Nomrombom

Clears almost instantly though IIRC.

What I meant by "can survive on its own" is that it does not require the parents to live on its own. Physical independence. A two year old is (probably) not a person because it is (probably) not conscious. Consciousness is what let humans control the Earth. Consciousness is what separates us from nearly all other species. This is what makes us people rather than just apes.

Are there units stronger than the riflemen? Or, rather, units more useful for attacking siege machines than them.

So you've discovered that people are stupid and do stupid things all the time and when corrected, defend themselves even if they're wrong (and even if they know they're wrong). Join the club.

She. OT: When people can't process/see things like I can. I'm really not trying to toot my own horn, as it's actually sometimes a curse rather than blessing, but I feel like I'm on a higher "plane of consciousness" than many people. I love it when I get to talk to people who are at the same level or above. Anyone else ever feel like that?

You know exactly what I mean.

Cause so many people use smoke, right? But lots of people DO use Assassin Pro, making Marksman useless and wasting your third perk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlodQv4jWOY

Why pick it anyway? Just to make things hard, or do you like it? It looks so weird :L

Lmao, I guess we can just kill them when they restrict their parents' right to liberty and happiness, because, you know, they aren't people. I hope you realize how ridiculous this is. But on the one hand, you've nicely demonstrated why this pro-abortion argument is so flawed. As I said in the post, "you can't use this on already born humans...". Meaning no, you cannot kill them because (read the post). No, they're not people, but they do have a right to life since they do not restrict anyone else's rights and can survive on their own. ......... Well, first off, I think you mean self-aware, not sentient. If you poke a newborn with a needle, it will cry. Newborns, however, fail the mirror test, meaning they have no concept of themselves as individuals (which is what I think you mean). But regardless, did you really just say that it's okay to kill a newborn because (s)he might not be a person? I... I don't really even know what to say to you., aside from saying that these are the kinds of conclusions you reach when you start trying to justify why some subset of the population are persons and why others are not. Yes, I mean self-aware. I did not say it was okay to kill a newborn. Do not put words in my mouth.

Good job picking your topic before you had done any preliminary research.

Fetuses aren't people because they aren't sentient. You can't use this on already born humans because they do not restrict the rights of anyone else and can survive on their own, plus we don't actually know when humans become sentient. Yes, there are humans who have been born who are not people. Most humans under age 2 are probably not people (were you sentient at 2 years old?).

Egads! No AC Revelations thread yet?! LOVING this game so far. So smooth. Great graphics. Hookblade is so useful. But how the hell do you kill the siege machines in den defenses?!

Who cares? Marksman pro is a terrible perk. Marksman is pretty bad anyway.

Good job, legal system -.-

You're admitting to making a stupid thread with a false basis?

You're not making any sense. On one hand, you say that people should be allowed to choose the morality of an issue for themselves regardless of how another feels about it but then, on the other hand, you turn around and say that it doesn't apply to rape because (1) there are no medical benefits to rape and (2) because not allowing one to rape doesn't take away their rights. (1) I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the "personally opposed to" line is not constrained by whether or not an action has medical benefits. For example, I'm going to assume that you're not going to refrain from using that line in the instances where someone wants to drink themselves into a coma or give themselves lung cancer by smoking twelve packs of cigarettes per day. Whether or not an action has medical benefits or not is immaterial to the issue of legality. (2) A few people in this thread have claimed that disallowing a woman from having an abortion restricts her rights to liberty and happiness (I'm not even going to talk about life). Following that chain of logic, then disallowing a rapist from raping someone could also be argued to be restricting his/her right to liberty and happiness. Number one, any restrictions on an action that the individual would otherwise engage in are a restriction on liberty, as liberty is defined as the ability of an individual to act according to their own will. And if, as you're arguing, that it's wrong to restrict one's liberty, then how can you argue against a restriction on rape? Number two, if engaging in rape would make someone happy, and everyone has a right to happiness, then why shouldn't one be allowed to engage in rape? Remember, everyone has the right to decide the morality of an action for themselves, even if you wouldn't engage in it yourself. (Now, there's a bit of facetiousness in the above post, but it's useful to highlight the ridiculousness of your position.) Because as I said, rape takes away the rape victim's right to their own body. And one person's right to their own body (especially in the case of rape) outstrip the rights of someone to be "happy" because they can rape people freely. Not to mention that rape sometimes ends in murder.

http://news.yahoo.com/pakistan-bans-obscene-words-cell-phone-texts-122933488.html This doesn't annoy me so much as amuse me greatly. Sucks for texters in Pakistan though.

Saying that people should not be allowed to have an abortion at all restricts their right to the power over their own body. Rape does this, as does murder and abuse. Thus, people consider abortion something to be chosen by each individual. Making rape illegal does not restrict anyone's rights and prevents people from taking away others' rights (as said above, rape takes away a person's power over their own body).

You might be against the use of birth control, but does that automatically mean you should want to make it illegal? You might think it's wrong to drink beer or have sex, so you must want them to be illegal, right? No. It means that you think people should be allowed to choose for themselves regardless of how you feel about it. They probably don't feel the same way about rape however, seeing as rape has no medical benefits and there is no taking away of anyone's rights if they aren't allowed to rape (in the case of rape, the woman loses the rights to decide what happens to her body, same as with illegalized abortion). So rape, murder, and abuse are not the same as abortion, and the reasoning can't be applied to them.

Part 1: Say I've killed 999 dragons. Someone else has killed 1,000. By your statement, my drop log is irrelevant to the discussion of rare drops, but theirs is relevant. Because they killed 1 dragon extra. You see the problem? Part 2: He was being sarcastic. He's using your own logic against you - "I've killed lots of this type of monster/all types of monster and I've only gotten this specific drop one or a few times, thus this item MUST be super rare for everyone." It is getting harder and harder to think that you're not a troll...

Schools in the US can be involved in things that kids do outside of school if it affects other kids. So I guess they were scared I would kill someone or something.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X_Ot0k4XJc

Oh, I thought you meant the game.

How intelligent...