| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Should the Census ask about sexual orientation? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 9 2010, 05:38 PM (1,387 Views) | |
| ivorythumper | Mar 10 2010, 03:00 PM Post #76 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
I agree, which is why I backed away. I think he's just a nutter, as he shows in his hysterical and aggressive attacks on people who don't share his world view. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Quagmire | Mar 10 2010, 03:03 PM Post #77 |
|
Senior Carp
|
sad, really. Edit: so much for backing away.
Edited by Quagmire, Mar 10 2010, 03:03 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Quagmire | Mar 10 2010, 03:06 PM Post #78 |
|
Senior Carp
|
So why do you respond to my posts? You may not have noticed, I never respond to yours, since I know it will ALWAYS end up with the same assinine game. I only respond when you directly talk to me. If you wouldnt, then we wouldnt engage at all. If I'm just a nutter, you have no reason to engage me, right? Give it a try. It works well. Edit: calling me hysterical is another lie. See a pattern? Edited by Quagmire, Mar 10 2010, 03:06 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Mar 11 2010, 10:11 AM Post #79 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Quag: I retract calling you a nutter. However, you do seem unduly aggressive and are quick to call someone a liar when they simply disagree with you
That is not a lie, it was a statement of judgment that you're a nutter, and I gave the rationale that you have hysterical and aggressive attacks on people who don't share your world view. I may be wrong that you are nutter, and but hysterical and aggressive attacks are certainly my perception of your style, which I can state without being a liar.
That cannot be a lie. It can be a misperception, but it is also obviously an analogous use of "frothing". That is not a lie. You advocate the government collecting data on homosexuals. You already mentioned the useful of the data to politicians in forming opinions ("What I mean is when someone (be it a politician, a voter, or just someone formulating an opinion) about a topic such as gay marriage for instance,"). The government is necessarily concerned with social policy. That is what a government does. You asked "If the percentage of gays in the population was making a marked increase or decrease, dont you think thats relevant data?" Relevant to what, if not social policy? Why else should the government be collecting that data? That is what I am missing in your argument. The fact that you do not understand the implications of your own ideas does not mean someone else is lying when they bring up the obvious point about it. Again, not a lie, just a perception. Are you even unable to acknowledge the indisputable fact that you did question my literacy and you did call me a liar? How exactly does that demonstrate a capacity to civilly disagree with someone who you REALLY disagree with?
That is not a lie. You have not demonstrated why the government should collect the data. You really have not even answered the question -- a simple yes or no is all that would be required. The fact that you gave another example -- which falls under the general category of something a private initiative could and arguably should do -- does not begin to address why the government should collect the data. Asking a question that continues to go unanswered does not make someone a liar.
How can asking a question that you don't understand the term of make someone else a liar? "Social policy" is what a government does. "The language of social policy" simply refers to the use of the term "social policy" to shorthand the work that a government does in enacting social policy. Individuals cannot enact social policy -- only a government. I don't see how my statement can be a lie.
Time and again I've quoted your actual words back to you. I can't claim that I understand the Word of Quag, but I certainly understand the common sense usage of the words that you use, and the fact that I do read them and even quote them back to you. How again can that be a lie? |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Der Fuhrer | Mar 11 2010, 11:16 AM Post #80 |
|
Junior Carp
|
Ach der lieber! Issen muchen liken syphillus. I t vill drrrrrrrriven you crrrrrrrrazzy! |
| miss me yet? | |
![]() |
|
| MIke Godwin | Mar 11 2010, 11:53 AM Post #81 |
![]()
Junior Carp
|
'Dolph, get a clue. If you're going to post, at least learn how to spell it right. It's Ach du lieber. I came this close to closing down this thread because of that. Carry on. |
| Now behave, it's the law, you know. | |
![]() |
|
| brenda | Mar 11 2010, 12:04 PM Post #82 |
![]()
..............
|
I noticed it, too. Thank you, Mike, for telling Adolph to get it right. Standards must be upheld here.
|
|
“Weeds are flowers, too, once you get to know them.” ~A.A. Milne | |
![]() |
|
| Der Fuhrer | Mar 11 2010, 12:45 PM Post #83 |
|
Junior Carp
|
Ach du lieber!
|
| miss me yet? | |
![]() |
|
| QuantumIvory | Mar 11 2010, 01:33 PM Post #84 |
|
Senior Carp
|
The ACS certainly is a "different animal", on that we can agree. But it is sent to 1 in 6 households not, as you contend, to "only" 1%. Also, you are mistaken that "it isn't the census". It is, in fact, part of the census (it takes the place of the old "long form") and is sent out every year and, to quote the U.S. Census Bureau,: "Both require your response." Now, it was clever of you to post question number 10 which concerns what kind of fuel is used most in heating your residence to obviously demonstrate how innocuous the questions are. Well, lets look at some of those questions (48 in all...not including sub-questions) to see if they are as innocent as you would have everyone believe. Here's a good one...question number 33: "What time did this person usually leave home to go to work LAST WEEK?" Or number 34: "How many minutes did it usually take this person to get from home to work LAST WEEK?" Or number 35: "LAST WEEK was this person on layoff from a job?" I particularly like number 36: "LAST WEEK , was this person TEMPORARILY absent from a job or business?" (Nice of our Nanny to be concerned whether we missed work because we had the flu, isn't it?) Here are some more really good ones: Number 18 (a) (The feds get 3 for 1 here): "Because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition, does this person have serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions? (b) Does this person have serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs? (c) Does this person have difficulty dressing or bathing?" And number 19: "Because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition, does this person have difficulty doing errands alone such as visiting a doctor's office or shopping?" Question 25(c) (this one has 3 parts too, but I'll go straight to the last one): "How long has this grandparent been responsible for the(se) grandchildren?" Question number 14 (a): "Does this person speak a language other than English at home? (b) What is this language? (c) How well does this person speak English? " I'll stop there, but there are many more just like these. You might consider what the government is doing here as harmless and a "big yawn" in terms of civil liberties, but I see it as going down a road where we shouldn't be going. Oh, and thanks for "educating" me Quirt; I'm sure I can't imagine how I've gotten along without your sagacious advice these 55 years. |
|
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. We cannot get behind consciousness." -Max Planck | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Mar 11 2010, 03:20 PM Post #85 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
I remember when he first showed up here, and all he did was follow me around trying to slap me, then ending his posts with "Giggity". |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Quagmire | Mar 11 2010, 03:45 PM Post #86 |
|
Senior Carp
|
Bullsh1t |
![]() |
|
| QuantumIvory | Mar 14 2010, 06:56 AM Post #87 |
|
Senior Carp
|
The Census and the Constitution "This will be a test of Americans who believe in personal privacy, the constitutionally guaranteed right to be left alone..." |
|
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. We cannot get behind consciousness." -Max Planck | |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Mar 14 2010, 07:01 AM Post #88 |
|
MAMIL
|
Dopplerpostenscheissenkopf. |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Mar 14 2010, 07:01 AM Post #89 |
|
MAMIL
|
I think you need to give him some leeway with the the German spelling - his first language is Austrian, after all, or Strine as it is commonly known. |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| George K | Mar 14 2010, 07:04 AM Post #90 |
|
Finally
|
OK, that was coffee-in-the-nose worthy. |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Mar 14 2010, 07:07 AM Post #91 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
I miscalculated. Your number is wrong, too, it seems. The correct answer lies somewhere in between.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Community_Survey I got 1% by dividing a 300 million population (rounded way down) by 3 million. However, there are multiple people in each dwelling. D'Oh! However, there are roughly 130 million housing units in the United States. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html Therefore, the correct number is probably somewhere around 3%. Not 1%, but nowhere near 16% either. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| QuantumIvory | Mar 14 2010, 07:27 AM Post #92 |
|
Senior Carp
|
Whether it be 2, 3, or 4 million per year, do the number of households really matter? The most important point here is despite the number of households involved, this portion of the census (which you say is not a part of the census) is overreaching and, in my view, an invasion of privacy. You, of course, disagree. I only hope there are more of me out there than there are of you out there. |
|
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. We cannot get behind consciousness." -Max Planck | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Mar 14 2010, 07:33 AM Post #93 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
You are the one who started the discussion by challenging my 1% figure. And now you want to say that the number doesn't matter? Why bother challenging it in the first place? Why not just make that argument at the beginning? Oh, and it doesn't really matter whether there are more like me, or more like you. What matters is whether there are more judges like me, or more judges like you. I'm fairly confident of that answer.
|
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| QuantumIvory | Mar 14 2010, 07:44 AM Post #94 |
|
Senior Carp
|
I got my number from the Census Bureau for the year 2000, but, again, that is not the most important point here. Are you now willing to admit that the ACS is, in fact, part of the census? And do you not find some of the questions at least a little bit disturbing? |
|
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. We cannot get behind consciousness." -Max Planck | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Mar 14 2010, 07:57 AM Post #95 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
I don't find the questions disturbing, and I don't understand why anyone else does, either. Even the questions you cherrypicked as troubling don't bother me. If you want to understand what's happening in a population as a whole, you have to do some statistical sampling. I don't really worry how what time you left for work last week can be misused by the government. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| Copper | Mar 14 2010, 07:59 AM Post #96 |
|
Shortstop
|
Exactly |
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Mar 14 2010, 08:00 AM Post #97 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
|
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| QuantumIvory | Mar 14 2010, 08:19 AM Post #98 |
|
Senior Carp
|
Of course, the government would never misuse Census data: Click |
|
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. We cannot get behind consciousness." -Max Planck | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Mar 14 2010, 08:30 AM Post #99 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
Under the Bush Administration? The horror! However, the place to stop that is at the use of the data. There are plenty of good reasons to want and to have aggregated data. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| QuantumIvory | Mar 14 2010, 08:59 AM Post #100 |
|
Senior Carp
|
FIFY. |
|
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. We cannot get behind consciousness." -Max Planck | |
![]() |
|
![]() ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community. Learn More · Sign-up for Free |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |










11:13 AM Jul 11