<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_04_1431214</id>
	<title>Murderer With "Aggression Genes" Gets Reduced Sentence</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1257349740000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Noiser writes <i>"New Scientist reports: 'In 2007, Abdelmalek Bayout admitted to stabbing and killing a man and received a sentence of 9 years and 2 months. An appeal court judge in Trieste, Italy, <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18098-murderer-with-aggression-genes-gets-sentence-cut.html">cut Bayout's sentence by a year after finding out he has gene variants linked to aggression</a>.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Noiser writes " New Scientist reports : 'In 2007 , Abdelmalek Bayout admitted to stabbing and killing a man and received a sentence of 9 years and 2 months .
An appeal court judge in Trieste , Italy , cut Bayout 's sentence by a year after finding out he has gene variants linked to aggression .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Noiser writes "New Scientist reports: 'In 2007, Abdelmalek Bayout admitted to stabbing and killing a man and received a sentence of 9 years and 2 months.
An appeal court judge in Trieste, Italy, cut Bayout's sentence by a year after finding out he has gene variants linked to aggression.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981056</id>
	<title>This is bullshit</title>
	<author>hallucinogen</author>
	<datestamp>1257013620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The phenotype of most of our traits is <b>not</b> due to our genotype alone. So unless <b>all</b> people carrying whateverthehell mutation this guy has stab people this ruling is f*cking stupid.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The phenotype of most of our traits is not due to our genotype alone .
So unless all people carrying whateverthehell mutation this guy has stab people this ruling is f * cking stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The phenotype of most of our traits is not due to our genotype alone.
So unless all people carrying whateverthehell mutation this guy has stab people this ruling is f*cking stupid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979892</id>
	<title>More Time, Not Less</title>
	<author>MBCook</author>
	<datestamp>1257010140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, let's say that this is true and it isn't this guy's fault that he's more likely to hurt/kill people (note: pure bunk).
</p><p>So that means that he is <b>more</b> dangerous than the average felon, because he can control himself less.
</p><p>Does that mean he should be put away for <b>more</b> time to protect society from his <b>increased danger</b>?
</p><p>"Agression Genes": Because more dangerous genes means you need to be able to get to commit crimes <i>you can't stop yourself from doing</i> <b>sooner</b>!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , let 's say that this is true and it is n't this guy 's fault that he 's more likely to hurt/kill people ( note : pure bunk ) .
So that means that he is more dangerous than the average felon , because he can control himself less .
Does that mean he should be put away for more time to protect society from his increased danger ?
" Agression Genes " : Because more dangerous genes means you need to be able to get to commit crimes you ca n't stop yourself from doing sooner !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, let's say that this is true and it isn't this guy's fault that he's more likely to hurt/kill people (note: pure bunk).
So that means that he is more dangerous than the average felon, because he can control himself less.
Does that mean he should be put away for more time to protect society from his increased danger?
"Agression Genes": Because more dangerous genes means you need to be able to get to commit crimes you can't stop yourself from doing sooner!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980460</id>
	<title>It's important that he get out sooner because:</title>
	<author>MarkvW</author>
	<datestamp>1257011700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>. . . he has the aggression gene and we want people with that gene out in the community with more opportunity for reproduction?</p><p>. . . we like to socialize with aggressive people?</p><p>. . . people with the aggressive gene should be given an aggressive crime discount?</p><p>. . . he is less accountable for aggressive acts that he is predisposed to commit?</p><p>. . . he gets one free aggression discount because of his predisposition?</p><p>. . . the judges had pity on him?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.
. .
he has the aggression gene and we want people with that gene out in the community with more opportunity for reproduction ? .
. .
we like to socialize with aggressive people ? .
. .
people with the aggressive gene should be given an aggressive crime discount ? .
. .
he is less accountable for aggressive acts that he is predisposed to commit ? .
. .
he gets one free aggression discount because of his predisposition ? .
. .
the judges had pity on him ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.
. .
he has the aggression gene and we want people with that gene out in the community with more opportunity for reproduction?.
. .
we like to socialize with aggressive people?.
. .
people with the aggressive gene should be given an aggressive crime discount?.
. .
he is less accountable for aggressive acts that he is predisposed to commit?.
. .
he gets one free aggression discount because of his predisposition?.
. .
the judges had pity on him?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980666</id>
	<title>Don't you see</title>
	<author>Shivetya</author>
	<datestamp>1257012420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it is obviously not his fault.</p><p>If anything his ancestors are at fault, or perhaps it was environmentally induced genetic damage caused by global warming?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it is obviously not his fault.If anything his ancestors are at fault , or perhaps it was environmentally induced genetic damage caused by global warming ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it is obviously not his fault.If anything his ancestors are at fault, or perhaps it was environmentally induced genetic damage caused by global warming?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29990008</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa</title>
	<author>tubapro12</author>
	<datestamp>1257003840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have an evil overlord gene, can I get a reduced sentence for trying to take over the world with giant robots?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an evil overlord gene , can I get a reduced sentence for trying to take over the world with giant robots ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an evil overlord gene, can I get a reduced sentence for trying to take over the world with giant robots?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980662</id>
	<title>Less responsible  more likely to reoffend?</title>
	<author>mb\_96\_net</author>
	<datestamp>1257012360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This lighter sentence doesn't make sense. If you accept the assertion that he has a gene that predisposes him to being more aggressive and therefore is less responsible for his actions, you should logically also conclude that he is more likely to reoffend. In most sentencing situations the likelihood or the person being a repeat offender is given a much higher weighting than if the person "couldn't help themselves".

Serial killers are a good example of this; they have a psychological predisposition to committing murder. Their short circuited brains should make them less personally responsible, but more likely to reoffend and the latter should give them a longer sentence</htmltext>
<tokenext>This lighter sentence does n't make sense .
If you accept the assertion that he has a gene that predisposes him to being more aggressive and therefore is less responsible for his actions , you should logically also conclude that he is more likely to reoffend .
In most sentencing situations the likelihood or the person being a repeat offender is given a much higher weighting than if the person " could n't help themselves " .
Serial killers are a good example of this ; they have a psychological predisposition to committing murder .
Their short circuited brains should make them less personally responsible , but more likely to reoffend and the latter should give them a longer sentence</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This lighter sentence doesn't make sense.
If you accept the assertion that he has a gene that predisposes him to being more aggressive and therefore is less responsible for his actions, you should logically also conclude that he is more likely to reoffend.
In most sentencing situations the likelihood or the person being a repeat offender is given a much higher weighting than if the person "couldn't help themselves".
Serial killers are a good example of this; they have a psychological predisposition to committing murder.
Their short circuited brains should make them less personally responsible, but more likely to reoffend and the latter should give them a longer sentence</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980156</id>
	<title>Re:Ah... do you smell that?</title>
	<author>gedrin</author>
	<datestamp>1257010860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Alternatively, our society is threatened by the notion that human beings are capable of free will and not just a product of their physical environment.  It really kinda depends on your perspective.  After all, if you think you can engineer a better person through giving them the right stuff, you don't need free will.  You just need enough control to make sure you can place people in the physical environments you desire.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Alternatively , our society is threatened by the notion that human beings are capable of free will and not just a product of their physical environment .
It really kinda depends on your perspective .
After all , if you think you can engineer a better person through giving them the right stuff , you do n't need free will .
You just need enough control to make sure you can place people in the physical environments you desire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alternatively, our society is threatened by the notion that human beings are capable of free will and not just a product of their physical environment.
It really kinda depends on your perspective.
After all, if you think you can engineer a better person through giving them the right stuff, you don't need free will.
You just need enough control to make sure you can place people in the physical environments you desire.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979330</id>
	<title>May be a slippery slope?</title>
	<author>arbiterveritas</author>
	<datestamp>1257008340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I find this a bit ridiculous.  I really don't care if you have a genetic predisposition to being aggressive. I don't even care if the voices in your head are telling you to cut people into little strips and make belts out of them.   The key is that when you *act* on those things and violate the rules society has, you are going to be punished.

Then again, this happened in Italy. As a citizen of the US, I'm not terribly worried.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find this a bit ridiculous .
I really do n't care if you have a genetic predisposition to being aggressive .
I do n't even care if the voices in your head are telling you to cut people into little strips and make belts out of them .
The key is that when you * act * on those things and violate the rules society has , you are going to be punished .
Then again , this happened in Italy .
As a citizen of the US , I 'm not terribly worried .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find this a bit ridiculous.
I really don't care if you have a genetic predisposition to being aggressive.
I don't even care if the voices in your head are telling you to cut people into little strips and make belts out of them.
The key is that when you *act* on those things and violate the rules society has, you are going to be punished.
Then again, this happened in Italy.
As a citizen of the US, I'm not terribly worried.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981872</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257016020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sometimes I see a post like yours. And the content truly interests me, but I know little on the subject. And at times such as those, I wish more people would actively debate with you so more info can come to light. Sadly, all they do is mod you up and forget about you.</p><p>Bad Slashdot, bad!</p><p>CvroyovXO</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes I see a post like yours .
And the content truly interests me , but I know little on the subject .
And at times such as those , I wish more people would actively debate with you so more info can come to light .
Sadly , all they do is mod you up and forget about you.Bad Slashdot , bad ! CvroyovXO</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes I see a post like yours.
And the content truly interests me, but I know little on the subject.
And at times such as those, I wish more people would actively debate with you so more info can come to light.
Sadly, all they do is mod you up and forget about you.Bad Slashdot, bad!CvroyovXO</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29994586</id>
	<title>Wasn't this addressed in House?</title>
	<author>Kerrany</author>
	<datestamp>1257435360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...It was. Episode 23, Acceptance. The quote was something like: "If we accept that the disease made him do it, then we dismiss the efforts of every other person with this disease who didn't go out and murder six people."<br> <br>There had better have been extenuating circumstances on this ruling. Otherwise, by the sentiment above, I have to call it a miscarriage of justice.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...It was .
Episode 23 , Acceptance .
The quote was something like : " If we accept that the disease made him do it , then we dismiss the efforts of every other person with this disease who did n't go out and murder six people .
" There had better have been extenuating circumstances on this ruling .
Otherwise , by the sentiment above , I have to call it a miscarriage of justice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...It was.
Episode 23, Acceptance.
The quote was something like: "If we accept that the disease made him do it, then we dismiss the efforts of every other person with this disease who didn't go out and murder six people.
" There had better have been extenuating circumstances on this ruling.
Otherwise, by the sentiment above, I have to call it a miscarriage of justice.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982546</id>
	<title>Re:Overlooking the fact</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1257017880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>That he got only 9 years for murder? That will rehabilitate him? People have gotten longer sentences for stealing cars.</i></p><p>I know a man (a close friend's brother) who spent five years of a ten year sentence in federal prison for "conspiring to sell cocaine". The biggest dope dealer in Cahokia got busted and turned state's evidence against everyone he knew, doper or not. Most of my ex-wife's high school graduating class went to prison.</p><p>The cops had him call people he knew and ask to borrow $1000. "It's so I can buy some coke to raise money for my legal fees. I'll pay you double next week." My friend's brother took the bait and loaned him the cash, not realising that he was committing a federal crime.</p><p>When I first moved to Springfield, I'd made friends with a young cab driver who was shot and killed by someone trying to rob him. The murder cherges were dropped, the guy that killed my friend only spent two years in prison for the armed robbery.</p><p>An armed robery that results in a man's death gets two years, and another man spends five years on Club Fed for loaning someone money. Justice?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That he got only 9 years for murder ?
That will rehabilitate him ?
People have gotten longer sentences for stealing cars.I know a man ( a close friend 's brother ) who spent five years of a ten year sentence in federal prison for " conspiring to sell cocaine " .
The biggest dope dealer in Cahokia got busted and turned state 's evidence against everyone he knew , doper or not .
Most of my ex-wife 's high school graduating class went to prison.The cops had him call people he knew and ask to borrow $ 1000 .
" It 's so I can buy some coke to raise money for my legal fees .
I 'll pay you double next week .
" My friend 's brother took the bait and loaned him the cash , not realising that he was committing a federal crime.When I first moved to Springfield , I 'd made friends with a young cab driver who was shot and killed by someone trying to rob him .
The murder cherges were dropped , the guy that killed my friend only spent two years in prison for the armed robbery.An armed robery that results in a man 's death gets two years , and another man spends five years on Club Fed for loaning someone money .
Justice ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That he got only 9 years for murder?
That will rehabilitate him?
People have gotten longer sentences for stealing cars.I know a man (a close friend's brother) who spent five years of a ten year sentence in federal prison for "conspiring to sell cocaine".
The biggest dope dealer in Cahokia got busted and turned state's evidence against everyone he knew, doper or not.
Most of my ex-wife's high school graduating class went to prison.The cops had him call people he knew and ask to borrow $1000.
"It's so I can buy some coke to raise money for my legal fees.
I'll pay you double next week.
" My friend's brother took the bait and loaned him the cash, not realising that he was committing a federal crime.When I first moved to Springfield, I'd made friends with a young cab driver who was shot and killed by someone trying to rob him.
The murder cherges were dropped, the guy that killed my friend only spent two years in prison for the armed robbery.An armed robery that results in a man's death gets two years, and another man spends five years on Club Fed for loaning someone money.
Justice?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29985664</id>
	<title>Use the Texas Defense</title>
	<author>Virtucon</author>
	<datestamp>1256983860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"He needed killing your honor." - Felon</p><p>"Well, okay, we'll let this pass this time but don't go killin folks who don't need it.  Case dismissed!" - Texas Judge</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" He needed killing your honor .
" - Felon " Well , okay , we 'll let this pass this time but do n't go killin folks who do n't need it .
Case dismissed !
" - Texas Judge</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"He needed killing your honor.
" - Felon"Well, okay, we'll let this pass this time but don't go killin folks who don't need it.
Case dismissed!
" - Texas Judge</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980528</id>
	<title>That's backwards</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1257011940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Shouldn't someone with "aggression genes" get a longer sentence, to protect others from his aggressive behavior? Since when has "being an asshole" constituted extenuating circumstances? Oh, that's right -- if you are <b>genetically</b> an asshole, then that's ok! So, all I have to do is prove in court that my father and my grandfather where assholes too, and I can get away with murder? That shouldn't be too hard...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Should n't someone with " aggression genes " get a longer sentence , to protect others from his aggressive behavior ?
Since when has " being an asshole " constituted extenuating circumstances ?
Oh , that 's right -- if you are genetically an asshole , then that 's ok !
So , all I have to do is prove in court that my father and my grandfather where assholes too , and I can get away with murder ?
That should n't be too hard.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shouldn't someone with "aggression genes" get a longer sentence, to protect others from his aggressive behavior?
Since when has "being an asshole" constituted extenuating circumstances?
Oh, that's right -- if you are genetically an asshole, then that's ok!
So, all I have to do is prove in court that my father and my grandfather where assholes too, and I can get away with murder?
That shouldn't be too hard...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981914</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257016200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to mainstream Christian Theism, at least...</p><p>No, because we are "made in God's image", we can infer things about him and how he feels about his creations from our own creative nature. God's an AI hacker on a grand scale -- if we had no free will, we'd be nothing but relatively boring scripts, not a successful AI program.</p><p>And while God \_does\_ allegedly intervene in the world sometimes  -- we call these "miracles" -- he limits most of his involvement to just keeping the system running. Again, this surely makes sense to any hacker.</p><p>(Oh, and for randomness's sake, think about Tron.  Flynn=God, Flynn-in-the-computer=Jesus.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to mainstream Christian Theism , at least...No , because we are " made in God 's image " , we can infer things about him and how he feels about his creations from our own creative nature .
God 's an AI hacker on a grand scale -- if we had no free will , we 'd be nothing but relatively boring scripts , not a successful AI program.And while God \ _does \ _ allegedly intervene in the world sometimes -- we call these " miracles " -- he limits most of his involvement to just keeping the system running .
Again , this surely makes sense to any hacker .
( Oh , and for randomness 's sake , think about Tron .
Flynn = God , Flynn-in-the-computer = Jesus .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to mainstream Christian Theism, at least...No, because we are "made in God's image", we can infer things about him and how he feels about his creations from our own creative nature.
God's an AI hacker on a grand scale -- if we had no free will, we'd be nothing but relatively boring scripts, not a successful AI program.And while God \_does\_ allegedly intervene in the world sometimes  -- we call these "miracles" -- he limits most of his involvement to just keeping the system running.
Again, this surely makes sense to any hacker.
(Oh, and for randomness's sake, think about Tron.
Flynn=God, Flynn-in-the-computer=Jesus.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979854</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1257009960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>And if prison exists for the purpose of reforming prisoners then his sentence should be longer because it's more effort to reform someone who has a genetic disposition towards violence.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And if prison exists for the purpose of reforming prisoners then his sentence should be longer because it 's more effort to reform someone who has a genetic disposition towards violence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if prison exists for the purpose of reforming prisoners then his sentence should be longer because it's more effort to reform someone who has a genetic disposition towards violence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980412</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards</title>
	<author>spongman</author>
	<datestamp>1257011580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>at the very least he should be neutered.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>at the very least he should be neutered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>at the very least he should be neutered.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980158</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984724</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256981160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have the Inappropriate Groping Gene, can I be exempted from sexual harassment firings/lawsuits?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have the Inappropriate Groping Gene , can I be exempted from sexual harassment firings/lawsuits ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have the Inappropriate Groping Gene, can I be exempted from sexual harassment firings/lawsuits?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981244</id>
	<title>That would be eugenics...</title>
	<author>Overzeetop</author>
	<datestamp>1257014220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and it is frowned upon by most of society.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and it is frowned upon by most of society .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and it is frowned upon by most of society.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981800</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards</title>
	<author>jameskojiro</author>
	<datestamp>1257015840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are ways to sterilize folks permanently while retaining their sex hormone levels.</p><p>That and if they ever rape again you won't have to worry about giving the victim a ride to planned parenthood.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are ways to sterilize folks permanently while retaining their sex hormone levels.That and if they ever rape again you wo n't have to worry about giving the victim a ride to planned parenthood .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are ways to sterilize folks permanently while retaining their sex hormone levels.That and if they ever rape again you won't have to worry about giving the victim a ride to planned parenthood.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980266</id>
	<title>Throw away the key</title>
	<author>Capt.DrumkenBum</author>
	<datestamp>1257011160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know about anyone else, but I would think that someone with "gene variants linked to aggression" might be someone you would want to keep locked up. Or maybe get them a job working with the UFC.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know about anyone else , but I would think that someone with " gene variants linked to aggression " might be someone you would want to keep locked up .
Or maybe get them a job working with the UFC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know about anyone else, but I would think that someone with "gene variants linked to aggression" might be someone you would want to keep locked up.
Or maybe get them a job working with the UFC.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981322</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>jayme0227</author>
	<datestamp>1257014400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've often wanted to see someone using the "acting out God's will" defense in court.</p><p>"Your honor, it was her time. She would have died regardless of whether or not I was driving drunk. God wanted her to die, and I was just His vessel."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've often wanted to see someone using the " acting out God 's will " defense in court .
" Your honor , it was her time .
She would have died regardless of whether or not I was driving drunk .
God wanted her to die , and I was just His vessel .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've often wanted to see someone using the "acting out God's will" defense in court.
"Your honor, it was her time.
She would have died regardless of whether or not I was driving drunk.
God wanted her to die, and I was just His vessel.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979274</id>
	<title>Eschewing responsibility?</title>
	<author>spineboy</author>
	<datestamp>1257008220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Honestly - do people refuse to accept responsibility for their actions, or lack of actions anymore?<br>The purpose of jail isn't really to punish anyone, but rather to keep them off the playground until they can "play nice".  If law is going to say that genes controll the way we behave, then will Italian courts start locking people up for having certain genes because they will tend to be violent?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly - do people refuse to accept responsibility for their actions , or lack of actions anymore ? The purpose of jail is n't really to punish anyone , but rather to keep them off the playground until they can " play nice " .
If law is going to say that genes controll the way we behave , then will Italian courts start locking people up for having certain genes because they will tend to be violent ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly - do people refuse to accept responsibility for their actions, or lack of actions anymore?The purpose of jail isn't really to punish anyone, but rather to keep them off the playground until they can "play nice".
If law is going to say that genes controll the way we behave, then will Italian courts start locking people up for having certain genes because they will tend to be violent?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984886</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>amn108</author>
	<datestamp>1256981580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By your logic, shouldn't we then give longer sentences to minors driving cars illegaly and getting into accidents compared to regular drivers getting into the same kind of accidents while posessing a legal driving license? Same thing, if you ask me. Point is justice does not punish the dangerous more, it punishes by trying to be JUST, in most respects. Like cutting some slack to someone less able to restrain him/herself from commiting a murder if it's in his/her genes, because he would have to put less energy to do so, contra a person who is not predisposed like that and will put more energy to commit the same act. Justice is supposed to both prevent other potential criminals from contemplating the same action, and at the same time instill them with hope in the "right thing" by showing them that they are tried with the best of judgement, and not merely lynched by a bunch of radicals. That is why it is called justice, and usually depicted as a blindfolded lady holding weights in each hand. That is why it is so hard to get right I think - it sounds like quite an ideology and a bit of an utopia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By your logic , should n't we then give longer sentences to minors driving cars illegaly and getting into accidents compared to regular drivers getting into the same kind of accidents while posessing a legal driving license ?
Same thing , if you ask me .
Point is justice does not punish the dangerous more , it punishes by trying to be JUST , in most respects .
Like cutting some slack to someone less able to restrain him/herself from commiting a murder if it 's in his/her genes , because he would have to put less energy to do so , contra a person who is not predisposed like that and will put more energy to commit the same act .
Justice is supposed to both prevent other potential criminals from contemplating the same action , and at the same time instill them with hope in the " right thing " by showing them that they are tried with the best of judgement , and not merely lynched by a bunch of radicals .
That is why it is called justice , and usually depicted as a blindfolded lady holding weights in each hand .
That is why it is so hard to get right I think - it sounds like quite an ideology and a bit of an utopia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By your logic, shouldn't we then give longer sentences to minors driving cars illegaly and getting into accidents compared to regular drivers getting into the same kind of accidents while posessing a legal driving license?
Same thing, if you ask me.
Point is justice does not punish the dangerous more, it punishes by trying to be JUST, in most respects.
Like cutting some slack to someone less able to restrain him/herself from commiting a murder if it's in his/her genes, because he would have to put less energy to do so, contra a person who is not predisposed like that and will put more energy to commit the same act.
Justice is supposed to both prevent other potential criminals from contemplating the same action, and at the same time instill them with hope in the "right thing" by showing them that they are tried with the best of judgement, and not merely lynched by a bunch of radicals.
That is why it is called justice, and usually depicted as a blindfolded lady holding weights in each hand.
That is why it is so hard to get right I think - it sounds like quite an ideology and a bit of an utopia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979216</id>
	<title>8 years?  Hate to be ethnocentric but..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257008040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even his original sentence of 9 years, 2 months seems a little light for murdering someone - "aggressive genes" or not.  If you look at prison as removing someone from society, does this just increase the risk that he will harm someone else?  If you look at prison as a means to force rehabilitation or reconstruction of personal development, wouldn't he require more time than the average murderer (given his disposition)?</p><p>I feel bad for the victim's family.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even his original sentence of 9 years , 2 months seems a little light for murdering someone - " aggressive genes " or not .
If you look at prison as removing someone from society , does this just increase the risk that he will harm someone else ?
If you look at prison as a means to force rehabilitation or reconstruction of personal development , would n't he require more time than the average murderer ( given his disposition ) ? I feel bad for the victim 's family .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even his original sentence of 9 years, 2 months seems a little light for murdering someone - "aggressive genes" or not.
If you look at prison as removing someone from society, does this just increase the risk that he will harm someone else?
If you look at prison as a means to force rehabilitation or reconstruction of personal development, wouldn't he require more time than the average murderer (given his disposition)?I feel bad for the victim's family.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979534</id>
	<title>I wonder</title>
	<author>Vinegar Joe</author>
	<datestamp>1257009000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a single round of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.45 ACP JHP in the back of the head would do to his genetic makeup?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a single round of .45 ACP JHP in the back of the head would do to his genetic makeup ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a single round of .45 ACP JHP in the back of the head would do to his genetic makeup?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979864</id>
	<title>Not Fair</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257010020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a gene variant linked to tickling policemen and, yet, they throw the book at me every time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a gene variant linked to tickling policemen and , yet , they throw the book at me every time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a gene variant linked to tickling policemen and, yet, they throw the book at me every time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981550</id>
	<title>I get your point</title>
	<author>abbynormal brain</author>
	<datestamp>1257015120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>However:<br>1. Is the science mature enough? And more importantly,<br>2. If the science is correct - a reduced sentence is not the solution.</p><p>I mean - are there any murderers who don't have the aggression gene? Hell - let's test every murderer and if they have the aggression gene -reduce all of their sentences!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>However : 1 .
Is the science mature enough ?
And more importantly,2 .
If the science is correct - a reduced sentence is not the solution.I mean - are there any murderers who do n't have the aggression gene ?
Hell - let 's test every murderer and if they have the aggression gene -reduce all of their sentences !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However:1.
Is the science mature enough?
And more importantly,2.
If the science is correct - a reduced sentence is not the solution.I mean - are there any murderers who don't have the aggression gene?
Hell - let's test every murderer and if they have the aggression gene -reduce all of their sentences!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980012</id>
	<title>Gattaca</title>
	<author>Bardez</author>
	<datestamp>1257010380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, officer, it couldn't have been me; there's not a violent bone in my body (paraphrased).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , officer , it could n't have been me ; there 's not a violent bone in my body ( paraphrased ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, officer, it couldn't have been me; there's not a violent bone in my body (paraphrased).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979284</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257008220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Depends on how you look at it.</p><p>If prison exists as a punishment, then he is less to blame for his actions, and therefore should have the shorter sentence.</p><p>If prison exists as an example to others, then this ruling doesn't even make any sense, as a person cannot change their gene structure.</p><p>If prison exists to keep the dangerous elements of society away from everyone else, then the whole idea of prison "terms" seems illogical to me.  Everyone should go to prison until such time as they are evaluated to no longer be a threat to society (which in this case might be never).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Depends on how you look at it.If prison exists as a punishment , then he is less to blame for his actions , and therefore should have the shorter sentence.If prison exists as an example to others , then this ruling does n't even make any sense , as a person can not change their gene structure.If prison exists to keep the dangerous elements of society away from everyone else , then the whole idea of prison " terms " seems illogical to me .
Everyone should go to prison until such time as they are evaluated to no longer be a threat to society ( which in this case might be never ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depends on how you look at it.If prison exists as a punishment, then he is less to blame for his actions, and therefore should have the shorter sentence.If prison exists as an example to others, then this ruling doesn't even make any sense, as a person cannot change their gene structure.If prison exists to keep the dangerous elements of society away from everyone else, then the whole idea of prison "terms" seems illogical to me.
Everyone should go to prison until such time as they are evaluated to no longer be a threat to society (which in this case might be never).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984402</id>
	<title>Missing the point</title>
	<author>InsertCleverUsername</author>
	<datestamp>1256980020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sigh...  It never ceases to amaze me how many people think the point of a justice system is to restore some magical cosmic balance.  It isn't.  The point is to protect the rights and safety of the rest of society --whether it's protection from murder or Bernie Madoff taking all your money.  I believe in mercy, but at the end of the day "the system" should give utilitarian goals highest priority.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sigh... It never ceases to amaze me how many people think the point of a justice system is to restore some magical cosmic balance .
It is n't .
The point is to protect the rights and safety of the rest of society --whether it 's protection from murder or Bernie Madoff taking all your money .
I believe in mercy , but at the end of the day " the system " should give utilitarian goals highest priority .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sigh...  It never ceases to amaze me how many people think the point of a justice system is to restore some magical cosmic balance.
It isn't.
The point is to protect the rights and safety of the rest of society --whether it's protection from murder or Bernie Madoff taking all your money.
I believe in mercy, but at the end of the day "the system" should give utilitarian goals highest priority.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981176</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257014040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>you're an idiot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>you 're an idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you're an idiot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980624</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>greyhueofdoubt</author>
	<datestamp>1257012300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should read up on Kant's categorical imperative. I am an atheist and it is the closest thing to a written rationale for a universal morality that I can find. Here's a link:</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical\_imperative" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical\_imperative</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>The summary, from the wiki page:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."</p></div><p>-b</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You should read up on Kant 's categorical imperative .
I am an atheist and it is the closest thing to a written rationale for a universal morality that I can find .
Here 's a link : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical \ _imperative [ wikipedia.org ] The summary , from the wiki page : " Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law .
" -b</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should read up on Kant's categorical imperative.
I am an atheist and it is the closest thing to a written rationale for a universal morality that I can find.
Here's a link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical\_imperative [wikipedia.org]The summary, from the wiki page:"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.
"-b
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983038</id>
	<title>Oh, it will be much worse then that</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1257019260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Free will? Try, freedom. Now everyone who has the same gene, is labeled a murderer in potentia with nothing they can do about it.
</p><p>Can you hear that? That is the gas-chambers starting up.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Free will ?
Try , freedom .
Now everyone who has the same gene , is labeled a murderer in potentia with nothing they can do about it .
Can you hear that ?
That is the gas-chambers starting up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free will?
Try, freedom.
Now everyone who has the same gene, is labeled a murderer in potentia with nothing they can do about it.
Can you hear that?
That is the gas-chambers starting up.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984056</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>brian0918</author>
	<datestamp>1257022140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Kant's morality is just as arbitrary and immaterial as a morality grounded in God.
<br> <br>
The moment I ask you <i>why</i> I should follow the categorical imperative as my moral system, you will have to resort to either blind faith ("well, because!") or another moral system for justification ("because if you don't, then X Y Z will happen, and that's <i>bad</i> because...").
<br> <br>
The only non-arbitrary moral system is one grounded in the nature of man, that answers fundamental questions like "why be moral?", "what is the standard of value?", etc, without resorting to a moral system in order to answer those questions (ie, leading to circular reasoning).
<br> <br>
As an example of the disconnect between Kant's morality and the nature of value, which is derived from the fundamental existential alternative faced by living things - <i>life</i> or <i>death</i> - I need only mention his conclusion that if lying to a friend or innocent person is wrong, then lying to a murderer or madman in order to save your life is also wrong. A friend recently wrote a great commentary on this - I'll quote the relevant bits:<p><div class="quote"><p>When Plato and Kant argue that a principle is "objective" and "absolute," they mean that they know that the principle applies in any and every context, even contexts that are still-unknown to everyone and possibly never-to-be-known-by-anyone. That is a logical contradiction; one cannot know of the applicability of a principle in a context that is unknown and was never known to anyone. In short, the Platonist argues that for a principle to be absolute, its applicability must <i>transcend context</i>. Immanuel Kant said that if it is true that it is ethically wrong to lie to someone who always tries to help you, then it is ethically wrong to lie to a murderer when he asks you for information that he will use in the commission of murder. Many people properly find Kant's "absolutist" argument repugnant, but they do not doubt Kant's insistence that there can be no logical interpretation of "absolute" except Kant's. Again, because they assume that no definition but the Platonic/Kantian one can be valid, most people conclude that "absolute" is useless in real life.
<br> <br>
Actually, a principle can be absolute, but its absoluteness is confined to context. That conclusion is consistent with Objectivism. First, we start with reality. The facts that are, <i>are</i>. The facts, as they are, are what we have to work with. They are the starting point in any and every decision. "The context" refers to the facts surrounding the area of discussion, inquiry, or decision to be made. <i>Context</i> means "an accounting of all the facts that are relevant to the current inquiry, discussion, or decision being focused on." These facts include metaphysically-given facts and man-made facts. The facts of reality precede any decision, and any rational decision is made according to a reading of the facts. That reading of facts is the context. That is why a rational decision cannot be made while ignoring the context.
<br> <br>
It is the context itself that necessitates that a decision be made, and also determines the extent to which the decision, once made, will have beneficial effects. The context likewise influences the likelihood that the decision will produce the consequences that the decision-maker intended. To the extent that one wants one's decision to be rational, the decision must be adapted to the context. And any and every normative prescription is such a decision that cannot be made except within a context. Hence, a normative principle cannot be rationally applied "in transcendence of context"; it is the context that sets the stage for the normative principle. As the "context" is the sum of the facts pertinent to the decision, the normative principle's applicability is unable to transcend the context for the same reason that the normal principle's applicability is unable to transcend the facts of reality.
<br> <br>
A moral principle is a principle that can be repeatedly applied within a certain context, and, in that context, the application of that moral principle will be quite reliable in producing similar results each time it is applied.
<br> <br>
Hence, to believe in moral absolutes about lying, one need not agree with Kant that if it is absolutely wrong to tell damaging lies to those who love us, then it follows that it is absolutely wrong to tell a damaging lie to someone who asks us for information which he intends to use in our murder. It is absolutely wrong to tell damaging lies to our loved ones, and absolutely right to lie to the murderer. That is not a matter of one moral principle being applied differently in two different contexts; this is a matter of two different moral principles being applied in two different contexts, one principle for each context. If a principle cannot transcend context, then why call it "absolute"? Because <i>the principle is absolute within its proper context</i>.
<br> <br>
Hence, it is not proper to start with a concept of "objective moral principles" and then try to force-fit them into any and every context. The facts of reality come first. Therefore: The facts begets context, and context begets at least one consistent, empirically testable principle for that context. "Contextual absolute" is not a contradiction in terms; it is almost a redundancy. Saying "contextual absolute" is like saying "factually-determined absolute."</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Kant 's morality is just as arbitrary and immaterial as a morality grounded in God .
The moment I ask you why I should follow the categorical imperative as my moral system , you will have to resort to either blind faith ( " well , because !
" ) or another moral system for justification ( " because if you do n't , then X Y Z will happen , and that 's bad because... " ) .
The only non-arbitrary moral system is one grounded in the nature of man , that answers fundamental questions like " why be moral ?
" , " what is the standard of value ?
" , etc , without resorting to a moral system in order to answer those questions ( ie , leading to circular reasoning ) .
As an example of the disconnect between Kant 's morality and the nature of value , which is derived from the fundamental existential alternative faced by living things - life or death - I need only mention his conclusion that if lying to a friend or innocent person is wrong , then lying to a murderer or madman in order to save your life is also wrong .
A friend recently wrote a great commentary on this - I 'll quote the relevant bits : When Plato and Kant argue that a principle is " objective " and " absolute , " they mean that they know that the principle applies in any and every context , even contexts that are still-unknown to everyone and possibly never-to-be-known-by-anyone .
That is a logical contradiction ; one can not know of the applicability of a principle in a context that is unknown and was never known to anyone .
In short , the Platonist argues that for a principle to be absolute , its applicability must transcend context .
Immanuel Kant said that if it is true that it is ethically wrong to lie to someone who always tries to help you , then it is ethically wrong to lie to a murderer when he asks you for information that he will use in the commission of murder .
Many people properly find Kant 's " absolutist " argument repugnant , but they do not doubt Kant 's insistence that there can be no logical interpretation of " absolute " except Kant 's .
Again , because they assume that no definition but the Platonic/Kantian one can be valid , most people conclude that " absolute " is useless in real life .
Actually , a principle can be absolute , but its absoluteness is confined to context .
That conclusion is consistent with Objectivism .
First , we start with reality .
The facts that are , are .
The facts , as they are , are what we have to work with .
They are the starting point in any and every decision .
" The context " refers to the facts surrounding the area of discussion , inquiry , or decision to be made .
Context means " an accounting of all the facts that are relevant to the current inquiry , discussion , or decision being focused on .
" These facts include metaphysically-given facts and man-made facts .
The facts of reality precede any decision , and any rational decision is made according to a reading of the facts .
That reading of facts is the context .
That is why a rational decision can not be made while ignoring the context .
It is the context itself that necessitates that a decision be made , and also determines the extent to which the decision , once made , will have beneficial effects .
The context likewise influences the likelihood that the decision will produce the consequences that the decision-maker intended .
To the extent that one wants one 's decision to be rational , the decision must be adapted to the context .
And any and every normative prescription is such a decision that can not be made except within a context .
Hence , a normative principle can not be rationally applied " in transcendence of context " ; it is the context that sets the stage for the normative principle .
As the " context " is the sum of the facts pertinent to the decision , the normative principle 's applicability is unable to transcend the context for the same reason that the normal principle 's applicability is unable to transcend the facts of reality .
A moral principle is a principle that can be repeatedly applied within a certain context , and , in that context , the application of that moral principle will be quite reliable in producing similar results each time it is applied .
Hence , to believe in moral absolutes about lying , one need not agree with Kant that if it is absolutely wrong to tell damaging lies to those who love us , then it follows that it is absolutely wrong to tell a damaging lie to someone who asks us for information which he intends to use in our murder .
It is absolutely wrong to tell damaging lies to our loved ones , and absolutely right to lie to the murderer .
That is not a matter of one moral principle being applied differently in two different contexts ; this is a matter of two different moral principles being applied in two different contexts , one principle for each context .
If a principle can not transcend context , then why call it " absolute " ?
Because the principle is absolute within its proper context .
Hence , it is not proper to start with a concept of " objective moral principles " and then try to force-fit them into any and every context .
The facts of reality come first .
Therefore : The facts begets context , and context begets at least one consistent , empirically testable principle for that context .
" Contextual absolute " is not a contradiction in terms ; it is almost a redundancy .
Saying " contextual absolute " is like saying " factually-determined absolute .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kant's morality is just as arbitrary and immaterial as a morality grounded in God.
The moment I ask you why I should follow the categorical imperative as my moral system, you will have to resort to either blind faith ("well, because!
") or another moral system for justification ("because if you don't, then X Y Z will happen, and that's bad because...").
The only non-arbitrary moral system is one grounded in the nature of man, that answers fundamental questions like "why be moral?
", "what is the standard of value?
", etc, without resorting to a moral system in order to answer those questions (ie, leading to circular reasoning).
As an example of the disconnect between Kant's morality and the nature of value, which is derived from the fundamental existential alternative faced by living things - life or death - I need only mention his conclusion that if lying to a friend or innocent person is wrong, then lying to a murderer or madman in order to save your life is also wrong.
A friend recently wrote a great commentary on this - I'll quote the relevant bits:When Plato and Kant argue that a principle is "objective" and "absolute," they mean that they know that the principle applies in any and every context, even contexts that are still-unknown to everyone and possibly never-to-be-known-by-anyone.
That is a logical contradiction; one cannot know of the applicability of a principle in a context that is unknown and was never known to anyone.
In short, the Platonist argues that for a principle to be absolute, its applicability must transcend context.
Immanuel Kant said that if it is true that it is ethically wrong to lie to someone who always tries to help you, then it is ethically wrong to lie to a murderer when he asks you for information that he will use in the commission of murder.
Many people properly find Kant's "absolutist" argument repugnant, but they do not doubt Kant's insistence that there can be no logical interpretation of "absolute" except Kant's.
Again, because they assume that no definition but the Platonic/Kantian one can be valid, most people conclude that "absolute" is useless in real life.
Actually, a principle can be absolute, but its absoluteness is confined to context.
That conclusion is consistent with Objectivism.
First, we start with reality.
The facts that are, are.
The facts, as they are, are what we have to work with.
They are the starting point in any and every decision.
"The context" refers to the facts surrounding the area of discussion, inquiry, or decision to be made.
Context means "an accounting of all the facts that are relevant to the current inquiry, discussion, or decision being focused on.
" These facts include metaphysically-given facts and man-made facts.
The facts of reality precede any decision, and any rational decision is made according to a reading of the facts.
That reading of facts is the context.
That is why a rational decision cannot be made while ignoring the context.
It is the context itself that necessitates that a decision be made, and also determines the extent to which the decision, once made, will have beneficial effects.
The context likewise influences the likelihood that the decision will produce the consequences that the decision-maker intended.
To the extent that one wants one's decision to be rational, the decision must be adapted to the context.
And any and every normative prescription is such a decision that cannot be made except within a context.
Hence, a normative principle cannot be rationally applied "in transcendence of context"; it is the context that sets the stage for the normative principle.
As the "context" is the sum of the facts pertinent to the decision, the normative principle's applicability is unable to transcend the context for the same reason that the normal principle's applicability is unable to transcend the facts of reality.
A moral principle is a principle that can be repeatedly applied within a certain context, and, in that context, the application of that moral principle will be quite reliable in producing similar results each time it is applied.
Hence, to believe in moral absolutes about lying, one need not agree with Kant that if it is absolutely wrong to tell damaging lies to those who love us, then it follows that it is absolutely wrong to tell a damaging lie to someone who asks us for information which he intends to use in our murder.
It is absolutely wrong to tell damaging lies to our loved ones, and absolutely right to lie to the murderer.
That is not a matter of one moral principle being applied differently in two different contexts; this is a matter of two different moral principles being applied in two different contexts, one principle for each context.
If a principle cannot transcend context, then why call it "absolute"?
Because the principle is absolute within its proper context.
Hence, it is not proper to start with a concept of "objective moral principles" and then try to force-fit them into any and every context.
The facts of reality come first.
Therefore: The facts begets context, and context begets at least one consistent, empirically testable principle for that context.
"Contextual absolute" is not a contradiction in terms; it is almost a redundancy.
Saying "contextual absolute" is like saying "factually-determined absolute.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980624</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983354</id>
	<title>Re:I'm ok with this ...</title>
	<author>Valdrax</author>
	<datestamp>1257020100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What do you do if he's already procreated?  Punish his children?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you do if he 's already procreated ?
Punish his children ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you do if he's already procreated?
Punish his children?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29990712</id>
	<title>Re:Following that line of reasoning...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257008940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only if he can prove he has a genetic predisposition to driving.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only if he can prove he has a genetic predisposition to driving .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only if he can prove he has a genetic predisposition to driving.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979724</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>falckon</author>
	<datestamp>1257009600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Seems to me, those that are \_not\_ predisposed to violence have a better chance of rehabilitating than those that aren't.  Shouldn't they need less time in the slammer to rehabilitate?</p></div><p>
Assuming that time in jail does rehabilitate, someone who is not predisposed to violence and has in spite of that committed a violent act is probably in need of more rehabilitation than someone who let slip their violent nature. Nevertheless, I believe all sentences should be equal, and exceptions like these allow for a corrupt system.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems to me , those that are \ _not \ _ predisposed to violence have a better chance of rehabilitating than those that are n't .
Should n't they need less time in the slammer to rehabilitate ?
Assuming that time in jail does rehabilitate , someone who is not predisposed to violence and has in spite of that committed a violent act is probably in need of more rehabilitation than someone who let slip their violent nature .
Nevertheless , I believe all sentences should be equal , and exceptions like these allow for a corrupt system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems to me, those that are \_not\_ predisposed to violence have a better chance of rehabilitating than those that aren't.
Shouldn't they need less time in the slammer to rehabilitate?
Assuming that time in jail does rehabilitate, someone who is not predisposed to violence and has in spite of that committed a violent act is probably in need of more rehabilitation than someone who let slip their violent nature.
Nevertheless, I believe all sentences should be equal, and exceptions like these allow for a corrupt system.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979336</id>
	<title>Not a good way to handle predisposition</title>
	<author>Improv</author>
	<datestamp>1257008400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When we have inherent individual faults of some kind, it would be better to have society expect us to strive to overcome them. A mens rea is a big part of crime, but the effects of this kind of biological difference threaten to make grey a matter that the law (and society) relies on being reasonably clear - whether people are to be judged responsible for their actions. If people are drugged through no fault of their own, are insane, or are in a situation where they have little other choice, we may be lenient or forgive certain acts, and if crimes are part of a culture of abuse (gang violence, racial violence) we may judge them more harshly than normal, but accepting genetic inclinations to violence is going too far and is not something we should accept.</p><p>Either he requires meds and is responsible for not having had them, he should've been the ward of the state all along, or he's fully responsible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When we have inherent individual faults of some kind , it would be better to have society expect us to strive to overcome them .
A mens rea is a big part of crime , but the effects of this kind of biological difference threaten to make grey a matter that the law ( and society ) relies on being reasonably clear - whether people are to be judged responsible for their actions .
If people are drugged through no fault of their own , are insane , or are in a situation where they have little other choice , we may be lenient or forgive certain acts , and if crimes are part of a culture of abuse ( gang violence , racial violence ) we may judge them more harshly than normal , but accepting genetic inclinations to violence is going too far and is not something we should accept.Either he requires meds and is responsible for not having had them , he should 've been the ward of the state all along , or he 's fully responsible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When we have inherent individual faults of some kind, it would be better to have society expect us to strive to overcome them.
A mens rea is a big part of crime, but the effects of this kind of biological difference threaten to make grey a matter that the law (and society) relies on being reasonably clear - whether people are to be judged responsible for their actions.
If people are drugged through no fault of their own, are insane, or are in a situation where they have little other choice, we may be lenient or forgive certain acts, and if crimes are part of a culture of abuse (gang violence, racial violence) we may judge them more harshly than normal, but accepting genetic inclinations to violence is going too far and is not something we should accept.Either he requires meds and is responsible for not having had them, he should've been the ward of the state all along, or he's fully responsible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981762</id>
	<title>Re:Implications for gay marriage?</title>
	<author>ElectricTurtle</author>
	<datestamp>1257015720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A genetic predisposition is not in of itself an action. I myself am unashamedly bisexual, but I have not had sexual contact with other men. That's a personal decision (mostly sourced in the convenience of taking the easy way out with regard to my family and how they would react). Genes may determine to whom you're attracted, but ultimately people decide for themselves how to act on that attraction.<br> <br>

I do support gay marriage without any reservations, and think that there is no reason why GLBTs should be hindered from living the way their genes lean them because they are within the realm of consenting adults. However, there are less savory applications of this scenario like pedophilia, or as in this case, violence. There are genetic predispositions toward actions that are and should remain illegal. It may be uncomfortable for genetic pedophiles and the violence-inclined, but so be it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A genetic predisposition is not in of itself an action .
I myself am unashamedly bisexual , but I have not had sexual contact with other men .
That 's a personal decision ( mostly sourced in the convenience of taking the easy way out with regard to my family and how they would react ) .
Genes may determine to whom you 're attracted , but ultimately people decide for themselves how to act on that attraction .
I do support gay marriage without any reservations , and think that there is no reason why GLBTs should be hindered from living the way their genes lean them because they are within the realm of consenting adults .
However , there are less savory applications of this scenario like pedophilia , or as in this case , violence .
There are genetic predispositions toward actions that are and should remain illegal .
It may be uncomfortable for genetic pedophiles and the violence-inclined , but so be it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A genetic predisposition is not in of itself an action.
I myself am unashamedly bisexual, but I have not had sexual contact with other men.
That's a personal decision (mostly sourced in the convenience of taking the easy way out with regard to my family and how they would react).
Genes may determine to whom you're attracted, but ultimately people decide for themselves how to act on that attraction.
I do support gay marriage without any reservations, and think that there is no reason why GLBTs should be hindered from living the way their genes lean them because they are within the realm of consenting adults.
However, there are less savory applications of this scenario like pedophilia, or as in this case, violence.
There are genetic predispositions toward actions that are and should remain illegal.
It may be uncomfortable for genetic pedophiles and the violence-inclined, but so be it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979720</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa</title>
	<author>NoYob</author>
	<datestamp>1257009540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Maybe I wouldn't have lost my job if I could have proven I have a laziness gene.</p></div><p>I think some should go for Slashdot. Some of us have the Troll/Flamebait gene and just can't help trashing Apple users, Windows users, and calling Linux users commie bastards - even though we ourselves may be big time Linux fans (writing this on my Ubuntu 9.1 which is working like a charm.)</p><p>Which means, I walk around all day saying, "I'm a Linux commie bastard!" repeatedly. Maybe, I'll get hauled away and get to be put on Social Security disability and never have to work again?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe I would n't have lost my job if I could have proven I have a laziness gene.I think some should go for Slashdot .
Some of us have the Troll/Flamebait gene and just ca n't help trashing Apple users , Windows users , and calling Linux users commie bastards - even though we ourselves may be big time Linux fans ( writing this on my Ubuntu 9.1 which is working like a charm .
) Which means , I walk around all day saying , " I 'm a Linux commie bastard !
" repeatedly .
Maybe , I 'll get hauled away and get to be put on Social Security disability and never have to work again ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe I wouldn't have lost my job if I could have proven I have a laziness gene.I think some should go for Slashdot.
Some of us have the Troll/Flamebait gene and just can't help trashing Apple users, Windows users, and calling Linux users commie bastards - even though we ourselves may be big time Linux fans (writing this on my Ubuntu 9.1 which is working like a charm.
)Which means, I walk around all day saying, "I'm a Linux commie bastard!
" repeatedly.
Maybe, I'll get hauled away and get to be put on Social Security disability and never have to work again?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979630</id>
	<title>Huh...</title>
	<author>mea37</author>
	<datestamp>1257009300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So if we can explain why you are who you are, then you are no longer responsible for being who you are?  Neat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So if we can explain why you are who you are , then you are no longer responsible for being who you are ?
Neat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if we can explain why you are who you are, then you are no longer responsible for being who you are?
Neat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982538</id>
	<title>Shouldn't that be 'longer' instead ?</title>
	<author>lbalbalba</author>
	<datestamp>1257017880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mean, if it is proven that you have a gene that makes you more likely to engage in criminal/illegal activities than others, doesn't that mean you're also more likely to become a repeat offender and should therefore be put in jail longer than others instead of shorter ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , if it is proven that you have a gene that makes you more likely to engage in criminal/illegal activities than others , does n't that mean you 're also more likely to become a repeat offender and should therefore be put in jail longer than others instead of shorter ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, if it is proven that you have a gene that makes you more likely to engage in criminal/illegal activities than others, doesn't that mean you're also more likely to become a repeat offender and should therefore be put in jail longer than others instead of shorter ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29993062</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1257423840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, but keeping him in would be punishing him for something he can't control. I agree with this early release, and I think we should release all the lions and tigers from zoos immediately. Their genes make them very dangerous, and they can't help it either. I need to contact PETA...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but keeping him in would be punishing him for something he ca n't control .
I agree with this early release , and I think we should release all the lions and tigers from zoos immediately .
Their genes make them very dangerous , and they ca n't help it either .
I need to contact PETA.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but keeping him in would be punishing him for something he can't control.
I agree with this early release, and I think we should release all the lions and tigers from zoos immediately.
Their genes make them very dangerous, and they can't help it either.
I need to contact PETA...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979414</id>
	<title>Practical Usage</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257008580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Both of my grandpas are terribly addicted alcoholics, and my father is a regular drinker. I've been charged with underaged drinking before, so does this mean I couldn't really help it?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Both of my grandpas are terribly addicted alcoholics , and my father is a regular drinker .
I 've been charged with underaged drinking before , so does this mean I could n't really help it ?
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Both of my grandpas are terribly addicted alcoholics, and my father is a regular drinker.
I've been charged with underaged drinking before, so does this mean I couldn't really help it?
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982384</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa (michael crichton Next)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257017520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Crichton talks sufficiently about the mis-use of this "I have aggression gene" plot well in his novel "Next". We are going to see all these things being used much more in coming days. It is going to be game-play than any fairness verdicts in courts!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Crichton talks sufficiently about the mis-use of this " I have aggression gene " plot well in his novel " Next " .
We are going to see all these things being used much more in coming days .
It is going to be game-play than any fairness verdicts in courts !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Crichton talks sufficiently about the mis-use of this "I have aggression gene" plot well in his novel "Next".
We are going to see all these things being used much more in coming days.
It is going to be game-play than any fairness verdicts in courts!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29988882</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256996880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No Pants Mondays?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No Pants Mondays ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No Pants Mondays?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980624</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980314</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa</title>
	<author>timeOday</author>
	<datestamp>1257011280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Careful, being labeled "special" is very much a double-edged sword.  I'd rather be respected than pitied, unless I truly thought I had no shot at being respectable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Careful , being labeled " special " is very much a double-edged sword .
I 'd rather be respected than pitied , unless I truly thought I had no shot at being respectable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Careful, being labeled "special" is very much a double-edged sword.
I'd rather be respected than pitied, unless I truly thought I had no shot at being respectable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979424</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>spottedkangaroo</author>
	<datestamp>1257008640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>not at all.  Organizing our behaviors is what differentiates us.   We can organize good or evil with astonishing effectiveness.  Look up genocide some time.  Nobody controls their behavior any more than animals.  In order to fit in we have to behave as though we want to fit in, it's simple feedback.  Simple animal feedback.  Communication and symbolism are the only things we really have going for us.</htmltext>
<tokenext>not at all .
Organizing our behaviors is what differentiates us .
We can organize good or evil with astonishing effectiveness .
Look up genocide some time .
Nobody controls their behavior any more than animals .
In order to fit in we have to behave as though we want to fit in , it 's simple feedback .
Simple animal feedback .
Communication and symbolism are the only things we really have going for us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not at all.
Organizing our behaviors is what differentiates us.
We can organize good or evil with astonishing effectiveness.
Look up genocide some time.
Nobody controls their behavior any more than animals.
In order to fit in we have to behave as though we want to fit in, it's simple feedback.
Simple animal feedback.
Communication and symbolism are the only things we really have going for us.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979174</id>
	<title>MAFIA RULEZ !!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257007920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I want me one of those genes !!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I want me one of those genes !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want me one of those genes !
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29989180</id>
	<title>Backwards?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256998500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't understand, isn't this backwards? If this guy is genetically predisposed to violence, for the good of society shouldn't the judge be ADDING time to the sentence?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand , is n't this backwards ?
If this guy is genetically predisposed to violence , for the good of society should n't the judge be ADDING time to the sentence ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand, isn't this backwards?
If this guy is genetically predisposed to violence, for the good of society shouldn't the judge be ADDING time to the sentence?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981622</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1257015300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone is proven to be more and more predisposed toward violence, it seems to me that incarcerating them for longer periods is appropriate as well, because I would assume that (a) it would be harder to rehabilitate that person, and (b) that person stands a much higher chance of recidivism.  The incarceration should be based on severity of the crime and the likelihood that the person will commit a similar or more violent crime in the future.  If we have accurate genetic markers to identify someone predisposed toward violence (and I think we might have a bit to go yet before we've got the genome tackled to that level of confidence) then we'd want to make sure they get more rehab and society is protected from them longer.  And the stronger the markers are, the further we'd want to go with that, up to and including permanent incarceration for true sociopaths for which there is little to no chance of ensuring the safety of people in their vicinity.</p><p>However, punishing them MORE harshly for a genetic "defect" is going to raise all manner of difficult issues, as well.  First, the science needs to be really solid, second, how do we avoid "prepunishment" (detecting and punishing criminals for crimes not committed, yet) or is that a direction we want to go in?</p><p>But, certainly, punishing them LESS harshly is both counterproductive and dangerous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone is proven to be more and more predisposed toward violence , it seems to me that incarcerating them for longer periods is appropriate as well , because I would assume that ( a ) it would be harder to rehabilitate that person , and ( b ) that person stands a much higher chance of recidivism .
The incarceration should be based on severity of the crime and the likelihood that the person will commit a similar or more violent crime in the future .
If we have accurate genetic markers to identify someone predisposed toward violence ( and I think we might have a bit to go yet before we 've got the genome tackled to that level of confidence ) then we 'd want to make sure they get more rehab and society is protected from them longer .
And the stronger the markers are , the further we 'd want to go with that , up to and including permanent incarceration for true sociopaths for which there is little to no chance of ensuring the safety of people in their vicinity.However , punishing them MORE harshly for a genetic " defect " is going to raise all manner of difficult issues , as well .
First , the science needs to be really solid , second , how do we avoid " prepunishment " ( detecting and punishing criminals for crimes not committed , yet ) or is that a direction we want to go in ? But , certainly , punishing them LESS harshly is both counterproductive and dangerous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone is proven to be more and more predisposed toward violence, it seems to me that incarcerating them for longer periods is appropriate as well, because I would assume that (a) it would be harder to rehabilitate that person, and (b) that person stands a much higher chance of recidivism.
The incarceration should be based on severity of the crime and the likelihood that the person will commit a similar or more violent crime in the future.
If we have accurate genetic markers to identify someone predisposed toward violence (and I think we might have a bit to go yet before we've got the genome tackled to that level of confidence) then we'd want to make sure they get more rehab and society is protected from them longer.
And the stronger the markers are, the further we'd want to go with that, up to and including permanent incarceration for true sociopaths for which there is little to no chance of ensuring the safety of people in their vicinity.However, punishing them MORE harshly for a genetic "defect" is going to raise all manner of difficult issues, as well.
First, the science needs to be really solid, second, how do we avoid "prepunishment" (detecting and punishing criminals for crimes not committed, yet) or is that a direction we want to go in?But, certainly, punishing them LESS harshly is both counterproductive and dangerous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981556</id>
	<title>Re:Ah... do you smell that?</title>
	<author>MenThal</author>
	<datestamp>1257015120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's the smell of free will going out the window, courtesy of people thinking that gene==unable to overcome that impulse. And with free will out the window, there's no liability. And with no liability... well, the court system we have is completely unworkable.</p></div><p>A man is presented before the court, accused of murder. He pleads not guilty due to determinism, and adresses the court.
</p><p> "All things that happen are the direct consequence of events preceding it. Like balls on a pool table. And with such a miserable childhood and social stature as mine, any man like me would have done as me, and ended up killing. So, I am not at fault and cannot be held responsible for my actions."
</p><p>The female judge is not amused and retorts. "While you argument may be valid and logical, it must apply to all if it is true. If so, I am also a product of determinism. My upbringing, my morals, my choice of career. In fact, even the inner strength I have to quell the impulse to have you put to death for your horrible actions are all but swirling marbles on the table of the universe. So, you see, I am bound as much as you by determinism when I seemingly, but not really, freely sentence you to life without parole."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the smell of free will going out the window , courtesy of people thinking that gene = = unable to overcome that impulse .
And with free will out the window , there 's no liability .
And with no liability... well , the court system we have is completely unworkable.A man is presented before the court , accused of murder .
He pleads not guilty due to determinism , and adresses the court .
" All things that happen are the direct consequence of events preceding it .
Like balls on a pool table .
And with such a miserable childhood and social stature as mine , any man like me would have done as me , and ended up killing .
So , I am not at fault and can not be held responsible for my actions .
" The female judge is not amused and retorts .
" While you argument may be valid and logical , it must apply to all if it is true .
If so , I am also a product of determinism .
My upbringing , my morals , my choice of career .
In fact , even the inner strength I have to quell the impulse to have you put to death for your horrible actions are all but swirling marbles on the table of the universe .
So , you see , I am bound as much as you by determinism when I seemingly , but not really , freely sentence you to life without parole .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the smell of free will going out the window, courtesy of people thinking that gene==unable to overcome that impulse.
And with free will out the window, there's no liability.
And with no liability... well, the court system we have is completely unworkable.A man is presented before the court, accused of murder.
He pleads not guilty due to determinism, and adresses the court.
"All things that happen are the direct consequence of events preceding it.
Like balls on a pool table.
And with such a miserable childhood and social stature as mine, any man like me would have done as me, and ended up killing.
So, I am not at fault and cannot be held responsible for my actions.
"
The female judge is not amused and retorts.
"While you argument may be valid and logical, it must apply to all if it is true.
If so, I am also a product of determinism.
My upbringing, my morals, my choice of career.
In fact, even the inner strength I have to quell the impulse to have you put to death for your horrible actions are all but swirling marbles on the table of the universe.
So, you see, I am bound as much as you by determinism when I seemingly, but not really, freely sentence you to life without parole.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982108</id>
	<title>Two sides</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257016800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Subject A is genetically predispositioned to violence.  The subjects older brother has a history of torturing and killing animals.  The subjects father has a history of domestic violence, committing and suffering from.  The subjects maternal grandmother was associated with a domestic political group associated with violent protests and unconfirmed bombings.  At the age of 30 and 3 months, the subject was convicted of murder, but spared the death penalty due to a "violence gene."  Anti-death penalty activists heralded it as a victory.<br> <br>
Subject B is genetically predispositioned to violence.  The subjects older brother has a history of torturing and killing animals.  The subjects father has a history of domestic violence, committing and suffering from.  The subjects maternal grandmother was associated with a domestic political group associated with violent protests and unconfirmed bombings.  At the age of 3 months, the subject was screened for a genetic violent predisposition and aborted due to its presence.  Pro-choice activists heralded it as a victory.<br> <br>
The anti-death penalty activists and the pro-choice activists are one in the same.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Subject A is genetically predispositioned to violence .
The subjects older brother has a history of torturing and killing animals .
The subjects father has a history of domestic violence , committing and suffering from .
The subjects maternal grandmother was associated with a domestic political group associated with violent protests and unconfirmed bombings .
At the age of 30 and 3 months , the subject was convicted of murder , but spared the death penalty due to a " violence gene .
" Anti-death penalty activists heralded it as a victory .
Subject B is genetically predispositioned to violence .
The subjects older brother has a history of torturing and killing animals .
The subjects father has a history of domestic violence , committing and suffering from .
The subjects maternal grandmother was associated with a domestic political group associated with violent protests and unconfirmed bombings .
At the age of 3 months , the subject was screened for a genetic violent predisposition and aborted due to its presence .
Pro-choice activists heralded it as a victory .
The anti-death penalty activists and the pro-choice activists are one in the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Subject A is genetically predispositioned to violence.
The subjects older brother has a history of torturing and killing animals.
The subjects father has a history of domestic violence, committing and suffering from.
The subjects maternal grandmother was associated with a domestic political group associated with violent protests and unconfirmed bombings.
At the age of 30 and 3 months, the subject was convicted of murder, but spared the death penalty due to a "violence gene.
"  Anti-death penalty activists heralded it as a victory.
Subject B is genetically predispositioned to violence.
The subjects older brother has a history of torturing and killing animals.
The subjects father has a history of domestic violence, committing and suffering from.
The subjects maternal grandmother was associated with a domestic political group associated with violent protests and unconfirmed bombings.
At the age of 3 months, the subject was screened for a genetic violent predisposition and aborted due to its presence.
Pro-choice activists heralded it as a victory.
The anti-death penalty activists and the pro-choice activists are one in the same.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981928</id>
	<title>I'm not fat</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257016260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm just "big boned".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm just " big boned " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm just "big boned".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979764</id>
	<title>Behavior is often linked to biology</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1257009720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As often as we try to "cut the heads off of people" by separating the mind/brain from the rest of the body, we really can't.  They are inseparable.  We have an abundance of evidence that shows, for example, that homosexuality is not the "choice" that many assert it is and occurs among animals other than humans as well.  Some people are quite naturally more aggressive than others and that, in fact, it can be modified through various chemical means.</p><p>It would be much more convenient if we could simple blame people for their behvior, their desires and their inclinations, but reality shows undeniable links between biology and behavior and it needs to be factored in.  We do not "blame" wild animals for their behaviors because we accept wild animals for what they are.  Humans are still animals.  While we have enhanced capability to manage our behavior through conscious decision making, our ability to control ourselves is not 100\% and certainly varies from person to person with links to inherited genetic traits.  Failure to acknowledge and factor in these facts is foolish, in my opinion.</p><p>When managing society, failing to account for the reality of who/what humans are misses the opportunity to build the best balance and management systems possible.  Without question, society needs to be able to protect itself from dangerous individuals.  Dangerous individuals, however, also deserve to be aware of their weakness or deficiency so that they can take compensatory measures so that he may better co-exist with society.</p><p>In a conflict between ideology and nature, I have observed that nature wins 100\% of the time.  You can't will nature into changing to meet ideology, after all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As often as we try to " cut the heads off of people " by separating the mind/brain from the rest of the body , we really ca n't .
They are inseparable .
We have an abundance of evidence that shows , for example , that homosexuality is not the " choice " that many assert it is and occurs among animals other than humans as well .
Some people are quite naturally more aggressive than others and that , in fact , it can be modified through various chemical means.It would be much more convenient if we could simple blame people for their behvior , their desires and their inclinations , but reality shows undeniable links between biology and behavior and it needs to be factored in .
We do not " blame " wild animals for their behaviors because we accept wild animals for what they are .
Humans are still animals .
While we have enhanced capability to manage our behavior through conscious decision making , our ability to control ourselves is not 100 \ % and certainly varies from person to person with links to inherited genetic traits .
Failure to acknowledge and factor in these facts is foolish , in my opinion.When managing society , failing to account for the reality of who/what humans are misses the opportunity to build the best balance and management systems possible .
Without question , society needs to be able to protect itself from dangerous individuals .
Dangerous individuals , however , also deserve to be aware of their weakness or deficiency so that they can take compensatory measures so that he may better co-exist with society.In a conflict between ideology and nature , I have observed that nature wins 100 \ % of the time .
You ca n't will nature into changing to meet ideology , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As often as we try to "cut the heads off of people" by separating the mind/brain from the rest of the body, we really can't.
They are inseparable.
We have an abundance of evidence that shows, for example, that homosexuality is not the "choice" that many assert it is and occurs among animals other than humans as well.
Some people are quite naturally more aggressive than others and that, in fact, it can be modified through various chemical means.It would be much more convenient if we could simple blame people for their behvior, their desires and their inclinations, but reality shows undeniable links between biology and behavior and it needs to be factored in.
We do not "blame" wild animals for their behaviors because we accept wild animals for what they are.
Humans are still animals.
While we have enhanced capability to manage our behavior through conscious decision making, our ability to control ourselves is not 100\% and certainly varies from person to person with links to inherited genetic traits.
Failure to acknowledge and factor in these facts is foolish, in my opinion.When managing society, failing to account for the reality of who/what humans are misses the opportunity to build the best balance and management systems possible.
Without question, society needs to be able to protect itself from dangerous individuals.
Dangerous individuals, however, also deserve to be aware of their weakness or deficiency so that they can take compensatory measures so that he may better co-exist with society.In a conflict between ideology and nature, I have observed that nature wins 100\% of the time.
You can't will nature into changing to meet ideology, after all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980410</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>the\_humeister</author>
	<datestamp>1257011580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's always quantum mechanics to throw a wrench in there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's always quantum mechanics to throw a wrench in there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's always quantum mechanics to throw a wrench in there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980480</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>CannonballHead</author>
	<datestamp>1257011760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But if you are predisposed, you obviously couldn't help it.  Which means that we need to make a special case for you - after all, it's much better to be kind to someone who "can't help themselves" than to protect innocent victims.  This man was a victim of his genetic makeup, which <i>obviously</i> supersedes being a victim of murder!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>It's hard to even be sarcastic about this.  Maybe we should only have judges that have been personally affected by criminals, that way they don't think that criminals (well... you know, murderers, rapists, etc) are better than they really are?  I don't see why someone who is known to rape and/or murder people should be walking around and looking for victims again after 9 years.  Or 8 years.  Or 4 with good behavior.  Or whatever...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But if you are predisposed , you obviously could n't help it .
Which means that we need to make a special case for you - after all , it 's much better to be kind to someone who " ca n't help themselves " than to protect innocent victims .
This man was a victim of his genetic makeup , which obviously supersedes being a victim of murder !
...It 's hard to even be sarcastic about this .
Maybe we should only have judges that have been personally affected by criminals , that way they do n't think that criminals ( well... you know , murderers , rapists , etc ) are better than they really are ?
I do n't see why someone who is known to rape and/or murder people should be walking around and looking for victims again after 9 years .
Or 8 years .
Or 4 with good behavior .
Or whatever.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But if you are predisposed, you obviously couldn't help it.
Which means that we need to make a special case for you - after all, it's much better to be kind to someone who "can't help themselves" than to protect innocent victims.
This man was a victim of his genetic makeup, which obviously supersedes being a victim of murder!
...It's hard to even be sarcastic about this.
Maybe we should only have judges that have been personally affected by criminals, that way they don't think that criminals (well... you know, murderers, rapists, etc) are better than they really are?
I don't see why someone who is known to rape and/or murder people should be walking around and looking for victims again after 9 years.
Or 8 years.
Or 4 with good behavior.
Or whatever...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979986</id>
	<title>Not surprising...</title>
	<author>HockeyPuck</author>
	<datestamp>1257010320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Society has been on a tear lately always looking to avoid personal responsibility and blame someone (or in this case, something else).  For example,</p><p>--Kids aren't hyperactive or have too much energy.  They have ADD and require Ritalin.<br>--Why isn't my kid cut out to do Algebra in 2nd grade?  It's not that he/she might have a disposition for the arts, but that I need to blame the school and the teachers.<br>--"The Man" is holding me down.  I find it odd that at my Fortune 500 company the "White male" is not the majority of VPs.<br>--I'm not fat, it's just that I have a genetic disposition to eat tons of crappy food and avoid exercise.  My genes make me buy ice cream and not even take a 10minute walk around the neighborhood every day.<br>--I can't get a date b/c I have a genetic disposition to be single, and not because I want to date Hawaiian Tropic models and I look like Bill Gates and dress like a slob.</p><p>Damnit people, take a bit of responsibility, there's millions of cases out there of people finding their niche and succeeding or overcoming their obstacles to obtain greatness. I don't recall all the immigrants that came through Ellis Island in the early 1900s saying, "I can't be anything" and blamed everyone else.</p><p>There used to be an expression, <i>"When the going gets tough, the tough get going."</i>  I think to many people this now has become, <i>"When the going gets tough, blame someone else."</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Society has been on a tear lately always looking to avoid personal responsibility and blame someone ( or in this case , something else ) .
For example,--Kids are n't hyperactive or have too much energy .
They have ADD and require Ritalin.--Why is n't my kid cut out to do Algebra in 2nd grade ?
It 's not that he/she might have a disposition for the arts , but that I need to blame the school and the teachers.-- " The Man " is holding me down .
I find it odd that at my Fortune 500 company the " White male " is not the majority of VPs.--I 'm not fat , it 's just that I have a genetic disposition to eat tons of crappy food and avoid exercise .
My genes make me buy ice cream and not even take a 10minute walk around the neighborhood every day.--I ca n't get a date b/c I have a genetic disposition to be single , and not because I want to date Hawaiian Tropic models and I look like Bill Gates and dress like a slob.Damnit people , take a bit of responsibility , there 's millions of cases out there of people finding their niche and succeeding or overcoming their obstacles to obtain greatness .
I do n't recall all the immigrants that came through Ellis Island in the early 1900s saying , " I ca n't be anything " and blamed everyone else.There used to be an expression , " When the going gets tough , the tough get going .
" I think to many people this now has become , " When the going gets tough , blame someone else .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Society has been on a tear lately always looking to avoid personal responsibility and blame someone (or in this case, something else).
For example,--Kids aren't hyperactive or have too much energy.
They have ADD and require Ritalin.--Why isn't my kid cut out to do Algebra in 2nd grade?
It's not that he/she might have a disposition for the arts, but that I need to blame the school and the teachers.--"The Man" is holding me down.
I find it odd that at my Fortune 500 company the "White male" is not the majority of VPs.--I'm not fat, it's just that I have a genetic disposition to eat tons of crappy food and avoid exercise.
My genes make me buy ice cream and not even take a 10minute walk around the neighborhood every day.--I can't get a date b/c I have a genetic disposition to be single, and not because I want to date Hawaiian Tropic models and I look like Bill Gates and dress like a slob.Damnit people, take a bit of responsibility, there's millions of cases out there of people finding their niche and succeeding or overcoming their obstacles to obtain greatness.
I don't recall all the immigrants that came through Ellis Island in the early 1900s saying, "I can't be anything" and blamed everyone else.There used to be an expression, "When the going gets tough, the tough get going.
"  I think to many people this now has become, "When the going gets tough, blame someone else.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980028</id>
	<title>gene's or family history</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257010440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm just posing the question - does having the gene predispose you to violence or does the gene mean your from a family where violence is the norm and the behavior is learned from generation to generation?</p><p>Imagine two families one with the "violent gene" and one with out.  Studying them you find one family is normally not violent and very lawfull(except, of course, for the few exceptions), while the other family is violent and ruthless(once again except for the few exceptions).  Isn't it a case that perhaps it is not the gene but the learned behaviour that causes the trend, and that it is the family that ties it together not the gene.</p><p>Do studies take this into consideration when finding this "violent gene"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm just posing the question - does having the gene predispose you to violence or does the gene mean your from a family where violence is the norm and the behavior is learned from generation to generation ? Imagine two families one with the " violent gene " and one with out .
Studying them you find one family is normally not violent and very lawfull ( except , of course , for the few exceptions ) , while the other family is violent and ruthless ( once again except for the few exceptions ) .
Is n't it a case that perhaps it is not the gene but the learned behaviour that causes the trend , and that it is the family that ties it together not the gene.Do studies take this into consideration when finding this " violent gene " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm just posing the question - does having the gene predispose you to violence or does the gene mean your from a family where violence is the norm and the behavior is learned from generation to generation?Imagine two families one with the "violent gene" and one with out.
Studying them you find one family is normally not violent and very lawfull(except, of course, for the few exceptions), while the other family is violent and ruthless(once again except for the few exceptions).
Isn't it a case that perhaps it is not the gene but the learned behaviour that causes the trend, and that it is the family that ties it together not the gene.Do studies take this into consideration when finding this "violent gene"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29991752</id>
	<title>Re:That's backwards</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257018720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All the system is backwards. The justice as it stands now is just a different word for revenge, that's why there are situations like this. This guy looks like he's unable to control himself and thus he deserves less revenge. If the justice was based on preserving security and fairness in society, this guy would be locked up or treated and closely monitored until it would be reasonable to believe that he will not commit a murder again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All the system is backwards .
The justice as it stands now is just a different word for revenge , that 's why there are situations like this .
This guy looks like he 's unable to control himself and thus he deserves less revenge .
If the justice was based on preserving security and fairness in society , this guy would be locked up or treated and closely monitored until it would be reasonable to believe that he will not commit a murder again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the system is backwards.
The justice as it stands now is just a different word for revenge, that's why there are situations like this.
This guy looks like he's unable to control himself and thus he deserves less revenge.
If the justice was based on preserving security and fairness in society, this guy would be locked up or treated and closely monitored until it would be reasonable to believe that he will not commit a murder again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979520</id>
	<title>Re:Practical Usage</title>
	<author>aicrules</author>
	<datestamp>1257008940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually yeah, you could use that to get your sentence/penalty reduced or commuted, though it would likely be at the inverse change to amount of court mandated therapy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually yeah , you could use that to get your sentence/penalty reduced or commuted , though it would likely be at the inverse change to amount of court mandated therapy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually yeah, you could use that to get your sentence/penalty reduced or commuted, though it would likely be at the inverse change to amount of court mandated therapy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979414</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980590</id>
	<title>Sorry Judge...</title>
	<author>gabereiser</author>
	<datestamp>1257012120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I beat my kids to death because I have an aggression gene.  It's not my fault, but my families breeding habits at work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I beat my kids to death because I have an aggression gene .
It 's not my fault , but my families breeding habits at work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I beat my kids to death because I have an aggression gene.
It's not my fault, but my families breeding habits at work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979850</id>
	<title>imagine sentence for leaving light on overnight</title>
	<author>peter303</author>
	<datestamp>1257009960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And adding a couple extra pounds of carbon to the air.  Probably worse than this if you believe all the climate hysteria on the other side of the ocean.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And adding a couple extra pounds of carbon to the air .
Probably worse than this if you believe all the climate hysteria on the other side of the ocean .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And adding a couple extra pounds of carbon to the air.
Probably worse than this if you believe all the climate hysteria on the other side of the ocean.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980262</id>
	<title>Re:Ah... do you smell that?</title>
	<author>ookabooka</author>
	<datestamp>1257011100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even for the mentally ill? One could argue that his brain simply works differently than yours or mine. I'm not saying I agree with the decision, I'm just curious where the line should be drawn.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even for the mentally ill ?
One could argue that his brain simply works differently than yours or mine .
I 'm not saying I agree with the decision , I 'm just curious where the line should be drawn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even for the mentally ill?
One could argue that his brain simply works differently than yours or mine.
I'm not saying I agree with the decision, I'm just curious where the line should be drawn.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983570</id>
	<title>The judge has the daft as a brush gene</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257020700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let me try to understand this. A person does something because the way they are made makes them likely to do it. They get a shorter sentence. Another person does a thing but only because a strange set of circumstances contrived to lead them into a unique situation which almost forced the crime upon them. They get a longer sentence because usually they would be unlikely to do it.</p><p>Both criminals should be put away for the same length of time. The criminally disposed criminal because he is likely to commit the crime again, and the usually law abiding citizen as a warning to all those other usually law abiding citizens, so that they don't get ideas in their heads.</p><p>If the summary was accurate, the judge is a fool.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me try to understand this .
A person does something because the way they are made makes them likely to do it .
They get a shorter sentence .
Another person does a thing but only because a strange set of circumstances contrived to lead them into a unique situation which almost forced the crime upon them .
They get a longer sentence because usually they would be unlikely to do it.Both criminals should be put away for the same length of time .
The criminally disposed criminal because he is likely to commit the crime again , and the usually law abiding citizen as a warning to all those other usually law abiding citizens , so that they do n't get ideas in their heads.If the summary was accurate , the judge is a fool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me try to understand this.
A person does something because the way they are made makes them likely to do it.
They get a shorter sentence.
Another person does a thing but only because a strange set of circumstances contrived to lead them into a unique situation which almost forced the crime upon them.
They get a longer sentence because usually they would be unlikely to do it.Both criminals should be put away for the same length of time.
The criminally disposed criminal because he is likely to commit the crime again, and the usually law abiding citizen as a warning to all those other usually law abiding citizens, so that they don't get ideas in their heads.If the summary was accurate, the judge is a fool.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979294</id>
	<title>Good to know...</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1257008280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look out RIAA's CEO</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look out RIAA 's CEO</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look out RIAA's CEO</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979924</id>
	<title>Vi!</title>
	<author>niko9</author>
	<datestamp>1257010200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So remember emacs users, it's really not your fault!</p><p>Ducks...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So remember emacs users , it 's really not your fault ! Ducks.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So remember emacs users, it's really not your fault!Ducks...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981830</id>
	<title>Re:Behavior is often linked to biology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257015900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>talk like that will get you thrown right out of the sociology department...unless it gets minorities reduced sentences.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>talk like that will get you thrown right out of the sociology department...unless it gets minorities reduced sentences .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>talk like that will get you thrown right out of the sociology department...unless it gets minorities reduced sentences.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982902</id>
	<title>Re:Lock him up again? More? NO!</title>
	<author>Rockoon</author>
	<datestamp>1257018900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This guy may be a greater danger to society, but we don't just lock him up again because of that.</p></div><p>
Why not?<br>
<br>
Lets take this to the logical conclusion.<br>
<br>
Suppose this persons level of 'greater danger to society' amounted to a 100\% chance of a future murder. Surely you would not want to let them out of prison in that case, right?<br>
<br>
Ok, how about a 90\% chance? Probably still wouldn't.. right?<br>
<br>
80\%?<br>
70\%?<br>
60\%?<br>
<br>
Where the hell are you drawing this line of yours?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This guy may be a greater danger to society , but we do n't just lock him up again because of that .
Why not ?
Lets take this to the logical conclusion .
Suppose this persons level of 'greater danger to society ' amounted to a 100 \ % chance of a future murder .
Surely you would not want to let them out of prison in that case , right ?
Ok , how about a 90 \ % chance ?
Probably still would n't.. right ? 80 \ % ?
70 \ % ? 60 \ % ?
Where the hell are you drawing this line of yours ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This guy may be a greater danger to society, but we don't just lock him up again because of that.
Why not?
Lets take this to the logical conclusion.
Suppose this persons level of 'greater danger to society' amounted to a 100\% chance of a future murder.
Surely you would not want to let them out of prison in that case, right?
Ok, how about a 90\% chance?
Probably still wouldn't.. right?

80\%?
70\%?
60\%?
Where the hell are you drawing this line of yours?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980660</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979870</id>
	<title>Implications for gay marriage?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257010020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are those who suggest that homosexuality isn't a choice, but a strong genetic predisposition.  If one can choose not to be homosexual, they are at core the same as everyone else, and then gay marriage laws aren't discriminating against people, but behavior.  Granted the behavior discriminated on is a silly and unnecessary distinction when judging marriages (homosexual couples have demonstrated they can raise children, have stable households, contribute positively to society), but it's no longer a civil rights issue.
<br> <br>
Is this a road we want to go down?  Surely there must be some consideration for genetic predispositions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are those who suggest that homosexuality is n't a choice , but a strong genetic predisposition .
If one can choose not to be homosexual , they are at core the same as everyone else , and then gay marriage laws are n't discriminating against people , but behavior .
Granted the behavior discriminated on is a silly and unnecessary distinction when judging marriages ( homosexual couples have demonstrated they can raise children , have stable households , contribute positively to society ) , but it 's no longer a civil rights issue .
Is this a road we want to go down ?
Surely there must be some consideration for genetic predispositions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are those who suggest that homosexuality isn't a choice, but a strong genetic predisposition.
If one can choose not to be homosexual, they are at core the same as everyone else, and then gay marriage laws aren't discriminating against people, but behavior.
Granted the behavior discriminated on is a silly and unnecessary distinction when judging marriages (homosexual couples have demonstrated they can raise children, have stable households, contribute positively to society), but it's no longer a civil rights issue.
Is this a road we want to go down?
Surely there must be some consideration for genetic predispositions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981524</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>Fnord</author>
	<datestamp>1257015060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Calvinist faiths say that god predetermined all the people who would be saved or damned before creation.  Other Christian doctrines say that what sets man apart from the angels is his ability to choose to follow him.  So, I guess it depends on which religion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Calvinist faiths say that god predetermined all the people who would be saved or damned before creation .
Other Christian doctrines say that what sets man apart from the angels is his ability to choose to follow him .
So , I guess it depends on which religion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Calvinist faiths say that god predetermined all the people who would be saved or damned before creation.
Other Christian doctrines say that what sets man apart from the angels is his ability to choose to follow him.
So, I guess it depends on which religion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.30011162</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>Dread\_ed</author>
	<datestamp>1257510480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"How is this train of thought any different for a theist? "If God's creations, enacting his will, then where does personal responsibility come into play?"</i></p><p>If there is one thing I cannot abide it is an atheist who has to resort to straw men to attack religion.  As a spiritual person with intimate knowledge of the Bible I must say it is laziness, stupidity, or an incredible new combination of both traits that leads an atheist to malign religion for qualities it does not posess or things is does not say.  There are literally millions of viable and vulnerable attack points and you have to make one up?  Come on!  Atheists are generally much, much smarter than that.</p><p>Ok, my beef is that every religious book in history points to the vast and often insurmountable (without divine help, tada!) disfunction between gods and men.  No religious book ever written describes mankind as faithful enactors of the will of God.  If they did there would be no central conflict between man and the unknowable infinite, and therefore no sitcom spinoffs.  How the hell are you going to make a viable franchise like that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" How is this train of thought any different for a theist ?
" If God 's creations , enacting his will , then where does personal responsibility come into play ?
" If there is one thing I can not abide it is an atheist who has to resort to straw men to attack religion .
As a spiritual person with intimate knowledge of the Bible I must say it is laziness , stupidity , or an incredible new combination of both traits that leads an atheist to malign religion for qualities it does not posess or things is does not say .
There are literally millions of viable and vulnerable attack points and you have to make one up ?
Come on !
Atheists are generally much , much smarter than that.Ok , my beef is that every religious book in history points to the vast and often insurmountable ( without divine help , tada !
) disfunction between gods and men .
No religious book ever written describes mankind as faithful enactors of the will of God .
If they did there would be no central conflict between man and the unknowable infinite , and therefore no sitcom spinoffs .
How the hell are you going to make a viable franchise like that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"How is this train of thought any different for a theist?
"If God's creations, enacting his will, then where does personal responsibility come into play?
"If there is one thing I cannot abide it is an atheist who has to resort to straw men to attack religion.
As a spiritual person with intimate knowledge of the Bible I must say it is laziness, stupidity, or an incredible new combination of both traits that leads an atheist to malign religion for qualities it does not posess or things is does not say.
There are literally millions of viable and vulnerable attack points and you have to make one up?
Come on!
Atheists are generally much, much smarter than that.Ok, my beef is that every religious book in history points to the vast and often insurmountable (without divine help, tada!
) disfunction between gods and men.
No religious book ever written describes mankind as faithful enactors of the will of God.
If they did there would be no central conflict between man and the unknowable infinite, and therefore no sitcom spinoffs.
How the hell are you going to make a viable franchise like that?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29987720</id>
	<title>You're doing it wrong</title>
	<author>Nekomusume</author>
	<datestamp>1256991240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A person with a proven biological predisposition to murderous violence needs to be locked up for more time, not less.</p><p>Of course, the science probably doesn't actually support either response.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A person with a proven biological predisposition to murderous violence needs to be locked up for more time , not less.Of course , the science probably does n't actually support either response .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A person with a proven biological predisposition to murderous violence needs to be locked up for more time, not less.Of course, the science probably doesn't actually support either response.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979958</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa</title>
	<author>masshuu</author>
	<datestamp>1257010260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was gonna try that but it was to much work just trying to figure out who to call.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was gon na try that but it was to much work just trying to figure out who to call .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was gonna try that but it was to much work just trying to figure out who to call.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981614</id>
	<title>That leads to racism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257015300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The same thing would be to gather statistics on aggressiveness of people of different color or nationality and sentence accordingly. One could say his nation mentality is more aggressive and get reduced sentence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The same thing would be to gather statistics on aggressiveness of people of different color or nationality and sentence accordingly .
One could say his nation mentality is more aggressive and get reduced sentence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The same thing would be to gather statistics on aggressiveness of people of different color or nationality and sentence accordingly.
One could say his nation mentality is more aggressive and get reduced sentence.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980664</id>
	<title>So...He gets out sooner to be aggressive again?</title>
	<author>Tangential</author>
	<datestamp>1257012360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seems like that should lengthen the sentence rather than shorten it.

Statistically speaking, he is probably far more likely to become violent again....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems like that should lengthen the sentence rather than shorten it .
Statistically speaking , he is probably far more likely to become violent again... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems like that should lengthen the sentence rather than shorten it.
Statistically speaking, he is probably far more likely to become violent again....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980158</id>
	<title>Backwards</title>
	<author>i-like-burritos</author>
	<datestamp>1257010860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If that genetic link is legitimate, then shouldn't that get him a longer sentence?
<p>
Prison has two purposes: removing dangerous people from society until they are no longer a threat, and deterring future crimes.  If this guy really is genetically prone to violence, that would make him more dangerous, and it would presumably take longer to determine that he is not a threat to others.  The reduced sentence would also give him less incentive to overcome his aggression the next time he's thinking about committing a crime.  It's completely backwards.
</p><p>
Also, reducing the sentence for him might even encourage further crimes by others, whether or not the genetic science is sound.  It could give some sense of justification to somebody who's about to commit a crime.  For example, just as I'm deciding whether or not to kill somebody, I might think, "It's not my fault I have genes linked to aggression.  Hell, they'll even reduce my sentence for it," and then go through with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If that genetic link is legitimate , then should n't that get him a longer sentence ?
Prison has two purposes : removing dangerous people from society until they are no longer a threat , and deterring future crimes .
If this guy really is genetically prone to violence , that would make him more dangerous , and it would presumably take longer to determine that he is not a threat to others .
The reduced sentence would also give him less incentive to overcome his aggression the next time he 's thinking about committing a crime .
It 's completely backwards .
Also , reducing the sentence for him might even encourage further crimes by others , whether or not the genetic science is sound .
It could give some sense of justification to somebody who 's about to commit a crime .
For example , just as I 'm deciding whether or not to kill somebody , I might think , " It 's not my fault I have genes linked to aggression .
Hell , they 'll even reduce my sentence for it , " and then go through with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If that genetic link is legitimate, then shouldn't that get him a longer sentence?
Prison has two purposes: removing dangerous people from society until they are no longer a threat, and deterring future crimes.
If this guy really is genetically prone to violence, that would make him more dangerous, and it would presumably take longer to determine that he is not a threat to others.
The reduced sentence would also give him less incentive to overcome his aggression the next time he's thinking about committing a crime.
It's completely backwards.
Also, reducing the sentence for him might even encourage further crimes by others, whether or not the genetic science is sound.
It could give some sense of justification to somebody who's about to commit a crime.
For example, just as I'm deciding whether or not to kill somebody, I might think, "It's not my fault I have genes linked to aggression.
Hell, they'll even reduce my sentence for it," and then go through with it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983620</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa</title>
	<author>Darinbob</author>
	<datestamp>1257020820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Maybe I wouldn't have lost my job if I could have proven I have a laziness gene.</p></div><p>Same problem here.  I would have sued my previous employers over this, but I figured it'd be too much work.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe I would n't have lost my job if I could have proven I have a laziness gene.Same problem here .
I would have sued my previous employers over this , but I figured it 'd be too much work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe I wouldn't have lost my job if I could have proven I have a laziness gene.Same problem here.
I would have sued my previous employers over this, but I figured it'd be too much work.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979410</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>walterbyrd</author>
	<datestamp>1257008580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is what I thought.</p><p>Maybe, after he gets out of prison, he should be kept in some other institution? An institution designed, not to punish, but to keep dangerous people off the streets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is what I thought.Maybe , after he gets out of prison , he should be kept in some other institution ?
An institution designed , not to punish , but to keep dangerous people off the streets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is what I thought.Maybe, after he gets out of prison, he should be kept in some other institution?
An institution designed, not to punish, but to keep dangerous people off the streets.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980960</id>
	<title>Your honor</title>
	<author>Orion Blastar</author>
	<datestamp>1257013380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087507/quotes" title="imdb.com">I AM handicapped, I'm psychotic!</a> [imdb.com]</p><p>That case is like something out of a funny movie from the 1980's.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I AM handicapped , I 'm psychotic !
[ imdb.com ] That case is like something out of a funny movie from the 1980 's .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I AM handicapped, I'm psychotic!
[imdb.com]That case is like something out of a funny movie from the 1980's.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252</id>
	<title>Backwards?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257008160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seems a little bit backwards there.</p><p>If I'm actually genetically predisposed to violence, keeping me in society might not be the best course of action.</p><p>Seems to me, those that are \_not\_ predisposed to violence have a better chance of rehabilitating than those that aren't.  Shouldn't they need less time in the slammer to rehabilitate?</p><p>Predisposed to violence = more time in?</p><p>Not Predisposed = less time in?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems a little bit backwards there.If I 'm actually genetically predisposed to violence , keeping me in society might not be the best course of action.Seems to me , those that are \ _not \ _ predisposed to violence have a better chance of rehabilitating than those that are n't .
Should n't they need less time in the slammer to rehabilitate ? Predisposed to violence = more time in ? Not Predisposed = less time in ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems a little bit backwards there.If I'm actually genetically predisposed to violence, keeping me in society might not be the best course of action.Seems to me, those that are \_not\_ predisposed to violence have a better chance of rehabilitating than those that aren't.
Shouldn't they need less time in the slammer to rehabilitate?Predisposed to violence = more time in?Not Predisposed = less time in?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981246</id>
	<title>Re:That's backwards</title>
	<author>fyoder</author>
	<datestamp>1257014220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The legal system is largely about punishment.  It's not appropriate to punish a being for behaving according to its nature.  From the perspective of punishment, they were way too hard on this poor agressively predisposed person.</p><p>Personally, I'd like to see us collectively dismiss the idea of punishment as a throwback to a darker time of stocks and gibbets, and focus solely on rehabilitation and protection of the public.</p><p>The only reason to put someone away is that they're a demonstrated danger, and then there must be a sincere attempt at rehabilitation.  When they're no longer a danger, they can be released, whether that's after two years or never if they're totally unrehabilitatable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The legal system is largely about punishment .
It 's not appropriate to punish a being for behaving according to its nature .
From the perspective of punishment , they were way too hard on this poor agressively predisposed person.Personally , I 'd like to see us collectively dismiss the idea of punishment as a throwback to a darker time of stocks and gibbets , and focus solely on rehabilitation and protection of the public.The only reason to put someone away is that they 're a demonstrated danger , and then there must be a sincere attempt at rehabilitation .
When they 're no longer a danger , they can be released , whether that 's after two years or never if they 're totally unrehabilitatable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The legal system is largely about punishment.
It's not appropriate to punish a being for behaving according to its nature.
From the perspective of punishment, they were way too hard on this poor agressively predisposed person.Personally, I'd like to see us collectively dismiss the idea of punishment as a throwback to a darker time of stocks and gibbets, and focus solely on rehabilitation and protection of the public.The only reason to put someone away is that they're a demonstrated danger, and then there must be a sincere attempt at rehabilitation.
When they're no longer a danger, they can be released, whether that's after two years or never if they're totally unrehabilitatable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980074</id>
	<title>Re:Ah... do you smell that?</title>
	<author>smellsofbikes</author>
	<datestamp>1257010560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While I agree with the general idea behind your statement, it's not as clear as just overcoming impulses.  If it were, you could just tell people with clinical depression to "just cheer up!" or schizophrenics "just stop listening to those voices in your head!"  Or, as a particularly horrible example, people with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay-Sachs\_disease" title="wikipedia.org">Tay-Sachs disease</a> [wikipedia.org] who have been known to beg to be tied back up so they will stop chewing off their own fingers, and go back to just chewing off their own lips.  They are absolutely unable to control their own impulses.<p>
It's easy to say "just learn to control your impulses."  The point with this guy is he is genetically less able to "just control his impulses" than other people, so if we presume that at some threshhold, every person will act impulsively rather than rationally, this guy hits that threshhold before most other people do.</p><p>
So then we get to the meat of the question: what's the purpose of prison?  A lot of people believe it's to punish wrongdoers, some people believe it's to rehabilitate wrongdoers, and some people believe it's to keep wrongdoers off the street so they can't do wrong again.  If you're in the 'punishment' camp, you'll come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter whether the guy has the gene or not, just what he did.  If you're a rehabilitation person, you'll probably assume that he's less guilty, because he's less able to resist impulse, and as such should be rehabilitated and let out.  If you're a keep-wrongdoers-locked-up, you'll decide this guy should be locked up for as long as possible, for exactly the same reason the rehabilitation people think he should be let out more quickly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I agree with the general idea behind your statement , it 's not as clear as just overcoming impulses .
If it were , you could just tell people with clinical depression to " just cheer up !
" or schizophrenics " just stop listening to those voices in your head !
" Or , as a particularly horrible example , people with Tay-Sachs disease [ wikipedia.org ] who have been known to beg to be tied back up so they will stop chewing off their own fingers , and go back to just chewing off their own lips .
They are absolutely unable to control their own impulses .
It 's easy to say " just learn to control your impulses .
" The point with this guy is he is genetically less able to " just control his impulses " than other people , so if we presume that at some threshhold , every person will act impulsively rather than rationally , this guy hits that threshhold before most other people do .
So then we get to the meat of the question : what 's the purpose of prison ?
A lot of people believe it 's to punish wrongdoers , some people believe it 's to rehabilitate wrongdoers , and some people believe it 's to keep wrongdoers off the street so they ca n't do wrong again .
If you 're in the 'punishment ' camp , you 'll come to the conclusion that it does n't matter whether the guy has the gene or not , just what he did .
If you 're a rehabilitation person , you 'll probably assume that he 's less guilty , because he 's less able to resist impulse , and as such should be rehabilitated and let out .
If you 're a keep-wrongdoers-locked-up , you 'll decide this guy should be locked up for as long as possible , for exactly the same reason the rehabilitation people think he should be let out more quickly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I agree with the general idea behind your statement, it's not as clear as just overcoming impulses.
If it were, you could just tell people with clinical depression to "just cheer up!
" or schizophrenics "just stop listening to those voices in your head!
"  Or, as a particularly horrible example, people with Tay-Sachs disease [wikipedia.org] who have been known to beg to be tied back up so they will stop chewing off their own fingers, and go back to just chewing off their own lips.
They are absolutely unable to control their own impulses.
It's easy to say "just learn to control your impulses.
"  The point with this guy is he is genetically less able to "just control his impulses" than other people, so if we presume that at some threshhold, every person will act impulsively rather than rationally, this guy hits that threshhold before most other people do.
So then we get to the meat of the question: what's the purpose of prison?
A lot of people believe it's to punish wrongdoers, some people believe it's to rehabilitate wrongdoers, and some people believe it's to keep wrongdoers off the street so they can't do wrong again.
If you're in the 'punishment' camp, you'll come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter whether the guy has the gene or not, just what he did.
If you're a rehabilitation person, you'll probably assume that he's less guilty, because he's less able to resist impulse, and as such should be rehabilitated and let out.
If you're a keep-wrongdoers-locked-up, you'll decide this guy should be locked up for as long as possible, for exactly the same reason the rehabilitation people think he should be let out more quickly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979512</id>
	<title>Oh, I see.</title>
	<author>EkriirkE</author>
	<datestamp>1257008940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have a propensity for murder?  Get released earlier!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have a propensity for murder ?
Get released earlier !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have a propensity for murder?
Get released earlier!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981324</id>
	<title>Sociopaths rejoice!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257014400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't help yourself for being evil, so you might just as well run free.<br>After all, the point of jail sentences is not to protect society from harmful individuals, is it?<br>No, rather your right to freedom is greater than my right to life. Apparently.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't help yourself for being evil , so you might just as well run free.After all , the point of jail sentences is not to protect society from harmful individuals , is it ? No , rather your right to freedom is greater than my right to life .
Apparently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't help yourself for being evil, so you might just as well run free.After all, the point of jail sentences is not to protect society from harmful individuals, is it?No, rather your right to freedom is greater than my right to life.
Apparently.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980424</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257011580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think some should go for Slashdot. Some of us have the Troll/Flamebait gene and just can't help trashing Apple users, Windows users, and calling Linux users commie bastards - even though we ourselves may be big time Linux fans (writing this on my Ubuntu 9.1 which is working like a charm.)</p></div><p>I'm just nitpicking here, but that should be Ubuntu 9.10 (not 9.1) the version number refers to the year.month of release rather than some incremental set of revisions or a build number, so the 0 is important.</p><p>Can I argue that I have some sort of 'nitpicking gene' to avoid getting modded down?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think some should go for Slashdot .
Some of us have the Troll/Flamebait gene and just ca n't help trashing Apple users , Windows users , and calling Linux users commie bastards - even though we ourselves may be big time Linux fans ( writing this on my Ubuntu 9.1 which is working like a charm .
) I 'm just nitpicking here , but that should be Ubuntu 9.10 ( not 9.1 ) the version number refers to the year.month of release rather than some incremental set of revisions or a build number , so the 0 is important.Can I argue that I have some sort of 'nitpicking gene ' to avoid getting modded down ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think some should go for Slashdot.
Some of us have the Troll/Flamebait gene and just can't help trashing Apple users, Windows users, and calling Linux users commie bastards - even though we ourselves may be big time Linux fans (writing this on my Ubuntu 9.1 which is working like a charm.
)I'm just nitpicking here, but that should be Ubuntu 9.10 (not 9.1) the version number refers to the year.month of release rather than some incremental set of revisions or a build number, so the 0 is important.Can I argue that I have some sort of 'nitpicking gene' to avoid getting modded down?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194</id>
	<title>Whoa</title>
	<author>mewsenews</author>
	<datestamp>1257007980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe I wouldn't have lost my job if I could have proven I have a laziness gene.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe I would n't have lost my job if I could have proven I have a laziness gene .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe I wouldn't have lost my job if I could have proven I have a laziness gene.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980434</id>
	<title>Re:Whoa</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1257011640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Maybe I wouldn't have lost my job if I could have proven I have a laziness gene.</p></div></blockquote><p>Or the Slashdot troll gene<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)<br>
&nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe I would n't have lost my job if I could have proven I have a laziness gene.Or the Slashdot troll gene : - )  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe I wouldn't have lost my job if I could have proven I have a laziness gene.Or the Slashdot troll gene :-)
 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980000</id>
	<title>But...</title>
	<author>Chris Mattern</author>
	<datestamp>1257010380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...don't we need to keep him locked up *longer*, since he's more likely to do it again?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...do n't we need to keep him locked up * longer * , since he 's more likely to do it again ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...don't we need to keep him locked up *longer*, since he's more likely to do it again?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979982</id>
	<title>Re:I'm ok with this ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257010320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm ok with this, so long as the genes are removed from the pool.</p><p>How about, "You have bad genes and we're so empathetic that we're lowering your punishment. And because we don't want anyone else to suffer like you do, we're preventing you from procreating."</p><p>I think I could get behind that.</p></div><p>that is genius, give them the choice of full punishment or reduced punishment and a vasectomy</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm ok with this , so long as the genes are removed from the pool.How about , " You have bad genes and we 're so empathetic that we 're lowering your punishment .
And because we do n't want anyone else to suffer like you do , we 're preventing you from procreating .
" I think I could get behind that.that is genius , give them the choice of full punishment or reduced punishment and a vasectomy</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm ok with this, so long as the genes are removed from the pool.How about, "You have bad genes and we're so empathetic that we're lowering your punishment.
And because we don't want anyone else to suffer like you do, we're preventing you from procreating.
"I think I could get behind that.that is genius, give them the choice of full punishment or reduced punishment and a vasectomy
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981422</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>D Ninja</author>
	<datestamp>1257014700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure what study you have given to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predestination" title="wikipedia.org">election</a> [wikipedia.org], but maybe I can give you a different way to think about it.  (You don't have to agree of course, but I generally like various viewpoints on a subject.)</p><p>God did give us free will.  This is why the fall of man happened (AKA, Adam and Eve eating the apple in the Garden of Eden).  As a result, we (humans) always make our own decisions, although we may be influenced by God (via our conscience, the study of the Bible, etc) or Satan (via...well...lots of bad stuff out there - though I <b>do not</b> subscribe to the idea that everything that is not "good" is inherently evil).  But, at the end of our day, we make a decision, for better or for worse.</p><p>Now (and this is where God's Will comes into play), God never intended for the world to be "fallen."  In his creation, he did not intend for sin, sickness, disease, or whatever to enter the world.  Because it did, though, he allows it.  If he didn't, we wouldn't have free will.  With this said, that does not mean that God won't use bad things towards his good purpose (see <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0399862/" title="imdb.com">End of the Spear</a> [imdb.com] for a movie which demonstrates just this).  Of course, this brings up the question - "Well, God can only respond to events.  He sounds pretty impotent."  This is where, as the Bible shows, God <i>can</i> exert his will however he wants - he just chooses not to (most of the time - miracles still happen.  And I mean real miracles; not the image of Jesus on some toast).</p><p>So, in this context, God can both allow free will, exert his will in bad situations, and, should he deem it necessary, overtly use his will.</p><p>Hopefully that makes some sense.  Again, I'm not looking to say that this is right, but this is some of what I learned in my own study of the topic because, as you just pointed out in your post, it can all be very confusing and I wanted to learn more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure what study you have given to election [ wikipedia.org ] , but maybe I can give you a different way to think about it .
( You do n't have to agree of course , but I generally like various viewpoints on a subject .
) God did give us free will .
This is why the fall of man happened ( AKA , Adam and Eve eating the apple in the Garden of Eden ) .
As a result , we ( humans ) always make our own decisions , although we may be influenced by God ( via our conscience , the study of the Bible , etc ) or Satan ( via...well...lots of bad stuff out there - though I do not subscribe to the idea that everything that is not " good " is inherently evil ) .
But , at the end of our day , we make a decision , for better or for worse.Now ( and this is where God 's Will comes into play ) , God never intended for the world to be " fallen .
" In his creation , he did not intend for sin , sickness , disease , or whatever to enter the world .
Because it did , though , he allows it .
If he did n't , we would n't have free will .
With this said , that does not mean that God wo n't use bad things towards his good purpose ( see End of the Spear [ imdb.com ] for a movie which demonstrates just this ) .
Of course , this brings up the question - " Well , God can only respond to events .
He sounds pretty impotent .
" This is where , as the Bible shows , God can exert his will however he wants - he just chooses not to ( most of the time - miracles still happen .
And I mean real miracles ; not the image of Jesus on some toast ) .So , in this context , God can both allow free will , exert his will in bad situations , and , should he deem it necessary , overtly use his will.Hopefully that makes some sense .
Again , I 'm not looking to say that this is right , but this is some of what I learned in my own study of the topic because , as you just pointed out in your post , it can all be very confusing and I wanted to learn more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure what study you have given to election [wikipedia.org], but maybe I can give you a different way to think about it.
(You don't have to agree of course, but I generally like various viewpoints on a subject.
)God did give us free will.
This is why the fall of man happened (AKA, Adam and Eve eating the apple in the Garden of Eden).
As a result, we (humans) always make our own decisions, although we may be influenced by God (via our conscience, the study of the Bible, etc) or Satan (via...well...lots of bad stuff out there - though I do not subscribe to the idea that everything that is not "good" is inherently evil).
But, at the end of our day, we make a decision, for better or for worse.Now (and this is where God's Will comes into play), God never intended for the world to be "fallen.
"  In his creation, he did not intend for sin, sickness, disease, or whatever to enter the world.
Because it did, though, he allows it.
If he didn't, we wouldn't have free will.
With this said, that does not mean that God won't use bad things towards his good purpose (see End of the Spear [imdb.com] for a movie which demonstrates just this).
Of course, this brings up the question - "Well, God can only respond to events.
He sounds pretty impotent.
"  This is where, as the Bible shows, God can exert his will however he wants - he just chooses not to (most of the time - miracles still happen.
And I mean real miracles; not the image of Jesus on some toast).So, in this context, God can both allow free will, exert his will in bad situations, and, should he deem it necessary, overtly use his will.Hopefully that makes some sense.
Again, I'm not looking to say that this is right, but this is some of what I learned in my own study of the topic because, as you just pointed out in your post, it can all be very confusing and I wanted to learn more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980874</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1257013140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Nobody controls their behavior any more than animals. In order to fit in we have to behave as though we want to fit in, it's simple feedback.</p></div><p>In other words, in order fit in we control our behavior so that we fit in?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody controls their behavior any more than animals .
In order to fit in we have to behave as though we want to fit in , it 's simple feedback.In other words , in order fit in we control our behavior so that we fit in ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody controls their behavior any more than animals.
In order to fit in we have to behave as though we want to fit in, it's simple feedback.In other words, in order fit in we control our behavior so that we fit in?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979886</id>
	<title>Italian justice</title>
	<author>bored\_lurker</author>
	<datestamp>1257010080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am not sure this isn't because of the odd Italian justice system. If you want to get a better understanding of the justice system in Italy read the Monster of Florence by Douglas Preston. It is a fascinating read on a serial killer that ran wild from the 60s to the 80s.</p><p> What you will learn is that the Italian system is no where near what you would expect a civilized country to have. The prosecutor discarded the idea that it was a single serial killer killing couple and mutilating them for the notion that a Satanic cult was doing it. Anyone who tried to prove otherwise soon became accused of being part of the Satanic cult making the whole event look like the Salem Witch Trials. Preston himself got accused, even though he did not arrive in Italy until the 90s.</p><p> The worst part - the judge bought that non-sense. And as an interesting side note the same judge became involved with the Amanda Knox case (the American accused of murdering her room mate). What did they come up with in that case? That the victim died as part of "some kind of Satanic rite, with Amanda allegedly first touching Meredith with the point of a knife, then slitting her throat." It would be funny if it wasn't a court of law.</p><p>In the end it made me understand that what would never stand up in court in other western courts can happen in Italy - it just does not surprise me. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not sure this is n't because of the odd Italian justice system .
If you want to get a better understanding of the justice system in Italy read the Monster of Florence by Douglas Preston .
It is a fascinating read on a serial killer that ran wild from the 60s to the 80s .
What you will learn is that the Italian system is no where near what you would expect a civilized country to have .
The prosecutor discarded the idea that it was a single serial killer killing couple and mutilating them for the notion that a Satanic cult was doing it .
Anyone who tried to prove otherwise soon became accused of being part of the Satanic cult making the whole event look like the Salem Witch Trials .
Preston himself got accused , even though he did not arrive in Italy until the 90s .
The worst part - the judge bought that non-sense .
And as an interesting side note the same judge became involved with the Amanda Knox case ( the American accused of murdering her room mate ) .
What did they come up with in that case ?
That the victim died as part of " some kind of Satanic rite , with Amanda allegedly first touching Meredith with the point of a knife , then slitting her throat .
" It would be funny if it was n't a court of law.In the end it made me understand that what would never stand up in court in other western courts can happen in Italy - it just does not surprise me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not sure this isn't because of the odd Italian justice system.
If you want to get a better understanding of the justice system in Italy read the Monster of Florence by Douglas Preston.
It is a fascinating read on a serial killer that ran wild from the 60s to the 80s.
What you will learn is that the Italian system is no where near what you would expect a civilized country to have.
The prosecutor discarded the idea that it was a single serial killer killing couple and mutilating them for the notion that a Satanic cult was doing it.
Anyone who tried to prove otherwise soon became accused of being part of the Satanic cult making the whole event look like the Salem Witch Trials.
Preston himself got accused, even though he did not arrive in Italy until the 90s.
The worst part - the judge bought that non-sense.
And as an interesting side note the same judge became involved with the Amanda Knox case (the American accused of murdering her room mate).
What did they come up with in that case?
That the victim died as part of "some kind of Satanic rite, with Amanda allegedly first touching Meredith with the point of a knife, then slitting her throat.
" It would be funny if it wasn't a court of law.In the end it made me understand that what would never stand up in court in other western courts can happen in Italy - it just does not surprise me. </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979632</id>
	<title>Makes sense, sort of</title>
	<author>Thyamine</author>
	<datestamp>1257009300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Given punishments for crimes where judgment is impaired, this makes sense.  I don't know that I can agree though.  For example, if your are driving drunk in a car and kill someone, that carries a different sentence than being sober and killing someone, in or out of the car.  Circumstances dictate different sentences, which they should.  In theory, genetic dispositions are not something you can control so could actually require more consideration than drinking.  I do think personal judgment should override that however.  You can't just get angry and start murdering people because you have an excuse in your genes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Given punishments for crimes where judgment is impaired , this makes sense .
I do n't know that I can agree though .
For example , if your are driving drunk in a car and kill someone , that carries a different sentence than being sober and killing someone , in or out of the car .
Circumstances dictate different sentences , which they should .
In theory , genetic dispositions are not something you can control so could actually require more consideration than drinking .
I do think personal judgment should override that however .
You ca n't just get angry and start murdering people because you have an excuse in your genes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given punishments for crimes where judgment is impaired, this makes sense.
I don't know that I can agree though.
For example, if your are driving drunk in a car and kill someone, that carries a different sentence than being sober and killing someone, in or out of the car.
Circumstances dictate different sentences, which they should.
In theory, genetic dispositions are not something you can control so could actually require more consideration than drinking.
I do think personal judgment should override that however.
You can't just get angry and start murdering people because you have an excuse in your genes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979578</id>
	<title>Junk science!  The judge should have read this 1st</title>
	<author>jcwren</author>
	<datestamp>1257009120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/04/love-of-shopping-is.html" title="boingboing.net">http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/04/love-of-shopping-is.html</a> [boingboing.net]</p><p>And I agree with a previous comment that he should have gotten an INCREASED sentence, since clearly we can't allow someone who has no control over themselves loose in public.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.boingboing.net/2009/11/04/love-of-shopping-is.html [ boingboing.net ] And I agree with a previous comment that he should have gotten an INCREASED sentence , since clearly we ca n't allow someone who has no control over themselves loose in public .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/04/love-of-shopping-is.html [boingboing.net]And I agree with a previous comment that he should have gotten an INCREASED sentence, since clearly we can't allow someone who has no control over themselves loose in public.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982042</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257016560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Speak for youself. I control myself all the time in what I eat, when I sleep, what I spend money on, and what I do with my time. Another thing I control myself on is how I treat other people. The level of control varies depending on some physiological and chemical factors (sleep, amount of coffee), but I manage to keep myself from head-butting other people pretty much all the time.</p><p>Calling all of this a simple effort to fit in is very facile, very vague and very wrong. The proof, or the closest I can come to proof on this soft-science question at the moment, is alcoholics: many of them kick the habit and stay off drink, despite the strong internal need for more of it. If an alkie saying 'no' to booze isn't self control, I don't know what is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Speak for youself .
I control myself all the time in what I eat , when I sleep , what I spend money on , and what I do with my time .
Another thing I control myself on is how I treat other people .
The level of control varies depending on some physiological and chemical factors ( sleep , amount of coffee ) , but I manage to keep myself from head-butting other people pretty much all the time.Calling all of this a simple effort to fit in is very facile , very vague and very wrong .
The proof , or the closest I can come to proof on this soft-science question at the moment , is alcoholics : many of them kick the habit and stay off drink , despite the strong internal need for more of it .
If an alkie saying 'no ' to booze is n't self control , I do n't know what is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speak for youself.
I control myself all the time in what I eat, when I sleep, what I spend money on, and what I do with my time.
Another thing I control myself on is how I treat other people.
The level of control varies depending on some physiological and chemical factors (sleep, amount of coffee), but I manage to keep myself from head-butting other people pretty much all the time.Calling all of this a simple effort to fit in is very facile, very vague and very wrong.
The proof, or the closest I can come to proof on this soft-science question at the moment, is alcoholics: many of them kick the habit and stay off drink, despite the strong internal need for more of it.
If an alkie saying 'no' to booze isn't self control, I don't know what is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29989024</id>
	<title>Re:Italian justice</title>
	<author>Shin-LaC</author>
	<datestamp>1256997600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because we've never read stories of egregious mishandling of justice in America or other countries, right?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because we 've never read stories of egregious mishandling of justice in America or other countries , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because we've never read stories of egregious mishandling of justice in America or other countries, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979886</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984016</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257022020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>. . .  because it's more effort to reform someone who has a genetic disposition towards violence.</p></div><p>And in many ways a bit arrogant to think you have a good enough handle on human psyche to really believe you could ever truly reform them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>.
. .
because it 's more effort to reform someone who has a genetic disposition towards violence.And in many ways a bit arrogant to think you have a good enough handle on human psyche to really believe you could ever truly reform them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.
. .
because it's more effort to reform someone who has a genetic disposition towards violence.And in many ways a bit arrogant to think you have a good enough handle on human psyche to really believe you could ever truly reform them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981304</id>
	<title>what's really funny . . .</title>
	<author>Tanman</author>
	<datestamp>1257014340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People generally want shorter sentences in the hopes of someone being rehabilitated.  This guy's defense is basically "I can't be rehabilitated -- I'm a natural killer!"  In response, the judge gives a reduced sentence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People generally want shorter sentences in the hopes of someone being rehabilitated .
This guy 's defense is basically " I ca n't be rehabilitated -- I 'm a natural killer !
" In response , the judge gives a reduced sentence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People generally want shorter sentences in the hopes of someone being rehabilitated.
This guy's defense is basically "I can't be rehabilitated -- I'm a natural killer!
"  In response, the judge gives a reduced sentence.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29989716</id>
	<title>Just Send Them...</title>
	<author>IonOtter</author>
	<datestamp>1257001440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien\_3" title="wikipedia.org">Fiorina "Fury" 161</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>I hear they've got a good place to wait, there...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...to Fiorina " Fury " 161 [ wikipedia.org ] .I hear they 've got a good place to wait , there.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...to Fiorina "Fury" 161 [wikipedia.org].I hear they've got a good place to wait, there...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981408</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257014640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>until nearly all of the violently predisposed are in jail and only the passively predisposed are in the public ripe to be manipulated and too peaceful to resist.  this is an interesting argument against the insanity plea psychology and such that if it becomes too convenient to label one person as insane how do you keep from labeling your opponents insane and have them locked up.  However did not seem to me that he got off too easy only a year off a nine year sentence if he was genetically predisposed to violence shouldn't they have gone insanity plea route?  would be more productive if in the end he could not control his actions he would be in a place , hopefully,  where until he was "cured" he could not leave and expose the public to his violence. but only if he is in fact a danger and it is out of his control.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>until nearly all of the violently predisposed are in jail and only the passively predisposed are in the public ripe to be manipulated and too peaceful to resist .
this is an interesting argument against the insanity plea psychology and such that if it becomes too convenient to label one person as insane how do you keep from labeling your opponents insane and have them locked up .
However did not seem to me that he got off too easy only a year off a nine year sentence if he was genetically predisposed to violence should n't they have gone insanity plea route ?
would be more productive if in the end he could not control his actions he would be in a place , hopefully , where until he was " cured " he could not leave and expose the public to his violence .
but only if he is in fact a danger and it is out of his control .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>until nearly all of the violently predisposed are in jail and only the passively predisposed are in the public ripe to be manipulated and too peaceful to resist.
this is an interesting argument against the insanity plea psychology and such that if it becomes too convenient to label one person as insane how do you keep from labeling your opponents insane and have them locked up.
However did not seem to me that he got off too easy only a year off a nine year sentence if he was genetically predisposed to violence shouldn't they have gone insanity plea route?
would be more productive if in the end he could not control his actions he would be in a place , hopefully,  where until he was "cured" he could not leave and expose the public to his violence.
but only if he is in fact a danger and it is out of his control.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983816</id>
	<title>Natural Selection</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257021420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>A radical way to look at this problem

Ok. He gets a reduced sentence so that he can get out of the jail quickly, reproduce , pass on his genes and have more murderers?
Hmm...looks like in the modern world we are naturally selecting murders.

I realize that this is not an easy problem to solve.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A radical way to look at this problem Ok. He gets a reduced sentence so that he can get out of the jail quickly , reproduce , pass on his genes and have more murderers ?
Hmm...looks like in the modern world we are naturally selecting murders .
I realize that this is not an easy problem to solve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A radical way to look at this problem

Ok. He gets a reduced sentence so that he can get out of the jail quickly, reproduce , pass on his genes and have more murderers?
Hmm...looks like in the modern world we are naturally selecting murders.
I realize that this is not an easy problem to solve.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981544</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>misexistentialist</author>
	<datestamp>1257015120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Better to just lock you up at birth. And those criminals not pre-disposed, who chose to become evil, should be burned.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Better to just lock you up at birth .
And those criminals not pre-disposed , who chose to become evil , should be burned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Better to just lock you up at birth.
And those criminals not pre-disposed, who chose to become evil, should be burned.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980660</id>
	<title>Lock him up again? More? NO!</title>
	<author>metrix007</author>
	<datestamp>1257012360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is wrong with you people all advocating or demanding he be locked up again? This is not we as a society(and especially<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./'s who are meant to be a bit more enlightened) should be advocating. Here we have a person who, for all intents and purposes, acted involuntarily. As someone who used to have a violence problem, I know just how hard it can be to gain self control, and not just react without thinking.</p><p>This guy may be a greater danger to society, but we don't just lock him up again because of that. Jesus. On the other hand, we should be aware that he may be a greater danger. The ideal treatment is then therapy, drugs, or perhaps some isolation. But not simply locking him up because it makes everyone else potentially safer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is wrong with you people all advocating or demanding he be locked up again ?
This is not we as a society ( and especially ./ 's who are meant to be a bit more enlightened ) should be advocating .
Here we have a person who , for all intents and purposes , acted involuntarily .
As someone who used to have a violence problem , I know just how hard it can be to gain self control , and not just react without thinking.This guy may be a greater danger to society , but we do n't just lock him up again because of that .
Jesus. On the other hand , we should be aware that he may be a greater danger .
The ideal treatment is then therapy , drugs , or perhaps some isolation .
But not simply locking him up because it makes everyone else potentially safer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is wrong with you people all advocating or demanding he be locked up again?
This is not we as a society(and especially ./'s who are meant to be a bit more enlightened) should be advocating.
Here we have a person who, for all intents and purposes, acted involuntarily.
As someone who used to have a violence problem, I know just how hard it can be to gain self control, and not just react without thinking.This guy may be a greater danger to society, but we don't just lock him up again because of that.
Jesus. On the other hand, we should be aware that he may be a greater danger.
The ideal treatment is then therapy, drugs, or perhaps some isolation.
But not simply locking him up because it makes everyone else potentially safer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979366</id>
	<title>Fat Gene?</title>
	<author>Caviller</author>
	<datestamp>1257008460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have the fat gene....can i get a discount from McDonald's then since the gene is causing me to spend more money on food then i can afford?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have the fat gene....can i get a discount from McDonald 's then since the gene is causing me to spend more money on food then i can afford ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have the fat gene....can i get a discount from McDonald's then since the gene is causing me to spend more money on food then i can afford?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>MyLongNickName</author>
	<datestamp>1257008700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is personal responsibility compatible with atheism? Before you break out the troll mods, I ask this in seriousness. If we are nothing more than a chemical being, then where does personal responsibility come into play? I am the raw computer I was born with, influenced by external factors beyond my control. I would never blame a computer for a programmer's error. How do we blame a person for its hardware and programming?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is personal responsibility compatible with atheism ?
Before you break out the troll mods , I ask this in seriousness .
If we are nothing more than a chemical being , then where does personal responsibility come into play ?
I am the raw computer I was born with , influenced by external factors beyond my control .
I would never blame a computer for a programmer 's error .
How do we blame a person for its hardware and programming ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is personal responsibility compatible with atheism?
Before you break out the troll mods, I ask this in seriousness.
If we are nothing more than a chemical being, then where does personal responsibility come into play?
I am the raw computer I was born with, influenced by external factors beyond my control.
I would never blame a computer for a programmer's error.
How do we blame a person for its hardware and programming?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981658</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257015480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Communication and symbolism are the only things we really have going for us.</p></div><p>We have neat thumbs too.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Communication and symbolism are the only things we really have going for us.We have neat thumbs too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Communication and symbolism are the only things we really have going for us.We have neat thumbs too.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982802</id>
	<title>Re:Implications for gay marriage?</title>
	<author>david\_thornley</author>
	<datestamp>1257018540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I've been angry at people and decided not to hurt them.  It's something that looks to me like a choice.  I've gotten better about not even being tempted to hurt people.
</p><p>
On the other hand, I never decided on what I wanted for sexual orientation.  The people I was sexually attracted to, by nature or coincidence, were all female.  I had no choice about it.  This hasn't changed since my first crush, and I'm not at all sure it would be possible to change it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been angry at people and decided not to hurt them .
It 's something that looks to me like a choice .
I 've gotten better about not even being tempted to hurt people .
On the other hand , I never decided on what I wanted for sexual orientation .
The people I was sexually attracted to , by nature or coincidence , were all female .
I had no choice about it .
This has n't changed since my first crush , and I 'm not at all sure it would be possible to change it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I've been angry at people and decided not to hurt them.
It's something that looks to me like a choice.
I've gotten better about not even being tempted to hurt people.
On the other hand, I never decided on what I wanted for sexual orientation.
The people I was sexually attracted to, by nature or coincidence, were all female.
I had no choice about it.
This hasn't changed since my first crush, and I'm not at all sure it would be possible to change it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979998</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1257010380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Until a gene therapy solution comes out, anyway</i></p><p>There are other therapies, such as drugs or anger-management classes. You may be genetically predisposed to cancer, but rather than "genetic cancer therapy" you'll get radiation and chemo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Until a gene therapy solution comes out , anywayThere are other therapies , such as drugs or anger-management classes .
You may be genetically predisposed to cancer , but rather than " genetic cancer therapy " you 'll get radiation and chemo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until a gene therapy solution comes out, anywayThere are other therapies, such as drugs or anger-management classes.
You may be genetically predisposed to cancer, but rather than "genetic cancer therapy" you'll get radiation and chemo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984476</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>Idbar</author>
	<datestamp>1256980260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>At first I thought in the same way you did. Then it came the paradox:<br> <br>
If someone is not predisposed to violence and murdered someone, then was it or not predisposed?<br> <br>I think this shouldn't be causing his sentence to be any shorter or longer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>At first I thought in the same way you did .
Then it came the paradox : If someone is not predisposed to violence and murdered someone , then was it or not predisposed ?
I think this should n't be causing his sentence to be any shorter or longer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At first I thought in the same way you did.
Then it came the paradox: 
If someone is not predisposed to violence and murdered someone, then was it or not predisposed?
I think this shouldn't be causing his sentence to be any shorter or longer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980592</id>
	<title>Ban it!</title>
	<author>morgauxo</author>
	<datestamp>1257012120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>No matter what science learns about our gene's roll in the choices we make I'm for banning this information from the court room.
<br> <br>
I can see both sides of this to an extent.  If someone has less control than it is less their fault, etc.. etc..  If someone has less control they are more of a danger to others, etc.. etc... I don't care.  I think any information about ones genetic tendencies should be banned from the courtroom. People should be judged based on their own personal decisions, not their genetic makeup.
<br> <br>
Any decisions made based on genes during this generation will effect the genes which get passed to future ones.  Those genes must exist for a reason or they would have been selected out ages ago.  I wonder how many in law enforcement or the military today have a genetic predisposition for violence?  If one country completely eliminated said genes how much of a disadvantage would it be at if another invaded? On the other hand if everyone had them could we keep the peace at all?  Nature will keep this in balance.  We had better not try.
<br> <br>
On a positive note, I suspect if society can reduce violence by other means then the benefit of having such genes around will drop.  Natural selection should reduce them on it's own.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No matter what science learns about our gene 's roll in the choices we make I 'm for banning this information from the court room .
I can see both sides of this to an extent .
If someone has less control than it is less their fault , etc.. etc.. If someone has less control they are more of a danger to others , etc.. etc... I do n't care .
I think any information about ones genetic tendencies should be banned from the courtroom .
People should be judged based on their own personal decisions , not their genetic makeup .
Any decisions made based on genes during this generation will effect the genes which get passed to future ones .
Those genes must exist for a reason or they would have been selected out ages ago .
I wonder how many in law enforcement or the military today have a genetic predisposition for violence ?
If one country completely eliminated said genes how much of a disadvantage would it be at if another invaded ?
On the other hand if everyone had them could we keep the peace at all ?
Nature will keep this in balance .
We had better not try .
On a positive note , I suspect if society can reduce violence by other means then the benefit of having such genes around will drop .
Natural selection should reduce them on it 's own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No matter what science learns about our gene's roll in the choices we make I'm for banning this information from the court room.
I can see both sides of this to an extent.
If someone has less control than it is less their fault, etc.. etc..  If someone has less control they are more of a danger to others, etc.. etc... I don't care.
I think any information about ones genetic tendencies should be banned from the courtroom.
People should be judged based on their own personal decisions, not their genetic makeup.
Any decisions made based on genes during this generation will effect the genes which get passed to future ones.
Those genes must exist for a reason or they would have been selected out ages ago.
I wonder how many in law enforcement or the military today have a genetic predisposition for violence?
If one country completely eliminated said genes how much of a disadvantage would it be at if another invaded?
On the other hand if everyone had them could we keep the peace at all?
Nature will keep this in balance.
We had better not try.
On a positive note, I suspect if society can reduce violence by other means then the benefit of having such genes around will drop.
Natural selection should reduce them on it's own.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29985764</id>
	<title>Hellooooo Gattica</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256984160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Time to start gene filtering.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Time to start gene filtering .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Time to start gene filtering.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979852</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>Poruchik</author>
	<datestamp>1257009960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That depends on the purpose of the imprisonment, is it 'corrective' or 'preventive'.  If it's corrective (punishment for committed deeds), then leniency is in order.  If it's preventive (you are in prison so you cannot do this is again) the sentence should be longer.
<br>
I subscribe to latter point of view.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That depends on the purpose of the imprisonment , is it 'corrective ' or 'preventive' .
If it 's corrective ( punishment for committed deeds ) , then leniency is in order .
If it 's preventive ( you are in prison so you can not do this is again ) the sentence should be longer .
I subscribe to latter point of view .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That depends on the purpose of the imprisonment, is it 'corrective' or 'preventive'.
If it's corrective (punishment for committed deeds), then leniency is in order.
If it's preventive (you are in prison so you cannot do this is again) the sentence should be longer.
I subscribe to latter point of view.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980070</id>
	<title>Wrong way?</title>
	<author>dissy</author>
	<datestamp>1257010560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>An appeal court judge in Trieste, Italy, cut Bayout's sentence by a year after finding out he has gene variants linked to aggression.'"</i></p><p>So the fact it has been proven he has gene expressions linked to aggression, shouldn't that mean his sentence should be RAISED?</p><p>This is a man who proved to others his genes make him dangerous to everyone around him.<br>That is exactly what prisons are for.  To keep such animals away from human beings.</p><p>Does this mean if he runs at someone, and gets shot for doing so, it is not murder or manslaughter but just 'putting down a rabid dog' which also can't help itself?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An appeal court judge in Trieste , Italy , cut Bayout 's sentence by a year after finding out he has gene variants linked to aggression .
' " So the fact it has been proven he has gene expressions linked to aggression , should n't that mean his sentence should be RAISED ? This is a man who proved to others his genes make him dangerous to everyone around him.That is exactly what prisons are for .
To keep such animals away from human beings.Does this mean if he runs at someone , and gets shot for doing so , it is not murder or manslaughter but just 'putting down a rabid dog ' which also ca n't help itself ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An appeal court judge in Trieste, Italy, cut Bayout's sentence by a year after finding out he has gene variants linked to aggression.
'"So the fact it has been proven he has gene expressions linked to aggression, shouldn't that mean his sentence should be RAISED?This is a man who proved to others his genes make him dangerous to everyone around him.That is exactly what prisons are for.
To keep such animals away from human beings.Does this mean if he runs at someone, and gets shot for doing so, it is not murder or manslaughter but just 'putting down a rabid dog' which also can't help itself?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982262</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1257017160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bet he himself does not *want* to be more violent. No wouldn't it be the most fair thing to do, to help him against it, if he himself sees it as a disease?<br>I mean, this is no different from any other genetic mutation where we as a community feel bound to help that person.<br>Imagine this being your brother. <em>Of course</em> it would be wrong to put him in jail because he happens to have an unfortunate set of genes.<br>But of course I'm not saying he should go around, killing people.</p><p>I'm saying: He needs <em>help</em>! Not punishment!</p><p>Damnit! We're not in the dark ages anymore, for god's sake!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bet he himself does not * want * to be more violent .
No would n't it be the most fair thing to do , to help him against it , if he himself sees it as a disease ? I mean , this is no different from any other genetic mutation where we as a community feel bound to help that person.Imagine this being your brother .
Of course it would be wrong to put him in jail because he happens to have an unfortunate set of genes.But of course I 'm not saying he should go around , killing people.I 'm saying : He needs help !
Not punishment ! Damnit !
We 're not in the dark ages anymore , for god 's sake !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bet he himself does not *want* to be more violent.
No wouldn't it be the most fair thing to do, to help him against it, if he himself sees it as a disease?I mean, this is no different from any other genetic mutation where we as a community feel bound to help that person.Imagine this being your brother.
Of course it would be wrong to put him in jail because he happens to have an unfortunate set of genes.But of course I'm not saying he should go around, killing people.I'm saying: He needs help!
Not punishment!Damnit!
We're not in the dark ages anymore, for god's sake!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29989998</id>
	<title>What's this say about rapists?</title>
	<author>RazorSharp</author>
	<datestamp>1257003780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm pretty sure we all have a horny gene. These genetic determinists seem to have forgotten that being civilized is overcoming natural impulses in lieu of rationality and morality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure we all have a horny gene .
These genetic determinists seem to have forgotten that being civilized is overcoming natural impulses in lieu of rationality and morality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure we all have a horny gene.
These genetic determinists seem to have forgotten that being civilized is overcoming natural impulses in lieu of rationality and morality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979638</id>
	<title>Legal system</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257009300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The legal system shouldn't reduce sentences on account of inevitability or propensity or genetic disposition.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The legal system should n't reduce sentences on account of inevitability or propensity or genetic disposition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The legal system shouldn't reduce sentences on account of inevitability or propensity or genetic disposition.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1257009000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is personal responsibility compatible with atheism? Before you break out the troll mods, I ask this in seriousness. If we are nothing more than a chemical being, then where does personal responsibility come into play?</p></div><p>How is this train of thought any different for a theist? "If God's creations, enacting his will, then where does personal responsibility come into play?"</p><p>But if you go down that 'lack of free will' route, then crime was predestined, this subsequent capture was predestined, the judge was predestined to set that particular sentence too, and everything about the whole world is basically pointless.</p><p>So it's best to assume free will exists for practical purposes. Save the metaphysics for those insomniac nights (or take a philosophy degree).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is personal responsibility compatible with atheism ?
Before you break out the troll mods , I ask this in seriousness .
If we are nothing more than a chemical being , then where does personal responsibility come into play ? How is this train of thought any different for a theist ?
" If God 's creations , enacting his will , then where does personal responsibility come into play ?
" But if you go down that 'lack of free will ' route , then crime was predestined , this subsequent capture was predestined , the judge was predestined to set that particular sentence too , and everything about the whole world is basically pointless.So it 's best to assume free will exists for practical purposes .
Save the metaphysics for those insomniac nights ( or take a philosophy degree ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is personal responsibility compatible with atheism?
Before you break out the troll mods, I ask this in seriousness.
If we are nothing more than a chemical being, then where does personal responsibility come into play?How is this train of thought any different for a theist?
"If God's creations, enacting his will, then where does personal responsibility come into play?
"But if you go down that 'lack of free will' route, then crime was predestined, this subsequent capture was predestined, the judge was predestined to set that particular sentence too, and everything about the whole world is basically pointless.So it's best to assume free will exists for practical purposes.
Save the metaphysics for those insomniac nights (or take a philosophy degree).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214</id>
	<title>Backwards?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257008040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>By that logic, isn't he more dangerous, and therefore should get a longer sentence?  (Until a gene therapy solution comes out, anyway).</htmltext>
<tokenext>By that logic , is n't he more dangerous , and therefore should get a longer sentence ?
( Until a gene therapy solution comes out , anyway ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By that logic, isn't he more dangerous, and therefore should get a longer sentence?
(Until a gene therapy solution comes out, anyway).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980288</id>
	<title>[Oblig. Star Wars] It's Not My Fault!</title>
	<author>siglercm</author>
	<datestamp>1257011220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey!  Who needs personal responsibility when you've got bad genes???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey !
Who needs personal responsibility when you 've got bad genes ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey!
Who needs personal responsibility when you've got bad genes??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982378</id>
	<title>Re:Not Fair</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1257017460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Policemen with books? Which planet are we talking about again?</p><p>Next you tell my, the employees of the TSA and the international bouncers association founded a high-IQ club for the pursuit of fairness and research on progressive moral values...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Policemen with books ?
Which planet are we talking about again ? Next you tell my , the employees of the TSA and the international bouncers association founded a high-IQ club for the pursuit of fairness and research on progressive moral values... ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Policemen with books?
Which planet are we talking about again?Next you tell my, the employees of the TSA and the international bouncers association founded a high-IQ club for the pursuit of fairness and research on progressive moral values... ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981252</id>
	<title>We have now officially seen the</title>
	<author>idontgno</author>
	<datestamp>1257014280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>effective 21st Century equivalent to "The Devil made me do it!"</p><p>Science has become the new superstition.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>effective 21st Century equivalent to " The Devil made me do it !
" Science has become the new superstition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>effective 21st Century equivalent to "The Devil made me do it!
"Science has become the new superstition.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29995362</id>
	<title>I Got it</title>
	<author>kenp2002</author>
	<datestamp>1257439260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The devil made me do it!</p><p>The  made me do it!</p><p>The Agression Gene made me do it!<br>The booze made me do it!<br>The drugs made me do it!<br>The fact he\she was a two timing whore made me do it!<br>The television made me do it!<br>The video game made me do it!<br>Society made me do it!<br>The disturbing hentai tenticle monster movie with the school girls made me do it!<br>Ron Jeremy made me do it!<br>Rebecca Demorney and Tom Cruise in the mid 1980s classic Risky Business with soundtrack by Tangerine Dream made me do it (on a subway)!</p><p>The fact is: Americans no longer have the mental capacity to understand personal responsibility and personal accountability. I can only assume there must be a "personal responsibility" gene that has been weeded out of the gene pool; or the fact they removed any sense of personal accountablility, responsibility, and achivement from the education system and now those that grew up with that removed are acting in step with that concept (or lack thereof).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The devil made me do it ! The made me do it ! The Agression Gene made me do it ! The booze made me do it ! The drugs made me do it ! The fact he \ she was a two timing whore made me do it ! The television made me do it ! The video game made me do it ! Society made me do it ! The disturbing hentai tenticle monster movie with the school girls made me do it ! Ron Jeremy made me do it ! Rebecca Demorney and Tom Cruise in the mid 1980s classic Risky Business with soundtrack by Tangerine Dream made me do it ( on a subway ) ! The fact is : Americans no longer have the mental capacity to understand personal responsibility and personal accountability .
I can only assume there must be a " personal responsibility " gene that has been weeded out of the gene pool ; or the fact they removed any sense of personal accountablility , responsibility , and achivement from the education system and now those that grew up with that removed are acting in step with that concept ( or lack thereof ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The devil made me do it!The  made me do it!The Agression Gene made me do it!The booze made me do it!The drugs made me do it!The fact he\she was a two timing whore made me do it!The television made me do it!The video game made me do it!Society made me do it!The disturbing hentai tenticle monster movie with the school girls made me do it!Ron Jeremy made me do it!Rebecca Demorney and Tom Cruise in the mid 1980s classic Risky Business with soundtrack by Tangerine Dream made me do it (on a subway)!The fact is: Americans no longer have the mental capacity to understand personal responsibility and personal accountability.
I can only assume there must be a "personal responsibility" gene that has been weeded out of the gene pool; or the fact they removed any sense of personal accountablility, responsibility, and achivement from the education system and now those that grew up with that removed are acting in step with that concept (or lack thereof).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979300</id>
	<title>Right...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257008280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can understand that it doesn't seem right to punish someone for things out of their control, but part of the purpose of putting murderers in prison is to make it harder for them to kill more people (at least that's my impression). They could maybe put him in a nicer prison, but if anything having the gene implies he's more dangerous than most people, so there is more reason to keep him in prison longer- not less. Hopefully they can help him overcome his genetic aggression, but it makes no sense to put him back on the streets if he is higher risk than most people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can understand that it does n't seem right to punish someone for things out of their control , but part of the purpose of putting murderers in prison is to make it harder for them to kill more people ( at least that 's my impression ) .
They could maybe put him in a nicer prison , but if anything having the gene implies he 's more dangerous than most people , so there is more reason to keep him in prison longer- not less .
Hopefully they can help him overcome his genetic aggression , but it makes no sense to put him back on the streets if he is higher risk than most people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can understand that it doesn't seem right to punish someone for things out of their control, but part of the purpose of putting murderers in prison is to make it harder for them to kill more people (at least that's my impression).
They could maybe put him in a nicer prison, but if anything having the gene implies he's more dangerous than most people, so there is more reason to keep him in prison longer- not less.
Hopefully they can help him overcome his genetic aggression, but it makes no sense to put him back on the streets if he is higher risk than most people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980020</id>
	<title>Following that line of reasoning...</title>
	<author>Zebra\_X</author>
	<datestamp>1257010440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The alcholic who was drunk driving and killed someone should get a reduced sentence?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The alcholic who was drunk driving and killed someone should get a reduced sentence ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The alcholic who was drunk driving and killed someone should get a reduced sentence?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982480</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>taude</author>
	<datestamp>1257017700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Communication and symbolism are the only things we really have going for us.</p></div><p>And dancing.  There are no animals that can dance to a beat.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Communication and symbolism are the only things we really have going for us.And dancing .
There are no animals that can dance to a beat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Communication and symbolism are the only things we really have going for us.And dancing.
There are no animals that can dance to a beat.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980790</id>
	<title>Re:Liberal europe</title>
	<author>SomeKDEUser</author>
	<datestamp>1257012840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And how does the crime rate correlate to the severity of sentences? Is it the role of the governments to protect the public, or simply to follow what the mob seems to want, never mind that it is absurd, destructive, dangerous, or sometimes simply evil?</p><p>The wish of the people are to be respected, certainly, but what if the people wishes for duels to the death to be legal?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And how does the crime rate correlate to the severity of sentences ?
Is it the role of the governments to protect the public , or simply to follow what the mob seems to want , never mind that it is absurd , destructive , dangerous , or sometimes simply evil ? The wish of the people are to be respected , certainly , but what if the people wishes for duels to the death to be legal ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And how does the crime rate correlate to the severity of sentences?
Is it the role of the governments to protect the public, or simply to follow what the mob seems to want, never mind that it is absurd, destructive, dangerous, or sometimes simply evil?The wish of the people are to be respected, certainly, but what if the people wishes for duels to the death to be legal?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29985892</id>
	<title>Not covered!</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1256984520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lazy isn't yet covered under the ADA.  Perhaps you'd like to try ADD/ADHD instead?  Different cause, same unhappy outcome for your employer, and it's "legit".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lazy is n't yet covered under the ADA .
Perhaps you 'd like to try ADD/ADHD instead ?
Different cause , same unhappy outcome for your employer , and it 's " legit " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lazy isn't yet covered under the ADA.
Perhaps you'd like to try ADD/ADHD instead?
Different cause, same unhappy outcome for your employer, and it's "legit".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980564</id>
	<title>So it's ridiculous</title>
	<author>Vahokif</author>
	<datestamp>1257012000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So it's ridiculous when a statistical genetic correlation is taken as an excuse for a lack of self control, but it isn't ridiculous when bulimia and daydreaming get treated with drugs?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So it 's ridiculous when a statistical genetic correlation is taken as an excuse for a lack of self control , but it is n't ridiculous when bulimia and daydreaming get treated with drugs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So it's ridiculous when a statistical genetic correlation is taken as an excuse for a lack of self control, but it isn't ridiculous when bulimia and daydreaming get treated with drugs?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980508</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>mejogid</author>
	<datestamp>1257011880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If prison exists as an example to others, then this ruling doesn't even make any sense, as a person cannot change their gene structure.</p></div><p>I think this is an understatement - it's a dangerous ruling since if prisons exists as an example to others then those most genetically predisposed to killing will have less of a deterrent and be even more likely to kill if gene tests become as common as many predict.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If prison exists as an example to others , then this ruling does n't even make any sense , as a person can not change their gene structure.I think this is an understatement - it 's a dangerous ruling since if prisons exists as an example to others then those most genetically predisposed to killing will have less of a deterrent and be even more likely to kill if gene tests become as common as many predict .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If prison exists as an example to others, then this ruling doesn't even make any sense, as a person cannot change their gene structure.I think this is an understatement - it's a dangerous ruling since if prisons exists as an example to others then those most genetically predisposed to killing will have less of a deterrent and be even more likely to kill if gene tests become as common as many predict.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980962</id>
	<title>Brilliant thinking</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257013380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great bit of judicial logic, isn't it?  "You've got a propensity for violence, so let's get you out of jail sooner."  Somehow doesn't make Italy an attractive place to visit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great bit of judicial logic , is n't it ?
" You 've got a propensity for violence , so let 's get you out of jail sooner .
" Somehow does n't make Italy an attractive place to visit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great bit of judicial logic, isn't it?
"You've got a propensity for violence, so let's get you out of jail sooner.
"  Somehow doesn't make Italy an attractive place to visit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979844</id>
	<title>Why can it only be one?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257009960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Prisons serve all three roles.  Their existance is ment to be a deterrent to those that have not broken the law, punishment for those that have already broken the law, and protection of the rest of society from those who've demonstrated a willingness to break the law.  The nature of the crime will effect to what extent the sentencing is intended to act as a punshment or protective role.  <br> <br>Sentencing of Blue and White colar criminals are going to be aimed at punishment and a warning to others that may be tempted to perpetrate similar acts (embezlement, breaking and entering, etc.).  The ancillary effects of incarceration (loss of job, being ostrasized by friends/family, difficulty finding a job post incarceration) are as much part of the punishement as the actuall time spent in prison.  <br> <br>The sentencing of violent offenders is going to be targeted more at punishing the perpetrator and protecting the innocent.  That's why they tend to have longer sentences and are locked up in higher security facilities than their blue collar compatriots.  Rehabilitation is more important, but less successful with certain groups of violent criminals and thus they serve longer sentences and are occationally euthanized by the state (depending on where they are incarcerated).  <br> <br>The death penalty is the ultimate in both punishment of the criminal and protection of society, and IMO not to be used lightly.  It should never be used for those that have not proven themselves to be violently dangerous to the rest of society (ie tax fraud doesn't deserve a needle, but repeated homocides does).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Prisons serve all three roles .
Their existance is ment to be a deterrent to those that have not broken the law , punishment for those that have already broken the law , and protection of the rest of society from those who 've demonstrated a willingness to break the law .
The nature of the crime will effect to what extent the sentencing is intended to act as a punshment or protective role .
Sentencing of Blue and White colar criminals are going to be aimed at punishment and a warning to others that may be tempted to perpetrate similar acts ( embezlement , breaking and entering , etc. ) .
The ancillary effects of incarceration ( loss of job , being ostrasized by friends/family , difficulty finding a job post incarceration ) are as much part of the punishement as the actuall time spent in prison .
The sentencing of violent offenders is going to be targeted more at punishing the perpetrator and protecting the innocent .
That 's why they tend to have longer sentences and are locked up in higher security facilities than their blue collar compatriots .
Rehabilitation is more important , but less successful with certain groups of violent criminals and thus they serve longer sentences and are occationally euthanized by the state ( depending on where they are incarcerated ) .
The death penalty is the ultimate in both punishment of the criminal and protection of society , and IMO not to be used lightly .
It should never be used for those that have not proven themselves to be violently dangerous to the rest of society ( ie tax fraud does n't deserve a needle , but repeated homocides does ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Prisons serve all three roles.
Their existance is ment to be a deterrent to those that have not broken the law, punishment for those that have already broken the law, and protection of the rest of society from those who've demonstrated a willingness to break the law.
The nature of the crime will effect to what extent the sentencing is intended to act as a punshment or protective role.
Sentencing of Blue and White colar criminals are going to be aimed at punishment and a warning to others that may be tempted to perpetrate similar acts (embezlement, breaking and entering, etc.).
The ancillary effects of incarceration (loss of job, being ostrasized by friends/family, difficulty finding a job post incarceration) are as much part of the punishement as the actuall time spent in prison.
The sentencing of violent offenders is going to be targeted more at punishing the perpetrator and protecting the innocent.
That's why they tend to have longer sentences and are locked up in higher security facilities than their blue collar compatriots.
Rehabilitation is more important, but less successful with certain groups of violent criminals and thus they serve longer sentences and are occationally euthanized by the state (depending on where they are incarcerated).
The death penalty is the ultimate in both punishment of the criminal and protection of society, and IMO not to be used lightly.
It should never be used for those that have not proven themselves to be violently dangerous to the rest of society (ie tax fraud doesn't deserve a needle, but repeated homocides does).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979514</id>
	<title>Liberal europe</title>
	<author>Viol8</author>
	<datestamp>1257008940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately here in a number of countries in europe the judiciary has swallowed the liberal rehabilitation BS hook line and sinker. They and the politicians seem to believe that criminals are all just misunderstood little angels who if only given a chance would shine and all become rocket scientists or whatever pathetic fucking fantasy they have in mind this week. Punishment is seen as a dirty word by this liberal elite and so we get these sorts of absurd situations and if they can blame the scums behaviour on his genetics then even more reason not to give him some nasty punishment. Its not his fault after all, right?</p><p>Its a prime example of the state completely ignoring the wishes of the people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately here in a number of countries in europe the judiciary has swallowed the liberal rehabilitation BS hook line and sinker .
They and the politicians seem to believe that criminals are all just misunderstood little angels who if only given a chance would shine and all become rocket scientists or whatever pathetic fucking fantasy they have in mind this week .
Punishment is seen as a dirty word by this liberal elite and so we get these sorts of absurd situations and if they can blame the scums behaviour on his genetics then even more reason not to give him some nasty punishment .
Its not his fault after all , right ? Its a prime example of the state completely ignoring the wishes of the people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately here in a number of countries in europe the judiciary has swallowed the liberal rehabilitation BS hook line and sinker.
They and the politicians seem to believe that criminals are all just misunderstood little angels who if only given a chance would shine and all become rocket scientists or whatever pathetic fucking fantasy they have in mind this week.
Punishment is seen as a dirty word by this liberal elite and so we get these sorts of absurd situations and if they can blame the scums behaviour on his genetics then even more reason not to give him some nasty punishment.
Its not his fault after all, right?Its a prime example of the state completely ignoring the wishes of the people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981326</id>
	<title>therapy</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1257014400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So then the question becomes:</p><p>Should you continue your current life without murderous tendencies but with the possibility of a longer sentence OR hedge your bets by electing for gene therapy to introduce the aggression gene while reducing your sentence if you do kill someone?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So then the question becomes : Should you continue your current life without murderous tendencies but with the possibility of a longer sentence OR hedge your bets by electing for gene therapy to introduce the aggression gene while reducing your sentence if you do kill someone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So then the question becomes:Should you continue your current life without murderous tendencies but with the possibility of a longer sentence OR hedge your bets by electing for gene therapy to introduce the aggression gene while reducing your sentence if you do kill someone?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29987802</id>
	<title>That's just... weird</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256991540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let me see if I've understood correctly: being more likely to re-offend means that you deserve a shorter sentence... presumably so you can get out and do some more quality offending sooner rather than later?</p><p>This. Ruling. Makes. No. Sense!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me see if I 've understood correctly : being more likely to re-offend means that you deserve a shorter sentence... presumably so you can get out and do some more quality offending sooner rather than later ? This .
Ruling. Makes .
No. Sense !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me see if I've understood correctly: being more likely to re-offend means that you deserve a shorter sentence... presumably so you can get out and do some more quality offending sooner rather than later?This.
Ruling. Makes.
No. Sense!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981382</id>
	<title>Cue the "expert" comment...</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1257014580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's see how a community with next to no competence in social and moral questions, with nearly everybody <em>not</em> being an expert in genetics, reacts to this article. ^^</p><p>Protip: If you still think that the concept of "guilt" exists, and/or that punishment is the best thing to do, then you are still in the dark ages, and <em>not</em> up-to-date on these topics.</p><p>P.S.: Notice how I do not exclude myself from this. I only learned some things that irreversibly changed my views on this forever. Hint: Try deducing everything that we do from the basic rules of cause and effect! Then you are likely to come up with, what is the modern scientific view on these topics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's see how a community with next to no competence in social and moral questions , with nearly everybody not being an expert in genetics , reacts to this article .
^ ^ Protip : If you still think that the concept of " guilt " exists , and/or that punishment is the best thing to do , then you are still in the dark ages , and not up-to-date on these topics.P.S .
: Notice how I do not exclude myself from this .
I only learned some things that irreversibly changed my views on this forever .
Hint : Try deducing everything that we do from the basic rules of cause and effect !
Then you are likely to come up with , what is the modern scientific view on these topics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's see how a community with next to no competence in social and moral questions, with nearly everybody not being an expert in genetics, reacts to this article.
^^Protip: If you still think that the concept of "guilt" exists, and/or that punishment is the best thing to do, then you are still in the dark ages, and not up-to-date on these topics.P.S.
: Notice how I do not exclude myself from this.
I only learned some things that irreversibly changed my views on this forever.
Hint: Try deducing everything that we do from the basic rules of cause and effect!
Then you are likely to come up with, what is the modern scientific view on these topics.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29986986</id>
	<title>Re:I get your point</title>
	<author>stephanruby</author>
	<datestamp>1256988540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is nothing to see here. There were other mitigating circumstances. The Algerian man was slightly retarded. His sentence was reduced once by the original judge for that reason. And the appeal's judge just needed a different reason to reduce it again. Anyway, it looks like the guy is probably not going to survive the remaining prison sentence either way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is nothing to see here .
There were other mitigating circumstances .
The Algerian man was slightly retarded .
His sentence was reduced once by the original judge for that reason .
And the appeal 's judge just needed a different reason to reduce it again .
Anyway , it looks like the guy is probably not going to survive the remaining prison sentence either way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is nothing to see here.
There were other mitigating circumstances.
The Algerian man was slightly retarded.
His sentence was reduced once by the original judge for that reason.
And the appeal's judge just needed a different reason to reduce it again.
Anyway, it looks like the guy is probably not going to survive the remaining prison sentence either way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979662</id>
	<title>I'm ok with this ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257009360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm ok with this, so long as the genes are removed from the pool.</p><p>How about, "You have bad genes and we're so empathetic that we're lowering your punishment. And because we don't want anyone else to suffer like you do, we're preventing you from procreating."</p><p>I think I could get behind that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm ok with this , so long as the genes are removed from the pool.How about , " You have bad genes and we 're so empathetic that we 're lowering your punishment .
And because we do n't want anyone else to suffer like you do , we 're preventing you from procreating .
" I think I could get behind that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm ok with this, so long as the genes are removed from the pool.How about, "You have bad genes and we're so empathetic that we're lowering your punishment.
And because we don't want anyone else to suffer like you do, we're preventing you from procreating.
"I think I could get behind that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29996928</id>
	<title>Tag 'em</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257446820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In that case, have them wear tags that say "I have one or more aggression genes". Will that get them discriminated? Yes. But how's that different to what you get now? The only thing is that they'll get discriminated BEFORE they punch or kill someone, not after.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In that case , have them wear tags that say " I have one or more aggression genes " .
Will that get them discriminated ?
Yes. But how 's that different to what you get now ?
The only thing is that they 'll get discriminated BEFORE they punch or kill someone , not after .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In that case, have them wear tags that say "I have one or more aggression genes".
Will that get them discriminated?
Yes. But how's that different to what you get now?
The only thing is that they'll get discriminated BEFORE they punch or kill someone, not after.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983018</id>
	<title>Re:Practical Usage</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1257019200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Poor Tami, she's part Irish, part German, and part native American. The German part wants beer, the Irish part wants whiskey, and the Native part can't drink!</p><p>Lucky for me I'm mostly of Irish desent, so I have an excuse to get shitfaced.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Poor Tami , she 's part Irish , part German , and part native American .
The German part wants beer , the Irish part wants whiskey , and the Native part ca n't drink ! Lucky for me I 'm mostly of Irish desent , so I have an excuse to get shitfaced .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Poor Tami, she's part Irish, part German, and part native American.
The German part wants beer, the Irish part wants whiskey, and the Native part can't drink!Lucky for me I'm mostly of Irish desent, so I have an excuse to get shitfaced.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979414</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388</id>
	<title>Ah... do you smell that?</title>
	<author>NeutronCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1257008520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's the smell of free will going out the window, courtesy of people thinking that gene==unable to overcome that impulse. And with free will out the window, there's no liability. And with no liability... well, the court system we have is completely unworkable.</p><p>I was wondering when that issue was going to crop up. Thankfully, Italy seems bound to test just how much of a disaster that road will be.</p><p>The only solution to this is to ignore genetic predisposition when judging a convicted criminal.</p><p>Or, to put it differently: we have no choice but to believe in free will. Our society depends on it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the smell of free will going out the window , courtesy of people thinking that gene = = unable to overcome that impulse .
And with free will out the window , there 's no liability .
And with no liability... well , the court system we have is completely unworkable.I was wondering when that issue was going to crop up .
Thankfully , Italy seems bound to test just how much of a disaster that road will be.The only solution to this is to ignore genetic predisposition when judging a convicted criminal.Or , to put it differently : we have no choice but to believe in free will .
Our society depends on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the smell of free will going out the window, courtesy of people thinking that gene==unable to overcome that impulse.
And with free will out the window, there's no liability.
And with no liability... well, the court system we have is completely unworkable.I was wondering when that issue was going to crop up.
Thankfully, Italy seems bound to test just how much of a disaster that road will be.The only solution to this is to ignore genetic predisposition when judging a convicted criminal.Or, to put it differently: we have no choice but to believe in free will.
Our society depends on it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29987350</id>
	<title>Italian Justice</title>
	<author>RobinEggs</author>
	<datestamp>1256989920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Before you all get too bent out of shape (too late, I know) this comments much more on the Italian justice system, and only to a lesser extent on the increasing debate over whether your genes "made you do it". <br> <br>Italian law provides for "degrees of guilt", meaning even if you admit your crime certain affirmative defenses result in reduced sentences. They can decide *how* guilty you are after deciding you're guilty, as an official process, as opposed to the fuzzier ways judges think about "mitigating circumstances" and stuff in other places.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Before you all get too bent out of shape ( too late , I know ) this comments much more on the Italian justice system , and only to a lesser extent on the increasing debate over whether your genes " made you do it " .
Italian law provides for " degrees of guilt " , meaning even if you admit your crime certain affirmative defenses result in reduced sentences .
They can decide * how * guilty you are after deciding you 're guilty , as an official process , as opposed to the fuzzier ways judges think about " mitigating circumstances " and stuff in other places .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Before you all get too bent out of shape (too late, I know) this comments much more on the Italian justice system, and only to a lesser extent on the increasing debate over whether your genes "made you do it".
Italian law provides for "degrees of guilt", meaning even if you admit your crime certain affirmative defenses result in reduced sentences.
They can decide *how* guilty you are after deciding you're guilty, as an official process, as opposed to the fuzzier ways judges think about "mitigating circumstances" and stuff in other places.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981746</id>
	<title>Re:That's backwards</title>
	<author>jameskojiro</author>
	<datestamp>1257015660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey if I genetically predisposed to steal stuff I should be able to go to your house and take your sweet X-Box because you know I couldn't help myself.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey if I genetically predisposed to steal stuff I should be able to go to your house and take your sweet X-Box because you know I could n't help myself.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey if I genetically predisposed to steal stuff I should be able to go to your house and take your sweet X-Box because you know I couldn't help myself.....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982340</id>
	<title>Get ready</title>
	<author>ThatsNotPudding</author>
	<datestamp>1257017400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>DNA profiling at birth in 3, 2...</htmltext>
<tokenext>DNA profiling at birth in 3 , 2.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DNA profiling at birth in 3, 2...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979316</id>
	<title>Overlooking the fact</title>
	<author>quatin</author>
	<datestamp>1257008280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That he got only 9 years for murder? That will rehabilitate him? People have gotten longer sentences for stealing cars. I suggest when the guy is released from prison, he be given residence next to the judges house.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That he got only 9 years for murder ?
That will rehabilitate him ?
People have gotten longer sentences for stealing cars .
I suggest when the guy is released from prison , he be given residence next to the judges house .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That he got only 9 years for murder?
That will rehabilitate him?
People have gotten longer sentences for stealing cars.
I suggest when the guy is released from prison, he be given residence next to the judges house.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979398</id>
	<title>In some countries like Latvia people go to jail</title>
	<author>HollyMolly-1122</author>
	<datestamp>1257008580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In some countries like Latvia people go to jail if they are caught driving with relatively small amount of alchohol in their blood.
That's called prevention measures against car accidents.
Isn't that a good prevention measure to find those with higher aggression level in their genes ?
Let's say: force those parents to stay in jail who born such a child ? In nowedays it can be definitely true measured!
All this recalls me a good movie I saw some years ago about what would we see in near future:
GATTACA (1997) music - Michael Nyman
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9fcHHOCBDg" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9fcHHOCBDg</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>In some countries like Latvia people go to jail if they are caught driving with relatively small amount of alchohol in their blood .
That 's called prevention measures against car accidents .
Is n't that a good prevention measure to find those with higher aggression level in their genes ?
Let 's say : force those parents to stay in jail who born such a child ?
In nowedays it can be definitely true measured !
All this recalls me a good movie I saw some years ago about what would we see in near future : GATTACA ( 1997 ) music - Michael Nyman http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = u9fcHHOCBDg [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In some countries like Latvia people go to jail if they are caught driving with relatively small amount of alchohol in their blood.
That's called prevention measures against car accidents.
Isn't that a good prevention measure to find those with higher aggression level in their genes ?
Let's say: force those parents to stay in jail who born such a child ?
In nowedays it can be definitely true measured!
All this recalls me a good movie I saw some years ago about what would we see in near future:
GATTACA (1997) music - Michael Nyman
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9fcHHOCBDg [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980930</id>
	<title>Re:Ah... do you smell that?</title>
	<author>SecurityGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1257013320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, and the wonderful thing is:</p><p>If there is free will, then choosing to believe in it is correct.<br>If there isn't, whether we choose to believe in it or not, we can rest assured we didn't really make the choice anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , and the wonderful thing is : If there is free will , then choosing to believe in it is correct.If there is n't , whether we choose to believe in it or not , we can rest assured we did n't really make the choice anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, and the wonderful thing is:If there is free will, then choosing to believe in it is correct.If there isn't, whether we choose to believe in it or not, we can rest assured we didn't really make the choice anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29985442</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>Thuktun</author>
	<datestamp>1256983260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But if you go down that 'lack of free will' route, then crime was predestined, this subsequent capture was predestined, the judge was predestined to set that particular sentence too, and everything about the whole world is basically pointless.</p></div><p>Can you really say that, for any of your decisions in the past, that given the same circumstances, same background, same knowledge, etc., that you would have chosen anything differently?</p><p>Things may be predestined, but that doesn't mean there's any way to discover what that would be.  The sheer complexity of the universe (with over a trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion particles all interacting simultaneously at the quantum level) and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle conspire to keep that from you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But if you go down that 'lack of free will ' route , then crime was predestined , this subsequent capture was predestined , the judge was predestined to set that particular sentence too , and everything about the whole world is basically pointless.Can you really say that , for any of your decisions in the past , that given the same circumstances , same background , same knowledge , etc. , that you would have chosen anything differently ? Things may be predestined , but that does n't mean there 's any way to discover what that would be .
The sheer complexity of the universe ( with over a trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion particles all interacting simultaneously at the quantum level ) and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle conspire to keep that from you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But if you go down that 'lack of free will' route, then crime was predestined, this subsequent capture was predestined, the judge was predestined to set that particular sentence too, and everything about the whole world is basically pointless.Can you really say that, for any of your decisions in the past, that given the same circumstances, same background, same knowledge, etc., that you would have chosen anything differently?Things may be predestined, but that doesn't mean there's any way to discover what that would be.
The sheer complexity of the universe (with over a trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion particles all interacting simultaneously at the quantum level) and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle conspire to keep that from you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983198</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257019740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>or, god's creation or predestine considered: maybe it's our job to fix our own species...elimate the excessively violent peo</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or , god 's creation or predestine considered : maybe it 's our job to fix our own species...elimate the excessively violent peo</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or, god's creation or predestine considered: maybe it's our job to fix our own species...elimate the excessively violent peo</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979542</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>MyLongNickName</author>
	<datestamp>1257009000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let me also respond to my own post: Is personal responsibility compatible with religion. If, after all, a god created me who is omniscient and omnipotent, where is there any room for free will, and consequently personal responsibility?</p><p>There. I've offended everyone. Mod away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me also respond to my own post : Is personal responsibility compatible with religion .
If , after all , a god created me who is omniscient and omnipotent , where is there any room for free will , and consequently personal responsibility ? There .
I 've offended everyone .
Mod away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me also respond to my own post: Is personal responsibility compatible with religion.
If, after all, a god created me who is omniscient and omnipotent, where is there any room for free will, and consequently personal responsibility?There.
I've offended everyone.
Mod away.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983776</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>fastest fascist</author>
	<datestamp>1257021300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you've ever been to prison, you'll know saying a long sentence will make a person fit into society better is more than a little dubious. It can happen, but often the opposite is true.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 've ever been to prison , you 'll know saying a long sentence will make a person fit into society better is more than a little dubious .
It can happen , but often the opposite is true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you've ever been to prison, you'll know saying a long sentence will make a person fit into society better is more than a little dubious.
It can happen, but often the opposite is true.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210</id>
	<title>Where's the...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257008040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... personal responsibility?  Controlling our behaviour is one of the things that differentiates us from animals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... personal responsibility ?
Controlling our behaviour is one of the things that differentiates us from animals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... personal responsibility?
Controlling our behaviour is one of the things that differentiates us from animals.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981516</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>m.ducharme</author>
	<datestamp>1257015060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think personal responsibility is a crutch that people lean on instead of facing up to the fact that our problems and questions have difficult and complicated solutions.  It's far easier to put responsibility on individuals than it is to admit that there may be genetic or social infrastructures issues that encourage criminality in some people and discourage it in others. If we can say the criminal is solely at fault for his actions, then we never acknowledge our own responsibility for the problems that the criminal was trying to correct.</p><p>The philosophical Free Will debate finally has a physical answer. Our actions are determined by our genetics, chemistry, upbringing, etc, and on back to the big bang, but the Uncertainty Principle guarantees that at some fundamental level, we can't deterministically predict the future. So the whole debate basically becomes meaningless.</p><p>Free Will, per se, is an illusion. So is determinism, for that matter, because on a practical level we can't do anything with it. The reality is that we each have a will (and really, internally we may have several, competing wills), and it is more or less free to act depending on the wills of those who would act for or against our wills.  Nietsche solved this one more than a hundred years ago.  Heisenberg confirmed it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think personal responsibility is a crutch that people lean on instead of facing up to the fact that our problems and questions have difficult and complicated solutions .
It 's far easier to put responsibility on individuals than it is to admit that there may be genetic or social infrastructures issues that encourage criminality in some people and discourage it in others .
If we can say the criminal is solely at fault for his actions , then we never acknowledge our own responsibility for the problems that the criminal was trying to correct.The philosophical Free Will debate finally has a physical answer .
Our actions are determined by our genetics , chemistry , upbringing , etc , and on back to the big bang , but the Uncertainty Principle guarantees that at some fundamental level , we ca n't deterministically predict the future .
So the whole debate basically becomes meaningless.Free Will , per se , is an illusion .
So is determinism , for that matter , because on a practical level we ca n't do anything with it .
The reality is that we each have a will ( and really , internally we may have several , competing wills ) , and it is more or less free to act depending on the wills of those who would act for or against our wills .
Nietsche solved this one more than a hundred years ago .
Heisenberg confirmed it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think personal responsibility is a crutch that people lean on instead of facing up to the fact that our problems and questions have difficult and complicated solutions.
It's far easier to put responsibility on individuals than it is to admit that there may be genetic or social infrastructures issues that encourage criminality in some people and discourage it in others.
If we can say the criminal is solely at fault for his actions, then we never acknowledge our own responsibility for the problems that the criminal was trying to correct.The philosophical Free Will debate finally has a physical answer.
Our actions are determined by our genetics, chemistry, upbringing, etc, and on back to the big bang, but the Uncertainty Principle guarantees that at some fundamental level, we can't deterministically predict the future.
So the whole debate basically becomes meaningless.Free Will, per se, is an illusion.
So is determinism, for that matter, because on a practical level we can't do anything with it.
The reality is that we each have a will (and really, internally we may have several, competing wills), and it is more or less free to act depending on the wills of those who would act for or against our wills.
Nietsche solved this one more than a hundred years ago.
Heisenberg confirmed it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981090</id>
	<title>Re:Ah... do you smell that?</title>
	<author>H0p313ss</author>
	<datestamp>1257013740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>... we have no choice but to believe in free will. Our society depends on it.</p></div><p>Quite possibly the most insightful comment I've ever seen on Slashdot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... we have no choice but to believe in free will .
Our society depends on it.Quite possibly the most insightful comment I 've ever seen on Slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... we have no choice but to believe in free will.
Our society depends on it.Quite possibly the most insightful comment I've ever seen on Slashdot.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983214</id>
	<title>Uh, hello?</title>
	<author>dorque\_wrench</author>
	<datestamp>1257019800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even before the gene results, dude only got <b>9 years</b> for killing someone???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even before the gene results , dude only got 9 years for killing someone ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even before the gene results, dude only got 9 years for killing someone??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980978</id>
	<title>Re:Where's the...</title>
	<author>spitzig</author>
	<datestamp>1257013440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lack of free will doesn't make everything pointless. What's the difference between "free will" and "no free will and an ILLUSION of free will"? If I were a deity, maybe I could tell the difference. Unfortunately, I'm not. For the rest of you mortals, maybe it's fortunate, though.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>I certainly don't have the other option-"no free will and NO illusion of free will". That would require me to be one of the aforementioned deities.</p><p>I guess a truth table would allow a fourth option-"free will and no illusion of free will". I don't know what that would mean. Maybe we have free will and have no false illusions about it? Maybe it would mean we know that we have free will?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lack of free will does n't make everything pointless .
What 's the difference between " free will " and " no free will and an ILLUSION of free will " ?
If I were a deity , maybe I could tell the difference .
Unfortunately , I 'm not .
For the rest of you mortals , maybe it 's fortunate , though .
; ) I certainly do n't have the other option- " no free will and NO illusion of free will " .
That would require me to be one of the aforementioned deities.I guess a truth table would allow a fourth option- " free will and no illusion of free will " .
I do n't know what that would mean .
Maybe we have free will and have no false illusions about it ?
Maybe it would mean we know that we have free will ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lack of free will doesn't make everything pointless.
What's the difference between "free will" and "no free will and an ILLUSION of free will"?
If I were a deity, maybe I could tell the difference.
Unfortunately, I'm not.
For the rest of you mortals, maybe it's fortunate, though.
;)I certainly don't have the other option-"no free will and NO illusion of free will".
That would require me to be one of the aforementioned deities.I guess a truth table would allow a fourth option-"free will and no illusion of free will".
I don't know what that would mean.
Maybe we have free will and have no false illusions about it?
Maybe it would mean we know that we have free will?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980192</id>
	<title>Re:Implications for gay marriage?</title>
	<author>lymond01</author>
	<datestamp>1257010980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>There are those who suggest that homosexuality isn't a choice, but a strong genetic predisposition.</i></p><p>You mean the people who don't listen to Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck and are not the Iranian president.</p><p>If we are chemical beings which, Paranormal Activity notwithstanding, seems likely, then the playing field is simply leveled.  You either did it, or didn't do it, and motives be damned because it was preordained in your genetic structure that you had a predisposition to kill.  Maybe get ahead of the game and screen for that gene.  Abort the fetuses that have it.</p><p>While we're at it, I think the Alliance is working on an air additive that will calm the populace in general, and possibly counteract any violent tendencies brought on by genetic traits.  What could possibly go wrong?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are those who suggest that homosexuality is n't a choice , but a strong genetic predisposition.You mean the people who do n't listen to Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck and are not the Iranian president.If we are chemical beings which , Paranormal Activity notwithstanding , seems likely , then the playing field is simply leveled .
You either did it , or did n't do it , and motives be damned because it was preordained in your genetic structure that you had a predisposition to kill .
Maybe get ahead of the game and screen for that gene .
Abort the fetuses that have it.While we 're at it , I think the Alliance is working on an air additive that will calm the populace in general , and possibly counteract any violent tendencies brought on by genetic traits .
What could possibly go wrong ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are those who suggest that homosexuality isn't a choice, but a strong genetic predisposition.You mean the people who don't listen to Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck and are not the Iranian president.If we are chemical beings which, Paranormal Activity notwithstanding, seems likely, then the playing field is simply leveled.
You either did it, or didn't do it, and motives be damned because it was preordained in your genetic structure that you had a predisposition to kill.
Maybe get ahead of the game and screen for that gene.
Abort the fetuses that have it.While we're at it, I think the Alliance is working on an air additive that will calm the populace in general, and possibly counteract any violent tendencies brought on by genetic traits.
What could possibly go wrong?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984142</id>
	<title>Re:Implications for gay marriage?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257022380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ultimately, the issue of gay marriage is about if you allow them to have the same monetary and social incentives that normal marriages have <b>to encourage reproduction and raise the birth rate of the country</b>. Most gay supporters say that this is a given because they should be treated equal, but that is the same claim than those people that want the same salary for all workers regardless of context. But even though it sounds great to many, it's still bullshit and a fraud that ultimately hurts everyone.</p><p>Actually, most of the reasonable benefits that could be achieved with gay marriage (legal security and so) can be obtained right now using a  mere legal contract, no need of changing the law.</p><p>My opinion? because homosexuality cannot be verified and their lobbies fiercely oppose any attempt at it, the best course of action is not to pass any law favouring them until it can be proven  without doubt if a person is homosexual or just fakes it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ultimately , the issue of gay marriage is about if you allow them to have the same monetary and social incentives that normal marriages have to encourage reproduction and raise the birth rate of the country .
Most gay supporters say that this is a given because they should be treated equal , but that is the same claim than those people that want the same salary for all workers regardless of context .
But even though it sounds great to many , it 's still bullshit and a fraud that ultimately hurts everyone.Actually , most of the reasonable benefits that could be achieved with gay marriage ( legal security and so ) can be obtained right now using a mere legal contract , no need of changing the law.My opinion ?
because homosexuality can not be verified and their lobbies fiercely oppose any attempt at it , the best course of action is not to pass any law favouring them until it can be proven without doubt if a person is homosexual or just fakes it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ultimately, the issue of gay marriage is about if you allow them to have the same monetary and social incentives that normal marriages have to encourage reproduction and raise the birth rate of the country.
Most gay supporters say that this is a given because they should be treated equal, but that is the same claim than those people that want the same salary for all workers regardless of context.
But even though it sounds great to many, it's still bullshit and a fraud that ultimately hurts everyone.Actually, most of the reasonable benefits that could be achieved with gay marriage (legal security and so) can be obtained right now using a  mere legal contract, no need of changing the law.My opinion?
because homosexuality cannot be verified and their lobbies fiercely oppose any attempt at it, the best course of action is not to pass any law favouring them until it can be proven  without doubt if a person is homosexual or just fakes it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981526</id>
	<title>Re:Liberal europe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257015060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We "liberal elites" (including the judiciary, which I very much hope is elite--incompetence in such a position is unforgivable) simply understand that punishment isn't effective for deterring behaviour. Over half a century of research and the evidence therefrom has shown (NB: behaviorism), reinforcement is the most effective way of doing so. Punishing a behaviour simply leads to the punished avoiding specific factors of the one instance of the behaviour which was prosecuted, continuing to perform the behaviour in a different setting and/or avoiding specifics which lead to the punishment.</p><p>tl;dr: strawman, poisoning the well, punishment is ineffective.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We " liberal elites " ( including the judiciary , which I very much hope is elite--incompetence in such a position is unforgivable ) simply understand that punishment is n't effective for deterring behaviour .
Over half a century of research and the evidence therefrom has shown ( NB : behaviorism ) , reinforcement is the most effective way of doing so .
Punishing a behaviour simply leads to the punished avoiding specific factors of the one instance of the behaviour which was prosecuted , continuing to perform the behaviour in a different setting and/or avoiding specifics which lead to the punishment.tl ; dr : strawman , poisoning the well , punishment is ineffective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We "liberal elites" (including the judiciary, which I very much hope is elite--incompetence in such a position is unforgivable) simply understand that punishment isn't effective for deterring behaviour.
Over half a century of research and the evidence therefrom has shown (NB: behaviorism), reinforcement is the most effective way of doing so.
Punishing a behaviour simply leads to the punished avoiding specific factors of the one instance of the behaviour which was prosecuted, continuing to perform the behaviour in a different setting and/or avoiding specifics which lead to the punishment.tl;dr: strawman, poisoning the well, punishment is ineffective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981456</id>
	<title>New Prisoner Diet and Exercise Regiment.</title>
	<author>jameskojiro</author>
	<datestamp>1257014820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I saw we should only feed prisoners Junk food and Sugary Soda pop.</p><p>Forget feeding them three "Healthy" squares a day.   Feed them left over Halloween Candy, Twinkies, HoHos, Potato Chips, Soda Pop (the more High Fructose Corn Syrup the better) and any meat is to be fried in lard or High Trans fat oils.   Basically anything that puts on weight is a plus.</p><p>For exercise I recommend that we make them stay in their cells and provide them with a video gaming system, (Preferable those cheap ass NES and Sega Genesis Chinese rip offs.)   Pipe in soap operas on the TV and reward prisoners who watch soaps with a supply of Bon Bons.  No one is to be able to use the prison gym and they will be measured ever month to ensure they have a BMI that is well over 30.   If they start exercising in their cells on their own you throw them into the hole where they are force fed like a goose being prepared for Fois Gras until their BMI has exceeded 30.</p><p>We can also supplement their food with popular diet medication and give them new diet meds every three months as this stuff usually is responsible for increasing long term weight gain, you could even put the whole prison on a Binge/Bust cycle to permanently ruin their metabolism.</p><p>Now you may be asking why should you do this?   Well the answer is simple, when you release law breakers back into society you don't want a bunch of fit and healthy but angry men who can outrun the doughnut eating cops better than they could before they went to the big house.  Instead you want ex-cons that are soft marshmallowy and easy to re-capture should they insist on robbing the local 7-11 for all that is in the register and 4 boxes of Little Debbie snack cakes.</p><p>Victims of violent offenders as well would benefit from this as well, as a Prison Fattened rapist would be unable to easily engage in actual rape with a large lump of fat effectively decreasing their "reach".   Those who have beaten people up within an inch of their lives would now be out of breath by the time they threw their third punch.   It is harder for fat people to even get around to commit crime as anyone living in a bad area of town in an apartment two or three floors up without an elevator would be living in near complete safety from ex-cons.</p><p>What are the drawbacks of this?   Well you might see an increase in the number of lazy folks Wanting to get into prison and this is remedied by moving some of the Welfare Budget directly to the prison system.   You would see more rednecks and white trash in prison, which would lower attendance to NASCAR races.</p><p>What are some indirect benefits of this?  Well law abiding folks would want to stay thinner so you would actually be increasing the health of law abiding citizens as they would want to be thin to avoid the "criminal stigma" of being fat as an ex-con.</p><p>I say we need to create a new class of Jail Bird, The Couch Potato Con.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw we should only feed prisoners Junk food and Sugary Soda pop.Forget feeding them three " Healthy " squares a day .
Feed them left over Halloween Candy , Twinkies , HoHos , Potato Chips , Soda Pop ( the more High Fructose Corn Syrup the better ) and any meat is to be fried in lard or High Trans fat oils .
Basically anything that puts on weight is a plus.For exercise I recommend that we make them stay in their cells and provide them with a video gaming system , ( Preferable those cheap ass NES and Sega Genesis Chinese rip offs .
) Pipe in soap operas on the TV and reward prisoners who watch soaps with a supply of Bon Bons .
No one is to be able to use the prison gym and they will be measured ever month to ensure they have a BMI that is well over 30 .
If they start exercising in their cells on their own you throw them into the hole where they are force fed like a goose being prepared for Fois Gras until their BMI has exceeded 30.We can also supplement their food with popular diet medication and give them new diet meds every three months as this stuff usually is responsible for increasing long term weight gain , you could even put the whole prison on a Binge/Bust cycle to permanently ruin their metabolism.Now you may be asking why should you do this ?
Well the answer is simple , when you release law breakers back into society you do n't want a bunch of fit and healthy but angry men who can outrun the doughnut eating cops better than they could before they went to the big house .
Instead you want ex-cons that are soft marshmallowy and easy to re-capture should they insist on robbing the local 7-11 for all that is in the register and 4 boxes of Little Debbie snack cakes.Victims of violent offenders as well would benefit from this as well , as a Prison Fattened rapist would be unable to easily engage in actual rape with a large lump of fat effectively decreasing their " reach " .
Those who have beaten people up within an inch of their lives would now be out of breath by the time they threw their third punch .
It is harder for fat people to even get around to commit crime as anyone living in a bad area of town in an apartment two or three floors up without an elevator would be living in near complete safety from ex-cons.What are the drawbacks of this ?
Well you might see an increase in the number of lazy folks Wanting to get into prison and this is remedied by moving some of the Welfare Budget directly to the prison system .
You would see more rednecks and white trash in prison , which would lower attendance to NASCAR races.What are some indirect benefits of this ?
Well law abiding folks would want to stay thinner so you would actually be increasing the health of law abiding citizens as they would want to be thin to avoid the " criminal stigma " of being fat as an ex-con.I say we need to create a new class of Jail Bird , The Couch Potato Con .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw we should only feed prisoners Junk food and Sugary Soda pop.Forget feeding them three "Healthy" squares a day.
Feed them left over Halloween Candy, Twinkies, HoHos, Potato Chips, Soda Pop (the more High Fructose Corn Syrup the better) and any meat is to be fried in lard or High Trans fat oils.
Basically anything that puts on weight is a plus.For exercise I recommend that we make them stay in their cells and provide them with a video gaming system, (Preferable those cheap ass NES and Sega Genesis Chinese rip offs.
)   Pipe in soap operas on the TV and reward prisoners who watch soaps with a supply of Bon Bons.
No one is to be able to use the prison gym and they will be measured ever month to ensure they have a BMI that is well over 30.
If they start exercising in their cells on their own you throw them into the hole where they are force fed like a goose being prepared for Fois Gras until their BMI has exceeded 30.We can also supplement their food with popular diet medication and give them new diet meds every three months as this stuff usually is responsible for increasing long term weight gain, you could even put the whole prison on a Binge/Bust cycle to permanently ruin their metabolism.Now you may be asking why should you do this?
Well the answer is simple, when you release law breakers back into society you don't want a bunch of fit and healthy but angry men who can outrun the doughnut eating cops better than they could before they went to the big house.
Instead you want ex-cons that are soft marshmallowy and easy to re-capture should they insist on robbing the local 7-11 for all that is in the register and 4 boxes of Little Debbie snack cakes.Victims of violent offenders as well would benefit from this as well, as a Prison Fattened rapist would be unable to easily engage in actual rape with a large lump of fat effectively decreasing their "reach".
Those who have beaten people up within an inch of their lives would now be out of breath by the time they threw their third punch.
It is harder for fat people to even get around to commit crime as anyone living in a bad area of town in an apartment two or three floors up without an elevator would be living in near complete safety from ex-cons.What are the drawbacks of this?
Well you might see an increase in the number of lazy folks Wanting to get into prison and this is remedied by moving some of the Welfare Budget directly to the prison system.
You would see more rednecks and white trash in prison, which would lower attendance to NASCAR races.What are some indirect benefits of this?
Well law abiding folks would want to stay thinner so you would actually be increasing the health of law abiding citizens as they would want to be thin to avoid the "criminal stigma" of being fat as an ex-con.I say we need to create a new class of Jail Bird, The Couch Potato Con.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29987392</id>
	<title>Right, that makes me feel better.</title>
	<author>Sets\_Chaos</author>
	<datestamp>1256990040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wait, shouldn't that mean he should be locked up LONGER? I mean, if he's genetically disposed to lash out, isn't he a greater threat to society than someone who was just feeling a bit feisty that day?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , should n't that mean he should be locked up LONGER ?
I mean , if he 's genetically disposed to lash out , is n't he a greater threat to society than someone who was just feeling a bit feisty that day ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, shouldn't that mean he should be locked up LONGER?
I mean, if he's genetically disposed to lash out, isn't he a greater threat to society than someone who was just feeling a bit feisty that day?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979320</id>
	<title>Re:Backwards?</title>
	<author>zwei2stein</author>
	<datestamp>1257008340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thats what i though when i saw this.</p><p>Prisons serve as place to corret behavior and redeem criminals where it makes no sense to keep someone ucorrectable longer.</p><p>But at same time they also serve as means of preventing further offenses and insulating society from criminals.</p><p>Basically, it makes more sense to jail person with innate violent tendencies for longer period, not shorter.</p><p>Even better, just make no difference at all and it will be fine.</p><p>Also, WTB, personal responsibility.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thats what i though when i saw this.Prisons serve as place to corret behavior and redeem criminals where it makes no sense to keep someone ucorrectable longer.But at same time they also serve as means of preventing further offenses and insulating society from criminals.Basically , it makes more sense to jail person with innate violent tendencies for longer period , not shorter.Even better , just make no difference at all and it will be fine.Also , WTB , personal responsibility .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thats what i though when i saw this.Prisons serve as place to corret behavior and redeem criminals where it makes no sense to keep someone ucorrectable longer.But at same time they also serve as means of preventing further offenses and insulating society from criminals.Basically, it makes more sense to jail person with innate violent tendencies for longer period, not shorter.Even better, just make no difference at all and it will be fine.Also, WTB, personal responsibility.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980508
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980192
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981516
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980978
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29986986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29985892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.30011162
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29989024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983620
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29990008
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979414
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979520
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29993062
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980930
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979998
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29991752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29990712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981244
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981556
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979414
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980874
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29985442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979852
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981544
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29988882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982378
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980666
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_1431214_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981090
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979534
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979216
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979424
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981176
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981872
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981658
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982042
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982480
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979444
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979546
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29985442
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.30011162
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981422
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983198
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981914
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980978
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981322
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980410
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980624
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984056
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29988882
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979542
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981516
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981524
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979300
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979662
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983354
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981244
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981090
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979870
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984142
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980192
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981762
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982802
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981556
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980000
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980662
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980012
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979720
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981550
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29986986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982384
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980434
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29990008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29985892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983620
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979924
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980020
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29990712
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29989998
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982378
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980664
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983018
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979174
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979852
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979284
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979844
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980508
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979854
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979514
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980790
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981526
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29993062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979998
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979410
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29989024
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980660
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982902
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982546
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981746
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29991752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981246
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979892
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979764
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981830
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979252
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29984476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981544
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29982262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29983776
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29980412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29981800
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979274
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_1431214.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_1431214.29979986
</commentlist>
</conversation>
