[Sandwich]

Originally posted by Kamikaze
That's like saying we should let people use swords, becuase if we ban swords we'll have extremists going around trying to ban kitchen knives too. (It was the best analogy I could get off the top of my head )

Just look at Sept. 11th and the repercussions. After those planes were hijacked by terrorists with knives that came with the meals (apparently and AFAIK), many (all?) airlines or airline security screenings confiscate everything from pocket knives (quite understandable) to ball-point pens ( ). And yes, a personal friend of mine had his pen confiscated.

Understand that when people feel threatened, if they have the power or authority to act to change the situation, they will often go to extremes. I'm not saying this is a bad natural reaction, but it needs to be tempered with common sense.

Speaking of which, what a shame that common sense isn't common, eh?

Kazan, I don't want to get off on another tangent, but I'm intensely curious: how do you view the abortion issue? Do you look at it from the POV of the mother (or mother-to-be) who has the right to make her own choices? Or do you view it from the POV of the human embryo, who has the right to have a chance to be born and live? PM me the response if you want, so we don't derail this thread, but I'd be interested in seeing how you view this, as it also deals with parents making choices for their offspring without the offsprings' consent.

[Kazan]

The statements I make in this post are NOT open for debate _in_ _this_ _thread_ and may not be open to debate in any thread, if you with to inquire about them and possible debate do so in PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sandwich: i make a differentiation when it comes to the abortion issue - anything in the embryonic state is unequivically part of the mothers body/not yet it's own life - pretty much right up to birth it isn't yet it's own life ..

But to be medically correct you have to say "until it can survive outside of the mothers body without medical assitance"  - also babies that come out severely deformed in any way (especially genetic like Downs) should be immediately euthanised.   [A) it is cruel to let them live, B) it's a massive economic drain that just slows down human progress, C) blatantly genetically defective individuals may pass on their genes]

Once the baby is born and it has been determined that it's not majorly deformed (genetically or developmentally) it then "inherits" all it's human rights immediately.

[Sandwich]

*Continues discussion via PM*

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Kazan
The statements I make in this post are NOT open for debate _in_ _this_ _thread_ and may not be open to debate in any thread, if you with to inquire about them and possible debate do so in PM
 

You know, I suspect you really mean this to apply to the whole thread, Kazan.

[TheCelestialOne]

bobboau: i reference you to sources - who reference their sources

that's called investigating references - i'm not talking about investigating my refereces - im talking about investigating my reference's references

Reference's references? Ooook... And those references have their own references and those references are in turn based on an opinion. That opinion in turn were derived from another reference that was made up out of several other references.

[Odyssey]

In other news, George W. Bush is the anti-christ! I hereby present the evidence!
http://www.tylwythteg.com/enemies/Bush/bush24.html
http://mirrors.meepzorp.com/geocities.com/george-bush-antichrist/
http://www.tomdomican.com/heinous.html
http://www.dccsa.com/greatjoy/Illuminb.htm

And if you DARE argue with me, I'll throw those links in your face so many times you'll want to cry!



...no offence or anything, Kazan, but... please get a new discussion technique.

[Kazan]

*loses patience*

odyssey and TCO - **** you, if you are completely inable to do your freaking 'homework' and check sources then either A) you need to go to college and take some gen ed science and language course or B) your college degree needs to be stripped from you

[Gloriano]

okay first this was good discussion but now it's Bad everyone just chill out:)

[Odyssey]

I checked sources. My outcome was that everything has a source that wants to have a source. So what? IT'S NOT A BIG ISSUE. CALM DOWN.

And as for the college thing, it's going to be all of, oh, 3 years or so before I go there. In other words, I'm still at school. So I know what homework is. Boy, do I know.

Please don't take things so personally. It's never a good trait, because you'll always be on the defensive. And then, this kind of thing happens when people try to tell you what you're doing.

I've tried to keep a balanced viewpoint throughout this argument, but that doesn't seem to have worked either. What would make you happy, eh Kazan?

[TheCelestialOne]

Having finished the university, I must say you need an education my friend. On how to start, have and finish a good debate.

I will now summarize what you have done/done wrong:

1). Started off with some statement that nobody was even ALLOWED to refute. If they did, you freaked out.
2). Gave sources that were invalid. they contained biased information by biased people. Haven't seen any "numbers" or conclusive evidence. For each of your sites that you gave as reference there are dozens of sites that say the contrary. They are just as wrong as their whole premise is based on an opinion and personal assumptions just like your "references".
3). You seem to be unable to keep your cool. If you want anybody to agree with you stay calm and have a good, calm discussion.
4). If your mind is set about something and can't be changed. Don't start a debate as its pointless.
5). Use facts. Always place facts such as concrete numbers and PROVEN facts. Loss of sensation and all things you named differs with each person and thus is variable and can't be called conclusive. Most of this is psychological rather then medical anyway therefor in no way conclusive.

[Kazan]

1) if you want to refuse a source then investigate their sources and show exactly why their sources are dubious -- i did this, in this thread -- do not just say "oh they're biased", "oh you believe them because you want to" -- you're accusing people of intellectual crimes -- I WOULD NEVER BELIEVE A SOURCE SIMPLY BECAUSE I WANTED TO

2) See response to 1

3) I don't remember being the first one to start making blatant insinuations and insults

4) If I start a debate about something it's me out to convince you, not me out to let you try and change my mine (normally) -- I will no debate about anything that I am not 100% sure I have the most valid scientific sources backing me up on[/n]

5) Um, so the anatomy of the human body isn't fact?  almost all my argument was based off the anatomy - very little did I mention the pyschological

[Woolie Wool]

Just look at Sept. 11th and the repercussions. After those planes were hijacked by terrorists with knives that came with the meals (apparently and AFAIK), many (all?) airlines or airline security screenings confiscate everything from pocket knives (quite understandable) to ball-point pens (). And yes, a personal friend of mine had his pen confiscated.

You can do some damage if you stab someone in the eye or stab him elsewhere and push hard enough.

Anyway, here are the apparent facts. Circumcision causes:
Lots and lots and lots of pain for around two weeks
Loss of much sexual sensitivity
No real lasting psychological or physical damage, besides loss of sexual sensitivity

Circumcision is done primarily for religious reasons and to prevent masturbation.

I don't really see any real need for circumcision, it causes unnecessary pain and loss of sexual pleasure, and should be outlawed.

[Kazan]

it's also done routinely here in a america - which has nothing to do with religion - but false medical information

thank you for pipin in woolie

[TheCelestialOne]

Originally posted by Woolie Wool

Circumcision is done primarily for religious reasons and to prevent masturbation.

I don't really see any real need for circumcision, it causes unnecessary pain and loss of sexual pleasure, and should be outlawed.

Prevent maturbation!? Ahem... well let's just say it doesn't help

There is NO need for circumsision. I agree 110% with that. That is UNLESS there is an obvious medical reason. Like with me.

As for the loss of sense: Happy me, they left the most imprtant nerve clusters!

[01010]

Give a man a penis and he'll play with it for a while. Give a man a thread about his penis and he'll talk about it all day.

[Odyssey]

Originally posted by Kazan
4) If I start a debate about something it's me out to convince you, not me out to let you try and change my mine (normally) -- I will no debate about anything that I am not 100% sure I have the most valid scientific sources backing me up on

Hmm... Then that's not called a debate, AFAIK. It's called a 'persuasive argument' or somesuch.

[Woolie Wool]

Originally posted by TheCelestialOne

Prevent maturbation!? Ahem... well let's just say it doesn't help

Nope...

[Odyssey]

Originally posted by Woolie Wool
Nope...

Agreed!

[Ulala]

Originally posted by Kazan
Once the baby is born and it has been determined that it's not majorly deformed (genetically or developmentally) it then "inherits" all it's human rights immediately.

Wait, wait... so babies that are deformed don't have human rights? What about people that were deformed babies, and now they're just physically/mentally handicapped people? They aren't supposed to have human rights either?

[Edit] Disclaimer: The reason I replied to this in the thread instead of PMing is because the thread is originally focused on human rights, I think you might have said so yourself.. so anyway, sorry if this derails the thread a little. [/Edit]

[Kazan]

Ulala: since you have a valid reason to keep it in the thread i'll address it

The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few. -- This statement has no bearing on the circumcision discussion -- but it has every bearing on the deformities arguement.

The need of the invidiual that is deformed is vastly outweighed by the needs of the generally population - the deformed individual makes no contribution to the gene pool (or even worse: makes a negative contribution), drains the economy, consumes resources, etc.  There is no value in keeping alive someone that is massively deformed - it is bad for the species.

No to mention I consider it cruel to keep alive the massively deformed.