Re: Peterson's Death Sentence

Discussion in 'Linux Networking' started by Aunty Kreist, Jan 20, 2005.

  1. Aunty Kreist

    Parse Tree Guest

    I don't think they're even useful for organ harvesting.
     
    Parse Tree, Jan 21, 2005
    #81
    1. Advertisements

  2. Aunty Kreist

    Parse Tree Guest

    Then that would work on most people, but not us because we'd be wearing
    our tinfoil hats.

    Speaking of the electroprobe mind control device, are there any on
    sci.electronics.design that could give us some valuable insight into
    defeating this nefarious device?
     
    Parse Tree, Jan 21, 2005
    #82
    1. Advertisements

  3. Aunty Kreist

    Aunty Kreist Guest

    Hee hee! I aim to please. :)
     
    Aunty Kreist, Jan 21, 2005
    #83
  4. Aunty Kreist

    Aunty Kreist Guest

    I just get a kick out the the hypocritical behavior that many pro-lifers
    exhibit. They try to deny a woman's right to an abortion; yet do not so much
    as lift a finger to help the needy kids that are brought into the world by
    their own agenda.
     
    Aunty Kreist, Jan 21, 2005
    #84
  5. Aunty Kreist

    Aunty Kreist Guest

    Haha! I think I might enjoy that.
     
    Aunty Kreist, Jan 21, 2005
    #85
  6. Aunty Kreist

    Paul Burke Guest

    It must have been a real bugger to be public prosecutor in Anglo Saxon
    times... I mean, you've just presented a watertight case, all you are
    waiting for is the judge to pronounce sentence... but bugger me, it's
    the king, Edward the Confessor... "I find myself guilty of this crime,
    and the sentence is one hundred lashes. Bring in the monks!"

    Paul Burke
     
    Paul Burke, Jan 21, 2005
    #86
  7. Aunty Kreist

    Aunty Kreist Guest

    You have to take synthetic fiber, and create a cap to cover your head with
    it; this will prevent earth elementals from feeding off of your brain waves.
     
    Aunty Kreist, Jan 21, 2005
    #87
  8. Because "I" am programmed by genes and memes to not to do this. "I"
    don't have any choice in the matter.
    I course I realise this, more than most. Its something I have really
    looked at in detail (http://www.anasoft.co.uk/replicators/index.html)

    Its simply irrelevant as to how and why our emotions come about, i.e
    wanting to live. We *have* them, and there is f'all we can do about it.
    I enjoy being alive, its matters diddly squat that such enjoyment is
    pointless.

    Kevin Aylward

    http://www.anasoft.co.uk
    SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
    Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
    Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
     
    Kevin Aylward, Jan 21, 2005
    #88
  9. As I noted, and noted that I noted, its not for its *own* sake. The
    carrot simply doesn't care. It cant. It cant feel. Its truly that
    simple. We look after carrots because of their value to us, not to them.

    Its completely daft to respect a non conscious object for its own sake.
    Think about what you are really saying dude. Its no different from
    claiming a baseball bat should be respected.
    So what. A P4 has unconscious goals, are we to give it rights as well?

    Unconscious goals are simple *not* sufficient to delimit life. We need
    more.
    Its not an explanation. Its was subjective waffle.
    I was simply simplifying things to avoid a drawn out argument. A fetus
    with no brain has no feelings to care about.

    My point here was yeah, sure they may be a few bits and bobs associated
    with neural connections, but in no way whatsoever, is they anything that
    could be considered consciousness.
    Nope. The real data is somewhere after 3 months up to birth.

    Look, one has to face facts. It is not *what* we are made of that makes
    us, its how what makes us is *arranged*.

    You cant get divorce yourself of the idea that we are truly a machine.
    You think that our individual materials are special. They are not, other
    than they are what makes consciousness.
    But in my view, you opinion is made based on ill-informed prejudice
    originating from your past, when you had little science to justify your
    ideas. You are still relying on faith.

    The chemicals of life are not special, that is, the chemicals by
    themselves do not clasify something uniquly as "life". So basing ones
    ideas on that idea that is flawed.
    Yes, it is an opinion, but one that is based on sound reasoning from
    known facts.

    Give me an *argument* why consciousness should not be the the decider.
    All you have done is state "life begins at conception". I counter this
    with, how can you consider the feelings of a blob of chemicals if it
    doesn't have any feelings?

    It just makes no rational sense whatsoever. We care about sliocing up
    babies becuse we know it hurts us, and we know that babies are hurt,
    i.e. we both feel. We are both aware. Thats what *is* key. No matter how
    much you try and ignore it.
    No. It simply hasn't sunk into you what is really being said, and what
    the truth of life really is.

    Forget your *faith* in your view, and actually try and convince
    yourselves with a *logical* *argument* why a bunch oh molecules,
    undergoing behaviour subject to the shrodinger equation should be given
    respect.

    When an explanation appears nebulous, it usually is.

    You must have some religious bent.[/QUOTE]
    [/QUOTE]

    Sure, but you concept of relevant "life" is flawed. There is no relevant
    "life" in a 2 month foetus. Its just a bunch of chemicals.
    Not at all. This is *your* personal concept of "life". You are using the
    same word with one meaning in one context and another in a different
    context to claim that support in one context means support in another.
    Sure, biologists use the concept of "life" when referring to say,
    bacteria or viruses, but this has nothing to do with "life" as referred
    to us humans.

    Human life is the total arrangement of the chemicals. It is the
    arrangement that matters, not the building components.

    This is obvious in that it would be hard to deny the possibility of
    manufacturing consciousness without DNA. DNA is simply not sufficient or
    necessary for human type life, imo, of course.
    Not necessarily. Definitions of typicall life usually involve aspects of
    self-replication, and other such fine details.

    In principle, we could artificially construct something that is
    conscious, but not "life" in any of our usually definitions.

    If something is conscious are you suggesting that its ok to pull its
    plug?

    Relevant life is an *emergent* property of its parts. The parts, by
    themselves, have no reverence. And I mean reverence, not relevance.
    Irrelevant, and not necessarily true by your simplified definition of
    "life".

    "It is not what we are made of that makes us, its how what makes us is
    arranged"


    Kevin Aylward

    http://www.anasoft.co.uk
    SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
    Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
    Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
     
    Kevin Aylward, Jan 21, 2005
    #89
  10. Aunty Kreist

    ^reaper^ Guest

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    In <
    http://snipurl.com/transcranmagstim

    ^reaper^


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

    iQA/AwUBQfDZHFMeYoHj2dI5EQL2+gCfXAfm+NlEkDaAB+mgbTKQ1pGslo8An3EO
    a/QGBjHzjyTd4B7M1w6tPDwW
    =jSvZ
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    ^reaper^, Jan 21, 2005
    #90
  11. How about, "When it exists."?

    A fetus is not a human. A pregnant woman is ONE person, who happens to be
    pregnant. Her fetus is composed entirely of molecules provided by her,
    just like any other organ.

    There's this little event, called "the miracle of childbirth", in which
    this one pregnant person goes through Hell, and then suddenly, there are
    two people.

    It's just that simple.

    If you want iron-fisted control of other people's bodies, wouldn't it make
    more sense to ban tattoos and piercings and other self-mutilation?

    But religious fanatics have already checked their brains at the door.

    Thanks,
    Rich
     
    Richard the Dreaded Libertarian, Jan 21, 2005
    #91
  12. Has anybody ever seen "pro-lifers" (now there's a contradiction!) lining
    up at the adoption agency to feed those unwanted screaming poop machines?

    Feh.
     
    Richard the Dreaded Libertarian, Jan 21, 2005
    #92
  13. I like them. Sometimes they inspire my butthole to sing!

    Cheers!
    Rich
     
    Richard the Dreaded Libertarian, Jan 21, 2005
    #93
  14. Or, we could heal our denials and judgements, and manifest Heaven on Earth
    at our leisure:
    http://www.godchannel.com

    Good Luck!
    Rich
     
    Rich The Philosophizer, Jan 21, 2005
    #94
  15. So, you _are_ God. "Revenge is mine, saith the lord".

    Or maybe you just think you are.

    Thanks,
    Rich
     
    Rich The Philosophizer, Jan 21, 2005
    #95
  16. If killing is "wrong", then killing is wrong, no matter how big a lynch
    mob you can put together.

    Thanks,
    Rich
     
    Rich The Philosophizer, Jan 21, 2005
    #96
  17. I read in sci.electronics.design that Kevin Aylward
    lueyonder.co.uk>) about 'Peterson's Death Sentence', on Fri, 21 Jan
    2005:
    That would be a REALLY big step. It might even help us to understand
    what 'conscious' means. Beyond 'conscious' is 'sentient' - ability to
    think as well as react.
     
    John Woodgate, Jan 21, 2005
    #97
  18. (in <>) about 'Peterson's Death Sentence',
    He was called 'Confessor' due to exhibitions of piety, but his real
    character is controversial - some say he was weak and cruel. He was
    certainly a very bad politician - antagonizing his strongest potential
    opponents by slighting them.
     
    John Woodgate, Jan 21, 2005
    #98
  19. "Kevin Aylward" <> schreef in bericht

    [snip]
    I agree with you Kevin, including all portions that I snipped.
    But this is just all smoke screens. It has nothing to do with
    respect for life and/or consiousness, whenever that sets in, after
    two months or three. The pro-lifers kill living animals too and
    have them for lunch if not breakfast.

    No, it's all about the girl has been naughty, she had her bit of fun,
    and as an example to the rest of the narrow-minded community of
    peasants, she has to give birth to the baby. Period. It has been
    that way for centuries.

    The truth is that 'respect for life' is a much more complicated
    area and these pro-lifers are the last ones to understand a bit
    about it. They blindly focus on the abortion issue, make it the
    center of their peanut-sized universe, while the abortion issue
    is only a very very minor bit of what makes up 'respect for life'
    in the first place.

    Where was the 'respect for life' in the Iraq war? To hell with
    these pro-lifers and their retarded ideas.

    [snip]
     
    Frank Bemelman, Jan 21, 2005
    #99
  20. Aunty Kreist

    Rhyanon Guest

    No, xstain whoreson, I will support a woman's right to CHOOSE what to do
    with HER body no matter what, and there ain't shit some stupid fuckless man
    can do about it. Nor a balless eunuch like you, either.
     
    Rhyanon, Jan 21, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.