SIR_Sergeant

"Let me check on him" guy made that a lot more difficult than it needed to be.

I don't see how a personal anecdote is supposed be convincing on this subject. Genetic mutation is a function within evolution. Mutations that provide better conditions for survival (natural selection) are reproduced and the bridge between two distinct species can begin to be established. Your explanation of mutation is correct, but mutation is a driving force of evolution, not the overarching process. This chart shows it nicely: '> (Didn't want to post the actual image, it's pretty big)

I'd love to see that if you happen to remember it, I've never heard of this story.

I say no. I'm aware that I've contributed to discussions that have gotten well off topic and far more heated than they needed to be. I think we all, myself included, can do a better job of self-policing. OPs can do a better job of trying to keep discussion on track, and those replying can take a moment to consider if what they're posting is appropriate, necessary, etc... As to what is being posted, I think some topics, as mentioned above, might be better suited to be left alone. However, it is a board for discussing "politics, current events, and society." This is very broad, so to expect nothing posted to be controversial defeats the purpose of having the board. Just because you have whatever expectations or predispositions toward the internet and those using it doesn't excuse you from the forum rules or making quality discussion and/or contributions.

Could you clarify what you mean by "human structure evolved too fast?" For anyone interested, this is another good Richard Dawkins interview:

Nearly every major medical or psychological association would disagree with you. They all report that conversation therapy is not based on any kind of real scientific methodology and that it's effects are quite harmful. They also report that, because research strongly suggests sexual orientation is immobile, that conversation therapy "successes" are instances where the homosexual desires have been repressed or subdued, but they do still exist. If someone voluntarily undertakes this "therapy," so be it. No one however, whether they're an adult or a minor, should be forced to do this. Do you at least agree that making someone involuntarily do this is wrong?

It's a win-win. The truthful party is validated, the lying party is invalidated. Cost for me is the biggest obstacle to implementing this. And I think the real costs will come from storage. One of these cameras costs somewhere between $50-a few hundred dollars. But that's a one time purchase per-officer. Storage will be needed as long as we have the cameras. Taser offers a cloud storage service for departments that use their cameras, but I don't know the cost. Perhaps states and counties and/or local governments could split the costs. Maybe each state could provide the funds to store the footage if localities purchase the cameras. I'm strongly anti-surveillance, but I don't really see it as a huge issue in this case. The cameras only see things that the officer sees. It is a little concerning that footage of me could potentially be kept by the government for a given period of time but I think to reign in police misconduct and false misconduct reports it is an acceptable practice. I don't see why discretion would be completely eliminated. Just because an event occurred on camera doesn't mean that officers can't give people breaks. We have dashcams all over now, but people get off on traffic violations all the time.

Had the officers been wearing body cameras, we could have known exactly what the officer did or did not see. *take the hint, police departments/local/state governments* I think just based on the nature of the incident that its being justified could go either way.

A community college near me had a threat called in last night, fortunately turned out to be false. Article: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/harford/belair/ph-ag-hcc-lockdown-0123-20150120-story.html

Even if they're a supporter of the war on drugs, I don't understand how someone could approve of this. I'd like to see the international community push to eliminate this practice, in all nations.

This is disappointing to read. You'd think the West would have learned by now to stay out of Iraq.

Hezbollah and Hamas do perform some terrible things, as mentioned above. However, the sheer one-sidedness of this conflict is staggering. Israel has killed far more Palestinians, both militants and civilians, by a long shot. I don't see what Israel could have possibly imagined what would have happened when they took over the Palestinian lands with their settlements and forced them into smaller and smaller areas.

This seems like a nice development that would help put Cold War era politics in the past. I think this integration will be highly successful and a huge boon for the Cuban economy as well as a motivator for change among the Cuban people. My fear is that the "authenticity" of the island will fade. It'll turn into a Jamaica or a Bahamas, where everything is commercialized and garnered to tourists. Some articles on the developments: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/01/18/us-cuba-meetings-relations/21868865/ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-30836679

You might want to get some more storage space.I have a 1TB HDD and is about 90% full. 128GB may seem like a lot but it will go quickly. Alternatively, you could invest in an external hard drive.

The devotion of the North Koreans to Kim Jong-un (and his predecessors) is cult-like. There really is no way to tell, but I'd love to know how many people actually believe it and how many people just put on a facade out of fear. The amount of state control over all facets of life is incredible.

Currently an economics student. Might double major with political science, I haven't decided yet. I don't have a specific career in mind that I want to do yet, but that's what college is for. I'd like to get a job or internship in DC (UMD is just a few miles from DC), maybe with the government, a non-profit, or a business. Something on the Hill would be awesome. Annapolis is another place I'd like to work, specifically with the state government or the Maryland General Assembly. I know a few members of the Maryland House of Delegates and Senate that I'd love to work for. Baltimore is a bit far for work while I'm at school, but afterwards it would also be an option for me that would be pretty close to home.

I don't think refusing to try a same sex relationship is closed minded. If someone knows what they like and what they don't, you can't expect them to try something else.

You're on a board titled "Politics, Current Events, and Society." What exactly were you expecting? People have opinions because this is a serious matter. Someone killed themselves over this practice. She isn't the only one and I guarantee you she won't be the last.

*disclaimer* I'm not replying to any one particular forum member with this post, just a line of thought I've seen throughout this thread. I think everyone here would condemn anything considered abusive, be it on moral grounds, religious grounds, any kind of reasoning. I think we can all agree that the practices undertaken by conversion therapy providers can be considered abusive physically, psychologically, and emotionally. If someone doesn't think so, could you explain why you don't consider it a form of abuse? Anyway, my point is the following: If we all condemn abuse, for whatever reason, and we agree that conversion therapy is highly abusive, what explanation can be given for refusing to sign onto such a proposal? And I don't mean reasons like White House petitions are really worthless (believe me, I know they have little legislative value) or that you didn't feel like filling out, but a substantive reason as to why you would refuse to actively condemn something you know is harmful? The question I'm raising isn't even really about this petition per se, rather the underlying principle of the matter. edit: If your response is that you have a problem with homosexuality or transgender people, I don't see how this is relevant. Abuse is abuse. Not to mention that we've already had that circlejerk, you can read it here. Let's not revive that disaster.

He is an Islamic terrorist... Islamic isn't a race or nationality. edit: That isn't to say his actions represent the whole of all Muslims.

Conversion therapy is a form of abuse. An awful practice. Any parent that forces their child to go through it doesn't deserve to be a parent. I normally wouldn't consider myself a person to support bans on things, I'm generally very libertarian minded. I don't see how this practice is anything but criminal, and should be treated accordingly.

That might be a bit scary but definitely fun.

I played it for a little while (Steam says 1.7 hours) and I felt it got old really fast. Nice concept, just not for me.

The law of conservation of mass states that matter cannot be created or destroyed. How does your model of god creating everything work if you've accepted that matter cannot be created?

Such as...? And what do you mean by "spiritual evidence?"