GStwin.com GS500 Message Forum

Quote from: daviputarzanboy, you sir are a idiot. that is all I am going to say on the subject.
the both of you need to read two wheels through terror
http://www.whitehorsepress.com/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=4&products_id=4809
......

Why are you trying to pick a fight.  There are plenty of other forums filled with jerks and assorted trolls.   Go visit them if you want to have a flame war. I don't have a problem with being told (even pointedly) that I may be incorrect.... but if you can't respond with any modicum of respect then i'll thank you to keep whatever opinion you have of me to yourself and off the message board.

You were out of line.  Period.

This sort of thing belongs in a PM.

no no...he was drunk, period.

no no. its what he does. and you got off fairly easily compared to some of his other posts. and btw dont take it so seriously that just davipu. he is probally serious about loaning you that book if that tells you anything.

-ash

Quote from: aaronstjThis sort of thing belongs in a PM.

While I agree this belongs in a PM, so does calling someone an idiot if you feel it is necessary to do so.  :thumb:

Tarzanboy - I agree there is no excuse for being impolite to anyone from anyone. From the posts I've read, he is usually jesting (albeit a little hardcore sometimes). I am hoping that is the case here  :thumb:

Let's just be nice to eachother and talk about things like bikes and "purple lesbiens"  :mrgreen:

Quote from: Phaedrus

Quote from: aaronstjThis sort of thing belongs in a PM.

While I agree this belongs in a PM, so does calling someone an idiot if you feel it is necessary to do so.  :thumb:

Tarzanboy - I agree there is no excuse for being impolite to anyone from anyone. From the posts I've read, he is usually jesting (albeit a little hardcore sometimes). I am hoping that is the case here  :thumb:

Let's just be nice to eachother and talk about things like bikes and "purple lesbiens"  :mrgreen:

why do you make it so complicated...this would have sufficed:

"can we all just get along?"

I'm surprised that you're making excuses for him.  

Why should the fact that being insulting is his regular behavior be some some sort excuse or pass for him to keep on doing it.   Shouldn't the opposite be true?

To put it bluntly, i expect a lot better than that from this site/message board in particular (which prides itself on being friendly).

As i said before, its not difficult to find trolls elsewhere.  If davipu's comportance is the expected norm, then I might be mistaken about the folks on this board in general.

Quote from: TarzanBoyI'm surprised that you're making excuses for him.  

Why should the fact that being insulting is his regular behavior be some some sort excuse or pass for him to keep on doing it.   Shouldn't the opposite be true?

To put it bluntly, i expect a lot better than that from this site/message board in particular (which prides itself on being friendly).

As i said before, its not difficult to find trolls elsewhere.  If davipu's comportance is the expected norm, then I might be mistaken about the folks on this board in general.

You raise a very valid point Tarzanboy. You really do.  :thumb:

yes, we collectively might be more mature than others but that doesn't mean it'll be abosolutely davipu-free...

I consiter this site like a family. we may not all exactly enjoy each other or get along but we are a group bound by a lil 482CC motorcycle called the gs500.  So you know what? I'll stand up for Davipu you dont like the kinda person he is or this board then tuff nuts man. Cuz davipu and most everyone on this board will help you out when you need it. maybe you havnt been around long enuff to know it. but sorry man, maybe you should take a chill pill. he didnt piss in your cornflakes come on now. geez.

-ash

attn Moderators: please throw this into the ODDs and ENDs.  :lol:

He just about 'pissed in my cornflakes' as much as possible given that this is an internet message board.

I still find it surprising that davipu is the one who did the insulting (unprovoked, I might add), and yet here you are telling me that I am the one who should adjust my attitude/behavior.  

Why not also tell him to stoping being a jerk to other posters for no reason.

Well, not to defend what he said... But, he did say he was drunk in the post.   :oops:

Quote from: ashmanI consiter this site like a family. we may not all exactly enjoy each other or get along but we are a group bound by a lil 482CC motorcycle called the gs500.  So you know what? I'll stand up for Davipu you dont like the kinda person he is or this board then tuff nuts man. Cuz davipu and most everyone on this board will help you out when you need it. maybe you havnt been around long enuff to know it. but sorry man, maybe you should take a chill pill. he didnt piss in your cornflakes come on now. geez.

-ash

attn Moderators: please throw this into the ODDs and ENDs.  :lol:

Yea I might also stand by you ... OK lets say I will as soon as it becomes a lil 482 CC bike ...  :lol:  ... OK ...
Cool.
Srinath.

5CC worth of carbon build up?

Quote from: TarzanBoy
I still find it surprising that davipu is the one who did the insulting (unprovoked, I might add), and yet here you are telling me that I am the one who should adjust my attitude/behavior.  

Why not also tell him to stoping being a jerk to other posters for no reason.

Look man.  I know you want someone to kiss your boo-boo and make it all better, but it ain't gonna happen.  And I know you want the internet nice police to bat him in the knee, but that ain't gonna happen either.  Crying about it in a new thread was probably not ever going to help you, and opens you up to all kinds of new ridicule.  Others have already told davipu to be nice and guess what, he doesn't want to.  Grow a thicker skin, and move on with your life.

Davipu is just one of the characters that make this forum fun, just because you consider us the "poster children" of motorcycles forums doesn't mean we are all angels all the time, so I guess you gotta get used to it or just ignore him.  People have to remember we are online...it's not the same as real life, when you turn off your computer it all goes away.

Quote from: SuZuki10when you turn off your computer it all goes away.

These things turn off?   :?

Quote from: SuZuki10Davipu is just one of the characters that make this forum fun, just because you consider us the "poster children" of motorcycles forums doesn't mean we are all angels all the time, so I guess you gotta get used to it or just ignore him.  People have to remember we are online...it's not the same as real life, when you turn off your computer it all goes away.

davipu is our drunk mascot...i don't remember the last time he said anything useful  :P  :cheers:

Quote from: RVertigo

Quote from: SuZuki10when you turn off your computer it all goes away.

These things turn off?   :?

noooo...dont ever turn off your monitor. it turns off the internet too. just turn off your brain at night.

No one else is going to say it, so I guess I will  :lol:

In between his drunken ramblings, he really knows what the hell is he talking about. I think people respect that, and that is why it is overlooked that he can be a complete jackass sometimes.

Does that make it right? Of course not, but since this is such an open forum, people are going to post whatever they want. I can be a complete jackass sometimes also.  :lol:

And there isn't anything stopping you from telling him to go f&^% himself, either. If it makes you feel better, tell him. No one is going to blame you.

I think what everyone is saying is to let it get to you. It isn't right, but it isn't really worth worrying about, either. What can be done about it?  :dunno:

Besides, Roadstergal has a crush on him, and she's a moderator, so there's nothing we can do.  :lol:

:o When did THAT happen?

Crap!  I'm outa here!!!



:lol:

Quote from: PhaedrusI think what everyone is saying is to let it get to you. It isn't right, but it isn't really worth worrying about, either. What can be done about it?  :dunno:

Is that right? I think what people are trying to say is, "DON'T let it get to you"

:lol: :mrgreen:  :mrgreen:  :lol:

Yeah, Don't forget, It IS the internet. Internet = real life x crazy woman x 6 year old x peta member x drunk.

Check it out, you met 1/5th of the internet. :mrgreen:

Quote from: PhaedrusNo one else is going to say it, so I guess I will  :lol:

In between his drunken ramblings, he really knows what the hell is he talking about. I think people respect that, and that is why it is overlooked that he can be a complete jackass sometimes.

Does that make it right? Of course not, but since this is such an open forum, people are going to post whatever they want. I can be a complete jackass sometimes also.  :lol:

And there isn't anything stopping you from telling him to go f&^% himself, either. If it makes you feel better, tell him. No one is going to blame you.

I think what everyone is saying is to let it get to you. It isn't right, but it isn't really worth worrying about, either. What can be done about it?  :dunno:

+1

you have to tell him to %@&# off right there and then (you don't really mean it though). but you can tell him off. basic rule of thumb is we should be more tolerant of others on online forums. on the flip side, you can be more rude than in real life. if you think about it, it's really quite different different than "in person". i even say stuff that i would not say in person, like calling pandy a purple lesbien. wait...nevermind, she IS a purple lesbie(a)n!

well, those are the rule whether you like it or not.

Quote from: NightRyderYeah, Don't forget, It IS the internet. Internet = real life x crazy woman x 6 year old x peta member x drunk.

Careful or us PETA members will gang up and kick your @$$!!
Guess thats 1/3rd now...

Quote from: aaronstjBesides, Roadstergal has a crush on him, and she's a moderator, so there's nothing we can do.  :lol:

what? rg has davipu's baby??  :o

As someone said already. Just fight back and go off on him. Shoot from the hip and then keep on shooting until people start accusing you being an e-tuff guy or whatever the girls call it. :guns:  Now at this point you can ask questions. So, shoot first and then ask questions. :)

In his davipu's defense, he does seem like a good guy. He was going to give me something for nothing and I have never even talked to the guy. It came out of him and I was shocked, but it shows that he is a good guy.

Yeah, but thoes drunks and crazy women will get in the way, and I'll just run off. Plus that real life part comes into play, and BOOM it's all over.

 :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

You forgot crazy perverted old men who talk to the cops pretending to be 6 year olds and make plans to meet up at the mall!!!!  

And stalkers ex boyfriends  

you can't just say crazy women.

I can too. Doesn't mean it's right, but I can.

You can add in thoes. It will only cost you a dollar.

Quote from: ashmanCuz davipu and most everyone on this board will help you out when you need it.
-ash

:thumb: ash

When I broke a valve in my 02 GS last April due to a sticking bucket, davipu IM'd me right away offering a valve and buckets.  Not knowing what I needed I waited to reply till I tore down the engine a week or so later and then IM'd Dave back to see if he still had the extra parts.  He did and immediately mailed me an exhaust valve and 4 buckets and wanted no payment for them.  Just wanted to help a fellow GSer out.

First time I saw a post like TarzanBoy is complaining about from Dave, I clicked on his profile and on the list of his posts and read a few.  The pattern was clear and I've enjoyed davipu's posts ever since.   :)  Dave readily admits when he's posting under the influence almost bragging about it.  Well, I know where he's coming from and have been there.

OK, time to vote-

davipu            :thumb:

TarzanBoy         :dunno:

C'mon Tarzanboy, like JetSwing said  "can we all just get along?"

My girlfriend is a PETA member. They can get pretty aggressive  :P

Davipu called me a geek once but I thought it was interesting and it didn't make me mad.  I have always liked Davipu because I'm a drunk too!  


Brrrraaaaaaap!

Quote from: gsJackDave readily admits when he's posting under the influence almost bragging about it.

I usually just assume that it is all the time, really.:lol: But I agree. He's helped me out before, and since I can be just as harsh at times I don't hold it against him.

there is nothing more impolite and offincive than a brash young american showing his stupidity through comments on a subject that he is rather ill imformed upon.

and the last time I checked the republicans were in office so we don't have to get along. we just need more oil.

Quote from: PhaedrusMy girlfriend is a PETA member. They can get pretty aggressive  :P

That's what way of putting it.  Another way of putting it is, they're an extremist terrorist organization.

"Arson, property destruction, burglary, and theft are acceptable crimes when used for the animal cause." (Alex Pacheco, director of PETA at the time, and its co-founder, in 1989)

I'm a member of People for the Eating of Tasty Animals. :thumb:

Quote from: RVertigoI'm a member of People for the Eating of Tasty Animals. :thumb:

:thumb:

Quote from: RVertigoI'm a member of People for the Eating of Tasty Animals. :thumb:

I had a hamburger the other day, and I had it cooked medium rare. Oh man. It was so freakin' good.

I'm sorry for who this offends, but this is the truth. I use it on my board when needed.


(http://sohchonda.com/ipw-web/gallery/albums/d15z6/Argue.jpg)

Quote from: aaronstjThat's what way of putting it.  Another way of putting it is, they're an extremist terrorist organization.

"Arson, property destruction, burglary, and theft are acceptable crimes when used for the animal cause." (Alex Pacheco, director of PETA at the time, and its co-founder, in 1989)

I love how often that quote is thrown around. Who know the story behind it? Who knows in what context it was said? who knows any damned thing about it other than a PETA founder said it? Yeah, didn't think so. I always like the quote from the current leader:

QuoteOur nonviolent tactics are not as effective. We ask nicely for years and get nothing. Someone makes a threat, and it works.

Which was in defense of the actions of another group. Blowing up a slaughter house is more effective that asking the owners to do something. But, PETA doesn't do it. Alex Pacheco was, is and always will be an extreamist in every sense of the word. He worked on ships that went around sinking whaling ships before he, and a large number of others, started PETA. He's suspected to be part of an organization that are on the terrorist list. How many people have they killed? None. Zero. They would ram ships in order to shink them, giving people plenty of time to grab a life jacket. None of these terrorists are wanted for murder or terrorism of any kind. They are wanted for vandalism, breaking and entery, theft, and so forth. Grouping them in with al Quida is just plain rediculous. Hell, even Alex isn't breaking any laws and is granted tax-exempt status and protection by the UN.

People like to do what they are used to doing, and they have the ignorant view that PETA wants to turn everyone into a vegan. PETA is a political organization. They don't blow things up, they don't kill people and they don't run around spraying people with blood or paint. They're members might, and some riders are 1%ers and squids. That obviously doesn't mean PETA condones it (they simply don't condemn it, grab a dictionary).

What PETA actually does is talk to ranchers, slaugher houses and fast food companies to have the lifestock treated better. Recently they've been tryinf to get another 1/2 square feet per chicken in slaugher houses. This will reduce the number of suicides and violent behavior of the chickens. They figure that will be enough to end the debeaking practices. They want uniform breading and size of poultry in order to be able to mechanize the butchering process. This makes the process less painful. Repeat after me: PETA is full of wimpy little pencil pushing WASPs, which is precisly why guys like Alex left long ago.

PETA isn't trying to outlaw eating meat and the majority of members eat meat. So enjoy your burger, and stop bitching about things you don't understand.

Not just a member of PETA, I'm also a member of PASTA.

People for the Adorning of STylish Animals.

:thumb:

Heh, that picture never gets old. It is soo true.

It is like arguing over religion or politics, in the end nothing happens.

EDIT: uh... right. PETA is ____. That is fine. It just poped into my mind when I wrote that.

Has anyone seen the Penn & Teller: Bullshit! ? They have an episode about PETA, not that I have seen that one. One day..

I'm vegetarian.

Quote from: gsJack

Quote from: ashmanCuz davipu and most everyone on this board will help you out when you need it.
-ash

:thumb: ash

When I broke a valve in my 02 GS last April due to a sticking bucket, davipu IM'd me right away offering a valve and buckets.  Not knowing what I needed I waited to reply till I tore down the engine a week or so later and then IM'd Dave back to see if he still had the extra parts.  He did and immediately mailed me an exhaust valve and 4 buckets and wanted no payment for them.  Just wanted to help a fellow GSer out.

First time I saw a post like TarzanBoy is complaining about from Dave, I clicked on his profile and on the list of his posts and read a few.  The pattern was clear and I've enjoyed davipu's posts ever since.   :)  Dave readily admits when he's posting under the influence almost bragging about it.  Well, I know where he's coming from and have been there.

OK, time to vote-

davipu            :thumb:

TarzanBoy         :dunno:

C'mon Tarzanboy, like JetSwing said  "can we all just get along?"

. or cant we all just get a bong, hes (davipu) kinda pissed me off in the past, but i just drank a lil more and forgot all about it lol, oh yeah, WELCOME BACK GSJACK WHERE YA BEEN HIDIN?

Quote from: PhaedrusNo one else is going to say it, so I guess I will  :lol:

In between his drunken ramblings, he really knows what the hell is he talking about. I think people respect that, and that is why it is overlooked that he can be a complete jackass sometimes.

Does that make it right? Of course not, but since this is such an open forum, people are going to post whatever they want. I can be a complete jackass sometimes also.  :lol:

And there isn't anything stopping you from telling him to go f&^% himself, either. If it makes you feel better, tell him. No one is going to blame you.

I think what everyone is saying is to let it get to you. It isn't right, but it isn't really worth worrying about, either. What can be done about it?  :dunno:

This is basically the truest, most all encompassingly correct statement I have ever read on this thing called the internet.. Well played, Phaedrus.

dionysus - Very well said. Since my GF is a vegetarian and a PETA member, and I am a good boyfriend  :P , I listen to her when she tells me about this and that. She has never tried to stop me from eating meat. And she has friends (and both of her sisters) that are PETA members and vegetarians. None of them are crazy, extremists. They are some of the most level headed people I know actually.

Blingmasta - Thanks. I am glad someone could read though my "spelling and tiping eras"  :thumb:

Roadstergal - How long have you been vegetarian? Can I ask what your reasons are? Healthly diet? Activism? Just don't like meat? My GF stopped eating meat because she felt it was cruel to animals, but now swears by it for health reasons. We also have such an overwhelming amount of vegetarians at work (we only have about 400 employees) but our staff cafeteria ALWAYS has vegetarian alternatives.

Since high school.  For ethical and environmental reasons.  I don't have a problem with other people eating meat, even though I wouldn't do it myself, but the high rate at which we eat it and the farming practices we've fallen into to feed that are good for neither the animals nor the people who eat them.

I have friends who used to live in Bakersfield, and they're now vegans after seeing what it was they were eating.

<--- FARM KID


PETA can kiss my.....

Former farm kid.  Corn and soy.  Michigan.

Sorry, you're not my type.

I could easily go vegetarian if I didn't need all the protein. That, and I like bacon cheeseburgers too much. That's why I can't be Jewish either.

yeah but she is totally my type and completely hot!!!! :kiss:  :kiss:  :kiss:  :kiss:

Quote from: AlphaFire X5I could easily go vegetarian if I didn't need all the protein.

I get plenty of protein.

My daughter is a vegan, and my son a vegetarian.On a recent trip to Ithaca, NY, where my son attends college, we went to the Farm Animal Sanctuary at Watkins Glen.Its true our treatment of farm animals is pretty barbaric-i.e. "veal" lambs, crammming them into tiny spaces where they can hardly move etc. My wife and I are not quite vegetarian, but are working into it over time. I'm finding restaurants where the vegetarian or vegan food is so dam good, I don't miss meat at all-my favorite is a Jamaican/vegan place in Tacoma called Quickee Too.

lol...corn and soy doesn't count :roll:, try having livestock. You talk about ethical treatment of animals but you refer to factory farms. I'm from a 1200 acre family farm. We don't push cows to produce gallons more than they should be, we dont use rBGH, Its farming the way it should be. We eat our own meat, not the shaZam! that is locked up in cages for their entire life.  PETA tries to get rid of that, but ends up hurting the entire farming industry. They're extremists....

Quote from: Roadstergal

Quote from: AlphaFire X5I could easily go vegetarian if I didn't need all the protein.

I get plenty of protein.

I need a lot more protein than you do.

Quote from: AlphaFire X5I need a lot more protein than you do.

I don't think I buy that.  :)

Quote from: Onlypastrana199corn and soy doesn't count

For what?

Quote from: Onlypastrana199You talk about ethical treatment of animals but you refer to factory farms.

I'm very clear on that.

Pastrami - I think farming the way you do it is fine. I see absolutely nothing wrong with eating meat, but some places (factory farms) are extremely cruel. Farms like yours are the heart of America, though.  :thumb:

I could give up red meat pretty easily if it weren't for the occasional cheeseburger. But I would have an EXTREMELY difficult time giving up chicken, which is my favorite food.

Quote from: Roadstergal

Quote from: AlphaFire X5I need a lot more protein than you do.

I don't think I buy that.  :)

Psh. I'm a growing teenage boy who is trying to build muscle. I need a hell of a lot of protein. :)

Soy has a hell of a lot of protein.  So do beans.  And rice.  And eggs.  And peanut butter.

Quote from: Roadstergal

Quote from: Onlypastrana199corn and soy doesn't count

For what?

As farming.....sorry but growing shaZam! is more like gardening...

Quote from: aaronstjSoy has a hell of a lot of protein.  So do beans.  And rice.  And eggs.  And peanut butter.

Yeah, but there are different types of proteins. Meat combined with the others provides complete protein. Also, eggs have a lot of cholesterol (most vegetarians don't eat eggs, too), and peanut butter is high in fat. Rice doesn't have protein. It's a starch.

Quote from: dictionary.com
v. farmed, farming, farms
v. tr.

  1. To cultivate or produce a crop on.

Ja, and tending animals is like keeping pets.  :lol:  Complementary.

Trophically, you get much more energy from plants than animals.  Not to mention rapidly renewable fuel.

Quote from: AlphaFire X5Yeah, but there are different types of proteins. Meat combined with the others provides complete protein. Also, eggs have a lot of cholesterol (most vegetarians don't eat eggs, too), and peanut butter is high in fat. Rice doesn't have protein. It's a starch.

Rice has protein.  Grains and legumes, combined, provide all essential amino acids.

Quote from: RoadstergalRice has protein.  Grains and legumes, combined, provide all essential amino acids.

Depends on the type of rice. Dorm food isn't exactly easy to get your reccomended amount of protein from. Vegetables don't have the same protein:mass ratio that meat does. Fish are also excellent sources of this, but I'm not a big fan of seafood :(.

Quote from: RoadstergalI get plenty of protein.

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_054

:P

I apologize Roadstergal but it had to be mentioned.  :lol:

rice has some protein...and they're "good" protein. but you really want to eat brown rice which is one of the healthiest shaZam! you can eat. white rice is basically a brown rice minus all the nutrients (but it taste better).

Quote from: JetSwingrice has some protein...and they're "good" protein. but you really want to eat brown rice which is one of the healthiest shaZam! you can eat. white rice is basically a brown rice minus all the nutrients (but it taste better).

Yup. Take some brown rice and smother it in backed chiken and gravy and I am set.

Quote from: Phaedrus

Quote from: RoadstergalI get plenty of protein.

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_054

:P

I apologize Roadstergal but it had to be mentioned.  :lol:

:lol:  :lol:  :lol:

unrelated to above....you guys are making me hungry....!

Quote from: AlphaFire X5Vegetables don't have the same protein:mass ratio that meat does.

They do, actually - check a good rice (not that white shaZam!)/beans dish.  Protein, fiber, and less fat (and E.coli) than meat.

Ja, that Straight Dope was in the back of my mind, but I let it sit there...   :P

Quote from: Roadstergal

Quote from: AlphaFire X5Vegetables don't have the same protein:mass ratio that meat does.

They do, actually - check a good rice (not that white shaZam!)/beans dish.  Protein, fiber, and less fat (and E.coli) than meat.

Yeah, but good rice is hard to find in the dorm. And when you combine all that with meat and vegetables you've got a variety of flavors, proteins, nutrients, etc... I realize I could get a decent amount of protein, but I'd have to resort to eating tofu. I don't think I could handle that.

I'm not saying that vegetarians/vegans should eat meat or anything...I'm just saying that PETA sucks..there's better ways of getting good results without attacking everyone..family farms and small farms would probably GLADLY pair up with them if they were reasonable and help to get rid of factory farms.

Quote from: Onlypastrana199I'm not saying that vegetarians/vegans should eat meat or anything...I'm just saying that PETA sucks..there's better ways of getting good results without attacking everyone..family farms and small farms would probably GLADLY pair up with them if they were reasonable and help to get rid of factory farms.

+1. PETA is crazy. If they were reasonable in their methods they might be a worthwhile group. The AMA is effective. Why can't PETA be too?

Pastrami are you saying there are better ways than bombing them or stealing the animals and then burning the barns down?  That is a very un-American attitude you got there  :P

From what I know of PETA, they focus mostly on factory farms that supply food to the fast food chains.  :thumb:

That's like saying Christians suck because of the KKK.  As Niven says, there is no cause so just that you won't find an idiot following it.  PETA has the right idea, and it has a few followers who go nuts.

you do know what kind of meat (beef, chicken, pork, whatever) are coming out of those factories, right? they're "juiced", the kind of meat that slowly kills you. i know people who have worked at chicken factory and get all get sick just by handling the chickens. i'm talking about weird sicknesses like growing rashes on skin... :o

RG...u work in science how many animal studies have you done? Is that any less cruel that "farming" ? I doubt it, I've done research too, I know the kinda crap they do...

according to their own filings, PETA's animal shelters killed 86.4% of the animals they took in in 2004.


http://www.thisistrue.com/peta.html

Quote from: Onlypastrana199PETA sucks..there's better ways of getting good results without attacking everyone..

Just out of curiosity, since when is sending letters to congress, business and general people of power saying "hey, that sucks, do this" attacking everone? That was the point of my last post. People talk about PETA, but have no clue what the hell they are saying. PETA consists of a bunch of pencil pushers. The family farmers need to wake up, and consider talking to PETA not simply blame them for their problems.

Quote from: AlphaFire X5Yeah, but good rice is hard to find in the dorm. And when you combine all that with meat and vegetables you've got a variety of flavors, proteins, nutrients, etc... I realize I could get a decent amount of protein, but I'd have to resort to eating tofu. I don't think I could handle that.

The only thing thats in a meat-diet thats not trivial to find in a vegitable diet is B12, which is primarily produced by bacteria in the guts of animals. There are two factors with protein: how easy it is to digest, and how many AA it has. Soy ranks fairly low on both, but is much more protein rich. Keep in mind most protein comparison charts will compare "2oz" of tofu with meat. But, tofu is more than half water (probably way more) so you can eat a lot more of it. What's more important is percentage of calories that are protein.

But with dorm food? Uhm.. good like finding anything you can stomach for more than a month. And I'd get a good vitamin suppliment, since lacking vitamin/minerals can prevent the digestion of protein.

Quote from: PhaedrusPastrami - I think farming the way you do it is fine. I see absolutely nothing wrong with eating meat, but some places (factory farms) are extremely cruel. Farms like yours are the heart of America, though.

The "heart" in only a wishful way. Very, very, very, very little meat that a consumer buys comes from a family farm. A family farm simply can't afford to sell meat for $1 a pound.

Quote from: AlphaFire X5most vegetarians don't eat eggs, too

I wouldn't say most. I'd actually say a minority of "vegetarians". Vegans obviously dont. But most vegetarians are veggy for a few main reasons:

1) Ethical in which case they shouldn't be eating eggs but a good number haven't thought it through that far
2) Health in which case they can, if they limit their chol.
3) Environmental probably shouldn't

While I'm on the subject, one thing that typically annoys the hell out of most veggies* is the whole "I really don't eat much meat" routine. After the four thousandth time you hear it, it make you want to strangle people. Most veggies couldn't care less if you eat meat, its a personal decision.

*This is the opinion of most veggies I've know, what's yours RG?

Yeah those peta bitches show up in front of my work and I have to watch them til they leave.  Get a life you freaks!!!!!

Quote from: dionysus

Quote from: AlphaFire X5Yeah, but good rice is hard to find in the dorm. And when you combine all that with meat and vegetables you've got a variety of flavors, proteins, nutrients, etc... I realize I could get a decent amount of protein, but I'd have to resort to eating tofu. I don't think I could handle that.

The only thing thats in a meat-diet thats not trivial to find in a vegitable diet is B12, which is primarily produced by bacteria in the guts of animals. There are two factors with protein: how easy it is to digest, and how many AA it has. Soy ranks fairly low on both, but is much more protein rich. Keep in mind most protein comparison charts will compare "2oz" of tofu with meat. But, tofu is more than half water (probably way more) so you can eat a lot more of it. What's more important is percentage of calories that are protein.

Soy also has a lot of estrogen, which is not beneficial for a developing teenager. It messes with horomones and can affect your body's chemistry. Young men who take in high amounts of soy can get some serious problems out of it including impotence and other very non-productive things.

:lol:  I love where this thread has ended up. Wouldnt of guessed that in a million years.

-ash

um..what was the original post that started all this?

Quote from: jake42um..what was the original post that started all this?

Some guy complaining about davipu being an @$$hole when he's drunk.

Quote from: AlphaFire X5Soy also has a lot of estrogen, which is not beneficial for a developing teenager. It messes with horomones and can affect your body's chemistry. Young men who take in high amounts of soy can get some serious problems out of it including impotence and other very non-productive things.

Smart ass, no. Soy contains no estrogen. So contains compounds that can be used by the body to create estrogen. They're called isoflavenoids(sp?). This myth is based on the use of soy in dietary suppliments for middle aged women.

There has never been any study linking soy to impotence*, "very non-productive things", blindness and/or hair palms. There are many cultures with soy as a large portion of their diet, there are many, many millions of people that have consumed a large soy diet for their entire life. There's no evidance that its bad, and only very slight evidance that its better than anything else (not everything else, for the logically impaired). If you don't want to eat soy, fine withe me. Just shut your mouth about things you don't know.

Which brings my right back on topic (honest, it does read david's post). I was joking about us PETA freak!! Really, really I was!

*The first time I read that as "incontinence", damn would I be in trouble if that were true.

Quote from: jake42um..what was the original post that started all this?

davipu wrote in another post.
tarzanboy, you sir are a idiot. that is all I am going to say on the subject.


tarzanboy took offense to it, then it went to talk about peta or pita bread or something ;)

And specifically davidpu getting pissed at some asshat talking out of his ass.

Soy has no estrogen.  Plenty of teens have been raised veggie.

My connection sucks, so my ability to search pubmed is very limited.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15212753&query_hl=1

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12826028&query_hl=1

In fact, it's so shitty that D got to it first.

But even with a good connection, I was too lazy to search (and link) to pubmed. ;)

The first time I heard this was from a lady who latter claimed one brand of water was better because it had "smaller molecules". It may even have been atoms, but I'll give her the benifit of the doubt. No, not trying for a straw man I just thought it was funny as hell.

you were called an idiot....  The way I look at it you got off easier than I did awhile back.

I got called childish, a squid, squidly, and my favorite one was "cap'n fast n' furious".  This was all in one day.  At first it made me mad but hey I opened my mouth and said some stuff too.

Quote from: indestructiblemanaccording to their own filings, PETA's animal shelters killed 86.4% of the animals they took in in 2004.


http://www.thisistrue.com/peta.html

If given the choice between a lifetime of cruelty, disfigurement, and pain beyond comprehension and euthaniasia....I would choose euthanasia.

Depending on the level of disfigurement, I'd have to go with the disfigurement.

Quote from: Onlypastrana199RG...u work in science how many animal studies have you done? Is that any less cruel that "farming" ? I doubt it, I've done research too, I know the kinda crap they do...

Factory farming methods are much worse than the vast majority of research. And, you'll notice PETA also works against abuse in labs. But, compare a few thousand lab animals to tens (if not hundreds) of millions of livestock, and the priorities for PETA are kinda obvious. The type of farming methods PETA wants to stop are things like:

1) starving chickens to force them the into laying eggs
2) cutting the beaks, toes and occasionally feet/face off chickens to keep them from pecking each other, and themselves, to death. This is why peta is trying for another 1/2 square foot per bird so this practice is no longer needed.
3) nailing calves hoofs to the floor to produce veal
4) disposing of "used" egg-laying chickens by chucking them, while still alive, into wood chippers (the starvation prevents them from being useful for food)

Don't many factory farms also put an excessively heavy and short  chain around the neck of a calf so they cannot move so their meat is more tender?

That's pretty frocked up, too. There is no need for cruelty when the same results can be acheived without it, by paying just a little bit more. I'd pay $3 for a cheeseburger instead of $1. Anyone who wouldn't should remember karma.

the article says that the SPCA in PETA's home town finds homes for 73% of the animals taken in.

i've had several animals put down.  i realize it becomes a kindness at some point.  however, i'm skeptical that 86.4% of  the animals they bring in are really in that bad of shape.

Quote from: Blazinjr

Quote from: jake42um..what was the original post that started all this?

davipu wrote in another post.
tarzanboy, you sir are a idiot. that is all I am going to say on the subject.

You sir, are an idiot!

Since we came back around to this, don't people recognize this phrase as an old internet standby. It dates back to pre-web days on usenet etc. It is a ridiculously over the top response to someone you disagree with. I think it may be from Monty Python but not sure.

When someone posts  :nana:  :nana:  :nana:  I hope no one takes that seriously.

Quote from: Phaedrus

Quote from: indestructiblemanaccording to their own filings, PETA's animal shelters killed 86.4% of the animals they took in in 2004.


http://www.thisistrue.com/peta.html

If given the choice between a lifetime of cruelty, disfigurement, and pain beyond comprehension and euthaniasia....I would choose euthanasia.

There's also one other thing to consider. Dogs and cats are horribly over bred, and no one wants to rescue an animal they all want puppies/kittens. This means that the vast majority of resuced animals will never be adopted. So, all animal shelters are given two options, keep the animal in a kennel for the rest of its lives or kill it, and use the saved money/resources to rescue more animals. If you can hold/support 1000 animals, and 80% can't get homes your going to fill up with animals that have no chance of being adopted very, very fast while only 10% will die off each year from natural causes. After the first year, your supporting 800 animals that wont be adopted, thats something like $16k for food each year and 800 animals locked in a kennel.

In this case, almost all animal shelters will kill animals after 6mo to a year in order to free space for an animal that has half a chance of having a decent life. It sounds bad, but its either do a little to help them out or do nothing. Any "no-kill" shelter works by limiting the number of animals to a handful, which live with "foster parents". The only no-kill shelter in Riverside, CA has a whopping 2 dogs right now, and can't handle any more. They had a lot more, but the "foster" part just got dropped, and now those people have a few more dogs.

alright.  further research helps.  PETAkillsanimals.com is apparently run by the Center for Consumer Freedom, a food industry lobby.  so take enerything they say with a grain of deep-fried in partially hydrogenated oils salt.

they're under investigation by the IRS http://www.citizensforethics.org/press/newsrelease.php?view=5 because their taking of funds from the food industry may violate their Tax Exempt status.

here's another article on The Center http://www.consumerdeception.com/

i became suspicious reading their page about PETA's response.  they said that while PETA claims they REFER healthy animals to other shelters, records show they've only TRANSFERRED one animal in the last year.  sort of a bait-and-switch argument.

Quote from: callmelennyYou sir, are an idiot!

Jane, you ignorant my mama.

Is one of my favorites...but you've got to be careful where you use it these days.

You also get fun quotes like:

QuoteNot counting the dogs and cats PETA spayed and neutered, the group put to death over 85 percent of the animals it took in during 2003 alone

Which means, 85% of the animals that where NOT fixed were killed. And they also appear to be looking at a shelter that doesn't take in animals from people, but from other shelters. I'd be willing to bet those shelteres counted animals PETA took as "adopted". [/i]

Quote from: PhaedrusI'd pay $3 for a cheeseburger instead of $1.

And that is exactly the problem: most people won't.  This isn't restricted to animal treatment, either...overseas sweatshops are the result of exactly the same economics.  People (and by this I mean "The People", the unwashed masses) say they want quality, decency, and apple pie, but when it gets right down to it they want the cheapest product.  In many areas, you can certainly find meats and poultry that have been raised in humane ways (most likely sourced from the same types of farms Onlypastrana refers to), and these usually come at something of a premium price, but the masses still prefer their McMeat and McNuggets.

Quote from: PhaedrusDon't many factory farms also put an excessively heavy and short  chain around the neck of a calf so they cannot move so their meat is more tender?

Kobe beef is created by overfeeding the cattle, not letting them move around, and massaging them every day.  Cruel?  Sounds like a setup most couch potatoes aspire to.  I'm not trying to be glib, but the "cruelty" of the treatment is really a perspective thing.  (note:  I generally avoid eating, cooking, or purchasing veal...with the exception of the occasional stock).  A lot of folks gripe about dropping live lobster into a boiling pot, but it is very doubtful that they mind all that much. (besides, lobster are cannibalistic...if they can eat lobster, why can't we?)  

I admit, I'm a bit hypocritical about the 'ethics' of food...I don't eat fast food because I don't care for the way they engineer their livestock or the quality of the product; I generally don't eat veal because of the reasons you state; (I also don't shop at Wal-Mart because I don't care for the way they treat their employees and suppliers, but that's another subject); but I can't resist the occasional bit of foie gras...the poster child for inhumane food production (unforutnately, there isn't an alternate way of producing it.)

One note on the lobster side of things...at my new job at a local seafood shop, we cut up live lobster.  Take a big-ass serrated knife, cut 'em right down between their eyes, and start pulling their brains out.

It always comes down to how cute the animal is.  Dogs/cats are easy to pawn off on people, lobsters, not so much.

Oh yeah, davipu=asshat.

QuoteAny "no-kill" shelter works by limiting the number of animals to a handful, which live with "foster parents".

granted ive been out of that shelter business for 3 years now

must be nice to hand pick who you can save.   many of these no kill shelters also get drop off animals some of which they KNOW cant be saved, be it injury,sickness, or age.  these dogs/cats get shipped over to other shelters for the dirty work.  some folks will work with the no kills to basicly give and care for the animals untill they die. basicly sit death watch.

ive got my own pets, 3 cats, fish, ive had numerous dogs,birds,etc etc
ive seen em die, ive raised food animals,(rabbit) and being a CET ive Euthanized many many more then i can count for reasons like old age, failing health,injury,and overpopulation/owner carelessness.

tell me why is it we dont have this issue as bad with cows,pigs and chickens? (they have other issues but im refering to over population and unwanted animals?)  its because we eat them and otherwise use thier bodies for products.   i suppose eating dog and cat meat would be abit apaling to some.  but then, im sure the folks in the restraunts arnt staring as a cow getting butcherd up when they order, or have the family pig waggin its tail at the door when they come home from work.

while its true humans have treated all kinds of animals poorly, without real excuse or cause including feed animals.  many have learned other ways to do so with better respect FOR the animalss.  even though i eat meat and animal products and will NEVER give it up, i would support peta more if they were ONLY pushing for better treatment, and not to stop animal product consumption all together.  now like most organizations its got its fenatics and crazies, and most seem to be spokesperson's.

i agree, animals should be treated right.  its not wrong to eat an animal. its not wrong to work an animal, but basic respect should be used and Enforced.  There is middle ground, too bad neither side will listen to the middle.

sorry double post browser hicup

Tarzanboy, about the support Davipu got.
At work, we used to have a formula sheet for Bull sh*! resume's we used to get.  Kinda funny, but mostly true.

Knowledgable  = knows enough to be dangerous
Willing to help others  = opinionated
Confident   = always thinks they are right and everyone else is wrong
Team leader  = thinks everyone should listen to him/her.
Stands by their word = thick headed.
:)
No offense Davipu, i just read the formula sheet yesterday and found it amusing.

Dave gave me a part free of charge once.

Quote from: Blueknyti would support peta more if they were ONLY pushing for better treatment, and not to stop animal product consumption all together.

I find it ironic that if somehow the "anti-carnivore" crowd were successful in stopping the consumption of animal products, it would almost certainly result in the extinction of manylivestock species.  I don't think you'd ever see vast herds of wild dairy cows or flocks of chickens scurrying south for the winter.  These animals don't really have a place in the wild...they have been bred to be livestock.

Quote from: Badgerthey have been bred to be livestock.

*DING*

Most of the animals we eat and wear wouldn't be around if we didn't eat and wear them.   :dunno:  Leather looks cool and is protective.  Fur is warm.  Meat tastes soooo good... :thumb:

Quote from: Badger

Quote from: callmelennyYou sir, are an idiot!

Jane, you ignorant my mama.

:lol:  :lol:  :lol:   Thanks Badger, you made reading those 6 pages worthwile.

Quote from: jen_[ :lol:  :lol:  :lol:   Thanks Badger, you made reading those 6 pages worthwile.

No he didn't. Your just so desperate, that you just think he did. You really did just waste all that time. ;)

Quote from: dionysus

Quote from: jen_[ :lol:  :lol:  :lol:   Thanks Badger, you made reading those 6 pages worthwile.

No he didn't. Your just so desperate, that you just think he did. You really did just waste all that time. ;)

Yeah, well I know I did. :mrgreen:

Yeah, I'm so cheap I don't even buy $1 hamburgers. Maybe oncea month a $6 meal, but thats about it. :mrgreen: It's not that I don't like the food, I just don't like paying a ton of money for shitty burgers.

WHY does Wendy's come up as the first google hit for hamburgers?  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

If Davipu just stopped drinking this stuff he'd be fine..

http://www.arrogantbastard.com/index2.html

Completely off topic (or maybe this is on topic now?).  I was a vegetarian for about 12 years.  Then one night I was watching TV and subway had this awesome deal on 12 inch turkey subs.  Oh man, it looked good.  So I snuck out of the house (to avoid the wrath of my idol worshipping parents) and chowed down on a 12 inch turkey sub.  Man it was good.  For the next three weeks I made up for lost time.  I hit KFC, McDonalds, Burger King.. and oh yes.. Taco Bell.  I don't think I was "regular" for a whole month.. I had enough fiber to last for a damn life time.

while at that time they may not have any Place in the wild, they would make the attempt, they will break down fences and block roads to get to food and water.  or worse, knowing humans USE to tend to them would Follow humans around hoping to get food from them.  OR worse, have to kill them off for NO reason other then too many animals that have no place in the wild. Livestock is bred to numbers to feed the "Tribe/s" so they dont have to rely on munching roots through the winters when things dont grow that well. but perhaps thats it, its compititon between vegans 2 and 4 legged. if the 4 legged arnt around then there is more room to grow the weeds for the newly,unwillfully converted former carnivors.  Anti carnivores wont win completely of that im pretty sure. as stated i do belive the treatment of Food animals should be better but then while the ones holding the knife cant always be trusted for that, the ones holding the soybean cant be left souly to govern that either.

while many may argue there is NO reason to kill animals for food in this day an age, and we arnt living in the conditions like when we needed hunters and gatherers, we still have many going hungry each day.  lack of food? partly, lack of funds? yeah could be. i would imagine sprouts would increase in price if suddenly 1/2 the US alone decided no more meats, dairys, or eggs of any kind.  

na, stoping animal breeding and processing isnt the answer, folks giving up veal wont happen regretfully. Enforcement of better treatment is the only way.   but leave the meat eaters alone. :)

(http://www.arrogantbastard.com/images/intro.gif)

Quote from: Blueknytwhile many may argue there is NO reason to kill animals for food in this day an age, and we arnt living in the conditions like when we needed hunters and gatherers, we still have many going hungry each day.  lack of food? partly, lack of funds? yeah could be. i would imagine sprouts would increase in price if suddenly 1/2 the US alone decided no more meats, dairys, or eggs of any kind.

actually, you can feed more people off 100 acres of land planted with crops than 100 acres of land with cows grazing.

if everyone were vegetarian, ranching land could be used for growing crops, which would increase our food production, which could help the world hunger situation.

i do love a rare tenderloin filet, though.


cheers,
will

Is it just me or are a lot of people unable to read? Or, do they simply not understand that the large animal rights/welfare organizations really don't care about people eating meat? They just want the meat eaters to treat the animals that they live off of a bit of respect. The handful of organizations that want everyone to be vegitarian are usually full of nut jobs. Like the total morons that light feed truck of fire, where the logic in that?

For the argument that the animals would all die of. NO shaZam!. Guess what's gonna happen to them now? They'll be killed and eaten. The only difference is, if everyone were to miraculously stop eating meat, the current generation of cows would all die off. BUT THERE WOULD BE NO MORE BORN. No more born means fewer dead. Understand?

And yes, modern livestock have no place in the wild. Just like modern plants. Bannanas, for instance are about to die off, since they've been bred to suit a purpose and have a desease attacking them now. BFD. The species won't become extinct because they're kept all over the place for non-food reasons.

For starving, think about this. A cow weighs about 800# and provides around 400# of meat. A cow takes roughly 5 years for cattle to grow large enough to be slaughtered. Figuring a meager portion of 4oz per person per meal a cow can provide 1600 meals. Assuming a cow ate the same as an average human (4oz of beef 3 times a day). Thats 5475 meals. Even that ridiculous math, biased as far as I can go in favor of eating meat, opposes it. Of course, a cow is going to eat at leat 4 times that. Plus, it needs the room to live, to be slaughtered and butchered, etc, which could be farmed rather than used for animals.

Quote from: Blueknytbut perhaps thats it, its compititon between vegans 2 and 4 legged.

Are you suggesting we eat vegans?  Hmmmm...  :lol:

Vegetarians taste better ;)

Quote from: dionysusVegetarians taste better ;)

8)

Quote from: dionysusIs it just me or are a lot of people unable to read? Or, do they simply not understand that the large animal rights/welfare organizations really don't care about people eating meat?

I was specifically talking about anti-carnivores.  a.k.a.: militant vegetarians.  a.k.a.: the people that want to impose their will, ethics, and morals on others.  I do know the difference.

Quote from: dionysusNo more born means fewer dead. Understand?

Not really.  If the goal is to prevent animals from dying without regard to the survival of a species, the logical next step would be to kill off all the other carnivourous animals.  It's a little bit frightening to think about what this might do to the ecosystem.

I'd also submit that We (as a species) haven't had good success trying to willfully manipulate large-scale ecosystems...even with the best intentions (that is, without doing more damage than we prevented).

If you really want to be logical about things, the best thing to do most likely be to "thin the herd" of the human population...but that's not really a very popular position.

Look...I'm all for people who choose to be vegetarian, vegan, kosher, or whatever...for whatever reason they choose.  I also think causes to reduce unnecessary cruelty to animals are noble, but also seem to be plagued with the militant minority.  I also fall into the category of people willing to voice my opinion with my wallet and pay more for products from those that follow what I consider to be acceptable practices and not buy from those I don't...but I don't suffer from any delusions that the majority of the population will do the same....and:

I strongly believe that nothing will change unless there is an economic motivation.

Quote from: BadgerI'd also submit that We (as a species) haven't had good success trying to willfully manipulate large-scale ecosystems

Manipulation such as growing entire species just to feed ourselves, giving them hormones to make them grow bigger, and feeding them on themselves?

Backing off of that is less maniuplative than sustaining it.

And on the other hand, if all you care about is the human species, then you can feed a lot more of it on a diet that relies a lot less on meat.  So in that way, those who care about animals and humans and those who care about only humans, screw the animals, can find a common ground.

Quote from: BadgerNot really.  If the goal is to prevent animals from dying without regard to the survival of a species, the logical next step would be to kill off all the other carnivourous animals.  It's a little bit frightening to think about what this might do to the ecosystem.

I've never heard of anyone proposing killing off preditors.Humans, yes.. ;) Though, I'd have to admit I was a little disapointed at the end of Rainbow 6 when the ecoterrorists failed... ;)

QuoteI'd also submit that We (as a species) haven't had good success trying to willfully manipulate large-scale ecosystems...even with the best intentions (that is, without doing more damage than we prevented).

We, as a species, haven't been very good at many things other than pollution and overpopulation.

QuoteIf you really want to be logical about things, the best thing to do most likely be to "thin the herd" of the human population...but that's not really a very popular position.

Sounds good to me, birth control in water?

QuoteLook...I'm all for people who choose to be vegetarian, vegan, kosher, or whatever...for whatever reason they choose.  I also think causes to reduce unnecessary cruelty to animals are noble, but also seem to be plagued with the militant minority.

I guess it must be me, because I've never seen this "millitant minority" sure heard stories about them. But all second hand, from 25 years ago. Can't recall seing or reading a single instance of violent animal rights protests, but I was born in the 80s, so it could simply be leftover sentiment from before then.

QuoteI also fall into the category of people willing to voice my opinion with my wallet and pay more for products from those that follow what I consider to be acceptable practices and not buy from those I don't...

Cool! Keep it up!

Quote from: Roadstergal

Quote from: BadgerI'd also submit that We (as a species) haven't had good success trying to willfully manipulate large-scale ecosystems

Manipulation such as growing entire species just to feed ourselves, giving them hormones to make them grow bigger, and feeding them on themselves?

I knew someone was going to jump on this...I was more referring to introducing foreign sepecies to do population control of other foreign species we've inadvertently introduced, building dams and levies in general, trying to prevent wildfires (before 'controlled burns' were in vogue), and that kind of thing.  But...I didn't say we don't do it, I just pointed out that (in the long term) we haven't had good success.  Mad cow disease, anyone?  Bird flu?  You could probably extend it to potato blight, citrus cankar, and the banana thing that dionysus pointed out (hadn't heard of that one), and any of scores of other problems.  I think it's hard to discount that these things are the result of the manipulations you point out.  Thus I think the point still stands...not a good track record, we just haven't yet seen the final impact of our hubris.

Quote from: Roadstergal
And on the other hand, if all you care about is the human species, then you can feed a lot more of it on a diet that relies a lot less on meat.  So in that way, those who care about animals and humans and those who care about only humans, screw the animals, can find a common ground.

There is the other option:  trend toward -fewer- people, and thus the demand for all resources goes down (or at least stabilizes).  Regardless of how efficiently we can feed people, unrestricted population growth will inevitably allow consumption to outpace any efficiency.  I say, screw the humans.  I am of the opinion that We (as a species) are overly concerned with keeping people alive indefinitely, producing as many offspring as possible, and generally causing unsustainable population growth.

Like I said...not a very popular position.  I don't really hold the human race in general in very high regard sometimes.

That, and I'm in a grumpy mood today.

Quote from: Roadstergal

Quote from: dionysusVegetarians taste better ;)

8)

So do spinning instructors.  

8)  8)

Quote from: dionysusSounds good to me, birth control in water?

I'd settle for a 'breeding tax'...or a tax credit for sterilization with fewer than 2 children.  Remember:

Quote from: BadgerI strongly believe that nothing will change unless there is an economic motivation.

Screw the "breeding tax". What we need to do is stop giving such large tax breaks for people with children.

I think it is ABSURD that I can pay a good $4-5g a year and get nothing back, and my co workers who make the same amount get most, if not all, of their money back. One co-worker got back almost everything she paid in, because she has kids.

I say, if you have kids - YOU suport them - not me. Having children should not give anyone a tax break. Children are a CHOICE; a costly expensive yes, but still a choice.

Quote from: PhaedrusScrew the "breeding tax". What we need to do is stop giving such large tax breaks for people with children.

Sorry, I thought that was implied in the breeding tax.  Woudn't make much sense to tax people then give it right back, would it?

Quote from: PhaedrusI say, if you have kids - YOU suport them - not me. Having children should not give anyone a tax break. Children are a CHOICE; a costly expensive yes, but still a choice.

Must...resist...urge...to...post...about...current...administration's...policies. Gaaaaaah! That's probably the shortcut to the tard farm.

you mean to tell me you guys aren't in VHEMT?
http://www.vhemt.org/

it seems to me that we are lacking a predator at the top of the system.

Quote from: BadgerLike I said...not a very popular position.  I don't really hold the human race in general in very high regard sometimes.

I'm witcha.  Birth control is absofreakinglutely a big priority that is being ignored.  We're spending billions on fertility treatments when we have way too much fertility as a species.

Quote from: davipuit seems to me that we are lacking a predator at the top of the system.

You sir, are an idiot! (I was waiting for the right opportunity to say that, but could not hold it in any longer  :P )

Anyways, I think voluntary human extinction isn't as crazy as it sounds.  :o The site is interesting, anyway. Good find.

Quote from: davipuit seems to me that we are lacking a predator at the top of the system.

Are you looking for volunteers?   8)

Thats just great:

QuoteTwo is better than four, and one is twice as good as two, but to purposely set out to create even one more of us today is the moral equivalent of selling berths on a sinking ship.

Quote from: RoadstergalI'm witcha.  Birth control is absofreakinglutely a big priority that is being ignored.  We're spending billions on fertility treatments when we have way too much fertility as a species.

That's because the Republican God wants us to have 16 children each.  :dunno:

Quote from: pandy

Quote from: RoadstergalI'm witcha.  Birth control is absofreakinglutely a big priority that is being ignored.  We're spending billions on fertility treatments when we have way too much fertility as a species.

That's because the Republican God wants us to have 16 children each.  :dunno:

As long as they aren't very well educated.

Quotedavipu wrote:
it seems to me that we are lacking a predator at the top of the system.

Are you looking for volunteers?

yeah, I'm going to start a cult.


and how is that a idiotic statment? if we had a predetor that fed on humans we whouldn't have overpuplation problems.

From IRS Form 1040 instructions, Line 6c, Column (4):

QuoteIf you have a qualifying child, you may be able to take the child tax credit on line 51 and the additional child tax credit on line 67.

Those credits are, of course, in addition to the exemptions.

If there is a better indicator that the government wants people to "be fruitful and multiply" I haven't seen it.  I mean, give me a break...It's actually called the "additional child tax credit".  

I give up.

I would *like* to think it's due to the fact that children are not at fault for the fact that their parents might have had more children than they could afford. Most of the social programs (eg. Social Security, Welfare, etc) have come from the Democatic party. I wonder if this is true for the tax exemptions for children?

As a fiscal conservative, I do believe that we're in a world of money trouble in this country.

As a human being and a mother, I can't blame the children for something that's not their fault. Unfortunately, removing the tax exemptions would hurt those that are blameless: the children. Now, I couldn't disagree with the tax exemptions/credits disappearing when the parents reach a certain level of income, but that's not likely to happen under this administration.

Quote from: davipuif we had a predetor that fed on humans we whouldn't have overpuplation problems.

We have a few...

Disease...  Flu Pandemics...  AIDS...  Bubonic...  ETC!

Then we have territory, resource, and religious wars...

Quote from: davipuand how is that a idiotic statment? if we had a predetor that fed on humans we whouldn't have overpuplation problems.

It wasn't an idiotic statement. I was just being a smartass. Pay attention  :P

I love YOU's a smartass.

Quote from: pandyI would *like* to think it's due to the fact that children are not at fault for the fact that their parents might have had more children than they could afford. Most of the social programs (eg. Social Security, Welfare, etc) have come from the Democatic party. I wonder if this is true for the tax exemptions for children?

Just to clarify...what I referred to aren't exemptions, they are credits, and they are in addition to the exemptions.  One credit apparently wasn't enough, so they threw in another just for good measure.  They are not based on need, thus making them more like entitlements rather than social programs.

As someone who grew up on government assistance (I still can't look at unsliced cheese in the deli counter without feeling a little sad*), I understand that need-based services are necessary for exactly the reasons you state...there is no reason to punish the innocent.  I understand that there are people that need the funds...and there should be a way for those people to get the assistance they need.  However, providing a tax credit is just the goverment's way of incenting people to procreate.  Where's the tax credit for sterilization?  I know that as a DINK, my wife and I pay more in taxes than if we were both single....just another way that the goverment tries to encourage "correct" behavior through financial motivation...

Quote from: pandyAs a human being and a mother, I can't blame the children for something that's not their fault. Unfortunately, removing the tax exemptions would hurt those that are blameless: the children.

I'm not trying to be down on people that have children.  I hope I'm not being offensive (that's not my intent).  What I am railing against is the social, political, and economic encouragement and insistence that people have as many children as humanly possible.  This is illustrated by things like the national celebration when some asshat has 8 children (at the same time) by choice...and the resulting outpouring of social and financial support, as if they should be beatified for their 'miraculous' use of modern science.

Quote from: PandyNow, I couldn't disagree with the tax exemptions/credits disappearing when the parents reach a certain level of income, but that's not likely to happen under this administration.

To be fair, there are reductions that kick in above certain income levels.  I didn't look at the worksheet to figure out how they worked.

* One of the assistance programs in Massachusetts would provide some staples for families will children, this included things like a deli-sized block of uncut american cheese, 1lb commercial blocks of butter, and a few other things.  For a good deal of time, we pretty much survived on grilled-cheese sandwiches.  I'm not sure if other places have similar programs.

Quote from: davipuI love YOU's a smartass.

Pandy - So you are saying that working adults that choose to be single with no kids should have to pay more in taxes than those working adults who choose to have children?  :roll:  That hardly seems right.

Of course a cut off at this point would harm the children already in existence. But if there were a cut off date so in time the policy would be phased out, that would be ideal. That way, the children alive now would still benefit but in the future parents would have to take their financial status into consideration when having children. People would be more willing to stop and think "Gee, can I afford to support kids?" Less children would be born into poverty that way also.

In other words: Children are a choice. If you can not support them on your income, you should not have them, and you should not expect others who do not have kids to support them for you.

Quote from: PhaedrusPandy - So you are saying that working adults that choose to be single with no kids should have to pay more in taxes than those working adults who choose to have children?  :roll:  That hardly seems right.

Not only do childless people have to pay for other people's kids, we have to deal with their screaming kids and get really dirty looks when we ask the parent to take the screaming kid to the bathroom and drown them in the toilet.

So unfair.

Quote from: BadgerI'm not trying to be down on people that have children.  I hope I'm not being offensive (that's not my intent).  

I don't find you offensive at all. ;)  You're participating in a respectful exchange of ideas, and I respect you GREATLY for that!  :thumb:

Quote from: BadgerWhat I am railing against is the social, political, and economic encouragement and insistence that people have as many children as humanly possible.  This is illustrated by things like the national celebration when some asshat has 8 children (at the same time) by choice...and the resulting outpouring of social and financial support, as if they should be beatified for their 'miraculous' use of modern science.

I couldn't agree more with you here. I had one child by choice, partly because I don't even really LIKE children all that much ;), and partly because I felt that providing for one was what I could financially handle (and do it right), and partly because I didn't want to fill the world with little pandyz! Think of it as a public service of a sort.  :lol:

I absolutely agree that it's not in the best interests of our country, our wallets, or our planet to be having dozens of children (I think I heard a story of someone having had 16 children so far, and they're not sure if they're finished...appalling...adopt some children that are already here if you have that great a love of children!). I know this is a heated issue, and we all have differing opinions. I believe in financial responsibility, but we also need to provide for the innocents. Where do we find that balance? Well, that's a questions that Republicans and Democrats have been struggling with for decades. ;)

Quote from: RVertigoNot only do childless people have to pay for other people's kids, we have to deal with their screaming kids and get really dirty looks when we ask the parent to take the screaming kid to the bathroom and drown them in the toilet.
So unfair.

I feel the same way. *I* should not have to put up with other peoples' screaming little darlings, and I have the absolute WORST kid karma. No matter WHERE I go, there will be screaming children. People think I'm kidding until the spend a day with me or go to lunch with me! Then they learn! I'm not kidding! We choose to have a meal in the bar of some restaurants to lessen the likelyhood of children, and--I kid you not--a table of about FIVE children sat right next to us...in the BAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  :x

I believe that it's the parents who raise such little darlings who should be the ones who are drowned in the toilet!  :thumb:

Quote from: PhaedrusPandy - So you are saying that working adults that choose to be single with no kids should have to pay more in taxes than those working adults who choose to have children?  :roll:  That hardly seems right.

Not quite sure where I said that, but feel free to point it out to me!  :dunno:

Quote from: PhaedrusIn other words: Children are a choice. If you can not support them on your income, you should not have them, and you should not expect others who do not have kids to support them for you.

While I agree in principle with the above, I also have to say that this is a middle-class mentality. The poor might submit that they have just as much right to bear children as the rest of society.

In a perfect society, we wouldn't NEED social programs. Believe me, I'm all for financial responsibility... But, having been one of those starving, throw-away children that our society rails against, I just can't stand to see the children suffer. They're the innocents here. I'd like nothing better than to see ALL of our children happy, fed, and...  :lol: polite.

Is it fair for some to pay more than others?  :dunno: It's hard to say what's fair. I don't like paying as much as I do in taxes, especially when I know my tax dollars are going for $800 toilets, $300 hammers, and $50,000,000 elections that the people don't want. That $ could feed a lot of children.

Believe it or not, I'm not at all a bleeding heart... I'm one of the ruthless Republicans (who's been more for the Dems lately...well...for years now.... :roll: ), but I don't want to see the innocents suffer (even if I'm not too fond of the little darlings).

right to have children, fine, limit to what you can support and not rely on breeding to ensure your retirement care. or one kid after another to chain a husband down. that only works Half the time thesedays.

Quote from: Blueknytor one kid after another to chain a husband down. that only works Half the time these days.

You seem a bit cynical when it comes to the female half of our species, Blueknyt. ;)

I've known several women that have gotten pregnant to keep a man.  It didn't work in the long term...

Quote from: RVertigoI've known several women that have gotten pregnant to keep a man.  It didn't work in the long term...

Yup, I know they exist...I've known a couple of them myself. However, men can take responsibility for preventing unwanted pregnancy fairly easily!  :thumb:

Uh yeah...  Real damn easily.

But, when a man thinks they're off the hook 'cause the chick is on the pill, then men don't worry about it...

The person that controls the birth control controls the pregnancy.  That's why most women have the control.

Quote from: RVertigoThe person that controls the birth control controls the pregnancy.  That's why most women have the control.

Depends on what you are using as a contreceptive  :thumb:

I've made some rather poor decisions in my days..trust me.  :roll: But my rule now is that if I wouldn't want to have a child with her, then I don't go 'unwrapped'.

after rereading yeah, there were very few hits about men, save my own admissions anyway. Men can and often are just as bad.

and yeah, cant say all my dealings nor witnessing of the female species has been all  positive, but not all negitive either.  i will say at times its hard to figure out and while one must work at a relationship, it shouldnt be pushing a boulder up and endless mountain either.

i have one child, i will have only one child and not another, even by mistake.

I used to think it was arrogant to think the world needed another person in it "just like me", ie., my child.  But the older I get, the more I start to think that maybe that is EXACTLY what this world needs.   8)

Quote from: PhaedrusBut my rule now is that if I wouldn't want to have a child with her, then I don't go 'unwrapped'.

:thumb: The beauty is that either the male or the female or both can be in control of the birth control! The complaint that "she said she was taking care of it" or "he said he was taking care of it" doesn't fly. If YOU don't want a child, then YOU take responsbility for making sure you don't have one! Simple!  :mrgreen:

And I don't mean YOU specifically, Phae...I just liked what you said, so yours is the msg that gets mine tacked on! ;)

Quote from: Jake Dthe older I get, the more I start to think that maybe that is EXACTLY what this world needs.   8)

:o

















;)

I agree - the world needs more people that act just like me. Instead of populating the Earth with my genes, I would much rather establish some sort of training academy. The academy could focus more on nurture instead of nature and offer courses to mold the young minds into my image. Ah, yes, that would be ideal.  :mrgreen:

Quote from: PhaedrusI agree - the world needs more people that act just like me. Instead of populating the Earth with my genes, I would much rather establish some sort of training academy. The academy could focus more on nurture instead of nature and offer courses to mold the young minds into my image. Ah, yes, that would be ideal.  :mrgreen:

:?  :o  :?  :o :lol: