Gfted1

Ive heard it as "Live hard, die young, leave a good looking corpse." Anywho, WTF, did this family recently handle the Hope diamond or open a tomb? They gots the BIG MOJO CURSE on them!

No apology necessary. I suppose I sould clarify myself. Im not against cures for diseases or even so much for subsidizing the cost (although it does rankle me a little). Im against the government MANDATING anything medically that does not effect the wellbeing of the populous. I would also be against a MANDATED HIV vaccine. Not because its not a good thing, not because you would be an idiot not to get it, but because in those examples (non-communicable) they have no business in your body. Now regarding parents who "just cant be arsed" to educate and provide a ride to the clinic, well tbh, thats their problem. We do not need a nanny government that attemts to MANDATE every aspect of our health. Money is one issue (see subsidizing) but just plain ole dont give a damn isnt an excuse for the government to step in.

Or try www.housegun.com Hehe, this cracked me up: Imagine looking down and seeing 20 laser dots on your chest.

For a mere $55.00 you can get a CPU upgrade? I say go for it. How big of a jump up is it over your existing CPU?

So in lue of even the most basic parenting skills you advocate the government "taking charge" of those pesky decisions and deciding for you? Well, youve got me there, I have no adequate response for that.

Eh? How did you get that from what I just typed? If it isnt "mandated" doesnt mean it ceases to exist. You want it, trot you daughter on down to the obgyn and get it. Whats the big deal?

Im not arguing against a cure. I disapprove of the delivery. Protecting the general public against the most common and easily transmittable virus is just good business. Its the targeting of niche, non-trasmittable viruses and then mandating innoculation that raises my hackles. Throw in the $6,000.00 kickback, I mean donation, his election fund received from the very maker of the drug and the whole thing stinks to hell.

I find it disturbing that the multitude of psychological tests she undoubtedly took failed to identify such a glaring flaw.

From the original link:

My point has nothing to do with the act of sex and everything to do with the manner of contraction. Mandating vaccination for a virus thats non-transimittable through convention means and only effect a niche of the population is akin to mandating a balanced diet. As a matter of fact, Id wager the govenor of TX would better serve his constituency by enforcing such a mandate. Think of the billions of state dollars saved in obesity related health issues and the thousands of people saved from themselves!

I may have missed something about cervical cancer, but I'll wager you can get it without having sex. I may be off base but iirc, this particular vaccination is for a cancer caused by HPV (Human Papilloma Virus (SP?)) which I think can only be contracted though sex. So thats my point, all current "must have" vaccinations for public school are for viruses that are easily trasmitted via touch or air, and hence they make sense to have in place for the greater good of the community. This is not the case with this vaccine which treats a virus you cant get just walking about.

*is flabbergasted* Nathan sure does get around. Invisible Mans solution to an overloading Peter was pretty funny.

^I thought the "no children killed" thing was only for certain countries that outlawed it.

What every one of you has failed to notice is that cancer is not an airborn communicable disease so immunization isnt "required" like the other examples that have been cited. This is not "for the greater good" as all anyone has to do to prevent this cancer is have safe sex.

The Wicker Man: Includes Ending Not Shown In Theaters! Total garbage. Not sure of the ending shown in theaters but in this one I mean seriously, this cult of women plans YEARS ahead to dupe a guy into coming to the island JUST IN CASE they have a bad crop one year and need to burn him up in a sacrifice? Lamest. Plot . Evar.

Go me.

Eh, its not like we have closed borders or anything. Every sigle immigrant is afforded the opportunity to legally enter the country, some simply choose the easier route. It has nothing to do with them, and their poor family, being screwed out of opportunities.

^Wow, impressive!

Yes. Because operating outside of the law is so much fun, everyone wants to do it! Edited for DRAMA! No, only about 50% of them. Actually, you should re-read the article. It's more about the increasing efficiency in identifying illegal immigrants in US jails and prisons so they can be deported, than an actual study on the proportion of criminal illegals. There isn't a direct relation between the fact that 50% of the deported illegal immigrants last year had criminal records and the actual proportion of illegal immigrant criminals. After all, it makes sense that criminals have more chances of being deported than non-criminals. EDIT: damn I'm dense today. I understand the intention of the article, I just thought it had a little tie-in to your statement. However, I dont understand your second paragraph. The way I read that is, out of all the people deported last year (not just the ones already in jail) roughly 50% had existing criminal records. IMO, I feel that does show some cause and effect. People already predisposed to crime have no qualms about breaking more laws to further their own gain/status (such as illegally immigrating).

Yes. Because operating outside of the law is so much fun, everyone wants to do it! Edited for DRAMA! No, only about 50% of them.

lol i wonder what the temp means I get a 404 error for about half a second before the site calls me a bad, bad man for blocking ads. Lol, same here. OH NOES!!!!11

^What game is that?

Your quote fully supports degawinda's statement. I stand corrected. It wasnt an attempt to "call him out", I simply misread it while looking up the word "parthenogenesis". And really, you dont always have to get so excited every time someone posts a counter-point.

This statement seems to contradict deganawida's: