This is an archive of the mabination.com forums which were active from 2010 to 2018. You can not register, post or otherwise interact with the site other than browsing the content for historical purposes. The content is provided as-is, from the moment of the last backup taken of the database in 2019. Image and video embeds are disabled on purpose and represented textually since most of those links are dead.
To view other archive projects go to
https://archives.mabination.com
-
Justified wrote on 2010-10-04 04:05
Quote from Alex;174912:
If you are suggesting me, I never pleaded as being smart in the first place. So, in that case, your point is irrelevant.
It's not irrelevant. If you are stupid, then anything you say should get tossed out the window, because you are stupid.
Not everyone is the same in the feeding factor, sure.... some are unhealthier than others and eat less. My friend takes pills for food (medical issue), had a baby, turned out perfectly healthy. Animals are smaller and their food is ground and smooshed up, but it has the same ammount as humans (fish, chicken, ect). So depending how you provide the food, is another story.
Animals don't eat anywhere near the same as humans. Even if their food is processed into itty-bitty pieces, it was still less to begin with. Especially if the human is out working instead of sitting on their butt all day.
For example, you said Animals (fish, chicken, etc) eat the same as Humans. Go try to survive the rest of your life eating only one spoonful of fish flakes and see how far you get. Or maybe one handful of chicken feed.
-
Alex wrote on 2010-10-04 04:09
Stupidity is an opinion, it differs per person. Unless you are medically in that state, it still is not considered 'stupid'.
It also really depends on the animal, in that case of ammounts of food. Also... depending on the type of human. Everyone is different.
-
abc33kr wrote on 2010-10-04 04:14
Ohhhh....
I'm soo slow. Just realized I was being trolled.
QQ
-
Justified wrote on 2010-10-04 04:20
Quote from Alex;174926:
Stupidity is an opinion, it differs per person. Unless you are medically in that state, it still is not considered 'stupid'.
It also really depends on the animal, in that case of ammounts of food. Also... depending on the type of human. Everyone is different.
It's not an opinion. Stupidity is the lack of intelligence.
Calling somebody stupid is an opinion, however you admitted that you were not knowledgeable in an area, thus that you were stupid.
It doesn't matter if animals and people don't all eat the same amounts of food. Go find the fattest chicken on earth and try to live off the same food as it, and I bet you can't. Just because "all chickens and humans eat different amounts of food" that doesn't mean that humans don't eat more food. Because they do.
Unless you have a
real explanation for any of your ideas. Something besides, "it depends! different! arbitrary and pointless!"
-
Kazuni wrote on 2010-10-04 04:21
Tone down the hostility a bit, kay?
And I'd save a cat over unborn children ._.
No matter how much more people value human life, a cat who has already been born has consciousness. Well, to the extent of knowing pain and dying, anyways. Fetuses don't have thought, and they don't feel pain.
No, I'm not christian. I don't care about abortion.
-
abc33kr wrote on 2010-10-04 04:44
Personally, I think ppl should not have sex until they know they can support children properly.
That means less abortion needed due to dumbasses ****ing all the time, which would definitely tone down the controversial issue over abortion since the protesters outside abortion center would get bored after they see one person per 9 months.
Not only that, there will be less child abuses and divorces. Because people who have children would actually want (stop child abuse) and can take care of them (stop divorce due to financial struggle).
So all you sex addicts out there, just because people tend to think fetuses are not life doesn't mean you can **** 24/7 without thinking about the consequences. Does that mean you can't have sex until you deserve it? yes so go QQ moar or actually work and deserve it.
*the vulgar language is required to make my argument strong*
yes this relates since people are saying cat>fetuses and I'm explaining why fetuses have lost so much in value (tldr version -> theres soo many fetuses out there cuz of sex addicts and by supply and demand, fetuses are reduced down to something even lower than a cat)
-
Kazuni wrote on 2010-10-04 04:51
Quote from abc33kr;174970:
Personally, I think ppl should not have sex until they know they can support children properly.
That means less abortion needed due to dumbasses ****ing all the time, which would definitely tone down the controversial issue over abortion since the protesters outside abortion center would get bored after they see one person per 9 months.
Not only that, there will be less child abuses and divorces. Because people who have children would actually want (stop child abuse) and can take care of them (stop divorce due to financial struggle).
So all you sex addicts out there, just because people tend to think fetuses are not life doesn't mean you can **** 24/7 without thinking about the consequences. Does that mean you can't have sex until you deserve it? yes so go QQ moar or actually work and deserve it.
*the vulgar language is required to make my argument strong*
yes this relates since people are saying cat>fetuses and I'm explaining why fetuses have lost so much in value (tldr version -> theres soo many fetuses out there cuz of sex addicts and by supply and demand, fetuses are reduced down to something even lower than a cat)
No, I don't pick animals over fetuses because there are more fetuses ._.
And vulgar language doesn't make your argument strong, it makes you look like you have nothing better to say and so you resort to swearing.
Cats are conscious and can feel pain while fetuses cannot. That's the simple reason.
The fact that there are a lot of abortions and such out there doesn't lessen the effect or value or children.
-
Justified wrote on 2010-10-04 05:04
Quote from Kazuni;174973:
Cats are conscious and can feel pain while fetuses cannot. That's the simple reason.
I have a question then.
A grown man and a newborn baby both face instantaneous and painless death. Which one do you save?
The grown man has already experienced life for some time. He's had his enjoyable moments and knows what it's like to live.
The baby, on the other hand... how many of us remember what it was like to be a newborn? Probably none of us. The baby won't know what it's missing because it hasn't truly experienced anything yet.
They both deserve to live, regardless of the stage they're at.
Obviously, this was just another example of cat (man) vs fetus (baby). Except cats suck.
-
abc33kr wrote on 2010-10-04 05:05
Quote from Kazuni;174973:
No, I don't pick animals over fetuses because there are more fetuses ._.
And vulgar language doesn't make your argument strong, it makes you look like you have nothing better to say and so you resort to swearing.
Cats are conscious and can feel pain while fetuses cannot. That's the simple reason.
The fact that there are a lot of abortions and such out there doesn't lessen the effect or value or children.
Seriously? To Nazis, the value of jews were less than piece of crap once they were massacring them by millions. Today, the horny American society have decreased the value of fetuses because we needed to get rid of them to have sex without responsibility. Thus, when that practice became too common, people didn't value them as much as before.
People in the past used expensive medicines to make sure the woman became pregnant. Medicines that worth thousands of dollars. How did it decrease in value from that to something you find in a trash can outside the hospital? Of course its the abundance of ppl having too much sex that is at fault. I bet if abortion was illegal, US would have a population even greater than china and india combined. tldr; Abortion isn't at fault; the horny society is.
*if you still go with that argument that fetus has no feeling, i have a good counterargument, but i would rather not write it cuz i have to brush my teeth and sleep to keep me from going insane at this madness.
-
BobYoMeowMeow wrote on 2010-10-04 05:14
-
Kazuni wrote on 2010-10-04 05:17
Quote from Justified;174982:
I have a question then.
A grown man and a newborn baby both face instantaneous and painless death. Which one do you save?
The grown man has already experienced life for some time. He's had his enjoyable moments and knows what it's like to live.
The baby, on the other hand... how many of us remember what it was like to be a newborn? Probably none of us. The baby won't know what it's missing because it hasn't truly experienced anything yet.
They both deserve to live, regardless of the stage they're at.
Obviously, this was just another example of cat (man) vs fetus (baby). Except cats suck.
I would save a baby if compared to a cat. A fetus is different.
Quote from abc33kr;174985:
Seriously? To Nazis, the value of jews were less than piece of crap once they were massacring them by millions. Today, the horny American society have decreased the value of fetuses because we needed to get rid of them to have sex without responsibility. Thus, when that practice became too common, people didn't value them as much as before.
People in the past used expensive medicines to make sure the woman became pregnant. Medicines that worth thousands of dollars. How did it decrease in value from that to something you find in a trash can outside the hospital? Of course its the abundance of ppl having too much sex that is at fault. I bet if abortion was illegal, US would have a population even greater than china and india combined. tldr; Abortion isn't at fault; the horny society is.
*if you still go with that argument that fetus has no feeling, i have a good counterargument, but i would rather not write it cuz i have to brush my teeth and sleep to keep me from going insane at this madness.
Are you saying if there are a billion people then the value of one person decreases as opposed to when there is a million?
-
abc33kr wrote on 2010-10-04 05:18
Quote from BobYoMeowMeow;174994:
how about we delete all the replies to thread starting here
http://mabination.com/mabination-community/general-discussions/news/10322-housewife-drowned-eight-cats-baby-bath-3.html#post174671
biased action!
Just cuz u r a cat doesn't mean you get to delete the reality.
-
BobYoMeowMeow wrote on 2010-10-04 05:22
Quote from abc33kr;174997:
biased action!
Just cuz u r a cat doesn't mean you get to delete the reality.
sure
the reality of you and Justified being TL;Dr with filler.
-
Justified wrote on 2010-10-04 05:23
Quote from Kazuni;174996:
I would save a baby if compared to a cat. A fetus is different.
Fetus human or fetus cat then? The point is that your comparisons aren't entirely fair.
You said the main thing was that the cat "could feel pain" while a fetus couldn't. But if both were to die without feeling any pain, which would you choose?
-
Kazuni wrote on 2010-10-04 05:24
Quote from Justified;175003:
Fetus human or fetus cat then? The point is that your comparisons aren't entirely fair.
You said the main thing was that the cat "could feel pain" while a fetus couldn't. But if both were to die without feeling any pain, which would you choose?
Then I would pick the human. To live, that is.
It's because it's one of my species and I'm biased like that.
But the reason I picked the cat is because the fetus couldn't feel pain. That's the only reason.