David

Disclaimer, if you are pro-life, you probably know what the answer is, but this is a serious question to people who think otherwise.

Assuming all the eggs and sperm came from willing donors, and assuming there is no God and human genes are not sacred, what are the moral implications of harvesting human fetus for parts to save lives. They will never be born so they are not human, at least according to certain perspectives. Unless there is a new definition of being born thanks to the completion of the artificial womb. We will save countless lives.

If having millions of farmed fetus causes discomfot to people who dont see fetuses as anything more than a lump of cells, why, and even if a fetus is more than cells and less than a life, would it not be logical to trade the fetus for saving real lives? Is the discomfort of farming fetus real or just outdated fear?

Is there any reason to paint the drywall of a house other than aesthetics? Can't you save money, time, and the environment for not painting your house?

I heard painting a house between 500 and 1500 sqft can cost between $1000 - $3000.

I also heard that paint encourages cancer and produces ozone formation such as smog.

Painting can raise a house's price, but it doesn't make any difference if you aren't selling it in the first place.

Can someone explain to me why everyone paints their house? And what are the worst things that can happen if you build a new house without painting any of it on the inside?

I'm a Trump supporter, and someone on Youtube said he wanted to challenge Trump to a schoolyard fist fight.

I was like, nah, Trump isn't that stupid. He's a businessman. If he's gonna fight, he might as make some money doing it.

So, why not make a TV show "Who wants to take on the president?", where Donald Trump steps into the ring with contenders, for boxing or MMA. Donald Trump has WWE experience. Maybe even have Shawn Spicer and Mike Pence as backup for 2vs2 and 3vs3 action.

The crazy thing is, people would probably watch the hell out of the show, which means huge viewer ratings, huge profit. Donald Trump can donate the earnings of the show to pay off the national debt. He'll be the first president to pay off the debt, and we'll be super grateful. I bet the show will be an international hit. Even Putin and Merkel will watch it.

So, what do you think about my idea of a TV show? Of course, there will be referees and bodyguards to prevent things from getting out of hand.

The show will make billions of dollars.

Trump's or Clinton's team could have met with ambassadors with other countries. We still don't know the identity of the person who leaked the emails. We don't know how the machines were rigged, or if they were even rigged at all (the recounts didn't show evidence of rigging).

Yet, everybody around me is certain that it was Russia, and not some other country. How can they be so sure? Why aren't we considering China, India, or even Germany?

According to Guy McPherson, a biology professor at the University of Arizona and a climate change expert, humans will become extinct in less than 10 years due to climate change, and nothing we do can stop it.

Moreover, his estimate is also shared by Professor James Renwick, a climate scientist at Victoria University.

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2016/11/humans...

We're all dead. Nice knowing you, guys.

In many states, common law spouses get the same rights as married couples. Which means, if these two adults stay together, they are financially bonded together.

Also, if one common law spouse provides another, the provider will be expected to keep providing for a period of time after separation, possibly even forever.

But why are parent and adult children relationships exempted? They are two or more adults living together often with financial agreements or dependencies. Why does the law treat these relationships differently than common law couples?

Is it because couples living together is supposed to be special somehow? More special than the bond between a parent and offspring?

If I prioritize others over my own family, does that make me a good person or a bad person?

In the fictional scenario, I did give a small fortune to the needy, but I failed to take care of my own daughter. This means that I am possibly more generous on average that an average person, and that I might not clearly distinguish between friend, family, and stranger when giving help.

If I am not a good person for not helping my daughter, where is the moral law that says parents need to help their children after they turn 18? And should people prioritize their own family over strangers rather than giving to the most needy despite their relationship to you. And why or why not?

Measurements show that we have a 1 degree Celsius increase in temperature as a result of global warming.

According to wikipedia, the atmosphere has a mass of about 5.15×10kg to the power of 18. That's 5,150,000,000,000,000,000 kg.

Assuming that it takes 1.039 kj of energy to heat 1 kg of nitrogen 1 Celsius, and assuming the atmosphere is mostly nitrogen, there is an approximation of 5,350,850,000,000,000,000 kilojoules of free energy floating around the air, not even counting the energy stored in the oceans and land.

Can we use any of that energy?

Bonus points for explaining why.

The newest low flush urinals use more than 6 times less water than a dual-flush toilet at half flush. 1 pint vs 0.8 US gallon.

Yes, installing a urinal would create some environmental damage in the short term, due to creating the urinal, renovating the bathroom, and material and installation costs, but the long term effects can be beneficial.

Women can use urinals too!

Do you want to get a low flush urinal in your home?

In other words, which of the three categories is proving to be the biggest bottleneck for you when it comes to reaching the next level of happiness and fulfillment?

Money, relationships, or health?

I feel that I have dampened emotions compared to the average person. I don't feel emotions very strongly. Anger, jealousy, love, sadness. I'm pretty numb emotionally. I rarely feel any of them, and if I do, it's very weak.

Which is why I don't understand people's emotions sometimes. Some people say that they have to control their anger. But I don't have anger to control. It's not there.

Which is why I'm curious. Do you ever feel like you want to smack someone for being stupid? I know I never get the urge, but I heard other people do.

Besides big corporation bailouts from the government, banks can't force you to use their institution or pay for their services. And for the bailouts, shouldn't the government be responsible for the theft?

Of course, many banks are very reckless with their consumer's money. Some of them make terrible decisions with no sense of responsibility. They lend money they don't have, and use other people's money in bad ways.

But there are also some banks that are financially responsible . I don't see what's wrong with a bank lending money if they make sure their business is sound and stable.

For example, if I ask my girlfriend to lend me $500, and she does, she doesn't automatically become some evil witch cause she started lending out money. I would be stupid if I think that her lending me money makes her a bad person.

So what do you think about lenders. Are they oppressive? Is society blaming them for their own bad choices? Is society letting financial institutions exploit them? Is the government at fault for letting financial institutions off the hook for bad decisions, and enabling them by giving them taxpayer money for their failures?

Please let me know what you think about lenders! Evil, or not?