166 Forum Posts by "D-R-P"
At 2/21/05 07:08 AM, -Anthony- wrote:At 2/21/05 06:39 AM, D_R_P wrote: Some people develop ulcers due to stress, and if left untreated and the stress continues, they can lead to death. If the source of stress could be pinpointed to a single individual, would you charge that individual with murder for causing so much stress that it killed the person?If that individual was deliberatly trying to cause this person to stress out, and it ended up killing her. I would've charged him with manslaughter one.
Now the lines are starting to blur. Continuing would lead us into a case by case basis of "if if if" and a bunch of conflicting opinions about a decision that should be left up to a judge.
But I seriously doubt someone would rape a woman with the intent to force a miscarriage through excessive stress. Yes, it is possible, but that wasn't really the initial question.
At 2/21/05 12:57 AM, -LazyDrunk- wrote:At 2/21/05 12:47 AM, D_R_P wrote:...
Having sex while pregnant cannot harm the baby due to the mucus that seals the cervix, and the amniotic sac the baby is inside.
So no, the man should not be charged with murder. There was no way for him to harm the baby simply by penetrating the woman.
If asked about 'shock', perhaps women from more states would agree that a strong emotional jolt is likely to cause a woman to miscarry.
yea, it's kinda obscure, but it is possible.
Yeah, the emotional stress of a rape can lead to a miscarriage, but I still wouldn't charge the guy with murder (or even manslaughter). Some people develop ulcers due to stress, and if left untreated and the stress continues, they can lead to death. If the source of stress could be pinpointed to a single individual, would you charge that individual with murder for causing so much stress that it killed the person?
I can't think of a situation in which causing a traumatic event is a crime, either.
That was an odd reference, by the way. Traditional Indian views on women and pregnancy?
At 2/21/05 12:40 AM, -LazyDrunk- wrote: The rapist, through forcible penetration, was the cause of the miscarriage in the pregnant woman. I think you misunderstood the scenerio.
Oops. You're right, I misread that.
Having sex while pregnant cannot harm the baby due to the mucus that seals the cervix, and the amniotic sac the baby is inside.
So no, the man should not be charged with murder. There was no way for him to harm the baby simply by penetrating the woman.
At 2/21/05 12:35 AM, -LazyDrunk- wrote: Say a woman is pregnant. She is raped and has a miscarriage shortly after. The perp is caught. Should he be charged with murder?
No. He didn't kill anyone. His actions resulted in the creation of something, and that something was destroyed in circumstances he had no control over.
Why are you squabbling about statistics? It doesn't matter what the cause of the pregnancy was, or how many pregnancies are caused by which actions. The question is whether abortion is morally acceptable or not, and to answer that you need to know if and when an unborn child has the same rights as a newborn.
At 2/20/05 02:28 PM, Dr_Arbitrary wrote: I personally believe that the attributes that differentiate Humans from Animals and Fetuses don't develop until after birth,...
Out of curiosity, what do you believe these attributes to be?
At 2/20/05 08:46 AM, Quare wrote: I know this sounds weird, but there is a part of me that pities you...
At the end of my life at least, I just want to be able to die knowing that whatevers next, I did this right. I did this well.
Thats just my feelings, but if you think its worthles and pointless, thats up to you. I would suggest you try and find some point to your life, instead of giving in so easily. But thats just me.
Woah woah woah. I'm not going to kill myself. I'm saying that the only meaning in life is what you want it to be.
My argument for newbman there, was that I thought it was pointless to make your life's goal to make your offsprings' lives better until the species is extinct. Simply making life easier sounds lame to me. There's fun in the challenge.
Since I firmly maintain the idea that beliefs allow your mind to just accept or deny things without any analysis, I don't have any true beliefs. There are certain ideas that I maintain instead, but I accept the fact that in all possibility, those ideas could be completely wrong. I don't believe in a deity. I don't believe in an afterlife. I don't believe that there is a soul. If there is no deity, and there is no afterlife, and there is no soul, then life is simply a phenomenon. There is no meaning, it just happened. I haven't and will not kill myself because there would be no point in that either. I'm having a perfectly good time being alive, so why stop now?
I feel that creating/having faith in a belief or an idea about the meaning of life is simply a method that allows people to cope with life everyday. It's a survival mechanism, and we wouldn't need it if we weren't self-conscious. The only thing that sets us apart from the animals is that self-consciousness. We still have instincts, and our bodies still react the same way to our environment, despite our ability to think rationally. I am coping with life everyday because I realize and accept that.
At 2/20/05 06:11 AM, Dr_Arbitrary wrote: If Human cells are the deciding factor, then recently dead corpses have a right to life as much as Fetuses do, not all the cells are dead yet, they're just dying.
I don't know about that. You could argue that we should respect the dead (i.e. by giving them a proper burial, or not desecrating the corpse). Although you couldn't "kill" a corpse, there are things you could do to it that would kill the remaining live cells (which would be desecrating it). So in that sense, you could tie rights to Human cells.
I think the absurdity in tying rights to cells would be more along the lines of removing or killing Human cells to save the life of the rest of the Human. If you had a cancerous growth, or needed your appendix removed, I doubt there is anyone who would say, "No! My tumor has rights, and I refuse to violate them!" Granted, a fetus is not life threatening (more often than not), but it is also perfectly acceptable to kill your brain cells by drinking (even a little), kill nerve cells with botox injections, damage your skin cells by tanning, etc.
Still, you have raised an EXCELLENT point. What ARE rights tied to?
I tend to lean towards self-consciousness. If something is conscious of it's own existence, it has the right to live. A Fetus is not conscious until it reaches a certain point in development. Animals are not conscious of their own existence, and hence do not have the same right as Humans.
But I'm open to suggestions at this point.
At 2/20/05 05:33 AM, Dr_Arbitrary wrote: ...it was determined that time isn't constant,...
Are you talking about the theory of relativity, or something I've never heard of? If it's not relativity, can you post a link to something so I can read about it?
At 2/19/05 07:58 PM, BeFell wrote:At 2/19/05 07:54 PM, D_R_P wrote: Before you guys go any further, you should read all the other threads and all the other ideas on this topic. There's a couple good ones that cover a lot of issues with abortion, and raise some interesting questions about the instant that life begins.Shut up. We know it's the same damn debate we have had dozens of times before.
Haha. I know you do. I was just pointing out that there are already some great ideas in the other threads, and I'd rather see something new or an extension of one of those.
Before you guys go any further, you should read all the other threads and all the other ideas on this topic. There's a couple good ones that cover a lot of issues with abortion, and raise some interesting questions about the instant that life begins.
A lot of people seem to be confused about whether evolution is a theory or a fact, and it sounds like that's because you are all using the word 'evolution' to refer to two different parts of the idea.
There's microevolution (scientifically proven fact), and macroevolution (scientific theory).
Microevolution is the whole "domesticated animals" thing. Breeding (or genetics) is a way to force microevolution to get a particular desirable outcome. Microevolution as it happens in nature can be seen in Darwin's finches in the Galapagos. Finches on different islands had different sized beaks and other such features, which was an adaptation to their environment, and happened over several generations through natural selection.
Macroevoltuion is the part that makes all the religious zealots get their panties in a bunch. That's the idea that over long periods of time, new species are created. This happens when a group of animals (or plants) from a single species are separated for a long period of time, and unable to mate with other groups. Over time, microevolution produces more and more variations, until at some point the sex cells of the two groups would not join to create new offspring. They would be too different. Then there are two species where originally there was one. With enough speciation, you would eventually see new genuses (genii?), families, and kingdoms. It doesn't sound so bad when you say it like that, but as soon as you say "man from ape" (or even "amphibian from fish") then somebody's belief structure crumbles and they get defensive.
As for the whole sticker thing, I think that's totally absurd. If it wasn't for the fact that a textbook is seen as merely a book while a bible is seen as a sacred object, then I'd say they should have put stickers on bibles too. I'd put a sticker on a bible to show my disgust.
At 2/19/05 01:32 PM, newbman wrote:At 2/19/05 03:11 AM, D_R_P wrote: That of course raises a few questions:Becasue it leaves life easyier for those who come after, and so on and so forth til life becomes too easy and we become exinct.
"Why put effort into anything if it doesn't matter?"
"Why not just kill yourself?"Becasue you have a goal, one solitary goal, to reproduce and make your heir one who will surpas you in their achivments, that's what it's like to be a parent. Oh but if your an idiot, please kill yourself casue we don't need idiocy in the gene pool.
Actually, I had answered the questions I was expecting someone else to ask me, not posing questions of my own.
But in response to your answers:
Does an endless cycle of improving the lives of your offspring until the species is extinct seem like a good goal to you? I'd say that's pretty "short term," in the sense that either your goal is achieved or you've failed in one generation. Since you put the "until we become extinct" clause on there, I can ask the same question again: Why put effort into it if it doesn't matter? We'll be extinct eventually anyway, so why not systematically destroy ourselves now and get it over with?
At 2/18/05 06:01 PM, newbman wrote: I think one of two things: 1, your soal is recycled inot new bodies, and 2, once that soal has lived for long enough it shall plunge inot the final empyness of abyss once it's finall husk dies out.
At 2/18/05 06:25 PM, newbman wrote: Life matters not to one so close to enlightenment, in fact if I reach such a lodty goal my life would be complete and i could willinly fofit it.
Been reading Plato's Phaedo lately?
I don't think there is an afterlife. The only "meaning" of life is what you want it to be. It's whatever you can convince yourself to believe that will motivate you to continue living. The irony of the rational, self-conscious mind is that it must ignore rationality to keep itself conscious.
That of course raises a few questions:
"Why put effort into anything if it doesn't matter?"
Because it gives me something to do.
"Why not just kill yourself?"
Where's the fun in that?
At 8/14/04 06:47 PM, Redwrath wrote:
What I mean is that if you postpone the election by days, weeks, or even months it still means voters have to get out to the poles. You cannot speed up the election or you will have massive protests from millions people who did not reach the poles in time. A terrorist can only do so much. he can't stop the entire country from voting.
Ah, I though you meant that if the terrorists are going to attack, changing the election day will not have an effect on their plans.
I agree with you on this. But if they do attack and have any impact at all on the votes, people will probably demand for another election (as will whatever party lost). Unless the terrorists attacked a very small percentage of the population, and the election was won by a landslide.
At 8/11/04 05:29 PM, RBS13 wrote:At 8/9/04 07:34 PM, southwest_strangla17 wrote:wasn't darwin's theory Natural Selection? i thought died before he ever came to a full blown Theory of Evolution. :-/ pardon my ignorance.
like i said evolution is just a big theory made up by darwin. and theyve been wrong countless times on carbon dating. and how can evolution be true if we cant really see it happen...
Yes, Darwin did not come up with the theory of evolution, he came up with natural selection. That's a common mistake. He also never said anything about "survival of the fittest."
How can evolution be true if we can't really see it happen? If you only believe the things you see, then you don't believe much, if anything. Basing a belief purely on sight is pretty risky, too.
At 8/7/04 05:44 AM, Dirdmister wrote: Why has nobody ever thought of this..evolutionists say we originated from single celled organisms over years of evolution..church goers say God created life..why not both?
What if God created the world and life ie singled celled organisms TOO evolve...they could both be brought into it ;)
Someone did think of it already, it's called Intelligent Design (not Intelligent Creation, as somebody said, not to be an ass). The idea is that a deity created things with the intent that it would become life, and that this life would evolve.
Personally I think that life as we know it was pure chance. It is simply the interaction of particles that create an immensely complex and larger entity. Of course, then you have to think "well, did God create particles and atoms?" Which leads to the theories of the creation of the universe, and whether or not the universe was "created" or if it was just always there (which the human mind cannot fully comprehend because we are creatures who base our existence on periods of time). And then there's all the theories about what time is, and different dimensions and planes of existence, and hyperstring theory, and the concept of infinity, and... and...
We don't know shit about shit on a universal scale.
How depressing/exciting/boring/interesting...
At 8/14/04 04:27 PM, Redwrath wrote: Well, Bush's administration wanted to put off the elections "if" the terror level goes up to red. Since some 300 million people in America are going to know when election day is going to be, then so do terrorists. Changing the date won't make any difference.
It won't change the fact that they will still know what day elections will be held, but changing the election day will screw up the terrorists' plans if they are relying on a particular date and/or time. It also gives security a little longer to prepare.
At 8/14/04 09:00 AM, Lord_Humungus wrote: WOW!!! Thats even lower than USA "reality" shows.....especially because no TV show can actually issue a "green card"!!!
Reminds me of those intrnet porn sites that "trick" Latinas into doing porn in exchange for help getting a "Green Card"
The winner is awarded a team of lawyers who will try for a year to get them a green card. There is no guarantee that they will actually get one.
Speaking of green cards... It takes years to be granted citizenship. There is a guy I work with who is from India, and he was talking about his experiences. He had 1 week before his visa expired and he was going to be deported. He went to the place where they review what the immigrants have done, and either grant or deny them citizenship, an hour before it opened (so about 7 AM). There was a line around the block, and they were already turning people away because they didn't have enough time to get everyone through. So he went back the next day at 6 AM. Again, there was a huge line. But this time, when the place opened, the line sped through very quickly. Apparently, it was the reviewer's birthday. Normally she would do a lengthy review, and she had a reputation for being especially strict about granting citizenship. On this particular day, she did the following: "It's my birthday," *stamp* "It's my birthday," *stamp*. She granted everyone citizenship that day, and went home early.
The whole system is a joke.
At 7/4/04 03:10 AM, Joseph_Anarchy wrote: ya if ur underage its caled somthign rape LOL
It's called statutory rape.
What the fuck is your point and what are you trying to argue?
At 6/25/04 06:26 AM, TheShrike wrote: It's not about trying to erase the lines, it's about trying to understand that they don't matter.
Very true.
Almost... too true...
*calls CIA (kept on speed dial for just such an emergency)*
*realizes the CIA is already watching*
*smiles faintly, taking comfort for once in extreme paranoia*
At 6/24/04 05:16 AM, NoHitHair wrote: The national debt is currently about 7.2 trillion - the highest ever.
Damn, higher than I last heard. Where the fuck is it all going? I just can't comprehend how any government can spend THAT much money in the course of less than 4 years...
Source: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/179217_warcrime24.html
A summary:
As (hopefully) most of you know, the US has been trying to gain immunity from international courts for the troops in Iraq. This would mean that no court may prosecute any individual or group of US soldiers for any war crime or local crime after power is transferred to Iraq later this month. Yesterday, the US gave in after a UN conference, and decided to stop pushing for immunity. The resolution for a year of exemption had passed twice before, but not this time. It became especially hard to convince members of the council to pass it again after all the reports of prison abuse.
Do you still feel the same way now as you did when this topic was first brought up? (assuming you knew about it before)
General comments?
At 6/24/04 03:03 AM, KupaMan wrote: I've made plenty of interesting threads of myself, thank you. But, I, unlike many others, am tired of seeing the politics forums filled with brainless crap. I have seen maybe 6 unique threads on ths page today. It would help to not read a rendition of the same thing every day.
Nobody said they weren't tired of them. The regulars complain about it all the time (despite my relatively low post count, I do read a lot of this forum). It's not that I don't agree with you, I just think you should contribute by making an interesting topic instead of a thread for flaming the recent influx of Bush bashers. If you'd like to see some new discussion, come up with an interesting and thought provoking topic for others to discuss.
I'll try to help you out right now, and browse around some news sites.
Feel free to come up with something interesting instead of just creating a thread to flame the other ones. :(
At 6/23/04 02:15 PM, niffweed17 wrote: i have a much more reasonable reason for why god doesn't exist:
there is no evidence that he does.
...
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. ;)
At 6/23/04 10:42 PM, Toocool48167 wrote: ...G.W.Bush Jr. (A major Jackass in my opinion) put us right back into debt nearly immediatly and I belive it is currently around over 400Trillion, if I am wrong with that number someone show me proof of what it is now and I'll inform those who I talk to the truth...
I wish I had $400 trillion dollars... I'd buy out the entire world.
It's actually about $4 trillion. I don't know the exact number, but it's definitely above $2 trillion and below $6 trillion.
Wow. It's not the fact that they can see my dangly parts that bothers me, it's the fact that x-rays can give you cancer, and they are trying to put full body x-rays into airports, where millions of people will walk through them, and thousands on nearly a daily basis. At hospitals and such they always give you a big lead vest to put on, and they always make sure it covers your genitals (since they are the most prone to cancer from radiation). I wonder how many people will sue the airports when they get testicular/prostate/breast/ovarian cancer? I sure would.
At 6/23/04 07:09 AM, gem1 wrote: Much of the economic probloms we have today are created by unions. They have driven any descent industry out of the country. The industry they can not drive out such as ailines cannot survive bad times. The second issue is we are un willing to do labor or work. We are a lazy society. We bring in mexicans to do stuff we are un willing to do an they gladly do it be cause our economy is not bad. Theirs is. The jobs exist if people really want to work. The economy is not as bad as the media brainwashes everyone to be.
I'm not going to touch on the unions because I haven't come to a decision on how I feel about them yet.
As for the manual labor work, citizens who are poor are willing to do manual labor, but usually as a last resort (at least from what I've seen and heard, and that's also what I would do). The immigrants fill the jobs when the economy is good and citizens can get jobs elsewhere. When the economy is poor, immigrants make it worse because they take jobs away from citizens since they do not have to be paid a minimum wage. Despite whatever brainwashing the media may do, the economy really is shitty right now.
Outsourcing is another problem, though it is actually both good and bad at the same time. Companies get cheaper labor, make more profits, and create jobs in poorer countries at decent wages so that people can earn enough to survive. Their stock goes up. But at the same time, the unemployment rate in this country goes up, because outsourcing moves all the opportunities to other countries.
Excuse me:
At 6/22/04 10:31 PM, Not_Lucifur wrote: some proofs of God's non-existence
