And unlike Nur, Rahima needs not to apologize, becouse she and this Idea share the character flaw of arrogance.

Castro, no i don´t , it just occured to me that they too exist and even the holy Quran mentions them, so i thought since we´re catagorizing ppl by SEX, why not give them a place on SOL?

^^ And i thought we were integrating!! What about the eunuchs? can´t we pray together? On the contrary , i beleive we make development by not isolating ourselves. i need to know about tampon types and where they´re tucked, someone else wanna know how to brup in public or scratch somewhere in the back, and go about your day. On the contrary NUR, i´m of the idea that the "women" section should be removed .

^^ Does that very case refute Viking´s position or it just looks so?

Originally posted by Legend of Zu: So..I still resist to "Get Weaned" Cheers ] Legend, Soy milk is made by soaking, crushing, and cooking soybeans, unlike the dairy milk. Loads of other stuffs are used to give the soy milk the "mouth feel" of dairy milk,and mimic the sweetness that comes from the lactose in dairy milk. calling it Milk sounds barely Natural, woulden´t you agree LOZ? i do agree with u though,there is no breastfeeding bean-baby in it´s production. So, you may not notice it , but you just are artifcially unweaned . Originally posted by STOIC: When you look at hunters and gathers historically men were the hunters who killed for meat and not milk? If we survived all those years without any milk(untill 12000) can't we stay away from milk now? Thanks for the historical background STOIC,some here thought human were never weaned. Originally posted by liibaan: We humans are the ones with the big brains(at least most of us) so that's why we do things other animals in the kingdom don't do . For example, humans drink milk from other animals. Doesn't mean we're doing anything wrong. Liibaan, scroll up to that picture and imagine yourself in the place of that sheep, think again, regardless of the kneeing and method,reconsider the RED colored part of your post. it´s not about beeing right or wrong.

Originally posted by Muhammad: JB, before you have us all nude-walking on all 4-eating hay, Garaad, I´ve difficulties seeing it from the prespective of a COW, but, if we accept and realize our affinities,a notion like " Human are weirdos ,they act like my calve" should be Natural utterance for the Cow and for us.

The psycology of rapists is funny, i´ve seen a Swedish repport where a great per cent of rapists admitted that they would walk away if the victim went, " yeah, give it to me ,you lil yummy thing, give it all to me ". So ,it takes only 3 words to break a man´s ego. Is it in ? ? Some here seem to forget that the topic is about the BLAME on the victim.

^^ lol @ Diet Coke, Liibaan, What i´m saying is : Human milk is for human infants, dogs' milk is for pups, cows' milk is for calves, cats' milk is for kittens, and so forth. Clearly, this is the way nature hints to intend. Just use your own good judgement on this one. Now , The question is, why a human adult has to drink milk ( a short term nutrient for new-borns ) from the WRONG mamal? Lii, time to get weaned .

Originally posted by Callypso: JB, Right now I'm wearing a wool sweater. What animal kills another and covers itself with the hide of the dead animal? Seen in that light, milk consumption is not so strange, after all. Man , you´re weird. just get weaned

It felt like if some here implied that most of us who lack a vertical smile are nothing , but potential rapists who´re deprived of the right moment. Anyone else who felt pointed at?

Bro Mutakalim... luckless thee or lucky thee, that could be the natural question , careful is Man ,shameful is Man not. For a reason very familiar to us gets a Goat dragged into a dungeon and devoured naturally, Thus a nutural 'intellectual similie' was recorded by our senses , be it unbeknownst or uncomprehensible ,but consquently drinking it´s Milk and thus imitating it´s offspring gesticulates unavoidable affinities, woulden´t it sayable? 178, you´re technically right, but not of that reason, could u mean drinking is an advanced behavior of sucking? Liiibaan , Nothing is wrong with your choice of Milk source, it´s just that it´s 'unnormal' ,becouse Milk is a maternal lactating secretion, a short term nutrient for new-born mamals, Invariably, the mother of any mammal will provide her milk for a short period of time immediately after birth. When the time comes for 'weaning', the young offspring is introduced,to the proper food for that species of mammal.. see where this is leading? yeah , exactly, ever tasted a Scoopy bone? Legend , Nice seeing ya again man , and yes i guess see where you´re heading ,but i can ONLY remind ya ,without lawyers Hell´d been a beautiful beach Legend, Nursing is provided by nature ONLY for the very youngest of mammals. so, Get weaned

Holly mooly !! When did Molly move to Somalia? Garaad, swap Molly for a beeing that is highr than Molly in the chain of food.and refute JB´s theory.

What is natural is what follows Nature´s laws, In your circle the third statement is unnatural. a more natural one could look like this , man eats goat. , but as it is today , man does not only eat goat man plays her adoptive "orgi/cessan" too, and that is what i get problem with. Garaad, Get weaned or sound like a goat

Do you drink CAMEL or COW milk? if yes,could you drink milk from other mamals? say Rats? why not? You get to be weaned NOW. you´re neither a baby-Camel or baby-Cow. that is if you´re baby at all. Human drink Human milk , no? Is it NATURAL? Which is more NATURAL , to kill the Animal and eat it´s flesh to nurture ,or to drink their milk and pretend to be their NATURALLY adapted son/daughter? Did you knew that Human beeings are the ONLY mamals who continue to drink milk beyond babyhood. ARE Human beeings really at the top of the chain of food ? And for a good reason ? I´m having lunch-break at work now ,and i don´t feel NATURALLY eating,i´m having something that looks like a coarsely chopped hay. What is your take ?

Originally posted by Castro: ^ It's always great when the other party sees things my way. Sometimes they just don´t have a choice .

And that concludes a weird era on SOL. Well done and thank you Nur, JZK. Yes,this is my first JZK.

^^ As you´ve already figured , figuring out the thing to give back is my akile's heel,but,once i figure it out, i appreciatively deleiver it even if that conveys rubbing it on some Pinnochio noses. Yet, In this particular case , where no one means all s/he says, and yet very few say all they mean, for words are slippery and thought is viscous, I find Sheh beeing victimized for beeing a plaintiff sans Assailer in the wrong courthouse,while the judges know that beeing in the wrong courthouse is a trviality in this State. and if despite the roubustness of the logic and the water proofness of the emotions it turns out to be that i´ve exercised my greatest human right , namely beeing basically WRONG, then so be it. And i don´t have to worry much about getting away with it, as long as my siding with Sheh is a subjectt matter of her opponents, have i? As for the whole community , this is a good lesson for us all, that we can only stand by what we type, and adore or make ourselves the butt of amusement about what others type, either way no one but the typer can answer.

Good morning!! Originally posted by Brown: ^Indeed. Whereas the topic [Look up this word in my responce] was abt sheh,eh Jay & its Git-er done [Look for the 'Git-er'in my signature].comprende Amigo? ARE we already there at the judgement stage? even a typo gets us going? Okey,The tiny but red part of your answer (yeah, that single word)floored the rest of it, and with that went your client´s questioning of my Role and all the pandering that followed. My conclusion: Ladies and Gentlemen,my Client has a huge heart, but her heart is not a whore. This is what my clients thinks: there is little room for men that want my private parts to fulfill their own appetites, sexual or intellectual all the while dressed up in the holy name of Islam. Apparantly ,my client doesn´t care about your Client´s private parts, but your Client subconsiouly seems to want to donate some of my client´s private parts intellectually to her client. Your client failed to find some other dead four-legged creature to flog. This was my client´s OWN, and my client is neither 4 legged nor is she intellectually molested. and thanks for the correction Amigo. Rahima. In a normal forum Brother Nur would have been done by abandoning that original thread but in a Somali Forum it´s like a family affair. The question you avoid in the kitchen , you still have to fcae it in the living room. To defend Nur is clossally WRONG ,unless his ability to defend his stance is in question by the VERY ones who openly defend him and thus nibble Sheh on the way, while diverting the gist in a Topic is a commonly practised right on this Forum. Therefore WOL your client is guilty of ridiculing Sheh my clinet and like minded by letting her private parts fulfill WOL´s Client´s sexual and intellectual appetites.

^^ As much as i could have sworn that Sheh was addressing Nur? ~~ get er verily UNDONE And what is your Role in this Thrice?

Originally posted by Warrior of Light: ^^^JBravo, Do you have to meddle in? No , i don´t have to . But what was your Role in this again?

Originally posted by Warrior of Light: If I had started the thread, you are "IN" all shackled. Now, dont sweat it, breathe in , out All that just to get Sheh off Nur to just turn her attention towards YOU? WOL, You apparently want the best for Nur,It's just that you´re so woefully wrong about what that might be now,and you´re everything but persuaded that Sheh owns the humility to accept Nur´s wrong judgment on that thread say at face value? You´re neither doing a favor each nor letting it take it´s natural short course. Nur is definately going to tear that Recommendation letter at your face. I´d done that.

Khary, i´ve asked you to pen your point and defend ID instead of making selective quotations and a linearly answering to make a point ,if you wanted me to address you, but I see you haven´t done that , hence ,carried on with your usual, wonder if that is all you can contribute ? Khayr, I´ve decided to appeal to your rataionle one last time and ask you to pen down a line ot two where you emphasize ID and share with us why it is the correct theory Now Bro Khayr, let me share with you some points in your linears where you unconciousely caused an unusual mirth , silently ofcourse . Firstly, you can never question the motives and purpose of the participants of a debate, it´s fallacious, cowardly and colossally barbaric, why? becouse: 1: Nobody knows 'or cares about ' your motive 2: You´re supposed to decipher other´s codes(motives) by understanding deeply the point the´re making. 3: It´s gigantically fallacious as it is an improper prerequisite , you can question one´s competence but never one´s motive to contribute. Ofcourse i stand for every line i typed ,and beleive me i´m more concerned of you capability to understand my point , than i´m concerned of having erred , having a flaw or remotely beeing self-righteous. Secondly, This Why are the rules different for them? What one party can get away with all their suggestions and the other is held at 'pen point'? is the only valid , but unsound argument you made, so lemme answer it. One could wonder what exactly is the injustice you´re protesting against when it´s obviousely apparent that ID is the correct theory becouse almost everybody beleives to be a creature? On a serious note though, your argument is unsound becouse The evolution theory never got away with a single semi-leap, on the contrary , it´s one of the most evaluated|validated (turned and twisted)scientific theory in modren science,while ID (creationism) crusade after crusade produced and still produces an overwhelming preponderance of miracles over evil science. Originally posted by Femme Fatale: And God said 'Be'. And thats the end of that debate as far as I'm concerned. That is excatly what was missing here , THANKS !!

Originally posted by Callypso: ^ What would it take JB? I thought of many senarios, still can´t find the minute that i could conclude "KILL". You see Cally,It ain´t easy raionalizing an irrational act.

Murderers !! It takes more that murder to convince me support CP.

Bashi my beloved Graad, For once i thought you meant it when you earlier said "this was a layman´s type of cake",now i´m confident that your issues with Darwin´s Evolution theory is nill, but you just can´t let the ID cup of bloody marry you been drinking look empty becouse of it. Garaad, you´ve almost repeated yourself when you said: I could be mistaken but my understanding is that Darwinist implicitly unsuccessfully refute the idea that Super Omniscient God having hand in the design and creation of living organism. In essence, it boils down to whether Darwinists can furnish evidence that refutes Intelligent Design theory. From where I stand, and I don't pretend to be scientists, all the Darwinists have came up so far is turning tables to Intelligent Design proponents and demand evidence that supports Great God being the first cause. This repeatation of yours is counterfeited need of whatissoever your mind is crying for. Again i´m tempted to tell you "Garaad,let us sift the assumptions first" becouse you seem to be despairing ,that the Evolution Theory should act like a "Origin of life" Theory and thus refute ID/creationism. Garaad once again The evolution theory doesn´t CARE about the existance or absence of an intelligent designer having finger or two in it. This debate has demonstrated the unscientific-ness and the covert religious-ness of ID, and the lack of a culture of conscious democratic participation. Garaad, the ONLY scientific about ID is it´s questioning of the proposed examples of irreducible complexity in the Evolution theory, and even that done on the wrong grounds. They base their criticisms on the motives of the proponents of Evolution Theory, which is a blatantly fallacious stand to take . The Evolution theory itself is logically invulnerable to attacks on the motives of its proponents, and ID can NEVER be a blow to evolutive science I.e. I hearby offer you and all ID supporters the explanations against examples of proposed irreducible complexity, and by extrapolating from very well-corroborated genetic data to show you that. the variously proposed items of irreducible complexity are in fact reproductively related and thus not independently designed, (unless the designer 'wants us to think that'!) If there are limits on the plasticity of genetic change these limits do not preclude the natural macro-evolutionary diversification of specieschanges from one species into another,Indeed, that it follows from the known nature of genetics that one must predict the diversification of species. There you have your potted refuation of ID in a nutshell , and Yes i consider myself a scientist whatever that may mean to you Anyone with a cencere hope to venture a responsible opinion can evaluate this. Garaad ,I understand that Evolution Theory is perceived by many as a blow that directly goes agaist their religion,and a great evil , But i'd like to think that reasoned, evidence based on thought will prevail over blind faith. Garaad the problem of creationism are many, worst beeing the following stance, "we have the one truth/way/god/mantra/hakuna matata/spagetti monster. ' Follow us or die ". I'm tempted into making the following impulsive reasoning: 1- Suppose that ID is the Correct theory. (even the bibilical creationism goes under ID) 2- Someone comes in, and asks, 'Okay, so there IS intelligence behind everything. So. Which intelligence is it?' 3- Someone says, 'God', someone else says, 'Allah', someone says 'The river spirit', and another belts out, One goes 'Hakuna matata','Spagetti monster!'. 4- The next 2000 years are spent in heated debate over wich God is the true god, true religion, and stuff.. They sink into the murky pit of tar they've created themselve. 5- Scientist, left alone in their corner, continue working virtually unbothered, every un-scientific ID attempt on their researches will be blocked by another fellow ID supporter of another faith. Simply I, Your source has been dealt with earlier in the debate, scroll on.