thejediknighthusezni

      In the new Trek universe, an expo drop about the red matter black hole showing up more than 9 months before the birth and the Kelvin being sent out on a long journey would explain the differences in appearance.

       It's a broad and fuzzy line between trying to understand what the market is doing and conspiring to set prices.

       If the Obama/Holder JD is going after them, it is entirely hyperpolitical.

       Gotta love the spectacle of the Bamster Gang going after anyone else for conspiracy.

       This is not to say that every single person involved was "innocent" of "violating" every single provision in the overly broad legal code. It only means that economic fascism will be turned up to the max for remainder of the Dear Leader's rule. 

        If they are going after them, I wonder how they crossed our Lord and Master.

       For outfits that pay a solid middle class wage, my attitude is to let the market forces sort it out to the furthest reasonable extent.

     EDGE OF TOMORROW

     Great sci-fi. Great job all around. I'm glad the movie made back it's money, unlike other deserving sci-fi entries. It deserved to make much more. 

     Not so much wrong as just a little "huh?"

     There was no explaination for Ben and Yoda being in hiding rather than helping the rebs.

     Maybe a quick expo drop about their power would be sensed if they came out and were active.. Exposing the rebels.

TheBoost said:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/06/11/oklahoma_tea_party_candidate_scott_esk_supports_stoning_gay_people_to_death.html

Finally, some honesty from a politician. 

(for the record, not agreeing, but it's nice to hear them come out and say it, not just imply it)

        Well, a RADICAL HATE-MONGERING rag says he wants that in spite of his claiming "he doesn't remember" (as the rag put it).

        That's good enough for me. Obviously, homosexuals must do EVEN MORE to destroy everything normal people value in life. Their children must be raped and defiled and have their sexuality destroyed in front of the faces of these evil and vile normies. They must be made to choke and call it wonderfull "progress" as their lives are crushed and they SUFFER AND DIE!!!!!!

       The herd needs it's culling anyway. How will the homosexuals be galvinized to do the job without pretending to believe that there is an epidemic of horrible violence against them?

      Actual severe violence for no other reason than hate for an innocent homosexual is more rare than man-bites-dog. This is why things like the Wyoming attack become national news. It turns out it was about drugs. The normies must NEVER be mindful that TENS OF MILLIONS of children and confused teens(regressed children) are violently crushed while the hate-mongering media desperately scours a nation of 300 million to find just one case that can be twisted into "only because the innocent dear was gay".

     Do you know how many of the rapes of females are commited by males who had their sexuality destroyed by homosexaul predators? There's an epedemic!

     It's the only way. Our elite masters must have their utterly depraved shock troops.

     Probably the wrong thread, but....

     I have insisted on believing the Iraq war must have happened because it is the only practical way into Iran. Iran will never voluntarily give up their nuke program and it will be for too easy for them to plant phoney  stories about loose nukes from the old Soviet Union, Pakistan, or North Korea and then give the devices to terrorists.

    This seemed to be the broad consensus among conservatives who payed attention to foreign affairs.

     The idea that Bush and Cheney would plunge us into that for any other primary reason seemed FAR too insane and evil to accept.

     After seeing what the bushies are willing to do to give Jebby a slight chance of taking a joy-ride in AF1, I'm becoming ready to believe about anything concerning those jackals.

twister111 said:

darth_ender said: I can see the argument to be made for an embryo not being a child (though I don't agree), but I don't see the sperm comparison as valid. Left to its own devices, a sperm will never develop, never survive independently, never make it past a single cell, is not even genetically human as it is lacking half its chromosomes. Once fused with an ovum, suddenly it multiplies, has the potential to grow into a 100 year-old man or woman, as long as health or the influence of others don't hinder it. It requires life-saving reliance on another human for a time, but it is still genetically a unique human, growing, ultimately with the likelihood of survival on its own.

See this is why it's so hard to have this conversation and why I didn't want to go here in the first place. Not three exchanges in and it's so bent over backwards to mean whatever you want it to mean. You use emotional terms to define "person" when talking about a fetus. Drunk driving, slavery, braindead individuals you bring up in analogies. Then when it's a sperm you get all technical. You forego emotional bonds and focus on chromosomes, cell count, and viability of further life independent of another human. Suddenly the potential life it could lead, if preserved, means nothing and it's all about whether or not it could survive and grow on it's own.

Course in the next comparison you mention a fetus would need "life-saving reliance on another human for a time" as though you didn't just dismiss that as a qualification of "personhood" for a sperm. The argument's already turned so upside down to mean whatever you want.

darth_ender said:Thanks for the summaries and for catching my poor phrasing. I'd meant originally to say, If I am not only the only....but I am also the reason," but clearly forgot how I was originally writing my sentence by the time I got to that point. I edited it, but as "If I am the only...and I am the reason," as it's probably less likely to get confused that way by future readers. Thanks for pointing that out :)

No problem.

darth_ender said:I see. It seems still over the top. Maybe to improve it, the organ loaned would not be so critical as the heart (which unlike the uterus [which is designed exclusively for pregnancy, btw, and therefore is fulfilling its design, while a heart transplant does not], is absolutely essential for human life to continue).

So, what about if the woman in question was born with some genetic illness or born premature? Like it was only through massive medical intervention that she even survived to the point in which she could decide to get an abortion. Would you then be okay with her gaining infinite abortion rights because her initial design was to die when she was a little girl?

darth_ender said:Perhaps a kidney would be best. A person can live without it, but the potential for death from the surgery or future loss of the other kidney probably better matches the risk. And in a finite period of time, the person would get the kidney back.

I know, it seems like splitting hairs, but while we're on the topic of refining analogies, let's get them right ;)

RicOlie_2 said:

Yes, the kidney analogy is far more appropriate.

Twister, you exaggerate the risk involved in pregnancy by a hundredfold, and you are forgetting that both ender and I share the belief that abortion is justified in cases where the mother's life is in danger.

Your concerns about C-Section are exaggerated as well, as the procedure carries less risk than you seem to imply. That's how I was born, and my mother had six kids after me, and I know other women who have had C-Sections.

You also ignore the risk of abortion, and in your analogies, don't portray that option as having side-effects. Some women, who have had abortions are not incapable of having children, because their uterus was damaged in the operation. Not to mention the emotional and psychological effects it can have, and the loss of a life and a person (not that you consider it a person, but it at least has the potential to become a happy, intelligent, and productive human being.

Comparing the act of sex to uncaring just want fun drunken car rides is already a huge exaggeration in and of itself. I mean unless that's only meant to apply to a person knowingly cheating on a spouse with someone who knows that person's cheating and they intend to bring a life threatening STD back to their faithful spouse and the person in the know has that and knows it.

Anyways the choice of organ hardly matters at this point. I just didn't want the risks of pregnancy to be entirely ignored.

I'm not ignoring the risks involved with abortion but that would be her choice to deal with. The analogies were already getting hard to follow anyways.

darth_ender said:

Remember that even post-birth children still require the physical, emotional, and monetary resources of their caregivers for survival. My children take a toll on my health and billfold. But I don't think I'd get away with aborting them at this point it their lives. As unique individuals of my creation, I am now responsible for their survival, regardless of the fact that I am less healthy than I would be if I didn't have them.

First let me say it's fantastic that you want to take care of your children. Unfortunately you unwittingly help my side of the argument by mentioning this. Many guys just walk out on their children or never know they exist and it was just a one night stand to them. In many ways guys get choice by default. Even if a woman gives the kid up for adoption she'd still be forced to go through the 9 months of pregnancy if the choice of abortion was denied to her. For guys the "consequence" of kids could potentially be absolutely nothing. Well nothing but feeling good for a time of course. Only good decent honorable Men try to be good fathers to their children, try to be good husbands, and do right by them. It's a respectable and wonderful choice but it remains a choice.

Though that "less healthy" thing is debatable as it's just as likely that you're more healthy with kids than without. There's not some certain definable physical toll that being a father takes. Can't exactly measure it with c-section scars, stitches, or blood loss the way just giving birth can be.

      I'll have a try for an analogy that can be followed.

      Suppose that a teenage girl, out of sheer criminal irresponsiblity, decides to jack a car for a joy-ride. Unbeknownst to the little ditz, someone's little one year-old baby is in the back seat. To escape the cops, she decides to drive deep into a national park and runs out of gas.

      It's freezing cold, no water or food, no telling how many hours or days until help comes by. She discovers the sleeping baby.

      If she doesn't carry the baby next to her warm body several miles to where they can be found, the baby will freeze and die. But this is extremely inconvenient. There is even a slightly increased risk of great harm or death for the car-jackette.

     Fortunately, the rad-femmes and their enlightened backers know exactly what to do.

     Just chuck that little wad of meaningless proto-plasm into a ravine and forget about it.

TV's Frink said:

SilverWook said:

Why are straight cut toenail clippers so darn hard to find? I feel ridiculous running all over town just to find such a mundane item.

 Why do some people insist on clipping their nails at work?  Do the clippers not work in a residential zone?

      Yeah. Why do some people insist upon making a public spectacle out of some things that obviously belong in the private chambers?

      And if you DARE to express the preference for keeping such things private, YOU become the evil intolerant monster. YOU deserve to SUFFER AND DIE for your lack of sensitivity.

      Meanwhile, public toenail clipping fetishists can get into the faces of other people's children to recruit them into their public clipping circles, they viciously demonize and destroy the lives of anyone revealed to be less than enthusiastic, and yet they are the ultimate examples of sensitivity, tolerance, and understanding.

     ^He said he didn't endorse these views. He only posted them for consideration.

       Hmmmmm, I wonder what the going rate is for the purchase of a minor party hack? A little something that is infalmmatory and fits the lefty dominated media narrative? What carrots and sticks?

       Of course, it would all be justified. The champions of the same lefty crowd that slaughtered more than a hundred million directly, hundreds of milions more through cruel depravations, enslavement and cruel abuse of still hundreds of millions more, they do this kind of thing in the service of the latest gang of well-meaning "agrarian reformers".

     Bumpy foreheads aren't enough for exemption.

        There's sort of a WATCHMEN theme going there. So it is kinda-proper. :P

Bingowings said:

thejediknighthusezni said:

      ^ So then, when you are sound asleep or passed out drunk, you're cool with having anyone who finds you inconvenient tear you to shreds instead of waiting whatever period of time is necessarry for you to awake and display these qualities of personhood?

         Dude, I sure wouldn't let the gang pushing the global warming fraud and Agenda 21 hear you say that! 

There is a difference between a sleeping person and an non-existent one and I never said I was 'cool' about abortion either.

In debates like these people (a fetus and a baby can't do this) wave silly little flags like 'person' and 'human rights' around. Where is the personhood of the more developed and aware animal? Where are the human rights for pigs?

People are aborted every day in hospitals. When the old are the uncommunicative are left without food or water to 'pass away" and yet the calls against these actions are tiny compared to the abortion issue because babies are cute and old and disabled people are probably even more inconvenient than an unwanted pregnancy.

People who will defend the rights of a fetus while munching on a close cousin are a maze of contradictions.

         Many differences. A two month old developing person has far more human potential than a passed-out 50 year-old.

         Our elite masters love this business of comparing and equating people with base animals. They love the suggetions of close relationship and spread that word.

        Why would the same jackals who have their fingers on civilization's kill-switch and The Button be so obsessed with with ensuring that people stop viewing each-other as special creations of God? Why relentlessly push the view that your neighbor is nothing but a brute animal?

         The tools of these enlightened ones need not worry. Their overlords will ALWAYS think that they are special. Why, they would cry themselves to sleep over the loss of any one of their goons, even after the culling and the betrayers of everyone they were supposed to care for are no longer indispensible. They'll order their foreign "peace-keeper" army to turn over all the better stuff to their pet non-vital lackeys. :)

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

And I still don't know what "True Law" is.

        The physical constants that keep us from flying away or bursting into photons, Natural Rights, positive principles... everything embedded in the universe since the beginning that leads to the most pleasant human existance.

       Totalitarians, anarchists, "progressives", libertines... these are excellent reverse-weathervanes with the arrows in the tails. Find out what they want and then turn 180 degrees to find True Law. They might find some depraved titallation along their path, but, ultimately, it's catastrophe for the rest.

       I've read studies by sociologists and cultural anthropologists. They were looking for the different essential rules by which various cultures all over the world hope to govern themselves. They found The Ten Commandments (plus or minus sabbath keeping and honoring only one God.)

      There is a single universal code of Law applicable to all humans.

     ^ ^Um...Most all observant Christians strongly support contraception. This includes most all Catholics. It's just a few ultraconservatives egged on by Jesuit dominated clergy (seeking to create social and political HAVOC in their host countries) who are a problem.

         And there is a TREMENDOUS demand for healthy babies in adoption.

      ^ So then, when you are sound asleep or passed out drunk, you're cool with having anyone who finds you inconvenient tear you to shreds instead of waiting whatever period of time is necessarry for you to awake and display these qualities of personhood?

         Dude, I sure wouldn't let the gang pushing the global warming fraud and Agenda 21 hear you say that! 

        Well, His Grandios Jesuiticalness has let fly another spark of his enlightenment into our dark world.

        He wants to "leave the door open" for priestly celebacy because opening the doors of children is really a Mass for the Lord of Enlightenment.

        Yep, I just can't get enough of Franny's door metaphors.

DuracellEnergizer said:

thejediknighthusezni said:

      I look to designed nature and inspired scripture for guidance. 40 is a number associated with trial and developement towards a higher state. 40 days to a being with clearly definable features of a person, 40 weeks of gestation, 40 years of fertility. It is said that "ensoulment" comes at 40 days.

     I have great doubts as to whether God is just. But if the creator has even the barest concept of human justice, we are in UNIMAGINABLE trouble.

You doubt God is just, yet you continue to worship Him?

 

      I have grave doubts concerning God's devotion to human concepts of justice. 

     A Being so trancendant and/or utterly different might have an entirely different concept of "justice" or no interest at all in being just.

     And who said I worship God?

     I am quite certain of the existence of God. I have no choice after witnessing so much unlikelyhood in the design of nature.

     I greatly fear God.

     I don't pretend to comprehend God or God's motivations well enough to engage in anything I'd call worship.

     As it stands, I don't like God.

     I am happy to worship the True Law embedded in the universe from the begining. Everything that makes possible and leads to the optimum human existance. It's Trancendant, Immutable, True... Even if an intelligent Creator didn't exist, The Law does, and It would be the only thing worthy of worship. 

         Hey, I'm not the one who dedicated the great "progressive bible" to Lucifer.

         It's a question of direction.

         Islamists, Social Democrats, "democratic" Communists... they all start at the same place. Economic Fascism. The government provides much and must have ever greater control over the fewer and fewer "private" enterprises.

         They tell you that the only choice is between left and right on the side of the cliff. You must never understand that the only real choice is up or down.

       Well, I don't believe in left and right. I believe in upwards toward True Law, or downwards toward ever greater tyrannical horror.

       Imagine a sheer cliff. Upwards is a plateau of pleasant green fields and fruit trees. Downwards is a roiling sea filled with vicious, repacious sharks. There is a left and right along the cliff face. Rightwards might be something like Iran. Fascism might be somewhere towards the middle. Communism to the left.

       Wherever we are on the cliff face, the issue is essentially the same. Do we go upwards or downwards. Lateral movement will only take us to a slightly different flavor of horrible tyranny.

      (It is true that you can have too much of a good thing and attempt to go higher than the plateau. This is the Libertarian error. It will lead to anarchy and chaos. We would arc over and slide down into the shark infested sea. Ayn Rand is the Immanuella Goldstein of the modern era. Like Marx, she was extremely good at diagnosing and denouncing the problem. It's no wonder the satanists have helped to promote her as the alternative side of the equation next to Fascism.) 

       But let's turn things 90 degrees to the orientation the satanists have been programming everyone to see. Central to satanist philosophy is that individuals must experience the full measure of evil in order to appreciate the "good". You have to bash your head hard into that brick wall in order to gain "the wisdom" of knowing what it is to not knock your head. They tell us we must have both and the sinister side must be more powerful than the right (it's no accident that the "Progressive" bible, Rules For Radicals, is dedicated to Satan.)

      Where "right" is in fact upwards, why not have two powerful wings that carry us up?

       Ayn Rand was right. Where's the compromise between food and poison?

      The focus of government should be upon sheilding the people from the evils of others and protecting the basic value of Life, Liberty(enslavement to True Law in order to escape enslavement by evil men), and property. This should always be done with the attitude of greatest reluctance and suspicion. It's far too easy to get it wrong.

     "Progressives" only know how to dive into things enthusiasticaly, head-first. They are the enlightened ones of vast intellectual and moral superiority. What could go wrong?

DuracellEnergizer said:

darth_ender said:

This world is overpopulated anyway
This world sucks and I don't want a child to be subject to the evils therein
...

Wow, those all sound like they boil down to convenience.

How do those "boil down to convenience"?

      Well, it is EXTREMELY convenient that the people who judge "overpopulated" and "too evil world" are the same ones who decide whether the child is too inconvenient for their lifestyle and/or socio-political interests.

      That said, I'll confess to having a great deal of sympathy for the idea that, if the world is most likely hurtling towards chaotic horror, the child is probably better-off escaping quickly and early.

      This doesn't reduce the evil and horror of infanticide by a scintilla, however. It only means that I am weak and culpable in the evils.

      I am also sympathetic to the idea that a 5 day-old clump of cells doesn't rise to the same level of a 4 month-old fetus.

      I look to designed nature and inspired scripture for guidance. 40 is a number associated with trial and developement towards a higher state. 40 days to a being with clearly definable features of a person, 40 weeks of gestation, 40 years of fertility. It is said that "ensoulment" comes at 40 days.

     I have great doubts as to whether God is just. But if the creator has even the barest concept of human justice, we are in UNIMAGINABLE trouble.

Bingowings said:

thejediknighthusezni said:

Bingowings said:

UKIP...it exists, people vote for it in large numbers and everybody seems to have forgotten the funny little comic Austrian that had the popular touch in Germany in the 30's.

      ^Far better applied to the Labour hacks and Stalin.

        There's a TIPPING POINT to EVERYTHING.  You alter it so far, and it's of a very different character. This is most especially true of "liberal" democracy.

        Just ladle on a little statism here, a little there...

        It's horrifyingly disappointing that the denizons of that isle that gave us Orwell are so willfully ignorant to the point of being ROCK STUPID.

 The Labour hacKs are THATCHERite these days.... of and Stalin is DEAD and never stood FOR election in the UK.

        Yeah, the WHOLE problem is that the lefties aren't totalitarian enough. That's the ticket. There just isn't enough ENGSOC.

        You all need to get a head start for when American constitutional government is gone and you can finally discover the full glories of leftism.

Bingowings said:

UKIP...it exists, people vote for it in large numbers and everybody seems to have forgotten the funny little comic Austrian that had the popular touch in Germany in the 30's.

      ^Far better applied to the Labour hacks and Stalin.

        There's a TIPPING POINT to EVERYTHING.  You alter it so far, and it's of a very different character. This is most especially true of "liberal" democracy.

        Just ladle on a little statism here, a little there...

        It's horrifyingly disappointing that the denizons of that isle that gave us Orwell are so willfully ignorant to the point of being ROCK STUPID.

TV's Frink said:

Oh good, the "people get abortions because their babies are inconvenient" argument.

      Actually, It was the "All these inconvenient humans are messing up my backyard, but it's okay, my pals and I are so vastly superior, we know how to cull the herd" argument.

    A twenty year-old who is sound asleep or passed out drunk doesn't display so many qualities of personhood. You have to wait a period of time for that.

    Unless they are inconvenient to you.

    These unconscious 20 year-olds will only wake up to promote global warming.

        Having reached an age when my birthdays don't evoke quite as much enthusiasm, I look to the birthdays of youths to rediscover the wonder.

        I shouldn't limit myself so. When you think about it, reaching GL's age is a great achievement in itself.

        HAPPY BELATED BIRTHDAY, GEORGE! :)