User Name Remember Me Password [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.

02-20-2009, 09:44 PM
 Location: Columbus, OH 857 posts, read 1,231,349 times Reputation: 558

Quote:
 Originally Posted by juggler A point to ponder: Did you know that if every single person on the entire planet was given a 400 square foot "apartment", surrounded by a 6 foot lawn/garden on all sides, you could fit everyone in the world in the state of Texas? Every single person in the world (6 billion +). Each person gets ~1240 square feet of space, including their outdoor area. The entire planet can be housed in Texas. And this is with just single story housing. Do the math. We're not overcrowded.
ur an idiot, and to prove it I will do the math

1240 square feet x 6 billion = 7,440,000,000,000 square feet (7.44 quadrillion!!)

7.44 quad / 5280 = 1,409,090,909 sq miles (rounded)

size of texas in square miles (including water area) = 266,874

1,409,090,909 / 266,874 = 5280 (rounded, kinda wierd this # came up again)

so apparantly u think texas is actually 5,280 times bigger than it really is

total surface of the earth (including oceans) = 196,940,400 sq miles

1,409,090,909 / 196,940,400 = 7.15

so if we could live on top of the ocean and take up every inch of possible space including mountains and rain forests the earth would only have to be a little over 7 times larger than it is now to accomadate everyone with this reasonable amount of space you are talking about. dont tell me to do the math if u obviously haven't. its OBVIOUS to me u have no idea how large a number 6 billion is. i think its safe to say we are more than overcrowded right now

PS math just owned u

02-20-2009, 09:55 PM
 Location: Portland, Oregon 7,091 posts, read 10,510,086 times Reputation: 4104
I am pro-choice, though I would only vote for an abortion if necessary (I.E. Severe disability of the child, so much so to be life limiting). I think everyone has their own choice of what happens, I do not have a choice on their life.

02-20-2009, 11:17 PM
 412 posts, read 814,845 times Reputation: 214
Quote:
 Originally Posted by ulnevrwalkalone ur an idiot, and to prove it I will do the math 1240 square feet x 6 billion = 7,440,000,000,000 square feet (7.44 quadrillion!!) 7.44 quad / 5280 = 1,409,090,909 sq miles (rounded)

It's 7.44 trillion. Also, you need to divide 7.44 trillion by 5280 squared to convert from square feet to square miles.

02-21-2009, 07:44 AM
 Location: Not where you ever lived 11,544 posts, read 25,158,102 times Reputation: 6190
I an neither for abortion nor against choice. What I am against are back alley butchers where abortions are performed in the middle of the night with a coat hanger and no anesthesia in filthy conditions. This is what abortion was in America before abortion was legalized. A nurse friend died in 1968 from Septisemia because of it. I am against late term and partial birth abortions beause there is a viable life, a formed child - not a large clot of coagulated blood.

There are medical exceptions that only a doctor can cprrectly diagnose that should be accepted, like it or not. I would not want my child to die while I was arguing with a doctor over a diagnosis. I feel very strongly whether an abortions occurs or it does not, the final decision is between God and the woman. My opinion does not count, and should not be the decision of a bunch of old men in congress.

It is hard enough to raise a healty child. Parents who want to raise a handicapped child - well, that is their choice. Who am I to make any life altering decision for anyone else? I can't make my own.

Last edited by linicx; 02-21-2009 at 07:52 AM.. Reason: edit

02-21-2009, 07:55 AM
 Location: Miami 537 posts, read 256,215 times Reputation: 170
Quote:
 Originally Posted by ulnevrwalkalone I have to assume this has been done before but I want to hear peoples stance on one of the most controversial debates of our time. Please post your stance first before u start arguing against other peoples stance. and as always, there is no reason we cannot be civil about this so dont go postal on anyone for stating their beliefs .
I'm personally against abortion. However, I respect the right of women to make their own decision (terminate a pregnancy) without interference from the goverment.

02-21-2009, 07:56 AM
 1,788 posts, read 4,157,466 times Reputation: 1234
Quote:
 Originally Posted by skchi It's 7.44 trillion. Also, you need to divide 7.44 trillion by 5280 squared to convert from square feet to square miles.
Oh the irony.

02-21-2009, 08:01 AM
 Location: Not where you ever lived 11,544 posts, read 25,158,102 times Reputation: 6190
Quote:
 Originally Posted by ulnevrwalkalone : PS math just owned u
Me too.

It's an impossible situation anyway. If you put that many women that close together, they would kill each other.

02-21-2009, 08:42 AM
I am pro-choice, simply because I have seen the damage done by the 'secret' abortions. One student in my high school died from using Drano as an abortifacent, and several friends had to travel 400 miles one way to get a "secret" abortion. Abortions are nothing new in human history - I prefer the ability for all, to access sterile and non-dangerous facilities if that is their choice. The choice between a scalpel and a coat hanger is not a choice at all.

As for the sociological impacts of these decisions, many people ignore the single fulcrum on which these decisions balance - who is responsible for a child's life. It is far cheaper to get an abortion than it is to raise a child to the age of 18. But many children whose parents are irresponsible are raised in homes with only one parent, who is drug addicted or otherwise selfshly engaged in their own life, and who uses the child as a source of income. They care nothing if the child is fed, clothed, or educated, or ever becomes a viable contributing human being. They simply breed for the income with which that child provides them. No one ever suggests cancelling Welfare, AFDC, and Social Security benefits, then taking all of these children up and putting them in places where they have a chance to become responsible viable human beings - well, Newt Gingrich did and was soundly trounced for it. We can tell a woman that she can't abort, but we can't tell a woman that having children indiscriminately and expecting others to pay to raise that child is wrong?

The key word here is - responsibility. When people are held accountable for their actions - from the crackhead that has unprotected sex so that she can get free crack from her dealer (popularly known as the "crack for crack" trade) to the man that thinks that having any number of babies from any number of women proves his masculinity, whether or not he pays one dime to support them - we can start talking about pro-choice or pro-life. Life is too important and too precious to throw away, be it on a clean and sterile table or on the street in a gang. We can't have laws that protect one and not the other.

Until we stop using the emotional cries and start using our reason to determine what is really pro-life, whether we are really doing all we can to demand responsibility from every parent, then the argument is moot and a waste of emotional effort.

02-21-2009, 09:09 AM
 Location: Not where you ever lived 11,544 posts, read 25,158,102 times Reputation: 6190
Quote:
 Originally Posted by ulnevrwalkalone 1240 square feet x 6 billion = 7,440,000,000,000 square feet (7.44 quadrillion!!)
I am not a math major by any stretch and I am not trying to argue with you. I want to learn. I am confused at how you arrive at 1240 sf?

For simplicty sake, if one assumes a 400 sf house is 20'x20' and 6' yard all around was added, each side would be 26' long. Wouldn't that be 675 sf, rather than feet squared (1350)?

The 1350 is the area of a 3 bedroom house - which is what prompted me to ask.

Thanks!

Last edited by linicx; 02-21-2009 at 09:13 AM.. Reason: edit

02-21-2009, 09:38 AM
 Location: Cody, WY 9,209 posts, read 10,191,240 times Reputation: 18336
Quote:
 Originally Posted by juggler A point to ponder: Did you know that if every single person on the entire planet was given a 400 square foot "apartment", surrounded by a 6 foot lawn/garden on all sides, you could fit everyone in the world in the state of Texas? Every single person in the world (6 billion +). Each person gets ~1240 square feet of space, including their outdoor area. The entire planet can be housed in Texas. And this is with just single story housing. Do the math. We're not overcrowded.

It sounds lovely.
 Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over \$68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned. Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.