[Kellan]

That certainly is one big spanner. Let's see if it works.

[HotSnoJ]

Originally posted by Bobboau
OK lets set this right,
uuhmmm...
you, ****ing... idiots, and ummm

Ah, I got it

Abortion, why is it you religious zealots want to make a woman slave to an unborn, unliving fetus, so if she approaches the sexual indiscretions of men, she should give her life over and be a doding mother to a child that will have a less bright future, because it (he/she) was born while it's mother was trying to get an education or a fanatical foot hold and was pushed into ignorant poverty unable to escape because she can't afford collage any more, and is too busy trying to raise a child she didn't want,
Not to mention the situations were the mothers very life is in danger,

Then look at how you people conduct you're selves, posting pictures of women, there families, planting bombs, killing real living adult people, now I'm not saying YOU do that but people in your movement do, few if any on our side would do this unprovoked

that should fix it . I feel, like I acomplished something today

If she didn't want the baby then she shouldn't have had sex in the first place!

And saying that a fetus is unliving "Shame, shame, shame!" (Gomer Pile if you are wondering).  You say evolution happend and that one cell evolved and lived but fetuses don't! That is almost contridincting yourself! The fetus is living, it cell are dividing and I can't remember when it is but it's like two weeks ore something its heart starts beating. Do you call something that has a heartbeat not living? If you do then that would mean that everyone on earth isn't alive! Or lets go to brain waves. Again I can't remember when they start. But are you saying you aren't alive? If you say that a fetus isn't alive then you should start saying that about youself.

Now I going to touch the femist movement and maybe some, other "issuses".

The femist think men and women are the same in every respect. ! Men are just physicly stronger then women. Now unless I an unworkout guy goes against a gal who does work out I, most likely would lose. Men also think different. We space think. Meaning we can more accuertly judge space for fighting (wars, the gal's you likes honor) and driving and whatever else that would require allot of spaceial thinking. Women think emotional. I don't really get it myself. But the difference between men and women are suppose to counter themselfs to make something of a balance. Of course this would only happen if the two were married. The guy's "go get 'um" and the women's "let's think this over first". Now a gal can drive a truck or be in the military (they really shouldn't) but they are better at mothering then those.

Now about women in the military.

As I've said before men and women think differently. This also alppies in the military. Since men have that 'let's go get 'um" attitude they are more likely to take the risk to go after an ememy and catch him. Risk is something that women don't really like to take when it involes someone's life. I was watching Good Morning American a month or so after 9/11 and they were interviewing sailers. And guess what they were interviewing a couple of women. Now these women had stuffed animal and what have you all over their room. I don't think guy's would be catch seen within a 100 ft. of them (stuffed animals). These women also said that when they joined the navy they had not planed onm going to war! What ignorance (who called me ignorant here?)! Joined the military and not planned on going to war (they had joined up in peace time). If you join the military you should plan to go to war because that is what the military is for. My dad was in the navy. He knew that he might die in a war against the USSR and that his wife (my mom) might die in a nuclear blast. Not to mention other relatives. If you get a job expect to do that job! Armies job is to protect the country, not just sit around.

Well I think thats all for now.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Originally posted by hotsnoj


1. If she didn't want the baby then she shouldn't have had sex in the first place!

2. And saying that a fetus is unliving "Shame, shame, shame!" (Gomer Pile if you are wondering).  You say evolution happend and that one cell evolved and lived but fetuses don't! That is almost contridincting yourself! The fetus is living, it cell are dividing and I can't remember when it is but it's like two weeks ore something its heart starts beating. Do you call something that has a heartbeat not living? If you do then that would mean that everyone on earth isn't alive! Or lets go to brain waves. Again I can't remember when they start. But are you saying you aren't alive? If you say that a fetus isn't alive then you should start saying that about youself.

1. tell that to rape victims and see how long you live

2. a fetus is indeed not alive. It's individual cells are but as a whole (even with the hart beating) it is not alive. A fetus as a whole only becomes alive somewhere around 7.5-8 months (premature) when it can survive mostly on its own when put in favourable conditions (incubator in hospital), but the earlier the fetus leaves the more deficient it will be.

You are however, welcome to try to make a fetus survive outside the womb earlier than that. If it lives you'll be stuck with an individual that'll be dificient in so many ways it would be better of dead.




Week 26 The fetus can now inhale, exhale and even cry. Eyes have completely formed, and the tongue has developed taste buds. Under intensive medical care the fetus has a over a 50% chance of surviving outside the womb.

before this the fetus is not capable of surviving on its own, even with medical attention, it only 'lives' because of the mother. Not alive thus

Week 30 The fetus is usually capable of living outside the womb and would be considered premature at birth.

premature but alive

Week 40 This marks the end of the normal gestational period. The child is now ready to live in outside of his mother's womb.

normal

[TheCelestialOne]

Point 2 is a fact. There is no denying that.

[HotSnoJ]

Originally posted by Crazy_Ivan80


1. tell that to rape victims and see how long you live

2. a fetus is indeed not alive. It's individual cells are but as a whole (even with the hart beating) it is not alive. A fetus as a whole only becomes alive somewhere around 7.5-8 months (premature) when it can survive mostly on its own when put in favourable conditions (incubator in hospital), but the earlier the fetus leaves the more deficient it will be.

You are however, welcome to try to make a fetus survive outside the womb earlier than that. If it lives you'll be stuck with an individual that'll be dificient in so many ways it would be better of dead.

Week 26 The fetus can now inhale, exhale and even cry. Eyes have completely formed, and the tongue has developed taste buds. Under intensive medical care the fetus has a over a 50% chance of surviving outside the womb.

before this the fetus is not capable of surviving on its own, even with medical attention, it only 'lives' because of the mother. Not alive thus

Week 30 The fetus is usually capable of living outside the womb and would be considered premature at birth.

premature but alive

Week 40 This marks the end of the normal gestational period. The child is now ready to live in outside of his mother's womb.

normal

So ppl that rely on machines to survive are not 'alive'? That is in effect you're saying.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Originally posted by hotsnoj


So ppl that rely on machines to survive are not 'alive'? That is in effect you're saying.

Don't put words in my mouth... the people you refer to are usually in coma with little hope of recovery.

The babies in Incubators are not in coma. Big difference there.

[Kellan]

Oh, brother...

1. Rape. Ahem.

2. I shouldn't expect you to understand a feminist viewpoint...now, I personally think that the feminist movement, whilst doing some good in breaking down obvious sexist barriers (like women in the military) it's essentially destructive in its anti-manism. Male and female are two sides of the same coin. By working together they can achieve more than by working apart.

3. Women in the military? Why not? Your assertion that men have a better innate ability to fight and to drive is an overgeneralization (as there are varying degrees of spatial awareness in all individuals) but also an easy get-out clause for sexism. "Women are better at mothering", you say. The implication of that statement is "women should do what they're good at, and shouldn't be allowed to interfere in things that men are 'better' at". Mixed militaries in Holland are no less operationally effective than single-sex militaries, it has been shown. In fact, the Dutch army allows men and women of both sexual persuasions to serve together (I think) because it improves camaraderie and coherency.

4. It's not just women who join the military without thinking of fighting. Given that the military will finance a University degree for you, people from deprived backgrounds (or cheapskates) do 3 years' (or whatever) service and end up as a skilled professional who is highly employable in the private sector.

Besides, if people went around fantasising about going to war all the time, you'd end up with some kind of war-fetishing army that would jump at the chance for combat.

[Bobboau]

women are smarter than men, they think more logicly, men are more emotional,
and I made my previus statment just to get this going again, intentionaly leaveing good points for atack
I am actualy not in favor of abortions (I don't think anyone is realy gung ho about them) I just don't think it's my place to dictate about a situation I would never ever find my self in.
if a woman came to me and asked for advice, I would tell her that she has three options,
1) you could carry the baby to term and raise it
2) you could carry the baby to term and give it up for adoption
3) you could abort now before it is realy alive
I would try and point her twards option 1 or 2 more than three, unless there are some unusual sercomstances

and my defonition of when a baby is alive, is when it can survive outside the womb

[Zeronet]

Originally posted by Bobboau
women are smarter than men, they think more logicly, men are more emotional,
and I made my previus statment just to get this going again, intentionaly leaveing good points for atack
I am actualy not in favor of abortions (I don't think anyone is realy gung ho about them) I just don't think it's my place to dictate about a situation I would never ever find my self in.
if a woman came to me and asked for advice, I would tell her that she has three options,
1) you could carry the baby to term and raise it
2) you could carry the baby to term and give it up for adoption
3) you could abort now before it is realy alive
I would try and point her twards option 1 or 2 more than three, unless there are some unusual sercomstances

and my defonition of when a baby is alive, is when it can survive outside the womb

Women arent smarter than men. Anyway at the moment of conception its human, everything it decided and programmed at that point, the build, height, eye colour, hair colour, boy or girl. At that point its human life. After the period of time he  spends growing he will be born and grow up, enjoying life or the mother decides to abort and he is cut up and killed. Denied the right to live a life as we do. To be for abortion, you would also be willing to accept the termination of your life before you could defend yourself.

[Kellan]

But, Zeronet, since it would be frankly bizarre to claim that a fetus can actually feel or understand that situation, even if the fetus were me I wouldn't 'mind' so to speak - only because I wouldn't have a mind to 'mind' with.

I do agree that if someone doesn't want a baby, they should at least use protection when they're having sex. Remember that some abortions occur during marriage, so your noraml abstinence rule wouldn't hold here. Again, a prospective mother could give a baby up for adoption but that does still mean personal and professional sacrifices, plus the emotional burden of giving away a baby you have had for nine months, touched, seen, etc. I'm not saying that there are no emotional issues with aborting, but I believe they are lessened.

You can't defend a no-abortion stance realistically without being awful to the women who carry those babies. If they are raped, should they have to carry the rapist's baby, sacrificing their happiness and job (plus the possibility of emotional damage)? What if giving birth would be dangerous to the mother, and the baby might actually kill her? What if (as is the case with a friend of mine) one baby is ill and might infect the other, healthy one?

Briefly, here's a situation I know. A family friend was expecting twins but was told that one had Down's Syndrome after medical tests. She could choose to have both, but there was a possibility that the healthy baby might end up with Down's too due to sharing in the womb. In the event, they chose to abort one and save the other.

In these cases, I feel it's a matter of personal choice, but the legal right should be there. As with drugs, actually (ooh, controversy)...

All drugs should be legal. :devilidea

[Blitz_Lightning]

What is the definition for something that's alive?

Definition Of Life As Determined By Science:

1. Shows evidence of growth and replication - embryos grow, and it's cells replocate...(CHECK)

2. Shows evidence of purposeful energy transfer...(CHECK)

3. Responds to stimuli...(CHECK)

4. Acts in such a way as to ensure self-preservation...(CHECK)

5. Is significantly different from the surrounding environment...(CHECK)

Therefore, since the embryo is alive, it really should have its own rights too...

[killadonuts]

Originally posted by Kellan
And what makes Socialism bad? Don't tell me it's discredited by the USSR; that one is just plain wrong.

I'm not trying to say that socialism is all that bad. In fact, in certain situations (like an economic depression) it works well.
I'm just saying that the people who started this country took careful steps in creating a small national government.
In the course of 226 years, this country has slowly but surely contradicted all that was fought for during the revolution.
For most countries socialism works well, but it's not what was intended for the United States.
Any government intervention in business is wrong.

[Kellan]

How does it ensure its own self-preservation? The mother does that.

And how do you respond to my exceptional circumstances above? If the fetus has rights, it could legally be tried for attempted manslaughter (2nd degree murder?) against the mother if birth would cause damage.

[Kellan]

Originally posted by killadonuts

Any government intervention in business is wrong.

What about when business is wrong? Paying workers starvation level wages is wrong. Pumping industrial waste into waterways is wrong. Profiting from illness is wrong.

Businesses do all of these things. Without government intervention, they'd do what they liked and destroy the planet and the people.

[Bobboau]

Originally posted by Blitz_Lightning
What is the definition for something that's alive?

Definition Of Life As Determined By Science:

1. Shows evidence of growth and replication - embryos grow, and it's cells replocate...(CHECK)

2. Shows evidence of purposeful energy transfer...(CHECK)

3. Responds to stimuli...(CHECK)

4. Acts in such a way as to ensure self-preservation...(CHECK)

5. Is significantly different from the surrounding environment...(CHECK)

Therefore, since the embryo is alive, it really should have its own rights too...

I hope you wern't being serius with this

[wEvil]

Originally posted by Kellan


What about when business is wrong? Paying workers starvation level wages is wrong. Pumping industrial waste into waterways is wrong. Profiting from illness is wrong.

Businesses do all of these things. Without government intervention, they'd do what they liked and destroy the planet and the people.

This is correct - a Corporation is not capable of being nice, even if it wanted to as the director has an obligation to squeeze as much money out of everything for the shareholders.

That is it's sole purpose.

And after you actually understand this (i mean UNDERSTAND it) you can start to see why western society is coming apart at the seams.

[Styxx]

Originally posted by Kellan
All drugs should be legal. :devilidea

Yeah, let'em all kill themselves, while I make huge mountains of cash from selling them, and the government is happier than ever with all the extra tax money.

[CP5670]

Therefore, since the embryo is alive, it really should have its own rights too...

Well, many things are alive to some extent, but that does not really mean anything. Lets take ants for example: they are actually just as living as these embryos are, possibly even more so, but they are not mentioned at all in the official laws of any nation. I bet that there is a guy in the US who is claiming that ants are equally as alive as we are and should be allowed to vote in national elections or something, and of course, to complement his idea, he has his website and his institution. For the purposes of a decision though, it really boils down to a balance between the benefits of the individual and those of the society; in this case, the individual benefits and the society is unaffected, making a compromise unnecessary, and therefore I say go for it. I'm not a really big advocate of that position either though, since if people are having sex in the first place when not wanting children, they deserve to suffer anyway.

On the topic of drugs, I could probably start a claim where I contend that this is a form of social discrimination because people of a certain age are allowed to buy them while others are not. (although they get them anyway ) Either make them available to everyone or ban them altogether.

[Kabal]

Originally posted by an0n
Vote Microsoft:

hehe...

[Kabal]

On the topic of drugs, I could probably start a claim where I contend that this is a form of social discrimination because people of a certain age are allowed to buy them while others are not. (although they get them anyway ) Either make them available to everyone or ban them altogether.

Aren't drugs illegal anyway? If you get caught with a narcotic, don't you go to jail for 25 years. (In america) If you get caught with drugs in the middle-east you get life.