It's an excellent program. There are mentions to religious persecution of scientific discovery in the first few episodes, that I saw, and this is likely the part that riles up religious ideologues. Then, there's the mention of science, which itself pisses off a lot of people. For folks like that, Lewis Black was right: they find the Flinstones more informative than any science documentary.
johnnycee Wrote: So should we turn eyes away with a "wink, wink" attitude because this individual does or did so many other good things ? Where would we draw the line on the wink,wink, attitude and hold these people accountable for their actions?
I'm not winking at you, Johnny, I'm disagreeing with your insinuation that because of the Clinton scandal Monica Lewinsky needs to be publicly shunned for the rest of eternity. Firstly, it's a Vanity Fair article, not the front page of Time: if this is still an outrage, you should read up on their article where they compare Gwyneth Paltrow to Kim-Jung Il. Secondly, what is it you would do to hold her accountable for her actions, further than what has already been done? Put her in the stocks and hurl cabbages? Have you actually read the article? Because the point that was being made was actually directed at sentiments exactly like yours: the idea that we need to inflict shame on people for consensual acts.
Newslo, the source for this article, is a parody website. Sorry, OP, you wouldn't be the first to be tricked -- they appear very real, and are frequently cited by people as fact.
Ted Cruz's father, as far as I can tell, has said none of these things, though both he and his son have made some pretty strange, whackjob comments on a number of subjects.
Sadly, you might be right. The United States is far more forward-thinking, environmentally, than China, and even we aren't taking the thing seriously enough to affect industrial standards. Instead, we opted for "green-washing." On my more cynical days I wonder if we'll only go down the right path once the natural disasters start getting even more serious, but the fight is still worthwhile. The simplest solution would be for these countries to do the right thing, and we can influence change in our government. It will just take a radically different approach. Namely, being more aggressive: middle-of-the-road liberals, while thoughtful and usually our best chance at stability, are more or less useless in times of crisis.
New strategy is needed. People should be angry about this kind of worldwide inaction.
Yes, how Machiavellian of me, actually reading what's in the article. Giving publicity to real issues is not "justifying the means," it's a step in the right direction.
The jury's not out, and there is no real debate about if it is happening. Climate change is coming, and it is (at least largely) man-made. The problem isn't that there isn't enough scientific data, it's that the data collected isn't good news for virtually any industry in the United States, or the world.
The point of the article was that society collectively shaming certain individuals for any situation, but especially ones involving sex or sexuality, is destructive and cruel (see: Tyler Clementi
. see: Amanda Todd
.) Ms. Lewinsky is using her spotlight to draw attention to a real and prevalent problem in this country: whatever you think of how she got that spotlight, that's a good thing.