Balance of Trade Improvement ??

insulation

Well, would you rather be californicated,

or canuked?

John

insulation

be

know

increased

as

The ones in the apartment we're renting have to be flushed four times, or it's out with the plumber's helper (and then twice more). :-(

How about late-term abortion? Partial birth abortion?

Tim

-- Deep Fryer: A very philosophical monk. Website @

insulation

What's a "patio home"? A townhouse or something? You can't get squat fully detached around Toronto for less than half a mil-- 300k is condo apt. territory.

Best regards, Spehro Pefhany

sulation

to be

ding

do

ou know

eased

mes

t, as

but

Jim would seem to buy his household necessities in the cheapest and nastiest German supermarkets, or - more likely - consults for companies who who don't want their employees to spend too much time in the toilet.

In the U.K. there were companies who bought the infamous Bronco paper for their staff toilets

despite the fact that nobody ever bought it for their own bathroom.

One of the problems of being a neo-con would seem to be the company you keep.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

insulation

Most of Chandler is what we would call "tract" homes.... California ticky-tack ;-)

Besides, Canukes are all hot air... they flee Arizona in April because "it's too hot" ;-)

...Jim Thompson

How about you let the woman decide for herself.

Or do think you own women ? Or do you think women are not smart enough to understand ? Or do you want to be sure that 1/2 the population does not vote aginst you in the next election ?

Please let us know what the REAL goal is here.

donald

Huh?

Do tell indeed. Your mind must be pretty twisted, that came out of nowhere.

_I'm_ trying to see where Rich turns insignificant fetuses into fully fledged human beings with all their rights and responsibilities.

Tim

-- Deep Fryer: A very philosophical monk. Website @

You use of the nonsense phrase "partial birth abortion" would indicate you had a political slant in mind.

Yabbut, organized crime is at least honest about their motives - they're in it for the money, plain and simple.

Big government is driven by ideology.

I'd rather pay my protection money to the Mafia than to Big Governemnt. When the Mafia gets their money, they go away. When Big Government gets your money, they just keep hounding you and legislating morality and other insane crap like that.

But, you seem to be addicted to the proposition that government control is better than freedom, which is wrong.

But, like all addicts, your denial prevents you from seeing the facts.

When people are truly Free, there is no need for "protection".

Cheers! Rich

How about them? Are you saying that since she's been making this fetus for almost 9 months, that there's some magical, miraculous moment when the woman is no longer a person, but only her fetus is?

Would you declare women to be beasts of burden, then? The pro-lifers clearly do.

If you don't own your own body, them "freedom" is nothing but an empty buzzword.

Thanks, Rich

Well, you'll never find that out, since it's the exact opposite of what I'm actually trying to say.

A fetus is not a person.

A person (actually an infant) is what happens at "the miracle of childbirth", when the woman expels her fetus and it becomes a viable individual being.

It's like this: one person, one pregnant person, one VERY pregnant person.

It's really quite simple.

Cheers! Rich

What is this mental block with you people and thinking women are "beasts of burden"? I just don't get it. It's certainly nothing I've said or implied, in this thread or I think at any time on the internet.

The point is, when does the fetus become a human being, and why? If the baby is a person immediately after (or while?) being born, and nothing before that event, what fundamentally is different about it? C-sections prove that the fetus can be "personized" so to speak at an arbitrary time, so I don't really get why birth should be the defining event. It seems to me it is the mother's responsibility to care for her fetus just as it is her (and her S.O.'s...if there is one) responsibility to care for the child. There are clear laws concerning the treatment of children, which you have stated your approval of. Why shouldn't these apply to a fetus as well?

Tim

-- Deep Fryer: A very philosophical monk. Website @

I DO NOT AND NEVER HAVE believed that women are beasts of burden.

It's the "pro-lifers" who do that.

Bringing up their boogeyman words, like "late-term" and "partial-birth", makes you sound like you're one of them, or at least an apologist.

Thanks, Rich

person.

Alright, so having established that, what, physically, is different between the fetus, one second before birth, and the baby, one second after? Two seconds have passed, and it's still the same physical entity. How did it suddenly gain your empathy?

Tim

-- Deep Fryer: A very philosophical monk. Website @

Even if that were true it would not justify compounding the problem a thousand fold, or even one fold. But, of course, it isn't true and is simply a "twisted" invention of yours designed to demonize those you openly claim to "hate."

Pro lifer's believe the unborn are human and entitled to the same right to life as any other human but that doesn't mean the woman has 'no rights', or is considered to be 'cattle', any more than it being illegal for adults to murder their pubescent offspring, because they're more work and cost than they find to be convenient, means parents have 'no rights' and are considered to be 'cattle'.

Frankly, if you're going to accuse anyone of treating people like 'cattle' it might be closer to the other side who seem to argue that humans are incapable of rational thought and hopelessly subject to animal urges so that the only means of 'herd control' is abortion since, as the saying I keep hearing goes, "they're going to do it anyway." Sort of like when a bull gets loose among the milk cows. Well, there ya go. What can you expect?

I liked this thread when we were giving away cars.

donald

Citizenship isn't the definition of 'person'.

That may be, and obviously is, your opinion but simply declaring it to be so doesn't make it so and there are plenty who disagree.

And, I dare say, some would argue your definition to be arbitrary with no philosophical or scientific basis. Why not pick when it can walk, or talk, or passes puberty and can reproduce? Those are all 'conveniently' definable events as well.

The other side, however, can argue that the unborn's DNA clearly establishes it's 'human' and, further, a 'human' distinct from either parent.

Or, put another way, take a biopsy of both mother and the unborn, send it off for blind testing, and the DNA results will identify two distinct, albeit related, human beings. And, btw, you'll get similar DNA results regardless of which side of the birth canal the biopsy is taken.

The DNA of the unborn clearly establishes it is not 'her body'.

The situation changes if you use the neurons as brain cells instead of just rubbing them together.

Check this google for population density, the US is not the bad nation.

world population density With this as second item

And this is a credible analysis of world food trade: