Posts by Josh Addison
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I have been told (and do correct me if I'm wrong) that up until about 14 days after conception, there's no difference between tissue that will become the placenta and tissue that will become the embryo, and that prior to 14 days, it's still possible for it to divide, making twins. If this is true, it means that at conception, the "baby" is not a distinct organism, and is potentially, well, "babies".
-
Vaguely on topic (newpapers and their wacky quote marks), this has been doing the rounds a bit, apparently - the Washington Times no longer refers to gay "marriage".
-
Interestingly, some (but not all) of the West Wing writers claim that Santos was originally going to lose the general election to Vinick. When they had to write out Leo McGarry (due to the death of the actor that played him), they decided that having Santos lose the election and his running partner was too much pathos, so they changed the storyline. Not sure how that would be emulated in real life, though...
-
John Rogers is cleverer than me, so I'll let him do the "no policy" rebuttal.
Interesting first comment on that post, which includes the factoid that Obama has the same amount of experience as Lincoln did when he ran for president. True, or feel-good myth? I can't be bothered doing the research...
-
I remember that proposal of Goff's - it suggested a two year age difference. The intention, of course, being that an 17-year-old who has sex with this 15-year-old girlfriend is not branded a paedophile and thrown in prison. How this makes a 28-year-old having sex with a 15-year-old a less serious offence I have no idea - the difference between the two cases is obvious to me.
Furthermore, the proposal was to apply down to the age of 12, meaning that you could avoid a statutory rape charge for having sex with a 12-year-old only if you were 14 or younger. Painting that as "lowering the age of consent to 12" - now that's dishonesty.
-
I haven't followed the whole affair with detailed interest, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't S59 get ammended, not repealed? It still exists, doesn't it, just in a form that says that force for the purposes of correction is not allowed.
I keep hearing people (sometimes people who really should know what they're talking about) saying "since S59 was repealed..." and wondering if I've got it wrong or if they have.
-
I've often found that the more objectionable the content of a piece of graffitti, the more objectionable the spelling and/or grammar. I once saw an "Asians go home" where the author had clearly tried about three different spellings of "Asians" during the process of writing it - it came out as something like "Asanians".
-
So how do you pronounce "hawt"?
Or, for that matter, "kewl"?
-
my dad would vehemently insist that tyranosaurus was pronounced tyro-nossorus.
I knew a guy who preferred to pronounce oxymoron "ok-simmaron", presumably because he thought a serious word couldn't possibly end in "moron". Etymologists will, of course, know that the "moron" in "oxymoron" comes from the same Greek word (meaning "dull") from which we get "moron"...
-
I'm 32, and I've never pronounced those two sounds differently, nor do I recall being taught to. If I try, I end up affecting an exaggerated English accent for "share" and "air" (in the manner of the famous Bill T James "air hair lair" sketch...)