• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Which of these do you support the legaility of?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: Amused
The abortion question for men is easily answered with the Richard Simmons analogy.

If you were to accidentally have Richard Simmons attached to you body in a biologically dependent fashion (to remove him would kill him) how hard would your choice be?

Given that to do so would be my choice, and (in the analogy you're using) he would be gone in 9 months, I'd deal with it.

You'd agree to have Richard Simmons remain attached?

Sorry, but my body is mine. I do not agree with being forced to have ANYTHING biologically dependent on me against my will.

The choice to have... the... biological act that would transplant Richard Simmons' body onto yours would be yours. You suffer the consequences.

Not if I don't have to. And I don't. The fact the he is biolgically dependent on me means my rights come first.
 
Originally posted by: SilentRavens
Wow, the typical response wasn't hard to guess...

I said no, no, apathetic (don't care), yes, yes.

Have any of you ever been to Holland, the idea of legel prostitution isn't a pleasent one, but thats just my .02.

Regulated brothels like they have in Nevada are a lot more pleasant idea than the illegal street prostitution found in nearly every metropolitan area.
 
Originally posted by: Amused
Not if I don't have to. And I don't. The fact the he is biolgically dependent on me means my rights come first.

You know, you come off sounding like a spoiled brat in this debate, and I come off sounding like a religious fundamentalist. Given that I'm not going to change your mind, and you're not going to change mine, I'm going to stop this before either of us waste any more time.
 
Originally posted by: hscorpio
Originally posted by: SilentRavens
Wow, the typical response wasn't hard to guess...

I said no, no, apathetic (don't care), yes, yes.

Have any of you ever been to Holland, the idea of legel prostitution isn't a pleasent one, but thats just my .02.

Regulated brothels like they have in Nevada are a lot more pleasant idea than the illegal street prostitution found in nearly every metropolitan area.

Yep. The vast majority of "problems" commonly associated with drugs and prostitution are, in reality caused by the very illegality of them.

Drive anything underground and it becomes dangerous and exploitive to not only those involved, but innocent people not involved.
 
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: hscorpio
Originally posted by: SilentRavens
Wow, the typical response wasn't hard to guess...

I said no, no, apathetic (don't care), yes, yes.

Have any of you ever been to Holland, the idea of legel prostitution isn't a pleasent one, but thats just my .02.

Regulated brothels like they have in Nevada are a lot more pleasant idea than the illegal street prostitution found in nearly every metropolitan area.

Yep. The vast majority of "problems" commonly associated with drugs and prostitution are, in reality caused by the very illegality of them.

Drive anything underground and it becomes dangerous and exploitive to not only those involved, but innocent people not involved.


Yep. Whenever I watch COPS and they explain why they spend so much time and resources doing prostitution stings, the reason is always that prostitution negatively effects the community since most of the girls are addicts and use the money to support their habits.

But if it were legal and regulated there would be no more crack whores in business. What guy is going to screw a crack whore on the street and risk getting arrested when he can just drive to a legal brothel and screw a girl he knows has been screened for std's and drug use. Bring it out in the open where it can be properly regulated and almost all of the previous negative effects on the community are removed.
 
Originally posted by: hscorpio
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: hscorpio
Originally posted by: SilentRavens
Wow, the typical response wasn't hard to guess...

I said no, no, apathetic (don't care), yes, yes.

Have any of you ever been to Holland, the idea of legel prostitution isn't a pleasent one, but thats just my .02.

Regulated brothels like they have in Nevada are a lot more pleasant idea than the illegal street prostitution found in nearly every metropolitan area.

Yep. The vast majority of "problems" commonly associated with drugs and prostitution are, in reality caused by the very illegality of them.

Drive anything underground and it becomes dangerous and exploitive to not only those involved, but innocent people not involved.


Yep. Whenever I watch COPS and they explain why they spend so much time and resources doing prostitution stings, the reason is always that prostitution negatively effects the community since most of the girls are addicts and use the money to support their habits.

But if it were legal and regulated there would be no more crack whores in business. What guy is going to screw a crack whore on the street and risk getting arrested when he can just drive to a legal brothel and screw a girl he knows has been screened for std's and drug use. Bring it out in the open where it can be properly regulated and almost all of the previous negative effects on the community are removed.

Here, Here.
 
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
NO

On euthanasia, I do support such issues as the so-called assisted suicide, etc., where the suffering terminally ill take an active part in the ending of their own life. Their life, their choice. But euthanasia, by definition, is a mercy killing that may or may not involve the consent of the individual, and in those cases without consent I cannot support it.
 
by the way, 46 responses, and no one mentions that the OP spelled "legality" incorrectly. I'm impressed.
 
Back
Top