Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 7/8/12 04:00 AM, Iron-Claw wrote: Fundamentalism
Terrorism
Arrogance
Genocide
Holocaust

I'm sorry. I have to point this out. Reading the initials on your listing made me think of one thing only.

Ia! Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn!

At 7/8/12 02:12 AM, benmitchell0036 wrote: Just because you don't want to believe it doesn't make it fake.

That'd be one hell of an argument, if only you would ever realise that "just because you want to believe, it doesn't make it real" either.

Still, here's a couple more points:
"Hundreds of black-and-white photographs beamed back to earth by NASA's hard-working Spirit rover since 2004 show architecture reminiscent of the glimmering marble structures that were common in ancient Greece."
1. Leave Ancient Greece out of it. Ancient Greece had no relation whatsoever with Christian beliefs.
2. Where would those "hundreds of photographs" happen to be? I'd assume one who writes an article, also has access to the evidence he writes about?

3. So, you mean to tell me that
a. either there's a few trillion roaming people on Mars and we just didn't happen to notice them before or
b. invisible etheral souls that live on in "heaven" need real marble structures to... not lose their way or something

Nice try but 98% of the reason I even replied is that it's summer, warm, I'm bored and it's noon.

PS: "He's shown us Heaven. What more proof do you need?" Bitch, no one showed me shit. All I was shown was a text by someone I never heard of, claiming something with zero justification. Brb, updating my blog with an article about how scientists discovered my penis is the thronegate to heaven, then proclaiming that finally there's the evidence we always looked for - I wrote it, so it's true.

At 7/7/12 10:46 PM, Xenomit wrote: It only looks better to you because you hate how much it sucks to grow up, and when you think about how great your childhood was, watching all those wonderful cartoons, you start to think "holy shit dude, it's so much better in every way :O"

Grow up

Because, clearly, appreciating "modern days cartoons and anime" is how one grows up, as opposed to older people that grew up about a decade before you started spamming how "your" cartoons and anime are "better" than "theirs". Yes? Yes, sounds like a mature process indeed.

Let me raise a first point. Even though I'm not opposed to your view, I feel compelled to point out that humans lack ethics as a species, which seems to be the base of your debate that they do use ethics "just in the wrong way".

If you want an example of that, see how a lawyer is expected to defend an accused because it's "his job" even if he knows or believes the accused to be guilty of the crime.

Doesn't matter where it was, tbh. Shifting blame for a person's actions to "the big bad wolf" Internet is providing with excuses to keep up the behaviour. How come the other billions of users didn't think it's ok to do that? It's one thing to understand a 7 year old isn't aware of its actions, and a different thing to assume a teen isn't. Maybe he has no sense of consequences, because he hasn't been brought up right. ...And what better way to teach him there are consequences than this policy of "awww not your fault" for such a hideous violation of the 5 year old kid's entire life, right? >.>

At 7/6/12 11:48 PM, Painbringer wrote: If they were all skinned alive?

Yes. They'd find ways. "Big feet" vs. "Small feet" perhaps. "Tall" vs. "Short". They would just find SOMETHING different to hate on.

INTP

At 7/5/12 10:39 AM, ParadiseCosts wrote: the 3rd Crusade

Just noticed that. My mistake. 4th, not 3rd.

At 4/10/11 01:34 PM, yos2 wrote: good advice on how to forget spoilers?

Avoid making threads about them.

At 7/6/12 08:43 AM, KennyD wrote:

At 7/6/12 08:21 AM, ParadiseCosts wrote: Why is it that everyone:
a. assumes they are sexually active and
b. thinks "18-15" is a "gap of hellish dimensions" by default?

a. because the ultimate goal of dating is sex.
b. 15 - is middle of puberty and can't even drive yet. 18 - for all intensive purposes is considered an adult

a. "ultimate" doesn't mean immediate. quite the opposite.
b. 15 is middle of "teens". it's pretty much towards the end of puberty, especially for girls. Driving is irrelevant, menstruation and hormonal changes have nothing to do with a century-old invention, believe me. As for 18 being considered an adult, that is true, by law. Not by nature. I've met many 30yearolds that were nowhere near maturity. The base assumption you make is that your country's lawful age of consent is universal truth. It's not. In Spain, age of consent is 13. In most of Europe it's between 14-16. A third point to make, is that not everyone matures at the same pace. Her maturity at 15 may well be on par with his at 18. In fact, it's probably ahead of his. But, to keep this on facts, law prohibits her from sexual intercourse. Law says nothing about "dating". And it never will. If you see someone as a "sick fuck" for... dating a 15yearold when they are 18, what are those of us that dated 32yearolds when we were 23? Seeing a relationship as a "prize" to "brag about" or with the sole purpose to "get in her pants" doesn't say much about the couple's maturity, only about the one judging it.

All this has happened before
And all this will happen again

Sexism is the discrimination based on the sex.

If you would retaliate (not escalate) against a man, but wouldn't against a woman, that's sexism too.

I wouldn't hit a woman. But not to "not be called sexist" - most of the people that would call me sexist are hypocrites anyway, there's no value in their words. Just because I wouldn't really hit a man either. Unless, ofc, I was being attacked. In that case, I don't care if it'd be a man or a woman. Simple as that.

Why is it that everyone:
a. assumes they are sexually active and
b. thinks "18-15" is a "gap of hellish dimensions" by default?

At 7/6/12 07:55 AM, tox wrote: Lizzylovespink.... I don't exactly know what to say...
I don't know what angle your playing dating someone soooo much older then your self..

Hint: it may be that she likes him.

Anyone here understand Greek? I'd love to know what they were all saying before things got out of hand.

The "radical left" (which is neither radical nor left, as I mentioned above) told the GD member that GD would take the country 500 years back.

:Golden Dawn - Greece's only hope.
Yeah - if they take over Germany's government perhaps. Not Greece's, though.

:They also feed the homeless, They run safety patrols
And stab and beat poor immigrants on the streets, as well as legal greek citizens just because they don't share their views.

:When you start your topic like that, nobody will ever take you seriously
^ this

:Golden Dawn is a neo-Nazi group. They have a goal of eliminating immigrants, both legal and illegal, and particularly among the Muslim community. They also want land mines across the border between Greece and Turkey.

Support for them is dangerous. If they are allowed to gain power, they could eventually shift into a Fourth Reich, a regime designed for mass extermination of undesirables.
^ and this

:but again, democracy would never do this! it has never and will never elect dictators!

this is TOTALLY not an example of an old trend that we have seen in the past with Democracy!
^ and this. It's not unnoticeable that the circumstances that got our friend, Adolf, to power were exactly the same: high unemployment, global crisis, lousy economy, focusing intolerance to foreigners, exhausted workers' class (the NaZi -were- a workers' party, after all). I hate History repeating itself.

:there are already calls for Golden Dawn to be banned, and that says it all.
Yes, it does. It says it all to anyone BUT the GD.

:But which people they will mass kill? The Macedonians.
Slavomacedonians you mean. "Macedonians" involves greeks in its most part.

:We're talking about Greece and you can't remember Ioannis Metaxas?
Be fair, the only reasons even Greeks remember Metaxas is the word "No" and a brandy.

:Golden dawn? You mean the nazi party that got 12% of their parliament?
Um. 7. They got 7%. I don't know who and how "doubled" it to reach "12%" but they got 7% - and it was enough to be an outrage.

:greece just elected a conservitive government outing the bailout Left and keeping the Euro. so the Eu exonomy is still safe for now
Actually, what it elected (under firm pressures from EU & co) is the same two parties that have been ruling for the past 40 years (and are responsible for this situation). They were not "the only ones that wanted to keep the Euro", about 75% of the people want that. They were just the only ones that wanted to uphold Merkel's batshit stupid policies. As for the "radical left", believe me, they are neither radical nor left. Just like PASOK aren't socialists. They just label themselves that.

:I know because right wingers always know how to fix an economy and left wingers always mess it up.
Yeah, I mean look at Sweden and Denmark's messed up economies! Right? To get something straight: Left means full government control (think USSR). Right means zero government control. The current "left" and "right" have nothing to do with it. If anything, some "left" is central and most of the "right" are completely left. Fascism and Nazism, both tagged "far right" are utterly left - full government control.

:the really funny thing about the Golden Dawn is that they are just leftists with xenophobia.
^ this

:Immigrants don't rape people!
Oh, they do. We call that "individual liability". Because natives do too. People do. But being an immigrant doesn't -make- you a rapist. There's a big difference in "Immigrants rape people" when it means that some immigrants do and when it means that they all do -because- they are immigrants. The former is stating a fact. The latter is bigotry.

Long story short, if Germany's politics don't change course 180 degrees, expect a lot of unpleasantness - and not just because of parties like GD that gather up and harvest anger and rage.

For the sake of the US (as well as the rest of the world that can't stop facepalming and headdesking at your Bushes and Clintons and Romneys), I hope he will win. With a clear margin. And that his way of thinking will affect more everyday Americans.

Agnostic.

To the post above: put it this way, if you refrain from illegal activity and just focus on building on it, platonically, there will be a time when she will be 20 and you'll be 24 and no one will care about those 4 years of difference. There's nothing wrong with that. There's no law forbidding romantic interest. Only explicit behaviour. It's simple as that. Just make it count. :)

At 7/5/12 01:08 AM, 4761 wrote: He's like SOPA. These media crazes just die out.

I bet a good half of you don't even remember SOPA anymore

SOPA/PIPA didn't "die out as a trend". It failed to pass. As did ACTA in the EU.

KONY was shot down about 2 days after its launch. Mostly for misrepresenting the country's situation. According to locals, he hadn't been there in years by the time the vid became viral (some even claim he's been long dead). Plus, there were severe accusations about the way the videomaker's organisation worked, something about 10% of the income going to charity, making a profit of a couple of million dollars annually or some such. I didn't even hear about bacon sizzling or any other sort of bbq, I tend to not pay attention to "juicy gossip".

PS: No offense meant towards tolerant Christians that don't step on others' toes. I wouldn't be using the same tone, if it were the case.

Oh yay, another bigoted ignorant christian fanatic that thinks he's "educating" by trying to shove his religion's outdated values down the world's throat.

Let's get one thing straight (pun not intended) : whatever your religion tells you, keep it to yourself. I'm not gay, but I'm not christian either, and I frankly don't care what your religion teaches you. It's taught it to me long ago, and I've rejected its bullcrap when I was 12. I don't need to live by them in my 30. Thanks, live long and prosper, and stuff, but keep your fantasies out of public administration please. World doesn't belong to you.

Don't get me wrong, I don't hate your view. Just like you're not preaching bigotry.

*sigh*

At 7/5/12 10:51 AM, BAKEdLays wrote: Society will perceive it as a bad thing when really it's not. Deal with it.

That kinda depends on -which- society that would be. I don't think any societies I've seen would see 3 years of difference as a bad thing. Most would just shrug it off and not even pay any attention to it. It kinda depends. Not saying it doesn't apply where you live, just that it doesn't around here. Agreed that it's not bad, though.

Nope.

Smells a lot like trolling. Just in case it isn't (which I'm 98,56% sure it is), here's a brief answer that examines your question both historically and sociologically:

1. Peasants fight holy wars for religion's sake. See #2 about why. But those that declare those holy wars, don't declare them for religion's sake. If that was the case, we'd have a constant holy war, everyone against everyone else. Declaration of war serves an agenda. Typical example, the 3rd Crusade, where the Pope even excommunicated the ones participating in it, because they never actually went to "free the holy lands" blah blah, they just went to ransack a Croatian port for Venetian interests, and then onwards to ransack Byzantium - also Christian lands - to serve the interests of a banished monarch. Long story short: religious wars are only religious in the minds of the common soldier. Truth is their causes are almost never religious.
2. Humans don't define themselves according to what they are, but according to what they aren't. And, for that, they need a "them" as opposed to "us", to create a feeling of belonging in an artificial group based on objective "differences", to provide for a common enemy so that the "group" doesn't turn against its ruler. It's been common practice since god knows how long.

Why -do- we fight those wars? Well, basically because we're idiots. :D

At 7/5/12 09:06 AM, onescarydude wrote: From a legal point of view, you're perfectly safe as long as you don't do anything with her. Assuming you do, or you get accused of it, as she's only 3 years your junior, it's a misdemeanour, as opposed to a felony. I can understand the worry about her felony, but it doesn't seem like they'd actually do anything to you, beyond calling you a "hurtful" name.

I don't think breaking up with her is the best thing you could do, but perhaps keeping it on the downlow, particularly in terms of her family, might be best. Although i'm in the UK, so the age of consent is 16 here, as opposed to 18 where you are, in Cali, my fiancÃf©e was fifteen when I met her, and I was 19. I'm now 20, and she's 16, and we're engaged.

The long and short of it is, if you love the girl, and connect well with her, it's noone's place to tell her you can't be with her, but it may be wise to keep it on the down-low, and for your own sake, stay out of her pants until she's 18.

Pretty much what he said ^

(Provided you don't break any laws) age difference is just a concept. People are different enough as it is, if you find someone that gets you, it doesn't matter if you're 10 years older or 10 years younger. It can prove tricky with such big gaps, but 3 years? Definitely not a problem there, if you got proper communication going on.

Just make sure you both realise and understand the legal framework that is set in your country/state/whatever to protect her from sexual abuse (and don't kid yourself, consensual sex with a minor is still abuse, as statutory rape). There's no laws against having a relationship, though, as long as it doesn't get sexually explicit. And certainly there's no "nature laws" to how much age difference a couple can have. Just individual experiences. Some have had good, some have had bad. It doesn't constitute a "law" of any kind.