News Stories

[TurkeyPotPie]

Parents have to evict adult children

Damn, can't even kick an adult child out of your own home. Further proof that property rights don't mean shit in this country.

The entitlement attitude the "child" displays in the story is what blows me away though:

Kristine Fazzi says she hopes to eventually have a relationship with her son.

"I love my son. I don't want him to be this way," Kristine Fazzi said. "He's made some very bad choices. I had to do something."

Her son has no plans to have a relationship with his mother.

"I think she's crossed a line that shouldn't have been crossed," Nick Fazzi said.

The guy is THIRTY THREE YEARS OLD. Even if he wasn't a jailbird, dopehead, and unemployed that'd be reason enough to ask him to leave after three years.

[Kizoku Keenan]

this is a news story that is currently happening near where I live, very tragic.

http://www.u.tv/News/Baby-missing-af...7-4647fb4ebcde

[Urzu 7]

Originally Posted by Kizoku Keenan

this is a news story that is currently happening near where I live, very tragic.

http://www.u.tv/News/Baby-missing-af...7-4647fb4ebcde

UTV? I thought where you were from it'd be Zoo TV (yes, that is a U2 reference. ).

[flying ^]

Originally Posted by Urzu 7

Viewing child pornography online not a crime: New York court ruling

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow...165025919.html

It is legal in that state if not downloaded. They determined that after looking at the current law. I suspect their current law will be changed now.

I think their law should be changed. Otherwise, this will encourage many in the state to look at that stuff. You'll even have people who will pack up their bags and move to NY just because of this.

isn't it still technically dl-ing cp since there's cookies and flash files and history etc still stored in your harddrive even after exiting browser?

[Urzu 7]

Originally Posted by flying ^

isn't it still technically dl-ing cp since there's cookies and flash files and history etc still stored in your harddrive even after exiting browser?

Maybe they didn't think of that. Or maybe a lawyer convinced them otherwise.

[SeijiSensei]

President Obama Endorses Same-Sex Marriage

Originally Posted by NY Times

President Obama on Wednesday ended nearly two years of “evolving” on the issue of same-sex marriage by publicly endorsing it in a television interview, taking a definitive stand on one of the most contentious and politically charged social issues of the day.

“At a certain point, I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married,” Mr. Obama told ABC News in an interview that came after the president faced mounting pressure to clarify his position.

The political ramifications of this announcement are profound. Black Americans largely belong to conservative Protestant sects and oppose any acceptance of homosexuality. More significant may be the role the issue might play with Hispanics who are a key voting bloc, but whose Catholicism puts them on the opposite side of this issue from the President as well. White opponents are largely already committed to the Republicans so they wouldn't have been expected to vote for the President anyway. The so-called "battleground" states, ones where the election will be decided because of the workings of the Electoral College, are also more mixed on the issue of same-sex marriage than other parts of the country. This is hardly surprising, of course, since the balance of Democratic and Republican sentiment in these states is, by definition, closer to 50-50.

According to the Times's reporters, the President had already decided to take this step after the recent vote in New York State legalizing same-sex marriage there. When Obama considered what he would have done had he been one of those legislators, he decided he would also have voted in favor. Intriguingly, he took the same position over a decade ago when running for the state Legislature in Illinois, but he became more cautious when he ran for the Senate from Illinois and later for President. While in office, he eliminated the infamous "don't ask, don't tell" policy that allowed homosexuals to serve in the military as long as they didn't publicly express their sexual orientation. He also told his Justice Department not to argue in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act whose constitutionality is under review by the Supreme Court. DOMA forbids the Federal government from recognizing same-sex unions in areas of law where marriage confers benefits like taxes and pensions, even when the couples involved are legally married under the laws of a particular state like here in Massachusetts.

Public support for same-sex marriage has increased substantially over the years since the question was first asked in polls. Today a slim majority now favors same-sex marriage by about five percentage points. Here in Massachusetts where it has been legal for eight years, opinions have reversed entirely from about 50-30 against in 2004 to 55-35 in favor today. One reason for that shift is that people here have discovered that legalizing same-sex marriage just hasn't changed things all that much. In a poll last month, two-thirds of Massachusetts voters said legalization had had no effect on them personally whatsoever, and another 19% said it had affected them positively. Only 14% of Massachusetts voters polled said that legalization had had a negative effect on their lives. And, while Massachusetts has a justified image as a relatively "liberal" state in American terms, it also has a very large Roman Catholic population for whom homosexuality is still problematic.

Generational differences are quite substantial. Americans over 50 are firmly opposed to same-sex marriage, while those under thirty support it by nearly two-to-one. However those older Americans vote at much greater rates than voters under thirty, so younger voters greater support for same-sex marriage may have a muted effect at the polls.

[flying ^]

'12 POTUS (general) election looks eerily similar or even a rerun of '04... and the deciding factor may be ghey marriage again

[SeijiSensei]

I really think this will largely be old news come November. I suspect that belief motivated Obama and his advisors to decide he should "come out of the closet" (as it were) now. I think it also poses some problems for Romney in his efforts to move to the center. He's pretty much tied to the religious conservatives on his right on this issue. That will open him up to attack along anti-discrimination, pro-civil-rights lines that might have some resonance among the few remaining more libertarian Republicans and the much larger contingent of independents. Romney's own positions on this issue have been as malleable as most of his other viewpoints reinforcing the "flip-flopper" image that is one of his biggest liabilities.

Kerry had a lot of other problems besides same-sex marriage in 2004. The term "swift-boating" comes to mind. If you look at the polling results in the first link, the issue of same-sex marriage appears just twice; in one case the candidates were tied, in the other Bush led by just eight points, as compared to differences of twenty points or more on Iraq and terrorism. This time around Obama holds the unusual position as a Democrat of being the tough guy on defense issues, thus robbing the GOP of one of its most consistent advantages in the postwar period.

[aohige]

Whatever the ramifications and political reasoning, I applaud Mr President for growing a pair.

[flying ^]

welcome to the 'romney' club

[aohige]

^I didn't watch the whole thing, but from watching the first half, he's simply stating sepration of his personal faith from what is fair and right in running a state.

Which is pretty much the appropriate stance a politician should have, IMO.

[SaintessHeart]

Although I applaud Obama's stance on same-sex marriage, why isn't he tweaking the clause on guy-guy marriage?

Do you people seriously want to see two guys hugging and kissing each other in full public view?

[Zakoo]

Don't really mind. You would prefer two little girls? I understand. But it would be a fatal error to make such a thing, you can't forbid different sexe intense skinship while allowing the same sexe skinship.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Zakoo

Don't really mind. You would prefer two little girls?

The little girls each other can't marry yet you doofus. Unless one of their parents take the other girl home in a marriage sack.

I understand. But it would be a fatal error to make such a thing, you can't allow different sexe intense skinship while forbidding the same sexe skinship.

Of course, it would be a fatal error - America becomes a hotspot for BL tourism. It is legalising a social vice.

[Zakoo]

There's plenty of countries who acknowledged same sex mariages and I don't believe they became a BL hotspots why would America be different? Even some state in US recognize it, it's only a matter of having a general politic.

I never thought you would be against that, if you allow me it's usually extremist zealots who are against such "social evolutions" (those are my words, you have your own) and you aren't kind with them in your posts.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Zakoo

I never thought you would be against that, if you allow me it's usually extremist zealots who are against such "social evolutions" (those are my words, you have your own) and you aren't kind with them in your posts.

How would it be a social evolution when young boys and girls are being corrupted into fujoshis and fudanshis? Mind you, you could be marrying one of them in the future, or they might also be your pure and innocent little daughter who went there for an exchange program!

[Zakoo]

You are going to pull a certain mademoiselle. We ought to be careful in this battlefield.

[aohige]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Although I applaud Obama's stance on same-sex marriage, why isn't he tweaking the clause on guy-guy marriage?

Do you people seriously want to see two guys hugging and kissing each other in full public view?

While it's discomforting, it certainly should not be illegal.

I was a chinese diner today, and a hispanic woman had a grown child, arond age of 8-9, GURGLING his drink the entire time. It was very annoying, and unappetizing, and I had to move my seat away.
Do I think they should be legalliy punished, or banned? No.

Personal discomfort is not an excuse for prohibiting civil rights.

[ganbaru]

China orders "Big Four" auditors to restructure
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...84905R20120510

The world's top four accounting firms will have to bring in Chinese citizens to run their operations in China and end the dominance of foreign partners under new rules announced by the Finance Ministry on Thursday.

The Big Four auditors - Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, Pricewaterhousecoopers, Ernst & Young and KPMG - must start to convert their practices this August and comply with all the new rules by the end of 2017.

The rules require them to "localise" their operations so that they are led by Chinese citizens and dominated by accountants holding China's accountancy qualifications.

And of course, what's the probability than one (or more) of thoses Chinese citizens to be much more likely to lets pass a few shit than would be embarasing for China ?

[DonQuigleone]

Methinks SaintessHeart is trolling ~.

I was surprised to find out my country legalized same sex unions back in 2011.

It seems the Catholic church has drawn it's line in the sand here over marriage.