatment than the white male?
As I've stated before, not everyone agrees with your opinion on how much females are discriminated against in western society. For example in my personal opinion it seems like you are stuck in 1963 instead of 2013. And even moreso, among those calling for special treatment and extra opportunity for black lesbians, I'm sure you all would disagree on exactly how much special treatment and extra opportunity that black lesbian should get.
This is why I think it's so stupid to keep drawing these lines and keep slicing and dicing groups of people. There's no reason to keep giving black lesbians more milk and honey and cookies from the cookie jar just for being a black lesbian. Stop judging people based on their race and sex and just be done with it already.
A government official has for the first time acknowledged the practice of injecting women of Ethiopian origin with the long-acting contraceptive Depo-Provera.
So, what do we think of this? Is there any way in which this action can be excused? Are we, western nations, finally sick of Israel's bull**** after the so manieth scandal? Human rights violations, assassinations, apartheid and now also sterilisation of ethnic minorities.
Is it to prevent the spread of AIDS? I think if you're trying to prevent the spread of AIDS then preventing AIDS babies is a good idea.
Write down "middle class white males are the most persecuted minority on the planet", then read it back to yourself, laugh at the absurdity of it, and get on with the your rest of your life without the weight of the chip on your shoulder.
Why does it matter which group is discriminated against more or less?
I highly recommend you and others on this thread grab a dictionary and look up the word "equality".
Now, does it say that it's okay to discriminate against white males specifically?
I am planning on buying a new car for the first time. I am kind of nervous about the whole thing. I have an idea of what I want. I have an idea of what I should pay. This is just going to be the largest purchase I've ever made. Does anyone have any experience, advice, or warnings?
dont buy things like this from anyone that isn't easy to sue.
Have you considered Flinthoof Boar? I'm brewing a Naya list myself (damn it, everyone is brewing a Naya list these days). I think the boar is getting a boost in power for the same reason as Arbor Elf: Stomping Grounds.
Flinthoof Boar is a pretty good card. It helps to think of him this way: He is a 3/3 with haste for 3 with the option to be cast as a 2/2, possibly 3/3 as a 2 drop. Options are good and 3/3s with haste at 3 cost are generally considered good. It all depends on your mana mix though, the list I'm brewing is more Green/Red splash White, and your list is a bit more white-intensive. But definitely a card to keep in mind if your land mix changes (he also requires a fair number of mountains in a similar fashion to the way Arbor Elf kinda needs forests).
Another card I like is Burning Tree Emissary. This particular decklist would not be good for BTE, but in a deck with more 2 drops (and Farseek) it is a real house. I've been playtesting for a few weeks through proxy and this card is really a house. If you were going to Farseek turn 2, now you can Free Bear AND Farseek.
Also while on the subject of deck options, I like Ghor-Clan Rampager as a possible card. The pump is decent, a 4/4 with trample at 4 is okay-ish. Two okay cards on one card usually make a good card.
My father used to say "Life would be a lot easier for me if I was a black deaf lesbian."
I legitimately LOLed, kudos.
This illustrates my original point. So much has been done in the name of "equality" that the roles are actually reversed now and the people that the ones fighting for "equality" from are now the ones being oppressed.
Let's take your hypothetical scenario. 999,999 adults are killed. 1 child is killed. While the death of the child is equally tragic to any of the adults, it is not evidence of a systematic problem in the way the deaths of the adults are.
Who is the one deciding the systemic problem exists? You? Believe it or not, I actually don't agree with you in regards to how much women are discriminated against in western society. Shocking, I know. So what you're saying is that because you personally have decided something, I now have to follow your decision.
I don't agree with that. I like the idea that all people are (or at least should be) treated equal. I feel it's a tragedy that you don't feel the same way while claiming to espouse liberal ideologies.
So why in your world is it okay to discriminate against white males, with the dozens of examples previously listed, such as college scholarships or calls for supreme court nominations, but it is not okay to discriminate against a child by killing them for being a child.
Discrimination is discrimination. Discrimination is not discrimination unless you do it against white males in which case it is okay.
^I've been asking for an explanation of why that blatant double standard is okay in your world. I've been asking for it for like 50 posts now. I have yet to get the explanation I am asking for, and I highly doubt I will get it in your next post. But feel free to try anyways.
Commons cited a statistic. I asked if that statistic took into account men who did not contest custody.
Wow, it's so amazing the way this ties into my original post.
*ahem* And did YOU take into account WOMEN who did not want custody?
BOOM!
What? That doesn't even make sense.
A) his previous post said "it was very common for women or men to not contest custody" so yes, he did.
B) He was responding to your claim about 85% of custody cases in Canada going to females.
First off, I've never made any claim about Canada in this thread, it's a minor first world country that I care little about.
Furthermore, as I just posted 2 or 3 posts ago, the point isn't numbers, the point is intent. Just because you perceive women are discriminated against
"more" than men doesn't, or at least it shouldn't, give you the authority to determine that women should get special treatment and how much more special treatment they should get.
Basically what you are saying is that because out of the last 1 million people killed, if only one was a child, killing that child is not bad because it was only 1 out of the last million people.
The problem here isn't numbers, the problem is intent.
Basically what you guys are saying is "well of the last 1 million people killed, 999,999 of them were adults and only one was a child. So because of that, killing a child is not bad."
Why, to you, is killing children not bad?
Discriminating against white males is the same thing as killing a child merely for being a child.
This is 2012, dude, no one burns their bras anymore. Similarly no one is on MySpace or solving interpersonal disputes with revolver duels. Also, for one, Stan isn't depicted as an idiot, he's depicted as emotionally ignorant, and for two, it doesn't sustain harmful stereotypes about men. There is not a prevailing stereotype about men being stupid, regardless of how often you complain about Homer Simpson.
Oh I see, so in your world, depicting females as intellectually retarded is bad, but depicting males as emotionally crippled is par for the course.
Perhaps you could explain to me more about how your world works and why you justify things the way you do, because it makes absolutely no sense to me.
They already give people condoms and education in Africa. Strangely, it doesn't seem to be working very well.
How would aborting children with AIDS not help prevent the spread of AIDS?
This really ties into my original post. Who here has decided that black lesbians are more worthy of special treatment than white males, and how much more special treatment they get?
In America, we give a check to people with disabilities instead of executing them. That's fine, give the black deaf lesbian a check from the government. But beyond that, why should she get any more opportunity or special treatment than the white male?
As I've stated before, not everyone agrees with your opinion on how much females are discriminated against in western society. For example in my personal opinion it seems like you are stuck in 1963 instead of 2013. And even moreso, among those calling for special treatment and extra opportunity for black lesbians, I'm sure you all would disagree on exactly how much special treatment and extra opportunity that black lesbian should get.
This is why I think it's so stupid to keep drawing these lines and keep slicing and dicing groups of people. There's no reason to keep giving black lesbians more milk and honey and cookies from the cookie jar just for being a black lesbian. Stop judging people based on their race and sex and just be done with it already.
I think he means adding other colors, probably bant because bant is already getting a big boost from the simic cards
Is it to prevent the spread of AIDS? I think if you're trying to prevent the spread of AIDS then preventing AIDS babies is a good idea.
Why does it matter which group is discriminated against more or less?
I highly recommend you and others on this thread grab a dictionary and look up the word "equality".
Now, does it say that it's okay to discriminate against white males specifically?
dont buy things like this from anyone that isn't easy to sue.
Flinthoof Boar is a pretty good card. It helps to think of him this way: He is a 3/3 with haste for 3 with the option to be cast as a 2/2, possibly 3/3 as a 2 drop. Options are good and 3/3s with haste at 3 cost are generally considered good. It all depends on your mana mix though, the list I'm brewing is more Green/Red splash White, and your list is a bit more white-intensive. But definitely a card to keep in mind if your land mix changes (he also requires a fair number of mountains in a similar fashion to the way Arbor Elf kinda needs forests).
Another card I like is Burning Tree Emissary. This particular decklist would not be good for BTE, but in a deck with more 2 drops (and Farseek) it is a real house. I've been playtesting for a few weeks through proxy and this card is really a house. If you were going to Farseek turn 2, now you can Free Bear AND Farseek.
Also while on the subject of deck options, I like Ghor-Clan Rampager as a possible card. The pump is decent, a 4/4 with trample at 4 is okay-ish. Two okay cards on one card usually make a good card.
I legitimately LOLed, kudos.
This illustrates my original point. So much has been done in the name of "equality" that the roles are actually reversed now and the people that the ones fighting for "equality" from are now the ones being oppressed.
Who is the one deciding the systemic problem exists? You? Believe it or not, I actually don't agree with you in regards to how much women are discriminated against in western society. Shocking, I know. So what you're saying is that because you personally have decided something, I now have to follow your decision.
I don't agree with that. I like the idea that all people are (or at least should be) treated equal. I feel it's a tragedy that you don't feel the same way while claiming to espouse liberal ideologies.
Discrimination is discrimination. Discrimination is not discrimination unless you do it against white males in which case it is okay.
^I've been asking for an explanation of why that blatant double standard is okay in your world. I've been asking for it for like 50 posts now. I have yet to get the explanation I am asking for, and I highly doubt I will get it in your next post. But feel free to try anyways.
First off, I've never made any claim about Canada in this thread, it's a minor first world country that I care little about.
Furthermore, as I just posted 2 or 3 posts ago, the point isn't numbers, the point is intent. Just because you perceive women are discriminated against
"more" than men doesn't, or at least it shouldn't, give you the authority to determine that women should get special treatment and how much more special treatment they should get.
Basically what you are saying is that because out of the last 1 million people killed, if only one was a child, killing that child is not bad because it was only 1 out of the last million people.
Wow, it's so amazing the way this ties into my original post.
*ahem* And did YOU take into account WOMEN who did not want custody?
BOOM!
Basically what you guys are saying is "well of the last 1 million people killed, 999,999 of them were adults and only one was a child. So because of that, killing a child is not bad."
Why, to you, is killing children not bad?
Discriminating against white males is the same thing as killing a child merely for being a child.
Oh I see, so in your world, depicting females as intellectually retarded is bad, but depicting males as emotionally crippled is par for the course.
Perhaps you could explain to me more about how your world works and why you justify things the way you do, because it makes absolutely no sense to me.