It's sex... it is the insertion of an engorged pleasure membrane into, another engorged (but not as much), pleasure membrane. Then friction is created by the use of movement. This stimulates the nerves in both engorged pleasure membranes. This ultimately leads to an intense sensation of pleasure in either one, or both participants... are neither sometimes I guess.

that's it... chill your nips.

Although the lack of money can make one unhappy, money itself cannot guarantee happiness. This is exemplified by those who inherit a large sum only to live life in despair.

Russia is in too much disarray to do anything.

Japan has very strong economical ties to the USA... plus the don't have any nuclear bombs.

Yes, it is a good system because it ensures that the Government will meet the expectations of the most people possible. The rights of the people should be met under a democratic system more than monarchic system. People will look out for their own good... so if government policy is determined by the people then the most people should get what the want.

When a student is using a locker it is essentially rented out to them. I am not sure about every school I know that my school requires students to sign a contract when they receive the locker.

Keeping schools drug and weapon free is important to ensuring a quality education, and it's not unreasonable to search lockers for drugs and weapons.

To be fair...

The monarchy in the UK is purely ceremonial... they don't hold any real power.

And the UK doesn't even have a constitution.

I just used war as an example of why traditions are not necessarily good. It's just an analogy...

Protein from plants is the same as protein from meat... go figure... there aren't a lot of types of protein out there. Yeah...they just need to take Iron capsules... I don't see anything wrong with that.

...fuck you

Religious bigots like yourself hinder societal advancement. The Islamic faith is reputable and legitimate based off of peace and love for mankind. Sure perhaps some of their traditional practices are questionable, but what religion doesn't have questionable traditions?

And Governments shouldn't advocate any religion because it violates in the first amendment.

There are other forms of protein besides that which comes from animal flesh.

Sure, it's been around forever...but so has war.. does that mean war is better than peace... just because something is a tradition that doesn't mean it is good?

Okay... you're not really arguing anything at this point...at least I think

There are people who support an income tax... it shows that people are sensible enough to know that they have to pay for certain privileges

...yes the best thing to do would be the right thing... "best" goes hand in hand with "right"

... yeah you got me on the allergy argument...

But honestly how important is flavor?

Well... okay... but to say that all of those people will be against the tax is a big assumption...

And besides sometimes the best thing to do is the unpopular thing

Well, soy is a pretty damn useful plant. From soy products we get the necessary protein that we would normally get from meat.

There are many more people that would agree with my logic than yours.

You have no way of verifying that.

Those two arguments are not weak just because you say they are... you need to show why they are weak

Sure people enjoy junk food... but then they go to the hospital and cost the system money... thus the choices of the individual will harm the autonomy of others which is inherently flawed.

Yes, but they don't feel pain as the typical animals would.

Yes, I'm pretty sure that is how the Federal Reserve system works

http://www.gallup.com/poll/126755/Race-Control-Congress-Remains-Close.aspx

I dunno... this looks like its still stacked towards the Democrats

I guess it all does depend on what kind of meat you eat I'll give you that... but still most cuts of meat do have unhealthy components.

I'm just stating what the benefits of Vegetarianism are and why it is a better eating habit... on a health based issue and on a moral based one because there are still the moral arguments

These don't stand for everybody I'll admit that, but they do stand for me

Because of the cholesterol and saturated fat in the meat is bad for... there is no denying that.

For the moral argument. The meat industry is known for it's horrid conditions for raising animals for meat... we're subjecting living creatures to pain for pretty close to frivolous causes

...okay... so you're advocating that governments allow unrestricted drug use?

Well consumption of bad things should be reduced.

It doesn't matter how much I'm willing to pay thats irrelevant to the topic on hand.

I don't agree with the tax on plastic surgery... and it doesn't matter because that provision was taken out of the bill anyways

You claim that standards could be applied to drugs like those we have on alcohol yet you're advocating we get rid of the age restriction on alcohol... so if all of your standards were applied we would have unrestricted drug use

Adding taxes isn't forcing anyone to do anything... it just adds benefits to decision... it urges people to choose to eat healthy but if they don't want to they are free to do that.

And yeah, why should you expect to be able spew smog into the air not pay for that privilege.

No, by stating this you are mocking the judgment abilities of the average video game consumer. This argument has been made against TV, Books, Comic Books, and movies. This is just the typical attack from an older generation on a newer form of media.

Well, if they don't want to pay a higher tax or, eat healthier food than tough luck to these people.

It's not like the government is forcing you to eat healthier... you're just being charged what you cost to society. If you don't like it tough luck get better eating habits

Being a vegetarian is healthier for you and is better from a moral standpoint.

But Damn, it's hard to do so thats why I eat meat on occasion.

Now after this health insurance law the bill for the insured will be less and more evenly spread out because everyone is insured.

Well... look at this. If drugs were legalized more people would use them. Well, nobody wants to hire a crackhead because of the side effects of crack so it becomes harder for that person to buy crack... well he needs his crack so what else is he going to do... perhaps steal a few things and commit some petty crimes... but then it all gets worse.

Plus hard drugs are not good for society. We'd be better off without them and a government ban is working towards that goal. Gangs are not going to go away because you legalize drugs either.

Look... the government's isn't to pamper the individual... it's too help out society. This goes under the Social Contract. You, the individual, give up a portion of your rights to a governmental organization and that organization will use all of that newly gained power to protect that rights of everyone; including you.

Wait...did I say 57? Well I meant 53 sorry my bad. Keep in mind this number is what would occur if every single toss up state was lost by the democrats.

Honestly though, the republicans fucked up. Their strategy was to be obstructionist so that they could claim that the democrats weren't doing anything. They essentially put all of their eggs into one basket and that was healthcare. Now when healthcare passed the Republicans lost a big portion of their campaign strategy. Even now support for healthcare is rising and Obama's approval ratings are at 46% which is pretty high for a midterm number.

You can claim that the New York Times is biased but that doesn't change what is going on in the nation.

Government gives billions in tax breaks and subsidies.

Well the government did not give tax breaks and subsidies to corporations in the late 1800s which shows that companies can work just fine without the governments help

Once again... it is not completely morally based... I mean for something to be considered obscene it has to show genitals, sexual intercourse, or excretory functions ... that isn't morally based... that is all objective and since something has to do that to become deemed obscene there is a protection from a particular message being biased against.

Well... to be fair they don't spy on everybody... just those who are suspicious.

yet it is impossible for the internet to be completely censored.

In our current social and political evolution, a world government would look like an amalgamation of democracy from the west, pseudo-secularism and state religion from the middle east and northern Africa, secret police, lack of human rights and censorship from asia.

I don't think it works like that... I think democracy would win out because of the open ended nature of the Internet would facilitate this

Well, you said that the internet increases the effectiveness of intelligence agencies... which I believe is good because that helps national security... sure the PATRIOT act sucks... but that isn't the fault of the internet.

ACTA will require ISPs to monitor traffic for copyright-infringing content. Also the DRM I speak of encrypts the content, requiring a key from a server to decrypt and function. This is common in multimedia, and some ebook formats I believe

Yet this isn't censorship... it's copyright protection... which isn't bad

I would argue though that heterogeneous cultures prevent dominant legal systems, economic models, and ideologies from spreading internationally.

Perhaps it would be best if the whole world was lead by one government... it would cut back on a lot of conflict and would get rid of some of the more questionable regimes such as Kim Jong Il and Hugo Chavez.

Yet the Bank runs were bad for the economy... thus showing that Banks are vital...

In this case of the 2008-2009 recession the Federal Reserve helped keep the economy afloat and this shows that the Federal Reserve is a good concept because they help banks keep afloat.

In the case of the Great Depression the Federal Reserve didn't do enough of what it was designed to do... that is it did not lend out enough money... that doesn't mean that the central idea of the Fed. is bad that means it needs to be implemented... which means my get rid of the Fed. instead of making it better?

Well you bring up the fact that banks have failed in the last year yet the economy still did fine... but you failed to keep in mind that is was just 140 small banks out of 8625 banks.. a nominal percentage of banks... When I stated when banks collapse the economy gets screwed over I was talking more on the big scale... where a large percentage of banks fail... a small group isn't going to be enough to have an affect on the economy sure... I'll give you that... but a large group will have a big affect.

Yet, can you see how destruction will reasonably arise because of political differences amongst the populace? In fact, believe it or not... America is moving away from a Democrat and Republican mindset and moving towards a more moderate mindset.

The people you see on the news are the oddity... it's why they're on the news in the first place.

The internet makes intelligence gathering agencies more efficient, since people give their information and opinions out online.

This seems like a good thing.

The internet enhances censorship when incorporated with DRM technologies, a single authentication server can destroy an entire dataset at the press of a button now.

Yet the entire internet can't be monitored... besides DRM doesn't censor it stops you from pirating

The internet creates a detachment from people since social relationships have become more distant.

Perhaps... if you only use the internet to socialize... you can't blame the internet because people aren't very good at forming social lives.

The internet helps to homogenize cultures by exposing them to each other.

This seems like a pretty good thing to me.

The internet helps to spread misinformation and shape opinion in ways that were much more difficult decades ago.

Yet, this the other edge that is the doubled edged sword to freedom of speech... if you want to give people a voice you take that with the fact that people will use that voice in improper ways.

Okay... but when you look at these failed banks they are not at the same level as Citigroup or the Bank of America are... these are tiny local banks that don't much of a role on the larger economy...

it's the larger banks that matter... and it's those that are crucial... the banks that hold billions --up to trillions-- of dollars in assets.

140 local banks is a small amount compared to the around 8,625 banks there are...

.. okay look I think you're missing the whole point here

When banks collapse the economy will do poorly because a bunch of assets will be frozen... this is shown by the Great Depression... the Federal Reserve is designed to centralize banking which prevents systematic collapse... thus the Federal Reserve is good for the economy... you've gone off on this tangent when it is a simple concept...

Well... remember in 2009 the banks were going to fail... but they got bailed out before they could go under... so thats a moot point... that was the purpose of the TARP loans.

And... unemployment decreased from an unnormally high rate that occurred in 2008 because of the declining economy... because banks were collapsing

So ultimately our economy is based on the dollar? Right!

Not exactly... the economy is based on the value of the dollar which is ultimately determined by what consumers feels is the value of the dollar. It is not debt based entirely...

There is no doubt that the internet will prove to be great influence on the world given the time.

The printing press may have set the precedent for the internet... yet the internet has far more advantages... like using this stream of knowledge you can say that a Model-T Ford is a better car than a Toyota Camry... or that VHS tapes are better than DVDs...

No, everyday great discoveries are made... students will attend school... hungry people will be fed and the homeless given a roof to sleep under... society advances with both efficiency and compassion... Sure... I know that everything isn't perfect but, we can't expect it to be. Yet, anyone can tell you that society is doing pretty well.

If anybody can just go out to that street and see what Google would be showing you then Google is not invading anyones privacy. Seriously, just don't do stupid shit where people from the road can see you and you'll be fine.

I like it here... I'm not starving, enslaved, in constant danger, repressed, dehumanized, or shielded... I'd say it's pretty damn good

They are --for the most part-- peaceful people... it's the crazies that always make the headlines though which is why I think a lot of non-Christians have this notion of a violent Glenn-Beckesque image whenever they think of Christians.

First of all... way to load the question

Well that's just it... it can save many lives but it definitely infringes on the rights of people.

It is the duty of the government to give each their own due. By using torture that tenet is broken and the government loses legitimacy.

No because in a lot of these movies these women are objectified and used as sex symbols... that is certainly not compliant with the feminist movement

Man, wouldn't that be great to have no government... wait.... but will happen to the roads... my water... who's going to stop all of these shoplifters... crap we're being invaded by Mexico... sure wish we had an army... great now a giant monopoly is charging me exuberant prices...sure wish there was some sort of organization to stop this from happening.

Let's put it this way... there is a reason that governments exist... it's because they are beneficial to mankind... they give us structure, justice, and order.

Well... that's what it can become... what will actually happen is a different story.

Also this is an example of what happens when a healthcare system has its funding cut.

Yeah... but this plan fails because well economic collapse leads to mass death and bitter conflict between the social classes which could lead to a civil war. When big civilizations collapse it's not peaceful and keep in mind... nukes now play a role in the game... of course once we start bombing shit the Russians are going to start bombing other shit... this may lead to global destruction... I think we need to find a balance point here...