why should that matter?

Because men aren't allowed to be married in most states. I would assume that first cousins of the opposite sex could get married since they would probably have different last names.

Why are Americans and their legal system so phobic about first-cousin marriage while Europeans aren't? Ottenheimer blames several factors. First, bad research in the 19th century greatly exaggerated the dangers of imbecility, blindness, etc, among children of close kin. This research was eventually discredited in Europe, but Americans and their state legislators never got the word. Second, cousin marriage in the U.S. was considered a sign of barbarism (probable translation: hillbillies did it). In Europe, on the other hand, particularly in Mediterranean cultures, cousin marriage had a long and reasonably respectable history, although it's rare today. Finally, European deep thinkers contended that certain forms of cousin marriage increased social cohesion. No such positive arguments were advanced in the States.

 

LINK

LINK

 

 

so you're in favor of cousins and homosexuals getting married. What about siblings?

so you're in favor of cousins and homosexuals getting married. What about siblings?

 

 

Who is anyone to say who can or can't get married.

Who is anyone to say who can or can't get married.

 

Yeah, but what about siblings?

Yeah, but what about siblings?

 

 

People act like there's millions of people who wann marry their sister's. I think there's maybe some isolated cases. More than likely in Texas.

so you're in favor of cousins and homosexuals getting married. What about siblings?

I'm a big proponent of the harm principle. Who someone marries doesn't really bother nor hurt me.

what makes a homosexual have more of a right to get married than two first cousins?

um... homosexuals won't bring mentally disabled children into the world?

 

um... homosexuals won't bring mentally disabled children into the world?

Check out the link I posted a bit earlier in this thread.

No because I am pro gay marriage.

 

But I am sure you admire his steadfastness to this issue dispite the meaningless contradictions in his own personal life, right?

But I am sure you admire his steadfastness to this issue dispite the meaningless contradictions in his own personal life, right?

 

um... homosexuals won't bring mentally disabled children into the world?

 

it's the 21st century Mr Um. If a dude can get a va-jay-jay and become a women, I'm pretty sure they've figured out how to prevent two people from having kids.

Well, I know this will spark the whole debate about carbon offsets again and whether or not the systems currently set up work

 

Actually, I am thinking about selling some carbon credits. I live close to work and ride my bike there. Sooooo, I figure I can sell the amount of carbon I would have created if I lived 40 miles from work and drove. I should send Mr.Edwards an email telling him I can sell him some Mr_g carbon credits. Then we can both go on Good Morning America and brag about how great we are, even though we haven't really accomplished anything.

an appropriately built carbon offset market which the wealthy treat as a charity is actually one way to get started.

 

 

Imagine all the Carbon Credits homeless people could sell! they barely ever drive an SUV!

 

 

Edited August 31, 200718 yr by mr_genius

Actually, I am thinking about selling some carbon credits. I live close to work and ride my bike there. Sooooo, I figure I can sell the amount of carbon I would have created if I lived 40 miles from work and drove. I should send Mr.Edwards an email telling him I can sell him some Mr_g carbon credits. Then we can both go on Good Morning America and brag about how great we are, even though we haven't really accomplished anything.

Well, you might be able to buy a nicer bike.

I have an idea! Why don't all the Democrats in the audience stop breathing? That would reduce the carbon footprint enough that the rest of the world could drive their SUV's without even thinking about it.

 

 

Well, you might be able to buy a nicer bike.

 

na

 

the creation of new bikes creates carbon, so i will keep using my old one and sell those credits too

Actually, I am thinking about selling some carbon credits. I live close to work and ride my bike there. Sooooo, I figure I can sell the amount of carbon I would have created if I lived 40 miles from work and drove. I should send Mr.Edwards an email telling him I can sell him some Mr_g carbon credits. Then we can both go on Good Morning America and brag about how great we are, even though we haven't really accomplished anything.

Unfortunately...your President refuses to acknowledge the existence of anthropogenic climate change, and has failed to set up a carbon offset trading system in this country.

 

Therefore...in order to have that plan work, you'll have to move to Europe.

Unfortunately...your President refuses to acknowledge the existence of anthropogenic climate change, and has failed to set up a carbon offset trading system in this country.

 

Therefore...in order to have that plan work, you'll have to move to Europe.

 

oh man, i knew it was too good to be true

Unfortunately...your President refuses to acknowledge the existence of anthropogenic climate change, and has failed to set up a carbon offset trading system in this country.

 

Therefore...in order to have that plan work, you'll have to move to Europe.

Just yesterday, I was reading a report from the BLM about their resource and environmental plan for a certain area of the country (long story as to why). Anyway, I thought it was interesting, the paper spoke about human change on climate as if it were a given. Just interesting to me because now even a federal agency like the BLM, who are usually pretty solidly on the side of the more conservative side of the argument in the West (generally in favor of land use more oriented towards consumption than conservation), are now accepting it. I wonder what Dubya would say if he read that report which came from within his administration?

 

Unfortunately...your President refuses to acknowledge the existence of anthropogenic climate change, and has failed to set up a carbon offset trading system in this country.

 

Therefore...in order to have that plan work, you'll have to move to Europe.

 

 

Yeah, 80 years of the GWB presidency has been enough already...and when he killed off all the other politicians in the US, well that was WAY over the top. I guess we'll just have to wait until 2008 when the cryopods open and the freeze dried politicians from the 1920s come back and run for president.

 

 

I don't think it is fair to compare him to a "normal" American. Compare him to other Senators, CEOs, peers in his group.

 

 

Why? Why should we allow these sanctimonious politicians to exude sacrifice of the rest of us while they gleefully exempt themselves from their own rules? You think John Edwards is going to give up his private jets or his fleet of cars? If he's so damn worried about the environment he should fly commercial, have his mansion turned into wetlands while he moves into a 1000 sq ft home and take public transportation everywhere he goes.

Why? Why should we allow these sanctimonious politicians to exude sacrifice of the rest of us while they gleefully exempt themselves from their own rules? You think John Edwards is going to give up his private jets or his fleet of cars? If he's so damn worried about the environment he should fly commercial, have his mansion turned into wetlands while he moves into a 1000 sq ft home and take public transportation everywhere he goes.

As long as he is a candidate for president, honestly, that's not practical. After he loses to Mrs. Bill Clinton, THEN he needs to give up all that s***.

 

Why? Why should we allow these sanctimonious politicians to exude sacrifice of the rest of us while they gleefully exempt themselves from their own rules? You think John Edwards is going to give up his private jets or his fleet of cars? If he's so damn worried about the environment he should fly commercial, have his mansion turned into wetlands while he moves into a 1000 sq ft home and take public transportation everywhere he goes.

 

But, but, he raises awareness

 

long time no post, good to hear from you Mr.Nuke

As long as he is a candidate for president, honestly, that's not practical. After he loses to Mrs. Bill Clinton, THEN he needs to give up all that s***.

Ding.

 

It's an issue of practicality.

 

For instance -- I can't bike to work every day (10+ miles one way and all 4 lane major roadways to get there) but I do car pool a few times a week. I walk most places that I am going to from my apartment unless I need my car (i.e. dropping off book donations at the Indy Media Center Books to Prisoner program or going to Danville helping out at the VA -- which'll start after I clear my TB test appt.) I do most of my grocery shopping at a local co-op. It is almost all organic and the vast majority of the products come from area farms so production and shipments are not using up fuel shipping things across the US/world. I only use my lights in the apt. when I need to when it gets dark. I recycle and reuse/repurpose as I can. Just because one does not live in a 1,000 sq. ft. house does not mean that what they say should be thrown out. Don't toss out the baby with the bathwater.

 

With SUV's -- the high center of gravity/danger for accidents and flipping, the lack of fuel efficiency in an age of high fuel costs, the fact that SUV's are 3.5 times more likely to kill a pedestrian than a regular car if they hit a pedestrian and the lack of need for these cars by many consumers (think of the people who simply buy it as a status symbol rather than needing the space for products etc.) -- who the Hell would want to plunk down their hard earned dollars to buy one in the first place?