Datasets:

0x-YuAN

/

NLP_explainable

like 0

"yea I did n't get an answer there , and I probably wo n't get one here either ."

"Well , answering you seems to be a waste of time . You ignore/reject any attempts at explaining the things you clearly do not understand , and youlater bring up the exact same things that you have had explained to you as if the subject was never broached before . You are incorrigible and uneducable ."

DISAGREE

"answer there , I probably wo n't get one here either ."

"answering you seems to be a waste of time . You ignore/reject any attempts at explaining the things you clearly do not understand You are incorrigible and uneducable"

"yea I did n't get an answer there , and I probably wo n't get one here either ."

"Well , answering you seems to be a waste of time . You ignore/reject any attempts at explaining the things you clearly do not understand , and youlater bring up the exact same things that you have had explained to you as if the subject was never broached before . You are incorrigible and uneducable ."

DISAGREE

"I did n't get an answer there , wo n't get one here either ."

"Well , answering you seems to be a waste of You are incorrigible and uneducable ."

"yea I did n't get an answer there , and I probably wo n't get one here either ."

"Well , answering you seems to be a waste of time . You ignore/reject any attempts at explaining the things you clearly do not understand , and youlater bring up the exact same things that you have had explained to you as if the subject was never broached before . You are incorrigible and uneducable ."

DISAGREE

"did n't get an answer , probably wo n't get one"

"seems to be a waste of time explained to you as if the subject"

"Sorry to tell you this , but Behe already refuted the idea :  “ The important question for us biochemists is , can symbiosis explain the origin of complex biochemical systems ? Clearly it can not . The essence of symbiosis is the joining of separate cells , or two separate systems , both of which are already functioning ... Because symbiosis starts with complex , already functioning systems it can not account for the fundamental biochemical systems we have discussed in this book. ” ( Darwin ’ s Black Box , page189 )"

"And once again , is this a strong enough rebuttal to assert proof ? no , Behe assumes that a biochemical system that exists today can not have a precursor , or less complex state of existence . Clive did a good job of demolishing this notion with the mouse trap example he lin the debate thread ."

DISAGREE

"Sorry to tell you this , but Behe already refuted the idea : Â The important question for us biochemists is , can symbiosis explain the origin of complex biochemical systems ? Clearly it can not"

"And once again , is this a strong enough rebuttal to assert proof ?"

"Sorry to tell you this , but Behe already refuted the idea :  “ The important question for us biochemists is , can symbiosis explain the origin of complex biochemical systems ? Clearly it can not . The essence of symbiosis is the joining of separate cells , or two separate systems , both of which are already functioning ... Because symbiosis starts with complex , already functioning systems it can not account for the fundamental biochemical systems we have discussed in this book. ” ( Darwin ’ s Black Box , page189 )"

"And once again , is this a strong enough rebuttal to assert proof ? no , Behe assumes that a biochemical system that exists today can not have a precursor , or less complex state of existence . Clive did a good job of demolishing this notion with the mouse trap example he lin the debate thread ."

DISAGREE

"symbiosis starts with complex , account for the fundamental biochemical systems"

"is this a strong enough rebuttal to assert proof ? Clive did a good job of demolishing this notion"

"Sorry to tell you this , but Behe already refuted the idea :  “ The important question for us biochemists is , can symbiosis explain the origin of complex biochemical systems ? Clearly it can not . The essence of symbiosis is the joining of separate cells , or two separate systems , both of which are already functioning ... Because symbiosis starts with complex , already functioning systems it can not account for the fundamental biochemical systems we have discussed in this book. ” ( Darwin ’ s Black Box , page189 )"

"And once again , is this a strong enough rebuttal to assert proof ? no , Behe assumes that a biochemical system that exists today can not have a precursor , or less complex state of existence . Clive did a good job of demolishing this notion with the mouse trap example he lin the debate thread ."

DISAGREE

"Sorry to tell you this , but Behe already refuted the idea :"

"And once again , is this a strong enough rebuttal to assert proof ?"

"http : //www.baptistlink.com/dman/fossil4.html this says 200,000 - 400,000 http : //www.dentalgain.org/erect.html this says 300,000"

"www.you'realiar.com says I 'm right . I 'll respond to the sole credible one you have . http : //www.anth.ucsb.edu/faculty/walker/classes/anth121/121archaic.pdf # search='rhodesian % 20man % 20400 % 2C000 % 20years ' 300,000 It says at least 300,000 years and the rest of your argument supports evolution , even stating some are transitional fossils . Well , you did n't read your article ."

DISAGREE

"http : //www.baptistlink.com/dman/fossil4.html this says 200,000 - 400,000 http : //www.dentalgain.org/erect.html this says 300,000"

"I 'll respond to the sole credible one you have . http : //www.anth.ucsb.edu/faculty/walker/classes/anth121/121archaic.pdf # search='rhodesian % 20man % 20400 % 2C000 % 20years ' 300,000 It says at least 300,000 years and the rest of your argument supports evolution , even stating some are transitional fossils . Well , you did n't read your article ."

"http : //www.baptistlink.com/dman/fossil4.html this says 200,000 - 400,000 http : //www.dentalgain.org/erect.html this says 300,000"

"www.you'realiar.com says I 'm right . I 'll respond to the sole credible one you have . http : //www.anth.ucsb.edu/faculty/walker/classes/anth121/121archaic.pdf # search='rhodesian % 20man % 20400 % 2C000 % 20years ' 300,000 It says at least 300,000 years and the rest of your argument supports evolution , even stating some are transitional fossils . Well , you did n't read your article ."

DISAGREE

"says 200,000 - 400,000"

"Well , you did n't read your article ."

"http : //www.baptistlink.com/dman/fossil4.html this says 200,000 - 400,000 http : //www.dentalgain.org/erect.html this says 300,000"

"www.you'realiar.com says I 'm right . I 'll respond to the sole credible one you have . http : //www.anth.ucsb.edu/faculty/walker/classes/anth121/121archaic.pdf # search='rhodesian % 20man % 20400 % 2C000 % 20years ' 300,000 It says at least 300,000 years and the rest of your argument supports evolution , even stating some are transitional fossils . Well , you did n't read your article ."

DISAGREE

"http : //www.baptistlink.com/dman/fossil4.html this says 200,000 - 400,000"

"www.you'realiar.com I 'm right . It says at least 300,000 years and the rest of your argument supports evolution , stating some are transitional fossils"

"how is that fair ? basically your reasoning is `` lets just give the christians the whole marriage thing , and let the gays get married at city hall by a 67 year old judge who probably doesnt agree with them anyways. `` i mean , what happened to the separtion of church and state ? did we , somewhere along the line forget , that little document we call the constitution . it dosnt simply say `` see bible `` everybody should have equal rights . no matter your race , creed , or religion . if joe and bob want to get married , how the heck is it our place to stop them ? and im sorry if it makes you uncomfortable to think of that , but unless joe comes to your house to shoot your dog , its not really your concern . and come on , im tired of all these ppl using the bible to cover up simple ignorance and prejudice . so why dont we all take a hop-skip-and- jump into 2007 , re evaluate our morals , and get a clue ."

"You have to remember that those christians believe that the laws of God superceed those of man . That thier allegiance is to God and his laws above those of the constitution . They also believe that all should be subject to Gods by force if nesesary ."

DISAGREE

"let the gays get married at city hall by a 67 year old"

"remember that those christians believe that the laws of God superceed those of man ."

"how is that fair ? basically your reasoning is `` lets just give the christians the whole marriage thing , and let the gays get married at city hall by a 67 year old judge who probably doesnt agree with them anyways. `` i mean , what happened to the separtion of church and state ? did we , somewhere along the line forget , that little document we call the constitution . it dosnt simply say `` see bible `` everybody should have equal rights . no matter your race , creed , or religion . if joe and bob want to get married , how the heck is it our place to stop them ? and im sorry if it makes you uncomfortable to think of that , but unless joe comes to your house to shoot your dog , its not really your concern . and come on , im tired of all these ppl using the bible to cover up simple ignorance and prejudice . so why dont we all take a hop-skip-and- jump into 2007 , re evaluate our morals , and get a clue ."

"You have to remember that those christians believe that the laws of God superceed those of man . That thier allegiance is to God and his laws above those of the constitution . They also believe that all should be subject to Gods by force if nesesary ."

DISAGREE

"how is that fair ? basically your reasoning is `` lets just give the christians the whole marriage thing , and let the gays get married at city hall by a 67 year old judge who probably doesnt agree with them ."

"You have to remember that those christians believe that the laws of God superceed those of man . That thier allegiance is to God and his laws above those of the constitution ."

"how is that fair ? basically your reasoning is `` lets just give the christians the whole marriage thing , and let the gays get married at city hall by a 67 year old judge who probably doesnt agree with them anyways. `` i mean , what happened to the separtion of church and state ? did we , somewhere along the line forget , that little document we call the constitution . it dosnt simply say `` see bible `` everybody should have equal rights . no matter your race , creed , or religion . if joe and bob want to get married , how the heck is it our place to stop them ? and im sorry if it makes you uncomfortable to think of that , but unless joe comes to your house to shoot your dog , its not really your concern . and come on , im tired of all these ppl using the bible to cover up simple ignorance and prejudice . so why dont we all take a hop-skip-and- jump into 2007 , re evaluate our morals , and get a clue ."

"You have to remember that those christians believe that the laws of God superceed those of man . That thier allegiance is to God and his laws above those of the constitution . They also believe that all should be subject to Gods by force if nesesary ."

DISAGREE

"how is that fair ? `` let the gays get married at city hall separtion of church and state ? . `` everybody should have equal rights"

"christians believe that the laws of God superceed those of man . thier allegiance is to God and his laws above those of the constitution also believe that all should be subject to Gods"

"Maybe they 're just trying to prevent any more kids from being shot by mistake ."

"You are joking right ?"

DISAGREE

"just trying to prevent any more kids from being shot by mistake ."

"You are joking right ?"

"Maybe they 're just trying to prevent any more kids from being shot by mistake ."

"You are joking right ?"

DISAGREE

"Maybe they 're just to prevent any more kids from being shot by mistake ."

"You are joking right ?"

"Maybe they 're just trying to prevent any more kids from being shot by mistake ."

"You are joking right ?"

DISAGREE

"trying to prevent any more kids from being shot"

"joking"

"Maybe they 're just trying to prevent any more kids from being shot by mistake ."

"You are joking right ?"

DISAGREE

"they 're just trying to prevent any more kids from being shot by mistake"

"You are joking right ?"

"Really ? Do you know how many people get shot in the UK ? Handgun violence has gone up ."

"But your own link says that the rise in crime was partially explained by the new system the UK police were using for recording crime and that the British Crime Survey showed a decrease in crime since 1997 ."

DISAGREE

"Do you know how many people get shot in the UK ? violence has gone up ."

"that the rise in crime was partially explained British Crime Survey showed a decrease in crime since 1997 ."

"Really ? Do you know how many people get shot in the UK ? Handgun violence has gone up ."

"But your own link says that the rise in crime was partially explained by the new system the UK police were using for recording crime and that the British Crime Survey showed a decrease in crime since 1997 ."

DISAGREE

"Handgun violence has gone up ."

"British Crime Survey showed a decrease in crime since 1997 ."

"Really ? Do you know how many people get shot in the UK ? Handgun violence has gone up ."

"But your own link says that the rise in crime was partially explained by the new system the UK police were using for recording crime and that the British Crime Survey showed a decrease in crime since 1997 ."

DISAGREE

"people get shot Handgun violence"

"crime was partially explained British Crime Survey showed a decrease"

"Really ? Do you know how many people get shot in the UK ? Handgun violence has gone up ."

"But your own link says that the rise in crime was partially explained by the new system the UK police were using for recording crime and that the British Crime Survey showed a decrease in crime since 1997 ."

DISAGREE

"Really ? Do you know how many people get shot in the UK ? Handgun violence has gone up ."

"But your own link says that the rise in crime was partially explained by the new system the UK police were using for recording crime and that the British Crime Survey showed a decrease in crime since 1997"

"( 4 ) No example of true evolution from one basic `` kind `` into another `` kind `` is known either in the present world or in the fossil record of the past ."

"What 's a `` kind `` ? Of course , evolution is a slow process so only a fool would expect to see one `` kind `` of animal change into another `` kind. `` But there are some quite good examples in the fossil record . The horse and the whale are two . And the dinosaur to bird line is getting better all the time ."

DISAGREE

"No example of true evolution from one basic `` kind `` into another `` kind `` is known either in the present world or in the fossil record of the past ."

"What 's a `` kind `` ? Of course , evolution is a slow process so only a fool would expect to see one `` kind `` of animal change into another `` ."

"( 4 ) No example of true evolution from one basic `` kind `` into another `` kind `` is known either in the present world or in the fossil record of the past ."

"What 's a `` kind `` ? Of course , evolution is a slow process so only a fool would expect to see one `` kind `` of animal change into another `` kind. `` But there are some quite good examples in the fossil record . The horse and the whale are two . And the dinosaur to bird line is getting better all the time ."

DISAGREE

"No example of true evolution from one basic `` kind `` into another `` kind"

"What 's a `` kind `` ? Of course , evolution is a slow process so only a fool would expect to see one `` kind"

"( 4 ) No example of true evolution from one basic `` kind `` into another `` kind `` is known either in the present world or in the fossil record of the past ."

"What 's a `` kind `` ? Of course , evolution is a slow process so only a fool would expect to see one `` kind `` of animal change into another `` kind. `` But there are some quite good examples in the fossil record . The horse and the whale are two . And the dinosaur to bird line is getting better all the time ."

DISAGREE

"No example of true evolution the fossil record"

"evolution is a slow process `` kind `` of animal change fossil record"

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns they could very well have started shooting and then how do the other students know which one is the real threat ?"

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns then this never would 've happened because the shooter would 've known that he 'd be met with a hail of bullets the second he brought out his own guns . This kind of # # # # is what everybody says will happen , but it never does ! Everybody seems to think that it 's best the nobody but the shooter is armed because that 'll somehow yield less deaths than somebody being able to kill the school shooter ."

DISAGREE

"and then how do the other students know which one is the real threat ?"

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns then this never would 've happened because the shooter would 've known that he 'd be met with a hail of bullets the second he brought out his own guns"

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns they could very well have started shooting and then how do the other students know which one is the real threat ?"

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns then this never would 've happened because the shooter would 've known that he 'd be met with a hail of bullets the second he brought out his own guns . This kind of # # # # is what everybody says will happen , but it never does ! Everybody seems to think that it 's best the nobody but the shooter is armed because that 'll somehow yield less deaths than somebody being able to kill the school shooter ."

DISAGREE

"how do the other students know which one is the real threat ?"

"if the kids in the classroom had guns then this never would 've happened because the shooter would 've known that he 'd be met with a hail of bullets the second he brought out his own guns ."

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns they could very well have started shooting and then how do the other students know which one is the real threat ?"

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns then this never would 've happened because the shooter would 've known that he 'd be met with a hail of bullets the second he brought out his own guns . This kind of # # # # is what everybody says will happen , but it never does ! Everybody seems to think that it 's best the nobody but the shooter is armed because that 'll somehow yield less deaths than somebody being able to kill the school shooter ."

DISAGREE

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns they could very well have started shooting"

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns then this never would 've happened because the shooter would 've known that he 'd be met with a hail of bullets the second he brought out his own guns ."

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns they could very well have started shooting and then how do the other students know which one is the real threat ?"

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns then this never would 've happened because the shooter would 've known that he 'd be met with a hail of bullets the second he brought out his own guns . This kind of # # # # is what everybody says will happen , but it never does ! Everybody seems to think that it 's best the nobody but the shooter is armed because that 'll somehow yield less deaths than somebody being able to kill the school shooter ."

DISAGREE

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns they could very well have started shooting and then how do the other students know which one is the real threat ?"

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns then this never would 've happened because the shooter would 've known that he 'd be met with a hail of bullets the second he brought out his own guns ."

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns they could very well have started shooting and then how do the other students know which one is the real threat ?"

"For all we know if the kids in the classroom had guns then this never would 've happened because the shooter would 've known that he 'd be met with a hail of bullets the second he brought out his own guns . This kind of # # # # is what everybody says will happen , but it never does ! Everybody seems to think that it 's best the nobody but the shooter is armed because that 'll somehow yield less deaths than somebody being able to kill the school shooter ."

DISAGREE

"if the kids in the classroom had guns they could very well have started shooting"

"if the kids in the classroom had guns then this never would 've happened"

"It is much more important that you concern yourself with the destiny of your soul , not how many years you can stay on the earth ."

"I 'm sure it is many a doctors ' spiritual duty to relieve suffering , just as Jesus healed the sick . Besides , who wants to go back to 40 year average lifespan , like they have in Afghanistan ? Not me ."

DISAGREE

"It is much more important that you concern yourself with the destiny of your soul"

"who wants to go back to 40 year average lifespan , like they have in Afghanistan ? Not me ."

"It is much more important that you concern yourself with the destiny of your soul , not how many years you can stay on the earth ."

"I 'm sure it is many a doctors ' spiritual duty to relieve suffering , just as Jesus healed the sick . Besides , who wants to go back to 40 year average lifespan , like they have in Afghanistan ? Not me ."

DISAGREE

"It is much more important that you concern yourself with the destiny of your soul , not how many years you can stay on the earth ."

"I 'm sure it is many a doctors ' spiritual duty to relieve suffering , just as Jesus healed the sick ."

"It is much more important that you concern yourself with the destiny of your soul , not how many years you can stay on the earth ."

"I 'm sure it is many a doctors ' spiritual duty to relieve suffering , just as Jesus healed the sick . Besides , who wants to go back to 40 year average lifespan , like they have in Afghanistan ? Not me ."

DISAGREE

"It is much more important that you concern yourself with the destiny of your soul , not how many years you can stay on the earth ."

"who wants to go back to 40 year average lifespan , like they have in Afghanistan ? Not me ."

"It is much more important that you concern yourself with the destiny of your soul , not how many years you can stay on the earth ."

"I 'm sure it is many a doctors ' spiritual duty to relieve suffering , just as Jesus healed the sick . Besides , who wants to go back to 40 year average lifespan , like they have in Afghanistan ? Not me ."

DISAGREE

"It is much more important that you concern yourself with the destiny of your soul"

"I 'm sure it is many a doctors ' spiritual duty to relieve suffering"

"It is much more important that you concern yourself with the destiny of your soul , not how many years you can stay on the earth ."

"I 'm sure it is many a doctors ' spiritual duty to relieve suffering , just as Jesus healed the sick . Besides , who wants to go back to 40 year average lifespan , like they have in Afghanistan ? Not me ."

DISAGREE

"It is much more important that you concern yourself with the destiny of your soul"

"I 'm sure it is many a doctors ' spiritual duty to relieve suffering , just as Jesus healed the sick"

"Ok , let 's give that a try . Evolution does n't require something to have evolved from nothing , so this is n't a valid criticism . Evolutionary theory seeks to explain the plain fact of common descent ."

"I know that . Evolution releases itself from its foundation at will . When it wants to speculate about things like abiogenesis and claim it to be science , it allows itself to do that . It 's that interchangeability thing you spoke of above ."

AGREE

"Evolution does n't require something to have evolved from nothing Evolutionary theory seeks to explain the plain fact of common descent ."

"abiogenesis claim it to be science , it allows itself to do that . It 's that interchangeability thing you spoke of above ."

"Ok , let 's give that a try . Evolution does n't require something to have evolved from nothing , so this is n't a valid criticism . Evolutionary theory seeks to explain the plain fact of common descent ."

"I know that . Evolution releases itself from its foundation at will . When it wants to speculate about things like abiogenesis and claim it to be science , it allows itself to do that . It 's that interchangeability thing you spoke of above ."

AGREE

"Evolution does n't require something to have evolved from nothing , so this is n't a valid criticism ."

"I know that ."

"Ok , let 's give that a try . Evolution does n't require something to have evolved from nothing , so this is n't a valid criticism . Evolutionary theory seeks to explain the plain fact of common descent ."

"I know that . Evolution releases itself from its foundation at will . When it wants to speculate about things like abiogenesis and claim it to be science , it allows itself to do that . It 's that interchangeability thing you spoke of above ."

AGREE

"Evolution does n't require something to have evolved from nothing , so this is n't a valid criticism"

"I know that . Evolution releases itself from its foundation at will ."

"Ok , let 's give that a try . Evolution does n't require something to have evolved from nothing , so this is n't a valid criticism . Evolutionary theory seeks to explain the plain fact of common descent ."

"I know that . Evolution releases itself from its foundation at will . When it wants to speculate about things like abiogenesis and claim it to be science , it allows itself to do that . It 's that interchangeability thing you spoke of above ."

AGREE

"Evolution does n't require something to have evolved from nothing , so this is n't a valid criticism ."

"I know Evolution releases itself from its foundation at will"

"To disarm the people is the best , most effectual way , to enslave them . ' - George Mason"

"Is George Mason some kind of anarchist ? It seems to me that the por-gun people are more and more pushing towards the 'every man for himself , the government can´t protect us , we have to defend our property and way of life ' . Shouldn´t the government be improved instead ? Besides , where I live we have very restrictive gun-laws and I´ve never feeled 'enslaved ' in any way . Ok , a comment to these 'myths ' . First of all , where did you get these facts ? Second of all , no matter how you try , now matter how much statistics you dig forth , no matter how many references to the constitution you do , you can never , ever convince me that harsh gun-restrictions would not reduce the amount of murders and the amount of armed crime . Besides , all people doesn´t share your attitude of : a good criminal is a dead criminal , so those arguments get a bit meaningless ."

DISAGREE

"To disarm the people is the best , most effectual way , to enslave them"

"Shouldn´t the government be improved instead ? Besides , where I live we have very restrictive gun-laws and I´ve never feeled 'enslaved ' in any way ."

"To disarm the people is the best , most effectual way , to enslave them . ' - George Mason"

"Is George Mason some kind of anarchist ? It seems to me that the por-gun people are more and more pushing towards the 'every man for himself , the government can´t protect us , we have to defend our property and way of life ' . Shouldn´t the government be improved instead ? Besides , where I live we have very restrictive gun-laws and I´ve never feeled 'enslaved ' in any way . Ok , a comment to these 'myths ' . First of all , where did you get these facts ? Second of all , no matter how you try , now matter how much statistics you dig forth , no matter how many references to the constitution you do , you can never , ever convince me that harsh gun-restrictions would not reduce the amount of murders and the amount of armed crime . Besides , all people doesn´t share your attitude of : a good criminal is a dead criminal , so those arguments get a bit meaningless ."

DISAGREE

"To disarm the people is the best , most effectual way , to enslave them . ' - George Mason"

"Is George Mason some kind of anarchist ? It seems to me that the por-gun people are more and more pushing towards the 'every man for himself"

"To disarm the people is the best , most effectual way , to enslave them . ' - George Mason"

"Is George Mason some kind of anarchist ? It seems to me that the por-gun people are more and more pushing towards the 'every man for himself , the government can´t protect us , we have to defend our property and way of life ' . Shouldn´t the government be improved instead ? Besides , where I live we have very restrictive gun-laws and I´ve never feeled 'enslaved ' in any way . Ok , a comment to these 'myths ' . First of all , where did you get these facts ? Second of all , no matter how you try , now matter how much statistics you dig forth , no matter how many references to the constitution you do , you can never , ever convince me that harsh gun-restrictions would not reduce the amount of murders and the amount of armed crime . Besides , all people doesn´t share your attitude of : a good criminal is a dead criminal , so those arguments get a bit meaningless ."

DISAGREE

"To disarm the people is the best , most effectual way , to enslave them"

"anarchist ? man for himself , the government can´t protect us , we have to defend our property and way of life"

"To disarm the people is the best , most effectual way , to enslave them . ' - George Mason"

"Is George Mason some kind of anarchist ? It seems to me that the por-gun people are more and more pushing towards the 'every man for himself , the government can´t protect us , we have to defend our property and way of life ' . Shouldn´t the government be improved instead ? Besides , where I live we have very restrictive gun-laws and I´ve never feeled 'enslaved ' in any way . Ok , a comment to these 'myths ' . First of all , where did you get these facts ? Second of all , no matter how you try , now matter how much statistics you dig forth , no matter how many references to the constitution you do , you can never , ever convince me that harsh gun-restrictions would not reduce the amount of murders and the amount of armed crime . Besides , all people doesn´t share your attitude of : a good criminal is a dead criminal , so those arguments get a bit meaningless ."

DISAGREE

"To disarm the people is the best , most effectual way"

"the government can´t protect us , we have to defend our property and way of life '"

"There is nothing racist about the truth ."

"Your stated stereotype of the person in the story is racist . It 's a racist stereotype and you know it . You 're so entrenched in your own world and nothing outside of it , you would n't know the `` truth `` if came into your face like a lemon meringue pie ."

DISAGREE

"There is nothing racist about the truth ."

"Your stated stereotype of the person in the story is racist . It 's a racist stereotype and you know it"

"There is nothing racist about the truth ."

"Your stated stereotype of the person in the story is racist . It 's a racist stereotype and you know it . You 're so entrenched in your own world and nothing outside of it , you would n't know the `` truth `` if came into your face like a lemon meringue pie ."

DISAGREE

"There is nothing racist about the truth ."

"Your stated stereotype of the person in the story is racist ."

"There is nothing racist about the truth ."

"Your stated stereotype of the person in the story is racist . It 's a racist stereotype and you know it . You 're so entrenched in your own world and nothing outside of it , you would n't know the `` truth `` if came into your face like a lemon meringue pie ."

DISAGREE

"There is nothing racist about the truth ."

"Your stated stereotype of the person in the story is racist . It 's a racist stereotype and you know it"

"There is nothing racist about the truth ."

"Your stated stereotype of the person in the story is racist . It 's a racist stereotype and you know it . You 're so entrenched in your own world and nothing outside of it , you would n't know the `` truth `` if came into your face like a lemon meringue pie ."

DISAGREE

"There is nothing racist about the truth ."

"It 's a racist stereotype and you know it ."

"The gun haters use their 1st amend right to attack the right to bear arms . When racist use their 1st amend right to attack other peoples right it is called hate speech . So why is it that gun haters demanding the banning of the right to bear arms is not considered hate speech ? After all gun haters are just like the other hate groups . All they do is attack the right to bear arms ."

"Probably because the 'hate ' is directed at the gun , not the person . Are you defending the rights of racists to exercise their free speech ? I thought 'slander ' was against the law in the US ."

DISAGREE

"When racist use their 1st amend right to attack other peoples right it is called hate speech . So why is it that gun haters demanding the banning of the right to bear arms is not considered hate speech ?"

"Probably because the 'hate ' is directed at the gun , not the person ."

"The gun haters use their 1st amend right to attack the right to bear arms . When racist use their 1st amend right to attack other peoples right it is called hate speech . So why is it that gun haters demanding the banning of the right to bear arms is not considered hate speech ? After all gun haters are just like the other hate groups . All they do is attack the right to bear arms ."

"Probably because the 'hate ' is directed at the gun , not the person . Are you defending the rights of racists to exercise their free speech ? I thought 'slander ' was against the law in the US ."

DISAGREE

"When racist use their 1st amend right to attack other peoples right it is called hate speech . So why is it that gun haters demanding the banning of the right to bear arms is not considered hate speech ?"

"Probably because the 'hate ' is directed at the gun , not the person ."

"The gun haters use their 1st amend right to attack the right to bear arms . When racist use their 1st amend right to attack other peoples right it is called hate speech . So why is it that gun haters demanding the banning of the right to bear arms is not considered hate speech ? After all gun haters are just like the other hate groups . All they do is attack the right to bear arms ."

"Probably because the 'hate ' is directed at the gun , not the person . Are you defending the rights of racists to exercise their free speech ? I thought 'slander ' was against the law in the US ."

DISAGREE

"The gun haters use their 1st amend right to attack the right to bear arms . why is it that gun haters demanding the banning of the right to bear arms is not considered hate speech ?"

"because the 'hate ' is directed at the gun , not the person ."

"If it was anybody I was choose adult stem cells . My whole point is that adult stem cells work and embryonic cells do n't ."

"well , then why are the doctors trying 2 also test the embyonic cells ? what 's their reason then ? we do n't know , because the doctors might not want everything that they 're doing be on the front page of every newspaper . they have their reasons for their actions , and they just do n't want people like you to know about them . or ... they already have their reasons published and everything and you 're just 2 close-minded 2 take the information in ."

DISAGREE

"If it was anybody I was choose adult stem cells ."

"then why are the doctors trying 2 also test the embyonic cells ? what 's their reason then ?"

"In fact , the `` Scientific Method `` originated from the idea that the Physical Universe operates on rational physical laws because the Creator did it in logical fashion . What did we have b4 that ? '' Dragons eating the moon during an eclipse ' ? Angry gods causing volcanoes to erupt ? Apollo racing his fiery chariot across the sky every day ?"

"And yet now we have returned to a faith-based view of the universe that relies on a Creator acting illogically ( read : deliberately fabricating a false version of reality , with ( for example ) light from the stars sped up in order to reach earth in time ) in order to work . I ca n't help but feel that some of us have moved backwards ."

DISAGREE

"Scientific Method `` originated from the idea that the Physical Universe operates on rational physical laws What did we have b4 that ?"

"yet now we have returned to a faith-based view of the universe some of us have moved backwards ."

"In fact , the `` Scientific Method `` originated from the idea that the Physical Universe operates on rational physical laws because the Creator did it in logical fashion . What did we have b4 that ? '' Dragons eating the moon during an eclipse ' ? Angry gods causing volcanoes to erupt ? Apollo racing his fiery chariot across the sky every day ?"

"And yet now we have returned to a faith-based view of the universe that relies on a Creator acting illogically ( read : deliberately fabricating a false version of reality , with ( for example ) light from the stars sped up in order to reach earth in time ) in order to work . I ca n't help but feel that some of us have moved backwards ."

DISAGREE

"the `` Scientific Method `` originated from the idea that the Physical Universe operates on rational physical laws because the Creator did it in logical fashion"

"And yet now we have returned to a faith-based view of the universe that relies on a Creator acting illogically"

"In fact , the `` Scientific Method `` originated from the idea that the Physical Universe operates on rational physical laws because the Creator did it in logical fashion . What did we have b4 that ? '' Dragons eating the moon during an eclipse ' ? Angry gods causing volcanoes to erupt ? Apollo racing his fiery chariot across the sky every day ?"

"And yet now we have returned to a faith-based view of the universe that relies on a Creator acting illogically ( read : deliberately fabricating a false version of reality , with ( for example ) light from the stars sped up in order to reach earth in time ) in order to work . I ca n't help but feel that some of us have moved backwards ."

DISAGREE

"Scientific Method the Creator ''"

"faith-based universe that relies on a Creator"

"In fact , the `` Scientific Method `` originated from the idea that the Physical Universe operates on rational physical laws because the Creator did it in logical fashion . What did we have b4 that ? '' Dragons eating the moon during an eclipse ' ? Angry gods causing volcanoes to erupt ? Apollo racing his fiery chariot across the sky every day ?"

"And yet now we have returned to a faith-based view of the universe that relies on a Creator acting illogically ( read : deliberately fabricating a false version of reality , with ( for example ) light from the stars sped up in order to reach earth in time ) in order to work . I ca n't help but feel that some of us have moved backwards ."

DISAGREE

"the `` Scientific Method `` originated from the idea that the Physical Universe operates on rational physical laws because the Creator did it in logical fashion"

"And yet now we have returned to a faith-based view of the universe that relies on a Creator acting illogically"

"In fact , the `` Scientific Method `` originated from the idea that the Physical Universe operates on rational physical laws because the Creator did it in logical fashion . What did we have b4 that ? '' Dragons eating the moon during an eclipse ' ? Angry gods causing volcanoes to erupt ? Apollo racing his fiery chariot across the sky every day ?"

"And yet now we have returned to a faith-based view of the universe that relies on a Creator acting illogically ( read : deliberately fabricating a false version of reality , with ( for example ) light from the stars sped up in order to reach earth in time ) in order to work . I ca n't help but feel that some of us have moved backwards ."

DISAGREE

"the the Creator did it in logical fashion"

"And we have returned to a faith-based view of the universe that relies on a Creator acting illogically ( , ) but backwards"

"In fact , the `` Scientific Method `` originated from the idea that the Physical Universe operates on rational physical laws because the Creator did it in logical fashion . What did we have b4 that ? '' Dragons eating the moon during an eclipse ' ? Angry gods causing volcanoes to erupt ? Apollo racing his fiery chariot across the sky every day ?"

"And yet now we have returned to a faith-based view of the universe that relies on a Creator acting illogically ( read : deliberately fabricating a false version of reality , with ( for example ) light from the stars sped up in order to reach earth in time ) in order to work . I ca n't help but feel that some of us have moved backwards ."

DISAGREE

"Physical Universe operates on rational physical laws because the Creator did"

"Creator acting illogically ( read : deliberately fabricating a false version of reality"

"ah , but why do you use the word concept for both evolution and intelligent design ? Evolution is a theory that has been studied , given evidence , and offered up for peer review . Intelligent design is simply a concept , a single belief . Evolution is a theory that can be backed up and the world can benefit from it . How can the world benefit from a simple statement that there is an intelligent designer . This has absolutely no application to the natural world today ."

"Intelligent design is a recent concept ( not associated with any one religion ) and it has n't had over 100 years to be studied . Why not start now ? It ca n't happen if we block it from future generations . Why not give it a chance , study it , search for evidence , and offer it up for peer review ? What are you afraid of ? That it can mathematically rule out previous evolutionary theories ?"

DISAGREE

"Evolution has been studied , given evidence , and offered up for peer review ."

"Intelligent design has n't had over 100 years to be studied . Why not start now ? Why not give it a chance , study it , search for evidence , and offer it up for peer review ? What are you afraid of ?"

"ah , but why do you use the word concept for both evolution and intelligent design ? Evolution is a theory that has been studied , given evidence , and offered up for peer review . Intelligent design is simply a concept , a single belief . Evolution is a theory that can be backed up and the world can benefit from it . How can the world benefit from a simple statement that there is an intelligent designer . This has absolutely no application to the natural world today ."

"Intelligent design is a recent concept ( not associated with any one religion ) and it has n't had over 100 years to be studied . Why not start now ? It ca n't happen if we block it from future generations . Why not give it a chance , study it , search for evidence , and offer it up for peer review ? What are you afraid of ? That it can mathematically rule out previous evolutionary theories ?"

DISAGREE

"and Intelligent design is simply a concept , a single belief Evolution is a theory that can be backed up"

"Intelligent design is a recent concept ( ) and it has n't had over 100 years to be studied Why not give it a chance , study it , search for evidence"

"ah , but why do you use the word concept for both evolution and intelligent design ? Evolution is a theory that has been studied , given evidence , and offered up for peer review . Intelligent design is simply a concept , a single belief . Evolution is a theory that can be backed up and the world can benefit from it . How can the world benefit from a simple statement that there is an intelligent designer . This has absolutely no application to the natural world today ."

"Intelligent design is a recent concept ( not associated with any one religion ) and it has n't had over 100 years to be studied . Why not start now ? It ca n't happen if we block it from future generations . Why not give it a chance , study it , search for evidence , and offer it up for peer review ? What are you afraid of ? That it can mathematically rule out previous evolutionary theories ?"

DISAGREE

"Evolution is a theory that has been studied , given evidence , and offered up for peer review . Intelligent design is simply a concept , a single belief ."

"Intelligent design is a recent concept ( not associated with any one religion ) and it has n't had over 100 years to be studied ."

"ah , but why do you use the word concept for both evolution and intelligent design ? Evolution is a theory that has been studied , given evidence , and offered up for peer review . Intelligent design is simply a concept , a single belief . Evolution is a theory that can be backed up and the world can benefit from it . How can the world benefit from a simple statement that there is an intelligent designer . This has absolutely no application to the natural world today ."

"Intelligent design is a recent concept ( not associated with any one religion ) and it has n't had over 100 years to be studied . Why not start now ? It ca n't happen if we block it from future generations . Why not give it a chance , study it , search for evidence , and offer it up for peer review ? What are you afraid of ? That it can mathematically rule out previous evolutionary theories ?"

DISAGREE

"why do you use the word concept for both evolution and intelligent design ? Evolution is a theory that has been studied Intelligent design is simply a concept , a single belief can be backed up and the world can benefit from it ."

"Intelligent design is a recent concept has n't had over 100 years to be studied not give it a chance , study it , search for evidence , and offer it up for peer review ? What are you afraid of ?"

"The reason you wo n't go into how all men were created equal during reconstruction is because you can not prove that all men are not created equal ."

"depends on what you consider proof . A beliief that they are is rubbish as it can not be proven . A argument based upon behavior , history and countless examples , well it seems you do n't consider that you be of any use . That sentence does n't even make sense ! I wo n't go into arguing that your claim is right because I do n't believe it ."

DISAGREE

"all men were created equal during reconstruction is because you can not prove that all men are not created equal"

"A argument based upon behavior , history and countless examples , well it seems you do n't consider that you be of any use"

"The reason you wo n't go into how all men were created equal during reconstruction is because you can not prove that all men are not created equal ."

"depends on what you consider proof . A beliief that they are is rubbish as it can not be proven . A argument based upon behavior , history and countless examples , well it seems you do n't consider that you be of any use . That sentence does n't even make sense ! I wo n't go into arguing that your claim is right because I do n't believe it ."

DISAGREE

"The reason you wo n't go into how because you can not prove that all men are not created equal"

"depends on what you consider proof wo n't go into arguing that your claim is right because I do n't believe it ."

"The reason you wo n't go into how all men were created equal during reconstruction is because you can not prove that all men are not created equal ."

"depends on what you consider proof . A beliief that they are is rubbish as it can not be proven . A argument based upon behavior , history and countless examples , well it seems you do n't consider that you be of any use . That sentence does n't even make sense ! I wo n't go into arguing that your claim is right because I do n't believe it ."

DISAGREE

"The reason you wo n't go into how all men were created equal during reconstruction"

"A argument based upon behavior , history and countless examples , well it seems you do n't"

"The reason you wo n't go into how all men were created equal during reconstruction is because you can not prove that all men are not created equal ."

"depends on what you consider proof . A beliief that they are is rubbish as it can not be proven . A argument based upon behavior , history and countless examples , well it seems you do n't consider that you be of any use . That sentence does n't even make sense ! I wo n't go into arguing that your claim is right because I do n't believe it ."

DISAGREE

"you can not prove that all men are not created equal ."

"That sentence does n't even make sense ! I wo n't go into arguing that your claim is right because I do n't believe it ."

"I guess it depends on your perspective . IMO , a Starbucks that allows legal gun owners to carry should be safer than one in which only criminals carry ."

"Safer by openly carrying unloaded handguns ? That 's the law in CA . Of course you can have a loaded magazine or two on the other hip . http : //abclocal.go.com/kgo/story ? sec ... bay & amp ; id=7261522"

DISAGREE

"it depends on your perspective . IMO , a Starbucks that allows legal gun owners to carry"

"That 's the law in CA . Of course you can have a loaded magazine or two on the other hip ."

"I guess it depends on your perspective . IMO , a Starbucks that allows legal gun owners to carry should be safer than one in which only criminals carry ."

"Safer by openly carrying unloaded handguns ? That 's the law in CA . Of course you can have a loaded magazine or two on the other hip . http : //abclocal.go.com/kgo/story ? sec ... bay & amp ; id=7261522"

DISAGREE

"a Starbucks that allows legal gun owners to carry should be safer than one in which only criminals carry ."

"Safer by openly carrying unloaded handguns ?"

"I guess it depends on your perspective . IMO , a Starbucks that allows legal gun owners to carry should be safer than one in which only criminals carry ."

"Safer by openly carrying unloaded handguns ? That 's the law in CA . Of course you can have a loaded magazine or two on the other hip . http : //abclocal.go.com/kgo/story ? sec ... bay & amp ; id=7261522"

DISAGREE

"I guess it depends on your perspective . legal gun"

"Safer by openly carrying unloaded handguns ? law in CA"

"I guess it depends on your perspective . IMO , a Starbucks that allows legal gun owners to carry should be safer than one in which only criminals carry ."

"Safer by openly carrying unloaded handguns ? That 's the law in CA . Of course you can have a loaded magazine or two on the other hip . http : //abclocal.go.com/kgo/story ? sec ... bay & amp ; id=7261522"

DISAGREE

"a Starbucks that allows legal gun owners to carry should be safer"

"Safer by openly carrying unloaded handguns ? That 's the law in CA"

"I guess it depends on your perspective . IMO , a Starbucks that allows legal gun owners to carry should be safer than one in which only criminals carry ."

"Safer by openly carrying unloaded handguns ? That 's the law in CA . Of course you can have a loaded magazine or two on the other hip . http : //abclocal.go.com/kgo/story ? sec ... bay & amp ; id=7261522"

DISAGREE

"allows legal gun owners to carry safer than one in which only criminals carry ."

"Safer by openly carrying unloaded handguns ? That 's the law in CA ."

"Its not even allowed in Minnesota ."

"So Minnesota is the one state Ohioprof was referring to ?"

DISAGREE

"not even allowed in Minnesota ."

"Minnesota is the one state Ohioprof was referring to ?"

"Its not even allowed in Minnesota ."

"So Minnesota is the one state Ohioprof was referring to ?"

DISAGREE

"not even allowed in Minnesota ."

"So Minnesota is the one state Ohioprof was referring to ?"

"Its not even allowed in Minnesota ."

"So Minnesota is the one state Ohioprof was referring to ?"

DISAGREE

"not even allowed in Minnesota ."

"So Minnesota is the one state"

"Its not even allowed in Minnesota ."

"So Minnesota is the one state Ohioprof was referring to ?"

DISAGREE

"Its not even allowed in Minnesota"

"Minnesota is the one state Ohioprof was referring to ?"

"Its not even allowed in Minnesota ."

"So Minnesota is the one state Ohioprof was referring to ?"

DISAGREE

"Its not even allowed in Minnesota ."

"So Minnesota is the one state Ohioprof was referring to ?"

"There is only one place in the law where a really significant and intimate sacrifice has been required of anyone in order to save another : the law of abortion . If you woke up with the hypothetical violinist attached to you , the law -- and , probably , the views of morality held by most people -- would permit you to free yourself of him . When the law prohibits a woman from freeing herself of the fetus inside her , the law appears to work a harsh discrimination against women even if fetuses count as persons"

"To which Cone raised an objection similar to :"

DISAGREE

"prohibits a woman from freeing herself of the fetus inside her the law appears to work a harsh discrimination against women"

"which Cone raised an objection similar to"

"There is only one place in the law where a really significant and intimate sacrifice has been required of anyone in order to save another : the law of abortion . If you woke up with the hypothetical violinist attached to you , the law -- and , probably , the views of morality held by most people -- would permit you to free yourself of him . When the law prohibits a woman from freeing herself of the fetus inside her , the law appears to work a harsh discrimination against women even if fetuses count as persons"

"To which Cone raised an objection similar to :"

DISAGREE

"place in the law where a really significant the law -- and , probably , the views of morality"

"which Cone raised an objection similar"

"There is only one place in the law where a really significant and intimate sacrifice has been required of anyone in order to save another : the law of abortion . If you woke up with the hypothetical violinist attached to you , the law -- and , probably , the views of morality held by most people -- would permit you to free yourself of him . When the law prohibits a woman from freeing herself of the fetus inside her , the law appears to work a harsh discrimination against women even if fetuses count as persons"

"To which Cone raised an objection similar to :"

DISAGREE

"If you woke up with the hypothetical violinist attached to you , the law"

"To which Cone raised an objection similar to"

"There is only one place in the law where a really significant and intimate sacrifice has been required of anyone in order to save another : the law of abortion . If you woke up with the hypothetical violinist attached to you , the law -- and , probably , the views of morality held by most people -- would permit you to free yourself of him . When the law prohibits a woman from freeing herself of the fetus inside her , the law appears to work a harsh discrimination against women even if fetuses count as persons"

"To which Cone raised an objection similar to :"

DISAGREE

"If you woke up with the hypothetical violinist attached to you , the law -- and , probably , the views of morality held by most people -- would permit you to free yourself of him"

"To which Cone raised an objection similar to :"

"There is only one place in the law where a really significant and intimate sacrifice has been required of anyone in order to save another : the law of abortion . If you woke up with the hypothetical violinist attached to you , the law -- and , probably , the views of morality held by most people -- would permit you to free yourself of him . When the law prohibits a woman from freeing herself of the fetus inside her , the law appears to work a harsh discrimination against women even if fetuses count as persons"

"To which Cone raised an objection similar to :"

DISAGREE

"abortion the law appears to work a harsh discrimination against women"

"Cone raised an objection"

"There is only one place in the law where a really significant and intimate sacrifice has been required of anyone in order to save another : the law of abortion . If you woke up with the hypothetical violinist attached to you , the law -- and , probably , the views of morality held by most people -- would permit you to free yourself of him . When the law prohibits a woman from freeing herself of the fetus inside her , the law appears to work a harsh discrimination against women even if fetuses count as persons"

"To which Cone raised an objection similar to :"

DISAGREE

"only one place in the law where a really significant and intimate sacrifice has been required of anyone in order to save another : the law of abortion"

"Cone raised an objection"

" “ Contrary to what marriage redefinition activists might argue , redefining marriage in New Hampshire would have serious consequences for the religious community beyond the limited protections the governor has proposed ,  ” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Austin R. Nimocks .  “ The governor is right to recognize the threat to religious liberty , but he underestimates the threat by a long shot . Where are the protections for business owners with religious objections to recognizing same-sex  ‘ marriages ’ ? Formally affiliated organizations are not the only ones who need their religious liberty protected. ” ... After reviewing the proposed language of the statute , ADF attorneys claim that religious organizations would be forced to recognize counterfeit  “ marriages ” of potential clients or customers in many situations or face severe consequences ."

"ADF : NH gov 's proposed revisions to marriage redefinition bill fail religious freedom test - Alliance Defense Fund - Defending Our First Liberty And there it is ... The repeated demand from the anti-gay for SPECIAL PRIVILEGES for the `` religious `` detractors . I fully support CHURCHES and PASTORS from being exempt , but it 's not necessary . Currently , our RELIGIOUS discrimination protection is much stronger than our gay discrimination protection , but do you see churches being forced to perform inter-religion marriage if the church doctrine is against it ? NO ! Do you see atheists saying `` I like the look of this church . I do n't belong , but I 'm going to force you to rent the church for my wedding party anyways. `` ? ? NO ! The existing language and constitutional protections are good enough . But when given more explicit ( redundant ) wording , what do the anti-gay marriage organizations demand ? Something NO GROUP HAS EVER HAD before . They want BUSINESS OWNERS to be free to discriminate if they have `` religious objections `` ... What if their objections are NON-religious in nature ? Why is the religion supposed to get the special perk ? ? ? And as mentioned , NO GROUP HAS EVER HAD this . There were plenty of religious interpretations against black equality and interracial marriage . But did we give THEM special privilege to ignore and discriminate against interracial marriages ? NO ! The really refreshing part of all this ? These whiny temper tantrums just do n't matter ... If the NH legislature includes the religious exceptions ( if they are just reconfirming that churches / pastors do n't have to perform ceremonies they do n't want to ) , then the governor WILL sign it ."

DISAGREE

"redefining marriage in New Hampshire would have serious consequences for the religious community beyond the limited protections the governor has proposed"

"And Currently our RELIGIOUS discrimination protection is much stronger than our gay discrimination protection ( )"

" “ Contrary to what marriage redefinition activists might argue , redefining marriage in New Hampshire would have serious consequences for the religious community beyond the limited protections the governor has proposed ,  ” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Austin R. Nimocks .  “ The governor is right to recognize the threat to religious liberty , but he underestimates the threat by a long shot . Where are the protections for business owners with religious objections to recognizing same-sex  ‘ marriages ’ ? Formally affiliated organizations are not the only ones who need their religious liberty protected. ” ... After reviewing the proposed language of the statute , ADF attorneys claim that religious organizations would be forced to recognize counterfeit  “ marriages ” of potential clients or customers in many situations or face severe consequences ."

"ADF : NH gov 's proposed revisions to marriage redefinition bill fail religious freedom test - Alliance Defense Fund - Defending Our First Liberty And there it is ... The repeated demand from the anti-gay for SPECIAL PRIVILEGES for the `` religious `` detractors . I fully support CHURCHES and PASTORS from being exempt , but it 's not necessary . Currently , our RELIGIOUS discrimination protection is much stronger than our gay discrimination protection , but do you see churches being forced to perform inter-religion marriage if the church doctrine is against it ? NO ! Do you see atheists saying `` I like the look of this church . I do n't belong , but I 'm going to force you to rent the church for my wedding party anyways. `` ? ? NO ! The existing language and constitutional protections are good enough . But when given more explicit ( redundant ) wording , what do the anti-gay marriage organizations demand ? Something NO GROUP HAS EVER HAD before . They want BUSINESS OWNERS to be free to discriminate if they have `` religious objections `` ... What if their objections are NON-religious in nature ? Why is the religion supposed to get the special perk ? ? ? And as mentioned , NO GROUP HAS EVER HAD this . There were plenty of religious interpretations against black equality and interracial marriage . But did we give THEM special privilege to ignore and discriminate against interracial marriages ? NO ! The really refreshing part of all this ? These whiny temper tantrums just do n't matter ... If the NH legislature includes the religious exceptions ( if they are just reconfirming that churches / pastors do n't have to perform ceremonies they do n't want to ) , then the governor WILL sign it ."

DISAGREE

"After reviewing the proposed language of the statute , ADF attorneys claim that religious organizations would be forced to recognize counterfeit  marriages of potential clients or customers in many situations or face severe consequences ."

"If the NH legislature includes the religious exceptions ( if they are just reconfirming that churches / pastors do n't have to perform ceremonies they do n't want to ) , then the governor WILL sign it ."

" “ Contrary to what marriage redefinition activists might argue , redefining marriage in New Hampshire would have serious consequences for the religious community beyond the limited protections the governor has proposed ,  ” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Austin R. Nimocks .  “ The governor is right to recognize the threat to religious liberty , but he underestimates the threat by a long shot . Where are the protections for business owners with religious objections to recognizing same-sex  ‘ marriages ’ ? Formally affiliated organizations are not the only ones who need their religious liberty protected. ” ... After reviewing the proposed language of the statute , ADF attorneys claim that religious organizations would be forced to recognize counterfeit  “ marriages ” of potential clients or customers in many situations or face severe consequences ."

"ADF : NH gov 's proposed revisions to marriage redefinition bill fail religious freedom test - Alliance Defense Fund - Defending Our First Liberty And there it is ... The repeated demand from the anti-gay for SPECIAL PRIVILEGES for the `` religious `` detractors . I fully support CHURCHES and PASTORS from being exempt , but it 's not necessary . Currently , our RELIGIOUS discrimination protection is much stronger than our gay discrimination protection , but do you see churches being forced to perform inter-religion marriage if the church doctrine is against it ? NO ! Do you see atheists saying `` I like the look of this church . I do n't belong , but I 'm going to force you to rent the church for my wedding party anyways. `` ? ? NO ! The existing language and constitutional protections are good enough . But when given more explicit ( redundant ) wording , what do the anti-gay marriage organizations demand ? Something NO GROUP HAS EVER HAD before . They want BUSINESS OWNERS to be free to discriminate if they have `` religious objections `` ... What if their objections are NON-religious in nature ? Why is the religion supposed to get the special perk ? ? ? And as mentioned , NO GROUP HAS EVER HAD this . There were plenty of religious interpretations against black equality and interracial marriage . But did we give THEM special privilege to ignore and discriminate against interracial marriages ? NO ! The really refreshing part of all this ? These whiny temper tantrums just do n't matter ... If the NH legislature includes the religious exceptions ( if they are just reconfirming that churches / pastors do n't have to perform ceremonies they do n't want to ) , then the governor WILL sign it ."

DISAGREE

"redefining marriage in New Hampshire would have serious consequences for the religious community . he underestimates the threat by a long shot . affiliated organizations are not the only ones who need their religious liberty religious organizations would be forced to recognize counterfeit  marriages of potential clients"

"our RELIGIOUS discrimination protection is much stronger than our gay discrimination protection They want BUSINESS OWNERS to be free to discriminate if they have `` religious objections What if their objections are NON-religious in nature ?"

" “ Contrary to what marriage redefinition activists might argue , redefining marriage in New Hampshire would have serious consequences for the religious community beyond the limited protections the governor has proposed ,  ” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Austin R. Nimocks .  “ The governor is right to recognize the threat to religious liberty , but he underestimates the threat by a long shot . Where are the protections for business owners with religious objections to recognizing same-sex  ‘ marriages ’ ? Formally affiliated organizations are not the only ones who need their religious liberty protected. ” ... After reviewing the proposed language of the statute , ADF attorneys claim that religious organizations would be forced to recognize counterfeit  “ marriages ” of potential clients or customers in many situations or face severe consequences ."

"ADF : NH gov 's proposed revisions to marriage redefinition bill fail religious freedom test - Alliance Defense Fund - Defending Our First Liberty And there it is ... The repeated demand from the anti-gay for SPECIAL PRIVILEGES for the `` religious `` detractors . I fully support CHURCHES and PASTORS from being exempt , but it 's not necessary . Currently , our RELIGIOUS discrimination protection is much stronger than our gay discrimination protection , but do you see churches being forced to perform inter-religion marriage if the church doctrine is against it ? NO ! Do you see atheists saying `` I like the look of this church . I do n't belong , but I 'm going to force you to rent the church for my wedding party anyways. `` ? ? NO ! The existing language and constitutional protections are good enough . But when given more explicit ( redundant ) wording , what do the anti-gay marriage organizations demand ? Something NO GROUP HAS EVER HAD before . They want BUSINESS OWNERS to be free to discriminate if they have `` religious objections `` ... What if their objections are NON-religious in nature ? Why is the religion supposed to get the special perk ? ? ? And as mentioned , NO GROUP HAS EVER HAD this . There were plenty of religious interpretations against black equality and interracial marriage . But did we give THEM special privilege to ignore and discriminate against interracial marriages ? NO ! The really refreshing part of all this ? These whiny temper tantrums just do n't matter ... If the NH legislature includes the religious exceptions ( if they are just reconfirming that churches / pastors do n't have to perform ceremonies they do n't want to ) , then the governor WILL sign it ."

DISAGREE

"marriage redefinition activists religious community"

"RELIGIOUS discrimination protection NO GROUP HAS EVER HAD"

"If all life evolved from a common ancestor , then there should be countless instances of new body parts evolving . Body parts such as eyes , muscle , bone , etc . We have not seen one instance of a new body part evolving in a population in which it has not existed previously . Evolutionists will wave the magic `` time wand `` and simply claim that such a change could never be observed in a few decades . What about fruit flies ? One generation of fruit flies = around a day . Fruit flies were exposed to x rays to speed up mutation rates , we have observed the equivalent of millions of years ( in terms of human generations ) of super-accelerated mutation and .... no new body parts . Evolutionists will also list in steps how a new body part can arise . This is only plausible if each of those steps could be directly observed . If not , then it is nothing more than science fiction . Evolutionists have been searching for any direct evidence of the theory of evolution since the 1800 's . They are still looking ."

"What you are talking about is irreducible complexity ; it is the only argument against evolution that appears to be totally immune to rebuttal . I have thought this issue is far over debated like gay issues but perhaps that are because I have an objectivist view point . I do n't suppose any evolutionist have realized that all the evidence for evolution is also evidence for ID . They often talk about the mountains of irrefutable evidence , but the fact that the sun rose and set every day was evidence for the sun orbiting the earth , but it 's also evidence for the earth spinning . Likewise all the evidence for evolution can be condensed into one statement `` life forms are similar to other life forms `` , This is predicted by the intelligent design hypothesis as well . Direct evidence for ID that would not support evolution would be irreducibly complex biology , direct evidence for evolution that would not support ID would be more than just adaptation , it would have to be original useful DNA , or a simulation showing that coherent structure can be achieved without intelligent design by randomization and elimination ."

AGREE

"If all life evolved from a common ancestor , then there should be countless instances of new body parts evolving ."

"What you are talking about is irreducible complexity ; it is the only argument against evolution that appears to be totally immune to rebuttal ."

"If all life evolved from a common ancestor , then there should be countless instances of new body parts evolving . Body parts such as eyes , muscle , bone , etc . We have not seen one instance of a new body part evolving in a population in which it has not existed previously . Evolutionists will wave the magic `` time wand `` and simply claim that such a change could never be observed in a few decades . What about fruit flies ? One generation of fruit flies = around a day . Fruit flies were exposed to x rays to speed up mutation rates , we have observed the equivalent of millions of years ( in terms of human generations ) of super-accelerated mutation and .... no new body parts . Evolutionists will also list in steps how a new body part can arise . This is only plausible if each of those steps could be directly observed . If not , then it is nothing more than science fiction . Evolutionists have been searching for any direct evidence of the theory of evolution since the 1800 's . They are still looking ."

"What you are talking about is irreducible complexity ; it is the only argument against evolution that appears to be totally immune to rebuttal . I have thought this issue is far over debated like gay issues but perhaps that are because I have an objectivist view point . I do n't suppose any evolutionist have realized that all the evidence for evolution is also evidence for ID . They often talk about the mountains of irrefutable evidence , but the fact that the sun rose and set every day was evidence for the sun orbiting the earth , but it 's also evidence for the earth spinning . Likewise all the evidence for evolution can be condensed into one statement `` life forms are similar to other life forms `` , This is predicted by the intelligent design hypothesis as well . Direct evidence for ID that would not support evolution would be irreducibly complex biology , direct evidence for evolution that would not support ID would be more than just adaptation , it would have to be original useful DNA , or a simulation showing that coherent structure can be achieved without intelligent design by randomization and elimination ."

AGREE

"then there should be countless instances of new body parts evolving . Body parts such as eyes , muscle , bone , etc ."

"I have an objectivist view point . I do n't suppose any evolutionist have realized that all the evidence for evolution"

"If all life evolved from a common ancestor , then there should be countless instances of new body parts evolving . Body parts such as eyes , muscle , bone , etc . We have not seen one instance of a new body part evolving in a population in which it has not existed previously . Evolutionists will wave the magic `` time wand `` and simply claim that such a change could never be observed in a few decades . What about fruit flies ? One generation of fruit flies = around a day . Fruit flies were exposed to x rays to speed up mutation rates , we have observed the equivalent of millions of years ( in terms of human generations ) of super-accelerated mutation and .... no new body parts . Evolutionists will also list in steps how a new body part can arise . This is only plausible if each of those steps could be directly observed . If not , then it is nothing more than science fiction . Evolutionists have been searching for any direct evidence of the theory of evolution since the 1800 's . They are still looking ."

"What you are talking about is irreducible complexity ; it is the only argument against evolution that appears to be totally immune to rebuttal . I have thought this issue is far over debated like gay issues but perhaps that are because I have an objectivist view point . I do n't suppose any evolutionist have realized that all the evidence for evolution is also evidence for ID . They often talk about the mountains of irrefutable evidence , but the fact that the sun rose and set every day was evidence for the sun orbiting the earth , but it 's also evidence for the earth spinning . Likewise all the evidence for evolution can be condensed into one statement `` life forms are similar to other life forms `` , This is predicted by the intelligent design hypothesis as well . Direct evidence for ID that would not support evolution would be irreducibly complex biology , direct evidence for evolution that would not support ID would be more than just adaptation , it would have to be original useful DNA , or a simulation showing that coherent structure can be achieved without intelligent design by randomization and elimination ."

AGREE

"If all life evolved from a common ancestor , then there should be countless instances of new body parts evolving"

"What you are talking about is irreducible complexity ; it is the only argument against evolution"

"If all life evolved from a common ancestor , then there should be countless instances of new body parts evolving . Body parts such as eyes , muscle , bone , etc . We have not seen one instance of a new body part evolving in a population in which it has not existed previously . Evolutionists will wave the magic `` time wand `` and simply claim that such a change could never be observed in a few decades . What about fruit flies ? One generation of fruit flies = around a day . Fruit flies were exposed to x rays to speed up mutation rates , we have observed the equivalent of millions of years ( in terms of human generations ) of super-accelerated mutation and .... no new body parts . Evolutionists will also list in steps how a new body part can arise . This is only plausible if each of those steps could be directly observed . If not , then it is nothing more than science fiction . Evolutionists have been searching for any direct evidence of the theory of evolution since the 1800 's . They are still looking ."

"What you are talking about is irreducible complexity ; it is the only argument against evolution that appears to be totally immune to rebuttal . I have thought this issue is far over debated like gay issues but perhaps that are because I have an objectivist view point . I do n't suppose any evolutionist have realized that all the evidence for evolution is also evidence for ID . They often talk about the mountains of irrefutable evidence , but the fact that the sun rose and set every day was evidence for the sun orbiting the earth , but it 's also evidence for the earth spinning . Likewise all the evidence for evolution can be condensed into one statement `` life forms are similar to other life forms `` , This is predicted by the intelligent design hypothesis as well . Direct evidence for ID that would not support evolution would be irreducibly complex biology , direct evidence for evolution that would not support ID would be more than just adaptation , it would have to be original useful DNA , or a simulation showing that coherent structure can be achieved without intelligent design by randomization and elimination ."

AGREE

"should be countless instances of new body parts not seen one instance of a new body part ...."

"you are talking about is irreducible complexity the only argument immune to rebuttal"

"HUNTSVILLE , AL – Jesus Christ , son of God and noted pro-life activist , killed two and critically wounded seven others when He opened fire in the waiting room of a Huntsville abortion clinic Tuesday . Security guards at the Women 's Medical Clinic of Huntsville were able to disarm the Messiah before He could reload His weapon , a secondhand Glock 9mm pistol that authorities said He purchased legally at a Jackson , MS , sporting-goods store . '' Abortion is a sin , `` said Christ as He was led away in handcuffs . '' It is an abomination in the eyes of Me. `` Witnesses said the attack , which took the lives of Dr. Nelson Woodring , 51 , and clinic nurse Danielle Costa , 29 , came from `` out of nowhere. `` '' He walked up to the admissions desk and asked if He could see Dr. Woodring , `` receptionist Iris Reid said . '' The next thing I knew , He was shouting Biblical verses and opening fire on everything moving. `` '' It was horrible , `` said injured clinic nurse Jessica Combs , recovering at a local hospital with bullet wounds to the leg and abdomen . '' He put his hands over Dr. Woodring 's head and told him He forgave him for his sins , and then He shot him right in the face. `` Huntsville police officials are not certain how the Messiah was able to bypass clinic guards and proceed undetected past security cameras and into the clinic waiting room , where He produced the gun from its hiding place in the folds of His robe . Federal investigators are similarly baffled , saying that the heavily armed Christ had moved in `` mysterious ways. `` Speaking to reporters from His holding cell , Christ , 33 , said He had `` no regrets `` about what He had done . '' As I said in John 16:21 , every life is precious , `` Christ said . '' This means every life , not just those who have already been born . My father , the Lord , feels the same way I do . In Jeremiah 1:5 , He said unto the prophet Jeremiah , 'Before I formed you in the womb I knew you , before you were born I set you apart . ' The unborn fetus is a sacred , living creation of my Father in Heaven and should be treated as such. `` Added Christ : `` What if the Virgin Mary had decided to abort me ? Certainly she must have been tempted to do so . After all , it was n't even her decision to conceive me in the first place . But in the end , she made the right decision , bringing her pregnancy to term and giving the world a Savior . Blessed is she among women. `` According to legal experts , if convicted , Christ could face the death penalty ."

"Christ Kills Two , Injures Seven In Abortion-Clinic Attack | The Onion - America 's Finest News Source Disclaimer : It 's THE ONION ( as if most would n't figure that out on their own ... )"

DISAGREE

"Huntsville abortion clinic Tuesday . Security guards at the Women 's Medical Clinic of Huntsville were able to disarm the Messiah"

"Injures Seven In Abortion-Clinic Attack | The Onion - America 's Finest News Source Disclaimer"

"HUNTSVILLE , AL – Jesus Christ , son of God and noted pro-life activist , killed two and critically wounded seven others when He opened fire in the waiting room of a Huntsville abortion clinic Tuesday . Security guards at the Women 's Medical Clinic of Huntsville were able to disarm the Messiah before He could reload His weapon , a secondhand Glock 9mm pistol that authorities said He purchased legally at a Jackson , MS , sporting-goods store . '' Abortion is a sin , `` said Christ as He was led away in handcuffs . '' It is an abomination in the eyes of Me. `` Witnesses said the attack , which took the lives of Dr. Nelson Woodring , 51 , and clinic nurse Danielle Costa , 29 , came from `` out of nowhere. `` '' He walked up to the admissions desk and asked if He could see Dr. Woodring , `` receptionist Iris Reid said . '' The next thing I knew , He was shouting Biblical verses and opening fire on everything moving. `` '' It was horrible , `` said injured clinic nurse Jessica Combs , recovering at a local hospital with bullet wounds to the leg and abdomen . '' He put his hands over Dr. Woodring 's head and told him He forgave him for his sins , and then He shot him right in the face. `` Huntsville police officials are not certain how the Messiah was able to bypass clinic guards and proceed undetected past security cameras and into the clinic waiting room , where He produced the gun from its hiding place in the folds of His robe . Federal investigators are similarly baffled , saying that the heavily armed Christ had moved in `` mysterious ways. `` Speaking to reporters from His holding cell , Christ , 33 , said He had `` no regrets `` about what He had done . '' As I said in John 16:21 , every life is precious , `` Christ said . '' This means every life , not just those who have already been born . My father , the Lord , feels the same way I do . In Jeremiah 1:5 , He said unto the prophet Jeremiah , 'Before I formed you in the womb I knew you , before you were born I set you apart . ' The unborn fetus is a sacred , living creation of my Father in Heaven and should be treated as such. `` Added Christ : `` What if the Virgin Mary had decided to abort me ? Certainly she must have been tempted to do so . After all , it was n't even her decision to conceive me in the first place . But in the end , she made the right decision , bringing her pregnancy to term and giving the world a Savior . Blessed is she among women. `` According to legal experts , if convicted , Christ could face the death penalty ."

"Christ Kills Two , Injures Seven In Abortion-Clinic Attack | The Onion - America 's Finest News Source Disclaimer : It 's THE ONION ( as if most would n't figure that out on their own ... )"

DISAGREE

"Jesus Christ , son of God and noted pro-life activist , killed two and critically wounded seven others"

"Christ Kills Two , Injures Seven In Abortion-Clinic Attack"

"HUNTSVILLE , AL – Jesus Christ , son of God and noted pro-life activist , killed two and critically wounded seven others when He opened fire in the waiting room of a Huntsville abortion clinic Tuesday . Security guards at the Women 's Medical Clinic of Huntsville were able to disarm the Messiah before He could reload His weapon , a secondhand Glock 9mm pistol that authorities said He purchased legally at a Jackson , MS , sporting-goods store . '' Abortion is a sin , `` said Christ as He was led away in handcuffs . '' It is an abomination in the eyes of Me. `` Witnesses said the attack , which took the lives of Dr. Nelson Woodring , 51 , and clinic nurse Danielle Costa , 29 , came from `` out of nowhere. `` '' He walked up to the admissions desk and asked if He could see Dr. Woodring , `` receptionist Iris Reid said . '' The next thing I knew , He was shouting Biblical verses and opening fire on everything moving. `` '' It was horrible , `` said injured clinic nurse Jessica Combs , recovering at a local hospital with bullet wounds to the leg and abdomen . '' He put his hands over Dr. Woodring 's head and told him He forgave him for his sins , and then He shot him right in the face. `` Huntsville police officials are not certain how the Messiah was able to bypass clinic guards and proceed undetected past security cameras and into the clinic waiting room , where He produced the gun from its hiding place in the folds of His robe . Federal investigators are similarly baffled , saying that the heavily armed Christ had moved in `` mysterious ways. `` Speaking to reporters from His holding cell , Christ , 33 , said He had `` no regrets `` about what He had done . '' As I said in John 16:21 , every life is precious , `` Christ said . '' This means every life , not just those who have already been born . My father , the Lord , feels the same way I do . In Jeremiah 1:5 , He said unto the prophet Jeremiah , 'Before I formed you in the womb I knew you , before you were born I set you apart . ' The unborn fetus is a sacred , living creation of my Father in Heaven and should be treated as such. `` Added Christ : `` What if the Virgin Mary had decided to abort me ? Certainly she must have been tempted to do so . After all , it was n't even her decision to conceive me in the first place . But in the end , she made the right decision , bringing her pregnancy to term and giving the world a Savior . Blessed is she among women. `` According to legal experts , if convicted , Christ could face the death penalty ."

"Christ Kills Two , Injures Seven In Abortion-Clinic Attack | The Onion - America 's Finest News Source Disclaimer : It 's THE ONION ( as if most would n't figure that out on their own ... )"

DISAGREE

"Jesus Christ killed two wounded seven others fire abortion clinic Witnesses said"

"Christ Kills Two , Injures Seven In Abortion-Clinic Attack The Onion ..."

"HUNTSVILLE , AL – Jesus Christ , son of God and noted pro-life activist , killed two and critically wounded seven others when He opened fire in the waiting room of a Huntsville abortion clinic Tuesday . Security guards at the Women 's Medical Clinic of Huntsville were able to disarm the Messiah before He could reload His weapon , a secondhand Glock 9mm pistol that authorities said He purchased legally at a Jackson , MS , sporting-goods store . '' Abortion is a sin , `` said Christ as He was led away in handcuffs . '' It is an abomination in the eyes of Me. `` Witnesses said the attack , which took the lives of Dr. Nelson Woodring , 51 , and clinic nurse Danielle Costa , 29 , came from `` out of nowhere. `` '' He walked up to the admissions desk and asked if He could see Dr. Woodring , `` receptionist Iris Reid said . '' The next thing I knew , He was shouting Biblical verses and opening fire on everything moving. `` '' It was horrible , `` said injured clinic nurse Jessica Combs , recovering at a local hospital with bullet wounds to the leg and abdomen . '' He put his hands over Dr. Woodring 's head and told him He forgave him for his sins , and then He shot him right in the face. `` Huntsville police officials are not certain how the Messiah was able to bypass clinic guards and proceed undetected past security cameras and into the clinic waiting room , where He produced the gun from its hiding place in the folds of His robe . Federal investigators are similarly baffled , saying that the heavily armed Christ had moved in `` mysterious ways. `` Speaking to reporters from His holding cell , Christ , 33 , said He had `` no regrets `` about what He had done . '' As I said in John 16:21 , every life is precious , `` Christ said . '' This means every life , not just those who have already been born . My father , the Lord , feels the same way I do . In Jeremiah 1:5 , He said unto the prophet Jeremiah , 'Before I formed you in the womb I knew you , before you were born I set you apart . ' The unborn fetus is a sacred , living creation of my Father in Heaven and should be treated as such. `` Added Christ : `` What if the Virgin Mary had decided to abort me ? Certainly she must have been tempted to do so . After all , it was n't even her decision to conceive me in the first place . But in the end , she made the right decision , bringing her pregnancy to term and giving the world a Savior . Blessed is she among women. `` According to legal experts , if convicted , Christ could face the death penalty ."

"Christ Kills Two , Injures Seven In Abortion-Clinic Attack | The Onion - America 's Finest News Source Disclaimer : It 's THE ONION ( as if most would n't figure that out on their own ... )"

DISAGREE

"Jesus Christ , son of God and noted pro-life activist , killed two and critically wounded seven others"

"Christ Kills Two , Injures Seven In Abortion-Clinic Attack | The Onion -"

"Some would say , the answer is that man is both a physical being ( evolutionist ) and is for the lack of a better word , a spiritual being ( creationist ) . So , in a sense they are both right . In short , an ape like creature was zapped with a spirit and thus became human . In layman 's terms that is what happened . The interesting part is understanding the true nature of this zap and what that means to our future ."

"........."

DISAGREE

"man is both a physical being ( evolutionist ) and is for the lack of a better word , a spiritual being ( creationist ) ."

"........."

"Some would say , the answer is that man is both a physical being ( evolutionist ) and is for the lack of a better word , a spiritual being ( creationist ) . So , in a sense they are both right . In short , an ape like creature was zapped with a spirit and thus became human . In layman 's terms that is what happened . The interesting part is understanding the true nature of this zap and what that means to our future ."

"........."

DISAGREE

"that is what happened ."

"........."

"with contraceptives though a human is created and thus ca n't be denied an opportuntity to be born . The human part has n't happened yet while after fusion it has ."

"But thats not what unkerpaulie was getting at . Contraceptives deny the possibility of life , just at a different stage . There should be no mystique over conception as a substantial percentage of fertilized embryo 's ( a human life in your estimation ) are going straight down the toliet when nature is left to take its course . At least the Catholic opposition to contraception can be viewed as being morally consistent , ie . there is no man-made intervention permitted in the human reproductive process ."

AGREE

"is created and thus ca n't be denied an opportuntity to be born ."

"But thats not what unkerpaulie was getting at . Contraceptives deny the possibility of life , just at a different stage"

"with contraceptives though a human is created and thus ca n't be denied an opportuntity to be born . The human part has n't happened yet while after fusion it has ."

"But thats not what unkerpaulie was getting at . Contraceptives deny the possibility of life , just at a different stage . There should be no mystique over conception as a substantial percentage of fertilized embryo 's ( a human life in your estimation ) are going straight down the toliet when nature is left to take its course . At least the Catholic opposition to contraception can be viewed as being morally consistent , ie . there is no man-made intervention permitted in the human reproductive process ."

AGREE

"with contraceptives though a human is created and thus ca n't be denied an opportuntity to be born ."

"Contraceptives deny the possibility of life ,"

"with contraceptives though a human is created and thus ca n't be denied an opportuntity to be born . The human part has n't happened yet while after fusion it has ."

"But thats not what unkerpaulie was getting at . Contraceptives deny the possibility of life , just at a different stage . There should be no mystique over conception as a substantial percentage of fertilized embryo 's ( a human life in your estimation ) are going straight down the toliet when nature is left to take its course . At least the Catholic opposition to contraception can be viewed as being morally consistent , ie . there is no man-made intervention permitted in the human reproductive process ."

AGREE

"contraceptives though a human is created and thus ca n't be denied an opportuntity to be born"

"Contraceptives deny the possibility of life"

"Put a fork in it . Socialized medicine is DOA . The possible scenarios that could get the healthcare bill made into law are both suicidal moves that will cause the Democrats to become Washington outsiders in quick order . They are : 1 . Get the HR to pass the Senate Bill without any changes . This will be suicidal to the most liberal Democrats and the most Conservative ones , because the Senate Bill is a neutered version of the House Bill . 2 . They drag their feet on certifying Brown until after the reconsiliation process occurs so that they maintain their supermajority . This option is ever worse than Option 1 because it exposes every Democrat in Congress for the unprincipled b @ # $ % rds that they are and will cause a firestorm against them for years to come . If there 's one lesson that crooked politicians should have learned by now , it 's the lesson of Watergate . The people have long memories when it comes to blatant attempts to throw elections ."

"So you are saying that the democrats have no choice but to inaugarate Brown and let him stop the bill ? You suggest that whatever option they pick will be political suicide ."

AGREE

"The possible scenarios are both suicidal moves"

"whatever option they pick will be political suicide ."

"Put a fork in it . Socialized medicine is DOA . The possible scenarios that could get the healthcare bill made into law are both suicidal moves that will cause the Democrats to become Washington outsiders in quick order . They are : 1 . Get the HR to pass the Senate Bill without any changes . This will be suicidal to the most liberal Democrats and the most Conservative ones , because the Senate Bill is a neutered version of the House Bill . 2 . They drag their feet on certifying Brown until after the reconsiliation process occurs so that they maintain their supermajority . This option is ever worse than Option 1 because it exposes every Democrat in Congress for the unprincipled b @ # $ % rds that they are and will cause a firestorm against them for years to come . If there 's one lesson that crooked politicians should have learned by now , it 's the lesson of Watergate . The people have long memories when it comes to blatant attempts to throw elections ."

"So you are saying that the democrats have no choice but to inaugarate Brown and let him stop the bill ? You suggest that whatever option they pick will be political suicide ."

AGREE

"Socialized medicine is DOA ."

"So you are saying that the democrats have no choice but to inaugarate Brown and let him stop the bill ?"

"Put a fork in it . Socialized medicine is DOA . The possible scenarios that could get the healthcare bill made into law are both suicidal moves that will cause the Democrats to become Washington outsiders in quick order . They are : 1 . Get the HR to pass the Senate Bill without any changes . This will be suicidal to the most liberal Democrats and the most Conservative ones , because the Senate Bill is a neutered version of the House Bill . 2 . They drag their feet on certifying Brown until after the reconsiliation process occurs so that they maintain their supermajority . This option is ever worse than Option 1 because it exposes every Democrat in Congress for the unprincipled b @ # $ % rds that they are and will cause a firestorm against them for years to come . If there 's one lesson that crooked politicians should have learned by now , it 's the lesson of Watergate . The people have long memories when it comes to blatant attempts to throw elections ."

"So you are saying that the democrats have no choice but to inaugarate Brown and let him stop the bill ? You suggest that whatever option they pick will be political suicide ."

AGREE

"They drag their feet on certifying Brown until after the reconsiliation process This option is ever worse than Option 1"

"So you are saying that the democrats have no choice but to inaugarate Brown"

"Just because the bible is over 2000 years old does n't make it unreliable , I mean your placing all your money on a billion year old one cell organism . You do n't have any absolute proof and neither do I ."

"But at least Evolutionist can give physical proofs for their beliefs . It is right that nothing is completely sure and clear , but Evolutionists and Scientists have shown a lot more evidence that shows that Evolution is right , Creationists just ca n't show enough ... ( my opinion ) And it 's right that most stuff Evolutionists are dealing with are millions of years old , but it still all makes more sense than some stuff in the bible ... There is no complete proof for any of the theories , but Evolution just gives more evidence ... And if Creationists just want some credit for their beliefs and work , they should n't want evolution to be deleted vom Education . No one knows what is right but right now the theories of Evolution just shows more evidence and is widely accepted and used ..."

DISAGREE

"You do n't have any absolute proof and neither do I ."

"but Evolution just gives more evidence"