11,660 Forum Posts by "MortifiedPenguins"
At 5/9/06 03:27 PM, VirginLungs wrote:
Most of the shit your missing for me.
Your nickname ends with the letter:
F. It ends in Y
2) You have in insane urge to do_______:
A. Curling kicks ass.
3) What way are your socks?:
D. Normal I assume you mean ankle socks.
4) Right now you've _ shoes on:
D.
5) Your favourite kitchen utensil is a:
C. Knife kicks ass.
6) Your favourite place to shop for cloths is:
C. Call me a jock.
7) Descibe your hair do:
Natural
8) You drive a?:
E. You making fun of cycles.
9) Most said phrase is:
A.
10) You descibe yourself as__________:
A. Greco Roman Wrestling, Boxing and American Football.
At 5/9/06 03:31 PM, -Toast- wrote:At 5/9/06 03:26 PM, YankeeFli wrote:At 5/9/06 03:21 PM, -Toast- wrote:At 5/9/06 03:13 PM, YankeeFli wrote:At 5/9/06 03:08 PM, -Toast- wrote:At 5/9/06 03:00 PM, YankeeFli wrote:At 5/9/06 02:38 PM, -Toast- wrote:
I'm not extremely informed about when guns where developped, but how does it matter? Were romans more unhappy than we are now?
Your meaing Ancient Rome right.
Spell out our point more.
That's just silly, people who would want to eat yummy things don't HAVE to eat chocolate chips and DIE :P
What about Alchohol or Tobacco, there legal, according to you useless and they kill people.
What is the difference if both the criminal and the officer have a gun (and if the criminal is more skilled or has a better gun the officer can be killed) or none of them have guns?
Because most of the time Die Hard situations never happen and the police officer is better trained with firearms.
At 5/9/06 03:21 PM, -Toast- wrote:At 5/9/06 03:13 PM, YankeeFli wrote:At 5/9/06 03:08 PM, -Toast- wrote:At 5/9/06 03:00 PM, YankeeFli wrote:At 5/9/06 02:38 PM, -Toast- wrote:
3000 years ago is way too exaggerated, 300 years ago guns weren't developped enough for humans to use it very well.
Right thats why the Spanish invade Aztec Mexico in the 1500's with Matchlock Muskets.
There were Flintlock Muskets 300 years ago lass.
I never said there won't be guns one day, I was just saying it is quite useless for the human culture & civilization.
Yes, if that day ever comes when humans are no longer violent or greedy then guns will be useless.
Yes, except chocolate chips don't kill people...
They contribute to high obesity ratings which in effect kills the person.
Cars kill more people yearly then guns do, lets illegalize that. Same with Alchohol and Tobacco.
I never said that. What I was saying is that a police officer doesn't kill a hundred criminals every day.
But if the chance comes when his life is in danger, does not that gun come in handy.
At 5/9/06 03:10 PM, JoS wrote:At 5/9/06 02:53 PM, YankeeFli wrote:
Anthrax and tactical nuclear weapons for all!
Yeah because seriously, nuclear weapon and Anthrax really compare to a Glock.
Nice comparison Jos.
How, when we install laws of murder lets make sure that they include plants and animals too.
At 5/9/06 03:08 PM, -Toast- wrote:At 5/9/06 03:00 PM, YankeeFli wrote:At 5/9/06 02:38 PM, -Toast- wrote:
1) Other weapons can be used, humans managed to survive very well 300 years ago.
Hunting,
I think you mean 3000 years ago, because we had guns 300 years ago.
Self Defense,A gun as defence is not needed if there is no gun offense.
And there will always be guns. Do you realize how easy it is to make a gun.
That's quite useless.
So is video games, chocolatte chip cookies and soda but those are illegal.
They don't use guns so much. and as I said before, it can exist without being accessible to civils.
Your meaning that the military doesn't use weapons.
Right.
Please take your ideas over to Britian because in America, families live off hunting still.
At 5/9/06 03:00 PM, Proteas wrote:
I had to go to Casual Male (men's big and tall knockoff) to get some dress slacks today.
I go there all the time.
See I can't find 13 size shoes in regular department stores.
And sometimes I can't find shirts or pants that are long enough for me.
At 5/9/06 02:38 PM, -Toast- wrote:
Fine then, I can listen to other people's opinions, please tell me then: what are guns useful for if not prive humans from their lives?
Hunting, Self Defense,tinkering, showmanship, shooting ranges, police and military, collectors.
I'm taking a quote from south park here:
If your not a fan of the team, then get the hell out of the stadium.
Okay.
Good for you I guess.
People have a right to own and bear arms that is in our constitution.
That ammendment will not be changed any time soon, so get used to the idea that we will be keeping weapons.
And what would you do if they illegalized it. People already own guns, are you going to break into thier houses and search them for weapons.
You could say that we could illegalize the ammounation, making the weapon useless except that there is Canada and Mexico and a booming black market.
At 5/8/06 09:39 PM, -Michael- wrote:At 5/8/06 09:37 PM, Papa_Smuff wrote:At 5/8/06 09:13 PM, -Michael- wrote:
Don't listen to what the scientists say, you naive kid.
Seriously, you know that great winter that killed half the pilgrims off. It was just a coverup.
It was actually aids.
He's an illusionist. Do you actually think he's holding his breath, probally, probally not.
It's Harry Houdini like, all he needs is for us to believe that he is. All the other stuff he designed himself.
Now he may have trained his lungs to hold his breath for longer amounts of time but 9 minutes is impossible and inhuman.
At 5/8/06 08:31 PM, ASeriousDilemma wrote:At 5/8/06 08:28 PM, YankeeFli wrote:
Because that's what you just implied. This is not a board-room meeting. Bible-thumper.
Wait am I supposed to be insulted by that.
Because otherwise have fun with the whole non existance thing.
At 5/8/06 08:34 PM, Begoner wrote:
Simply put, genetic engineering is moral, legal, and oh-so logical.
To who, not every person in this world is supposed to be intelligent or atheletic.
Your simply implying that your own opinion that it's moral and logical.
But likewise it is still illegal.
At 5/8/06 08:27 PM, JackPhantasm wrote:At 5/8/06 08:26 PM, shake911 wrote:
And another intelligence point goes to the bible thumpers!
Hooray for overgeneralization and sterotypes from our friend JackPhantasm.
At 5/8/06 08:19 PM, Begoner wrote:
What does that have to do with anything? If you genetically engineer a human, you can change any gene to any allele, be it dominant or recessive. You do this for both paternal sets of genes, not just one.
Then that person is no longer a true person but a tinker toy. A construction built up from a scientific lab were the value of human life has been devalued to such a low level that death is nothing.
Or how about the fact that even with the HGP our intellingence on the whole genetic spectrum is extremely limited to what is know and that tampering and playing with a culture and race given benifits could have horrible effects.
Simply, genetic engineering is immoral, illegal, and illogical.
At 5/8/06 08:11 PM, Disarray_yarrasiD wrote:At 5/8/06 08:06 PM, KemCab wrote: By the way, God will pwn you.
if he exists he will because he is an asshole. I refuse to worship an asshole or anyone for that matter.
Yeah because the creation, promise land, sending down Christ for our sins and the chance for everlasting life is really assholish.
At 5/8/06 07:59 PM, Tomsan wrote:At 5/8/06 07:48 PM, Begoner wrote:
No YOU dont.. explain your comment.
First off you dumbass.
You just don't erase someone's genetic history.
Secondly, you understand homozygous and heterozygous genes right.
At 5/8/06 07:54 PM, BeFell wrote: Coencidentally it was a Mormon investor who made Las Vegas possible.
Like I said, Mormons are just little devil in disguise.
Or they watch Rosemary's Baby too much.
At 5/8/06 07:50 PM, -Ocelot- wrote:At 5/8/06 07:47 PM, YankeeFli wrote:
I simply cannot comment on such horrendous behaviour. You are against his argument, yet you disrespect God in such a way you do not even know.
Simply refering to the universal spirit that animates and bonds all living things would be giving credit to Jehova.
At 5/8/06 07:48 PM, Begoner wrote:
I think that genetic engineering should be allowed for all traits, not just to cure diseases, as long as the trait does not cause any undue amount of pain without any positive characteristics. If you want blonde hair, go for it.
First off, your logic in ealier abortion arguments illustrates that zygotes can't feel pain.
Likewsie Eugenics is used upon zygotes and the genetic equivalent, not living breathing humans.
That's not a bad thing. Who cares if we get rid of the stupid gene?
You know nothing about genes do you.
Don't base your argument on a 188-year-old fiction novel.
Why not. Does not the moral still stay the same. Doesn't the moral still show the dangers of playing god or tampering with something you don't understand.
So pretty much, according to your skewed and corrupted logic, there is no god.
Wow, maybe you should try sharing this to the scientific community because you know, they may like to hear.
We should really listen to this genius.
At 5/8/06 07:38 PM, Begoner wrote:Anyways, who do you think supplied Isreal with the Uranuim and Plutanuim.France. Here's a bit about Israel's nuclear program. They went to great lengths to keep it secret:
You seem to be forgetting the importance of the British.
Top secret British documents obtained by BBC Newsnight show that Britain made hundreds of secret shipments of restricted materials to Israel in the 1950s and 1960s. These included specialist chemicals for reprocessing and samples of fissile material - uranium 235 in 1959 and plutonium in 1966 - as well as highly enriched Lithium 6 which is used to boost atom bombs and fuel hydrogen bombs
At 5/8/06 07:31 PM, Begoner wrote:
You can never say that a person has a soul -- they don't. You can, however, judge if a person is human by whether they can theoretically produce fertile offspring with another human or have distinguishing human characteristics.
I'm bassically using a slippery slope argument for this. With the beginning of this what stops people from labeling, blonde hair as a genetic trait that shouldn't be around. What could be classified as a trait or a disease. What happens if we find a gene for violence or risk taking, should that also be classified as a disease of some sort that can be fixed.
Scientifically, Eugenics leads to the loss of genetic diversity, and the loss of different kinds of recessive traits.
Man shouldn't and can't play god in these types of matters. Frankestien clearly illustrates these types of things.
At 5/8/06 07:31 PM, LadyGrace wrote:At 5/8/06 07:23 PM, Gunter45 wrote:
You ahh such a whora!
Your all fucking jews that should go back to the cess pool thats called Las Vegas.
Plus Nomaaar is a frieken pussy.
At 5/8/06 07:22 PM, Begoner wrote:
It had the first nuclear program, but it was by no means secretive. Everyone knew the US was working on an atomic bomb.
For not being so secretive it took pretty damm long for Russia to keep up.
Anyways, who do you think supplied Isreal with the Uranuim and Plutanuim.
Us.
Who do you think shared Nuclear technology and ideas with Isreal.
Us.
At 5/8/06 07:02 PM, GSgt_Liberal wrote: Genetic engineering should be permitted only for legitimate medical purposes, particularly in the treatment of genetic disorders, such as trisomy 21, other trisomies and monosomies and genes that cause succeptibility to alzeheimers' (on chromosome 19)...
I don't believe in that though.
I'm all for the cure of diseases when there living.
This is playing witht he child itself. This is playing god.
At what level can you stop at and say that this person is still human or still has a soul.
At 5/8/06 06:58 PM, GSgt_Liberal wrote:At 5/8/06 05:41 PM, YankeeFli wrote:I paaaarrrked the caaarr in the daccked yaaaard.Naaaah. It's "I pahcked the kah at Hahbah Yahd.
Dude, no.
You add on to words like Car and Yard. You stress A more.
For words like docked or lock you stress the O as a A.
For examle...
Hey, how was the Sox game.
Oh wicked good. I paaaarked my caaaar down by the Public Gaaaardens. You.
Oh I parked near the South Daaack in Backbay.
At 5/8/06 06:44 PM, Tomsan wrote:At 5/8/06 06:13 PM, The_Crazy_Potato wrote:At 5/8/06 05:37 PM, YankeeFli wrote:
But why exactually not?? There is no god, so if you look on it that way the discussion is useless, and being able to do it is a course of nature itself.
To who, You.
Morality and Politics are too close related things.
You know I could start pulling quotes and lessons from Frankestien but I think we can all agree then when does a person change to a science experiment to a creature on one of these things.
At 5/8/06 06:24 PM, animedevil wrote: Like 2 hours ago she said "I only weight less than 101 pounds!"
My ass thats not true
Maybe in her bra.
