Quick takes 2

[Guest DragonflyKid]

1. ARE YOU INTERESTED IN THE ROBERT BLAKE CASE?

 

I was going to put "Do you think the coverage is going overboard" but felt it was too obvious a question.

 

There are people obsessed with celebrity and this story is getting tons of publicity, it's being speculated on constantly and being likened to the O.J. mess.

 

2. FOR OR AGAINST ABORTION, THE DEATH PENALTY AND EUTHANASIA?

 

Everyone has their own moral judgements and killing under certain circumstances may or may not be viewed as wrong.

 

Abortion: Being nonreligious I don't believe the soul to be anything more than a highly sophisticated function of the human body and certainly not a divine gift. The fetus is just organic matter with no feelings, relationships or attachments to life so it's death is irrelevant IMO. Life itself is abortive and has the potential for suffering, forcing a women who made a mistake and wants no part in pregnancy and parenthood to go through with it and have a child seems unreasonable to me.

 

Euthanasia: Some say dying when unneccessry when people care about you is selfish, but isn't forcing or encouraging someone to exist also selfish? To prolong someones anguishd existence just so one can put off their own anguishing sense of loss is self-serving. If someone want to die, especially if they are old and have lived a full life I say let them die. To many life may be sacred but it should be the individual's right to continue existing or not; if they are paralyzed, depressed, decripit,etc., I say nobody should stand in their way if they are clear minded and desire death.

 

The death penalty: Being an amoralist of sorts I was won't declare it wrong or right but ask does it deter serious criminal activity? The majority of the civilized world condemns capital punishment as being barbaric which in turn can causes conflict with the U.S. and issues like extradiction.

 

Is capital punishment hypocritical to those who say life is sacred? Is it even less humane to lock someone up in a cage for the rest of their lives?

 

3. ARE YOU PESSIMISTIC OR OPTIMISTC?

 

There seems to be growing instability in some parts of the world. Oil is a major component in the world's economy, the countries where oil is rich tend to be anti-westren. The ant-western sentiments in the mid-east foster extremists intent on destroying the westren way of life. As conflict with terrorist groups andthe countries that harbor them intensifies a larger conflict can ensue. China(The volatile Taiwan issue.), north Korea, and several mid-east countries already have shakey relationships with the U.S. and their allies so a World War 3 scenario with apocolyptic weapons isn't totally out of the realm of possibility.

 

Human overpopulation can have catastrophic consequences but little is done to alleviate the problem. The rapacious exploiting of finite natural resources, severe ecological imbalance, traffic conjestion, runaway urban sprawl, insufficient fresh water supplies, pollution, etc., are all manifestations of uncontrolled human population growth.

 

Will the human population continue to boom, and if so is it sustainable and can catastrphe be averted?

 

Technological advances have made man god-like, with all it's potential for good come thepotential for bad. echnology has made for improvements and simplifies areas of daily life but also made it more elaborate and complex. We have sophisticated modes of transportation but have smog, a dependancy of oil, etc. We have synthetic materials which promote convenience but we pillage and poison that which we depend on at the same time. The medical establishment has made for longer, healthier human lives while ignoring the overall healthiness of a stabiized human population more apt to live in harmony with the world and each other.

 

I'm a realist(Some would say pessimist) who sees future generations inheriting catastrophe. Long term sustainability is sacrificed for short term gain in the end something has to give.

 

Does the positives of technology outweigh the negatives? Can the technologies of the future repair the destruction of the past?

 

4. WHAT IS YOUR RELIGION OR PHILOSOPHY?

 

Deep down I think religion and philosophy seeks to answer, "Is life worth living," or seeks a way to transcend life's apparent deficiencies. Religions utilize the idea of an all-powerful  sustainer of value to escape man's smallness and accidental occurance in a vast universe. Philosophy attempts to be objective when concerning our place in a seemingly meaningless universe.

 

Do you believe in the religious portayals of God?

 

I believe delusion in some capacity is integral to human existence. People want so hard to believe in tangible purpose and value as a means to self-preservation. To fearlessly examine existence is to confront an emptiness, one can then be empowered by it's quasi-freedom or be overwhelmed by it's hopelessness and be left to extract reason from illusion.

 

I consider myself an existentialist if I consider myself anything at all. I don't see a cosmic purpose but see freedom in that and am able to make life what I want it to be even if that requires me to be somewhat delusional.

 

"If God does not exist, then everything is permitted"-Dostoevsky

[Guest cobainwasmurdered]

1. NO

2. I'm for all three

3. optimisticlly pessimistic

4. I don't have a religon, "anything that can go wrong will go wrong"

[Guest Vern Gagne]

1.No

2.Against Abortion(but since it will  occur it should probably be legal)

 For the Death Penalty in some cases but what I used to be

 Against Euthanasia

3.Pessimisitc

4.My religion is Chrisianity. I'm a catholic.

[Guest Some Guy]

1) No

2) I'm pro-abortion, pro-Death Penalty, anti-Euthanasia (mercy killing), and pro-assisted suicide (someone's choice to die rather than suffer)

3) opimictic, generally

4) Agnostic (I don't beleive in God, but I'm open to the possibility of there being one)

[Guest TheMikeSC]

<<<1. ARE YOU INTERESTED IN THE ROBERT BLAKE CASE?

 

I was going to put "Do you think the coverage is going overboard" but felt it was too obvious a question.

 

There are people obsessed with celebrity and this story is getting tons of publicity, it's being speculated on constantly and being likened to the O.J. mess. >>>

 

 

Is Blake really a celebrity nowadays? Does anybody remember "Baretta'/

 

 

<<<2. FOR OR AGAINST ABORTION, THE DEATH PENALTY AND EUTHANASIA?

 

Everyone has their own moral judgements and killing under certain circumstances may or may not be viewed as wrong.

 

Abortion: Being nonreligious I don't believe the soul to be anything more than a highly sophisticated function of the human body and certainly not a divine gift. The fetus is just organic matter with no feelings, relationships or attachments to life so it's death is irrelevant IMO. Life itself is abortive and has the potential for suffering, forcing a women who made a mistake and wants no part in pregnancy and parenthood to go through with it and have a child seems unreasonable to me.>>>

 

 

Unequivocably anti-abortion. The death of an innocent person should never be legal.

 

 

<<<Euthanasia: Some say dying when unneccessry when people care about you is selfish, but isn't forcing or encouraging someone to exist also selfish? To prolong someones anguishd existence just so one can put off their own anguishing sense of loss is self-serving. If someone want to die, especially if they are old and have lived a full life I say let them die. To many life may be sacred but it should be the individual's right to continue existing or not; if they are paralyzed, depressed, decripit,etc., I say nobody should stand in their way if they are clear minded and desire death.>>>

 

 

HOWEVER, a can of worms is opened up. Do you think the gov't wouldn't try to pressure the famly of a gravely ill person to go ahead and "let him go" to avoid the costs of taking care of him/her?

 

In the end, anything that lowers the sanctity of human life isn't a positive thing.

 

 

<<<The death penalty: Being an amoralist of sorts I was won't declare it wrong or right but ask does it deter serious criminal activity? The majority of the civilized world condemns capital punishment as being barbaric which in turn can causes conflict with the U.S. and issues like extradiction.>>>

 

 

The death penalty is a suitable punishment. Does it stop crime? Well, the dead criminal won't have a chance to kill again, so it stops that person.

 

The majority of the civilized world is much more racist, much more anti-Semitic, and far less intelligent than we. The opinion of idiotic, Jew-hating racists holds little water with me.

 

 

<<<Is capital punishment hypocritical to those who say life is sacred? Is it even less humane to lock someone up in a cage for the rest of their lives?>>>

 

 

The better question is why is killing an innocent child a respectable exercise of somebody's rights, but the killing of a guilty party convicted of a heinous crime is barbaric?

 

 

<<<3. ARE YOU PESSIMISTIC OR OPTIMISTIC?

 

There seems to be growing instability in some parts of the world. Oil is a major component in the world's economy, the countries where oil is rich tend to be anti-westren. The ant-western sentiments in the mid-east foster extremists intent on destroying the westren way of life. As conflict with terrorist groups andthe countries that harbor them intensifies a larger conflict can ensue. China(The volatile Taiwan issue.), north Korea, and several mid-east countries already have shakey relationships with the U.S. and their allies so a World War 3 scenario with apocolyptic weapons isn't totally out of the realm of possibility. >>>

 

 

The world is inept outside of us. I feel no concern about that.

 

 

<<<Human overpopulation can have catastrophic consequences but little is done to alleviate the problem. The rapacious exploiting of finite natural resources, severe ecological imbalance, traffic conjestion, runaway urban sprawl, insufficient fresh water supplies, pollution, etc., are all manifestations of uncontrolled human population growth.>>>

 

 

The hue and cry over overpopulation has been discredited time and time again. And, the countries who have a problem with "urban sprawl" are the ones with the low birth rates.

 

 

<<<Will the human population continue to boom, and if so is it sustainable and can catastrphe be averted?>>>

 

 

It is absolutely sustainable.

 

 

<<<Technological advances have made man god-like, with all it's potential for good come thepotential for bad. echnology has made for improvements and simplifies areas of daily life but also made it more elaborate and complex. We have sophisticated modes of transportation but have smog, a dependancy of oil, etc. We have synthetic materials which promote convenience but we pillage and poison that which we depend on at the same time. The medical establishment has made for longer, healthier human lives while ignoring the overall healthiness of a stabiized human population more apt to live in harmony with the world and each other.

 

I'm a realist(Some would say pessimist) who sees future generations inheriting catastrophe. Long term sustainability is sacrificed for short term gain in the end something has to give.>>>

 

 

I'm an optimist. Humanity consistently improves his/her station in life every generation.

 

 

<<<Does the positives of technology outweigh the negatives? Can the technologies of the future repair the destruction of the past?>>>

 

 

It already has.

 

 

<<<4. WHAT IS YOUR RELIGION OR PHILOSOPHY?

 

Deep down I think religion and philosophy seeks to answer, "Is life worth living," or seeks a way to transcend life's apparent deficiencies. Religions utilize the idea of an all-powerful  sustainer of value to escape man's smallness and accidental occurance in a vast universe. Philosophy attempts to be objective when concerning our place in a seemingly meaningless universe.

 

Do you believe in the religious portayals of God?>>>

 

 

Absolutely. The world is far too orderly to be the result of what, if atheists are to be believed, is an accident.

 

 

<<<I believe delusion in some capacity is integral to human existence. People want so hard to believe in tangible purpose and value as a means to self-preservation. To fearlessly examine existence is to confront an emptiness, one can then be empowered by it's quasi-freedom or be overwhelmed by it's hopelessness and be left to extract reason from illusion.

 

I consider myself an existentialist if I consider myself anything at all. I don't see a cosmic purpose but see freedom in that and am able to make life what I want it to be even if that requires me to be somewhat delusional. >>>

 

 

I'm a Christian (Methodist to be exact) and am a firm believer in a kind, loving God. He won't do harm upon you if you don't believe him--only if you do significant harm to others.

                  -=Mike

[Guest]

Unequivocably anti-abortion. The death of an innocent person should never be legal.

How marvellously naive. Say a 14 year-old girl is raped and beaten by her father and becomes pregnant. The father is sent to prison. Now, the "person" inside the girl's womb hasn't committed any crime, so I suppose you think she should be refused an abortion. And what if her life is put at risk by the pregnancy? What then, Mike? Still "never?"

For some reason, even if I hadn't seen your name, I think I would have been able to guess that your post was written by a male. It must be nice to know that you'll never have to confront a situation like this personally. How comforting, then, to sit on your high horse and yap about innocence and absolutes. Here's a newsflash, Mike: no one ever WANTS to have an abortion. It's an embarrassing, painful, and invasive surgical procedure. (Oh, and it costs money, too.) Women who have abortions generally don't have any other choice. It's a last resort. It's not like it's an alternative to the pill.

 

The death penalty is a suitable punishment. Does it stop crime? Well, the dead criminal won't have a chance to kill again, so it stops that person.

There's a bit more to this than the prevention of recidivism. There's also the question of executing the innocent. (And, in fact, a judge may be about to rule the death penalty unconstitutional on these grounds. CNN story)

You claim anything that reduces the sanctity of human life is ipso facto undesirable (and I agree). I put it to you that this claim is completely irreconcilable with supporting a system which has unjustly deprived innocent people (rather than foetuses) of their lives. What exactly is the problem with putting them in prison for life without parole? It costs less, and if we find out 20 years down the road that we made a mistake, we can at least let the guy go.

I'm not saying that there are no criminals who don't deserve death. I'm just saying that as long as we have to rely on an imperfect system, let's try to make it capable of correcting its mistakes. You can't correct killing an innocent. You can't correct imprisoning an innocent either, but at least you can stop doing it.

 

I'm a Christian (Methodist to be exact) and am a firm believer in a kind, loving God.

How nice. Next time you talk to him, ask him where he was on September 11th.

[Guest DrTom]

Quick answers:

 

1. Not at all.

2. I'm for abortion; I agree with the death penalty in principle but not in execution (no pun intended, honest); and I'm for euthenasia.

3. Pessimistic.  I'm a cynic; it comes with the territory.

4. Devout atheist.

[Guest]

I suppose I should give my answers too, since I attacked Mike's.

 

1) No.

2) No one's "for" abortion. I'm for the legalisation and protection of abortion. I'm against the death penalty. I'm for euthanasia despite the real and serious dangers Mike cited.

3) Optimist, in spite of myself.

4) Apathetic agnostic. If God is real, he's proved over countless centuries of blood and horror that he's either irrelevant, incompetent, evil, or all three. If he isn't, he isn't.

[Guest TheMikeSC]

<<<Quote  

Unequivocably anti-abortion. The death of an innocent person should never be legal.

 

How marvellously naive. Say a 14 year-old girl is raped and beaten by her father and becomes pregnant. The father is sent to prison. Now, the "person" inside the girl's womb hasn't committed any crime, so I suppose you think she should be refused an abortion. And what if her life is put at risk by the pregnancy? What then, Mike? Still "never?">>>

 

 

According to a study by the Alan Guttmacher Institute (a division of Planned Parenthood), you know how many abortions are performed for the reasons of incest, rape, or possible death/injury to the mother?

 

7%.

 

7% of all abortions.

 

Who, exactly, is being naive here?

 

 

<<<For some reason, even if I hadn't seen your name, I think I would have been able to guess that your post was written by a male.>>>

 

 

Irrelevant. I've never been raped.

 

I guess I have no right to say that rape is bad, huh?

 

 

<<<It must be nice to know that you'll never have to confront a situation like this personally.>>>

 

 

It's called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

 

Not exactly a bad thing.

 

 

<<<How comforting, then, to sit on your high horse and yap about innocence and absolutes.>>>

 

 

Yes, it is.

 

 

<<<Here's a newsflash, Mike: no one ever WANTS to have an abortion. It's an embarrassing, painful, and invasive surgical procedure. (Oh, and it costs money, too.) Women who have abortions generally don't have any other choice. It's a last resort. It's not like it's an alternative to the pill.>>>

 

 

Other reasons women had abortions, according to the survey (again, done by Planned Parenthood, not exactly a pro-life group):

 

Concern about how the baby would affect their lives: 16%

Not ready for the responsibility: 21%

Couldn't afford the child: 21%

Relationship problems: 12%

Not mature enough: 11%

Felt they had all the children they wanted: 8%

Other reasons: 4%

 

Yup, not a subsitute for the pill. No sir.

 

You know, if a woman doesn't want to have a child, she can ABSTAIN FROM SEX.

 

Is personal responsibility completely lost in society?

 

 

<<<Quote  

The death penalty is a suitable punishment. Does it stop crime? Well, the dead criminal won't have a chance to kill again, so it stops that person.

 

There's a bit more to this than the prevention of recidivism. There's also the question of executing the innocent. (And, in fact, a judge may be about to rule the death penalty unconstitutional on these grounds. CNN story)>>>

 

 

The judge has no ground to make the case. It's illegal in NY regardless last time I checked and unless the Supreme Court changes its mind (which, BTW, it won't), it'll remain legal.

 

I'm just amazed that people worry more about the possibility of killing an innocent inmate than the definite absolute of killing an innocent child.

 

Screwed up priorities in the world.

 

 

<<<You claim anything that reduces the sanctity of human life is ipso facto undesirable (and I agree). I put it to you that this claim is completely irreconcilable with supporting a system which has unjustly deprived innocent people (rather than foetuses) of their lives. What exactly is the problem with putting them in prison for life without parole?>>>

 

 

Possibility of escape. Needless lawsuits filed by criminals over ridiculous claims clogging up the legal system.

 

Heck, I'd love to see murderers killed in the exact same manner that they killed their victims.

 

 

<<<It costs less, and if we find out 20 years down the road that we made a mistake, we can at least let the guy go.>>>

 

 

And if a woman suddenly decides that maybe she does want the child after all after she has the abortion, she can fix that, huh?

 

 

<<<I'm not saying that there are no criminals who don't deserve death. I'm just saying that as long as we have to rely on an imperfect system, let's try to make it capable of correcting its mistakes. You can't correct killing an innocent. You can't correct imprisoning an innocent either, but at least you can stop doing it.>>>

 

 

And considering how few death row inmates are even close to being innocent, it's not even worthy of mention.

 

 

<<<Quote  

I'm a Christian (Methodist to be exact) and am a firm believer in a kind, loving God.

 

How nice. Next time you talk to him, ask him where he was on September 11th. >>>

 

 

God allows mankind to live without His interference but people, ultimately, will have to come to gripe with what they've done in their lives.

                  -=Mike

[Guest]

Irrelevant. I've never been raped.

I guess I have no right to say that rape is bad, huh?

I have no idea what you were trying to say here.

 

It's called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

Ditto.

 

Who, exactly, is being naive here?

The one who isn't taking that 7% into account, and the one who believes that any but the young and the poor would be affected by a ban on abortion. The rich would still do exactly as they pleased. You would victimise and ostracise only the most vulnerable, and give them no legal recourse in the case of malpractice or death. I'm hardly surprised by your boneheaded stance, though. Christianity as a religion has always persecuted youth and criminalised sex.

 

You know, if a woman doesn't want to have a child, she can ABSTAIN FROM SEX.

How old are you again? Y'know, Bush is a great president, but not everything he says is practical or sensible.

 

The judge has no ground to make the case.

He has 80 excellent grounds.

 

Possibility of escape. Needless lawsuits filed by criminals over ridiculous claims clogging up the legal system.

I suspect that a vanishingly small amount of people escape from maximum security prisons. If that isn't the fact, I'd say we have a much bigger problem on our hands than can be solved by pulling the switch more often.

As for the lawsuits, capital cases involve almost 5 times the cost and much more court time than non-capital cases. You want to clog up the legal system, try to put someone on Death Row. It's a much better way. But I suppose acknowledging the facts would dent your pompous, self-righteous worldview, and we can't have that, can we?

 

I'm just amazed that people worry more about the possibility of killing an innocent inmate than the definite absolute of killing an innocent child.

Hmm, last time I checked, we still didn't have any conclusive evidence to decide when a human life started. Do you know something the rest of us don't?

Maybe women who have a miscarriage should be prosecuted for involuntary manslaughter?

 

Heck, I'd love to see murderers killed in the exact same manner that they killed their victims.

Now you're simply ranting. That's not justice, that's revenge. You know what I'd love? I'd love to see people like you shipped off to Saudi Arabia, where the system of "justice" better matches your ideals.

 

And if a woman suddenly decides that maybe she does want the child after all after she has the abortion, she can fix that, huh?

Yep. It's called having sex again.

 

<<You can't correct imprisoning an innocent either, but at least you can stop doing it.>>>

And considering how few death row inmates are even close to being innocent, it's not even worthy of mention.

Better a thousand murderers go free than one innocent die. That is the principle on which United States law is founded. You want to tell me where it says "Sorry we screwed up and killed you, but it's one of the risks you take for living in America" in the legal code? Somewhere between "Liberty" and "justice for all?"

And, parenthetically, the racist, socially elitist bullshit implicit in your statement is revolting. "Oh well, even if they weren't guilty of that crime, I'm sure they'd committed others..." Well, of course they have, Mike! 78% of them are black, aren't they? Criminal ghetto scum! How dare they be poor!

Beautiful argument. Ever heard of presumption of innocence? Again, it seems you'd be happier in Saudi Arabia.

 

God allows mankind to live without His interference but people, ultimately, will have to come to gripe with what they've done in their lives.

Blah blah blah delusional bullshit blah blah blah it's our own fault blah blah blah more illogical lunatic self-flagellating crap blah blah blah

Funny, I think Jerry Falwell said approximately the same things after 9/11. So tell me, what exactly had the people in the Pentagon and the WTC done? They didn't really get a chance to come to grips with anything, did they? Not even handholds that wouldn't char the flesh from their hands, as I recall. Did you watch people jumping to their deaths hundreds of feet below rather than die in an inferno? I did. Do you think they were praying for God to save them? I do. Do you think God responded? If he did, I didn't see it. The blood would be there to prove that he didn't, only it was all covered up by the solid mountains of dust and concrete that crashed onto the pavement shortly thereafter.

It must be pleasant to have more blind faith than intelligence.

[Guest TheMikeSC]

<<<Quote  

Irrelevant. I've never been raped.

I guess I have no right to say that rape is bad, huh?

I have no idea what you were trying to say here.>>>

 

 

You were saying that because I'm a male, I can't really comment on abortion.

 

I was pointing out that I'm not likely to ever be raped, either---yet you have no problem with me condemning that.

 

Hey, I'm a white guy---am I allowed to say that slavery was bad?

 

I figure I'll go ahead and request your blessing on any opinions from hence forth.

 

 

<<<Quote  

It's called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

Ditto.>>>

 

 

And when the man has a child he doesn't want---women can go to court and force him to at least contribute financially.

 

When the man makes an irresponsible mistake, he has to pay for it.

 

 

<<<Quote  

Who, exactly, is being naive here?

The one who isn't taking that 7% into account, and the one who believes that any but the young and the poor would be affected by a ban on abortion.>>>

 

 

So, because a few "legitimate" abortions might be banned, let's just legalize all of them?

 

I don't think so.

 

The child is the innocent party here and the pro-abortion forces have become less rational than the most zealous pro-lifer in this regard.

 

"Require parental notification? ARE YOU NUTS? Why in the world should a teenage girl be expected to discuss this with her parents? They'll probably beat her or something"

 

"Partial birth abortion ban? Why, women might DIE if they can't do this procedure. Yeah, almost all of them are not done for any legitimate medical reason. No, you can't really save a life by bringing all of the baby but the head out of the birth canal and then sucking out the infant's brain---but hey, it's not a life.

 

Yeah, it LOOKS like a baby and the fingers are clutching and all---but no, it's not a life."

 

Possible death to the mother? Provide PROOF of this and I might support it. You can get a doctor to make any claim you want for the right price.

 

Rape? Also, provide proof. Do you think that if abortion was only legal for rape that we wouldn't see a monumental increase in women claiming rape?

 

 

<<<The rich would still do exactly as they pleased.>>>

 

 

Thus is the cruelty of life. The rich ALWAYS do what they want.

 

I'm just amazed that you equate abortion with, somehow, levelling the playing field here.

 

 

<<<You would victimise and ostracise only the most vulnerable, and give them no legal recourse in the case of malpractice or death.>>>

 

 

No legal recourse? Yeah, the abortionist wouldn't be TRIED AND SENT TO PRISON for that, would he?

 

Of course not.

 

 

<<<I'm hardly surprised by your boneheaded stance, though. Christianity as a religion has always persecuted youth and criminalised sex.>>>

 

 

Thank God your non-Christian beliefs prevent you from making incorrect blanket statements, huh?

 

Just checking---I'm supposed to be the overly judgmental one here, right?

 

 

<<<Quote  

You know, if a woman doesn't want to have a child, she can ABSTAIN FROM SEX.

 

<<<How old are you again? Y'know, Bush is a great president, but not everything he says is practical or sensible.>>>

 

 

Why isn't it practical or sensible? If you don't want a child, not having sex will go a long way in taking care of that problem.

 

Are women ALL uncontrollable sluts? Are women *gasp* no better than men?

 

Are you saying that YOU couldn't say "no" to any man you meet? Heck, I don't sleep with every woman I meet. Nor do I sleep around. When I become sexual with anybody, it's with somebody who I'm rather certain I could spend a lot of time with because, darn it, a child does need two parents in its life.

 

Must be a rough life you lead if you don't hold the men you're with up to any standard.

 

If a woman won't go through whatever loss of sexual gratification even though she is clearly incapable of handling the outcome, then I feel NO sympathy for her. It's no different than when a junkie dies from a drug overdose.

 

 

<<<Quote  

The judge has no ground to make the case.

He has 80 excellent grounds.>>>

 

 

He can try---won't go anywhere. The death penalty is legal and, thankfully, will remain that way.

 

 

<<<Quote  

Possibility of escape. Needless lawsuits filed by criminals over ridiculous claims clogging up the legal system.

I suspect that a vanishingly small amount of people escape from maximum security prisons. If that isn't the fact, I'd say we have a much bigger problem on our hands than can be solved by pulling the switch more often.>>>

 

 

Why keep them alive? Why maintain the POSSIBILITY of escape when you can eliminate it outright?

 

 

<<<As for the lawsuits, capital cases involve almost 5 times the cost and much more court time than non-capital cases. You want to clog up the legal system, try to put someone on Death Row. It's a much better way. But I suppose acknowledging the facts would dent your pompous, self-righteous worldview, and we can't have that, can we?>>>

 

 

I love that you insult me repeatedly here---but I am the pompous, self-righteous one.

 

Got it.

 

Love that atheistic sensibility of yours.

 

 

<<<Quote  

I'm just amazed that people worry more about the possibility of killing an innocent inmate than the definite absolute of killing an innocent child.

Hmm, last time I checked, we still didn't have any conclusive evidence to decide when a human life started. Do you know something the rest of us don't?>>>

 

 

Life begins at conception. Since we cannot pinpoint any time other than that when it begins, that will have to do.

 

 

<<<Maybe women who have a miscarriage should be prosecuted for involuntary manslaughter?>>>

 

 

Wow, you ARE irrational about this, aren't you?

 

Let me guess, you see nothing wrong with partial-birth abortion, do you?

 

 

<<<Quote  

Heck, I'd love to see murderers killed in the exact same manner that they killed their victims.

Now you're simply ranting. That's not justice, that's revenge.>>>

 

 

Yes, it is. I'm not looking for justice. I'm looking for these sub-humans to suffer the same fate they made their victims suffer.

 

Criminals, by and large, don't WANT rehabilitation---nor can they be rehabilitated.

 

 

<<<You know what I'd love? I'd love to see people like you shipped off to Saudi Arabia, where the system of "justice" better matches your ideals.>>>

 

 

I'd love to see you gain an inkling of what personal responsiblity is in this world, but alas, I doubt I'll see that, either.

 

 

<<<Quote  

And if a woman suddenly decides that maybe she does want the child after all after she has the abortion, she can fix that, huh?

Yep. It's called having sex again.>>>

 

 

Ah, the replacement of children.

 

Nice to see you hold innocent life to such lofty highs.

 

"No, don't kill that guy. Yeah, he killed a bunch of people but---no doctor, go ahead and suck that child out of me. Oh, relax, I can screw some guy next month and replace it. Anyway, as I was saying..."

 

 

<<<Quote  

<<You can't correct imprisoning an innocent either, but at least you can stop doing it.>>>

And considering how few death row inmates are even close to being innocent, it's not even worthy of mention.

 

Better a thousand murderers go free than one innocent die. That is the principle on which United States law is founded. You want to tell me where it says "Sorry we screwed up and killed you, but it's one of the risks you take for living in America" in the legal code? Somewhere between "Liberty" and "justice for all?">>>

 

 

Ever wonder why the appeals process for a death sentence is so long?

 

To take care of this problem as well as humanly possible.

 

 

<<<And, parenthetically, the racist, socially elitist bullshit implicit in your statement is revolting. "Oh well, even if they weren't guilty of that crime, I'm sure they'd committed others..." Well, of course they have, Mike!>>>

 

 

Ah, inventing racism in my posts. I guess if you have no point to make, attacking straw men is a good substitute.

 

I have touched a nerve.

 

Oh well.

 

 

<<<78% of them are black, aren't they? Criminal ghetto scum! How dare they be poor!>>>

 

 

You know, you seem to be projecting your beliefs upon me here. You're making claims I've never said nor implied in my posts.

 

These beliefs, though, must come from somewhere. Either you or me.

 

Don't blame ME because YOU have racist beliefs.

 

 

<<<Beautiful argument. Ever heard of presumption of innocence? Again, it seems you'd be happier in Saudi Arabia.>>>

 

 

Hmm, you seem to be the one who is inventing things and attempting to suppress opposing views.

 

Pot---meet kettle.

 

 

<<<Quote  

God allows mankind to live without His interference but people, ultimately, will have to come to gripe with what they've done in their lives.

Blah blah blah delusional bullshit blah blah blah it's our own fault blah blah blah more illogical lunatic self-flagellating crap blah blah blah>>>

 

 

Well, you showed me the error of my ways with that withering intellectual banter. Thanks.

 

 

<<<Funny, I think Jerry Falwell said approximately the same things after 9/11.>>>

 

 

Actually, he blamed homosexuals and liberals for inviting God's wrath, a claim both incorrect and blasphemous. His comments offended me greatly. God could care less if you're gay or not. He could care less if you vote Democratic or not. All He cares about is how you treat your fellow man. But, rather than attempt to understand my beliefs, you choose to lump me in Jerry Falwell.

 

Falwell is an idiot---but hey, we're both Christians so I MUST support him, right?

 

Got it.

 

 

<<<So tell me, what exactly had the people in the Pentagon and the WTC done?>>>

 

 

Did I say they did anything? They won't be punished. They will live in paradise for eternity (provided they had not committed some mortal sin that we're unaware of). The sub-humans who killed them, however, have an eternity of damnation to live with. That is a suitable punishment.

 

 

<<<They didn't really get a chance to come to grips with anything, did they? Not even handholds that wouldn't char the flesh from their hands, as I recall. Did you watch people jumping to their deaths hundreds of feet below rather than die in an inferno? I did.>>>

 

 

Yup, it was a tragedy.

 

 

<<<Do you think they were praying for God to save them? I do. Do you think God responded? If he did, I didn't see it.>>>

 

 

You won't see it until you die. Then you will. Be patient.

 

 

<<<The blood would be there to prove that he didn't, only it was all covered up by the solid mountains of dust and concrete that crashed onto the pavement shortly thereafter.

It must be pleasant to have more blind faith than intelligence.  >>>

 

 

God is a hand's off deity. He told mankind how he wants them to live, but allows them to live how they choose (that whole "free will" thing).

 

Mankind is free to harm others if they choose to. Their punishment will eventually come to them.

 

However, you are too irrational and disrespectful to understand that some people in the world think differently than you.

 

And for that, I deeply pity you.

                  -=Mike

[Guest]

No, I don't think you have the right to comment on abortion. I don't think it has been proved that human life begins at conception (although I won't deny that it might) and so I'm willing to go with the certainty of the woman's life and well-being in this matter.

(Incidentally, it's really easy for me to say "No" to men because I'm gay. But for straight women, saying that they should abstain from sex if they want to be safe - from pregnany, VD, or whatever - is ridiculous. You sound like the king of Swaziland.)

You still haven't addressed my serious and perfectly logical question about miscarriages. By your definition, it is the involuntary killing of a human being. What penalty do you propose for this crime?

 

By the way, I'm not "pro-abortion." I don't like abortion. I really don't like partial-birth abortion. But in the absence of conclusive proof I am willing to give the woman the benefit of doubt. Certain harm is being done to her.

I'm not being irrational here, Mike. You are. You're making groundless claims of knowledge when in fact no such knowledge exists.

 

Yeah, the abortionist wouldn't be TRIED AND SENT TO PRISON for that, would he?

So might his victim.

 

As for the death penalty - it's been ruled unconstitutional before, and I hope it will be again. You still haven't addressed the much higher costs, which practically bankrupt innumerable counties regularly and tie up courts for decades on end.

I'm not looking for justice. I'm looking for these sub-humans to suffer the same fate they made their victims suffer.

Thankfully, your barbarism is not part of US law. We hold ourselves to higher standards than murderers. We don't torture people, no matter what they've done. Even executions are designed to be as painless as possible, because inflicting unnecessary suffering is recognised by this country as cruel and unconscionable.

Criminals, by and large, don't WANT rehabilitation---nor can they be rehabilitated.

No, I agree. But that isn't the point of criminal justice. It's supposed to penalise, not reform. Rehabilitation is immoral. People have the right to make their own choices, and we have a duty to punish them if they make the wrong choices.

Why maintain the POSSIBILITY of escape when you can eliminate it outright?

It seems that the possibility of executing an innocent man is comparable to the possibility of escape. That should give anyone pause.

 

Anyway, if I unfairly ascribed racist beliefs to you, I'm sorry. But tell me exactly what the hell you meant by this, because it sure sounds hateful and presumptuous to me:

And considering how few death row inmates are even close to being innocent

 

Jerry Falwell said Americans deserved 9/11 because they'd turned away from God. You're saying we mortals just have to wait until they die for the terrorists to get what they deserve, and you're taking as the basis for this silly belief a book of myths based on the oral traditions of a bunch of desert nomads. Sorry, but promised divine justice doesn't do a damn thing for me. Osama bin Laden perpetrated an atrocity that makes me weep with sorrow, horror, and fury every time I see it. And God let it happen. I hold him equally responsible. If he exists I want his head on a fucking stick too.

Are my views disrespectful and irrational? That's just peachy. As my President said, I will not distinguish between terrorists and those who harbour them. That includes the "Almighty."

[Guest TheMikeSC]

No, I don't think you have the right to comment on abortion.>>>

 

 

Not a stickler for the 1st Amendment, are we?

 

 

<<<I don't think it has been proved that human life begins at conception (although I won't deny that it might) and so I'm willing to go with the certainty of the woman's life and well-being in this matter.>>>

 

 

And considering that a whopping 3% of all abortions are done for that reason, you seem awfully cavalier about killing babies. So be it.

 

 

<<<(Incidentally, it's really easy for me to say "No" to men because I'm gay. But for straight women, saying that they should abstain from sex if they want to be safe - from pregnany, VD, or whatever - is ridiculous. You sound like the king of Swaziland.)>>>

 

 

No, just a guy who can also say no when he chooses.

 

If a woman doesn't want a child---don't have sex.

 

 

<<<You still haven't addressed my serious and perfectly logical question about miscarriages.>>>

 

 

It's not a logical question. Women don't induce miscarriages and nobody knows how one can be induced perfectly every single time. It's like saying that masturbation is murder because a man wastes sperm.

 

 

<<<By your definition, it is the involuntary killing of a human being. What penalty do you propose for this crime?>>>

 

 

World of difference between a miscarriage (something the woman had precious little control over) and manslaughter.

 

 

<<<By the way, I'm not "pro-abortion." I don't like abortion. I really don't like partial-birth abortion. But in the absence of conclusive proof I am willing to give the woman the benefit of doubt. Certain harm is being done to her.

I'm not being irrational here, Mike. You are. You're making groundless claims of knowledge when in fact no such knowledge exists.>>>

 

 

Where are these groundless claims of knowledge I'm making?

 

 

<<<Quote  

Yeah, the abortionist wouldn't be TRIED AND SENT TO PRISON for that, would he?

So might his victim.>>>

 

 

If she was harmed by it, no prosecutor in America would try her.

 

 

<<<As for the death penalty - it's been ruled unconstitutional before, and I hope it will be again.>>>

 

 

See, I'd rather see abortion illegal because innocent people are killed in every single procedure.

 

 

<<<You still haven't addressed the much higher costs, which practically bankrupt innumerable counties regularly and tie up courts for decades on end.>>>

 

 

If the county can't afford the costs, then they can't have the death penalty. I'd assume you'd be all for that.

 

 

<<<Quote  

I'm not looking for justice. I'm looking for these sub-humans to suffer the same fate they made their victims suffer.

Thankfully, your barbarism is not part of US law. We hold ourselves to higher standards than murderers. We don't torture people, no matter what they've done. Even executions are designed to be as painless as possible, because inflicting unnecessary suffering is recognised by this country as cruel and unconscionable.>>>

 

 

My barbarism is righteous outrage.

 

 

<<<Quote  

Criminals, by and large, don't WANT rehabilitation---nor can they be rehabilitated.

No, I agree. But that isn't the point of criminal justice. It's supposed to penalise, not reform. Rehabilitation is immoral. People have the right to make their own choices, and we have a duty to punish them if they make the wrong choices.>>>

 

 

And making them suffer as they made their victims suffer is an exceptionally appropriate punishment.

 

 

<<<Quote  

Why maintain the POSSIBILITY of escape when you can eliminate it outright?

It seems that the possibility of executing an innocent man is comparable to the possibility of escape. That should give anyone pause.>>>

 

 

Yes, yes it is.

 

 

<<<Anyway, if I unfairly ascribed racist beliefs to you, I'm sorry. But tell me exactly what the hell you meant by this, because it sure sounds hateful and presumptuous to me:Quote  

And considering how few death row inmates are even close to being innocent >>>

 

 

There are thousands of people on death row.

 

How many have ANY claim to ANYTHING resembling the possibility of innocence? The VAST majority have cases so airtight that Marcia Clark couldn't have blown the prosecution. The rest have cases so airtight that Clark MIGHT have blown the prosecution.

 

The system works. Does it work perfectly? No---but nothing man does works perfectly. People on death row, in 99% of the cases, absolutely belong there. The remaining 1% MIGHT have doubt---but even ALL of them aren't innocent.

 

 

<<<Jerry Falwell said Americans deserved 9/11 because they'd turned away from God. You're saying we mortals just have to wait until they die for the terrorists to get what they deserve, and you're taking as the basis for this irrational belief a book of myths based on the oral traditions of a bunch of desert nomads.>>>

 

 

Yup. That's EXACTLY what I'm saying.

 

I also love that atheists refuse to acknowledge that Christian belief no longer believes the Bible to be the absolute, unquestioned truth but, rather, a collection of parables and tales to express what God desires.

 

It'd be like me condemning science because the earth was once felt to be flat.

 

 

<<<Sorry, but promised divine justice doesn't do a damn thing for me. Osama bin Laden perpetrated an atrocity that makes me weep with sorrow, horror, and fury every time I see it. And God let it happen. I hold him equally responsible. If he exists I want his head on a fucking stick too.>>>

 

 

Did YOU stop it? Did I stop it?

 

Using your logic, we're ALL responsible.

 

God is hands off. He gave Man free will to do with as Man sees fit. Man falls short of God's wishes constantly, but God is forgiving and will forgive those who seek it.

 

Personally, I wouldn't want a God who interfered constantly in my life.

 

 

<<<Are my views disrespectful and irrational? That's just peachy. Like my President said, I will not distinguish between terrorists and those who harbour them. That includes the "Almighty." >>>

 

 

I have friends who use drugs. Some of the drug money makes it to terrorists (though the TV ad campaign for this is horrible). Should I condemn my friends for aiding terrorists?

 

No, I simply try and get them to get off of the drugs.

                     -=Mike

[Guest]

<<<No, I don't think you have the right to comment on abortion.>>>

Not a stickler for the 1st Amendment, are we?

Oh, please. Save the whiny martyrdom for cfici or someone else who's dumb enough to be fooled by it. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." As far as I can see it doesn't say a damn thing about people on Internet message boards telling you that your arguments against abortion have zero credibility. I'm all for you expressing your opinion. Knock yourself out. But expect to be called on the carpet if you don't make sense.

 

Did YOU stop it? Did I stop it?

Using your logic, we're ALL responsible.

No, we'd all be equally responsible if we were all omnipotent. According to the Old Testament, God isn't hands-off at all. He saved Moses and his people from the Pharaoh. He destroyed entire cities. He caused a worldwide flood. He turned a woman into a pillar of salt. That's hands-off?

It's awfully hard for me to be religious when some people are never struck by lightning.

[Guest TheMikeSC]

<<<No, I don't think you have the right to comment on abortion.>>>

Not a stickler for the 1st Amendment, are we? >>>

 

 

<<<Oh, please. Save the whiny martyrdom for cfici or someone else who's dumb enough to be fooled by it. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." As far as I can see it doesn't say a damn thing about people on Internet message boards telling you that your arguments against abortion have zero credibility.>>>

 

 

Using your logic, only women can comment on issues involving women; only men can comment on issues involving men; so and so forth.

 

Do you fail to recognize that, sometimes, somebody can think rationally about an issue that doesn't directly affect them?

 

 

<<<I'm all for you expressing your opinion. Knock yourself out. But expect to be called on the carpet if you don't make sense.>>>

 

 

And I made perfect sense. You mistake disagreeing with not making sense.

 

Ultimately, not my problem.

 

 

<<<Quote  

Did YOU stop it? Did I stop it?

Using your logic, we're ALL responsible.

No, we'd all be equally responsible if we were all omnipotent. According to the Old Testament, God isn't hands-off at all. He saved Moses and his people from the Pharaoh. He destroyed entire cities. He caused a worldwide flood. He turned a woman into a pillar of salt. That's hands-off?>>>

 

 

According to the New Testament, he is more hands off.

 

The Old Testament is the basis for the Jewish faith.

 

The New Testament is the basis for the Christian faith.

                 

 

<<<It's awfully hard for me to be religious when some people are never struck by lightning. >>>

 

 

It's awfully hard for me to be atheistic when I see all of the beauty in the world.

 

But that's just me.

                 -=Mike

[Guest]

Fractals are beautiful. You don't need to postulate direction.

[Guest TheMikeSC]

Fractals are beautiful. You don't need to postulate direction. >>>

 

 

Sunsets are beautiful. The bounty of life on earth is beautiful.

 

A little much to assume that it's all a gigantic fluke.

           -=Mike

[Guest]

Y'know, it's funny. I studied physics, biology, and mathematical models fairly intensively in college, and I still never figured out quite how to respond to bland assertions of blissful ignorance.

Whatever blows your skirt up, I guess.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

"Y'know, it's funny. I studied physics, biology, and mathematical models fairly intensively in college, and I still never figured out quite how to respond to bland assertions of blissful ignorance.

Whatever blows your skirt up, I guess."

 

Well, it looks like Mike won, again.

 

Oh yeah. Quick takes.

 

1) I care as much about Blake as I do about OJ back in the mid-90s. In other words, I don't care.

 

2) I'm pro-life. Since abortion is legal I'm not about to go out and shove aborted fetuses in the faces of women trying to enter Planned Parenthood. On the other hand, I don't mince the word pro-choice, aka pro-baby-killing.

 

3) Instead of seeing the glass as half full or half empty, I like to see what liquid is actually IN the glass.

 

4) I'm not religious, but I don't look down upon those who are. Religion may be the opiate (sp?) of the people, but there are a lot worse things one can get hooked on. In addition, every time I see some ACLU-like group suing a school or town over them putting up a sign saying "God bless America" or some other nonsense, it makes me wish the parents of those protesting used their freedom of choice many moons ago.

[Guest]

Well, it looks like Mike won, again.

Of course. It's not hard to win if you're deaf, blind, and have no nerve endings, but infinite lung capacity to keep shouting the same thing over and over again. I can't beat a big rock either.

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

1. No

2. Pro-Abortion, Pro-Death Penalty, Anti-Euthanasia

3. Optimistic

4. Anglican

[Guest TheMikeSC]

Y'know, it's funny. I studied physics, biology, and mathematical models fairly intensively in college, and I still never figured out quite how to respond to bland assertions of blissful ignorance.

Whatever blows your skirt up, I guess. >>>

 

 

I have yet to be amazed at how closed-minded atheists can be that somebody might actually believe differently.

 

I'm sorry that my Christianity threatens your worldview---but it isn't my problem.

 

Keep in mind that I can just as easily support my beliefs as you support yours.

                   -=Mike

[Guest TheMikeSC]

Quote  

Well, it looks like Mike won, again.

Of course. It's not hard to win if you're deaf, blind, and have no nerve endings, but infinite lung capacity to keep shouting the same thing over and over again. I can't beat a big rock either. >>>

 

 

Amazing.

 

I think the same of you.

                -=Mike

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

I love it when someone resorts to name-calling when they can't, or don't want to, prove their point. It's nothing more than bland assertions of blissful ignorance.

 

Oh, by the way I'm for anyone who wants to kill themselves. I figure if someone who has lived a long and healthy life wants to exit early due to an unbeatable, painful bout with cancer, let them. I'm also anti-capital punishment. There are soooo many other ways to torture killers, rapists and thugs. My brand of justice, which either consists of 16 hours of backbreaking labor up in Alaska during the winter and in the Deep South during the summer or 24 hours of solitary confinement, would start right after I fry Mumia though. My first customer would be Andrea Yates, who would be locked in a room with nothing but pictures of her slaughtered boys hanging all over the walls...

[Guest]

Well, it's a little hard to prove that God didn't create the universe. He might have. I simply see no direct evidence of it. But the specific argument of intelligent design (because things simply couldn't have happened by chance) is a very old one, folks, and it's been disproven thoroughly. Everything we see in the natural world can be explained by current physical theory. We still don't know a lot about the fundamentals, but positing that there's an invisible divine hand out there arranging them neatly is a huge stretch. Sure, there might be. But is it a falsifiable theory? No, because you can easily fall back on the supposed omnipotence of your god to explain away any inconsistencies. He lets people suffer and die? Well, it's all part of a plan you don't understand. He never shows himself directly and establishes once and for all beyond any doubt that he exists? Well, you just have to have faith. The Bible is filled with inconsistencies? Genocide on the one hand, love and peace on the other? Well, you just can't question God's will. It's his creation and he can do with it as he pleases.

Convenient, but not terribly convincing, no? If a theory is unfalsifiable it is worthless. QED.

 

I don't expect to convince either of you, and that's not what I'm trying to do. I just don't think these endless accusations and counter-accusations of closed-mindedness serve anyone's interests. There are comparable amounts of proof for both positions, but they're in two different models of thought, and I don't think these models can be reconciled.

Admittedly, I started this - out of "frustration," I guess, like the Palestinians - but it's time to drop it. No one's "won" or "lost," because neither side has convinced the other, or offered overwhelming and incontestable evidence. It's an armistice, and claiming that it isn't is mere propaganda and juvenile snickering, which I'd like to believe is unworthy of you both.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

What do the pro-choice people think of partial-birth abortion. This is sucking the arms and legs off of a baby that would have a good chance to survive if it was delivered.

[Guest]

Personally, I don't think abortion is right after the foetus is viable. I don't think it's legal in the US, anyway (or at least not widely so). I know it happens in China, though.

[Guest DragonflyKid]

I have no problem with partial-birth abortion. Everyone is going to die eventually, if it's a baby or someone who's elderly everyone's destiny is non-existence so there's no use really in prolonging the inevitable.  

 

 

What do pro-lifers think of consuming flesh? I would think if you are truly "pro-life" you would also be vegetarian and would want to preserve eco-logical balance so that none of the species of God's creation go extinct. Why promote the unneccessary slaughter of God's creatures to momentarily satisfy one's blood-thirsty tastebuds?

 

It's natural for man to be omniverous, if God created a seemingly amoral world of predator and prey and the elimination of the weakest individuals, why would God deviate from this method of promoting balance, sustainability and health so man can run amuck and decimate earth?

 

Why would God create a universe over billions of years(13 billion being the latest findings) but focus on the preservation of the individuls of a single species of intellctually sophisticated primates on a single,remote planet through morals? Especially since that single species of primate is the most pernicious species in the world by far?

 

Would you consider killing an Orangutan, Gorilla or Chimp as immoral or evil since they are so close to humans genetically or are they just another disposable species of God's creation?

 

BTW, I'm no vegetarian or enviromentalist I'm just curious as to what believers think.

 

One more question to the athiests: Where do you find inspiration to get out of bed each day? If there is no God then all purpose and value disappear don't they, how do you go about affirming life from this void?

[Guest TheMikeSC]

I have no problem with partial-birth abortion. Everyone is going to die eventually, if it's a baby or someone who's elderly everyone's destiny is non-existence so there's no use really in prolonging the inevitable.  >>>

 

 

Using your logic, shouldn't you have committed suicide by now?

 

 

<<<What do pro-lifers think of consuming flesh? I would think if you are truly "pro-life" you would also be vegetarian and would want to preserve eco-logical balance so that none of the species of God's creation go extinct.>>>

 

 

Nope. God provided animals for Man to eat. Nothing immoral about eating them.

 

 

<<<Why promote the unneccessary slaughter of God's creatures to momentarily satisfy one's blood-thirsty tastebuds?>>>

 

 

Because they were created for that purpose.

 

 

<<<It's natural for man to be omniverous, if God created a seemingly amoral world of predator and prey and the elimination of the weakest individuals, why would God deviate from this method of promoting balance, sustainability and health so man can run amuck and decimate earth? >>>

 

 

Man doesn't run amok.

 

 

<<<Why would God create a universe over billions of years(13 billion being the latest findings) but focus on the preservation of the individuls of a single species of intellctually sophisticated primates on a single,remote planet through morals?>>>

 

 

 

Because we were created in His image.

 

 

<<<Especially since that single species of primate is the most pernicious species in the world by far?>>>

 

 

Should I even mention the percentage of extinct species that weren't killed off by man?

 

 

<<<Would you consider killing an Orangutan, Gorilla or Chimp as immoral or evil since they are so close to humans genetically or are they just another disposable species of God's creation?>>>

 

 

They are beneath human, so they're fair game.

 

However, I doubt they taste good.

                 -=Mike

[Guest]

Where do you find inspiration to get out of bed each day?

Guinness. Guinness and cigarettes.