When people can't admit that I'm right, it means that they can't admit that they are wrong. If they can't do that then they are going to have a very frustrating life because the facts won't change any more than they will.

People who refuse to admit when they are wrong become their own worst enemies.

People have a right to decide on what is right for their own children.

It is not the government's right to dictate to someone how to raise their children.

Since the lesson plan is controlled by the government also, it would be giving them a tremendous amount of power over how we see the world around us. They would be able to dictate what is or isn't fact by penalizing those who have different opinions.

No doubt about it. Ignorance. It's an epidemic.

We should find a cure for it as soon as possible.

I'm going to say no. Not because it is ruining teens, but because it's not an invention of this generation.

It's just "Instant Messaging" ported to a phone. People have been using text based messaging for over 30 years.

Also, it's inferior to just using the phone itself. It takes less time to convey information via speech.

Absolutely not.

It separates the family, and shapes the way we see the world by dictating what will and will not be taught.

In this country, and this day and age, it is possible to receive an education for anyone who actually wants one. The institute of higher learning is called "The Library." My grandparents taught me how to read before I even started kindergarten.

The only thing school teaches you is how to do what you are told, and to fit in with your peers or be punished.

It sure is. Those were my thoughts exactly.

Somebody got paid real well for that too.

Now THAT is crazy.

Here's another example: What about child molesters?

Do you have a child molest them?

I'm sure that would work out great.

This is clearly an advertisement. It's a targeted attempt at viral marketing.

The site is built around a trailer for the movie Devil's Due which will be released on January 17th.

That doesn't really come off as crazy to me, although it does seem stupid.

Perhaps even irresponsible.

Equating Islam with terrorism is like equating Christianity with mass murder and genocide.

The truth of the matter is that PEOPLE are terrorists, not Muslims. PEOPLE are murderers, liars, thieves... and so forth...

People find excuses to do whatever it is their own twisted agenda dictates.

I would have to say yes.

You can if you throw darts at it. :)

It's easy enough to find out. Let's get a dictionary and see.

Human

1: of, relating to, or characteristic of humans

2: consisting of humans

3a : having human form or attributes

3b : susceptible to or representative of the sympathies and frailties of human nature

If you use an encyclopaedia you'll also note that humans are listed as a type of primate, and the only species within the genus: Homo

So humans are animals. A very specific type of animal. Check.

Animal

1: a living thing that is not a human being or plant

2: any living thing that is not a plant

3: a person who behaves in a wild, aggressive, or unpleasant way

Well, your dog may wear a shirt but he's still not a human. :)

Oh, and we're all a bunch of homos.

I'd better call my folks...

This is easy.

It hasn't been resolved because people are different. Different people have different opinions.

It doesn't matter who is right or wrong. People have the right to be wrong.

If we are to follow the assumption that they only make food look better, and are not harmful, then we are still left with a problem. There's no need to add them other than to attract the attention of children. It is proven that candy is bad for your teeth, and that too much sugar can lead to type 2 diabetes.

A simple search will tell you that there are concerns about Red #40, Red #3 Yellow #6, Yellow #5, Sodium Benzoate, Green #3, Orange B, Blue #1 and Blue #2.

Many people on the other side of this debate have stated that the only purpose of these colors is to make the candy look better. Well, paint would make it look better too.

If something is good, it doesn't matter what it looks like.

To assume that putting something in your body has no effect is nonsense. So, harmful or not, why consume something which has no known nutritional value?

Why take the risk?

Either way... to present something, as something it is not, is clearly unethical.

To misrepresent food is dangerous. Artificial coloring doesn't just color candies, it hides the quality of other food products as well. To willfully misrepresent something is called fraud. Trust me, I know what fraud is. I used to be a fraud investigator.

Yes, it should be illegal, and it already is.

It needs to be enforced.

People are different from the day they are born.

Physically, we are constructed differently, therefore we perceive the world differently because we are equipped with different faculties. Since we perceive the world differently, we interact with it differently. We are unique and separate entities, even if we do have similarities.

Although conformity does exist as well, it is the choice of an individual to conform to the will of the many.

Though there are laws, individuals decide to follow them or break them.

Though there is indoctrination, an individual decides not to challenge what they are taught.

People choose to live differently every day. If individuality did not exist, we wouldn't even be able to debate this.

Even if the result of an action were not the original intent, one should still take responsibility for that action.

A person should learn to accept that unintentional results may come from any action, regardless of intent. They should make the best decision possible and be willing to accept the fact that it may be the wrong one.

If the result does not match the intent, they should accept responsibility and take a different action if the same scenario presents itself again.

If we do not accept responsibility for our actions, we can not make better ones in the future regardless of our intent. If we truly intend to see a specific result, we will change our actions until we get it right.

I should also note that you can't just clone a species without some serious complications. We would need to collect material from a huge amount of existing creatures for it to be feasible. Genetic diversity needs to be well established or the population will collapse due to birth defects and sterility.

We need to understand that the natural world is self regulating. The answer is not to attempt to control it, because that's what is leading to so many of our problems. A more effective solution would be to minimize our impact on other lifeforms as much as possible.

If we were to start cloning these species it would completely ignore the problems which caused them to become endangered or extinct in the first place. Where will they live? What will they eat?

Even if human activity wasn't to blame for their scarcity, these problems would still remain. If they are re-introduced into the same habitat which they died off in, the solution would be redundant. If we move them to another location we would be upsetting the balance of that ecosystem. We may also be introducing an outright invasive species which would destroy more biodiversity than we had repaired.

As for the situations where we are to blame specifically, well, we need to take responsibility for our own actions and change our behavior.