archimage_a

I think Dusty is more like the comic relief factor, a peasent giving the symbolic reverse-victorysign to the universe. Either that or he is delusional, one or the other really. By the way, give me a few minutes to get setup and then I am ready to go =P

Not quite, the brain doens't give you the ability to blow up Midguard at a thought, or summon minions...Kind of a neuted God.

That laws exist so that the majority do not get exploited or offended by the minority. There is no reason not to accept beastiality except that the majority of people are against it. In the words of Martin Luther King: "Never forget that everything Hitler did was legitimate." Legitimacy doesn't mean it was the right thing to do, it means that society believed and accepted it at the time. And yes, a scientist-only rocket would be much better. But Civil Rights are surely the rights of the Civilian, and thus by your logic the Civilians should be the ones choosing how to run the country...which is what Democracy(supposedly) is. If you were going to say that some people are more civil than other people then you are basically siding with the aristocracy and they seem to be the most opposed against people getting civil rights. Voting is present in every system of government though. Even if the only vote that can be cast is 'Accept or Die'

Sorry, I thought we were talking about things we legislate against, or who we take active steps to prevent... Bestiality is illegal Furies are generally disallowed by most forums Transexualism has been illegal for a long time and is now tightly regulated. BDSM is considered torture Nudists are arrested for indecent behavior Cyclists are confined to their lanes Motorists are confined to roads and speed limits and MOTs and Tax and Insurance Slavery is illegal Child Labour is illegal Capitalists have the Sherman Anti-Trust Bill Communists have the McCarthy Trials and Homeland Security Bestiality... You want me to prove that it does not harm the animal? Prove to me that castration and spaying is not mutilation of the animal and maybe that argument has some credibility. Or consider that without castration or spaying or bestiality you are inflicting suffering on the animal by refusing it the ability to sexually relieve itself because you personally do not want to look after its babies. So, there is a choice between: Bestiality, the apparently immoral option Mutilation, the truly immoral option Torture, the do nothing option Buying another animal to get raped by the first animal(visa versa, obviously), the natural option Looking after a fresh litter of puppies every few years, the expensive option Personally I chose not to get involved, but as you can see no choice is actually favourable.

I disagree but fair enough. Beastiality Furies Transexuals BDSM Nudists Cyclists Motorists Capitalists Communists Slave Owners(Debatably admittedly, pain and suffering is not inherant merely common) Child Labour I am sure I can go on. But taking the top one, beastiality, why should it be illegal?

I would be forcing them to accept something they believe to be wrong. But it shouldn't be up to them to decide what you do as long as it doesn't concern them... I completely agree. But let me ask you this...If you saw a child being abused by one of its parents would you not feel concern for them? Why do you feel concern? This person is none of your concern, they are the being looked after by their parent, who is, after all the proper person to be looking after them. You might not agree with them beating the child within an inch of their lives. Now imagine that you were also a parent and you were up for some 'Good parent of the Year Award' and in the final round the other person also recieved a medel/trophy/whatever. Would you not feel morally offended that something which you should feel achievement over has been given to someone who you cannot abide? That is how the average straight person who is against gay marriage feels. They feel that two people are doing something morally wrong and then being given an honour for it, something which they had always considered to be good is suddenly turned into something morally abject. What do you do? Abandon the concept of marriage? The idea which you have strived for your entire life....Or do you try to limit the damage, remind people that marriage is something which is good, not something which is evil. Understand it from their point of view and then decide whether or not it is right to force them to accept it and try to relate it to something which you can't stand either and put yourself in their shoes because in the end empthay wins out, far more often than civil rights...If I can understand the plight of others then I learn not to hate them, if I am forced to like them I just resent them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGunZnb7Az0&feature=PlayList&p=DE530A1E6239F416&index=9

Military traditionalists have repeatedly pointed out that Assault Mechs are very poorly designed weapons- farcically bad, some have said. They are extremely tall and are almost impossible to camoflage, making them easy targets. Their two or four legged gait is more more complicated, more vunerable and less efficent than are treaded wheels. And if one of the blasted things falls over, it can't get up again without the assistance of massive cranes or helicopter. Yank the legs off and mount the chassis on treads, the experts say, and you'll get a better weapon at a lower cost. All of this is true. However, the units have one thing going for them that more than makes up for all their weaknesses: They are massively, enormously cool. Military Planners have long noted that national governments often confuse coolness with effectiveness and are willing to pay a lot more for flashy armament than for effective, but dull, systems. In other words, a military with an army of assult mechs has a far better chance of getting a bloated budget approved than one without them!

Once I get back to Ikana I replant the flameweed just next to the castle(as extra defence) then I go to the quarry and begin mining rocks, if I can find it I focus on Slate. I carry the slate back to Ikana, slowly by slowly, which eventually amounts to a fairly modest pile. I then begin to construction of a house, using dove tailed joins where I can to hold the structure together. I wear my gloves, underneath I wrap my hands with the offcuts for extra protection... This should take until tommrow to complete?

I test the flameweed seeds for the same effect. If they heat up then I will collect a handful(wearing gloves) and then wrap them in the off cuts and return to Ikana with the Flameweed and seeds. If they start burning then I will place the flameweed I have on my Polemace and carefully carry it back to Ikana.

I buy the gloves and off cuts. I then return to the fireweed and test its flamability with one of the off cuts. If nothing bad happens then I will harvest the fireweed, placing it in my herb bag with my garlic.

Archarnis...I buy a bag, then go to the Exile guild to claim my Solarmancy reward. Then I head back to the shop and ask how much are a pair of gloves and some off cuts of fabric?

Archarnis takes the flameweed, and takes some of it's seed pods as well then heads into Exile asks how much a herb bag will be.

I doubt there would be many civil rights around the world if that set of mind prevailed. In democracy, you have to protect oppressed groups from the tyranny of the majority, and you can't shouldn't put up civil right questions to public votes. That's why, IMO, we now have such things like Supreme Courts around the world. In a democracy you need to ignore the majority because the majority is usually wrong... Thats not a democracy then is it? That is a farse. A country is the sum of its parts, and enforcing a law which is not supported by more than half the people of a country is plainly wrong. And that should apply to the other side of the debate. These bans stop people from doing something they want. I agree, unfortunately that doesn't mean much because I am not on that side of the debate....Whats the saying? Don't throw rocks from inside a glass greenhouse. I would be forcing them to accept something they believe to be wrong.

Hehe, random thoughts in my head scream 'Pod people', the perfectly normal suddenly become addicted to checking their facebook account, and update their status every other second. I agree that it is people's choice. But I feel compelled to say that people are often dragged along by the current, for example some American psycologist did an experiment in which normal people from all walks of life were made temporary assistants to him and part of their 'day' was to shock another human being in order to extract information. Something like 90% did so with one man actually saying 'Ok, what do we do now' when the actor(since they were not going to really shock people) pretended to pass out. Or consider playing a computer game, we are all much more violent on games like Grand Theft Auto than we are in the real world. What we consider to be normal changes our actions in ways we cannot even percieve, so if people are walking around with projectors hanging off them it slowly becomes more normal until eventually it is normal and it is not normal not to have one. That is what I mean by insidious.

Demonstrative purposes, since it is your idea :roll:

Mather- [topic='247660'][img=http://i583.photobuc...Hegemonysig.png][/topic] [code][/code]

You mean the shadow coated bear...

Isn't it Ross tonight?

We on pause or something?

We gays should be forging our own path, not trying to live up to the straight person's standards. It just sickens me to see gay people trying achieve equality by showing themselves to be inferior to their straight counterpart. I would be more impressed by the title 'Federal court overhauls marriage to be fair' OR 'Federal court allows religious groups religious freedom to marry whoever they want to.'

Frankly if that is what people want then that is what people want. We gay people have been at the bottom of the pile for the last 600 years(before that we owned, and in Russia we owned up until 1890 something), I hardly think that we should force people accept our ideas because we believe them to be correct. If more than 50% of people have a problem with me marrying another guy then why should I be given the right, by them, to make them feel uncomfortable... Sort of like saying 'Hey, what we are going to do is kill you, but we thought that was a bit tiring so you are going to dig your graves and then shoot yourselves into the grave.' Its pretty much morally wrong to force someone to do something they don't want to do, simply because we think it is right for them to do it. Example, the British Empire taxing African people because we decided that African people were lazy because they wouldn't do what we said....The few should never dictate their will onto the many just because the few believe it to be correct and proper.

For a real life example of why we shouldn't make things simpler, take evolution. A virus is the most basic and most successful form of life. Why? Because all it does is consumer and reproduce. Humanity is the most successful form of macro scale life...Why? Because all it does is consume and reproduce. The Digital World will be the most successful form of world...Because all it does is consume time and reproduce ideas...over and over in a vicious cycle, getting larger and larger, destroying the real world because the simplest strategy is to wait for someone or something else to produce something, then steal that and use that to make more of yourselves. The problems that already exist because of Facebook and its counter parts, the weakening of the English Language because of Txt speak, of MSN speak and of LEET speak. The corruption of relationships via the ease at which it is possible to get in contact with new people. The interrupting nature of the digital world as a whole. As I have said before ignoring a phone call is a rarity. How many of us read emails the moment we get them just because we have the nagging feeling they might be important. It used to be that if you were bored talking to someone you politely put up with them, now you can just fiddle with your phone until they shut up. What about conversations on trains, buses, bus stops even? The MP3 Player has rendered all of these obsolete. The TV has all but rendered the Book obsolete.... And why is this? Why do all of these things occur? Because the digital world demands attention because human beings demand attention... 2 Billion people demanding attention compared to maybe two in the real world. Even supposing your friend group is only 20 online people, those twenty people all demand your attention whenever they do anything online...Compared with that the real world occasionally demands your attention, but it just cannot compete...We risk being subsumed into a digital world which functions only to grow larger, without any product... I suppose, if nothing else, it is the casual nature of the digital world, which Sixth Sense embodies.... Do you want to fiddle pointlessly with something(as you pointed out those Photos)? Do you want to be working during your break simple because you can? I can be typing away for a good half an hour and then decide actually I have lost interest in what I was writing about...Writing you try to make it work because you have invested something, you have invested a piece of paper, you have invested ink....Computer you have invested nothing and so you feel nothing when you get rid of it. PS. Sorry for subjecting you to me rambling, explaining my ideas is like running DOS on a MAC, two completely different system.

Swallowing air bubbles can keep you alive like breathing, but it hurts a lot and takes some practice to force it down the right tube. So it is not impossible, just very useless.

On the Amethyst I will need to think about it. Isn't your heart a Bloodheart? If not then the Blood heart is whatever I said it was(Its Ross' term so...)