HopperWolf

Thanks for your comment, rev. The change is minor, call it a lil experiment. Does it flow any better? or make more sense? Cacophony is waves upon a cliff, And screaming voices, The wind’s raging voice. Deep pulsing beat our life in motion, This unchained screeching, Is a flowing melody. The sound of the world changes From old to young, But it’s always the same song sung. Howling of strings made choir of angels, Looking Upon A corrupted state. Shostakovich’s name taken in vain, That’s the highest honour That we could bestow. The sound of society, From high to low, Has always been to strike a blow. Random mess, Beautiful construct, Revolving noise Our beautiful song. The sound of generations, From young to old, Always meaningless disorder. This is our madness, This is our noise.

I like! yay Learn it is. thanks. now.... any thoughts on the thing? Thanks for chaning the title!

Experience speaks, Means the world for the past, Nothing comes Without the will of thought, Wisdom gained.

It is an amazing piece.

Cacophony Is waves upon a cliff, Screaming voices, The wind’s raging voice. Deep pulsing beat By which life is motion, Unchained screeching, Flowing melody. The sound of the world changes From old to young, But ‘tis always the same song sung. Howling of strings Our choir of angels, Looking Upon A corrupted state. Shostakovich, His name taken in vain, Highest honour That we could bestow. The sound of society, From high to low, Has always been to strike a blow. Random mess, Beautiful construct, Revolving noise Our beautiful song. The sound of generations, From young to old, Always meaningless disorder. This is our madness, This is our noise.

hippy happy birthday

tragic. I like the rhyme scheme and rhythm, it is one i feel has a child like simplicity (which is good) which adds to the feel of the poem.

haunting and striking. I like. The imagery is, for me, just the right blend of subtlty and vividness. well done

Sorry to have deserted the place for the past couple months, but life got hard, and worse, I have been unable to write ANYTHING creative (literally) for the longest time. To all those who's birthdays i have missed, happy birthday! To Ayshela, how are you doin, hun? To everyone else who noticed my absence, hi I'll be trying to post more often, though my creative input could be somewhat stilted.... ¬_¬ BUT HI!! I'm around! again.

this is the first thing I've written in many months (I have been agonisingly unable to write) so go easy on me but I would reeeeallly appreciate any and all comments. Tis just a first draft though. ------------ Forced to walk the rope, Cross watery depths, Below, the teary graves, Mark too many Holy deaths. Tread the path before, Embrace the fall, To choose is to live, But have we any choice at all? Break free of your bonds, And take the dive, It looks deep enough from here, To control your own life. A world open before you, Freedom gained, Power of choice yours, Worth all chance and pain. Or keep to the rope, One destination, The same end for us all, No matter our intention. Walk reluctant, Or bend your knee, And think on those, Who thought themselves free. Walk not to reach the end, But look around, The journey will make you, You will find your ground.

I likie the imagery very much. tis good stuff. Again showing your skill with characterisation.

Ayshela... I wouldn't worry... doubt it's you. I don't seem to recall reading anything offensive on your part at all. Everyone has conflicting views, and I am glad we respect eachother here enough to discuss them and not attack each other. I think you've discussed perfectally well. As for the problem areas, well, I guess I missed them myself... perhaps because I've been away so long. anyhoo... I'll be sorry to see y'all go.

My sympathies to you both, I really hope both members of family are ok. remember, you've always got this place if you need to talk. I know the people here do care Falcon, your right, and I wish everyone hope with their problems, even me.

I'm feeling terrible. I have got some really big personally problems going on right now and I REALLY want to EXPRESS MYSELF! But no, I can't because I seem unable to write a dang thing right now which is just great. *sigh* I hate this. Sorry to bother you people but I have to say something. and I can't compose a poem to save my life so this is as good as it gets for now

very true..... UNLESS! You could somehow awaken a "genetic memory" (the memory that is imprinted upon it's genetic makeup) and then you could have your very own ghola!! (too much Dune.... sorry) naw, yer right man. I don't think clones would be the same people, but the question is would you behave the same way as your clone (or vise versa) in it's circumstances. Who knows?

any red dwarf fans are likely to know that a double of yourself is not a wise idea Hrm, I think there's a chance that a clone of you would not have the same personality. for what ever reasons: soul, brain patterns or numerous other reasons that I'm not clued up on Still... I'd be creeped out about the body part thing (think Thing from Adam's family) but i see nothing ethically wrong with it myself. be interesting to see how it all pans out.

Well said the both of you. (Psi and Jareena) As to Arch's point (Just cos I like to be contradictory with you, my friend) would it really open up an avenue of testing better than present? they wouldn't be brainless bodies - being the clone of an individual would include the brain probably. but more than that, in religious aspects they may not be vacuous either. If we all have souls at conception/birth/somewhere between, then perhaps a clone would posses his own unique soul. (And Arch! Perhaps there is your "self" that makes you unique and truely you despite your upbringing) But then, maybe if they just clone an arm or something.... still, creepy.

It may be off subject, but I like yer thinking have to agree.

Archaneaus and I agree on something! yes, the issue of cencorship is a common thing for us. we may disagree about everything else but at the end of the day we both want to be able to hear whatever we want! yay!

The wolf by the fire raised his head at the comotion. The fire light flickered in his yellow eyes as he watched the woman take a lone seat in a dark corner. He would've chosen a seat by the fire himself, but she had style... and a good drink. Hopper thought on this fact a moment before slowly getting to his paws, stretching and padding over to the newcomer. Eventually, the wolf makes it to the corner, dodging many a falling drunkard and narrowly avoiding damage to his tail. He silently sits at the stranger's feet, his now shaded yellow eye flickering between woman and drink. If the stranger strained her ears and the room were silent (hah) then she might have been able to make out a faint whimpering. Hey there, name's HopperWolf. We've met, but I think you might have a bad impression of me. I'm not usually so objectionable. Here, I'll let you get me a drink and say hello and welcome! really, welcome to the pen, I'm sure you'll make a fine addition

Again Jareena, dead on again. (I thinnk you're better at this getting ideas across than me ) Ayshela, I agree that our society could do with a bit more tolerence and understanding as a whole, though in some areas I would say that there is possibly too much, the results of not knowing where to draw the line. However, I still disagree. I think there are even absolutes in the moral world, like "it is right to kill this person or it is not right to kill this person" And yet opinion and subjectivity is just about the only thing we can actually base our opinions on, and in the end that's where we must draw them from. But we must always be aware of the ultimate truth, if only so we can have that greater understanding you want. The ability to say "I could be wrong, you could be right." But that's not a rule to apply to every situation because, like i said before, it would breed chaos. Arch, yes, morality is a product largly of our social upbringing, but if we did not have that, what would we have? would we have any inhibitions at all? look again at the example of the puppy in my previous post. I he was not conditioned, would he know any boundries? He would pee where he liked in the house, bite who he pleased, eat until he could eat no more and his teeth rotted. Morality of the socially enforced kind may be just what we need to survive as a society together. As to your believe that you can't say cloning is wrong simply because God creates us individual (for example) I woud say that i's entirely subjective. However, cloning is either right or it is not. That is the unalterable fact. our justifications are something else entirely. I would want more reasoning than I have had thus far to endorse cloning, but I still don't think it is necessarily wrong. I err on the side of caution, if you will.

I think reality is composed by many layers. The further ytou get from the core fundamentals the more "shades" there are. As there is more room for interpretation with subjective views the spectrum opens right up. and in that I do agree with what you say. However, my belief is that ultimately there is only one truth. Either something is true or it is not true. The universe, for all intent and pruposes, can be split into those two catagories. Now, if it is not true, then a whole universe of choices open up, but each one boils to to "true or not true". Simply put, either Hitler was right to kill those people or he was not. It doesn't matter what people think, it is a simple fact. Beyond that there are people. each with their own subjective opinions, each probably differing in some way from everyone else's. That is where your shades come in. But it remains that opinion does not affect to state of reality. As to your comment on least harm being right, well, that opens up the whole good vs evil debate which I have spent so long studying that my head hurts. Though I will give an example: You are house training a puppy and he pees in the house. do you smack him and put him out for a nour, the night, however long.... in other words, punish him, or do you do nothing (causing less harm to the puppy) and let him do it again and again? Perhaps it is for the greater good to punish the puppy so that he relates peeing in the house to something bad and so does not do it again. In the same way perhaps Hitler was serving the greater good in killing mere millions in order to save billions. In which case Hitler was perhaps not so most definitely wrong. There are things which we do not know, these ultimate truths, that affect us and we may never know them, but we should be aware of them.

BPS *sheepish look* sorry. don't mean to bite. was just feeling the rage! Jareena - right on

I said nothing about rules. each case is individual. Though I guess instead of saying right or wrong, i should better say true or false.

Psimon, I think you hit it dead on. Ayshela, I think that you and actually mostly agree... I just worded my response in a confusing manner. Where we seem to differ is that I am sure that everything is in actuality black and white. Our view reveals only part of a whole, and so our perception is coloured and not entirely informed. let me give an example: (Hypothetical of course) Say that Hitler knew it was right to kill all people who did not comform to his ideal of the master race. The reasoning being for the human race to survive they must be fasioned for their own good into the ideal that could survive the aeons. By his view of the truth he was doing the right thing. However, I am sure that most people are pretty much repulsed by the idea that that is the right course of action. that each person has the right to life and the persuit of happiness, or what have you. In your view it is wrong to kill in any circumstance except possibly that of self defence. Ultimately only one of these views is right: he was either right to kill those people or he was wrong, but people's perception of the truth is coloured greatly by their own morality, based greatly on the environment where they grew up and such. People base their decisions on their morality, but if one person's morality conflicts with another's how could that work? The answer is that there must be an ultimate truth. I read in the original quote a desire to disregard the ultimate truth simply because we do not know it, and may never know it. Experts may be right or wrong, but you can't just ignore them because you don't know. you must make a choice, based on your own experiences and morality as to you opinion. The original quote seems to me to hide from the truth. To each his own, because who knows who's right? The consequences of such a stance are obvious. Where does it stop? Do you let the murderer about his business simply because he MAY be right to do it? Or, do you stop him. Drawing the line and saying, "No, that's wrong." It is a problem that seems to plague society ever more lately. Look at western politics and they are clearly visible. We have to come to our own conclusions, ever concious that there is an ultimate truth. To disregard the idea of ultimate truth completely would mean that there would be no basis for any moral code. Every subjective view would be just as valid as any other and so the world would fall to chaos.