john5746

1. What other minority group on the list would you prefer they pick? 2. The article sums it up nicely - people cannot imagine a value system without religion, so they see society without religion as dangerous. I am an atheist by the way.

I wonder if there is ANY process that doesn't have variation?

I think that TV sound bites make issues appear very simple, black and white. If you only have 3 minutes to make a point, it is more effective to appeal to emotion then the intellect. In reality, most issues require deep discussion with many details to consider when trying to practically implement a solution. While debating an issue needs no compromise, in the real world, I think compromise is key to getting anything done. The problem is excaserbated by the thought that delay means apathy. Rather than compromise, it is better to take a side and complain about the "wrong" side and make them look ridiculus for being on that side.

Sort numbers in column A, then past following formula in B column, except the first cell, which you would set to 1. =IF(A2=A1,B1+1,1) this will increment if repeated or set to 1 if not. If you are doing alot of this kind of stuff, importing to Access and doing queries would be some useful knowledge. Excel is great for calculations, statistics and quick sorting. Access is better with sorting, counting, etc

I agree with Pangloss, but have to say: Ahmadinejad would love that Apocalypse movie!

Actually, last night they were harsh on the Bush Administration. I didn't watch all of it, but they were tough on the Clinton Administration on Sunday. Not sure how much they changed, etc.

Forget if Iraq was worth it or not, what I am saying is that the invasion and occupation of it far overshadows the lewinski affair. So, if that affair was so overwhelming to an administration, the Iraq war is 10 times as much. I am sure I could find a quote from a paper somewhere, but it could just be dismissed as politically biased anyway.

OK, so the Iraq war has been a HUGE diversion from the war on Al-Queda and Osama Bin Laden and making Homeland Security a working, viable agency. Fair enough?

I find it interesting that some people are willing to believe that an Administration would be distracted by a lawsuit, but not a war.

1) Nicotine isn't the only bad thing in cigarettes. 2) Nicotine is the drug the people are trying to get from smoking. I am guessing without nicotine, people would not smoke.

I helped grow tobacco in Tennessee as a kid. I know that most small farmers no longer grow tobacco. I am not sure, but I think it is legal to grow a few plants for personal consumption. I would love to see Americans trying to make their own cigs though! As far as the govt. getting involved, I think they should at least provide information on drug levels and regulate the % of the addictive drug contained. Another point though, if the nicotene levels are reduced, would people actually smoke more cigarettes, to get the nicotene they need? This might actually increase the health risk. Maybe reducing them slowly over time would be OK?

If I type in the following words: science forums debate Google - SFN listed around number 35 Yahoo - SFN listed first. Seems like google gives no weight to titles

Nicotine Levels Basically, nicotine levels have been rising over the years, especially those popular to young people. This makes them more addictive. I placed this in politics to ask the question - should the government do anything about it?

I voted not an environmentalists. Unfortunately, environmentalists and liberal is almost as bad as terrorist in the States. I said no because I feel America as a whole doesn't think much of the environment and I don't do enough to offset that. But I am not ready to go climb a tree.

Yes, that is the point. Teenagers are more likely to do stupid, irresponsible things. Especially if they are not educated. Since most are not able to take care of themselves, much less a child, it is a big problem for them to become pregnant. Since sex is the primary cause of pregnancy, it behoves us to let teenagers know that sex is something more than an orgasm. I think kids should abstain from sex until they finish high school, but I am not stupid enough to think laws or banning contraception will make it so. Just as banning slim fast will not make fat people quit eating too much.

This is a quote from the link I provided in the opening post. Teen Pregnancy in decline Summary: 1/4th of the decline is due to abstinence and 3/4ths is due to more effective birth control - long term hormonal treatments. Europe vs America This article is basically saying Europe is more open in discussing teen sex, which results in "smarter" sexual habits. More discussion leads to better education - who would have guessed? I think this all boils down to the breakdown of the family unit, the teen culture and attitudes towards sex. The family isn't talking about it, MTV is saying do it, everyone's doing it, if you ain't you are a loser. Promiscuity to me means having multiple partners. This increases the liklihood of transimission of sexual disease. Why are Americans more promiscuous? I think they are having sex for the wrong reasons. In regards to birth control, it appears to me that the effectiveness of the method(including ease of use) is important. Having condoms all over the place won't help if no one uses them. Having pills readily available won't help if people can't remember to take them or are afraid of being caught.

Not a bad idea. The thread topic isn't even being discussed. Personally, I don't think the terrorism "problem" needs to be debated as much as a solution. What are some proposed solutions? Thinking about the solution may bring to light the actual problem.

The Problem Plan B Over the Counter This is a tough one for me. I fall on the side of allowing younger girls access to the drug. If they are old enough and unsupervised enough to get pregnant, then they should be allowed to take Plan-B unsupervised.