Lindaland
  Global Unity 2.0
  Reid Takes On Nevada`s Brothels (Page 1)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Reid Takes On Nevada`s Brothels
juniperb
Moderator

Posts: 1057
From: Blue Star Kachina
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 02:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for juniperb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
For me , a parent, I find is it absurd to believe parents really really would rather their children live near a brothel vs view the prostitutes standing on the corner with wares for sale?

The "profession" isn`t going anywhere anytime soon so have brothels,moderate it, tax it, and keep it off the streets makes more sense to me.


CNN) -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is taking aim at the world's oldest profession, calling for an end to legal prostitution in his home state of Nevada.

Addressing state legislators Tuesday in Carson City, the Democrat said it was time for an "adult conversation" on a topic that often spurs as much awkward laughter as it does serious debate. He warned the state's Wild West tradition has become an impediment to economic growth, causing companies to think twice before relocating there.

Nevada's reputation is suffering, he said.

"Nevada needs to be known as the first place for innovation and investment, not as the last place where prostitution is still legal," Reid said. Parents "don't want their children to look out a school bus and see a brothel. Or to live in a state with the wrong kind of red lights."
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/02/23/reid.nevada.brothels/index.html?hpt=Sbin

------------------
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

- George Eliot

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 6106
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 02:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
i agree, juni, going after prostitutes is not only the most futile of all law enforcement exercises but one of the oldest rabbits politicians pull out of the hat to obscure the fact that elsewhere things are not going well...

and even if he were to try to reform the real sleazy image of nevada (casinos everywhere) the prostitutes would still be there when he is long gone...silly people.

apparently the legislature are so very mature that discussing this topic invokes "awkward laughter" in that august body. probably because half of the members contribute to the prosperity of the business they love to denigrate.

(not meaning to run down nevada as a whole, but gambling and sex are high on the list of how it is seen from the outside!)

IP: Logged

juniperb
Moderator

Posts: 1057
From: Blue Star Kachina
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 05:10 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for juniperb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Indeed kat.
It boggles my mind Reid "thinks" parents want unregulated prostitution over regulated brothels.


I`d love to see his poll

------------------
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

- George Eliot

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 6193
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 05:41 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hell must have frozen over (from all that global warming, I presume), because I actually agree with you, Kat. Nevada was built by crime lords who then went legit (more or less), so when they point this way, it's because they don't want you to look that way.

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 6106
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 05:55 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
why randall, you have a short memory! before you decided i was "part" of a "clique" you don't like you used to agree with me quite often!

have you really swallowed whole jwhop's pegging me as a leftist tart? i mainly argue with him because of his MO, self-professed, of being just like those he hated a few years back, bringing as much inflammatory material here as he can to "roust the enemy". i don't like his TACTICS. if he had been more reasonable i could have agreed with him on quite a lot of points.

i would not limit this estimation of political sleight of hand to nevada though, it is rife throughout the land, and the "rid us of hookers" pretense at propriety has been with us forever. in my own town in california the amount of money wasted by the police dept trying to regulate the massage industry so they can "rout out" the sex trade is ridiculous.

IP: Logged

juniperb
Moderator

Posts: 1057
From: Blue Star Kachina
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 06:02 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for juniperb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
a leftist tart?

------------------
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

- George Eliot

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 6193
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 06:15 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I never said you were part of any clique. We have no cliques here at Lindaland to my knowledge. You may have inferred that on your own, but I have never made mention of such. I don't recall agreeing with you or not agreeing with until recently. I tend to agree with rational arguments of logic and reason, and Jwhop tends to err on the side of logic, which is why I often agree with him. Arguments that seem to come from a place of irrationality just for the sake of disagreeing with another person's presentation of facts, paints that person in a bad light (and has the appearance as if that person can't understand simple concepts). It's not a good strategy to employ, as it reflects badly on others of that ideology.

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 4757
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 06:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I can't think of a person's "logic" that has been challenged more than Jwhop's.

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 6193
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 06:39 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Haha! To "challenge" logic by disagreeing with it doesn't make it invalid. The burden of proof is on the petitioner--a concept proponents of junk science just don't understand. I can make all sorts of outlandish claims and ask you to prove me wrong, but that is sheer lunacy. Just one (most common) example: global warming...let me restate that..."man made" global warming, is absolutely ludicrous. It's all about power and control. The masses believe in it like sheep, while the puppet masters rake in billions. We couldn't raise global temperatures if we intentionally tried to. And we couldn't destroy the ozone if we intentionally tried to. We simply overestimate our importance. All hail junk science! *bows*

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 4757
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 07:30 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Ahhh...global warming...I knew we'd get back to this. That's the issue that you seem to think Jwhop was rational on, isn't it? Let me tell you, and I can back this up from scientific quarters, there isn't a SINGLE argument that's been put forth by Jwhop on the issue that hasn't been dismantled by science.

You're also a bit confused on "burden of proof" where logic is concerned.

Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit. ~ Latin maxim

Translated: "The necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."

“Usually one who makes an assertion must assume the responsibility of defending it. If this responsibility or burden of proof is shifted to a critic, the fallacy of appealing to ignorance is committed.” - Alex Michalos, Principles of Logic

Now who's always making the claims that are being disagreed with? Who bears responsibility for warranting his unsubstantiated opinion? Yeah. That's right. It's the guy with more threads in GU than anyone else ever.

This is why you need to find your voice if you're going to play here, because no one's going to accept, "I'm rational and open-minded, and I say you're wrong," as a rationalization.

Alligning to Jwhop's so-called logic is like digging up your own grave, jumping in, and pulling the dirt over your head.

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 6193
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 07:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Nope, the science backs up Jwhop. The burden of proof is always on the petitioner of absurb claims. If you tell me that demons cause popcorn kernals to pop, is it up to us to prove to your satisfaction that demons are not the cause? Of course not. Your last post shows more about your googling skills of Latin than it does about your knowledge of science. But I'm not going to volley back and forth with you. Jwhop has done a fine job of presenting the facts. BTW, you misinterpreted both of those quotes (not that copying and pasting a quote is scientific, as one can find a quote for anything, but if you use a quote, at least use it correctly). The first one is in the context of legal charges. Science is a different matter. The second one actually supports my position as a critic/skeptic, so thanks!

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 4757
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 08:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Science has never backed up Jwhop on global warming, and you can't volley back and forth with me on this because literally everywhere you'd look for credible support of your claim would go against your "schema" as you like to call it. All over the world anyone that studies climate backs global warming. Even the skeptics acknowledge it has, in fact, warmed. They're only skeptical regarding cause, a position you've never taken a scientifically-backed stance on.

Virtually anyone that levies an opinion on anything takes responsibility for defending their position. Citing "burden of proof" nonsense doesn't rid you of that responsibility. It's like a kid starting a game, and then huffing off when it doesn't go his or her way.

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 6193
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 08:34 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Haha! I'm not here to play by your rules or comply with "your standards of debate" (as you stated elsewhere on this Forum). There is plenty of evidence to the contrary as it relates to global warming (showing global cooling), and yes, some say that the global temperatures have slightly risen but acknowledge that it isn't related to human activity. Your "charts" prove nothing. I even once asked how they got that temperature info from centuries ago, but you couldn't answer. And data means nothing when it's manufactured (or other data is intentionally omitted). But whether warming or cooling, it really makes no difference. Global temperature is cyclical and devoid of any human activity. Even Kat admits that she agrees with Jwhop on many issues but argues over his delivery method. That's because rationality is hard to deny. But once one gets comfortable with one's head in the sand, it's not difficult to be blinded by the sand.

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

PlutoSquared
Moderator

Posts: 3299
From: Mars
Registered: Aug 2010

posted February 23, 2011 08:36 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for PlutoSquared     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
So, this is where the fire's at...

IP: Logged

PlutoSquared
Moderator

Posts: 3299
From: Mars
Registered: Aug 2010

posted February 23, 2011 08:38 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for PlutoSquared     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I don't have a problem with brothels, even though I don't agree with the idea of prostitution as a healthy choice for anyone...

I think if handled responsibly, legal brothels can stand to make this profession safer for both the prostitutes and the people who procure prostitutes (and maybe even their unknowing spouses, too).

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 4757
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 08:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I neither said, nor implied that providing a quote is equal to science. That's a rather ridiculous thing to have said.

I'm referring to logical argument, which both of those quotes are perfect for. You take petitioning or charging to be someone disagreeing with another person. Your perspective is that whoever disagrees with someone else is responsible for proving the point of disagreement. However, the person they are disagreeing with has ALSO made certain claims/charges/petitions, etc. They retain burden of proof for their perspective regardless of whether someone disagrees or not. If it were in a court, say a landlord/tenant dispute, if the landlord said I charge $1000 for that apartment, and the tenant claims the landlord charged $1500 for the same apartment, both sides would have to prove their positions. Neither is off the hook for the representations they've made.

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 6193
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 08:52 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Junkscience.com will pay $500,000 to anyone who can prove in a scientific manner that global warming is caused by human activity. It should be easy to do. Maybe you could try, AG.

But anyway, the reason you believe as you do is due to the propagation of scientific skullduggery, so we shouldn't blame you for being duped. I don't see the need to post links, as anyone can do a search for themselves, but I couldn't resist this one, since you are so adamant that the "evidence" points to a rise in global temperatures, and this is why you think that:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/24/hiding-evidence-of-global-cooling/

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 6193
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 09:00 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of science, AG. A legal proceeding is quite different from making an absurd claim in the scientific community. Now, granted, I am not a scientist, but I have had several college-level classes...enough to know that "the burden of proof is on the petitioner." In fact, I have three college degrees, including a Master's, and I seem to have had a good understanding of my classes as I graduated with a 3.93 GPA (only one "B"). Yes, of course, your landlord analogy is fitting for the quote you copy and pasted, as that quote relates to legal charges and court procedure. But this volleying is really going nowhere. Jwhop can have all the fun. I don't take any pleasure in trying to present facts to someone not willing to listen to reason. Sorry for hijacking your string, Juni. Um, yeah, keep the prostitutes legal.

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

juniperb
Moderator

Posts: 1057
From: Blue Star Kachina
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 09:10 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for juniperb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Can we rename the thread?

------------------
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

- George Eliot

IP: Logged

juniperb
Moderator

Posts: 1057
From: Blue Star Kachina
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 09:13 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for juniperb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
thank you but it`s not my thread and please don`t let me discourage a lucid debate.
Now if you start rambling, that`s a horse of a differnt color LOL

Carry on

------------------
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

- George Eliot

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 6193
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 09:20 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Juni:

While I do not agree with all of the conspiracy diatribe that Jesse Ventura spouts, I do enjoy his show, because I get to refute some of it with logic, and also because he has presented evidence that I cannot refute. One such example of the latter is the global warming conspiracy (keeping in mind that he is good friends with Al Gore). It's well worth a watch on You Tube, as he explains not only how it's a hoax, but he gets into the who and the why. Ventura says one thing I agree with: "Follow the money." I think that might apply to most things, including this issue in Nevada. Follow the money to find out the real reason behind the proposed legislation. I doubt the officials in "sin city" care much about their reputation.

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

juniperb
Moderator

Posts: 1057
From: Blue Star Kachina
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 09:23 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for juniperb     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I had a feeling Harry Reid would have this effect on folks


As my Gran said, always follow the money & find the stinker behing the flatulance .

------------------
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

- George Eliot

IP: Logged

PlutoSquared
Moderator

Posts: 3299
From: Mars
Registered: Aug 2010

posted February 23, 2011 09:26 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for PlutoSquared     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Here's a National Geographic Article, 2010...
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/07/100728-global-warming-noaa-climate-hottest-decade-science-environment/

I guess this would be something good to pick apart?

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 6193
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 09:34 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Yeah, it was Reid's fart that caused global warming in Nevada.

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 6193
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 23, 2011 09:41 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
That article is just opinion, PS. Not worthy of much picking. But the talk of how it is increasing at an alarming rate is hilarious. The actual numbers do not support that nonsense. Here is an unbiased study that refutes the suppositions in the NG article:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,275267,00.html

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright © 2011

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a