Upload
Login or register

conduffchill

Last status update:
-
Gender: male
Age: 22
Date Signed Up:8/30/2013
Last Login:3/07/2016
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Thumbs: 280 total,  379 ,  99
Content Level Progress: 6.77% (4/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 0% (0/10)
Level 127 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry → Level 128 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry
Subscribers:0
Total Comments Made:101
FJ Points:270

latest user's comments

#57 - Picture 08/27/2015 on SJW's +1
#231 - But if you didn't sue and just quietly let him go, no one woul… 08/12/2015 on Getting caught 0
#151 - But if you sued him, all your customers would hear about what …  [+] (2 new replies) 08/12/2015 on Getting caught -3
#207 - anon (08/12/2015) [-]
compared to being known as the place that let piss slip through because "dont dislike us"?
#231 - conduffchill (08/12/2015) [-]
But if you didn't sue and just quietly let him go, no one would know it was your business. Also, as the owner, I'm sure you'd be liable to be sued by any customers who ate there, especially if they can prove it was the same time the guy did this. And frankly, they have more right to sue you than you do him so I guess it's a good thing you don't own a restaurant.
#20 - I visited Arcadia and considered going there, but I found it h… 03/09/2015 on Random Facts 0
#515 - You're correct in saying life begins when cells react to stimu… 03/09/2015 on Debate 0
#478 - The problem with this argument is that you consider a fetus to…  [+] (2 new replies) 03/09/2015 on Debate 0
#496 - winglit (03/09/2015) [-]
because I gave you the single criteria of "without dehumanizing" an unborn human... the chicken or the egg which came first dear conduffchill? the answer is the egg laid by a bird that was not a chicken, evolution gives us that answer so is an unborn human not a human? is it another species? would you kill a dog or cat the same way? "where life begins" the instance it can react to stimuli it has proven that it is a living thing, nerves and cells are living things frankly if you want to make the argument youre not incorrect you destroy living cells when you pull out... but those arent human they do not contain the entire genetic code required to create a human being theyre cells same as any other cells... I care about humans where it becomes human
#515 - conduffchill (03/09/2015) [-]
You're correct in saying life begins when cells react to stimuli, my mistake. What I meant was intelligent life. It's good that you bring up the chicken and the egg, since you're essentially implying that the egg is actually a live chicken. A fetus is simply that egg inside of a person. Also, every single one of your cells (minus the sex cells, sperm and eggs which contain half) contains that genetic code required to make a human. Anytime you get cut it's partial murder then? If you amputate an arm, are you murdering that arm? No, because that arm isn't self aware. It wouldn't continue to move and live without the rest of you, even though it has all the genetic code required to make the rest of you. This is the same as a fetus, which wouldn't survive outside of another human's body. Again, it comes down to where you personally see intelligent life as beginning. I don't consider anything truly alive until it is self-sufficient and self-aware as it's own entity.
#471 - So then it's irresponsible to have sex for any reason other th…  [+] (4 new replies) 03/09/2015 on Debate 0
#475 - winglit (03/09/2015) [-]
is it not? I do the same thing I have sex for fun because its enjoyable... does that mean its not my responsibility if she gets pregnant? "I did it cause it was fun didnt want a baby" is that a good reason to kill someone?
#478 - conduffchill (03/09/2015) [-]
The problem with this argument is that you consider a fetus to be a living human being, a view the majority of the world doesn't share. You have to understand to us what you're saying seems as ridiculous as my statement before that pulling out is murder. We simply have a difference of opinion on where life begins, and since you see it as murder no other argument can be valid in your eyes.
#496 - winglit (03/09/2015) [-]
because I gave you the single criteria of "without dehumanizing" an unborn human... the chicken or the egg which came first dear conduffchill? the answer is the egg laid by a bird that was not a chicken, evolution gives us that answer so is an unborn human not a human? is it another species? would you kill a dog or cat the same way? "where life begins" the instance it can react to stimuli it has proven that it is a living thing, nerves and cells are living things frankly if you want to make the argument youre not incorrect you destroy living cells when you pull out... but those arent human they do not contain the entire genetic code required to create a human being theyre cells same as any other cells... I care about humans where it becomes human
#515 - conduffchill (03/09/2015) [-]
You're correct in saying life begins when cells react to stimuli, my mistake. What I meant was intelligent life. It's good that you bring up the chicken and the egg, since you're essentially implying that the egg is actually a live chicken. A fetus is simply that egg inside of a person. Also, every single one of your cells (minus the sex cells, sperm and eggs which contain half) contains that genetic code required to make a human. Anytime you get cut it's partial murder then? If you amputate an arm, are you murdering that arm? No, because that arm isn't self aware. It wouldn't continue to move and live without the rest of you, even though it has all the genetic code required to make the rest of you. This is the same as a fetus, which wouldn't survive outside of another human's body. Again, it comes down to where you personally see intelligent life as beginning. I don't consider anything truly alive until it is self-sufficient and self-aware as it's own entity.
#439 - Irresponsible behavior isn't always the cause. There is no 100…  [+] (6 new replies) 03/09/2015 on Debate 0
#453 - winglit (03/09/2015) [-]
and by your logic sex happens out of nowhere with no one giving their consent in the slightest? I obviously dont think pulling out is murder and thats a silly comparison to make, millions of sperm compete to become your offspring but once the genetic code of 2 individuals combines it has the potential to be a person. You seem to think that sex between 2 people is some kindve magical event that neither individual has any say in where they are thrown into the sky their clothes fly off and the penis enters the vagina... you make the conscious decision to risk pregnancy, you make the conscious decision to have sex a child has no say in its conception or its execution
#471 - conduffchill (03/09/2015) [-]
So then it's irresponsible to have sex for any reason other than procreation? I think 99% of the population over 18 is irresponsible by that logic. A child also isn't considered a child until birth - you don't put the moment of conception on your birth certificate, you don't add 9 months to your age. At what point exactly do you think a person is created?
#475 - winglit (03/09/2015) [-]
is it not? I do the same thing I have sex for fun because its enjoyable... does that mean its not my responsibility if she gets pregnant? "I did it cause it was fun didnt want a baby" is that a good reason to kill someone?
#478 - conduffchill (03/09/2015) [-]
The problem with this argument is that you consider a fetus to be a living human being, a view the majority of the world doesn't share. You have to understand to us what you're saying seems as ridiculous as my statement before that pulling out is murder. We simply have a difference of opinion on where life begins, and since you see it as murder no other argument can be valid in your eyes.
#496 - winglit (03/09/2015) [-]
because I gave you the single criteria of "without dehumanizing" an unborn human... the chicken or the egg which came first dear conduffchill? the answer is the egg laid by a bird that was not a chicken, evolution gives us that answer so is an unborn human not a human? is it another species? would you kill a dog or cat the same way? "where life begins" the instance it can react to stimuli it has proven that it is a living thing, nerves and cells are living things frankly if you want to make the argument youre not incorrect you destroy living cells when you pull out... but those arent human they do not contain the entire genetic code required to create a human being theyre cells same as any other cells... I care about humans where it becomes human
#515 - conduffchill (03/09/2015) [-]
You're correct in saying life begins when cells react to stimuli, my mistake. What I meant was intelligent life. It's good that you bring up the chicken and the egg, since you're essentially implying that the egg is actually a live chicken. A fetus is simply that egg inside of a person. Also, every single one of your cells (minus the sex cells, sperm and eggs which contain half) contains that genetic code required to make a human. Anytime you get cut it's partial murder then? If you amputate an arm, are you murdering that arm? No, because that arm isn't self aware. It wouldn't continue to move and live without the rest of you, even though it has all the genetic code required to make the rest of you. This is the same as a fetus, which wouldn't survive outside of another human's body. Again, it comes down to where you personally see intelligent life as beginning. I don't consider anything truly alive until it is self-sufficient and self-aware as it's own entity.
#424 - How about unplanned pregnancies? If the family isn't properly …  [+] (8 new replies) 03/09/2015 on Debate 0
#430 - winglit (03/09/2015) [-]
is it morally correct that they be allowed to kill someone due to irresponsible behavior? when other options do exist... adoption? why is abortion a suitable replacement for birth control?
#439 - conduffchill (03/09/2015) [-]
Irresponsible behavior isn't always the cause. There is no 100% effective method of birth control outside of sterilization, condoms can break and birth control can fail. Adoption still requires 9 months of pregnancy plus the actual act of giving birth, which can be life threatening and still costs money. And if a person is considered dead only when brain activity stops, how can they be considered alive before it begins? By your logic every time a man pulls out he's committing murder
#453 - winglit (03/09/2015) [-]
and by your logic sex happens out of nowhere with no one giving their consent in the slightest? I obviously dont think pulling out is murder and thats a silly comparison to make, millions of sperm compete to become your offspring but once the genetic code of 2 individuals combines it has the potential to be a person. You seem to think that sex between 2 people is some kindve magical event that neither individual has any say in where they are thrown into the sky their clothes fly off and the penis enters the vagina... you make the conscious decision to risk pregnancy, you make the conscious decision to have sex a child has no say in its conception or its execution
#471 - conduffchill (03/09/2015) [-]
So then it's irresponsible to have sex for any reason other than procreation? I think 99% of the population over 18 is irresponsible by that logic. A child also isn't considered a child until birth - you don't put the moment of conception on your birth certificate, you don't add 9 months to your age. At what point exactly do you think a person is created?
#475 - winglit (03/09/2015) [-]
is it not? I do the same thing I have sex for fun because its enjoyable... does that mean its not my responsibility if she gets pregnant? "I did it cause it was fun didnt want a baby" is that a good reason to kill someone?
#478 - conduffchill (03/09/2015) [-]
The problem with this argument is that you consider a fetus to be a living human being, a view the majority of the world doesn't share. You have to understand to us what you're saying seems as ridiculous as my statement before that pulling out is murder. We simply have a difference of opinion on where life begins, and since you see it as murder no other argument can be valid in your eyes.
#496 - winglit (03/09/2015) [-]
because I gave you the single criteria of "without dehumanizing" an unborn human... the chicken or the egg which came first dear conduffchill? the answer is the egg laid by a bird that was not a chicken, evolution gives us that answer so is an unborn human not a human? is it another species? would you kill a dog or cat the same way? "where life begins" the instance it can react to stimuli it has proven that it is a living thing, nerves and cells are living things frankly if you want to make the argument youre not incorrect you destroy living cells when you pull out... but those arent human they do not contain the entire genetic code required to create a human being theyre cells same as any other cells... I care about humans where it becomes human
#515 - conduffchill (03/09/2015) [-]
You're correct in saying life begins when cells react to stimuli, my mistake. What I meant was intelligent life. It's good that you bring up the chicken and the egg, since you're essentially implying that the egg is actually a live chicken. A fetus is simply that egg inside of a person. Also, every single one of your cells (minus the sex cells, sperm and eggs which contain half) contains that genetic code required to make a human. Anytime you get cut it's partial murder then? If you amputate an arm, are you murdering that arm? No, because that arm isn't self aware. It wouldn't continue to move and live without the rest of you, even though it has all the genetic code required to make the rest of you. This is the same as a fetus, which wouldn't survive outside of another human's body. Again, it comes down to where you personally see intelligent life as beginning. I don't consider anything truly alive until it is self-sufficient and self-aware as it's own entity.
#419 - What if you practice safe sex but the contraception fails? Not… 03/09/2015 on Debate +1
[ 100 Total ]