Drea

Actually no. I'm just reading a cool book about the differences between men and women's brains and why men have trouble finding the butter in the fridge and why women can't parallel park. It's written with humour and not condescending towards either gender.

Why worship anything? The earth is going through natural changes and there is nothing that we humans can do to change it. Sure, we put some pressure on but not enough to tip the balance of the entire globe. If we were to stop all fossil fuel burning today, the climate would still change. It's a cycle of thawing and freezing that the earth goes through. This thisfrom Nasa But we digress... Belief in a god requires a certain level of acceptance that highly intelligent people don't adhere to. They question and analyze. Intelligence isn't a one-time event; it's the entire life of learning experiences. If you allow yourself to question, you're learning, if not then you are just memorizing. Learning to think is about questioning and solving problems using logic, not memorizing.

From Telegraph.co.uk I knew it all along. Intelligent people 'less likely to believe in God' Intelligence is the ability to analyze a problem and reach a conclusion through informed thought. Religion hampers intelligence by teaching followers to accept what they are told rather than question (analyze). Hence children are more likely than adults to believe in the concept of god -- they accept things as they are told because they are children. As the child grows he begins to question his parents and the world around him. In order to learn a person has to ask questions. Religion forces people's intelligence to stay childlike by not allowing analysis.

Jebus! Have you been in a cave for the last eight years? LOL There are no elephants in my living room since I put up a sign that said "no elephants allowed" -- my sign is working! Wow, without that sign I would overrun... thankfully some junked-out-on-fear-rightwinger gave me good advice and told me to put up a sign. And it's Armygettin' time for you anyway isn't it? Aren't you frothing at the mouth to see Jebus? First one must have WAR in whole of middle east yes? Then Jebus come with 10headed beast and save us all from sex and other "bad", "dirty" stuff Go ahead, go early... you'll get a better seat. Anyone that still supports GW Bush after eight years of incompetence is either being paid by the repubs, has been trapped in a cave, been living on the moon or is mentally challenged. Which are you? Oh yah, I'm Drea... I don't believe in God OR your #ty cowboy president. Welcome aboard.

Whooo hooo! More Bush Administration! Americans really are not that stupid. You know this! Why do you think they are retarded? Why do you hate America? LOL Of course you could be right, but if it's close and the repubs get in... many many MANY Americans will be very very VERY angry. I don't think they will "take it lying down" like they did in 2000 and 2004. They are wiser now. LOL

That's the plan... Obama will win the election and America will be "attacked again" on his watch and the whole thing will be blamed on the damn leftist commie arab loving hippy freadazoids. LOL or Obama will be assassinated and America will decend into civil war... you think the Rodney King riots were bad... just wait how bad it gets when Obama is offed. or America will be "attacked again" before the election, forcing it to be "postponed". Dough heads -- real human beings don't think of Barak Obama as a "saviour" or an "anti christ"... only freakazoid religious nutbars believe this... like GW and Isreal pushing to attack Iran to "usher in" a fullblown war in the middle east to facilitate the nutbar belief in (booga booga!) "Armaggeddon" LOL

It doesn't. The Steelworkers are working with CAW and other unions across the world to form one big huge formidable union.

Finally! Someone with a link that proves what the CAW wages really are.... looks like in '04 it was approx. $20/hour... a decent living wage. caw chapter 6

Ok I'll bite... 1. a woman does not decide if the law says the fetus has rights equal to that of a born person -- the law decides. 2. She CAN say "I'm one week pregnant with a baby!" then turn around a month later and say "I am going to abort this fetus". If the language she uses makes her feel better about her decision who are we to condem her? When I was fourteen I had the cells growing inside of me removed... they were three/four weeks into their evolution into a human being. Happily it will never know. Happily, my young self got to graduate highschool, party, go to college, get married, get divorced, have a career, have a baby (on my timetable, when I was ready) and meet the man of my dreams. So why would you deny a fourteen year old the right to have a good life? Is her life worth less (in your opinion) than that of the fetus? In nature, if the lion pride is starving, the lionesses eat before the cubs... as the lioness can always have more cubs. ROOOAAR!

But we were all nomadic hunter/gathers until the advent of agriculture. The "people-who-came-here-allegedly-over-the-Bering-Strait-Land-Bridge-hundreds-of-thousands-of-years-ago" just had not evolved past this stage when Europeans arrived. The only way they could have possibly kept in this "unevolved" state would be to isolate them without contact from the rest of the "evolved" world. It would be utterly impossible. I mean only the evolution of agriculture, not the intelligence or ingenuity of "people-who-came-here-allegedly-over-the-Bering-Strait-Land-Bridge-hundreds-of-thousands-of-years-ago" - they simply hadn't seen a need to change from hunter/gatherers to community dwelling farmers. Perhaps the amount of land and the lack of population contributed to this. In Europe (thousands of years earlier) competition for hunting grounds from various "clans" would have forced the population to adopt agriculture as a means of feeding a growing populace. Hence "people-who-came-here-allegedly-over-the-Bering-Strait-Land-Bridge-hundreds-of-thousands-of-years-ago" never developed a "working" culture with a certain timetable.

"Playing the female card" no kidding... it's pregnancy we are discussing (happens only to females, whoda thunk it) I guess we could have a convo about how it feels to have a circumsized or uncircumsized penis and I could make assumptions on how it feels, mkay? Never mind that I will never know for sure, but I can consider myself an expert because I sat beside a man on the bus last week... LOL You are just too funny! You assume women think of the fetus as nothing more than "a blender". So of course I believe that you don't understand what pregnancy means to a woman. How could you possibly know what it is like as you have never done it? When I was a young woman I didn't know what it was all about either. So I am not blaming you or insulting you as you cannot possibly know how a woman (any woman) feels about her pregnancy... even if she tells you... it's not like doing it yourself. Sadly, your opinions on pregnancy, birth and abortion are limited because of your gender. Once again, I didn't mean to insult you... but NO woman (ok maybe a few mentally stunted ones) thinks of the growing thing inside of her as uselesss as poo or as disposable as an old blender. So you said "blender" and I said "poo"... are we even?

Sharkman, I cannot imagine any woman who has felt the kicking and seen her tummy grow big, would "change her mind and throw away the baby" as though it's yesterday's garbage. Most women don't abort on a whim... or treat their pregnancy like it's no big deal. Late term abortions (as pointed out earlier) occur usually when a health issue (spina bifida for example) is found in the developing fetus. There is nothing, I repeat NOTHING like pregnancy -- nothing is as frightening, as wonderful, as stressful or as beautiful as the feeling of carrying that baby inside you... as a male you unfortunately will never get to experience it so you think that women treat it as casually as taking a poo.

Exactly the dilema Melanie... It's a slippery slope to say pregnant women must be "monitored" to ensure they are not doing anything that could potentially cause birth defects, etc. Perhaps all drug/alcohol addicted pregnant women should be given the option of abortion immediately. As in "right now, go down the hallway, the doctor is waiting". If they don't opt for abortion they should be housed in treatment facilites (paid for by the taxpayer) to remain "clean" for the duration of the pregnancy. As in "right now, there is a van waiting to take you to the facility". Perhaps we should give all pregnant women drug tests and if the test is positive, just force them to abort and be done with it. "You want a baby? Prove you are clean, then you will be allowed to carry the pregnancy to term". Smacks of extreme fascism imo and would never fly. IMO abortion is perferable to giving birth to a child that will never be able to live a normal life.

Anything to say on the issue at hand, guyser? Or are you so obsessed with me that you've forgotten the topic. WIP, I believe in women having choice. I also believe that late term (5 months and more) abortions should occur only in rare circumstances. If a woman wants an abortion it should not take her six months of "waffling" to decide. If she waffles she should NOT have the abortion. Drug/alcohol abuse by pregnant women is a totally different kettle of worms... I would be hardpressed to TELL a woman she had to abort, but for the sake of the child, it would be better than being born messed up for life. I also have a problem "monitoring" or "detaining" pregnant drug/alcohol users during pregnancy as it is very intrusive. However, once the defective child is born... take it away and prosecute the mother for endangerment/damages. I'd say "Listen Bitch - you had the option to abort, but you chose not to; you chose to give birth to a child that you KNEW would not be able to function... so therefore we are prosecuting you to the full extent of the law." That's what I'd say.

When this "type" of poster cannot refute the topic, they resort to insulting the poster. Typical of the rightwing. Very expected... welcomed actually... I like to toy with 'em, they get soooo angry... it's quite funny to watch.

Would you at least have the decency to clarify what on earth you are blathering about? PM me if you feel the need... instead of wandering around the board throwing out meaningless one-liners. Are you arguing against abortion? For it? Against women making the decsion? Where, oh where dear forum-stalker, do you stand on this issue? M.Dancer... you are so awesome. (I even laughed at your scoliosis joke a while back, remember?) Thank you for being so consistently an ass... unlike guyser who flip flops all over the place with his incoherent posts

Oh, so it's the workers' fault that they build gas guzzlers? Is it also the worker's fault that management is so slow to act and change what is produced? Nah! Can't BE! Management is never wrong -- it's the workers fault -- they should have FORCED management to change production to smaller vehicles. Darn those workers only wanting to build big SUV's! /sarcasm Slow reaction in business is the fault of managment, not the workers. Toyotas and Hondas always have a higher resale value. It's not because they were built by low wage workers, but because management is wise enough to have foresight and build fuel efficient, quality vehicles. My sis just bought a Pontiac G5... a cheap tin friggin' box IMO. I'm pissed because there really is no such thing as a "small" car today. The smallest car available (aside from the smart car) is the Mini and it is HUGE compared to the 1976 Honda Civic I used to drive. I guess the big 3 ought to take a look at WHY Toyotas and Hondas are selling... instead of blaming their own workers, they should look at their business practices. You sure got that right

Really? When was the last time you heard of a back alley deal for vodka? Where is the tobacco smuggled from? Who is doing the smuggling and why? The solution is to legalize and regulate all mind altering substances. AND educate the public just like has been done with smoking. What part of this do you have difficulty understanding? Cigarettes are harmful, legal and readily available -- yet many people are no longer smoking. Please explain how this could be possible? Is it the EDUCATION perhaps? Think man think.

If a person wants to alter their mind with a substance why can they not legally do so? Unless you are advocating for the prohibition of alcohol and tobacco then you do not have a leg to stand on. Many people mess their minds and bodies up with alcohol and tobacco; many choose not to; many choose "other" mind altering substances. The key is in education (isn't education really the answer for everything? ). Currently, we teach our youth that caffiene, nicotine, cocaine, heroin, alcohol and marijuana are all "drugs". Yet this young person sees people drink, sees them smoke cigarettes and determines for himself that if those one's are ok and safe for mom and dad, then the others are also safe and ok. Many people have quit smoking, not because it became unavailable, but because the public was (is) inundated with educational messages about the dangers of smoking and limits were placed on public smoking. There is absolutely no logical reason to continue criminalizing drugs, in fact, (yes, we all know this already) legalizing drugs would remove the criminal element.

Pardon me, guyser, but I really think you've replied to the wrong thread...something about "three or four weeks" and "claims"...""back then...back when?

I think that educating drug/alcohol addicted women that abortion is a start -- if they are not willing (or able) to give up the addiction for the duration of the pregnancy they should be counselled on the option of abortion. They should be shown children that have the physical effects of drugs and alcohol so that they can make an informed choice. They can knowingly choose to abort and continue drugs or quit drugs and keep the pregnancy. I don't know what enforcement could (or even if it should) be used if the woman decides to keep it and continues substance abuse.

HA! Then you are admitting that those three buildings were designed to withstand (not fall, not burn to the ground) a hit by large aircraft! OR you admit that they were they specifically designed to fall (tickety boo into their own footprints right)?

That is correct. The "anti-mother"? You are too funny... The WOMAN holds all the cards -- the life or death of the fetus is in her hands. This really gets your goat doesn't it? That a woman can choose to abort a fetus and you have no say whatsoever. Oh well. Some people (you?) go through life with such a desperate need to control others under the guise of "saving lives". Yet these same people would never lift a finger to assist in the raising of the child. Everyone who is anti-choice should have at least ONE adopted child... or their argument is a waste of bandwidth.

She did do it, therefore she is guilty. It's the punishment (or lackthereof) that will be the issue. I think counselling is in order... as well as some help in day to day life dealing with so many babies...