Prove there's a god.

Sockstar wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't think anyone else should be allowed to use it either.

I seem to have missed something.

What is the reason you oppose IVF?

undefined apathy wrote:

<quoted text>
I think we all want alot of things that aren't going to happen.
Yeah, I'm not saying that drugs hoes can't be saved, I'm saying we don't have the resources or manpower to go round up every crack addict and heroine junkie for rehab. We just can't afford to do that. It's literally an impossible task...well maybe not for the flying spaghetti monster, but he's too busy torturing african babies to worry about helping people.

The money that's spent on methadone projects could be better spent. Rehab clinics could be better run and community service needs brining upto speed. But yeah it's a big task.

AugieDogie2 wrote:

<quoted text>Michael, may I call you Michael, that is a good name, do you know what the Hebrew of Michael means?
In answer to your question, You are man..You think as man..With GOD there is NO CONCEPT of TIME! Therefore, It would be of no consequence to INFINITE GOD what His Purpose would be 100-200-300-billion years ago or in the future..etc......None what soever.....Think on it....
Stephen...."Child Of Promise!"

so your answer is that there is no answer?

Cause that's pretty retarded if you ask me.

HipGnosis wrote:

<quoted text>I am mystified by his assertion, "...explain how whites mutated out of the Ice Age, since there is no evidence of Caucasians then." No doubt I'm reading it wrong. Any ideas?

scatter-brained even if one helps his logic it still leaps and twists and makes connections where there is none.

It is quite a surprise how many "believers" are truly mentally dysfunctional.

nanoanomaly wrote:

<quoted text>Your good buddy is the one who brought up a long list of supposed excuses that women give at a clinic. Get a clue, troll.

You can never debate an issue without being a nasty trank.
No wonder you are single and have no friends or children.

undefined apathy wrote:

<quoted text>
And to the teen pregnancy thing which started this. How exactly is having a child going to make a mother unable to stick with school. I've seen older and mentally rustier people juggle multiple children, a full time 40+ hr a week job, and school. It obviously wouldn't be easy, but it is possible, very much so.

AND post on Topix for hours every day?

Catcher1 wrote:

<quoted text>
I seem to have missed something.
What is the reason you oppose IVF?

Well personally I think people who can't have babies should accept their issue. In a rapidly over-populating planet we need to put a cap on this technology. There are plenty of children in the care system that need a home. I know IVF doesn't count for a great deal of births but it's not needed. It only appeals to the emotional needs of a person who has the desire to have a child that shares their DNA.

Sockstar wrote:

<quoted text>
The money that's spent on methadone projects could be better spent. Rehab clinics could be better run and community service needs brining upto speed. But yeah it's a big task.

agreed. It's not something that'd ever happen though. Our officals who make those decisions are greedy and corrupt, they aren't worried about crack hoes.

Catcher1 wrote:

<quoted text>
AND post on Topix for hours every day?

...? 0.o

Has nothing to do with what you quoted from me...so confused >.<

logic error?

undefined apathy wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah it's sad, but is death really better than that? Besides I believe you said earlier that the government steps in and takes alot of these babies away from their mothers anyways, yes?

The State takes away alot of children, tens of thousands are in care other than their parents and that is a whole other can of worms. But ultimately the decision must be left up to the woman. Only she can best decide what in fact is best and all we can do as spectators is hope she makes the right decision for HER and the developing fetus.

Whether death is for the best, only time will tell.
I'll leave you with this photo to ponder that.

http://rehman.posterous.com/saddest-picture-o...

And remember, this issue goes to every corner of the earth.

Buck Crick wrote:

<quoted text>
YOU WANT TO KILL IT FOR ITS OWN SAFETY?????
I'm out.
This one does it.
You people are the dumbest I have ever conversed with.
And that's a low bar.
I cannot have a discussion with people this stupid.

I would say "great," but I don't believe you're out.

You'll be back in minutes.

Sockstar wrote:

<quoted text>
Well personally I think people who can't have babies should accept their issue. In a rapidly over-populating planet we need to put a cap on this technology. There are plenty of children in the care system that need a home. I know IVF doesn't count for a great deal of births but it's not needed. It only appeals to the emotional needs of a person who has the desire to have a child that shares their DNA.

I could not disagree more.

Catcher1 wrote:

<quoted text>
I would say "great," but I don't believe you're out.
You'll be back in minutes.

Has he ever had a storm out before?

topbiatchh wrote:

I AM GOD!

Congratulations.

Lyndi wrote:

<quoted text>
The State takes away alot of children, tens of thousands are in care other than their parents and that is a whole other can of worms. But ultimately the decision must be left up to the woman. Only she can best decide what in fact is best and all we can do as spectators is hope she makes the right decision for HER and the developing fetus.
Whether death is for the best, only time will tell.
I'll leave you with this photo to ponder that.
http://rehman.posterous.com/saddest-picture-o...
And remember, this issue goes to every corner of the earth.

depressing picture, very sad, very sad.

Yeah I suppose that's true it is up to the woman ultimately we can't force her to do anything or not do anything.

Although, I sort of hate how the father isn't involved in the decision ( don't get me wrong on this one I'll elaborate ) Obviously he isn't carrying the thing in his body so woman has ultimate call, but I think if you know who the father is for sure, the very least you could do is hear his opinion out and actually consider it. Cause I can tell you right now if I ever knocked up a girl and she offed the baby. I'd probably go to her house and blow my brains out right in front of her face to scar her forever.( not really...but I wouldn't be happy with it, and she'd definitely get cut the hell out of my life forever.)

undefined apathy wrote:

<quoted text>
...? 0.o
Has nothing to do with what you quoted from me...so confused >.<
logic error?

No, just injecting a bit of (lousy) humor. Trying to avoid this scenario:

MP: Mr. Churchill, must you fall asleep while I'm talking?

Churchill: No, it's purely voluntary.

Catcher1 wrote:

<quoted text>
I could not disagree more.

That is perfectly within your rights. People have different opinions and that's a good thing. It's my own moral path.

I just feel in a world of 7 billion something needs to be done to stop the increase in births. Also they is a huge mass of children that need homes who have no families.

Catcher1 wrote:

<quoted text>
No, just injecting a bit of (lousy) humor. Trying to avoid this scenario:
MP: Mr. Churchill, must you fall asleep while I'm talking?
Churchill: No, it's purely voluntary.

okay fair enough :3

undefined apathy wrote:

<quoted text>
if the mother wants to keep the child, she looks after herself?

That's the ideal, no?

undefined apathy wrote:

<quoted text>
Ha!

Ho!

undefined apathy wrote:

<quoted text>
what fairy tale world do you live in.

Used to, at least

undefined apathy wrote:

<quoted text>
my friend is a nurse

Cool

undefined apathy wrote:

<quoted text>
and she said almost all the babies they deliver are born hooked on drugs.

That is terrible.

undefined apathy wrote:

<quoted text>
It doesn't matter though mommy didn't commit a crime it was only a fetus when she got her baby hooked on smack, it wasn't a person, right?

Strawman, yet again.

I tire of these fallacies.

Sir Doctor wrote:

<quoted text>Wrong, there was more than one Ice Age and this one effected 1/3 of the earth. Me know, according to evolution science that there were dinosaurs in Africa and South America, and an alleged Ice Age destroyed them and that is not the Northern Hemisphere. You can't dance with maybes, a then promote evolution is anything more than a myth or children's fairy tale.

Um no. According to scientists dinosaurs (Other than avians) and a large percentage of the other animals More than half) were killed when a massive asteroid hit the Earth in Mexico. This is known as the KT extinction.
Who the heck told you it was an ice age? You need to do some research.