Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

No, it would be considered a gift to society, and we would all turn a blind eye.

But yes, there have been cases of Euthanasia.
The famous Dr.Kevorkian, for one.

Pre-Emptive war = Terrorism
Freedom Fighters = Terrorists
Terrorists = Afghani Defenders

Tyrant or not, Iraqi or not, Saddam could be a drooling kid with Down Syndrome, no one has the right to tell him what weapons he can and cannot have.
It is a soveirgn country, and nothing gives the US or the UN the right to push their ideals onto the leadership of it.

Everyone seems to be in the same quadrant

At 2/27/03 09:16 PM, karasz wrote:

::

least votes win... thats hysterical, like anyone in America could win by getting LESS votes... (im not going to finish the thought because everyone knows what is next and if u dont then u didnt follow the 2000 election)

I know what is next, I was kidding.

Sanctioned by the UN or not, Iraq has every right to these weapons. Not the US, not the UN, not anyone, has the right to try to take them away from him.
All these people trying to do "what is right" are only doing what is best for themselves, and sometimes not even that. As long as they posess these same weapons, they cannot condemn Iraq for having them, and as long as they are not Iraq, they have no right to take them away.

The new pole on the NG homepage is about Iraq.
When I last viewed it, Pro-War was just barely ahead.
Vote there now!

This could let us rewrite the entire Arch-Nemesis idea.
Who is your opposite?

I should be at odds with swayside, and I should often agree with Freakapotimus.

It may seem odd, but I think Slizor brought up the point that pretty much settles this.
Excellent idea.

Interesting....

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -3.00
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -5.74

I wouldn't be a wheel trekkie, but I do love his writing.
What I find most refreshing about it is that he isn't fanatically devoted to the characters staying the same. In most books or series, the character might change attire, or attitude, but they remain the same, or similar, in stature in the book.
In Jordan's writing, he's not afraid to mold the characters and change them, advance them, until they are much different and much more than youu began with.

Most series give you a book or two or three and leave you without what happens, but Jordan fills you to the limit with <|> Saidin <|> and keeps you hanging on.

And "dhoom" etc, I suppose are tributes to Tolkein's work. Jordan obviously has a great deal of respect and admiration for his works, to give him a sort of Cameo appearance with his words.

It's true. People shouldn't have to say it, and not only because of the words "under god", but because the government has no right to these people's alliegance.
Alliegance is given willingly after being earned, not forced.

And the government said they were fighting to make it stay compulsory because it "is a right". But why don't we just waive our right?

Because he's a rich, middle aged white man who "sings" aka talks to a beat about hot "oppressed" he is, and how much "shit" his life is.
Meanwhile, he's rich as hell, can but paradise, and doesn't even sing.

Spam bombs, logic-tipped bullets, etc.

But if everyone constricts themselves to their own forums, (CC, BC, etc), and don't come out.... that will tear apart regular BBS use.
There will be far less debate, people more spread out, less in each area, less to debate each topic, etc.

Ok, if you consciously decide to not support any canditates, but if you just decide not to vote because "voting's for fags" or "bush is ghey", then you shouldn't be complaining.

And what other system would you rather they use?
One with the least votes in an area wins?

Because Politics is just a name.
Not everything we discuss is political, but Politics as a name serves it's main purpose of discouraging idiots from coming in here.
What we are meant to discuss is completely up to us.
We can't be told what to discuss, but politics is meant for intelligent discussion.

You say it's a moral thing, and then go on to talk about how very important laws are. Laws and morals are completely seperate, and morals should never be based on laws. That's conformity. Laws should be made to suit morals, the collective morals of society.

Nice well worded response.
Maybe try a real argument.
Loser.

Abortion is clearly and obviously NOT murder.

Muder is:The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

And since abortion is LAWFUL, saying that it is murder is just purposeful stupidity.
And no, it should not be illegal.
A fetus is not a human, a fetus does not have a "right to live", and the woman has no reason to be forced into bearing thw child unwillingly.

I think people have every right to not vote, but as long as they don't, they don't have any right to complain about the government.
Throw away one right, and you lose more.
Doesn't make a whole lotta sense to throw one away, does it?

At 2/26/03 10:09 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote:

::

Actually, 17 I can see. Nothing less, though. Nothing less.

See? People draw this imaginary moral line on or around 18, and seem to think that because the law says something, then that must be their morals, as well.
I'll repeat myself- Laws don't govern morals.
Otherwise, everyone in the US would think it was right for capital punishment in the US, and everyone in Canada would think it was wrong.

Morals don't have clear boundaries in most cases, and where they are, you can usually see a wrong reason, like the law having too much influence, like in this case.

One of the main arguments for legalizing pot has always been "it's not near as bad as alcohol or tobacco".
The thing is, though, that that doesn't matter.
Alcohol and tobacco should also be banned. We're not debating alcohol or tobacco!
It's about pot.

I really don't think it would work out.
I can't say why, but I just don't think it would.

I'd like to see that.
Let's merge all the politics topic into MEGAPOLTIK and go to war with the General forums.

Symbolism or not, she's not going to accomplish anything. If she was serious about being against the war, she's do something constructive to stop it.

Looks like it's made of sugar.
mmmmmmm

This is indeed a privately owned site, but Tom and Wade allow for debate, not only of topics, but of decisions by NG authorities.

We do need Mods in some fashion here, because without a change in the way the BBS works, it's impossible for regular users to influence locking or unlocking of threads.

Mescal, maybe you should shut up.
You've posted twice right there and your post count is at one. How screwed up are you?

No, don't do that.
If everyone starts switching over, then the peak times will be the middle of the night and 9am-5pm.

Try reading Ratbert's theory on Ignorance. The less you know, the longer you live. He lived in a coffee can for two weeks to prove it.