atinymonkey

No, you picked the wrong law, banning the slave trade was after slavery became illegal in the UK. The slave trade was the route from Africa, with slaves, to the West Indies and United States, where they were sold, to Liverpool with cotton from the West Indies and the US. It was very profitable for merchants, and it took extreme measures from the English Parliament to put a stop to it (the slavery part didn't happen in English waters, so it was hard to stop). There was no law passed to abolish slavery in Britain, but it became illegal in 1772 (note, that is 4 years before the war of independence, and therefore a valid timeline for a contribution factor). What happened was a runaway slave came before Lord Chief Justice Lord Mansfield, who ruled that the Magna Carta prohibited the act of Slavery under English Law. The slave was called James Somerset, and this became known as the Somerset ruling. Interestingly the slave belonged not to a Englishman, but to Boston customs official in North America named Charles Stewart: - http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/blackhistory/rights/slave_free.htm This meant not only was it deemed against the law, but it always had been. It also meant that England was ruling on the affairs of officals in the Americas. This angered a great number officals, mostly the ones who owned slaves. In England slavery was not common and the law did not change things much, but in the colonies where most of the manual labour was slave based it represented a significant threat to profits. As soon as the law was passed in England, it was only a matter of time until parliament ruled it to apply to the colonies. Sure enough, by November the Americas had begun steps to declare independence in the second Committee of Correspondence, which would prevent the American public officials (including the court system and the ruling on Slavery) coming under direct control of the Crown. This would ensure public officals (like Charles Stewart) could keep their slaves: - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committees_of_Correspondence In all honesty, neither the English or the Americans had the moral high ground. It would be incorrect to paint a picture that either side was motivated by a higher ideal. Both were motivated by profit, the Americans maybe a little more so than the English (it is the pioneer spirit after all, they went to America to make their fortune). It was much later on that America has the good fortune to find men with enough backbone to create a country based on an ideal, and not a profit.

No, not for the Xbox. All of the components are generic PC components. The Xbox operating system is the same 'insert disk to play' system that Windows Vista (nee longhorn) utilises. Basically, it's just a PC in a different box with a huge graphics card.

The next Star Trek series is already in the planning stage*. Its working title is Star Trek : Cadets, but it will be aired as Star Trek : Barclays Quest. It's based back in TNG timeline, and follows the escapades of Reginald 'Howling Mad' Barclays crew of cadets. Reginald Barclay was shown briefly training cadets in Starfleet Academy at the end of the Voyager series, this new series will chart the progress of Barclay from his first contact with the Voyager crew. Through a comedy of errors involving the Ferengi, the Deep Sapce Nine Wormhole and a very poor trade by the Captain and his officers, chief technician Reginald Barclay will be left the ranking officer on an obsolete dreadnought class training ship, full of cadets, where he is forced into assuming command. Deep in Dominion space, Reginald will have to get the cadets home, and comedy will ensue**. *If you count my brain as a planning stage. Luckily, it looks as though Sayonara³ will be funding this if the franchise is not renewed. **If we can get Mr T on board for a number of cameos. He will indeed pity the fool.

The last one. I loved that, because it meant the Wachowski brothers could sink back into banal obscurity and not subject the world to the substandard brain musings they put to film. There isn't an original thought between the two of them, and they stole every concept and design in the entire film. It's practically a remake of Dark City. Which is why Alex Proyas is still working as a director today and the Wachowskis have gone back to script writing for B action movies like V for Vendetta.

That may be a little unfair. The birth of language is a very interesting subject to a lot of people. It's not often used as a gambit by creationists.

The OP in any thread is inherently an invitation to discuss. IMM was implicit that this was to be a discussion on the reasoning in the OP. I think you have got a little confused, and assumed this was a rambling diatribe, which it is not. It is a discussion on what IMM saw as an inconsistency of logic, and an explanation of why it is not seen that way.

Hmmm. I see we are casually missing out the part where the British declared Slavery illegal, and American landowners decided to rebel rather than accept the loss of profits. I don't think that was an example of Englands greed.

You realise the irony in saying that via the medium of a computer?

Well, they were Iranian which probably means they were born and grew up in Iran. I presume they had not thought about moving countries.

Arthur Ewings rendition of 'The Bells of St Mary's', as played on the mouse organ. With Mallets.

You may be confusing satire with reality. We may like to portray the current American administration as being incompetent or hillbillies, but in reality they are not. George Bush may be many things, but he is not drunk at the wheel. America has been a little gung ho with peace keeping wars for the past half century. It's not a reflection on an individual President that they are at in Iraq now. Granted, George Bush has huge problems justifying his position (hampered by his less than eloquent rhetoric) but he was supported by the majority of America and the Senate.

This political religious Jihad is a bit of a closed book to me at the moment, I understand Pakistan is involved and they are teaching some of the militant groups but I don't really know why. I've got a book on the subject, and I'm going to set some time aside to read it. As far as I can see at the moment, Pakistan represents a significant threat to world peace on a much higher level than Iraq.

Yes. And I told you was that's deliberately misunderstanding a perfectly clear definition. Abortion has got nothing to do with drug use, the laws are not the same. Your argument is, as usual, a bizarre fallacy which is convincing precisely no-one. It doesn't need to sit well, if you have a different opinion to me then that's fine. I'd suggest is that you come to your own conclusions, and not just pick the simple choice. Sometimes the right thing to do is complicated, sometimes the right thing to believe is hard to grasp. It's better to work out your own ideas on tricky subjects. Unlike Douglas, I'm not trying to cram my opinions down anyones throat. I've just explaining the reasoning behind my own.

It must be a difficult time for you. Who was your grandfather on this site? Why can they not find his body?

The problem lies in the Shiites being placed in positions within the Police. Positions, in some cases, that they held under Hussein. Positions that they used as an excuse to abuse and torture people, and that they have returned to doing. The reason for this is that there is a huge shortage of police in Iraq, and the coalition has been forced to give jobs back to the people they 'liberated' the civilians from two years ago. The UK/US security forces are overwhelmed with the work to rebuild Iraq. The solution, it would seem, would be to get more resources to police Iraq. If the security forces were substantially larger, they would have time to train up fresh recruits and provide a truly effective and humane police in Iraq. There is one prominent source for the resources. It's world recognised and proven as effective in policing troubled and wartorn lands. The United Nations, given enough public and political apology, would step in to help. The issue is now the stubbornness of the UK and US political leadership. They refuse to admit that there is an issue in Iraq, or that they were in any way at fault. This makes it impossible to approch the UN, unless they modify their position. Iraqis are being abused and tortured becasue of the leadership in the UK and US, instead of the homegrown version. I suspect that Bush will go to the UN in two years, when he has nothing political to lose. In the meantime, we wait.

Hmm. On a personal level I trust the BMA to let me know when cognative thoughts have formed, and at that point I would consider the foteus to be part of humanity (as that is the point it truly becomes a child). Any other definition is just anthropomorphising the foetus. Because the fetus never becomes a child in the case of abortion. However, damaging a child is a different matter.

I think YT is referring to his persistent psychosis of using prisoners for 'medical research': - http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showpost.php?p=134755

It's because

Him. Jacques is a boy, not a girl.

Yes. That's just what I was saying. Babies are not human' date=' they are the souls of aliens who died eons ago on the earth. Some Doctors assert that cognitive thought process being at the third trimester, and usually at that point the becomes a child. Others insist it's during the second. I don't intend to be pulled into a debate about the precise second during pregnancy when a fetus becomes a child. My point is, an abortion is intended to end the potential life of a child. I have no opinion on that, I don't see it as any of my business any more than I see it my business to ensure you personally never wear a condom. However, alcohol during pregnancy is damaging a fetus that will become a child and an eventual member of humanity. That's the part where it becomes society's business, humanity's business, as it's one person abusing another (abet abuse in advance of birth).

For me, it goes like this - A girl does not need to justify her abortion to me, because it's not my business. It arrogant to presume otherwise. However, if someone is torturing a child then that is my business. It's my business then because the child is part of humanity, and any damage done to one member of humanity lessens us all. No man is an island, and all that.

Wow. I have no idea what SCTV is, who Bob and Doug are, or what content laws entail. Something tells me I don't want to know.

That's because the gay mice have all the best cheese partys.

We're leaving together But still it's farewell And maybe we'll come back To earth, who can tell I guess there is no one to blame We're leaving ground (leaving ground) Will things ever be the same again It's the final countdown... The final theory Ooh oh We're heading for Venus (Venus) And still we stand tall 'Cause maybe they've seen us And welcome us all (yeah) With so many light years to go And things to be found (to be found) I'm sure that we'll all miss her so It's the final countdown... The final theory The final countdown (the final theory) Ooh ooh oh (fade out) Ooh ooh oooh

Jesus. So we see from wikipedia that Buffer solutions are used to stabalise solutions for enzymes to work. It's not a massive leap of logic to realise that cleaning products may use enzymes. A quick google returns over 200,000 results to look through and confims that there are enzyme based cleaning products. Now, lets look at antacid: - Now, what does a buffer solution do? It stabilises PH. What does an Antacid do? It stabilises PH.