I think black absorbs all colors, and white reflects them all.
...don't make me get out the big book 'o science here.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Backs Federal Non-Discrimination LGBT Equality Act of 2015
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think black absorbs all colors, and white reflects them all.
...don't make me get out the big book 'o science here.
I don't think you have a shred of evidence that Chinese factories working for apple operate under neo-slavery...
It depends on whether one is using the subtractive color theory or the additive color theory.I think black absorbs all colors, and white reflects them all.
...don't make me get out the big book 'o science here.
http://www.colormatters.com/color-and-design/are-black-and-white-colors
His first 5 points are backed up by citations on Wikipedia: that bastion of conservative thought:
#1:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_Republican_Party#Ideological_beginnings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln
#2:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire-Eaters
#3:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan#Political_role
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_segregation_in_the_United_States#In_the_South
#4
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiram_Rhodes_Revels
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blanche_Bruce
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Brooke
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Rainey (plus 20 more black Representatives)
#5
I'll follow up with the URLs for this tomorrow AM.
That's right, you just keep on ignoring that party swap and pretending like its a "myth". I know facts are inconvenient for the right wing agenda.
But yeah, the former Republican Party once had a black candidate 126 years ago. That totally erases the fact that the first black president is a Democrat. Sorry if that FACT doesn't fit with your attempt to paint Republicans as the progressive party. I bet not even you believe that crap that comes out of your mouth.
You're pointing out the fact that in the past, the democrats were the racists who'd be more likely to burn a cross in someone's front yard than they would hold hands with a black guy as a symbol of racial solidarity?
...yeah, I know this.
But what was true then isn't true now. The ideological shift that so many people absolutely love to deny is a well documented phenomenon that began roughly around the time of FDR's presidency, and ended with Nixon's Southern Strategy, spurred on mostly by the various Civil Rights Movements through the early-mid 20th century.
Got to love it when Republicans spout ancient history and ignore everything that's happened since.
http://www.livescience.com/34241-democratic-republican-parties-switch-platforms.html
This is an inconvenient truth. How quick we forget that Apple has no problem doing business in countries that have zero LGBT rights. They're for whatever rights in each country that are the most profitable for them.
Exactly, if Apple was truly righteous, Apple products would be made in America using labor from all walks of life. This is just phony "doublespeak".
Well it didn't take long for the hate mongers to come out on this one. What is it they say about people who hate, homosexuals in this case, so much? Deep down inside, they're really gay themselves and they're only projecting their hate on others who are already out of the closet.
For all the hate mongers....
For all the hate mongers....
Where does your "logic" stop??
If civil rights are lacking anywhere in the world whatsoever that we do trade with, we should give up on equality here at home??
We should not continue campaigning for LGBT rights?? We should bring back slavery?? Just what in the hell point do you think you are making??
No, he was a Republican, tried and true. Perhaps the greatest president to ever hold office.
But, as has been said time and time again over the last couple of pages of this thread, things are different now. Verifiably and objectively so.
I'm not about to address the well documented party switch for the umpteenth time. Open a goddamn history book for Christ sake. Or at least look back a page or two in this thread.
This is one reason why I don't frequent the PRSI forum much any more, that is, I'm tired of trying to reason with the unreasonable. In my book, many diehard conservatives are so deluded that they will ignore facts and reality despite being slapped in the face with it. They are often very willfully ignorant or just plain stupid and there are better things us enlightened people can focus on.
It appears this thread has prompted a few to test the boundaries of civil dialogue. Makes one wonder what mood the moderators are in.
Yeah, like making sure they have as little political influence as possible. Arguing with brick walls is useless, building around them is the only way.
No. I don't.
There is "Mongoloid", "Negroid" and "Caucasian" classification, even if Caucasian seems to be more controversial, because it has at least racial attributes.
"the taxon has historically been used to denote one of the three proposed major races (Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Negroid) of humankind.[5] Although its validity and utility are disputed by many anthropologists, Caucasoid as a biological classification remains in use,[6] particularly within the field of forensic anthropology." - Wikipedia
This is also, what I have learned in school long time ago and it has NOTHING to do with any kind of discrimination or racism. It is just a differentiation of our human race on certain characteristics.
"Usage in the United States
Further information: Race in the United States
In the United States, the term "Caucasoid" is used in disciplines such as anthropology, craniometry, epidemiology, forensic medicine and forensic archaeology. It is also sometimes associated with notions of racial typology.
Besides its use in anthropology and related fields, the term "Caucasian" has often been used in the United States in a different, social context to describe a group commonly called "White people".[37] "White" also appears as a self-reporting entry in the U.S. Census." - Wikipedia
All I have to say: luckily, world does not end with USA and Wikipedia is not being controlled or censored by those american "Political Correctness Zealots".
I don't think you are up to speed. The existence of a gay gene is all but confirmed. http://mobile.the-scientist.com/article/41472/zeroing-in-on-the-gay-gene
No. The 1st amendment was about religious freedom and separation of Church and state. Republicans have been trying to use religion as the basis for passing discriminatory laws, like the defense of marriage act or new ones like it.
The issue is, that violate the 1st amendment in an of itself.
Then if you want to get really technical, these people who wanted to put in law a biblical definition of marriage is between "one man and one woman" obviously never read the book known as the Bible.
- The bible does not define marriage as between ONE woman and ONE man
- The bible defines a woman as property and marriage as a business transaction with husband getting assets from her father for taking her off his hands (the dowry)
- The bible allows the husband to have as many concubines as he likes, but he must financially support them
- The bible also states that a man can rape a woman, but must pay her father for damages due to loss of property and then must marry her without dowry because she is not a worthless bargain bin vagina not good for cows or land.
This is why it is harmful religious legislation because it's all based on man made crap.
How does one have tolerance for anyone who wishes to harm another for no other reason than they are different than them?
So to use your logic, I should give hugs and Kisses to the KKK and tolerate them burning crosses and killing african american people? Let me get my time machine.... because damn, how stupid could we all have been! We shouldn't have bombed hitler.... he just needed a hug!
I don't think people loving each other and not discriminating is quite the same thing.... and if you want to pull the religion card, Jesus had one commandment.... love one another. I cannot defend "christians" who ignore the teachings of jesus and want to get all leviticus on people....
I mean, those people should also really read the book they quote... because it says if a woman has her period in the house the husband is to stone her to death for it.
If people got that literal, it's a good thing homosexuality has become more accepted.... there would be no women left and Tampax would go brankrupt.
Apple, build better products and keep the F out of politics!