What is humorous on the "yay" side, is many people are asking to define normal.....so the easy answer is just that......If "normal" can not be objectively defined, than the answer is no.....it doesn't matter what person it's pertaining to.....Are {insert any attribute here} people normal.....the answer is no.....so thank you for allowing me to conclude this debate. I have officially won....Keep reading, you might actually read enough to be right way day (giggles).

The winners are the cockroaches.....I remember 1945, the Americans were the winners.....but i guess the argument could be made whether Americans are cockroaches or now.....just ask Richard Dawkins (laughter)

How can you be against nuclear warfare..... You can hope it never happens, give reasons why it would be bad, and destructive......But the problem is this....Nuclear warfare is just another kind of warfare, just more effective.......so the question should be against Warfare or not.....not how it's achieved.

TURPIFICATUS...... you hit the nail on the cross...... people do not care to get involved, they care to wait on their choices, and then gripe about them...... seems the American way now...... I just hope we don't go the way of Russia before it's all said and done.

Excuse me!.....Hey you, LOSTMMA.....hello??? oh thank you .... finally you put down the TV remote.....thanks for listening.....

Get a hint, quit getting so caught up in the politics of OTHER people, and start getting INVOLVED......

You may now return to your television program, already in progress.

Why are people so caught up in who is the next president. Here is a question....think mentally since you can't respond....pick one of the numbers, 3, 5, or 7........you most likely picked 3....its generally how it works....the reason you picked a number, is one, there are three numbers only, and i gave you the choices. This presidential election is nothing different....yes i know we had primaries, but did you pick who went to the primary? no.....did you pick who won the primary? maybe.....the point is.....if people do not get involved in their civic duty, it doesn't matter who is elected, it's still going to be a selection made for you........

Congress at 12% approval......the laughs on us.....they are still elected, and yet the approval of congress rarely tops 40%....seems americans need a change of venue, not just the leadership.

First off, I could easily make the argument that the developing countries (USA, JAPAN, CHINA, GERMANY, CANADA to name a few) would be the only ones attempting to fight emission problems, due to the fact that they are the only ones CREATED THE PROBLEMS. The reason I call them developing, is they are changing more in a day, than most of AFRICA does in a year. I would call most countries, developed. They have been the same for 50 years, and have little improvements on the horizon.

FYI, China being third world, is about as good as saying Germany had little power in 1935. GDP by country, USA, Canada, CHINA, Japan, Germany.....so yea, i guess if CHINA is third world, then so is Japan, Germany, and every country that follows.

What good is it to agree that "their [sic]' might be a problem." When major global policy takes form on possibilities, I have yet to see a positive outcome. When Hitler threatened in WW2 and the world finally woke up to the fact, major changes took affect. However, when Saddam was an "imminent" threat, few countries agreed to join forces....... The Kyoto Protocol was supposed to revolutionize the way emissions were treated, initially by (if memory is right, I'm not googling to see if I'm right either) they started at reduction of 40% by 2020, and by the final agreement the USA agreed to 4% or something to that affect. So what's going to change now.

The agreement has very little to do with whether or not countries reduce emissions. However, global recessions on the hands of oil tycoons, and alternative methods of energy (via last resort) will take form, and greatly reduce emissions. This is a lot more likely than the former.

The government should stay out of personal choices....however, insurance companies could easily state that benefits would not be paid without someone wearing the seatbelt....do not forget, it was the insurance companies which wanted seatbelts installed, not pissed off mommies

Being here, does not supply the reason, on the effect.