Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Proof that John Kerry is Unfit for Command -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cirrus who wrote (18588)	10/14/2004 10:52:09 AM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27181

Your idea of morals do not square with the majority of the population. It appears that your are morally similar to Democrat politicians. So why should our constitution be amended? That is the point buddy. The American people do not want activist judges who will abridge the Constitution because they feel like it. We have to defend our way of life. If adding a new amendment to define what is understood under common law is required, then don't blame the right. You can express your anger at the left wing whackos who tried to change the law. You're a fool, then. You are idealistic and unrealistic. The fear that someone who values life more than you might die because of your idealism saddens me greatly. Even one life is too much. In Beslan it was hundreds dead because the terrorists were able to move freely. Good. When you find some moral values, please keep them to yourself. It is too bad that you don't like dealing with moral people. You may vote with your feet. Why should we be subsidizing medical research for Canada, France, Germany, et al? We should not be. The current proposals for re-importation do not solve the problem.

To: cirrus who wrote (18588)	10/14/2004 12:19:14 PM
From: Richnorth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27181

Exactly. Why should we be subsidizing medical research for Canada, France, Germany, et al? I don't agree with you on this point simply because the chances of success in scientific investigations are greatly enhanced when more investigators are involved. That's why scientists share their info/data and discoveries with other scientists worldwide by publishing them in journals so as to preclude anyone from wasting his/her time by re-inventing the wheel, so to speak. Also, the investigations of any research group might provide useful insights and leads to other groups and this, more often than not, spells success! Needless to say, scientific investigation should ever be an ongoing co-operative endeavour in order to produce results, more often than not. BTW, Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1626) Renaissance author, courtier, and father of deductive reasoning, wrote about this fact nearly 400 years ago! .