Basmas

Basmas

Joined Member # 658105
0 Posts 0 Replies 145 Reputation

[quote who="Rightwinger" reply="5" id="2873804"]To Basmas... .. It's so funny; what is it with you guys and fake documents? You guys were more than happy to accept Rather's fake Bush National Guard record, too. [/quote] Which guys are you exactly referring to?

13 Replies 16,277 Views

The rate of autism is the same between kids that recieved the vaccine and those that didn't. The same. The same. If the vaccine increased the rate of autism how is the rate the same between the kids that got it and those that didn't? Please answer me that. If the rates in Denmark have spiked they have spiked in the same way for un-vaccinated kids as for vaccinated kids, given that the rates of austism are the same between them. Well

56 Replies 26,067 Views

[quote] However, the Hawaii Department of Health, itself, has declined to verify the document; so, around it goes. [/quote] Really? "I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American c

13 Replies 16,277 Views

Well seeing as half a MILLION children were followed in Denmark and the those that didn't have the vaccine actually had the same rate (in fact those had had the vaccine was very slightly less although not statically significant) than those who didn't I recon the evidence is in.

56 Replies 26,067 Views

In the UK there were several cases of people convicted of IRA bombings who had 'confessed' to the crime and were later proved to be completly and utterly innocent. As far as my understand of the USA legal system goes if somebody kills somebody by accident they will not be killed by the state. Those cases I listed were (in the main) one's where a jury decided on the evidence shown to them to be guilty even though they were not and the legal system later proved they w

74 Replies 168,722 Views

[quote who="Nitro Cruiser" comment="39"]These death row inmate who have subsequently been released probably disagree with the hastening of the process.All well and good, unfortunately I was referring to clear cut cases of murder (such as the Ft. Hood and Connecticut family murderers come to mind). How long would you suggest they languish in the "system"? [/quote] And who would decide which cases are 'clear cut'? Why should that one person have the power of life or d

74 Replies 168,722 Views

These death row inmate who have subsequently been released probably disagree with the hastening of the process. I would also image that there were a number of people killed who deserved the process being more though. 1973. 1. David Keaton Florida (Keaton v. State, 273 So.2d 385 (1973)). Convicted 1971. 1974 2. Samuel A. Poole North Car

74 Replies 168,722 Views

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4657897.stm male case from 2005 that hit UK mainstream press http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/04/texas-execution-mental-disability-iq 2009 male case that hit UK mainstream press Both caused complaints at the time

74 Replies 168,722 Views

[quote who="CharlesCS" comment="12"]Had this person been a man and attempted to kill his wife, would that 2 point difference be seen in the same manner? [/quote] Yes [quote who="CharlesCS" comment="12"] Would this had caused a shock wave as well? [/quote] Yes [quote who="CharlesCS" comment="12"] Would the IQ test be considered unreliable as well? [/quote] Yes [quote who="CharlesCS" comment="12"]

74 Replies 168,722 Views

It caused shock waves because her IQ was so low. The difference between 72 and 70 is basically impossible to tell apart using IQ tests as they are unreliable and have a huge history of misapplication. The woman getting killed by the state while the actual killer didn't also threw up a lot of 'confusion',

74 Replies 168,722 Views

I normally use firefox but I have had some sucess with switching to IE when I have problems with this site (indeed just did)

6 Replies 3,795 Views

[quote] Yes, that is covered by the 14th. You can extend privileges to all, or none, but discrimination based upon a physical or spiritual characteristic is banned. [/quote] err that is kind of their point. They have a physcial characteristic that the person they want to marry is the same sex as themselves. And I agree about the whole marriage/civil union thingy. I got married only because I could not get a civil partnersh

33 Replies 6,322 Views

Sensible discussion is can also be rather boring, which makes the more immediately impacting TV/news story - the foaming at the mouth rabble rouser (of any persuasion) or a nuanced dicussion of all the factors behind a certain issue? No doubt that the second is the 'better' one but people don't turn on in droves to listen to it. This is just an example that I know - I realise that both sides use it. Clinton was attacked for funding an UN thingy that did family pl

19 Replies 88,492 Views

People have the right for fair and equal treatment and the USA that is a clearly defined right. It would agaisnt that right to not allow homosexuals the privilege to drive (for example) based on nothing other than their homosexuality or banning ex-service men the privilege of a driving linceanse. Being able to drive isn't a right but preventing a certain group from doing it based on purely on a class group would violate that groups fair and equal treatment right. Banning peo

33 Replies 6,322 Views

That could easily be used to restrict speech in other places and other ways though couldn't it? Eg lease the land outside an abortion clinic during hours of operation. It is just the case just during funerals of service men then you would have to potential cover a huge area and the practicality could be a problem - eg turn all the surrounding land private could potentially prevent non-funeral related traffic couldn't it?

11 Replies 4,631 Views

My point is that the essence of the case (as I understand that people who want gay marriage) is if it is a right to marry somebody you love - or the person of the other sex. And there is a hell of a difference between homosexuals marrying and people marrying animals or their siblings and allowing homosexuals to marry would not lead to people being allowed to marry animals - after all allowing people to marry people of the other sex did not allow people to marry siblings or animals of t

33 Replies 6,322 Views