I do live in a continent.
Paper Towns and Ed Wood, respectively.
Yeah, but people are smart enough to figure that out on their own. If they're having a blood relation is that important, they'll simply ignore those commercials, just like people who'd rather buy a pet at the store. However, if they're on the edge, and able to be just as attached to their own biological kid as they are to an adopted one, why not push them toward the option that gets a kid out of the orphanage? In the end, it's always going to be their decision.
I missed the "not" at first and thought that, judging from the positive score, this site's gotten a lot kinkier recently.
I admire your attitude, but frankly, travelling doesn't put me in the best mood. I know that's no excuse to be a jerk but if they're not willing to assume that maybe I have a big job interview, then quid pro quo.
If I'm flying at night, though, I'm usually sympathetic to someone in need of a rest.
I've got nothing personally against people who recline on me, but if they can't take the time to think "maybe this 6'5 guy with barely any leg room as it is doesn't need someone reclining on him", then I have little motivation to think that they may be in desperate need of a rest.
This is an old conversation, and I'm not re-having. Just know that you're an entitled piece of shit who thinks he has an inherent dictation over a decade just because he was there for more of it. And I know this won't mean much from me, me being a teenybopper and all, but I feel you should know that I'm going to associate with whatever decade I feel I deserve to associate with, and that decade is the one in which I was born. There is nothing you can do to change my mind, short of slitting my throat, and I won't be replying to you again. Good day.
This really should just use "YYA" or "NW". "Other" is not an appropriate response to this question.
Henrietta, we got no flowers for you...
First of all, I kind of skimmed your last comment and missed the part about it increasing. Secondly, it depends entirely on how much it increases. Besides, if it does take that long, why bother with a cutoff date at all?
That sounds about fair.
The only good way, yes. But it's still inarguably more dangerous than walking of biking
If they feel like they're going to get away with it, they must also be somewhat confident that they won't get pulled over. The thing is, if they're gonna break the law, they're gonna break the law. License or not. If they have their license, they at least have the potential to drive legally, which could encourage them to. Why take away any chance they have of driving legally, when really, as you just said, it's the only practical mean of transportation for some people? What if it's some stupid college kid who does it repeatedly, loses his license, grows up and has a family. Ten, twenty years later, do you wanna tell him he can't drive his kids around because of some mistakes he made and paid for a long time ago?
He didn't say we would do it at all. Obviously we're not going to go around killing people we think are imperfect, and I'm a bit shocked that's what you took from this. All we would do is not save people who bring death upon themselves. The reason I didn't YYA is because I don't believe in not helping the sick, but I didn't NW because I do believe in taking off a couple of warning labels and seeing what happens.
Yes, he did take part in eugenics, but that's not his legacy. No one has ever said "Hitler is bad because of his involvement in genuine eugenics". He may've been horrible, but that doesn't mean everything he did was horrible.
Also, and this is important, I don't support eugenics, as I said in the post. All I'm arguing is that this post has nothing to do with eugenics.
It would be even safer not to let anyone drive ever. At some point, human rights have to take precedence. Besides, a license isn't some magical key that you need to operate a motor vehicle. If they're going to break the law and drink and drive, how concerned would they be about having a license?