|
|
 |
| [Apr 09, 2004, 10:22 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
I had along-overdue visit with the eye doctor yesterday, though it turns out my
glasses prescription hasn't changed (I'm nearsighted), so the delay was of no
consequence. I forgot, however, to try to satisfy my curiosity when he asked me
if I had any questions, because I wanted to ask him his thoughts on that LASER
eye surgery (I'm guessing he gets that a lot). I will follow-up with him on this
directly soon enough, but I decided to lay some groundwork on the web...
searching for "LASER eye surgery problems" (naturally the aspect of this I am
most curious about) turned up enough of an abundance of results to turn anyone
off to the prospect. A more refined search for "Custom LASIK problems" was much
less pessimistic, though, with the majority of hits from eye doctor sites
discussing potential complications. Along the way I learned that the Custom
LASIK is also capable of coping with astigmatisms too (though mine is considered
quite mild to start with), so it's possible I'm a candidate for this. At this
point I admit to still being a bit doubtful about all this... I'm not much of a
gambler, and I'm reluctant to risk my vision in order to take the chance on
improving it, but I am still tugged by curiosity, so if anyone has any links or
information about the pros and cons of this procedure, I'd be very interested.
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 182. |
Re: $0.02 |
Apr 16, 2004, 07:16 |
Tango |
|
|
First, pat on the back all round for taking this post to the 180 post heights. 
it isn't possible for a man and a woman to feel for each other what two men or two women can
L.A.C.K O.F. U.N.D.E.R.S.T.A.N.D.I.N.G.
The fact that gays want to get married shows that even if that is the case, whatever they do feel is strong enough to 'qualify' for marriage. If you have ever met a gay loving couple, then you'll know it's no different from a straight loving couple.
The fact remains that homosexuals don't want equal rights, they want new ones. They wan't the right to get married. To have the full privelidges that marriage affords straight couples - to take each other's name, full taxation benefits, full recognition by every organisation that recognises marriage, etc. If this is a new right, then yeah, that's what they want. I fail to see what difference it makes, but what I do see is that currently they are unable to join each other in the way they want. If they were allowed to, I don't see how it weakens the institute of marriage, unless it is your opinion that marriage should be restricted to man and woman. And I am yet to see convincing evidence that this is the case.
You simply haven't thought through the matter far enough to find where the infringement occurs in this case I've thought about it plenty. It does not occur. Please suggest some of your ideas.
Where is this written?
"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes" (Jefferson's Letter to von Humboldt, 1813)
"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own" (Jefferson's Letter to H. Spafford, 1814)
"Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contary to their conscience, or that one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combined together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform" (Annals of Congress, Sat Aug 15th, 1789 pages 730 - 731, emphasis added).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Twitter 
