Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

I don't see the purpose of these ID cards to be used as a protection against terrorism. It's completely absurd that they are actually saying that it will.

But on another note, I highly doubt they will intrude onto your personal freedom. What it can be is an improvement upon the current ID systems we have in place. Hell this would be great to prevent people from getting fake licenses , then buying liquor or tobacco. It probably would be hard or expensive to create an iris and facial scan that would work with a certian person. It could also help hospitals like it was previous said. Also we are in an technological age and we should have an ID system that utilizes it.

At 4/25/04 08:54 PM, zachomis wrote: yes, it makes me want to hump just about everything that moves :-/

You might just have an emotional disorder....

At 4/25/04 01:19 PM, _Thanatopsis_ wrote: not to mention the fact that if it wasnt for the british then the situation would have been totaly differnt and maybe there would be peace in the middle east if the british hadnt handed over the land to just the holocaust survivors. but we will never know.

Yeah we will never know, *eyes apfelsafat* Dam brits screwed up the middle east :)

apfelsafat, looking at your past posts, all you do is criticize. I haven't seen anything from you on what could possibly be done. All you say is "bush sux!" and "Israel oppresses" but yet there is very little material behind all of it. Also you criticise capitalism and communism, the two basic economic systems we have going today, which supports the lives of over billions of people. Once again, only criticism. And on how capitalism will destroy free thought and will, will you please exagerate on that?

Also, I didn't know they only had rocks in palestine. How in the world are they managing to blow up buses with rocks? Rock propelled rock? Please man.

Basically after all of that rumbling I'll tell you this. Think of the world today. Think about why things are occuring the way that they are. Don't be persuaded by your fellow english men because they will probably put you down a pre-determined path and only be influence by what they say. Create your own genuine thought. If it stays the same that it is today, good because you will have more proof to why things are so wrong and how they can be improved upon. Notice the word "how." Criticism does not work well if you only provide criticism and no alternatives. Things will not change, or if they do, it will be for the worse.

(If you want to know what the hell I'm talking, just look at apfelsafat's past posts)

At 4/25/04 01:12 PM, _Thanatopsis_ wrote: i personaly dont support eather side they both are in the wrong.

Same here, both of the sides had the land at one time. Both of them took the land from each other. So basically we have, from both perspectives, 2 people who are attacking and 2 people who are defending.

As for the differences in inteligence between races, it is a good possibility. There is a different size of the brains between the races because of different characteristics in the skull, but it does not mean a person with a larger brain will be instantly smarter. Look at the person who had the largest brain, he has mentally retarded. But then again, Einstein had an enlarged area of his brain(forgot what the area was called) that allowed him to be so dam smart. But like what it was said before, it only matters what you learn and your "actual inteligence" in order for anything to matter.

At 4/25/04 12:29 PM, freek90 wrote: (Something)

Those were the 2 longest sentences I have ever seen.

At 4/25/04 09:13 AM, zachomis wrote: but back to the issue, i think the first thing we need to do is tether corporations and start allowing the UN to regulate tham...i also think the "UN Army" thing has already been done...its called NATO

North Atlantic Treaty Organization does not equal United Nations!!!!

As for the UN having an army, it would prove to be WAY too inefficient. Not inefficient as going into and fighting, but the timing in which they do it it will be. The UN is way too splintered with international disputes that deciding to go to war would take a long time. Look at Rwanda whenever there was a genocide. They acted way too slow causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands(According to the Rwandan government, 937,000 people were killed).

At 4/24/04 01:20 AM, Fiend_Lore wrote: i thought if you were 18 you were allowed to vote. Maybe not on certain things, but isnt that for congress to decide?

That's basically what we're debating about, lowering the voting age to 16. But in order for congress to care, people have to show an opinion on the topic.

I really think its hilarious that Bush is using it as a political tool. He didn't stop it, he was even somewhat ignorant about pre-911 terrorists. What is really bothering me know is people dealing with security and Republicans scrutinizing Kerry for having a pre-9/11 stance on security. I mean wtf? Republicans are bloating how much their aggressive stance to invade and attack countries that harbor terrorists is actually going to stop terrorism. It's completely retarded and extremely expensive. Kerry's stance on defense is more of a gather inteligence and then prosecute the terrorists.

How to stabilize the world:

Uniformity

How to stabilize the world in its current condition:

Assimilation of the world to a different society to an extent and learning of other cultures. As well as that, end embargoes and stop nationalism.

At 4/21/04 11:57 PM, RedSkvnk wrote: Strange how you have a definitive turnout percentage on the 2002 elections, since even the FEC website hasn't released the data, but I understand what you're saying. Off-election years (non-prez) usually have lower turnout. But your number was still way off. The estimated percentage of people from the eligable voting population was 39.9% (estimated) in 2002.

But off prez elections is basically a state election. These will vary by state(of course). In my state the turnout was about 28%, which I just rounded to 30% whenever I remembered it. I live in Virginia if you really want to check that number.

Hey Judge, I already know that a lot of things that are told in history books are half-truths. They only state one side of the story. That's why I usually take all sides to a story and make out the most logical or couplle logical reasons to why people do what they do or why things occurred the way they did.

As for most of the things you said, like the Limbaugh thing, I don't pay attention to how they are saying something, but what actually happened. I think about why that particular person would do something, and most of the time Limbaugh is being an ass by only looking at one particular thing and scrutinizing it (I might be thinking of the wrong person right now, so...).

As for the Hitler thing, I already knew that. I also knew Lincoln wasn't as great of a person as people said he was. Ignorance is there if you let it to be or forget that there is such thing as ignorance. Sure many teenagers fail to realize that there is ignorance, even in the news, but so do many adults.

At 4/21/04 11:32 PM, RedSkvnk wrote: Wait wait wait, unless we're talking about your local school elections - more than 50% of the voting population voted in the 2000 federal elections.

My bad I was thinking about the '02 elections.

At 4/21/04 11:27 PM, RedSkvnk wrote:

At 4/21/04 11:13 PM, Ravens_Grin wrote: Strange how a person can be a legal adult at 16, be living on his own, and have a job that supports his life and possibly family.

Emancipation only carries certain advantages. They aren't legal adults in a full sense, for instance - not being able to vote. And they also still must follow state child laws. Which, it would seem to me, would be hard to support a family on.

Now back to this voting topic....

Sure. I'm looking for a reason to allow children to vote... mmm...

Hmm and in that article it says I can't have sex period even if I'm not emancipated. Strange.

16- and 17-year olds may be employed for unlimited hours. There are no federal laws restricting the number of hours of work per day or per week.

Also here is another link for state laws for child labor

At 4/21/04 10:54 PM, TheGooie wrote:

At 4/21/04 10:52 PM, RedSkvnk wrote:

At 4/21/04 10:30 PM, BWS wrote: Are you two gonna go have sex now or something?

Are you going to videotape?

If you video tape it, please don't use night vision mode, okay? We don't need another Paris Hilton crappy porn going around.

Yeah make sure you also have lights if it is during the middle of the night...because we don't want to just hear thinks going on and a blank screen to go along with it.

And yeah I just got one of those "You have exceeded your 4 posts limit in 30 minutes, please try again in 28 minutes" So yeah...(in the voting topic)

At 4/21/04 11:09 PM, TheGooie wrote:

At 4/21/04 11:00 PM, Ravens_Grin wrote: Give me a credible reason why 16 year olds should not be able to vote.

Do most 16 year olds understand how our government works (or SHOULD work)?

Probably not. But looking as less than 30% of Americans voted in the 2000 election, it doesn't seem like most people that can vote understand either.

Can you support yourself?

If I needed to, I could quite easily.

Do you own a home? Rent?

Nope because it would be irrational to do so. Let me ask this, how many 18-20 year olds live with their parents?

Have you come close to finishing peuberty?

(kermit voice) Of course I have (/kermit voice) But how does that pertain to a 16 year old's ability to vote?

Can you drive (well? If you can't, how can you get to the polls?)?

16 is the driving age, of course I can drive.

Have you passed an American History Final Exam (or regents or AP test)?

Never taken it but I know about American history. Again let me ask this, how many people that vote have taken the AP tests for American History? How many actually retained any facts during the time period that they learned about that stuff?

At 4/21/04 11:05 PM, RedSkvnk wrote:

At 4/21/04 11:00 PM, Ravens_Grin wrote: Give me a credible reason why 16 year olds should not be able to vote. None of this, "They're stupid and can't decide stuff" because you have no evidence to back that up. If you have evidence to prove it, then PROVE IT!

They aren't adults? That isn't enough? The fact that they need a legal guardian perhaps? That if they go into debt, it is passed onto their guardians?

But you can file for emancipation at 16. Let me give you pre-requisites for being emancipated, you only need one:

You must be married, or
You must be in the U.S. armed forces, or
You must be living apart from your parents or guardian and be managing your own money, or
The court must decide that an emancipation is in the best interests of you, or your parents, or your minor child (if you have one).

Strange how a person can be a legal adult at 16, be living on his own, and have a job that supports his life and possibly family. Now back to this voting topic....

At 4/21/04 11:01 PM, _Thanatopsis_ wrote: just wondering why people are avoiding my first post like the plague. does it have the plague does it need to be put on a heavy dose of antibiotics so that people would be willing to look at it what is going on?

Don't worry it happens a lot on this forum.

Well a couple people posting here have very little posts and they might not understand why so many people are getting on their asses or acting like pricks to them. That is basically my reasoning behind this topic.

I think it's funny that a lot of people are saying if you can vote you can go to war. Women can vote, but yet they are excluded from the draft. So then using your reasoning, women can't vote because they can't be drafted.

At 4/21/04 10:52 PM, RedSkvnk wrote: I know, I'm sorry. I should of clarified before when I asked for some reason. I meant a credible reason.

Could it be that 16 year olds have to pay social security when they get a job, a tax primarily for the working class?

Give me a credible reason why 16 year olds should not be able to vote. None of this, "They're stupid and can't decide stuff" because you have no evidence to back that up. If you have evidence to prove it, then PROVE IT!

Don't forget the wal-mart is costing my city a lot of money because they are having to restructure the roads to better suit the higher traffic. It also doesn't help that our wal-mart is the wal-mart that sells the most on the east coast. Also, it has created a horrible urban sprawl in my area, causing an increase in gas usage to drive to wal-mart as well as higher traffic on the interstate(which by the way is going to get another lane added onto it which is going to cost millions).

Why is congress doing this? Because of Janet Jackson's right boob, that is why. It has telepathic powers telling the entire religious community to go out and revolt against anything obscene. The senators are feeling this telepathic power of Janet Jackson's right boob and are acting upon it to retain votes and a job.

***Looks around****
Your not talking about me are you? :0

I know, I do it a lot, ideas just flow in my head and I just keep writing.

In order for your view to be properly thought about, please be able to spell. Also it would be a wise idea to have proper grammar. It is very annoying for many people to try and figure out what you are trying to say. May it be improper spellings or incomplete/fragmented sentences.

It's excise tax and it is basically a tax on goods, including gasoline, tobacco and various other taxes. I'm not great at defining stuff, so you should probably just look it up.

If income tax is illegal than driving on interstates, social security, the military, FBI, Federal wildlife reserves, etc. are illegal because of the use of illegal money. Come on get a grip on what you are actually saying. Income tax is necesary because it is a definite supply of income to supply all of the things you utilize or will use. Looking at your profile it says your 14. That means you are currently in school. The action that you are partaking in is then illegal because it is receiving money from an illegal source by the federal government through income taxes. Really, don't be stupid and actually think I'm siding on your side because I have a feeling that you just might. I am showing you the wrongs in your ways.

BTW, if income taxes are abolished, what would are military, defense, education, welfare, and healthcare system be supported by? Excise taxes? Hmm... Is the majority of the states as well as the federal agencies currently collecting excise taxes? Is there a lot of states in a budget crisis and are required to cut back on spending, including spending on infrastructure? Isn't the federal government in the same dillemma? Really, you need to think of more cause and effect than to say something is wrong. Suggest a system that would work effectively instead of just saying a system that is currently in place. What good does it do to that something should be abolished and give no alternatives? Use the same thing you are saying on different topics. Gasoline should be abolished because it is creating global warming and an increase of the deadly CO gas. Carbon monoxide if you don't understand formulas. High voltage electric poles should be eliminated because the people that are around them have a higher chance of getting brain tumors. Come on man, think.

At 4/21/04 10:13 PM, NoHitHair wrote: Slippery slope... I'm teaching my debate kids about that this week. Hopefully they don't end up resorting to the same illogical tactics when they debate.

Ooh, they're probably going to ramble on and use that on war, the FCC, FBI, cops, drugs and a whole bunch of irrational stuff that it shouldn't be combined with.

At 4/21/04 09:58 PM, RedSkvnk wrote: At 16, you are not an adult.

If we lower the age to 16, why not 15? Or intelligent 14 y/o's?

Why don't we let infants vote?

Aww the slippery slope excuse, used by way too many topics.