Steak is definitely optional. I choose steak.

Killing only stops if there are no cows. If there are living cows they will die one day. In the wild pretty quickly if you apply your morals to wolves also.

A cow has no abstract concept of the fear of being eaten (only a general fear and instincts) so unless you purposefully go out of your way to hurt it there is nothing philosophically wrong with eating one, unless you get all emotional and make a complicated moral choice. Which is your choice to make.

Cavemen is a pretty wide term. I am probably smarter than most cavemen. But from the time they got organized and hunted large animals until now man has not really changed much - a couple of tens of thousands of years. We probably tend to remember less and be more depressed and weaker and use our senses less well. Can type faster though.

The flu, partying night before...

I just think it's bizarre behaviour of all involved. As it's happened since birth, she's normalized it, but being programmed to think being recorded is just another weekly chore -like I had to collect and take out the trash- is an alien concept to me.

She has achieved her Warhol Quota though...

EDIT: Her brother Vince is being documented too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWINGOpjwrs&feature=emb_rel_pause
16 years so far.

I can see the Republican party disavowing Trump en masse once it's undeniable that he'll be removed. So soon. That'll give them time to try to weave a new reality in their voters' brains and maybe not be tossed out in 2020. Certainly it's clear that hard-core Fox News viewers have a very malleable concept of reality, so there's a chance it'll even work.

they missed conception bay, dildo, south dildo, come by chance, little heart's ease, tickles, nugget's bay, random island, lady cove, and the motion. and that's just on the east coast of newfoundland.

Not in my experience. I've known many people who tried in Texas and Nevada, all failed. They said it was about 3 pages in triplicate (4 with cover page, totalling 12), fingerprints, photos, a pristine criminal record, chests of cash (the guns cost thousands or tens of thousands), a Class 3 FFL dealer willing to sell to you, 9 months to a year waiting for approval, and no local ordinance against it (local police will be notified).

I said the background check is similarly difficult to pass, not the entire process.

No one asked you that. We balked at your claim-
"The 2A specifically says "arms". There is plenty of debate and case law regarding what arms they meant. Suffice to say there isn't a shadow of a doubt that it means firearms (long and short) of all varieties commonly available."
...and I then gave you the federal definition of "firearms" which you begrudgingly admitted trumps yours, but still cling to the concept that firearms can't be regulated (even though they clearly are). I'm surprised you recall it so differently, especially when you can verify by just scrolling up.

This is a paranoid delusion. Because that's a possibility in a future where the 2a is repealed, they think that's enough reason to ignore any positive uses, like knowing if the person just diagnosed with schizophrenia has an arsenal, or the person who's stalking your 15 year old daughter, or the man who beats his wife. Also, taken to conclusion, that argument is basically "It might make it harder for me to break the law. That's unacceptable." Hardly a reasonable argument imo.

? Your argument was there are better issues to throw money at, bucketloads you said, now you admit it takes no money and declare yourself correct?!

Then don't be dumb and fuck little kids.
Don't be dumb and rape random women.
Don't be dumb by getting caught in the Jr high locker room filming.
Don't be a snarky tool who hides from what he said by doing mental gymnastics to pretend their warnings aren't implications.
See how giving these warnings imply you needed warning? That's how warnings work.

Because I post here doesn't make me the big dog...I'm not even top 20. Everyone is welcome, welcome to post as much or little as they choose, but if I see lies, misstatements, abuse, or insults when none are called for, I'm going to say something, just like I do in person. That's called being an upright citizen. I guess you prefer those who shrink away from that obligation....so hit ignore. That's what I'm doing.

I didn't call you dumb. I warned you that if you were to do something (future tense possibility) then the result would be that you were being dumb.

Do you get how that works? There are multiple future possibilities, I don't want one to happen so I warn against it. This is not a difficult concept so I am at a loss as to why you don't understand it.

There was nothing in your previous correspondence to suggest that it would be a statement referring to a past tense behavior. You unfortunately assumed it to be referring to past tense behaviour. If you had doubt as to what I was referring to you could have just asked. I.e. if you read it and went "does he mean past tense or future tense? There isn't any past tense behaviour he could be referring to, so logically it must be future tense. I'm still confused though", you could have just asked which it was.

I believe any restrictions on the 2A have been justified by the supreme court. So they believe it was within the scope of what the founders intended. That is how.

"Hazard a guess" and "assume" are two different things.

Hazard a guess means to admit you don't know what is true but that with the given information you will gamble on an outcome (with full disclosure that it could be wrong).

Assume means to presume something is true, without any proof that it is.

You're welcome.

My memory of palmetto bugs is entering a room, turning on a light, three of the bastards turn around, look at me like they're sizing me up, and then scuttle away.

Insects making eye contact with a human is just fundamentally wrong. Insects whose concept of humans is anything less than an ineffable cosmic force have evolved beyond their allotted station and should be purged from existence. They can take their flaming death trees with them.

Kurzgesagt has a history of taking something overly complicated and simplifying it to the point where it looses it's meaning and slips into fantasy-land. With this video, it bridges too many concepts and strings them together, until it becomes unsure what the actual path is.

It does handle a more complex occurrence, so It tries, but it loses it's momentum as it gets going because it consists of too many gaps in facts to complete a proper narrative.

Yes, yes and no so much anymore. The delamination / damage from bumps and potholes have been pretty much resolved in the Michelin and Bridgestone designs (according to Michelin and Bridgestone - ahem...) Haven't seen any reports on whether running temps are worse lately, but hard to make the comparison (the #1 root cause of tire failure today is under-inflation so tires running hotter than design). Now with 10 or more of the big boys in the hunt for the best airless design, will be an interesting ride. The concept out of SciTech Industries in Florida is neato, but they are a (relatively) smaller startup, so might get lost in the scramble, though producing a lighter tire with less heat build (quite a different concept compared to Michelin). cheers

You posted it happily as fact. If you post/repeat someone else's lie, you are a liar.

The teacher knows better why he acted than the ignorant obstinate disruptive kid that won't listen. Derp.

Still lies. You LOVE lies. Grow a pair and stand by them. I get that, in your efforts to support Trump, you have trained yourself to believe any right leaning lies and claim any non right wing fact is fake news, that doesn't mean the rest of us must support your psychosis.

Sure, kid gets to lie, you get to repeat it and claim it's not a lie because you didn't create it, just repeated it. That's pathetic, Bob. Infantile, dumb, and pathetic.

Bob. Learn to read. I'm not going over it again. I answered that question in the previous post. Doubly pathetic.
Do you still have any teeth?

Bottom line, the kid is an ignorant obstinate idiot who believes his uninformed opinion outweighs any other, including the school boards, and that he may exercise his right to free speech anywhere at any time with impunity.

Bottom line, kid is a disruptive, ignorant dumbass....and I'm not a bit surprised you're backing him and contradicting rules, laws, authority, the English language (that you seriously need to learn better, Vladimir), logic, civility, and fact to do so.

Guess you've never heard of hermaphrodites or neuters. Not surprising. The words/concepts are only a few thousand years old, created by those Greek libtards to muddy the language and hurt Trump. Your arguments get dumber every day. *facepalm

https://www.etymonline.com/word/hermaphrodite

And you realize you say that as a man who has no womb. You can only base your argument with science without having an incubator of your own.

I realize there are times when a woman can make a decision to abort as in rape but I also realize a woman may not abort in the case of rape.

I can't even imagine what it would feel like to be pregnant.

A decision I would not want to make. But I say that as a man.

For the record "Pro choice."

Leave it up to the incubator. After all, she's the one that has to live with her decision. The father is secondary. If she makes a decision you don't like, cowboy up. That's why you're the man. If she makes a decision she regrets, support her. That's why you're the man.


EDIT: newt's profile page.

I once threatened to sue my parents for depriving me of the bliss of non being through a willful and wanton act of conception.

BTW, did you get any money out of them?

So, the argument is two fold.
One, this issue of personal freedom/choice is important enough that it can't be left to states who might eliminate individual choice in favor of a state's choice. This is the liberal position on this issue, that states will take the choice away from individual woman in favor of the choice made for them, usually by groups of old men. That's why Roe V Wade is essential, it denies the states the right to enslave women to their unwanted, potential, in some cases forced upon them, offspring.

Second, he argued we can't allow laws that take away the freedom of individuals to choose, which slavery did...as do anti abortion laws. You cannot crush the choices of another person....this includes the choice to not be an incubator for another "person" (to misuse the word, assuming they're incorrectly insisting a blastocyst or foetus is a person, all medical and scientific evidence notwithstanding). The "developing life" (doesn't realize he just blew the "life starts at conception" argument with that phrase) cannot take away the rights of the womb's owner, cannot make them a slave to the blastocyst/foetus. The right to life argument fails when you realize no person is forced to donate blood or organs, which people need to live. Real right to life would extend beyond birth and require people become medical slaves to those who need them or their parts.

If it can live without help, fine, develop an abortive processes that allows that at any point in pregnancy, fund it across the board, and start the debate again. Until then, this dumbass just made two arguments for pro choice.
Pathetic.

Because I don't buy into the concept that money is above all else. I feel a life well lived and enjoyed responsibly is better than one that made money but not happiness.
Also because I'm broken and was disabled throughout what should have been my "productive years". Getting off opioid medications has helped with that more than I would have believed....but I'm still fairly unemployable.
...and because I made my money the old fashioned way....I inherited it....but family members just aren't dying rich like they used to. ;-)

Well newtboy, how about this? Start promoting the concept of taking action on your own behalf and on behalf of your fellow man in situations that most would normally delegate to the police force.

Start first with listing every situation that would cause someone to call the cops. Be comprehensive. It might take several days or weeks. You may even want to interview subject matter experts to help with this ideation phase.

Then, come up with 3-5 alternative courses of action for each situation that don't involve a police force.

How motivated are you? I organize these types of research projects for a living. Heck, even without you I might undertake this project. I have many others higher on my list though.

Once you are done, it's a matter of publishing and promoting your research. I do all that as well.