mmmcannibalism

Any school sex ed that teaches abstinence only is going to be useless so of course they should teach protection and such. edit--condoms and birth control are both in the very high 90's when used correctly; I think they are actually considered to be 85% in non perfect usage.

They keep doing it though to show defiance to the UN... How many more test will they go before we finally say "That's it, your stopping now." *Insert non-nuclear military strike* I heard the UN is preparing to wave its finger really angrily at nk; its going down get to the bunkers

As an adopted child(birthmom was 16 unintentional bla bla) I can tell you thats a rather pointless assumption. The only real problems with adoption are getting families to adopt instead of trying to force a natural pregnancy(yes I hate in vitro) and getting enough families that want to adopt. I just say this because someone will always defend abortion by saying adopted kids are messed up and its to be frank total bull.

Communication wouldn't be a big deal at all; when you think about it out of everything in life, is there anything you would put more effort into then communicating if we found another intelligent species. In fact, even the Spanish managed to communicate with the aztecs.

what's funny is brave new world is OLDER than 1984 and it s way more insightful and accurate, 1084 is just scare mongering it's ridiculous. it read more like an encyvkopedia when compared to bnw. wrote a comparative essay between the two for my senior year I think 1984 is very powerful; its been haunting me for a few days which I think is the idea. BNW is showing what could happen if power is unchecked; 1984 is showing why we can't let power be unchecked(in a way, the world in bnw is something I wouldn't mind, after all whats actually wrong with it? 1984's main beauty is showing the sheer wrongness that can happen when you think about it spoilers [hide=]O reilley's sheer sociopathy beyond sociopathy is a key factor here. The fact that the party is pursuing power for the hell of it is evil beyond even hitler. Their isn't a goal of better life for one group, its just lets just screw up everything so we keep the party in power.[/hide] I don't think 1984 is great plot wise since it kind of breaks down at the end, but I think its real beauty is in the central theme that absolute power corrupts absolutely. You should read animal farm, it's relatively short, and a good read. I've read it; its a very good book, but again its rather simple(while effective) in its purpose. Oh, on 1984; the poor being called the proles is a play on proletariat correct?

zerker pures are accounts intended for pking they keep their defense at 45 due to some equipment reqs of 45 defense; similair to a rune or barrows pure they are trying to minimize combat level while maximizing damage dealing ability.

what's funny is brave new world is OLDER than 1984 and it s way more insightful and accurate, 1084 is just scare mongering it's ridiculous. it read more like an encyvkopedia when compared to bnw. wrote a comparative essay between the two for my senior year I think 1984 is very powerful; its been haunting me for a few days which I think is the idea. BNW is showing what could happen if power is unchecked; 1984 is showing why we can't let power be unchecked(in a way, the world in bnw is something I wouldn't mind, after all whats actually wrong with it? 1984's main beauty is showing the sheer wrongness that can happen when you think about it spoilers [hide=]O reilley's sheer sociopathy beyond sociopathy is a key factor here. The fact that the party is pursuing power for the hell of it is evil beyond even hitler. Their isn't a goal of better life for one group, its just lets just screw up everything so we keep the party in power.[/hide] I don't think 1984 is great plot wise since it kind of breaks down at the end, but I think its real beauty is in the central theme that absolute power corrupts absolutely.

This is quite an interesting concept, I tend to disagree on the basis that I don't think humanity will actually wipe itself out(even nuclear war might not be entirely destructive). One thing I would note, it would seem that the prescence of conciousness(and therefore the potential for self destruction) is one of the prerequisites for developing advanced technology. If so, then this could have some reasonability, as any species that could reach us could also destroy itself.

I think we are defining a lot of things very differently for instance, you consider things black and white but then say something wrong can be justified. I and a few others consider nothing black and white because in some cases its justified. On the abortion one I don't consider it inherently wrong(similair to the defining) because I consider it justifiable in many circumstances. I think abortion solely for conveinence is always wrong but in the case of something like severe deformity I consider it justified. I can't get my chat box at bottom to open to get quotes so I can't respond to anything else specific right now.

So then why are knives legal? In the hands of someone irresponsible, they are way more deadly than alcohol. A knife is a utensil used for cutting food. Unless you mean like combat knives or then yeah... you can easily kill someone with a steak or bread knife.

yay America; lets see if it makes it ten more

So then why are knives legal? In the hands of someone irresponsible, they are way more deadly than alcohol. Come to think of it so are words, lets ban words to prevent propaganda that corrupts the masses.

I dont know if it has been mentioned; but a reason it was moved from 18 to 21 was to prevent high school seniors from being able to provide for underclassman. Not that it stops anyone.

Nice or the quaran or the vedas or the torrah or the gospel of the flying spaghetti monster or the book of mormon or the buddas teachings or the bajillion ways god could exist in a way unlike what the bible says.

Are you actually worried that NK could take over the world... #-o

I generally agree Engineered murder by self defense... So what if someone wants to kill themselves because they can't play football, its their life. Severly disabled is always intended to mean a horribly dipilitating condition that would make life arguably worse then death. the gay one--I like how your response to an alleged slipperly slope is a horrid strawman That doesn't mean it can't work Marriage is a lawful contract connecting the assets of party a and party b; marital rape would be domestic abuse which is wrong for quite a few reasons. Justice doesn't mean following a strict set of laws to the letter in all circumstances. Justice is following the rule of law but understanding when common sense is more important to do what is best for everyone. A good example is when an archaic law (say kissing in public) is ignored by a judge because its hasn't been used for a century and its obvious noone would approve of it now. Morals ARE black and white. If something is wrong in one situation it is wrong in all situations. What changes is the level of justification that can be used. For being open minded, you sure have a long highly specific list of what is right and wrong. I actually agree with you on all of those but the last and the statement it is inherently wrong. Morality is never going to be black and white; unless we are going to be painfully specific and say (it is definetely wrong to kill someone who you dont know in cold blood just because you feel like it) which is hardly a general statement on morality. We can say murder or killing is wrong and then define it, but it will still leave trouble when we run into something like self defense.

For the majority yes. In some though it is still the victims's (Leaving the windows open, undressing in front of windows...ect) and the person who designed the house (for making entry so easy) Just to clarify, if we are talking about rape at home there are two main types(well that I would class anyway): Opportunistic and Characteristic. What about rape by the person's spouse? Well clearly they married the rapist so its their fault :roll: Cite legalized prostitution lowering the rate of sexual assault. Being moral and objective doesn't imply being inflexible or even authoritarian. It is in fact quite necessary to understand that just because you think something is "wrong" doesn't mean it needs to be outlawed. The main beauty here is that can create our laws on the basis that you have the right to do whatever doesn't infringe on someone elses rights. While there are still some problems with this system, it at the very least creates encourages personal freedom. edit--wow, you actually are justifying marital rape you will never have justice if you refuse to allow it.

The worst case scenario is a nuke hitting seol and North Korea being destoyed by the resulting conflict. While potentially horrific, humanity isn't going to be destroyed.

This isn't a new threat, and should go in the already existing NK thread.

I finally decided, Brave New World is a better book then 1984. I really appreciate the writing of 1984, but there are two things I find flawed that killed its edge a. the ending feels rather contrived; not like the last page but the last few chapters just have a lot of stuff that felt unrealistic b. I think its counterpoint to the obvious immorality(argument that perception is everything) is presented in a way that shows it as clearly "wrong". Brave New World has the beautifully written banter between John and Mustafa that really pulls the work together, a feature I think 1984 lacks On the bright side, 1984 is degrees of magnitude more terrifying to read.

check your clan settings, he might not have a high enough rating in your clan; if true its possible it doesnt let you ls with one eligable person.

Are most Americans governor? Are most Americans running for VP? Do most Americans have the possibility of becoming President if a 72-year old cancer survivor kicks it or retreats to the hospital? No. And also, as idiotic as a lot of Americans are, I highly doubt that 51% of Americans couldn't name another Supreme Court Case, and I also doubt most Americans didn't think about the Iraq War until 2006. Im speaking to the behavior/naivity; not the fact that most people arent governors, lets not be facetious The only common court cases are; roe v wade, plessy v ferguson, and brown v board. Beyond those three I highly doubt 85% of the population will know any(I only knew about 5 pre AP US history) court cases; much less have an idea what they were about. Anybody else find it amusing two Americans are arguing about how stupid Americans are?

It's largely because theres noone else that has really shown promise. Huckabee was a very good conservative, while he is far to right winged for me, he was such a nice and genuine guy that I would take him over most people Romney, well I dont see anything wrong in his reseme but for some reason he just creeps me out.\ Ron Paul, too radical to actually be president; more useful as the guy who brings up issues. I think im out of people lolz edit-- In fairness, without saying if she was a republican or democrat that would make her an accurate representative of most americans(maybe not the newspaper part). I hate to defend palin, but the trashing of her is hardly necessary. lord--right...

Can I use time as a god? I mean time created life, if nothing was moving then we wouldn't be living.

[hide=] I like the irony of the gramatical errors in a sentence that is calling someone "not smart". Its not that she isn't smart, she is just a a terrible orator and gives badly written speeches. She manages to fire up the republican base because that requires "hotwording" issues, but looks less then brilliant to a lot of people because her speeches are executed in a rather sub par manner. I really don't want to see her on the republican ticket, then again theres no one in either party I want to see as president in 2012. You understood what i said, yet you request a perfect grammar from me... If you want to be a teacher that badly, i suggest go doing something about it instead of being a grammar idiot on forum boards. [/hide] Of course I understood, and I'm not requesting perfect grammar, but if your going to insult someones intelligence you should try to avoid basic grammatical errors in your post. I don't think its the religion thats annoying, its the blindly following of whatever said religion says to believe.