http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEvNS5TzvwM&feature=related

> Douglas Reynholm wrote:

>So I conclude, and it may not surprise you, that your argument is not a valid one. You insinuate we only speak foreign languages cause the people who speak it live closer to us than most americans. Our aim is to be able to communicate with other people, regardless where they're from, not because they're part of Europe..

i think you're in denial if you think its purely coincidence that the vast majority of Europeans don't know non-european languages..

lets take primo for example because he is the only european that listed the languages he speaks. he knows his native tongue, and is fluent in english; so far reasonable consistent with the "Our aim is to be able to communicate with other people, regardless where they're from" claim... but then he learned german, italien, and estonian? those languages don't travel well, and at very least germans and italians are far more likely to know english or spanish or french then say chinese or indians would know english, spanish, or french...  those languages are wasted ones if his aim was to be able to communicate with other people regardless of where he's from; so either Primo is an idiot who thought those would be the next obvious choices or his goal wasn't to be able to communicate with as many people as possible regardless of where they are from...

also, if an american would travel to Italy or Germany and spoke none of their language, because they are confident that the majority would speak english perfectly fine, he would receive a rather icy reception in many of the places he went. europeans want you to at least to attempt to learn their language, and if you don't, they are insulted. i think learning another country's language is a sign of respect and european's tendency to learn each other's languages is the different european populations jacking each other off.

i  play random, i am 19-15 in plat, so i know a bit about each race...

> [TI] ZoZferatu [Pw9] wrote:

> And a troll thread turned into an actual discussion!

*bows*

for my next trick i will make this elephant disappear.....

because its advertising?   someone provided a link to a free game they made, closed for advertising. link to free video is advertising as well...  although understandably i would see why one you would be more concerned with editing then the other.

so, murdering millions of people like the nazi's wasn't ethical to improve the human race, but murdering millions of human embryo's and fetus's to improve the human race is?

> [TI] Primo wrote:

> As true as that may be, all I am trying to say is that there are so many different steps in this chain, that it would be hypocrytical to say this one is humane, but the next one isn't. It's completly subjective.

and thats where you are wrong... sperm only have half the DNA that is needed to become an adult human, sperm or an egg is not a human on its way to develop into an adult. a embryo is a human with all the genetic material needed to become an adult human, all that is needed is the proper environment to allow it to grow. an embryo is a complete human that will eventually become an adult unless it is killed. a sperm or an egg is genetic material that in its current form cannot become an adult.

> [TI] Primo wrote:

> Avo, in the same line one could claim sperm is human life, and masturbation equals murder.

nope, sperm needs more the nutrition and proper enviroment to become a human... sperm also only has half a human's DNA...

just because something bad has happened to you, it doesn't justify you killing a completely innocent human being. 

she also doesn't have to keep the child; newborn babies are in high demand in most if not all first world countries.  there are plenty of babies that were not aborted and were adopted that have perfectly fulfilling lives; hell some of my best friends were adopted.  Hell, my aunt and uncle adopted, and it was damn difficult because of the competition for the few babies that are given up for adoption.

also, what countries does the decision rest on both parents? that i am aware of, its solely the mother's decision.

the commitment involved in not having an abortion is a commitment until the baby is born where you can give it up for adoption. even if adoption wasn't an option, killing an individual because it would inconvenience you not to kill it is not morally justifiable. killing a human being because theres a chance that his life isn't as good as you think he would deserve is also not morally justifiable..

> Douglas Reynholm wrote:

> I have put myself to the defence of abortion before, so here it goes again. Abortion is never intended, by anyone, as the first of best solution to what the people involved consider to be a problem. And abortions are always a emotionally loaded thing. Although when those people opt for abortion, they shouldn't be limited by other people's (often god-inspired) morals. Those are irrelevant, or at least they should be. Abortion, again, is never the easy way out and it's always a hard decision to make. So, I don't think the often used argument that it's the easy way to escape consequences of irresponsible behaviour fits. I consider it to be the last, drastic choice of intervention to save people (and their direct social environment) who made a serious mistake.

why should other people's morals not have an effect on laws? people consider murder wrong, so they make laws against it. people consider rape wrong, so they make laws against it. if people consider abortion wrong, why shouldn't they be able to make laws against it?

> Douglas Reynholm wrote:

> "The real debate isn't "is abortion OK" it is "does the foetus have the right to life"."

I disagree. I think the coreissue is this: "Does the foetus' 'claim' to life, in whatever social environment, outweigh the right of the involved (wich is in the worst scenario only the mother-to-be) to organise its own life?"

i think thats a really simple question. if the claim to life does not outweigh the right to organize its own life, then all murders would be legal; furthermore if you kill a living human being for your right to organize your own life you are robbing the fetus of its right to organize its own life...