Rex Kickass

QUOTE(Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 09:39 AM) There are other legitimate reasons for those restrictions that aren't based on your gender and religious beliefs/practices. Why should that matter? I'm paying for it aren't I. I pay the professor's salary, why shouldn't I be allowed to attend his lectures? Your argument is that your tuition should allow you access to public space at all times. I fail to see the difference between reserving a room in a University restaurant that would otherwise be open for a regular staff meeting and this. What if I wanted to sit in this room? What if I would have to walk an extra five minutes to eat in another comparable room? Shouldn't I be entitled to use of that room no matter what as long as its open for use?

If only one out of seven votes that Nader got would have otherwise gone to Gore in Florida, we'd have had a different president. If one out of three voters that voted for Nader in New Hampshire voted for Gore, we'd have had a different president. I don't think you can reasonably argue that George Bush represented a better set of policies and positions towards issues that the Green Party would generally care about.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 09:00 AM) Umm, not exactly the case.... Are you saying that McDonald's can just stop serving all Muslims? Or all black people? All women? I agree with NSS here. This isn't a huge deal, and the slippery-slope arguments are getting a bit out of hand. But there certainly are better ways this could have been accomplished. What strikes me as a bigger problem and what bothers me the most is the "corporatization" of our institutions of higher education. Does anyone think if some other group of people came to Harvard and asked for this (without being represented by a large $ donor) they would have gotten this policy put into effect? That's what bothers me the most- that the policy was placed into effect in an effort to represent the interests of a donor who wrote a check for twenty million dollars. What about other groups that want special accommodations? Do they have to find a large donor before their policy request will be considered? Universities that are "private" are not held to the same legal standards as state-operated universities for one reason- so that they may favor one religion over others- not so they can pimp themselves out to the highest donors because of their ability to escape the same standard. Given that this request came from the main student organization for women in conjunction with a few women students who happen to be muslim, I'd argue that yes, in this case, Harvard would have looked to make arrangements.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 02:44 AM) That's a business, not an educational institution, regardless I will tackle it. Some portion of every student's tution is going towards that building. Businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone, so if a man walked in and wanted to join and told him no, that's the business' loss. If that man owned part of that particular franchise, or paid some of the rent or utilities, and was was told he would have full access to everything on that lot due to his contributions and still was denied membership, he should be pissed off and at least get a portion of his money back. It's as simple as that. So any student should be allowed to sit in on any/every class they would like? When the University holds a private event, any/every student should be allowed to attend? Any/all students should be given priority to attend any school athletic event for free?

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 02:55 PM) What's wrong with a third party vote for the explicit message of voting "NO!". If may not affect the outcome, but if more people would do so, it might wake up both parties. I've taken the course on quite a few occasions in the past. It's my way of saying I'm not happy with the choices offered. I don't regret a single vote that I cast. I didn't live in a state where my vote would have made an effect when I voted for Nader in 2000. Indiana was going for Bush regardless of my vote. Had I lived in Michigan, where it was close until three days before the election, I wouldn't have dared. The truth is, another four years of the same party in power along the executive branch means the calcification of the Supreme Court as conservative activist for a generation. That's not something I'm willing to chance happening by protesting whether or not I think my candidate is a nice guy. I think if most people who voted for Nader anticipated the differences a Gore presidency could have offered them over the last eight years, they'd gladly switch their vote retroactively. If you really want a third party to make a change, start at the bottom. Start with local races, state races. Don't start with an election that gives you no shot to do anything other than possibly derail your own interest. However, YAS, given you are generally diametrically opposed to my political point of view, I encourage you to vote for the third party nominee of your choice .

QUOTE(103 mph screwball @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 12:56 AM) More on Sen. Obama's 50 super delegates rumor here. If a number of those delegates previously endorsed Clinton, that could be a huge blow.

Unless Obama starts going tit for tat on the attacks. They are low hanging fruit for Obama and a lot juicier than Tony Rezko. As much as I don't wanna see Obama stoop to that level, I know he probably has to. Kerry didn't when it came to the Swift Boaters, and that hurt him enough to flip the election IMO.

So are you saying we should protest Curves for having a women's only gym? Isn't that the same principle?

In a related story, Patrick Swayze - also of Roadhouse - confirmed that he is currently suffering from Pancreatic Cancer. The National Enquirer is reporting that he only has weeks to live.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 06:33 PM) Obama with a decent lead in the TX caucus, about 40% reporting. Texas looking like it will end up a near-tie or actual tie, delegate-wise. And on the supers, again... they'll break for who they think will win in November. Right now, that's Obama, and has been for a while. The only way Clinton can get the majority of them to break for her is if she wins PA and also manages to convince the electorate (and the supers) that she will do better against McCain than Obama would. That is still a long shot. Not impossible, but, a long shot. Texas was actually won by Obama. Clinton nets four delegates in the Primary. Obama will net seven more than Clinton in the Caucus. Total delegate count in TX? Obama +3.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 07:31 PM) My religion bans people from walking more than 5 minutes. Where's my shuttle? Do not be ignorant to my beliefs. http://www.shuttle.harvard.edu

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 05:08 PM) Eventually it's going to be 60 of 70, then 54 of 70, then 44 of 70, all the way down to 0 to 70. If you can do one, you can do them all. That was a weak response to his question. Why should someone pay full price for a 10% reduction? I'm sure you wouldn't like it if a fine restaurant sat you in the bathrooms (unisex or separate,) or denied you entrance for your dinner and told you, "well during these select hours we make some accomodations to satisfy a small minority of people, so you can either stay in the bathroom or go to the other restaurant over there. Full price will still be applied." Because as we all know, you go to Harvard for the gyms.

CNN Exit poll for Republican voters in TX Obama - 53 Clinton - 47.

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 03:46 PM) I can say that you are probably correct, unless Muslim was replaced with White, Black, Christian, Jew, Gay, etc. However, it DOES say Muslim, resulting in this thread, and Jenks, Strange and Yas just made some good points. Again this change applies to all women. I think there's a big difference between offering different sexes time to exercise on their own, than there is to compare it to race or orientation. We separate locker rooms by women and men, we don't separate them by color, race, religion, sexuality.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 02:56 PM) Just answer the question. It's direct and to the point. Regardless of my position on it, how would you enforce that? I'd be against it, by the way.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 02:47 PM) You may very be right about Alpha, I don't know. But for you 'nondiscriminitory' democrats to be backing a discrimintory policy seems to be a bit hypocritical. How about 6 hours a week of no gays allowed in the gym? Would that be okay as well? How would you know who's gay and who isn't?

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 02:43 PM) Character is also importmant. Or lack of it, as the case may be. Character is important, sure. But at the same time, if you claim to support what Obama supports. If those issues matter to you, voting against those issues is frankly stupid. I know that we shouldn't live in a two party state. But the truth is we do, and if you want to build an independent political party, the way to do it is from the ground up, not the top down. A vote for a third party nuisance candidate for President is a wasted vote. If you don't want to vote for Clinton, just stay home then. But then don't b**** when the issues that are important to you aren't even brought up because the person you didn't like but agrees with you never got the chance to advocate for you.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 02:39 PM) But women are allowed to use the gym a full 70 of the 70 hours. Why is discrimination based on gender ok here? Would it be ok to have a gym where women couldn't workout for a certain period, or would there be an awful lot of uproar? And you didn't answer Alpha's question. At what point does the discrimination become unacceptable? 10 hours? 35 hours? A separate gym only for women? I don't think its unacceptable to have a separate gym for women. At all. Is it a bit biased? Sure. But then again, if there is demand for women-only gym time, and judging from the success of Curves, and based upon the use I see of the Women Only studio at my gym, I don't see the problem with a private university catering its facilities to meet the needs and wants of its students. I also think that nobody, not even Alpha, would have given two s***s about this if the word muslim wasn't in this story.

I think that would be a great idea to do. If there were six men only hours, I think that's more than acceptable.

Except exit polls showed that GOP voters in the Dem Primary broke for Obama 53-47.

So then you don't really care about issues then.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 11:08 AM) Why should I not be allowed to use a gym I'm paying for equally because of someone else's religious beliefs? You would be allowed to use this gym. 64 of the 70 hours that the gym is being used. You also would be able to use every other gym in the system during all open hours as well. There are other restrictions on the use of other athletic facilities in the Harvard system based on ability as well. Nobody is having anything taken away. And if someone is whining that they have to walk an extra 10 minutes to exercise, that's almost as stupid as this fake outrage is.

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 11:19 AM) So because it is ONLY 6 hours, thats ok? How many hours would it take to not be ok? This isn't the only gym in their system. So, lets ask this question, if its ok to build a new facility to accomodate these people's needs, why is it not ok to accomodate their needs by adjusting the rules and schedule of an otherwise existing, underutilized space in the system?

The total gain for Hillary was 12 delegates. And it was a split victory in TX. Hillary took the primary, Obama took the caucus.