|
Post by artluvr on Sept 28, 2004 19:20:46 GMT -5
redwine21: yeah I think women should just put all their unwanted chilluns up for adoption if they get raped or molested or their condoms break and stuff. 'cause then nice people can adopt those poor homeless children.
Liberals: But wait, isn't that just increasing the amount of homeless ki--
redwine: SHUT UP, YOU GUYS PROBABLY ABORTED THE MESSIAH AND THE GOVERNMENT IS TOO BIG >:(
|
|
Luigi
Bewildered Beginner
Posts: 0
Likes: 2
|
Post by Luigi on Sept 28, 2004 19:23:03 GMT -5
You know what would be really funny? If there was a kid who was aborted, but in another alternative universe, he wasn't. He would've grown up to cure cancer, if it hadn't been for another kid who was not aborted as well. Anyway, Kid B kills Kid A and several dozen other people, and cancer is never cured.... Makes you think, doesn't it?
|
|
|
Post by artluvr on Sept 28, 2004 19:56:39 GMT -5
You know what would be really funny? If there was a kid who was aborted, but in another alternative universe, he wasn't. He would've grown up to cure cancer, if it hadn't been for another kid who was not aborted as well. Anyway, Kid B kills Kid A and several dozen other people, and cancer is never cured.... Makes you think, doesn't it? You know what'd be cool? If we ended up aborting the Messiah, but we also ended up aborting the Antichrist. Then they'd do battle in Fetus Heaven and/or Fetus Hell and then the Earth would be at the mercy of two lumps of stem cells who look vaguely like shrimp.
|
|
|
Post by Soidanae on Sept 28, 2004 20:01:42 GMT -5
... Christ, guys, make fun of the stupid people.... Redwine has intelligence on her side, at least.
|
|
|
Post by artluvr on Sept 28, 2004 20:08:32 GMT -5
... Christ, guys, make fun of the stupid people.... Redwine has intelligence on her side, at least. Hey, we're not making fun of her. We're merely discussing hypothetical situtations, and maybe dear redwine could share her opinions about what would happen if Jesusfetus and Lucifetus went to wage a pint-sized jihad. Okay, and I'm sorry for the post I did near the top of this page.
|
|
Luigi
Bewildered Beginner
Posts: 0
Likes: 2
|
Post by Luigi on Sept 28, 2004 20:43:49 GMT -5
If I were on my main computer, I would so [crudely] photosdhop a picture of Fesus and Luietus...Where, oh where is Kobolos when you need him?
|
|
|
Post by redwine with valium on Sept 28, 2004 21:06:57 GMT -5
... Christ, guys, make fun of the stupid people.... Redwine has intelligence on her side, at least. Well at least somebody likes me....and though what you others said was mildly offensive, I shall choose to ignore it. Dang, you're making me think and do research again, what is this world coming to? Now I know you guys are going to disagree with what I come up with, because I'm fairly conservative and everyone else seems to be liberal. (Hey, I should make a poll about that...) But here goes: The national government should ONLY control international matters and state-relations matters. Other than that, states should govern themselves, therefore making the laws in each state directly affectable by the people living in said state. Example: People who approve of gay marriages, polygamy, and what all can move to a state with others like them, where the laws will reflect this, while those who don't approve of these things can move to another state, where the laws reflect their beliefs. This would be more efficient and make people happier. The overriding rule to all this: The more centralized a government is, the less effective/efficient it is. One of the many reasons why Communism doesn't work. (and please don't get sidetracked on that)
|
|
Luigi
Bewildered Beginner
Posts: 0
Likes: 2
|
Post by Luigi on Sept 28, 2004 21:39:03 GMT -5
Well at least somebody likes me....and though what you others said was mildly offensive, I shall choose to ignore it. Dang, you're making me think and do research again, what is this world coming to? Now I know you guys are going to disagree with what I come up with, because I'm fairly conservative and everyone else seems to be liberal. (Hey, I should make a poll about that...) But here goes: The national government should ONLY control international matters and state-relations matters. Other than that, states should govern themselves, therefore making the laws in each state directly affectable by the people living in said state. Example: People who approve of gay marriages, polygamy, and what all can move to a state with others like them, where the laws will reflect this, while those who don't approve of these things can move to another state, where the laws reflect their beliefs. This would be more efficient and make people happier. The overriding rule to all this: The more centralized a government is, the less effective/efficient it is. One of the many reasons why Communism doesn't work. (and please don't get sidetracked on that) We weren't trying to offend you, we were simply plasying around with fetus scenerios. Anyway, why would you outcast someone IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY? you pack group X aup[ in one state? You inconvenience them--they have to find new lives, new jobs, new houses, new freinds? Tahat's not the American way... The way you say it, it sounds g ood, and when I think "he should just let states decide" i don'trealize whan inconvienence it is...
|
|
no-one
Reptile Researcher
Posts: 28
Likes: 1
|
Post by no-one on Sept 29, 2004 0:51:26 GMT -5
FIXED that for you... may i recomend a strike your way?
|
|
|
Post by VFDeye on Sept 29, 2004 0:59:36 GMT -5
Hey sorry. Didn't mean to make anyone mad or anything. Trust me I kind of got queezy posting it, but I just wanted to show what REALLY goes on.
|
|
|
Post by Freckles on Sept 29, 2004 12:41:58 GMT -5
Yesterday, my aunt came home with alot of blood waiting for my uncle to come home. She waited for two hours and called my mother. My mother told her to go to the hospital immediately i was nervous, would she die? Would somthing happen to her baby? It was only 3 months old.
She called this morning, the baby, it died. My mom said the docters aborted it. I feel very sad, my uncle was so mad, and whoever prays at night, please pray for them.
On another note, my Sunday School Teacher is going to Guatamala to adopt there 2nd child, and Maddies real brother.
|
|
Antenora
Detriment Deleter
Fiendish Philologist
Put down that harpoon gun, in the name of these wonderful birds!
Posts: 15,891
Likes: 113
|
Post by Antenora on Sept 29, 2004 14:25:52 GMT -5
You know what'd be cool? If we ended up aborting the Messiah, but we also ended up aborting the Antichrist. Then they'd do battle in Fetus Heaven and/or Fetus Hell and then the Earth would be at the mercy of two lumps of stem cells who look vaguely like shrimp. Luna, that's completely sick and disgusting a rather intriguing idea. Since I believe in reincarnation, I think that an aborted baby will promptly get another chance at life, perhaps under better circumstances. Just my personal opinion, you don't have to agree. As J said, letting the states decide could lead to inconveniences of all sorts. A lot of people would have to leave their neighborhoods. Personally, I don't think the national government should decide who marries whom, but letting state governments decide is troublesome. Maybe the government should just stay out of this issue entirely. I need to think about this more, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Sept 29, 2004 15:11:07 GMT -5
Abortion good in certain circumstances, adoption good. I can't see how adoption could be bad, really. I'd probably have to read the rest of the thread, which I don't feel like doing. But I'm not arguing my point because all my arguments will already have been posted.
And that picture would be a very late abortion. But then again, I'd expect nothing else from a site called gospelbillboard.
|
|
|
Post by Soidanae on Sept 29, 2004 15:41:56 GMT -5
Dang, you're making me think and do research again, what is this world coming to? Now I know you guys are going to disagree with what I come up with, because I'm fairly conservative and everyone else seems to be liberal. (Hey, I should make a poll about that...) But here goes: The national government should ONLY control international matters and state-relations matters. Other than that, states should govern themselves, therefore making the laws in each state directly affectable by the people living in said state. Example: People who approve of gay marriages, polygamy, and what all can move to a state with others like them, where the laws will reflect this, while those who don't approve of these things can move to another state, where the laws reflect their beliefs. This would be more efficient and make people happier. The overriding rule to all this: The more centralized a government is, the less effective/efficient it is. One of the many reasons why Communism doesn't work. (and please don't get sidetracked on that) Actually, that's false. The reason communism doesn't work is because the eventual goal is a lack of real government, and it depends entirely on good human nature. There ain't no such thing. By your opinon, Anarchy would bne the most successful form of government simply because it isn't centralized at all, which is false. Anarchy is weak and inefficient and incapable of working for all the same reasons. Granted, extremely centralized governments aren't as effected, but there is a median. However, marraiges and so on need to be a federal law, because it is specific to the rights of the people, and belongs in the Constitution, along with the Bill of Rights.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Sept 29, 2004 16:02:53 GMT -5
I concur with the very intelligent Soidanae. I believe that I've made the same argument myself at times... Or did I just steal it from him? Either way, it doesn't change the fact that I agree.
|
|