Homosexuality a mental disease? The f*** s*** are you on?
As for the Iraq thing, however, the issue is generally not that he went over there, although in the aftermath the conservatives want the debate to be that, because it makes their position easier. The issue is that Dubya lied and decieved the American public in order to get support for his holy war. If his intentions were simply to end Saddam's reign of terror, then why make up all this s*** about WMDs and trying to pin 9.11 on them? Could it possibly be because he wouldn't have gotten the support for it? Or perhaps that he knew the american public would have retaliated, and told him to go fix our issues at home before worrying about everyone else's?
So what did he do? He made Iraq a supposed "issue at home" by claiming it was "national security". Now it's an issue that affects us, right? Except, oh, wait, Iraq never was an issue of national security. In fact, there are many other countries right now that are of a much greater national security threat which we have simply done nothing about. It's a hard truth to face, especially during a debate, but the fact is that Merkins are selfish people. If the majority of Merkins didn't think they'd be affected by Saddam being in power, then they wouldn't have supported any of it.
°(o.o)° (c) Ethereal Enterprises, 2004
Aug 31, 2004 10:56
What strange lands this Nintendo topic treads.... just like the original post homosexuality was brought up in, so we dare not discuss it further here; we already covered all the ground we needed to with it, even if it was with Ryuujin and the old crew. If you want it, find it for yourself. There is nothing new to say. We have enough repeating of topics and conversation in these forums. * shakes fist at three NDR topics *
However, I shall need to snub out Ice's little quib. Yes, it is a mental disease, and no, it is not a mental disease. It was removed from the DSMMD quite a while ago. Problem is, it was not removed by psychologists. It was removed by philosophers and sociologists who felt that because it was socially acceptable, it no longer had a place among mental diseases (Social-acceptance being the greatest downfall of modern psychology; Nymphomania is no longer a disease, but the exact opposite now is!).
It is still most psychologists' point-of-view that homosexuality belongs with all of the other little sexual disorders like incest and anything-philia. Of course, you also have to remember that things like Narcissism are considered mental diseases; it does not take a messed-up brain and brain-juices, just a messed-up mind.
Okay, back to the important matter at hand. Now, forgive if I recall incorrectly, but was there not a huge document produced by the agency telling of WMD in Iraq? I mean, I do not think Bush just said "I think I wanna lie about WMD!" True, such papers were later proven to be the result of a huge intelligence failure, but still. I would not blame any intelligence report being looked over after 9/11.
"Yeah, yeah, terrorist attack. Just put that in the file someplace. How likely is that to happen...."
I do not think anyone brought it up yet, but a lot of people always say "Why aren't we going against North Korea instead? They have The Bomb!" Gee, I dunno.... maybe because they have The Bomb?!?! Saddam was a jerk who was already made impotent to arms but kept violating the weapon inspections; it was our belief we was just startin' to make 'em. Going up against someone who actually has 'em is much better done non-confrontationally....
Then, the big one, the economy. Why is it that people act like the president owns a magical switch that turns the economy good and bad?
What I really hate is how everyone says "Things weren't like this with a Democrat." "Clinton was better." Clinton was f***ing lucky!!! He didn't do squat; he was just in the right place at the right time. Reganomics and computers built-up for the nineties; economists knew that. They also knew that it was going to crash hard at the end of the ninetines; the dot-com bubble-burst was just insult to injury.
The other thing... the economy is better. Bush's tax-cuts to the wealthy allowed businesses to hire more employees, thus the trickle down effect. Why is it that everyone acts like big businesses are the bad guy? I dunno if you looked around recently, but big business employs, like, most of America.
Also, yes, there is a huge job loss under Bush.... manufacturing job loss. Menial job loss. Jobs that are supposed to be lost. Take a freakin' high school economics course, people. It is capitalism for low-paying, less-educated, physical jobs to disappear and get replaced with white-collar work. We would not even be in this mess if it were not for the death-grip of Labor Unions, which I am usually for, but sometimes they get a li'l crazy, like when they try to keep their uneducated worker's jobs for so long without giving them any other sort of training that once their jobs get out-dated, they got a-nuthin' to run to.
Cruel, yes, but that is how capitalism works.
Aug 31, 2004 11:21
Why do people hate businesses?
A:they are jealous
B: they don't know what it is like to have that much money/power
thus C: they dislike/are afraid of it/them
Oh and D: EVERYBODY WANTS TO STICK IT TO THE MAN!!!
Although I don't argee with everything you said Mints, but I feel safer knowing that someone is actually smart enough to notice that economics is for the most part the luck of the draw for the prez.
Now my problem is...Ice and Gobbo are both right. If he wanted Saddam out because we fu(ke) before is understandible, but he shouldn't have lied about it. If he would have waited a year after 911, it would have looked a whole lot better.
As for people without jobs, regardless, it still sucks. I'm sure that there is someone on this forum who either they or their caretakers don't have a job because they were laid off for someone in another country.
*Hint* American's may be rich now, but if you take away all their jobs, they won't be.
My question is:...give me a minute, I was getting out a mini snickers. Um...Does anyone remember how paper mario was at first Super Mario RPG 2, and it was supposed to come out for 64DD, which neither came out that way? Giant man or Yellow Giant, whatever it was called was supposed to come out for the 64DD as well. Never did hear of a later remake to a different system for that.
The New Dawn has risen. Are you the one to unlock it?
Aug 31, 2004 14:55
I wish I had something to debate about. Whereas normal people right now are being bombarded with ads and such, us Texans get nothin'!
Um, nothin'! We're all voting for Bush anyhow, so no one cares. This is his home state, and most Texans are Republicans anyhow. I'll be voting for Bush because o' reasons already mentioned here.
So, in conclusion, I have nothing important to say. Hoorah!
Endless Horizon "It looks like I'm going to die as I have lived.... completely surrounded by morons!"
Aug 31, 2004 16:26
Hmmm, another post turned into homo-bashing! This brings back bad memories.... At that time I didn't know not to defend random demographics I have no reason to. Since then, I've developed some kind of..of... phobia against gays. It's almost like I have homo-phobia! Yep, Ice, sad to say you can never win this fight. Not that I have anything against gays, but well, don't be a-gaying up around me!
* uses the technique Haste to escape gay-rights groups chasing him * The Official Man's Man of RE.
VinnyD uses Haste
Aug 31, 2004 17:45
On Aug 31, 2004 16:26, VinnyD said:
don't be a-gaying up around me!
Could any more of a hilarious phrase be spoken? ... Probably not.
Er, didn't Ems say "Let's not have this topic go there"? Oh well
And, don't call that "gay bashing". That's something uneducated bigots and red necks fling around. Merely looking at it as a scientist which, it's just that, in all truth, such "choices" are acceptance of evolutionary failure. Really, it's kind of funny. Heh heh heh. That's it. It's not like I'm saying lynch people or whatnot. Just wanna make that clear.
* fabricates a TenFootPole to ward off peoples * * uses the technique SabreDance with a tenfootpole to... ward... people... off *
Er, back to re-directed topic: Lol! I never thought of how little campaigning one would have to do in his own state. You lucky dog, you get to see good commercials for these couple of months!
Heh, imagine if Kerry tried, tho'. I mean, I think it happened to Bush Sr... or was that Gore? ...
MadGoblin fabricates a TenFootPole
MadGoblin uses SabreDance with a TenFootPole
Aug 31, 2004 19:02
Thank you for backing up my opinion!!! I'll shut up now, seeing as I'm politically challenged.
The n00b who has been around for over a year and is still a n00b!
Aug 31, 2004 21:11
I really wasn't going to reply at all to this post since I have very little support for either candidate (or modern politics in general, really) but I just wanted my to get my two cents in on the homosexual issue. I think the whole gay movement in politics needs to be stopped. There's a reason it's called an alternative lifestyle. "Gay marriage" (which, by definition can't be a marriage) has no place in the Constitution, or any laws, for or against. This country gives this kind of people the right to practice their (soooo wrong) lifestyle, but marriage is an issue for the church to decide. And I guarentee you that the church will not support it.
That's all I have to say on the issue. As for campaigning, the more prominent ads locally, are for the Senate race. It's kind of ridiculous, the amount of crap being pumped in from out-of-state groups that simply want control of Congress. Of course, none of this really affects me, considering I'm only sixteen.
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
A Elbereth Gilthoniel o menel palan-diriel, le nallon sí di-nguruthos! A tiro nin, Fanuilos!
Aug 31, 2004 22:36
Now gay marriage is something we never even got to since it was not even an issue way back then.
Okay, something has gotta be said on this. No, laws do not need to be made about it. The reason is because it should not even be an issue. Now, marriage actually concern for the state since way back in Roman times, it was actually made to something that was part of the government.
Unfortunately, politicians today do not know squat about history or common since and have no idea why exactly the government grants marriage licenses.
See, governments like babies. Overpopulation does not exist anywhere except China and India; we want babies. There is plenty of room in Wyoming.
To encourage baby-making, governments make a tax-break incentive, traditionally given to a married couple.
... now let's see here, why is it gays shouldn't get married? Technically, they can, just not state-recognized, and the reason is 'cause the freakin' state ain't gonna give a tax break to someone who blutty ain't gonna function as the freakin' tax break is meant to be spent! Der! Blutty idiots... rights, love -- I don't see how that has anything to do with rights, and there are already too many arguments going on in this topic to bring up how love is a figment of the human imagination. Huh wha Oh well, no time for you :p
Anyway, me and Gobbo live in freakin' Ohio (a swing state), so we get freakin' swamped by ads. Bah! Television commercials should not be allowed to be used as political advertisements....
Sep 1, 2004 11:28
* uses the technique Strike on writer77 for being a republican *
If you're voting for Bush, there must be something wrong with you. The "war on terrorism" was entirely misleading, and the invasion of Iraq was totally based on lies. The President just NOW says that he "miscalculated"...his miscalculation costs people's lives! Do you think that any mother of their fallen child will vote for that idiot?!
However, this topic was about Nintendo...so, anyone like the Nintendo DS or Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door? PM: TTYD seems like a really cool and funny game, but...I'll just have to see when it comes out.
Duuuuuuuuddddeee! DS looks so freakin' sweet! I wished that I lived in Japan (or at least a populated part of America) moreso now because of that killer BlueTooth technology in the DS!
I mean, you can just walk into a place and start fightin' with people for no good reason, or chat with that little stylus.
But just a quick thing on Iraq... do you honestly think that the people over there that have had their DNA radically altered by Saddam's chemicals believe the effort was unjustified.
Just a quite biology leason: people aren't supposed to have scales... * shudders much *
MadGoblin uses SabreDance with a TenFootPole
Sep 1, 2004 13:59
Whatever the Iraqis think, I certainly think that this was just another part of the neo-conservative plan for American imperialism. And don't get me wrong here, but this was also a war on oil.
But anyhow, politics aside...yes, the DS does seem pretty cool. By the way, GBA owners, the wireless adapter has now been created, so you don't need to link up anymore to fight on GS(:TLA) or to exchange items/partake in team missions on FFTA, as well as all other stuff like that.
Does anyone know anything about the new Zelda game coming out? I liked the graphics, but I am at a loss as to the storyline.
I said, Bush was fixing the mess America started long ago! Don't blame him for following through! Wakka wakka!* uses the technique Strike on LieutenantEagle to get it through his skull *
Anyhoo, a Zelda game with good graphics? You have got to be talking about the cool GameCube one where Link's all adult and not lame, ie: Wind Waker.
Here's the storyline as far as I know (and care, 'cuz its so awesome):
An army of Moblins is marching to war against Hyrule. Stop them. Sweet.
Man, that DS sure does look frickin' great! It makes me wish that I lived in an actually populated location just so I could pimp people upside the head in battles of stuff.
MadGoblin uses Strike on LieutenantEagle
Sep 1, 2004 17:51
Dude!!! Did you not listen to what *checks* LE said? You don't need the DS to go wireless anymore! The new shiny wireless adapter has that covered!
The n00b who has been around for over a year and is still a n00b!
Sep 1, 2004 18:34
That thing is gonna devour battery power like (cut out)
Homosexuality first. [No, I said we ain't doin' this again. Ryuujin and the rest of us already countered everything you said pretty dang good, and we didn't once bring up the Bible; we don't use the Bible to justify our actions. We use reason to justify the Bible -- that is the only way to go about it rhetorically. Otherwise, we are not presenting anything can be argued reasonably.]
Sorry about bringing up the homosexuality... again. Just responding to what's been said, though.
Battalon: Marriage is in fact *not* an issue for the church to decide up in this here country. See, if it was, there are plenty of unitarian universalist churches out there that will marry gay couples. (Everyone forgets that since we can't have religious exclusion in our country that there is actually more than one church, and that they don't all hate people who aren't just like them.) However, your government does indeed allow the "ick" factor to be a real arguement (because otherwise they won't get voted in, and the people voting for them got nothing else). Thus they have to find some way to make sure all them gay people can't go around marrying. Also, I'm sure you'va all heard this arguement before, but what is now considered a normal lifestyle lifestyle might have previously been considered an alternative lifestyle. How many people here have mothers who work? What about parents of different races? Both of these, 50-60 years ago, were "alternative lifestyles". America is a progressive nation. We always have been. Instead of basing our current opinions on outdated traditions, we look critically at the decions which we now have to make.
Minty: If the government wants to grant tax breaks to those who have kids, then they should simply have a baby-making tax break. As it is, with the crrent situation, the goverment is trying to give homosexuals the shaft. And so are you. Whore. Plus, what about the married couples who don't have babies? Or the gay couples who adopt? Your idea is crap, so stop spewing it.
Also, I live in Ohio, too. Well, lived. Luckily, I'm in school, so I get to vote for my state without seeing the various ads. Sadly, both sides' ads are stupid and make me want to hit the teevee.
Now, on to the other issues!
1) We'll wait til the 911 commission releases all of it's reports to see whose fault it is for the horridly wrong information about everything in Iraq. I recall one part of the report which said "it doesn't matter what we say, they're going in anyways".
2) You still didn't address Bush's attempt to connect Iraq to 911.
3) Korea doesn't have the bomb yet. And bush was claiming that Saddam actually *did* have the bomb when we went to go get 'em. Korea is simply restarting their nuclear (nucular) arms program, and thus poses a possible actual threat as compared the the imaginary one the Iraq had. Just wondering where his real interests actually were.
4) The economy. You have, in fact, taken an economics class, correct? Recently?
I've taken two separate econ classes that both dealed with macroeconomics. One was taught by a republican. The other a democrat. What's one small thing they both had in common? "Tax cuts don't help anything!"
If you cut taxes, then where does the government get their money to operate from? They either cut services, or they raise taxes elsewhere. Basically all it is is a way to tell people "Hey, we're gonna make you think we're not taking as much money from you!" The overall net effect on the economy however is none.
Tax cuts to the wealthy make businesses hire more people? What the f*** are you on? For one thing, wealthy people get that way because they save and to a point even hoard their money. Wealthy people also are not = big businesses. Bush's tax cuts went to wealthy people. Not wealthy businesses.
And I wasn't going to broadly state that bringing in a Demcrat would, in fact, stimulate or fix our economy. However, I'm not voting for the prez based on economic issues, anyways. I simply do not think that a man we cannot trust to honestly run our country (ie: not lie to its people) or to intelligently run our country (ie: go to war without knowing enough information) should, in fact, be running our country. I realize, however, that not all americans how intelligence and integrity as high morals. This is where I end, by saying this: Superficiality sucks.
°(o.o)° (c) Ethereal Enterprises, 2004
[Editted by MintMan on Sep 1, 2004 21:55]
Sep 1, 2004 18:58
Boy, Ice, are you lucky I need to wait before using a tech.
I say, we had a +$1 trillion budget, and now we're -$500G? That's unacceptable, and it answers the economy question - Bush left the economy worse than it was before. And to talk about job cuts...I mean, come on, what's so good about outsourcing jobs? And I hope you'll be with me on this MintMan because if job outsourcing continues I very much doubt that you'll find yourself a job with a degree in computer science.
The Zelda game I am talking about is NOT Wind Waker. They are releasing a new game that has non cel-shade graphics; Link resembles his adult form in Ocarina of Time, according to the screen shot that I saw. When I saw "new", I mean "new", not released last year.
Oh, and, by the way, where's the border between Mexico and Canada if border relations between the two have never been better? Ah well, I guess Bush is just trying to do the right things to bring the solution to an end. (See DubyaSpeak.com, I am referencing two actual Dubya quotes)
* uses the technique LandSmite on Ice for insinuating that he is a Bush liker * Yeah, Bush was a frickin' idiot for trying to tie Iraq to 9/11. I never disagreed with that. I've already said that Bush is an idiot. I fuggin' hate the guy, but then again, I hate just about anyone.
If you would frickin' read a post for once, you would know that I said I would like people to stop getting on him for things beyond his control, not things he foolishly did.
Then, also, what are you, a freakin' idiot or something? Didn't this marriage thing get explained in my post?
Way back when in the Roman times, the first marriage tax break was created. The government gave a break to those two got married to give 'em a little reason to do so. The reason to do so was because it is assumed that a married couple will make babies.
Back then, as they do now, the government gave a second break for every child. Nowadays, this is all bundled up right under "dependents". It is a very old concept, and governments like it.
It has nothing to do with lifestyles. It has nothing to do with anything you were crappin' out yer arse and onto my forums. Like I said, governments themselves could not really care less. People who control an individual governing body might for some reason, but if they have a reason to be stingy with a tax break, they by-gum are gonna do it.
Also, I never said tax breaks helped the economy. I said this one did. It was one of those voodoo economics things (like all of Reaganomics) that really should not have worked but somehow did in this one, isolated instance. Bush of course did not plan on such a thing occuring because I do not think he is capable of planning much of anything other than poor invasion strategies.
What the Hel else was there to say? Ah, it'll prolly get brought up later. I'll just go to the point at hand: Writer, don't vote Bush. Vote Nader.
It really does not matter what you vote one way or another. Normally, I am all for every vote counting, but yer in Texas. That is going blue (or red; I don't know which color is associated with which color as I am concerned about the more important aspects of political parties -- why they suck and are ruining American government) no matter what you do. Just give a vote to ol' Nader, even if you don't believe in a thing he says. He needs all of the increasein percentage that he can get. If independents and third parties get more votes, then more, better third-party candidates will join the races, thus giving America a real choice in what it wants instead of two opposite sides of a coin.
* looks at Bush *
* looks at Kerry *
* shudders *
MintMan uses LandSmite on Ice
Sep 2, 2004 24:19
Wow, Ice, you're really making me wish I staved of my pummelin' till you spoke. Sorry, Eagle.
While on that note, Lt., I only mentioned Wind Waker to say how this game's graphics were not, meaning New Zelda >>>> Wind Waker. I can kinda see how you might have thought that, as I wrote it a little weird, but the rest of the context, dude, the rest! ... Back to Ice.
Ice, you've said it enough, so I'll hop on the band wagon: What... the f***. You, sir, are truly an uneducated dickwad. Tax breaks not affecting the economy? WTF? What type of quack eco teachers you have? I've had good teachers, you know, college professors who, shock, know what they're saying, but, that aside, I could friggin' tell you that tax breaks (and gov't spending) boost the economy. That's why they friggin' do it! When taxes drop, people have more disposible income. They save some, spend the rest (initial boost to economy). That extra money they spend, guess what? That's someone else's upped profit! They save some and spend the rest (second boost to eco). Shock, that money they spent? Yep, you guessed it: 3rd boost! Repeat to infinitity. Same deal works with gov't spending. I mean, that's like first day stuff. I mean, [ dY/dI = 1/(1-b) ], man! That equation sez it all! ... if I could remember what the varibles stood for, I'd say... but that's a powerful equation.
Enough with the poor economic studies, onto more bashing. People changing the view on what's acceptible? People being stubborn or hating change? I say, YES, they should be, for, in most cases, the reason are well founded! Working mothers? That is a terrible thing! Mothers shouldn't have to work, but since Americans are so damn idiotic and rack up such a debt, they are forced to. Bad thing? I say yes. And, if you dare think "What about single mothers?", I say, screw them! Oh, I'm sorry, obviously someone else already did. They deserve any hardships they come across, the stupid sluts. Learn to keep yer legs closed. "What if they got divorced?" Serves them right for jumping into a marriage so fast. You shouldn't marry asses. That's why I'll never get married (hah! I beat anyone else to it! ) Believe, I could counter about anything in such respect. A working mother should not be regarded as "normal" or "unacceptable", it should be taken at what it is: unfortunate (or funny, if the slut case).
Interracial couples? Okay, that was only an issue with stupid, old day, racist Americans. No where else is really even racist but America. Other places hate you because of your nationality, not your ethnicity. That's how it should be! You cannot choose your parents, and therefore it is out of your control. That fact should in no way be biased against. Now, to pre-counter point, keep in mind that homosexuality is something within someone's realm of control. I don't care what crap is spewed out about being "born that way" or anything else. You're just an idiot. I mean, some of the lowest forms of life can put together the simple equation of "Male + female = duh".
Now, on to unholy marriages. "Der, gay people can adopt children". That's hardly the same as mass producing them. The whole tax break to marriage deal, as already mentioned, was started so long ago that families were much, MUCH larger than a couple of children. You'd have five and consider it small. You didn't know which ones were gonna die and didn't have any way to stop them from popping out, so, oh well! Having a fully functional family of that size deserves a break, not for financial reasons but as a sort of "Dude, I feel so bad for you. Have a few bucks" deal. A truly gay person, in no way to their declared "lifestyle", can produce child. And adopting isn't really boosting America's population any, either, keep in mind, its just watching over one of the numbers that already existed. No matter what they did, that unwanted sap would still be there.
I'm almost certain I have more that I could say, but it's late, I'm tired, and I should have been drowning myself in alcohol right now. Boo to me having classes tomorrow! Er, today.
Sep 2, 2004 24:36
Dangit! I forgot a lot of things to say. Good ol' Gobbo fillin' in the blanks.
I really came back to fill in that thing I forgot out I was going to say: outsourcing.
Oh no, people are losing their jobs, and I won't have a job being in IT and all.... no wait, you idiots just listen to the liberal media.
Yeah, jobs move overseas. Guess what? That's the new international trade. I know people are losing jobs, but I know a Hel of a lot of people who are getting jobs, too, that are importing into America. My cousin gets paid an @$$load working for Toyota or something, much more than a Japanese person would get paid with the same job. It is something wacky with how that works that they do that....
As for me, moving overseas will frickin' get me a job. Intel is moving all of their jobs right now to Russia's Siberia region and China. Not even to hire locals, really. They are importing workers from everywhere into a giant melting pot for seemingly no good reason. I wouldn't mind one bit. I would actually ask to get transferred to Russia.
Relocation assistance + Cold weather + Easy access to Asia(n hotties) + Russian chicks + Russian gymnasts, of both artistic and rhythmnic varieties = Sign me up, boyyyy!
And how is outsourcing ruining IT jobs? Ninety percent of the people I worked with at Intel were not even American. Don't blame outsourcing. It is mostly just a scapegoat in hard economic times that everyone could join the bandwagon against.
Now, my opinion is... outsourcing sucks. Not for IT as I have already mentioned, but for a lot of stuff they they are doing it for, like anyone who speaks on a phone. Okay, if I need help, I want to be able to speak with someone who knows English or at least Spanish, man. I don't speak it, but I think I could fair a bit better than with Hindi.