BTW, I myself is not a biophysicst. It's just the name of a broad field. — Hailey

Of course.

Yes, he delivered in my filtered view. — Hailey

Hilarious, I didn’t know Chinese biophysicists were so funny. :lol:

I clearly said I don’t consider it [abortion] murder. — NOS4A2

If that were the case I wouldn’t have needed to pull teeth for an answer. Your position is still not clear.

You’re just too strange and laborious to philosophize with, praxis. — NOS4A2

We were never philosophizing.

I have no cut-off. — NOS4A2

You said that a valid excuse is being too young. That means that those not too young do not have a valid excuse and you consider them murderers (unlawful killers). To be clear, saying adults getting an abortion are killers is different than saying adults getting an abortion are murderers. The latter is considered criminal. You used the term "murder" here:

I would not consider it murder because there is a valid excuse for it. — NOS4A2

They say… — NOS4A2

You asked me what my principles said, not what popular opinion said. It's an awkward question, and redundant since I just answered it, but that's what you asked. I did go further though, and you seem to have ignored that part.

None of that is up to me. — NOS4A2

None of any of this is up to us. If you don't want to answer that's fine. I don't care.

I am anti-abortion. — NOS4A2

Until a certain age, apparently. I asked what the cut-off age is. Again, I don't care if you don't want to answer. That is up to you.

What do your principles say? — NOS4A2

They say around 16 weeks. If you're asking which are strongest on this issue it's hard to say. Like you, I'd say that autonomy is high on the list. Unlike you, I'd say that equality is also high on the list. That I look to the norm suggests that I value cooperation and tolerance, perhaps. Could go on and on but I don't see the point.

No, what I consider a valid excuse for abortion is if the unborn is a product of rape or if the mother is too young or if the fetus is malformed. — NOS4A2

In the case of rape, I suppose that it would need to be a proven case of rape, like a criminal conviction?



Regarding age, you're pro-life for adults? What's the age cutoff?

What are your own views on the matter? — NOS4A2

If I were able to vote on it, I guess that I'd go along with 98.3% of the population, around 16 weeks.

I would not consider it murder because there is a valid excuse for it. — NOS4A2

If I'm reading you right, what you seem to consider a valid excuse is that "the unborn is not autonomous". That doesn't make sense. Babies, young children, and those with debilitating injuries or health lack autonomy. Those conditions may be temporary. They certainly tend to be in the case of the unborn.

Are you able to clarify what you consider a valid excuse to kill human life?

So you merely disapprove of killing human life and don't consider it murder. Your libertarian friends will be very very impressed. :starstruck:

As far as i can tell, the task of the pro-abortionists has been to diminish and belittle in the conscience the body of the unborn. To kill it with a clean conscience, for example, one must sneak in and sever its life before this or that occurs, before it has feelings or a heartbeat. At least then will the killer be satisfied with herself and her humanity. — NOS4A2

You're a mind reader?

People make all sorts of choices in life which leave them with a dirty conscience. For instance, I feel bad about using plastic grocery bags whenever I forget to bring reusables to the store. Even if I'm able to somehow rationalize it the feeling remains and my task isn't to diminish and belittle that feeling. My task is to do better.

I have to quell the dissonance and remain satisfied that it isn't up to me wether someone wants to kill the life growing inside of her. I leave that to her, but will always remember that they are killing a life that is not their own, and will judge accordingly. — NOS4A2

Her choice but you judge her guilty of murder? That means you're pro-life. Your libertarian friends will be so disappointed in you. :meh:

I thought the real appeal of Trump for Americans is a promise to address the economical problems right at hand and to alleviate some of the economical struggles for the people. — Hailey

Did he deliver on that promise, in your filtered view?

Funny that you get the filtered image of Trump as a saint and the image of Biden as a demon.

The candidate did not seem fazed by the clashes, tweeting after the rally: "Thank you Costa Mesa, California! 31,000 people tonight with thousands turned away. I will be back!"

The amphitheater capacity is 18k. Does he always double the crowd size? :roll:

Photoshop reality. At least she's consistent. :roll:

He litterally surrendered himself to authorities but the shirts say NEVER SURRENDER! :chin:

Another incongruity, Trump's arrest record states that he is 6 feet, 3 inches tall and weighs 215 pounds. However, as reported in April, after being arrested in an unrelated case in New York, he was 6 feet, 2 inches and weighed 240 pounds—suggesting Trump has gained an inch and lost 25 pounds in little over three months.

My bad. :grimace:

Hi again ChatGPT! I have another question to help my simple-minded friend if you please. Can a question be suggestive?

ChatGPT
Hello again! Of course, I'd be happy to help. Yes, a question can definitely be suggestive. A suggestive question is one that implies a certain answer or a particular way of thinking. It may guide the person being asked the question towards a specific response or conclusion. This type of question can sometimes influence the person's thoughts or decisions, even if subtly.

For example, consider the following question:

"Sally, isn't it true that you enjoy spending time with your new friends?"

This question suggests that Sally does indeed enjoy spending time with her new friends and might make her more likely to answer in the affirmative, even if her true feelings are more complex. Suggestive questions can be used intentionally or unintentionally to influence conversations or gather information in a biased way. It's important to be aware of the wording of questions to ensure that they're fair and unbiased, especially in situations where objectivity is crucial.

I suppose this is what you would call a leading question?

ChatGPT
Exactly! A suggestive question is often referred to as a leading question. A leading question is designed to lead or guide the person being asked toward a specific answer or response. It can sway their perception or influence their opinion on a matter. In legal contexts, leading questions are sometimes used to shape a witness's testimony in a desired direction. However, in other situations where objectivity and fairness are important, it's generally best to avoid leading questions to ensure that the responses obtained are as unbiased as possible.

Most enlightening. Thanks for your assistance!

ChatGPT
You're very welcome! I'm glad I could help. If you or your friend have more questions in the future, don't hesitate to ask. Happy learning!

Okay, nevermind then.

Maybe I misread what you were suggesting. You seemed to be suggesting that the lockdowns were designed for the purpose of voter suppression and not for the purpose of saving lives or generally mitigating the pandemic. I pointed out that at one point Trump extended the lockdowns, or at least took credit for doing so, in an effort to save lives. So even Trump thought that the point was mitigating the pandemic.

Anyway, besides all that I still don't get it. Republicans were far more comfortable voting in person than Democrats so employing a pandemic/lockdown to suppress voting would seem to be most effective against Democrats.

Apparently, the lockdowns were supposed to save lives rather than suppress votes. At least Trump seemed to think so.

Would you agree that lockdowns were suppressing votes, then? — NOS4A2

I took a few seconds to google it and this is the first thing that came up:

Trump Extends Coronavirus Lockdown Until April 30

:chin:

:rofl:

It obviously depends on the change. PLEASE READ WHAT THE AI WROTE FOR YOU.

I don’t. — NOS4A2

Hi ChatGPT! Can you explain the difference between a minor change and a fundamental change to my simple-minded friend?

ChatGPT
Of course, I'd be happy to help you explain the difference between a minor change and a fundamental change to your friend!

A minor change and a fundamental change refer to two different levels of alteration or modification in something. Let's use an example to make it clearer:

Imagine you have a car. Making a minor change to the car would involve things like getting a new paint job, changing the seat covers, or adding a sticker. These alterations don't drastically affect the car's overall functionality or structure. They are small adjustments that might improve the appearance or comfort, but the core nature of the car remains the same.

On the other hand, a fundamental change to the car would involve altering its basic structure or purpose. For instance, if you were to replace the engine with a completely different type of engine that runs on a different fuel source, that would be a fundamental change. It would likely lead to significant alterations in how the car performs and what it's capable of doing. This kind of change goes beyond surface-level adjustments and has a more profound impact on the overall nature of the object.

In essence, a minor change is something small and often cosmetic, while a fundamental change is something substantial that can alter the very nature or functionality of the thing being changed.

If we're talking about the same thing, because of the circumstances involved, namely the pandemic.

Do you not understand that a change may not be a fundamental change?

That doesn't explain how there was a fundamental change. Just more hyperbolic language?

It just so happened to favor one candidate, one party, some people, some states, at the expense of the rest. — NOS4A2

Can you explain how it favored one candidate? Trump voters are too stupid to put something in the mail?

How does one suppress votes by attempting to block fundamental changes to election laws? — NOS4A2

How is it a fundamental change? I've been voting by mail for years. It's claimed that Trump votes by mail.

Well, the hyperbole of "countless" efforts aside, it appears that his efforts were designed to suppress the votes of Democrats.

You mean efforts like this?

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump frankly acknowledged Thursday that he’s starving the U.S. Postal Service of money in order to make it harder to process an expected surge of mail-in ballots, which he worries could cost him the election.

https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbreak-election-2020-ap-top-news-elections-politics-14a2ceda724623604cc8d8e5ab9890ed

MY INTERVIEW WITH TUCKER CARLSON WILL BE AIRED TONIGHT AT 9:00 P.M. “SPARKS WILL FLY.” ENJOY!

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/110938777359431324

Poor cowardly Trump too afraid to attend the debates and resigns himself to the kid's table. :lol:

It might be interesting to watch how they dance around the issue of Trump, desperately trying not to offend the MAGA.

Cherry-picking, I guess. — NOS4A2

Your cherry-picking doesn’t appear to indicate anything, other than that Switzerland is highest on the Human Freedom Index and Singapore and the Netherlands have good infrastructure.

I can't bold those countries if they're not listed, obviously. None of them are in the top 6 countries with the highest taxes, for instance. The Ivory Coast is not listed at all.

I've just extended the courtesy of italicizing those countries in the list for you, however. What does it indicate?

No argument. Just pointing out that the bolded countries are at the top of the list for high taxes, also top of the human freedom index list, and top of the list for quality infrastructure. I'll now add that they're at the bottom of the wealth gap list.

I've also been to the low-tax countries such as Monaco, the Bahamas, and Dubai, and can report that their infrastructure is far superior to the ones I see here. Countries that are higher in degrees of freedom, at least according to the Human Freedom Index — NOS4A2

Countries with the Highest Human Freedom Indexes (2021):
Switzerland— 9.11
New Zealand — 9.01
Denmark — 8.98
Estonia — 8.91
Ireland — 8.90
Canada — 8.85
Finland — 8.85
Australia — 8.84
Sweden — 8.83

Countries with the Highest Tax Rates in The World in 2023
Aruba.
Sweden.
Austria.
Denmark.
Japan.
Finland.

Quality of port infrastructure (2006 - 2019)
Singapore — 6.5
Finland — 6.4
Netherlands — 6.4
Hong Kong — 6.3
Denmark — 5.8
Japan — 5.8
Panama — 5.7
Belgium — 5.6
Estonia — 5.6 9
USA — 5.6
South Korea — 5.5
UA Emirates — 5.5
Iceland — 5.4
Qatar — 5.4
Spain — 5.4
Taiwan — 5.4
Sweden — 5.3

:chin:

Also, Monaco, the Bahamas, and Dubai are high in wealth disparity.

If memory serves, Trump fired Barr because he refused to investigate political rivals, and because he disputed claims of widespread voter fraud, speaking of a weaponized DOJ. Trump simply failed at it. He also failed to drain the swamp. No reason to think a second term would be any different. Can’t teach a fat old bad dog new tricks.

I'm reading Kafka on the Shore next.

And for those not in the know, no, that doesn't mean I'm going to lazily read Kafka on the beach somewhere, although I'm pretty sure that I've done that too.

I don’t remember Oracle Night well at all but I do recall enjoying it.

A masterpiece! you will love it. — javi2541997

Loved the way it started simply with a lost cat and gradually branched into a complex story that came together in the end. Loved the rich and beautifully flowing writing.

Several years ago I was in a long line for a popular blockbuster film in a small-town community on the islands where some white kids, looking early twenties and from affluent backgrounds, went to the front of the line and talked a local couple into letting them cut. I think they picked the couple because they looked like they had the most *aloha spirit*. Creepy and annyoing as hell to watch.