- Feature Articles
- CodeSOD
- Error'd
-
Forums
-
Other Articles
- Random Article
- Alex's Soapbox
- Announcements
- Best of…
- Best of Email
- Best of the Sidebar
- Bring Your Own Code
- Coded Smorgasbord
- Mandatory Fun Day
- Off Topic
- Representative Line
- News Roundup
- Editor's Soapbox
- Software on the Rocks
- Souvenir Potpourri
- Sponsor Post
- Tales from the Interview
- The Daily WTF: Live
- Virtudyne
Admin
Just FYI, this and the second letter in the article are illegal in California.
Admin
There's always the unlikely option of drinking less.
Admin
Slavery makes perfect sense from an accounting perspective.
Admin
You're kidding, right? I just spent 6 months working 12 to 16 hour days without a day off for probably a third of your salary. To top it off, I had to worry about IEDs, the Taliban, and anyone else who wanted to kill me. Yeah, I volunteered, but that doesn't make it suck any less. Until you're willing to man up and endure some real hardship, enjoy your cushy office and Starbucks and STFU.
Admin
So now that we concluded she is probably hawt, and I'm a young single developer ^^, could you tell me where I can find her?
Admin
Oooh I so much envy you. You get nearly as much as everybody here, where I work. And use it ofcourse, as we have personal time too, not only work todo :-P
Admin
Admin
Yeah! And if you were a Jew living in Nazi Germany, you have no right to complain when they throw you in a concentration camp, because by choosing to live in Germany you chose to abide by their laws. Right?
Funny how the lefties on this thread are making two key arguments: One: There should be laws to insure that every job provides some minimum level of pay and benefits. It's no answer to say that if your job isn't good enough you can always quit and get a better job, because that's not a practical choice for most people. And two: It's absurd to complain about the tax burden required for the government to establish these minimums, because by choosing to live in this country, you agree to abide by the laws.
So, it's ridiculous to say that if you don't like your job you can always quit and get another job. But it's not ridiculous to say that if you don't like the law, you can always move to another country with different laws. Seems to me that getting a new job is way easier than moving to another country. By the way, in a free country, if you don't like any job available, you could always start your own business. What's your leftie equivalent to that? If I don't like the laws of any country I can move to, what, I can always start a revolution and create my own country?
Admin
Admin
If the courts did not have the power to send the police to your house with guns to force you to pay up, who would care what a judge says? Would you even bother to show up at court when you got the summons? Sure, most people obey the law without getting into a shoot-out with the police, but surely that is because they either (a) agree the law is a good idea and it's what they would have done anyway, in which case the law is irrelevant, or (b) know that they are not likely to win a shoot-out with the police, and so meekly hand over the money.
If a mugger threatens me with a weapon and demands I give him my wallet, the fact that I meekly hand it over without him actually shooting me or stabbing me or beating me with the tire iron does not mean that I gave him the money voluntarily. Ditto when the government orders me to hand over money under threat of the police coming to collect it by force.
Admin
Okay, call it "your beliefs about religion" then. In any case, you make claims about factual questions -- what will send someone to hell, if indeed there is any such place -- based on ... what? You say your beliefs are based on science. Exactly what scientific experiment have you performed that tells you what will send someone to hell? Physics and chemistry are of no obvious help in answering such a question -- any more than they are in answering a question like "Did Julius Caeser really conquer Gaul?" or "What are the laws regarding marijuana use in Colorado?" Some questions are not scientific questions.
Your beliefs aren't based on science. They are based on what you would like to believe. That is, wishful thinking.
Yeah, pretty cool, isn't it! That why it baffles me why people refuse the offer. It's like someone on the street corner handing out thousand dollar bills and you refuse to take them because ... why?
But wow, this thread has really gotten off anything related to computing.
Admin
In the UK it's really very common to specify when employees take at least some of their holidays.
Many companies don't work on 'Bank Holidays' for instance, so the employees have to take those days off.
Of course, it all depends how you count them. For instance, we give our employees 4 weeks, plus Bank Holidays, plus the week between Christmas & New Year. We could say that, or we could say they get '31 days a year and we'll tell you when you have to take 11 of them'. People don't seem to mind the first way of saying it, but might get upset at the second - even though it's identical.
Admin
That's illegal!
The minimum in the UK is 28 days a year. (http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Employees/Timeoffandholidays/DG_10029788)
Employers are allowed to tell you when you have them though, so Bank Holidays & National Holidays are included.
So, the minimum is often really 20 days PLUS Bank Holidays. Or, if your company opens on Bank Holidays, then it's 28 days.
(If you work part time, then it's pro-rata'd)
Admin
This is nothing unusual. We constantly have Collective holidays like this. Only instead of borrowing from next year (wchih can also be done) we are required to work or get unpayed holiday.
Admin
That seems perfectly reasonable with me, our office closes around that period every year. Note that my contract allows management to plan 6 days off per year, which will be subtracted from my vacation days.
Admin
Admin
As an agnostic, I see no more reason to believe in the Christian version than in the Judaic or Muslim one or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. And it doesn´t convince me when each religion basically claims: But we are right! The other religions are wrong, because we are right. We don't need to give evidence, because we are right. And therefore you must believe us.
More like someone handing out rules that he wants you to obey, and if you do, you'll get a thousand dollars -- of course, after your death, so if you won't get them, you can't complain anymore.Admin
From a friends facebook post: "The T and the G key are very close to each other on the keyboard. Never really payed much attention to that before. On a related note, I will never end a work email with "Regards" again. On another related note, I have sensitivity training tomorrow morning"
Admin
Deuteronomy 22 among others. I would think a trivial Google search would provide many more. Off the top of my head I believe 1 Corinthians 6 are a couple Hebrews 13.
Admin
Yep, there's the Strawman/Slippery Slope I was expecting
Admin
What the hey, I'll provide the citations. They're not really hard to find. I just searched for "virgin". Note, however, that the Bible (and especially the OT) tends not to talk about women very much. It's written for men. You have to often infer what these things mean for women.
Monetary (or barter equivalent) penalty for men who have sex before marriage: Exodus 22:16-17 If a man seduces a virgin who is not pledged to be married and sleeps with her, he must pay the bride-price, and she shall be his wife. If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he must still pay the bride-price for virgins.
A single woman who isn't a virgin can't marry a high priest (it goes on to bar anybody who is deformed or simply unsightly from coming anywhere near the Holy of Holies): Leviticus 21:14-15 The woman he marries must be a virgin. He must not marry a widow, a divorced woman, or a woman defiled by prostitution, but only a virgin from his own people, so he will not defile his offspring among his people. I am the LORD, who makes him holy.
This is a long one. Claiming that your wife wasn't a virgin when you married her (which is sufficient grounds, in the OT, to divorce her) is such a horrific slander that you will have to pay 100 silver shekels -- if her family can somehow prove she was a virgin at the time. If they can't, she gets stoned to death. Deuteronomy 22:13-22 If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, "I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity," then the girl's father and mother shall bring proof that she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate. The girl's father will say to the elders, "I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. Now he has slandered her and said, 'I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.' But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity." Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, and the elders shall take the man and punish him. They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give them to the girl's father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives. If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl's virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father's house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father's house. You must purge the evil from among you.
Next verse: if you're married and you are caught sleeping with a woman not your wife, you and she will both get the death penalty. Deuteronomy 22:22If a man is found sleeping with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.
Following right on from that, if you're unmarried and have sex with a betrothed girl who either consents or doesn't put up enough of a fight, you both get stoned to death. Deuteronomy 22:23-24 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the girl because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man's wife. You must purge the evil from among you.
If she does scream, or if it's out in the country where nobody could hear, they're a little nicer to her (though she's gonna have a heck of a time finding a husband). Deuteronomy 22:25-26 But if out in the country a man happens to meet a girl pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. Do nothing to the girl; she has committed no sin deserving death.
But this only applies if she's betrothed. If not (which probably means she's less than 12 years old), you have to pay her father, and she has to marry you, and you're not allowed to ever get divorced. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
That's probably enough for now.
Admin
Admin
Admin
Oh, and that, if you're a woman and don't bleed on your consummation, your husband can invoke the lemon law and have you stoned. Righteous.
1 Corinthians 6 talks about "sexual immorality", without indication of what that means, except for explicitly citing prostitutes and implying a link from there to said immorality.
Hebrews 13 again cites either whoremongers (yup, pimps) or the "sexually immoral" as worthy of god's judgement. Doesn't say a thing about sex in general, or fornication in particular.
Seems like so far all you've found are references to selling your "god-given temple" for petty cash. In fact, the term fornication didn't even appear in the definition you use it until the 14th century.
Stop being obtuse, Hatterson. You're usually much more lucid than this.
Admin
Btw, that's quite a vicious translation you have there, buddy. Must be the new super-church self-righteous born-again bible, rather than the "standard" texts.
You drive on with your bad self!
Admin
Several regard to situations where neither party is married; they count as references. The assertion was that the OT does not condemn anything other than adultery. I merely wished to point out that this was not true.
BTW, the translation was just the easiest one to find. New International Version. It is generally considered accurate; what's vicious is not the translation but ancient cultures. The ancient Hebrews were actually not particularly unusual in their attitudes towards extramarital sex. You can find similar attitudes among the Babylonians, who were of course close contemporaries and substantially influenced the course of Hebrew civilization.
(And in case you were wondering, I do not regard myself as a born-again Christian.)
Admin
No, only one of your verses referred to a situation where BOTH parties were unmarried and willing. The rest were either both adulterers or one adulterer, one unwed, plus or minus rape and prostitutes.
Incidentally, the cultures weren't necessarily vicious, except by modern pussified standards. Rape, murder and violence were just plain vanilla boring normal until somewhere around the 14th century. Whoops, 20th century? Eh, whatever.
(And in case you were wondering, I don't give two shits about what kind of Christian you regard yourself as.)
Admin
I also pay taxes and the government use it to maintain roads I never drive on, give healthcare to people I never met and so on...
Admin
Actually, the law states 35h/week but you do work 40h/week. In compensation, you get some free holidays (10 a years) in addition to our 5 weeks/year.
A typical workday depends on the company but 9-6 is pretty standard. I don't know any IT company which starts at 8, at least in Paris.
Admin
Admin
I have always worked in the UK and have have never had less than 26 days paid holiday + public holidays (Easter, etc). Sick leave has always been paid at full pay for 6 months, then 1/2 pay for 6 months.
I think it depends on the company you work for. I tend to work for large companies (bank, multi-national) but could see things being different for smaller companies.
Admin
I live in Vancouver BC and have been at my job for three years; this year I get five weeks of paid holidays. Last year the most senior employee got eleven weeks; the year before he got twelve.
Admin
I know of a bank that had that policy. They called it the "Home for the Holidays" program. They would furlough all consultants at Thanksgiving and then expect them to come back after Jan 1. Of course they were not paid for that time and the bank even requested that the consulting company not place those employees on other contracts because their skills were desperately needed.
Admin
At my work site, there's always a 'mandatory shutdown' between Christmas and New Year, but people can arrange to work then if they really really must (with the advisory warnings that first aiders and such won't be around so they're taking a risk doing so), plus on those days we can take miscellaneous leave or recreation leave at our discretion.
More like someone handing out rules which everyone has broken and there's a resulting billion dollar fine for breaking them, and then paying the fine for you because you can't pay it yourself and would be stuck in jail, and then you have the option of of being forever grateful to the person who paid your fine or telling them to mind their own business as you figure you can find your own way out of it.Actually it's more like being on a plane which is going to crash and the law of gravity says that if you jump out you'll die when you hit the ground, and you have the options of ignoring gravity and hoping it goes away, or having as much fun as you can on the way down, or trying to flap your arms, or taking the parachute that's offered to you, and then being thankful to the awesome person who gave you their parachute instead of saying 'thanks but I think I'll hop in another plane even though it didn't work out last time'.
(Also, using metaphors to illustrate moral principles is like when your in a train that gets to the end of the line but it crashes through the buffers and keeps going because the driver was reading his email on his Blackberry because it's company policy to always have access to company email and a message had just been sent to all stuff notifying them that there was a malfunction in the automatic emergency braking system that's supposed to activate when the train gets close to the end of the line which is ironic because the email was supposed to have the effect of increasing safety but because of bad timing it actually reduced safety, but explaining the joke makes it unfunny and this sentence is way too long plus it turned out that somehow the train ended up running onto another line, which is to say metaphorically that the topic of this absurd sentence went off the rails but ended up being about corporate emails so it was kinda relevant to the original topic of this thread even though I didn't mean to be discussing that at all. Oh and I'd better close my parentheses.)
Admin
Leave me out of this, please.
Admin
That wouldn't be a Netherlands company with a major division in Cleveland, OH, would it? Because the manufacturing people there got that same email this last holiday season...
Admin
If she was already promised to another man, you'd be stoned to death. You'd have been hard pressed to find a girl who wasn't, unless maybe you were a pedophile. Because...
Girls were married very young to ensure their livelihood. With very little means of income on their own, their alternatives outside their father's house were marriage, prostitution, or begging. Which is why, even if you only "hafta get married"...
You could never divorce her. She and her children and her children's children were all guaranteed food, clothing, and shelter - for life - and a share of your family inheritance. A fair trade, since...
Her father would otherwise have to support her if he didn't want her becoming a prostitute. She could never marry anyone else. No other man would want to marry her, and she'd risk death by stoning.
But I'm curious about this idea that it's okay to break laws as long as you don't get caught. Isn't the point of the law to punish people if they get caught? How do you make laws that punish people who don't get caught? That doesn't imply that it's okay if you're not caught.