I don't really know which side to pick, but I'm not against zoos. The purpose of a zoo is to inhabitant animals and rehabilitate and raise them so as to not go extinct. Considering, most animals in zoos are endangered species, and if you put them back in the wild, they will be wiped out. Plus, the letting people see the animals part of a zoo is probably to make the situation a win/win for the zoos. Meaning, the people that go to the zoos and pay to get in and who donate money within it, the money gets used to help the animals. So, in a sense, it's like fundraising for the animals. And no one would really wanna just give the people $30 if they can't at least see the animals. The zoos are just the foreground to making the general public more aware of animals in the world, and it WORKS... it makes us more compassionate towards them and wanting to help them... and it leads people to give money to random animal preservation charities.
Therefore, they are not primarily in zoos for human entertainment. Because there actually is NOTHING entertaining about watching an animal locked in a caged home. In fact, zoos make me sad more than happy. But I love seeing the animals at the same time because they're more beautiful than the average human being. :-)
stereotyping helps produce statistics. A statistic of approx 45% of all married couples divorcing someday, is a statistic based on a stereotype. In 2005, 57% of illegal immigrants in the US, are from Mexico, is therefore a statistic and a stereotype that at least half of illegal immigrants are Mexicans.
No.
Partly because I wasn't raised to. Partly because I see no reason to. And partly because I don't want to.
I don't like the way religious people act, whatsoever. I don't like churches. They idea of worship is obnoxious. The belief that Jesus is suppose to be my role model, sounds like bullshit.
Therefore, if there is a God, he's not worth my time, mind, or energy. I'm a perfectly decent person without religion and God. And best of all, I'm not a hypocrite! Woot!
Well, you have no better grounds to know if that was a racial issue or if those black guys are perhaps, listed fugitives.
It does sound racist, but blacks DO have a higher rate of unlawful behavior. There have even black men admitting to it.
Therefore, I think cops, (not all, but some) use the facts to determine what they might have to deal with when they come in contact with a white man, vs. a black man, and even vs. a Mexican. I mean, shit, blacks may be more likely to pull a gun on you and drive off, but Mexicans are more likely to start running like hell (back to the border, hehe). Like, I said, this doesn't apply to every cop or every man of any race or color, but it's pretty much statistics.
Yes.
Here's why: there's this one quote in the movie 'What happens in Vegas' that I effin admire... the judge declares that it's not gays that ruin marriage, but people that go to Vegas (or a place similar to it, or no where really) and get married on impulse, and then go on and get divorces... therefore, treating marriage like a bit, fat, joke.
Seriously, marriages should be banned in places like Vegas, places loaded with alcohol and immature behavior, banned for people that have known each other, perhaps, for less than a year, people that treat marriage like a piece of shit. At LEAST gays are fighting for the goddamn thing out of respect, integrity, and love.
So, yes, gays should have the right to marry because they're more serious about it than the common straight couple is. I don't care what's in between someone's fucking legs, it's the motives, desire, commitment and love that counts.
No one is ever hated by everyone as a whole. Therefore, just in today's world, there are a handful of people that dislike me, maybe even hate my being, but there's also a wider portion that like/love me. Therefore, I would rather, and I will, die being hated (and loved), than forgotten.
I become more annoyed and annoyed seeing men say women are so irrational as if we accept "2+2=5." That's not irrationality, that's lack of education, and it sure doesn't apply to the majority of women.
I think there's been a misconception... women aren't irrational, we're rather seen as "emotional." Emotional to the point of "don't fuck with me." Which I guess I can see how the emotions can lead to a sense of irrationality, but do you men also realize we're mainly only really emotional one awesome week a month? At least, that's how it applys to me. I don't become irrational through it, but I do become an emotional "fuck off."
Therefore, I do think this 'women are irrational' statement being made by men is ridiculous and sexist and flawed. Men are seriously just as irrational a species.
Otherwise, I'm interested in hearing what you men find so hard to understand about women. So, we, women, can sit here and bring you enlightenment and solve all your problems.
You forgot to mention the huge rise in obese Americans... another major result of American's laziness.
Plus, it doesn't help this country when useless junk keeps being invented that just allows you to be lazier. Or that crappy processed food is being more and more produced and American's aren't educating themselves that they can still eat healthy on low income. I mean, no one can seriously blame the producers of processed foods, lazy inventions, and all the other junk resulting in obesity and laziness. Lots of Americans really are JUST lazy.
I agree. These aren't really two topics that can fairly compared. The Jews definitely went through some serious inhumane and hellish situations because of Hitler and the losers that decided to follow and obey him. Nothing can really be compared to the Holocaust; it was just horrendously awful.
The Native Americans were definitely treated like shit too. In fact, what the Europeans did to the Natives to gain control of America, is the main foundation of why I think this country is a corrupted and crass place. America is better than other countries just because we're a fascist Democracy? Not in my opinion. Europeans forced ownership of something that is in no ways, rightfully their owns. It's an insult to Native American's, to their culture, and to this country. Native Americans deserve a lot more respect and payback than they've been given.
So, really, two totally different situations. The Natives have been robbed of peace, ownership, and respect, and the Jews were robbed of any sense of humanity, as they were treated as if they were annoying pests.
The FDA is corrupted. They pass what they want and ignore what they want. They pass alcohol and that stuff ain't healthy either. Plus, there ARE products that are just tobacco... they're mostly known as cigars. Smokers know they have the option of other tobacco products over cigs... and pretty much every cig smoker is aware they're addicted to them, and they're aware they're addicting from someone else's verdict when they decided to smoke some anyway. I really don't think the FDA is responsible for it all. Everyone likes to blame the FDA for the countries troubles with drugs and even FOOD. HA!
MY preference would be cremation because I consider a burial a waste of money and LAND.
However, I'm leaving it up to my husband, or parents, or children... depends when I die and who I want to make the decision. Knowing my husband and his family, they'd opt to have my buried, being the traditional Christians that they are. My mom would have my cremated. I don't know what anyone else would choose, but I just.don't.care. As long as my organs are donated, I'm otherwise dead and a useless body. :-)
Depends on ones idea of fashion. I won't follow "trends" or the most new fashions going around every month. I always dressed in what makes me comfortable, even if it's jeans and a tank. It might not be hollywood fashion, but it's fashionable in a Me-ish way. I otherwise, don't think it's worth the money to keep up with society's obsession with fashion and trends. Is it just me, or are skinny jeans the grossest jeans ever? I'll never get over how much I love boot cut jeans.
Yes it takes skill. I mean, there's 5...6...7 different pieces on a drum ensemble, and each drum makes a different beat, and you have to be in sync with the music, and hit the right drums, with the right amount of power, in the right order... I pretty much suck at them.
But I wonder if Bongo's count as an instrument? I friggin love bongos!
I'd also like to note that I LOVE book stores. Small ones, Barnes and Nobles especially, Borders, etc. If books cease to exist, will these places go out of business? Then what? Instead of being able to read in a corner of a semi-quiet store that only tempts you to read, we'd have to go elsewhere...typically some loud place, like Starbucks.
What about libraries? When students do research... is EVERY antique book of valuable information going to be on computers instead? That's no fun (thought easier for research), but still.
Actually, I'm pretty confident physical books will NOT dissapear. Because there's still a handful of Americans that will never be able to afford that... computer book thingy... and be able to keep up with it. Unless you're in the middle class and above, getting one fo those things and thinking they're worth it would probably be out of your league. Plus, we'd still probably be expected to pay like $20-200 per e-book, because otherwise, how are the writers going to make any profit? That's a lot of money to spend to shove onto a little computer device that wil eventually break down and you lose all your books! Technology is getting out of hand, seriously. The beauty of a book is once you buy it, it's physically there forever. (Unless in a fire or stolen or something). But it's there more than an e-book ever will be. Plus, part of the perks of books is "page turning," not "down scrolling" or whatever.
I pick scientists as being more openminded because religious people aren't that open minded. Most religious people I know, reject science as a whole. Including my own husband who was raised as a Protestant. He won't listen to anything I have to say about anything scientific. Although, I've noticed he's admitting some things I've said, months later, but at the moment I tell him, he'll call it ridicule and won't want to listen (though I make him sometimes, hehe).
Here's my arguments: us that follow science more than religion... it's not that we're really close-minded towards religion, because in fact, we spend lots of our damn lives finding the truth between it all, and that means examining science and religion. We just have the ability to fall back on science instead of religion. Rather religious people, like I said, won't examine both sides of the image, they stick to theirs and call the rest blasphemy. (Doesn't occur to every religious person though. There really are a handful that choose to be religious despite knowing every scientific fact in the world, but they come off "genuine" and not like an annoying robot). So, even though we accept science over religion, we still listen to it all and might even have experienced church and read the bible and blah blah, but we rightfully reject it as a way of life. Personally, I think man-made religions are creepy as hell and that's why I don't like being involved in religious situations.
Perhaps downvoting should be entirely disabled? Then people can only up vote best arguments, and result in the same thing going on right now (most voted will climb the chart and leave the regular ones where they are instead of strolling to the bottom). But then, I realize the downvoting is the one thing that determines efficiency... so...eh. Perhaps we have to suck it up and accept the idiots that like to push buttons?
Yea, I agree. You've basically phrased everything I want to tell people about religion, in a better way than I would ever be able to.
I do realize my statement was a little...all over the place. What i meant was, that in many stories (movies and books), those that have contact with entities, are those that have suffered some sort of trauma that somehow, makes them more "sensitive" to the presence of spirits. I've seen about 3 ghost movies over the past 2 weeks, and that's been the bottom line in them of why a selected view can sense entities, compared to otherwise "truly healthy" people, who have no experienced any serious trauma or whose life isn't hanging on the line... in the sense of a physical complication within them (cancer, tumors, AIDS, anything). That's what I was trying to say though.
English is a pain in the ass, and it's my primary language since birth. Here's why: I found out I Had a hearing loss at age 6, that was also when I started First Grade and was learning english basics. How you say words, how they're typically spelt, so on. Since I couldn't necessarily "hear" people saying words in a sense that I'd say it the way they say it, I taught myself to speak english based on what I learned. The main thing I learned was like, the vowel is strong if followed by an e... amongst other things. So I taught myself by sounding them out the way they looked. Here's the fuck-up: 15 years later I was told I was saying practically every english word wrong. Apparently the shit I learned a piece of shit lesson. Basically, it felt like you don't learn english by anything you read, but you learn it by pronouncing it all exactly the way everyone else says it. Because it seems almost every word breaks the rules of standard english. Pain in my ass. But I'm sure it has something to do with us taking so many of our words from other languages and deciding they're "english." Psh.
I love physical books. I'm sure with technology, they will start to disperse. But like many awesome vintage things, they will still exist and there will be a handful of people collecting and trading them because they'll be worth more money than they are right now.
I WANT physical books to be around forever. I don't particularly like e-books whatsoever. Staring at a computer screen and scrolling down often just sucks. I get so bored I'll start to do something else. The illumination of the computer screen isn't great to be looking at for extended periods of time either. Physical books hold more comfort of being able to go anywhere, being easier on the eyes, and so forth.
However, I CAN see some perks to e-books, if they evolve the software more. Being able to change the font of the book to the style and size of our choice would be a pro. Because I have issues with really big font and really small font. I like really average font (size 10 on computers). And some fonts flow better in our eyes to read. (I particularly like Book Antiqua). Also, if there was a side notepad within the book to bookmark and label easier than in actual books (would be really convenient with textbooks) and having a "find" feature to track it down in seconds. So, e-books can be convenient, mainly for school instead of carrying those huge suckers and they'd probably be a ton more convenient and cheaper than $100! But we still use physical books for a reason.
Yea, seriously, I agree with the other guys against you... you're not understanding the psychology of entering a child into this stuff. You're making it all seem so simple-minded; 'they have a choice, and if they do it for 20 years, they MUST LIKE IT!" Doesn't work that way. They could've been doing it for so long because they weren't given the opportunity to realize there's more to life than pageants. They could also have been threatened into remaining in pageants, as well as, manipulated, and/or on a contract.
I posted a debate a month ago about a kid that was actually like 12 or something, that didn't want to do western medicine methods of curing his cancer. His parents agreed with him, or perhaps actually just convinced him to agree that he shouldn't get it done the western way. Either way, his parents got the upper hand... and unfortunately, the government had the upper hand against all of them. Point being, any child can say what they want, but if you're under 18, it's going to happen the way your parents want it to happen, period.
That makes sense. I was finding it coincidental of the people experiencing all the supernatural stuff because they were near a chemical plant. Maybe there was a leak in the air causing most of the citizens to experience the same side effects of the leak, leading to hallucinogens. The premonitions though, would have to be looked into. Maybe they had nothing to do with the "real" story but were added in the movie to make it more suspenceful? What would be reasoning for this Mothman being visible in a lot of other cities though? And then dissapearing and being in a new city?
I just watched it not too long ago and was pretty freaked out of my soul. I'm not even religious, nor do I believe in God or spirits, but this movie came off FEELING like it was some religious scenarios that many people have witnessed/experienced. Considering it's based on a true story... and has been seen in many other areas in the world. In fact, it came off seeming like "mothman" is actually "Death." Whom pries on the weak and is in a sense, warning them all that they're going to die soon (although, not always straight up). I mean, is it just me, or is anyone else noticing that those that turn to God actually have weak minds? I don't mean weak as in will-power or mental clarity, but weak as in their life is hanging on the line (whether they know it or not), and they have to seek God, or God (and entities) seek them because they're closer to their deathbed than an otherwise healthy person?
Anyways, it made me think all that. But it also makes you ponder the supernatural further. And then it makes you wonder if the Mothman story (all of them) are successful myths, of a sort. Either way, it's effing creepy of a movie. I wanna know what anyone else that has seen it thinks.
I don't agree with you. Watching everyone we care for die away one after another is for sure, sad, but we're also capable of adjusting to it with a great sense of acceptance and wisdom if we allow ourselves.
However, I'm going to take into consideration the stories I've seen in movies of people (or creatures) that live forever, and none of them are happy about it. It becomes mundane, lonely, miserable and feeling like you're in a trap if you live forever. Personally, part of the beauty of life is that we all die. We have a rough time frame to make the most of our life and it's a lesson to not take anything for granted and fucking "LIVE." You're not living if you're spending your life preparing for your "life after death."
I wouldn't want to live forever. Nor would I want to die today. But I would like a more definite time-frame, to live til 100 years old, exactly.
Indeed. I think it's an expression of the "blunt truth" of things in society. As in, the side of reality many people don't want to see or acknowledge or step out of the box to ponder.
However, I personally don't watch the show just because it is cartoonish. They tend to bore me, so I don't prefer it if I can watch something else. Has to do with my hearing loss. But it is funny when I give it a chance.
My answer no because it is ridiculous. However, I think it's funny there's a small portion of us that are like "animals deserve their freedom and rights and shouldn't be treated under us!" and then there's the people saying animals are here for us to do whatever we want to them because we're stronger and more intelligent. We're also more stronger and intelligent than children. How seriously inhumane.
But really, I don't think they should be in cages at all. And I also think that people feel they should be in cages because some are dangerous and/or unpredictable and/or hard to completely control, and they should actually be put back in their natural habitats where they belong. In fact, I borderline think people having "pets" is inhumane too. :-)
I'm more attracted to lesbians more than I am girl/boy combo's. Though, I am not a lesbian, nor bi. However, how it turns me on varies. For instance, girls that look like they truly enjoy it and know what they're doing, are sexy. But girls that are doing it for attention, or because they're friggin idiots and are being pried on because they have no self-worth (like in Girls Gone Wild videos...effing hate that shit), is a huge turn-off.
The only negative effect that I've ever really heard that makes people worried about their children playing video games all the time, is them playing VIOLENT video games and transforming their behavior to what they see in the game. However, there have been studies done on this and it was pretty low. A child playing a violent video game isn't any more negative than a child watching a violent film. And even so, the ratio of them actually becoming violent was low.
Now, besides that, I guess it makes sense that if you play it ALL the effin time (like in the World of Warcrafts episode on south park, in which Cartmen became a serious addict to the game and gained 20+ lbs), you could gain weight. But not anymore than you'd also gain if you watch TV ALL the time (and it's easier to eat when watching tv than playing a video game, or reading). But seriously, serious addicts typically do have a higher weight than than their peers their age and in their environment. But I do know there are also serious addicts that are thin as hell because they never eat.
I'm sure it can also lead to heart problems, as well as other organ problems from lack of increased cardiovascular exercise, but 'eh. I'll say the effect is more on the body than the mind. The end.
My choices don't make sense. You're asking if that statement is true or false, but that's not the two options you've listed. Anyways, I do agree with the statement. And my reasoning is that when you see someone with a lot of money, you think they must be doing something right to get it. Or at least just doing something you might feel you're too stupid to figure out yourself to get all the money. So, a rich person gives the implication that they are intelligent, even though it has nothing to do with it... most of the time. In fact, most of the rich people in America are rich because they're manipulative, selfish, greedy and liars. Doesn't sound very smart to me. Sounds like some douchebags that I'd like to learn bank computer hacking just to steal their money. (Not totally serious here... I'm not that gutsy).
Yea, I totally agree. In fact, it's never the child's wish to do this stuff, it IS the parents (the mothers) desire to give her daughter something she could never accomplish herself. Not to mention, forcing a child into beauty pageants is ingraining the sense that beauty if physical, period. I really do NOT care how much I hear that beauty pageants are about more than what people see on the surface, because I believe the bottom line is that is what they are about. Otherwise, they wouldn't be expected to walk around in damn bikini's, with high heels, tans, overdone make-up, and a super toned body. Good way to ingrain a low sense of self-worth (because most of them will develop eating disorders, amongst an addiction to everything requiring the necessity of physical beauty).
They should definitely ban them. Or just get rid of them. Parents are more and more destroying their child's abilities to have a real "childhood," and it's getting ridiculous every decade that they come up with more things to make a child "grow up fast."
Holy hell. Look at this side! Some ignorant douche decided to down vote everyone with a sense of rationality! Don't you wish there was an automatic system alerting everyone that gets down voted and who down voted you? Man, we could ban the people ruining this site so much faster if that existed.
I agree. In fact, I've come acknowledge that everytime someone describes something as "faith" (like in the bolded statements), it sounds more like expectations. Is it really faith that your car's brakes are going to work, or is the expectation that they should, would, and probably will work? Is it faith that you get up in the morning and expect your feet to touch the ground without thinking that they will, (because that would be considering compulsive thinking if you think that way about everything to take away the sense of "faith"), or is it the reality that for every morning you've woken up since you learned to walk, that the floor has been there and you subconsciously expect it to be there?
You can look at it all either way, really. In my opinion, I think those falling on "faith" are those that like to ignore psychology...which has so many awesome explanations about how the human mind works. Is faith ignorant? To a degree. But I think it's the point that the word is so applied to religious belief that those of us annoyed with religion, just hate the hear the word when you could use something more... real... like, the word "expect." :-)
What he said. I agree. Even though, I "think" I have seen one when I was a kid, the only reason I think that is because I can't think of any of reason for what I "saw." But it certainly could've been a daydream, or a memory I formed when I was a teen for some unknown reason. But I otherwise, don't really believe in them. I mean, either they don't exist and I formulated the experience for some unconscious reason, OR they do exist, and I saw one, and I refuse to believe it.
Ghosts and all the weird things that occur to make people thing there's a ghost around them. I don't fully believe in ghosts, but I don't fully disbelieve their existence and powers either. I think I saw one when I was about 5 years old, emphasize the word 'think'. But I when I watch all that stuff on TV and all, it starts seeming slightly absurd. As in, a lot of theories and info being said relating to "ghosts" is probably a lie or a sort to keep people's attention, and it's annoying. Lying about something we hardly understand isn't going to help us develop a better theory or answer regarding ghosts. Just my opinion. Perhaps we should all tell true ghost stories we've encountered? I'll tell my story if anyone is interested. :-)
