Poll: Democrat or Republican

<p>Yeah, They’re criminals have other weapons (knives, etc.) and the law-abiding citizens cannot defend themselves properly. Think about how easy it would be to scare off a weaponless thief with a gun.</p>

<p>

Because we base our stance on logic rather than unfounded emotions? Yeah, a cluster of cells DEFINITELY have human emotions/characteristics. You might as well say masturbation is murder because sperm cells are killed.</p>

<p>This thread is going downhill because people (notably Qwertykey, MillardFillmore, blackbanana) would take any opportunity to turn a thread such as this into a political debate.</p>

<p>Yes, he is smart. But look where it has gotten us.</p>

<p>^^ And what are you doing?</p>

<p>The bottom line is, vote Republican. Obviously.
I would if I could.</p>

<p>“This thread is going downhill because people (notably Qwertykey, MillardFillmore, blackbanana) would take any opportunity to turn a thread such as this into a political debate.”</p>

<p>Well, firstly there’s no real point to the thread if it’s not a political debate. Otherwise it’s a poll, and everyone who wants to answer already has.</p>

<p>Secondly, you’re singling us three out only? I’m not even one of the main conspirators here. That started back at like page 9.</p>

<p>ryanxing, stop being ignorant. It is not killing someone until it becomes a fetus.</p>

<p>^^^^Apparently you can’t comprehend the word “turn”. The fact this thread is already full of debates means it’s irrelevant what people post anymore. Most of the posts in the past few pages are off topic.</p>

<p>^^A lot of threads in HSL are “pointless.” This thread is truly pointless because it has strayed from its intention.</p>

<p>^ Of course, anyone who supports abortion is ignorant and anyone who opposes it is right. Why would I even want to argue against such a mindset. Nonetheless, what I said still stands. What you consider as human is only your own sentiments and is unscientific.</p>

<p>You are ignorant because you think that masturbation is abortion, not because you oppose pro-life.</p>

<p>Then you are even more ignorant because that’s not what I said or think. Your lack of reading comprehension skills is really wasting my time. I don’t think masturbation is killing anything. I was drawing a parallel because what MillardFillmore believes to be human with sperm cells.</p>

<p>I don’t think sperm cells are human. I never said that, mind you. But a fetus is.</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/high-school-life/986369-big-political-debate-big-angry-argument-thread.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/high-school-life/986369-big-political-debate-big-angry-argument-thread.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>@post231: Can’t you people ever read? I made the comparison precisely you claim a fetus is human and I never assumed you think sperm cells are human.</p>

<p>First, U.S. law prohibits abortion during the late stages in development. Second, a fetus in its early stages barely, if at all, developed human characteristics. Face it, you reason you oppose abortion is due to your personal unfounded belief of what is considered human. Your argument does not have any scientific merit.</p>

<p>^Try my thread.</p>

<p>^^Just because a fetus has not developed human characteristics does not make it human. Where do you draw the line where a fetus becomes a human? It can’t survive on its own, but neither can a person on an IV tube or a respirator. Are they not human either? Are we allowed kill people who are severely handicapped as long as they aren’t “human” enough? You can’t exactly judge a fetus’s humanity based on what it can and cannot do at that current point in its life. ITS LIFE. Because it IS alive.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Ok, great! Get 66,862,038 other people who can agree on what the definition of smart is, and I’ll join you.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I think he’s rather naive… He say we’re going to double our exports in the next 5 years… Do you realize how not-going-to-happen that is?</p>

<p>^I agree, Obama is seriously naive. Obama also tried to make a goal for America: land a PERSON on an ASTEROID by 2025 (I’m dead serious - <a href=“http://www.natchezdemocrat.com/news/2010/apr/17/asteroid-landing-obamas-plans/[/url]”>A ’Bama-LSU rematch is the only option - Mississippi's Best Community Newspaper | Mississippi's Best Community Newspaper). Not only would a project like this be costly and risky, it has a low return on investment. What on earth are they going to do on an asteroid? Analyze its composition to see if they can mine its minerals? Send a rover or a robot to do it, not a person. Who does Obama think he is, JFK? We’re not in a cold war; we don’t need to pump up our ego by proving that we can land on a celestial body.</p>

<p>Actually, one of the reasons Obama wanted to do so would be to stop an asteroid from colliding into the earth. So landing on ONE out of MILLIONS of asteroids would prevent an asteroid from crashing into the earth…sounds good.</p>

<p>Make a goal for America to cure cancer 2025. Not only would it call for lots of spending and jobs, thus restarting the economy, it would have a great return on investment - we would have a cure for a fatal disease and could save millions or even billions of people.</p>

<p>Thats actually a really good idea cucumber! A two for one. You get to boost the economy, and you get to save millions of lives. (:</p>

<p>^ Bad idea. You create bunch of jobs, but you also save a bunch of lives. Net change in unemployment: zero.</p>

<p>^You need numbers to make that conclusion.</p>