|
| Thread: Examples of Human Stupidity |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
posted March 14, 2010 08:01 PM |
|
Edited by Celfious at 20:06, 14 Mar 2010.
|
okay JJ I missed the whole this thread tastes like ear wax debacle but I am not really thinking the threads topic is
A: The taste or tastelessness of this thread
B: Lets call someone stupid based on something in no relation to seeing elephants in a frying pan.
C: After thread being geared towards original intended topic lets take it off course immediately again by calling ones judgment grounds of stupidity.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 14, 2010 08:28 PM |
|
|
Ok, Celfious.
You can surely tell me not only what so darn stupid and silly is with the cited news the thread starts off with, compared to what you can watch on TV every day between 11 am and 3 pm, these silly shows where some incredibly awkward people tell the camera and the audience that they have sex with their relatives and a tattoo where it hurts.
Or with any another of a gazillion things - that warrants
Quote:
I would like to dedicate this thread to those rare human specimens that are contaminating the gene pool. The ones that evolution would have naturally weeded out if it weren't for humanity's apparent modern immunity to natural selection.
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted March 14, 2010 09:08 PM |
|
|
|
Xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 14, 2010 09:12 PM |
|
|
Yeah, I have read about that too and its amazing. So incredible stupid. My brain is starting to leak.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 14, 2010 10:12 PM |
|
|
|
It's Utah, what did you expect?
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 02:45 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 14:47, 15 Mar 2010.
|
Quote:
The bill passed by legislators amends Utah's criminal statute to allow the state to charge a woman with criminal homicide for inducing a miscarriage or obtaining an illegal abortion. The basis for the law was a recent case in which a 17-year-old girl, who was seven months pregnant, paid a man $150 to beat her in an attempt to cause a miscarriage. Although the girl gave birth to a baby later given up for adoption, she was initially charged with attempted murder. However the charges were dropped because, at the time, under Utah state law a woman could not be prosecuted for attempting to arrange an abortion, lawful or unlawful.
The bill passed by the Utah legislature would change that. While the bill does not affect legally obtained abortions, it criminalizes any actions taken by women to induce a miscarriage or abortion outside of a doctor's care, with penalties including up to life in prison.
That makes sense. A fetus has unique human DNA and multiplying cells and so is human life and not part of the mother(it would have the same DNA as the mother if it were part of the body of the mother.)
They should have gone furthur and outlawed all abortions unless the life of the mother was in danger.
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 02:50 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
The bill passed by legislators amends Utah's criminal statute to allow the state to charge a woman with criminal homicide for inducing a miscarriage or obtaining an illegal abortion. The basis for the law was a recent case in which a 17-year-old girl, who was seven months pregnant, paid a man $150 to beat her in an attempt to cause a miscarriage. Although the girl gave birth to a baby later given up for adoption, she was initially charged with attempted murder. However the charges were dropped because, at the time, under Utah state law a woman could not be prosecuted for attempting to arrange an abortion, lawful or unlawful.
The bill passed by the Utah legislature would change that. While the bill does not affect legally obtained abortions, it criminalizes any actions taken by women to induce a miscarriage or abortion outside of a doctor's care, with penalties including up to life in prison.
That makes sense. A fetuse has unique human DNA and multiplying cells and so is human life and not part of the mother(it would have the same DNA as the mother if it were part of the body of the mother.)
They should have gone furthur and outlawed all abortions unless the life of the mother was in danger.
The thing most stupid thing in this is that if someone accidentally gets a miscarriage she might be facing a murder charge.
Think about it. Someone falls down the stairs, Slips badly on ice, Is mugged and gets a death sentence. Makes sense?
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 02:52 PM |
|
|
Nah, let's be honest about this. The law is intended to stop the sort of thing that was done in the case in question. If a woman has a normal miscarriage she won't be prosecuted.
____________
Revelation
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 02:54 PM |
|
|
You sure about that?
The whole justice system is messed up in the states.
If people get fortunes for seeing a fly in soup then what can we expect?
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 03:40 PM |
|
|
Has nothing to do with the US: if there is a law, that deliberately caused miscarriages are to be prosecuted as criminal homicide, then every miscarriage has to be checked for that "suspect circumstances".
If a husband or a wife is reported dead falling down the stairs, the circumstances of the death have to be investgated: was it an accident or not?
If a pregnant wife falls down the stairs having a miscarriage that will have to be investigated as well: was it an accident or not?
In practise, it will be difficult to prove the deliberation - however, it will be necessary investigate, whether the woman in question seem to have been pleased about being pregnant or not. In other words, there will be more "suspect" cases, and there will be more unspect cases, depending on the situation of the pregnant.
For example, if you somehow applied for an abortion, but couldn't get one, you'll have to be extremely carefully with "accidents" - you might end up with a murder charge in case of an accident.
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 05:47 PM |
|
|
Laws shouldn't be ambiguous...
Anyway, nature itself aborts babies all the time!
This is just silliness, people!
The law shouldn't be thrusting its clammy hands up everyone's womb.
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 06:12 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 18:14, 15 Mar 2010.
|
Quote:
Laws shouldn't be ambiguous...
Anyway, nature itself aborts babies all the time!
This is just silliness, people!
The law shouldn't be thrusting its clammy hands up everyone's womb.
So you are saying murder should always be legal then. Perhaps you were not aware that some humans die at a week old, some a year old, some 30 years old, some 100 years old, ect. Your argument means that it should be legal to kill anyone at any time because some people die at that age anyways.
I should have control of my body until the point that I exercise that control to infringe on another person's rights.
I have control of my hands but it is illegal for me to use my hands to choke you to death unless I am defending myself. Even so, mothers should not get a free pass in murdering their children.
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 06:17 PM |
|
|
A 30 or 100 year old is hardly a part of your body, while a fetus is..
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 06:27 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Laws shouldn't be ambiguous...
Anyway, nature itself aborts babies all the time!
This is just silliness, people!
The law shouldn't be thrusting its clammy hands up everyone's womb.
So you are saying murder should always be legal then. Perhaps you were not aware that some humans die at a week old, some a year old, some 30 years old, some 100 years old, ect. Your argument means that it should be legal to kill anyone at any time because some people die at that age anyways.
I should have control of my body until the point that I exercise that control to infringe on another person's rights.
I have control of my hands but it is illegal for me to use my hands to choke you to death unless I am defending myself. Even so, mothers should not get a free pass in murdering their children.
No, my dear friend, I'm saying it will be nigh impossible to figure out when nature did it and where our dearest mummies did.
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 07:07 PM |
|
|
Quote:
A 30 or 100 year old is hardly a part of your body, while a fetus is..
Errrrrrr....all parts of your body have the same DNA. The DNA of a fetus is not the same DNA as the DNA of the mother and therefore the fetus can't be a part of the body of the mother. The fetus is a unique human life that is temporarily inside the mother, exactly where he is supposed to be in that stage of the human life cycle.
|
|
Shares
Supreme Hero
I am. Thusly I am.
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 07:20 PM |
|
Edited by Shares at 19:26, 15 Mar 2010.
|
That's not even true, if I recall correctly, abut 60% of the cells in the human body is not even your own cells. It's bacterias and other kinds of cells. That means that at LEAST 60% of your cells have a different DNA than you. How ever, you do raise valid points, and indeed do make sense. I still disagree though. As long as the baby is inside the mother, it is part of her, and it's up to her what to do with it.
EDIT: This is an age old question. We all agree murder is wrong, and murder is when you kill a living human being. So the question is: "When does "life" begin?" Ancient it is! Saying that all living cells is "alive" would mean that killing a tree is murder. Saying that all animalistic cells are "alive" would mean killing a rabit, or even killing bacteria would be murder. Saying that all human, or human to be cells are "alive" would mean that every man propably kills thousands every night, and women become murderers every month or so.
I guess we can all agree on that at least, right?
____________
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 07:24 PM |
|
|
Elodin, your DNA argument seems vague. Defining what makes a living being unique via DNA seems unlikely to be correct.
Your hair also expresses your DNA, but when you get a haircut, eventhough your hair still expresses said DNA, does not make that hair a part of your body anymore.
A cloned person have the same DNA as the original, however they don't share the same consciousness, thereby they're not the same person.
A dead baby will have a different DNA than the mother, inside the mother as well.
Yes it is an unfortunate birth works, I'd much rather have that the baby could survive independent of the mother, but that's first true after birth with the current technology. We've to respect that the mother is master of her body and she uniquely decides the future of whether that baby will get to alife or not. No one else, as it is her body and she is the one to decide who she supports.
In a future where technology allows for us to keep the baby alive outside the mothers boby independent of stage of birth is the place where we actually can do something good.
Are you interested in continuing this topic with me, then we can continue it in my "reply to" thread. 
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 07:31 PM |
|
|
it is probably true according to popular belief that all parts of the body contain the same DNA but is popular belief and fact itself challenging when considering how long it would take to document every cell within the body? I know I know, its probably true and i am sure some scientist has considered analyzing and documenting the DNA of each of the trillion cells that are considered to have a nucleus, also we have to assume that we know DNA in enough depth to say there is no deeper truth about its makeup than we already know.
Thinking of this brings to mind all of the skeptics throughout history who many times joined up with the majority of like minded thinkers to burn people at the stake for making claims of witchery like the world is not flat.
|
|
Shares
Supreme Hero
I am. Thusly I am.
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 07:40 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Thinking of this brings to mind all of the skeptics throughout history who many times joined up with the majority of like minded thinkers to burn people at the stake for making claims of witchery like the world is not flat.
I never understand how that could happen. That the earth is round has been known about as long as there been sailing.
____________
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted March 15, 2010 07:46 PM |
|
|
some cultures knew but many others even decades after sailing long expeditions and stuff assumed if they went steady west they would run into monsters and eventually fall off the planet/flat lands.
Cant exactly call them stupid in every perspective though until they start denying evidence and burning the researchers families. Can someone else think of more examples like this?
I have actually been interested for quite awhile to gather a list of similar skeptical thoughts in masses throughout cultures that ended up being entirely wrong. I am thinking it is in some at least small way categorized as stupidity in many of these cases, so not off topic due to them not being alive in this decade?
____________
What are you up to
|
|
|
|
