ku

If a society of people (society A) engaged in torture and slavery of their children as part of the culture, would it be correct and moral for another more powerful society (society B) of people to steal children away from society A for the good of the children? Assume that society B has a government that will protect the children's individual rights to freedom and pleasure.

Okay relax. This is hypothetical. My point is that the relationship between parent and child is virtually identical to the relationship between government and citizen. Government is defined as the "institution with a monopoly on coercion." Parents too have this power but as pointed out there is the police and government, so the parents don't actually have a monopoly (maybe a duopoly or an oligopoly), but if we take the police and government away, thereby giving the parent the most power, then effectively each parent is a country. E.g. parents giving kids pocket money is government welfare. A kid asking a parents for gifts is like special interest lobbying. Parents letting a private firm do the mowing (like Jim's Mowers) instead of the spouse is outsourcing. Parents adopting someone is the same as immigration. But people tend to treat family versus nation as different, and this I believe has to do with the fact that things on a smaller scale are more real, concrete, and personal. However, on a macro level things become politicized, abstracted, and in this state many horrendous things are rationalized and accepted, such as killing of innocent civilians or torture of people for the national interest. This is related to Stalin's idea that one death is horrible but a million deaths is a statistic.

The creationists are probably doing something similar with evolution terms and many seem willing to pay for it. I've seen very many creationist sites on Google put on the sponsored site section or the ads section. In my opinion, evolutionists have lost the battle between creationism and evolution. Support for creation is somewhere around 70% in the USA. With the more friendly-looking intelligent design seeping into the mainstream and into schools with the support of George Bush, things aren't looking good. But it doesn't matter. If you're a scientist you believe in objective reality. 97% of the population may believe 1+1 = 3 but that doesn't make it so. This is why I've practically given up trying to convince people of anything. Truth stands well on its own. It doesn't need popularity nor does it need authority.

I've been to the police but they are unable to do anything. The neighbor has two children. If I harm one (maybe even kill her) with the threat of harming the other child, the neighbor won't harm my children because he likes his children. Otherwise, he'll try to harm my children. All children are innocent, including the neighbor's children, who may be victims of their abusive parent. I have been told by some that harming (or torturing) the neighbors children is okay because it is their responsibility to oppose their parents.

If I had had children and a neighbor who also has two children moves into my neighborhood, then if that neighbor threatens to harm my children, do I have the right to harm the neighbor's children if by harming the neighbors children (e.g. torturing them) I prevent my neighbor from harming my own children? What do you think?

The following is fairly good: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA201.html When a non-scientist uses the word "theory" generally he or she is referring to a hypothesis. A hypothesis becomes theory when more and more empirical data back it up.

Is it possible for a mating between a person with black hair and a person with blonde hair to create offspring with blonde hair? I know hair color inheritance is influence by multiple genes, but how exactly does it work? Is it dominance/ressesive inheritance or additive?

A number of people here count lives probably lost if the police had not have shot and compare this to lives probably lost if the police had not have shot. But should number of lives be the unit of measurement we try to optimize, or should overall satisfaction be the correct unit? Satisfaction may be a function of individual freedom. For example, government using its power and its monopoly on coercion can create a crimeless world by locking every citizen up in cells, feeding them through tubes, and distracting them with TV. Crime would almost be zero but satisfaction may be low. If prisoners have no way to comparing their lives to any other people's lives--no point of reference or whatever--then satisfaction may be high, but what most people would find objectionable is each citizen's lack of freedom. Their whole lives are dictated by the state, by the calculations of elitisits of what is good for them.

Remember that this quantitative attitude to what is good for society is what motivated the advancement of communism. Do you think that maybe using different categories and situations the same person can be foung worthy and unworthy of death by two different people. For example, one suspect is analysed by scientist A who, based on the suspect's hair color, height, and clothing, is deemed a threat, but scientist B looking at the same suspect uses different categories, e.g. chest width, body-mass index, and lip size, and comes up with different probabilities.

Multiculturalism is a result of freedom of expression. Culture is perceived by perople. For people to perceive culture it has to be expressed by others. Therefore, to argue against multiculturalism is to argue against freedom of expression. If a person is against multiculturalism and defends his position by saying that he is free to express himself, wouldn't this be contradictory?

I think essentially this is one of those individual versus society issues, whether the welfare and rights of the individual is more important than the rights and welfare of society as a whole. In America, for example, the focus tends to be on individual rights, which is illustrated in the Western legal system and the concept of guilty before proven innocent--it is better for ten guilty people to walk free than for one innocent person to be found guilty. In more collectivist cultures, however, it is right for the individual to sacrifice himself for the good of society. Many communist countries were like this. Many Muslim-dense countries are like this as well.

One important principle protected by most civilized governments is that of freedom and choice. It is a fact that if the Australian TV market were left alone, American shows would dominate--I assume because American TV shows are simply better (better being defined by what consumers want). Don't you think it's odd for someone to say that television viewers should be denied from getting what they want and be forced to view something they don't want simply for a vague concept called "national identity"? Is "national identity" just another empty virtue-word? Who defines national identity? A small group of elitists or the people? If the people, then why not let consumer demand dictate the content of TV? Anyway, here in Australia there is a protectionist law (and I don't know if it is followed or enforced by TV stations) that states that a certain propertion of TV shows after 6 p.m. must be Australian made. What I have found, however, is that instead of "preserving Australian identity," Australian media executives simply take American shows and then label it so that it appears superficially Australian. For example, Australian Idol and Australian Big Brother, both are technically made in Australia.

I was speaking to an Australian who said that all American TV shows should be banned from Australian TV because they were "destroying Australian national identity" and promoting the Americanization of Australia. I argued that the ratings statistics clearly show that viewers in Australia prefer American shows to Australian-made shows, so whatever the consumers want the consumers should get. What exactly is "national identity" and why would anyone think it's important?

As I recall, the average American is about 5"8'. Your height is a function of such factors as genes, nutrition, and even socio-economic class.

Based on experience, the best way to cure sleep problems is to wake up eight hours after the time you would like to sleep. So if you would like to fall asleep at 10 p.m. everyday then set your alarm clock to wake you up at 6 a.m. every morning. If you too often turn the alarm clock off and go back to sleep, position the alarm clock far away from your bed so that you are forced to get up to turn the alarm clock off. Also, to get yourself into the mood to sleep, hire three DVDs beforehand and watch them all before going to bed. This will numb and exhaust your mind. I also hear that cardiovascular exercise three hours before going to sleep helps, but I have never tried this.

Gary Becker, a Novel prize winner, says that fines are one of the best punishments. Fines are good because it involves only transfer of wealth and involves negligible costs, unlike jail, which costs very much for the government.

It's been said that websites that illustrate how bombs can be made are hazardous because they allow terrorists to more easily create bombs and more easily educated those sympathetic to terrorists. Do you think the state should be allowed to try censor these sites for the sake of national security?

Judge in hot water over masturbation claims Oklahoma's Attorney-General wants a state judge removed on suspicion he frequently masturbated and used a device for enhancing erections while his court was in session. Attorney-General Drew Edmondson filed a petition with state judicial authorities seeking the removal of Sapulpa District Judge Donald Thompson, 57, for "conduct constituting an offence involving moral turpitude in violation of the Oklahoma Constitution". Mr Thompson is not immediately available for comment. The judge, elected to the bench in the state's non-partisan judicial elections, is based about 130 kilometres north-east of Oklahoma City. In the petition, the Attorney-General alleges Mr Thompson used a penis pump, a device billed as providing sexual pleasure and promising better erections and larger penis size, during trials. The Attorney-General also says he exposed himself to a court reporter several times while masturbating on the bench. "On one occasion, Ms (Lisa) Foster saw Judge Thompson holding his penis up and shaving underneath it with a disposable razor while on the bench," the petition reads. Several witnesses, including jurors in Mr Thompson's court and police officers called to testify in trials, say in the petition they heard the "swooshing" sound of a penis pump during trials. They say they saw the judge slumped in his chair, with his elbows on his knees, working the device. The witnesses say the pump sounded like a blood pressure cuff being pumped up. According to the petition, Mr Thompson admitted he had a penis pump under the bench during a murder trial but he told investigators it was a gag gift from a friend. The petition also charges Mr Thompson with firing his former court reporter after she cooperated with investigators. --Reuters http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200406/s1140012.htm

In countries like Australia, voting is compulsory, while in countries like the USA, voting is voluntary. I hypothesize that, if voting is voluntary, then there will be a bias by politicians to supply more extreme policies in an attempt to get people to vote. Would you agree with this? Have there been any studies on the topic? http://www.answers.com/topic/public-choice-theory

When taking a shower is it a health hazard to breathe in steam, which may condense in the lungs, thereby drowning them and decreasing how well they take up oxygen? Furthermore, I've been told that steam from the shower can accelerate the wrinkling process, making you look much older than you really are. Can these problems, if they are problems, be fixed by having colder showers? How long should a normal shower be before it become bad for your health?

Very interesting documentary. Outsourcing is an excellent idea and a very American idea as well. The documentary does, however, go through some of the downsides of outsroucing military operations to private firms, that of reduced coordination and accountability.

Lack of exposure to sunlight can result in vitamin D deficiencies, which can lead to osteoporosis down the track. It is suggested that people who do not expose themselves to much sunlight supplement vitamind D levels with their diet. What I want to know is what types of food has much vitamin D and whether or not all dairy products (such as milk) are vitamin D rich or only specific ones?

That raises an interesting issue because culture can be defined not only for groups but also for individuals. Each individual has a unique culture. Companies hiring you want to make sure there is a "cultural fit," i.e. is your individual culture compatible with the culture prominent among incumbent staff.

Does it start with M, end in Y, and make the world go round?

Is there a number below 360 that has more positive divisors than the number of positive divisors for 360?