Hahaha. So basically they need to find some beautiful coma victims and rig them up with puppet strings.

Its unreal. Either they seem to accept that their hate message is moronic, or they realise that celebs won't help them if they know they are being used. Unfuckingbelievable.

freedom of speech

but the moment he stepped outside he beaten into a coma by other cops.

Bored yeah, plus I've had people about run me down despite having flaggers, cones, and equipment parked in the roadway to keep people from running us over. You know they were close when they hit the handle of the tool you are working with.

And had a relative who works highway crew who got ran down by a car, broke his legs, brain bleed, had to be choppered to a specialized hospital to save him and deal with the damage done. Someone else got struck in the head by the side mirror on a semi truck who got too close, put them into a coma that led to their eventual death.

If possible embarrassment keeps them from running people over who have taken reasonable and sometimes extreme measures to block off the work zone......I support embarrassing the hell out of them. Sad thing is, driving into wet concrete will probably end up costing him more than running someone over with all that damage to his car and the state regulations on how streets must be built probably forcing them to throw out material he drove in.

>> ^transporter:

I feel your empathy towards wildlife, but if you lived near the Mississippi River you would understand. I don't know if you noticed but those sliver carp get pretty big and they jump out of the river when they hear a motor. So yeah, pretty much makes boating impossible, and there have been cases where people have been put in comas or worse from them. Not to mention they kill off all the native fish populations....and their next destination is the great lakes. So its tough to care about how it gets done --> these fish need to die. Slow, quick, I don't care, but they need to be culled big time.
The Mississippi is fucked up and the entire ecosystem of the great lakes is in jeopardy. This is a cause that unites sport fishermen (billion dollar industry in great lakes) and environmentalists alike. Although these guys aren't going to spokesperson for PETA anytime soon, the carp isn't exactly a higher life form. The farming industry does much worse to higher functioning animals. I think here the ends justify the means.
Anyhow, I thought this was hilarious.>> ^artician:
I'm not exactly an animal rights person, but I was a little miffed at the fact that they basically just maim the majority of the fish they hit.
Early in the video the guy with the machete even cuts a fin off of one. You know that fish lived, and it kind of sucks to think about.
For me...
Again, not an animal rights person, (maybe I am and don't know it?) but this is a good example of humans just fucking up their world and the species they share it with for fun.



Hah! Not a perspective I had previously thought of. Thanks for shedding some light on it for me!

I feel your empathy towards wildlife, but if you lived near the Mississippi River you would understand. I don't know if you noticed but those sliver carp get pretty big and they jump out of the river when they hear a motor. So yeah, pretty much makes boating impossible, and there have been cases where people have been put in comas or worse from them. Not to mention they kill off all the native fish populations....and their next destination is the great lakes. So its tough to care about how it gets done --> these fish need to die. Slow, quick, I don't care, but they need to be culled big time.

The Mississippi is fucked up and the entire ecosystem of the great lakes is in jeopardy. This is a cause that unites sport fishermen (billion dollar industry in great lakes) and environmentalists alike. Although these guys aren't going to spokesperson for PETA anytime soon, the carp isn't exactly a higher life form. The farming industry does much worse to higher functioning animals. I think here the ends justify the means.

Anyhow, I thought this was hilarious.>> ^artician:

I'm not exactly an animal rights person, but I was a little miffed at the fact that they basically just maim the majority of the fish they hit.
Early in the video the guy with the machete even cuts a fin off of one. You know that fish lived, and it kind of sucks to think about.
For me...
Again, not an animal rights person, (maybe I am and don't know it?) but this is a good example of humans just fucking up their world and the species they share it with for fun.

>> ^speechless:

Shit people who are sick of this so called meme say:
"Please slip peacefully into a coma and shut the fuck up."


when was the last jack ass nyan cat. It will die if you ignore it. Or downvote it !

Shit people who are sick of this so called meme say:
"Please slip peacefully into a coma and shut the fuck up."

Why is everyone so scared by consideration of the real question, when does life begin?


First off, I agree it's clear there's value to this question. I think a logical, utilitarian ethical calculus has to rely on some definition of a "live human" and a "future live human" (not "could be" but "will be"). I think, going by a materialist view, this definition of life has to itself be based on some definition of "being human" involving capacity for thought or reason. And I think it also can't rationally be binary (not live human/live human); there has to be weighting (almost dead guy, 12 week-old fetus, guy in coma, etc... should probably all be partially weighted).

But humans aren't rational utilitarians when it comes to ethics. We're superstitious. We're habituated to rely on deontology. We value aesthetics.

And that's why debates like this take place is terms of analogies and emotions. And that's why, I think, you aren't putting down your simple answer for "when does life begin" - because we understand that having a single answer gets a whole deontological train moving. If we take any single answer there as a premise, we're driven to accept other answers we don't like, so instead it's arguing in the margins and specific cases.

It's a deadlock inherent in our irrationally based ethical system. Sorry.

I like what Sylvester said about not putting in the stuffing, and using a meat thermometer. Personally, I put the thermometer right in the breast meat, and pull it out somewhere between 161-165 F (72-74 C). And then let it rest. Just like a good steak, don't you dare cut into that juicy sucker until it has sat for at least 15-20 minutes or else all your moisture will just pour out all over your cutting board instead of being absorbed back into the meat.

BUT, the real secret, is to brine your turkey. Check out this recipe by food scientist Alton Brown: Good Eats Roast Turkey Recipe. There's a reason it has 3,750+ reviews and a 5-star rating. Only instead of a 5-Gallon bucket, I just use a brining bag and put it in the bottom drawer of the fridge. Do make sure it's fully submerged. A brine promotes osmosis, which lets your flavorful bath soak through the meat. It's SCIENCE!

The only reason I don't eat turkey more often is because it's just me and my lady here and a weeks worth of food comas would be counter-productive.

All religions are at their heart rotten. They are anti-thought. A form of intellectual coma. All of them.

I havent watched this video, but it seems a little rude to say that Bachman is in a coma.

>> ^spoco2:

>> ^marbles:
>> ^spoco2:
Ha! She really got him with that last comment...
Where's marbles to arc up about vaccines then?

When you've got liberals quoting Rush Limbaugh as the authority, then you know something is seriously fucked up.

OR, if everyone INCLUDING Limbaugh admits that there is ZERO evidence for the claims then you know the claims are utter bullshit.


Ok pal. Gardasil contains aluminum, polysorbate 80 and sodium borate.

aluminum: Toxic. Linked to Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. Can cause memory loss and speech problems. Linked to a wide variety of other health problems. Side effects and severe allergic reactions include rash, hives, itching, difficulty breathing, tightness in the chest; swelling of the mouth, face, lips, or tongue, loss of appetite, muscle weakness, nausea, slow reflexes, and vomiting.

polysorbate 80: Carcinogenic as well as mutagenic. When injected into prepubescent rats, it caused abnormal growth of reproductive organs and made the rats sterile. When used intravenously with vitamins it has been known to cause anaphylactic shock.

sodium borate: Roach pesticide, i.e. poison. Listed side effects include: vomiting, collapse, coma, convulsions, low blood pressure and twitching of facial muscles, arms, hands, legs, and feet.


According to VAERS – the following reports have been listed for HPV, HPV2 & HPV 4 and "mental disorders." This is an estimated 1 to 10% of the vaccine-injured population reporting:

VAERS Analysis / HPV, HPV2, HPV4 – U.S. & Foreign / HPV4 U.S. Only


1. Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis (ADEM) / 21 / 7
   
2. Encephalitis / 53 / 27
   
3. Demyelination / 60 / 28
   
4. Psychotic Disorder / 14 / 5
   
5. Abnormal Behaviour / 49 / 41
   
6. Cognitive Disorder / 22 / 19
   
7. Mental Status Changes / 41 / 38
   
8. Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging Brain Abnormal / 132 / 95
   
9. Speech Disorder / 90 / 67
   
10. Myelitis Transverse / 30 / 21
    
11. Facial Palsy / 138 / 105

>> ^blankfist:

And I too could recite your position. In my sleep. In a coma. In my grave.

But you can't. You're constantly misapprehending and misrepresenting my position on things, and you don't listen when I try to correct you on what I think.

>> ^blankfist:
If no one is willing to help someone who is dying, then they would die. I felt like I've answered this. But you want me to say something sensational and controversial, that I want people to die or think they should. But my point is it shouldn't be up to me or you. It should be up to the individual how he handles his life even in life-saving health treatment.

So it's okay for a doctor to choose to let the guy die if he wants to? Morally and legally, that's his right?

Keep in mind that at the same time, you're saying it's totally off-limits for there to be any kind of compulsory solution. No law saying that patients in life-threatening situations need to be treated regardless of their ability to pay. No taxes collected to compensate doctors for the services they render to people who are unable to pay. No collective bargaining to keep prices on drugs and treatments low. No national health insurance program, or even health insurance regulation, and definitely no subsidization of anything.

Maybe doctors are supermen who have an infinite wellspring of compassion, but they still live in a market-dominated world. They're going to need money to pay off their college debt. They're going to need a place to live, food to eat, etc. The hospital is going to demand some level of compensation for the use of rooms, equipment, and medical supplies. Once all the donations and his own savings are exhausted, even the most noble doctor is going to eventually have to say no to somebody, whether he wants to or not.

So, you're saying the patient who's dying must not be given guarantees of any kind, while the doctor must as a matter of moral imperative, be guaranteed the right to refuse to treat people, even if that's a death sentence for their potential patient.

That is sensational, controversial, and in my opinion, morally reprehensible.

I'm not asking you this as some sort of "gotcha" question. I'm mostly using the question to try to get you to think about this conflict between mainline libertarian ideology, and what you know is right in your heart.

There's gotta be a better way. I'm not married to any one way to solve the issue, but I definitely reject the way you and Paul are insisting is the only way society can handle these kinds of situations.

>> ^NetRunner:

@blankfist I'm pretty confident that by this point I could recite your position on health care and government in my sleep.
That's why I'm still waiting for you to answer the question. "Free market" rules work like this:
Person A has X dollars, and wants cherries. The market price of cherries is Y dollars. If X < Y, then Person A can't have cherries, no matter how badly he might want them.
Should those rules ever be different if we're talking about life-saving medical procedures?
Since this keeps being answered with cries of "Charity!" I guess I need to point out that charity doesn't change that fundamental picture, nor does it eliminate the possibility of that ever happening to anyone.
So we're back to the same question, with just one more caveat. What should be done with people who can't pay, and didn't get helped by charity? Leave them to die?


And I too could recite your position. In my sleep. In a coma. In my grave.

If no one is willing to help someone who is dying, then they would die. I felt like I've answered this. But you want me to say something sensational and controversial, that I want people to die or think they should. But my point is it shouldn't be up to me or you. It should be up to the individual how he handles his life even in life-saving health treatment.

What you've created is a very specific scenario that appeals to our fears as mortal beings. And using it to promote a political agenda is just as disgusting as those who used 9/11 to justify taking away our liberties and rights.

What's worse, you think you've discovered some big gotcha question to rule them all. You didn't. It appeals to the basest of emotions instead of reason. And it shows the narrow-mindedness of your movement. We let people die all the time. It's almost an accepted part of our lives. You thump your chest over saving lives with universal healthcare, yet say nothing about military aggressions that lead to large scale life loss. At least dying in a hospice gives you some dignity and comfort unlike dying in a wartorn street from phosphorus burns.

In reply to this comment by steama:
Deepak talk total crap. He mixes his breed of mythology psycho-babble to the point it is sickening. I have never heard a man make more unsubstantiated claims than Chopra.

Sorry, I assumed that people would get the sarcasm using the bug and windshield analogy. As for Gupta, of course death has a process if there is 'time' but often the luxury of time would be gone if we were squished by a large boulder let's say! Science will continue to uncover the mysteries of the human mind. It's amazing.

In reply to this comment by Trancecoach:
actually, check out "The Serpent and the Rainbow." In it, Wade Davis describes that the pronouncement of death is actually a much trickier and more ambiguous process than is commonly understood. People have recovered after being "clinically dead" (i.e., no brain activity, no heart rate, etc.) for several minutes, or even longer. If a person goes into cardiac arrest during a coma, the declaration of the time of death is, in this sense, simply the time at which the doctors have decided to stop working on revival.

>> ^steama:

Deepak make statements regarding the brain, mind, consciousness, that he cannot back-up with any evidence at all. He obviously likes to hear himself talk.
When the brain dies the mind is gone — period.
Also, Gupta stating that death is a process and doesn't happen all at once. Well ask that bug that hit your windshield how long the death process took.