Posted by Bob301 at dialup-171.75.6.231.dial1.phoenix1.level3.net on June 04, 2003 at 04:14:13:
In Reply to: I'm in! What's the ante? posted by fluffy on June 04, 2003 at 03:21:30:
: ~~ you forgot to add that if you are intelligent , you can probably achieve wealth.
But the question rules implied you couldn't be intelligent and wealthy.
: : Nobel prize. The feeling of accomplishment that comes from having your life's work recognized and appreciated is more important to me than knowing that I am probably the very best at what I do for the time my body is able to handle it. I think I'm more of an intellectual than a physical guy, anyway.
: ~ and aren't you sexy for that? I think tose atheletes take steroids or wierd drugs..makes them..unnatural
I am certainly a sexy man. Haha..seriously though, I don't think there is anything wrong with realizing that we are physical beings as well as mental ones, and keeping ourselves in shape. I just believe the personal reward would be greater if achieved because of a lifetime of work. However, Einstein did not do anything noteworthy after his early twenties (well, he did sue for peace during WWII), but he didn't get the prize until he was 42.
: : Probably world peace, but only because I think the Earth is far too overpopulated. However, I wouldn't make a decision over the life and death of anyone other than myself. And when you say abortion, what does that entail? 2-nd trimester? Partial birth? Or do you consider the morning-after pill abortion? It's a fuzzy area, and I wouldn't know where to draw the line betweens a woman's right to choose and an embryo's right to come full term.
: ~~ abortion is necessary for women who want it...anyone with half brain does it in the first trimester
I absolutely don't disagree with you here. Women should have rights...but when does an embryo become a person, and human rights kick in?
: : : 4. Elvis - OR - The Beatles?
: ~ I disagree! Elvis was scandalous..he broke the rules..sure he wasn't as full of the wisdom and art the beatles finally managed to impart..BUT..He broke the rules..Ed Sullivan show..and he was unorthodox for the conservative public as we know it.
OK, Elvis broke the rules and boudaries of what was acceptable for performance, but his music wasn't that daring. The Beatles, on the other hand, took those aspects of society, like drugs and war, that exised but were not acceptable to talk about, and published them in the open to a very large audience. They pushed other boundaries. So how about we compromise:
Without Elvis and The Beatles, music as we know it would be far more conservative and acceptable to Southern Baptists, which I think we can all agree would be a bad thing (sorry if I offend any Southern Baptists with my insensitive joke).