Wired article
-
Colin Davies wrote: not that I'm calling this an American only issue. C'mon Colin, Mike uses the group filters to find people refering to the US in any way, so he can complain about people attacking ze Fatherland. Christian come on all you MS suckups, defend your sugar-daddy now. - Chris Losinger - 11/07/2002
Try to keep the Amuricun bashing to a minimum, please -- you might hurt their poor widdle feewings.. :laugh: :rolleyes: "Religion is based on faith, and faith is immune to logic. Therefore, it's impossible to have a logical conversation about religion." -Christopher Duncan, CP Lounge
-
Try to keep the Amuricun bashing to a minimum, please -- you might hurt their poor widdle feewings.. :laugh: :rolleyes: "Religion is based on faith, and faith is immune to logic. Therefore, it's impossible to have a logical conversation about religion." -Christopher Duncan, CP Lounge
Daniel Ferguson wrote: Try to keep the Amuricun bashing to a minimum, please -- you might hurt their poor widdle feewings.. Cute. Take an honest, unbiased (if that's possible) look at this thread and the two replies I've made in it before now. The topic is abortion - Right or Wrong. Why did the issue of the US even get brought up? Abortion is an issue that faces the entire world. It is HUGE and mostly unreported in China. The "morning after pill" is used by millions of women in Europe (and Canada I think). Colin's and Christian's comments hardly hurt my feelings, I was simply trying to point out their mistake of singleing(sp?) out the US. Anymore I get the feeling that much of this obsession (by non-Ameican CPians) with the US is just a way for them to villianize us so they can forget about the same problems in their own cultures and nations.
Mike Mullikin - I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals. Sir Winston Churchill
-
Mike Mullikin wrote: What about the hypocrisy of non-Americans who kill abortion doctors? Does that astound you as well?? No, I think killing abortion doctors is justifed anywhere in the world except the US. Next dumb question..... I mentioned the US because I've never heard of it happening elsewhere, but quite obviously the region has nothing to do with it. I would hope even the most stupid person would understand that my comment had nothing to do with race, and everything to do with the fact that certainly my media has reported this happening quite a few times in the US, and never anywhere else. I presume that has something to do with the ease with which people in the US can aquire firearms, which of course is part of how free y'all are over there. (OK, so now I'm baiting you, but your reply to me was just plain dumb ). Christian come on all you MS suckups, defend your sugar-daddy now. - Chris Losinger - 11/07/2002
Christian Graus wrote: Next dumb question..... Christian Graus wrote: I would hope even the most stupid person... Christian Graus wrote: but your reply to me was just plain dumb No - my original reply was just plain sarcastic and you completely missed it. P.S. Your childish little jibes about intelligence are getting old. You certainly have a high opinion of yourself.
Mike Mullikin - I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals. Sir Winston Churchill
-
Daniel Ferguson wrote: Try to keep the Amuricun bashing to a minimum, please -- you might hurt their poor widdle feewings.. Cute. Take an honest, unbiased (if that's possible) look at this thread and the two replies I've made in it before now. The topic is abortion - Right or Wrong. Why did the issue of the US even get brought up? Abortion is an issue that faces the entire world. It is HUGE and mostly unreported in China. The "morning after pill" is used by millions of women in Europe (and Canada I think). Colin's and Christian's comments hardly hurt my feelings, I was simply trying to point out their mistake of singleing(sp?) out the US. Anymore I get the feeling that much of this obsession (by non-Ameican CPians) with the US is just a way for them to villianize us so they can forget about the same problems in their own cultures and nations.
Mike Mullikin - I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals. Sir Winston Churchill
Mike Mullikin wrote: Why did the issue of the US even get brought up? Why not? The US exports their culture, food, lifestyle, news, etc all over the globe, so everyone is familiar with it. Mike Mullikin wrote: is just a way for them to villianize us so they can forget about the same problems in their own cultures and nations. Interesting because that's exactly what I think of the wars the US starts and gets involved in. The people look up to the current president as a man who really gets things done, they watch the 24-7 coverage on CNN and forget about the problems within their own nation for a short time. "Religion is based on faith, and faith is immune to logic. Therefore, it's impossible to have a logical conversation about religion." -Christopher Duncan, CP Lounge
-
Christian Graus wrote: Next dumb question..... Christian Graus wrote: I would hope even the most stupid person... Christian Graus wrote: but your reply to me was just plain dumb No - my original reply was just plain sarcastic and you completely missed it. P.S. Your childish little jibes about intelligence are getting old. You certainly have a high opinion of yourself.
Mike Mullikin - I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals. Sir Winston Churchill
Mike Mullikin wrote: No - my original reply was just plain sarcastic and you completely missed it. You must be new to the internet. We have these things called emoticons by which you can help people to understand intentions that would be much clearer if made face to face. Mike Mullikin wrote: You certainly have a high opinion of yourself. I hate to fly in the face of popular opinion. :P Christian come on all you MS suckups, defend your sugar-daddy now. - Chris Losinger - 11/07/2002
-
Mike Mullikin wrote: Why did the issue of the US even get brought up? Why not? The US exports their culture, food, lifestyle, news, etc all over the globe, so everyone is familiar with it. Mike Mullikin wrote: is just a way for them to villianize us so they can forget about the same problems in their own cultures and nations. Interesting because that's exactly what I think of the wars the US starts and gets involved in. The people look up to the current president as a man who really gets things done, they watch the 24-7 coverage on CNN and forget about the problems within their own nation for a short time. "Religion is based on faith, and faith is immune to logic. Therefore, it's impossible to have a logical conversation about religion." -Christopher Duncan, CP Lounge
Daniel Ferguson wrote: they watch the 24-7 coverage on CNN and forget about the problems within their own nation for a short time. What problems would that be? The only problem I have with Bush is that he did not obliterate every last vestage of Islamic civilization when he had the chance. "Human imagination has been sculpted by the universe within which it was born" Hmmmm...
-
Mike Mullikin wrote: No - my original reply was just plain sarcastic and you completely missed it. You must be new to the internet. We have these things called emoticons by which you can help people to understand intentions that would be much clearer if made face to face. Mike Mullikin wrote: You certainly have a high opinion of yourself. I hate to fly in the face of popular opinion. :P Christian come on all you MS suckups, defend your sugar-daddy now. - Chris Losinger - 11/07/2002
Are you trying to make Mike Mullikin the next MM? Your clever barbs look as if they are taking hold..
-
Mike Mullikin wrote: No - my original reply was just plain sarcastic and you completely missed it. You must be new to the internet. We have these things called emoticons by which you can help people to understand intentions that would be much clearer if made face to face. Mike Mullikin wrote: You certainly have a high opinion of yourself. I hate to fly in the face of popular opinion. :P Christian come on all you MS suckups, defend your sugar-daddy now. - Chris Losinger - 11/07/2002
Christian Graus wrote: You must be new to the internet. We have these things called emoticons by which you can help people to understand intentions that would be much clearer if made face to face. I looked and looked and couldn't find one that expressed my personal level of sarcasm at the time. Oh well. I was hoping that the pure idiocy of the question was enough.
Mike Mullikin - I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals. Sir Winston Churchill
-
The thing to me is that the issue is so not 'black and white'. Am I against abortion ? Yes. Do I have the right to impose my will on a girl who has been raped ? No. Do I have the right to impose my will on any member of society ? No. I am astounded at the hypocrisy of people in the US who kill abortion doctors. Beyond that, would they rather an unwanted child is raised to know that it was not wanted, and at some point their kids go to school with this (through no fault of their own ) maladjusted individual ? More to the point, they won't BE at school, they will be robbing someone at knifepoint. Christian come on all you MS suckups, defend your sugar-daddy now. - Chris Losinger - 11/07/2002
Christian Graus wrote: The thing to me is that the issue is so not 'black and white'. Am I against abortion ? Yes. Do I have the right to impose my will on a girl who has been raped ? No. Do I have the right to impose my will on any member of society ? No. I am astounded at the hypocrisy of people in the US who kill abortion doctors. Here is what I do not understand about the position you have expressed, an opinion I hear quite frequently. If *you*, for whatever reason, believe something constitutes a human life, and are convinced that such life is being wantonly destroyed, are you not morally obligated to defend it? If you do not consider a fetus to, in some way, represent human life, than why are you "against abortion"? Is it not just another medical procedure? And if you do consider a fetus to represent human life how can you tolerate its distruction? It would seem to me that we certainly have a right to impose our will on others in defense of human life. Frankly, I am not against abortion as I am prepared to accept arbitrary but pragmatic legal definitions of when human life begins. However, in the context of the U.S. legal system, I am opposed to our Supreme Court's "Roe Vs Wade" decision. In that case, the court created law where none existed before, and that is clearly not within their legitimate realm of authority. They are the judicial branch, not the legislative branch. By their actions they impose their will on every American undemocratically. "Human imagination has been sculpted by the universe within which it was born" Hmmmm...
-
Christian Graus wrote: The thing to me is that the issue is so not 'black and white'. Am I against abortion ? Yes. Do I have the right to impose my will on a girl who has been raped ? No. Do I have the right to impose my will on any member of society ? No. I am astounded at the hypocrisy of people in the US who kill abortion doctors. Here is what I do not understand about the position you have expressed, an opinion I hear quite frequently. If *you*, for whatever reason, believe something constitutes a human life, and are convinced that such life is being wantonly destroyed, are you not morally obligated to defend it? If you do not consider a fetus to, in some way, represent human life, than why are you "against abortion"? Is it not just another medical procedure? And if you do consider a fetus to represent human life how can you tolerate its distruction? It would seem to me that we certainly have a right to impose our will on others in defense of human life. Frankly, I am not against abortion as I am prepared to accept arbitrary but pragmatic legal definitions of when human life begins. However, in the context of the U.S. legal system, I am opposed to our Supreme Court's "Roe Vs Wade" decision. In that case, the court created law where none existed before, and that is clearly not within their legitimate realm of authority. They are the judicial branch, not the legislative branch. By their actions they impose their will on every American undemocratically. "Human imagination has been sculpted by the universe within which it was born" Hmmmm...
Reverend Stan wrote: If *you*, for whatever reason, believe something constitutes a human life, and are convinced that such life is being wantonly destroyed, are you not morally obligated to defend it? The question is more complex than that. 1. Do I have any hope of causing my opinion to prevail ? No. 2. Do I have the right to tell a rape victim that they cannot have an abortion ? No. 3. Do I think that banning abortion clinics will stop people from having abortions ? No. Reverend Stan wrote: If you do not consider a fetus to, in some way, represent human life, than why are you "against abortion"? I am against abortion as a method of contraception because of the affects it has physiologically on the mother, because I regard that it is callous to think it OK to create and destroy human life as a matter of convenience. I don't think that an abortion is the same as killing a live baby though. Reverend Stan wrote: And if you do consider a fetus to represent human life how can you tolerate its distruction? It would seem to me that we certainly have a right to impose our will on others in defense of human life. My life is too short and the cause filled with too many narrow minded people who do not live in the real world for me to make it my lifes work. I have better things to do. My point is precisely this - that there is no such thing as a free society, but abortion rides the edge of being something that should be up to the individual, and not the society, to decide. People standing outside abortion clinics with dead baby parts strapped to their sandwhich boards, harrassing people trying to get inside or walk past is not the sort of debate I want to enter into. Society is pretty much a lost cause anyhow, I regard my responsibility to rest in my own life, which is more responsibility that most human beings are willing to take on nowadays. BTW the dead baby part example is not taken from the news or my imagination, I've seen it with my own eyes. Someone went into that clinic a few days after I was in the vicinity, and shot dead a security guard. His intention was to kill a whole lot more. THAT is sick, and wrong. I have a hard enough time because of the nutcases I get associated with through being a Christian without risking being associated with that. Reverend Stan wrote: However, in the context of the U.S. legal system, I am opposed to our Supreme Court's "Roe Vs Wade
-
Reverend Stan wrote: If *you*, for whatever reason, believe something constitutes a human life, and are convinced that such life is being wantonly destroyed, are you not morally obligated to defend it? The question is more complex than that. 1. Do I have any hope of causing my opinion to prevail ? No. 2. Do I have the right to tell a rape victim that they cannot have an abortion ? No. 3. Do I think that banning abortion clinics will stop people from having abortions ? No. Reverend Stan wrote: If you do not consider a fetus to, in some way, represent human life, than why are you "against abortion"? I am against abortion as a method of contraception because of the affects it has physiologically on the mother, because I regard that it is callous to think it OK to create and destroy human life as a matter of convenience. I don't think that an abortion is the same as killing a live baby though. Reverend Stan wrote: And if you do consider a fetus to represent human life how can you tolerate its distruction? It would seem to me that we certainly have a right to impose our will on others in defense of human life. My life is too short and the cause filled with too many narrow minded people who do not live in the real world for me to make it my lifes work. I have better things to do. My point is precisely this - that there is no such thing as a free society, but abortion rides the edge of being something that should be up to the individual, and not the society, to decide. People standing outside abortion clinics with dead baby parts strapped to their sandwhich boards, harrassing people trying to get inside or walk past is not the sort of debate I want to enter into. Society is pretty much a lost cause anyhow, I regard my responsibility to rest in my own life, which is more responsibility that most human beings are willing to take on nowadays. BTW the dead baby part example is not taken from the news or my imagination, I've seen it with my own eyes. Someone went into that clinic a few days after I was in the vicinity, and shot dead a security guard. His intention was to kill a whole lot more. THAT is sick, and wrong. I have a hard enough time because of the nutcases I get associated with through being a Christian without risking being associated with that. Reverend Stan wrote: However, in the context of the U.S. legal system, I am opposed to our Supreme Court's "Roe Vs Wade
Christian Graus wrote: Do I have the right to tell a rape victim that they cannot have an abortion ? No. I suppose that is the only point on which you and I disagree. As a society we tell people how to behave all the time. If society arbitrarily decides that life begins at conception, than we certainly have the right to require a rape victim to protect the life they carry (I would vote agaisnt any candidate supporting such a law, but would support the law if it were passed). If on the other hand society arbitrarily decides that human life begins with the first heart beat, than the rape victim is free to do as they please until that time. Christian Graus wrote: I don't think that an abortion is the same as killing a live baby though. But what if you did believe so? That is my question. What is the moral obligation of those who do believe so? If I believed that my coffee cup were a human life, would I not be morally obligated to defend it against those who would destroy it? I'm not trying to be contrary or argumentative here. It is just a question which I think has deep philosophical relevance. It is a quandry for me. I don't know the answer. "Human imagination has been sculpted by the universe within which it was born" Hmmmm...
-
Christian Graus wrote: Do I have the right to tell a rape victim that they cannot have an abortion ? No. I suppose that is the only point on which you and I disagree. As a society we tell people how to behave all the time. If society arbitrarily decides that life begins at conception, than we certainly have the right to require a rape victim to protect the life they carry (I would vote agaisnt any candidate supporting such a law, but would support the law if it were passed). If on the other hand society arbitrarily decides that human life begins with the first heart beat, than the rape victim is free to do as they please until that time. Christian Graus wrote: I don't think that an abortion is the same as killing a live baby though. But what if you did believe so? That is my question. What is the moral obligation of those who do believe so? If I believed that my coffee cup were a human life, would I not be morally obligated to defend it against those who would destroy it? I'm not trying to be contrary or argumentative here. It is just a question which I think has deep philosophical relevance. It is a quandry for me. I don't know the answer. "Human imagination has been sculpted by the universe within which it was born" Hmmmm...
Reverend Stan wrote: What is the moral obligation of those who do believe so? If I believed that my coffee cup were a human life, would I not be morally obligated to defend it against those who would destroy it? That is why I said abortion walks the edge of being a matter for the individual more than the society. Because we really do not know the answer - at what point is human life defined ? The inability to PROVE the point one way or the other is what makes this a sticky issue. Christian come on all you MS suckups, defend your sugar-daddy now. - Chris Losinger - 11/07/2002
-
Daniel Ferguson wrote: they watch the 24-7 coverage on CNN and forget about the problems within their own nation for a short time. What problems would that be? The only problem I have with Bush is that he did not obliterate every last vestage of Islamic civilization when he had the chance. "Human imagination has been sculpted by the universe within which it was born" Hmmmm...
Reverend Stan wrote: The only problem I have with Bush is that he did not obliterate every last vestage of Islamic civilization when he had the chance. Stan, in the past I have looked on your posts and thought that you were a very intelligent person, but a comment like this seems so out of character. Roger Allen Sonork 100.10016 If I had a quote, it would be a very good one.
-
Reverend Stan wrote: What is the moral obligation of those who do believe so? If I believed that my coffee cup were a human life, would I not be morally obligated to defend it against those who would destroy it? That is why I said abortion walks the edge of being a matter for the individual more than the society. Because we really do not know the answer - at what point is human life defined ? The inability to PROVE the point one way or the other is what makes this a sticky issue. Christian come on all you MS suckups, defend your sugar-daddy now. - Chris Losinger - 11/07/2002
Christian Graus wrote: Because we really do not know the answer - at what point is human life defined ? The inability to PROVE the point one way or the other is what makes this a sticky issue. Yes, that really seems to be the main problem. Couldn't we deduct it from the other way around?, I do not know about elsewhere, but in Denmark you are considered Dead when the brain stops function. At that point it is legal to reuse his/her organs if the diseased and/or the relatives has agreed to donate them. At what point is it then possible to detect brain waves?. "It could have been worse, it could have been ME!" -Rincewind
-
Colin Davies wrote: not that I'm calling this an American only issue. C'mon Colin, Mike uses the group filters to find people refering to the US in any way, so he can complain about people attacking ze Fatherland. Christian come on all you MS suckups, defend your sugar-daddy now. - Chris Losinger - 11/07/2002
Christian Graus wrote: C'mon Colin, Mike uses the group filters to find people refering to the US in any way, so he can complain about people attacking ze Fatherland. Grow up.
Mike Mullikin - I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals. Sir Winston Churchill
-
Reverend Stan wrote: The only problem I have with Bush is that he did not obliterate every last vestage of Islamic civilization when he had the chance. Stan, in the past I have looked on your posts and thought that you were a very intelligent person, but a comment like this seems so out of character. Roger Allen Sonork 100.10016 If I had a quote, it would be a very good one.
Unfortunantly, Roger, there is not an intelligent solution to every problem. Fortunantly for me, the violent American redneck in me is never too far below the surface. I have found that when intelligence fails, violence is usually a good backup. When someone tells me they don't like me and my country and murder 3000 of my countrymen to make their point, I tend to take them seriously. When they justify their actions by appealing to religious zealotry, I believe in demonstrating to them in no uncertain terms precisely who's side God is on. When I have reason to believe that the attitude which prompted those feelings are wide spread within a society that is promoting values diametrically opposed to those I live by, I believe that the time for thoughtful introspection is over. I believe that Islamic civilization is irredeemably evil. It deserves to be destroyed. It should be destroyed. On 9/11/2001 we had moral justification for doing that, and were too squimish to act. We will pay horribly for that mistake for years to come. "Human imagination has been sculpted by the universe within which it was born" Hmmmm...