zapatos

Citation? What I found was that... https://www.hrw.org/news/2015/11/23/saudi-arabia-poet-sentenced-death-apostasy

dimreepr was speaking of the "proper" use of the book. Most Muslims do not consider apostasy worthy of death, any more than than Christians believe not being a virgin on your wedding night is worthy of death. Neither are generally considered proper use of the book by a reasonable person.

Haha. That made me laugh.

That is why I thought it useful to say "perceived injustice". Often times extremists are manipulated by others into perceiving injustice where there is none.

That's true to some extent. What country beset by Muslim Extremism do you believe has played no part in oppression and injustice? Well, in the case of Dylan Roof, it was in part because "blacks were taking over the world". It may have been easy for Dylan Roof to perceive, but not so obvious to the rest of us.

While I generally agree with your assertion, I think it would be more accurate to say that "extremism is caused by perceived injustice and oppression". Some extremists are manipulated, and others are outraged by the injustice and oppression that white males are suffering under in the United States.

Except that a black king cannot kill another black piece...

Generally speaking I think something like mistletoe at work is to be avoided. Not worth the risk. However, depending on who benefits and the environment, it can be a good thing. I always told my boys (both good looking, personable lads) that they should always make a point to pay attention to, and flirt with, girls who were, um, less popular. Costs them nothing, and just may brighten someone's day. So, if you are chasing girls with the mistletoe because you haven't kissed an 18 year old in 40 years (back when you were 18), don't do it. But, if you believe a subtle invitation at a party will be appreciated, go for it.

There is no chess section. Didn't mean to cause such confusion.

Indeed. I imagine the number of countries that terrorist groups operate in is directly related to where they perceive their enemies to be.

LOL! Didn't notice that!

It wasn't in the "Chess" section of this forum, it was in the "Brain Teasers and Puzzles" section. You have to look for some way in which you are being tricked or misdirected.

The Almighty made a point of saying "If you stick with MY rules", which led me to believe I could take literally his statement that "2. Pawn can be promoted to any other piece EXCEPT KING after reaching rear rank."

Promote pawn to black knight.

You've misunderstood what is going on.

Well, there is another way to argue it is "overthrowing" the election. For the elector to vote for someone other than for whom they are pledged, they must break the law (in 29 states and D.C.). Breaking the law to get your candidate elected could certainly be considered an "overthrow" of the election by a reasonable person. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector

So perhaps we should make the politicians watch videos about abortions.

Just to put the shoe on the other foot, if it is acceptable to require politicians to take a science course, then perhaps it would be acceptable to require a woman having an abortion to watch a video first. Forcing education on people is unlikely to work IMO.

I am pivoting to a defensive position because of your continued attack. If I wish to talk about the financial implications associated with a woman's decision regarding abortion I will do so, with your blessing or without. I don't see how you can judge the substance of my view to be lacking when you attempted to shut off discussion without exploring it at all. And don't start with the straw man arguments. I never claimed or implied that people were property or that women give up the rights to their own body. Since you find this area of discussion to be irrelevant, can you please just move on and leave me alone?

Why don't you participate in the parts of the conversation you wish, and ignore the rest. Then you won't feel obligated to play traffic cop.

I didn't realize this was your thread and that you were in charge of managing the flow of the discussion.

Tell it to the government, they are the ones who tied financial obligations to reproduction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_support_in_the_United_States

Yeah, I didn't claim to actually have an answer. But... It doesn't have to be only about whether the abortion takes place. Perhaps there can be some legally mandated financial considerations. For example in an extreme situation let's say the man and women only ever knew each other for about 30 minutes, during which time the woman became pregnant. If the man does not want the pregnancy to come to term, perhaps his financial obligation can be reduced. Or perhaps the woman has to make a reasonable attempt to contact and talk to him prior to the birth or she risks reduced child support. There perhaps could be some guarantee of visitation for the father, or even a guarantee that he never be contacted again, once the child is born. Or maybe some agreement about how the child is to be raised (for example, in a religious environment). I am of course just throwing out ideas. I don't know if any are workable, but if I am the 'father', then I'd at least like the 'mother' to be encouraged to talk to me prior to any major decisions. I agree it won't, and shouldn't, be an equal decision. She just has too much invested to take that choice away from her.

It seems unreasonable to me to allow the man no input into the decision of whether or not to abort, as there can certainly be a significant impact on him (albeit probably less than that of the woman). For example the woman may choose to have the child then expect financial support for 18 or more years that the man then must contribute. The woman may also choose to have an abortion when the man is willing and able to provide 100% custodial care and financial support if the child is born. While I cannot come up with any scenario where I see the man having veto power over the woman's decision, it seems reasonable for the man to have some influence on a decision that could impact him for life.

Of course we are all just speculating, but I don't think people like being the worst, even if 'the worst' is not that bad. It is the knowledge that every social class is better than you and the feeling that you are not getting a fair shake. I personally find it discomforting to come in last place, even if competing at a high level. No one wants to graduate last in their medical class, even though that is a higher achievement than the bulk of the population manages. I think everyone in the pool of people you describe have someone to point to who is worse off.