Yet even more islamic lunacy: mother of two to be stoned to death!

[GPIDEAL]

Read the Bible. Stoning is nothing new. It is still done in Saudi Arabia, and probably Afghanistan.

Is stoning any less barbaric than using the Electric Chair when the chair fails to kill the first (or second) time? Any less lethal than "Lethal Injection" or the "Gas Chamber"?

How barbaric is it compared to an economic system that allows an ecological disaster like the fouling of the Alaskan coast give rise to the fouling of the Gulf coast, but does not change any regulations or hold the corporate leadership accountable?

Your analogies suck. At least, there's due process for the electric chair for someone that's committed a heinous crime. In any event, would you rather be stoned to death?

Barbaric economic system? You tell me that Exxon didn't pay for that spill? Aren't people as a whole better off in the west? What other economic systems are superior? The one that accounted for the Chernobyl nuclear disaster? Where's your Utopia?

 

[scarlet6969]

note to fellow women steven harper wants to get rid of the pay equity act so employers can choose to pay women whatever they want!!! harper MUST GET OUT!

 

[**Sophie**]

note to fellow women steven harper wants to get rid of the pay equity act so employers can choose to pay women whatever they want!!! harper MUST GET OUT!

You know what I'm talking about....Harper is messing up this country in soo many ways. Who voted for this guy? When is the next election? This fall?

But let's get back to this male dominated gendercide that's going on.

Did you know that woman are being genitally mutilated by female circumcision?? It's completely disgusting what woman have to endure. They cut the woman completley and then sew them up and then get sold into marriage at the age of 8 or 9, then have to be cut open again so they can consumate the marriage??

It's sick.

There was a new release called Desert Flower and I urge you to watch it if you can sit through it without crying.

 

[afterhours]

Gimme a break. Good thing I'm self-employed.

are you aware that you are self-employed because you happen to be selling a monopolized product for which all the men are paying pretty penny in one form or another, and which all women are selling in one form or another?

 

[**Sophie**]

are you aware that you are self-employed because you happen to be selling a product for which all the men are paying pretty penny in one form or another, and which all women are selling in one form or another?

Is that not the basis of all business. Buyer and Seller? What's your point?

 

[afterhours]

note to fellow women steven harper wants to get rid of the pay equity act so employers can choose to pay women whatever they want!!! harper MUST GET OUT!

link? he becomes my hero all of a sudden!

 

[afterhours]

Is that not the basis of all business. Buyer and Seller? What's your point?

I cannot sell my dick, you can sell your vagina. We are inherently not equal. If we are equal in all the other aspects, then I am inferior and you are superior.

 

[**Sophie**]

monopolized??? What are you talking about now??? If you want to use that argument perhaps it's monopolized because there is no woman who would need to pay for it, and not all woman can provide this much needed service??

Whoaaaaaaaa

 

[**Sophie**]

then I am inferior and you are superior.

Now your getting it!!! lol...
That was a joke in case you missed it.

FYI: We are not equal in all other aspects as I have already pointed out, not completely in this country, yet, and certainly not in most other countries hence the topic of this thread, so your argument is moot honey.

I will say that woman have come a longgg way since the 50's and I'm happy about that.

 

[djk]

Lest we forget men - woman are still getting paid 29% less on the dollar than their male counterparts

Myth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cb_6v-JQ13Q

There's eight parts to this video lecture. Please review and if you disagree, provide a logical counterargument using empirical evidence.

 

[afterhours]

monopolized??? What are you talking about now???

straight women have a product to sell and straight men don't. what's not to understand?

 

[**Sophie**]

There's eight parts to this video lecture. Please review and if you disagree, provide a logical counterargument using empirical evidence.

Could Mr. Boaz be more mean spirited and dismissive of women? His introduction is an insult to women who have experienced discrimination.

 

[**Sophie**]

straight women have a product to sell and straight men don't. what's not to understand?

Again, what is your point?

 

[afterhours]

Again, what is your point?

The point is that the pendulum swung too far. Men had it better than women in the 50s, and women have it better than men in 2010.

Ironically, men now are so pussy-whipped that they are even in denial as to how fucked they are.

 

[**Sophie**]

The point is that the pendulum swung too far. Men had it better than women in the 50s, and women have it better than men in 2010.

Ironically, men now are so pussy-whipped that they are even in denial as to how fucked they are.

In the 50's??? LOL..You mean men have had it better from the beginning of time?? Generally speaking.

Let's not get sidetracked. Woman are treated like property and inhumane in most 3rd world countries. That is a FACT which cannot and should not be argued.. EOS

Perhaps that's why they are still 3rd world countries, it's all the men still running the show. Give the women some rights, like being able to pick their own clothes, don't mutilate their genitals, allow them to pick up a book and read and maybe just maybe they will build a better country for themselves.

 

[djk]

Could Mr. Bose be more mean spirited and dismissive of women? His introduction is an insult to women who have experienced discrimination.

No emotional subjective opinions. Review his arguments and counter them with your own salient arguments based on empirical evidence.

 

[**Sophie**]

No emotional subjective opinions. Review his arguments and counter them with your own salient arguments based on empirical evidence.

I'm not emotional about what Boaz said in any way shape or form. Sorry to dissapoint you lol. The fact of the matter is, men are paid more then woman now and have been since women have been allowed to work.

Question? What exactly does CATO stand for?? Please don't tell me it's some military organization!

Edit: Nevermind I know who they are now.

CATO: A "libertarian" quasi-academic think-tank which acts as a mouthpiece for the globalism, corporatism, and neoliberalism of its corporate and conservative funders. Cato is an astroturf organization: there is no significant participation by the tiny libertarian minority. They do not fund it or affect its goals. It is a creature of corporations and foundations.

The major purpose of the Cato Institute is to provide propaganda and soundbites for conservative and libertarian politicians and journalists that is conveniently free of reference to funders such as tobacco, fossil fuel, investment, media, medical, and other regulated industries.

Cato is one of the most blatant examples of "simulated rationality", as described in Phil Agre's The Crisis of Public Reason. Arguments need only be plausibly rational to an uninformed listener. Only a tiny percentage will notice that they are being mislead. That's all that's needed to manage public opinion.

 

[djk]

I'm not emotional about what Bose said in any way shape or form. Sorry to dissapoint you lol. The fact of the matter is, men are payed more then woman now and have been since woman have been allowed to work.

Question? What exactly does CATO stand for?? Please don't tell me it's some military organization!

I understand. Whenever, a group of people are enjoying bailouts, government regulations in their favor and other privileges due to a myth. They'll say and do anything to defend it.

 

[Aardvark154]

Is stoning any less barbaric than using the Electric Chair when the chair fails to kill the first (or second) time? Any less lethal than "Lethal Injection" or the "Gas Chamber"?

Not less barbaric, far, far more barbaric!

 

[rhuarc29]

The only thing I disagree with in your argument Sophie, is that you use the wage gap as evidence of inequality. Aside from the fact that I believe the wage gap is 21% for full-time, 15% for part-time workers, this means your basis for equality is based on representation rather than opportunity. If I followed your line of thinking, I would be appalled that the gender gap in university enrollment is close to 40% (60 males per 100 females). But I don't see it that way. Inequalities (to me) exist when people of different sexes (or races) don't receive the same opportunity. A gender gap doesn't prove varying opportunities. It only proves that there once was.

Where I disagree with afterhours is that he seems to think the pay equity act is without merit. I think it is great in theory, and mediocre in practice (thus far). The problem I see with it is that is often religiously followed to the letter. A man and a woman may have the same job title and many of the same responsibilities. But the one with more specialized skills and who does the better job should be making more. The pay equity act does not take this into account.