Capitol Hill has gone too far

Laguna said:
I understand my mother PROBABLY wants the best for me, and I appreciate that, but reproductive rights are God-given, and inalienable to all. While I know there are a few exceptions as far as pedophilia goes, and sodomy, which I think is bogus anyways.

Notice that you said 'reproductive rights'. Are you trying to reproduce? And yes, you are free to do what you will with your body, but how old are you? If you are under 18 then you are still your mother's responsibility, and what is going to happen if you fuck up or get someone pregnant? And on a side note, I'm hoping that the sodomy part of the last sentance in the only part you find bogus, and not the pedophilia as well.

I know they HAVEN'T banned violent video games, not YET, but did you see what was up in the first paragraph?

Banning Sodomy in 13 states.

Have you been paying any attention to the news at all? The Supreme Court stuck down the Texas sodomy law, effectively taking down the last remaining sodomy laws as well. So much for the point you were tying to make. As for your examples, which I have no intention of quoting (it would take too much space), the same could be said for nonviolent games as well (preaching to the choir, I know). What that means is, though, that it's an arguement that cannot be used to ban violent games, as it is not limited to violent games, and even if a law is passed, it would not be upheld if this arguement was a main factor in it's passing. Now please stop overreacting until there is a reason for you to.

Laguna said:

Stuff

w0rd

I don't believe in reproductive rights. You should have to be able to pass an intelligence test and prove that you have adequate resources to raise a kid before you can have one, and even then you should only get two. Overpopulation is gonna kill us all, and Darwinism seems to have gone haywire as it seems like stupid people are thriving.

We need to clone SabreTooth tigers and release them into the general population. If you are smart enough to avoid being killed by the tigers then you have earned the right to procreate. :p

I think three basic tests should suffice:
1) Putting up a old-fashioned deckchair (without physical injury).
2) Making a cup of coffee (without making a mess or burning oneself).
3) Successfully using Winzip for simple zipping and unzipping.

They provide an adequate test in fundamental areas of modern living, and manual and mental dexterity.

Pedophilia is downright disgusting, it is an act of desperation in the face of predatory sexual depravity, and I detest anyone who indulges in such acts.

Deathbringer - Was the "Stuff" comment supposed to be a bash, or praise? lol

Yes the Texas anti-sodomy law was struck down, but what about the other 12 states that are still working on it? They will just keep on with it until they get their way... Kinda makes you wonder why Bush would allow such a law to be passed, considering that this is the "Land of Freedom."

Oh wait, he's Texan, and we all know how Texas is collectively:

Texan friend: Man, I hate those hippy democrats, trying to outlaw guns.
Me: Oh, yeah?
Texan friend: Yeah, it is so unconstitutional... But the fags gotta go man, we curb queers down here! I think they should pass anti-sodomy laws.
Me: Wait, that's unconstitutional too!
Texan friend: I don't care all fucking fags should DIE!

I think Bush probably fits into that category of ignorance, too... Pro firearms (or is he? I dunno his stance on guns), but Anti-homosexual.

lol

First of all, because of the Supreme Court's ruling, all of the state laws banning sodomy are overturned, not just those in Texas. Second of all, I'm from Texas myself, and do I strike you as some sort of incompetent hick? There a lot of people in Texas who are much more liberal than you give them credit for.

omg lol laguna u r a fuken faget ;-) ;-) ;-)
*goes an shutes sometign nad curbs a faggrit*

Laguna said:

I think Bush probably fits into that category of ignorance, too... Pro firearms (or is he? I dunno his stance on guns), but Anti-homosexual.

so do you fit into the stereotyping category of ignorance or what?

Laguna said:

I think Bush probably fits into that category of ignorance, too... Pro firearms (or is he? I dunno his stance on guns), but Anti-homosexual.

...right

I don't really think that Gore would have done better or worse thatn Bush, but I don't like him regardless. Even if he doesn't like homosexuals, as president, I don't think he could say anything about it. As far as firearms... who knows who cares? They shouldn't be taken away, and if someone wants them bad enough, theyll get them if they are not legal and use them before they can be arrested for possession.

I think the genral consensus on these forums is if someone makes a really long post, and you wanna reply to it direct after it, dont quote the whole thing, just write "stuff" in the quote, and make it clear who's post youre quoting, then people wont have to read thier entire rant again XD

I'd pretty much go along with that. If the only reason for including a quote is to make it clear whose post you're responding to, it doesn't make sense to quote the whole thing, especially if it is a lengthy post. But perhaps "stuff" isn't the best word to use for this purpose though, since it can be taken the wrong way.

Grazza said:

useless bullshit

I totally agree stuff can be taken the wrong way. That's why I've come up with a solution. Note above!

As far as firearms... who knows who cares? They shouldn't be taken away, and if someone wants them bad enough, theyll get them if they are not legal and use them before they can be arrested for possession

Bah, it's not the crazies I'm concerned about. Well, okay, so I'm concerned about them, but like you said, they'll manage to get ahold of guns anyway. Personally, I feel we need gun control because (a)guns aren't necessary and (b) all of those incidents involving "mistakes," such as 2-year-old gets ahold of a gun, or man shoots his wife thinking she's a burglar or something like that. Now, I know the canned response is gonna be "Well, that's their own stupid fault if they aren't careful enough with their guns," but you know, it's not fair to the 2-year-old who has to pay for the mistakes of his idiotic parents. I mean, I draw the line for freedom when somebody who had no choice in a situation is hurt. And I don't want to hear one word on Darwinism, either. That's just sick.

I don't own a gun, probably never will-- I have no use for it. I don't think that the masses do. I think that the people you have to worry about are as you said, 2 year olds and such who end up turning their brains into decorative wallpaper, those paranoids with itchy trigger fingers, and those who are not trained in using them because they would be more apt to kill their spouses/family members once they get the gun in their hand, they would not be as apt to think logically if it is a desparate situation they are not used to. Those, and the crazies.

I should be president.

http://www.geocities.com/insertwackynamehere57/me1.jpg

I'm already starting to resemble Bill Clinton!! ;-)

My quick thoughts of the subjects brought up in this thread:

Not selling r rated games to minors = Fair enough

Bush = Idiot puppet.

Gore = ...a little better then bush.

Homosexuals = A harmless lifestyle choice.

Gun Control = I don't see why civilians (or even most police) would need Automatic weapons. In fact, why would you need a pistol (ie, a concealable weapon) if it's for defence? weapons should only be sold when the buyer can show a clear need for the weapon in question, and the ability to use and store it responsibly.

Ralphis said:

I totally agree stuff can be taken the wrong way. That's why I've come up with a solution. Note above!

LOL.

Oh, yes, we -must- protect the children! All content harmful to their dear little ears and eyes must be eliminated! For the good of their mental well being!... it makes them easier to absorb into the collective.

You know, if the government made more money off of video games, they wouldn't do this. It's sheerly for publicity and re-election campaigns. It's politics. That's why Socrates or whosit was against democracy... the politicians pander to the demands of the masses, instead of doing useful things, like keeping this country out of economic turmoil. Oh well.

Thankfully, it affects me not... *snickers*

Oh, very funny thing, WalMart evidently thinks parents have the IQ of goldfish... every day, they rant on the same message on the PA... "see? There's a black and white ratings box! And if it says 'mature', little six-year-old Billy might not understand the content. On the back of the box, it lists features!". Are parents really that stupid not to notice?... rethorical question. It's not supposed to be answered.

the politicians pander to the demands of the masses

Er, isn't that why we elect them in the first place? Yes it would be a better world if we didn't have to cater to the retarded majority, but since they're the majority it's their way or the highway. Viva la stupid people!

Ah well. At least some of the idiotic generation will die eventually... maybe the next one won't be as boneheaded...

Cecillia said:

Are parents really that stupid not to notice?... rethorical question.

I'm going to answer it anyway. What most of you people fail to
understand is that these parents don't understand the whole video
game thing nowadays. It was a lot different back when they were younger and they probably don't really know too much about todays video games despite whats on the box. Let's face it, the kid is gonna say he wants the game and hes gonna tell his mom its nothing he hasnt seen and shes going to get it. That doesn't mean the parents are retarded, they just dont realize the major gap between super mario bros and grand theft auto.

Bah, my mom knows about games... though, she had me when she was 18, so, she's about 36-ish now.

I just bought her Pikmin and Metriod Fusion XD it's harder finding games for the visually impaired (legally blind, but, she's got color back), but she plays Animal Crossing and Legend of Zelda: Link the the Past GBA well enough.

She drives me insane with her Animal Crossing fixation... I don't play it anymore, myself, though. Too mundane... and there's only so much you can do with furnature.

Anyway, many parents do understand games. My mother, even when I was younger, never objected to me playing evil, bloody, violent, 'yay, dismerberment!' games because of this: she knows I'm not an idiot and will take a chainsaw to a random person in the street. One of my first PS games was Final Doom, when I was... 13? Been too long...

Just because I'm a violent psycho in games doesn't mean I am at heart. I don't even think I could kill someone close-range *shrugs* don't have the stomach for it.

I may only be 14, but that doesn't mean I jumped on to the bandwagon late, for Doom. Doom, Blake Stone, Duke I, and Falcon 3.0, are probably the first games I ever played, and yes, I was 4 and younger when I played them, but I'm not screwed up.

Mmm. . . shotgun. . .

"Cease fire? What are we suposed to do? Hurt them with harsh language?!"

*Paraphrased from Aliens*

Mmmm.. . Brains. . .

Am I the only one who slightly wants to give the Fat Zombie a hug? Maybe that's all he needs. . .

In anycase, I think that a shotgun is a more intimidating weapon, who needs a fucking handgun for defense?

You know, I've been meaning to say this for a while, and now I'm gonna say it. I'm not taking sides in the violent video game issue, because frankly I'm 19, and I really don't care, but it seems to me that this whole thing stems from our "I Me Mine" culture, where we are supposed to be free to do whatever we choose, and nobody should interfere with anything. It seems like a good concept, but after going outside and looking around, I've decided that our nation is just too dumb to allow that. Really, I mean, I cannot believe that we as a species ever made it anywhere. For instance, take homosexuals: Canada just allowed gay marriages, whereas we just recently struck down laws giving people permission to go out and shoot them for sport (exaggeration, I know, but it's practically true). President Bush has just gotten us into Vietnam II, and yet his approval rating is still very high. Finally, the Christian right continues to make live miserable for anyone with an IQ above 5. So you see, government regulation isn't all bad, and in fact is sometimes necessary. Now, if only we could change our focus and drop this whole silly war on terrorism and declare war on stupidity.

geekmarine said:

declare war on stupidity.

That'd be holocaust for the US ;p

Agreed man. All Hail the United States of America. We suck.

Fredrik said:

That'd be holocaust for the US ;p

That would be a holocaust for humanity.

Humanity in general is stupid. SARS is yet another example of nature trying to reduce our numbers. It's telling us that we're ripe for the picking and we're still too stupid to hear it. I tell ya, sooner or later AIDS is going to mutate in Africa or India just like Tuberculosis did, it's gonna go airborne and that'll be the end of us.