165 Forum Posts by "Matty233"
There's a girl in my school who is dyslexic, and I hate her. Now because she's dyslexic, but because she whines all the time about being dyslexic and she always has special treatment, even when it's not needed. But she can still play the clarinet moderatly well, so she's not totally helpless. All this to say, it doesn't matter whether you're dyslexic or not, you will adapt. But if you're going to whine and get special treatment for being dyslexic (treatment you don't even need) then you do have a serious problem. If youre going to judge people by whether they're dyslexic or not, then you are racist.
This has probably been touched so many times but it's fun to hear everyone's opinion again...
Well, people are saying that we have the ability to clone a human being. I am strongly, strongly against that idea. I am an agnostic, and my main question about cloning is: do clones have souls? Now I know this could fade off into a different thread about souls instead, but let me give you my opinion on life. As I said, I'm agnostic, which means that I do not follow a religion but I do believe there is something after death, which involves souls. Whether we reincarnate or go to heaven/hell, we would need a soul after our physical self dies to continue the journey beyond. But cloning, which is making an exact replica of a human being, would it have a soul, or would it just be an "empty shell" or so to speak? If a clone dies, what happens?
But this is not the real reason for this thread. I am posting this to ask you all the obvious question: is cloning wrong? I think it is, to copy another human being's genetic dna is to steal their identity. And who knows, the goverment may just weed out the weak people and clone the stronger people (yes, it sounds Nazi-ish). Or what if you cloned an army of assassins or something and decided to take over the world? But even if extreme cases do not happen, I still believe that cloning should be banned worldwide. I am glad to hear that Canada and the U.S. have banned human cloning in their countries, but there are countries out there who would be willing to fund for a cloning device. But would you like to have an exact duplicate of yourself? Would you be willing to give up your name and identity to create your duplicate?
At 9/1/04 03:53 AM, FatherVenom wrote:
If you have to validate your life by how your nation's athletes did in a few races/games, then you need to reevaluate your life.
You're right, I'll just go back to gloating about the War of 1812.
I'm just saying that seeing as we are the second biggest country in the world we'd be able to obtain more than 12 medals, shoudn't we?
At 8/30/04 10:57 PM, Rooster349 wrote:
Yeah, what proof do you have that Bill O'Reilly's goal is to teach children to hate other kids? Or to brainwash them into conservatives? It just sounds like he's writing a sort of chicken soup for the teenage soul, except with only his own stories and opinions.
I would hardly call it a Chicken Soup for the Soul, more of a Deathtrap Read for the Retarted. I'm sure John O'Rielly must have some strong points if you looked deep deep deep deep down, but writing a book for children (or teens, but aren't they all really children?) is pushing it. It looks to me like another underhanded trick by the conservatives...
Honestly, he's a Bush supporter, he's into himself and he's a bit of a blowhard, but he's actually far more moderate than people make him out to be.
So let me get this straight. He likes Bush, he's a conservative and he doesn't hate himself but you call him moderate?
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....
Oh man, that's funny....
At 9/1/04 03:10 AM, Camarohusky wrote:At 9/1/04 03:04 AM, BeFell wrote: That's because your government spends all it's money on cheap persrciption drugs for Americans.=PWhile our government spend its money on performance enhancing drugs for American athletes.
Nobody's buying drugs for anybody. Honestly, if you don't know what you're doing, shut up. But really, I just don't understand why Canada isn't complaining more about this. The rest of the world made us look like chumps. How can we be proud after a performance like that?
USA is 4 trillion dollars in debt, what's a couple million more in sports going to do?
Please... PLEASElet this thread die! It's been over a year now! If I have to listen to that faschist Eskimo_Joe one more time I'll put an axe through my computer!
At 8/31/04 08:07 PM, Quanze13 wrote: because killing is, well, wrong. It is bad to take another human live, and not even a good cause will justify it, let alone abortion.
But abortion is taking another human life, no matter how undevelloped it is. But don't get me wrong, if you wake up to a girl in the morning with a hangover and she tells you she's pregnant a month later and you're still in university, sometimes the extreme case must be done. But there used to be Olympic athletes that got pregnant before the olympics (so they were 1-2 months pregnant during the olympics) which put thier bodies in naturally better form with the pre-birth hormones and all, and they couldn't get busted for it, because it wasn't a drug. Then after, they'd get an abortion. Now that's just wrong. But going back to the main topic, those extremists could have done something a little less extreme, although you do have to admire their courage and faith in what they believe in...
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm furious with the results of the Canadian olympic team. While the US managed to obtain a whopping 103 medals, Canada got 12, which places them in a tie for 19th country overall. That's right, Bulgaria and Canada got the same number of medals. I think that the Canadian goverment needs to fund our athletes more, because this is just depressing...
Do you really think you can eliminate all the terrorists in the WORLD??? You're talking the perfect world here, with no crime. It can't happen. But if you just mean Bush's war on terrorism, who knows when Bush will stop destroying third-world countries. The only hope I can see will be if Kerry wins, then it'll be over sooner.
At 8/18/04 12:51 PM, Creedar wrote:
first of all, so you have no problem having all these people dieing and suffering over a drug that "might" stimulate the economy because its their fault?
I apologise if I didn't make my point that clear. I simply meant to say that if people choose to die off of smoking or alchohol consumption that it's their own choice and we can't change that.
Third I have no problem with alchol other then I dont and probably never weill drink it, this is because alcohol is not a second hand product in which others are affected, save for your own body, and in moderation could be safe, car accidents and deaths resulting from alcohol can be avoided if alcohol is used in moderation
The number of failed pregnancies because of mothers that drink alchohol is very high, and babies are humans too. And like you said, drunk driving.
Mcdonalds doesnt affect anyone but the ones who eat it. However any type of smoking can have negative effects on another person through second hand.
Please notice that second-hand smoke was not my main topic, McDonald's was a part of a list of things that are bad for you. You should consider reading posts before trying to act smart.
however cigarette companies and drug cartels that use blood money dont really think about harmful affects of cigaretts
all they think about is the money, which again makes me sick to my stomach.
Well with the power of the vote we should be able to do something about it then, shouldn't we? I hate smoking, smokers and second-hand smoke as much as anybody, but you'll find that marijuana does not have as many negative effects as tobacco, which brings me back to my first point. If pot is better than tobacco yet illegal while tobacco isn't, why not legalise pot or illeagalise cigarettes? Wouldn't that make sense?
Stop typing with capitals in fucked up places. It's annoying.
At 8/17/04 03:59 AM, BeFell wrote:
I hate to break it to you but it's a two party system, your opinion doesn't matter.
WRONG!!!!! The only reason it appears as a two party system is the fact that people want their vote to count so they hop on the bandwagon. People have to learn to vote for a minority goverment if that's where their opinions and political beliefs lie!
ONFG!!!!! Is it really Bush versus Kerry? Gee, I thought it was Mickey Mouse... I think this subject has been treated enough on this forum. Let's get ready to rumble indeed...
At 8/18/04 01:34 AM, Creedar wrote:
1. FIRST OF ALL 2nd HAnd SMOKING!
2. PEople affected BY second hand SMOKING (I KNOW, I HAD A DRUG DEALER FOR A ROOMATE AT COLLEGE)
3. brain damage
4. SHRUNKEN TESTICLES (thats right gentleman)
5.DEATH! DO U KNOW WHAT THAT IS!?! IT IS CALLED DEATH!
6. CANCER, And this ones not one of those wierd things like french fries!
7. go to A search engine and look up "NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF pot or any other DRUG THat would kill you AND or mess u up!
8. IF YOU WANT IT LEGALIZED FOR MEDICAL USES FINE YOU GET IT IN A BREATHER LIKE AN ASTHMA MEDICAL TREATEMENT DISPENCER! NOTHING MORE! however NO! I would not WAnt IT LEGALIZED for medical puposes for people WHO are dieing of the very same drug they are taking so therefore i would reccomend to all doctors to find something else that would take the pain away from dying, suffering people WHO ARE SUFFERING!
All that stuff applies to cigarettes also, but they're legal. Are you saying we should illegalise cigarettes? Marijuana is much better than alchohol, cigarettes, McDonald's and especially junk food. Marijuana does cause brain problems, but that's only if you go ballistic and smoke it like normal people drink water. So the answer is: legalise it, but in moderation. And of course some people will abuse the law, but they're the ones dying. It's their own fault.
50 000 nuclear weapons in the US and you want to ban assault rifles...
Shoot higher!
Are you just having an opinion because you heard "the idiots are taking over" or do you really know what you're talking about because right now you're sounding pretty ignorant.
At 8/17/04 09:08 PM, Proteas wrote: I don't have anything against him for saying what he did at the Golden Globes,
It was the Oscars that Moore made his speech at.
I just don't think that it was the correct time or place for him to give a speech about President Bush.
There is no law that prohibited him from speaking his mind during his speech. You just have to look at Moore's personnality. He's the kind of guy that would make public statements like that, didn't you know? Personally, I think that what Moore said was really just a slap in the face for Bush, because there were a lot of americans at the time (and still are) who hate him but don't do anything about it before Moore came along. And let's face it, if Bush can get the Dixie Chicks, who is safe?
When it comes to WMD's, I think North and South Korea pose a much greater threat than Iraq, but then again, they don't have oil. But we know for a fact South Korea has a nuke, and they hate the US. The only reason Iraq would have WMD's is because Bush Sr. was giving the WMD's to fight Iran. Now it's all coming back in our faces...
At 7/7/04 03:40 PM, mrpopenfresh wrote: Basic facts; Hartper is a right wing nut, Bloc doN't have nything else to do except preach for Québec, and NDP have no chance.
Which was a problem in the election. Martin actually gave a speech in Winnipeg where the said "I urge you to vote Liberal instead of NDP so that the Conservatives do not get a majority goverment." Sad thing is, I think some people listened to him. I appalls me that someone could be so arrogant. But the Liberal's time of reign is almost over, next election will probably be a (ugh!) conservative majority but they'll be out before term ends on a vote of no confidence. Then the NDP will have a mighty good chance, and so will the Green Party, which is nice because we so desperatly need some enviromentalists in Ottawa, enough to be heard.
At 7/14/04 03:36 AM, Dagodevas wrote:At 7/14/04 12:19 AM, Rzo wrote: Did your mam drop u on your fucking head or something!?Did my "mam" drop me? Um, I'm not sure. My "mom" may or may not have dropped me as an infant, but I'm unsure. If I had to take my best guess, I'd say no, she didn't because if I was dropped, I would have trouble using grammar and wouldn't be able to spell simple words like “mom” correctly.
Break iy up ladies. But seriously, don't conform to anyone's opinion, just read up on the link up there and make your own decision, and make sure not to let anyone else influence your choice.
Don't waste our time with your pointless excuses.
I'm here to make a complaint about the Winnipeg goverment. About a year ago, the Winnipeg arena lot went up for auction to the highest bidder, and one of the bids was for the world's largest indoor water park. It would have put Winnipeg on the map, right? Like Edmonton, what else does Edmonton have besides the mall? But our new mayor Sam Katz (former manager of our baseball team) decided against the water park and decided to make the neighbouring mall bigger (it's already the biggest mall in he city). But we have no indoor waterpark in Winnipeg, the biggest one is one slide at random hotels! The waterpark would have brought in so much business but my sister (she works for the goverment) told me that she heard the mayor saying that he was against the waterpark because right now he could get more money from the people from the mall than the waterpark, even though the waterpark would have definetly brought more long-term benifits. I find it unfair, and I was just wondering your opinions.
At 7/14/04 01:42 AM, Stresskillingme wrote:
and the Luis Reil (Red River) uprising.
He was Louis Riel, and he was the founder of Manitoba. His "uprising" created the sixth province of Canada. The Québec uprising was much more horrible, people were murdering just because they wanted their own country. It was pathetic, and the only time the riot squad and the canadian military was called out in full force, it could have erupted into a coup d'état. But that was a while ago, and most of the seperatists (they were all 45+ at the time of the riots, the leaders anyway) are mostly all dead, and the new generation wants nothing to do with separating, so there are no worries. Now all we have to worry about is how much Steven Harper's gonna screw over the french so bad there'll be another coup.
At 7/13/04 01:53 PM, Brahma wrote: French people I'm afraid shouldn't get land.
Why would you say that? The french are a very brave people. They were the first to form a resistance against the Germans in World War 2, yet the americans refused to help until they themselves got attacked. And the french helped found this continent, you know. The reason the Québecois are separating is that they feel their language has diminished so much in Canada that they don't feel a part of the country anymore. It's that simple.
At 7/7/04 12:48 AM, clichealias wrote: Now I'm all for freedom of expression and all that jazz... but this guys giving christians a bad name.
You have no idea about giving christians a bad name. Those people I like to call uber-christians, and they follow the bible so well it's almost satanic (ironic, no?). Here's an example. I went to a christian rock group a while back and they had a guest speaker there, a priest who got up on the podium and started yelling about how he had performed miracles and exorcisms in his lifetime, and that we should all follow him into a non-homosexual paradise, to use his EXACT words. Then after, the band began to play and everyone lifted their hands up in a nazi salute and started their little dance moves. I didn't see the rest, I actually ran out of that church as fast as I possibly could. There are people out there that are literally mental. But this is all beside the point. There's nothing wrong with being gay, just don't go around announcing it to the world cause that's a little retarted.
At 7/4/03 08:15 PM, Jiperly wrote:At 7/2/03 11:00 PM, Chaos_263 wrote: they can make a killer putine (spelling?)!Poutine(god i hate that crap)
How can you hate poutine?
At 7/2/03 11:32 PM, MikeFulp wrote: WE, the Americans, will supply you with all the weapons you need to throw off the Canadian threat. The Canadian government is ruthless and they don't treat their citizens well. Their human rights record are dismal compared to Combodia. We Americans stand by our Quebecan friends, when they say they want independance and freedom from Canadian tyranny!
I hope you're kidding when you said that, because if not you are a horrible, horrible fachist.
First off, I'm from Manitoba, the third most francophone province. Yes, I'm franco-manitobain and I went to a full-french high school, so I cna give you all a good reason why Quebec wants to separate from Canada. Canada is supposed to be a bilingual country, but if you go to a fast-food restaurant and order something in French outside of Quebec, you probably will not be understood. On commercial airplanes, about 90% of the service is only-english, you have to take a special flight to get on in french. But yet, after all that, people go to Quebec and complain because some people in Quebec don't speak english. I see no fainess in that. If Canada is so bilingual, then we should have bilingual services everywhere! French should be mandatory as a curricular subject, not so everyone can speak french impeccably but so that they can understand a bit of the language.If the goverment doesn't want to speak French they might as well rip up the constitution and write another one. But even so, Quebec separating is a little extreme.That would mean to get from the maritimes to Ontario you'd have to pass through another country, which is a big waste of time. Thing is, the Québecois spend too much time complaining and not enough time trying to resolve the problem. So we're all at fault really.
At 3/21/04 10:43 PM, InsaneWarlord wrote: About as hot as any other middle-aged woman out there. Still, I wish she'd won. She seems less radically right than Harper. He just gives me that feeling.
That feeling? Well go figure! This idiot and his promises are about as good as Mulrooney's! Ban gay marraiges? That bastard! (not gay, but for gay marriage) if he wants to run a country like that, send him to Iceland. Nobody cares about Iceland... VOTE NDP!
At 2/15/04 04:51 PM, EvilGovernmentAgent wrote:
So much for the sterotype of peaceful Canadians ardently opposed to violence and war........
Not all Canadians are as stupid as h-dawg over here.
