I have witnessed police confronting a white woman and white man who was trying to break into their own car with her purse locked inside. They weren't approached because of race but because they were doing something that appeared suspicious, which is what police are expected to do. Without all of the facts though it is hard to tell anything else from here
Exactly. The only reason businesses want the laws changed so there is no minimum wage is because they want to put the wages below what is now the minimum, to boost their own profit margin. Seeing as most of the companies wanting the laws changed are large industry with already huge profit margins, and alot of people are already living on or below the povity line I cant see how this would be an improvement to the economy, especially local. I can see however how the local lifestyle would change dramatically for the worst.
Most women make decisions using their better judgement and weighing up the facts. Most women have a firm enough grip on their emotions to not let them totally rule their life and dont run around whilly nilly ranting like crazy fools. The last time I saw an incoherent woman, she was blind drunk. I'm sure if women are as you describe, there would be none in the workforce, or in marriages for that matter.
A man claims that he wants to please a woman and asks what she wants. She tells him clearly, once, of which goes ignored or unheard as he finds it hard to stay focused. The man claims to still not know what the woman wants, so she tells him again in detail, to which the man tries to do but gets it wrong, as he wasn't really listening to her, as she just goes on and on.So again he asks her what she wants, this time, trying to please her, he gets her something he thinks will be better as she doesn't really know what she wants and he obviously does. Then when she's screaming and yelling about how he never gives her what she asks for, he screams back that she's being irrational. So just who is the irrational one?
I believe the question is should gays have the right to MARRY, not do i think gays should have the same legal and moral rights and obligations as married heterosexuals. Gays, when choosing to live together can sign contracts protecting their rights, very similar to vows, and can hold their partner accountable if they dont abide by the contact, protecting themselves financially and morally and creating obligations. This is usually legally stronger than marriage vows as contracts are often added to marriages to clarify the terms.
I agree that a person doesn't Choose who they fall in love with, but they do choose to act on it. There are alot of gay people out there who have chosen to be in heterosexual relationships for reasons of their own, just as someone else has chosen to go with their desires and follow the path they feel is right for them. Living in a gay relationship is definitely a choice.
If a person buys his house knowing he is beside the airport, should he be listened to when he complains about the noise. If your answer to this is no, then why should a gay couple who enter a relationship KNOWING they cannot get married, whine about the fact later.
I believe the question is should gays have the right to MARRY, not do i think gays should have the same legal and moral rights and obligations as married heterosexuals. Gays, when choosing to live together can sign contracts protecting their rights, very similar to vows, and can hold their partner accountable if they dont abide by the contact, protecting themselves financially and morally and creating obligations. This is usually legally stronger than marriage vows as contracts are often added to marriages to clarify the terms.
I agree that a person doesn't Choose who they fall in love with, but they do choose to act on it. There are alot of gay people out there who have chosen to be in heterosexual relationships for reasons of their own, just as someone else has chosen to go with their desires and follow the path they feel is right for them. Living in a gay relationship is definitely a choice.
If a person buys his house knowing he is beside the airport, should he be listened to when he complains about the noise. If your answer to this is no, then why should a gay couple who enter a relationship KNOWING they cannot get married, whine about the fact later.
As for did I ever CHOOSE to go the heterosexual path , the answer is YES I DID.
As for what are the perks. Many gay people would claim that their coming out has brought them great relief and as much, if not more, possitive attention than when they were choosing to portray themselves as heterosexual. Also many gays who choose a partner of their own sex claim that there are alot of advantages, such as the feelings of love are deeper and feel more real, their desire for sex with that person rather than with someone of the opposite sex is stronger and the sex more satisfying, and I could keep going on and on. Also in certain fields of work, such as fashion design or interior design, the gay guy is usually assumed as going to be good before even showing any other credentials. And how can someone really say they are BORN gay, when boys and girls don't really even know the difference between the sexes until they are at least 2-3.
Thankyou for your answer. I was unsure as to wether a TV had a computer on board and this answers my question. But does turning the TV off cause any harm to the TV or are we burning unneccessary energy to just save ourselves the 2-5 seconds that we'd have to wait to turn on our TV?
Again, you can't enforce a law to make a woman put her child up for adoption, and I never stated this either, however it can be put in the care of foster parents, or other family until the woman is properly rehabilitated.
In your edit in your first statement you do correct your view and say not to enforce abortion, but give her the choice of going to jail and adopt out the baby OR agree to an abortion. Wouldn't this be considered a legal way of blackmailing her.
And although the arguement isn't about the men with evil motives, they would be the ones wrongly abusing the ruling.
As far as "it's more common than we think". You have "heard married women admit to it and teenage girls admit to it." By this are you saying they say they tricked the male involved or that they admit to knocking them out, drugging them and raping them. If it is just that they they have been tricked, then I revert to my stance on that the male should take measures so that they can't be tricked, as when a man "TRICKS" a woman saying "I'll pull out" and doesn't' and most people blame the woman saying, "well she should have been on the pill if she didn't want to get pregnant" If you bothered to read my answer in context, I did say, as with a woman, a man can't protect himself 100% against rape, but has other legal avenues to get justice. The vasectomy idea is for those men who want to ensure they dont impregnate anyone as they don't want children, just like a woman has her tubes tied if she is adamant about not wanting to get pregnant and has it reversed when she wants to get pregnant. And No! you couldn't be talking to a straighter person!
Yes, I do believe you can and are more succeptable to when you are young. When you fantasise about someone that you have a crush on and imagine them to be all these different things. You build them up to be this perfect piece of fiction. But then if you have the privelidge of making that fantasy a reality, you become let down, as that person can never match up to the fantasy character that you have made up of them in your head. The reason some people become so infatuated with movie stars and famous people is that they create a whole view on what they believe that person would be like, even making excuses for them when they see something stupid that they have done in the mags, just like they would a lover. So I do believe it is possible to fall in love (in a sense) with a fictional character.
Although I do support some of your views I can't wrap my head around the comment that you made about IF A WOMAN GETS RAPED AND GETS PREGNANT, CAN THE RAPIST DEMAND THAT SHE HAVE THE CHILD ON THE GROUNDS THAT HE IS PERFECTLY CAPABLE OF RAISING THE CHILD IF SHE DOESN'T WANT TO. How on earth is this the same. Again, it is NOT his body carrying the child so AGAIN he should not be able to enforce any such law. You dont seem to get it that the LAW is not going to Condone the LAW violating a womans body, which is what you are asking for. Even where a man has been RAPED of his seed, his body is not continuously raped for nine months which is what you are doing if you force this on a womans body. I can see however, how a man who has been raped would do his damdest to make sure the rapist never gets legal custody of the child, and how with all the evidence you are talking about, why would any court deem that mother to have the behaviour needed to look after a child and raise that child with descent morals, without heaps of rehabilitating. A Rapist should be dealt with as a rapist, wether it is a man or a woman who is the victim. For a woman to be a rapist there is more wrong with her than just the urgent wanting to have a baby.
I didn't see anything excluding those men in your question. No I do not condone any woman DECEIVING A MAN INTO AN UNWANTED PREGNANCY. Lets get that fact straight. And any woman who drugs someone to concieve should be charged with rape and jailed for her crime. But I still say no to giving any man the right to order any woman to have an abortion. Sure their are times where I wish you could, but the repercussions of this are just to huge. Just how are you supposed to ensure that everything going on in someones bedroom isn't legit. There are plenty of guys out there having sex WILLINGLY with girls while he's bombed off his brain and both adults aren't as cautious as they could be and a pregnancy occurs. There are plenty of guys out there that would scream she tricked me if she provided the condom and it burst or fell off. There are plenty of guys who wake up with a hard on and do the deed without thinking with their friend who scream later that she tricked me because she got pregnant. And it would be pretty easy to concoct a story and create evidence to make the woman look as though she tricked him, especially if she is already a single mother or has said that she'd like children someday soon to anyone. True that these aren't the men who you have written the question about, but these are the men that would wrongly put innocent women through hell using the laws that you are proposing. Although these men haven't genuinly been tricked, all could scream that they have been, which is exactly why you can't condone this law being introduced. There are more men out there that would take advantage wrongly of this law then genuine men that it would actually help. Not fair on the genuine guys true, but look at how many innocent people that would be hurt by such a law being introduced. There is such a thing as a male pill coming out and I think it is now available in some parts. Also any man who wants to make sure that he isn't tricked into becoming a father could get a vasectomy (which is usually successfully reversible, not really a problem anyway if he's adamant he doesn't ever want kids) done to HIMSELF if he is really serious about it, just as a woman has to to protect herself against unwanted pregnancy. He doesn't have to order someone else to have surgical procedures done on their body. And once the woman is told that he can't provide a baby unwillingly, if she is this sort of girl, she would run a mile. Who knows, he may even get laid more by WOMEN who also dont want any or more babies. A Man cannot protect himself 100% against the RAPE that you are talking about, but he can protect himself against unwanted pregnancy.
In the video and the way it is explained you would consider ourselves to be an intelligent form of livestock. Although I do find this video to be a hyped up distortion of the truth. It obviously is refering back to the slave trade calling it's slaves livestock (which through history have been of all colours and races) and how we are just a variation of the slave trade, and that by allowing the slave to be more "free range" they recieve better production.
Basically he is saying that the government is the controller of these free range slaves as if it is a bad thing, instead of stating that the government is voted for and is there to actually serve the people and if they don't do their jobs efficiently, they will be sacked. What he doesnt tell you is that alot of the national debt is created by the people borrowing for things such as cars, fancy housing and overblown credit limits. And that a country which is badly governed usually has alot of fighting and TRUE starvation. Yet judging by his accent he wouldn't really have experienced that. He speaks out against the government as if they are using the countries people totally for their own good instead of saying that you get paid well if you get yourself educated and do a good job. It sounds like to me that he is trying to swing people with a bias oppinion of the TRUTH. While we may just be a free range version of LIVESTOCK, thankgod it works pretty well and if we all did a better job, it would be running even more efficiently. The only time it doesn't work well is when GREED steps in or people think they deserve everything for doing nothing or doing something half assed and this happens at all levels.
As you said, the brain for such a small organ uses up more than it's share of calories. You also find how the brain is reacting to certain things will help burn even more calories, ie producing nervous energy, or the flight response. I guess this is one of the reasons why different psych meds can play havock with your weight and energy levels.
Yes there is truth to it. You find the weak minded and weak spirited would hate someone who has an opinion, and those who don't give a damn about anything would obviously think someone who does is a pain in the ass. Somethings are worth having an opinion about and somethings are worth arguing about. It's how most good decisions are made. A debate is just people voicing different opinions. If someone cant stand someone who has an opinion that is different to them, they are just a bull headed idiot.
I understand how you feel, but no-one should be given the legal power over some one elses body. Look at the complications it would cause. Single men wanting to be fathers would be tricking women into pregnancies by splitting the condom, force her legally to not abort the child, and then get custody. Then what happens if it's not all it cracked up to be. She gets to be the single parent of a forced pregnancy that she would have aborted. Not a happy scenario for anyone concerned, especially the baby. Not to mention, they call forced sex rape. What would you call a forced pregnancy.
I am sure if the government really wants to cut back on greenhouse gas emissions they could do it in thousands of other ways. And as far as reducing the drain on our power plants and (most are far from overused with actual sections of some energy plants being closed due to lack of use), seeing as they get paid well for it I doubt that is the reason. If some areas need to conserve energy, I'm sure even if every household had to use energy saving lightbulbs, that the energy savings would not be reduced that significantly to solve the whole problem, but would only be a bandaid. Maybe if the country who has such a problem with energy turned of its 200,000 odd poker machines we wouldnt need to buy the dull energy saving lightbulbs or worry about the mercury, not to mention put alot of money back into the community that would normally be sucked out of the towns.
True. Like with any recipe, to have true success, you have to follow it completely. Sure you can add your own flare and decoration to make it you but if you change the ingredients it tends to lose it's whole structure. If you dilute the ingredients of a cake to much, the whole thing will collapse,.
with airlines making the seats smaller and cramming more people in I think it's rude that it is even suggested. Seeing as they even have people sitting in the emergency exit seats now I find this ridiculous. What happens if the people sitting near the exit panics. They're allready sucking in every penny they can get.
some plane seats dont even accomodate an average person adequately. And seeing as the obesity rate in the USA is so high this would mean every second ticket has to pay double if its done on the standard obesity weight.
Marijuana in this day and age, with all of the hydro stuff, can actually be addictive and you do have to be aware of what stuff it is and who you get it off. Also it greatly inhibits your ability to drive GREATLY and is also responsible for many deaths annually, wether it be healthwise ( for some reason pot smokers constantly ignore that dope has 7 times the amount of tar as cigarettes and is inhaled deeper for longer., meaning 3 cones is like having 21 cigarettes), not to mention the amount of accidents they have or CAUSE.
Yes your right but in the same token if you are giving out your details to someone you have the right to know who it is you are giving them to. You aren't allowed to walk into a shop or bank or even a service station wearing a helmet so why should this be any different. There is nothing that tells you who is under the scarf so why should you trust a total stranger who wont show their face. Not to mention how intimidating it is to alot of people.
