FelixGV
Nov 28, 11:38 PM
Aren't you tired of companies trying to have it their way? Here's what we, as consumers, should do, if that stupid policy happened:
We should create a website, where iPod buyers could subscribe by providing a proof of their iPod purchase. The website would then declare that until Universal pays back what they have taken from every member, those members will steal Universal's music instead of buying it off of the iTS. That's what the tax is there for, right?
Sweet deal! We now have the moral justification to download all of Universal's music for 1 buck. Bring it on!
We should create a website, where iPod buyers could subscribe by providing a proof of their iPod purchase. The website would then declare that until Universal pays back what they have taken from every member, those members will steal Universal's music instead of buying it off of the iTS. That's what the tax is there for, right?
Sweet deal! We now have the moral justification to download all of Universal's music for 1 buck. Bring it on!
DoFoT9
Aug 12, 04:48 AM
Multi-quote madness!!! :eek:
haha thats nothing ;)
haha thats nothing ;)
Hellhammer
Apr 6, 12:32 PM
I think most ppl here do not seem to realize the number 1 problem of MBA: overheating. I am the proud owner of a Rev. C MBA, which I would not exchange for anything else (especially the new models). The only problem I can complain abt is frequent overheating, which makes apps and the OS slow down consistently or (very rarely) even freeze.
I believe that the processor downgrading, as well as the elimination of backlit keys, are mostly in order to avoid such problem (as well as improve battery life). Otherwise, they would not make sense.
MBA is not MB Pro. If u want less weight/space, u must be willing to compromise.
Rev D. has no overheating issues. My CPU doesn't go over 70�C when watching 1080p Flash video in fullscreen. The fan sometimes kicks in but it's still very comfortable to use on your lap, since it's barely even warm. Older MBAs suffered from overheating, that is true.
I believe that the processor downgrading, as well as the elimination of backlit keys, are mostly in order to avoid such problem (as well as improve battery life). Otherwise, they would not make sense.
MBA is not MB Pro. If u want less weight/space, u must be willing to compromise.
Rev D. has no overheating issues. My CPU doesn't go over 70�C when watching 1080p Flash video in fullscreen. The fan sometimes kicks in but it's still very comfortable to use on your lap, since it's barely even warm. Older MBAs suffered from overheating, that is true.
ssk2
Apr 14, 04:20 PM
But the iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone on the market and will continue to be so well past June.
If you want to choose to get an inferior phone because you want to chase after a spec sheet that is on you. That does not change reality.
LOL. Right.
Opinion is not fact. This works on both sides of the argument, I concede.
Still, you cannot say the iPhone is the best smartphone on the market, just as someone else can't say the Atrix is the best. Different strokes for different folks!
If you want to choose to get an inferior phone because you want to chase after a spec sheet that is on you. That does not change reality.
LOL. Right.
Opinion is not fact. This works on both sides of the argument, I concede.
Still, you cannot say the iPhone is the best smartphone on the market, just as someone else can't say the Atrix is the best. Different strokes for different folks!
bushido
Mar 26, 05:29 AM
been using the preview as my main OS since its release and havent had any problems besides sagari being a bitch sometimes. havent touched my snow leopard ever since.
will we be able to get the GM by software update or will it be a complete nee upgrade disc image?
oh and dashboard isnt pointless. i use it A LOT. for weather, world clock, istats, translator, notes and so on. i would rly miss it if it were to be replaced
will we be able to get the GM by software update or will it be a complete nee upgrade disc image?
oh and dashboard isnt pointless. i use it A LOT. for weather, world clock, istats, translator, notes and so on. i would rly miss it if it were to be replaced
Eidorian
Jul 14, 05:43 PM
Interesting question, but I don't think any of us here will have the answers.
PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.EFI can emulate BIOS though. It's basically what Boot Camp and the original Windows hack did.
As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.I've rarely noticed third party hardware that requires drivers. Most of them simply say "Requires OS 8.x, 9.x., 10.x". Of course newer things like 802.11g and USB 2.0 are going to need a version of OS X.
Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.You don't need a special ROM code for the auxiliary hardware. The video BIOS doesn't change when you boot between OS X and Windows.
PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.EFI can emulate BIOS though. It's basically what Boot Camp and the original Windows hack did.
As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.I've rarely noticed third party hardware that requires drivers. Most of them simply say "Requires OS 8.x, 9.x., 10.x". Of course newer things like 802.11g and USB 2.0 are going to need a version of OS X.
Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.You don't need a special ROM code for the auxiliary hardware. The video BIOS doesn't change when you boot between OS X and Windows.
Mattie Num Nums
Mar 31, 02:42 PM
If anything this is Google telling the manufacturers to get their crap together. All of the custom UI's need to be updates in some sort of a Google approved Roadmap.
IE: Google releases Android 2.3.3. All manufacturers have X amount of time to port their Custom UI's (HTC Sense, TouchWiz, etc.). What this will do is take the pressure off of the "fragmentation" of Android and place it in the hands of the real culprits... the manufactures, HTC, Samsung, et al.
It's because of the Buy One Get One option. Nothing more. People choose that option because it makes financial sense and if they don't really care about the OS or the phone, they will choose the one that fits their check books. If Apple was to OK ATT and VZ to do a Buy One Get One on the iPhone, there would be no comparison. It would be game over for Android.
-LanPhantom
Thats not true. Me and my gf both switched because we hated AT&T and Verizon. We went to Sprint and are very happy. I have an EVO she has an EVO-Shift. Almost everyone I know with Android phones have high end phones.
IE: Google releases Android 2.3.3. All manufacturers have X amount of time to port their Custom UI's (HTC Sense, TouchWiz, etc.). What this will do is take the pressure off of the "fragmentation" of Android and place it in the hands of the real culprits... the manufactures, HTC, Samsung, et al.
It's because of the Buy One Get One option. Nothing more. People choose that option because it makes financial sense and if they don't really care about the OS or the phone, they will choose the one that fits their check books. If Apple was to OK ATT and VZ to do a Buy One Get One on the iPhone, there would be no comparison. It would be game over for Android.
-LanPhantom
Thats not true. Me and my gf both switched because we hated AT&T and Verizon. We went to Sprint and are very happy. I have an EVO she has an EVO-Shift. Almost everyone I know with Android phones have high end phones.
notjustjay
Apr 8, 12:13 AM
I wouldn't be surprised. The quota explanation was given already, but they might also be holding back stock of the cheaper models in order to drive more sales of the higher end ones. "Oh, you wanted the 16 gig wifi model? Sorry, all sold out. But we do have this lovely 64 gig 3G version. If you really want the iPad 2, this is your big chance... it's only a little bit more..."
That happened to me, almost, when I bought the original iPad from Best Buy here in Canada on our launch day last year. The guy almost smirked when he said, sorry, the 16 gig ones were all sold out, but they had plenty of the 64 gig models. Luckily I persisted and he managed to find one more 16 gig, the last one! How lucky was that! :rolleyes:
That happened to me, almost, when I bought the original iPad from Best Buy here in Canada on our launch day last year. The guy almost smirked when he said, sorry, the 16 gig ones were all sold out, but they had plenty of the 64 gig models. Luckily I persisted and he managed to find one more 16 gig, the last one! How lucky was that! :rolleyes:
~Shard~
Jul 14, 03:05 PM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.
I've never thought much of the relevance of its placement myself - why do you say that? Care to elaborate on why it is "REALLY stupid"?
I've never thought much of the relevance of its placement myself - why do you say that? Care to elaborate on why it is "REALLY stupid"?
parapup
Apr 11, 11:46 AM
Just picked up a Atrix 4G and on my way checked out the iPhone 4 - it looks decidedly antique and bland in front of the competition - Apple waiting until September would mean they rely awful lot on people's stupidity to keep buying it for 8 more months!
That ain't gonna happen - we will see a dual core iPhone 5 by June shipping by July or something (followed by shortages and long waits.)!
That ain't gonna happen - we will see a dual core iPhone 5 by June shipping by July or something (followed by shortages and long waits.)!
sierra oscar
Sep 19, 09:54 AM
The tone has not been warm to this point. Read the first few pages of the posts. There was a lot of Apple-blasting on pretty silly grounds. It's not like it's months and months later (a pattern we used to have with Apple all the time). It's a matter of a couple weeks -- MAX. Like I said, you and others can wait if you want. Heck, I have a MB and a MBP and am probably going to sell the MBP soon and wait for a revision myself. But the implication that many posts had, such as that the world was coming to an end, was pretty darn ridiculous.
I don't really understand... are you saying that antisocial behavioural traits be encouraged?
I don't really understand... are you saying that antisocial behavioural traits be encouraged?
NickMela
Apr 7, 11:33 AM
The 11" will get the i5-2537M (1.4GHz. Turbo: 2.3GHz, TPD: 17W, 2cores, 3MB cache):
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=54619&processor=i5-2537M
While the 13.3" will get this (1.6GHz. Turbo: 2.7GHz, TPD: 17W, 2cores, 4MB cache):
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=54615&processor=i7-2657M
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=54619&processor=i5-2537M
While the 13.3" will get this (1.6GHz. Turbo: 2.7GHz, TPD: 17W, 2cores, 4MB cache):
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=54615&processor=i7-2657M
iStudentUK
Apr 11, 11:26 AM
They should stick to the June update each year. I know it may not be their fault but Apple need to keep the iPhone up to date, otherwise they will lose ground. Mobile phones are very competitive.
fivepoint
Mar 23, 02:20 PM
Again, Fivepoint, you forget that the President was selling the Iraq war with suspicious and weak information that the many questioned. It turns out they were right. Pre-war, the big issue was whether the war was justified based on the evidence being pushed by the President. The criticism President Bush faced thereafter had a lot to do with the fact that he lied to the American people in order to start a poorly planned war. They bungled every aspect of a war they lied to get us into. There were plenty of reasons to be critical.
"Lying" implies intent. Are you accusing them of lying, or getting it wrong?
Yes, there were many reasons to be critical.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations?
Out of curiousity, what do you expect? I expect conservative congressmen and women to support a conservative president, but to think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. I don't respect blind support like what they did under GWB. Similarly, I expect liberal congressmen and women to support a liberal president, but to also think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. Some are speaking out, and some are not blindly supporting President Obama. Can you acknowledge that the liberals are doing a better job with consistency than the GOP? If not, how do you explain GOP opposition to the Libya action?
Part of what you say is true, in that I should EXPECT people to be more critical of the other side. This is true. But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. What I personally expect is people to stand on principles, and not on parties. What I expect is that people live their lives in a honorable way and present a consistent philosophy. This is the same reason I rip on neo-con Republicans for talking about fiscal conservatism when history has shown us that their real world actions when in power are very different from their rhetoric... even if they still aren't as bad as the Democrats... it's not good enough. Both parties are bad at it, too many people simply tow the party line and don't think for themselves.
It sure is easy to peg me isn't it? Too bad if you go back over my posts you will find more than enough denouncing involvement in Iraq / Afghanistan.
It's much easier than actually addressing your real views... it's a defense mechanism which she uses to avoid serious debate.
If you are supporting non-intervention, than I disagree. I support the notion that the UN (using member-nations' pooled military or civilian assets) should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions.
Being a 'non-interventionist' does not mean that you NEVER support war, it means that you avoid it whenever possible. It means that you are far less prone to military intervention than someone who does not care about the values of non-interventionism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-interventionism
Nonintervention or non-interventionism is a foreign policy which holds that political rulers should avoid alliances with other nations, but still retain diplomacy, and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.
"Lying" implies intent. Are you accusing them of lying, or getting it wrong?
Yes, there were many reasons to be critical.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations?
Out of curiousity, what do you expect? I expect conservative congressmen and women to support a conservative president, but to think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. I don't respect blind support like what they did under GWB. Similarly, I expect liberal congressmen and women to support a liberal president, but to also think for themselves, and do what they independently think is right. Some are speaking out, and some are not blindly supporting President Obama. Can you acknowledge that the liberals are doing a better job with consistency than the GOP? If not, how do you explain GOP opposition to the Libya action?
Part of what you say is true, in that I should EXPECT people to be more critical of the other side. This is true. But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. What I personally expect is people to stand on principles, and not on parties. What I expect is that people live their lives in a honorable way and present a consistent philosophy. This is the same reason I rip on neo-con Republicans for talking about fiscal conservatism when history has shown us that their real world actions when in power are very different from their rhetoric... even if they still aren't as bad as the Democrats... it's not good enough. Both parties are bad at it, too many people simply tow the party line and don't think for themselves.
It sure is easy to peg me isn't it? Too bad if you go back over my posts you will find more than enough denouncing involvement in Iraq / Afghanistan.
It's much easier than actually addressing your real views... it's a defense mechanism which she uses to avoid serious debate.
If you are supporting non-intervention, than I disagree. I support the notion that the UN (using member-nations' pooled military or civilian assets) should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions.
Being a 'non-interventionist' does not mean that you NEVER support war, it means that you avoid it whenever possible. It means that you are far less prone to military intervention than someone who does not care about the values of non-interventionism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-interventionism
Nonintervention or non-interventionism is a foreign policy which holds that political rulers should avoid alliances with other nations, but still retain diplomacy, and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.
thibaulthalpern
Mar 31, 10:14 PM
Probably what bothers me the most about the discourse that Android is open is the underlying logic that is an implicit (or perhaps really explicit, depending on who is touting that discourse) assumption that it is democratic, liberal, progressive, and for "the people" and thus prevents a "draconian future" from happening because instead of letting corporations dictate our digital worlds, the people will a) have a say in it and b) have a choice.
Baloney!
This discourse makes a false link between software being open source and political ideology. The two are not necessarily corresponding. And furthermore, that Android is actually open source is highly debatable but I won't go there.
Why do so many technophiles fall for the discourse that open means choice means freedom mean democracy discourse? It's all BALONEY! Google isn't really interested in protecting your freedom, democracy etc.. It's really interested in surviving and making money. Let's try not to fall AGAIN for that political cover.
In this case, I find Apple much more honest. They don't talk about political ideologies like freedom, democracy etc. All they say is they want to make devices that are friendly and easy to use. They don't couch their products in political ideological terms.
Baloney!
This discourse makes a false link between software being open source and political ideology. The two are not necessarily corresponding. And furthermore, that Android is actually open source is highly debatable but I won't go there.
Why do so many technophiles fall for the discourse that open means choice means freedom mean democracy discourse? It's all BALONEY! Google isn't really interested in protecting your freedom, democracy etc.. It's really interested in surviving and making money. Let's try not to fall AGAIN for that political cover.
In this case, I find Apple much more honest. They don't talk about political ideologies like freedom, democracy etc. All they say is they want to make devices that are friendly and easy to use. They don't couch their products in political ideological terms.
Blasterzilla
Apr 27, 08:24 AM
Great, glad Apple did something. Hope we can all move on now to bigger and better things.
Thanks again Apple.
Thanks again Apple.
OS2toMAC
Mar 22, 03:55 PM
With the shortages of iPad2's out there, and international sales about to start up, probably making it worse, if the Xoom, G Tabs and Playbooks are "close enough" (particularly for folks that are not avid Apple followers), they could get quite a few sales. At least that is my opinion. (And like everyone I have an @$$-hole too.):)
AppleScruff1
Apr 11, 12:02 PM
My 3Gs contract ends in June and Apple will be pushing it's luck for me to go half a year without me being tempted to jump platforms instead of waiting for the iPhone 5.
Do you think they are losing sleep over it?
They should stick to the June update each year. I know it may not be their fault but Apple need to keep the iPhone up to date, otherwise they will lose ground. Mobile phones are very competitive.
Even if iPhone 5 is the same as iPhone 4 people will still be lined up to buy it.
Big mistake if true.
If true, this means that Apple has raised the white flag and accepted the defeat that Android has given to them. Not caring about the power of the hardware relative to others in the marketplace is a hallmark of a niche ecosystem.
Welcome to obscurity Apple - Population You
Do you really think they care? Even if they make a phone that doesn't make calls people will think it's the greatest innovation in the history of mankind.
Do you think they are losing sleep over it?
They should stick to the June update each year. I know it may not be their fault but Apple need to keep the iPhone up to date, otherwise they will lose ground. Mobile phones are very competitive.
Even if iPhone 5 is the same as iPhone 4 people will still be lined up to buy it.
Big mistake if true.
If true, this means that Apple has raised the white flag and accepted the defeat that Android has given to them. Not caring about the power of the hardware relative to others in the marketplace is a hallmark of a niche ecosystem.
Welcome to obscurity Apple - Population You
Do you really think they care? Even if they make a phone that doesn't make calls people will think it's the greatest innovation in the history of mankind.
jiggie2g
Jul 15, 01:08 PM
The only reason I see Apple going all Woodcrest is to justify their high markups , while insulting you Mac Loyalist on price they also offer you less performance for your money.
Look here at the current woody pricing at Newegg
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?Submit=ENE&N=50001157+2010340343+1050922423&Subcategory=343&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=
So apple is going to charge you guys $1799 for a Desktop with a 2.0ghz CPU , when everyone else will charge $1199 for a Conroe E6600 2.4ghz based desktop.
This is not looking good apple.
Look here at the current woody pricing at Newegg
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?Submit=ENE&N=50001157+2010340343+1050922423&Subcategory=343&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=
So apple is going to charge you guys $1799 for a Desktop with a 2.0ghz CPU , when everyone else will charge $1199 for a Conroe E6600 2.4ghz based desktop.
This is not looking good apple.
Amnak
Apr 7, 10:55 PM
Normally I'd call bs, but I got mine at Best Buy and my friend a former employ asked if they had any more, the said technically no but for him they'd "find" one. Thank god I got it from there for reward pointssss!
iJohnHenry
Mar 23, 11:46 AM
Some called them 'the coalition of the billing' because so many members were paid off in some way.
For the Brits, that would be 'the coalition of the shilling'. :p
For the Brits, that would be 'the coalition of the shilling'. :p
rezenclowd3
Nov 24, 09:36 PM
Oh I forgot. Still no qualifying/race weekends. LAME.
Why the F%^$ don't race games include the race weekend experience, especially if it's a sim? F1 2010 at least does, but that game, even post-patch is horrendous.
From racing RC cars, and AutoXing, qualifying/practice is so much of the experience. I hate always starting halfway or last in the field like I am forced to be a noob. It seems instead they force one to use a better car than the rest of the field to win, or severely inhibit the AIs ability.
Why the F%^$ don't race games include the race weekend experience, especially if it's a sim? F1 2010 at least does, but that game, even post-patch is horrendous.
From racing RC cars, and AutoXing, qualifying/practice is so much of the experience. I hate always starting halfway or last in the field like I am forced to be a noob. It seems instead they force one to use a better car than the rest of the field to win, or severely inhibit the AIs ability.
Cameront9
Aug 7, 06:35 PM
I am not hearing impaired, but I often watch TV and movies with the closed captioning on. I cannot really say what about it makes it more enjoyable to me--no one has ever understood why I do it, maybe it has to do with how I process information (I do have trouble listening in lecture classes, maybe a learning disability etc.), but my point is to say that I am also interested in getting closed captioning on iTunes shows.
I wrote to Apple on the feedback part of their web-site about this. I was wondering if you might know better what the law is about closed captioning. I always assumed it was required for network television shows. Is it not for network shows that appear online?
Anyhow, it's functionality I would definitely like to see.
Online is a grey area because it's new...
I'm not completely familiar with Closed Captioning laws. I believe all new TVs are required to have a Closed-Captioning decoder, and I think that all Network shows (and maybe cable-based, too) have to be captioned.
A quick Google gives this:
http://www.captions.org/caplaw.cfm
Which explains in more detail...
Regardless, I have seen a number of hearing-impaired users comment on the issue before. It would be so simple to implement, after all...
I wrote to Apple on the feedback part of their web-site about this. I was wondering if you might know better what the law is about closed captioning. I always assumed it was required for network television shows. Is it not for network shows that appear online?
Anyhow, it's functionality I would definitely like to see.
Online is a grey area because it's new...
I'm not completely familiar with Closed Captioning laws. I believe all new TVs are required to have a Closed-Captioning decoder, and I think that all Network shows (and maybe cable-based, too) have to be captioned.
A quick Google gives this:
http://www.captions.org/caplaw.cfm
Which explains in more detail...
Regardless, I have seen a number of hearing-impaired users comment on the issue before. It would be so simple to implement, after all...
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 03:21 AM
But you ARE trying to control others Bill. It's quite obvious. There are no negative consequences inherent to being gay. I'm a 43 year old man, and quite happy. The only negative consequences I've suffered have been at the hands of people like you, who think you know how everyone should live and try to force your beliefs on us with laws. You absolutely want to control others, or at the very least, impose your punishments on us.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy
Hmm...but did they make any laws against you doing any of those things?
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
There are risks inherent in any sexual activity Bill, heterosexual or homosexual. I'm well aware of the risks of both. Apparently, you seem to feel that all gay men engage in sodomy, which is far from the truth. Also, many of these statistics are based on the results of promiscuous behavior. Gay people marrying would discourage promiscuity, which would most likely reduce those statistics. One would think you should be pro gay marriage rights in that case. But hey, we all know that's not what your real concern is. Your concern is to get everyone to conform to your rules.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
My handicap puts me in a minority full of people who think like Marxists. They'll tell you that they're the innocent, persecuted ones and that everyone else is the evil oppressor. Newsflash: Good and evil are on both sides. The "victims" aren't all good and the "persecutors" aren't all bad.
As I told you guys, I think that moral liberty consists of the ability to adopt the means to do the good. Moral liberty is not license. License causes chaos.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy
Hmm...but did they make any laws against you doing any of those things?
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
There are risks inherent in any sexual activity Bill, heterosexual or homosexual. I'm well aware of the risks of both. Apparently, you seem to feel that all gay men engage in sodomy, which is far from the truth. Also, many of these statistics are based on the results of promiscuous behavior. Gay people marrying would discourage promiscuity, which would most likely reduce those statistics. One would think you should be pro gay marriage rights in that case. But hey, we all know that's not what your real concern is. Your concern is to get everyone to conform to your rules.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
My handicap puts me in a minority full of people who think like Marxists. They'll tell you that they're the innocent, persecuted ones and that everyone else is the evil oppressor. Newsflash: Good and evil are on both sides. The "victims" aren't all good and the "persecutors" aren't all bad.
As I told you guys, I think that moral liberty consists of the ability to adopt the means to do the good. Moral liberty is not license. License causes chaos.