Nightingale

No, it's not just your school. in the last three years, my school has: scheduled required classes for second years at the same time as other required classes so there was no way in hell we could take everything we were supposed to. added the same class to my schedule twice, one after the other. required a computer program to take exams that requires windows but won't run on service pack 2. put a hold on my registration because they messed up my financial aid, and took a week to get rid of it, which completely messed up my registration and now I can't take a class that's bar-tested, and this is my final semester.

This is my libertarianism 'tag line' - thank you

And for those that can't take care of themselves? (orphans, among many others)? Well, orphans usually become wards of the state if there is no family member willing to take responsibility for them. They then become the state's responsibility and should be cared for. As for the disabled, they should work to the extent that they can, and I have no problem with the government providing housing, food, and clothing directly. It's when the government provides cash to be spent as the individual sees fit that problems arise. I'm sick of reading about situations where people with disabilities could get a job and then don't, because the job would pay less than their disability, and they'd lose their disability benefits because they are now working. Nobody should have to say "I can't afford to get a job."

No. If I got in a paralyzing car wreck, I certainly wouldn't change my tune, because I've been responsible and budgeted for purchasing excellent health and disability insurance. Financially, I'd be set for life. I've been responsible, and I'm prepared to be able to financially take care of myself. I wouldn't depend on the government to do it for me, mainly because it's not their job to take care of me. It's my job to take care of me, so I've done so. Also, judging by the less than stellar track record our government has with managing its social programs, they'd probably fuck things up anyway. No, it's to get people off their asses and taking care of themselves instead of letting mommy-government do it for them. If the people on welfare that were able to work did so, then there would be much more resources left over to help the truly needy. It's the job of a PARENT to protect the children. It's the job of the government to provide a safe atmosphere for the parent to do so. The government should keep people safe from crime, fire, and invasion, as well as ensuring protection of our natural resources. It is not the job of the government to pay your rent, feed you, or to force other people to be nice and pay for it for you. You're saying that the government exists to make us be nice and take care of each other. You're wrong. The government exists in order to provide an environment in which we can take care of ourselves.

No. Libertarians don't believe that privatizing welfare will solve all society's problems (though I think it'd be a start). Libertarians simply believe that it is not the job of the government to take from some individuals to give to others. The job of the government is ensuring the safety of its citizens from outside factors, not playing Robin Hood.

Send him an email saying that you're not an auditory learner, so you have trouble remembering what he tells you on the phone, and to please contact you via email so you can look back at his instructions to make sure you've got them right.

I learned the mnemonic "Please Excuse My Dear Aunt Sally" which stood for Parentheses Exponents Multiplication, Division Addition, Subtraction. Since division is really multiplication (18 divided by 2 is the same as 18 times one half), and subtraction is really addition (you're not subtracting... you're adding a negative number. one minus one is the same as one plus negative one), you do division in the same step as multiplication, left to right, and same with addition and subtraction.

Oh, I'm sure you're right. It's just that I've got a fair vocabulary and didn't know such an adjective existed. The irony in its meanings caught me by surprise. Blues, Dave I wouldn't have known myself, except I was raised Catholic and was confused as to why, in the Nicene Creed, catholic was not capitalized, and asked my mom, so we looked it up.

"Educated enough," in my opinion, means being literate and knowing how to use resources such as a library or the internet to look up necessary information, and knowing how to discriminate between sources to determine accuracy, and how to write a report on it. Also, enough math to be able to manage their finances and file income tax, enough science to understand how our bodies work along with basic physics and chemistry, and, of course, a working knowledge of our government and constitution, as well as at least some idea of US and world history. So, in my opinion, required classes to graduate high school should be: Composition/Grammar/Research Algebra 1 Physical Science (basic chem/physics) Life Science (basic biology/health) US History and Government World History and foreign governments No, it's not right that people look down on people who do not have a college degree. They've simply made a different life choice based on their own priorities. Businesses, however, have the right to hire who they wish, education wise. My dad does many of the job interviews for his department, and says that he never hires people without a degree if at all possible, because when he hires someone who's gone through college, he gets someone who he knows can probably research whatever he needs done, and is more likely to be able to compose a legible memo about it. He doesn't want to waste time correcting the grammar and spelling of the people below him. I totally understand that. What I don't understand is why people aren't learning those skills in high school. Reading "Huckleberry Finn" is good, but learning how to write a memo to your boss is probably a lot more important.

I think they're talking about "catholic" the adjective, not "Catholic" the noun. 1. Of broad or liberal scope; comprehensive: “The 100-odd pages of formulas and constants are surely the most catholic to be found” (Scientific American). 2. Including or concerning all humankind; universal: “what was of catholic rather than national interest” (J.A. Froude).

Like I said, I'd really like to read your sources, so please PM them to me, if you don't wish to post them on the forum.

It's right here. http://www.lp.org/issues/platform_all.shtml I found it in about two clicks, under the "issues" heading.

When you find a source other than your own opinion, please let me know. I'd be interested to read it. As for believing what you read on the internet: Of course not. Just like you can't believe everything you hear and see. What you can do is use your critical thinking skills and weigh the evidence. Look at which sources are reliable, and which ones probably aren't. The internet is a fabulous resource if used properly, and I wish more schools would teach their students how to use it before they get to college and end up citing less than reliable sources.

Of course you're going to have some people who are very intelligent. The studies above discuss AVERAGES of groups as a whole, not individuals.

Cool! I've read most of them as well, and picked the one that best fit my views, even though I don't agree with all of it.

Just curious.

You didn't say why. I think, no matter who is elected, that most voters are not educated to the degree they ought to be about the issues, the candidates, our constitution, and our legal system. Many people vote along party lines because they don't understand the issues and don't research the candidates. I don't think it's got anything to do with college. Anybody can read their voter guide, go to their library and look up the candidates on the internet, and read their party's platform. College is too late to wait to educate kids about the way our government should work, what its role is, and what its role is not. Constitutional law should be a mandatory high school subject. In recent years, it seems as though we've been confusing the role of high schools and colleges. After high school, a person should have a working knowledge of math, science, English, history, and political science. College is supposed to be extra education, above and beyond the basics. Colleges shouldn't have to teach composition and grammar. That's high school's job. Colleges certainly shouldn't be teaching remedial math, basic chemistry, biology, or physics. They shouldn't have to teach that the US Constitution overrules the majority vote. A high school graduate should already know this stuff. College should be an extra, but recently, people have been looking at it as a necessity. Not everybody should go to college. Not everybody wants to go to college. They should be able to get along fine without that degree, but more and more, employers expect it and people without it are treated as second-class.

LOL. Some police departments have used cardboard cutouts, and the speeders don't realize the thing is cardboard (if they realize it at all) until after they've hit the brakes and slowed down.

I'd like to know where you're getting your data, as mine indicates that this isn't the case. Burnham P. Beckwit, in his article "The Effect of Intelligence on Religious Faith" (1986) summarized the major studies done on religiousity and IQ. All but four of the forty-three polls listed support the conclusion that native intelligence varies inversely with degree of religious faith; i.e., that, other factors being equal, the more intelligent a person is, the less religious he/she is. His summary: Sixteen studies of the correlation between individual measures of student intelligence and religiosity, all but three of which reported an inverse correlation. Five studies reporting that student bodies with high average IQ and/or SAT scores are far less religious than lower-scoring student bodies. Three studies reporting that geniuses (IQ 3+ standard deviations above average) are much less religious than the general public. Seven studies reporting that highly successful persons are much less religious in belief than are others; and eight old and four new Gallup polls revealing that college alumni (average IQ about one standard deviation above average) are much less religious in belief than are grade-school pollees. Other studies: A 1959 study of a group with IQs over 140 found that of men, 10 percent held strong religious belief, of women 18 percent (Terman). Sixty-two percent of men and 57 percent of women claimed "little religious inclination" while 28 percent of the men and 23 percent of the women claimed it was "not at all important." A 1968 study (Southern and Plant) of Mensa members found that they had fewer religious beliefs than the typical American college alumnus or adult. A survey (Larson and Witham, 1998) of the 517 members of the United States National Academy of Sciences showed that 72.2% of the members expressed "personal disbelief" in a personal God while 20.8% expressed "doubt or agnosticism" and only 7.0% expressed "personal belief".

Have you called your local police department? Sometimes they will send a cop out to ticket, especially if you live in a suburb rather than a big city. My parents' HOA calls them in every so often because of people speeding through the side streets, and they actually do show up. Something they tried in Florida: It’s a familiar sight in a small suburban Florida town heading south on State Road 7 to Fort Lauderdale: the police officer standing next to a parked patrol car in the median, pointing a radar gun at oncoming traffic, a pair of sunglasses shielding his eyes from the sun’s glare. But in the bedroom community of Margate, Fla., the ticket writer may be made of paper himself. The Margate Police Department added the decoy officer to its force to slow motorists with lead feet. The “Dannequin” is a cardboard replica of Officer Dan Baumwoll, a member of the local force who lent the two-dimensional cop his face. “He was placed anywhere we had excessive speeding complaints or accidents,” Sgt. Andy Zettek said. “You could not tell that he was a cardboard cutout until you were right up on him. You could see motorists react to it by putting on the brakes.” .......... You can find cardboard cutouts of the CHiPs guys at some nostalgia stores, and if you can't find them, you can take a photo of a motorcycle cop (or just grab one off the internet), and take it to your local copy shop or kinko's, and they can make one for you. A manequin in a cop outfit on a motorcycle holding a hair dryer or star trek phaser would work better, but it'd be a lot more expensive.

College opens doors for you and gives you options that you wouldn't have otherwise. It also gives 18 year olds, who don't know anything about the world or themselves, more exposure to different things. I had a friend who was sure he wanted to be an engineer and picked up a real-estate class as his business elective. He's now a hotel broker getting commission off multi-million dollar deals. Personally, I knew what I wanted and didn't change my major, but I took some electives that have had a big part in shaping who I am today. My law and politics class is a big reason why I'm in law school right now. My creative art elective is why I'm still looking to dance as exercise and stress relief, ten years after the class. My world history class taught me to love learning about other cultures, and even now, half the books in my bookcase are history books or historical fiction. My choral music classes gave me the confidence to be able to stand up in front of a large group and do something I'm good at. When you've faced a sold-out crowd at the hollywood bowl, public speaking and argument in law school really isn't a big deal. If I hadn't gone to college, I would never have known that I love history and dance, or that large crowds really aren't so scary. I would never have discovered that I enjoy legal argument, and I certainly wouldn't be in law school. At my last job (before I went to law school), I sat next to a guy who did the same job as I did. Exactly the same. But... I got paid about $15K more than he did because I was a college graduate and he wasn't, so they considered my skills and potential more valuable and paid me more. Was I better off? If I'd stayed there a few more years, my degree would've paid for itself easily. Education is a very personal journey, and I don't think I'm better than anyone else because I chose to go to college. I do, however, think I'm better off than I would be if I hadn't.

They have a terrible understanding of how their state school system works? Or... They prefer the small class size of private universities, where the professors will actually know their kids' names, where all their classes will actually be taught by the professors and not TAs. Perhaps, the state universities in their state do not offer the major that their kid wants, and the private school does. Private schools don't care what state the kid is from. I went to a private university and don't regret the cost at all (and no, my parents didn't pay for it. I did). However, I took the time to apply for scholarships and grants, also. I wanted to study film. I had pretty much two choices if I wanted my education to have any kind of name-recognition, and those were Loyola Marymount or USC. Both private. I visited both, and picked the one I liked best, which also happened to be the cheaper of the two. I worked in the industry for a few years, and had been getting job offers while I was still working on my degree. I didn't have to chase down job offers. They came to me. I think the biggest difference between public and private schools here in California is size. My largest class ever as a college student had 24 people in it. My brother, who went to Cal State Fullerton, found that his smallest class had 100 people. I knew my teachers and was on a first name basis with most of them. I felt like my teachers knew me and really wanted me to succeed, while my brother's teachers didn't even know his name.

What a beautiful little kitty! Please, don't teach her to play with ribbon. Ribbon can be very dangerous for cats if they get to it when you're not supervising them. It ends up turning into a VERY expensive vet visit. Also, the ASPCA has veterinary health insurance for pets that might be a wise investment. My cat had a surgery that cost about $1500 that would've cost me $50 if I'd had insurance. $1500 is more than I'd have paid in insurance premiums for 8 years. She's such a pretty kitty...such bright eyes! My name suggestions: Morgana (morgan or morgaine), king arthur's sister, Nimue (Nim-way), Merlin's girlfriend. Morrigan, the Irish goddess of prophecy Crookshanks, Hermione's cat in Harry Potter Bastet, the egyptian cat goddess Freya, the norse goddess whose chariot was drawn by winged cats Bagheera, the panther in the jungle book (Kipling) Minerva, the roman goddess of wisdom, and the harry potter character who can turn into a cat Schrodinger, after the famous paradoxical quantum mechanics experiment (Shrodinger's Cat) Artemis - greek moon goddess Rhiannon - celtic goddess Isis - egyptian goddess, wife of Osiris Megara - one of the Furies

Abortion is personal. "Pro-choice" and "Pro-Life" are political. They describe how you vote/how you would vote. I agree. Politically, I'm pro-choice, because I don't believe it's my place to step in and tell another woman whether or not she should carry a child. What happens within my own body is my business. What happens inside your body is not my business and doesn't affect me in any way whatsoever. Personally, I'd never have an abortion unless my life was in danger. I'm pro-choice, and that's my choice.

I don't think not wanting kids is selfish... I don't know if this is coincidence or not, but most of the people I know who don't want children had fairly rotten home lives when they were children (not saying this is the norm...just what I've seen personally). My brother and I have a large extended family (including the folks who've married in, 11 aunts and uncles, 13 cousins, and more extended family than we can really get to know even though we all get together a few times a year anyway, but we'd all do anything for each other. If you're family, you're family. We stick together, and even though we all don't always agree, we all care about each other). All my cousins, and my brother and I, all want kids. We've seen what a wonderful experience a big extended family can be, and we have a desire to share and maintain that experience.