stan18

My statement was made to a statement that Bluelancer made. He brings up a related issue, I answer. You bring up a related issue, I will also answer: Romans enslaving "white people" isn't as simple as that. From what I learned in high school it was a social/economic class issue. Blacks selling off other blacks when slavery was accepted was also a economic issue. But whats your point? Does a black man selling slaves to white men make it okay? Does it take the blame off the ones who started and promoted the act?

White guys started all racist jokes? Even if that was true it would be irrelevant. It's "offensive" for white people to make racist jokes because in Australia/UK/USA we're the majority ethnic group. Why is it irrelevant?

"not being able to laugh at yourself" is a cheap statement to make. Do you realize what that statement means when you say it to someone? You are putting blame on someone else for something you do. If the other person finds it offensive, its due to some personal fault he or she has. Its not that he or she is "not ... able to laugh at [oneself]", its that you're not willing to ask "why do you find that offensive", because maybe it actually is, and you would be the one with some personal fault. Its offensive when whites make the jokes because they were the ones that started them. They were the ones that propagated them, they were the ones that used them against a group, and they're the ones who complain when they can't use them now that they've been called out for those jokes. I don't find the OP's skit offensive, I also agree that its blown out of proportion. I have to say though, I'd understand why people would get offended. While blackface isn't really a problem now, yellowface (using powder to represent asians) is still a problem, with white men using yellowface getting chosen before auditions for asians exist. One last thing to most people here - don't let the media's sensationalism build your ignorance and impatience. I still have my own prejudices but if someone finds something offensive that i don't find offensive, the least respectful thing you can do is tell them they're being "oversensitive" without understanding why its a sensitive issue.

Theres a huge problem with the idea "leave people to think for themselves". Some people can't handle the responsibility of handling consequences of their actions. If no law mandates the use of seat belts, and, by some physical feat car crashes don't turn humans into projectiles both inside and outside the vehicle, accidents will happen, people will die or get seriously injured, and people will blame someone. There will be lawsuits, there will be terrible PR, and people will turn and say, why didn't the car company do something? Or, why didn't the government do something? Parents or relatives of victims of stupidity will want answers. The law preemptively stops this. And, of course, people turn into projectiles without seatbelts. Fun situation: There are five people in a 5-person car. The person in the back seat does not wear a seatbelt. There is an accident, the unseatbelted kid is turned into a projectile and hits someone else IN the car, killing the other person. Whose fault is it?

In all honesty, Baby P suffered a better fate dying. Had he not died, he would have grown up with likely the same genes that made his mother "insane" or "abnormal", as well as the woman herself. In other words, if you had some way to read someone's genes and found that they had a predisposition to abnormal ones that would likely lead the child to become a serial killer, would you prevent the baby? I'm all for the death sentence, btw, for sake of money and society. Most people don't change after ~20 years

As an ebay buyer (my feedback is over 700) you messed up. I've balked on 0 items. You can pay for it and get it, or get your account suspended. Sign up with a new email fine, but they do cross reference the addrress's on file I believe They do cross reference - my sister made her own account but used the same address as mine - mine with 70 pos feedback. Both were suspended the next day. It took about three months to un-suspend it since you need to provide a TON of proof of address - and i was not the actual homeowner (that was my dad) To the OP, if you get your account suspended, and you're not the homeowner, it will be a huuuge pain unsuspending your account. You can't just make another one (really, do you think they're that stupid?) And if anyone else in your house needs ebay... well... they'd be screwed

if you're ever in philadelphia, you have to get a philly cheesesteak. really.

Orbit peppermint. 5 is too soft, i hate it.

I, too, kind of like ugly girls. And if you haven't logged into classic for a while, you're wiped

Good catch. The current set up isn't logical...

I wish they kept the achievments and quest tabs the same - now all the other tabs seem smaller The rings look beast, though

The manifestation of Holocaust denial is really one of the worst acts of racism in human society. You are completely right, holocaust deniers believe it was exaggerated. And thats why its so wrong. Despite overwhelming evidence (from the museum to the wikipedia article), those who follow holocaust denial still claim what they believe is true, which means they've never actually been faced with evidence that counters holocaust denial. That leaves two possibilities: 1) they were told the holocaust was exaggerated and never confirmed the evidence that concludes why the holocaust was denied, or 2) they were taught that the holocaust was exaggerated. (2) means that the environment in which a child was brought up supported the denial of the holocaust. In other words, they were grown up with hate. (1) means they learned the (modern) history of the holocaust, were presented evidence that denied it, and they accepted it. I will make the assumption that when someone provides evidence that denies something significantly large that you've accepted as true(2 + 2 actually equals 5, for example), you will provide some effort to make sure the allegation is true. So being presented with information that completely belittles/denies the holocaust should spark a, "wait, that can't be right" flame in your head, and conduct some research. If it doesn't, then that meant you were willing to concede to the allegation. In other words, it agreed with something you though; it sparked a, "i knew it!" flame in your head, and you agree with it, and provide no further research, because you really knew that those dirty jews were trying to trick society, and this evidence further confirms it. Holocaust denial is just a credible looking vehicle to spout and spread antisemitism. To most people, reading this would immediately raise a flag on credibility, because you feel somethings wrong because it contradicts what you learned. For someone who hates jews but could never provide evidence to their trickery, the evidence provided by holocaust denial gives the hateful a righteous confirmation of their hate. And why is that? Theres always going to be fear of different. I don't agree with hatred, though. [hide=On euthanasia]I do agree with Robert. Why do we remove tumors? Because they waste bodily resources and get worse over time. If we had the possibility of, say, scanning a fetus and detecting genes that code for a weak or nonexistent conscience (aka serial killers), would you approve of aborting it? Why? Because if we don't, we already know that theres no way to fix them (them being the genes that make him a serial killer) if the fetus is allowed to mature into an adult - it would be a tumor on society. If we could scan a fetus for mutations or code that cause, say, downs syndrome, would you abort it? Why? Because if we don't, we already know theres no way to fix it (the genes that mutated, or the bad genes), and if it is allowed to mature into an adult, the person with downs syndrome, all its life, would only take away from society (and even those who raise him/her). What if you scanned a fetus and found it had the genes for huntingtons (dominant gene)? The person would die in their early/mid years and know their doom was inevitable. Would you rather abort it, and let the mother grow another child without the dominant allele (its a 50/50 chance per child to get the disease)? Why? What if we scanned one fetus and found it would not grow arms and legs, or be able to hear or see? Would you let it develop as just a vegetable? Why? If we had the technology that would allow this person to have prosthetic limbs, eyes and hearing replacements, would you let the fetus live? Why? The first two examples have complications we cannot fix, and the latter two do. Except, in now-a-days society, we can't scan; we only find out after it has been born. Why can't we abort them then, when we know they are going to be a plague to society?[/hide]

Did anyone watch the NBA playoffs? During the last cavs magic game (where the cavs got thrashed) on TNT (i think) one of the NBA ads that played after the commercials but before it went back to the game it would play a song but I cant remember any lyrics (though I'm not exactly sure there were any). Does anyone know the song?

Keeping it illegal pushes it underground, forces people who want to do it to associate with drug dealers who also deal harder stuff. In criminal trade there is no regulation, gangs fight for control of key shipment lines and dealing turf and there are countless deaths associated with this. Gangs fund other criminal operations with their main money source; drugs. Also, how does the state/majority have any justification to tell you what you can and cannot do to yourself? Sound argument I agree with you but at the same time you can't dismiss the fact the the world's mental instability will increase the more widely available it becomes. If you want to go give yourself schizophrenia/paranoia/anxiety that may not have otherwise surfaced then be my guest but the general public is at harm. To say that all schizophrenics are molesting, murderers is a stereotype but it'll definitely increase. If everyone could run around and do whatever they wanted, the world would be an ugly place. Why can't I go up and stab you if you annoy me and not get away with it? lol I'm not serious by the way. Marijuana isn't a big of a cause for mental illness - it increases the chances of getting schizophrenia by 70% (I have a source, but I also have a midterm in 1 hour and 20min, ill get it later) -but that 70% is only in the pot smoking population. It hasn't been linked (last time i checked) to either dementia or anxiety disorders. But I'll check up once I'm done my midterm and the party that ensues afterwards Back to the OP- I have to ask you: why do people take prescription pills? Its kind of funny how this topic started off as a "discussion" about prescription pills and immediately the potheads spring to the defense of marijiananananana.

I find that HS and college aren't much different, as long as you've applied yourself in hs, you'll be way prepared for college. I still get the time to go or hang out - the thing with college is you no longer have filler classes you don't want or need to take. The most time i spend in class in a day is 5 hours. And I don't have my mom nagging at me.

Which hs you at? I'm at tufts and know a couple boston hs kids. And tufts is nice. go there for the sledding... which i will do if classes are canceled due to the impending doom of a snowstorm coming while i've heard that too, I've never heard any real instances of it. Teachers aren't as mean as HS teachers, though I guess it depends on where you go. I've never, ever been called out on by a teacher in all the many times ive been late If you're only going undergrad, then it probably won't matter, unless you go to a top school ("harvard" looks nice). If you plan on going grad, you really shouldn't go to a state school unless you know you can get top of the class and a 4.0 or really close Not all schools consider the 'new' writing section. In fact, most of the schools that I applied to didn't. I agree with everything you said though :P And my sister is currently at Tufts 8-) True. And I remember that you told me your sister goes to tufts when I got in a short while back :) what year is she?

Generally, you'll want to look into colleges you'd want to go to, and find two safeties. Then, you apply to 8-10 total, then start considering the ones you want to go to once you get in. While I'm sure you are qualified for Rice (and any other schools you decide to apply to), other people are too, and it gets to a point where college admissions is, more or less, completely fickle in choosing applicants - don't get too caught up in looking up a dream school, because, even with all the hard work you put into it, admissions is 30% numbers and 70% chance. I'm not trying to dash your hopes or anything, its just that two schools isn't a lot to choose from, and regardless of how much you want to get into a school, you have to be able to face the very feasible possibility you won't get in. Just remember anything you decide now likely will waver once you get past all the excitement. And SATs are out of 2400 now. I'm currently a freshman at Tufts University

You got lucky. When i took it, we had a good percentage fail. The required % was 80, and i got 82% and I actually studied -_-;

Wow. I thought i was the only one. Its excruciatingly frustrating, and if you click on a banker/exchanger thats not closest to you, you walk up and do nothing.

yeah my bad. i figured someone will get confused. it shipped the day after i ordered. i received it 3 days after. 3 days is a bad shopping experience? Damn, man, I don't think even amazon has gotten anything to me in 3 days. 3 days is almost always the minimum time it takes to ship an item (2 if the shipping location is close). I'm always happy when i get something in 3 days (thats rare, though. Some places (well, ebay mostly) you would expect them to take up to 3 days to even ship the order)

What does this mean? What does taking both maxed range and maxed melee mean? And how is it different from hybriding?

im confused; did you order it and receive it in three days, or did you order it, have to wait 3 days, then saw that it shipped? My worst experience occurred when I was the seller. It wasn't really a frustrating experience, it was just an ...omfg... experience. I was selling a pair of jeans on ebay. Simple enough, sold for $20 no problems... but i didn't get payment. I didn't get it for two weeks; i was figuring, okay, he'll pay eventually. He does, i ship out, glad that I don't have a package waiting to be shipped About a week later, I get an ebay message: I check the listing... i say "a pair of jeans". Then i respond explaining how, in the american language, some things are plural but only refer to one thing, hence "pair" he responds I resist responding back and let the issue die

Routine? You sound dead set on bringing down any positive outlooks on these future updates. Why don't you want for them to come out first before you try trashing them? Don't take every update as a personal insult And there are better things to do to vent than post on an RS forum. on topic, i'm looking forward most to the RE update. Long needed.

Downhill? For which team? The game was ups and downs, pretty intense... I believe you're thinking of baseball my friend. And the commercials this year kind of sucked. hah yea, baseball has nothing on football the comercials, i agree, werent that great. Well, a couple got me laughing. But there was one for some TV company (vixia or something?), my friend checked their site after the commercial and it had crashed already. And a lot of the budweiser commercials sucked. The sobe one, with the dancing, jesus i was scared...

The point is she applied for a job that has high stress levels. Even if outside factors contributing to her stress made her "snap" she could have dealt them appropriately such as seeking counselling or time off. If that's too much to ask for, don't work with children. I didn't miss the sentence, my sentence referring to how i thought there wasn't a preexisting psychological condition addressed it - you think theres an "underlying issue", which is an inability to cope with stress, and i think not. Psychiatrically, anxiety isn't the inability to cope with stress; rather, it is often a side effect of anxiety, which is "generally a uncontrollable worry about everyday events". If its a preexisting psychological condition, then she'd probably have generalized anxiety disorder, which, according to how her family and friends described her, she did not have. The above was simply to explain why i don't think she had a preexisting psychological condition. I agree she may have been overwhelmed with stress; i would not go as far as to say she has the inability to cope with stress (which is a personality factor more than a psychological condition), otherwise she would have crashed much, much earlier (say, before she even got the job at the center). But she was stressed. Whats left, then? You and zierro also said "self-control". What is she controlling, then? Self-control usually refers to limits set by the person on something with the intent on controlling. How much they eat, and the ability to stop when they can. How much they watch tv, and their ability to stop when they can. In zierro's case, his tolerance for his cousins. Where does this girl come into play? Her self control involved her, presumably, frustration in the face of mounting stress. Self control itself has limits, though. Eventually, people snap, impulsively acting to reduce stress. In her case, the cause of stress was the baby, who wouldn't shut up. Was she thinking straight? Of course not. Shes frustrated and angry and under a mound of stress, adrenaline and cortisol pumping through her. Thats a lot of stress, and the (evolutionary, i think to how basic it goes) response would be to stop the stress before the mind breaks down (aka nervous breakdown) So then, i have to disagree with your saying that her inability to cope with stress and her self control makes this her fault. Of course, this couldn't have happened to anyone - not everyone is a childcare worker. But everyone has stress, everyone has limits, and few people know their limits and their capabilities because few people ever reach that point. Everyone gets stress, and they get stress in varying amounts. She can't just get therapy because she doesn't know if or when she'll snap - no one does, because, once again, no one knows their limits. I'm stressed as [bleep] right now, should i get therapy? What if i snap? What if the stress passes? Therapy is for people who know their limits are low; i'm sure she'll get therapy now (of course, more for trauma than for stress control) If someone knows they are unable to handle stress, they'll keep that in mind. But normal people w But for all the other normal people who can't control how much stress gets mounded on them (esp in a short period of time, where therapy ), including this girl, theres little we can do. Oh, and i meant she realizes Now that she has poor control, which isn't really what i meant, because i meant she knows her limit now. I don't think she necessarily has poor control (once again, her description doesn't seem like it). And the psych exam reference i made was to the post you made before mine. I hope all of this makes sense, i wrote it over a period of an hour, one chunk of it involved trying to fix my friend's watch with superglue and superglue covering half my thumb.