Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Because America is unique and is suppose to be different from the rest of the world. Same thing goes with soccer/football.

Sounds awesome but what happens if it stops working in the middle of teleporting?

At 4/16/10 03:52 PM, Thundarius wrote: What can change the nature of a man?

It's from a game.

What can change the nature of a man?

Ehthiest

OP, why the hate on Mexican?

At 1/31/10 12:38 AM, TDwizBang wrote: to answer some questions...

after WW2 the Republic of China (ROC) received Taiwan as war spoils from japan...

Correction: Taiwan was a part of China until Japan defeated China in the First Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895). China just took back what was stolen from them.

What would be the incentive for people to breed if they have to give up their children to the government after birth? Organisms reproduce because they want to be able to pass down their genes. Inheritance is a way to improve your offspring's chances of survival. The concept of the "family" is a part of the human's natural survival instinct.

You claim that all children will be kept artificially equal (financially) and be given equal resources at the time of their birth. How old should they be before they are sent out to battle it out in your "capitalistic society"?
Also, there is NO equality since the adults (older people) in the "capitalist" society would already be well-established, and the newcomers are placed at a disadvantage.

At 6/4/08 01:57 PM, ILovezoms wrote: Why do we live in a two party system... (in both England and America) in America its the democrats and the rebublicians England its the Labour party and the consevertives
. How did we end up like this.

It's a combination of several factors. The media gives more coverage time to the two major parties than any third party. Voters seem to be less scrutinizing to the candidates' political choices and stances, and they seem to go with the candidate that they like, rather than one that is good for the job. It winds up being sort of like a popularity contest.

It takes a lot less work by watching tv and have pundits/news tell you who to vote for, usually based on what politicians say.

Also third parties don't have as many members, and they can't get the kind of funding that major parties get.

I heard this from a credible source: signs of badger activity was sighted on the day of 911. It's those damn Badgers! Digging the ground and blowing things up and making the foundation loose.

Waterlollies really deserved the win. Congrats to Adam Phillips!

Colbert does have a lot of influence on the younger voters (18-30s).

At 6/1/08 07:30 PM, Malachy wrote:

At 6/1/08 07:25 PM, HorseloverFrost wrote:

At 6/1/08 07:23 PM, alternativesolution wrote:

At 6/1/08 06:53 PM, Malachy wrote:

At 6/1/08 06:48 PM, Extremewookie wrote: Ignorant stooge

Illiterate fool

Ludicrous oaf

Unread dullard

Doody Head

Nutritious Broccoli

At 5/22/08 11:16 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote: Answer some of these questions, I can't force you to keep to the topic, but do me a favor and atleast try to answer 1 of them or more if you can, before responding to somone else. [especially since bashing ideas is 1 thing, contributing better ones is another]

1) Do you agree with the statement that all humans are created equal and why? [Yes or no and why]

No, that's a sugar-coated lie propagated by politicians (people who wants us to feel better). Some people are born with better eyesight, some are taller, some are born into wealthier families, etc...
That doesn't mean that they shouldn't be treated equally, to a certain extent.

2) What is your conscious reasoning for doing acts of altruism?

Doing something simple to help people is a part of my upbringing. Appreciation can be rewarding.

3) Do you beleive Altruism is or can be a subconscious act? if it is, what makes it treated as so 'venerable' in our society? Can you make a case for why it should still be venerable in our society even if you feel that it is or can be subconscious?

It can be subconscious, especially we have been indoctrinated since childhood to be "good citizens".
It is "venerable" because acts of altruism is beneficial to the society as a whole. Back in day, teamwork is very important in the survival of the tribe, and this altruism plays an important role in it. If members in society take the "everyman for himself" policy to the extreme, there wouldn't be a functioning society.

4) Would you do something beneficial to yourself and consequently harmful to somone else if you knew that you wouldn't get caught or punished for it?

It depends on the degree of pros and cons.

5) Would you kill a murderer if you felt doing so would save more lives? [Spur of the moment descision, a now or never sort of thing]

I can see where you're coming from. You are asking a question that deals with a dilemma. And the earlier questions about altruism are set up as contradictions. Again, this question is abstract, and I can't give a specific answer to an abstract question. Who are we killing here (a murderer?), and whose lives and how many are we talking about?

@ ThePretender:
If we let natural selection run its course, then old people, mentally-disabled people, physically-disabled people, fat-people should be "dealt with" too, no? Because they are sucking up resources? Where do we draw the line? What you are suggesting sounds like eugenics.

PS. I'm not against abortion, btw.

At 5/16/08 12:58 AM, Coronus42 wrote:

At 5/16/08 12:50 AM, Jesse-Ray wrote:

At 5/16/08 12:48 AM, SirBackBoobs wrote: Fixed. I forgot about mules and such.

Right you are, some other examples include Ligers (SPECIAL POWER MAGICK), Wolphins

You forgot Cabbits.

Cow and Rabbit? Wonder if it will taste like beef or rabbit, or ending up tasting like chicken, like everything else?