http://www.englishforums.com/search/pro.htm?q=user%3aChameleon&o=DateDescendingSearch results for 'user:Chameleon'en-USXMOD (Build: 3616.28671)http://www.englishforums.com/English/SmokersMadeLookOutcasts/zjvx/post.htm#27502Sat, 10 Apr 2004 00:39:14 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:27502chameleonOf course we shouldn't make people feel like outcasts. But some habits force a person to assume some other responsibility. If I choose to drink, the law says I have to consider the safety of others when I get behind the wheel. I don't think it's too much to expect smokers to respect others' wishes not to breath bad air when both people have an equal right to visit an establishment. No, our laws and regulations need to respect all individuals equally. But I can only hope that the added annoyance of having to go outside the bar to smoke will convince more people to quit.http://www.englishforums.com/English/SmokersMadeLookOutcasts/zjvx/post.htm#27399Fri, 09 Apr 2004 05:49:50 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:27399chameleonNobody forces anyone to not smoke just as no one forces anyone not to drink. If I have a beer, that's my business. If I have ten beers and then get in my car and drive, now it's someone else's business. Similarly if I have a cigarette out of doors, in my own car, or in my home, that's my business. But if I smoke around another person who has chosen not to do so, I'm forcing that person to smoke, compromising their choice not to smoke, or forcing them to leave. Public places are public because everyone can assemble there. If everyone cannot assemble there, they're not public anymore. The rights to freedom of movement and assembly are generally protected in western society. There's a difference between taking away someone's choice to...http://www.englishforums.com/English/UseWordNothingInsteadAnything/zgpd/post.htm#26580Mon, 29 Mar 2004 20:55:48 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:26580chameleonYes. English never uses double negatives to negate. However, Spanish (and some other languages) do use double negatives. "No esta nadie." Literally: "there isn't nobody." But it MEANS "There isn't anyone."http://www.englishforums.com/English/ShouldProvenTerroristsAssassinated/zzkm/post.htm#26230Wed, 24 Mar 2004 22:57:27 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:26230chameleonI think it really depends. You risk causing more death and destruction when there is a clear possibility of a political settlement. The middle-east conflict is one over territory and both sides have historical claims. Ideological disputes do not lend themselves so easily to political resolution (i.e., al Qaida and the West). How likely is it that the terrorists will retaliate? If the risk is low or you can put measures into effect to reduce the risk of retaliation, maybe it's worth it. But if they live next door in Gaza City, you'd better think long and hard about it or a lot of civilians are going to die. This most recent killing was, in my opinion, a huge mistake.http://www.englishforums.com/English/LivingWithRoomates/zzbw/post.htm#26171Tue, 23 Mar 2004 18:27:47 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:26171chameleonI don't think you need to worry too much. Lots of students skip class occasionally. The professor isn't going to take it personally. It is your money after all (unless your education is subsidized). Don't volunteer for more work Are you crazy? hehe. Anyway, it takes the teacher more time to prepare work for you to do than it is worth. The teacher might like an apology if he's really strict about attendence, but don't do it every time you're late or you miss class. Sometimes it's better to let your mistakes go unnoticed than to apologize for every one. That just brings unwanted attention on you.http://www.englishforums.com/English/LivingWithRoomates/zzbw/post.htm#26159Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:25:10 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:26159chameleonThat depends on your major. I know if I had cut classes once or twice, it would have made my life harder, not easier because I would have missed material. I am thankful I do not get sick very often! Besides, I paid for the class, so I'm going to go to every session. There's plently of time for breaks after class.http://www.englishforums.com/English/LivingWithRoomates/zzbw/post.htm#26113Mon, 22 Mar 2004 20:22:50 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:26113chameleonIf your roommates have the same major as you, it can be motivating and supportive. If they do not, I would say it is more likely a distraction. Especially if you have very different fields of study or your major is much more difficult than your roommates'.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhatIsMorality/4/zbpd/Post.htm#26111Mon, 22 Mar 2004 18:26:08 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:26111chameleonActually, no one is executed by electric chair anymore. All executions are by lethal injection. Of course, it doesn't change the dilemma. I don't know that this thread is the right one for that discussion anyway.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WarVsPacifism/3/zdbn/Post.htm#26096Mon, 22 Mar 2004 14:35:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:26096chameleonGuest, should I infer from your assertion that it doesn't matter who serves in the military as long as they can hold an M-16 and don't question their orders? Maybe we could take this opportunity to take care of a few other problems while we're at it, huh? China has a population crisis; how about they sign up pregnant mothers and little girls? If we put them on the front lines, that would certainly get rid of a few more mouths to feed. Yes, soldiers have to follow orders and yes, that's their job. If you look at the original situation, children in our ficticious scenario were being recruited by preying on feelings of revenge. And like I said before, a ten-year-old can't even follow orders from his mommy to go to bed. I'll repeat: whose...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WarVsPacifism/2/zdbn/Post.htm#26071Mon, 22 Mar 2004 02:28:26 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:26071chameleonYou can enlist voluntarily in the US army for active duty if you are between 17 and 34 years old. The draft, if it is instated by Congress, begins at age 20. The age sequence goes 20-21-22-23-24-25-19-18. There hasn't been a case where the draft age needed to be extended below 18. Incidentally, there is legislation in Congress right now to reinstate the draft in 2005 (how convenient! Right after an election year!). My vote this year will definitely be influenced by this. At what age does the British draft start? Even if children are allowed to be on active duty, do they have to serve on the front lines? Are you claiming that it wasn't a crime to put the Hitler Youth on the front lines in the final days of WW2? THEY believed what they...http://www.englishforums.com/English/IsInternetFlirtingCheating/zdhh/post.htm#25988Sat, 20 Mar 2004 06:45:59 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25988chameleonAnother great thing about internet friendships is the amazing ability of two people to become close without ever touching or even seeing each other. The idea that pure language has the ability to bond two people together is quite amazing. I think it's really cool to realize how I've gotten to know maj, rommie, woodward and the other regulars just by reading their posts, and it such a short time too! I think much of the time, this feeling of bonding is what drives people to develop intimate online relationships. These people are heartbroken that they cannot develop this kind of closeness when the person they tell in person, "I love you", the person they make love to, eat with, sleep with, go fishing and biking with, etc. "Why can't...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WarVsPacifism/2/zdbn/Post.htm#25987Sat, 20 Mar 2004 06:28:50 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25987chameleonThanks so much for you input! You should register and post more often. Don't feel bad about posting at work...I do it a lot! I thought your example of the child warriors was very interesting. But something bothers me about this situation. Shouldn't the powers that be in the countries where this war is going on be preserving their own youth instead of letting them join the military for the sole purpose of vengeance? How is it at all ethical to send children into battle and justify it simply because the children are mad at the enemy? If the government already has the money to pay combat death compensation to the families, what other reason do they have for offering such a payment except to lure naive children into becoming low-cost...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhatIsMorality/3/zbpd/Post.htm#25952Fri, 19 Mar 2004 15:33:06 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25952chameleonYou mean electric chairs or aliens? My feelings on the death penalty are mixed. As for aliens, slaughter could be part of their reproductive cycle for all we know. I think if humans ever made contact with intelligent alien life, we could never truly understand them because the odds are very great that they would be nothing like us. Best to stay out of their business unless it affects us.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhatIsMorality/3/zbpd/Post.htm#25882Thu, 18 Mar 2004 20:46:03 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25882chameleonI guess I didn't think it through before, but riddle me this... Rommie, you gave an example some time back about 9/10 people in a room of 10 people wanting to kill the last person. Are they justified? Put aside the reason they want to kill that person for a moment. Don't we have to ask: 1) "do any people outside the room exist? What is their role in defining the morality of the people inside the room?" 2) "do we, as an exterior observer, have any input as to the nature of the decision?" This is more than just an extension of "does nation A have a say in what nation B does" because regardless of our nationality, we are all human, so we DO have an interest in defining morality. Consider it from the point of view of observing an...http://www.englishforums.com/English/DoYouBelieveInFate/4/pml/Post.htm#25867Thu, 18 Mar 2004 15:51:11 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25867chameleonWhat I believe is irrelovant. What IS, whether fate or free will, is impossible to discern, so there's not much point trying to decide. I never really understood why this topic has caused so much debate over the centuries. Will not life go on whether or not free will is real? Continue as if you did have free will and everything will be just fine! In fact, if you act as if you have free will, your life will probably be considerably more interesting and more meaningful, so why not act that way even if you aren't sure of it?http://www.englishforums.com/English/WarVsPacifism/2/zdbn/Post.htm#25866Thu, 18 Mar 2004 15:45:19 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25866chameleonI think the main point we were beating around the bush earlier on is that I have a part of me that hates making subjective judgements. If I have to make a subjective judgement, I want to rationally exclude as many options as I can before I do that. Case in point with pacifism. Yes, I can make a decision on whether the first world war was justified or not, but it's not very satisfying because I can't rigorously outline my reasons for doing so. General philosophies are much easier to argue about when you can keep context out of the picture. Unfortunately, that's not possible most of the time.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WarVsPacifism/2/zdbn/Post.htm#25865Thu, 18 Mar 2004 15:37:37 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25865chameleonThis thread doesn't have nearly as many posts as some of the others. Maybe we should let it linger a little. I think the rebels were not terrorists in the modern sense. They usually complied with the rules of war that we have on earth while conducting a guerilla campaign (extemely difficult to do if you're in a Columbian jungle and not in space). And I don't mean to reveal my complete dork-dom, but I think the members of the Alliance were actually planet-wide rebellions. Either way, if we're going by the Geneva Conventions, partisans don't need a mandate from the masses to operate legitimately...but they do have other rules to follow. The rebels usually would have been entitled to prisoner of war status if captured, which I think...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WarVsPacifism/2/zdbn/Post.htm#25818Wed, 17 Mar 2004 20:40:08 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25818chameleon"The Great War" The European powers that became involved in the first world war did so of their own accord, and for pretty foolish reasons. It is always easy to assign blame in retrospect, but if Russia had not declared war on Austria-Hungary for attacking Serbia, nothing might have happened. France and Britain and Russia became involved because of the Triple Entente agreement, just as Germany and Austria-Hungary were bound to each other by the Triple Alliance (Italy bailed and joined the Allies). Everyone who got involved after that just wanted a piece of the pie. The United States became involved because of attacks on its merchant vessels in international waters (which were probably carrying arms anyway) and its objection to the...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ShouldAffirmitiveActionAllowed/zvdh/post.htm#25802Wed, 17 Mar 2004 15:20:44 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25802chameleonIf you are better qualified for the job or education, you should get it. If the winning candidate is disproportionately from one race or another, that problem needs to be addressed long before the point where people are competing for college admission slots and jobs. Affermative action, the way it is employed today (where it is legal), is being used as a stop-gap measure to make up for poor education in urban and underdeveloped neighborhoods and as an out for governments to dismiss education spending increases. That's my take on it.http://www.englishforums.com/English/AMatterOfEngrish/zvdb/post.htmWed, 17 Mar 2004 06:34:48 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25773chameleonEngrish... A hilarious phenomenon to be sure. Usually, east asian examples are cited, but I have seen some from pakistan and mexico too. For classic examples, see www.engrish.com (updated daily Monday - Friday!) I really think this is fascinating because of the complete apathy when it comes to correcting achingly funny (and sometimes risque) english on store fronts, advertisements, t-shirts, etc. The attitude is "who cares what it says: english is sexy." It's like having french on your shampoo bottle. Sometimes they are so cleverly bad, I think there must be some native speaker working for the t-shirt company trying to see what he can get away with. One interesting reverse case in the US is the rampant kanji tatoo craze. I walk...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhyAgainstAfghanistanians/vqjd/post.htm#25768Wed, 17 Mar 2004 03:01:04 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25768chameleonI never made the claim that EVERY Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40 was responsible for the acts of terrorism listed above (although, for fun, list me a few positive social contributions that ANY group of violent extremists have made to the human condition). I made the claim that a SINGLE Muslim male extremist or a small group of the same were responsible. I am not making the following leap of logic: More men commit violent crimes than women. (True) -> It is statistically safer to walk next to a woman than a man in public. (True) -> All men should be strip searched for weapons when they leave the house. (Ridiculous) The fact that #3 is not an appropriate course of action doesn't make #1 and #2 any less true. The...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WarVsPacifism/zdbn/post.htm#25752Tue, 16 Mar 2004 15:25:48 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25752chameleon" "I believe there is no such thing as total and absolute pacifism". -- I have met total and absolute pacifists, so I cannot agree with that. If someone refuses to commit violence as a philosophy, and lives by that philosophy with such passion that they are prepared to die in the persuance of those beliefs, then who are we to argue with that? " All I want to know from this statement is would a total pacifist stand idly by while greater crimes are being committed? If so, how in the world does that qualify as non-violence? I guess the distinction we're not jiving on is how is a total pacifist required to interact with other people? If he has an obligation as a pacifist to intervene in a situation where others may come to harm by...http://www.englishforums.com/English/AreIntelligentWomen/5/vphq/Post.htm#25727Tue, 16 Mar 2004 10:18:28 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25727chameleonMy other point was that these women, brief though their reign was, demonstrated some level of power and political clout in a relatively primitive government by today's standards. It's not impossible to find examples of powerful political women in history, even in repressive societies. Moreover, the imperial court and the old zaibatsu (huge trade groups / banks ... they still exist today) supported these rulers even though it was clear that they have some significant leverage to influence matters of state in a profound way.http://www.englishforums.com/English/AreIntelligentWomen/5/vphq/Post.htm#25724Tue, 16 Mar 2004 10:03:33 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25724chameleonMy point was that power (such as it was) was largely passed in a female to female line for a period of about a hundred years. I guess it really IS too much to claim it was matriarchal. I'll retract that statement. Still, the fundamental point is that societies HAVE existed where power was passed in a largely feminine line, even if briefly. I guess it doesn't prove anything, I just thought it was interesting. However, I think it's pretty obvious from your list that 8/126 is not a great track record. Then again, who am I to judge a social stucture I was not conditioned by... It's still higher than 0/43 (US presidency)http://www.englishforums.com/English/WarVsPacifism/zdbn/post.htm#25721Tue, 16 Mar 2004 09:48:19 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25721chameleonWell, I can't really argue with that. If we're going to have free license to define terms to suit a specific agenda, no argument for or against any value of X can be made. The author of the above article I quoted simply suggests why certain behavior does not qualify as pacifism if pacifism means "non-violence", and then makes an argument why such a philosophy does not always err on the side of caution. Yeah, he's a little caustic... but I think he makes his point. All I'm trying to say is that absolute pacifism is not self-consistent because it promotes violence by submitting to the will of the violent. If we choose to define pacifism as some shade of gray, there's really no convincing argument that can be made either way. If that's...http://www.englishforums.com/English/AreIntelligentWomen/4/vphq/Post.htm#25707Tue, 16 Mar 2004 02:24:03 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25707chameleonMatriarchies _have_ existed in the past. During the 8th century of Japanese history, the ruling imperial was usually an empress. (Sorry everyone, I'm a Japanophile...) I thought maybe you would find this interesting Lucy: Quote from: http://www.npf.org.tw/PUBLICATION/NS/091/NS-C-091-187.htm ******************** There were altogether eight empresses in Japan. Empress Suiko was the first female sovereign, who ruled the empire efficiently with the help of Prince Shotoku from 592 to 628. The second, Empress Kogyoku, reigned briefly from 642, abdicated in favor of her son in 645, and re-ascended the throne in 661, when the son, Emperor Kotoku, died. Renamed Empress Saimei, she continued to reign until 661. The third empress, Jito,...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WarVsPacifism/zdbn/post.htm#25688Mon, 15 Mar 2004 20:05:49 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25688chameleonRegarding the quote... I guess this all depends on whether you consider wounding / maiming to be pacifism. There are differences between vigilantism and state administered capital punishment, and individual pacifism and social pacifism. A strict (personal) pacifist commits no violence, for whatever reason. Thought experiments, unrealistic as they may be at times, can be used to determine if a philosophy is logically sound. Yes, the above example is unrealistic, but if it is so black and white, doesn't it deserve an answer? For every ridiculous situation that can be made up, many more probable situations may present themselves in real life than can be planned for. That's why investigating the extremes is important. Has anyone...http://www.englishforums.com/English/IsInternetFlirtingCheating/zdhh/post.htm#25610Sun, 14 Mar 2004 17:31:02 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25610chameleonSeems like it was written by a girl who got burned / caught. She seems to start off by saying it's not right to have an online fantasy when you are in a relationship, then goes into all the reasons why online relationships are bad. Those two topics have little to do with each other. The only reason you shouldn't flirt with someone online when you are in a relationship is that it can get you in trouble with your other-half that you never intended. What about people who are single? I'd prefer to have an open mind and meet new people. I've met several people in real life that I first started talking to online. Some of them are good friends of mine and I never met anyone from online that I truly didn't like at all.http://www.englishforums.com/English/CorrectMeaning/zdbh/post.htm#25476Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:33:25 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25476chameleon"To detail a car" means to clean and polish the surfaces and maybe add some cool decals or little equipment upgrades. You would also try to remove any scratches and other defects. I made my car look new and cool = I detailed my car.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhyAgainstAfghanistanians/vqjd/post.htm#25466Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:51:58 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25466chameleonSo racial profiling is the same as covering children in napalm? Sorry, I think you're getting a little too emotional. Maybe you should focus on what we should do to prevent terrorism when the answer to every question above is d), and suggest a way we can do it without violating anyone's civil rights. I think that would be a lot more productive than comparing me to some bigot with whom I have no association. On your point, do you think you or I can tell the difference between a Taliban soldier and a northern alliance soldier? I don't mean to be culturally insensitive, but I can't tell the difference. Yet, we were fighting one group and allies with the other. There is more to being enemies and allies than simple appearance. And say...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhatCanAmericansDo/2/zrjp/Post.htm#25463Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:35:29 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25463chameleonDone and done.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WarVsPacifism/zdbn/post.htmFri, 12 Mar 2004 16:35:04 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25462chameleonIs violence never justified? What are your thoughts? I believe there is no such thing as total and absolute pacifism. Human existence is defined by conflict whether it be internal, environmental, interpersonal, or international. Further, sometimes violence must be employed to minimize greater violence.http://www.englishforums.com/English/ANonEnglishQuestion/zdbv/post.htm#25461Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:20:58 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25461chameleonIn Japanese, one of the few strict word-order rules is that all sentences must be verb-final. The only things that can follow the verb or copula in a complete sentence are punctuation and mini-words called particles that express context. I know there are other strict verb-final languages, so maybe they are excluded from this problem as well.http://www.englishforums.com/English/Concerning/zcmq/post.htm#25390Fri, 12 Mar 2004 00:26:39 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25390chameleonThe sentence is wrong. It should be: "Concerning this topic, let me ask you some questions." But, "Let me ask you some questions concerning this topic." would be even better.http://www.englishforums.com/English/SomeFewAndAny/zcnb/post.htm#25387Fri, 12 Mar 2004 00:12:32 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25387chameleon"some X" or "some X's" means more than zero, but less than all. It doesn't specify whether "some X" is a majority or not. If X is countable, "some X's" always means more than one. "few X" or "few X's" means less than a majority of a group. It doesn't specify a quantity either. "any X" or "any X's" means there is no restriction on which or how much X. It could be whatever amount or number is necessary. But from your question, I think you are interested in the case when someone says: "There wasn't any toilet paper." This means there was zero toilet paper. In other words, there was not a lot, not a little, but NONE! Does everything make sense?http://www.englishforums.com/English/Essay/zcnj/post.htm#25386Thu, 11 Mar 2004 23:59:46 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25386chameleonUse fewer words and don't break up your sentences with long strings of additional information. Try to think of the most efficient way to say something. Readers usually find long sentences tiring. You may even confuse some readers because there is too much information to keep track of. For example: "Coming to grips with the harsh reality of racial bias and cultural privilege is difficult for adults who have been socially conditioned to accept inequity." This is a much shorter version of your first sentence. Use idioms like "hard pill to swallow" sparingly when writing essays. There is usually a simpler way to say what you mean. Also try not to be melodramatic when writing most essays. Your last sentence is a little too flowery....http://www.englishforums.com/English/CanOldWomanLearnEnglish/zcnl/post.htm#25385Thu, 11 Mar 2004 23:46:54 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25385chameleonNo one is too old to learn! I'm glad you decided to be persistent and learn more english. We will be happy to answer your English questions. Please just post questions when you have them. If you need help with vocabulary, the website: www.dictionary.com is very helpful.http://www.englishforums.com/English/PartsOfSpeech/zcnq/post.htm#25384Thu, 11 Mar 2004 23:44:10 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25384chameleonIt depends entirely on how the word is used. Onomatopoeia can be used as many different parts of speech. That's part of why they are so useful! Can you give an example sentence?http://www.englishforums.com/English/TerrorismKillingWord/zclg/post.htm#25377Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:20:00 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25377chameleonMy sincerest condolences. It seems no part of the world is safe from the depravity of inhuman beasts like these. I have not seen the video footage and pictures you are talking about. I can completely see why people would not want these images televised. But maybe seeing the horror of this terrible crime is a way for people to truly understand the insanity. It can move people to action. When I saw the pictures and read the stories about people jumping from the burning world trade center, I felt I had to do something, so I went to give blood. This is what seems to be happening in Spain. I applaud the Spanish people for coming to their fellow human beings' aid in such short order. It seems that the worse the injustice that is done,...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhatCanAmericansDo/2/zrjp/Post.htm#25205Tue, 09 Mar 2004 20:53:28 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25205chameleonBefore I give an impression that I am a pacifist: I don't disagree with all military action around the world. Sometimes it is worse when powerful countries stand idly by. In hindsight, someone can always (and usually does) criticize that such-and-such country should have acted sooner, etc. when the outcome of a war seems positive. Of the wars that have been waged by the US in the past 15 years, I only protest the Iraq War in totality and the Gulf War in part. Yugoslavia and Afghanistan had clear objectives with international support. Human rights were in the process of being violated and an immediate threat was posed by those regimes. Maybe those wars didn't have as crystal clear an objective as the Second World War, but I still...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhatIsMorality/2/zbpd/Post.htm#25201Tue, 09 Mar 2004 18:10:16 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25201chameleonHere's my quandry: You have three people with knives. Persons A, B, and C. Person A attacks Person B (the reason may be important, but I'll save that for later) and Person B cannot defend himself. Is Person C at all obligated to defend Person B? The harder question is, "should they do it anyway?" There are two problems here: 1) What is the motivation of Person C to defend Person B and attack Person A based on the principle of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you"? 2) If Person C suceeds in killing or maiming Person A and prevents Person B from being injured, who has commited the more serious violation here? Person A or Person C?http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhatIsMorality/zbpd/post.htm#25142Mon, 08 Mar 2004 23:37:47 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25142chameleonAh... an oldie but goodie. In short, I agree with your evaluation. Here's how I came to the conclusion myself. First I think we need to define what kind of absolute right and wrong we are talking about here. This means we must have an absolute source of authority. If we choose God(s) as a source of authority, game over. There's your source. Unfortunately, humans have a nasty habit of disagreeing when God(s) is/are the standard. That's a whole other can of worms. If we say we need ultimate authority, arguing over whose non-verifiable God(s) has authority (or even exists) will get us nowhere. There is no morality in Nature. The conditions on the surface of Venus are 400C and 90 atmospheres of pressure. Amazonian pitcher plants...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhatCanAmericansDo/zrjp/post.htm#25124Mon, 08 Mar 2004 20:52:23 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25124chameleonThat's very interesting. I will keep it in mind when I'm tempted to use the word too often.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhatCanAmericansDo/zrjp/post.htm#25056Mon, 08 Mar 2004 09:15:06 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25056chameleonOkay, now a quick reply to Elena's post. Yes, a world without borders would be great. But I fear a world government. Who would check and balance this awesome, uncontested power? We haven't hit on a perfect system of government yet by a long shot. I'd be afraid to put everyone under one roof if there was a chance it could collapse and crush us. And there are still too many people around who hate each other for no good reason. As it stands now, the world is absolutely not ready for world consolidation. Much of the world doesn't even have clean drinking water, let alone electricity, libraries, self governace, etc. It is a beautiful dream to have and I share it, but with caution. We might not get another chance at it if we screw up...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhatCanAmericansDo/zrjp/post.htm#25054Mon, 08 Mar 2004 08:59:01 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25054chameleonThanks so much for your posts ladies! Re: Superman - I believe that as the younger generations of Americans mature, this kind of useage is dying out. The word "nationalist" is a dirty word to most people my age and younger (~25). I am proud of my country, but I also hold it accountable for poor policy. Re: politics - I think a lot of this kind of misunderstanding on the part of Americans has to do with confusion over the popularity of all things US. The proliferation of American idioms and speech (for better or, like, totally worse) is ubiquitous. Brittney Spears is playing on the radio in Kabul. For some, the logical conclusion is that other unrelated American culture is also of interest to the world. Let me tell you, not even...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhyPleaseRead/zbkq/post.htm#25048Mon, 08 Mar 2004 07:18:15 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:25048chameleonA very good question. If our aim is to help people because we care about the human condition, we should help the people who need the most help first. It is also definitely cheaper to feed starving peasants in North Korea than it is to support the homeless in a high-standard-of-living country like the United States. If we're talking about what benefits the American people the most, that's a different and more complicated story. But if the purpose of charity is to relieve human suffering, should we not help those who suffer the greatest?http://www.englishforums.com/English/HomosexualMarriagesAgainstNatures/3/zrdh/Post.htm#24944Sat, 06 Mar 2004 19:23:41 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:24944chameleonNeither do I.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhatCanAmericansDo/zrjp/post.htm#24927Sat, 06 Mar 2004 17:38:59 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:24927chameleonI think the term "American dream" is extendable to all of humanity. In principle, it means the freedom and the opportunity to pull yourself up into achievement and out of the throng according to your ability and work ethic without interference from feudal or authoritarian regulation. Historically, the United States was one of the few places in the world where this was possible in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Whether it was readily achievable is another story. Often, industrial and commercial tyrrany took the place of governmental tyrrany. The labelling of the "dream" as American is, I think, just a result of the wild popularity for the concept which IS the human dream at a particular historical time in US history.http://www.englishforums.com/English/HomosexualMarriagesAgainstNatures/2/zrdh/Post.htm#24923Sat, 06 Mar 2004 17:26:17 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:24923chameleonVery well. http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/gss4.html This is also a gallup poll (1996). This still does not constitute a "vast" majority (unless you define "vast" as a 14% difference in opinion) You'll also note that public opinion has been becoming more tolerant for the last 10+ years. Also, you might want to review some material on poll taking. A 49%/46% poll can tell you little to nothing about majorities and minorities depending on the sample size. I am still waiting for any data demonstrating any of your points conus. Just saying "no you're wrong" doesn't hold any weight. I would not have objected to your claim if you had simply made a statement of personal belief. But when you make declarative statements about...http://www.englishforums.com/English/HomosexualMarriagesAgainstNatures/2/zrdh/Post.htm#24818Sat, 06 Mar 2004 05:53:44 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:24818chameleonBelow, I quote from: http://gallup.com/poll/focus/sr040127.asp This is a Gallup poll. Gallup is regarded as one of the most reliable polling services in the United States. When you claim facts on controversial subjects, you should back them up with references. I can present more data points and compare the numbers if this one is unsatisfactory. QUOTE: "Forty-nine percent of Americans say homosexual relations between consenting adults should not be legal, compared with 46% who say they should be. These results, obtained in the Jan. 9-11 poll, have changed dramatically over the past year. In early May 2003, 60% of Americans said homosexual relations should be legal. This percentage dropped to 50% in mid-July, following the Supreme...