NavajoEverclear

wow thats a pretty good idea for preservation, but you'd need to transfer you mind to a different medium. Maybe find a way to translate all your neural patterns into a computer type form. Would this take more or less space than the original brain? I don't know how small computer circuits are these days.

who's john?

still doesn't make him famous. How often do you see a picture of the one who take pictures? Especially in newspapers? The pictures are just there, it will take several more years for anyone to discover that he was the sole photographer. Then they'll just give him an interview and all, but he'll be more older enough to be not recognizable as the same person he was a decade ago.

to be beautiful in my eyes you have to turn me on with your clothes on. That girl is just not my type, the only thing she has going for her is the nudity, and like i said i am not deluded to accept that as the only nessisary requirement. She is simply not sexy enough for me.

Gir is most certainly advanced. yourdadonpogos must not be well versed in vasquez scripture. By the way, i really dont think that girl is very hot. Shoulders look too broad, she's probably transexual.

No crap. And they must give the citizens brainless lines on purpose. When i think of it that way i don't really care. It was a really wonderful movie. Plotwise and visually. Doc Ock rocked. But one thing i couldn't justify (you always have to stretch what you'll accept as possible, to enjoy these types of movies) was when the sun was sinking into the ocean---- i would have been happy if massive plumes of plasmatized water exploded into the air---- instead it lamely died out like a lightbulb. I know that machine is supposed to contain the sun, but obviously it was the water that was causing its diminishment, so why wasn't there a much bigger reaction from coming on contact? My friend claims that at the very end there were some poorly animated (lame unrealistic CG) helicopters flying around that really pissed him off. I didn't notice, i've only seen the movie once tho Besides that Spidro Two was really neat.

you can use any picture you find you know right? of coarse you do, stupid question. But i have this nice program where you can crop the picture, then resize it to the right amount of pixels (75x75)----- that way you dont get any crappy effects to change in revolution.----- However there are ways to resize(accurately) in paint. I don't know what standard programs apples or linux's have tho. . . . . Plan to get a linux someday. Become a hacker.

Why is my summoning of the historians not working? Come on guys, Hinduism is cool! Gandhi was Hindu.

Again i resort to saying, thank God its not my choice. Tho i guess in democracy i do have more influence than possible otherwise. I keep on forgetting these ideal concepts, wouldn't work in the reality of uncertainty, which is where we live. Perhaps we shouldn't try to determine if we know we cant, where its a case of life and death.------ seems like a waste of time after arguing the opposite point so long, but i think that fact makes my new decision very solid.

Well maybe my opinion is based on some unconscious bias, but i think what i'm talking about is different than punishment. Isn't punishment basically the same as revenge? Wheras what i'm talking about is simple termination of a person uncapable of rehabilitation, no emotional motivation for serving justice--- simply seems like the most logical option if you seperate reasoning from the primitive drive for vengence.

But when was that line drawn? Is it as simple as some switch? I know its true cause other animals that are indefinately sterile if bred hybrid, i just want to identify what it is that makes the difference. The Dog example again, far as appearances go, our relationship with apes seems very similar, and yet all dogs, despite breed, are the same species and capable of procration . . . . . . I think. Noone has yet set me straight if that's not correct.

like JDona's first post, it'd depend on what stage of life a person is. Children, though they have some concept on sexuality, dont really care about preference, until its become a learned behavior to treat them a certain way. After puberty tho, i think homophobia is kind of natural for straight people, tho as you get more mature you can overcome it. Isn't it interesting how this site has such a fascination with the topic of homosexuality? Not accusing, i started the second most popular thread on the subject, and the first most popular homosexuality thread, is the second most popular thread out of all of them. (looking on the top 20 most replied) Probably cause its a big social and political debate this year especially.

i know the old testament, has little to do with Jesus, sorry for wording it wrong. I meant it as another item on the list of examples of white bias.

i just remember when talking about people of virtue, one of the qualities listed is usually fair skin . . . . give me some time and i'll try to come up with some references. Meanwhile we can just talk about the Hinduism subject.

http://www.atributetohinduism.com/aryan_invasion_theory.htm check out that link, read the intro at least. It makes sense, given the prejudice of white supremecists, who have imperialized the world until quite recently, that such lies would be contrived with so little evidence. I would really like to believe that Hinduism did not come from white invaders, as they've taught in history class. I assume that there must be more evidence to justify such teachings, there must be someone here who has credentials in history and can tell us how stable they think the claims for either side are. Could this be a case similar to the belief of Jesus being white, and now most scientists and non-biased historians agree he would not have been, given his heritage. But then what about the old testament? there are many verses expressing that fairness of skin was considered a desirable trait over dark skin--- was this orginally there, or is that something white biased priests could have added?

6,000 years Lucid? Your not a literal bible believer are you? One thing, many bible stories are MEANT to be symbolic, rather than actual history, two, lots gets misunderstood in the translation from the original, three, priests and such have changed portions of the Bible, ommitted parts, added parts--- to suit their 'needs'. Is that true in all cases? ALSO i was wondering, i know our difference between our other primate cousins is very small, just wondering, is that difference comparable to the difference between a chiuwawa and a wolf? I heard that all dogs and wolves can interbreed (tho size difference prevents major extremes from choosing to breed). Could this be the same type thing with us and other primates? Do the other primates have the same amount of chromosomes as us? (come to think, they most if the genetic difference is so little)

holy crap i havent seen this thread for a while, so i dont know how we got to discussing such things, but i'll jump in anyhow. You'd have to add an extra heart to accomidate what the flapping requires--- duh

happens to me too, but you can blame that on an incredible biological clock, rather than future seeing. Along those lines though --- for about a month i would always look at the clock at exactly 11:34 (upside down 'hell'). Didn't matter where i was, some how there was a clock around, i happened to glance at at just the right time. Don't know what started triggering it but it kept happening everyday for quite a while. Wasn't even thinking about it the rest of the day, but somehow my bioclock took control just in time.

This has happened to me before--- not with something so large. Its usually random things, so i don't remember until it is triggered by the experience i dreamed about. I admit it might be some kind of glorified deja vu---- but it IS about more than assumptions (the assuptions aren't under conscious control anyway), cause really do remember it. So i donno, could be either. depends on if you believe in seeing the future

How do you mean 'justice'?--- what i mean by that more later in the post True, but what purpose does it achieve to keep them alive. What purpose are you assuming it is ATTEMPTING to achieve? I think the answer would vary from case to case, but i explained my purpose, and in a sec i'll repeat it In my mind it has nothing to do with either, maybe the justice, if you can find away to seperate it from emotional connotations. To me its just a matter of common sense. Many, probably most, of the people who support the life sentence over death say that they consider it a GREATER punishment than death. As i've said, tho the title of the thread might mislead you, i don't consider capital punishment, to be punishment of any form. To me death sentence is completely disconnected from trying to issue what the killer deserves. What he deserves cannot be determined, to do so accurately would require us formulating some formula of morals, and precisely how individual atonement can dealt---- which is impossible, therefore would be a load of bullshit. Death is simply for the protection of society, which imprisonment may also serve, but with the addition of a lot of waste on pointlessly preserving an empty life.

Rape, Insest, and if it can be told that the birth could kill the mother(or some type of serious health risk), or that the baby would die soon after birth, are the only cases i consider fully acceptable. In my church those are the only instances when it is considered OK. Otherwise the baby should be delivered, and given for adoption if the parent is not fit to parent the child. I may consider accepting it if before the baby is capable of percieving pain, or before the heart beats. But Even in that case the reason for desiring the abortion is more what i care about. Lack of responsibility to prevent fertilization does not justify murder. I most certainly do not think sex is wrong, but it is an act of love, which if results in children should be accepted. It is rare for birth control to fail (well depending on the method)----- i might even propose that people not responsible enough to be parents should not be allowed to have sex that might result in children (planned or not).-------- of coase thats ridiculously proposterous---- for which sake i might consider that if the parents are that irresponsible, maybe it be better the baby not be born, but the abortion should be early as possible. Hey i was just wondering, right now in the U.S., abortion isn't legal right? Is it at least a medical option in the case of rape and such? Whatever the case, those who oppose abortion should accept those exceptions.