Recent posts by Twilight_Ninja on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Extra-terrestrial disclosure

Originally posted by greg:

Hypothetical, right? No, it already happened, last year, by the Canadian minister of defense: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDuqZbjxB_E

It corroborates with a ton of other leaks and reports, but none have been so public from such a high-level government official. This kind of seems like a big deal. Shouldn’t we at least be talking about this? Let’s start with this thread!

Interesting. I’m just not sure if it’s real, or a voice over.

Originally posted by Mafefe_Classic:

Clutching at Straws 101

srsly tho, pics of aliens or gtfo

To be fair, though, even if he produced photos, you’d cry they were Photoshopped. Skeptics will be skeptics.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Vulgarity

Originally posted by denamo:

in my opinion they should be only used as underlining words for stronger emotions, but i guess nobody would understand or actually try to use it like that

Depends on the environment. None would be tolerated if you are writing a term paper (unless they were cited as a quote from something else), and I think little fits into everyday conversation. Vulgar language is usually used to express a burst of anger or frustration at something, although if mixed into everyday language very infrequently it can add emphasis to a statement.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / 7even Deadly Sins

Originally posted by dd790:

Think that’s defamation rather than wrath, courts would be more interested than God

So then, in your opinion, exercising free (if angry) speech is not wrath, at least in the eyes of God, or for this discussion?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hell

Originally posted by vikaTae:

It could mean that heaven and hell are the same place, since Det will meet you whether you go to heaven or to hell, Kasic.

Or perhaps heaven and hell do mixer evenings, where the two sets of residents hobnob?

I heard an interesting allegory about Heaven/hell recently:

Someone went to Hell, and instead of the fire they were expecting, they saw a large buffet table filled with delicious foods. Each person sitting at the table had a six foot spoon, and they spent eternity hungry, struggling to figure out how to feed themselves.

Then they visited Heaven, and to their surprise, saw the same large buffet table with it’s inhabitants utilizing a six foot spoon. The difference was, they were feeding each other.

I thought this was illuminating because it really illustrated (for me, at least), how “hellish” certain environments I’ve been in have felt, simply from extreme lack of teamwork. When people—due to misery, selfishness, boredom, or whatever else—throw each other under the bus as a matter of principle, the whole mission seems to sink. The allegory, in any event, put in perspective for me how we can see shades of Heaven/hell in everyday life.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / 7even Deadly Sins

Originally posted by dd790:

Wrath – Being angry just gives me a headache and I was brought up well so use words rather than fists so that’s out
Greed – Too much of a soft touch to be greedy, would feel like a twat taking more than my share
Sloth – Idleness bores me
Pride – Love watching people who think they are better than themselves look like tools, couldn’t do with being one of them
Envy – Never seen the point in jealousy
Gluttony – Can’t eat a full Mars bar without feeling sick let alone be a glutton
Lust – Probably the nearest but I’d still say no, I have a huge sex drive, very flirty and think NSA is the best acronym ever. However, I don’t join in with the lads when out and seeing a girl where they do that typical “whoa she’s nice, wouldn’t mind a go on that, look at those tits/arse etc” stuff, I just find it all very distasteful. I don’t tend to look at strangers sexually at all, obviously I can see a girl is my view of pretty, but I don’t lust after women. Passion yes, lust no.

So I’m just curious….how (strongly) would we define wrath here? For instance, if someone gets fired by an employer and they feel it is unjust, is releasing stress by blogging about it wrath?

Or would we only start to consider it “wrath” if they slashed their employer’s tires or planned a shooting spree?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Should medical crystal meth be legalized?

Originally posted by RollerCROWster:

Hey guys, when people ingest water in excess they die from water poisoning

And how often have we seen or heard of hyponatremia deaths, compared to those due to drug use?

Water’s not addictive, like meth. The last instance I heard of someone over ingesting water was as a side effect of ecstacy, so again, really a drug problem (not a water problem).

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Should medical crystal meth be legalized?

I’m just joining this discussion, but I see no good reason meth should be legalized. It quite obviously has deleterious effects, and is not a benign sort of pharmaceutical (like MJ or some prescription drugs).

Studying the effects of Meth (some dentists even have a term for dental disorders called Meth Mouth) or watching a couple seasons of Breaking Bad should really illuminate for anyone what is wrong with it.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Free speech vs. discrimination -- where do we draw the line?

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:
Originally posted by onlineidiot1994:

It’s protected under free speech, but that woman is, quite frankly, a cunt.

Ooopppsss…where I live, THAT is a very, VERY strongly disliked (by women) assessment.

And? If she’s going to dish it out, she should be prepared for a lot of heat coming her way. Again, name calling (towards her), however offensive sounding—free speech.


Originally posted by onlineidiot1994:
The college as a whole is going to have to play damage control as a result of her spitting off her opinion.


I’ve seen people fired for a lot less.

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:
AND, your profile on this site says that YOU are “employed” by the Army Reserves as a CBRN specialist.
I’m sure they are extremely proud of the way ya representing them here.

Is it really the same thing, though? Not really, because (1) his identity’s anonymous (2) he’s not in a position of power over her (to impact her grade).

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Free speech vs. discrimination -- where do we draw the line?

A similar topic has been brought up with the Westboro Baptist Church, but this media story puts a little different spin on things. A junior college communications instructor has faced controversy with both the college and the military veterans community for some comments she’s made that are disparaging towards veterans; namely that they are an unintelligent subculture and made predominantly of rapists/misogynists. The full story is here:

http://www.krcrtv.com/news/local/instructors-facebook-comments-stir-controversy-at-butte-college/24985422

Reactions from the veterans community ranged from ambivalent to outraged, some even taking it to their blogs for more in depth analysis:

http://thelibertyzone.wordpress.com/tag/jodi-rives-meier/

So my question to everyone is—are her opinions appropriate and protected under free speech? Or are they out of line, and reflecting poorly on the college she represents? Are they discriminatory, and if so, should her military students be eligible for reparations and grades they feel they may have been awarded unfairly?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Spanking: yea or nay. -- Now expanded to include: How humanity uses physical force to ensure desired compliant behavior.

Originally posted by RollerCROWster:

The only people who are pro spanking are ppl who were abused as kids and are in denial about being abused.

Hyperbole argument, and false. I was not spanked as a child, and I grew up believing in corporal punishment.

I agree, obviously a bunch of psychology NERDS who will never have kids know more about raising kids than me, an actual parent!!!

A bunch of those “psychology nerds” and people who advocate spanking are parents as well. Are you threatened by the use of a strong, scholarly source? Not your best work, CROW.

 

Topic: Serious Discussion / Spanking: yea or nay. -- Now expanded to include: How humanity uses physical force to ensure desired compliant behavior.

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Spanking: yea or nay. -- Now expanded to include: How humanity uses physical force to ensure desired compliant behavior.

Originally posted by tenco1:

The tunica should hold against the initial injection, vein walls aren’t ‘that’ weak. The problem comes as this mass of air is propelled towards the heart by the blood behind it. When it reaches the heart, it becomes something really nasty known as a venous air embolism.

I wonder how close this is to a pulmonary embolism. My husband had one of those, which of course, decreased the uptake of oxygen so he couldn’t catch his breath. Although, he described it more as worrisome, rather than painful/sharp. What you’re describing (the injection of air into the lungs) sounds much more intense.

I brought up the outer space without a suit because I’d always been preoccupied with that as a child. Pondered it and asked a million questions, and got answers ranging from—you’ll explode, you’ll implode, you’ll hold your breath and lose consciousness.

Originally posted by tenco1:
The only one who really seems to be against it is dd790, but I don’t think he’s really giving all of his thoughts on it.

Although, to be fair, it seems CROW is against it too, as he posts the same two sentence argument/troll over and over, about how spanking is violence, and violence means you’re impotent etc.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Spanking: yea or nay. -- Now expanded to include: How humanity uses physical force to ensure desired compliant behavior.

Originally posted by vikaTae:

Kid won’t tell them either. The bends is kinda lethal and a hypodermic full of air at sea level pressure would be more than enough to ensure fatality.


Sometimes I wonder if I don’t know too many creative ways to off people, and for whatever reason, they all seem to stick in my head.

As a side note, that is also just about the most painful way to die, which really adds to the gravity of the punishment.

Sounds like outer space, without a suit.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Spanking: yea or nay. -- Now expanded to include: How humanity uses physical force to ensure desired compliant behavior.

Originally posted by CROWlympics:

I agree, your post that adds nothing to the thread and has nothing to do with the topic is way better than my post making fun of someone’s stupid arguments in a sarcastic way!!

Now, now, CROW, I was referring to the fact that you didn’t even address my previous response to your post.

also, if u have to resort to hitting your kids ur admitting that ur a weak loser that cant control their anger lol :>>>

This sounds like a strong bias on your post. I’m not a “loser” for a parent, as you so eloquently put it; just the opposite, I feel. And parents who advocate for corporal punishment don’t necessarily have “anger” issues because they believe this works; that is a hyperbole argument.

Although, I was spanked as a child, rarely, and with a grim sort of sense of obligation by my parents. I actually have the family leather strap, passed down along generations from old Patriarch Grandad himself.

Interesting. My dad tells a similar story—his dad would tell him (when it was spanking time) to go out and find the stick he was going to be spanked/lashed with. When he would come back, his dad would often say, “Not big enough, not sharp enough, go find another one.” Now, I would never do this with my child, but I do think there’s a time and place for regular spanking with certain children. If people can raise their kids to be responsible citizens without spanking and with just reasoning, more power to them, and I’m not trying to exclude the possibility.

I just wouldn’t really say that all children that were raised on spankings turned out to be ax murderers, either—my dad spent almost 20 years working as a state legislator, before going on to become the CEO of a major company (where he is now), and of course, being a responsible, tax paying citizen. So what’s the point of trying to say that one approach or the other is right/wrong, or works 100% of the time?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Spanking: yea or nay. -- Now expanded to include: How humanity uses physical force to ensure desired compliant behavior.

Originally posted by RollerCROWster:

I agree, the slippery slope fallacy is a legit debate tactic!

Also, obviously everyone who is spanked is a military superhero and everyone who isnt is a poor hipster that works at mcdonalds!!

Also, also, spanking going down correlates with the rise in ADHD diagnoseses, so ADHD must be caused by not spanking! Its not like a rise in child psychological studies discovered this disorder and also showed the harmful effects of spanking! that would be ridiculous!!

Now you’re not even trying.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Spanking: yea or nay. -- Now expanded to include: How humanity uses physical force to ensure desired compliant behavior.

Originally posted by RollerCROWster:

I agree, its impossible to raise a child into a well adjusted adult unless you hit them all the time!

Not necessarily, CROW. I never advocated beating or hitting them “all the time”. I think spankings should probably be used as a last resort—after the reasoning and withdrawal of privileges has failed—but I do think there is a time and a place for them.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Spanking: yea or nay. -- Now expanded to include: How humanity uses physical force to ensure desired compliant behavior.

Originally posted by issendorf:

A spanking =/= child abuse.

I agree with this (and the rest of the post). While I respect different people’s approaches to rearing their kids, I think there is a time and a place for spanking. Nothing overboard, obviously, nothing that would injure them or leave bruises. But there are some kids that are stubborn enough that reasoning alone doesn’t work. My friend raised her child on the concept of, “We’re equals, we’re friends, we’ll talk it out”. Although I’m sure her (now teenager) is doing fine, she was a hellion at about age 6. I would be able to tell my child (who was spanked on occasion), “Well, it’s time to leave.” and they would shrug and say OK. My friend would tell her child the same thing and it would result in a complete meltdown. I saw this once in a McDonald’s; she actually ended up carrying her daughter out to the car while her daughter was biting her and drawing blood. The joys of life without corporal punishment.

I do think it would probably be good to save spanking as a last resort, though. I’ve found withdrawal of privileges, coupled with incentives for good behavior, to usually do the trick.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage

Originally posted by Athrul:
Originally posted by YoucantbutICan:

But do you honestly think that sex between a man and a women isn’t sin?

Sex is sin?
Did I understand that correctly?

Maybe according to him, but like Kasic mentions he seems to contradict himself quite regularly. Besides, I thought the Song of Solomon was all about extolling the joys and virtues of marital bliss. He should go back and read his Bible some more.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage

Originally posted by YoucantbutICan:

…..

Well wtf was that? Never have I been so stumped on where someone actually stands on an issue. Or maybe I’m just reading it wrong; it’s late and I have a headache.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage

Originally posted by Kasic:

If he isn’t religious or basing his beliefs on the Christian god, I’ll be quite surprised.

You might have to be surprised then. Christianity is the only traditionally conservative value I have seen him not display and put front and center in his arguments. Gun loving? Check. Small government? Check. Anti gay/women’s/minority rights? Check.

But go ahead and put jhco to the test next time he decides to pop in. Ask the defining questions for that particular topic/value (Do you go to church? Do you believe Jesus Christ was the son of God and died on the cross for your sins?) and see how he answers. I would guess you might get an answer like, “I was raised with Christian values” which is a little different. A lot of people were raised with Christian values who don’t label/identify themselves as “Christian”. And I don’t really think that’s the driving force behind his values, it’s more a conservative, old-school America, “back in my day” type of persuasion that influences that thought process.

Just because jhco hyperboles and combines various ideologies into an easy to understand, idealistic lump doesn’t mean you should do the same.

Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

Pretty sure I’ve seen no one say that outright unless it was 50 pages ago. I’m also pretty sure that there would be quite a few people who, in the interest of ‘fairness’, would love to see the government force churches to be more progressive.

I never understood the viewpoint of people that would want to force churches to marry them. If a church’s doctrine disagrees with the way they live their life—no matter how bullyish it may seem to them—it would make more sense to seek acceptance elsewhere. I mean, if for instance, a church didn’t want to include me as a member because I was Caucasian (I’m picking out an arbitrary trait I have no control over), I wouldn’t want to have anything to do with them. Even if the church was forced to legally marry a gay couple, they would have the church’s legal recognition, but never their emotional recognition. It kind of defeats the purpose of being part of a church, which is the inherent belief set/docrine. Really, a civil union with full legal benefits ought to be enough.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage

Originally posted by Kasic:

What frightens me is that this kind of cognitive dissonance on current events and views is quite extremist. It’s only a step away from the things you hear the WBC, KKK, and other Christian hate groups spouting.

I’d just like to point out that not all Christian groups are hateful, or can easily placed into a bigoted (or for that matter, even Republican) category. I have a good friend who is Christian, church-attending, and gay. The KKK has disbanded—Christianity doesn’t advocate beating the crap out of people anyway—and the WBC is really unpopular with mainstream Christian groups right now. I’m sure you probably didn’t intend to paint all Christian groups with a broad brush, but I was just clarifying.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Thug" is the new "N-word"/Jordan Davis and Treyvon Martin

Geez did SD die in the last day? No activity/bumps and I’ve been seeing a lot of this up in here

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Philosophy

Originally posted by RollerCROWster:

I philosophize that this thread will eventually become a flamewar about a completely unrelated subject

You would probably be right.

I like ravens more than crows, Crows are ugly

No they’re not. Crows are cool. Especially in my area. They look like small black chickens. I bet they would even best my cat.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Thug" is the new "N-word"/Jordan Davis and Treyvon Martin

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

We probably should include the Latin Grammy Awards, the ALMA, the DAR and any other such events that celebrate accomplishments within a particular group demographic.

That’s true; I just wasn’t aware of the Latin Grammy Awards, etc. Whenever there is an event that is specific to one race, even if it’s meant in a positive vein, the implication is that it excludes all the other races.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / "Thug" is the new "N-word"/Jordan Davis and Treyvon Martin

Originally posted by urine420:

ignoring systemic injustice makes it go away

If you say so, CROW.

Over time, it will need to be less and less about one particular ethnicity, and more and more about how all ethnicities blended, with particular emphasis on when one ethnicity was singled out for less than equal treatment by others.

That would make a lot more sense than the way it is now. For instance, look at the film awards/Academy Awards—they are open to all genders and ethnicities. Halle Berry, a black woman, won best actress in 2002. However, are the Ebony Awards open to all ethnicities or just one? So right now we have a system where both blacks and whites are participants in one, but only blacks are participants in the other. It’s not balanced.