Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 2/19/03 09:45 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: Hey, ass, get a new argument besides "omg bush is stupeed" when you want to talk politics.

Hey, this wasn't my topic.

At 2/19/03 09:44 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: Don't worry about it, I already schooled the kid...

Now you see? We can all be friends. It's just politics, nothing personal to anyone. =)

At 2/19/03 09:38 PM, PuritanicalInterface wrote: bush is a n00b who is racist sexist and hates any religion other than christian. in fact if any of you aren't christian, bush himself said you arent wanted in america. i hate that fucking moron that talks like a 2 year old!

Now this is just immature.

Now you're just scraping the bottom of the barrel there. Anyway, someone put this topic back on track. I'm too lazy to. *Goes off to blam crap*

Bashing Bush is taking full advantage of the First Amendment. It's quite an American exercise to voice an opinion, even if it goes against the will of the dictato...er...warmon....er....PRESIDENT.

At 2/19/03 09:21 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: Yeah...because that's the only thing he ever did, right?

First off...dynamite isn't a weapon, it's a construction tool, and wasn't made to be used to kill people, even if it occasionally is.

Get your story straight, slick.

Nobel was a good guy, but everyone focuses on the dynamite. I'm curious to know of his other achievements...seriously. Pardon me while I go look up Mr. Nobel.

At 2/19/03 09:03 PM, Ayscotty wrote: is it just me or is bush just wanting to clean up what his "daddy" started?¿?¿?¿ >:þ

It's a little more complicated than that, though. There's a lot of factors going on. Feel free to join the Anti-Bush Association, though. We're always looking for new members. Oh, yeah, we have a lot of intelligent people hanging around here, so don't take it too hard if you get smashed on for your views. I'm guessing we're all friends in the end. It's just politics!

We are not all born equal. Some people are born smarter or stronger than others (note this isn't a rascism thing or anything like that don't turn it into one). All men are entitled to equal treatment before the law, but all men are not inherently equal.

That's true, and it's not going to change. However, if we base all of our judgements on physical conditions (not doing the racist thing, per your request), then it will truly prevent any progress in our system. All men (and women) are equal in the eyes of the law. That's what should be seen.

I got the point of the post I just have a rather unique sense of morality.

Isn't that the joy of free thought? It makes everything so interesting!

See? I agree with that. Like I've said, I'm not anti-war. I'm anti pre-emptive without a good reason war. This strategy seems decent enough, without any radical stuff. We could just play the bluffing game and see how it turns out. We still don't know if the missile could launch to LA - it's never been tested in flight.

If Bush plans to have a war, then he is disturbing peace. If he is disturbing peace, then to have peace, he must be gotten rid of. By your definition of "peace", the only way to attain peace would be to assassinate Bush, Saddam, and, hell, all the world leaders...So maybe a large-scale nuclear holocaust would bring about peace.

That depends on what your definition of the word "peace" is.

At 2/19/03 05:44 PM, Nevah73 wrote: It's like enjoying a movie that stars an actor that's an asshole, or later murdered someone. You have to separate the artist from the art. Same deal with the discovery and the doctors.

Assuming that the discovery decreases the overall human suffering of the world...

Scenario 1(use procedure): Suffering increase: Those tortured. Suffering decrease: Billions of people worldwide for ages to come. Net suffering change: GIANT decrease.

Nice point. Congrats. So many good points that these morals threads bring. They're quite fun to read, too, as there aren't a lot of flaming things in these. Oh, how I love dignified conversation

At 2/19/03 07:02 PM, Sirterox wrote:

At 2/19/03 07:01 AM, Ted_Easton wrote:

Just like stealing, if you steal $100 dollors or 1 penny it doesnt matter, you are still stealing.

I hear this one far too much

At 2/19/03 05:53 PM, Nevah73 wrote: THE LOGIC BEHIND ANARCHY (from someone who isn't a moron)

The theory of anarchy works only in a situation where the world has no assholes.

Oh well. Next planet?

At 2/19/03 05:53 PM, Nevah73 wrote: THE LOGIC BEHIND ANARCHY (from someone who isn't a moron)

The theory of anarchy works only in a situation where the world has no assholes.

Well, count this world out. Maybe on the next big meteor there'll be some people who can make it work.

At 2/19/03 05:54 PM, Nevah73 wrote: As per usual, I agree with Ted.

We all seem to agree with good ol' Ted

At 2/19/03 06:47 PM, Russian37 wrote: France can kiss my ass. I mean up unitl we bailed them out in WWII France would be known as Germany, and how do those frogs pay us back? By standing in our way in defending the well being of the world.

Defending the well being of world oil...

I mean it would be ok if they thought many lives would be lost, but that is not what they are thinking. They have their minds set on the investments that they have in Iraq, and worried about what we are going to do with the oil when we take over all the oil in Iraq.

Just like America...except America is doing the opposite

It's not like we going to let other countires suffer without oil. That won't happen we will do the noble thing thing like always, well almost always. So basically France and the US are a like (obession with oil).

Good. Good. Now, which one is more insane? The one who doesn't want to kill for it, or the one who wants to go in guns blazing and shoot anyone who stands in the way of oil?

At 2/19/03 05:33 PM, Nevah73 wrote: As was stated before, all humans are born equal, but the world, society, leaders, prejudices, civilization and social constructs change that, at least in the eyes of the general populous.

Which is why corruption is always going to be there. Give one man more power over someone else, and they'll eventually abuse it. Even to the smallest extent, this abuse will lead to topics like this coming up and making all of us discuss it. I'm not trashing the topic, either. Just using it as an example.

At 2/19/03 06:28 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: **cough** idiots **cough**

*sigh* A few outbursts here and there don't stop the grand scheme of things.

At 2/19/03 05:44 PM, Jax_Cross wrote: not to mention that this is an old trick that bush is using to get reelected.

There you go. Propaganda!

At 2/19/03 05:15 PM, karasz wrote:

At 2/19/03 01:20 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote: Yes. This is the problem. But I plan on doing something...I don't know quite yet, though. Maybe I'll just end up being another 'politician'. But at least it'll be the acheivement of my dreams.

well hey, gimme a call if u want to run...

Haha, I'll keep you in mind!

At 2/19/03 06:34 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: Seriously, you anti-war people never know what you're talking about.

I'll agree on this case. I can't vouch for this guy.

Well, you have one sympathizer on your side. Legal homicide isn't the best thing in the world. I don't know why people think soldiers take such pride in it. Just look at what happened to some of the people in WWII and Vietnam. They're scarred.

being gay is unnatural, changeable, and tramples the ethics and moral values of many people.

People must learn to tolerate the sexual orientations of others before the world can move on and continue to grow as a whole. People who view homosexuals as 'less' or 'not worth tolerating' stand against everything America and equality stand for.

At 2/19/03 03:40 PM, Ted_Easton wrote: Except that he isn't really fighting for peace.

In his eyes, he's fighting for peace and righteousness. He's just going about it the wrong way.

Personally, I believe soldiers have gotten the bad end of the publicity because of war. My grandfather was a soldier chosen for his IQ, not his combat skills. He was for the war he was serving in, but that doesn't change it. Soldiers aren't mindless killing machines.

At 2/19/03 07:46 AM, TheEvilOne wrote: Allow medical personnel to use the new discovery, but punish the group that made it. How simple can it get?

This is the simple answer. Sadly, morals of people in government positions prevent the simple from ever going through just as that. It's debated and sanctioned and watered-down until there's nothing left but useless trash.

At 2/19/03 10:02 AM, NEMESiSZ wrote: A weblog

They're for angst ridden anime fangirls, and apparently whoever this dude is.

People who want their secrets to not be secret. Angst indeed.

At 2/19/03 07:06 AM, mysecondstar wrote: i think the only bump in the road we'll see in this whole war is when the US hits baghdad. and even then i doubt it should be too hard to take. i think that iraq will fold as quickly as it did in 1991 on the outer stretches of the country but the US will have quite a time taking the capital. we just aren't prepared enough for urban warfare of this kind of magnitude.

I'll side with this scenario. Baghdad is going to be a sore in the side of the military.

Welcome to Indiana, battleground of SBC. Our televisions are washed in propaganda from both sides of the battleground, yet I've chosen to side with SBC. I don't have much reasoning, as from the research I've done, both companies will basically be vying for monopoly power. Just...SBC. I have better fights to wage.