ParanoiA

Well, you're right it does make sense to me. But it still isn't arbitrary. It's, chronologically, the earliest point of human production. There's nothing arbitrary about that. And, not getting laid is a problem. Not fertilizing the egg is a problem. A miscarriage is a problem. Or you can call it a set back. Or you can call it interference. Or whatever you want, but it's fairly obvious it's not the intent of the design. Proof? How about that fact that the major majority of the time an egg is fertilized a baby is a result. The major majority of the time an egg is formed a baby is not a result. The major majority of the time sperm will not create a baby. It takes both.

You go girl. I believe Reza Aslan said that the Islamic culture is about 500 years behind christianity. If you trace chrisitianity's history of violence and oppression, you'll see that Islam is following a similar path. So maybe that means they'll eventually give up this crusade thing...

I think you are justified to say white people are the cause for the world's problems when you provide links or substance to your claim. That's the point. If the subject matter is sensitive for you, then it is you that should not participate. No one should be limited intellectually, as long as it remains intellectual. When folks start mouthing off racial epithets and name calling then that is obvious racism. To judiciate the dynamics of a racial matter, we should require substitive arguments - not limit the integrity of the debate. That's all I'm saying. I simply believe Islam is a racist religion, fundamentally - which is worse. Probably because it was written about the time the Jews were persecuting Arabs, if I remember correctly. Europe had shown them nothing but misery. Christianity, to my knowledge, has no racist theme in any part of the bibles, let alone fundamental racism. Although, the practitioners of christianity were certainly racist as hell and many are still today. I can't claim the religion is so, nor does it teach that way. Religion is dangerous and plagued with death and oppression all throughout history. I don't like any of them. But I only see racism in the teachings of Islam.

A miscarriage or similar is a problem - not the intent of the design. By design, fertilization is the starting point of all humans. There's nothing arbitrary about that. Seems like common sense to me. Examining a gob of cells and arguing about when it becomes important enough to feel sorry about killing it is arbitrary, highly subjective and with no end in sight.

I simply don't agree. I'm not going to make my sensitivity issues everbody else's problem. People waste too much valuable space and time toying around with verbage just in case somebody might get offended. If you're offended, it's your own problem - not the supposed "offender". But then, I'm an extremely tolerant, live-and-let-live libertarian. I don't agree with the liberal PC movement. I'm more interested in the meat and potatoes, not how they're presented.

Are all KKK members guilty of beating or terrorizing minorities? Of course not. But that also doesn't mean that their views on white power are harmless and it's just extremists poisoning an honest and decent way of life. There are things about the Muslim religion that separates it from most' date=' in my opinion and apparently others too. It has a racist and oppressive tone its teaching. No, that doesn't mean that every Muslim is therefore a terrorist, but it [i']does[/i] mean there is an inherent problem with their belief system - much like the KKK. And no I don't think it's racist to point that out. I think it's dangerous not to...

I read those quotes and I would agree with almost all of them except that Christianity had its time slaughtering folks for belief and so forth and now they prefer good ole fashioned propaganda pursuasion. Yes, the Arab world does seem to be obsessed with death and religion. There doesn't seem to be a diplomatic bone in their bodies. When the entire region erupts and people literally die - over a cartoon mind you...geez I could go on but my wife is on my ass about getting off my ass so I got to split, sorry.

Scroll up to see how I figure...

There's nothing good and healthy about cencorship due to other's sensitivity issues with race and religion. This debate is largely along racial lines. Arabs and Jews. Of course there's going to be negative criticism addressed to one race or another. Too bad folks are more interested in being PC rather than being truthful. Kind of a let down seeing as how this is a scientific forum. I thought the intellect here would be far superior to such shallow concepts.

I don't get your point. What does that have to do with anything? This is simply when human life begins.

Apparently, nobody is interested in its originality since the idea is at least as old as May 14, 1948. Most are more interested in the substance of it.

Yeah. Fertilization is when it the actual human potential begins. Everything that happens before that will not make a baby. This is the moment of truth. Not really sure what your point is here. Yeah, I'm all for the government not forcing me to give up my kidney for anybody. I prefer the government stay out of all matters to do with my body - inside or out. Legally and socially and any other-lly...

Well, I'm not going to base my beliefs on what might happen as a result - but rather what logically makes sense. I can't help that legislation will evolve the way you say, but it doesn't make the just-conceived human conclusion wrong because of that. Furthermore, legally speaking, I believe a woman should have a right to kill her unborn child. If it's in her body, it shouldn't have any rights other than the rights she grants. I don't care if it's 9 months, she can kill it if she wants as far as I'm concerned. That is, if she can live with her decision.

I guess, if you want to split hairs, you could conclude that's a philosophy in itself. I'm just saying it is murder but I'm not against it. I don't think it's productive to mislead yourself with shady philosophy so you don't have to face the fact you're in favor of murdering undeveloped humans.

I don't see how that would fix anything. The Arab world would still hate it and attack it because: 1) Still has Jews living there 2) Isn't dominated by Islam 3) Doesn't oppress women 4) Can't be controlled and manipulated with filtered media

Ok, now think that through. We're going to train some elite force to operate in any peacekeeping scenario in any part of the world? First of all, that's a ton of training that will require partitions and huge numbers of manpower. They're going to be training for environments they will likely never operate in. Whereas the armies already in that region already are trained for that environment, with history and knowledge of the area not available as a neutral outside force. And again, the dynamics of a given conflict are not compatible with the limitations of such a force. The limits of the peacekeeping force becomes the bar of expectation for the insurgents when those limitations are known. A modern army doesn't really have a reasonable limitation for insurgents to surpass, whereas this peacekeeping force would. And would have to if it's not going to be a new world order threat. It just sounds all nice and logical on the surface, but thinking it out doesn't really yield anything desirable, to me anyway. Not sure I really dig the police force mentallity either. I understand the psychological perspective, and is very appealing, but it's still a static value being applied to dynamic problems. I guess I just like the flexibility and responsibility that comes with each nation coughing up military resources on a per conflict basis.

I think it can come along way. We're awesome tool makers. I'm sure we can come up with state of the art tools and weaponry to help. If necessity is the mother of invention then why not embrace the opportunity?