Aperson
-
Posts
276 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by Aperson
-
-
Maybe, there is of course the chance that the rioters might decide to use firearms after they've been shot at.
-
Other factors probably determine crime rate more than whether guns are legal or not.
-
So far the muslims that have "not intergrated" have pretty much been told: "Keep your beliefs but follow our rules" as was seen when the Ontario Goverment refused Shari(sp) rule for muslims. So long as that happens everything should be fine and hopefully no violence will break out (and if it does, quickly contained).
-
quote:Originally posted by Soback:quote:Originally posted by Aperson:You'd lose then, as politics is popular vote more or less.
Well, in that case at least you are admiting that as US keeps on degenerating on it's socialist path.
No I didn't. It was supposed to be a cynical remark on how politics works (I.E. whoever can tell the best false promises wins). -
You'd lose then, as politics is popular vote more or less.
-
Jaguar:
Whiping Canadians to a wild frenzy is, um, kinda hard. Unless hockey or canadian beer is involved.
Soback:
Some people find history boring, others do not. Just like some people find Math or Science boring while others do not. Also, some people are very good at historiacal studies, while others are (you guessed it) not. That's just the way it is.
Added to that there are other reasons not to study history. Such as you know, career choices, other interests etc. But hey, I guess to be an indivudual you have to study history.
Plus you seem to miss the fact that interest (or lack there of) DOES NOT mean that you are unable to learn something, it just means that you'll be less likely to seek out more information about a subject.
Finally, clowns wouldn't make history more interesting, they're scary.
-
quote:Originally posted by SobackBecause we have people that just plain out think it's "boring", and fail to learn it's lessons. It really is that simple.
Unfortunatly, the way history is often taught IS boring.
quote:Originally posted by SobackHow long do you think you will survive with those whos views are similar to yours, Grizzle, Nomad, Aperson.Well if riots are anything like they were in the past (in Canada) a pretty long time. As I A: can't remember the last riot and B: the last one I heard of where people died (2) was in the 1800's.
-
That could backfire. As the poeple rioting might not be interested in just vandilism after that.
-
Jaguar:
I thought Wolferz was our resisdent conspiracy theorist.
-
I would call France a socilistic country with captialistic elements, much like Canada, but Canada is a bit more ,um, right (I think that's right, the left/right labeling confuses me at times).
Well based on points one through six of the ones you listed, America is looking fairly socialist-like. Then again, I would called its economic model a captialistic one with socialistic elements, but what do I know?.
-
First of all, it was supposed to be a bit of a joke (I know, politics forum, humour bad). Secondly, don't make assumptions (as we all not what happens when you assume don't we?) on what I will or will not do later on in my life.
-
quote:Originally posted by JaguarAin't socialism GREAT? LOL
Obviously socialism only works when its cold and the countries inhabitants can laugh at their military.
Kudos to thoses who get the referance.
-
Soback: I'm pretty sure that is just an example of some people (perhaps even the whole party) being hypocrits among other things and not of liberal parties in general.
-
quote:Originally posted by LostInSpace:Yup, I was going to post the article about this same issue but I got too irritated. With a representetive people like, they make Bush look like he's got a 150+ IQ.
It isn't very difficult to find people that make a group look smart/dumb/whatever.
-
Cross posting is bad...
In any event it seems that Nomad is just saying that the terrorist response to Russian rule isn't particularly surprising.
Also, someone can agree with parts of a persons opinion and disagree with others.
Finally, of course the world isn't black and white, there's always blue!
-
quote:Originally posted by nomad:1)Stop to behave like if the other members of this board are braindead, and educately cite entire paragraphs so the original context is preserved
Nice to see that you weren't being hypocritical.
[ 10-30-2005, 09:15 PM: Message edited by: Remo Williams ]
-
Corporations often terminate a scietist's contract or even sue if the researcher points of flaws in the drug design. Also, virtually all researchers in the biomedical industry are payed by corporations, meaning an independant and unbiased study is extreamly difficult to find. Compounding this is the fact that studies don't have to be released publicly, so there is no way for a person to make their own opinion if they wanted to.
Also, its mostly drugs that have practicly no benifit or have additional side-effects than other drugs on the market that get the pass. Not the ones that kill people. So the chance of getting sued is very small.
The only thing I found relating to sovereign immunity in Canada was relating to U.S. laws, the Canadian goverment using diplomatic immunity to protect Bush from getting criminaly charged while in Canada and stuff about forign boats. Also, I confirmed that goverment website searches suck.
-
I wasn't aware of any ID supporters that have tried going through proper channels. Unfortunatly for them preveious people have "burned the bridges" so to speak.
-
I havn't. And who said I thought it was a joke?
-
quote:Originally posted by Soback:No sane person would give up the product of their mind or of their skill for free, NONE. Only a self destructive fool would.
Um, I hope you don't also mean volenteerly.
quote:Originally posted by Soback:There IS no co-existence between socialism and capitalism. The "co-existence" can be likened to that of a cancer and it's host, because socialism destroys the wealth capitalism creates. REAL Co-existence is when a host and another COMPLEMENT each other, socialism DOES NOT complement capitalism, it EATS at it, dependent upon it's wealth.The problem is, that with captilism, there is greater pressure for scientists and researchers fudge results to better fit what their employer wants. This is particulary prevelant in the pharmaceutical at the moment. Hence why I believe that the goverment should be the ones funding the studies for the products when it reaches the human trial stages. I also consider this a socialistic practise.
quote:Originally posted by Soback:The BEST thing you can do for yourself Aperson, and I mean THE BEST thing in this world, is go read Atlas Shrugged. It's an interesting book, has nothing to do with politics or anything else, it's just a story, and an interesting one at that. And even although it's fiction, the events described LITERALLY happened in Russia. It's like history, but the same events are happening NOW in US, and as you know, there's a saying "History repeats itself" and "Those who don't know history are dooomed to repeat it's mistakes". So read that book, and decide for yourself. Maybe we should even start a thread about it, and people can debate about what's presented in that book. But that's for later.I'll try to find the book. But I seriously doubt its the best thing in the world for me.
-
quote:Originally posted by Prez:1) I don't think being against stem cell research is 'anti-science' - it is more of an objection to a reason to encourage abortion. The stance on the issue by most Americans as far as I can tell is that stem cell research is okay as long as it is limited to existing stem cell lines.
Abortions were dropping and continued dropping after the time that stem cell research was first developed. Also there is very little incentive, except maybe the "you'll help people" agrument, to get an abortion to give stem cells (at least in most western countries as they have laws preventing embryos from being payed for). Finally, most stem cells are received from IVF embryos that would have been thrown out anyways. On the other hand, there are new techniques that do not damage an embryo and pretty much void that argument.
quote:Originally posted by Prez:2) I find the pursuit of the legitimization of intelligent design by certain people is more of hope for validation through scientific recognition, thus it is actually embracing science and looking for its approval. Whether it actually possible for science to accept ID has been discussed at length already, but the point is, ID is not so much a fear or a dismissal of science as it is recognition of its importance.It'd be nice if ID supporters were trying to legitimize ID through science, but they arn't. As was already mentioned, they did not get a peer-reviewed paper published and they went straight to the schoolboards. That was a pretty good way to make sure they would have a snowball's chance to try to make their theory legitimite.
-
No problems, I'm biased as well (obviously).
In any event, it depends on how its set up. If you get support whether or not you do anything, its going to fail alot faster than if the goverment requires the people to work/take classes in order to recieve aid. Granted, I believe that a hybrid between socilism and captilism is best: The captilist part should be rather obvious in its function, while the socilist part deals with essential (army, healthcare, fire and police etc.) as well as are the ones who pay the people to do studies that have to deal with the countries health (to prevent academic dishonesty resulting from bribes).
-
Um, Canada's first line of defence is the fact that most people don't know or care about it.
In any event, no I would not want the US destroyed, as its not a bad country at all and its destruction would do nothing but hurt the world. However, I find that article has overplayed many things and is mostly plying to ones emotions.
-
You missed my point. Captilism is not perfect, and Socilism has some good points. That is all.
And, believe it or not, some people do things because they enjoy it, not because they want large sums of money.
France Unrest
in Politics, Religion & Legal etc
Posted
Let them, rioters are normally those that are poor, uneducated, and liberal, they have NO idea how to use a gun.
I Would rather be the target of an untrained gun toter then a trained one.
MOST trained gun owners are law abiding citizens who will not riot to just destroy property to make a point, they will go after those who have created the problem.
Let then grab guns, then they are REAL 110% pure LEGAL targets....
So would that make them not legal targets beforehand?
Hopefully if a riot does end up happening near you then turns into firefight that your right.