The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
No bio...
User ID: 174
There was also some cases (Nevaeh Crain and Josseli Barnica) clearly within Texas's rules, but doctors claimed there was ambiguity and let the patient suffer and die to make a political point.
Arday isn't in "The Witch is Dead!" category for me, but only because he lacked the reach. He had basically no influence in the US, he didn't even write (or rather plagiarize) papers read by local wokescolds. Other than that... well, Arday went so far as to report his critics to the police. He was not some tragic, innocent victim, not in the least.
People have suicided due to cancellation before, e.g. Mike Adams.
"Seppo" is an American, derogatory rhyming slang from "Yank" to "Septic Tank".
Personally I'm in favor of actually fighting against encroachment on the cases which you think are too far
The point of "slippery slope" is this doesn't work. Once the principle has been yielded, you can fight all you want but you're going to slip down the slope.
maybe the structure we want is that mercy killing should be illegal and prosecuted by the legal system, but it always remains a possibility for individual action.
This sort of thing is a cry for tyranny. Legal things should be legal, not illegal but overlooked if the right people find it convenient to do so.
I meant generally move their body in controlled but odd ways, not that specific (choreographed) dance.
Chesterton said "if you understand why the fence was there, then you can tear it down".
No, he did not. He said "If you do not understand why the fence is there, then you may not tear it down". Understanding is necessary, not sufficient. Which is why in practice people invoking Chesterton's Fence are usually just saying "no". If you point out the reason the fence was there, they'll come up with another reason.
They require incurable instead of terminal.
That's a big difference. Lots of fairly minor conditions are incurable.
It's hard to reconcile on purity grounds, which 'ghoulish' evokes. But it's not hard on more practical grounds, like "It's bad to euthanise terminally ill grandma, because that sets us on a slippery slope where we're euthanizing Mom because she's got killer migraines and Sis because feeling depressed"
(all the MAID horror stories I've seen are women, but that may just be reporting bias; almost no one cares if a mostly healthy guy offs himself, with help or without)
Then the "system" that you're referring to dismantling entirely here is the government, right?
The science-funding part of the government, anyway. The rest can wait for another subthread.
The leadership of the Gulf States are happy with Israel now on the "my enemy's enemy" principle. The people of those states (including people in their military) still hate the Jews as much as ever.
Banning mere possession (with no before-the-fact knowledge of production) is already on shaky ground, free-speech-absolutist-wise. As soon as you cross into "This should be illegal because it resembles actual CSAM" you have to turn in your absolutist card.
Actually, you've probably already lost your card when you ban production, because CSAM includes material produced by sexting teens.
You're going to exclude single-vehicle accidents?
Best I can do is https://ohss.dhs.gov/topics/immigration/yearbook/2024/table10
There's a lot more from the third world, but there's still a significant number from Europe.
Hot take: Talented nepo babies in Hollywood are vindication of HBD.
Sampling non-fatal accidents is impossible; you'd get into too many arguments about what constitutes an accident. If you include every fender-bender and aviation "incident", the number will be close to zero in both.
Were those a requirement of the funding agency?
Yes. And the funding agencies were (and maybe still are) routinely including this stuff. Maybe the government ones aren't now, but they will again as soon as a Democrat is in charge. There's no way to keep that from happening without dismantling the system entirely.
Most of the ones I've read were fed to me... by people outraged at their being canceled because there was clearly no DEI in there. But there was.
The press and special interest groups do not produce the data themself though.
The people who fund them do. They produce studies which just happen to support what they are advocating through the press and the special interest groups.
How many engineering/math grant proposals or papers have you read?
Enough to see the ideology. When supposedly pure math grant proposals contain various DEI goals, it's pretty clear the system is broken.
It's occupying the niche while not satisfying it. It has to be burned down for another institution to arise.
Undergraduate is a proxy for IQ and conscientiousness, so replacing it with pure IQ loses something.
Postgrad, lowercase-a academia
Kill it with fire. This system is entirely broken. The grants are politically or ideologically written, peer review is largely logrolling, papers are nonsense (Replication Crisis). The PIs are there to take in money and build fiefdoms, the PhD students are highly-educated grunts to actually write the papers.
DeSantis is term limited out in Florida in January; that'll end his attacks on Florida college woke. Abbott's haven't been nearly as effective.
- Prev
- Next

It is tempting to believe that like leftists, rightists will engage in ridiculous contortions, twisting plain language to go after their enemy. And if that were true, abortion would certainly be the issue in which they would. But to my surprise the evidence of this is lacking; one interesting data point is that when an abortion law looked like it threatened IVF, Alabama fell over itself (overcorrecting, IMO) to avoid that. One might reasonably believe that Ken Paxton himself might be overzealous, but I believe he would have no support in Texas courts.
More options
Context Copy link