LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 06-23-2009, 01:41 PM   #46
DotHQ
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2006
Location: Ohio, USA
Distribution: Red Hat, Fedora, Knoppix,
Posts: 542

Rep: Reputation: 33

Quote:
Originally Posted by rsciw View Post
Ah, didn't know Linux had oil, or why should it be American suddenly?

And whatever it takes for an American to necessarily call something "it's American"...

Unix / BSD was there before Microsoft. Didn't take up much either, so doubt that would've helped with Windows much.
Linux was there before win95. granted, Win3.1(1) was quite popular then already, but still, not really everyone was online then.

There's also nothing un-Australian about sharing, neither un-european, neither un-south african (don't know any other countries' mentality down there. but best example for RSA and sharing --> canonical's boss...)
Probably also nothing un-Asian about sharing.

so all in all, what was the whole sense of your post in the beginning?
Yep, UNIX / BSD and AT&T UNIX were all way before MS came around. 1970 or therebouts. I read long ago that Bill Gates original DOS was based on UNIX.
Linux is UNIX that runs on the i386 processor. It is no more American than it is any other nations who have contributed to it's development.

If the OP meant it is American in that now our country is working to take from the rich and give to the poor Robin Hood style, I do not see that in the Linux community. Linux is a gift. Those that can give to it, help build it and make it better. To me, that is what makes Linux great and the hope for the future of OS's.
 
Old 06-23-2009, 03:49 PM   #47
ANO1453
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Location: Portugal
Distribution: Kubuntu 8.04.2
Posts: 52

Rep: Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbiesforever
I understand that in European countries, abortion was accepted through legislation
Here, it was approved by the legislative body, against the People's will. Most of us could not conceive how does someone, with all the information and contraceptive methods there is, would still want the 'right to abortion' (before, it was only legal in cases of raping or when it represented danger to the mother or the foetus), paid with taxpayers money! Specially in a country with demographic ageing.

The same happened with the Treaty of Lisbon, approved without referendum. In Ireland, they voted No to the Treaty in a referendum and now they are making another. It's a shame. The Irish, the only Europeans called to vote the Treaty directly, said NO, and now a new referendum is being made. They intend to make referendums until Ireland says yes.
 
Old 06-23-2009, 03:52 PM   #48
newbiesforever
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Location: Glendale, AZ
Distribution: Distro-homeless. Lost.
Posts: 1,875

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 62
I see...I didn't know many Europeans opposed abortion. (Because so many are Roman Catholic, perhaps?) Thanks for the information.

Last edited by newbiesforever; 06-23-2009 at 03:55 PM.
 
Old 06-23-2009, 04:22 PM   #49
XavierP
Moderator
 
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Kent, England
Distribution: Lubuntu
Posts: 19,176
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 430Reputation: 430Reputation: 430Reputation: 430Reputation: 430
Quote:
Originally Posted by ANO1453 View Post
Here, it was approved by the legislative body, against the People's will. Most of us could not conceive how does someone, with all the information and contraceptive methods there is, would still want the 'right to abortion' (before, it was only legal in cases of raping or when it represented danger to the mother or the foetus), paid with taxpayers money! Specially in a country with demographic ageing.
The thing is, if they have the baby the taxpayer will be supporting the child for much longer and for more money. Using "taxes" as a justification for or against abortion is a no-win situation. It's far too emotive a subject and too far-ranging in terms of supporters of both sides.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ANO1453 View Post
The same happened with the Treaty of Lisbon, approved without referendum. In Ireland, they voted No to the Treaty in a referendum and now they are making another. It's a shame. The Irish, the only Europeans called to vote the Treaty directly, said NO, and now a new referendum is being made. They intend to make referendums until Ireland says yes.
IIRC, Ireland voted No because they wanted some concessions. Also, IIRC, they were planning to vote Yes when it was resubmitted as long as it had the concessions they wanted. This is purely from memory, by the way, and I can't be bothered to go to Wikipedia or other sites to check
 
Old 06-23-2009, 04:48 PM   #50
newbiesforever
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Location: Glendale, AZ
Distribution: Distro-homeless. Lost.
Posts: 1,875

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 62
Wait--which Ireland?

Since humor tends to excuse controversial statements, I should have cribbed American comedian Steven Colbert by titling this "Linux is American, And So Can You."

Last edited by newbiesforever; 06-23-2009 at 04:51 PM.
 
Old 06-23-2009, 04:52 PM   #51
rsciw
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2009
Location: Essex (UK)
Distribution: Home: Debian/Ubuntu, Work: Ubuntu
Posts: 206

Rep: Reputation: 44
I'll never understand people who're against abortion.
If it's not their own body, they can pretty much F off imo.

Only those roman catholics or others stuck in old ages are against it.
Well, time to wake up for them
 
Old 06-23-2009, 05:02 PM   #52
ANO1453
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Location: Portugal
Distribution: Kubuntu 8.04.2
Posts: 52

Rep: Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierP
The thing is, if they have the baby the taxpayer will be supporting the child for much longer and for more money. Using "taxes" as a justification for or against abortion is a no-win situation. It's far too emotive a subject and too far-ranging in terms of supporters of both sides.
But the child will eventually produce and contribute. The question here is that many think that the State shouldn't pay for the abortions of woman that knew perfectly the consequences of their actions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierP
Ireland voted No because they wanted some concessions. Also, IIRC, they were planning to vote Yes when it was resubmitted as long as it had the concessions they wanted. This is purely from memory, by the way, and I can't be bothered to go to Wikipedia or other sites to check
With the changes that the Treaty presents, they obviously wanted concessions. Their measures will withdraw power from the smaller countries. Until now, any country could exercise its veto. After the Treaty, the number of representatives will depend upon its population, and it won't suffice a single country veto to block a measure. Also, they want the fisheries controlled directly from Brussels.

Quote:
Originally Posted by newbiesforever
I see...I didn't know many Europeans opposed abortion. (Because so many are Roman Catholic, perhaps?) Thanks for the information.
I only speak of what I see in my country.

Quote:
Originally Posted by "newbiesforever
Wait--which Ireland?
Republic of Ireland.
 
Old 06-23-2009, 05:27 PM   #53
XavierP
Moderator
 
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Kent, England
Distribution: Lubuntu
Posts: 19,176
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 430Reputation: 430Reputation: 430Reputation: 430Reputation: 430
Quote:
Originally Posted by ANO1453 View Post
But the child will eventually produce and contribute. The question here is that many think that the State shouldn't pay for the abortions of woman that knew perfectly the consequences of their actions.
We hope the child would contribute. We see stories every day of people who are oxygen thieves! Speaking of which, under the National Health Service, if I get drunk and drive a car ploughing through a convent and a nursery and hit my head on the dashboard and sustain an injury, I will get treated at the expense of the taxpayer! Great system, eh?

The fact is that we all are capable of and do things that are subsidised by the taxpayer and contribute nothing at all to the rest of the country. Which is more humane: an abortion or to have the child and to leave it with abusive foster parents ensuring it will perpetuate a cycle of abuse*?

Again, no win situation, except that in a "no abortion" state we end up with amateur and butchered "backstreet" abortions that leave the woman unable to procreate again (best case scenario) or dead from sepsis. We know this, because it's exactly what happened in the years leading up to the legalisation of abortion.


* Not a dig at foster parents, most of whom do it selflessly and often.
 
Old 06-23-2009, 06:58 PM   #54
Uncle_Theodore
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Location: Charleston WV, USA
Distribution: Slackware 12.2, Arch Linux Amd64
Posts: 896

Rep: Reputation: 60
Abortion is entirely the woman's decision. The government should not have a say in it. And the government should not pay for it, from the taxpayers' money. That's my opinion. Yeah, I'm a libertarian, it's like a conservative, but somewhat better...
Also, I think, if the woman has the right to abort a child if she chooses so, without asking the child 's father for permission, the father should have the right to deny to support the child he doesn't want. Wouldn't that be fair?

Lesse, what haven't we flamed about in this thread yet?.. Anybody want to take Emacs vs Vi challenge?
 
Old 06-23-2009, 07:14 PM   #55
bloodsugar
Member
 
Registered: May 2009
Posts: 36

Rep: Reputation: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierP View Post
or to have the child and to leave it with abusive foster parents ensuring it will perpetuate a cycle of abuse*?

* Not a dig at foster parents, most of whom do it selflessly and often.
Also, Id just like to add that the vast majority of the cases we are hearing about today where an infant is seriously abused or even killed, are from single mothers who take in a boyfriend.

Stepfathers are the bigger danger to children than biological fathers, because they are not related. Its like lion cubs. if theres a new male it will often kill those cubs which were not produced by him.

I should put in my own caveat here, and say obviously not all stepfathers are like this.
 
Old 06-23-2009, 07:23 PM   #56
bloodsugar
Member
 
Registered: May 2009
Posts: 36

Rep: Reputation: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle_Theodore View Post
Also, I think, if the woman has the right to abort a child if she chooses so, without asking the child 's father for permission, the father should have the right to deny to support the child he doesn't want. Wouldn't that be fair?
Unfortunatley, as good and proper that suggestion may be, im afraid if you get a woman pregnant (and yes some women do purposely trap men), then that man has to pay regardless of wether he wants to or not. I cant see that changing.

Another huge issue is paternity fraud. Pregnant women claiming that a particular male is the biological father of her unborn child, when she is not sure, or blatently knows he is not. Its estimated that it might be as high as 1 in 10 children may not be biologically related to the man who thinks he is the father.

On a related note, it is thought that 80% of the female population have sex with only 20% of the male population.

Last edited by bloodsugar; 06-23-2009 at 07:37 PM.
 
Old 06-23-2009, 07:32 PM   #57
johnsfine
Guru
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Distribution: Centos
Posts: 5,107

Rep: Reputation: 1114Reputation: 1114Reputation: 1114Reputation: 1114Reputation: 1114Reputation: 1114Reputation: 1114Reputation: 1114Reputation: 1114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle_Theodore View Post
Abortion is entirely the woman's decision. The government should not have a say in it.
I agree. I understand and respect the other side of that view, unlike the right wing side of most of what I consider "church and state" issues. But I still take the (American) liberal side on that one.

Quote:
And the government should not pay for it, from the taxpayers' money.
Much harder question, but I land on the other side (liberal again). I hate being the liberal in an argument, but it does happen.

Quote:
I'm a libertarian, it's like a conservative, but somewhat better.
As an abstraction, I agree with you. As a practical political position in America, it doesn't work and it attracts a lot of nuts with very objectionable (and very non libertarian) views.

I guess I'm none of the above. I just dislike the liberals more than I dislike the conservatives.

Quote:
I think, if the woman has the right to abort a child if she chooses so, without asking the child 's father for permission
Yes.

Quote:
the father should have the right to deny to support the child he doesn't want. Wouldn't that be fair?
Sorry. Some aspects of life just can't be made fair. Pretending they can be made fair just makes them worse. The father should not have the right to deny support. That often is very unfair to the father. But the alternative law would be worse.

Quote:
Anybody want to take Emacs vs Vi challenge?
First I annoyed the old-time Linux fanatic by pronouncing it like the word "vie". When informed that was not correct, I got him real angry by pronouncing it "six".

Don't worry. I also hate Emacs.
 
Old 06-23-2009, 07:55 PM   #58
Uncle_Theodore
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Location: Charleston WV, USA
Distribution: Slackware 12.2, Arch Linux Amd64
Posts: 896

Rep: Reputation: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsfine View Post
Much harder question, but I land on the other side (liberal again). I hate being the liberal in an argument, but it does happen.
Now, wait a sec! If you can't make a decision, you shouldn't be forced to pay for its consequences. Same goes for the government. If taxpayers' money is used to pay for abortions, but the majority of them don't agree with the whole issue, then it's theft.
Quote:
As an abstraction, I agree with you. As a practical political position in America, it doesn't work and it attracts a lot of nuts with very objectionable (and very non libertarian) views.
Well. How does it not work? Libertarian party is quite young and developing. But the message is clear, the ideas are strong and consistent, just give it a little time. As to the nuts, they can be found everywhere. Especially in political movements. Take feminism for an obvious example.
Quote:
Sorry. Some aspects of life just can't be made fair. Pretending they can be made fair just makes them worse. The father should not have the right to deny support. That often is very unfair to the father. But the alternative law would be worse.
If you count the number of smileys in my original post, you'd see that I was not entirely serious.
Quote:
First I annoyed the old-time Linux fanatic by pronouncing it like the word "vie". When informed that was not correct, I got him real angry by pronouncing it "six".

Quote:
Don't worry. I also hate Emacs.
Mighty flames on you and plague on both your houses!!!!!!!
Emacs is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and anyone who thinks otherwise has no clue about anything!!! Flame, flame, flame!!!!

Last edited by Uncle_Theodore; 06-23-2009 at 07:59 PM.
 
Old 06-23-2009, 08:27 PM   #59
newbiesforever
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Location: Glendale, AZ
Distribution: Distro-homeless. Lost.
Posts: 1,875

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 62
That sounds similar to my parody of NBA superstars' fanboys. It starts with "[name] is the best player ever at every statistic in the game. If you disagree, shut up, or I'll come to your home (yes, I know where you live, because [name] told me) and make you watch videos of all his best games. Which could take a while, because every game he plays in in his best..."

Last edited by newbiesforever; 06-23-2009 at 08:29 PM.
 
Old 06-24-2009, 04:04 AM   #60
ANO1453
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Location: Portugal
Distribution: Kubuntu 8.04.2
Posts: 52

Rep: Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle_Theodore
If taxpayers' money is used to pay for abortions, but the majority of them don't agree with the whole issue, then it's theft.
Precisely! When representatives of a country do what its population doesn't want or simply doesn't care, they are not doing what their supposed to do, that is, to represent the People.

For instance, the Treaty of Lisbon diminished the powers of the smaller countries. What authority have the representatives to abdicate of a power that's not theirs, but of their people?
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Where are the American Linux desktop users? LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 10-24-2007 08:20 AM
LXer: Linux to help the Library of Congress save American history LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 03-29-2007 09:01 AM
American Linux veteran in Asia jdickey LinuxQuestions.org Member Intro 2 06-06-2006 11:38 AM
LXer: Novell bringing Linux to American schools LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 12-21-2005 02:46 AM
Three kinds of Linux users: an observation ptesone General 37 03-31-2004 11:53 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:00 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration