GENIUS FORUMS

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:

millipodium wrote: Are you against abortion in general, or against it for the "wrong reasons"? Just curious.

Who?

I meant that many times they throw their babies away after they are born if they are female. It isn't abortion after birth, it's infanticide. If you think there are right reasons for infanicide, maybe you need another look at the genocide thread.

If you were asking me about my opinion about abortion - well, maybe that deserves a separate thread.

Oh so you weren't talking about abortion. Ok. Clears that up.

Did you notice how you were completely wrong on the internet changing china, because the internet is censored in china? Did you know that?

Ryan Rudolph wrote:Here are some relevant articles I found pertaining to the current economic changes happening within China and how those changes are affecting the world:

Thank you Ryan - facts are helpful.

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:

Ryan Rudolph wrote:Here are some relevant articles I found pertaining to the current economic changes happening within China and how those changes are affecting the world:

Thank you Ryan - facts are helpful.

Yeah. Like the fact that china censors the internet? DOes that factor into your "technology will change china" thesis?

mil-

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:

Sue Hindmarsh wrote:Imagine a billion people all wanting their own TV, DVD player, iPod, mobile phone, PC, fridge, washing machine, car, nicer home, better job, and cheaper electricity

...then imagine if they find out that much of the rest of the world has unrestricted access to the internet. They might get online with the whole world wide web and suddenly realize that killing babies just because they are female is not a great solution - unless they spend too much time on misogyny sites, of course.

Why do you keep bringing up to me what I said like you're informing me of something?

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:mil-

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:

Sue Hindmarsh wrote:Imagine a billion people all wanting their own TV, DVD player, iPod, mobile phone, PC, fridge, washing machine, car, nicer home, better job, and cheaper electricity

...then imagine if they find out that much of the rest of the world has unrestricted access to the internet. They might get online with the whole world wide web and suddenly realize that killing babies just because they are female is not a great solution - unless they spend too much time on misogyny sites, of course.

Why do you keep bringing up to me what I said like you're informing me of something?

Actually what I keep bringing up is the evidence which contradicts your "technology will change china" thesis.

I'm just wondering if your brain can process information contrary to what it believes to be true, or if you are in denial about the issue.

millipodium wrote:Actually what I keep bringing up is the evidence which contradicts your "technology will change china" thesis.
.

I did not say that technology alone will change China, although I did imply that technology could contribute to a change in China.

millipodium wrote:I'm just wondering if your brain can process information contrary to what it believes to be true.

Yes, it can. When given data that changes the meaning of previous data, I update my opinion. When I have evidence that previous data were false, I change my analysis of the situation.

No amount of sheer grandstanding does anything but adds that observation about the one grandstanding.

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:

millipodium wrote:Actually what I keep bringing up is the evidence which contradicts your "technology will change china" thesis.
.

I did not say that technology alone will change China, although I did imply that technology could contribute to a change in China.

What else will contribute to the fascist chinese changing?

I can not use the word "will" in this context as I feel the word "could" is the only accurate term.

The best possibility of change for China is the Chinese people. The Chinese people could change if they change their minds. Their minds could change if new ideas are introduced. The problem is that their government keeps new ideas from being introduced into their culture. If the Chinese get their hands on enough technology, they could use it to become aware of how the rest of the world works.

Now the differences between could change and will change are many, but if the "free" world isn't in order when they look outside of their wall, they might decide that what they are doing is better. They might even decide that they would be doing us a favor by taking over and getting this mess in order for us. Ever see the movie "Gung-Ho" about a Chinese company taking over a failed automobile assembly plant? It shows that there are some things better about the Chinese way and there are some things better about the American way - but by understanding each other and working together, we can make something better than either side alone can do.

Let's get our houses in order first. We can not show China that freedom is better if all we have to show for it is corruption and anarchy.

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:I can not use the word "will" in this context as I feel the word "could" is the only accurate term.

The best possibility of change for China is the Chinese people. The Chinese people could change if they change their minds. Their minds could change if new ideas are introduced. The problem is that their government keeps new ideas from being introduced into their culture. If the Chinese get their hands on enough technology, they could use it to become aware of how the rest of the world works.

Now the differences between could change and will change are many, but if the "free" world isn't in order when they look outside of their wall, they might decide that what they are doing is better. They might even decide that they would be doing us a favor by taking over and getting this mess in order for us. Ever see the movie "Gung-Ho" about a Chinese company taking over a failed automobile assembly plant? It shows that there are some things better about the Chinese way and there are some things better about the American way - but by understanding each other and working together, we can make something better than either side alone can do.

Let's get our houses in order first. We can not show China that freedom is better if all we have to show for it is corruption and anarchy.

Our house is in fine order. And we could show the chinese people is that it's possible to say NO to totalitarianism. Giving the chinese hegemon massive trade dollars does not send this message, in fact, empowering their captors only sends the message that we don't care if they are in slave camps.

We should divest now.

SAY NO TO SLAVE LABOR!

Milli wrote:

Our house is in fine order. SAY NO TO SLAVE LABOUR!

Milli, via outsourcing to various underdeveloped parts of the world, america profits and depends upon slave labor. So the house of america in not in fine order. It is in a mess.

If it was in fine order, you wouldnt be crying: "how can we be so stupid!?"

It's because America is, to a degree, in a mess.

But I would of course rather live in America than in China.

Cory Duchesne wrote:But I would of course rather live in America than in China.

Same here. That's why I believe that we'd better take care to be responsible with our freedom so that the whole world will not become China (and for other reasons, too).

Cory Duchesne wrote:Milli wrote:

Our house is in fine order. SAY NO TO SLAVE LABOUR!

Milli, via outsourcing to various underdeveloped parts of the world, america profits and depends upon slave labor. So the house of america in not in fine order. It is in a mess.

If it was in fine order, you wouldnt be crying: "how can we be so stupid!?"

It's because America is, to a degree, in a mess.

But I would of course rather live in America than in China.

Well obviously I desire the change I've been advocating this entire thread. Our house is in order in terms of basic human rights protections and freedoms concepts.

Milli wrote:

Our house is in order in terms of basic human rights protections and freedoms concepts.

Did you know that here in Australia we are forced to vote! That's right - if you don't cast your vote you get fined. And in a few wars last century conscription was bought in to force our blokes to fight for the country. And added to that, Australia has a growing problem with police brutality, domestic violence, gang violence, rising poverty, political corruption, homelessness, and racism. Also, our government pushed us into violating another countries sovereignty in both Afghanistan and Iraq, which was consider by quite a few folk here as somewhat ‘bad form’, mainly because of the inconsistency - for we wouldn't tolerate so-called ‘enemy nations’ doing the same thing.

So, unlike you, I can’t say with such bravado that Australia’s house is in order when it comes to ensuring that government policies and institutions are doing all they can to ensure that Australian citizens enjoy equal rights and freedoms, and that our interactions with other nations are always going to be legal and just.

-
Sue

Sue Hindmarsh wrote:Milli wrote:

Our house is in order in terms of basic human rights protections and freedoms concepts.

Did you know that here in Australia we are forced to vote! That's right - if you don't cast your vote you get fined. And in a few wars last century conscription was bought in to force our blokes to fight for the country. And added to that, Australia has a growing problem with police brutality, domestic violence, gang violence, rising poverty, political corruption, homelessness, and racism. Also, our government pushed us into violating another countries sovereignty in both Afghanistan and Iraq, which was consider by quite a few folk here as somewhat ‘bad form’, mainly because of the inconsistency - for we wouldn't tolerate so-called ‘enemy nations’ doing the same thing.

So, unlike you, I can’t say with such bravado that Australia’s house is in order when it comes to ensuring that government policies and institutions are doing all they can to ensure that Australian citizens enjoy equal rights and freedoms, and that our interactions with other nations are always going to be legal and just.

-
Sue

Most of this is due to your anti-gun laws. Thugs run rampant when they know regular people cannot defend themselves.

It was cool to see the anti-muslim riots on the beach. White people need to stand up for themselves more often. Why is there no complaining when white farmers have their property seized in africa? africa has a diversity problem.

Ryan Rudolph wrote:Sky wrote:

i was raised in the far east i don't see why china must absolutely necessarily be our enemy though i understand what is being said

China is not ‘my’ enemy. “I” have no enemies, however China has the enough power to drastically alter the global economy; especially for the west.

China is only regarded as an enemy to those who have power in the west and those who are frightened of losing their power.

I have nothing to lose in all this. I’ll accept anything that causally happens.

There is no 'will' left in me to have enemies.

You think you have no enemies because people have died to protect your right to be free. When we are completely dependant on chinese goods, have lost all ability to produce for ourselves, and are subject to the whims of overseas totalitarians, you may feel differently.

millipodium wrote:Most of this is due to your anti-gun laws. Thugs run rampant when they know regular people cannot defend themselves.

The right to bear arms (guns) is a pretty fundamental part of the United States, but we also have problems with corruption, crime, police brutatlity, poverty, domestic violence, racism, and gang violence. Some areas are worse than others - a humorous but true story exemplifies this. A northern real estate speaker came to Florida to do some presentations, and one of the terms he kept using to refer to a process of checking on real estate was "do a drive-by." Getting a strange reaction, he shortly learned that in Florida, a "drive-by" is an activity where people (usually gang members) drive by a group of people and shoot as many of them as possible.

As for regular people defending themselves - a few years ago in Ft. Pierce (the other side of Florida) a co-worker of someone I knew got shot for cutting someone off in traffic. Now there's a regular person defending himself. People were also getting shot for honking their horns or flashing their lights, and for many other reasons. An unfortunate number of children have started shooting people just because they wanted to know what it felt like to shoot someone.

And guns sure don't make domestic violence any better. When my father had me at rifle-point because I was not following his orders fast enough, I lost my ability to understand the spoken word. He was speaking clearly, but it was like he was speaking another language. Obviously I was trying my best to understand him, but the language portion of my brain must have just shut down. All I could do was literally stand there in the corner of my bedroom and look at him while he yelled at me down the sight of his rifle.

I don't know if it was scarier because it was a gun or because it was my father; the first time I was at knife-point (in the third grade), I was still able to understand English. Either way, guns are no match for the application of logical solutions to make the world a better place.

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:

millipodium wrote:Most of this is due to your anti-gun laws. Thugs run rampant when they know regular people cannot defend themselves.

The right to bear arms (guns) is a pretty fundamental part of the United States, but we also have problems with corruption, crime, police brutatlity, poverty, domestic violence, racism, and gang violence. Some areas are worse than others - a humorous but true story exemplifies this. A northern real estate speaker came to Florida to do some presentations, and one of the terms he kept using to refer to a process of checking on real estate was "do a drive-by." Getting a strange reaction, he shortly learned that in Florida, a "drive-by" is an activity where people (usually gang members) drive by a group of people and shoot as many of them as possible.

As for regular people defending themselves - a few years ago in Ft. Pierce (the other side of Florida) a co-worker of someone I knew got shot for cutting someone off in traffic. Now there's a regular person defending himself. People were also getting shot for honking their horns or flashing their lights, and for many other reasons. An unfortunate number of children have started shooting people just because they wanted to know what it felt like to shoot someone.

And guns sure don't make domestic violence any better. When my father had me at rifle-point because I was not following his orders fast enough, I lost my ability to understand the spoken word. He was speaking clearly, but it was like he was speaking another language. Obviously I was trying my best to understand him, but the language portion of my brain must have just shut down. All I could do was literally stand there in the corner of my bedroom and look at him while he yelled at me down the sight of his rifle.

I don't know if it was scarier because it was a gun or because it was my father; the first time I was at knife-point (in the third grade), I was still able to understand English. Either way, guns are no match for the application of logical solutions to make the world a better place.

Statistics show violent crime skyrockets when handguns are outlawed, despite your anecdotal evidence to the contrary.

What is your logical solution to crime? Let me guess, socialism? Handouts?

millipodium wrote:What is your logical solution to crime?

1. Determine why crime happens. (answer - criminals get something out of it.)

2. Teach a better way for people to get what they want, including appropriate motivation.

3. Provide appropriate medical and mental health care to prevent/repair biological damage that prompts irrational behavior.

4. For those abherrant individuals who want to do something bad just because it is wrong (unhealthy rebellion), provide punative measures that:

a. do not damage the individual physically or psychologically

b. provide a protective measure for the rest of society, and

c. provide restitution (full if possible, otherwise as close to full as possible) and atonement if the person is capable.

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:

millipodium wrote:What is your logical solution to crime?

1. Determine why crime happens. (answer - criminals get something out of it.)

2. Teach a better way for people to get what they want, including appropriate motivation.

3. Provide appropriate medical and mental health care to prevent/repair biological damage that prompts irrational behavior.

4. For those abherrant individuals who want to do something bad just because it is wrong (unhealthy rebellion), provide punative measures that:

a. do not damage the individual physically or psychologically

b. provide a protective measure for the rest of society, and

c. provide restitution (full if possible, otherwise as close to full as possible) and atonement if the person is capable.

People KNOW getting a job is a better way than stealing. Your fantasyland concepts prove exactly why people like you will never set policy in this country again. You live in a world of wishful thinking.