prev <-> next
[2001-02-23 02:53:00] - yeah, like miguel said - travis
[2001-02-23 02:53:00] - Travis They don't have the physical requirements to create enough different phonic sounds in any combination to communicate beyond basic concrete ideas. Most of thier language Run eat, food here, etc. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:53:00] - but all animals have a self-preservation, which they intrinsically understand - travis
[2001-02-23 02:53:00] - Animals know about as much about death as we do, what do we know about death? -paul?
[2001-02-23 02:53:00] - pierce: once again i'll say this. all animals have the instinct of self-preservation. they don't *want* to die, and will protect their own life. that tells me they know about death - mig
[2001-02-23 02:52:00] - I'd love to argue more, but I really have physics to do, and without aparna it's not as much fun. Later all -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:52:00] - and in what way do animals know about death, travis? - boing
[2001-02-23 02:52:00] - They know about the occurance of dying. They don't think about death or what it means beyond Bob doesn't move no more - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:52:00] - Because we can only teach them to talk about concrete ideas -paul
[2001-02-23 02:52:00] - not being able to, sorry - travis
[2001-02-23 02:51:00] - not sure on the details . . . the point is there usually are bad effects ~a
[2001-02-23 02:51:00] - Some type of animal learned to use a stick to catch bugs or something, some sort of tool
-paul[2001-02-23 02:51:00] - so what, can you talk to a monkey in its own language? hell no, so don't blame them for being to able communicate originally with you - travis
[2001-02-23 02:51:00] - all animals have the instinct of self-preservation, and there are humanns that don't care of religion - mig
[2001-02-23 02:51:00] - "which i admit is not perfect" - boing
[2001-02-23 02:50:00] - They can sign, but they are limited to talking about concrete ideas paul. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:50:00] - Incest? What kind of good effects? -paul
[2001-02-23 02:50:00] - ah, but while monkeys can use sign language to mimic simple statements that they know will result in reward, they have never shown that they can recombine language primitives to make new ideas - boing
[2001-02-23 02:50:00] - There is a clear defenition between animals and man. If you can't see that there are some serious problems. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:50:00] - ick.. what reduces it.
[2001-02-23 02:50:00] - paul, i think it has some good effects some of the time ~a
[2001-02-23 02:50:00] - does anyone know they don't know about that? and animals sure as hell know about death - travis
[2001-02-23 02:50:00] - it was a typo. the law is wgat reduces by prohibiting it.
[2001-02-23 02:49:00] - I thought that was commong knowledge, incest over time increases birth defects... We learned that from the Hapsburgs I think
-paul[2001-02-23 02:49:00] - how do you know they cannont communicate complexly. communication is not just speech - mig
[2001-02-23 02:49:00] - Yes Travis they are smart. However they can't communicate ideas about morality or things cognative. They can say that the book is on the table. But asking them what they think of god or death doesn't work - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:49:00] - travis: well, based on observation, which I admit is not perfect, animal communication does not have nearly the flexibility as human speech - boing
[2001-02-23 02:49:00] - Monkies can use sign language -paul
[2001-02-23 02:49:00] - I'd like to see the same findings, katie. if it is supported, it would change my stance on incest dramatically - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:48:00] - pierce, i heard it sometimes benifical results . . . but not often. ~a
[2001-02-23 02:48:00] - so, animals still communicate with each other - mig
[2001-02-23 02:48:00] - I read a nice LONG book on the simple subject of speech, actually part of a book was on speach... I forget the title currently - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:48:00] - but aren't we dumping millions of dollars into investigating stuff like chimps and dolphins, who are supposedly extremely smart? - travis
[2001-02-23 02:48:00] - katie: where did you get that info? I've never heard that incest reduces birth defects - boing
[2001-02-23 02:47:00] - Or maybe we just can't understand them -paul
[2001-02-23 02:47:00] - was - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:47:00] - No travis you are just wrong. Animals don't have the physical requirement to create a language complicated enough to express themselves to the depth and breth that we can.
[2001-02-23 02:46:00] - how do you know how complex animal speech is? - travis
[2001-02-23 02:46:00] - i don't know if that has been proven ~a
[2001-02-23 02:46:00] - heterosexual sex has less chance of spreading disease, and serves the additional purpose of reproduction. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:46:00] - they not helping the population at all, which is what andrew was arguing a while ago, but i'm not saying that's bad - travis
[2001-02-23 02:46:00] - travis: I don't think they communicate as well... ideas in human communication are much more complex than "run! lion!" - boing
[2001-02-23 02:46:00] - sorry . . . that was in reference to andrew ~a
[2001-02-23 02:46:00] - It's like if a mother drinks alcohol while pregnant, is that ok? -paul
[2001-02-23 02:45:00] - it's a cultural convention. it was a rule in old europe and it's been in place so long that it's a part of the standard morals. in more recent times we've found that it reduces birth defects, but that's relatively new- katie
[2001-02-23 02:45:00] - as aposed to heterosexual sex? ~a
[2001-02-23 02:45:00] - for incest) if they are willing to accept the consequences of their actions, then go ahead and let them do whatever. they aren't hurting anyone outside of themselves - mig
[2001-02-23 02:45:00] - homosexuality is different because they really aren't hurting anyone - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:45:00] - I have nothing against homosexuals, I have a problem with the practice, as it spreads disease, and is physically unfit. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:45:00] -
[2001-02-23 02:44:00] - and things that do that are usually considered morally wrong - boing
[2001-02-23 02:44:00] - so what about our speech, other animals communicate just as well between themselves - travis
[2001-02-23 02:44:00] - Good point Vinnie, I don't have an answer to that -paul
[2001-02-23 02:44:00] - wow. bad grammar alert on myself! - mig
[2001-02-23 02:44:00] - I don't think it is directly morally wrong, but it is in that it decreases the overall health of the society - boing
[2001-02-23 02:44:00] - sorry, missed your statement andrew - travis
[2001-02-23 02:44:00] - We may be a member of the animal kingdom, but we have one difference. Speech. Our manner of communication is more advanced and totally different then any other in existance - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:44:00] - it's the same thing with homosexualty. if you disagree with it that's fine, but leave just fucking leave them alone - mig
[2001-02-23 02:43:00] - but no one has told me and paul why incest is morally wrong - travis
[2001-02-23 02:43:00] - probably not immoral, but incest is definitely a gray area in my opinion - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:43:00] - incest multiplies flaws in the genetic code and decreases diversity - boing
[2001-02-23 02:43:00] - So that is why it is illegal? Because some close-minded people find it icky? -paul
[2001-02-23 02:43:00] - Morals are things that back up common sense and lead to a better functioning society, incest is immoral because genetic deficiencies flow forth, murder is obviously immoral. Adultery is immoral because it weakens the value of the family. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:42:00] - so, if 2 people love each other, leave them be. - mig
[2001-02-23 02:42:00] - ok, but would you agree that it is immoral to have a child knowing that the child has a far higher chance of having genetic defects? - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:42:00] - good, good adrian
- travis[2001-02-23 02:42:00] - And to expand on my society statement. If society functions with a set of morals then a change can be better or worse. And there is usually conflict. Slavery caused a whole war. But when it just slides without any major conflict it decay - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:42:00] - define ick ~a
[2001-02-23 02:42:00] - hehehe . . . i was at the library and i was walking through to find a place to study and found a whole row of books on incest ~a
[2001-02-23 02:42:00] - the problem is society has created so many rules that contradict our true animal nature (yes people, we are a member of the anime kingdom) - travis
[2001-02-23 02:42:00] - the high ick factor? -katie
[2001-02-23 02:41:00] - What is wrong with incest anyway? -paul
[2001-02-23 02:41:00] - yes, but genetic is different from morals - travis
[2001-02-23 02:40:00] -
[2001-02-23 02:40:00] - Right and wrong is not judged by easiness
-paul[2001-02-23 02:40:00] - incest is a gray area though travis, mainly because of the high probabilty of genetic defect - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:40:00] - Woo-hoo, back on top. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:40:00] - that doesn't mean that there weren't men fighting in good faith for their ideal. the corrupt will always take advantage of the innocent -katie
[2001-02-23 02:40:00] - the invention of the gun was one of the worst events in human history in my view - travis
[2001-02-23 02:39:00] - well, if killing still involved skill, i'd say you can kill someone if they do something to you - travis
[2001-02-23 02:39:00] - And one of the ways of that to happen mig is kids raising kids... teenage pregnancy. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:39:00] - the priest comment was wrong. it was a device to urge men to further the political ideals of the men in power, both secular and religious - Katie
[2001-02-23 02:38:00] - Very true, Pierce, and I use the axiom a lot in politics, but I'm simply stating some things are incorruptable. Morals are one of those, esp. morals backed by a powerful religion. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:38:00] - The crusades would have fizzled had it not been for the religions driving it -paul
[2001-02-23 02:38:00] - xpovos, that's because the religion itself it just an ideal... it's the people in pover in that religion who pervert that ideal to their own will that are corrupt - boing
[2001-02-23 02:38:00] - Killing is easy Travis. Does that mean that if I can kill you I should? - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:37:00] - Society is formed on the idea that everyone in it accepts certian things as morally wrong. Like in America Killing is wrong. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:37:00] - most people think incest is wrong really only cause of society, why would anyone assum that it's wrong if it's so easy to happen? - travis
[2001-02-23 02:37:00] - we have an intrisic sense for good, but sometimes if we aren't raised right, or mistreated, it goes awry. - mig
[2001-02-23 02:37:00] - Religion was on top of the cause. Not the cause -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:37:00] - the commeners were used as cannon fodder in the Crusades. the driving force behind them for most people was economic and political. -katie
[2001-02-23 02:37:00] - sorry, travis... but it's an axiom because it seems to be true based on evidence. that doesn't mean evidence doesn't exist that disproves it - boing
[2001-02-23 02:37:00] - yeah, the knights went on crusade because they were promised a free ticket to heaven if they went and died for the lazy priests - travis
[2001-02-23 02:36:00] - Travis is killing a baby to save ten men right? There are grey areas. And there are conflicts between instinctual desires and morality. I mean most people would thing incest is immoral... but biologically it can happen easily - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:36:00] - But power hasn't corrupted many religions. Juddaisim is thousands of years old, and is inccorrupt. Catholocism still holds it's primary tenants, though not all Catholics do -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:36:00] - If the religions didn't exist though, the conflicts might not have happened, certainly not on the scale that they did -paul
[2001-02-23 02:36:00] - but if religion wasn't there, I do think that something else would have meant power to people, and that would have meant conflict - boing
[2001-02-23 02:36:00] - but the crusades would not have been popular with as many people if that was the case. - mig
[2001-02-23 02:35:00] - okay, i hate that quote about power corrupts, who can prove that? - travis
[2001-02-23 02:35:00] - i agree we all have a relative right and wrong, but how is anyone capable of setting rules for everyone in society then? - travis
[2001-02-23 02:35:00] - the problem was/is that religion could not separate itself from the axiom of "power corrupts" - boing
[2001-02-23 02:35:00] - But because religion was used as a scapegoat you can't blame the war on it. The crusades would have happened regardless. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:34:00] - We have a sense of what is right and wrong but it is all relative -paul
[2001-02-23 02:34:00] - true enough, pierce. I'll concede that point - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:34:00] - You are going back to a different time period where the Church was the Government in many ways Mig. That model has no bearing on the modern society of America or most of the world - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:34:00] - and if don't have intrinsic sense of right and wrong, who has the right to proclaim what they are? - travis
[2001-02-23 02:34:00] - I think we do, vinnie... but it's our own, and might not match greater society's - boing
[2001-02-23 02:33:00] - Mig if we knew to tell what was right and what was wrong then why do things like columbine happen? Why do bombings happen? - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:33:00] - but who was the crusades waged against? the islamic people. it was not religious in nature, but religion was used to justify it - mig
[2001-02-23 02:33:00] - No, we all don't, that kid wwho killed a man because the rapper said so didn't. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:33:00] - i don't think we do have an intrinsic sense of right and wrong - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:33:00] - "wek" of course being Latin for "weak" -paul
[2001-02-23 02:32:00] - We don't NEED religion to have morals. Religion however is a good place to FIND morals. I am not religious I am pretty damn moral. But many religious people get their morals from their faith - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:32:00] - "Religion is a crutch for the wek-minded" eh?
-paul[2001-02-23 02:32:00] - why do we need religion to tell us morals, though. we all have a good sense of what's right and what's wrong? - mig
[2001-02-23 02:32:00] - The Inquisition was marked up after the fact by the protestants to make the Catholics look bad, that's well documented. And the Crusades were a war for territory, not religious in nature. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:31:00] - referring to your "spead itself" comment - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:31:00] - OH there are of course non morality issues in religion boing. But to say that they don't deal with morality is not accurate. And to say they just want to spread is also inaccurate because lots don't. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:31:00] - we don't, Paul, but for the weaker of spirit it helps to have an omnipotent being looking over your shoulder to keep you from doing bad things - boing
[2001-02-23 02:31:00] - I don't think that's correct, mig. many religions do not share that belief, and nearly all religions deal with morality, even christianity - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:30:00] - take the crusades or the spanish inquisition. innocent people were killed, but it was okay, because they were "heathens" - mig
[2001-02-23 02:30:00] - even if religion is the front, if that's what it's used for, then that's what it is - travis
[2001-02-23 02:30:00] - or at least, roman catholic doesn't so much anymore - boing
[2001-02-23 02:30:00] - but all conflicts now are just based on the results of older conflicts - travis
[2001-02-23 02:30:00] - Why do we need religion to have morals in society? -paul
[2001-02-23 02:30:00] - In most cases travis the religion was a front. The excuse for the conflict. Some exceptions, but not many. And you can't say that mig. Jewish faith doesn't look to convert. Roman Catholic doesn't really either that is more the protestants- nemo
[2001-02-23 02:29:00] - If there weren't the religious differences they would've come up with something else, like they do now, and did before. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:29:00] - I concur with the vatican ii statement - boing
[2001-02-23 02:28:00] - ah, but things such as "respect the sabbath" are reflections of that specific religion, not morality - boing
[2001-02-23 02:28:00] - In a lot of ways you are right boing Vatican II was the Roman Catholics going... we need to make it possible to get more people in. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:28:00] - i just see most of the major conflicts in the history being a result of religious conflict in some way - travis
[2001-02-23 02:28:00] - oops, was it eight or nine? - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:28:00] - it's goal is to spread itself to eveyone it can. it doesn't care how it does it. - mig
[2001-02-23 02:28:00] - nine bars must be a record, right adrian? - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:27:00] - on a very basic level, religion does not deal with morality. - mig
[2001-02-23 02:27:00] - In the past people were more intolerent in general. Don't blame that on religion. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:27:00] - Religion is always concerned with morals. You want a nice set of em? Ten commandments isn't that bad overall for a base idea of morality. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:26:00] - but that's just my thought, I have nothing with which to back that up - boing
[2001-02-23 02:26:00] - There is a danger in too much non-conformism. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:26:00] - but in the past, a lot of religions have shown a lot of intolerance - travis
[2001-02-23 02:26:00] - It gets you to conform to social goods, equality for all, conform to thou shalt not kill. Tough one. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:26:00] - but I think that the religions with more influx of young people will always say it's okay to do most of the things those young people are doing - boing
[2001-02-23 02:25:00] - That isn't true Travis. I am not Roman Catholic, my GF is VERY Roman Catholic and she is plenty tolerant; And paul I agree with you. And mig if you say religion doesn't deal with morality then you are blind - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:25:00] - great job, pierce! - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:25:00] - - boing
[2001-02-23 02:25:00] - And I would actually say that religion only has more influence because it's "dumbing itself down" for the younger generation
[2001-02-23 02:24:00] - Sex education is another example of teachers being given the responsability traditionally the parents. As a future teacher this trend in america is also distrubing. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:24:00] - solid morals like don't tolerate any other religions
- travis[2001-02-23 02:24:00] - What we really need is personal responsibility -paul
[2001-02-23 02:24:00] - religion does not care about morality, just conforming. morality is just an excuse to get you to conform. - mig
[2001-02-23 02:24:00] - hey . . . the conversation is back to sex ~a
[2001-02-23 02:23:00] - hahah, i've broken into the bar!
- boing[2001-02-23 02:23:00] - Honestly I could link it to the growing lack of religious influence, but I am not for religion, but I do think that in the past it has taught very solid morals in many ways. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:23:00] - what we need is more of a balance of sex education and family education, not less sex education or even less sex - boing
[2001-02-23 02:22:00] - And we share the responsability for the decay, but the decay is still present. Who is to blame is irrelevent. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:22:00] - but those who understand it and its implications become more supportive family members - boing
[2001-02-23 02:21:00] - our generation is seeing though the stupidity of logic of the previous generation. how is that decay? - mig
[2001-02-23 02:21:00] - I think that education about sex has caused many people to become more comfortable with it (some too comfortable). - boing
[2001-02-23 02:21:00] - Simple mig The younger generation is the one pulling the trigger. And while teen pregnancy rates may be decreasing slightly it is just as easily because of the point in the generation we are at. Birth rate always rise and fall in a generation - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:20:00] - Agreed, politicians are looking for easy answer to help get elected -paul
[2001-02-23 02:20:00] - but people also lived shorter, i believe, so it's bad to compare across time - travis
[2001-02-23 02:20:00] - I know... I was pointing out an irony, I know why what I said was the case - boing
[2001-02-23 02:20:00] - that was - boing
[2001-02-23 02:19:00] - That is because the mortality rate was MUCH lower in the 1800's I mean I could point out that in the 1400's couples were married by 12 or 13. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:19:00] - however, teen pregnancy rates have been going down over the past few years, if I'm not mistaken
[2001-02-23 02:19:00] - the case of the kid shooting someone and blaming it on music is the result of the "grown-ups" looking for easy answers, and being lazy. how is this the our(the younger generation's) fault - mig
[2001-02-23 02:18:00] - No we aren't. The majority of society is riding the point the finger bandwagon. Look at the increase in lawsuits, the rise in violence especially involving younger children. The divorce rate. We ain't doing so hot - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:18:00] - ironically, more 16year-olds (by percentage) probably had families in the mid-1800's then now, but I digress - boing
[2001-02-23 02:18:00] - Err, I'm back off, paul, not telling you to back off. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:18:00] - Back off, paul. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:17:00] - I would suspect that when our generation starts becoming lawmakers, many of those types of things will change - boing
[2001-02-23 02:17:00] - blaming others for your own faults isn't really moral decay, it's just stupidity or not facing the truth - travis
[2001-02-23 02:17:00] - Back on top Andrew
-paul[2001-02-23 02:17:00] - Yes boing but in the case of Anti Slavery it was more an upholding of the "Higher Morality" Then the idea that I can take my 16yo GF and raise a family on welfare cause well I can. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:17:00] - I agree, we need more personal Responsibility -paul
[2001-02-23 02:17:00] - but many people of our generation are realize how ridiculous it is to (directly) blame media for violence, and we are changing those values - boing
[2001-02-23 02:16:00] - If you say that a child isn't responsible for shooting a gun because he listens to rap then I am saying society is slipping into a moral decay. When I don't have to take responsability for my actions, I don't think that we are doing so hot - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:16:00] - I can re-claim #1, but #2 is sufficient. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:15:00] - I'm mean? I wasn't the one threatening people or calling people racists. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:15:00] - the challenge of the parents' morals is not always negative, i.e. anti-slavery - boing
[2001-02-23 02:15:00] - gone ~a
[2001-02-23 02:14:00] - Don't worry Andrew, you are going down
-paul[2001-02-23 02:14:00] - Boing: To quote C S Lewis again, "When you cut in line you do not try to say that it was not a wrong thing to do. Instead you try to explain why the rule doesn't apply to you in that case." To apply it to society as a whole - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:14:00] - andrew, you need to stop being so mean ~a
[2001-02-23 02:13:00] - S'ok, I'm still going to put it on my wall of fame. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:13:00] - misguided values such as the common philosophy that "oral sex isn't sex, so I can give it away casually"... oral sex has many of the same disease risks as regular sex, so you should take the same precautions - boing
[2001-02-23 02:13:00] - Wow. First place!!! Take that paul, "king of the message board." -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:13:00] - responding to nemo - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:13:00] - "misguided values create offspring" only that creates offspring (last time i checked) is sex, so you are just saying sex is bad and the cause of moral decay - travis
[2001-02-23 02:13:00] - andrew, she has already been scared away ~a
[2001-02-23 02:12:00] - Okay They can challenge the moral foundations of the the parents. But when the challenge creates a disfunctional society or the often called "higher morality" is questioned I'll call it decay. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:12:00] - that's very poor reasoning. and besides, it's not even true - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:12:00] - 6876 - 2-23 12:49a - i'd probably sock you a good one if you were saying that to my face - aba This one's going into my hall of fame. I've rarey been more proud of my forensic ability.
-- Xpovos[2001-02-23 02:11:00] - if that wasn't the case, we'd still be watching our slaves pick cotton - boing
[2001-02-23 02:11:00] - What misguided values? -paul
[2001-02-23 02:11:00] - I'll agree with that, nemo, but I still don't think that intelligence tests are a good measure of intelligence - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:11:00] - Boing: Misguided values create offspring. Offspring learn misguided values. Repeat. If that isn't decay then what is? - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:11:00] - back to nemo: all young generations challenge the moral foundations of their parents - boing
[2001-02-23 02:11:00] - I'll be right back, going to the archives to get a quote of my own. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:10:00] - oh, I knew the definitions already
[2001-02-23 02:10:00] - I ain't touching the decay issue, as I have far too many liberal tendencies in that area. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:10:00] - Actually IQ is not heavily knowledge based. It is more logical thought accessment. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:09:00] - nemo: many of the values of the younger generation are misguided when they're not flat-out wrong. but that doesn't mean they are "decay" - boing
[2001-02-23 02:09:00] - just bringing pierce up to our agreed definitions, andrew :0 - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:09:00] -
[2001-02-23 02:08:00] - yes, intelligence is the capacity to learn. Education is what has been taught to an individual. Fair? -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:08:00] - however, what most intelligence tests test is knowledge - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:08:00] - you are right if you agree that intelligence is capacity to learn - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:07:00] - Actually Nemo is soooo far removed Christian it just isn't funny. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:07:00] - grrr, this signature thing is hard to remember to do... if only adrian would make my signature 24-point wingdings like I asked
- boing[2001-02-23 02:07:00] - Yes, but at the cost of societies benefits, increased arts, sciences, education, intelligence, and what not. Just as the gene pool reaches a new tier we systematically destroy it with our social agenda. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:07:00] - I am not saying sex is moral decay. I am saying the values of the younger generation (myself included) are moral decay. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:07:00] - America was the only "major industrial" nation to increase in population this past year. All due to immigration -paul
[2001-02-23 02:06:00] - I don't think that lowers the intelligence of the country
[2001-02-23 02:06:00] - but immigration brings less-educated but not less-intelligent citizens into richer countries, where the more intelligent immigrants can have access to better opportunities. This also keeps the population up - boing
[2001-02-23 02:06:00] - First world nations won't die out cause we pick up the imagrants... and with the overall world population growing It isn't a great concern that america is going to run out of people.
[2001-02-23 02:06:00] - Having sex is moral decay, who said that it was? -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:05:00] - why is having sex moral decay? what's so bad about it? - travis
[2001-02-23 02:05:00] - Let me guess, Nemo is a Christian?
-paul[2001-02-23 02:05:00] - "why do i get shit all the time? from you men you are swine you think dick is the answer but its not" - kittie - spit
[2001-02-23 02:04:00] - There are some issues I refuse to be dissuaded on, others I will argue as well as I can, and -if- beaten, I concede. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:04:00] - Let me guess Boing you are in favor of federal programs like birth control and such? How about this novel idea. Don't Have Sex!! It tends to help stop unwanted pregnancy in my experience. But that falls under moral decay of society not this - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:04:00] - Like me!
-paul[2001-02-23 02:03:00] - just so there's not real hard feelings andrew, that statement was a "blanket statement" to everyone, not just you, it's good to stick by a belief, but a lot of people argue with no intention of being swayed to the other side - travis
[2001-02-23 02:03:00] - I'm not sure that a higher birth rate in a poorer country in favorable - boing
[2001-02-23 02:03:00] - I am disgusted by it, but I have a sub-conscious reaction to people that I don't know based on their race -paul
[2001-02-23 02:03:00] - My whole point which started this fiasco was that society, being the first world countries are destroying themselves by not reproducing even their own number of people again. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:02:00] - in their favor?
[2001-02-23 02:02:00] - It is just a quirk of society. Italians tend to be Italians. French are French. Australians are Australians. They don't seem to have the same imigrant identity mentality that you find throughout america. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:02:00] - I don't know about that, I think everyone has some sub-conscious racism in them -paul
[2001-02-23 02:02:00] - Which is in their favor, pierce. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:02:00] - I can concede a point, I have on occasion even done so. Did so tonight. That's quote everyones always attributing to me was incorrectly stated, I admit that. -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:01:00] - why do we have to split up our society into factions based on original country of origin? - travis
[2001-02-23 02:01:00] - Oh, I like to think I can admit when I am wrong (which is often) -paul
[2001-02-23 02:01:00] - just a quick note on the birth rate thing, one thing to keep in mind is that developing countries do not have any significant access to contraception, abortion, or public sexual education - boing
[2001-02-23 02:01:00] - America is one of the largest exceptions to the rule. In america we don't have americans. We have Native American and African Americans, or Irish Americans so on and so forth. Really annoying in my mind. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:01:00] - America is one of the largest exceptions to the rule. In america we don't have americans. We have Native American and African Americans, or Irish Americans so on and so forth. Really annoying in my mind. - nemo
[2001-02-23 02:01:00] - Frankly I don't really care much about racism. I simply know that I am not racist, nor were my truly stated comments -- Xpovos
[2001-02-23 02:00:00] - ha ha ha, how did you get that smiley, adrian? I like it! - vinnie
[2001-02-23 02:00:00] - not all nationalism is covered by racism? ~a
[2001-02-23 02:00:00] - maybe for being able to concede a point, unlike a lot of people on this board - travis
[2001-02-23 02:00:00] - Commend me for being able to say what? -paul
[2001-02-23 01:59:00] - paul . . . i commend you for being able to say that
~a[2001-02-23 01:59:00] - Excellent points. Very well then, not all nationalism is covered by racism -paul
[2001-02-23 01:59:00] - Call them christian. But there is a word for this and that is Gentleman and if we create the word Christian to mean Gentleman then how would we define a Christian." It is a bad representation but you get the idea... - nemo
[2001-02-23 01:58:00] - gah, stupid double posts - vinnie
[2001-02-23 01:58:00] - but even in other countries, nationalism implies caring about your country, not ethnicity - travis
[2001-02-23 01:58:00] - nationalism is similar to racism, however - vinnie
[2001-02-23 01:58:00] - nationalism is similar to racism, however - vinnie
[2001-02-23 01:58:00] - CS Lewis said in mere christianity (paraphrase) "I am often scolded for holding the term Christian for those who believe in Christ as thier savior. They say I should not judge someones moral ground and that if they are a good person... - nemo
prev <-> next