OMG!! He gets extra points for using a lamp shade on a tesla coil. That's bloody wicked. This guy could be so dangerous if he hooked up with the likes of Dr.Evil or Al Qaeda.
But it's interesting that you bring up the part about the countries being run by BAD PEOPLE. Now I won't argue that the dictator of N.Korea is an asshole or not, I personally think that he is. But I will argue that the BAD PEOPLE defense is very relative.
Of course it is relative. Relative to most every other "leader" in the world, Kim Jong Il is a bad person. Glad to put it into context for you.
Thank you. I was having a hard time with that.
You can find a lot of people in the Mid East who think the exact same thing about the United States, and also believe that the United States is out to "GET" them, and to ruin there way of life.
How many of these people think this because of the propaganda they here from the mullahs and islamic extremists that are rampant in their countries? Or by their dictators in whose best interest it is if the people hate America?
How many of these American think the same thing becuase of the propaganda they here from their extremists politicians and religious leaders, who it is in there best interest to attack the people in the islamic world?
While I don't believe what I just said to be true. Your argument can be used right back at the United States. Not all Americans hate muslims, but they are recieving proganda to tell them that they should.
Is Iran a free, democratic country? No.
Is N. Korea a free, democratic country? No.
Are they both run by people oppressing their citizens? Yes.
Are they both armed with nuclear weapons or working toward that goal? Yes.
If they were armed with nuclear weapons, would they pose a serious threat to their neighbors? Yes. Iran -- Israel. N. Korea -- S. Korea.
Would they both be interested in selling nuclear weapons to terrorist cells? Probably so.
Without intervention of some kind, will these countries become freer, safer, less of a threat to the free world as time goes on. Doubtful.
Is the United States a free, democratic country? Well, it's democratic, but free? With the way that people are giving away their rights, and the way that the US is not continuing to give people freedom, I would say NO. The U.S. is no longer a free country.
Is it run by people oppressing their citizens? Somewhat.
Is it armed with nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction? Yes and Yes. And also the most advanced army in the world. The U.S. doesn't spend all that money on military just to defend themselves. The U.S. goes out and gets what it pays for.
Is the U.S. a serious threat to other countries? Yes. To who? Which ever country they want to attack.
Would they both be interested in selling weapons and military intelligence? Yes, and they have so, as in my previous post, where they GAVE military intelligence to Saddam Hussien.
Does the U.S. have a history of fucking around in the middle east where it has no real business in being except to protect their intrests in Fossil Fules? Yes. Ever since they gave Afghani Freedom fighters (read, Al Qaedia) weapons through Pakistan to fight the Russians.
If the U.S. hasn't been fucking around in the middle east for around 15 years, would they still be hated as much as they are? I don't know, that's a really big if. But I don't think that it's helping them.
Ok, maybe "pose a threat" is the wrong words to use, maybe the better words to use were "Countries that the United States thinks pose a threat". Maybe I should have spelt that out, but I wasn't arguing wether these countries were a threat to the United States or not.
The argument was that the United States will say that "They have weapons of Mass Destruction" when they don't, and then attack. But if they DO have weapons of mass destruction that argument won't be said simply because the United State wouldn't want to risk an attack with a country that has nukes.
Then again, I could be wrong. I wouldn't put it pass the U.S. to attack anyway.
But it's interesting that you bring up the part about the countries being run by BAD PEOPLE. Now I won't argue that the dictator of N.Korea is an asshole or not, I personally think that he is. But I will argue that the BAD PEOPLE defense is very relative. You can find a lot of people in the Mid East who think the exact same thing about the United States, and also believe that the United States is out to "GET" them, and to ruin there way of life.
It's that very thinking that causes terrorisim. "The United States is out to _get us_, so we have to go bomb them to stop them."
Also alot of this is a results of the United States protecting it's oil intrests in the middle east. Such as giving Iraq military intelligence in it's fight against Iran. So good guy Saddam Hussien could find out when those evil Iranians were going to attack and from where. You can see why Iran might have a grudge with the U.S. over stuff like that.
Now I don't want to say that I'm right and that they are wrong, I do want to say that there is a lot more to this then just your president pointing to a country on a map, and saying there evil, and everyone just believes it, and attacks. There is so much more, and that type of action and thinking just creates more problems, and continues to increase the risk of terrorisim in the U.S. instead of decreasing it.
You're absolutely right. It's sad that in order to prevent your country from being attacked, you have to be able to assure "MAD", Mutually Assured Destruction.
The States has proven with their pre-emptive attack that if you don't have WMDs, you are a threat.
It's such messed up logic. I can see why every single country that poses a threat to the U.S. will try to arm themselves now.
I thought it was necessary to go over the top and then over it again. We could argue it, but then I would have to conduct a study on the amount of money being wasted by people arguing over silly things on slashdot. Then/. would be sued by those angry CEOs for the billions and billions of dollars that are wasted anually.
I spent 5 minutes today scratching myself when I got into work. Now if everybody in the world does that, it costs $512823812937123 TRILLION DOLLARS every other minute! Then you'll get angry CEOS who will want to enforce rules to only higher ugly women, or remove them from the work force.
This is just more serious bullshit. If they really want to do a study. See how much money is spent on men looking at women's breasts at work. They will find out that is 123190238127398071273891029837129387 TRILLION DOLLARS EVERY minute.
Do these studies ever take into account that people can't spend every single waking second at work doing work, and that it neccessary to sometimes do something different. Although spam does differ, where it is a nusance, and as such it does waste peoples time constantly. But the way the factor it by putting a value on an employees time is very in accurate.
I love our liquor stores! While it is less of a convenience to be able to go to the grocery store or convenience store and pick up some booze, I love the benefits that we get from the LCBO that we wouldn't have otherwise. The LCBO (liqour control board of ontario) goes through great lengths to do quality control on all of the products it sells. If you purchase a bottle of wine that claims to be from Southern California, you can bet that is where it comes from. They chemically analyze all of there drinks, and they know the chemical makeup of the soil in Southern California, so they will compare the wine to the soil. If they find that certain products are lying, or they contain to much crap, the products don't get sold.
Personally, I love it. I also love it that the liqour stores are very pleasent to visit. I don't think I've ever met a rude employee at an lcbo.
That is a very nice budget. Even with hardware failures. I understand that you can't expect everything to be perfect, but now they have the money. So money is no longer an excuse.
It would be nice to know though that they are working on it. Or that they have the full staff that originally programmed it working on it. I hope that they haven't switched to some other group to do mantienance or something.
Regardless you are right. I must admit that I wrote the previous message while remembering problems that I've expereinced with the game. So I was definately writing with a bit of venom.
If things do not shape up in a couple of months, I do intend to cancel my account.
Yes I have thought about it. If you'll notice that I never mentioned the original cost of the game either. I know I didn't take into acount x,y,z factors, but I think we can both agree that with 600,000 units sold, the original cost of the game, and the monthly service fee that Blizzard is making a shit load of money. Even if they are making something like 5 million a month. You can't honsetly believe that it costs them 5 million a MONTH to keep that game running. I play the game, and I AM happy with it, even if it disconnects a couple of times every time I play it. Or you get to a point where everyone in the game is in the general chat complaining about how the server just isn't responding. The whole server runs into minute(s) long lag times. My point is that they are making a lot of money, and there product does have problems, and as a paying customer I expect them to fix them.
Now you go sit in the corner and contemplate that for a few minutes before you slip back into your willy nilly bitchy feely mindset.
600,000 * $15 a month = $9,000,000 a month in monthly services charges. With that much money, there should be no reason that I repeatedly run into server problems, such as lag, or having the server kick me for no reason.
I know that this doesn't garuntee you a perfect gaming experience. But common... For the amount of money they are making, I shouldn't be running into simple problems, such as my character drowning while I'm out of the water, because the server decides to take a nap.
Well there were talks in the meeting about replacing the maple leaf with a Newfie throwing up screech to make it more Newfoundland friendly. So that they would put the flags back up, and have something to be proud of.
It was later dismissed when we realized that the rest of the world would just point and laugh at us.
So we went with the less laughable pine cone.
I totally agree with you. The problem is that the U.S. now has a history of pre-emptively attacking a country that is not a threat to it. Which means that if you are a country that has something that the U.S. wants, the chances of you being fucked are greater.
The next dictator that is going to be in Saddam's shoes, when the U.S. gears up to attack his country, will not be as optimistic as you or I. If I was said dictator, and had an arsenal of ICBMS with nuclear warheads, I wouldn't hesitate to fire them at every major U.S. city becuase Mutually Assured Destruction would already be assured. The only difference is that instead of the U.S. launch an invasion, they would carpet bomb the country with nukes also.
During the Cuban missle crisis, Russia already had nukes in Cuba. Fidel told Khrushchev to USE the nukes against the U.S. Fidel was willing to sacrifice his people. Luckily Khrushchev's cooler head prevailed and nuclear winter was avoided. Which does support the argument about human nature not wanting to destroy everbody.
BUT, that was back in the day, if the Cuban Missle crisis happend now, do you think Khrushchev would hesitate to use those nukes? Especially when he knows that U.S. WOULD be attacking his country regardless if he uses them or not.
It's really sad, and I don't wish to be so pestimistic.
...spreading your legs a bit so that your boys can swing freely a bit. We all know that they are placed on the outside of the body so that they can regulate tempurature. When they are cold the skin tightens up a bit and they get closer to the body for warmth. When they are hot the skin loosens so they can get further from the body and cool off.
I'm assuming that the problem with laptops is that becuase people keep there legs together while they have the laptop on there lap, their boys have no place to go, so they just get warmed up. So spreading the legs a bit so that they can get further away from the body, and maybe not resting the laptop right ontop of your boys might help.
Then again, I didn't read the article, and I rarely use a laptop.
I have not read the bible from cover to cover. Although I have read parts. This doesn't make me wrong either.
I did not mean to imply that the Bible is on par with Mother Goose. The fact is that much of the original versions you refer to were not written at the time in which what it writes about was happening. The New Testament was written years after Jesus' death/resurection. The bible was also not written by God, it was written by man. Which you pointed out " The disease is sin, evidenced by our selfishness and pride. This is what separates us from a Holy God.". So the people the wrote it were inherintely sinners, like all of us.
Now because the bible was written a long time ago, and proverbs don't have the same meaning as the did back then, the Bible is interpreted. Once again the hand of man who is not perfect is tainting it. So is it possible that man got it wrong? Yes, very much so. At every step, regardless of how few it steps it is, we have said what we think the bible is trying to say. Regardless of good intentions, I don't have believe that it is always used correctly.
Again this shows that we should have an open mind, because we simply do not have all the answers. It doesn't mean that we can simply go around killing each other. That would be harming others. I don't see what 2 people do in there home and hurting anybody.
As for the cloning. I'm pretty sure that is what cloning is. You take an egg, and fertilize it with a couple of cells (the dna part). Kinda like artifical insemination (I probably didn't spell that right). You then throw it in an oven and bake for 9 months. I'm under the impression that you can just let the fertilized egg bake for a few days and remove the stem cells.
I wish I could use my moderation points to mod this up, but this is fascinating stuff.
What I don't get is, how is there a 1 in 4 chance that my child may not be my child? I know that you are speaking geneticly, but where do those number come from?
I say that, because It seems unlikely that there would be 25% chance that my child may not share a large portion of my genes.
Ok, so you also say that the clan benefits from having a person that is not going to have children. So then can the clan also benefit from having an uncle or aunt that is a homosexual?
How does this benefit the clan? The non-homosexual that doesn't have kids, and the homosexual that also won't have kids.
In fact, the Hebrew scriptures (read Old Testament) and the New testament affirm that the world in which we live is flawed as a result of the sin of Adam.
The old testament, and new testament affirm nothing. The are simply nice stories which are used by people to prove a point. Every week people around the world read the same reading from the same bible, and not every priest gives the same interpreation of the bible. That is proof that everything that is interpreted from the bible should be taken with a grain of salt.
I agree with you that people CAN have things forced on them that are beyond there control, such as a bad temper, alcoholisim, prone to physical abuse, whatever. The church does promote that you should have self control over that.
What I'm saying is that there might be a possibility that homosexuals are born that way. I'm not saying that they are, and not. It is a possibility. Secondly it is there free right to do as they please with there body. God's greatest gift is free will. If 2 guys want to bone each other, they are not going against God. There is no rule saying that they have to procreate. This can be argued that our soul responsibility is to procreate to insure the well being of the species.
Yet, I don't have to, if I don't want to. With these things in mind, you would think that people would have a lot more open mind about it.
Instead people treat it like it's a disease, and they try to cure these people of it.
As for the point about the embryo. I am under the impression that it is possible to use dna to place into an embryo, to get stem cells. That you would use the steps of cloning to get your stem cells. Badda bing badda boom.. no sperm, no problem
I agree, you would think that if there were a "gay gene" that it would have been removed from natural selection.
I've heard of studies saying that homosexuality can simply be the result of to much of the wrong hormone at the wrong time.
One of the interesting things about this was that if you look a man's hand. The ring finger, is longer then the pointer finger. If you look at a women's hand, then those two fingers are almost the same length. Yet if you look at gay men's hands (apparently some of them), will have those two fingers closer to the same length. Which is more like a women's. Interesting stuff.
I'm not saying that there is a "gay gene" or not. I really don't know. I wouldn't rule out the possibility that there is something in us that causes us to have gay children. I really don't know.
What I do know is that, I'm not going to tell someone how they can run there life. I'm also deffinately not going to do it because some man man behind a podium simply says so.
I have a different perspective, but I agree with you. This is my perspective.
I am kinda pro-life/pro-choice. I've had the issue of abortion very close to me. If my mother wasn't so dead against it, she would probably have taken the doctors recommendation to abort me.
Although, I've learnt to admit that what a woman does with her body is ultimately her decision, even if it includes murder. No sarcasm intended. When it comes to your body, you have the only choice.
Anyway, let's get back on topic. The way that the church works is that they believe that God created things a certain way. So if God made things a certain way, then that must be holy. The Church is against gay marrige, because they think that a man and a man can not procreate, so it goes against God. Abortion stops Gods miricale of birth right in it's tracks.
This is where I totally disagree with the Church, and I think that it should take a back seat to logic. If it is proven that people are born homosexual, then the church should be FORCED to accept them, because that's how God created them.
As for medicine, the church believes it's ok, because God gave us the gift of our minds, and the ability to defend ourselves to live longer. This is argueable to, because God also creates death.
Anyway, I think I'm finally getting to my point. With embryonic stem cells there is no sperm involved. So the "natural" course of life has been diverted. So this is not something that is naturally happening. Also what you are left with is a bunch of cells, that don't make up life. They may have the potential for life, but there is none. So as long as we don't let those cells turn into life, I don't see a problem at all. I also don't see how the Church and Chrstian extremists can possibly have a problem.
I for sure have no problem with any form of stem cell research, as long as the cells in the petri dish are not allowed to mature into life.
I've seen this thing on Daily Planet. It's a Discovery Canada science news show. They did a little piece on this thing. When I saw it like 4 months ago, the thopter was almost ready to get off the ground. The showed it running down the runway, and it was bouncing off the ground. As the wings came down, it would actually pull the wheels up, and as the wings went up, the wheels came down. It was pretty funny, but you could tell that this thing just needed a little more balls to get into the air.
Also when they interviewed the professor, he was saying that a thopter could potentionally be much more manuverable then a traditional air plane, which was one of the reasons why he was building it.
Slashdot Mirror
That's funny, I plan to punch in the face anybody I see carrying a towel. God help me if I see anybody with a gold fish stuck in their ear.
OMG!! He gets extra points for using a lamp shade on a tesla coil. That's bloody wicked. This guy could be so dangerous if he hooked up with the likes of Dr.Evil or Al Qaeda.
While I don't believe what I just said to be true. Your argument can be used right back at the United States. Not all Americans hate muslims, but they are recieving proganda to tell them that they should.
Is the United States a free, democratic country? Well, it's democratic, but free? With the way that people are giving away their rights, and the way that the US is not continuing to give people freedom, I would say NO. The U.S. is no longer a free country.Is it run by people oppressing their citizens? Somewhat.
Is it armed with nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction? Yes and Yes. And also the most advanced army in the world. The U.S. doesn't spend all that money on military just to defend themselves. The U.S. goes out and gets what it pays for.
Is the U.S. a serious threat to other countries? Yes. To who? Which ever country they want to attack.
Would they both be interested in selling weapons and military intelligence? Yes, and they have so, as in my previous post, where they GAVE military intelligence to Saddam Hussien.
Does the U.S. have a history of fucking around in the middle east where it has no real business in being except to protect their intrests in Fossil Fules? Yes. Ever since they gave Afghani Freedom fighters (read, Al Qaedia) weapons through Pakistan to fight the Russians.
If the U.S. hasn't been fucking around in the middle east for around 15 years, would they still be hated as much as they are? I don't know, that's a really big if. But I don't think that it's helping them.
The argument was that the United States will say that "They have weapons of Mass Destruction" when they don't, and then attack. But if they DO have weapons of mass destruction that argument won't be said simply because the United State wouldn't want to risk an attack with a country that has nukes.
Then again, I could be wrong. I wouldn't put it pass the U.S. to attack anyway.
But it's interesting that you bring up the part about the countries being run by BAD PEOPLE. Now I won't argue that the dictator of N.Korea is an asshole or not, I personally think that he is. But I will argue that the BAD PEOPLE defense is very relative. You can find a lot of people in the Mid East who think the exact same thing about the United States, and also believe that the United States is out to "GET" them, and to ruin there way of life.
It's that very thinking that causes terrorisim. "The United States is out to _get us_, so we have to go bomb them to stop them."
Also alot of this is a results of the United States protecting it's oil intrests in the middle east. Such as giving Iraq military intelligence in it's fight against Iran. So good guy Saddam Hussien could find out when those evil Iranians were going to attack and from where. You can see why Iran might have a grudge with the U.S. over stuff like that.
Now I don't want to say that I'm right and that they are wrong, I do want to say that there is a lot more to this then just your president pointing to a country on a map, and saying there evil, and everyone just believes it, and attacks. There is so much more, and that type of action and thinking just creates more problems, and continues to increase the risk of terrorisim in the U.S. instead of decreasing it.
The States has proven with their pre-emptive attack that if you don't have WMDs, you are a threat.
It's such messed up logic. I can see why every single country that poses a threat to the U.S. will try to arm themselves now.
I thought it was necessary to go over the top and then over it again. We could argue it, but then I would have to conduct a study on the amount of money being wasted by people arguing over silly things on slashdot. Then /. would be sued by those angry CEOs for the billions and billions of dollars that are wasted anually.
I spent 5 minutes today scratching myself when I got into work. Now if everybody in the world does that, it costs $512823812937123 TRILLION DOLLARS every other minute! Then you'll get angry CEOS who will want to enforce rules to only higher ugly women, or remove them from the work force.
This is just more serious bullshit. If they really want to do a study. See how much money is spent on men looking at women's breasts at work. They will find out that is 123190238127398071273891029837129387 TRILLION DOLLARS EVERY minute.
Do these studies ever take into account that people can't spend every single waking second at work doing work, and that it neccessary to sometimes do something different. Although spam does differ, where it is a nusance, and as such it does waste peoples time constantly. But the way the factor it by putting a value on an employees time is very in accurate.
Personally, I love it. I also love it that the liqour stores are very pleasent to visit. I don't think I've ever met a rude employee at an lcbo.
Anyway, that's my $0.02
I'm seeing an oscar contender shaping up here...
$9,000,000 / 100 != $9,000
$9,000,000 / 100 = $90,000
That is a very nice budget. Even with hardware failures. I understand that you can't expect everything to be perfect, but now they have the money. So money is no longer an excuse.
It would be nice to know though that they are working on it. Or that they have the full staff that originally programmed it working on it. I hope that they haven't switched to some other group to do mantienance or something.
Regardless you are right. I must admit that I wrote the previous message while remembering problems that I've expereinced with the game. So I was definately writing with a bit of venom.
If things do not shape up in a couple of months, I do intend to cancel my account.
Now you go sit in the corner and contemplate that for a few minutes before you slip back into your willy nilly bitchy feely mindset.
I know that this doesn't garuntee you a perfect gaming experience. But common... For the amount of money they are making, I shouldn't be running into simple problems, such as my character drowning while I'm out of the water, because the server decides to take a nap.
It was later dismissed when we realized that the rest of the world would just point and laugh at us. So we went with the less laughable pine cone.
You also missed the part of the meeting where we changed the flag from the maple leaf, to the pine cone.
The next dictator that is going to be in Saddam's shoes, when the U.S. gears up to attack his country, will not be as optimistic as you or I. If I was said dictator, and had an arsenal of ICBMS with nuclear warheads, I wouldn't hesitate to fire them at every major U.S. city becuase Mutually Assured Destruction would already be assured. The only difference is that instead of the U.S. launch an invasion, they would carpet bomb the country with nukes also.
During the Cuban missle crisis, Russia already had nukes in Cuba. Fidel told Khrushchev to USE the nukes against the U.S. Fidel was willing to sacrifice his people. Luckily Khrushchev's cooler head prevailed and nuclear winter was avoided. Which does support the argument about human nature not wanting to destroy everbody.
BUT, that was back in the day, if the Cuban Missle crisis happend now, do you think Khrushchev would hesitate to use those nukes? Especially when he knows that U.S. WOULD be attacking his country regardless if he uses them or not.
It's really sad, and I don't wish to be so pestimistic.
-Derek
What type of ice do you play that on?
-Derek
I'm assuming that the problem with laptops is that becuase people keep there legs together while they have the laptop on there lap, their boys have no place to go, so they just get warmed up. So spreading the legs a bit so that they can get further away from the body, and maybe not resting the laptop right ontop of your boys might help.
Then again, I didn't read the article, and I rarely use a laptop.
Just my $0.02.
-Derek
I did not mean to imply that the Bible is on par with Mother Goose. The fact is that much of the original versions you refer to were not written at the time in which what it writes about was happening. The New Testament was written years after Jesus' death/resurection. The bible was also not written by God, it was written by man. Which you pointed out " The disease is sin, evidenced by our selfishness and pride. This is what separates us from a Holy God.". So the people the wrote it were inherintely sinners, like all of us.
Now because the bible was written a long time ago, and proverbs don't have the same meaning as the did back then, the Bible is interpreted. Once again the hand of man who is not perfect is tainting it. So is it possible that man got it wrong? Yes, very much so. At every step, regardless of how few it steps it is, we have said what we think the bible is trying to say. Regardless of good intentions, I don't have believe that it is always used correctly.
Again this shows that we should have an open mind, because we simply do not have all the answers. It doesn't mean that we can simply go around killing each other. That would be harming others. I don't see what 2 people do in there home and hurting anybody.
As for the cloning. I'm pretty sure that is what cloning is. You take an egg, and fertilize it with a couple of cells (the dna part). Kinda like artifical insemination (I probably didn't spell that right). You then throw it in an oven and bake for 9 months. I'm under the impression that you can just let the fertilized egg bake for a few days and remove the stem cells.
I could be totally wrong though.
-Derek
What I don't get is, how is there a 1 in 4 chance that my child may not be my child? I know that you are speaking geneticly, but where do those number come from?
I say that, because It seems unlikely that there would be 25% chance that my child may not share a large portion of my genes.
Ok, so you also say that the clan benefits from having a person that is not going to have children. So then can the clan also benefit from having an uncle or aunt that is a homosexual?
How does this benefit the clan? The non-homosexual that doesn't have kids, and the homosexual that also won't have kids.
Fascinating stuff.
-Derek
I agree with you that people CAN have things forced on them that are beyond there control, such as a bad temper, alcoholisim, prone to physical abuse, whatever. The church does promote that you should have self control over that.
What I'm saying is that there might be a possibility that homosexuals are born that way. I'm not saying that they are, and not. It is a possibility. Secondly it is there free right to do as they please with there body. God's greatest gift is free will. If 2 guys want to bone each other, they are not going against God. There is no rule saying that they have to procreate. This can be argued that our soul responsibility is to procreate to insure the well being of the species. Yet, I don't have to, if I don't want to. With these things in mind, you would think that people would have a lot more open mind about it.
Instead people treat it like it's a disease, and they try to cure these people of it.
As for the point about the embryo. I am under the impression that it is possible to use dna to place into an embryo, to get stem cells. That you would use the steps of cloning to get your stem cells. Badda bing badda boom.. no sperm, no problem
-Derek
I agree, you would think that if there were a "gay gene" that it would have been removed from natural selection.
I've heard of studies saying that homosexuality can simply be the result of to much of the wrong hormone at the wrong time.
One of the interesting things about this was that if you look a man's hand. The ring finger, is longer then the pointer finger. If you look at a women's hand, then those two fingers are almost the same length. Yet if you look at gay men's hands (apparently some of them), will have those two fingers closer to the same length. Which is more like a women's. Interesting stuff.
I'm not saying that there is a "gay gene" or not. I really don't know. I wouldn't rule out the possibility that there is something in us that causes us to have gay children. I really don't know.
What I do know is that, I'm not going to tell someone how they can run there life. I'm also deffinately not going to do it because some man man behind a podium simply says so.
-Derek
I am kinda pro-life/pro-choice. I've had the issue of abortion very close to me. If my mother wasn't so dead against it, she would probably have taken the doctors recommendation to abort me.
Although, I've learnt to admit that what a woman does with her body is ultimately her decision, even if it includes murder. No sarcasm intended. When it comes to your body, you have the only choice.
Anyway, let's get back on topic. The way that the church works is that they believe that God created things a certain way. So if God made things a certain way, then that must be holy. The Church is against gay marrige, because they think that a man and a man can not procreate, so it goes against God. Abortion stops Gods miricale of birth right in it's tracks.
This is where I totally disagree with the Church, and I think that it should take a back seat to logic. If it is proven that people are born homosexual, then the church should be FORCED to accept them, because that's how God created them.
As for medicine, the church believes it's ok, because God gave us the gift of our minds, and the ability to defend ourselves to live longer. This is argueable to, because God also creates death.
Anyway, I think I'm finally getting to my point. With embryonic stem cells there is no sperm involved. So the "natural" course of life has been diverted. So this is not something that is naturally happening. Also what you are left with is a bunch of cells, that don't make up life. They may have the potential for life, but there is none. So as long as we don't let those cells turn into life, I don't see a problem at all. I also don't see how the Church and Chrstian extremists can possibly have a problem.
I for sure have no problem with any form of stem cell research, as long as the cells in the petri dish are not allowed to mature into life.
-Derek
Also when they interviewed the professor, he was saying that a thopter could potentionally be much more manuverable then a traditional air plane, which was one of the reasons why he was building it.
-Derek