Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

I'm sorry, but knowingly passing on HIV should be an automatic death sentence.

At 12/7/09 09:12 PM, Warforger wrote: So? Franklin Deleanor Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Jackson all did the same thing, but were widely regarded as good presidents.

FDR was a terrible President who created the only Depression in History. Lincoln created the only civil war.

Etc.

At 12/7/09 07:20 PM, Dawnslayer wrote: How does this contradict evolution? The unfit die out, and the fit survive to the next generation, carrying their genetic material with them. That's what "survival of the fittest" means.

How does it proe Darwin's theory wrong that the fittest couldn't survive? Really?

Because the environment in which they lived was suitable, until gradual changes to said environment made it no longer fit for their kind. Those who adapted to the environment survived, and those who remained the same did not. This process takes hundreds of thousand of years.

Yet both the previous and the after species survived? In reality this is known as horsecrap.

I'll see your claim of no evidence and raise you one fossil.

All right. Provide evidence of these halfway fossils.

Oh, you were bluffing?

Oh, ok. Next.

At 12/7/09 01:39 PM, zephiran wrote: Yeah, when the Black Sea might have flooded the Marmara and parts of the Aegean. It might have been "quite mild", if it ever occurred, as proposed in this recent National Geographic News article:

Or it mightve been bad.

Shall Iwrite you off now? Or continue?

And the Hebrew word used in the flood story is "land" not world. This is important. If the story says there was a regional flood,

It doesn´t.

It does. The Hebrew word says "land."

Have a good one bud.

Swine Flue/H1N1 is less deadly than the normal flu:

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/30/
science/sci-swine-reality30
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/sfl -swine-flu-scare-092609,0,3497663.story

NO ONE has died from H1N1 who was a perfectly healthy individual. They were sickly or old, or infants. Most of the people who supposedly died of the swine flu died of something else. And back during the "pandemic" doctors stopped testing, and just assumed it was swine flu.

You are more likely to drown in your toilet than die of swine flu.

At 12/5/09 04:10 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote: 1. The maths actually SUPPORTS evolution. We know the rate at which mutations occur. we take two different species who, according to the fossil record, are believed to have diverged from a common ancestor. we measure the genetic difference between the two modern day species. We use the rate of mutations to calculate how long ago the species diverged, and guess what? This matches up unbelievably well with the estimated time of divergence based on the positions in the fossil record.

I'll ignore the "maths" part and focus on the rest.

It's impossible to determine the rate that "mutations occur" as you're putting it forth. Mutations occur daily. This doesn't let us know how long it would take for a squirrel to become a bat, or how such a thing would actually happen.

2. if you're saying creationism of the same amount of viability as evolution, and also that evolution is "impossible", then you're claiming that creationism too is impossible.

That makes no logical sense. Try again?

there are THOUSANDS of books on evolution out there, all of which provide a simply staggering amount of irrefutable evidence to support evolution. teh evidence is out there are amazingly accessible, so no one needs to be spoon fed.

And I find it AMAZINGLY laughable that the only science which you claim is wrong and is being "spoon fed" just so happens to be the theory that goes against your religion. Ha!

By Darwins own theory, evolution is wrong. None of the intermediary species survived. Therefore none were fit. Yet they all survived the perfect amount of time to create the next one...then died. And they left no evidence of them ever existing.

Let's also combine this with the simple fact that the evolutionists theories about how life have started were all proved wrong.

Smart idea? It doesn't work!

People have been getting pregnant and getting STDs without sex?

Show your work, kid.

Every study you can find will show you that teaching abstinence will, if anything, make kids prolong from having sex around nine months longer than if they weren't taught it, and when they do have sex, they're far more likely to get pregnant because they have not been advised how to have sex safely.
Similarly, if the person who had been practising abstinence has sex with someone who has not, they again won't know about safe sex and will be more likely to contract an STI.

Of course none of this is true. As even England reported recently, their sex ed classes increased both the rate of sexual activity and the pregnancy rate.

Having gone through both abstinence only and "comprehensive" sex ed, I can say that abstinence is the better course. It was far more informative and accurate than any comprehensive class I took.

At 12/6/09 02:37 AM, poxpower wrote: Yeah creationism works with magic science.
Like the explanation for fitting the animals on the ark is that he didn't fit every species, just "kinds" of species. So you see, there's only like one kind of elephant and one kind of mouse and one kind of dog and those "micro-evolved" into all the animals we know today.
And they did it in something insane like1000-1600 years since the egyptians and all those other guys talk strictly about animals that live today.

Except the historical record supports that there was a flood in the Middle East. And the Hebrew word used in the flood story is "land" not world. This is important. If the story says there was a regional flood, which is accurate with history, vs a world wide one...that shoots down ALL of this sites moronic points.

Not to mention that yes he fit THE DINOSAURS IN THERE. Hahaha. It say "all the creatures". So yeah all the dinosaurs went on the ark, came back out alive but all failed to reproduce long enough for any people to ever talk about them again.
While somehow every other animal made it.

The idea that dinosaurs existed with humans is a remote belief, not endorced by any major branch of Christianity.

And somehow the lions survived by eating the few remaining animal couples without making them go extinct. Somehow.

And somehow they then all spread out into the world so that all the marsupials are in Australia and shit.

OK YEAH IT'S INSANE

Again, the bible never claimed the world flooded. But hey, whatever, eh Pox?

Sadly, some people need to tell others how to live.

It has nothing to do with safety, and everything to do with control. Like 95% of the laws on the books.

At 10/18/09 10:15 PM, ReiperX wrote: And I work with a guy who's two children had it. One spent 4 days in the hospital the other spent a week in it.

It affects people differently.

Well this is also like saying that someone got sent to the hospital for sepsis after an ingrown toenail. It can happen, yet it's extremely unlikely.

Might as well terrify people of ingrown toenails.

At 10/19/09 01:03 AM, GayDorf wrote: no. The economy is on the up-and-up. Unemployment always lags behind firms' recoveries because they've adapted to recession-era cutbacks and eliminated the necessity of some jobs at least temporarily.

The old line that "Unemployment is a lagging figure" was never really true. It's a half-lie to make political parties feel better when they screw up. Unemployment is directly related to the conditions on the ground. Businesses don't keep laying people off if things are improving. And you won't find a business who's aying "once we have a solid year of profits, we'll start hiring people again!"

People who believe this are deluding themselves.

no, it's not.

Yes, it is.

http://dailyreckoning.com/september-job-
losses-soar/

We're using parlor tricks to lower the unemployment rate..yet it still rises.

the media spins that as a good thing, and in a way it is, but, if Obama and his lackeys

Keynesian multiplier effect.

Imaginary.

But government investment causes a larger positive multiplier than an equivalent tax increase would cause a negative one.

Fantasy.

You're clearly not all that in the loop.

At 9/23/09 08:05 PM, Stoicish wrote: Except in the previous passage there was a person asking if it was lawful to give tribute to Caesar (taxes). Soooooo...

Whatever.

The fun part of the Bible is that no matter how much stuff is in there people will always pick and choose the ones that will apply to how they are living and knowingly ignore the rest.

Again, they asked if it was OK to give to the government what the government said they owed.

Jesus said yes. But also give God what is Gods.

Hence, seperation ofchurch and state.

You're not all that quick are you.

At 9/24/09 06:54 PM, Stoicish wrote: Oh and if the governments main function is to protect the people then shouldn't they have an obligation to protect them from disease, injury, harm, sickness and other lethal things. I mean you need to be clear on the obligation because if government is supposed to protect me then I'm pretty sure I'd want them to provide me with the best health care out there.

Of course not. Protecting someone has never been understood as protecting them from themself.

Conflating outward harm with sickness is foolish.

Sad to say that that isn't what is happening. Good thing everything is just a-okay in your world and people in America obviously aren't suffering because lack of health care or being denied claims because of something really fucking stupid.

No one in America has a lack of health care.

Oh well, I guess your morality only is based on the fact that, "My money is my own and I will use it how I see fit and fuck everyone else."

And if it's your money that is your choice.

I however live in a world where I think its okay to shed a few more dollars from my paycheck and actually know that people are getting care. I think its a God given right that everyone has health care regardless of the costs.

And you're basing this off what? Certainly not the bible, the Constitution or anything else.

Just your gut. Good stuff.

Some Pros:

Took out Saddam
Crippled Al Queda
Lowered taxes
Great Economy
Temporarily removed death tax

At 9/27/09 01:29 AM, Warforger wrote: Actually, the new Healthcare system has the potential to help the economy, with more appliccants coming in for health issues more docters would be admitted, and with endorseement from colleges then bam job increase.

Unless you have Stage 18 cancer that you let go for 4 years, you can afford a doctor's visit. I'm sorry, this is a foolish talking point. I'm poor by our standards and I can afford a doctors visit whenever I need one.

And people who CAN'T afford health care flood emergency rooms all the time.

This is bogus.

At 7/13/09 01:52 PM, Proteas wrote: But the Federal Government is above the state in terms of legislative power. If the Federal Government isn't allowed to do it, what right does the state have to do it?

On certain issues. But except for a few select things, they are not.

While it is ignored, if the state and federal laws ever conflict, unless the Constitution gives specific jurisdiction to the feds...the state is right

Oh, what the hell. I'll bite. Sine everyone else is just giving high fives.

Evolution falls flat in explaining how everything came to be.

Sorry. "Random chance" doesn't explain nothing becoming something. Nor does it explain non-life becoming life. Where did things come from is an interesting question. ID seeks to address this.

And on a cellular level, if anything was missing, the cell wouldn't work. A plant cell without clorophil would die. A cell without a nucleus would not survive. Etc.

But let's all keep pretending evolution knows all and ID is stupid. Feeling superior is fun.

At 5/4/09 05:30 AM, ReiperX wrote: I have to agree with Fli on this one. Homosexuals have a very strong identity. It's a physical and emotional attraction to those of the same sex.

So your identity is who you are attracted to.

This is something no one in the straight community can relate to.

Hell, most in the gay community cannot relate to it either.

Your identity IS NOT who you want to fuck. If you think otherwise. You're a moron.

At 5/4/09 05:30 AM, ReiperX wrote: I have to agree with Fli on this one. Homosexuals have a very strong identity. It's a physical and emotional attraction to those of the same sex.

Nope, sorry, try again.

Well lets see. One is harmful to the one you are having sex with and can't be done without legal consent, but two adult people of the same sex can consent to have sex with each other without any real harm comming to either one.

Ignoring the blatant stupidity of claiming that anal sex isn't harmful, it's DAMNED ballsy to claim that sex between two men is ok, but sex between a man and a 16 year old days from seventeen isn't ok. Epic fail.

Calling being gay an identity demands that we recognize nothing about the homosexual other than his or her affinity for their own sex. NO HUMAN BEING is simply the sum of their sexual encounters. Therefore the demand that we accept that homosexuals have a "culture" because they're gay is inherently bigoted and stupid.

At 5/2/09 10:05 PM, Elfer wrote: Love is far and away more important than anyone's petty hang-ups about what's gross and what's not. If you can't acknowledge that, then you have not loved deeply enough.

I'll be sure to tell the cops that if I ever decide I love outside the law.

At 5/2/09 07:37 PM, fli wrote: It's an identity that stems from sexuality.

Homosexuality isn;t "an identity". It's your sexual preference. When your identity IS your sexual preference, you're a sick individual.

What is more, homosexuals have a cultures and communities... and in mass.

No, they don't.

Furries have an option to drop the act.
Gays in general don't have that option (or at least, not without its very harsh consequences.)

That's stupid, but moving on.

Where as bestiality, pedophilia, and the rest of sort isn't marked with such complexities. These things are abusive loveless acts to gratify sexual lust or (more likely)-- darker needs.

"MY philia is ok....THOSE OTHER SICKOS aren't."

Typical hypocracy.

At 11/18/08 01:43 AM, Garthredbunlove wrote: Ha! I knew you were all words.

And those words make a pretty convincing point. Which you ignore.

Lol, am I working for GM? No. I just live here. I'd say the major problems are: the governor, the bad rap GM cars get, the former problem of gas prices, pensions and unions, and the fact that nobody is loaning money now when they need it.

GM cars aren't bad. Their business strategy is sound. They need better management and a good advertising campaign.

One CANNOT have poor management and sound strategy. It's simply not possible.

You're saying that "but for the people who run the company and make all the decisions...the company is fine"?

I move cars as a part time job for supplimental income and have gotten a chance to see all of the 08 GM cars in action. They suck.

They're designed to be hard to work on. That way, people have to go to the dealers. They're completely computerized. Do you REALLY need computer chips in the wheels so that they can tell you if the tire is 1 pound of pressure low? They have these idiotic ideas like "pretty engine" which is a series of covers that take 10 minutes to remove, and need special tools...just so you can look at the engine.

In short, you have a lot of poorly designed cars that are being pushed by a clueless management to a public that aint buying.

At 11/18/08 03:00 PM, fli wrote: This is a Civil Rights issue where we failed to protect a minorities' rights because the majority willed it.
And we got to fix it up soon...

Or not.

You don't have a civil right to other people's acceptance.

As long as we can tell straight people no, we can tell gays no. It's really that simple.

What "right" was removed? Civil unions existed in CA before, and they exist now.

OH RIGHT. Civil union is "you deserve all the benefits of marriage, but we don't really approve" whereas marriage is societal acceptance.

You. Do. Not. Have. A. Right. to . Acceptance. Sorry.

At 11/18/08 07:19 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: Sure I can! This country was supposed to be founded on equal rights for all. Gays have been denied the same right to marry that straights have been afforded.

Really? Gays can't marry someone who is of the opposite sex? I missed that part?

This country is also founded on a separation of church and state, yet the church campaigned pretty damn hard to get this passed, and a lot of the people who have publicly come out in support of it continue to use religious arguments as part of their attack of it.

So religious people no longer have a say? That's bs.

Just because the majority voted on it, and some can call that "democracy in action" doesn't mean this wasn't a slap in the face to what this country was built on. It's just a nice and convenient bit of propaganda for people to use to feel like they didn't just deny a minority the same rights as everybody else.

Gays have the same rights as everyone else. Grow up.

At 11/19/08 07:21 PM, aninjaman wrote:

Bankrupting the coal industry is no biggie,

It's extremely big. Coal provides half of our electricity. Getting rid of it will cause increased costs and blackouts.

At 11/20/08 12:04 AM, aviewaskewed wrote: Bro, we ALREADY have restrictions on types of guns people can buy (assault weapons bans anyone?) all he could quite possibly do is make them tougher, either by further limiting what types of firearms get sold, or strengthening gun education programs. I highly doubt anyone will be coming door to door to collect your guns, there would be a complete and utter revolt if tried. It's so expensive to hunt and fish anyway (least here in Jersey) that it makes me glad I have no interest in either one really.

In DC vs Heller, DC had completely banned guns. Is it not possible to do this on a federal level?

At 11/20/08 05:15 PM, CBP wrote: This is actually kind of ironic, seeing as websites like E-Harmony were where gays went to meet before straight people even thought about it.

Seeing as how E-Harmony was just sued for not providing gay dating, you are clearly wrong.

E-Harmony was set up as a dating site to promote straight marriage from a staunch Catholic.

Try again.

At 11/18/08 05:10 PM, aninjaman wrote: You didn't look at the link did you?

No, I really didn't. I've done a lot of research on the subject and when you ACTUALLY look at what's going on, homosexuality in nature is extremely rare.

" First of all, is homosexuality a specifically human behavior? If it is a fundamentally biological behavior, there should be some other species which share it. And, in fact, there are close to 500 known species which are known to engage in homosexual behavior, including elephants, dolphins, sheep, bears, deer, rats, cats, dogs, cows, rabbits, kangaroos, squirrels, whales, bats, pigs, mice, goats, as well as just about every other primate. And that's just the mammals! There are many more birds, fish, reptiles, and even insects which have also engaged in homosexual behavior."

Yet in very few of these do we see actual sex between the same sex. Male dogs humping male dogs is classified as homosexual, whether or not sex actually occurs. Again, "homosexual relations" in animals are extremely rare.

:blah blah blah

Do you know what you call a female who refuses male advances to be with women? One calls her a lesbian. Do you know what a man is called who goes after men instead of women? Gay. I hope this helps, children.

blah blah blah

Because of course any of that has ANYTHING to do with an evolutionary advantage to homosexuality.

Douche.

Animals do it on occasion. Therefore it must be an advantage. Also an advantage...horses running to their deaths in burning barns!

All right- well, that was a lot to chew on for this week. To review- homosexuality is not a strictly human trait- it is practiced commonly throughout the animal kingdom. It has a clear evolutionary benefit in that it fosters better socialization among members of both genders. In humans, the evidence strongly suggests some kind of genetic component in the development of homosexuality, although the specific genes have not yet been discovered. "

In everything else wetalk about nature vs. nurture. Yet in sex there's only nurture? What a load of crap.

At 11/18/08 02:51 PM, fli wrote: 1 out of 10 people are gay...

That's an extremely high number, considering everyone else estimates gays to be between 1-3% of the population.

At 11/18/08 03:24 AM, fli wrote: waaaa I didn't get my way. I'm sad.

Life sure is tough when you don't get your way huh.

HEY! I should apply for some sort of benefits when Obama becomes President...since I won't like it and all....

At 11/18/08 03:42 AM, Sajberhippien wrote: What do you know about that? Animals with bisexual behaviour is quite common, and there's a lot of reasons why it COULD be an evolutionary advantage.Most of the evolutionary reasons for homosexuality also applies to bisexuality.

Animals that have homosexual relations are extremely rare. Animals that are "bisexual" are nonexistant.

There is NO evolutionary reason to be gay or bi.

Wait, what? You cannot be bisexual if you don't have an active sexual life with both genders? Why, here i thought sexuality was about ATTRACTION.

At some point you have to make a choice. When you marry and decide to commit your life to a woman or man, you drop the bi label.

Yes it's a choice who you live with, no it isn't a choice who you are attracted to. I started out gay, but became increasingly bisexual and now I'm almost only for chicks (though there's still a few men I'd screw any day).

Your own argument destroys itself.

At 10/20/08 06:41 PM, RedSkunk wrote:

At 10/20/08 06:39 PM, Grammer wrote: I don't really know who he is. It's hard to tell the trolls from the sincere idiots

Why differentiate?

Shrug, I've debated both of you into the ground. I'll thank you kindly to not pretend that the two of you together are my intellectual equal.

At 10/20/08 05:56 PM, Grammer wrote: You haven't done a good job of mocking me, lol

Actually I have.

You insulted my use of what you see as excessive commas. Besides that you're just calling me stupid, lol

For good reason. Mainly cause you ARE stupid.

I DIDNT DOCTOR YOUR QUOTES LOL YOU RETARD

By your own admission, you did....

I know, that's why it's called a slip-up.

No, you worthless jackass. That's why it's called a lie.

He made a mistake. A mistake that he piled on, but fuck, if you knew Biden (you don't), you'd know he makes gaffes all the time.

OKI, so he's consistantly stupid....which TOTALLY excuses his current stupidity. Is that really your defense?

He didn't make a mistake. He either lied, or he's stupid.

The Patriots and the Jets make it to the super bowl. The Patriots beat the Jets 28-21.

A mistake is saying the Jets beat the Patriots by that score. A mistake is saying the patriots beat the Jets 35-21. If one says the Rams beat the Colts 104- 15, they're just making stuff up out of thin air.

That's the difference between a mistake and a lie.

At 10/20/08 05:49 PM, Grammer wrote: You're fucking retarded. The dude who runs the place says they don't teach any particular religion. That's the end of it. Think he's a liar? Prove it.

Why? Because you're either too fucking stupid, or too bloody lazy to use common logic?
Obama: In the past I learned....
Guy: We don't teach that now...

I've detailed at least three times why your defense is moronic. You just keep ignoring it. Proving, once again, that you're intellectually inferior to a 6 year old.

Prove that it was years ago.

I have the word of a former student. You have...nothing.
Fuck off, fool.

Excessive extrapolation much?

Nope. This is your thought process. I'm simply mocking your idiocy.

Prove that it's a secular Muslim school, and only Muslim.

I have. Twice.

This isn't a Catholic school. What Obama went to had Christians, Jews, and Muslims. The dude who owns the place said that. You calling him a liar?

Holy hell, you're stupid.

Even if that was in the book, it doesn't mean he was ever Muslim.

Which I never actually said. And you're just too damned dumb to understand.

How controversial? "Could be" considered controversial? That's pretty vague

Hmmm, I explained it. Maybe you're just retarded?

Denouncing Wright: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P5NDO2DX yU
Leaving Trinity: http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/01/
nation/na-obama1

Ignoring that your youtube link doesn't work.
Who cares? Obama defended Wright for over a month, then finally gave in an walked away...sorta. Then, he eventually had to alk away from Trinity too, cause it was clear he was lying.

Yet halfwits like yourself keep overlooking this.

Well, what you just said is, to be blunt, sad. Really. I mean damn. Holy shit. That's really stupid

It's also true. And you're, to be blunt, too fucking stupid, to counter it. So you write it off as bigotry. Awwww, that's cute.

You just said "wrong" a bunch of times

Twice actually.

I advise you to visit this site
http://www.fightthesmears.com/

OF COURSE. I can fix myself by reading an Obama launched site that lies about him to sell him to voters. You're an idiot. You're honestly gonna link me to a site with Barack Obama's logo to "educate" me? Holy crap, you don't deserve to vote.

At 10/19/08 10:41 PM, poxpower wrote: Well at first, the Kosher selection is small and costs most since it's specialized food. So people who want kosher food have to demand more of it and have to pay more to get it. But as they demand it, more companies realize they have nothing to lose from it and then they convert all their food to kosher, thus lowering the price of kosher products and eliminating the non-kosher version completely.

That's not even remotely realistic. And everyone here knows it.

Stay within the realm of possibility at least.

At 10/20/08 03:39 AM, kraor024 wrote: Lets look at the facts on the issue
deaths caused by marijuana:0
Percentage of marijuana related arrests in the US:44%
money spent on drug war annually: 49billion
money spent to house 1 prisoner for 1 year: $20000

EHHHHHH.

That's there's no deaths attributed to it simply isn't true.

http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/deat h/cannabis-age.htm
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/viewr esource.asp?resourceID=145#cause

People die from beathing. There's simply nothing that doesn't killing someone.

It seems pretty evident SOME people have died from it...but an extremely small number.

At 10/19/08 12:07 AM, Grammer wrote: Holy fuck that's some level of fucktarded you have no right to insult my intelligence, lol

I'm insulting your intelligence because you're stupid. It's called stirring the shit. I don't believe Obama is Muslim. That's why I mocked you, stupid.

Hey look, I fixed what you said so now it applies as if I said it against you

So, to put us on the same level you have to doctor my quotes? And we wonder why I mock your intelligence?

The FDR thing was either a lie, or complete cluelessness.

Biden slipped up, you really don't know Biden if you think he's some sort of idiot

Buzzer sound!

Nope, try again. NOTHING Biden said was correct. FDR wasn't President at the time. TVs weren't invented until a decade later, and there was no buying of homes. So I guess if we erase the mistakes of the sentence, we get. Someone during some year told the voters not to be afraid because something. I'm probably more forgiving than anyone else around here when it comes to politics. I may give a gentle tease that someone got their facts wrong (like you not knowing the difference between Kenya nad Indonesia), but I'll still not call them a clueless halfwit or liar. Names, dates, all easy to mix up. So if Hoover had done what Biden said....no biggie. If FDR had done what Biden said....no biggie. The date and TV comments are funny, but of no concern. The buying houses comment is utter BS, and makes Biden either a liar or stupid.