The KGB Oracle Forums General Public Discussion (PUBLIC) The Pub Who is your choice for US President?

I havent been following yours and Fleetings debate all that closely but I think I know what Fleeting meant in regard to this.

Quote:

---

I guess I dont know what you mean by the world is 10,000 years old. Who the hell belives that.

---

Man or any of its variants have only been around for about 10,000 years.

I could be totally wrong but that is what I am guessing he is pointing to.

I think fleeting meant how according to the general stretches of time and years between stories thrown around in the bible, if you follow the bible in a literal, rather than metaphorical sense (which a surprisingly large amount of extremely ignorant people do) then you pretty much believe that the world is 10,000 years old, even though through Carbon dating we can prove it's... I believe 4 billion years old.

Humans have been on the earth I'm pretty sure about 70,000 years actually.

Really, at about 19 days, heartbeat begins. I think brainwaves don't begin for around 3 months though. It's hard to really draw the line as to when an embryo changes from being a parasite living off the mother, to being an independent life-form.

I mean, if you want to say the second the Zygote forms and cells start splitting, then that's already a baby with a life, then what's really the difference between a zygote composed of 2 cells, and the 2 cells apart? Technically, cells are alive. In which case, the egg and the sperm are alive. In which case, you're killing millions of lives every time you beat off.

Obviously you're not going to consider a sperm a living human, I mean, it only has half of the necessary chromosomes, but I'm just saying, there's a really shady boundary with when life begins and when it doesn't.

I don't see what's so hard about the idea of separation of church and state. People treat the fucking government like when there's that little kid picking fights in elementary school, but then getting his big friend to back him up. People don't agree with say... gay marriage because of religion, but then try to get their buddies in the government to stand up for that stance and pass a bullshit religious agenda. And it's really like that for so many of these issues. That's really why I'll be voting Obama, it's an extremely critical time in our country's history, socially speaking, and I don't want an ignorant religious agenda to pretty much control what research can and can not be done, who people can and can't marry, whether or not a woman can have an abortion, etc.

Let's speak about gay marriage. I'm straight and I love it, as I'm almost 100% sure everyone in the KGB is. And although some of you might flat out hate/be disgusted by gays, I'm almost sure most of us feel like Represent explained the other day "I don't mind as long as they don't go hitting on me." Well guess what, they know society feels like that, and unless they're drunk and stupid, they know better than to hit on straight guys. They usually know when someone is gay, and pretty much keep their advances within the gay community. Past that, who cares if they get married or not? Are your balls going to fall off because two men just got married? No, it doesn't affect your life in any way, so just get over it and stop being so intrusive into other people's personal lives. Flat out, bottom line, it's discrimination. It's bullshit to preach Civil Rights and act about how archaic it was to have double-standards for Blacks v. Whites, but then do the same to Straights v. Gays. On top of that, in many cases, such as insurance, beneficiaries need to legally be married to the person with the insurance plan or whatever the case may be. In this case, gays are being royally screwed at the moment, and this is something that needs to be corrected. It's simply not fair to take rights away from any group of people that you're giving to the rest of the citizens.

How about stem cells? You know what, sure, it might be killing baby. Honestly, if the government deemed that anything before the 2nd trimester (I'm pretty sure still not even the size of your fist) is abortable, I don't see why science can't use it to save lives. Think about all the shit that stem cells can be used for. They can completely change the world. Fleeting has muscular dystrophy, no? And although I've heard some of those degenerative muscle diseases can be helped through the use of steroids, I'm sure it's just a way to stall the progress. On the other hand, although I personally haven't looked into stem cells' abilities to cure that condition, I'm sure Fleeting has, and that's why he's gunning for stem cell research, and maybe if he doesn't mind he could enlighten us as to what exactly the disease causes, and how stem cells could cure it. My Step-Father has Multiple Sclerosis. Pretty much what happens with MS is its an auto-immune disease where your white blood cells attack the lining of the nerves on the way to certain parts of your body. These linings act as insulators so that the nerves only react to signals you're specifically sending them, rather than any electrical signal nearby them. When this lining is gone, they get too much "white noise" and if you have any motion at all in the affected limb, it's just a fraction of the strength of what it used to be. My stepdad was in a wheel chair for I believe about six weeks, and then the attacks stopped. Through a bunch of physical therapy he was able to slowly get up and walk with a cane, and eventually without a cane. But he still walks slow as hell, he has a horrible limp (I guess on both legs) he can barely lift his legs, he can't run, he can barely climb stairs with much help of the railing, he can't kick shit, etc. Bush was all for stem cells at first cause he was on Reagan's Alzheimerous dick. There hope that stem cells could regenerate the cells that were dying in Alzheimer's patients' brains (forgot their name at the moment, all I can think is Axioms, which isn't their name. It'll come back to me eventually, but by then I'm sure someone will have said the name of braincells in a reply :P.) Also for example for people with organ failures, there is hope that with Stem Cells we could pretty much grow entire organs, rather than harvest them off other humans. Not just this, but the idea is it'll actually match the recipients' bodies, so that they won't have to take immuno-suppressant drugs so the body's white cells don't attack the foreign organ. There are a lot of bad diseases out there that Stem Cells can help. You're going to tell me that because you're killing the equivalent of one of the eggs you get at the super market, that this research shouldn't be further explored? Please, give me a break.

I've spent like half an hour if not more writing this. I'll speak about abortions some other time.

Register for Darkfall beta.

Err... just realized I sort of missed the whole point about MS. So the goal with stem cells is that they can somehow regenerate that lining to the nerves, therefore allowing those body parts to receive signals correctly again.

Great Post Bibliotequa. Agree with you on pretty much all of it.

I too am 100% hetrosexual but belive very strongly in equal rights and equal benefits for gays.

It's true that I have muscular dystropy like Toxiclore however my views on stem cell research are not related to my disablity.

Stem cell research or Gene therapy has almost no chance of being ready in time to save my life my views are based on what I think is best for the world.

My views on abortion of disabled babies though in certain circumstances is of course strongly coloured by my experiences and feelings and I'm also pro euthanasia.

1) Evolution is fact. We can see the impact of evolution every single day (and without stretching the imagination!). Of course scientists and the like get to watch bacteria and such evolve regularly, but the rest of us have to settle for evidence such as dog breeding. Breeding dogs is premeditated evolution; breeders take dogs with ideal traits and put them together until they make doggy babies. Then they do it again with the generation of dogs they just bred. This is how new breeds of dog *evolve* into existence.

If you deny that evolution is fact, then you aren't paying attention to the shit that goes on around you every day.

However, I understand that the controversy surrounding the battle between "creationists" and "evolutionists" can be very confusing at times.

It *is* (and this is where the argument is relevant) theory that all life evolved from single-cell organisms that magically appeared one day several billion years ago. At first glance, it seems just as improbable as an invisible sky-daddy deciding our rock needed a little something to spice it up a bit. It is a theory because we have no way of going all the way back to the origin of life and watching it happen. For questioning this, I respect you (as long as you can admit that your beliefs sound just as ridiculous as mine).

2) If we aren't going to let people abort unborn babies to prevent a whole fuckton of unnecessary bullshit then we should give them the right to eat them after they're born!

As a side note I would like to discredit any future rebuttal that may play on the idea that "those (born or unborn) babies are tomorrow's future." Aborting a fetus isn't something people go out and do for shits and giggles, abortions are a responsible way of maintaining the integrity of our social structure.

For 9 months babies are parasites, and then they enter the real world where they rely on us to be responsible and well-off enough to take care of them for 18 years. In the interest of unborn babies everywhere: no one deserves to be raised by parents who don't want them; no one deserves to be raised by parents who can't afford to feed them or bring them to the doctor; and no one deserves to be raised by parents who suck at life so bad that they think having sex doesn't make babies.

I personally believe that abortion should be mandatory unless a couple can meet certain criteria based on levels of education and income (not to say everyone needs a college degree and a desk job, but high school diploma and relevant real-life experience should be required), and can provide a rough outline of how they plan to manage their jobs, time, and money in a way which will provide to the child. It doesn't need to be a tedious procedure, but everyone should be required to prove they can take care of themselves and a child before they should be allowed to raise a child.