So there's a blood drive on campus tomorrow. Gonna think about that whole "morality" and "ethics" thing for a bit tonight.
This agian, eh?
You can give blood?
No
Pretty sweet. Here in Canada you have questionaire and if you say you slept with someone fo the same sex in the last 30 years you can't give blood. Same if you say you did heroin, cocain or slept with a hooker. Needless to say I can't give blood.
Pretty much the same as here.
You can give blood?
Uh... no. Hence the whole "thinking about ethics and morality" part.
If you're gay, but you know you're not infected, donate blood and lie.
All donated blood gets checked either way and useless blood doesn't get used. However, all those tests they have to do on the blood to see if it's good or not cost money and they want to be able to give the blood to the needy as cheaply as possible.
Personally I have no problem with the way it's done, but I can understand that if you're gay and don't attend midnight orgies at highway parkinglots, that it's quite unpleasant when there's a system in place that kinda assumes that you do, just because of your sexual preference. (Or that it feels like this)
Here in Belgium women also pay less insurance for driving a car, because statistically, women create considerably less traffic accidents. That's crappy if you're a man who drives carefully but once again there's a statistical reason for it so I have no problem with that.
You can give blood?
No
I wasn't talking to you. Not everything is about you.
I was not talking about me either. That was a "No [Escher cannot, or rather is not legally allowed to, give blood]."
And no.
The Army didn't know.
And no.
I didn't tell them.
So yes.
I lied.
But I got in!
EDIT: Hemophilia is known as a "Royal Disease". Mainly meaning that mostly royalty had it... but only because of, supposedly, interbreeding.
Not sure how to feel about it.
Not that it overly bothers me....
I have Hemophilia, so I don't donate.
And no.
The Army didn't know.
And no.
I didn't tell them.
So yes.
I lied.
But I got in!
EDIT: Hemophilia is known as a "Royal Disease". Mainly meaning that mostly royalty had it... but only because of, supposedly, interbreeding.
Not sure how to feel about it.
Not that it overly bothers me....
Didn't you put your fellow soldiers at risk? Unless you never really have knowned combat...
No, he didn't really put his comrades in arms at risk. If anything, it means he put himself at risk in the event of injury. It's a blood-clotting disorder, it just means that if he got hurt that he was more likely to bleed to death (and in shorter order). IIRC, RH has also stated that he was in artillery; which is one of the less dangerous combat arms jobs in the service (frequently miles from actual combat, but there is always the risk of crap going very wrong and artillery getting overrun or ambushed).
I can't really approve of what he did to get into the service in regards to this, but I can't fault him for it, either. It is, after all, his life to risk.
I can't really approve of what he did to get into the service in regards to this, but I can't fault him for it, either. It is, after all, his life to risk.
Plus it's kind of an American tradition. I know there were several stories about young men lying about their age to join the military during the civil war. There was even one civil war soldier that lied about her gender to join the army. Not to mention all the people today that are effectively forced to lie about their sexuality to join the armed forces.
He did put comrads or missions at risk. If he was given a order and got injured, he could have bleeded to death/unconsciousness and made the mission fail got comrads killed.
Of course this didn't happen since he didn't see actual combat.
Yes Goldo, dying is counterproductive to the mission. So is getting injured, as they both reduce your force's combat strength, but no one blames people with purple hearts for endangering the mission. Getting injured is punishment enough.
He did put comrads or missions at risk. If he was given a order and got injured, he could have bleeded to death/unconsciousness and made the mission fail got comrads killed.
There are plenty of injuries that result in pretty much instantaneous death regardless of medical conditions (or lack thereof). If he were injured and had to be taken care of, ironically, dieing sooner would free his caregiver(s) from seeing to him and allow them to focus on the mission.
Of course this didn't happen since he didn't see actual combat.
I do not recall way one or other any claims he has made as to combat. However, the military is a strange animal on that one. My older bro was a generator mechanic, not a combat arms job at all, but almost got deployed as a door gunner for a Black Hawk (he was in a serious training accident before it could happen, and was medically discharged from the service).
However, the military is a strange animal on . . .
Amen to that. The army lost my father's papers when he was in the service so he couldn't be deployed with the group he trained with (that group was actually slaughtered due to bad intel about their insertion point). Eventually they found my father's papers, but he had so little time left that they told him he'd have to reinlist if he wanted to go to Vietnam.
So I essentially owe my life to the fact that the army can't keep paperwork straight.
EDIT: Hemophilia is known as a "Royal Disease". Mainly meaning that mostly royalty had it... but only because of, supposedly, interbreeding.
Not sure how to feel about it.
Not that it overly bothers me....
Well, it sorta because of inbreeding. If I recall my genetics correctly (and assuming it's a genetic trait, which I'm pretty sure it is) the royal inbreeding thing meant that both of the parents of a "royal" were significantly more likely to be at least carriers, if not hemophiliacs themselves.
Sorta like how there's that hair-everywhere condition that's more likely in certain areas then others. It's possible everywhere, but in a small group where the carriers/afflicted stay in the small group as opposed to going out and finding a partner from far away, it's more likely to happen in their children.
Gay marriage is allowed here in Belgium. Gay couples can adopt children as well. As far as donating blood is concerned, the same rules as other people have stated apply here in Belgium too. From what I've heard it's because of the higher risk of the blood being infected and thus being useless. Articles published in the newspaper (but having nothing to do with blood donation) confirmed that higher risk to be true.
Gay Marriage is legal in Canada; one of only seven countries in the world I believe. Gay couples can also adopt in Canada but homosexual people are not allowed to donate blood. This is a double standard and fairly controversial in Canada. Statistically speaking: in Canada more heterosexual males have HIV/AIDS the homosexual people. I'm not sure if this is the case in Belgium or the U.S.A. but much of the controversy on this topic stems from that fact.
Also, in Canada, if you donate blood, it's completely voluntary and you do not recieve any compensation.
I donate blood fairly regularly but I am not sure why I do so. I certainly don't feel good about it.
Also, in Canada, if you donate blood, it's completely voluntary and you do not recieve any compensation.
I donate blood fairly regularly but I am not sure why I do so. I certainly don't feel good about it.
'least here on campus, you get a cup of OJ, a cookie, and a t-shirt for donating. And that night, you're a cheap drunk. But they tell you not to accept that part of your "reward".
And I used to donate blood regularly, mostly 'cause it seemed the right thing to do. Never know when you, or someone important to you, will be on the receiving end, so may as well stack the deck in your favor, ya know? As it turned out, only a few weeks after I donated the first time my sister was in the hospital and needed a transfusion.
Well, it sorta because of inbreeding. If I recall my genetics correctly (and assuming it's a genetic trait, which I'm pretty sure it is) the royal inbreeding thing meant that both of the parents of a "royal" were significantly more likely to be at least carriers, if not hemophiliacs themselves.
It's an X chromosome linked genetic disorder. Since females have two X chromosomes they can be carriers but not have the condition itself, provided they have a fully functional gene on their second X chromosome. Any boys born to a woman with hemophilia are going to have hemophila, a girl would also have it if both parents had it.
Men get hit harder by X chromosome genetic traits because we don't have two X chromosomes, we have an X and a Y. Male pattern baldness is also an X chromosome linked trait. If your father had it, don't worry guys, you can't get it from him. If your maternal grandfather had it, there's at least a 50/50 shot that you're screwed.
Ah, wasn't sure if it was an X-linked trait or not. But hey RH, 'least that means you shouldn't be able to pass it to your sons.
Yeah, they are all good!
last thing the world needs is a balding bugbear
Man, I wish I worked a union job... lucky bastards. But yeah, people who use that to avoid work (with no intention of giving blood) should probably be beaten and have their blood forcibly extracted using some terrifying device... that'll teach them!
Thirded.
Do it! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure! Peer pressure!
QFT!!!!!!
Do it!
Well, it does give one an excuse to get a really cool and unique tattoo, lol...
If I had any hope to be permitted to donate again, I'd go for that.
So... uh... yeah. All the time, pretty much. To date there are only three situations I can think of where I'm willing to lie: if the Navy ever calls me back1, if the hospital asks my relation to my SO2, and possibly (still haven't decided for sure) if I donate blood3.
________
1Not too hopeful about that anymore. Guess they don't need as many computer scientists as I was lead to believe. Ah well, there's the entire rest of the DoD to aim for.
2"We're brothers. Ignore that we look nothing alike."
3As I said, when I went on Friday they weren't accepting more walk-ins, so I didn't have to choose yet.
That's weird, I thought being gay was required for being in the navy.
That's weird, I thought being gay was required for being in the navy.
Nice.
That's my understanding at least.
You guys are thinking British Navy, not US Navy.
Yep, just look at this documentary about gays in the british navy.
C'mon, we're talking about the Navy; 100 single men leave port, 49 couples come back (with a couple jealousy killings en route).
I think my father may have skipped that part of the story in his recounting of his submariner days.
C'mon, we're talking about the Navy; 100 single men leave port, 49 couples come back (with a couple jealousy killings en route).
I think my father may have skipped that part of the story in his recounting of his submariner days.
Pro'lly didn' wan' Mum ta find out, yah? Li'le kiddies is prone ta waggin' thar jaws off n all.
C'mon, we're talking about the Navy; 100 single men leave port, 49 couples come back (with a couple jealousy killings en route).
I think my father may have skipped that part of the story in his recounting of his submariner days.
Your father was a submariner?
Gotta respect that!
And I bet he has some good tales...
But you may need to tone down your trademark arrogance a bit;)
Seriously though... I hate that a man wants to serve in the military but can't simply because of who he chooses to sleep with.
Good luck EE.
www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10/12/fede...
I think you would make a good sailor!
But you may need to tone down your trademark arrogance a bit;)
EE, arrogant? Say it ain't so!
I mean, seriously, most of us here are arrogant!
Seriously though... I hate that a man wants to serve in the military but can't simply because of who he chooses to sleep with.
More accurately, that's what would make it hard to stay in the military, but unless the recruiters checked around on me on campus and found out I was gay before talking to me more, it's that I'm just not what they need right now that's not getting me in.
I mean, face it, while the armed services do need some computer scientists, they don't need that many.
I mean, face it, while the armed services do need some computer scientists, they don't need that many.
You'd be surprised what they do and don't need. And where your expertise would come in handy. If you have a clean criminal background you could likely do well in the intelligence field. Every branch of the service has intel people, and computer skills are a huge asset.
Won't matter that you pass the hardest tests they can throw at you with flying colors.
You'll still get rejected.
Seriously though... I hate that a man wants to serve in the military but can't simply because of who he chooses to sleep with.
Something I can agree with, really. There's no need to differentiate on sexual orientation, for anything.
Seriously though... I hate that a man wants to serve in the military but can't simply because of who he chooses to sleep with.
Something I can agree with, really. There's no need to differentiate on sexual orientation, for anything.
Guy A: Hey, lets go sex.
Guy B: Sorry man, I'm not gay.
Guy A: ... so?
Edit: Point being, for every diffrence there is atleast one situation or aspect in which someone should differentiate baised upon it. If there is not such a thing, we do not call it a diffrence. We call it identical.
Arrrrrrrrrrr!
Guy A: Hey, lets go sex.
Guy B: Sorry man, I'm not gay.
Guy A: ... so?
What guy A should have said was "It wasn't a request.
Cpt_Escher?
Arrrrrrrrrrr!
... I think you cross a line into "creepy and disturbing" when you slash real people, Pig.
Seriously though... I hate that a man wants to serve in the military but can't simply because of who he chooses to sleep with.
Something I can agree with, really. There's no need to differentiate on sexual orientation, for anything.
Guy A: Hey, lets go sex.
Guy B: Sorry man, I'm not gay.
Guy A: ... so?
Edit: Point being, for every diffrence there is atleast one situation or aspect in which someone should differentiate baised upon it. If there is not such a thing, we do not call it a diffrence. We call it identical.
I'll just assume you knew what I meant.
honestly i'd be amused if that happened to me.
It happened to me. I was amused... no homo?
Anyway, for the actual donation, you should obviously eat something before hand. It'd also be good to wear a shirt that you can easily roll up either sleeves.
Depending on your fear level of needles, you can either look away when they stick you or be morbid and look at the needle going in. They give you a ball to squeeze/roll to keep your blood flowing, so I normally will squeeze, then roll for 5-10 seconds, then squeeze again, etc. That normally gets your blood flowing pretty quickly. I always use this method and I normally fill up the bag pretty fast. Oh, I also like to see the blood drain from my arm, but if you have an issue with that, make sure to look away or something.
And obviously eat and drink afterward. Its probably best to use the arm that you are not dominant in since you'll have issues bending it afterwards.
But good luck and hopefully you won't have a bad reaction. I'm not a very charitable person, but I think giving blood is pretty much a good thing to do without cost you anything (except time, I guess).
We have a blood drive at our school in a couple weeks. I'm old enough to donate now, and I'm gonna do it. Up here in RI, you either gotta be over 18 and 110lb, or 16-17, over 130lb, and have parental permission. So, any tips for prepping for being stuck with a giant-ass needle and being drained of a pint of blood? Aargh...
Everyone reacts differently. Whenever I get a needle shoved into me I look away, not because I can't take the sight of it, but because if I see it going in I'm going to flinch. And if I flinch that needle is still going to go in, but possibly not where it is meant to. Which means they're going to have to pull it out and try again. I'd rather not look like I got attacked by a porcupine.
After you give blood you are going to be a little woozy. Almost like when you first get up for the day or are sick, but without the other nastiness. First time I gave blood I started to get up off the cot after they unhooked the bag, the nurse then put a hand on my chest and informed me that I still had a needle in my arm; it was so slight a discomfort that I didn't even notice it after a few minutes. Conversely, the only time I went to a military blood drive was a horror story, I was almost in tears because of how much it hurt. (Military blood drives are notorious for having marginally competent workers.)
Cpt_Escher?
Arrrrrrrrrrr!
... I think you cross a line into "creepy and disturbing" when you slash real people, Pig.
I was talking about the whole Navy thing...
Cpt_Escher?
Arrrrrrrrrrr!
... I think you cross a line into "creepy and disturbing" when you slash real people, Pig.
I was talking about the whole Navy thing...
Then it should have been Cpt_Enigma...
Which does sound kinda cool... like a superhero or sumpin...
It is kinda insulting, and most likely in poor taste and juvenile.
... "most likely"?
It is kinda insulting, and most likely in poor taste and juvenile.
... "most likely"?
Hmmm...
"beyond doubt" would have been better, no?
I'll just assume you knew what I meant.
Clearly. It's just that the implications of your use of absolute phrasing amusedme.
We have a blood drive at our school in a couple weeks. I'm old enough to donate now, and I'm gonna do it. Up here in RI, you either gotta be over 18 and 110lb, or 16-17, over 130lb, and have parental permission. So, any tips for prepping for being stuck with a giant-ass needle and being drained of a pint of blood? Aargh...
Others have given good advice, but the main thing we can tell you is... don't sweat it. Seriously.
It doesn't hurt nearly as much as you probably think it's going to, and most likely any side effects from it will be mild and temporary. Having given two gallons of blood so far, it's about as inconvenient for me as having to dig my keys out of my pocket when I unlock the front door...
Well let me ask you this, how should I deal with RH and is unique way to interact with people?
Alas, every dynamic is unique, and I wouldn't dream of telling you how to handle the dynamic you share with RH. If worse comes to worse, you can always sever it and ignore him.
Well let me ask you this, how should I deal with RH and is unique way to interact with people?
Alas, every dynamic is unique, and I wouldn't dream of telling you how to handle the dynamic you share with RH. If worse comes to worse, you can always sever it and ignore him.
What I like to do is assume that RH is a contrived personality, like Stephen Colbet's faux, ultra-conservative, on-air persona.
What I like to do is assume that RH is a contrived personality, like Stephen Colbet's faux, ultra-conservative, on-air persona.
Too bad I'm as real as it gets baby!
What I like to do is assume that RH is a contrived personality, like Stephen Colbet's faux, ultra-conservative, on-air persona.
Too bad I'm as real as it gets baby!
There was an episode where Colbert said that same thing (in sentiment not wording), so that proves nothing.
What I like to do is assume that RH is a contrived personality, like Stephen Colbet's faux, ultra-conservative, on-air persona.
Too bad I'm as real as it gets baby!
There was an episode where Colbert said that same thing (in sentiment not wording), so that proves nothing.
I don't give a rats ass what Colbert did/does.
I don't need to prove anything to you, but if I did, my word is sufficient.
What I like to do is assume that RH is a contrived personality, like Stephen Colbet's faux, ultra-conservative, on-air persona.
Too bad I'm as real as it gets baby!
So do you accept as easily people who will disagree with you?
Easily?
No.
People that disagree with me?
Yes.
Trolls?
No.
What I like to do is assume that RH is a contrived personality, like Stephen Colbet's faux, ultra-conservative, on-air persona.
Too bad I'm as real as it gets baby!
There was an episode where Colbert said that same thing (in sentiment not wording), so that proves nothing.
I don't give a rats ass what Colbert did/does.
I don't need to prove anything to you, but if I did, my word is sufficient.
I never said you had anything to prove. I simply said you were an online persona crafted expressly for the purpose of comedy through satirical agreement with the things you actually oppose.
As for your word: It's unconvincing. I don't know you personally and thus can't accurately judge the quality of your word; so it's unreasonable to give it much weight.
So why are you less of a troll than me? Seriously?
Because of how I conduct myself.
No, I'm far from perfect on here, but I'm still light years ahead of you.
Heh... you should have seen me when I first started posting...I was probably a lot like you... except different...
*Shoots needles made of blood* *Pew-pew!*
So, let's say that you can make needle-sized needles out of your blood and shoot them at targets. How many could you theoretically make before you start to get negative effects?
So why are you less of a troll than me? Seriously?
Hoodlum and I have butted heads so many times I think we might both have callouses from it. But we have yet to kill each other. (I think we've just thrown it somewhere on the "to-do" list.) But you, Gold? You've found a way to be a bigger rooster than RH.
I mean, hell, he even surrendered his Golden Troll AwardTM to you.
I mean, hell, he even surrendered his Golden Troll AwardTM to you.
*Shoots needles made of blood* *Pew-pew!*
So, let's say that you can make needle-sized needles out of your blood and shoot them at targets. How many could you theoretically make before you start to get negative effects?
Yeah, going to need more information on that one to give any kind of answer. How the hell should we know how much blood a blood-needle shooting creature has compared to how much it needs before it starts suffering negative side effects?
What is trolling anyway? Seriously.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%...
How I am badder worse than RH? What is trolling anyway? Seriously.
You wanna know what's really off-topic? Talking about what makes someone an internet troll on a topic about the ethics of blood donation.
All I see is someone who doesn't conform and it makes people uneasy and frustrated because they cannot beat him up or isolate him like in high school. And no, I do not force myself to be an anticonformist. I truly am.
And that's what you see. Not surprising considering we all like to see ourselves in the best light. Thing is, it's obviously not how people here see you. You can make yourself a martyr all you like but that doesn't mean you actually are one.
Your presentation is possibly the culprit here - possibly impacted by the English as a second language thing. At any rate, you do not present yourself to us the way you see yourself. Hiding behind ideas like 'I'm just an anticonformost' and 'it's not me, it's you guys having a problem with my revolutionary ideas' is a cop out. You just don't want to admit that you may be the problem yourself for reasons you can't like. So, until you decide to really take a look at how you present yourself and stop pretending it's everyone else that's the problem, this is how your life is gonna look.
By the way, saying it's us calling you out in response for not getting these revolutionary ideas you're presenting is quite offensive. See, you're callin' us stupid. And we're not. So, you know, think about that when you look in the forum mirror tonight. Stuff like that tends to make people see you negatively. Cuz, you know, you're treating them poorly, acting arrogantly and are not on the same page which makes actual discussion impossible.
One more note: a friend of mine always says that if one person says something to you about you, there's about a 50% chance it's accurate. When two or more say it, though, you damn well best take an honest look at yourself. Thing is, I've found that people who push all the blame onto others, take a 'me against the world' stance and consider any opposing view simply the thoughts of someone not educated enough to speak on their level just don't really look at themselves honestly.
Thanks guys....although I am deathly afraid of needles. Then again, I'm deathly afraid of heights and I ride a roller coaster fine. Eh.
There's no reason whatsoever to be afraid of heights. Heights can't hurt you. At all. Falling from them, otoh ...
What I like to do is assume that RH is a contrived personality, like Stephen Colbet's faux, ultra-conservative, on-air persona.
He reminds me more of 80's TV cop Sledge Hammer.
Goldo reminds me of Rick from The Young Ones.
In other words, you think too highly of yourself to make discussion worthwhile. That arrogance you don't seem to care about? Yeah, it's just bit you on the ass.
The only problem I have with you, goldomark, is that you occasionally go into detail about various fetishes... as I mentioned I'm at work, or else I wouldn't mind...
Typically I just avoid threads you post in because I can't have them open at work. But that really only happened a few times for a day or two.
Nothing nobody else hasn't done, though.
The point I am making is that I might be arrogant sometimes, but just my ideas stur up hate.
Nope. It is all about the way you present yourself. Your ideas are not the groundbreaking concepts you believe them to be. They smack of the quaint rebelliousness typified by a teen who's just finished reading Marx for the first time.
Probably because I'm a left-winger and people here lean mostly toward the right.
Whoa, are you ever wrong on that assumption.
I'm not trying to present myself as a martyr, just trying to say I'm not that troll people make me out to be.
You said in another thread that everyone who kills is a murderer. By that logic everyone who habitually causes a negative disruption is a troll. QED.
Nope. It is all about the way you present yourself. Your ideas are not the groundbreaking concepts you believe them to be. They smack of the quaint rebelliousness typified by a teen who's just finished reading Marx for the first time.
Ding!
I would have said a douchy college student who took a political science (or philosophy) class or two and thinks he knows more about politics (or philosophy) than everyone else.
The point I am making is that I might be arrogant sometimes, but just my ideas stur up hate. Probably because I'm a left-winger and people here lean mostly toward the right. I'm not trying to present myself as a martyr, just trying to say I'm not that troll people make me out to be.
... He's the anti-RH! Same story, different angle!
The point I am making is that I might be arrogant sometimes, but just my ideas stur up hate.
Nope. It is all about the way you present yourself. Your ideas are not the groundbreaking concepts you believe them to be. They smack of the quaint rebelliousness typified by a teen who's just finished reading Marx for the first time.Probably because I'm a left-winger and people here lean mostly toward the right.
Whoa, are you ever wrong on that assumption.I'm not trying to present myself as a martyr, just trying to say I'm not that troll people make me out to be.
You said in another thread that everyone who kills is a murderer. By that logic everyone who habitually causes a negative disruption is a troll. QED.
I was thinking of of replying to Goldo, but honestly, it would be a waste of time. Boraxe, I couldn't have said it any better.
They aren't ground breaking, but a lot of people react like this is the first time they heard them. Sorry if this sounds arrogant. And these are forums and and I am not using my native language, I am limited in the way I can express myself.
Again no. It's not the ideas, it's how you present them.
I'm not so sure about that. I didn't say everyone as right-wing views, but I think the majority does.
I've been on these forums a long time and I can say that has certainly not been my experience. Indeed I would state with utmost confidence that the majority of people I've dealt with here, and gamers in general whom I know and have known, skew to the left.
The key problem is that you are drawing causal associations where none exist. You believe you are a radical non-conformist leftist who post radical non-conformist leftist ideas and when you are met with hostility you believe the only possible reason is that those railing against you are small-minded wingnuts, not that you predsent yourself in a negative manner and it is that to which people negatively respond.
So would you include youself in that? From time to time you post threads and posts that are removed because they were clear baiting/flaming/trolling.
No, because your claim is clearly wrong. I was applying your logic to you, no one else. If you are not prepared to be measured by your own yardstick it's more than a little hypocritical to expect anyone else to be.
I'll make an effort.
Much obliged.
We'll have to agree to disagree here.
I can't agree with that. ;)
This is why I was talking about your trolling.
'cept I'm not a troll, so it's a moot point.
... He's the anti-RH! Same story, different angle!
If they met in real life, would they cancel each other out?
... He's the anti-RH! Same story, different angle!
If they met in real life, would they cancel each other out?
I think we could get along... As long as we both stay sobber.
All of us would probably like each other better and get along in face-to-face than on the 'net.
I'm not as ... an ass in Real LifeTM as I probably come across on here, and I expect this is true for us all...
at least that's what I keep telling myself.
I would really like to hang out with Z_B, EE, and, believe it or not, escef.
I'm probably more lewd IRL when one thinks about it...
it's the way I grew up All of us would probably like each other better and get along in face-to-face than on the 'net.
I'm not as ... an ass in Real LifeTM as I probably come across on here, and I expect this is true for us all...
at least that's what I keep telling myself.
I would really like to hang out with Z_B, EE, and, believe it or not, escef.
I'm actually kind of an ass in RL, too. Thing is, I do it all in humor and, believe it or not, it typically works out. I beat myself up a lot, too, and can take whatever other people have to say to me well. It's kinda like the typical 'guy group' when my friends and I hang out - mean joking, stupid comments - but with gals involved, too. ;) I try my best not to talk politics, religion or current events but sometimes fall into it. This usually makes anyone not involved in the conversation uncomfortable and terribly, terrible bored. So yeah, I try to keep it all light and pointless.
I think that's a good group of posters to hang out with. I'd add a few more, too, but I don't feel like typin' out names and fear I'd forget someone anyway. But yeah, RH. I'd have a beer with ya any day. EE, too.
'cept I'm not a troll, so it's a moot point.
A while back you made a DODT thread that was pulled. And you wrote something like take that you republicans. It wasn't trolling?
No.
I'm a republican
IMO that is, in every appreciable way, wrong. One should form their own political outlook by examining and understanding issues and deciding form themselves what they choose to believe, not simply doing what their parents told them to do when growing up. Same goes for religion. One's fundamental beliefs about the universe are far too important to simply be handed down by parental decree.
And yes, before "someone" goes off on me, this applies to all politics, left and right alike. Parents should tell children "this is what I believe", not "you" or "we". They should be presented with the full gamut of possibilities from which they can make their own informed choices.
I'm a republican
IMO that is, in every appreciable way, wrong. One should form their own political outlook by examining and understanding issues and deciding form themselves what they choose to believe, not simply doing what their parents told them to do when growing up. Same goes for religion. One's fundamental beliefs about the universe are far too important to simply be handed down by parental decree.
And yes, before "someone" goes off on me, this applies to all politics, left and right alike. Parents should tell children "this is what I believe", not "you" or "we". They should be presented with the full gamut of possibilities from which they can make their own informed choices.
+1. If there is one thing you take away from the Offtopic, let this be it, please
I'm a republican
IMO that is, in every appreciable way, wrong. One should form their own political outlook by examining and understanding issues and deciding form themselves what they choose to believe, not simply doing what their parents told them to do when growing up. Same goes for religion. One's fundamental beliefs about the universe are far too important to simply be handed down by parental decree.
And yes, before "someone" goes off on me, this applies to all politics, left and right alike. Parents should tell children "this is what I believe", not "you" or "we". They should be presented with the full gamut of possibilities from which they can make their own informed choices.
lol when I filled out my voter registration do you think I didn't look up both? I did research sir :p I chose to be republican. while I realize what you're saying I want to make it clear that I CHOSE to be republican
but yeah I also CONVERTED to my religion lol I'm not afraid to explore my rightslol when I filled out my voter registration do you think I didn't look up both?
I find it weird that in American you have to choose, and that people think there are only two choices.
there are more than two but only two appealing options. and theres benefits depending on which political party you're in
Actually the two main parties are the least appealing. They just happen to have the most money and a penchant for making people feel they're 'wasting' their vote if they don't choose one of 'em. You know, to maintain their supremacy. Most of us would not be wasting a vote if we chose a third party. As a matter of fact, helping a third party gain enough votes to earn gov't cash would be a major benefit to the country. As long as the two major parties continue to give us the political theater we seem to crave and so long as we take that theater as reality, this is where we'll be. In a slowly accelerating downward spiral.
I find it weird that in American you have to choose, and that people think there are only two choices.
You don't have to choose a political affiliation when registering to vote.
well in case you haven't noticed...history doesn't progress in any sort of regular manner. everything goes to hell then rebuilds better than before. so progress needs chaos. chaos that can be achieved through our current system
Meh. I'd much rather find progress without a complete tear down. Less suffering that way, you know. However, so long as people like yourself exist, that major detonation is likely to happen. Any change at this point is good. I just prefer the thought of an instrument that causes less colateral damage.
I find it weird that in American you have to choose, and that people think there are only two choices.
You don't have to choose a political affiliation when registering to vote.
Good to know. The impression I had was that one needed to register through a party. I thought it quite weird and I'm glad it's not the case.
i'm not saying people have to get hurt but if it happens...thats unfortunatethere are more than two but only two appealing options.
Really? Which two.
and theres benefits depending on which political party you're in
Such as?
there are more than two but only two appealing options.
Really? Which two.and theres benefits depending on which political party you're in
Such as?
republican and democrat
and its my understanding that if you're a registered republican then you can't vote if its between two democrats and if youre independant then you can't vote in primaries
republican and democrat
It was being satirically ironical.
and its my understanding that if you're a registered republican then you can't vote if its between two democrats and if youre independant then you can't vote in primaries
Really? What a load of absolute horse
. Not being able to vote in certain circumstances isn't a benefit, it is a limitation.its a benefit if you're on the side with two representatives
And a deficit if you're not. Voting should be open to all irrespective of party affiliation.
And it only applies to what candidates are being officially supported by the party. Someone who loses a primary could still run in the election if they chose to.
i'm not the most reliable source of political informationhillary clinton?
Not Christine O'Donell for sure.
What Jesse.Two.Coins is referring to is primaries. You're not actually voting to elect someone to an office. You are voting to decide who will run for that party. Some primaries are closed to only allow registered party members voting rights.
That's not a special "benefit", though, just common sense. Only members of a party should vote for who represents that party.
Not Christine O'Donell for sure.
When I first saw that ad I couldn't help picturing here with a carrot tied to her nose being weighed against a duck.
hillary clinton?
Zing!
That's not a special "benefit", though, just common sense. Only members of a party should vote for who represents that party.
Even if it makes sense, its still a benefit. Someone who is a registered Democrat can vote in Democratic primaries that someone who did not affilliate with a party cannot.
And apparently, there are primaries that are open to the public (not restricted to party).
Maybe USA should elect a witch?
No way man. She's down on the self-touchin'. Oh, and batshit insane.
Maybe USA should elect a witch?
No way man. She's down on the self-touchin'. Oh, and batshit insane.
She's also by far the most entertaining thing about these elections. The only problem is she's totally thrown off the crazy-curve for Palin, Angle, Bachman et al. They're really gonna have to crank that
up to eleven now to get half the attention they did in the pre-O'Donnel era.The thing is, there's some sadness to this story. People actually want her in power. Like, not just the ones that'll get paid if she gets in. 'Normal' regular people. And that's ... frightening.
George Carlin said it best: Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
Mr Carlin was right about so much. ;)
Did you see Jesse Ventura on the news the other day talking about political parties?
It's a sad day when the man with the most common sense in politics is a wrestler.
Oh well. Time to take "old painless" outta' the bag.
... He's the anti-RH! Same story, different angle!
If they met in real life, would they cancel each other out?
I think we could get along... As long as we both stay sobber.
All of us would probably like each other better and get along in face-to-face than on the 'net.
I'm not as ... an ass in Real LifeTM as I probably come across on here, and I expect this is true for us all...
at least that's what I keep telling myself.
I would really like to hang out with Z_B, EE, and, believe it or not, escef.
...
I'm a bigger ass. Unfamiliar people make me uncomfortabler and put me on edge. Unless I'm drunk. It seems I'm a very lovey drunk.
You're a good drunk? That is very rare. I am a bad drunk.
When sobber and with people I am rather catatonic. I get bored easily.
Huh? No, I'm loud and goofy. And overly friendly. It's like all the friendly feelings I supress in my day to day life come out.
Maybe USA should elect a witch?
No way man. She's down on the self-touchin'. Oh, and batshit insane.
She's also by far the most entertaining thing about these elections. The only problem is she's totally thrown off the crazy-curve for Palin, Angle, Bachman et al. They're really gonna have to crank that
Hey, I said a witch! She clearly isn't one.
there are more than two but only two appealing options. and theres benefits depending on which political party you're in
... on one hand, I have candidates that are willing to give me honeyed words to get donor money, but are unwilling to put up more then a token effort in congress. On the other, I have candidates that actively villify me and put up more then a token opposition in congress.
Where are these appealing options you speak of?
________
1This happens about two drinks in.
... so I'm not sure how ZB, RH or the others are when drunk, but it seems like TA would be the friendly guy, while I'm just kinda sitting there in a corner with a smile on my face and blitzed off my ass1. Sounds like an interesting party.
________
1This happens about two drinks in.
I get stoopid and funny, slur, and sometimes lose my balance.... and my judgement...
And if I am drinking by myself, I usually listen to old music... and weep a little...
That reminds me. Sometime I really need to get to a karaoke bar. I love karaoke, but hate singing in front of other people, so it sounds like a great combination to me.
...
Or get one of dem thar singing musicy games that where all the rage with dem kids a few years back.
I have Rock Band, but bad singing is more fun with a crowd. Both singing along, and heckling.
How does Rock Band instead of a karaoke machine somehow preclude the presence of an audience and booze? I've had several karaoke star events with my sisters that included heckling, largish crowds, and copious quantities of vodka.
Your social crowd is different then mine. Mine wouldn't go for such a thing. So karaoke bar it is.
I'm confused, I guess. When you said you needed to get a Karaoke bar, because you enjoy Karaoke but do not like to do it in front of strangers, I believed you where talking about setting up a private in-home bar at some point, like people do from time to time, and including a Karaoke machine in it. I was suggesting that one of those music type games for a prominent home gameing system would be more economical and versatile.
What where you talking about?
Much less complicated then whatever you were thinking of.
To make it on topic...
Karaoke blood bank?
Going to a bar on karaoke night.
Much less complicated then whatever you were thinking of.
That does not seem to adress the "strangers" part.
The alcohol consumed at the bar, however, does.
Where (and why) on earth would you Karaoke sansalcohol? The two are inseparable, are they not? Non drunk Karaoke is called singing.
And not, they're not inseperable. They just go better together.
Hey, I said a witch! She clearly isn't one.
Tee hee.
... so I'm not sure how ZB, RH or the others are when drunk, but it seems like TA would be the friendly guy, while I'm just kinda sitting there in a corner with a smile on my face and blitzed off my ass1. Sounds like an interesting party.
________
1This happens about two drinks in.
Most of the time I talk a lot. Like a lot. I'm also a lot friendlier but in a mean, joking sort of way. It's like TA said, the stuff I suppress throughout the week seems to come out in uncontrollable bursts. So long as I keep the boozin' under control, I'm pretty sure I'm a fun guy to be around when drinkin'. When I don't, I get annoying (I have 'loop' conversations where I argue by repeating the same thing over and over while also being totally unable to comprehend what the other person is saying though I think I do) so keeping it under control is what I do most of the time. If the topic is light, I'm in a fantastic mood laughing and doing my best to get laughs. When it's serious, I get serious and that just isn't all that fun - unless the person I'm discussing the serious stuff with agrees with me, of course. I used to be prone to fits of fond memory that inspired emotion but that part of me died. Likely due to alcohol poisoning, but whatever. Really, I'm just a goofy, jokey fun drunk that talks a lot. Can't help it, you see.
Most of the time I talk a lot. Like a lot. I'm also a lot friendlier but in a mean, joking sort of way. It's like TA said, the stuff I suppress throughout the week seems to come out in uncontrollable bursts. So long as I keep the boozin' under control, I'm pretty sure I'm a fun guy to be around when drinkin'. When I don't, I get annoying (I have 'loop' conversations where I argue by repeating the same thing over and over while also being totally unable to comprehend what the other person is saying though I think I do) so keeping it under control is what I do most of the time. If the topic is light, I'm in a fantastic mood laughing and doing my best to get laughs. When it's serious, I get serious and that just isn't all that fun - unless the person I'm discussing the serious stuff with agrees with me, of course. I used to be prone to fits of fond memory that inspired emotion but that part of me died. Likely due to alcohol poisoning, but whatever. Really, I'm just a goofy, jokey fun drunk that talks a lot. Can't help it, you see.
We'd get along, I'm a good listener, regardles of my sobriety state. Just don't try to force me to drink beer ;)
We'd get along, I'm a good listener, regardles of my sobriety state. Just don't try to force me to drink beer ;)
Heh, when you're drinkin' with pals, booze is booze as long as everybody's content with what they got.
We'd get along, I'm a good listener, regardles of my sobriety state. Just don't try to force me to drink beer ;)
Heh, when you're drinkin' with pals, booze is booze as long as everybody's content with what they got.
Sorry, but all alcohol does to me is make my head feel heavier. That might explain why I don't really drink that much, and it's usually mead or wine with dinner.
So, of course, is abstaining.Mead and wine are both acceptable.
Hey, if I ever got to meet you guys in person, I wouldn't be such a spoilsport and bring a half or two, if you know what I mean. Traditions, man! I am a traditionalist ;)
I don't drink with people I don't trust and I absolutely dispise people that are totally hammered so if you don't mind I'd stay far, far away from any such gathering
I wouldn't mind...
Nope, not one bit...
there are more than two but only two appealing options. and theres benefits depending on which political party you're in
... on one hand, I have candidates that are willing to give me honeyed words to get donor money, but are unwilling to put up more then a token effort in congress. On the other, I have candidates that actively villify me and put up more then a token opposition in congress.
Where are these appealing options you speak of?
I assume you refer to your sexuality. i don't think i'll ever know your struggle that well....well theres always college lol but yeah anyway....you know theyre letting gays into the military now? I heard theyve been doing it all week! :D
is it really back that fast? oh my god....I dont even understand the purpose of that policy :/
There are people that think the armed forces aren't mature and professional enough to work alongside people who don't share their sexual orientation.
is it really back that fast? oh my god....I dont even understand the purpose of that policy :/
There are people that think the armed forces aren't mature and professional enough to work alongside people who don't share their sexual orientation.
Well judging from what I hear coming our of the mouth of militaries and ex-militaries around here, I would say a good bunch of them aren't mature.
bahahaha i should do a youtube video and look all sad and cute and say that my one wish in the world is to be in the armed forces but i'm gay and then look like this
If you could fake your suicide you would get a lot of hits and maybe a spot on some TV shows.
Not cool, man. Not cool.
Can't a fake suicide be a way to promote or make people conscious of the problem of suicide among homosexuals?
No, because if when it's discovered, all people will talk about is the lying gay activist.
Can't a fake suicide be a way to promote or make people conscious of the problem of suicide among homosexuals?
How does a straight kid pretending to kill himself in any way highlight the fact that gay kids actually do? You don't need stupid tricks when the reality of the situation is so ... real. Something like this would actually cheapen the very real awareness that these poor souls brought to us. Thinking something faked could possibly be more effective than an actual suicide is incredibly incorrect and offensive.
Can't a fake suicide be a way to promote or make people conscious of the problem of suicide among homosexuals?
No, it would prove homosexuals promote suicide.
Can't a fake suicide be a way to promote or make people conscious of the problem of suicide among homosexuals?
No, it would prove homosexuals promote suicide.
'Prove' is a wee bit strong there. Provide false anecdotal evidence, sure.
Can't a fake suicide be a way to promote or make people conscious of the problem of suicide among homosexuals?
No, it would prove homosexuals promote suicide.
'Prove' is a wee bit strong there. Provide false anecdotal evidence, sure.
That's what I've meant, just lacked the words and was being overly cinical ;P