582 Forum Posts by "PreacherJ"
At 4/5/03 12:58 PM, Newgrundling wrote: Harem wrote it, entitled "I care" on 3-19-01
Why would you try to take credit for his work?
Whatever you say, cheif. I may have posted here after that date, but it doesn't mean I stole it. The net is a large place, and who knows who wrote what first? I used to have my own webpage with plenty of hits where I'd post poetry. What makes you so sure this guy wrote it first? I'll give it to you that it's posted before mine on the other site, but short of tracking down some sort of time machine, we're never going to be able to tell who's it "really" is. I appreciate your attempt at keeping the boards legitimate, though.
One Word
----------------------------------
Although it's better than the rest,
this word can never pass the test;
it fails in all capacity
to describe the things you mean to me.
I need a word that's soft and mellow
but painted bright with sunshine yellow
I need a word to see my pain
a word that's proud, but never vain.
I need a word that says, "I care",
that goes where no-one else would dare.
I need a word that's fair and just.
I need a word of sultry lust.
I need a word to hold me tight
to comfort me throughout each night
I need a word of fun and play
to greet me as I start each day.
I need a word to tell me plain
when I'm in error once again.
I need a word that's fearless, bold,
not slow and weak and tired and old.
I need a word of tender touch
a word that needs ME very much.
I need a word that's sparkling new
to describe the love I feel for you.
Holy bajeezus! That site was one of the few things remaining in the world that scare me.
At 4/2/03 10:05 AM, Freakapotimus wrote: It takes forever to go through posts on the General BBS. *sigh* I'm not spanking anyone. I'm not much of a giver.
Can I give you a spanking then? Or anything else within my power?
I'm back. Anyone notice I was gone?
Well Hoo-Rah! Glad we could finally clear this whole point up after 5 pages.
*Disco Dances*
Looking forward to any other ideas for threads you have in the future.
I've been gone, too... non-internet-related problems at home... ugh... I'm so frayed right now... I'm at school right now for a few brief moments of serenity. Well, I'f I'd been here, Judge, I'd have missed you.
I prolly won't be on for awhile more, really. Too much to sort out and clean up. The whole family's falling apart, you see.
At 3/21/03 07:14 AM, swayside wrote: which was my point all along.
No... if this was your point, you'd have said "I think it should be ok to discriminate against people with no education."
Instead, you choose to discriminate against all manner of things that you consider "changeable", including homosexuality.
At 3/20/03 04:20 PM, Arsh wrote:At 3/20/03 03:56 PM, FokkerScourge wrote: What's a "teh"?It's a funny "the".
No, it's not. It's stupid.
Contrary to popular belief, I do not hate the Clock Crew. I think the idea of slamming clocks into everything is a little ridiculous, but they're otherwise neutral in my field of vision. What I really, really hate, are the guys who think they're a part of the clock crew simply because "clock" is in their name, and go around spouting gibberish and making shitty flash movies and giving the "real" clock crew a bad name. From my experiences with most members of the crew, I have benefitted positively. But, like many clubs, the crew has it's assholes. So, stop bashing the crew, unless you do it in the "clubs" forum.
Nobody should be supportive of war, ever. Nobody wants their children to march off to die in the support of ideals.
I understand the necessity in such practices to secure my safety and way of life, but I just wish everybody standing around in the desert shooting at each other wasn't the only way to resolve it.
What about Brave New World by Aldous Huxley?
Another interesting treatise on the topic of Utopia, and the politics and lifestyle that ensue from it.
Look, Shady, you seem to be an ok, guy, it's just that there are TOO MANY "This War/Bush/Saddam/etc. is Gay" topics. Think of something different. If you're worried about your friends, start a thread in the Geneal Forum for "People Who Have Friends In The War" or something similar. I have friends there too. It sucks. If the draft starts up, I'll go. It sucks. Deal with it somewhere else, though, chief, like the Clubs forum or the General forum.
Word.
Before I start, I'd just like to point out-
I'm not racist.
But stereotyping exists for a reason, even if it's been blown out of proportion. Arab-Americans (and other members of countries with Arab descent)can't help it if a select few members of thier race decide that the Americans are "White Devils," but by the same token, do you really care about somebody's feelings if your life is at stake?
Sure. Most Arab-Americans aren't going to strap a bomb to their chests and come after me. But I don't really care about hurting someone's feelings who isn't a bomber if I cross the street instead of walking next to them, no matter how small the chance is that they harbor suicidal resentment.
What if they do? I don't explode.
Many people are racist idiots, but by the same token, many people are just afraid for their lives. You only get one chance, and you might as well be careful with it. Think of your life as a vase you carry around. Now, suppose for the last 10-15 years, the media has portrayed Arab-Americans as clumsy fools that trip everywhere, and recently, a group of Arabs tripped into the pilots flying not one, but TWO planes, causing them to crash into the WTC, causing thousands of deaths. I don't give a rat's ass if you're the most graceful Arab-American in the world- I'm crossing the street, because if you can topple two huge buildings, my little vase doesn't stand a chance.
You might be hurt, but YOUR emotions are a small price to pay for MY safety. Berate me all you want, but there are plenty of people who would place their own safety (however small the chance may be) over somebody else's feelings. As long as I don't beat the crap out of these people, or do anything else worse then just crossing the street quietly, I don't really see what their gripe would be in that. If the Irish (my nationality) Republican Army (a group of extremists) took control of planes and crashed them into the WTC, I'd completely understand if people would rather avoid me quietly than interact, just as long as they don't throw beer bottles at me or call me a stupid Mick.
Word.
No! I liked Teddy... These reconditioned agents aren't nearly as... uh, nevermind...
I only hope my continued existence can be considered beneficial to such a shadowy organization and I don't end up on the reconditioning list...
*quiet, muffled sobbing*
At 3/20/03 12:26 AM, TheEvilOne wrote:At 3/20/03 12:24 AM, PreacherJ wrote:I just thought I'd point out that from my experience playing Civilization, the best form of government in the game is Communism. Just a thought...
I always preferred Technocracy, myself. Oh well. It's all about ruling your own country, right?
At 3/19/03 08:12 PM, NoNameProphet wrote: Not saying that leaving the choices up to the masses is a good idea, I like it in the fact that it would be interesting just to see what would actually happen ^_^.
:etc...
Have you ever played Civilization III? This is a form of covernment called "Virtual Democracy". It's like the second best government in the game. Anywho, just thought I'd point out the reference.
At 3/19/03 01:23 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote:Yeah, I saw that. It was really sad. PreacherJ, I think you require some medical assistance after that one. Carpal tunnel all the way! (From typing of course. A guy named Preacher would never do THAT)At 3/19/03 03:17 AM, PreacherJ wrote:
Yeah, I know. The sadness was unmatched. But hey, I couldn't sleep, it was 3 AM, and there was a sea of idiocy that night.
As for carpal tunnel... well... I'll just let you guys think whatever on that one. I plead the 5th!
=P
Word.
At 3/19/03 07:47 AM, NoNameProphet wrote:At 3/19/03 07:13 AM, swayside wrote:Once again, not something I would do. I'd certainly hire somebody on thier merits,see? you do discriminate. you wouldn't hire someone whi didn't finish the ninth grade would you? that's discrimination on the grounds of educational level.
If you treat this as discrimination, Swayside, what the hell do you do when you want the best person for the job? Close your eyes and point at the phone book?
Well, there are certain degrees of discriminatory severance! Lol. It's obviously less-bad to let someone work for you if they didn't complete certain levels of education because they may not know certain vital things, and school is a good reflection of a person's commitment, responsibility and dedi- you get the point right?
Yup. I agree.
Not hiring someone because they're black IS wrong, and you shouldn't be able to do it, but people will because yeah, they can. There's usually no way you can prove they did it either unless they say so. Of course, there are situations when descrimination due to age/looks/race come into play. That's in "themed" restaurants and stuff. If you've got a place where you want lots of cute server chicks then you obviously can't hire a guy. And if you're really pushing for some oriental theme, you're probably going to want to lean towards the appropriate race of women.
It's just to keep variety. Not everything has to be blended you know? It's not like they hate all other people, it's just that they want to give off a certain theme sometimes. So you can justify it in certain situations =P (Porn could be an example too if the people were looking for a certain theme due to their website theme/name)
Thank you. That's what I was getting at. Yes, I don't agree with people hiring based strictly on race, but it can be done, and currently remains a right.
As for educational discrimination, you're right, sway. I am discriminatory. Forgive me if I want my doctor to have graduated medical school.
At 3/17/03 01:24 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote:At 3/17/03 12:25 PM, TheShrike wrote:I came on at 10AM today and he had somewhere around 9 or 10 posts in a row. I felt the need to break it up. Mwahahaha.
Hey, Judge-
Did you ever see the night I covered the entire front page of the Politics board? I felt like, SO cool.
At 3/18/03 10:45 PM, swayside wrote: i still think you're assuming the worst. "discriminat[ing] for whatever reason" is not what i want to happen. discrimination against unchangeable things is wrong no matter how you look at it. things like race, gender, and other natural things. i would never discriminate on these grounds.
You're only going to be delving into matters of opinion on things you can change and things you can't. Sex change operations, non-straight sexual preferences, and Michael Jackson are all things that change what was once thought of as "unchangeable".
As for discrimination, we all know it's mean, but isn't it your right? If you hate somebody because they're black, shouldn't you be able to reserve the right to not want them to work in your little corner store? I'm not discriminatory in any way, but don't you have the right to run a personal business as you see fit, even if it makes you an asshole?
Once again, not something I would do. I'd certainly hire somebody on thier merits, not their (insert discriminatory reason here), but I don't think I should have to hire somebody because they're (blah blah blah here)either, and if somebody wants to be an asshole about their hiring habits, I support thier right to do so, but not the manner in which they do it.
So, as for the homosexuality rant, can you really think of anything else that hasn't been mentioned that won't be dismissed as an opinion at this point? I figured with an incredibly vague topic thread title such as "tol(l)erance" would expand to cover other things aside from debating whether discriminating against somebody because they are gay is wrong, and whether or not homosexual tendencies are natural.
As far as "God" is concerned, the whole idea of it strikes me as just a little ridiculous. Now, the concept of what has created the Universe in that it required something to create it, that's a more interesting and possible thought process to follow up on. The entire concept of "gods" and religions were thought up back in the times when people had jobs like "gathering berries for the tribe" and "royal sheep jerker-offer". Gods and religion were created to explain that what was unknown. People wanted rain, and they didn't want to feel helpless. So, they created something to do when there was no rain to get a sense of accomplishment. Religion works like that in many ways. It can give people hope, or absolution, or a positive model to live life, but often, it just restricts people from following basic human instict, and breeds other things, such as hate, bigotry, war, oppression, etc.
I'm not denying some sort of outside force, but rather spitting in the face of religion in it's forms as it stands today. I don't know what started the universe. Nobody does, regardless of your "faith". But I do know (as much as anyone else with any opinion in religion) that what we've been using to explain the universe (Creationism, etc.)is pretty stupid. I don't know how we can be anymore knowledgable about the beginnings of "Life, the Universe and Everything", short of "GOD" him/her/itself appearing magically and going on TV to explain it, but I think the world would be a lot better off in a lot of places if people would stop following ancient stories and look toward the future possibilities rather than the past. Stop crediting "God", and keep looking for (lame-ass Star-Wars reference) "The Force."
Word.
At 3/17/03 10:53 PM, Judge_DREDD wrote:At 3/17/03 10:48 PM, TheShrike wrote:*Looks left** Looks towards clapping sound *
*Looks right*
*Starts clapping quietly*
* Decodes Tempo Frequency Into Morse *
*Broadcasts secret morse code messages to the government's National Council of the Destruction and Defamation of Idiocy, calling in an airstrike to annihilate the Insane Clown Posse*
(Speaks into Earphone Walkie-Talkie)
Roger that, tango six-niner.
(Dramatic Pause)
Yes, The order came directly from Dredd, sir.
(Pause)
Yes, it was decoded by The Shrike.
(Pause)
Understood.
*Looks toward Shrike and Judge Dredd*
Good job, troops. We have a confirmed kill. Move out.
*Considers putting bullet through own head from overexposure to stupidity*
Nah...
*Lowers gun*
If I do that, then THEY win!
At 3/14/03 11:45 PM, Murph_Dogg wrote: You wanna know some fucked up shit?
Cigarettes kill 430,000 people a year
Marijuana caused no deaths, but 700,000 arrests a year.
Cigarettes are legal
Man, I hate these "Marijuana has caused 0 deaths" research projects. Doesn't anybody think that if somebody gets lung cancer from marijuana that marijuana would be blamed instead of "Big Meanie-Head Tobacco"? Doubtful, is it not? And what of people who smoke both regularly?
Who gets the tally then?
I seriously doubt, that in all of the research, that there hasn't been ONE (1) single friggin' marijuana-related death that doesn't involve shooting your friend because your parents deserve to have their faces smashed in with a large blunt object for leaving a loaded gun just lying around.
The effects of Marijuana use, courtesy of the NIDA (National Institute for Drug Abuse):
Short Term-
problems with memory and learning;
distorted perception (sights, sounds, time, touch);
trouble with thinking and problem-solving;
loss of coordination; and
increased heart rate.
(Basically, this is the "high" most users seek, because let's face it, if you can't think straight, you can't think about too much bad shit happening, right?)
Long Term Usage:
Cancer-
Regular marijuana use causes cancer. It is known that marijuana contains some of the same, and sometimes even more, of the cancer-causing chemicals found in tobacco smoke. Studies show that someone who smokes five joints per day may be taking in as many cancer-causing chemicals as someone who smokes a full pack of cigarettes every day.
Lungs and airways-
People who smoke marijuana often develop the same kinds of breathing problems that cigarette smokers have: coughing and wheezing. They tend to have more chest colds than nonusers. They are also at greater risk of getting lung infections like pneumonia.
Immune system-
THC increases the risk of developing infections by inhibiting normal disease-preventing reactions.
Now, that being said, I am actually for the legalization of marijuana on many levels. I myself do not smoke weed, but I believe it should be legalized for other reasons.
People are going to smoke it anyway. As far as drug users are concerned, marijuana users are relatively harmless, and the addiction one suffers from marijuana use is almost exclusively psychological.
Legalizing it would reduce the strain put on prisons, and bureaucratic police forces everywhere.
The government could actually put a tax on the stuff, and make more money.
Yes, marijuana is what people consider a "gateway" drug, but most pot users don't move on to bigger, better drugs. They just buy better weed.
So, I hope this post was informative, and I have shown some people all the facts.
Thank You.
At 3/14/03 11:47 AM, swayside wrote: preacher j,
this topic was never an anti-gay topic. i started this topic to say, for example, that if i own a buisiness, and need someone to work for me, i should be able to set whatever criteria i want to for hiring someone. anything that is a choice can potentially be a criterion for such a situation. things that can't be changed like race, gender, age, and things like that should be disregarded.
as for homosexuality, anyone can change their sexual preference. i can, and you can. it is very easy, and our society should not revolve around poeple so weak-minded as to say that they can't control themselves.
Well, I agree with you in that you should be able to decide who works at your business. It is your business, and I suppose if you want to discriminate, for whatever reason, then you should be able to, for the same reason you can discriminate against whoever you want in your house (like a babysitter, for example). It's a building you own, and as such, should allow you to reserve the right to refuse service (from both ends of the counter).
As for the gayness debate, anything else we can say here will just be a matter of opinion, so let's just bury the damned hatchet and move on.
At 3/13/03 07:09 AM, swayside wrote:At 3/5/03 05:31 AM, PreacherJ wrote: Decide that you're done with the topic, swayside?no. but thanks for your concern. i just took a break for a few days. i'm just checking back right now, but i'll be back in a while.
the way you're making the causes of homosexuality sound, you probably think (and freakapotimus will remember this point) alchoholism is a diesease, or even kleptomania for that matter. blame it on instincs and brain chemicals all you want to, but in the end, you make the dicision. people don't steal because they are kleptomaniacal. they are kleptomaniacal because they steal. people don't drink because they are alchoholics, they are alchoholics because they drink. in the end it's all a choice, a preference, and preferences can be changed. there is always a choice of wether you are gay or not.
You argued that homosexuality is unnatural, and thus people shouldn't make that decision. I argued that it was natural, and that homosexuals can't just choose to have sex with the opposite sex. It doesn't appeal to them. At all. Mr. Happy just refuses to play along.
As for kleptomaniacs and alcoholism not being a disease, yes, alcoholics are like that because they drink, etc., but what do you think about the more severe brain disorders/diseases? Stuff that exists even without the advent of a stimulant such as alcohol and stuff to steal? People experiencing these problems often make decisions that aren't socially acceptable, and yet, come completely natural to them.
I'm not saying homosexuality is a naturally occuring brain disorder. What I'm saying is that in many examples of nature, homosexuality occurs, and that alters the way one makes decisions (such as choosing to engage in sexual acts with those of the same sex).
People can't just choose to be gay, or not to be gay. It's not a choice to be aroused by the same sex, just as it's not a choice for you to be aroused by the opposite sex. If somebody plans to live out a healthy sexual lifestyle (and there are armies of doctors who support homosexuality) they can only accept their homosexuality, and follow it up. Sure, plenty of people have been confused about their sexuality, and plenty of people have been married and have had kids, only to "come out" later. Just as homosexuality occurs in several places naturally, so does bisexuality.
I also don't really see how you thought I'd gather alcoholism and kleptomania into the same category as homosexuality from my previous posts, either.
Yeah, if only there were a way to clone several Freaks, for then, the BBS board would kick so much more ass.
She could ALWAYS be on.
*sigh*
Damn me and my impossible dreams...
At 3/13/03 10:34 PM, Ted_Easton wrote: Leave, while you can!
This forum is controlled by vicious, ravenous users who flame idiots from the general forums to a burnt crisp. They feed on suffering and cause it whenever possible.
They're a power-hungry, mangy lot, and want nothing more than to send you running in tears.
I'm glad to call myself one of them, and welcome to the forums.
Teddy, I think I feel closer to you now then I have ever before.
*Wipes away a single tear*
I just wanted to say that I appreciate you and all of the other regulars here for your efforts at culling the stupid from the ranks of the Politics Forum. Somebody has to, and I'm glad to be helping in such a task.
At 3/13/03 10:13 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote:At 3/13/03 05:43 PM, mysecondstar wrote:Hallelujah.At 3/13/03 05:30 PM, Ted_Easton wrote:Amen.At 3/13/03 05:25 PM, Murph_Dogg wrote:Thank the Lord.
I'm gone.
*Disco dances the night away*
Sheesh. What a passionate post here. You had to hand it to the guy, at least he didn't pussyfoot around with his ignorance. I kinda felt sorry for him when everybody came out and destroyed him. Kinda.
