Adahn

I played most of that game, but for some reason I only remember him as "Dreamfart". I've got to go shopping now, but I'll edit the post later if I can think of something.

Drizzt: One of the main benefits of GM crops is that in many cases, it's possible to completely eliminate the use of pesticides. I think nearly all the corn in the U.S. is already and has been genetically modified for a long time. To prove your point, there was a massive overproduction of corn recently, of which you are likely aware. Environmental factors still play an enormous part, though, so yearly crop yields vary. As for the fuel, genetic modifications can eliminate the need for pesticides, which I believe plays an important part in the fuel requirements for food production. Everyone's afraid of being the first generation to experience the possible side effects of GM crops. It's already too late, though, as almost all the corn in the U.S. is already genetically modified. I guess it will be our generation that points to corn to say whether or not it was a bad idea! The13thMan: Cloning crops is the worst idea ever. The irish potato famine was a result of cutting seed potatoes from the same crop and replanting them, essentially using cloned potatoes for years. The cloned potatoes were susceptible to a disease, and since there was no genetic variation, all the potatoes died and lots of people starved to death. Just to play both sides of the GM crops issue, scientists were able to express a protein from brazil nuts in soybeans, and people that at the genetically modified soybeans that were allergic to brazil nuts had an allergic reaction to the soybeans. However, this is an extreme case where the allergen from another plant was identified and expressed purposefully in another food crop. Most genetic modifications either remove a gene from a plant or add a gene (proven not to be an allergen) that was taken from another plant. An example is golden rice. Rice is missing one protein that allows it to produce an essential vitamin (I think vitamin A). This causes all the rice to produce vitamin A, and the rice can be grown/distributed cheaply to populations that have been shown to have a vitamin A deficiency in their diet. Due to resistance from people wary of GM crops, golden rice is not used very widely and many people who could benefit from it will die from poor nutrition. There once were Flavr Savr tomatoes. They were genetically modified, but no gene was added to them. Tomatoes and other crops need to decompose in order for their seeds to spread efficiently. They do this in large part by producing ethylene, which triggers the decomposition of the fruit/vegetable. When the gene that produces ethylene is removed, the plants do not rot on the vine. It increased shelf life and productivity with no risk of any foreign protein causing allergic reactions. They were available temporarily, but due to a public outcry they were banned and no longer are available.

Hey Everybody! I'm curious to know what your thoughts and opinions are on genetically modified organisms. I've also just finished working in a lab that used mouse as a model organism, so if any of you have any questions or thoughts on the use of animals in research, I may be able to tell you something interesting. Since most concerns with GMO's are about food crops, it might also be interesting to talk about the development of organic foods. My opinion on GM crops is that if implemented correctly, they could greatly increase productivity and lower costs to consumers and farmers. I think there is a knowledge barrier between laymen and scientists that is preventing us from using genetic modification to its full potential. I understand countries other than the U.S. realize the benefits and are switching over to GM crops, so anyone from a different country could give especially valuable input that my own background cannot provide. I think everyone but the most adamant animal rights activists acknowledge the benefits that come from animal research. However, it is possible that anyone here who is against using animals for research may be misinformed in some areas, and I may be able to shed some light on the subject. Lastly, I see organic foods as the opposite of GM foods. They require more resources to produce and cost more to consumers and farmers. My wife loves organic foods, and while I try to dissuade her from getting everything organic because of the price, I don't mind if she buys organic eggs and milk. She says they taste different, but they all taste the same to me. I think the 'organic movement' is more based on making consumers feel like they're eating wholesome, 'natural' foods rather than on health benefits. Since I don't look for reasons to spend extra money on food, I may be missing some vital research on the subject, and if anyone here is an organic guru it would be nice to hear some reasons why organic foods are worth the price. That's all I can crank out at 4am, so I hope to hear from some of you tomorrow!

[size=2][/size] [size=2]Depending on the circumstances, sex can be wonderful or terrible or anything inbetween. Your first time is an experience, and it can affect sex for the rest of your life.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]So, what's wrong with being a virgin? There are pressures all around you, and if you somehow find yourself a virgin in your mid 20's or later, there may be shame associated with your situation. At that age, it is generally expected that one has had some experience with sex. This may make it difficult for one to develop a romantic relationship with another person. In turn, this could lead to a traumatic first sexual encounter, especially if it's with someone who degrades you for poor performance. You won't be a virgin anymore, but you will be even less prepared for a healthy sexual relationship.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]This doesn't mean old virgins are doomed, though. They may find someone caring and supportive to give them a useful, enjoyable experience that leads to a healthy sex life.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I'll give you something to ponder. If you are a virgin, you are most likely very bad at sex. No one is born a porn star, and you can pretty much expect to be terrible in bed your first time.[/size]

[size=2]I thought it was a good question. You'd rather suffer horrible losses and excruciating pain than be a despicably evil person.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]As for yours, I'd most fear being burnt alive. I imagine I'd go unconscious after a good time of drowning and being hit with rocks, so that would make the end nicer. Being burned alive would hurt until the very moment I expired.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]So, you didn't like my choices? I'll try to make my choices a little softer :)[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]1. Hugging a cute, fluffy white kitten?[/size] [size=2]2. Rubbing noses with a sweet, gentle bunny rabbit?[/size] [size=2]3. Petting a puppy that's only a couple weeks old?[/size]

[size=2]I'd have to choose being blinded as my greatest fear of all three. Neither of the other choices would really disable me.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]So, whoever is next, which of these would you fear the most?[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]1. Permanently forgetting everything about anyone you've ever met, and everything you've ever done, without any hope of recovering your memory.[/size] [size=2]2. Realizing that you have an overwhelming urge to rape and murder young children.[/size] [size=2]3. Being tortured painfully and continuously for one year, after which you would emerge without any physical deformities, and with your mind intact, but never being able to forget what you suffered.[/size]

[font=Tahoma]So, what scares me as a male? Well, I'm not afraid of too many things, and the things that do scare me don't have much to do with me being a guy. However, I can easily contort my fears to conform with your question. I am afraid of pointy things. Needles are a good example, but I'm also cautious around tacks, knives, and anything else that can put a hole in me, like guns. [b]Masculine contortion:[/b] I am afraid of being penetrated, as this goes against my natural male role as a penetrator. I am ridiculously afraid of spiders. I can be pretty tough if I've got a weapon and the little guy cornered, but if one gets on me, I will freak the hell out. You'd think Death himself had laid his hand on me. [b]Masculine contortion:[/b] I'm afraid of spiders because I think my junk will fall off if one bites me. I am afraid of others noticing my mistakes. It's ok if I make one and nobody knows about it, but if someone finds out, I'll do anything possible to deny it. I don't let others know that I know I'm wrong. [b]Masculine contortion:[/b] Guys never admit that they are wrong, or that they need directions. We don't need your help, and we don't need your bitching. I am incapable of peeing in the same room as someone I don't know. I also can't pee in a urinal, unless I know that the entire building is empty and there is zero chance of someone walking in on me. [b]Masculine contortion:[/b] I'm afraid that if anyone is in the same room [spoiler]with my impressive physical endowments,[/spoiler] they will be overcome with a jealous, murderous rage, and not even [spoiler]my mighty club[/spoiler] will be enough to fight them off. (not really, but it was fun to type anywho) As for fears in relation to women, I have none. Women are all as harmless as kittens :catgirl:

[font=Tahoma][size=2]I have to live at home right now, too, and it really does suck to be treated like I'm still a kid. I spent a year on campus, though, and was able to develop my own individuality.[/size][/font] [size=2][/size] [size=2]So, there are a couple things your friend can do.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]First, she can work very hard to get scholarships. If she can get enough financial aid through loans and scholarships to live on campus, then she can go live on campus. Even if it's for just a year, it should give her enough of an experience to go back home with some experience with independence, which could allow her to stand up to her parents in such a way that they'll still want her around. So long as she lives at home, though, she's going to have to tolerate being treated like a child.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Secondly, she can get a full time job over the summer, and save all of her money so that she can live on campus the next year. It will be hard, but if she wants independence, she's going to have to sacrifice her time for it.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]There is no easy way to get out of your parents' house, especially if you go to college and don't have very much money. If she really works at it, I think she'll be able to succeed.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]On a side note, I can't WAIT to be out and living on my own. Hopefully by this fall, I'll live with my wife (not married yet, but will be soon enough!) on campus, and never have to rely on my parents for a roof over my head again.[/size]

[size=2]How do you think your life would be different if you were the opposite gender?[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Now, to uncomplicate things, don't go rewriting your past. Take your current situation, and assume that you are the opposite gender. There wasn't some strange transformation that you are aware of. You must pretend that you have always been the opposite gender, yet still ended up in your current situation.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]First of all, I would probably have to get up an hour earlier than normal, because I would actually have to spend time getting ready to go to my classes. I would have to make my hair look nice, and probably put on make-up. I would also have to start exercising regularly, because it would be less acceptable for me to weigh as much as I do. I'd probably have to shave my legs and armpits, and pluck my eyebrows. At college, my routine probably wouldn't change too much.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Ech, this is ridiculously difficult! I honestly have [i]no[/i] idea what it would be like to be a girl. Instead of calling this a failed experiment and opting not to post the thread, however, I'll diverge from what I originally intended.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]What is it like being a girl? I'll try to set up a background for comparison by saying what it's like (for me) to be a guy.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Other guys,[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Go ahead and talk about what it's like being a guy for yourself.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Ok, so I wake up in the morning, and if I don't smell or look bad, I don't think I need a shower. I may or may not shave my face, depending on whether I remember. I don't do anything with my hair, because I simply don't care. I don't exercise beyond my daily routine of walking to and from classes, but I will if my girl tells me to. I wear the same pants for days at a time, because it's hard to tell jeans apart. It's cold, so I'll wear the same shirt if I can wear a coat over it. I don't need to actively look for girls, but many of them dress in a way that catches my eye. I'm never afraid to speak up about something, and I am never demure. If I itch somewhere, I scratch. I burp and fart, but try not to do so around people. If I do, I don't get too embarassed. I don't socialize very much.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]So, why do I think these things are significant? I think girls (in general) care much more about their appearance than I do. This is evident by how all the girls around me look...prepared. There are also only two types of girls. Those who don't control their weight, and those who do. There are no intermediates that I can see. I just assume girls change clothes regularly, because they're more used to being noticed. I don't meet many girls with a forceful personality, they mostly exude some amount of deference. Girls seem to control their body movements more precisely, more fluidly, and are not apt to contort their bodies to reach some pesky itch. Most girls seem kind of chatty, at least they talk more than I do, and usually when I talk to one of them, they initiate and guide the conversation.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Well, that's all I've got for now. This thread can also be used to discuss anything related to gender, but I thought it would be nice to set up a base for discussion, just in case nobody else comes up with something.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Also, if I'm horribly wrong in any or all of my assumptions, please do tell me. I love to learn new things, especially when they deal with human nature.[/size]

[QUOTE=taperson] First of all, have you yourself ever struggled with a self image/esteem problem? In other words, have you ever seen yourself as too fat/ugly/etc until it got to the point that you obsessed over it? Have you ever known someone go through this? Feel free to share stories.[/QUOTE] I was horribly teased and ignored by just about everyone I went to school with at a very young age. As a result, I saw myself as someone who could never be attractive to anyone. It wasn't really an obsession, but it did affect me. When girls did show an interest in me, I ignored them completely. I never really understood that it was possible for someone to like me, even through the end of high school. [QUOTE=taperson] Second of all, do you have any advice for overcoming it? Did you tell your parents [and if you did, HOW]? What steps did you take to overcome this?[/QUOTE] My advice to you is to find someone you trust and love to tell you that you're beautiful. There's someone out there who will be so blinded by your personality and appearance that all your 'flaws' will be invisible to them. I never talked to my parents about it. I didn't really take any conscious steps towards the solution, but I found it nonetheless. I met my fiancee on the internet, talked to her, exchanged pictures, fell in love, then met in person. She loves me for who I am, so I don't really care about my appearance anymore. Also, she's always beautiful to me, and I tell her so every day. [QUOTE=taperson] Just a note, having a low self image is a SELF thing. It has nothing to do with how people see you but with how you see yourself.[/QUOTE] When you objectify and judge yourself, it's not very much a self thing anymore. You see yourself as an other, one who you can change, and you want to control this other person's appearance. If you recognize that the girl in the mirror isn't someone you should push around, you may learn to let yourself [i]be[/i] yourself, which could help with your problem. It will lead to a pretty laid back lifestyle, but that's not such a bad thing, is it?

[font=Tahoma]Allamorph, I'm extremely uninformed in the area of physiology, so if you would be so kind as to tell me what the hell a pituitary gland is, and what function it has, I would be more than happy to answer your question. Mnemonica, I thought this particular mistake of mine was dead and buried, but here I find it resurrected. *sigh* I was bored when I created this thread, and wrote the introductory post to amuse myself. I am quite capable of discussing topics of substance and depth, but lately nothing has come to mind. When I combine pretty words with deep thoughts, the effect can be quite pleasant. Either without the other is quite ineffective and unappealing. I hope you enjoy OtakuBoards, and I hope you can find an RP that suits you. [/font]

[size=2]Oh, I love nothing more than taking a shot in the dark.[/size] [size=2]DS, you were talking to your friends about whoever died, and that the person's death itself didn't really bother you, because you didn't know them. They got on your case about it, saying you were heartless. You didn't feel as if you'd done something wrong, so you defended your position to the point that what you were talking about was twisted.[/size] [size=2]You are not wrong in feeling little for the person who died, and you are right in feeling bad for your friend.[/size] [size=2]Whether this happened recently or not, it is not appropriate to discuss these sentiments with your friends.[/size] [size=2]In bringing this up, you have made a mistake, not a heartless one, but a stupid one. Own up to it and apologize for speaking inappropriately. This will allow you to stop defending your position, however right it may be, and start smoothing over the ruffles you've created with your (either thoughtless or too thoughtful) comments.[/size] [size=2]I, personally, hate the thought that I have done something wrong, and have a huge difficulty admitting my mistakes. It's a character flaw I have, and one that you may share with me. I defend myself when I should apologize, even if I feel in the core of my being that I am absolutely correct. It's the hardest thing to do, and usually the best thing one can do in a situation like this.[/size]

[font=Tahoma]Well, I met my fiance' on the internet. On OtakuBoards, in fact. It's easy enough to verify someone's identity. A webcam, an internet connection, and a messenger program like AIM or yahoo make the identity of the person you're communicating with undeniable.[/font]

[font=Tahoma][size=2]Well, the whole thing about laughing at any reason for prohibiting stem cell research stems (haha) mainly from my aggravation with how little people understand about the subject.[/size][/font] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Even if someone does do something wonderful, like changing stem cell research so that it alleviates moral issues, politicians and the public take a distrusting stance, ask for more research, and all the while people are suffering and dying from disabilities that could possibly be cured/prevented by this research. I have very little patience when it comes to things of this nature.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I hate politics, and I think politicians hate science :D [/size]

[size=2]Swordsaint,[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I'll do my best to give an explanation suitable for those who aren't hardcore science majors.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]First of all, fetal stem cells are a thing of the past, and no longer very relevant. They [i]are [/i]able to develop into any kind of human tissue, but stem cells taken from fetuses are not genetically identical to the patient they would be used to cure. Research [i]can [/i]be done on them to see how stem cells function, but this is largely seen as morally wrong, because they are taken from aborted fetuses.[/size] [size=2][/size] [u][size=2]It is no longer necessary to use fetuses for stem cell research.[/size][/u] [size=2][/size] [size=2]So, what [i]can [/i]we do to obtain stem cells?[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Every cell in your body has a nucleus, and every nucleus contains the same DNA (except for eggs and sperm). Now, your cells have specific functions, but imagine for a moment that one of your skin cells is a newly formed zygote (a fertilized egg). When that cell divides, it has many genes that allow it to go through the incredibly complex process of turning into a fully-developed human being. We can alter that DNA, so that the 'zygote' cannot develop into a human being, because it lacks the genes that coordinate where all your limbs and organs go. Because of this, the 'zygote' cannot develop past a cluster of cells.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Now, each and every one of your cells isn't actually a zygote, but you've got to treat it as one to understand what happens next.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]You take the DNA from one of your own cells, which is the same as any other cell in your body, and you put it into an egg that has had its own DNA removed. The egg's DNA has no potential to be a human being, because it only has half as many genes as a human being. Removing this DNA is no different from a woman discharging an egg cell during her period.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]So, what has been done so far?[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]We've altered the DNA in a single human cell. There shouldn't be anything morally wrong with this, because X-rays and UV-radiation from the sun alter human DNA, also. We are doing nothing that does not occur naturally, just doing it more precisely to achieve a desired effect.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]We've also removed the DNA from an unfertilized egg. This DNA has [u]no potential[/u] to become a human being. No life is lost. If you think one removing one egg cell's DNA has anything to do with killing a human being, then every time a man attempts to impregnate a woman, billions of human beings die (lots and lots of sperm will not survive to fertilize an egg). It just doesn't make sense to humanize eggs or sperm.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]So, what's next?[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]We insert the DNA from one of your cells into the egg cell. This cell is now genetically identical to any one of your cells. The egg cell has no DNA of its own (except for mitochondrial DNA, but that's not important here). This cell can now grow and divide, and every cell is a stem cell. Also, if the person who donated the DNA is sick, these stem cells are genetically identical to that person, so there is no chance of tissue rejection or other related complications.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]So, what haven't we done?[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]1. We have not 'cloned' someone. The cell we have made cannot turn into a human being. It is just a clump of stem cells that will die if they are implanted into a uterus.[/size] [size=2]2. We have not fertilized an egg, making a new human being. Fertilization requires an egg and sperm to fuse, making a unique and new person. Many people believe that the fusion of egg and sperm is where life begins.[/size] [size=2]3. We have not violated anything human. Egg and sperm cells die by the trillions upon trillions every day. Removing DNA from an unfertilized egg harms nothing and noone in any way. Removing DNA from someone's cells and modifying it is also nothing new. DNA testing [i]requires[/i] this, and instead of modifying it like we do, they must destroy it.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]So, why is stem cell research an issue?[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]1. People still think stem cell research deals with aborted fetuses.[/size] [size=2]2. Almost nobody really knows what's going on in the scientific world.[/size] [size=2]3. People don't trust what scientists say.[/size] [size=2]4. Stem cell research has been made a political issue, and politicians who argue for [u]and[/u] against it don't know what the hell they're talking about.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I don't know about you, but it sort of pisses me off. There is so much benefit that can be gained from this research, but it's not happening because politicians are pretty much retarded when it comes to science.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]If anyone here can still come up with a reason to oppose stem cell research, I would really like to hear it. I can always use a good laugh. Hell, maybe someone will surprise me and come up with a real reason why we're letting thousands of people suffer for the sake of some obscure, minor, moral dilemma.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2][/size]

[size=2]I'll do a little Q & A here.[/size] [size=2]Question: Does stem cell research have anything to do with aborted fetuses?[/size] [size=2]Answer: No.[/size] [size=2]Question: Then, what is stem cell research?[/size] [size=2]Answer: Stem cell research is when you take the diploid nucleus of a person's somatic cell (like a skin cell, not a sex cell) and insert it into an egg that has had the haploid nucleus removed. The result is essentially a clone of the 'donor', which will be genetically identical. The cells from this developing embryo will be completely undifferentiated stem cells, which can then be used to treat the donor for some disease where undifferentiated cells could be useful.[/size] [size=2]Question: What's the main moral dilemma here?[/size] [size=2]Answer: The developing embryo has the potential to develop into a human being, albeit a clone, so many would consider it an alive and separate entity, and harvesting stem cells from this being (killing it) would be murder.[/size] [size=2]Question: Well, that sounds like quite a dilemma, Erik. Is there anything being done to help make this very beneficial research less morally reprehensible?[/size] [size=2]Answer: Yes, actually. We are now able to take your somatic cell's nucleus, and modify it genetically so that if it were to become undifferentiated, it would not be able to develop into a viable human being. The genes that allow the embryo to coordinate which body parts go where is removed, so if the cluster of cells were allowed to develop, it would have [u]zero potential[/u] to develop into a human being. If implanted into a uterus, it would be aborted without fail.[/size] [size=2]I think there is a similarity between stem cell research and cancer. Cancerous cells tend to undifferentiate and divide rapidly, forming a tumor. The tumor has no chance of being a person, and cancerous cells are harvested for all sorts of research all the time. Stem cells made from a somatic nucleus and an empty egg are undifferentiated. They will divide up to a point where they will try to move around and differentiate into different structures, but lacking those genes, they will fail and not survive.[/size] [size=2]I think of stem cells as a sort of induced, harmless cancerous growth, with remarkably useful and therapeutic applications. The only difference is that an empty haploid egg cell is used, rather than a cell that has mutated on its own. There is no fusion of egg and sperm. There is no potential for a new life. There is only a useful technique that could save countless lives and prevent an eternity of pain and suffering.[/size]

[font=Tahoma]*20 *D *Never really needed to make a [i]decision[/i]. *2 *Not very often at all *Yes *C (A full make-out session in public is inappropriate) *No *Juveniles should be able to have girlfriends, but real [i]dating[/i] that could lead to sex should start at 16. [/font]

[font=Tahoma][size=2]I didn't take into account that you might live in a place like that. I've always been able to find a person or two willing to talk about something.[/size][/font] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I think your best bet is to keep some things to yourself, and find a college far away from where you are now. I hear philosophical conversations just walking around buildings at my college, and all the honors classes I've taken were based heavily on discussion of philosophical ideas.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]If you can be patient just a little longer, College will bring you all the fulfillment you could want.[/size]

[QUOTE=The Boss][color=darkred][size=1] So my first question is, if you have ever looked into Philosphy, what schools of thought do you favor? Do you follow any kinds strictly? Or do you have a combination of interests such as myself?[color=#000000][/QUOTE][/color] [color=#000000][/color] [size=2][color=#000000]I may take it upon myself to look into philosophies someday, as I find them interesting, but I don't see it as a priority. I get a whole bunch of philosophy from the Bible, but my thoughts on the Bible differ from everyone else's, so I don't imagine I could call it a 'school of thought', unless philosophy need not be explained by another to be followed. I also had a class that was a comparison/contrast course of psychology and sociology, which could be considered schools of thought. I liked some things about them, but I could never accept either of them at face value.[/color][/size] [QUOTE=The Boss] In my eyes, choosing a single school of thought can cause a person to become, possibly, one dimensional. On a social level and personal level, I couldn't allow that to happen, so I choose to follow several different ways to create my own way. In essence, this is a bit like the Krishnamurti school of thought, along with Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do martial arts philosophy on a mental level.[color=#000000][/QUOTE][/color] [color=#000000][/color] [size=2][color=#000000]Well, [i]most[/i] philosophies are written such that they alone should be followed. I don't think one can get the most benefit from a philosophy without following it completely, but I personally think it is good to take bits and pieces from ones you like. Just make sure you throw some discipline in there with all the fun stuff to think about :D [/color][/size] [QUOTE=The Boss] Now, I enjoy deep thinking and looking at the world around me in different ways. But I also like to be socially acceptable by... how should I put it? 'Lay' people. Not all of my friends or acquintances look at the world on a deeper level than normal. I'd have an awful hard time finding a girl friend in high school if one of my first date questions where "So, do you favor Zen or Confucian thought?". So my second question is, how do you think a person such as myself should carry on with these ideas in general public? If you do it, how so? Or do you have the same problem?[color=#000000][/QUOTE][/color] [color=#000000][/color] [size=2][color=#000000]How do you know that your friends don't look at the world on a deeper level? Perhaps they are like you, afraid to express one's deepest thoughts and desires for fear of appearing socially unacceptable. If you can follow your own philosophy in life without preaching it to others, that is enough. If someone recognizes something good in your actions because of your philosophy, and asks you about, then you can talk to them about it, because they've expressed interest.[/color][/size] [size=2][color=#000000][/color][/size] [size=2][color=#000000]The first thing you should know is that you're no different from anyone else. A perception that others live their lives without deep thought is a sign of anti-empathy. [i]Everyone[/i] thinks just as deeply as you do, and just because they don't share their thoughts doesn't mean that they are not there.[/color][/size] [size=2][color=#000000][/color][/size] [size=2][color=#000000]If you feel a need to express your thoughts, find someone like-minded with whom to discuss them. The internet is a great medium for this, as social inhibitions are usually left at the sign-on screen.[/color][/size] [size=2][color=#000000][/color][/size] [size=2][color=#000000]I feel I must stress something to you, though. [i]You are no different from anyone else[/i]. If you don't get rid of that perception now, you'll come off as a high-and-mighty prick, whatever you choose to do. Now, I'm not saying you are a prick, but to me it seems you think you're special, and in this case, you're not.[/color][/size] [QUOTE=The Boss] I'd also like to simply discuss different schools of thought and philosophy in this thread, so speak up.[/size][/color][/QUOTE] [size=2]I like balance. There is balance in all things, regardless of one's perception. As far as I'm concerned, it's an absolute for everyone, even T13M.[/size]

[font=Tahoma] The only good advice I can give that can apply to you whatever the situation is this: Try new things, anything you think might give you that thrill. If you can find something that makes you feel the same way, and is less dangerous, then it may make a passable substitute for wrestling. I wrote some other stuff, but it was mostly crap I used to get to what I've written above. EDIT: Se-phi-roth! [/font]

[QUOTE=Boo][size=1]Dude, people can actually [i]think[/i]. Why on Earth can't you understand that people can actually carefully consider and overthink moral questions, before they actually agree to them? They are not blindly following people, they have made the decision to follow that opinion. I cannot say that I always agree to those decisions, but I also can't deny that they are human beings with a brain to think things over for themselves. [b]Edit:[/b] Sandy is not an American. [/size][/QUOTE] [Quote=Gavin] [size=1]they're accepting a piece of reasoning from those whom they believe are more qualified to make the correct decision.[/quote][/size] [size=1][/size] [size=2]What Gavin said, whether he realizes it or not, is exactly the premise upon which the Milgram experiments were done.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]About two-thirds of normal people will administer a deadly shock to someone with heart trouble because a scientist tells them to.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]How many people do you think will accept a religious leader's decision, especially if they see nothing morally wrong with it, and there are no consequences to hold them back?[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Just about all of them.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]People [i]can[/i] think and make decisions for themselves, but in a situation like this, they simply don't have to.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]My comments require a pretty good understanding of the Milgram experiments to make any amount of sense, so if you haven't looked at the link (there are better ones than mine), you may wish to do so.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]As for Sandy, well, I can't keep track of where everyone lives. Besides, if gays start getting treated better here, I don't think he would be too angry. Sure, it doesn't directly affect him, but what if he wants to travel here? It would be nice to be treated like a person and not a witch ripe for burning.[/size] [size=1][/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2][/size]

[quote name='Gavin][size=1']Adahn, I really do have to contend your point there. It's in no way, shape or form a shot at Jordan, as I consider him a good, if only occasionally encountered friend. But with that statement you seem to have labelled 99% of Christians as being blind, brainless individuals incapable of making a genuinely personal decision on an issue that is as serious and contentious as this.[size=2][/quote][/size][/size] [size=1][size=2][/size][/size] [size=1][size=2]I know Jordan very well, and cannot stress how thoughtful and intelligent about his faith he is. I said hardly any are [i]as good[/i] as Jordan, and I stand by it. I cannot even think to match him in this way. I have placed Jordan near the upper limit of thoughtfulness,caring, and sincerity, and when I said "others follow blindly", I thought I had appropriately juxtaposed the statement with the website. They are two opposite ends of the spectrum, with a host of intermediates. If I made it seem that 99% of Christians are terribly stupid, I apologize, because I did not clearly convey my intention.[/size] [QUOTE=Gavin] I consider the decision that I made on the issue to have taken careful consideration of my own ethics and morals, but by that same point, those who choose to abide by the Catholic Church's position are not simply blindly following, they're accepting a piece of reasoning from those whom they believe are more qualified to make the correct decision. I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing with it, I'm simply stating my belief that it's unfair to simply paint every Christian with the same brush[size=1].[/size][/QUOTE][/size][size=2]I don't exactly see how 'letting other people make moral decisions for you' isn't 'blindly following'. As an example, I give the [url="http://www.new-life.net/milgram.htm"][color=blue]Milgram experiment[/color][/url]. [color=black]The scientist is the authority figure, and people will do terrible things because of their respect for his station. It is not only important to make decisions for oneself without an authority figure to fall back on, it is [i]imperitave[/i] for people to keep themselves from doing atrocious things.[/color][/size] [QUOTE=Gavin] [size=1]This has to be simply one of the most offensive things I've ever laid eyes on, both as a person and a Catholic. This is nothing short of drivel produced by red-neck cretins with no idea of who or what God is, or how to properly interpret His word. Of course I'm not even mildly surprised that the site is American in origin.[/size][/QUOTE][size=2]Yeah, I think I did a good job choosing my lower bound of morality also. These are the people who show up at the funerals of those killed in combat to say that 'God wanted your son/daughter dead because this country is too lenient with homosexuals!'.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]EDIT: Thanks for your input, Sandy. I've been hit with a sudden better understanding of your perspective. There's so much more to a person than his/her sexual preference. The label 'homosexual' is but a word in the epic poem of someone's humanity. To single that out and place it above everything else is inhuman and immoral in the worst sense.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I don't think you'll have to wait too long to be treated the way you deserve, though. If Bush keeps pissing people off, I have a feeling there will be a Democrat as president, and with all the effort Republicans put into a constitutional ban on gay marriage, the retaliation will be swift and in your favor.[/size]

[size=2]Hello![/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]This topic is about how we have changed. It can either be a good change or a bad one. It can be a change we did ourselves, or something that just happened to us. Please give examples, because if other people are in the same situation, it would be good to know some possible solutions or pitfalls you have encountered![/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Also, if you've got something about yourself that you want to change, let's talk about it. Maybe someone will have some advice that will help ;) [/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]If you don't want to talk about [i]all [/i]your changes at once, that's fine, but it's also fine if you do! Save some for later or get it all out now, either will be good.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Okay, I got one![/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I used to be very insecure and concerned about what others thought of me. I saw myself as a bit of an outcast in high school, because I was picked on mercilessly when I was young, so I felt socially shunned. Even to my graduation day, it was a problem.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Then came college. Everyone was new and different, and my slate was wiped clean. The university is too large for specific cliques, and everyone has such different class schedules that there isn't enough time to pick on someone. It would just take too much time and effort! I'm no longer insecure about what others think of me, because most of them have so much more on their mind than to deal with me! I find it very comforting after the stress of high school. I don't have many friends, but I have many acquaintances, and we all get along fine. If you're still in high school and you have the same sort of social worries, college may help you get through them, if your college is anything like mine.[/size]

Jagdish Bhagwati>Globalization>First World>Australia Connect [u]Napoleon Bonaparte[/u] to [u]Torreón[/u]

[font=Tahoma][size=2]Aaryanna_Mom,[/size][/font] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I [i]know [/i]that the people on this board aren't stupid. I also know, however, that if my topics leave an opening for some sort of argument, many members will search for flaws before they even entertain my ideas. I chose simpler words because it is harder for someone to change the meaning of something less complex.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I'm not frustrated with people because I think they're stupid. I'm frustrated because when people reply only to point out the flaws in an idea, it discourages others from replying, even if they knew what I was talking about in the first place. There is no [i]harm[/i] in trying out my idea, and there is no benefit to saying it's a bad idea before anyone tries it out. The worst that can happen is that the idea flops. Big deal! Why do everything in your power to make it go away?[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I [i]am[/i] clear, but it is the argumentative nature of some members towards me that requires me to explain myself until I can no longer stand to try.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I did not insult DeadSeraphim. He was clever enough to choose his words in such a way that only I would really know what they meant. As insults go, that was really top notch. I appreciate it for its nature, but it was still an insult, and it wasn't very nice.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I don't believe he was moving away from the topic when he talked about guidelines. I think he actually believed I wanted my own guidelines implemented in the Otaku Lounge. So, I tried to make it especially clear that that was not what I wanted.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I [i]did[/i] clarify what I meant by ideal and deep, and if you sense 'thinly velied disdain', your emotions aren't much in line with my own. It is [i]exhausting[/i] to be required to explain myself so fully, and when I get tired, I get cranky. All I wanted was for people to [i]try[/i], and if there wasn't enough willing participants, to leave it alone.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Aaryanna_Mom, I'm disappointed that you don't want to talk about what you like in certain threads, because I am[i] very[/i] interested in what other people like, and it could help me to create better threads in the future. I regret more than anything using the words 'ideal' and 'guidelines', because they seem to subject to so much controversy that people don't even want to discuss anything related to them![/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I'm going to try [i]one more time[/i].[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]People can talk about what they like about in threads, and some common ideas might be discovered. These common ideas could be boiled down into [i]very loose guidelines[/i] for creating a topic that would be of particular interest to many forum members. Using these [i]very loose guidelines,[/i] people can come up with ideas for topics that are related to the [i]very loose guidelines[/i] in some manner. The ideas for topics can then be discussed, to see if forum members find them of particular interest. This in turn can reflect on the 'goodness' of the [i]very loose guidelines[/i] for being a tool of use in creating topics of particular interest.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Rachaminoff,[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I'm sorry if I seemed arrogant in the beginning when I was merely being cynical. I'm not usually cynical, but my experiences here have done this to me.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I didn't so much want to [i]control[/i] people's responses as guide the thread. I have enough foresight to see a topic with multiple steps proposed, like this one, become cluttered and unable to move forward without some sort of structure.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I said 'if there are enough responses' because I didn't think many people would be interested in something like this, but I hoped. Interpreting that as me saying people here are dull-witted is a very loose interpretation, and not at all my intent. Most of the forum members who visit the lounge just don't like me very much. I don't think I put it in my thread about merits and flaws, but it is ridiculously easy to convince me that you hate me for some reason, and rather difficult to convince me that you don't.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]The Lounge is great, except for one thing. I would personally like to see more activity. That's really all I want. It's distressing to check the threads after a day has passed and see two or three replies [i]total[/i], especially when I remember times that it was booming with replies, to the point where a thread created yesterday could be nearing the bottom of the front page after only a day or two. I'm a lounge-goer, and those were the good old days that I want to bring back.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Again, I was trying to exercise foresight, anticipating problems and attempting to correct them before they happen. I saw those things happening here (if people actually took to the idea), and thought it would be a good idea to do my best to prevent the degeneration of the thread.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]There are many members over 20, and I only mentioned 13 because I thought it was the minimum age for the boards. It doesn't seem like homework to me. I planned on compiling people's ideas, looking for commonalities between them, and moving the thread forward when it was felt that enough preliminary information was gathered. If this seems like a homework project, it's more of a project for me than it is anyone else.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]Your reasoning is that guidelines wouldn't work if enforced on the Otaku Lounge, but guidelines can work here. This is [i]only[/i] one thread, and if there are some mini-restrictions on the format, well, look at other places it may be necessary. People seem to like the Otakuties, and that has a format to it that doesn't apply to the lounge as a whole. I challenge you to provide a counterexample to support your reasoning.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]As for ideas for good threads, it really is something I wanted to bounce off other people, because I find the idea rather interesting. So, I'll see what I can do myself.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I will no longer use the word 'guideline'. I am replacing it with 'aspect'.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]People seem to like threads I create that deal with them on a personal level. I propose the personal aspect.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2][b]Personal aspect:[/b] The thread should involve some topic that members can personally relate to, however general or specific. If the personal aspect is general, a greater variety of members may reply. If the personal aspect is specific, not many members may be interested, but those that are may allow for more enthusiastic discussions.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]While my personal threads were great for self-exploration and self-revelation, they lacked specifically in their ability to sustain communication between members. I propose the Intercommunication aspect.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2][b]Intercommunication aspect:[/b] The thread should have some room for discussion, perhaps about the personal aspect. Controversial topics will lead to a more in depth level of communication, while uncontroversial topics will allow for a more relaxed level of communication.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]As I start more threads and interpret the replies, I may think of more. If you've got any ideas, you don't [i]have[/i] to sit here and argue with me about stuff, you can introduce some of your own ideas. I really would like information from other people, but I can't force it out of you![/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]So, with the combination of these two aspects, I think I'll go make a new thread, now.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2][/size]