posted on September 5, 2002 01:01:41 PM new
What is the Cube Root of 27?
Well?
What's my postion, my stance?
Everyopne's been giving me a hard time about questions = stance/opinion
>The actual act of putting a question out there before others presumes a lot and states in that assumption enough to define a position for the one posing it. gravid
OK, gravid - what's my position for the question above concerning the Cube Root of 27?
I'm not trying to pound on gravid alone, as others have also tried to make this same point. Must I go post quotes from them too? I want everyone who thinks that a question reveals something about the person asking the question to please step forward and explain how "What is the Cube Root of 27?" translates to a personal position, stance, or opinion?
posted on September 5, 2002 01:24:40 PM new
It is 3
Which of course means that you are a firm believer in the Holy Trinity (Big Daddy, Junior and the Spook)
Oops, here comes the Boss, back to serious work......
.
A Man will spend $2.00 for a $1.00 item he needs.
A Woman will spend $1.00 for a $2.00 item she doesn't need.
posted on September 5, 2002 01:29:57 PM new
If I were really mean I would say it presumes we care.
How the cube root of 27 matters to any particular other facts or conditions needs to be expanded a bit before we can see it's importance in your vision.
I've never had a deep talant for math so I certainally have no grip with the conventional forms for computing such numbers . When I was in school they never really even made clear such things as the difference between ordinal and cardinal numbers. I had to figure all that out at the library on my own. Still can't do calculus.
posted on September 5, 2002 02:30:55 PM new
Obviously your initial post reveals an inadequecy hang-up with calculus. I could do up an intergral for you but I don't have the proper keyboard.
posted on September 5, 2002 04:04:47 PM new
It's very simple, borillar. Gravid NEEDS to know if you tie your shoelaces left or right bowed, and if so why.
Why do you give time or thought to any of this at all? The spectacle of the group of chatboard denizens sitting in judgement of you or anyone is ludicrous enough without your assigning credence to it.
'on' to 'of'. (why? did he MEAN it?)
[ edited by krs on Sep 5, 2002 04:10 PM ]
posted on September 5, 2002 04:42:53 PM new
That's right. I'm amazed that you care enough to ask the question, borillar. When you sit in judgement of us, we don't assign any credence to it.
posted on September 5, 2002 05:28:54 PM new
If you have to ask, then really you have no place here among us. I'll expect your manifesto on my desk in the morning. LOL
posted on September 5, 2002 05:30:49 PM new
>Why do you give time or thought to any of this at all? The spectacle of the group of chatboard denizens sitting in judgement of you or anyone is ludicrous enough without your assigning credence to it.
posted on September 5, 2002 06:09:10 PM new
Borillar- I would think that there are relatively few who insist on the taking of a position with every posed question. I tend to agree with my good friend krs' statement, but them again I have at times asked him to take a position after seeing some of his inflammatory statements or quotes. The hypocrisy of it all!!!!!!! BTW- The smiley face is a good sign that you have joined the Lowered Expectations online chat/dating service. BTW2-The correct answer to your question on the AW/Jeopardy board is "what is three?"
posted on September 5, 2002 06:32:07 PM new
>>That's right. I'm amazed that you care enough to ask the question, borillar. When you sit in judgement of us, we don't assign any credence to it.
What a waste of time!<<
We all have our moments. Borillar seems to making a career of it. So I would say to Borillar, that even more than me, you need to get out more!
We are all bozo-pixels on this bus.
(Man whatta couple of days. I wish I had a hidden camera and a wire.)
My spinner won't spin and the exclamation marks are still here
You have the right to an informed opinion -Harlan Ellison
[ edited by snowyegret on Sep 6, 2002 07:56 AM ]
posted on September 6, 2002 10:03:33 AM new
Alright, I *am* curious, what makes you so emotional over the concept of illegal immigrants receiving American Citizenship anyway, gravid? I still do not understand the rationelle behind it.
posted on September 6, 2002 01:59:27 PM new
>>Alright, I *am* curious, what makes you so emotional over the concept of illegal immigrants receiving American Citizenship anyway, gravid? I still do not understand the rationelle behind it.<<
NOBODY ANSWER THIS UNTL BORILLAR TELLS US HIS "EMOTIONAL RATIONALE" FOR BANGING HIS HEAD AGAINST A MONITOR AND TRYING TO MAKE US ALL MISERABLE.
posted on September 6, 2002 02:06:14 PM new
eerrrrr, nycyn, that sounds like missionary position to me. You have the right to an informed opinion -Harlan Ellison
posted on September 6, 2002 08:48:50 PM new
Interestingly, I had responded to Borillar first but it has disappeared. That has been happening a lot this week..So it goes.
Cyn
Edited to add: It was a personal, self revelatory, maybe even sensitive to Borillar one. Maybe somebody got it in mail. So, Borillar, this medium has serious limitations... I may be impatient, but I'm one f the last to have given up on you.
But I'm tired, and still gone.
Every one, mostly , has been great and I love you for it. I just can't give back much right now.
posted on September 6, 2002 10:11:28 PM new
But, raw - what if I really want to be abandoned, all alone, and defenseless in the RT? What if I want everyone to be angry at me, write scathing replies to my posts that have nothing to do with the thread topic or post contents themselves? What if I really do enjoy exposing our hypocrisy? Can you image what it would be like to be in a thread "discussion" and get into a heated corner and not ever have anyone to come defend you? Hmmm . . . considering that's how I usually love the situation, maybe I've hit on something. Oh, well At least no one can accuse Helen and KRS and the others of teaming up with me to bash poor grunts who wish they'd never shared their CC info with AuctionWatch to get in here. LOL!
But thanks anyway, raw. I really and honestly did want a discussion on the topic of Citizenship, what is it and what it is not, should we keep it, amend it, or toss it all away as an antique that has outlived its usefulness. I just wanted to have - for once, an intelligent discussion that didn't include blasting one another's positions, but rather, logically testing out each other's propositions -- like we used to do on the debate team. But that's not what anyone else wants and that's when it really hit home.
posted on September 6, 2002 10:24:16 PM new
Actually, I wouldn't mind a discussion on citizenship. I wasn't around here when that thread was going and by the time I got here it was all gone to heck.
Debating is hard in this format though. I know I don't type fast enough nor do I formulate my thoughts as well when I type as when I talk. I could talk your ear off about this stuff in RL. My husband would attest to that.
posted on September 7, 2002 10:54:15 AM new
Well, as the creator of this thread, I'm saying that I don't mind if the topic turns that way.
Debating is hard in this medium. Intent is murky and often misinterpreted, so one has to be extremely careful how they word their posts. Try to approach each topic and point dryly and from a rational standpoint. Personal feelings are often the impetus for a notion, but by translating it into a non-emotional debate language, as it were, you can see how accurate your feelings without getting hurt or upset. It's a real challenge of typing and writing skills.
The Question was two-fold:
a) Is it right for illegal immigrants to come to America and to obtain Citizenship?
b) Is there a responsiblilty by Citizens to contribute of themselves in order to be Citizens?
From these arguements, I suggested that there were four things that a Citizen is required to do:
1) To pay taxes
2) To Obey the Law
3) To contribute personal time to the good of society or the nation
4) To participate in the functioning of government; i.e. voting and poltiics
KatyD brought in a good bit of info that she had heard on a television program, was that Citizenship was granted to those who are born in America only from the Civil War in order to give freed slaves the right to Citizenship.
REAMOND made a good point that the law does not mention a moral impreitive as such for the contribution of personal services to society or the nation. I did counter that with the question of the Draft, but REAMOND stayed away from the thread.
You know, we could continue in this vein if you want. All I can say is what I've said before: I agree with all sides of the issues and I'd like to resolve that situation logically.
posted on September 7, 2002 05:03:27 PM new
Actually, the 14th Amendment was primarily to allow ex-slaves full citizenship. The concept of citizenship here in the US dates back to the Continental Congress--and covered anyone born in the US...declarations through the years before the 14th amendment also touch on the fact that children of US citizens born outside of the US are themselves citizens.
Is it right for illegal immigrants to come to America and to obtain Citizenship?
No. If they don't get in legally, they shouldn't be here at all. Nor should they be allowed to access social services. Sounds harsh, but that's life. I'm getting sick and tired of hearing about illegals' "rights." They don't have any rights--they aren't citizens and therefore not covered by our Constitution, Bill of Rights or anything else. You can bet that if a US citizen decided to barge into another country illegally & demand the rights pertaining to its citizens, that person would be tossed out--and rightfully so.
Is there a responsiblilty by Citizens to contribute of themselves in order to be Citizens?
I think citizens do have a responsibility to vote, to serve on juries, to follow our laws, etc. I don't believe that public service (outside of juries or military)or volunteerism can be mandated, but rather should be up to the individual.
posted on September 7, 2002 07:13:00 PM new
On the one hand, I completely agree that persons who enter the United States illegally - uninvited as it were, do not have any claim on Citizenship or rights. On the other hand, many illegals have entered this country, put up with harsh living and working conditions, and have added to society in the form of taxes and enriching the cultural stewpot that we all eat from. Citizenship does entitle a person to the Rights granted by our Constitution, so it is something that anyone who comes here should want to obtain. Being on a "Green Card" does not grant anyone any Rights, but offers Privileges. The difference is that Rights can not be taken away, except by Due Process as defined by law. Rights also have Responsibilities. Privileges really have no responsibilities, but can also be summarily dismissed without Due process.
Gravid did try to make one interesting point, in that the concept of Citizenship might be outdated; that anyone who is cleared to come in here to this country ought to be automatically afforded the Rights guaranteed by our Constitution. If this way was expanded upon, I might agree with it, as the current system is not working.
I also think that service to one's nation or society may not be explicit in the law; however, there are times when it is. As before, when America has the Draft, why do they pick out only US Citizens for this compulsory duty? I mean, if we have no obligation to perform service to the community or nation, then we ought to be able to just go shanghai anyone caught in our waters or on our lands and force them to serve in our stead, right? My point is that while service to one's community or nation is not explicitly required, such service is still a requirement of Citizenship. Perhaps we had the Draft for so long that no one needed to create laws to "encourage" service. If so, do we need one now?
posted on September 7, 2002 07:43:11 PM new
Sorry Borillar. I forgot to tell you that we are having a yard sale this week-end so I don't have much time [or energy ] for this just yet.Bunni is doing a good job though.
posted on September 7, 2002 09:48:44 PM new
I also get sick and tired of hearing about how much illegals "contribute" to our country. I have friends who work for Social Services here in southern California, so I am aware of the many scams that illegals run here. And are allowed to get away with, despite the scams being reported by the social workers. I also see how they clog up our medical system, costing millions of dollars a year. I also see how the huge influx we get here in southern California overcrowds our schools and drains resources there. I also see how a large number of illegals *don't* pay taxes, as they are paid under the table in cash...and at the same time making street corners into mini-slums as they hang about waiting to be picked up by prospective employers. I have been rear-ended by an illegal who not only didn't belong on our roads but also didn't have insurance to pay for the damage he'd caused. Most in my area don't even bother to learn English--we are expected to cater to their languages, instead.
And until there is a single world government (don't hold your breath), or until every single nation is willing and/or able to put in it's fair share of $, food, habitat, etc. etc. etc. for every person on earth (yeah, right), the concept of "citizenship" is certainly not out of date.
posted on September 7, 2002 10:20:40 PM new
I hate to say it, but I also feel put upon by this influx of illegal foreigners as well. I am not just referring to Hispanics, but we also get Chinese that come into Vancouver, B.C. and are then smuggled across the boarder. Then there are the Russians that come here illegally and so forth. I don't mind having these people come here if they were here legally, but they aren't and that is not a good thing in my book.
The question that I see here is should we be extending to them the benefits of our society? Certainly, we are not so cruel a people that we'd turn starving people away while we have plenty.
I think what I am trying to say is that the only way this ties into Citizenship is that they have thier kids born here and that makes them American Citizens. In most other countries of the world, at least one parent needs to already be a Citizen before the child can be a Citizen. In other words, if it was impossible for these illegals to get their own kids Citizenship until they did, then that would change a lot in the way of complaints, wouldn't it?
I saw, as many have, on 60 Minutes where Mexican mothers-to-be cross over the boarder illegally, go check into a local hospital to have their kid (gratis on the part of Americans, BTW) and once the kid is born, cross the boarder to get all of the services allowed, including welfare checks which get mailed back across the boarder. We are paying for them to do this scam -- right? And when the kid gets old enough, every weekday, there is a long line of Mexican kids who cross the boarder into America to go to school and then back again at the end of day. Is it any wonder why many Americans are feeling a bit used or like doormats?
I think that we ought to stop extending Citizenship this way; but in return, find some other solution to the problem. I mean, we just can't go on being the world's richest nation next door to the world's nearly poorest third world nation --- right? We need to do something to help these people help themselves. I guess that's what NAFTA is for. So that these people can get the medical help, schooling for their kids, and social services that they need.
I guess that this is the wrong way to approach this topic, then. Illegal immigrants and the problems that arise because of it has got to be an entirely different subject on here from Citizenship. Except for that one fact that Citizenship is used as a lever for social services, it has nothing at all to do with many problems surrounding that issue. Am I wrong?
I guess, then, that I'll just concentrate on Citizenship itself, if anyone cares to join in. We'll leave illegal immigration out of the picture, since it is too hot a topic to be discussed by everyone.
Does that sound all right?
sp.
[ edited by Borillar on Sep 7, 2002 10:21 PM ]
posted on September 7, 2002 10:43:37 PM newThe question that I see here is should we be extending to them the benefits of our society?
well, already put my 2 cents in on this
I guess, then, that I'll just concentrate on Citizenship itself, if anyone cares to join in. We'll leave illegal immigration out of the picture, since it is too hot a topic to be discussed by everyone.
posted on September 8, 2002 03:10:36 AM new
I'm in total agreement with Bunnicula's two posts in regard to illegal's, and have stated so before.
I believe when we discussed this issue recently someone stated that there are some looking into changing the law so that children born in the US by illegal's wouldn't automatically gain citizenship.
and the exclamation marks are still here