Myweponsg00d

Just the next step forward of the United States taking over the world under the disguise of anti-terrorism. :thumbup:

So I suppose you never pleasure yourself or have sex with contraception? Or have oral?

I think that all cases of marriage between one consenting human adult and another consenting human adult should and will be legalized eventually. I dont think a human will ever be able to marry an animal because animals have no legal power or place in the state. I mean, its like saying I want to adopt my lamp as my child. It just cant happen because a lamp is not a child. An animal is not a human and does not have a social security number, etc to make it a legal actor in the state. We don't just want gay marraige because we want people to express their sexuality via something called marriage. We want gay marriage because married heterosexuals have legal benefits for being legally joined to another human. If anything, your post just kinda proves how silly the institution of marriage is to begin with. Its just some social custom that doesn't really make any sense once you think about it. I am just concerned with homosexuals and polygamists having equal acess to legal benefits of marriage. Add asexuality to your list above :razz: "Should I be able to marry myself? I love myself more than anyone in the world and want to make a lifetime commitment to being alone"

I think if you find a man who says he loves a woman enough to spend his life with her he is either: 1.) Lying to you 2.) Lying to himself 3.) Unable to see how much of a [bleep] she is Moral of the story: all men will be bored of their wives. It sounds cold, but I honestly think its true. When you hear a man complain about his wife, its always about specific stupid stuff she does. When women complain about the husband, usually it boils down to "He doesn't love me" Probably cause he doesnt. I have looked at the life of all my uncles, my grandfathers, etc and have basically realised that when you are a married man, your life is just about making sure you don't tick off your wife so that she will leave you the hell alone while you try to build your train set, work on the car, paint the house, or whatever hobby you take up to occupy all that time you have until sweet death comes your way.

First of all, an animal and an object are not human beings, so there would be no reason to legally join the two of you. Secondly, the case of pedophilia is more a question of the age of consent. Also, if you want to argue that a pedophile should be able to marry his under-18 girlfriend, then eventually that person is going to get older and won't be a child anymore. So if you want to acknowledge pedophilia as a legitimate sexuality, there is no way that he could ever marry a person because that person wont be underage forever... Thirdly, polygamy has valid ground to stand on and IMO should be getting legal attention. If a group of consenting adults all want to be married I don't think theres any reason why they shouldnt be able to. And finally, the "slippery slope" argument is a classic defense mechanism that people use when they have completely run out of logical support for their argument. The "how far should is this going to go???" thing serves as no defense for your viewpoint. Nothing could ever be accomplished if this was a valid argument. Some examples: Q. Should we raise the drinking age to 22? A. OMG whats next, 55?!!?!? Q. Should we put more security regulations in place at the airport? A. OMG whats next, people have to fly naked?? Q. Should we cut taxes by 0.5%? A. OMG whats next, no taxes?? Would you like that?? How are we going to get money without any taxes? What a stupid idea... Legislation gets handled on a case by case basis. Not by looking at an overly broad picture that may or may not be in the same line of thought.

First of all, I doubt you are ever going to observe a wild animal humping something inanimate. Secondly, the "humping" that your dog does to random objects is not the same thing as animalian homosexual behavior. When they say that homosexuality has been observed in animals, they dont mean that a male gorilla just randomly went over to another male gorilla and humped him for 2 minutes and then ran off. Animals have homosexual relationships that are on par with their heterosexual ones. They caress them, care for them, and partner up with them. It isnt just a quick roll in the hay like some random hook up and then some stupid scientist says "OMG THEY ARE QUEER!!! YES!"

When I was in grade school (3rd or 4th grade?) I crammed the sink full of paper towels, turned the water on, and left. I did it as we were all leaving, so nobody ever discovered it until the floor was already covered in water. Did it every day for 2 weeks then stopped completely. Never got caught. When I'm at stores like Wal Mart, I typically put something really big on the bottom of the cart (like a case of water) and then I pretend to forget about it. I usually get the item without paying, but sometimes the cashier sees it. I also superglue coins to the ground. Bathrooms, classrooms, on the street, in the market. I'm not sure how illegal this is, but I'm sure it falls under some type of vandalism.

Why the hell would anyone think it is important to have both a mother and a father, when we are living in a time where women now work full time jobs and such? Its not like women still stay around the house all day in their aprons and have the children hanging from them, while the man is gone for 10 hours of the day working in the steel mill, then comes home, smacks his wife on the arse and plops down on the couch. Our society is basically eliminating gender roles so how the hell can it be important to have a parent of each sex? If we think it is important to have a "man" figure and a "woman" figure to look up to, we better tell the women to get back in the kitchen. Either give gays more rights, or take away women's rights. Otherwise the system is just contradictory...

I have an interesting question to anyone who wants to tackle it. They always say that you can't choose to be gay or straight. However, I really feel that if I decided to try it, I could have an enjoyable relationship with a man. ...Does that make me bisexual? Because I feel like I am just choosing to be straight. So are bisexuals people who can choose which lifestyle they enjoy better? So do "straight" people feel like they would never be able to have a same sex partner? And gays could never imagine being happy with an opposite sex partner? I think it would be strange to feel that way...

This thread is gonna end up exactly like the thread on cochlear implants. A bunch of people who have no understanding of a culture make misinformed decisions based solely on propaganda that has been spread from biased sources. Gay people are the same as straight people except they choose a partner of the same sex instead of opposite sex. WTF is the big deal? How does their decision affect you at all? Why shouldn't they be able to live the exact same life as a straight person except for the fact that they go home and have gay relations?

Gaining muscle is a similar process to gaining fat. Basically you need to eat a lot of food. However, if you are weight training, this excess of calories will not go to fat but to muscle building. When you lift heavy weights, your muscles get millions of little tears in them. To repair, they need energy they get from your food. Start by eating 2500-3000 calories per day. If you see no weight gain after a week, increase cals by 100-200. Try to get at least your bodyweight in grams of protein (so since you weigh 111 lbs, eat 111 grams of protein or more). You also need 0.5 times your bodyweight in fat (so 55 grams of fat at first). You should mainly be eating things like rice, pasta, pancakes, chicken, fish, beef, milk, cheese, eggs, and any type of vegetable. But since you are trying to GAIN weight, you can also have some junk food as well. Such as candy, chips, pop...Dont do more than 500 calories from junk though. Most of your diet should be meat, vegetables, and grains. You MUST lift weight though, heavy weight. Otherwise all your extra food will just turn to fat. You want to lift a weight that you can only do 6-8 reps with. If you can do 9 or more, you need more weight. Do 3 sets of 6-8 reps. You can see a lot of progress with only about 3 hours per week invested in working out. On monday, do chest and triceps. Wednesday, back and biceps. Friday, legs and shoulders. http://www.bodybuilding.com/exercises/ Anything you can find there should be good. Just find like 6 or 7 different exercises to do on each day. 3 or 4 for the one body part, 3 or 4 for the other. I'll make an example routine for Monday: Flat bench press Incline dumbbell bench Dumbbell chest fly Pushups (for bodyweight exercises, do 2 sets for as many as you can) Skullcrushers Close grip bench press Tricep dips (again, bodyweight. 2 sets for as many reps as you can) Good luck

Well, I like the suggestion to get your hands on some spanish books/newspapers. You'll definitely need a good translation disctionary. You also need to make sure you have some type of listening education aswell, though. You could probably learn a great deal if you managed to find some Spanish children's shows or something. Or if you have the money, use Rosetta Stone. It honestly works. Usually when you learn a language, you end up thinking of the language in terms of your original language. For example when you hear "Feliz cumpleanos!" your mind tends to think "Okay...that means Happy Birthday!" But to truly learn a language you need to get rid of that step. You need to learn the language the same way you learned English, by learning the word that goes with the meaning. Rosetta stone is good at bridging that gap. So when you hear "Hola" your brain shouldn't say "This translates to Hello" it should say "I was just greeted and shout greet in return"

I'm glad you take amusement in a topic that is very serious. Deaf children are being born into hearing families, and the family is fed hearing-biased information and end up causing the poor kid a childhood of frustration and usually ends up hurting their cognitive and linguistic ability. Source? I have listed my sources throughout, but if you'd like me to suggest one again, okay. "Mask of Benevolence" by Harlan Lane would probably appeal to you, because he examines the entire Deaf community and history of Deaf oppression from a pretty scientific perspective. He is a hearing person and has put a good ammount of research into supporting his claims. Does it state how children become frustrated and have their cognitive and linguistic abilities hurt by having a cochlear implant? If not then I have no interest in it. Yes, he talks about the implants creating more linguistic failures than sucesses, especially when they are relied on to mainstream the child in a hearing school. He also talks about "adolescent rejection" where an implanted kid refuses to use his cochlear implant and wishes he his parents hadn't forced it on him. He also talks about a lot of reasons that Deaf culture isn't recognized. Like how when people are confronted with a culture that they do not understand, they percieve the culture as agressive, confusing, impractical, unrefined...etc...This is what happens with Deaf and ASL. Uninformed people have no concept of how the language functions or how much identity it brings to the Deaf, so they feel threatened by this unfamiliar way of life and deem Deaf culture inferior.

I'm glad you take amusement in a topic that is very serious. Deaf children are being born into hearing families, and the family is fed hearing-biased information and end up causing the poor kid a childhood of frustration and usually ends up hurting their cognitive and linguistic ability. Source? I have listed my sources throughout, but if you'd like me to suggest one again, okay. "Mask of Benevolence" by Harlan Lane would probably appeal to you, because he examines the entire Deaf community and history of Deaf oppression from a pretty scientific perspective. He is a hearing person and has put a good ammount of research into supporting his claims. First of all, I am flattered that you think I made the topic :lol: Secondly, yes. This is the only argument I had against this philosophy. The problem with choosing to implant is that typically, it means that the parents are going to take every path they can to try to make this kid into a hearing, speaking kid. It usually involves banning him from sign, and regular trips to the speech pathologist and audiologist so he can be evaluated, put through tests, etc. If you would like to implant your child, but still acknowledge that he may not ever be normal and therefore teach him ASL, then I can't really think of a reason why you would be doing him any wrong. I mean he still might end up being mad at you for putting a device in his skull, but this is more of an opinionated thing. Implanting your child and then essentially raising him as a bilingual individual (ASL and english) would give you a "safety net" to make sure that he will not end up with poor linguistic skills. The only problem is that in reality, people don't do this. I guess my lack of support for the cochlear is not really about the device, it is more about the way the device is typically implemented. If you are going to implant your child but take every step you need to in order to make sure he learns A LANGUAGE when he is supposed to, then I see no clear cut reason why you shouldnt be allowed to. To be clear though, I still wouldnt choose this road, but that is for personal reasons that I would feel uncomfortable with determining my kid's life like that. I would raise him as part of the Deaf community and if he tells me that he would rather take his shot in the hearing community, he is free to get the implant at any time in his life.

I'm glad you take amusement in a topic that is very serious. Deaf children are being born into hearing families, and the family is fed hearing-biased information and end up causing the poor kid a childhood of frustration and usually ends up hurting their cognitive and linguistic ability.

Any problem with hearing can be solved with a tool, and any problem with deafness can be solved with a tool. Communication can be done on paper, you can understand movies by reading a transcription, you can have interpretation. Etc. I suppose you will say "but the deaf cannot enjoy music" which is first of all, not true. Secondly, not everyone needs to enjoy every aspect of life that you deem important. When people are paralyzed, we dont equip them with inefficient robotic legs, just to make them conform to the standard that people need to walk. We give them the most efficient and dependable way to acess the world: a chair with wheels. For the deaf, a cochlear implant is not the most efficient and dependable way to acess the world. It is an uncomfortable process that may or may not even get the job done. I tried to leave this thread alone, but I really just feel too guilty that there are people who cannot accept the fact that some people have the right to live their life however they want to. There are plenty of crazy things that people like for no reason. Why cant people like being Deaf?

I think the problem is just that you haven't been hit hard enough. If you exercise, you are gonna have to do some real trauma to your body to make a bruise. Like on the calibur of getting into a fight or a car crash. Only people who are out of shape will be bruised by things like a drum stick or whatever. Also if you are purposely trying to cause them, your muscles are probably tensing up and protecting your system from damage. I bet youll bruise if you have someone blindside you in the shin with a baseball bat when you dont expect it.

Well evolution states otherwise. There is a type of underground lizard which is completely blind, why is it blind? Due to the lack of light there is no need to be able to see and in fact energy would be wasted trying to see. For it seeing is a disadvantage. However in humans being able to see and hear is a great advantage. I think this could be a valid point if we still spent most of our days out in the wild being hunted by animals. But human ears didnt freakin evolve so they could hear TVs, cashiers, etc. Nothing about us evolved to exist in homes filled with technology and now the quality of life is not really determined by how easy it is for you to survive. Oh well guys, I guess all the deaf people I have signed with in my life are just lying to me. The deaf people who you guys get your opinions from must be telling the truth. Oh wait none of you have probably even had one conversation with one person who is a member of Deaf culture. I'll leave this thread to continue its ignorance. If you'd like to learn more about how you can stop oppression against these people who are just trying to live their lives the way that makes them just as happy as you are, you can contact me.

Its almost like different people have different abilities. Crazy

I was thinking the exact same thing. There is no deaf culture as far as I'm concerned. Not to be offensive of course if someone takes it that way. But what is deaf culture? A way for a group of people to deal with inability to hear? So wouldn't this new implant be exactly what deaf culture wants? And as a side note, how the flipping hell did we bring Nazis and house robberies into this? Only on tipit :-? When a group of people develop a unique language, basically they also develop a unique culture to go along with it. Language is more than just words, language is the structure of human means of communication. With language comes things like social custom. For example, it is considered rude to leave a room without telling people where you are going and roughly how long you will be gone. (in Deaf culture) Deaf also like to wear plain clothes and keep things like jewelery to a minimum so that there arent as many visual distractions when signing. There are a lot more of such social customs. There is also unique forms of expression to accompany sign language. In spoken English, "poetry" is the use of words that are arranged in a meaningful fashion. Sign poetry also exists, and it is the careful use of handshapes to convey expression. There are also ASL "songs" and something called an "ABC story" where you tell a story, using the handshapes of the alphabet in order. The Deaf also have things like "word games" like when we would say "Bill bill bo bill banana fanna fo fill, me my mo mill...bill" And we arrived at Nazis because people like yourself are basically denying the existance of this culture, or calling it inferior to any other culture.

First of all I would rather sign to my husband, as it is simple to see sign language but hard to hear whispers depending on the environment. Do you think that Navy SEALs use whispers to communicate in enemy territory? They use hand gestures. Also deaf people have bed vibration devices to wake them up like alarm clocks, and these are usually tied into the home security system aswell. Light based alarms are also common. If you want to communicate with a friend in a loud room you dont have to shout. If you are trying to sleep on an airplane you wont be disturbed by a crying baby. If everybody was deaf you could fart in public. Not having to deal with the sound of jackhammers outside your window, or noisy neighbors, or telemarketers. You have less distractions when trying to concentrate on a mostly visual task. Google something like "perks of deafness" or benefits or something. Read from the Deaf themselves how many common annoyances they are glad not to have in their life.

I don't really see how. Height would be something that many people have that you lack. Nobody has laser eyes or X ray vision.

Its hard not to compare you to a nazi when you seem to think that your life is better than somebody elses because you experience it differently. You might aswell call the French disadvantaged because they grow up in a poorer country than people in the USA. Or call the Japanese quality of life more difficult because their language has thousands of complicated characters in it. Your hearing life is not better than a deaf life. It would be like someone telling you their life is better because they are a foot taller than you.

Do you have any experience with olympic lifts? I have been interested in them lately and can clean+jerk 115 now, but I still cant even get 65 on the snatch...was just wondering if this was normal when starting out.

Thats exactly correct. You could have your baby implanted and then teach him ASL anyway. But what is the point of doing the implant then? Why not just teach him ASL and then once he is old enough to understand what is available to him? I see no reason to predetermine a child's future like that. (have you seen the picture of what it looks like to have the implant?) Also it does destroy any natural/residual hearing that the individual has a chance of retaining. My one deaf ASL instructor used to always talk about the popular radio songs she liked (she knew the names of them because she asked her hearing son to name it when it came on). I mean she couldn't make out the words or anything but she could still hear the rhythm. I wouldn't want to destroy something like that and give her nothing but mechanical noises. I suppose that if you have a COMPLETELY deaf baby, maybe it would be a good idea to give him a cochlear as long as you raise him still learning his easier language (ASL). But in reality there is no way to know that your child has absolutely zero hearing and will never develop any ear activity. I am pretty sure I gave a response to that post. In a nutshell I said that something that anybody does places a burden on society. Choosing to throw plastic away instead of recycle creates a burden. Choosing to learn only one language in your lifetime makes you a burden to society too. Choosing not to exercise makes you a burden to society. I really dont think deaf are a burden to society though. Deaf can live with deaf communities and attend deaf events and have a perfectly full social life. Deaf dont have to be accomodated for by hearing. Also I have no idea what you are getting at with the ASL versus british sign vs FSL...? All different languages are hard to understand unless you learn the language...? How does this make sign language any different from spoken language? And furthermore, the different sign languages are more similar than the different spoken languages. Plus, when you learn to communicate via sign language, you engage your visual processing more with language comprehension. A person who knows only ASL could communicate with someone who knows FrenchSL quite easily by using calssifiers and gestures. Definitely easier than someone who only speaks English and someone who only speaks French.