Peripeteia

The ideal Objectivist government, as far as I understand, grants a government the authority to provide for protecting individual rights, police, national defence, and courts and a legal system. Am I correct in assuming that the courts and a legal system provided for would include prisons?

Galt0105 - think of acheivements on the basis of the individual, or the group working on a problem, not by a group as vague as race. Stephen Hawking's acheivements do not count as Sarah Palin's simply because they are both white.

Bastian - When talking to the Green, it is essential that you both understand what the other is saying. More often than not, two people use the same word (such as 'freedom' or 'altruism') to define two different concepts.

If this MMA venue is the best and only one around, and your ex has taken root there, then confrontation is inevitable. Whether you start training there today or a year from now, she will be there and there will be confrontation. I cannot pretend to know exactly what you are going through, but my advice to you is to simply get it over with. You have come closer to fulfilling your dreams than many ever will, and it took a devastating injury to stop you, and even that was only temporary! As malicious or slanderous your ex may be, I doubt that she has the same physical capabilities as the injury. Obstacles like her line the path to your goal. With the dertermination you have already shown thus far, I have no doubt in my mind that you can rise above them. When you confront her, inform her that you only wish to train, and inform her of this every time she is confrontational or spreads rumors. If she does spread rumors and some believe them, good riddance to them! Chances are, not everyone at the venue will believe everything she says, and you may even make friends with some of those honorable people who decided to know you through yourself rather your ex! May you have the best of luck!

You're very welcome, Matt! I actually adapted the idea from an episode in the t.v series Lost. A while back, I was terrified of nearly everything, that I has messed up too badly in the past, and that the future would bring only torment. Searching for anything to get me out, I tried this method, calmed down, and I was finally able to live my life again. It has worked for me ever since, and I certainly hope it works for you!

Being negative will accomplish nothing. Records are constantly broken and set and broken again. Just recently, a group of blind people scaled Mt. Everest! When you are sad and tormented, count to ten. During those ten seconds, and only those ten, let the sadness overwhelm you. But ten seconds is all you will give it. When it's time is up, get up and do something. It doesnt matter if its writing, running, or even simply petting a cat, as long as you do something. Nobody has an inability to socialise! By posting your message at all, you were interacting with others! When you meet someone new, start out by simply saying "Hi" and smiling. After pleasantries, ask them if they've seen a movie or if they've ever been to Chicago (great city and my hometown, by the way!). If the two of you can talk like this for a while, and you feel comfortable around them, you've just made a friend! (or at the very least, a friendly aquaintance). Many people have friends, but a true friend is rare. I have no doubt that you can find true friends. The frame of mind you need is confidence and optimism. By all means, pursue your dreams! Even if one door is closed, there are still ten thousand doors waiting to be opened. Have courage! You will experience misery and self-doubt on your journey, but only give them ten seconds. You are in control of your path. Unexpected events can put obstacles on your path, but the choice to take a step and overcome resides with you. All the best!! -Peripeteia

Hello, congratulations, and good luck! They're among my favorite genres (I'm working on one myself) and I certainly look forward to it. All the best!

Every major religion is made up of a diverse group. In Christianity, there are hundreds of different branches disagreeing on silly things. In Islam, there are Shi'ites, Sunnis, and other groups. On one end of each, there will always be the fanatics (Taliban, KKK, bin Laden, Ann Coulter, etc.), as well as people who are non-practicing and only follow the religion in name. It is silly to identify one billion people, a sixth of Earth's, as each person not respecting individual rights. In atheism, even though they believe in no God, also has a group of fanatics who wish to forcefully remove all religion. Same goes with almost every large group of people. This is why there are supremacists in every race and ethnic backround. Immigration is best settled on the merits of each individual, not the group they belong to. Fanaticism is the main threat, not each group as a whole. Agrippa - an increase in any religious group to a majority can lead to a controlling regieme. If, for some odd reason, Muslims become the majority in the United States. They will not agree on everything. If, for some even greater odd reason, Muslim fanatics take over and try to convert everyone. In such an event, the rest of the country will fight back, just as if any other fanatic group took control. Thankfully, we live in a diverse country, and the chances of any one group taking control like that is slim. The only time in United States history when one group so thoruoghly dominated was by the patriots following the Revolution, and this came about through the acception of the new government by those who were for independence and by some who were neutral and against, and large, voluntary migrations by those who were loyal to Britain.

Abuse of alcohol, just as any other self-injuring habit, is immoral. The alcohol in itself, however, is not immoral. If consumption of alcohol is kept at a safe level, I see no immorality.

I dislike Mrs. Palin ("You actually can see Russia from Alaska!") and disagree with her on many issues, and would normally welcome her being out of power. However, the people of Alaska elected her a full term, and she is disregarding their wish by giving up on governing for a few months to attempt her eventual bid for the Presidency (we all know she will attempt it soon). If she finds it too dificult to govern the 700,000 people of Alaska for a few months, how can she possibly expect people to let her govern over 300,000,000 people for four years? Just some fun trivia - During the RNC, she made a point about her firing the cook, presumably because she thinks its good to put someone out of a job in the middle of a recession and she believes that cooks don't need to support themselves (or families if they have one).

Thanks for the replies.

If time travel was possible, and one were to go back to when Hitler was an infant, there are two major possibilities that could happen. 1. The past is unchangeable, and whatever happened happened. This renders the morality of extinguishing Hitler's life irrelevent, since the outcome (our modern timeline) would inevitably happen. 2. The past is changeable. In this senario, since the Holocaust and Hitler's reign is not inevitable, he is simply an infant with a potential to be a painter or the ultimate representaion of humanity's potential for boundless cruelty. Therefore, you would be killing him for deeds he might not commit, rendering the act, in my opinion, just as immoral as killing any other infant. (Also, it might be more practical to simply have him raised in a more loving, tolerant environment.) Apart from the morality question, it is interesting to note, however, that Hitler and WWII halted Stalin in his own bid for world domination, and when the war did end, he was forced to contend with the enormous armies assembled by the rest of the Allies, as well as the threat of retailiaton via atom bomb should he attempted a conquest. It would be interesting to find out how history would have unfolded differently.

Severus Snape shares striking similarities (try saying that 5 times fast) with Wilhelm Canaris, who provided false intelligence for Hitler, as Snape did with Voldemort, and helped bring him down. They were both even excecuted by their respective dictators shortly before their wars ended.

Is it moral to follow someone and their cause, and even commit terrible acts for said cause, with the ultimate goal of subverting them and their cause? A fictional example is Severus Snape acting as a double agent in the Harry Potter series (this has become general knowledge by now), and a real life example is Wilhelm Canaris, who led the Abwehr (secret intelligence agency) of Nazi Germany and helped bring down Hitler's reign.

Ha!! In the ficticious "Zombie Survival Guide" by Max Brooks (who also wrote "World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War", an engrossing book with much deeper thought put into it than one would expect from a zombie-genre book) he claims that the Soviet Union actually did try to build a 'platoon' of zombies. In WWZ, the virus that turns people into zombies spread from China into the rest of the world. When it first spreads, many governments and citizens ignored it, claiming it was a hoax, or it was merely a flu or rabies outbreak. Some people manage to profit off of it for a while. As a result of their inaction, lack of cooperation, and short-sightedness, billions of people die, and humanity is nearly wiped out before a plan is formed to reclaim the globe. To tie it in with the genetic topic, it seems to me that humanity as a whole will need constant vigilance to prevent disaster, no matter the government. However, it should be noted that societies with a free press are always able to gain and transmit information faster than oppressive reigemes. (An interesting note - in the aftermath of WWZ, China threw off their Communists, became a republic, and were able to rid themselves of the plague, while North Korea has seemingly vanished, with no contact with anyone outside their borders in over a decade. They are believed to be hiding underground).