At 10/6/09 09:34 PM, DuMarquisX wrote: I would not want Gay marriage to become regular and seen as fine because as everyone knows kids would see that and just be Gay because that is what they are being taught. And this is all completely backwards.

As a bit of house cleaning, you don't need to capitalize "gay".

Content-wise, and I'm 99% positive this point has been brought up to death by now, but adults are not 100% products of what they were taught/exposed to as children, and human sexual identity certainly is not something thatcan be "taught" to any individual. Or to put it another way, MANY MANY MANY people who are gay grew up in environments that taught anything but tolerance for non-heterosexuality, so we shouldn't be using a mis-placed concern over protecting children as a shield for our own prejudices.

At 9/18/09 07:54 AM, WeirdJamFace wrote: My neck is 14 inches long.

beat that.

It's girth, not length, that counts (proportionally speaking).

At 9/14/09 02:00 AM, SolInvictus wrote:

At 9/14/09 12:14 AM, Warforger wrote: You know you can be both Buddhits and Christian right?

lets rein in the new-age bullshit a little.

It's only "new-age" insomuch as the positive interplay of religions is pretty much a recent development.

At 9/10/09 02:36 AM, Dawnslayer wrote: If there's anything to be gleaned from the civil rights movement, it's that an oppressed people are most empowered not by outside help, but by their own faculty

No one said achieving equality would be easy; but if it's worth dying for, then surely it's worth a little extra effort.

And who says minorities DON'T give *any* effort? I think it's highly ignorant for people to assume that just because there are AA policies that this equates to hiring the unqualified.

Furthermore, this notion that a mere 45 years of legal recognition of Civil Rights is enough to erase hundreds of years of systematic institutionalized prejudice and ecnoomic impairment is indicative of just how ingrained majority privelage is, i.e. racial majorities still get to decide whether or not discrimination is *actually* occurring.

Is there a problem with underachievment? Absolutely yes, and I completely agree with you that the greatest asset a person can develop is an intrinsic sense of self-worth in education and occupation. Not to get too political, but this is precisely what Obama (as well as MANY others) have been saying about education--that the government (including AA policies) can only do so much, but the real change and success is up to the individual to make that effort.

Affirmative Action, while sound in principle, does have flaws in its application, hence the court cases like the New Haven FD being used to analyze and correct the areas where AA is not living up to its intentions of equality. However, to dispense with it entirely is dangerously ignorant of the long road we as a nation and society have in addressing the explicit and implicit inequalities that occur because of unfound prejudices.

At 9/4/09 01:20 AM, HandsomePete wrote: It's been done... to death

see what I did there?

Exactly--it's basically what every "I Know What You Did Last Summer" and every "Scream" movie was about, only with the added element of more women [insert social upbraid about glamorizing violence aaginst women].

At 8/31/09 11:35 AM, aSquared94 wrote: First of all its most likely not love, just infatuation. It's probably just an effect of puberty to have gay thoughts, how old are you?

I don't think his issue was with being gay, but how to approach devloping a relationship with someone.

At 8/30/09 07:30 PM, Deadchick wrote: Intercourse, Pennsylvania. Can you believe it though, it's an Amish place :o

You haven't lived until you've had Amish sex.

You know what they say, once you go Amish...uhh...

Boca Raton, FL

translation: mouse mouth

At 8/30/09 06:49 PM, citricsquid wrote:

At 8/30/09 06:47 PM, Magik-Waffle wrote: Show us the pic.

kty

I present to you this picture made into "art"!

Ideally you'd also put some lyrics from Evanescence, or some other bullshit "emotional" song.

At 8/30/09 02:12 PM, XxXTHENIGHTWOLFXxX wrote: What the fuck is up with "scientology"

I looked it up and did research .. but it still beats the shit out of me.

Cults are very attractive, especially when they involve wealthy and/or famous persons, and to be fair, if you take the inherrent evilness of Scientology away, the belief system really isn't that much crazier than those who look to Star Wars or Star Trek for their "spiritual" guidance.

At 8/30/09 06:14 PM, ReiperX wrote:

I don't think you can get AIDs from eating a corpse, unless maybe its fresh.
be wrong on this, so if you want to show me evidence otherwise go ahead.

From the

Center for Disease Control

"Scientists and medical authorities agree that HIV does not survive well outside the body, making the possibility of environmental transmission remote."

Having said that, if you were to eat an HIV-positive person soon after kiling them, chances are the virus is still going to be active. So while the odds are pretty remote in the scenarios mentioned before, why even consider taking the risk?

At 8/26/09 01:57 AM, dySWN wrote: In Communist Russia, Mary Jo Kopechne outlives you!

SOVIET Russia! Respect your 1980s comedians, sir!

At 8/26/09 12:27 AM, 372 wrote: I wrote this a while ago.
Its comes in handy quite often...

Ehh, some interesting propositions, but you sir are the Pangloss of philosophy.

At 8/15/09 02:15 PM, Hellian00 wrote:

If you live in the US, then you are not getting paid $3.50/hr. Minimum wage is $7.25, I believe

Depending on the state, minimum wage for servers (i.e. waiter/waitress) can be below minimum wage. Unless it's changed in the past 5 years, I know in WI servers only get paid like $3.00

I wouldn't call the people who work at Sonic "servers" in the same sense as actual sit-down restaurants. Sonic is fast food, like a McDonalds or a Taco Bell, so their workers shouldn't be forced to rely on tips. Besides, what's 15% of a meal that costs less than $8.00? Even if they did get regular tips, you'd still be lucky to walk away with $10.00 by the end of your shift.

Yeah, this guy is getting ripped off BIG TIME.

Simply put:

Matthew 24: 36

"But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only."

At 7/26/09 12:43 AM, SeraphimFalling wrote:

That would be like saying height didn't exist before we made feet and whatnot.

No, height didn't exist before *we* collectively decided it was an important phenomenon to be noticed and codified.

At 7/24/09 06:24 PM, SuperDeagle wrote:

Quit jumping the gun and sticking words in my mouth. In this case Obama had zero reason to bring this up, he's injecting race into something that has nothing to do with it. It would be different if he started a whole new subject about it, but instead he has it in a list directly commenting on the situation.

The issue of race in this story was interjected LONG before Obama got around to it; in fact it was central the moment Gates was arrested. The only reason why Obama made these comments was because people were already discussing the issue of race, he was asked a pointed question about the issue, and all he was was acknowledge an incredibly sad fact about the state of race relations today.

At 7/24/09 06:11 PM, SuperDeagle wrote:

Taking sides or not, there was no reason for him to even remark on the whole long history of african americans and latinos thing.

Why? Because racial and ethnic discrimination doesn't happen in the USA anymore? CNN just did another large report on African Americans, and for MANY people of color, the issues surrounding prejudicial misconduct are a very real part of their lives.

At 7/23/09 11:58 PM, Col-Sandchez wrote:

Time was before man, although the passing of Time is experienced by man.

Time, as a unit of measurement, would hardly live up to the same standards which would be useful to non-human entities. To claim that a "minute" exists is to place an arbitrary label on something purely because we declare it to be of importance.

Maybe if Tosh could get the un-funny stick out of his ass, his show wouldn't fail so much at trying to be a replacement for "The Soup".

At 7/23/09 09:52 PM, Col-Sandchez wrote: We exist because we can experience the passing of Time.

But is not time an artificial creation of humanity?

NG, I give to thee hot solo cockatiel action

At 7/23/09 02:19 AM, BionicJuice wrote:

The characters stem from my own self, you can say it's bi-polar disorder, and you may be right, but i'll disagree. The main characters names are Allan and Elisa. Allan represents the goofy side of me and Elisa is the more serious side. I made her a girl because I thought it would be more interesting.
As far as their relationship goes they're friends. that's about as far as I thought about it.

I think your idea for your characters is actually quite interesting. We've all seen the webcomics where the main character is an [idealized] version of the creator, but you've chosen to take 2 contrasting aspects of yourself and develop them into individual characters--maybe I'm getting too philosophical, but this sort of reflective self-awareness is a core existential concept.

Experimenting with your art and your writing is always a good idea! I'm sure you've seen your styles improve and change, and I wish you the best of luck developing your skills. I'm glad you're able to take a mature look at your work, rather than getting defensive and approval-whoring like too many artists/writers are these days.

I bow to your usage of "whilst"!

It might help if we knew the premise of your comic.

Who are the main character(s)?
What is their relationship?
What is the primary source of your jokes?

Most importantly, what's going to make your comic stand out amongst the countless others out there? What's your hook?

My money is on most self-proclaimed "atheists" eventually settling on becoming agnostics.

At 7/23/09 01:22 AM, SeraphimFalling wrote: Nice. But there are mentally people, that in there minds created a whole life they lived, that they can remember the smells, touch, sights, and other senses. But in fact never happened. Also We can only know what our senses allow. So there could be things going on we don't even know about and have no way to tell.

I believe I can fly, therefore i can fly.

No, that's not how things work :P

Individual determinations are not the end-all to what constitutes reality.

Furthermore we only know all of this because our brains tell us we do. We have nothing to really on besides chemical reactions going on in our brain wich put the universe together in front of us.

But that's my point--my existence is not dependent on your ability to perceive me, nor is yours on mine, AND my ability to perceive that you exist is no less valid than your own ability to perceive your own existence. Our ability to process and recognize information may indicate to us that we exist, but the fact of our existence is wholly independent of our ability to recognize it.

At 7/23/09 12:46 AM, SeraphimFalling wrote:

Well here. Everything you sense is electrical impulses in your brain. So the only reason you know you exist is because your brain tells you so. But then again your brain can lie to you. Schizophrenia and what not. So Who know we could all be a figment of your imagination. And you could just be a random sequence of events in a universe that may not exist.

However, I can judge other things to exist. For example, I determine that the computer in front of me exists, and furthermore, I judge that should I walk away so that my computer is no longer in my direct perception, the computer will still exist.

Additionally, if existence is determined by an individual's ability to be self-aware, yet this awareness comes from interaction with external stimuli, then this would imply that either (A) there is a state that supercedes individual awareness/existence; (B) our existence is dependent solely on other entities; and/or (C) existence is created through a perpetual cycle of all things being aware of all other things.

If chicken = shaped like a penis, then what food would be vagina-esque?

At 7/21/09 08:36 PM, Dekagaru wrote:

At 7/21/09 06:20 PM, Khawner wrote: /stupid logic

"It says"; What says? The bible? Sorry but no relevance on US law there. The law? Well yea a very recent law called DOMA says so, but the entire point of this this thread is to show that law is unconstitutional. So... either explain yourself or don't post idiotic things.

It was a joke.