eddo

yeah, but at least they are in the free for all section.

Why you trying to get in the middle of johny and TJ, wez? I thought you hated it when people butted their nose in where it doesn't belong? Johny and TJ can debate and not carry their emotions from thread to thread. Maybe you should try that sometime...

that's even better!

I agree totally. Tiger Woods should be lynched...

lol, I posted it at the other site- I am pretty sure a couple will disagree with mom's actions there.

I asked this on another board, and haven't received an answer yet, so I'll ask here: How do you plan to tax something that can be easily grown by the consumer?

I agree as well.

Exactly, Brotherman's response was funny, not the situation that Atlantic faced.

That's not even funny. It made me laugh.

don't post that video. nobody wants to see that...

Abortion is so not necessary for stem cells. One can get more viable stem cells from the umbilical cord of a full term, delivered baby. no need for "take a life to save a life."

Actually, yes, alcohol absolutely fits into that category. as does anything that chemically impairs your mind. Honestly I don't. That was all my opinion, but take a look at alcohol. Booze is legal, and therefore available just about everywhere. More people drink than smoke pot (when I have heard many say that alcohol is more damaging physically to the body and more addictive than pot) and I think it is because it is more available, and has the "It's ok because it's legal" label attached to it. Again, this is my opinion.

nah, I'll just play coy and hope he shows up to lab one day completely naked and throws himself on me...

So we should just give up and make it ok? I don't buy that. I feel that, and I may be wrong, there are people that don't get high because they know it is illegal. There are always going to be those that disagree with the legality of drugs, and do it anyway, but I think there are some that abide by the laws. Making it legal would only increase the use & the abuse, and thus the harming of others that I mentioned earlier would increase. I don't think that is the answer. the laws are there for a reason, and I have never met a pot smoker that didn't know what he was doing was illegal. Do the crime, be prepared to do the time- again- that's your personal choice, but you know the possible consequences going into it.

Safu, I was referring to everything- killing, stealing, raping, drugs, etc. - make it all legal if our goal is more to keep people out of jail that it is to promote a society that protects those that cannot protect themselves.

and for the record, I don't have any issue with someone doing drugs (legal and/or illegal) in their home, on their own time. Wanna kill your braincells? Well, their your braincells. Have at it. Wanna drink yourself to death? again, it's your life, have at it. Where I have the issue is when that crosses the line and people neglect their children, or get behind the wheel, or in someway negativley affect someone else by their desire to get drunk or high. We as Americans have proven time and time again that we are to stupid to be able to control ourselves when we are under the influence. How to fix it? I'm really not sure.

What if she swallows your credit card? umm, actually, he didn't do any of that. He faced his responsibility in the hearing, and was found to be not liable. I have yet to see him discredit anyone's life, nor have I seen him duck the responsibility of his actions. That was a weak attempt...

hell, if we make everything legal, no one would ever be in jail. That's much easier than just following the laws...

LMAO! "I'll put an antler up your ass, pally. this time you won't enjoy it."

You got just that one word (attack) out of all this, huh?

Way to not be the bigger man about it... That's just it, You are part of the source. By your own thought process: Why should they quit when you dish it out as well? Do you not see that this circular "he started it, so I have to continue it" baloney leads nowhere??? Defending and protection of life vs. irresponsible taking of a life? I don't think I agree with you. Your rights as an individual should not allow you to take an innocent life, just for the sake of inconvenience (but for now they do, even though I don't think they should.) And that isn't what happens in a war. Another thing I thought of: I don't know of a time when the U.S. has attacked someone without some sort of provocation. Ignoring warnings, ignoring U.N. resolutions, mistreatment of people, threatening (or attack) of our allies, attack of us, etc. What kind of warning does an unborn baby have? What has it done to harm anyone else?

So you are showing him his errors in condemnation by condemning him? That is completely bogus. Honestly, how TimesJoke does or does not behave has nothing to do with how you respond to him. Plain and simple, you are doing it just to be back on the attack, instead of just furthering healthy and decent discussion. and for the record- You are doing the same thing TJ and Brotherman. Name-calling has no place in debate, and neither does taking attacks to a personal level. I completely agree with this. Having said all that: Wez, I get your point about people killing in wars vs. abortions. Both involve the ending of human life (in abortion that is always an innocent life, and in war many casualties are innocents as well.) I often struggle with this idea myself. But- in war there is a purpose- especially from the standpoint of America. Defense and protection come to mind. The main purpose for aborting a little baby is to shirk responsibility that often times could have been prevented before hand.

So you continually bringing up something from TJ's past is you forgiving him? or is it you condemning him? I see it more as the latter. Wez I don't judge you for your and Sasha's decision. It was an informed decision that you made as adults, and while I disagree with it, I don't condemn you for it. I do, however, condemn our society for placing such little worth on a little life, and for cheapening the act of sex to little more than self-gratification. Hell, it would be hard for me to think less of you anyway...

Bad logic. a 2 year old could not survive being dumped in the middle of the interstate from a car going 95 miles per hour, but that doesn't make it any less of a "life." Different stages of life require different levels of protection. In the womb stage of life, the baby needs protection and sustenance from the mother. In the toddler stage of life, that same baby needs protection and sustenance from someone. Later on, they start to develop independence and rely less and less on others. But it is silly to think that that early dependence (or any later) discredits a "life"

Not to nitpick, but I think that McDonald's offers excellent health benifits to it's full time employee's. I have a cousin that works in the maintenance dept (he goes around fixing a/c units, freezers, stoves, etc.) for McDonald's and he gets excellent health care. That may be a different group or something, I'm not sure how the company is laid out, but I know McDonald's takes very good care of him.