olpfan1 Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 Legal responsibility and voluntary liability are two very different things. Conflating marriage with paternity only confuses the issue even more. The welfare of the child now has to yield to the very individual rights issues that sanction abortion of children in the first place. Children don't get aborted Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 Children don't get aborted Yes they do...just like puppies or kittens! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Michael Hardner Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 If living conditions improved in the 20th century, it was because of discoveries from the 19th century. Technological change and social upheaval go hand in hand, so the 20th century improvements might better be credited to technology along with the social changes that accompanied it. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
cybercoma Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 Many Western women are single. They fear the future, wonder how to manage, would like to marry but they can't find a suitable mate. Hollywood calls this the RomCom market. Under the circumstances, they vote for the Leftist politician. These women believe that at least, the State will protect them. This was absurd and sexist when you first said it and it still is now. Stop being so insulting and disrespectful to women. Quote
cybercoma Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 Without using wikipedia, I'd say 1948 - but it was based on technology from the 1920s which in turn was based on basic research from the late 1800s. You could conduct the same thought experiment with cars tracing their invention back to the time of cave-dwellers. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 This was absurd and sexist when you first said it and it still is now. Stop being so insulting and disrespectful to women. I don't feel like you need to moralize about those kind of statements. How about just pointing out that they're blanket generalizations that they're unprovable. Many Western women are single. They fear the future, wonder how to manage, would like to marry but they can't find a suitable mate. Hollywood calls this the RomCom market.Under the circumstances, they vote for the Leftist politician. These women believe that at least, the State will protect them. How many women vote for leftists ? 100% ? How many of these say they want the State to protect them ? Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Bonam Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 Sorry, BM. I strongly disagree. The greatest advances in basic technology occurred in the 19th century - when governments were small and individual innovation was easy. After years of peace and small government, physicists discovered an anomaly in the 1880s and a minority Jew, Einstein, resolved the problem. Government bureaucracies, a feature of the 20th century, are synonym for stagnation, Soviet planning and even the Holocaust. --- If living conditions improved in the 20th century, it was because of discoveries from the 19th century. This is nonsense. Every day, new frontiers of science are explored, and new technologies are developed. Of course, every new advance stands on the shoulders of those in the past. But the pace of progress is accelerating, not slowing, and modern technologies utilize advances in our knowledge of physics that date back only a few years. Most such advances are far outside the awareness of laymen, not popularized like einstein's relativity. At my work, we develop new devices based on applied physics that we figure out ourselves, sometimes just the day before on the whiteboard. As for a scientist from the 30s not being surprised by the technologies of today, that too is false. Look at science fiction: people have predicted space travel, colonization of the galaxy, etc. Science fiction shows depicted humans zooming through space many times faster than light, but also showed computers that took hours or days to search a database for a keyword. Today, google will search all the world's knowledge for a keyword for you in a millisecond. From anywhere, using a device that fits in your pocket. No one from before the 80s or so ever conceptualized fast, pervasive computers, that saturate all aspects of our civilization. The basic physics may have been understandable to a scientist from the 30s, but the engineering and applications were utterly unforseeable. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 .... No one from before the 80s or so ever conceptualized fast, pervasive computers, that saturate all aspects of our civilization. The basic physics may have been understandable to a scientist from the 30s, but the engineering and applications were utterly unforseeable. I would have to slightly disagree with your assessment because what was conceptualised before the 1980's only lacked the vision for distributed networks, not scope or technology. Alvin Toffler's Future Shock (1970) did conceptualise such changes on a broad scale for wide social impact. Toffler correctly articulated the "acceleration" to which you refer, but he underestimated our ability to adapt in some, not all societies. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
cybercoma Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 How many women vote for leftists ? 100% ? http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/exit-polls.html2008: 56% 2004: 51% 2000: 54% 1996: 54%* 1992: 45%* 1988: 49% 1984: 44% 1980: 45%* * denotes years where combined Republican and Democrat votes added up to less than 95% of those surveyed. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/exit-polls.html 2008: 56% 2004: 51% 2000: 54% 1996: 54%* 1992: 45%* 1988: 49% 1984: 44% 1980: 45%* * denotes years where combined Republican and Democrat votes added up to less than 95% of those surveyed. Obama is a leftist ? Okay... Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Guest American Woman Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 Many Western women are single. They fear the future, wonder how to manage, would like to marry but they can't find a suitable mate. Hollywood calls this the RomCom market. Oh please. Western women can - and do - take care of themselves. They manage just fine. The fact that you're citing Hollywood/movie markets tells me all I need to know about your claim. Furthermore, many women make more than their husbands - in the U.S., 1/3 were making more in 2007 - and that number has been rising. Under the circumstances, they vote for the Leftist politician. These women believe that at least, the State will protect them. I've seen absolutely nothing to support your claim. Furthermore, many men take advantage of women financially - many men are taking advantage of government social programs. To say women are helplessly looking to the state to take care of them when they can't find a man to do it is ludicrous - not to mention insulting. Quote
-TSS- Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 (edited) Santorum has now one ace in that he can claim to be campaigning against all odds as Romney with his much larger campaigning budget should have finished the race off by now but hasn't been able to do so. People instinctly start sympathising underdogs. Edited March 9, 2012 by -TSS- Quote
cybercoma Posted March 10, 2012 Report Posted March 10, 2012 Obama is a leftist ? Okay... How else do you want to determine the voting preferences of American women? If Obama is not on the Left and McCain is not on the Left, then it's not possible for them to vote for anyone on the left. The Democrats are the left for that political atmosphere. Quote
kimmy Posted March 21, 2012 Author Report Posted March 21, 2012 Santorum has now one ace in that he can claim to be campaigning against all odds as Romney with his much larger campaigning budget should have finished the race off by now but hasn't been able to do so. People instinctly start sympathising underdogs. The converse of that is... if Rick is such a great candidate, how come he can't raise money? If he's such a great candidate, why can't his organization even get him on the ballot in all the districts? -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
kimmy Posted March 21, 2012 Author Report Posted March 21, 2012 By the way, did you hear about Rick's new buddy? Pastor Dennis Terry to non-Christians: GTFO!!! This was an event organized by the Family Research Council, apparently, and Rick was the guest of honor as he clearly needs more Jesus Juice if he's going to beat Romney. So this hollering idiot, Pastor Dennis Terry comes out to introduce Santorum. He's one of those guys who pronounces "Jesus" like it has four syllables-- Jee-eee-eee-ZUSS." The video can be found on youtube, if you're interested in watching idiots hollering. Santorum, asked why he was applauding the speech, contends that he didn't applaud that part, then concedes that he actually really wasn't paying a lot of attention to what Dennis Terry was actually saying. Rick insists that he's all about tolerance and doesn't agree that non-Christians should GTFO of America. Still, considering the trouble that Jeremiah Wright caused for Barack Obama, I would think that Rick would want to be a little more careful about being caught hanging out with religious fruit-cakes. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
cybercoma Posted March 21, 2012 Report Posted March 21, 2012 By the way, did you hear about Rick's new buddy? Pastor Dennis Terry to non-Christians: GTFO!!! This was an event organized by the Family Research Council, apparently, and Rick was the guest of honor as he clearly needs more Jesus Juice if he's going to beat Romney. So this hollering idiot, Pastor Dennis Terry comes out to introduce Santorum. He's one of those guys who pronounces "Jesus" like it has four syllables-- Jee-eee-eee-ZUSS." The video can be found on youtube, if you're interested in watching idiots hollering. Santorum, asked why he was applauding the speech, contends that he didn't applaud that part, then concedes that he actually really wasn't paying a lot of attention to what Dennis Terry was actually saying. Rick insists that he's all about tolerance and doesn't agree that non-Christians should GTFO of America. Still, considering the trouble that Jeremiah Wright caused for Barack Obama, I would think that Rick would want to be a little more careful about being caught hanging out with religious fruit-cakes. -k Careful about what? Leftists that persecute Christians? They can GTFO too! :sarcasm-emoticon: Quote
kimmy Posted March 21, 2012 Author Report Posted March 21, 2012 Careful about what? Leftists that persecute Christians? They can GTFO too! :sarcasm-emoticon: Well, telling them swarthy fellers and them lefty types to GTFO might play well in redneck country... but there aren't enough rednecks in America to make Rick the President. There aren't even enough rednecks in America to make Rick the GOP nominee, as we saw tonight. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
cybercoma Posted March 21, 2012 Report Posted March 21, 2012 Obviously the people voting in the primaries hate freedom. Quote
kimmy Posted April 1, 2012 Author Report Posted April 1, 2012 Santorum says: The Sheriff Is Near! -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
j44 Posted April 1, 2012 Report Posted April 1, 2012 For the past week I've been receiving emails from the Santorum campaign asking for donations and support. I'm pretty sure I can't donate to American politicians. And I have no idea where they got my email. Quote
Guest American Woman Posted April 1, 2012 Report Posted April 1, 2012 For the past week I've been receiving emails from the Santorum campaign asking for donations and support. I'm pretty sure I can't donate to American politicians. That might depend on how the lawsuit turned out .... Canadians sue for right to donate to US campaigns Quote
j44 Posted April 1, 2012 Report Posted April 1, 2012 That might depend on how the lawsuit turned out .... Canadians sue for right to donate to US campaigns Ooooh, I wouldn't not like that. I would want Americans contributing to our parties and politicians. Quote
Guest American Woman Posted April 2, 2012 Report Posted April 2, 2012 Ooooh, I wouldn't not like that. I would want Americans contributing to our parties and politicians. Why would you want Americans contributing to your parties and politicians; what would be the advantage to that? ~ Or did you mean to say that you would not want it? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 2, 2012 Report Posted April 2, 2012 That might depend on how the lawsuit turned out .... Canadians sue for right to donate to US campaigns Can't say I'm surprised....in 2008, 15% of polled Canadians would give up their domestic vote just to be able to vote in US elections. I guess we put on a better show! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Shady Posted April 2, 2012 Report Posted April 2, 2012 By the way, did you hear about Rick's new buddy? Is he anything like Obama's Rev. Wright? Cause I was told a few years ago that that stuff really isn't a big deal. Also, is he anything like Obama's critical race theory professor buddy from Harvard? You know, the guy that Obama said we should all open our hearts and minds to his words? Cause I was also told that that stuff isn't really a big deal. And is he anything like Obama's terrorist buddy from Chicago? You know, the guy that helped launch his campaign for state senator, several years after launching bombs at police stations around the country. Cause once again, I was told that that stuff isn't really a big deal. I guess just in Rick's case huh? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.