Eerily similar to Sarajevo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage
Printable View
Eerily similar to Sarajevo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage
https://i.imgur.com/VItihXB.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by Shaps
Stupid son of a bitch is ok, son of a bitch is not. Understand?
Watching the mental gymnastics of the liberal media in regards to this story is amazing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Methais
So much for the past 4+ years of "ZOMG! You can't say bad things about the press! That's undemocratic!"
Word of the day is Joemicron here at work, remarkably witty.
My ex legit believes that the vaccine is really HIV being injected into people. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
They have a cure for HIV now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Methais
I know someone that believe every person injected with the vaccine is dead in 2 years. She has a Q tattoo also. She is also 45 and single.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/op-ed-sup...193144660.html
"Op-Ed: If the Supreme Court bans affirmative action, it continues the U.S. legacy of racial discrimination"
First... think on that title...
"Eliminating race as a factor in admissions will significantly reduce minority admissions."
Second... dude gives numbers, but not any real reason for such a decline in his examples.
I'm serious and going to ask... because I'm perfectly fine with a standard - if someone meets that standard, then they are in. I don't think race should be on any form other than a medical one personally. College admissions shouldn't have the persons race on there IMO and accepted students should be based on the base educational standards of admittance.
We'll never get past "race" if we keep separating by it.
Not sure how eliminating someone's race on an admissions form would - as the author said - "significantly reduce minority admissions". The standard is the standard, and those above it would be accepted. Race has nothing to do with it, and if the people making selections don't know the race of the person they're admitting - then no racism can occur.... right??
https://www.yahoo.com/news/state-sup...223900562.html
"Must everyone be treated equally under the state’s progressive anti-discrimination laws? Or are some groups, such as women, entitled to greater protections under the law as compensation for historic discrimination or to protect religious belief?"
"the right of women to gender privacy. Such a right, the hearing officer said, is compensation for past discrimination and is consistent with the intent of the public accommodation law, which was written to remedy past injustice."
Never going to get past "discrimination"... by discriminating.