| 18241 - Reply from Régine203 , 52 yrs (France) - 2018-12-06 |
|Mon e-mail : email@example.com|
Do you humans think we Salmons should make peace with Bassistan? They use cars with Mayonnaise we use cars with Gravy absolutely unacceptable!
DO YOU THINK NORMAL THE PAINS OF WOMEN DURING CONFINEMENT, THEIR BELLY AND BACK ARE SCRUTCH THE WONB SQUIZE AND I WONDER WHY THE PRIORITY IS GIVEN TO THE BABY. WOMEN ARE MADE TO SUFFER TERRIBLLY AND MEN NOT. IN THE BODY OF A WOMAN EVERYTHING IS MADE FOR CONFINEMENT TO LAST; MEN HAVE A FREE BODY EVEN WHEN THEY MAKE TERRIBLE EFFORYS. THEY CAN STOP WHEN THEY WANT.
| 18246 - Reply from Régine203 , 52 yrs (France) - 2018-12-23 |
|Yes, but IT'S EVE WHO HAD EATEN THE APPLE, NOT US.|
| 18245 - Reply from Samuel111 , 19 yrs (Ireland) - 2018-12-21 |
|Hello. If you follow the bible, then if you check Genesis chapter 3 verse 16, when God was giving punishment to the serpant, Adam and Eve for disobeying him and eating from the fruit of life, he said to Eve "I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." Hope this was somewhat helpful :)|
| 18227 - Reply from Gabrielle20 (Great Britain) - 2018-10-10 |
|Although men are the more dominant sex and portray as the stronger and braver gender. You have to remember that just because they don't look like their physically hurting they may be suffering from things like depression, anxiety an eating disorder, and for younger boys, bullying. The fact that women are designed to carry a child for 9 months and birth it doesn't deny the fact that men don't hurt mentally. Even though abuse is more common for a woman to experience doesn't mean they don't experience it either.|
| 18222 - Reply from Lillian98 , 13 yrs (usa) - 2018-09-19 |
|I don't understand what your asking. Men and Woman are just designed differently. And though you say woman suffer more pain, many men suffer just as much physical pain. THey just have more pain tolerance.|
quelle relation peut établir entre politicien et penseur
| 18257 - Reply from Zaidou66 , 25 yrs (Burundi) - 2019-01-27 |
i don't think that the two types of politicians are the ones who thinks right and the ones that thinks wrong but from what i think is that there is those politicians that lies for the benefit of they people and those whom lies for their own benefits
| 18220 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-09-18 |
|Il y a des politiciens qui pensent bien et d'autres qui pensent mal.|
I understand that they have to respect the right to manifest but I also think that manifestations can bring breakers and that the Government cannot control everything and everybody. It's only Benalla who is guilty, if there is a fault. The reporters and newspapers systematically attack the government because it is not left winged.
Not long ago a Professor has been charged in Court because he had helped some cancerous people to die. What do you think ?
| 18352 - Reply from Silvia238 , 54 yrs (Peru) - 2020-01-24 |
|I think euthanasy is not the best way of ending our lives. Your life will always have a purpose, even in the last minutes. Suffering makes living harder but nowadays there are many options to diminish the pain. And who knows, maybe your recovering was coming and you cut your lifetime, losing a precious opportunity to stay with your beloved ones for a while more.|
How do you envisage the political landscape in France WITH THE AWFULL DECISIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT about MIGRANTS, TAXES, MONEY GIVEN TO THE RICH, DIRTINESS IN THE BIG TOWNS, ISLAMISTS PRISONNERS ALLOWED TO LEAVE THE JAIL, THE MULTIPLICATION OF MOSQUEES WHILE CHURCHES AND SYNAGOGS ARE OFTEN PROHIBITED IN ARAB COUNTRIES, and so on ?
Trump has decided to put taxes on Europe and China steel. Maybe he will do the same for cars. I think it's a scandal.
In France an old man, owner of a jewellry, has been taken to Court because he had killed with a gun a bugglar who robbed him and had a knife. What is your opinion ?
| 18254 - Reply from Abram15 , 16 yrs (United States) - 2019-01-10 |
| Hi Asta!
I agree that your suggested method for dealing with robbers is much more peaceful than the method chosen by the jeweler and far more desirable because it would not result in death. However, neither of us no the circumstances of the robbery or what threats the robber made against the jeweler. It is very likely that the robber threatened to kill the jeweler if he did not hand over his goods. In that case, the action that the jeweler took is certainly justifiable as self defense. Maybe the robber tried to kill the jeweler first just to make it easier to take what he wanted.
Using lethal force should always be a last resort, but it is necessary in some circumstances. I hope this helps!
| 18216 - Reply from Asta19 (Denmark) - 2018-09-07 |
| So, the law is there so that we don't decide what is rigth or wrong ourselves. The robber was there, not to kill the man, but to steal. The man should have given the robber what he wanted, waited to he left and then called the police. He would probably had had his stuff back and the robber would probably had gone to prison, but it would have been by the law. If we just start to kill each other, by proclaiming our own rigth and wrong, society will collaps into anarchy.|
| 18206 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-08-20 |
|I add that nothing goes right here and the government will have to make new laws to replace the existant ones that often give more rights to the riff and less rights to the victims. I remember that last President François Hollande had made the best he could for security. I think HE WILL BE OUR NEXT PRESIDENT.|
| 18205 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-08-20 |
|I completelly agree. I wonder why things are like that, it seems like an occult conjuration TRYING TO DESTROY FRANCE.|
| 18204 - Reply from Lily43 (Great Britain) - 2018-08-19 |
|I think this is simply self-defense. The man would probably have been badly injured if not. I think that law about the same weapon is pretty ridiculous, even if it is to prevent murder.|
| 18203 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-08-10 |
|In France self defense exist only if the defender uses the same weapon than the attacker.
Everything is made for the riff !!! (racaille)
| 18192 - Reply from Abram15 , 16 yrs (usa) - 2018-06-12 |
| "I am confident that this is the rule in France as well," but please correct me if I am mistaken.
| 18191 - Reply from Abram15 , 16 yrs (usa) - 2018-06-12 |
| Bonjour Laura!
The robber was making threats on the jeweler's life; Was the jeweler to wait till he was killed? It was probably not the jeweler's intention to kill the burglar, incapacitation would have been sufficient to protect himself and his goods. But if the jeweler had intended to kill, then he is at fault because thievery does not carry the death penalty nor is it justifiable to take a life only to defend possessions. However, the burglar did wield a knife and it is easy to imagine how the jeweler may have feared for his life and taken measures to neutralize the threat.
Is that what they teach you in France, that it is wrong for an individual to take initiative and do what is right? Must it be a government institution decides what is right, acts as the sole instrument of justice? What the founders of the United States held was that the true legitimacy of the law comes from God, not from the government. And government institutions are (1) made up of people and (2) not above ordinary citizens in interpreting God's law. They laid upon ordinary individuals great responsibility in keeping order and preventing tyranny by affording the right to keep and bear arms and reemphasizing their God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Christianity has influenced many man-made legal systems around the world, and in almost all of them violent actions that would otherwise be considered crimes are justified in the context of self defense when (1) the threat to life is imminent and (2) the fear of harm is reasonable. In this situation, the defender may take violent actions proportional to the level of threat to defend himself or other people. I am confident that this is the rule in France as well.
It is, however, up to the court to decide whether or not the danger was imminent and whether or not his response was proportional to the threat. There is also a doctrine called imperfect self defense which applies when the latter criterion is not met, i.e. the person had an irrational fear for their life. In this situation the person will still be charged with a crime, but the sentence will be less severe.
What do you think? And thanks for your input!
| 18188 - Reply from Laura160 (France) - 2018-06-05 |
|The burglar did not kill him. Simply robbed him. And the basic rule in justice is that you can't do justice yourself... So yeah of course he's got to go to court!|
| 18187 - Reply from Lillian101 , 13 yrs (usa) - 2018-06-05 |
|he shouldn't be charged in court. He was defending himself and his store.
I was about to say he was protected my the seccond amendment then I realized it was in france. XD
What do you think about the US ambassy settlement in Jerusalem ?There have been many shots on the palestinian side. It will increase tensions and hatred. We will see how Iran , for instance, will react. I don't understand that decision. Trump has fogotten Jesus'memorial place.
| 18178 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-05-19 |
|Yes, but among palestinians there are Christians. Do you think jews will keep them in this high symbolic place ? Will Christians be safe there ? Jews, while colonising, will destroy ANYBODY's own, without any distinction. Christians are concerned.|
| 18177 - Reply from Korla10 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-05-19 |
|Some people say "don't tell me, show me." Well, the United Sates of America stands with Israel, and I think that we have proven just that. Shifting the U.S. embassy from the Mediterranean metropolis of Tel Aviv, to the religious hub of Jerusalem, was an overdue promise. Every U.S. president, from H.W. Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama, had given their word to place the embassy in the Jerusalem, Israel. Yet for some reason or another, every six months, extensions were signed, crippling that expectation. During his first year of being in office, President Trump publicly acknowledged Jerusalem, as Israel's rightful, capital city. Within only five months later, he has done what others had procrastinated to do in two decades! I commend the United States and President Trump, for not only approving of the relocation, but for it bringing into physical manifestation.
Over 35,000 Palestinians and protesters, lined the Israeli border, rioting and trying to break through the border. Like most any other nation would do if on the precipice of invasion or massacre, Israel set up a line of defense. I don't understand why, sympathy, and attention was given to the Palestinian side, as though Israel was in the wrong. Sixty-two lives, is the death toll from violent protest in the Palestinian's "March of Return". At least fifty of the people, were from Hamas. Though the loss of life is lamentable, Israel did not intentionally kill innocent people, only defend their territory.
Tension has always been in the Middle East. Hatred is what many people thrive on. Death and threats are a daily part of living. The Palestinians were just pitching a hissy fit. Summer has just started and temperatures are rising. Hopefully soon things will balance out, and possible solutions be found.
| 18176 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-05-18 |
|It's me, Régine, who have written the message.|
I think birth control should be done in the world, should be limited, because stuff is not for share infinitivelly. When they are poor, many children are the problem. What is your opinion ?
| 18215 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-09-03 |
|My e-mail : firstname.lastname@example.org|
| 18214 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-09-03 |
|The more people are poor the more they have children. I think it's because of religions that prohibite contraception. Sisters burn pills and imams preach to have numerous children.I think your ideas are the result of your education,maybe religious.
Yes I would like to discuss and share points of view with you. YOU CAN E-MAIL ME.
| 18213 - Reply from Soph182 (USA) - 2018-09-01 |
|If a woman doesn't want or can't take care of a child she shouldn't have a sexual relationship. A child has never nor will a child ever be a problem. Children should not be murdered because a person doesn't want that child. Please email me if you'd like to talk more on the subject. I'dlike to talk whether you are for or against the situation.|
| 18198 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-06-25 |
|Would you love to reborn girl in a islamist familly and be forced to cope with birthgiving, young and without the help of healthcare ? Would you love not to be allowed
to go to school, to die of starvation, because of the poverty of your parents ?
I didn't mean abortion, but contraception. In these countries there are virus, sexual deseases, dirtyness, that's all.
| 18197 - Reply from Lillian101 , 13 yrs (usa) - 2018-06-22 |
|Write another way...what's so hard to understand about that statement?
You don't have an open mind, and no matter how much common sense I throw at you-you don't want to accept the fact that using birth control and having abortions IS considered killing. And it is NOT a woman's right to use birth control or have a abortion.
Think of it this way...abortion is legal, (yes I understand that this debate is about whether or not birth control and abortion should be spread in the third world. (which it should not) but that doesn't mean it's legal.
Let's put it another way, let's say, that...stealing was legal. Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right. It's the same way with abortion and birth control.
I see no point in arguing with you about this, as you don't seem to be accepting the fact that it's just wrong.
p.s. Did you know that most of the people who use birth control or have abortions regret it?
| 18196 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-06-22 |
|? Could you write in another way ? thanks.|
| 18195 - Reply from Lillian101 , 13 yrs (Usa) - 2018-06-22 |
|It's NOT their right to...oh, nevermind. You have as thick a skull as my freaking dog.|
| 18194 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-06-19 |
|I understand. But in poor countries having many children is as well a danger for women who are not helped and don't have medical assistance and the fact that they are often too young increases high risks for their health and life. And they are the more often muslims. So they are sold, married young without their agreement, and the explosion of demography has often the aim to invade Occident. Islam is a religion of expantion and usually don't respect their rights. Muslim children MAY reproduce the same and I bet they will increase more and more and maybe one day they will be very very numerous. Europe America Asia are not their territory. They have a continent : Africa. But of course migrants who respect our traditions and of course WHO RESPECT THE LAWS OF THE REPUBLIC AND SO WHO RESPECT THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN AND GIRLS ARE ABSOLUTELLY WELCOME.|
| 18189 - Reply from Qiu151 , 14 yrs (China) - 2018-06-06 |
|I think whether have a child or not depends on himself.It is against people's freedom and right to force them to have a child or not.In China,the government used to force people to have only one child.If you have more than one child,you'll be fined.If the only child lose his life when he grows up,his parents are too old to have another child,his family will lose their hope.The government don't give parents enough money,if they lose their ability to work,if they get ill,no one can take care of them or raise them till their death.Anyway,I do think parents should try their best to avoid their children behave badly.|
| 18186 - Reply from Lillian101 , 13 yrs (usa) - 2018-06-04 |
|Actually, there kinda was one...it just wasn't what people think it was.|
| 18181 - Reply from Lillian101 , 13 yrs (USA) - 2018-05-25 |
|'Cause there wasn't one|
| 18180 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-05-25 |
|Why don't you return to the cave age ?|
| 18179 - Reply from Lillian101 , 13 yrs (usa) - 2018-05-20 |
|First of all, children do not need to go to a public school. They can be taught what they need to know by their parents.
Secondly, children don't need THINGS to be happy. In the 1800's it was rare that children had toys. They can easily live without them and be happy.
If your homeless or VERY VERY VERY poor and have a child/children, you can give him/her/them up for adoption if absolutely necessary. But you do not need to murder it.
| 18174 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-05-18 |
|Numerous children are a problem for poor famillies who don't have enough money to send them to school, to feed them normally and to give them stuff which would be necessary for a happy life. They are assisted, and often have a behaviour of profitors when they come in Europe. But fortunatelly it is not always like that.|
| 18171 - Reply from Lillian209 , 13 yrs (USA) - 2018-05-14 |
|Since when in the crap are children a PROBLEM?|
| 18167 - Reply from Emre46 (Turkey ) - 2018-04-20 |
|Know new people|
| 18158 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-04-09 |
|I wanted to say birth controls should be spread in the third world.|
I have heard a proposal to "supprime," delete in English, the thread on either guns prohibition or Islam (it's unclear which), both important issues. I understand that some issues are sensitive and people would rather not talk about them just because they are distressing. Ignoring issues, however, will produce a far more grievous outcome and a more long-lasting period of hardship than the brief comfort allowed by a moment of blissful ignorance.
I encourage everyone to be patient, be polite, and have fortitude. If we strive toward these qualities in our discourse, then we will avoid discomfort while we share our opinions.
I hope there is no one here who will argue for censorship; this thread is only intended as a gentle nudge in the right direction, and not an invitation for debate.
I hope my message is not repugnant in that it sounds condescending; by no means does it imply that I embody the qualities that I am advocating for or that I am any better than anyone else. That is self-evidently false and arrogant.
| 18230 - Reply from Kae58 , 16 yrs (USA) - 2018-10-17 |
|I don’t see it as censorship. This is a child friendly site with kids younger than 10, this is not a political website meant and made for adults who actually understand what’s going on. I’m anti-gun so I’d rather not see post about them anyways. As well, lots of countries don’t even have gun laws and their citizens aren’t allowed to have them. Why would they care? They should ban post about guns, they have a right to as well, and I think, if anything, they should monitor posts about Islam. There are a lot of hateful people on the internet with nothing better to do than harass the Islamic faith. It’s not censorship.|
| 18153 - Reply from Abram71 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-04-06 |
| Bonjour Nicolas!
I agree completely! I would elect you if you ran for office in my country! Almost any random, sober minded citizen would do a better job than our current officials.
Thanks for your thoughts!
| 18152 - Reply from Nicolas209 , 53 yrs (France) - 2018-04-06 |
|Well, I don't like to tell about my own opinions. But this is what I think personally:
- Religion can bring both the worst and the best; it just dépends on people's mind.
- If I was a politic leader, I would stop wars and looting of poor countries. We should help poor countries to exploit themselves their own wealth (mineral resources, human ressources, renewable energy...), instead of just sending small amounts of money. They don't need begging ; just peace, respect and smart communication. Then, they will be able to grow, and poor people will be able to survive without having to leave their country.
| 18146 - Reply from Abram110 , 16 yrs (usa) - 2018-04-04 |
| Bonjour Nicolas!
Always! You're absolutely right; we're not here to "fight" each other, we're here to learn and expand our horizons. Proper debate should never be confused with fighting.
By the way, Nicolas, while you're here I'd like to see some of your own opinions. I'm sure you can bring something good to the table!
| 18145 - Reply from Nicolas17 , 53 yrs (France) - 2018-04-04 |
I understand what you mean. Well, you can debate about gun prohibition if you like, provided you don't tell about religion issues, please, because it will bring division or hurt some people.
Please, just think about the aim of this website : allow people to know each other better ; not fight each other. Let's try to stay positive.
I am beginning a new thread to discuss Islam because it is a new subject that shouldn't be discussed on the already packed thread "Guns Prohibition." Guns prohibition should be discussed on that thread, not Islam. But I encourage everyone to have a look at that thread, for that is where the debate on Islam began, and you can contribute to the buns prohibition debate.
I am not reposting all of the relevant excerpts from the Quran because that would take two more messages due to the 8000 character per message limit, and those excerpts are easily accessible on the "guns prohibition" thread. Please read those excerpts before you contribute to the debate; educate yourself.
| 18183 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-05-28 |
|It's normal to keep an open eye on Muslims because some of them have a wrong interpretation of the holly book. You cannot see a member of other religion becoming a terrorist. It's extremelly difficult to make a distinction between real Muslims and the ones who want to spread the djihad. So, FOR OUR SECURITY let's close our borders.|
| 18182 - Reply from Anonymous 166 (United States) - 2018-05-28 |
|My take on Islam?
I do not believe that Muslims are at all dangerous! I have met a few Muslims on here, and they are all great people. I have learned from a Muslim friend that it is against Islam to hurt people!
I also do not believe in a Muslim ban... it was a restriction looking for terrorists and trying to weed them out from the good people. If a Muslim wanted to come from... let me just say UK (for example, list any country not listed!) they would be perfectly allowed. The government doesn't just say no because they are a Muslim!!! If a woman from Canada wanted to move to the U.S., they wouldn't look at her and see a hijab and say that she couldn't come in. Same with a man wearing a taqiyah! And that is not to say that all Muslims wear those garments.
The government was just trying to keep our people safe. They know that not everybody is a terrorist! This was also not permanent. Also, may I mention, that if a Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, or anyone of any other religion besides Islam from those countries wanted to come in during the ban, they would be denied in the same way that a Muslim would! Also, Venezuela was listed as having a travel ban as well, and they are NOT a Muslim country!!!
So, that is my take on the supposed "Muslim ban" that was never put in place.
| 18164 - Reply from Korla10 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-04-19 |
I believe proper, respectful debate, is an insighful, pleassurable form of education and communication.
As long as there are issues of opinion, I am sure there will always be individuals with contradicting beliefs. We must be mindful of others fancy, but never avoid disscussing or expressing our own ideas, moderately and respectively.
| 18162 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-04-18 |
|I agree with Lea. I add that every belief is bound to be reality for the believer as long as it is not a message of hatred and intolerance.|
| 18161 - Reply from Eva212 , 17 yrs (Germany) - 2018-04-18 |
I think it is woth to dicuss religion in general, because just as I started talking about christianity I realised so many things. I learned to recognize metaphors, symbols, similies and how to interpret them. With thinking about religion I became tolerant and I learned that when to people are reading the same text, they could think a thousands of different thoughts and no one is wrong and no one completely right. I have not read the old discussion,but I think it is worth to talk about religion.
| 18143 - Reply from Abram110 , 16 yrs (usa) - 2018-04-04 |
| Bonjour, Nicolas!
I understand that some people find it difficult to maintain a calm demeanor while debating sensitive issues, and I implore everyone to do so. If this debate does not suit you, although I encourage you to watch from the sidelines, I don't mind at all if you abandon this thread.
I have been discussing various other issues on the preceding threads; please feel free and encouraged to contribute!
Thank you for your concern!
| 18142 - Reply from Nicolas17 , 53 yrs (France) - 2018-04-04 |
|Abram, il y a déjà eu pas mal de débat sur ce sujet ici, et on a fini par les supprimer car bien souvent, ça tournait mal. Si vous pouviez parler d'autre chose, ça m'arrangerait. Merci !|
Where is Nicolas Sarkozy's natural place?
Is he considered a war criminal ?
Should he be tried on charges of killing Libyans?
Or He deserves better treatment?
| 18141 - Reply from Nicolas17 (France) - 2018-04-04 |
|C'est fait, j'ai bien reçu ton message et j'ai répondu. Au passage, je te remercie pour ta vigilance.|
| 18137 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-04-04 |
|Nicolas, à quelle adresse courriel puis-je vous contacter? J'ai quelqu'un à vous rapporter.|
| 18130 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-03-31 |
|Nicolas Sarkozy did war to kill colonel Kadhafi because he did slaughters to his people. He was considered as a dictator. But I think it was a mistake because Kadhafi had ordered France 10 nuclear power plants, a right on uranium mines and quite 100 planes. Sarkozy had not fought of France.|
Strikes paralyse France. What is your opinion ? Do you think the radz unions must go on like this or not ? I think they are right. The government gives all the money to the ricH.
It takes on the poor and the middle classes.
| 18163 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-04-18 |
|Bonjour dear Luojun, it's a strong possibility. but I think a good Governement, everywhere in the world, should be a melting of social rights and freedom. Communism for jobs IN ADMIISTRATION, capitalism for jobs in private field AND decent wages FOR ALL.|
| 18159 - Reply from luojun127 (China) - 2018-04-13 |
| I think now it's a Revisionist government|
| 18156 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-04-08 |
|I thought that chinese governement was communist, left winged. I don't understand why it has decided to do that. Maybe it has started to become capitalist. Or only members of nomenclatura won't be concerned. If so, it seems like Soviet Union times.|
| 18149 - Reply from luojun127 , 15 yrs (China) - 2018-04-05 |
| Bonjour, dear Régine.
Someone may says the labors are wayward and ignore their proper occupations. But I believe they are right. French labors fought for their rights since 1831 in Lyon. Now the working class is weak, so they have no choice but to fight for their rights through strikes.
A few days ago, thousands of sanitationmen struck in Shanghai because their wages are deducted for no reason. It lasted for few days, then it was suppressed. I believe both French and Chinese government should cares for the labors more.
| 18136 - Reply from Lillian209 , 13 yrs (USA) - 2018-04-03 |
|Hey, looks like we all agree. :)|
| 18135 - Reply from Abram15 , 16 yrs (usa) - 2018-04-03 |
| Bonjour Raphael!
Yes, Here is a point about which we are in agreement: governments are corrupt; they have been , while the people have been brainwashed and distracted, hijacked by certain influential people to serve the interests of the "Cabal," if you will, and not those of the people. There is hope, however, for the US. It's just law granting ample individual freedom, although largely ignored today, still exists, the Constitution, and could be enforced if enough people could be educated properly.
Thanks for your opinion!
| 18124 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-03-26 |
|Presque tous les gouvernements occidentaux sont totalement asservis aux intérêts des riches et ne se préoccupent pas du tout du sort des pauvres et de la classe moyenne.|
| 18120 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-03-24 |
|My parents and I belongs to the middle classes. At the limit of poverty. Our wages won't increase. And we pay many taxes.|
I think computers couldhave a soul, as they work like a brain. Electronics are like neurons. And what about a next life in a machine ?
| 18232 - Reply from Head Salmon131 (Salmonistan) - 2018-10-28 |
|We Salmons upload ourselves on Google Drive when we die and we still preserve our souls. HUMANS ARE INFERIOR|
| 18160 - Reply from Camille163 , 15 yrs (France) - 2018-04-13 |
| Brain is a deep network with links between the neurons but I think one day we'll be able to do the same not necessarily on computers. We have to try to find how is it connect.|
| 18131 - Reply from Abram15 , 16 yrs (usa) - 2018-04-03 |
I think this question should be posted on the philosophy form, not the politics forum, but I'll have a go at it anyway.
I'll start out by saying that I don't know if machines could ever become human. But I will dispute your premise that "electronics" are like neurons; that's absurd. Electrical impulses are involved in brain function and are very important, but that's where the similarities end.
If humans have a soul, I think that it must have been made by God. Humans make machines, but they cannot make souls. So I do not think that humans can make machines with souls.
Thanks for your question!
| 18123 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-03-26 |
|C'est du gros n'importe quoi.|| |