Kishkumen: Modernity unchecked

[_Cicero]

Not enough commas for it to be Droopy.

Also, any post from Droopy longer than two sentences must always include the word "Left."

[_Tobin]

I'd have to agree. The OP is very droopy-esque.

[_Fence Sitter]

Seems about time for anther bout of Belmont.

[_Kishkumen]

Seems about time for anther bout of Belmont.

Ah, Belmont. Yes, we fondly remember the days when he pretended to have a sense of humor.

Would it be possible to recapture those halcyon days?

One suspects not.

[_sock puppet]

I'm curious, DrDarbyLDS, what was unlawful about DCP's dismissal from NAMIRS?

I think it was motivated for reasons that stand in violation of Title VII EEO 42 US Code Chapter 21.

You do know that Title VII protects individuals from adverse employment decisions because of an individual's "race, color, religion, sex, or national origin" (42 United States Code §2000e-2(a) (Civil Rights Act §703(a))), right?

Please identify which of these 5 protected demographic parameters you assert that was the improper motivating purpose behind DCP's dismissal?

And you do know, I'm sure, that Title VII exempts "a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, educational institution, or society of its activities" (42 United States Code §2000e-1(a) (Civil Rights Act §702(a))), right?

Are you saying that BYU, of which NAMIRS is a part, is not an educational institution with respect to DCP's (and others') employment of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by the LDS Church? and that the religious exemption does not apply to BYU?

[_Yahoo Bot]

I don't understand the opening post, or else I chose not to read beyond the first three sentences. But I agree that Kish is a deeply disturbed and conflicted individual. Not dangerous, of course, but not internally consistent. Ayn Rand would have a field day with such a person.

[_Kishkumen]

I don't understand the opening post, or else I chose not to read beyond the first three sentences. But I agree that Kish is a deeply disturbed and conflicted individual. Not dangerous, of course, but not internally consistent. Ayn Rand would have a field day with such a person.

Indeed. A "field day." Thus revealing herself to be the kook we all know she was yet again.

[_Stumpy Pepys]

I don't understand the opening post, or else I chose not to read beyond the first three sentences. But I agree that Kish is a deeply disturbed and conflicted individual. Not dangerous, of course, but not internally consistent. Ayn Rand would have a field day with such a person.

which one would be playing for the "unchecked modernity" team? Rand, or Kish?

[_Always Changing]

I think it is Gadianton at his satirical best. It displays an intimate knowledge of the inner workings of Cassius U. References to Flaubert, Rosenberg, Marx, Alfred Hitchcock, juxtaposed with an obscure reference to the "goddess suite" indicate a wide range of interests.

[_EAllusion]

It is obviously Stak. Jesus people. His posts contain both his academic interests and writing style to the point that someone would have to be trying hard to ape him if it wasn't him. In fact, it's so clearly Stak that I guess I'm being a jerk for pointing it out since this is a fun little ditty he is doing here.