IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New "is not a living, self-aware organism" ... coma?
I know what you're going for, but the language you used is problematic.
===

Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
New If you've got better verbiage, I'm all ears.
That's why I threw this out here...
Nobody wins in a butter eating contest
New How about
Citizenship shall be limited to living human beings. Under no circumstances shall these rights be confered upon nor enjoyed by a company, corporation or other such legally created entity; nor shall these rights be extended to any living entitiy otehr than human beings, such as plant life or animal life.
New Artificail life? Alien life?
--

Less Is More. In my book, About Face, I introduce over 50 powerful design axioms. This is one of them.

--Alan Cooper. The Inmates Are Running the Asylum
New Re: Artificail life? Alien life?
NO, these cannot be citizens (which sorta, I hope, makes "making" them somewhat less enticing)
jb4
shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf. BULLSHIT

New I think granting them the rights of citizens...
...decreases the chances of them being made. Why expend effort in creating an AI/whatever if you can't own it as your personal slave?
Nobody wins in a butter eating contest
New But when they are made/found
boy, what a bonanza for slavers!
--

Less Is More. In my book, About Face, I introduce over 50 powerful design axioms. This is one of them.

--Alan Cooper. The Inmates Are Running the Asylum
New Re: How about.. don't forget my cats
Going out on a limb, but...

must insist that legal protections be extended to non-human animals. They are sentient beings... not our property to buy, sell, slaughter at will.

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."
- Mohandas Gandhi

thanks
mx.
"I'm man enough to tell you that I can't put my finger on
exactly what my philosophy is now, but I'm flexible."
-- Malcolm X
New That's a long limb, alright.
And while I agree that such is a good idea, enforcing vegetarianism in a country's constitution might be overstepping what we are capable of at this time. :D
Nobody wins in a butter eating contest
New Current legal standard is "natural person"
Already defined for various purposes. Means exactly what you want. Should have mentioned that in my earlier post.
===

Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
New Thanks, incorporated.
Nobody wins in a butter eating contest
New Needs clarification
Natural person extends to artificially fertilized embryos? Pre-birth fetus's? Person remains fuzzy at present and getting fuzzier as the Anti abortionists continue to push their controlling agenda - which would appear to violate Thane's article 2 except they will invoke protection of unborn persons as justification for meddling.



Java is a joke, only it's not funny.

     --Alan Lovejoy
Expand Edited by tuberculosis Aug. 21, 2007, 06:40:20 AM EDT
     Defining the "next" constitution. - (inthane-chan) - (37)
         "is not a living, self-aware organism" ... coma? - (drewk) - (11)
             If you've got better verbiage, I'm all ears. - (inthane-chan) - (10)
                 How about - (jbrabeck) - (6)
                     Artificail life? Alien life? -NT - (Arkadiy) - (3)
                         Re: Artificail life? Alien life? - (jb4) - (2)
                             I think granting them the rights of citizens... - (inthane-chan)
                             But when they are made/found - (Arkadiy)
                     Re: How about.. don't forget my cats - (xtensive) - (1)
                         That's a long limb, alright. - (inthane-chan)
                 Current legal standard is "natural person" - (drewk) - (2)
                     Thanks, incorporated. -NT - (inthane-chan)
                     Needs clarification - (tuberculosis)
         I have problems with your use of "truth" - (Arkadiy) - (1)
             Freedom of religion. - (inthane-chan)
         Re: Defining the "next" constitution. - (JayMehaffey) - (2)
             on your post right to assemble and seek redress from the gov - (boxley)
             Good food for thought. - (inthane-chan)
         Re: Defining the "next" constitution. - (jb4) - (1)
             Re: Defining the "next" constitution. - (inthane-chan)
         Give it a shot - (boxley)
         Another thing to consider as a source - the UDHR. - (Another Scott) - (16)
             total disagreement on a few things - (boxley) - (15)
                 Re: total disagreement on a few things - (JayMehaffey) - (14)
                     that is not a basic function of states - (boxley) - (13)
                         The basic function of states . . . - (Andrew Grygus)
                         Re: that is not a basic function of states - (JayMehaffey) - (10)
                             what the state is better doing? - (boxley) - (1)
                                 US doesn't do it very well - (JayMehaffey)
                             Actually, it is... - (danreck) - (7)
                                 Confucius said it better - (Ashton)
                                 Not sure what your point is - (JayMehaffey) - (5)
                                     why should government cover health care? -NT - (boxley) - (4)
                                         Why should business 'cover' health care? - (Ashton) - (1)
                                             Lets start a new thread, free medical care for all or not (new thread) - (boxley)
                                         Things to consider - (JayMehaffey) - (1)
                                             Have you visited a VA hospital or IHS clinic lately? -NT - (boxley)
                         Re: that is not a basic function of states - (Ashton)

Sex.
190 ms