ProwlingTiger
Mar 31, 08:44 PM
I like everyone bashing on the Apple "fanboys." It's comical. Somehow telling it like it is hangs a sign around your neck saying "i'm a fanboy, flame me."
People defending Google here by saying Google is still open are simply delusional. Now, if you defend Google by saying, "hey, Google was wrong these past few years, they're going in the right direction now," I'll give you credit.
But, somehow, Google changing its policies that were clearly not in the best interest of consumers gives people a reason to bash Apple customers.
Google is practically admitting what Apple "fanboys" have been saying all along.
"You can't handle the truth!"
SactoGuy18: Good idea. I've been wondering why Google never did this originally.
People defending Google here by saying Google is still open are simply delusional. Now, if you defend Google by saying, "hey, Google was wrong these past few years, they're going in the right direction now," I'll give you credit.
But, somehow, Google changing its policies that were clearly not in the best interest of consumers gives people a reason to bash Apple customers.
Google is practically admitting what Apple "fanboys" have been saying all along.
"You can't handle the truth!"
SactoGuy18: Good idea. I've been wondering why Google never did this originally.
dethmaShine
Apr 12, 03:11 PM
3am.
Thanks.
And that's not good.
Thanks.
And that's not good.
M-O
Apr 25, 01:35 PM
wow, this has officially been blown out of proportion!
iAlan
Nov 28, 08:16 PM
I haven't read all the post as yet, got to around post #50 but my sentiments pretty much reflect those of most posters.
However, if there is evidence that a bulk of the royalty (and I mean more than 50%) will go to artists then I can see justification in the process (but it should not be a flat $1 per device as the cost/profit of devices varies). But at the same time, Apple should get a higher share of the 99c per track as I believe the money they get per song pretty much only covers there management of the stored data and hosting on iTunes with very little profit per song - and this is understandable as Apple can leverage the iTunes store to drive iPod sales.
If the record companies want a profitable piece of Apple�s pie (no pun intended) then Apple should be entitled to a profitable piece of the 99c download.
Same logic me thinks�
However, if there is evidence that a bulk of the royalty (and I mean more than 50%) will go to artists then I can see justification in the process (but it should not be a flat $1 per device as the cost/profit of devices varies). But at the same time, Apple should get a higher share of the 99c per track as I believe the money they get per song pretty much only covers there management of the stored data and hosting on iTunes with very little profit per song - and this is understandable as Apple can leverage the iTunes store to drive iPod sales.
If the record companies want a profitable piece of Apple�s pie (no pun intended) then Apple should be entitled to a profitable piece of the 99c download.
Same logic me thinks�
brayhite
Apr 25, 01:59 PM
I'm not from the US so if someone with some legal background over there could point out to me how this would work..? Where I'm from you have to have suffered damages in order to sue someone, otherwise a government regulator would just impose a fine on the company or require them to stop what they are doing..? How have these people (who are suing apple) suffered losses as a result of this apparent spying technology..?
IANAL, but AFAIK, here in America, having rights infringed upon is reason for sueing. That, in itself, is a "damage". Hence why Apple is being sued. They apparently are infringing upon the consumers' rights to privacy.
IANAL, but AFAIK, here in America, having rights infringed upon is reason for sueing. That, in itself, is a "damage". Hence why Apple is being sued. They apparently are infringing upon the consumers' rights to privacy.
charlituna
Apr 5, 11:48 PM
YES!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyqUj3PGHv4)
Did you see the Conan version.
I hope the next release of FCS integrates the different apps within the suite under a single UI.
I don't have an issue with the apps being separate but I do agree that a more common UI would be nice.
And I too hope to see the rest of Shake return in some form or another.
The speculation is that REDRay will be used for everything from 4K DCP playback in movie theaters to a download/streaming version that will be usable for buying up to 4K movies through iTunes.
if this means we could get HD itunes that are actually blu-ray quality without it being 50 GB I'm all for it.
I hope they ship it on DVD as i'm not going to tie up my Internet connection for 3 hrs while it downloads:(
Agreed. If not DVDs then a flash drive like they did the restore stuff for the Airs
I doubt Apple will ship a new version of FCP before they ship lion,
folks said the same thing about FCS3 and Snow Leopard and yet as I recall that is exactly what they did.
Ugh. Final Cut is fine the way it is for now... We need iWeb overhaul!! Make it more search engine friendly, none of the text as an image crap. grrr...
Final Cut is fine but it could be much better. Both full studios in fact could be much much better in a number of ways
That said, there are rumors about iWeb being revamped which is why it wasn't updated in iLife 11. And about the release of an iweb for ipad app. So you might get your wish
Did you see the Conan version.
I hope the next release of FCS integrates the different apps within the suite under a single UI.
I don't have an issue with the apps being separate but I do agree that a more common UI would be nice.
And I too hope to see the rest of Shake return in some form or another.
The speculation is that REDRay will be used for everything from 4K DCP playback in movie theaters to a download/streaming version that will be usable for buying up to 4K movies through iTunes.
if this means we could get HD itunes that are actually blu-ray quality without it being 50 GB I'm all for it.
I hope they ship it on DVD as i'm not going to tie up my Internet connection for 3 hrs while it downloads:(
Agreed. If not DVDs then a flash drive like they did the restore stuff for the Airs
I doubt Apple will ship a new version of FCP before they ship lion,
folks said the same thing about FCS3 and Snow Leopard and yet as I recall that is exactly what they did.
Ugh. Final Cut is fine the way it is for now... We need iWeb overhaul!! Make it more search engine friendly, none of the text as an image crap. grrr...
Final Cut is fine but it could be much better. Both full studios in fact could be much much better in a number of ways
That said, there are rumors about iWeb being revamped which is why it wasn't updated in iLife 11. And about the release of an iweb for ipad app. So you might get your wish
rdowns
Apr 28, 08:04 AM
Step out of your little fairytale world
I loves me some irony.
I loves me some irony.
mBox
Apr 8, 11:19 PM
Careful, some trolls will insist that your opinion is only relevant to your narrow world view and that you need itemized spreadsheets to prove that you know what you're talking about.The positive is that all the other mentioned apps are Apple capable :)
wmmk
Jul 14, 06:07 PM
the question still remains--will the powermacs be able to use standard, off the shelf, pc video cards?
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html
which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.
i'v actually heard that with a normal PC, you can make almost any NVIDIA card compatible with mac, but it takes a bit of geekery and hackery.
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html
which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.
i'v actually heard that with a normal PC, you can make almost any NVIDIA card compatible with mac, but it takes a bit of geekery and hackery.
netdog
Aug 11, 10:47 AM
"...Earlier than some may be expecting"??
Wasn't everyone expecting this a year ago?
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
Wasn't everyone expecting this a year ago?
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
bretm
Apr 11, 09:51 AM
Then that just begs the question, "why haven't these people left already?" FCP has been fairly stagnant for years. There are plenty of other alternatives, so doesn't that kinda make them fanboyish too for sticking it out when up to this point Apple has given zero hints about when or how it will take FCP to the next level?
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
I'm an independent corporate video editor. Work out of the house. I've been doing NLE since 1993. I started with VideoCube, then Media 100, then Avid, and then FCP in 2001. Avid had to get really behind (and threaten to leave the mac platform) before post houses made the switch. They really screwed that up at NAB that year. They had been languishing on the mac apps and releasing certain products- Symphony, DS, etc. on Windows only for a few years and at NAB one sales guy said to someone that they would essentially be phasing out the mac platform. They denied it later, but it was probably their plan. Then FCP came out and for the corporate folks that didn't need to spend 70,000 on an Avid system, it was wonderful. In the years that followed it closed the gap immensely and Avid fought back with cheaper products and options. It became a either or situation, with FCP being the slightly cheaper option. But with the new tech in the last 2 years, Apple has to leap frog again.
But still, it's so much more than just the app. Which is why Adobe (which has all the features everyone wants in FCP) is having such a hard time getting anyone but hacks to use it. There is an installed user base and an entire generation of people trained on FCP & Avid. And it was just the above fluke that gave FCP an in. It's one thing for an individual like me to switch, but for a company that uses contractors and other companies and rely on compatibility and workflows and such, it's a nightmare. I work with independent producers, and their clients are usually large companies. All 3 of us are using FCP. If I switch, I make life hard on the producer who is cutting together rough ideas on her laptop. When we deliver product, we deliver a product and the FCP project and files so that the big company, who has editing facilites of their own, can make changes without our help in an emergency. It's part of why they feel comfortable going out of house.
It's the smaller turnkey shops that do it all in house that can afford to keep totally cutting edge and buy every upgrade. But truth is, most good editing should rely on cuts and dissolves. You need anything fancier audio or graphic wise, you should be hiring an audio professional or a graphics professional.
I have the Adobe Master collection myself because I dabble in AE, PS, Flash and Dreamweaver. But the web authoring has just gone crazy. I can't keep up with all that. And AE is starting to get that way too. For me, I would just like FCP to upgrade and/or reinvent itself so I can integrate new tech simpler. Better authoring for Blu-Ray and DVD. Better web options. Importing file formats without log and transfer BS. And lets tune it up to make it use all the processors and be a ridiculous powerhouse. High end features rivaling Avid, and the touch and elegance of Apple. Plus a few neat tricks like offline editing on iPad or using the iPad as a controller, etc. would be cool and welcome.
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
I'm an independent corporate video editor. Work out of the house. I've been doing NLE since 1993. I started with VideoCube, then Media 100, then Avid, and then FCP in 2001. Avid had to get really behind (and threaten to leave the mac platform) before post houses made the switch. They really screwed that up at NAB that year. They had been languishing on the mac apps and releasing certain products- Symphony, DS, etc. on Windows only for a few years and at NAB one sales guy said to someone that they would essentially be phasing out the mac platform. They denied it later, but it was probably their plan. Then FCP came out and for the corporate folks that didn't need to spend 70,000 on an Avid system, it was wonderful. In the years that followed it closed the gap immensely and Avid fought back with cheaper products and options. It became a either or situation, with FCP being the slightly cheaper option. But with the new tech in the last 2 years, Apple has to leap frog again.
But still, it's so much more than just the app. Which is why Adobe (which has all the features everyone wants in FCP) is having such a hard time getting anyone but hacks to use it. There is an installed user base and an entire generation of people trained on FCP & Avid. And it was just the above fluke that gave FCP an in. It's one thing for an individual like me to switch, but for a company that uses contractors and other companies and rely on compatibility and workflows and such, it's a nightmare. I work with independent producers, and their clients are usually large companies. All 3 of us are using FCP. If I switch, I make life hard on the producer who is cutting together rough ideas on her laptop. When we deliver product, we deliver a product and the FCP project and files so that the big company, who has editing facilites of their own, can make changes without our help in an emergency. It's part of why they feel comfortable going out of house.
It's the smaller turnkey shops that do it all in house that can afford to keep totally cutting edge and buy every upgrade. But truth is, most good editing should rely on cuts and dissolves. You need anything fancier audio or graphic wise, you should be hiring an audio professional or a graphics professional.
I have the Adobe Master collection myself because I dabble in AE, PS, Flash and Dreamweaver. But the web authoring has just gone crazy. I can't keep up with all that. And AE is starting to get that way too. For me, I would just like FCP to upgrade and/or reinvent itself so I can integrate new tech simpler. Better authoring for Blu-Ray and DVD. Better web options. Importing file formats without log and transfer BS. And lets tune it up to make it use all the processors and be a ridiculous powerhouse. High end features rivaling Avid, and the touch and elegance of Apple. Plus a few neat tricks like offline editing on iPad or using the iPad as a controller, etc. would be cool and welcome.
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 6, 11:12 AM
I still don't think this means new MacBook Airs in June. Can anyone really see Apple releasing new hardware before Lion is released?
I can they have before. Drop in OS kits.
I can they have before. Drop in OS kits.
Northgrove
Mar 26, 11:16 AM
Since the release of Leopard, the subsequent releases haven't had the wow factor of before.
Just what I think anyway.
Releases? There's just been one release since Leopard. :p
Just what I think anyway.
Releases? There's just been one release since Leopard. :p
jackc
Aug 7, 06:12 PM
I keep reading stuff like this. I don't think Time Machine works with the reagular harddrive. You have to use it with an external drive.
Yes, I was wondering the same because it wouldn't make much sense would it.:)
It seems to me it would make some older versions available on your HD, but then you would want to make a copy to an external HD for space reasons and for backup in case of failure. But I'm just speculating of course
Yes, I was wondering the same because it wouldn't make much sense would it.:)
It seems to me it would make some older versions available on your HD, but then you would want to make a copy to an external HD for space reasons and for backup in case of failure. But I'm just speculating of course
Arcus
Apr 25, 03:33 PM
because as we know, there's no end to the absurd lengths people will declare their rights trod upon.
I do agree with you that this whole thing is a big 'ole waste of time and money, I would have appreciated it if Apple told me that this file existed. I certainly know they knew where I was at any given moment. I remember when old cell phones had the ability to turn off the 911 location option, I always turned mine on.
It would have been nice to know about the file and had the option to delete it if I want.
This is waaaayy overblown now.
I do agree with you that this whole thing is a big 'ole waste of time and money, I would have appreciated it if Apple told me that this file existed. I certainly know they knew where I was at any given moment. I remember when old cell phones had the ability to turn off the 911 location option, I always turned mine on.
It would have been nice to know about the file and had the option to delete it if I want.
This is waaaayy overblown now.
Multimedia
Jul 23, 03:14 PM
Given the change in Clovertown schedule, I expect that at WWDC Apple will release 2 "lower end" Mac Pro configurations both with dual Woodcrests. The higher end configuration with two Clovertowns will ship early Q1 (maybe around MW'07).
I expect it will be 2.33GHz and 2.67GHz Woodcrest models with 3.0GHz as a BTO option. Conroe in Mac Pro is looking highly unlikely.
Anyone care to speculate on Intel's pricing for a 2.67GHz Clovertown? I am thinking $999.Well Swami I am going to have to call your bluff. Makes no sense to skip Conroe Dual Cores on the Mac Pro yet. This Winter 2007 with Clovertowns, perhaps post MacWorld SF. But not yet. And maybe not ever.
There are some who may never find a need for more than two cores. But therein creeps back the need for a cheaper dual core tower line in the same price range as the iMacs. Seems inevitable doesn't it? Expand the Tower line down to $999 and let it go all the way up to $3.5k. Six models instead of only 3 expensive ones.
January - March 2007
..$999 - Dual 2.13 GHz One Conroe
$1399 - Dual 2.4 GHz One Conroe
$1699 - Dual 2.67 GHz One Conroe
$1999 - Quad 2.67 GHz One Kentsfield
$2499 - Quad 3.2 GHz One Kentsfield
$3499 or more for Mac OctoPod Fastest On EARTH - 8 x 3.2 GHz
Two Clovertown later One Yorkfield for less money.
I found that word "OctoPod" in my Tiger's Oxford Dictionary. It's a REAL word.
When they get to 8 via a Yorkfield then the whole line can be based on the less expensive desktop family motherboards and chipsets except the extreeme top where pairs of Harpertown will make 16 etc etc.
You fill in the specs. I can't remember what speeds are being offered. This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.
I expect it will be 2.33GHz and 2.67GHz Woodcrest models with 3.0GHz as a BTO option. Conroe in Mac Pro is looking highly unlikely.
Anyone care to speculate on Intel's pricing for a 2.67GHz Clovertown? I am thinking $999.Well Swami I am going to have to call your bluff. Makes no sense to skip Conroe Dual Cores on the Mac Pro yet. This Winter 2007 with Clovertowns, perhaps post MacWorld SF. But not yet. And maybe not ever.
There are some who may never find a need for more than two cores. But therein creeps back the need for a cheaper dual core tower line in the same price range as the iMacs. Seems inevitable doesn't it? Expand the Tower line down to $999 and let it go all the way up to $3.5k. Six models instead of only 3 expensive ones.
January - March 2007
..$999 - Dual 2.13 GHz One Conroe
$1399 - Dual 2.4 GHz One Conroe
$1699 - Dual 2.67 GHz One Conroe
$1999 - Quad 2.67 GHz One Kentsfield
$2499 - Quad 3.2 GHz One Kentsfield
$3499 or more for Mac OctoPod Fastest On EARTH - 8 x 3.2 GHz
Two Clovertown later One Yorkfield for less money.
I found that word "OctoPod" in my Tiger's Oxford Dictionary. It's a REAL word.
When they get to 8 via a Yorkfield then the whole line can be based on the less expensive desktop family motherboards and chipsets except the extreeme top where pairs of Harpertown will make 16 etc etc.
You fill in the specs. I can't remember what speeds are being offered. This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.
Bilbo63
Apr 19, 06:03 PM
According to Wikipedia It was released in Feb before the iPhone was released..
The iPhone was revealed on January 9th 2007. It didn't ship until June due to regulatory approval.
The iPhone was revealed on January 9th 2007. It didn't ship until June due to regulatory approval.
Popeye206
Mar 31, 03:43 PM
Oh, Lordy! The Fandroids were always delusional, but reading some of these comments�this seems to have pushed them over the line into some sort of clinical psychosis.
It's because they're learning that offering a commercial product like a college science project is good for developers, but stinks for consumers and the real world. Basically... Google is learning this too.
I've always believed that if Google doesn't start imposing some limits and "walls" the Android OS will get out of control and you'll have 20 versions of it out there all running in their own direction.
It's because they're learning that offering a commercial product like a college science project is good for developers, but stinks for consumers and the real world. Basically... Google is learning this too.
I've always believed that if Google doesn't start imposing some limits and "walls" the Android OS will get out of control and you'll have 20 versions of it out there all running in their own direction.
Mattsasa
Apr 6, 03:15 PM
Shame people are brainwashed by Apple with their crappy product, and the superior tablet is behind on sales. Im sure it will pick up soon.
superior tablet? lol
superior tablet? lol
TripHop
Jun 14, 06:27 PM
The info i stated is directly from my DM.
We havent been told no white ones. I even asked specifically on the call, and no one had heard that.
Rumor has it, 20k phones. We haven't got an official number, but i've heard 20k mentioned from a few different higher ups.That number has got to be just for your district. No way is that a national number. If I can't get a white one that leaves me out. I want a white 32.
We havent been told no white ones. I even asked specifically on the call, and no one had heard that.
Rumor has it, 20k phones. We haven't got an official number, but i've heard 20k mentioned from a few different higher ups.That number has got to be just for your district. No way is that a national number. If I can't get a white one that leaves me out. I want a white 32.
Zadillo
Aug 7, 09:35 PM
This preview of Leopard seemed really like a glaze over of some "fun" little advancements, it did not look polished at all...to all those dissapointed in what leopard has to offer, not to be punny, but steve has barely let the cat out of the bag
tonne more to come
I don't know, I thought Spaces and Time Machine looked very polished, personally. Spaces in particular is one of those things that I actually think will be genuinely useful (like Expose before it), and I like that it seems to be an even more useful implementation of the virtual desktops concept than what I've seen in Linux.
tonne more to come
I don't know, I thought Spaces and Time Machine looked very polished, personally. Spaces in particular is one of those things that I actually think will be genuinely useful (like Expose before it), and I like that it seems to be an even more useful implementation of the virtual desktops concept than what I've seen in Linux.
CaoCao
Feb 28, 06:47 PM
Wow. I have never, ever in my life been so tempted to troll a MacRumors thread, nor have I ever been so infuriated by the use of a set of double quotation marks.
Gay marriage is not "marriage." Gay marriage is marriage.
Gay people are not "gay." They are gay.
So a few things:
1) Deal with it.
2) Gays are going to keep on getting married. Whether that means that they have to leave your ass-backwards country to come to a real civilization to do so, or write their own damn marriage contract and hire a rational person to perform the ceremony, they will.
3) As Lee said, what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes (hell, anywhere, in fact) is their own damn business.
4) The claim by Bill McEnaney that gay people living together "should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another" is outrageous. (NB that this person had just said they must live "as siblings" which is weird, given that platonic love is only reservation from physical romance, not emotional romance...)
5) If you are going to pull the "protect the sanctity of marriage" card on me, think very hard about the institutions of divorce and annulment.
6) Many people (and many of the small number who claim to anyway) do not share your beliefs. Catholics have sex. In and out of marriage. *See Point One.*
7) Please try to be just a smidgen more cultured in your attitudes, and a little less abrasive in sharing them. Though I try to reserve judgment, I am currently not alone in thinking that you are completely insane just by your posts in this thread.
I feel better now. :)
2) okay, they can pretend to get married
3) We don't care what they are doing in there
5) Divorce is a terrible and tragic thing
6) The Catholic Church doesn't pretend that the people in it are perfect.
A) Maybe your feelings on the situation would be different if you actually had a girlfriend.
B) I'm interested to learn what exactly the physical and psychological risks of non-marital sex are?
You're kidding. Right?
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornication
You can pretend that particular fornication sessions are sacred because some guy wearing a white collar said so.
Definitions are useful
No, it's called "living a human lifestyle".
Why should your hang-ups be of any relevance to anybody else? Perhaps you need to deal with your own perceptions instead of relying on some dusty tome to tell you what to think. You know that Plato was a repressed homosexual, don't you? He spent hours at the gymnasium ogling naked young men, and perhaps like S/Paul, spent a lot of effort telling other people how to love to expiate his guilty feelings.
You are extraordinarily keen to prescribe what other people should do. What's it got to do with you?
You sound like a real catch, but hey, what you choose to do is up to you.
So, you assert that a married non-Christian couple can do nothing but fornicate? What an appallingly demeaning attitude! Do you regard any couple you meet as probable fornicators by default? Do you question them about whether they use birth control, or whether they were married, and if so whether it was in a Catholic church with the proper sacraments? You clearly swallow Catholic dogma hook, line and sinker, so choosing righteous friends must be a real PITA.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?
That is because to a Christian they aren't married. He probably doesn't because a marriage between two non-Catholic Christians is generally valid.
Lee, I agree with you about what you say, but he clearly did say that this was only his opinion. People are allowed that, even if it is hateful and exclusionist.
inclusivism is not inherently good and that position holds no hatred or malice
They decided not to rehire him, so?
Gay marriage is not "marriage." Gay marriage is marriage.
Gay people are not "gay." They are gay.
So a few things:
1) Deal with it.
2) Gays are going to keep on getting married. Whether that means that they have to leave your ass-backwards country to come to a real civilization to do so, or write their own damn marriage contract and hire a rational person to perform the ceremony, they will.
3) As Lee said, what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes (hell, anywhere, in fact) is their own damn business.
4) The claim by Bill McEnaney that gay people living together "should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another" is outrageous. (NB that this person had just said they must live "as siblings" which is weird, given that platonic love is only reservation from physical romance, not emotional romance...)
5) If you are going to pull the "protect the sanctity of marriage" card on me, think very hard about the institutions of divorce and annulment.
6) Many people (and many of the small number who claim to anyway) do not share your beliefs. Catholics have sex. In and out of marriage. *See Point One.*
7) Please try to be just a smidgen more cultured in your attitudes, and a little less abrasive in sharing them. Though I try to reserve judgment, I am currently not alone in thinking that you are completely insane just by your posts in this thread.
I feel better now. :)
2) okay, they can pretend to get married
3) We don't care what they are doing in there
5) Divorce is a terrible and tragic thing
6) The Catholic Church doesn't pretend that the people in it are perfect.
A) Maybe your feelings on the situation would be different if you actually had a girlfriend.
B) I'm interested to learn what exactly the physical and psychological risks of non-marital sex are?
You're kidding. Right?
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornication
You can pretend that particular fornication sessions are sacred because some guy wearing a white collar said so.
Definitions are useful
No, it's called "living a human lifestyle".
Why should your hang-ups be of any relevance to anybody else? Perhaps you need to deal with your own perceptions instead of relying on some dusty tome to tell you what to think. You know that Plato was a repressed homosexual, don't you? He spent hours at the gymnasium ogling naked young men, and perhaps like S/Paul, spent a lot of effort telling other people how to love to expiate his guilty feelings.
You are extraordinarily keen to prescribe what other people should do. What's it got to do with you?
You sound like a real catch, but hey, what you choose to do is up to you.
So, you assert that a married non-Christian couple can do nothing but fornicate? What an appallingly demeaning attitude! Do you regard any couple you meet as probable fornicators by default? Do you question them about whether they use birth control, or whether they were married, and if so whether it was in a Catholic church with the proper sacraments? You clearly swallow Catholic dogma hook, line and sinker, so choosing righteous friends must be a real PITA.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?
That is because to a Christian they aren't married. He probably doesn't because a marriage between two non-Catholic Christians is generally valid.
Lee, I agree with you about what you say, but he clearly did say that this was only his opinion. People are allowed that, even if it is hateful and exclusionist.
inclusivism is not inherently good and that position holds no hatred or malice
They decided not to rehire him, so?
SuperCachetes
Mar 4, 12:02 AM
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions.
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
Invalid because it endorses something that could cause the collapse of society
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
Invalid because it endorses something that could cause the collapse of society
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
ctachme
Jul 27, 10:50 AM
MBPs the end of august? I START school in the end of august.
ughghghghghghg
Me too. I'm just going to hang onto my aging iBook G4 until they come out. I really would kick myself if I bought a MacBook Pro now so close to them being updated. I'm just hoping I can order soon, and then they will arrive at the end of August... just in time for school. *crosses fingers*
ughghghghghghg
Me too. I'm just going to hang onto my aging iBook G4 until they come out. I really would kick myself if I bought a MacBook Pro now so close to them being updated. I'm just hoping I can order soon, and then they will arrive at the end of August... just in time for school. *crosses fingers*