5,460 Forum Posts by "HighlyIllogical"
At 6/8/07 03:13 PM, BigScizot wrote: I heard they were going to be replacing them with these.
Nope, the program got cancelled. It's too bad really, the M16/4 family sucks. They need to switch to the HK416 like Delta and other special operations forces are doing – but that won't happen...
At 6/7/07 10:58 PM, SolInvictus wrote: "this is madness!"
"no! this, is, EPIC!"
"Woah, this is epic, dude!"
The narration was as funny as the video itself.
Nothing wrong with trying to manipulate people...
He does do that, but his fundamental argument is true. Not that I'm a MM apologist.
That kind of stuff doesn't seem true. Maybe it's a particular school with those standards?
Idk, though.
Anyone heard of Andrew Dice Clay?
At 6/7/07 05:29 PM, Malachy wrote:
i'm sorry, but your profile says you're 15, though its possible that you lied (hell, i'm not 73 ^_^), but if you aren't, what the hell is Dodd recruiting 15 year olds for his campaign?
Nope, I'm 15, though only a few days from 16...I've done volunteer work for years, though (years meaning 3 or 4). No recruiting involved – I asked.
seriously, we were considering getting a new computer and my fiance wants to do graphic design work
I would so get a Mac if I were in that position..
At 6/7/07 04:52 PM, Memorize wrote: Michael Moore... dot com?
Are you... kidding?
His sources for the facts are very much there.
At 6/7/07 04:17 PM, Mathaeus wrote:
So blowing up innocent non-combative civilians (most of which are little children) isn't terrorism?
Academic source for that, please?
During the "Al-Aqsa" intifada, about 1900 Palestinians and about 700 Israelis were killed. Of the Palestinians, at least 54 percent were combatants (most of the rest could not have their combatant status determined...so it would be rational to assume that many were terrorists), while of the Israelis, 80 percent were non-combatants. Source: Link That's the website of the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism in Herzliya.
Abstenence only sex education doesn't work, though, and it's often misleading.
"Many American youngsters participating in federally funded abstinence-only programs have been taught over the past three years that abortion can lead to sterility and suicide, that half the gay male teenagers in the United States have tested positive for the AIDS virus, and that touching a person's genitals "can result in pregnancy," a congressional staff analysis has found."
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/article s/A26623-2004Dec1.html)
The 1964 Civil Rights Act doesn't ban discrimination in places of public accomodation on the basis of sexual orientation, but it does in terms of religion, ethnicity etc.
At 6/7/07 01:30 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote:At 6/6/07 06:57 PM, HighlyIllogical wrote: Again, I'll suggest it:and how the fuck does that work? (I really dont want to know but I want to know whats hes talking about)
We should chemically neuter them. They'll have less drive to do illicit sex acts...
Florida has a law for it:
"The new Florida statute authorizes a trial judge to sentence any defendant who is convicted of sexual battery to receive MPA [a sterilizing drug]. If the defendant is convicted of sexual battery and has a prior conviction for sexual battery, the trial court is required to impose a sentence of MPA administration. The administration of MPA is, however, contingent upon a determination by a court-appointed medical expert that the defendant is an appropriate candidate for the weekly drug injections. Likewise, the continued use of MPA is not required when a determination is made that it is not medically appropriate. The trial judge must specify the duration of the treatment that, in the discretion of the court, may be for life."
http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/fra mes/252/spalfram.html
Granted, the source is an anti-compulsory sterilization source, but the point is that it is done.
At 6/7/07 03:39 PM, Walks-on-water wrote:
lol. its their own fault.
That's highly inconsiderate. It's a parenting problem and a lack of sex ed. problem!
I blame abstenence only sex education.
Blargh, I'm SO P.Oed
I was invited to go to the debates in NH with the Dodd contingent (I'd done some work for them) and mom had declined for me, and I just found out this today...
Too bad, but I did get a sick shirt out of it -- Second Dodd shirt woot!
Dirty nursery rhymes FTW.
The verdict seems ok, if this is what it is:
(http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,
138277,00.html?wh=news)
"While Hunter subjected both Neal and Coyle to harsh questioning over their claims, the California lawmaker agreed that another round of tests is the only thing that will put the issue to rest."
At least they'll try figuring it out based on scientific principles.
Sac...rifices to become environmentally friendly? There are lots of simple things (they're cheap, too), such as lowering the temp in your house during the winter (just wear more clothes), planting a tree to block sun from entering an exposure that gets too much sun during the summer, replacing your bulbs with compact fluorescents (you have to replace bulbs anyway, so wait till they burn out and use compact fluorescents at that point), etc.
These are inexpensive things to do.
At 6/6/07 08:30 PM, Memorize wrote:
He lied under oath you fucking idiot. How many times to I have to spell it out for you?
He did not LIE in a legal sense!
The definition of what he "lied" about is the reason why he didn't lie!
As I've pointed out, the act that he was involved in was not placed under the definition of sex provided to him!
At 6/6/07 08:32 PM, stafffighter wrote: Because with all of these benifits plus the loosening of allowences for medical use and decriminalization they'd run low on exuse to keep it illegal.
Hemp lobby, maybe?
That'd sure do it, I have to say.
At 6/5/07 10:52 PM, stafffighter wrote:
A choice or prefrence and the race you were born as are compltly different things.
And there is the reason why racist, homophobic and anti-differently abled jokes are not O.K, while jokes about Scientology and stupid actions are.
We can judge people based on choices they make that have nothing to do with who they inherently are. Otherwise, for example, hell no you can't hate homosexuality without hating homosexuals...it's not a choice!
Because intent is not applicable here. An intentional murder is worse than a non-intentional one, but anything that indirectly leads to the sexual exploitation of minors is just so utterly immoral, repugnant and harmful...That's why it's illegal.
That's why they work at minimum wage...
Or it's a byproduct of doing the same task, they want some variety so they prompt you so that you help them?
At 6/5/07 07:35 PM, Elfer wrote: - Redundancy
It's not a command economy – capitalism works based on competition. Health care and education shouldn't be like that, but consumer goods? Pff, why not?
- Marketing
Corporations can spend money as they wish, it puts money into a lot of sectors and provides good jobs.
So yeah, this was a badly organised post, but here's what I was trying to say: Capitalism is great for a lot of things, but sometimes, like in the case of roads, police, education, and probably health care, handing the responsibility completely to the private sector is not always the best catch-all solution.
I totally concur with that assessment.
At 6/6/07 04:51 PM, Memorize wrote: I had a problem with him:
-Lying under oath
So did I, until I read about how they defined "sex" when they questioned him.
-And just for humor, trying to change the deffinition of "sex"
The question was asked with the definition of sex above, and his definition met that, meaning that he didn't commit a sex act, so he DIDN'T actually perjure himself.
Again, I'll suggest it:
We should chemically neuter them. They'll have less drive to do illicit sex acts...
At 6/6/07 04:50 PM, gijfef wrote: Hell if the Bible said that we should chop theives hands off we would most likely do it!
Good point, and it does say that we are supposed to "deal with" adulterers and homosexuals harshly, and it also states that you should kill someone who strikes or disrespects his/her parents...yet this wasn't done and is not done. Why? Back in the day, for one, the Sanhedring really did not inflict these kinds of overly severe punishments...and, of course, our culture has developed so that we don't do these cruel things...
At 6/6/07 04:56 PM, SevenSeize wrote: Your guess is as good as mine....We have some of the boats down there in one of the harbors, maybe that's why? I'm not sure. There may be another D day museum in DC as well.
Could certainly be...I think that HIggins boats were designed by a guy (named Higgins, naturally) down in Louisiana, near or in New Orleans.
I had a 2 minute brain fart trying to remember the name of New Orleans, lol.
That reminds me, I've got to get down to D.C. soon...
Here is a linky.
*Drool*
Nice museum!
*Ceases drooling*
That's just, ugh, stupid.
Firstly, can you prove that?
Secondly: You argue that:
If sex outside of marriage causes divorce, harming families, then sex outside of marriage harms families.
That's silly.
Hold on.
Clinton was shown this:
""For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in sexual relations when the person knowingly engages in or causes:
1. Contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person;
2. Contact between any part of the person's body or an object and the genitals or anus of another person; or
3. Contact between the genitals or anus of the person and any part of another person's body.
Contact means intentional touching, either directly or through clothing.""
Ok, so since the judge got rid of 2 and 3, only 1 remains.
Number 1 means that if he's recieving oral stimulation he's not intending to "gratify" Lewinsky. Plus, his touching could easily be for his own pleasure. If he's to actually have perjured himself, you'd have to read his mind and, if and only if he intended to gratify her is he guilty of perjury.
At 6/6/07 04:18 PM, SevenSeize wrote: God I hate double posting.
But I forgot, we have the National D Day museum in New Orleans. When you drive up, they have that exact photo painted on a mural on the side of the building. Whoever did it, did a darn good job.
Why New Orleans?
I would have put it in DC with a couple of higgins boats and made the photo into a giant, well, sculpture, kind of like the Korean War memorial.
Is it illegal? Well:
"The system of justice administered by tribal sardars, heads of tribes, is not only ruled out by the Constitution in areas other than the designated tribal areas; the institution of the sardar was formally abolished in the System of Sardari (Abolition) Act, 1976 which says in the preamble:
''The system of Sardari, prevalent in certain parts of Pakistan, is the worst remnant of the oppressive feudal and tribal system which, being derogatory to human dignity and freedom, is repugnant to the spirit of democracy and equality as enunciated by Islam and enshrined in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and opposed to the economic advancement of the people.''
Quoth http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engasa33 0242002
At 6/6/07 04:31 PM, Memorize wrote: Horrible idea.
And it's thanks to people like you who can't keep it in your pants.
I'm judging (a.) the legality with what limited info I have and (b.) the morality. Killing isn't necessary. At worst, you can lock them up. But even that is excessive!
Clinton didn't perjure himself, but that's immaterial...And, to top it, he wasn't convicted.
His sexual actions weren't punishable anyway.
Scoot was a criminal in all senses.
'Scuse me, but the law doesn't proscribe execution for sex outside of marriage, according to the original post.
"Sex outside marriage is a crime in Pakistan and tribal village councils often punish those involved with death.
Last year, Pakistan's parliament approved a new bill amending Islamic laws on rape and adultery.
The new law dropped the death penalty for people having sex outside marriage."
