Sick Frankenstein Shit

hate to tell you but they have already made a half human half animal and it has excaped:

OOOOOO splice my cock genes with that of a Clydesdale and its move over Ron Jeremy!!!!

Do we even need to go further than this original post? UpTight has already established:


1- he uses religion as a metric for government action (read first paragraph)

2- he later acknowledges his complete hypocrisy about this action (read 3rd paragraph)

3- he doesn't understand the separation of church and state (read link; and first paragraph again)

4- he doesn't even understand the science he is criticizing (that is obvious) but yet we should feel COMPELLED by his PJ O'Rourke AVATAR that he is a SERIOUS person whose UNINFORMED VIEWS should be RESPECTED

This thread should have been ended within 3 or 4 posts.

watch out... he's evolving...

Concern Troll!

We can debate actual science, that is not a problem. But it's hard to get past the initial inconsistencies of the original post.

Science questions:

1- what defines an 'organism'?
2- can an 'organism' ever change over time?
3- what defines life?


start there, attn_ho, since you seem to want to referee the debate.

i was referring to uptight. sorry. hence, i was agreeing with you.

thread dynamics move too fast for this old man. Good to know you attn_ho

Half vampire, half lycan and stronger than both!

Although the UK is largely a secular state, it is not entirely accurate to apply the notion of separation of Church and State to our law making apparatus.

The House of Lords is comprised of not only the Lords Temporal but also the Lords Spiritual. Hence, the nation's bishops and archbishops theoretically have some influence within the apparatus by which we create our laws. However, the Lords Spiritual are very much outnumbered by the Lords Temporal and they don't tend to vote on laws anyway.

In addition to this the Queen as Sovereign Head of State is not only the head of government but also the head of the Church of England. As such the authority of Church and State are vested in one individual.

In practice, of course, the Queen has no real power and the power of the House of Lords is also somewhat limited. The real power these days lies with the House of Commons. Hence, although Church and State are not constitutionally separated, in practice the law making process is a largely secular one.

Indeed, a person may quite easily maintain strong feelings concerning a subject while being thoroughly ill-informed concerning that subject.

However, it is unclear to me why such an ill-informed opinion should be afforded anything more than the merest desultory consideration promptly followed by perfunctory dismissal.

I was under the impression that Gordon Brown has now agreed to allow MPs a free vote on account of the threat of resignations from Roman Catholic frontbenchers.

I'd say that Frankenstein is the wrong reference for this; Dr. Moreau would probably be more appropriate.

mispost.