161–170 of 863 posts
I don't agree with Damore's message. But Google cultivated an environment were open discussion were encouraged. So firing him for stating his opinion is truly, hypocritical bullshit. People should get fired for not doing their jobs -- not for writing what they think. And I also want to say that before you blame "the Left" for Google's behavior... Had he been fired in "Socialist Europe," the firing would have been dec…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fair question: if one identifies as conservative to the extent as regarding women as less capable than men, is that still protected?
Fair question: if one identifies as liberal to the extent as regarding Trump voters as less capable than Hilary voters, is that still protected?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer. People really did exaggerate how bad the memo really was. That said, it definitely has portions that brought up stereotypes without citing direct evidence, like how men have a higher drive to achieve status. Google considered these statements "discriminatory," which sounded reasonable enough to the NLRB. It doesn't matter whether these statements were actually discriminatory because they…
He did cite evidence for his claims, but the most widely circulated copies of the memo removed his citations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why is being "complicit" in same sex marriage any worse than being "complicit" in a marriage for someone who has sinned, possibly grievously, in other ways? If you subscribe to the view that same-sex marriage is a sin against a higher power, then your involvement in the marriage makes you actively involved in the sin. If sinners get married, the marriage itself is not a sin. This is very straightforward in my mind.…
> If you subscribe to the view that same-sex marriage is a sin against a higher power, This is a newer one to me, off the top of my head I'm not aware of from where the marriage act would be considered the sin vs the homosexuality itself. What's the doctrinal reasoning here? Just curious, here, since I'm A-OK with churches being able to individually choose who to marry. Businesses, on the other hand, are subject to a…
Many religions view marriage as a sacred sacrament, instituted by God to join men and women. Under this view, same-sex marriage is easily viewed as mocking God and debasing the sacrament.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> absolute innate equivalence Is hacker aptitude some kind of conserved quantity that is conserved over sexes based on some natural symmetry ? Why not just say, absolutely pretended equivalence.
The null hypothesis is to assume there is innate equivalence; the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate otherwise and the attempts I've seen so far are lacking.
If there are very few women in computer science, you wouldn't assume it was due to some conspiracy or "systematic discrimination" without any proof. You wouldn't enact policies of reverse discrimination (affirmative action) to correct some supposed imbalance of the system.
You'd simply admit you don't know why, and search for proof of the reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer. People really did exaggerate how bad the memo really was. That said, it definitely has portions that brought up stereotypes without citing direct evidence, like how men have a higher drive to achieve status. Google considered these statements "discriminatory," which sounded reasonable enough to the NLRB. It doesn't matter whether these statements were actually discriminatory because they…
He cited multiple academic sources to back up the claims made about gender. He also belabored the point that averages and general trends of a demographic should not be used to make judgements about individual members of the demographic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> absolute innate equivalence Is hacker aptitude some kind of conserved quantity that is conserved over sexes based on some natural symmetry ? Why not just say, absolutely pretended equivalence.
The null hypothesis is to assume there is innate equivalence; the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate otherwise and the attempts I've seen so far are lacking.
The null hypothesis, unless you discount evolutionary theory, is that all things are different and almost nothing is equal.
The burden falls to the leftist to prove equality depsite differing evolutionary pressure.
Many make the claim that humanity was created relatively recently by a deity. “God made us all the same”, while being a statement I don’t subscribe to, is at least a consistent belief.
What’s bizarre is this piece of moral archeology is still firmly implanted in secular beliefs, absent scientific backing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why is being "complicit" in same sex marriage any worse than being "complicit" in a marriage for someone who has sinned, possibly grievously, in other ways? It isn't worse. I know pastors who would refuse to marry a couple that included someone how was divorced or a couple that was having pre-marital sex. They cannot get in legal trouble for refusing that but they might get in legal trouble for refusing to marry tw…
> We are just saying that what has been considered immoral and illegal should stay that way. But that doesn't seem like a reliable guiding principle on its own, e.g. mixed race marriage. This is one of those things where there is no compromise that satisfies both sides, so from a least-harm perspective, it seems better to, as far as the state goes, pick the people who probably don't have a choice in the matter (I'm i…
Agree completely on that point.
As much as I don't like the outcome, I think you are right on what the legal outcome should be based on the cultural viewpoint that homosexuality is innate.
A) Interracial Marriage is immoral. B) Homosexual Marriage is immoral. C) Remarriage (after divorce) is immoral.
Part of my disagreement is that I see B and C as related while you (and most of America) see A and B related. Alas, it seems like there is no way to convince the country of my viewpoint so I am stuck putting up with it.