Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
Politics and Government / Re: Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
« Last post by Askold on February 18, 2019, 10:01:26 am »
Republicans will be very vocal about doing that kind of thing if they don't manage to get one of them as the next president. It will one of the first reasons for them to shit on Trump while trying to distance themselves from him.
22
Politics and Government / Re: Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
« Last post by Id82 on February 18, 2019, 09:57:10 am »
Yeah good luck with that.
23
Religion and Philosophy / Vatican summit on child abuse: No action, or negative action?
« Last post by dpareja on February 18, 2019, 04:21:59 am »
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/pope-sex-abuse-summit-vatican-1.5022979

Quote
Church's credibility hangs in balance ahead of sex abuse summit

I find this headline hilarious since I think the Catholic Church has no credibility whatsoever.

Quote
Pope Francis called for prayers ahead of an unprecedented summit designed to tackle sexual abuse in the priesthood ... "I ask prayers for this appointment, which I wanted as an act of strong pastoral responsibility in the face of an urgent challenge of our time," Francis said.

Very nice, Jorge. Now go talk to the survivors of gun massacres in the US about how all those "thoughts and prayers" from the NRA and their political stooges have prevented the next ones.

Quote
Francis has summoned bishops to Rome to help him chart a way forward after decades of abuse by priests and prelates and systematic coverups by their superiors.

After you stopped US bishops from meeting on the same matter, probably because you were pissing yourself in fear that there was a tiny sliver of a chance they'd actually do something and make you look bad when this summit of yours predictably does fuck all.

Quote
"I am absolutely convinced that our credibility in this area is at stake," said Father Federico Lombardi, who Francis has chosen to moderate the meeting.

Don't worry, Mr. Lombardi. It's not. You have no credibility to be at stake.

Quote
"We have to get to the root of this problem and show our ability to undergo a cure as a church that proposes to be a teacher or it would be better for us to get into another line of work," he told reporters.

Quote from: Christopher Hitchens
On [Joseph Ratzinger's] comment, one of the few he's made, on the institutionalisation of rape and torture and maltreatment of children in Catholic institutions, he's said, 'It's a very severe crisis, which involves us,' he said, in the following: 'In the need for applying to these victims the most loving pastoral care.'

Well I'm sorry. They've already had that, and to say that this is the responsibility laid upon you by the horrific admission that you've already had to make is not accepting responsibility in any adult sense.

But I agree with Mr. Lombardi here. It would be better for them to get into another line of work, one that actually contributes something positive to society.

Quote
Revelations in many countries of sexual abuse against children and a pattern of bishops hiding the crimes have alienated many Catholics. They also test the pontiff's ability to ensure the safety of children and to punish the abusers as well as any complicit superiors.

Oh no! We're not getting the donations we used to!

As for "test[ing] the pontiff's ability", that's a test Wojtyla, Ratzinger, and Bergoglio have all spectacularly failed.

Quote
"You abuse a child, you have to be removed from the priesthood," said Peter Isely, founding member of the advocacy group Ending Clergy Abuse. "If you cover up for abusing a child, you have to be removed from the priesthood, and this is the only thing that is going to turn the corner on this global crisis."

Agreed, but you forgot the part where you also have to sue them for every last penny they have.

Quote
"There is a struggle going on between the pope and his supporters who want a change, and a lot of people among the bishops and among the clergy who don't want transparency and applying law and order in the abuse issue in the world," Politi said.

As Sigma has noted, Bergoglio is no different from any other Pope, really. He just has better PR. To steal a comparison from Mark Rosewater, Bergoglio is a squirrel where other Popes were rats.

Quote
Francis has tried to temper expectations for the summit, saying in January the "problem of abuse will continue" because "it's a human problem." Isely said the bar should be high and the participants "have to deliver for survivors."

Here's my expectation: fuck all with quite possibly a side of backsliding.

Sue them out of existence. Attack the money.
24
Politics and Government / Re: Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
« Last post by dpareja on February 18, 2019, 04:01:36 am »
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-veto-border-wall-1.5023124

Another matter where Trump is ready to issue his first veto: the national emergency declaration.

I wonder if there would be support for a Constitutional amendment to strip the President's veto in matters relating to Congressional reclamation of power previously delegated to the executive.
25
Religion and Philosophy / Re: Sex abuse in the Southern Baptist church
« Last post by dpareja on February 17, 2019, 01:22:45 pm »
A RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION INVOLVED IN CHILD MOLESTATION!?  I AM SHOOKETH!

https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/

You mean an institution involving children generally.

Yep. The BBC, the United Nations, Hollywood...

All dirty, all needing a clean-out and lawsuits.

Criminal charges, too, if possible.
26
Religion and Philosophy / Re: Sex abuse in the Southern Baptist church
« Last post by Chaos Undivided on February 17, 2019, 10:51:22 am »
A RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION INVOLVED IN CHILD MOLESTATION!?  I AM SHOOKETH!

https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/

You mean an institution involving children generally.

Yep. The BBC, the United Nations, Hollywood...
27
Politics and Government / Re: Best Political Cartoons
« Last post by Askold on February 17, 2019, 08:49:02 am »
28
Politics and Government / Re: What are your future presidential predictions?
« Last post by SCarpelan on February 17, 2019, 07:39:05 am »

Yes and no, perhaps. I don't like the idea of requiring that workers have a voice in how their companies are run, because there are people who just don't give a shit about that, and they should be free to work in the environment that best suits them, with that workplace subject to such regulation as is necessary to ensure fair wages and a safe environment.

I don't think anyone is promoting forcing people to take any more responsibility than they want to. Think about how representative democracy is set up as a political system: you can be as politically active as you want or just go along with what the others decide. Capitalism is the system where there is no real choice given for the workers; social democracy gives some indirect control to them when it works properly through regulations set by the elected officials.

The problem with the social democratic system is from the workers' point of view that the capitalist class has the resources to influence and corrupt the political system to their benefit. This is what has been happening in Finland and elsewhere in Europe since the '90s. The Social Democrats went along with privatizing government owned property and dismantling social democratic structures. Yes, there are institutions that have difficulties in changing with the times but the political pressure has been in the direction of privatizing as much as possible instead of investing public resources on reforming them.

Now we are in a situation where the fight is how to regulate the private actors to make them deliver what they have promised while the economic right that has grown stronger with each compromise is fighting back on every regulation. You want to change regulations to add more nurses to the nursing homes where people are dying due to lack of care? No way, that would restrict their freedom to provide the best service they can.

Edit:

This is a bit of a tangent but I want to clarify I don't think the debate about whether the regulations require 0,6 or 0,7 nurses / client makes a big difference in practice, it just gives the politicians an opportunity to grandstand. A system where the single minded profit seeking of a typical corporation is kept in control by stiff and bureaucratic rules brings out the worst from both private and public sector actors. There are privately owned nursing homes that work well, the worst actors are the big health care companies where the cost savings are enforced by people who have no contact to the communities that the nursing home serve. On the other hand, it's easy for a bureaucrat (who has constant pressure to decrease costs) to move people to a nursing home without caring about their capacity since they are not really his/her responsibility anymore there.
29
Politics and Government / Re: What are your future presidential predictions?
« Last post by dpareja on February 17, 2019, 05:45:10 am »
Well, I mean, I would describe myself as mostly a social democrat. If you just want to clock in and out every day for a wage from your boss, that's cool. I'll make sure your wage is enough to live on and that your workplace is safe and leave you to it.

EDIT: That is, I'm not post-capitalist.

That's fine. You just implied socialism equals government control when that's not how actual socialists define it. From an ideological perspective socialism does call for more freedom than social democracy since there is an authoritarian aspect in the capitalist ownership structure. The question of practicality is more debatable but that was not what you argued in your response.

Yes and no, perhaps. I don't like the idea of requiring that workers have a voice in how their companies are run, because there are people who just don't give a shit about that, and they should be free to work in the environment that best suits them, with that workplace subject to such regulation as is necessary to ensure fair wages and a safe environment.

I'm not post-capitalist because I don't think capitalism is inherently bad. I think there are many, many flaws in how it's been implemented, some that are perhaps inherent to it, but I think that capitalism works well when the profit motive is properly regulated so that the actions that maximise profit are also those which maximise value to the public.

https://reason.com/blog/2015/08/28/friday-av-club-what-political-advertisin

Quote from: Wendell Willkie
I would like very much to talk to everybody in this country personally about the issues of this campaign, but you understand that the size of the country and the time I have to devote to this campaign make that impossible. But I do take this method of presenting to you my views on some of the fundamental issues of this campaign on which my convictions are very strong and very clear.

Because I am a businessman, of which, incidentally, I am very proud, and was formerly connected with a large company, the doctrinaires of the opposition have attempted to picture me as an opponent of liberalism. But I was a liberal before many of those men heard the word, and I fought for the reforms of the elder LaFollette and Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson before another Roosevelt adopted and distorted the word 'liberal'.

I believe that the forces of free enterprise must be regulated. I am opposed to business monopolies. I believe in the right of collective bargaining by labor without any interference and full protection of that obvious right. I believe in minimum standards for wages and maximum standards for hours, and I believe that such standards should constantly improve. I am in favor of the regulation of interstate utilities, of banking, of the security markets.

I believe in federal pensions, in adequate old age benefits, and in unemployment allowances. I believe that the federal government owes a duty to adjust the position of the farmer with that of the manufacturer. If this cannot be done by parity prices, then some other method must be found without too much regimentation of the farmers' affairs.

I believe in the encouragement of co-operative buying and selling, and in the full extension of rural electrification, and I believe that the federal government owes a very strong obligation to preserve our natural resources.

But I do not base my claim to liberalism solely on my support and advocacy of such reforms. American liberalism does not consist merely in reforming things. It consists primarily in making things.

We must substitute for the philosophy of distributed scarcity the philosophy of unlimited productivity. I stand for the restoration of full production and re-employment in American private enterprise.

The present administration has spent sixty billion dollars. The New Deal stands for doing what has to be done by spending as much money as possible. I propose to do it by spending as little money as possible. This is one issue in this campaign that I intend to make crystal clear before the conclusion of the campaign so that everybody in this country may understand the tremendous waste of their resources and money that have taken place in the last seven and a half years.

Quote from: Clement Attlee
The Prime Minister made much play last night with the rights of the individual and the dangers of people being ordered about by officials. I entirely agree that people should have the greatest freedom compatible with the freedom of others. There was a time when employers were free to work little children for sixteen hours a day. I remember when employers were free to employ sweated women workers on finishing trousers at a penny halfpenny a pair. There was a time when people were free to neglect sanitation so that thousands died of preventable diseases. For years every attempt to remedy these crying evils was blocked by the same plea of freedom for the individual. It was in fact freedom for the rich and slavery for the poor. Make no mistake, it has only been through the power of the State, given to it by Parliament, that the general public has been protected against the greed of ruthless profit-makers and property owners. The Conservative Party remains as always a class Party. In twenty-three years in the House of Commons, I cannot recall more than half a dozen from the ranks of the wage earners. It represents today, as in the past, the forces of property and privilege. The Labour Party is, in fact, the one Party which most nearly reflects in its representation and composition all the main streams which flow into the great river of our national life.

EDIT: And, for good measure, potholer54's breakdown of how to address climate change starting from basic conservative principles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D99qI42KGB0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fV6eeckxTs
30
Politics and Government / Re: What are your future presidential predictions?
« Last post by Kanzenkankaku on February 17, 2019, 04:52:37 am »
One day, hopefully in my lifetime, we'll advance to social democrats and pass more new deal type stuff, and hopefully some time after that even if I'm long gone we can realize post-capitalism. I don't expect everything to change all that fast.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10