The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I've gone back to university taking classes for my degree and my sociology class has a group discussion at the end of term. My group is to discuss euthanasia (assisted suicide). One of the things we've decided to do is take a poll of people and find out what the general consensus or majority say about this. So, if you would, please post whether you're for it, against it, or just don't know.
Oh, yes! Please state briefly why you're for or against it. Thanks in advance.
Oh, yes! Please state briefly why you're for or against it. Thanks in advance.
Page:
i think it should be allowed.
If a person is of sound mind then they have a right to choose their fate.
the right to live is surely also the right to die.
If a person is of sound mind then they have a right to choose their fate.
the right to live is surely also the right to die.
Forest Fan wrote:
> Light wrote:
> Oh, and how about answering Pandaemoniums question?
>
> I've answered that.
~snigger~
Yeah, by moving the goalposts and trying to claim that we have both free will and that God predestines some things. Why aren't I surprised that you're trying to say that two completely contradictory statements are both correct for no other reason that it was you who said them?
>
>
> Oh, and how about answering my questions?
>
> That takes a little longer.
Yeah, an average of 2-3 weeks each time. And you've only actually answered 4 of them in 2 months.
>
> Now, let Archangel have his thread back, if you have something to say
> about me , say it on one of my threads.
Oh, one of YOUR threads? My, we are proprietorial today aren't we? Tell you what; how about you stop running like a coward on YOUR threads, and I'll be happy to talk to you there.
> Light wrote:
> Oh, and how about answering Pandaemoniums question?
>
> I've answered that.
~snigger~
Yeah, by moving the goalposts and trying to claim that we have both free will and that God predestines some things. Why aren't I surprised that you're trying to say that two completely contradictory statements are both correct for no other reason that it was you who said them?
>
>
> Oh, and how about answering my questions?
>
> That takes a little longer.
Yeah, an average of 2-3 weeks each time. And you've only actually answered 4 of them in 2 months.
>
> Now, let Archangel have his thread back, if you have something to say
> about me , say it on one of my threads.
Oh, one of YOUR threads? My, we are proprietorial today aren't we? Tell you what; how about you stop running like a coward on YOUR threads, and I'll be happy to talk to you there.
Whitestripes DX wrote:
> um..what's your problem?
>
To many to list quickly. But mainly that he's an ignorant cumwit.
> He was simply comparing abortion with euthansia, in no way does his
> original post show a lack of understanding.
I think this is what we call "a difference of opinion". You know, like people have when they have a mind of their own? The post asked about Euthasia. He's mentioned that once before launching into his learned by rote "Abortion is bad, m'kay" spiel. What was the relevance of that? Approximately? Nil. Gump has a history of looking at a post and using it to launch off on an unrelated and self-aggrandising topic. And I for one am sick of him doing it. So I don't give him any leeway. If that offends you, then I'm truly sorry, but might I suggest you try seeing the board you frequent get pretty much ruined by a moronic me-monkey before criticising too much.
> um..what's your problem?
>
To many to list quickly. But mainly that he's an ignorant cumwit.
> He was simply comparing abortion with euthansia, in no way does his
> original post show a lack of understanding.
I think this is what we call "a difference of opinion". You know, like people have when they have a mind of their own? The post asked about Euthasia. He's mentioned that once before launching into his learned by rote "Abortion is bad, m'kay" spiel. What was the relevance of that? Approximately? Nil. Gump has a history of looking at a post and using it to launch off on an unrelated and self-aggrandising topic. And I for one am sick of him doing it. So I don't give him any leeway. If that offends you, then I'm truly sorry, but might I suggest you try seeing the board you frequent get pretty much ruined by a moronic me-monkey before criticising too much.
Light wrote:
> Oh, and how about answering Pandaemoniums question?
I've answered that.
>
> Oh, and how about answering my questions?
That takes a little longer.
Now, let Archangel have his thread back, if you have something to say about me , say it on one of my threads.
> Oh, and how about answering Pandaemoniums question?
I've answered that.
>
> Oh, and how about answering my questions?
That takes a little longer.
Now, let Archangel have his thread back, if you have something to say about me , say it on one of my threads.
um..what's your problem?
He was simply comparing abortion with euthansia, in no way does his original post show a lack of understanding.
He was simply comparing abortion with euthansia, in no way does his original post show a lack of understanding.
Forest Fan wrote:
> Or to put it in my own words;
>
> Forest Fan wrote:
> Anyway; back to the subject everyone.
Mwah ha ha haaaa! Okay, seeing as we're back to the subject; do you know what the difference between euthanasia and abortion is, my scumbuttering little friend?
Oh, and how about answering Pandaemoniums question?
Oh, and how about answering my questions?
Heheheheheh...oh, this is all worthwhile to watch you implode in a cloud of your own self-importance.
> Or to put it in my own words;
>
> Forest Fan wrote:
> Anyway; back to the subject everyone.
Mwah ha ha haaaa! Okay, seeing as we're back to the subject; do you know what the difference between euthanasia and abortion is, my scumbuttering little friend?
Oh, and how about answering Pandaemoniums question?
Oh, and how about answering my questions?
Heheheheheh...oh, this is all worthwhile to watch you implode in a cloud of your own self-importance.
Light wrote:
> Anyway; back to the subject everyone.
>
> Or, to put it another way, "You've made it painfully clear that
> I'm a fool who understands little, and rather than admit that I was
> mistaken in a topic, I'd like everyone to move on and pretend that it
> never happened". Heh. Coward.
Or to put it in my own words;
Forest Fan wrote:
> Anyway; back to the subject everyone.
> Anyway; back to the subject everyone.
>
> Or, to put it another way, "You've made it painfully clear that
> I'm a fool who understands little, and rather than admit that I was
> mistaken in a topic, I'd like everyone to move on and pretend that it
> never happened". Heh. Coward.
Or to put it in my own words;
Forest Fan wrote:
> Anyway; back to the subject everyone.
Forest Fan wrote:
> Can't get rid of me that easilly.
Heh. God, you're easily manipulated aren't you? Give you a chance to show just how much you think of yourself, and you grab it with both hands.
Tell you what, seeing as you're not going anywhere, why not answer some questions?
>
> Anyway; back to the subject everyone.
Or, to put it another way, "You've made it painfully clear that I'm a fool who understands little, and rather than admit that I was mistaken in a topic, I'd like everyone to move on and pretend that it never happened". Heh. Coward.
> Can't get rid of me that easilly.
Heh. God, you're easily manipulated aren't you? Give you a chance to show just how much you think of yourself, and you grab it with both hands.
Tell you what, seeing as you're not going anywhere, why not answer some questions?
>
> Anyway; back to the subject everyone.
Or, to put it another way, "You've made it painfully clear that I'm a fool who understands little, and rather than admit that I was mistaken in a topic, I'd like everyone to move on and pretend that it never happened". Heh. Coward.
Light wrote:
> In summary: I'll say what I damn well like to you. If you don't like
> it, leave.
Can't get rid of me that easilly.
Anyway; back to the subject everyone.
> In summary: I'll say what I damn well like to you. If you don't like
> it, leave.
Can't get rid of me that easilly.
Anyway; back to the subject everyone.
Forest Fan wrote:
> Light, this is about people's opinions , I didn't agree with
> yours, but didn't start attacking it, because this is an opinionated
> poll, not a discussion.
What, you mean like you don't attack people's opinions on faith, or sexuality, or evolution? Hey, just cos I'm far better at making you look like a fool than you are at doing the same to others, don't blame me.
In any case, this is a place for discussion. It's called "discussing people's opinions". Thats always been my interpretation anyway. Plus, you could say I'm doing you a favour by pointing out your mistake so you don't repeat it in future. Alas, you're such an egocentric little simpleton that you'll probably parrot it along with your original opinion and still claim both are valid.
In summary: I'll say what I damn well like to you. If you don't like it, leave.
> Light, this is about people's opinions , I didn't agree with
> yours, but didn't start attacking it, because this is an opinionated
> poll, not a discussion.
What, you mean like you don't attack people's opinions on faith, or sexuality, or evolution? Hey, just cos I'm far better at making you look like a fool than you are at doing the same to others, don't blame me.
In any case, this is a place for discussion. It's called "discussing people's opinions". Thats always been my interpretation anyway. Plus, you could say I'm doing you a favour by pointing out your mistake so you don't repeat it in future. Alas, you're such an egocentric little simpleton that you'll probably parrot it along with your original opinion and still claim both are valid.
In summary: I'll say what I damn well like to you. If you don't like it, leave.
Page: