 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - - Posts by Silvershield |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 |
| User | Post | ||
Silvershield   580                   Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Everybody Wang ChungYes! I, of course, gave a critically acclaimed performance as Anton. That was my shining moment. Haven't done theater since, nor do I intend to. I dislike drama as a form of literature in general, but genuinely hate the performance aspect of it. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
Originally posted by SkreenameGo tell that pregnant mother - the one who actually wants her child, not the one who's contemplating murdering it - that her baby-to-be is a parasite. Sure, it might meet your technical criteria to be defined as such, but that's a gross (and frankly, offensive) oversimplification. Originally posted by SkreenameYour logic fails. You can get a "new" fully-developed human being just as easily as you can get a "new" fetus. Just as it's kinda hard to bring back a dead adult person, so is it a bit difficult to resurrect an aborted fetus. Each of the two is a unique creature both psychologically and genetically; it's no less impossible to create an identical replacement of one than it is the other. Originally posted by DracoonI'm not asking you to follow any specific doctrine of my church, but I would be a failure as a Christian and as a human being if I did not believe that my own carefully-examined morality cannot and should not apply universally. You don't have to believe in Jesus - hell, you don't even have to respect him (because so many people find that so difficult to do) - but I would personally act to "enforce" my beliefs on others insomuch as those specific beliefs that I seek to spread are precepts that humanity at large would do well to recognize. My stance against abortion is not born of Christian values, though it certainly falls in line with the view of the Church. Instead, I am anti-abortion because I personally value human life at all stages of development. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
I'm glad somebody else replied so quickly, so that I can actually respond to the original topic without having to go back and edit my post...
Sex is the natural animal act that leads to the perpetuation of a species, and isn't the "dirty" thing many of the religious tend to make it out to be. Or, to be more accurate, that many of the religious' critics say that the religious make it out to be. But that's a different story. Anyhow, there is no punishment for intercourse, beyond the chance to become pregnant. And that's certainly not a punishment. Nor is childbirth a punishment as much as it is an unfortunately painful experience that is a product of the human anatomy. The female human is certainly meant to pass an infant through the birth canal, just as the infant is designed to fit through that space (considering how the bones of the skull are not fully fused and can compress to some degree), but it is a far from painless process. Most mothers, though, will profess that the pain is the necessary and acceptable price for the end product. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
| I know it's been said a million times before, and I'm hardly an innovator for bringing it up again, but it is the parent who is responsible for the development of his child. A video game with certain content can certainly have an effect on the psyche of a youth, but any person of reasonable maturity and reasonable intelligence can lose nothing by enjoying electronic entertainment.
There is no relationship between a maladapted child and that child's enjoyment of video games, but there is definitely a correlation between that maladapted child and his parents' poor work at raising their offspring. The second should not be mistaken for the first. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580  Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
Originally posted by VyperYep, that's what I'm saying. The pain of childbirth is not some punishment of Eve's carried over to all women everywhere, but a consequence of basic anatomy. And, horrific as that pain is - not that I have, nor ever will, personally experience it - you'd be hard-pressed to find a mother holding her newborn who would not do it all over again. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
| Yeah, abstinence as a reliable method of birth control has not, and probably never will, catch on very strongly. Understanding sexual activity as a given, and also understanding that large scale absintence is not practical, the distribution of birth control becomes viable. It would reduce abortions, STDs (in the case of some methods of birth control), and the frequency of children who are unable to be cared for by their destitute parents. It's not an ideal solution - as I said, abstinence is ideal - but its positive effects would be overwhelming to the point of negating the negative. | |||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Snow TomatoThe livestock and poultry raised purely to be consumed as food don't have much in the way of a life, anyway. Chickens are born, raised to minimal age, and slaughtered relatively humanely. Larger animals naturally need a longer time to achieve viable size and weight, but can count on a life of plenty as far as food and basic necessities are concerned. No such animal lives a life of luxury, but man is naturally omnivorous and he has tamed the animal kingdom in such a way that, while not ideal - I suppose ideal would be treating each farm-raised chicken as if it were a millionaire's pet poodle, giving it expensive food and its own private living conditions - ably balances economy with some basic degree of humane care. Like it or not, a human being naturally consumes meat, and the only methods that could produce meat on such a large scale are not methods that many animal rights activists are all that fond of. It's just the way it has to be. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580  Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
| I don't see the point to it. Most other vices offer some sort of benefit, at least - marijuana will get you high, alcohol will get you drunk - but there's no benefit to smoking a cigarette. (Not that I endorse either marijuana or alcohol, but hey...) There are so many easier, healthier ways to achieve that "relaxation" that smokers say they get from a cigarette. Work out for a bit, take a nice jog; by the time you've finished and you've cooled down and taken a shower, you'll feel more mellow than a cigarette will ever make you feel, and you've improved your body rather than injured it!
I can understand a person who smokes because of a habit developed during a more impressionable age - I pride myself on never having given in to any of that peer pressure in high school, but that's another story - but when I see friends at college picking up the habit now, at age 18, it baffles me. A cigarette in hand certainly makes a person look cool in a casual, "I don't give a damn" way, but it's my own opinion that that "I don't give a damn" is in reference to the person's own physical health rather than an ultra-cool worldview. Which is a shame. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Captain SubtextChill out, brosef. I never said their living conditions are especially humane, just their method of execution. (And, honestly, I feel like "execution" is the best way to describe it.) But the animals in question - chickens, specifically - don't live all that long as it is, so it's not a priority. I'm not saying I'm all for current conventions in raising livestock, but the price of meat would shoot up ten times if conditions were improved to the point most people would consider acceptable. That doesn't constitute my approval of how things are, just an acknowledgement that that's how it has to be. Originally posted by Snow TomatoWhat do you suggest? Edit to respond to Snow Tomato, who posted as I was writing. (edited by Silvershield on 04-19-06 02:08 AM) |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Plus Sign AbominationDon't patronize me!!!11 You can't expect humans as a species to suddenly become entirely herbivorous. It's neither practical nor natural nor really even a good idea. I know that I, for one, am not about to give up meat, despite the state of the industry currently. And most people are on the same page as I am. Originally posted by Captain SubtextYeah, I know somebody at school that says "brosef," and I knew that you, of all people, would find it hilarious... I'm not saying we can't do anything about it, but I am saying that it's not practical to do anything about it. Economically, any sort of revolutionary change cannot be made without spoiling the entire state of affairs. To call meat a staple of the American diet would be an understatement, and increasing its price to the point that would be required if animals' conditions were improved is purely and simply not practical. That word keeps coming up but, plainly, it is just an issue of practicality. Edit for the same reason as above, responding to a post that came as I was writing. (edited by Silvershield on 04-19-06 02:21 AM) |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Snow TomatoIt's not "necessary" as a dietary stable in the sense that there are all sorts of new-age alternatives, but I'd rather get my protein from a juicy steak rather than a peanut butter sandwich or a hunk of tofu. Sure, it's petty. Sure, it's an issue of taste. But I'm not going to bend over backwards to make some sort of political statement or to save a farm-raised animal's life, an animal that doesn't have much of a life in the first place. If that offends anyone's beliefs, I'm sorry, but vegetarianism is not a value that I hold and, frankly, not a value that I believe to be valid (except when it's a result of health concerns or similar issues instead of simply "I think animals are cute and cuddly, so I don't eat them"). |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
| To address your point on oil - I don't have the energy it would take to make all the necessary quotes and whatnot to continue the discussion about meat for the moment - it very much is a global rather than an individual problem. As a consumer, I would love to drive a car that uses less gas, or even one that doesn't use petroleum products at all. Put simply, that's just a matter of money. But governments need to conspire to make such technology affordable and available. As it is now, I'm not going to buy a hybrid car that not only costs me more, but is less convenient to refuel. Investing money in improving the technology and making it more widespread is both wise for the environment and wise for business, but as long as governments are in bed with oil producers, we shouldn't hold our breaths waiting for any significant changes to occur. I'm about as far right-leaning as anyone on this board, but I'll be the first to admit that corruption is so rampant as to allow major corporations to have world governments wrapped around their little fingers.
Edit after noticing that I used the word "major" three times in two sentences... (edited by Silvershield on 04-19-06 03:34 AM) |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
| A bit of a bump, but I cannot sit back and let this thread die without at least mentioning Baldur's Gate and its sequel. The two greatest games I've ever played. And, let me tell you, I played the hell out of those games...
|
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
| DAMN Obsidian for not releasing it until September! I'll be back at school by then, and my laptop would choke and die if I ever brought the NWN2 CD within five feet of it. And I'd feel like it was a waste to only buy the game to play while I'm at home where my more powerful (but gradually aging) desktop is... | |||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Squash Monster--Everything human |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
| If Legion were here, he'd certainly agree that Demogorgon absolutely trumps Melissan in terms of raw difficulty. I don't expect anyone else to have played Throne of Bhaal, so I can't ask for much in terms of a second opinion, but suffice to say I could never even put a dent in Demogorgon's HP, and I'm a fairly skilled player. Main reason is probably that he's immune to Timestop, and most high level strategies revolve around some combination of that spell, Improved Alacrity, and a helluva lot of Meteor Swarms. Throw down a Timestop, and the part-baboon, part-squid, part-whatever will slaughter your mage while the rest of your party is frozen in time. Brilliant. | |||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
| Human is any being with the genetic code unique to the species Homo sapiens, strictly speaking. A two-second-old zygote has that DNA, just as an 87-year-old man does. Both are to be protected as human beings.
Edit because, apparently, all humans can be classified as "Home sapiens." Silly me. (edited by Silvershield on 04-20-06 02:43 AM) |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
| The only issue I had with the Fallout games, both the original and its sequel, was how terribly open-ended both were. Normally I'd say that's a good thing, but I found that each game was non-linear to the point that a player is often given absolutely zero direction in what he's supposed to accomplish. Otherwise, though, both Fallout and Fallout 2 (and, to a lesser degree, Fallout: Tactics, which was good but ultimately flawed) are unrivaled in their genre but have gone largely unnoticed. | |||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
Originally posted by emceeOuch. Brilliant argument you've posed there. Originally posted by BioSorry, but that's a bit ridiculous. Granted, the idea of changing an organism's DNA is so far in the future - or even outright impossible, period - as to be an entirely ludicrous notion right now, but even if it were somehow realized, you really think changing a person's genetic code would change his species, too? Defining humanity by its DNA is convenient and accurate right now, which is why I used that particular criterion. There's no need to bring up an outlandish hypothetical to try to thwart it. Originally posted by BioIs a person who uses a synthetic heart - something that you'll see in real life, unlike a creature's DNA being altered to the point of changing its species - not human? How about a person who has the human brain, but it's not functioning? Sure, that opens the whole issue of the rights of a patient who's in a vegetative state, but few would argue that that person is no longer a human being. Originally posted by BioNo, no we can't. Unless you know how to build a rabbit from a cell that has human DNA. Because a stem cell contains the genetic code of the person you've taken it from. Originally posted by JombSo, the Holocaust was a good method of population control, too. Originally posted by JombYou weren't sentient as a months- or years-old infant, either, and you certainly don't remember much of that part of your life. Should you have been "aborted" then, if your parents were in financial straits or simply didn't want you? Originally posted by JombNot at all, because a fetus is an entire, fully functioning (or at least someday within the next few months, fully functioning) and unique person. That appendix is no more human than the nails I bite off my fingers every day. Edit because I forgot to address what Jomb wrote. (edited by Silvershield on 04-20-06 10:17 PM) |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 5920 days Last view: 5908 days |
| ||
Yeah, so sue me for being an English major and not being up-to-date on the latest scientific innovations  .
But, as you pointed out, splicing DNA or just plain fiddling with it doesn't really approximate changing something's species. |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - - Posts by Silvershield |
Brosef? So you're basically saying you too don't agree with their living conditions but we can't do anything 'bout it? Way to be weak. You pathetic waste. 