Zierro

If time goes in a loop as opposed to a line, then traveling into the past could be possible by accelerating into the future. I really do think it's a loop too - it makes more sense than time having a starting and ending point.

Personally, if I was her I would abort it because I wouldn't be able to deal with something like that. However, I'm a strong believer in "to each his/her own". I advocate pro-choice, so if she makes the choice to keep the baby then I will definitely defend that right. My arguments are directed towards the people who say that she should die regardless of the mother's feelings.

Do you think incest is okay? Depends. No, personally... but then again, between two consenting adults? Not anyone else's business, is it? Why do you ask? My point is that a lot of us don't take the time to think logically about every opinion we have, and quite a few of our opinions just come from society - not ourselves. Of course thinking about your opinions logically makes them more reasonable than ones that weren't thought about logically, but I'm just saying it's a very common thing and we all do it.

Really? I thought my second point was crap compared to the first. :P You do not need to burn someone to know fire is hot, but you do need to experience both hot and cold temperatures to understand temperature in general. If you lived on the Equator all your life and you were sweaty all the time then you wouldn't see that as "hot", you'd see it as normal because it's all you know. However, once you go to Antarctica then you will realize that being sweaty isn't the only thing that can happen to your body - you can also shiver. You realize that being sweaty is not the default so you will then realize the distinction and two new terms will arise for you - cold and hot, instead of just what's normal or default.

So you're saying that aborting child is the "correct" choice and any other choice that she would make stems from nothing more than a delusion of her own? Who are you to say what makes her happy or not. I'm pretty sure the only person who gets any say-so in that field would be her - no one else. You were speaking about living - not productivity. You don't have to be productive in order to be considered "alive". As stated numerous times, criminals, bums, and couch potatoes usually aren't productive and they are very much alive. Is that how this works? In that case, you're misunderstanding me. You said that she wasn't alive because she doesn't even know about her existence. I said that a plant doesn't know about its existence, but the act of simply not acknowledging your existence doesn't mean you are not alive. I don't think you realized but we used the same exact approach for opposite intentions: I said, "She is more complex than bacteria so she is alive," but it doesn't suggest complexity = being alive. (You brought up how corpses are complex.) You said, "She doesn't acknowledge her existence so she is not alive," but it doesn't suggest that not knowing about your existence = not being alive. (I brought up how plants don't know about their existence.)

No, evil is necessary in order for good to exist at all. I see it as nothing more than a reference tool for comparison. To understand the concept of "hot" you must understand "cold" as well. It's all relative, so a reference tool is required. Not sure, but I think it might have to do with our independence. Having your parents do your science project for you is nothing to be proud of. Doing it on your own allows you to experience the feeling of triumph though.

You're saying she shouldn't get attached to her daughter because of the issue at hand. Ken was just pointing out that the issue of man's mortality doesn't stop us from loving/embracing/caring for each other while we still can, even though it's all technically in vain and being happy about it must just be a "delusion".

"Life isn't about trying to find yourself - it's about trying to create yourself." I saw it on Myspace I think.

It sounds like what you speak of as "purpose" is what one is genetically coded to do. Bacteria runs off instinct - it only uses the abilities it was endowed with at birth. This baby was only given the capability of breathing, so I guess that implies her "purpose" is to breath right? If you're talking about the universal concept of "purpose" then I have news friend. Life doesn't have purpose. Without bringing up religion, it's pretty much pointless and any contributions you make to society will not matter in the grand scheme of things anyways, therefore it's silly to base the right to live on something that doesn't even matter. And if you didn't like that response I have another one. The baby does contribute. As Venomai said, she brings happiness to others. Is this less important than what criminals, bums, lazy people do?

How do you know that every senior citizen put in more than what they took? Just because you're old doesn't mean you definitely contributed something to get to this point. There are plenty of bums, criminals, couch-potatoes, and WoW players around who contributed squat. Plants don't know about their existence either. That doesn't mean we should go uproot all of them. Wait, is it alive or not? You seem to keep switching back and forth between the two. The fact that she isn't dead is a given, that's why I chose not to add it. But of course you would disagree to make your stance seem more humane.

Bacteria has a purpose. This empty shell doesn't. :| And what is that purpose...? Why is nobody answering my questions about life being some sort of mission? She doesn't have all the qualities that a corpse has.

Purpose doesn't exist. It's something we made up, so of course it cannot be applied to everything. "What is the purpose of blue?" It doesn't work that way. That's not to say you can't create your own purpose to living, but there is no such thing as a universal purpose to life.

You say it is not alive, yet she is more complex than any bacteria I've ever seen. I think you'd agree that bacteria is very much alive. And what does "productive" mean? I didn't know life was supposed to be some sort of mission of efficiency.

Drain resources? You mean like everybody else?

I'd say a combination of both. If they didn't care at all, I doubt we'd have a thorough "Balance Your Playing" manual or whatever it is on the site. But then again, they're a company and their incentive is to profit.

Do you think incest is okay?

Clothing is the best way of passively catching someone's attention. I can't begin to imagine all the friendships/relationships that were formed just because someone was wearing a particular thing that caught someone else's eye that day. And to the people saying school is for education and not socializing, then when is the time for socializing?

But if mother nature gets to decide then it will definitely die. That's the same as saying she deserves to die. Death is inevitable for every human being.

Be the change you want to see.

Id' say Runecrafting. Even before 91, you'll be profiting depending on the method of training. Having that kind of income is definitely worth the wait though.

Angel of Death. I always loved spending my money.

American Idol

You're right but this is a bad topic to say it in because it's hard not to bring that up in a topic dealing with conformity. OT: I don't like the idea of outfits at all. It's already mandatory to go to school - why do we have to have a mandatory outfit too? Maybe on field trips because there is actually a point to it but other than that, no.

Looks like that baby has already made a pretty big contribution to society. She made this thread happen.

430