|
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Vespertine
Pages: 1 ... 39 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 49
1076
« on: July 29, 2005, 01:15:43 PM »
On a different note...
Willem, I think you need to spend more time paying attention in English class and a little less time listening to your loser friends. First off, sentences always begin with a capital letter. Next:
were != where (they're even pronounced differently)
ammount != amount
rime != time
its != it's
till != still
programa != program (or programme, if you prefer)
did != this
alwayz != always
frst != first
maby != maybe
whats != what's
oke != OK or okay
Finally, commas and semicolons are your friends.
Man kids these days really piss me off!
GET OFF MY LAWN!!!
Uhm i'll talk the way i want to talk and won't change it for anyone.
And what are you talking about my loser friends........ dude you don't even know me so shut up! And English class? i'm 22 not in school anymore.
You say kids are pissing you off, well you are pissing me off...
Hey, it's no skin off my nose. If you want to traipse around the planet sounding like a moron, that's your business. If, at 22 years of age, you want to sound like an illiterate 8th grader, I'm fine with that. Just don't hang around here flinging your filthy stupid all over the place.
1077
« on: July 28, 2005, 10:19:32 PM »
You'd have to look at it at a more complicated way than 'illegal drugs' to find a middle ground. Group the drugs into catagories based on harm, percentage of national useage, expense, abundancy and acceptance (or something like that). Certain groups would be decriminalized while others might stay illegal, or you might legalize some while decriminalizing the others.
Of course something like this could never happen. At the rate that things are going they'll have banned most things in cars and anything that can cause bodily harm in the slightest and will pass helmet laws for anything that could result in head injuries (ie. running, swimming, driving, talking). In New Jersey they're trying to make it illegal to smoke in your car on the turnpike. It won't be long till this happens, just watch. Personally, I think grouping the drugs into "categories of harm" doesn't solve the problem. To some extent, the government already does that. Some drugs, (e.g. tobacco, alcohol or caffeine) are deemed okay, while others (e.g. pot, speed or acid) are categorized and dangerous and illegal. Why is smoking pot considered more dangerous than smoking cigarettes or getting drunk? Why is speed considered more dangerous than smoking or eating caffeine pills? I never used to be in the "decriminalize everything" category. I think I started to change my position the more I looked around and noticed the government trying to get its foot through more than one privacy door. The more I think about it, the more firmly I believe that the government has absolutely no business telling me what I can and cannot put in my body. Should they be able to throw my ass in jail if I drive a car under the influence (of anything)? Hell yes! But that's because I've endangered countless other people with those actions. They shouldn't be able to tell me what I can or cannot put in my body in order to catch a buzz.
1078
« on: July 28, 2005, 10:07:14 PM »
Okay, so here's the deal. Very soon I'll be receiving a brand new 3.6G Socket-T Prescott , 1M, 800MHz FSB (it's a P4, if all that other junk doesn't make sense). Please to be offering suggestions about the hardware that I should build around this processor. The processor itself will scream, so I need hardware that can utilize all that power. I'll be building the thing from the ground up.
1079
« on: July 28, 2005, 03:27:02 PM »
On a different note...
Willem, I think you need to spend more time paying attention in English class and a little less time listening to your loser friends. First off, sentences always begin with a capital letter. Next:
were != where (they're even pronounced differently)
ammount != amount
rime != time
its != it's
till != still
programa != program (or programme, if you prefer)
did != this
alwayz != always
frst != first
maby != maybe
whats != what's
oke != OK or okay
Finally, commas and semicolons are your friends.
Man kids these days really piss me off!
GET OFF MY LAWN!!!
1080
« on: July 28, 2005, 03:15:26 PM »
Look, I'm posing as Bible dude!
While religious beleifs are influencing this debate, I don't really see this as a being religion driven like... say abortion. It's more related to social responsibility than pure religion.
I agree with you about the social responsibility, but let's not forget the financial/historical impact. This country was founded on tobacco. For once, I'd have to say that I don't necessarily think the government is mixing up religion and law on this particular point. I think it's more that the government doesn't think that people should be able to decide for themselves what goes into their body. I think it's a control issue (among other things), not a bible issue.
1081
« on: July 28, 2005, 01:46:08 PM »
I've just gotta say that the idea that drugs will ruin your life annoys the shit out me. I have two very good friends who use various types of drugs on a daily basis (and have done so for years). These two people are also very successful in their respective careers, and are not a danger to/drain on society in any way. Speaking for myself, I am not a drug user, but I have smoked pot a few times. I will perhaps smoke it a few more times in my life. Guess what? I am extremely successful and a very productive member of society. I know far more people who have ruined their lives with booze than those who have ruined their lives with drugs, and alcohol is perfectly legal. I'm personally of the opinion that the government refuses to legalize pot because it's too busy jumping in the pocket of tobacco executives.
With regard to the acid comments, the idea that your kids will have gills and you'll end up institutionalized, it just bull. I did a research paper on acid in college, and I can tell you flatly that if you're inclined to experiment, acid is, by far, the safest thing to experiment with.
1082
« on: July 17, 2005, 02:37:12 PM »
Update: His moblog has been taken down. I'm not sure if it has anything to do with my email do the site or not, but I like to think that it does.
 I never went to the moblog. What was it about? Why was it so bad?
1083
« on: July 17, 2005, 02:34:18 PM »
I think the Pope would agree. I just read a article saying that the Pope disapproves of Stupid Sexy Flanders. Apparently it "distorts Chritianity in the soul". 
1084
« on: July 17, 2005, 02:26:38 PM »
Told ya the last part was devastating. I don't know about you guys, but I'm not ashamed to admit that I cried. Now we have to wait another two years to find out how it all will end. GRRRR!!!  EDIT: I posted this before I read the little tiny text. Obviously you guys cried too. I have to go back and re-read it. This book was just amazing. Also, the more I think about it, the more I think that "it" had to happen this way to set up the final book. After all, it's not Dumbledore vs. Voldemort, it's Harry vs. Voldemort.
1085
« on: July 16, 2005, 07:46:24 PM »
Goonies
The Dark Crystal
etc.... Two of my favorites.
1086
« on: July 16, 2005, 07:45:05 PM »
So, I just finished the new book. WOW! Great book. And, without giving anything away, the last hundred pages or so are just devastating. Anybody else reading it?
1087
« on: July 15, 2005, 04:18:33 PM »
Here's my biggest pet peeve about how technology is represented in the movies. Not necessarily "hacking" movies, just movies and TV in general. Alsmost every time you see someone using a computer in a movie (or on TV), they're using a MAC or the MAC OS. These people would have you think that 90% of the world used the MAC OS. Bugs the crap outta me!
1088
« on: July 14, 2005, 12:47:26 AM »
As I see it, it's not murder so long as the fetus does not have a working brain. As long as there is no possibility of mental thought, it is not a living "thing" but an ugly clump of living "things" (cells).
Then I take it you have no objection of pulling the plug if someons' in a coma?
It looks like this might be the main subject of this thread. Should we start a thread for the other topics? It might get confusing if we don't.
Yeah, that's probably a good idea.
1089
« on: July 13, 2005, 10:24:38 PM »
Hot
VSUBs
ACTION! LMAO!!!1111 Maybe I'll try that one next...eh, probably not.
1090
« on: July 13, 2005, 10:23:24 PM »
Hmmm, I wonder when I'm going to be getting a similar PM...
Are those yours? Just um... curious. 
Yeah...I seem to recall doing it on a dare...or something like that...
1091
« on: July 13, 2005, 12:55:54 AM »
1092
« on: July 12, 2005, 12:30:19 PM »
Okay cat, color me confused. Why on earth would you head in to the Geek Girls section and then block the pictures? Aren't the pictures kind of the point about that section?
1093
« on: July 12, 2005, 12:26:45 PM »
Paragraphs are your FRIENDS.
Yeah, I have that problem!!!.... eh, no one but God is perfect!
I'm sure by now that you guys think I'm obsessed with God... and well, you are correct O'neill!
God is far from perfect.
[gasping] BizB, are you trolling?  [/gasping]
1094
« on: July 12, 2005, 02:38:53 AM »
you are correct, I misused the term totalitarian, a totalitarian government would be a single person or small group that controls just about every aspect of life... I used it in a more broad sense of the gov't controlling every aspect. As for communism, with perfect people, that would actually I think be the perfect government... but fact is, we live in a fallen world and what is labeled communist is actually a lot closer to my broader use of the term totalitarian (which yes we have established is misuse) To make a socialist government work in this fallen world, you HAVE to control every aspect... I think that is the direction that the US is heading, but it is soo subtle that no one even knows it is happening! on the other hand, the far right wingers (we'll endearingly call them the anarchists) would abolish all high level organization and we'd never be able to "judge" who's noses we were allowed to hit while we were swinging and who's noses we need to protect because they are too small a voice to protect their own (that was intended to mean minorities)
As for us never have seen a true communism, in the very early Christian days, that was as close as I think we can get, but after a few centuries, that turned into major corruption as could only be expected... Well, I also have issues with you referring to people on the far-right as anarchists. I don't know of anyone (except anarchists of course) who would limit governmental involvement so much as to eliminate government entirely. You'd do well to not overuse terms like anarchist and communist as they denote a very small percent of the population.
1095
« on: July 12, 2005, 02:32:53 AM »
Quatra, please remember that once a debate devolves into name calling, it's no longer a debate. You can be pissed all you want, but please refrain from comments that indicate how much you'd like to "smack him up the head" because of his viewpoints.
1096
« on: July 12, 2005, 02:29:34 AM »
Hmmm, I wonder when I'm going to be getting a similar PM...
1097
« on: July 11, 2005, 08:30:17 PM »
But please do it in the Political Opinion forum. Thx.  Yes ma'am!
1098
« on: July 11, 2005, 07:53:34 PM »
Oh yes, you will definitely help with the debate thing. Since your post covered WAY too much ground to tackle all at once (religion, abortion, the right to die, drug use, etc.), we'll just wait until specific topics come up. The one thing that I do want to point out is you definition of political terms (near the end of your post).
You should be aware that totalitarian and communist systems are completely different. While you're right that a far-left system would be communist in nature, it would never be totalitarian. In theory, a communist system actually has no need for government because the people govern themselves. Also according to theory, a communist system could never be forced on a people; it would arise naturally as a people learn to live for the good of the "community". China, the USSR, these were/are not communist systems. They were oligarchies (or authoritarian governments, if you prefer). As far as I know, and I could very well be wrong, we've never seen a truly communist system. So, by all means, call the far-left socialists or communists, but you cannot call them supporters of totalitarianism.
1099
« on: July 11, 2005, 03:59:27 PM »
I just saw an interview with Dahl's wife (a couple days ago) in which she says that he, Dahl, never liked the original version of the film.
1100
« on: July 11, 2005, 03:56:16 PM »
I can help.... I'm a hard core (social) conservative! WOOHOO!!! I'll have to see if I can come up with a good debate for you. Just to clarify... Being a hardcore social conservative means that you think the government has a right, nay a duty, to tell people how to live their lives, correct?
Pages: 1 ... 39 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 49
|
