1
Quote from RivaltunaDo you understand the problem of what you're doing here?
you weren't him, you aren't him, you didn't know him or anything about him...
what POSSIBLY makes you think you can put yourself in his shoes with anything even remotely resembling accuracy???
2
2
Quote from Konstant1n
I do feel sorry for people that live near black neighborhoods should be a hell of a few days as they destroy their homes in anger.
1
Quote from Konstant1nWell it's a good thing a innocent man was found innocent.
I do feel sorry for people that live near black neighborhoods should be a hell of a few days as they destroy their homes in anger.
1
1
1
It's well-established that the government can compel you to do things for the sake of public health. Remember Typhoid Mary?
I'm sorry, but while you have unique circumstances (as you mention below), your experience is the tiny, tiny exception, not the rule.
The risk of significant symptoms from the flu vaccine is [url=http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm]one or two cases per million, an incidence which is far, far less than the percentage who die from infectious flu. More to the point, no recent studies have backed up the claim made by some anti-vaccination advocates that the current H1N1 vaccine causes major problems.
A variety of things cause people to be unable to take vaccines. This is the reason it's so important that everyone else take theirs; your safety is directly correlated to the number of infected people you come into contact with.
No vaccine is 100% effective. What it definitely does is make it substantially less likely that you will develop it.
Correlation != causation
They're not pointless at all. The whole point of seasonal flu vaccines is to vaccinate you against those flu strains which are predicted to be most common in the upcoming season. Of course you can't stop every strain, but stopping the great majority of cases is still a major win.
What Valarin/Brandon said.
Allergies are not viral.
2
9 out of 10 white Mississippians would disagree.
--
I think this verdict is a crock of ****, and a travesty of justice. It institutionalizes a world where people of color have to be constantly obsequious to non-colored people, even when it's scary men approaching them in the middle of the night with a gun.
1
You might have a different opinion if your name were Tracy Martin--or, hell, Rodney King.
1
What evidence, exactly? The fact that the defendant was wounded, and...?
1
No, but people ought to, because...
...right now, if it were a black guy who killed a white kid, there would be no national organizations pouring money into his defense, no media circus, and no presumption of innocence. He'd be railroaded through the system.
But because this kid was black, and this guy was white, everyone's talking about how reasonable it was for Zimmerman to shoot a seventeen-year-old unarmed teenager who he'd stalked through the whole neighborhood and aggressively confronted.
And Barack Obama is "white" in Brazil. "Race" isn't a scientific concept; it has less to do with skin tone or ancestry than it does to culture and identification, and it's clear that Zimmerman was plenty comfortable in the culture and identification of a southern white male--and that other whites are plenty comfortable thinking of him as one.
1
1
1
1
But isn't that itself just narcissism disguised as self-righteousness? I don't mean to be flip, but the idea that your understanding of the plans and intentions of an unknowable and omniscient deity is so complete that you can make the ultimate judgment based on it (and if there is a Heaven and a Hell, this really is the biggest decision you can ever possibly make) seems to me incredibly arrogant.
1