[Outcast_Searcher]

Once the HUMAN has a defective arrogant gene kick in and thinks it becomes a "special" HUMAN then it is labeled a liberal or democrat and will certainly starve to death if not sustained by those it calls sub human.

+1

Um, you forgot a couple things though:

1). It will constantly complain that it is NEVER BEING FED WELL ENOUGH in quantity or quality, and it will constantly lobby anyone who will listen to improve its sustenance, even while it is being cared for.

2). If the sustainer dares point out that beggars can't be choosers, it will roundly attack the sustainer as being evil, even while demanding more sustenance.

[Pretorian]

Evolution should have given them some poison spines or sharp teeth if they were meant to survive. I like my place on the food chain, as its better to eat than be eaten.

rs or so.

Sea cows did just fine for 50 million years or so. Humanoid apes, that is it's only predator, barely 1 or 2 million years.

[Pretorian]

Sixstrings might have to adjust his moral standards a bit when TSHTF. Hunger has a way of making that happen.

People have never needed sea cows for food. It's just convenient. That's why the biggest one, steller's sea cow, went extinct in Alaska. It was just too easy pickings for sailors.. they're slow pokes, they won't and dive or try to get away like a whale will. Now they're gone forever:



Bottom line.. humans are just too damn good of an apex predator. We've got to restrain ourselves or we'll ruin the whole planet.

btw it took less than 27 years to kill them all off

[Cog]

Perhaps a moment of silence will suffice to mourn them properly.
The hell with that.
Down on your knees you atheists.
Lead us in prayer Sixstrings for the animals we have killed and are going to kill.

[clif]

Why not, the motto on a bottle of Jägermeister says:

"It is the hunter's honour that he protects and preserves his game, hunts sportsmanlike, and honours the Creator in His creatures"

Too bad western culture doesn't follow that idea any more.

[Fishman]

"Also,statistically speaking, many of those "unborn infants" , could develop into cogs and fishermen, so hurrying them back into oblivion is not just "right" , it's GOOD. Think about how many living beings they are not going to kill throughout their lives."

So the proper term would be fetus, killing a fetus is ok by your terms. Luckily, those aborting their fetuses are far more likely statistically to be folks like you, killing your own. So have at it.

"Too bad western culture doesn't follow that idea any more" Um, everything I hunt has a tight season, and regulations and punishments if violated. My native america relatives ran large herds of buffalo off cliffs. And they were far more likely to have decimated the stellar sea cows. They were only discovered by Europeans 27 years before extinction.

Sorry pstarr, no liberal can say "You do the right thing because it is right" Moral relativism disallows that statement. This is just your perception of right (at least as defined by your own standards) So you must be a strong advocate for the unborn (fetus)? "You also do the right thing because of enlightened self interest. No conscious human being takes any kind of life without concern and repercussion"
PS I shot a rabbit recently with my bow, would you like the carcuss?

[clif]

My native america relatives ran large herds of buffalo off cliffs.

But it took the white man with repeating winchester rifles fronted with railroad money to decimate the herds into almost extinction ... which is the reason Teddy Roosevelt and others of his era started environmental movement to correct the western culture idea of kill everything so the land can be developed for profit.

The western ideology of corporate power and domination over nature, is the reason we face the sixth mass die off in the entire planets history, one that could end up with the human race being extinct. The rules you lament are because instead of tens of millions using rudimentary weaponry, now a days we have fish finders, scoped riflers with laser designators, and many many more people after far fewer animals then existed when Columbus arrived here. With out the rules more animals would be on the verge of becoming extinct then already are.

[Pretorian]

So the proper term would be fetus, killing a fetus is ok by your terms. Luckily, those aborting their fetuses are far more likely statistically to be folks like you, killing your own. So have at it.

Mind me asking what do you have against abortions? I know you are a bible man, so you should know that there is nothing against abortion in bible. You know better. Fetus is not a human being, according to the Bible, because punishment for killing a human being is death ( unless it is a slave), and if, for example, your (pregnant) wife will anger someone in the store, or misbehaves in some sort, and will be beaten by sticks, kicks or whatever to the point of losing her fetus, the punishment is a fine, which is just a few silver coins. That is what your fetus is worth in the eyes of God, by the words of your Lord. You should read a bible once in awhile, you know.

[Pretorian]

My native america relatives ran large herds of buffalo off cliffs.

But it took the white man with ...

No, sorry. No need to clamour your white guilt here. His native america relatives were damn good at driving species to extinction. America was full of giraffes, rhinos, local horses, mastodons, mammoths and a ton of other animals when first Mongoloids showed up. And the only reason that cow ever got recorded in the first place is that there were no indians on those islands.

[clif]

America was full of giraffes, rhinos, local horses, mastodons, mammoths and a ton of other animals when first Mongoloids showed up

You are most probably talking about the Clovis people; 13,500 to 13,000 calendar years ago.

A little over ten thousand years ago in a much cooler climate as the remnants of the last Ice Age retreated, (other wise the Asian ancestors of the indigenous population of America couldn't have walked across the land bridge from Siberia to Alaska, then down to the rest of the continent.)


The Clovis people possibly weren't the first people in America because of discoveries in both North and south America which pre-date the Clovis discovery some date to ∼23,000 to ∼19,000 years ago.

Either way the die off took over 1000 years (maybe even more), and involved a heating planet, hence the glacial retreat.

The repeating rifle and commercial hunters managed to almost eliminate the bison (buffalo) on the plains in a little over 15 years.

Not the same ..... either by time frame or how the animals were used, the Bison were allowed to rot in place after skinning, where as the Clovis or other peoples couldn't afford to waste what they got from their hunt, which was essentially for food.

[Pretorian]

Either way the die off took over 1000 years (maybe even more), and involved a heating planet, hence the glacial retreat.

The repeating rifle and commercial hunters managed to almost eliminate the bison (buffalo) on the plains in a little over 15 years.

Not the same ..... either by time frame or how the animals were used, the Bison were allowed to rot in place after skinning, where as the Clovis or other peoples couldn't afford to waste what they got from their hunt, which was essentially for food.

You probably missed the part about driving herds off the cliff somewhere there; surely can be excusable for the sake of political correctness. The reason it took a 1000 years ( more likely significantly more than that ) to kill off the American megafauna is because original amounts of people were low, and it took them awhile to breed enough to become a real curse.

[Fishman]

"Mind me asking what do you have against abortions? " Didn't write that I was for or against it, only clarified the terminology you were fussing about, fetus not unborn child, that's a semantic issues. A fetus is still alive.
"I know you are a bible man, so you should know that there is nothing against abortion in bible. "
Those who would use this book as justification against abortion use Psalms "For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb." There's is nothing about geneticly modified organism, and certainly nothing about extinction of sea cows either.
"You know better." (apparently you do not)
"Fetus is not a human being, according to the Bible," Please provide your reference, I have provided one of another viewpoint. Would you agree a fetus is alive?
" because punishment for killing a human being is death" or unless authorized by the government.

" and if, for example, your (pregnant) wife will anger someone in the store, or misbehaves in some sort, and will be beaten by sticks, kicks or whatever to the point of losing her fetus, the punishment is a fine, which is just a few silver coins." Perhaps a Levitical verse? I couldn't find a verse you might be refering to.
"That is what your fetus is worth in the eyes of God, by the words of your Lord. You should read a bible once in awhile, you know." I have provided a verse otherwise. Help me out with your vast knowledge

[PrestonSturges]

The Bible seems consistent with the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi, that levies a fine for the accidental death of a fetus.

This site has a lot of fluff but catches the key points about the Bible:
http://www.elroy.net/ehr/abortion.html

"And if men struggle and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise." Exodus 21:22-25

..................What has been so clearly demonstrated by the passage in Exodus - the fact that God does not consider a fetus a human person - can also be seen in a variety of other Bible verses. In Leviticus 27:6 a monetary value was placed on children, but not until they reached one month old (any younger had no value). Likewise, in Numbers 3:15 a census was commanded, but the Jews were told only to count those one month old and above - anything less, particularly a fetus, was not counted as a human person. In Ezekiel 37:8-10 we watch as God re-animates dead bones into living soldiers, but the passage makes the interesting note that they were not alive as persons until their first breath. Likewise, in Genesis 2:7, Adam had a human form and a vibrant new body but he only becomes a fully-alive human person after God makes him breathe. And in the same book, in Genesis 38:24, we read about a pregnant woman condemned to death by burning. Though the leaders of Israel knew the woman was carrying a fetus, this was not taken into consideration. If indeed the Jews, and the God who instructed them, believed the fetus to be an equal human person to the mother, then why would they let the fetus die for the mother's crimes? The truth is simple. A fetus is not a human person, and its destruction is not a murder. Period.

[Pretorian]

Tamar thy daughter in law hath played the harlot; and also, behold, she is with child by whoredom. And Judah said, Bring her forth, and let her be burnt. -- Genesis 38:24

Yeah that is some hardcore stuff right there! Whoredom! Fishmen you should read this shit sometimes.

[Fishman]

Preston, reasonable points brought out there, but the conclusion can certainly be challenged with the verse I quoted, certainly no verses in the New Testament were noted in your post.
Wow Pretorian, consequences for one's actions, such a radical concept for a liberal.
Certainly since Preston didn't bring up anything about sea cows, Cog, lets throw one on the barbie!!

[clif]

Pretorian, consequences for one's actions,

So the fetus was guilty for it's mother's actions?

Cause it too suffered the penalty for those actions.

[dohboi]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jan/12/sea-co2-climate-japan-environment

[americandream]

I'm not a troll. It's an opposing view from a former believer and if you still think there are enough voters out there to vote yes to taxing the air to make the weather colder, YOU are the new denier. CO2 crisis was a blunder of a mistake. It was an Iraq War for us on the left and progerssive side and to all of science.

There's a difference between being progressive and an oystrich.

[dohboi]

http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2011/08/great-oyster-crash-im-afraid-ocean-will.html

The great oyster crash – ‘I’m afraid the ocean will be dead long before we have to worry about the other implications of global warming’

ocean acidification is pretty cut and dried for me now. You see it every day. You can't escape it.

[AdTheNad]

The great oyster crash – ‘I’m afraid the ocean will be dead long before we have to worry about the other implications of global warming’

ocean acidification is pretty cut and dried for me now. You see it every day. You can't escape it.

The thing about global warming is, the deniers have found many ways to attack the arguments. Ocean acidification seems to be so clearly derived from our burning of fossil fuels how the f*@k are they going to argue this away? I'm sure we'll soon start seeing a push against it however. How long until the 'it's all part of the natural cycle' spiel starts? I'm also sure we can look forward to a 'the sea was more acidic millions of years ago before man was here' argument.

As devastating as ocean acidification is, and no doubt will become, maybe it could be a platform to implement change where talks of climate disaster have failed.