flutterflye wrote: » I fully agree with her (him?). Megan Fox for instance isn't even attractive, just slutty/trampy looking
Galtee wrote: » Are you referring to Bertie or Hitler?
Misty Chaos wrote: » * The issue of Human Rights far trumps that of Animal Rights. Sure, I'm not saying there is not some shocking abuse of animals and that animals should be treated with respect but there a parts of a world where a human being has less rights than a dog in other parts of the world. This is wrong. Sort out the whole issue of human rights first THEN we can look at animal rights.
bubblypop wrote: » people who believe its ok for women to travel to another country to have a termination, or you believe its ok to allow rape victims to have a termination, but not in any other case are hypocritical a**holes. you either agree or you dont, make a choice and stick with it. (i believe it should be allowed in this country, btw!)
FetchTheGin wrote: » There are a lot of feminist men too.
Hogzy wrote: » Two and a Half Men is not at all funny. Its cheesy crap and repetitive.
Galtee wrote: » Huh?
pragmatic1 wrote: » I think there should be a limit on the number of kids dumb people have and smart people should be forced to have big families.
flutterflye wrote: » Intelligence is not based purely on genes, but also on circumstances such as availability of educational resources, good role models/teachers, attention, encouragement, a wide range of cultures and opinions etc... So your opinion makes absolutely no sense.
Zebra3 wrote: » There is nothing wrong wth grammar Nazis. A lot of people should be ashamed at how poor their grammar is.
pragmatic1 wrote: » I know its not soley based on genetics, but its thought that genetics accounts for 50% of a persons intelligence.
alphanine wrote: » I think the PC brigade bleeding heart attitude permeated in recent years enables welfare abuse in our system, especially when it comes to non-nationals/scum bags. Socialism is great.... until you run out of other people's money.
flutterflye wrote: » It is thought that genetics make up about half of human qualities. But there again, no one can agree on how much is actually nature, and how much is nurture, so that argument isn't necessarily valid. I don't see how your idea would benefit mankind at all, not that it would actually make any difference to the general level of intelligence anyway.
pragmatic1 wrote: » Well its fairly well established that intelligence has a strong genetic component. Twin studies have been used to confirm this. You cant see how a smarter population would benefit mankind? Take a look at countries that average near the top for IQ and then contrast that with countries that average near the bottom.