Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 5/19/09 08:07 PM, stafffighter wrote: Ok, Got too much quoted text. Ok, I'll do the speel. You have opions, you have a viewpoint. That's good. It's not one I agree with but it's great that you express it. What bothers me here is that you're trying to hide the argument of your point of view behind something tagged as general dishonesty. That's leading, manipulative and really just dishonest in and of itself.

Is there any neutral way to answer the question, "how truthful is that partial birth title?"

Yes, I have opinions on abortion itself, but as far as the issue of Obama's failure to compromise that I made the thread to talk about [and which was promptly derailed in favor of your rebuttals to my simple facts] my examples and I were unbiased.

At 5/19/09 07:56 PM, fatape wrote:

At 5/19/09 06:13 PM, RydiaLockheart wrote: I'm of the opinion it's not. And if this type of hentai is in the hands of a previous offender, then I have to agree that it's probably being used to satisfy pedophilic urges.

should being a pedophile in and of itself be illegal?

No, it isn't. However, if a pedophile watches pedophilic hentai, his urges are being nurtured, which would most likely lead to a higher chance of him committing the actual crime.

At 5/19/09 06:26 PM, stafffighter wrote: You made a topic and didn't want to debate the issues you set forth in it?

The issue I set forth regarded compromise on abortion, not dozens of mini-debates over whether the listed actions were right or wrong in and of themselves. Together, the actions highlight that compromise is not as easy as Obama makes it seem and aren't meant to be taken as individual arguments (note that all of them are wholly factual).

With that, I wanted to find out when and how we will work together to do something about it.

Yeah. You're not taking sides.

Considering that the topic is about how different opinions will come together, When did I say I wasn't? I never promised my neutrality, but I did say that I didn't want to argue about the individual events.

Both of you, you're missing the point. I don't want to argue about these issues, they are examples. I'm trying to make a point about Obama's legitimacy in proposing that we reason with each other and make compromises.

At 5/18/09 08:26 PM, stafffighter wrote: Really, how truthful is that partial birth title?

I was just putting that there for people who didn't make the connection. The topic-starter has to appeal to all of the Poli board. True, it's not partial birth, as the baby is torn to pieces in the womb before it is pulled and sucked out.

The parenthetical statement wasn't the point.

-His budgets call for taxpayer-funded abortions.

Unless you mean he's going to have a government sponcered abortian truck roll through suburban streets in the summer I'm going to assume you mean abortians will be covered by health care.

Irrelevant. Whatever the medium, anti-abortion people should not be forced to spend their money to finance an abortion. (More specifically, he wants to revoke the law in DC that bans taxpayer-funded abortions so that the DC budget can have money appropriated to local abortion agencies)

Medical reseach? How dare he.

The point is that it is a hot topic in the abortion debate. I'm not taking sides, I'm just listing examples of his refusal to make any compromises.

Being rated by groups means he doesn't comprimise?

Considering that said groups (just looked it up, the NLRC) analyzes voting trends and whatnot, yes. Yes it does.

Even though I do beleive the parents should be informed the simple fact is that a lot of girls would rather get themselves in much deeper than admit it to them. It's a sad comprimise but a nessecary one.

I'm not following you here... I don't see how it's a compromise.

At 5/18/09 09:24 PM, Tancrisism wrote: The pill.. as in, the morning after pill? Or birth control? Or the abortion pill?

I should've been specific. The abortion pill.
http://www.cc.org/blog/obama_allow_abort ion_pill_girls_young_seventeen

Send me a link of this. Last I remember, he was against this.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article /77500/barack_hussein_obama_jr_defends_p artialbirth.html

-He is overturning conscience protections that allow doctors to refuse to perform abortions without repercussions.

Another link here would be dandy.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2009/02/27/AR2009022701104.
html

Right. This =/= abortion.

It depends which taxpayer you are talking to. To a large, large group of people, it is the equivalent in the sense that it destroys life.

You remember them, you say, but what were your sources? Some of your examples don't sound like him at all.

That or you don't know your own president.

I'm not sure if you have actually listened to his rhetoric at all. He has said that he understands that it's an issue where people perhaps will not be able to compromise, but he thinks that both sides are turning each other into ridiculously polarizing "caricatures" (his own word for it) and that this is not healthy, or helping anything.
He has an opinion on the issue, naturally, but he wants a realistic debate to be opened up rather than each side painting the other as satan. Which is, essentially, what they do.

If something is to be done, there's going to have to be a compromise, plain and simple. Obama knows that's just how things work, people aren't going to just start agreeing with each other without meeting somewhere in between. Realistic debate is the means to the end of compromise. In that speech, he urged people to listen to each other and build off of each other's differing opinions, or compromise.

Obama apparently supports compromise on abortion, according to his speech at Notre Dame. However, Obama's presidential track record on abortion isn't showing any compromise:
-He is making it easier for young girls to obtain "the pill" by removing the parent from the issue.

-He is working on lifting the ban on third trimester abortions (partial-birth),

-His budgets call for taxpayer-funded abortions.

-He is overturning conscience protections that allow doctors to refuse to perform abortions without repercussions.

-He signed an executive order forcing taxpayer-funded embryonic stem-cell research.

-The vast majority of his relevant appointments are pro-choice.

Those are only the highlights that I can remember from only his few months in presidency. Take a look at his congressional voting records, and you'll see that the spirit of compromise is lost on him there, too:
-Rated 100% by pro-choice groups (100% being completely pro-choice) and 0% in similar scalings by pro-life groups, which means he didn't compromise on abortion.

-He voted to let minors cross state boundaries in search of legal abortions.

-He also voted against notifying parents whose minors receive out-of-state abortions.

Likewise, this is just from memory, so there surely is more to list.

After listening to his compromise rhetoric, I would like to know when the compromise will come? I don't understand how I'm supposed to just swallow this without questioning his commitment to what he says.

Obama is all talk. His presidential track record on abortion isn't showing any compromise:

-He is making it easier for young girls to obtain "the pill" by removing the parent from the issue.

-He is working on lifting the ban on third trimester abortions (partial-birth),

-His budgets call for taxpayer-funded abortions.

-He is overturning conscience protections that allow doctors to refuse to perform abortions without repercussions.

-He signed an executive order forcing taxpayer-funded embryonic stem-cell research.

-The vast majority of his relevant appointments are pro-choice.

Those are only the highlights that I can remember from only his few months in presidency. Take a look at his congressional voting records, and you'll see that the spirit of compromise is lost on him there, too.

I'm not trusting a word he says on the issue until he gives me enough to trust... which he hasn't.

Another factor could be that the abortion fervor is tiring itself out. Since 1980, abortions have spiked and begun a gradual decline, which might be indicative that as it becomes more common, more people are starting to question the morality of it. The mindset after Roe v. Wade was, "Hey, there won't be that many abortions, so it's no big deal," but as the numbers grew to the tens of millions they are today, people started thinking twice.

Military courts are a bit tougher than regular courts...

Don't assume he'll get off with the crazies.

That explains why I was able to go about my daily routines without hearing that dumb bitch in the coffee shop spout on about his oppression.

I like this holiday.

At 4/16/09 09:26 AM, KemCab wrote: The beauty of this is that when we can't pay our debts and our economy crashes, everyone else's goes down the shitter too. The biggest thing causing this problem is Social Security and Medicare, which are only going to worsen as time goes on. But that doesn't mean that you should stop all spending to divert this crisis, because that's not going to stop the debt and it's going to shrink the economy at the same time.

It is a problem, one without an easy answer. To be honest, there's no escaping the downfall of the social welfare programs, because whether we cut it and take the hurt or wait until it gives us the hurt, we're still pretty screwed.

At 4/13/09 07:02 PM, KemCab wrote:

At 4/13/09 05:33 PM, adrshepard wrote: Most people would say through massive amounts of debt. Any sort of government intervention in the economy is going to require it, but there's some abstract level where people say "it's too much."

When? Didn't FDR run up the national debt during the Depression? And surpass that spending during World War II? It's not like the economy stops simply because the government is using more money than it can pay off at a given moment.

Yeah, but we're not paying it off. We're just paying the interest on the loans, and whaddya know, it's getting higher and higher as the years go by. It worked back in the early days of Keynesian economics, but now the interest payments are getting more and more unmanageable, as is the debt, while we do nothing about it. We basically have to beg other countries to buy up our debts, because should they not or should we stop paying interest, America can kiss its ass goodbye.

At 4/3/09 03:16 PM, TheOutsiders wrote: I think im glad i dont live in America lol.
In a week America has more murders than England has in a year.

Maybe total, but percentage-wise, I think you've got somewhat of a problem with people stabbing each other a little too often.

Just my two cents.

Hey, in 2012, if the world goes to shit, can we find a basement and just drink Armageddon away?

At 4/3/09 10:41 PM, Proteas wrote: That may be your problem right there; electric shavers are meant for daily use, trimming off fine stubble and the like. I'd recommend using it a little more often on short hair (five o'clock shadow or less), and pretreat your face with something like Lectric Shave.

The fuck is a "Lectric Shave"? Be a man and do it without cream in the shower. Learn to do that, and you'll have a rough, full face of awesome in no time.

Speaking of wussy ways to shave, does any man on Earth "shave" with Nair?

At 4/3/09 11:57 PM, fli wrote: I'm personally am a manscapist-- and when I fix the downstairs... I also fix the upstairs too. (Fix my beard-- when I have it... trip nose hairs, pluck out ear hairs, make sure my eyebrows aren't going bushy.)

Last time I tried to mess with an eyebrow, I kinda shaved a corner of it off on accident. Haven't touched 'em since. Turns out, my eyebrows don't grow too bushy anyways.

Nah, my camera's spy-proof. There's this little blue light I have so I know when it's recording, all nice and wired up so that when the camera's on, so is the light.

At 3/28/09 12:32 PM, Elfer wrote: Nuclear fission produces dangerous waste, yes, but not NEARLY on the same scale that waste is produced from fossil fuels. Nuclear fusion, which should be pervasive in about a hundred years, is much, much cleaner.

Maybe, if we don't give up on cold fusion research. Every time they try, they hit a major roadblock along the way. It'll take decades upon decades.

Umm... Nuclear decay is 100% natural. We're just harnessing it's potential. Decay happens in EVERYTHING. You point at something, and I can tell you that part of it is undergoing nuclear decay, because every element on the periodic table decays at some rate. How come when we put the atomic masses of elements on the periodic table, we have to average them out with respect to each isotope's percentage in a sample?

Saying nuclear decay is unnatural would be like saying burning coal is unnatural, or electric power is unnatural, or wind power is unnatural.

At 3/23/09 08:07 PM, SevenSeize wrote: I wake up in the morning, and sometimes the walls are sweating. Like it's damp everywhere. HATE IT.

Maybe the walls are crying BECAUSE YOUR HOME DOESN'T LIKE YOU.

Because it's evil and hates nice things.

At 3/23/09 11:17 AM, morefngdbs wrote:

At 3/22/09 06:14 PM, Christopherr wrote: Linky

;;;;
Sorry Christopherr
But that is about the 'Gospels of Mark, Luke, Mathew & John...I think it mentions Peter.

No, not just the Gospels.

The Apostle Paul wrote Romans, First and Second Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, First and Second Thessalonians, First and Second Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, accounting for thirteen of 27 books (it is debated whether he wrote some of the other books or not, for example Hebrews). Paul died in 63 AD. Then there are the 8 catholic (not Catholic) epistles, largely penned by James, Simon, John, and Jude, with the exception of the book of Hebrews, whose author was anonymous but can be pinned to around 60-100AD. The last of these four men died in 100AD. Revelations, as I said earlier, was written at the end of John's life, around the turn of the century.

It's really hard to attribute the NT books to folktale passed from generation to generation, especially since we can tell to a very large degree of certainty that they were written in the first century. Unless the Apostles were given the power to write posthumously. That'd just be crazy.

At 3/22/09 10:06 PM, SkunkyFluffy wrote:

At 3/22/09 09:51 PM, SevenSeize wrote: Thank you. That pacified me greatly.

These are also medieval, also from the Met. My mom asked me to take a picture of the one on the right so she could make something like it.

I find the one on the left gaudy, but I do find it surprising that the other is remarkably similar to modern jewelry.

At 3/22/09 11:19 AM, morefngdbs wrote:

At 3/22/09 09:19 AM, Ericho wrote: Because Jesus was the greatest teacher of all time, while L. Ron Hubbard was a nobody who died taking drugs. To say that they are equal is simply insanity.

;;;;;
No one recorded anything about Jesus until years after his death.
Scholars are not in agreement (surprise,surprise) of when written recording of what 'he supposedly taught' was put down...about 300 years after his death is given as an example.

We all know that a story that's been verbally repeated for 2-3 hundred years is completely unchanged (LMFAO) & is absolutly nothign but the truth.

Ehh, people like to say that, but it's completely false. The books of the New Testament were written by the people who hand encountered at some point or personally known Jesus, who died somewhere around 30 AD. The final book was written at the end of John's life, which is somewhere around the end of the first century.

Linky

At 3/21/09 05:44 PM, SevenSeize wrote: Don't be like that dear! When you feel it's ready, post it. and we'll all go read it. Don't worry about people not liking it. Your style is your style.

No, it's not that--it's just a 300-word piece. I just wanted to work on it just a little more.

I'll get around to it someday.

At 3/21/09 12:30 PM, Christopherr wrote: Also, I figured I might put up a piece of short writing I had in my computer, everyone's doing it. It's a short piece in which I experimented with train of thought writing, and it holds personal value for me.

Never mind. I took it down because I wanted to work on it some more. You can PM me if you reallywant to see it.

Two things:
-Dude, they're making a movie about John Dillinger, and it looks sweet. FUCKING JOHN DILLINGER, THE MOST AWESOME BANK ROBBER EVER. I mean, for fuck's sake, he was a hero in the 30's, he broke out of a prison deemed escape-proof ON HIS OWN, using a homemade "gun" made of wood/soap and black shoe polish. AWESOME.

-Also, I figured I might put up a piece of short writing I had in my computer, everyone's doing it. It's a short piece in which I experimented with train of thought writing, and it holds personal value for me.

Come to think of it, my computer's writing files have gotten kinda large, I'm gonna start backing it up to a flash drive.

I've always supported mandatory gun safety training for anyone who wants to have live firearms, and this is exactly why. It's like giving someone a car without ever giving them the driving classes.

Then again, that conflicts with my perception of the Constitution, because the government has no business testing people to see if they deserve their rights, so I'm still on the fence.

I saw Watchmen tonight. It was worlds better than I expected, but it could've done better. The start had a lot of backstory fat that could've been cut out, and the end really, really dragged out. I guess you could sum those up in two words: too long.

At 3/20/09 07:12 PM, FUNKbrs wrote: I get that a lot, actually. My vocalist thinks I'm a total teddy bear, and I'm like "Dude! I once tracked down a guy who beat me up when I was 13 and ripped out his fucking earring!" (I was 19 at the time)
But yeah, I'm a very polite, very easy...
FUCK.

I sometimes fantasize about having the opportunity to put people I meet under the knife, I don't understand why. But I mean it in a nonviolent way.

This is the part where I realize I have a pocket full of tickets I'm selling to watch my drinking buddy Tony Myers get whacked up with broken glass in a hardcore wrestling match, the last video of which was so shocking and gruesome it was pulled off of youtube for vulgarity.

He consented to it, not your problem if he gets whooped on.

GODAMNIT I wish I were kidding.

Would it be too much to ask if you would upload it to rapidshare (or one of its other companions)? That just sounds plain awesome.

At 3/20/09 06:37 PM, FUNKbrs wrote: I used to, until they all kind of melded into the Path of Hate. Now I follow the Church of Hate, which is a pseudo christian cult combining all the most evil parts of messianic and abrahamic traditions.
Man I wish I were kidding. This more honestly becomes my serious system of belief every day.

I don't know you well, but you really don't strike me as a truly hateful person.

You actually seem kinda nice, once you get past the fact that you might enjoy watching me die.

At 3/20/09 05:30 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: Pox has his own its called the Church of Awesomalogy. Stephen Colbert, Chuck Norris and Austin Powers and Co. are all Gods.

Yes, we all take that religion very seriously in this thread.

At 3/20/09 04:50 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: your a scientologist Seven you do know that Scientology has no credible evidence to back it up?

We might as well rename this board the "alternate faiths board," there are a lot of us here.

Seven's a Scientologist, we have a smattering of atheists and agnostics, I think Funk makes his own religions whenever he so feels, and me, I'm an Aladura Christian.

At 3/19/09 05:28 AM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: the only problem is I need someone trust worthy to take care of my account while I'm gone.

Why not just leave it inactive like everyone else who goes on vacation?

I know he's in a good bit of trouble now, but Sirtom had a funny picture on his website: