1. Why is it wrong to kill a violent criminal but okay to kill an innocent fetus? I'm not particularly opposed to abortions, but it makes no sense that you rail against capital punishment while endorsing abortion.
2. Why do you despise Christianity but tell everyone else that their religions are beautiful and are to be respected? I don't understand how you can extol the greatness of science and education while while telling everyone (other than Christians) that their baseless beliefs should be protected. I'm generally opposed to religion, so I say if you're going to hate one of them, hate all of them.
3. Why is it wrong from conservatives to go on fear mongering about terrorism but it's okay for you to tell everyone the world is going to end because of global warming? Whether or not you believe in either of these supposed threats it's clear that both sides are using fear to manipulate people. Why not take the higher road if you're so educated and ethical?
4. Why do you like Mac so much?
5. Why do you believe the federal government can fix all of society's ills when it can barely deliver the mail? It has been proven throughout history that large central governments lead to corruption and abuse. Why do you continue to support big government?
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-30 8:30
>>120
"Because other religions are NOT trying to reform the USA into a fucking Theocracy."
Ummmm, ever hear of radical Islam?
Sidenote: Are you heavily medicated or something? I mean really, you can't be this stupid.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-30 8:43
1. Fetuses don't complain.
2. Because anglo saxons, whites, protestants and males did some bad things in the past so they must be punished for their collective crimes.
3. Because terrorism isn't real and global warming is.
4. Complicated things are hard to understand.
5. Because not everyone is willing to make sacrifice for the greater good, they must be forced to comply.
>>121 Ummmm, ever hear of radical Islam?
Yes, I hear about radical Islam running around the Middle East and Indonesia. However, there is no Islamic movement to take over the US. If there were, you could post a link to evidence of such, and of course you can't since there is no such movement and there are no Islamic riots in the US and there are no Sharia proclamations from the US, state and local governments and WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU SO GODDAMNED BIASED AND STUPID!?!?
You must be confusing Islam's intent of kicking the West out of the Middle East, with some sort of attack on you (a dipshit Westerner).
The people who are the worst threat to the secular governance of the West ARE THE FUNDIE CHRISTIANS and their Armageddon mindset. THOSE FUCKERS have taken over the US government and THOSE FUCKERS are actively trying to start World War III in the Middle East.
Of course, you probably believe that invading Iraq TWICE was some sort of move to secure your borders (while Mexicans and Guatemalans pour north over your southern border, but I digress). This just means that you are deranged and your worldview is a pre-programmed thing created by Conservatards.
Name:
Anonymous2008-05-01 3:56
>>125
I should have known that you wouldn't be able to extract the meaning behind that. There is no threat of radical islam takeover in America because simply there aren't that much muslims. There is a christfag majority, and if anything like that is going to happen, it's going to be from them. However, in Turkey there is a muslimfag majority and they are likely to cause the same problem christfags do in the US, however I'm sure there people whine about WAY DO YOU HATE MUZLIMS, YOU CHRISTIAN LOVERS. Getting a bit in there now?
>>117
It's not entirely true that Vikings could kill whomever. No one could go on a spree killing women and children. And if Thorgeir killed Eirik, Eirik's family would start a blood feud with Thorgeir and his family, effectively having eye for eye justice. If no peace could be made, the dispute would be settled at Tinget, which is sort of like a court, where the aggressors could settle things in a Holmgang (literally: going on a small island), which was a duel on a small island, usually ending in death, though one could yield, and be at the mercy of the opponent.
Thorgeir would of course have to have a "valid" reason for killing Eirik, he couldn't just kill him for the fun of it and expect no repercussions. But yeah, there are better legal systems.
Name:
Anonymous2008-05-11 15:42
I hear muslims and jews still ritually molest their son's foreskins. Barbaric.
Mullahs secretly drop the foreskins in a jar of brine during circumcisions and every year during Ramadan they take the "pickles" to their Imam whom proceeds to feast on them.
Name:
Anonymous2008-05-15 6:27
1: I personaly think a few criminals should fry, but that's just me. As far as fetuses go, men dont say eny thing becuase if the guy sugests abbortion and the woman has the baby and the kid finds out, he/she would hate said guys's guts for the rest of his natural life.
2: It's not Christianity that i hate, it's the ass hat hyporcits that use it for ther own personal gain or to be total tea bags that i hate.
3: It's not the message, it what it's used for that makes the difference. If the fear mongering wasnt used to pass every fucked up, unmangaged idea i wouldnt give a fuck about it.;
4: I perfer PCs. Macs are only for artst, and people who cant use Windows or Linex.
5: I think ther are some places that the goverment does belong, and some places that it doesnt belong. (like when im on the phone, trying order chines food for dinner.)
1. I support the Death Penalty. I don't really give a shit about abortion.
2. I don't. I despise fundamentalists. Also, I've personally found a lot more Athiests to be pricks as opposed to Christians.
3. While I do believe it, I don't take the issue all too seriously, at least not to the extent I've heard (all countries at sea level being flooded). However, Global Warming is a lot more believable than the notion that terrorists hate western civilization because of its liberalism.
4. I never liked Macs.
5. I don't. But I do believe it can handle social security and health insurance a hell lot better than the "free market" (it always amazed me that some libertarians still consider some GOVERNMENT regulation to businesses when it goes against the very definition of their beloved Laissez-faire capitalism).
Name:
Anonymous2008-05-15 12:00
>>146
Obvious full figured pre-op tranny is obvious.
>>151
does a fetus have a "life" in the sense that it has anybody that cares deeply about it? as deeply as one can care about someone whom they've known for years and years and years? no. it is not a person. the main reason that killing is wrong is the untold pain it inflicts on those still living who were deeply attached to the person killed.
you could say that the mother already does care that deeply about her unborn child. if so, said mother can just NOT have an abortion. problem solved.
you could also argue that by way of slippery slope this gets into "dumpster baby" territory. but obviously innate squeamishness takes hold of too many of us so that "dumpster babies" will NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS be something that is kindly looked upon. so trust me, you DO NOT have to worry about that.
then there's the bridge between "a thing that looks kind of like a fish" and "miniature baby".
that line should also be drawn by squeamishness. and that's exactly what is happening right now in many developed countries' legal systems. i maintain though that the mother's health takes precedence because, as i've said before, she is a fully developed person, while the life growing inside her is not.
Name:
Anonymous2008-05-17 9:15
>>15
You did not answer my question, but perhaps that's my fault. More specifically what is the criteria necessary to justify abortion?
Name:
Anonymous2008-05-17 9:53
>>153
are you talking to me? >>152
i suspect that you are. i don't see how that's not an answer to your question.
people need abortion, this is enough to justify it. the question is why should they NOT continue to practice it? and i said that since fetuses are not persons there is no moral problem, and therefore no reason stop the practice.
Name:
Anonymous2008-05-17 10:07
abortion is wrong because without it there'd be more population and unemployment, reducing average real labor cost
death penalty is wrong because he could be utilized as slave labor
AMERICA FUCK YEAH!!!!
Name:
Anonymous2008-05-17 11:36
>>154
What a deluded sense of logic you have.
Because people need something is enough reason to justify it.
Name:
Anonymous2008-05-17 11:39
>>155
Didn't you mean to say "Abortion is RIGHT because without it ..."
Or are you mentally handicapped.
(I have a suspicion it's the latter and not the former.)
Name:
Anonymous2008-05-17 11:56
>>156
well what i mean is that anything which you cannot otherwise condemn is automatically justified. if you can't tell me why i shouldn't do it, why shouldn't i do it?
Name:
Anonymous2008-05-17 12:10
>>157
Uhh... the post wants more population, so I'm pretty sure it's trying to say abortion is wrong.
Name:
Anonymous2008-05-17 13:03
>>158
wat???
Scenario: I can't condemn you for murdering your pedophile neighbor, so why shouldn't you do it?