Defeatist Elitist

Make a topic in Member Feedback or Questions and Suggestions complaining about women being allowed on the staff. Return from your suspension, and do it again. And again. Repeat until you have the MAXIMUM NUMBER OF WARNS. I have only completed the first step. :( On that note maybe say that Fritzl envisioned the future and all women should be locked up in basements and that Fritzl was a martyr and the second coming of Christ That is indeed a good suggestion. You would likely rack up a fantastic number of Warnings in a relatively short period of time. In fact, you will likely enter Warn nirvana, a state known only as "Bannage".

respect

Make a topic in Member Feedback or Questions and Suggestions complaining about women being allowed on the staff. Return from your suspension, and do it again. And again. Repeat until you have the MAXIMUM NUMBER OF WARNS. I have only completed the first step. :(

Ewan is clearly better because he is like 3 and is a massive pimp.

If you're commenting on what I think you are, it wasn't a question at all. He was saying that those were "essentially" my beliefs, despite the fact that I hadn't even touched any of those subjects. I don't see any misinterpretation or logical flaws. Now let's go back to the line that started this line of discussion: Notice the clause, "when all other things are equal". You, Crystal Shards and Esau all seem to have missed this. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough, but in that sentence I was talking about when there are multiple couples looking to adopt a certain child, which is actually not an uncommon occurrence in certain communities. I'm not talking about anyone being allowed or not allowed to adopt, I made my position on that issue clear a long time ago. As for my position on other groups that could cause stress and mockery, I think that these should be considered. I think it's important that adoption agencies look at all the information before they give a kid up because making an adult feel happy or accepted isn't worth ruining some kid's childhood for. But only so long as the system works the way it was intended to. There are certain things that it is illegal in the US to consider while placing children in adoptive families, most importantly race, and I don't think that this should be changed because there was abuse in this area before. We understand what you are saying. You seem to misunderstand us. Our point (at least mine, and I think there's) is that it is inconsistent, and rather discriminatory to say that X thing should be a "disadvantage" when adopting for Y reason, when Z thing is perfectly acceptable, despite it having Y "problem" as well.

Careful comrade, at one point in time comments like that could get you warned! I indeed took advantage of apparent loopholes in the rules that apparently were covered by an INVISIBLE set of rules that no new member could possibly read, and was warned for these incursions.

Fucking no. This can't be happening. Seriously, "We'll stop our social services if you let homosexuals have rights""? Really?

I can't really understand what you're trying to say I'd think in the second part of your post, there's a double negative that I'd guess was unintentional. I think I agree with your meaning, though. Anyway, what does this have to do with my post? So essentially, setting up straw men is the same as good debating. You're usually better than this. I didn't say any of that bullshit, which by the way is all illegal. These questions really don't belong next to each other, even if they are connected in that you'll find answers for both in earlier posts I've made. So what's up with you and Crystal Shards that you're having so much trouble reading my posts? Maybe you should try increasing the text size. I'd also be happy to clarify what I was saying if you're confused, but I'd like this to be the last time that you put words in my mouth. This has also been a problem in that other topic, "Question about the Christian God". It's never been in good faith and it sidetracks discussions just when they're starting to make progress. Dude. Dude. It is very clear what he is referring to. It is not straw manning. Want me to help out? You said that for the interests of that child, they should have a normal life, to release some stress, and avoid mockery and whatnot. He responded asking if you thought other people who could cause stress or mockery should be allowed to adopt. It is a completely reasonable thing to ask. Maybe you misinterpreted, I don't think he was trying to say that is what you said, he was pointing out a huge flaw in your logic.

I am Rhythm!

I haven't really looked into this, so I could be completely wrong, but what I have HEARD is that they overestimated the threat and figure they don't actually need to vaccinate everyone.

From the very limited level of studies there are about this, it seems that the incidence of homosexuality among children raised by homosexual couples is anywhere from about four times to twenty times the incidence of homosexuality among the general US population. This statistic depends on a solid statistic for the incidence of homosexuality in the general population, which varies wildly depending on who you ask. I like to say 2%, which I think is just about the most generous number possible without being unreasonable. It's not important for the numbers to be exact, the limitations of surveys like this and the recentness of the whole phenomenon make that impossible, what's important is that we see the big picture--that children raised by homosexual couples are a lot more likely to become homosexuals themselves. I think this is politically correct nonsense aimed at putting sexual minorities into the same category as racial minorities. I've heard it all before, I live in an area that has perhaps one of the largest proportioins of gay people in the world and went to high school in Berkeley. During which time I saw enough kids switch their sexual orientation back and forth to know that it's nothing preset from birth. One of my classmates came to school in eleventh grade thinking he was bixexual, then became convinced he only wanted men after a few months. A year later he decided that it was all wrong and that he was 100% straight, and got a girlfriend. These days he has a boyfriend. Two other classmates knew that they were gay from birth, but then decided that they were straight after fucking each other and hating it. One of them accidentally got a girl pregnant senior year. And even if this is all superficial, the fact that there's so little homosexuality among working-class people and in the developing world seems evidence enough that it can't be genetic. While homosexuality may not be ENTIRELY genetically driven, genetics DO have a fair influence on it, and it is certainly not a "choice" for the majority of people. The things you have brought up are easily explained by the fact that people tend to take a while to really figure out their sexuality, and of course the fact that homosexuality is generally still considered somewhat taboo. I agree, with the one reservation that a traditional couple should be given precedence over a nontraditional one when all other things are equal, simply for the sake of giving the child as "normal" a life as possible. What is a "traditional couple"? A straight couple? A white-white couple? A thirty year old man marrying a 12 year old girl? I assume the first because that IS what we're talking about, but I am interested if that was ALL you were referring to, or were you would draw the line on when it's still traditional. Then of course, why should we say homosexuals are "not normal"? Aren't they fighting to be considered normal? Again, what is normal? And why is normal so necessary? Do you think rich people and poor people should have less ability to adopt because they "aren't normal"? Do you think intellectuals should be given less ability to adopt because they "aren't normal"? Is it homosexuals specifically that you have deemed "not normal"?

You are a Queen, Death is a Defiler.

I'm torn. I'm rather forgiving, but not too forgetting. Usually I'll bring a past thing up as a joke, so I guess it really doesn't count as forgetting. I guess I'll go with forgive but do not forget. But often I do forget... I dunno.

yo yo brotha wussup in this bitch havin sum fun chillin wiv mah cru at serenes forest amirite i sed amirite yeah fuck yeah im rite im always right wanna come hangin' wiv me an' play sum b ball and sum pool yeah man thass right ah play pool brotha

I see Hika as the pure incarnation of all the delicious and beautiful evil in this world. Such sweet misery! Wist is like an ageless master of life, seemingly perfectly serene and calm, but with a deep and cunning mind hiding beneath the surface, ready to strike at any moment. Death is hilarious. Zeph is a bundle of sticks.

Why shouldn't they be allowed to? I say more power to them.

Though I think I was warned recently, and I am the wimp and do not want to be suspended yet again. Hmmm...

You're too slow but I'm too dead?

AMV is an awful abbreviation and nobody should ever use it. It sounds horribly gay. If you must refer to something, refer to it as a MAD, because at least that sounds passable.

Dude, I should totally post the Lyle Story that Death google translated into Spanish, then back to English.

yo yo yo wussup mah brother fucking shit up in this bitch fuck yeah this is pretty cool brotha fuck fuck shit yeah fucking right yeah fuck i am fuck

lol

Dude. I totally own him in Duel Monsters until he threatens to commit suicide. Duh.

3-P: Used Titania and Shinon, 9 turns + 6= 15 Turns total Meh, not very good at all, had little choice though 3-1: Used Shinon and Titania, 12 turns + 9= 21 turns total Fuck my life :D. 3-2: 10 turns total This is where things start picking up. :D That Brave Sword from DB was super awesome here.