MarginOfError

A bit off topic (from me): but I would love if we could collect the best possible data in order to be able to address such a problem. Unfortunately, for years, NRA lobbying has prevented even the collection of such data.  :grumble:

Yes, they can.  And if you don't believe that, then you have a very poor understanding of the complexity of human beings.
 
The discussion of what qualifies as the 'essential ingredient' to happiness is ludicrious.  The very premise suggests a failure to comprehend the human condition.
 
Humans don't find happiness from any one thing.  They feel happiness from a combination of things.  The best model I've ever come across to describe it is the dialectics model.  It describes the human need for both novelty and consistency; for selfishness and selflessness; for intimacy and independence.  Happy people typically have a good balance of competing needs.  
 
So if you try to boil happiness down to a simple ingredient, you'll never be satisfied with the answer.

I wear that title proudly!

If it had been one post, sure.  In fact, I humored him on his first few posts.  But when every single topic you start is about how the liberal agenda is destroying our freedoms (panic, fear, alarmism!!!!!!!), it starts to lose credibility, because, well, at that point you stop coming off as human and look more like an agenda.
 
In light of what you've said, however, I'd be willing to back off of the "troll" tag and replace it with "one-trick-pony." :)

If you have a better term for someone that advocates strictly that liberals get it all wrong and 'true conservatives' get it all right (and I use 'true conservatives' because of srmaher's criticisms of the growth of government under both Presidents Bush and Obama), then I'm willing to hear it.
 
But the reality is that liberals get some things right, and conservatives get some things right.  Regardless, the conservatives and liberals in government are all raking in their fortunes off of the dynamics that srmaher is laying at the feet of liberals.  

Political hackery cannot be restrained to a single forum, Pam.  Afterall, it's what the internet was created for.

I think in your ranting you may have actually stumbled across my point.

I'm the objective measure of truth!

Clearly, if man is inherently evil, then man cometh of the devil.  At which point, isn't it wrong for us to label ourselves 'children of God' since we actually came from the devil?
 
Or is this just another case of having an opinion and then going to the scriptures to "prove" the opinion while ignoring the fuller context and body of scriptural works?

Clearly, if man is inherently evil, then man cometh of the devil.  At which point, isn't it wrong for us to label ourselves 'children of God' since we actually came from the devil?
 
Or is this just another case of having an opinion and then going to the scriptures to "prove" the opinion while ignoring the fuller context and body of scriptural works?

I don't see an problem with a latino group being led by a white guy, or a woman's group being run by a man, so long as the members of the group have chosen to be led by that person.  Nor do I have a problem with a christian group being led by an atheist or a lesbian so long as the group chooses that person to be the leader.

Let's assume your 441 rapes reported to the police in a population of 707,000 is the starting point.  That gives us a female population of 353,500.  Children make up about 1/3 of the population, and crimes against children are more likely to be reported as child sexual abuse instead of forcible rape.  So let's take out 20% of the female population (older female children are more likely to experience rape at the hand of an acquaintance, so I don't want to toss them from the denominator).  That leave us with 282,000 women in our baseline population.  
 
Now, let's also factor in that somewhere between 75% and 95% of rapes go unreported (a British study, I know, but it was the easiest thing to dig up. Forgive me for being lazy).  This would suggest that there are actually somewhere between 1,764 and 8,820 rapes committed.
 
Estimated rape percentage of women in Detroit that were raped in 2012 comes to between 0.6% and 3.1%.  The CDC's report for rape in the past 12 months?  1.6%
 
Even if you use the whole population of 353,500, you're at .5% to 2.5%. 
 
The more I look into it, the more idiotic National Review's argument looks.

I don't see an problem with a latino group being led by a white guy, or a woman's group being run by a man, so long as the members of the group have chosen to be led by that person.  Nor do I have a problem with a christian group being led by an atheist or a lesbian so long as the group chooses that person to be the leader.

My understanding of this was that the group could no longer receive public funding if they were to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.  And in 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that groups didn't have a right to receive public funding while putting membership policies in place that discriminated based on sexual orientation.
 
If the Latino clubs are going to prohibit members based on race, then yes, disaffiliate the club.  But if the Latino group is going to welcome anyone of any race to come and learn about their culture and values, then let them be.

One flame war at a time, my friend; one flame war at a time. 

Very different things.  This CDC report (published on September 5th) reports that one in 5 women are raped, and that 40% of women experience some other form of sexual violence in their lifetimes.  Accounting for the potential of overlap, we're looking at 1 in 2 women being sexually assaulted in their lifetimes.
 
What isn't clear from the table, but is discussed more in the text, is that 80% of those events happen before the age of 25.  The more detailed break down is 40% before 18, 40% between 18 and 25, and 20% after age 25. If you want to extrapolate that, 40% of those 1 in 2 women is about 20% of women between 18 and 25 have been sexually assaulted.  
 
You're right, that doesn't translate to 1 in 5 women being sexually assaulted on campus, but it brings up the possibility that 1 in 5 women on campus have been sexually assaulted. (Realistically, that percentage is probably higher because we've ignored the influx of the women assaulted before age 18).  There's a bit of variance there, but the concept doesn't change.  In a class with more than 5 women on a college campus, there's a good chance that one of them has been sexually assaulted in their life.

Very different things.  This CDC report (published on September 5th) reports that one in 5 women are raped, and that 40% of women experience some other form of sexual violence in their lifetimes.  Accounting for the potential of overlap, we're looking at 1 in 2 women being sexually assaulted in their lifetimes.
 
What isn't clear from the table, but is discussed more in the text, is that 80% of those events happen before the age of 25.  The more detailed break down is 40% before 18, 40% between 18 and 25, and 20% after age 25. If you want to extrapolate that, 40% of those 1 in 2 women is about 20% of women between 18 and 25 have been sexually assaulted.  
 
You're right, that doesn't translate to 1 in 5 women being sexually assaulted on campus, but it brings up the possibility that 1 in 5 women on campus have been sexually assaulted. (Realistically, that percentage is probably higher because we've ignored the influx of the women assaulted before age 18).  There's a bit of variance there, but the concept doesn't change.  In a class with more than 5 women on a college campus, there's a good chance that one of them has been sexually assaulted in their life.

A bit off topic (from me): but I would love if we could collect the best possible data in order to be able to address such a problem. Unfortunately, for years, NRA lobbying has prevented even the collection of such data.  :grumble:

It's a "sandbox" game, which means you go in and you play with no real purpose or goal.  Essentially, the premise of the game is you're dumped in a world with nothing but a few clothes and you have to obtain all the materials necessary to survive.  If you don't have shelter before the sun goes down, you have to fight off zombies, skeletons, and "creepers" (some weird creature that blows up when it gets close to you).
 
My wife calls it "Legos on the computer"
 
If you look at my picture, that was all forest a year ago.  I've spent the year building up the city, mining all the materials for the buldings, and establishing a safe haven in which I can work without fear of monsters invading. I'm currently working on acquiring the materials to build a massive church.  
 
Mostly, it's a great way to waste a lot of time if you have time to waste.  I usually play it while I'm tutoring students (I do an online tutoring program) and when I can't sleep.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minecraft#Gameplay

I'm pleased to announce our new initiative for recruiting new members to the forum.

 

This has been a long time in the making[1] and has finally gained official approval from the moderating staff[2].  We will begin the roll out starting September 15th, and the program will go live on October 1st.

 

Forum members will be able to volunteer as ambassadors of the program beginning on September 15th.  Approval into the program will require a letter of recommendation from a member of the moderating staff, a personal statement reflecting your desires to participate, and a copy of your dental x-rays.

 

Once you are enrolled, you will be given access to the "Blue Form."  The Blue Form is a specially designed tool that will help you track the people you have reached out to, schedule follow-up Facebook chats, and set goals for bringing people to the love and warmth of the forums.  Each Sunday, you will be expected to tally up your contacts, hours spent e-mailing, and first Facebook chats to report back to the Assistants to the Administrator.  

 

With that being said, a new position is being created in the forums to help administer the outreach program and train new ambassadors.  There will be two Assistants at any given time, and they will be chosen from among the ambassadors for periods of 6 to 12 weeks.  Preference will be given ambassadors with higher reported metrics, though a fluency in corporate inspired synergy speak will also be factored in.

 

We hope you'll consider signing up for this new outreach program.  Expect additional information in the coming days regarding dress code [3], travel policy [4], and financial commitments.  And remember, the harder you work, the more attractive your avatar will be.

 

 

------------------------------------------

[1] totally....like, three whole minutes

[2] and by official approval, I mean, they've never heard of it.

[3] true ambassadors wouldn't e-mail in pajamas--there is NO quiet dignity in pajamas.

[4] you'll be expected to provide transportation to your own computer

Mission accomplished.

As an ambassador, would one have a personal chef assigned to him/her?  What about a clothes allowance to attend any formal gatherings?  I'm assuming the formal gatherings will be a potluck dinner in the family room....  

I'm pleased to announce our new initiative for recruiting new members to the forum.

 

This has been a long time in the making[1] and has finally gained official approval from the moderating staff[2].  We will begin the roll out starting September 15th, and the program will go live on October 1st.

 

Forum members will be able to volunteer as ambassadors of the program beginning on September 15th.  Approval into the program will require a letter of recommendation from a member of the moderating staff, a personal statement reflecting your desires to participate, and a copy of your dental x-rays.

 

Once you are enrolled, you will be given access to the "Blue Form."  The Blue Form is a specially designed tool that will help you track the people you have reached out to, schedule follow-up Facebook chats, and set goals for bringing people to the love and warmth of the forums.  Each Sunday, you will be expected to tally up your contacts, hours spent e-mailing, and first Facebook chats to report back to the Assistants to the Administrator.  

 

With that being said, a new position is being created in the forums to help administer the outreach program and train new ambassadors.  There will be two Assistants at any given time, and they will be chosen from among the ambassadors for periods of 6 to 12 weeks.  Preference will be given ambassadors with higher reported metrics, though a fluency in corporate inspired synergy speak will also be factored in.

 

We hope you'll consider signing up for this new outreach program.  Expect additional information in the coming days regarding dress code [3], travel policy [4], and financial commitments.  And remember, the harder you work, the more attractive your avatar will be.

 

 

------------------------------------------

[1] totally....like, three whole minutes

[2] and by official approval, I mean, they've never heard of it.

[3] true ambassadors wouldn't e-mail in pajamas--there is NO quiet dignity in pajamas.

[4] you'll be expected to provide transportation to your own computer

That's a bit off topic, as I'm not aware of anything in this thread stating that rape prevention was weakening modern women.
 
One of the issues srmaher has with modern feminism is that it is "weakening" women by doing things like putting trigger warnings on literature.  According to the CDC's report, some 1.6 million women under the age of 25 were raped in the previous year, with an additional 5.2 million suffering another form of sexual assault.  About half of those women are college aged.  This would suggest that in any given year, colleges across the use are deal with 3.2 million rape victims and 10.2 million victims of other sexual assaults.  For many of these women, the psychological damage is deep and may not be fully resolved...especially if it happened recently.
 
The sad fact is that women who are sexually assaulted in college have some of the highest drop out rates.  So the reality is that placing the trigger warnings may actually be empowering women--by establishing an environment less likely to trigger their traumatic memories; an environment more conducive to helping them finish their educations and accomplish their goals. 
 
There is nothing empowering about facing down your demons before you are prepared to do so.  

I didn't know the context of your post and I see I misunderstood it.