DeadSeraphim

[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][FONT=Arial]I'm mixed on the issue. On the one hand, censorship and ratings keeps kids from seeing **** they shouldn't be (or are supposed to), but on the other, if we censor minority groups who have a potentially volatile opinion, that is taking away the right to free speech, and it sets a precedent. It's all well and good to say "Yeah, but we'll just censor the Neo Nazis and God Hates Fags, it's cool," but humans are stupid and it [i]would[/i] get abused. A politician listens to music with aggressive lyrics toward the government? He's offended, he assumes others are, he lobbies to get it removed, bam, the music is gone. They've already tried it before, but only managed to get stickers slapped on the CDs. If they were given the actual right to remove and silence things that they 'believe' is volatile, then we'd be in a whole world of trouble, and not just for music and special interest groups.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][FONT=Arial][quote name='di.fm][COLOR=DarkSlateGray][SIZE=1][B]AC!D!C[/B] - Acidic. One part MG: AC!D one part !C. I really liked the way Konami reversed the Is' so I decided to make a play on acid by doing the little I thing. Liked it for a while.[/SIZE'][/COLOR][/quote] Huh? Really? I mustn't be one of the [i]cool kids[/i] because I would've never got that reference. I thought you were mangling the band name, to be honest (cause, you know, ACDC were classics, and I had no reason to believe [i]an exclamation point[/i] was meant to be a Goddamn [i]i[/i]). I guess... I guess I learnt something today.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][FONT=Arial]Aw, how cute, a thread for everone to prove how indie they are! A lot of my favourite bands that my friends haven't heard of are bands in genres they just don't listen to. Every time they commandeer my iPod they end up asking me who they're listening to and if I'll send them the music at some later date - these bands include Zeromancer (industrial group from the Scadanavianish area), The Kovenant (an awesome industrial metal band), the Bollweevils (awesome punk band from Chicago) and TISM (satirical dance rock act from Melbourne). I wouldn't say that noone else has heard of them, but you know. lol My friends are pretty mainstream or, failing that, just into angry stuff. As a side note, Silent Alarm is by far not the greatest punk album ever. Look up Apocalypse Hoboken's "House of the Rising Son of a *****" and get back to me.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][FONT=Arial][quote name='Veritas][size=1][color=dimgray]I am a rum drinker as well Dead, I am going to have to try Bundaburg.[/color'][/size][/quote] I'm not sure of your chances of getting it outside of Australia (or at a reasonable price, if so). It's unspiced and very dark and rich, so I wish you luck regardless, cause it really is delicious. [quote name='Shinje][color=crimson']I've never been drunk, despite tasting my first beer around the age of 8. I think I've built up a natural resistance to it's effectivness, because I can drink quite a bit yet feel nothing. That's mixing my poisons, too.[/color][/quote] It depends largely on your water intake during the drinking, and your body type. Generally, guys with large frames (or who are just plain old [b]fat[/b]) can handle a lot more than a weedier person, or a woman. So you're either a big guy, know to drink H2O between every few drinks, or both. lol[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[font=arial][size=1][color=indigo][/color][/size][/font]

[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][FONT=Arial]I doubt this thread will get a whole lot of replies, since most of you are either not legal age or straight edger types, but I figured I'd try anyway, since the only thing better than alcohol is talking about alcohol, and as a forum talking about things (including alcohol) is OL's designated purpose. Remember kids, your parents won't read your posts if you admit to underage drinking, so feel free to go nuts. Anyway, poirsonally, I am quite partial to [i]rum[/i], Bundaberg Rum in particular - but never by itself. Of the many terrible things in the world I have tasted, straight rum rates as one of the most terrible, so I always, [b]always[/b] have it with Cola. By themselves Cola and Rum are distinctly gross, together they make a wonderful taste sensation only surpassed by [i]OP[/i] Rum and Cola (which will **** you up real fast so I don't reccommend it if you can't hold your alcohol - OP is not for the faint of heart). I'm also partial to West Coast, which is lolly water of the most heinous variety, and occasionally I can manage beer. I have to be pretty wasted before I start considering beer, though, so it's not a common occurence. On the opposite end of the scale, XXXX is the devil for me, as is Johnny Walker (especially Johnny Walker Red, which can easily destroy a good Coke). Last time I had Johnny Walker I poured it all down the sink, it is really [i]that bad[/i]. But yeah. What's your favourite beverage to get inebriated on?[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]Not hell, just time out.[/font][/color][/size]

[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][FONT=Arial][QUOTE=Drix D'Zanth]Again, being tested and observed doesn't make something "proven" at all. Please spare me the dictionary definition on this; but many logical, tested, and seemingly "well understood" scientific principles have been disproven over the years. Just because we have our doubts as to what Aristotle describes is the "Formal cause" doesn't mean that a natural phenomena described by many as a spiritual one is unquestionably false. There's nothing wrong with being skeptical of "supernatural" events considering everything should carry the burden of truth as opposed to the other way. Let's open up our minds, though, maybe there is something real hiding behind the facade of spiritualism? I've heard of lucid dreaming, this seems more likely than some "spritual" release. I'll see if I can't dig up some neurochemistry articles on the subject.[/QUOTE] Hey man, I totally agree. I just don't choose to believe Astral Projection is a possibility, without proof. lol Some things I am more inclined to believe than others, and most people are that way. That's why I said it's up to the individual (I'm also very aware that science can be disproven but man, it's been pretty solid the past couple of decades).[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][FONT=Arial][quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1']DS, I was dealing with specifics here, seeing as personally I really do have an immense dislike for the term Christian is the way it's being applied in modern day usage. It's fine for you to say "You're a Christian so long as you believe in Christ" but believing in Christ goes beyond just believing he was the son of God and rose from the dead three days after the Crucifixion, there's also following the tenets of Christ as laid down by him to his Apostles and then on from his Apostles through the Church, whichever particular one you're a part of. Christ taught a specific path, and simply adding in what beliefs you feel are appropriate and interest you is straying from that path. I'm not trying to be confrontational, as I said I just take issue with people using the term Christian as it seems too vague in modern times.[/SIZE][/quote] The Bible doesn't mention most of the newer concepts people are embracing though, so the whole situation is a grey area (unless we count the Gnostic Scrolls but man, I'm not touching that one). Besides. who's to say Jesus wouldn't be cool with it anyway? He was a pretty laid back guy, the original hippy, as it were - and even if the ancillery beliefs are wrong, Jesus will forgive anyway. It's in his MO. As for the whole church stuff, I am a Christian and I rarely, if ever, visit a church. The last time I visited a church was with my ex, and that was in January (in another [i]country[/i]) and I'm not exactly chomping at the bit to go again anytime soon. I do acknowledge and feel JC's presence in my life, however, and the lack of church hasn't really changed that. In fact, there's millions of other people like me who don't identify with a single church who still believe in JC and consider themselves Christians. I'm kind of surprised that just because we don't attend a church that doesn't make us Christians in your sense of the concept, despite acknowledgement of Jesus, and the things he did and the things he continues to do in our lives and others. It's like, woah, medieval era Christianity all over again.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[QUOTE=Jakehammaren]Alright, I'll admit it. This album rocks. I know that's totally not metal of me to say, but it's the downright truth. I was not expecting what this little Arkansas outfit had in store for all of us. This is a huge departure from their major-label debut. Without Ben Moody's pop sensibilities running the show, Evanescence has taken on a much stranger, darker, heavier edge. It's friggin' cool, I might add. I know there's plenty of Evanescence fans here on the 'Boards, so let's hear some feedback![/QUOTE] [size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]Holy crap man. Could it be..? I... I think it is. Jake saying he thinks Evanescence is [i]good[/i]. Jesus man, not only is [b]my[/b] world blown, but your metal cred? It just went out the window, like a flock of angry, guitar dueling doves that broke the window down with some blast beats first. I'm so sorry I have to break this to you, but... You are no longer f*cken metal.[/font][/color][/size]

[QUOTE=kalon]Join the club, dear, mine never married. As a principle, I believe people should be free to be with whomever they want. However, the culture factors into things when talking about places where arranged marriages are common, so I can understand some people being okay with it. In truth, I've begun to disfavor the concept of marriage altogether lately, the best thing about it being some tax cuts. But that's a whole other topic.[/QUOTE] [size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]It's more than just tax cuts; banks treat you differently when married, and so do insurance companies. It's one of the many reasons gay couples want the right to marriage (or a differently named equivalent), so they can be treated the same as a married couple.[/font][/color][/size]

[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][FONT=Arial]Man, my parents weren't even married when I was born. Am I in the clear? [i]I think so[/i].[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[QUOTE=Gavin][SIZE=1]Two things about your post DarkFactor, and really the first one is more so in relation to the collective of people out there who claim to be Christian and yet belong to no particular Church from which to draw knowledge. Once you start adding outside beliefs to the mix, for instance chakras and neo-Wiccan theology then you need to stop referring to yourself as Protestant, because I'm pretty sure your local Reverend or depending on the denomination, Pastor would have issue with your beliefs. But hey your beliefs are your beliefs, I just have an intense dislike when people use the term Christian for an all-encompassing spirituality that they find convenient to latch their own beliefs onto. Secondly, for the love of God please use some form of spell check before you make a post, as there are rules pertaining to grammar and spelling here.[/SIZE][/QUOTE] [size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]Man, the only prerequisite to calling yourself Christian is a sincere love of Jesus and believing that he lived, died, came back in three days and was the son of God. You don't have to belong to a specific church, or close your mind to all possibilities just to say you're a Christian, as long as you believe in Jesus [i]Christ[/i] (thus [i]Christ[/i]ianity, clever huh?) you are, by definition, a Christian.[/font][/color][/size]

[size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]An informed opinion! [i]Plot twist.[/i][/font][/color][/size]

[QUOTE=Drix D'Zanth]I like this argument, Dark Orange. ?If it seems true it cannot be false,? or, if I address it contextually, ?If it is true, then it must be true.? Astral projection? I don?t know. Obviously, one can?t disprove it. But I would like to see the rational argument for it. It?s really pointless for me to make much of a decision about it considering how little it has affected my reality. This is where my distinction differs from most; just because I have no experience in the subject doesn?t qualify me in carrying much of an opinion. Perhaps some of these people who are in this debate should consider this point. I guess to play devil?s advocate, Dead Seraphim, can we be certain of anything? I think we can, but I would like you to justify your claim. Tell me what it means to prove something.[/QUOTE] [size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]I consider 'proof' in the scientific sense, something that can be tested and observed. It's pretty impossible to get proof for anything involving spiritual concepts or religion, so it's up to the individual to believe what they feel is true and right for them. The end.[/font][/color][/size]

[QUOTE=Retribution][size=1]How do you know they haven't? How is astral projection any less valid than religion? Both are based on little to no scientific evidence. Born-again Christians claiming to have seen the divine light of Jesus Christ are on the same level as self-proclaimed astral projectors. Both are claiming the unprovable. Just because not many people are doing it means absolutely nothing. Perhaps there is certain criteria for an astral projector and it just so happens most people do not fit that criteria? Saying the divine is possible, impossible, dodgy, or incredible means nil.[/size][/QUOTE] [size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]How do you know they have? What you're asking me to do is give you proof when the counter argument offers no proof except for anecdotal evidence to begin with, which doesn't work. It's an opinion. I don't think it's a real thing, just like atheists don't believe Christ is real and I don't see you jumping down their throat about it. Think of it like faith - I don't give Hinduism the time of day because I have faith Christianity is right. I don't know [i]for certain[/i] that they're wrong, but I don't have to, since I have utter faith in Jesus Christ. Similarly, I don't give this the time of day for the same reasons. I don't know for certain that they aren't leaving their bodies, but hey, I'm pretty certain in myself that I don't believe it and don't think it's possible from any perspective, and all the semantics you bring up in the world isn't gonna make a difference to that belief.[/font][/color][/size]

[size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]I don't think it's possible. Like Aaryanna said, if it was real more people would be doing it - and on top of that, those who say they've done it just sound dodgy. They spend hours meditating then suddenly coming back and proclaiming they'd seen something wonderful; I'm more inclined to believe they just had a particularly lucid dream than actually forced their soul out of their body to go tripping in a winter wonderland. In any case, astral projection gets the thumbs down from me. Oh, and Retribution? [quote][b]Opinion[/b]: a personal belief or judgment [I]that is not founded on proof or certainty[/I];[/quote] Keep it in mind.[/font][/color][/size]

[size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]It was a sentence long but it was stupid and hilarious. Who's silly, you for saying it originally, or me for making lulz out of your weaknesses? [i]I think I know who, kid.[/i] In conclusion, it's a joke, laugh at it, laugh at yourself, and get over it.[/font][/color][/size]

[QUOTE=Mistral]Whoo! Thank you Aaryanna~ That's all I needed. I know that some people who had talent, with maybe too much talent so much so that people got jealous were voted down on. Do you think someday they might come up with a set up that'll just make it harder to vote down? And to the people who can't answer my question but feel the need to bring up my ONE-TWO SENTENCED remark on new people being weak. Jeez. I'm not apologizing or sucking up for being ooooohh so serious and rude when I said weak. I'm not changing it. You can keep posting things about me saying it. I don't mind. I can't promise I'll read it all, though.[/QUOTE] [size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]I totally answered your question, man. Or maybe you only saw me accusing you of being weak. Either way, you said it first, so dammit, I ran with it. [i]Ran I say![/i][/font][/color][/size]

[size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]Post count is in your profile, yo. Not a hard thing to figure out, weakling.[/font][/color][/size]

[size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]CG hasn't lost it's edge, it's just become overstaturated. Almost all new animated films released theatrically are CG now, and it's understandable that the 'genre' is looking like it's lost it's touch. When the 'great' CG titles were released, back when Pixar were the only ones taking it seriously, they were the only things around, and the great scripts helped that. Now that production companies have seen how cheap it can be to produce a CG title in comparison to traditional 2D they use CG predominantly, especially because CG has much higher returns than 2D. Would you have been interested in Shrek or The Incredibles if it was 2D? Probably not, the CG made the experience. Production companies know this, and so they use it far more often than they would for 2D, and as such a lot of bad comes with the good. Just like any other genre, really.[/font][/color][/size]

[QUOTE=Desbreko][color=#4B0082]You say that like TP is going to suck simply because it's a ported GCN game. Even if it doesn't use the Wii controller's features as extensively as a Zelda game developed specifically for the Wii TP is still going to be an awesome game. Or do you seriously think Nintendo has wasted three years developing a boring game, all the while touting it as the best Zelda yet? I mean, you're not going to fault SSBB for using GCN controllers, are you? In that respect it's in the same boat as TP yet I don't see you calling it boring.[/color][/QUOTE] [size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]He didn't say that at all. He said it wouldn't be worth getting if the GCN will have the same game anyway, and be designed for the GCN specifically - meanwhile the Wii version is just that very same game with only minor use of the Wii's capabilities, and thus nothing to really get excited over. Fundamentally it is a port, and I don't think it should really count as a the 'first Wii Zelda' in any capacity, especially when you take into account that the use of motion sensor tech was only a very recent decision.[/font][/color][/size]

[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][FONT=Arial]If he killed so many people while driving drunk, he should've been in jail for manslaughter. Either he had a really good lawyer or your system really is ******.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[quote name='indifference][COLOR=DeepSkyBlue']You along with so many others are misunderstanding the reason the death penalty is even used. It has never been a tool to reduce crime rates. It is a tool to keep murderers from killing again. And contrary to popular belief, lots of things are being done to help reduce poverty and improve education. But as you already pointed out, many of the more richer members of society just use their money to buy their way out of getting in trouble, so even though they were educated and not poor, they still murdered others. Sounds like a contradiction to me to say that more education and less poverty would help when those who are not poor and have an education murder as well. [/COLOR][/quote] [size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]It seems you and a lot of people in this thread can't think of how society would run without the death penalty killing dangerous criminals and closing the tiny window that they'd be released on parole if they were held for life. I invite you to live in a country like Australia, or Britain, and see how we get along just fine without it - you'd be surprised how [i]few[/i] released murderers are running rampant in the streets killing every other person, really you would.[/font][/color][/size]

[QUOTE=dog dancing1]Well I think in stend of just killing them fast and almost pain less. They should execut them slowly or slower. Like depending on the crime the worse it is the slower they die and so if you killed a raped 5 people the kill you slowly with very painful ways for like 30-40 minutes. Then they might think twice about it because how would want to have that happen to them. Well thats my way of thinking for you but some of you might think that I'm mean but if your the on whos getting murdered/raped ect... How would you feel. Well thats my ~logiK~ :animestun[/QUOTE] [size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]Dude, that is sick. I mean, death penalty is usually applied quickly or while they're asleep. You're suggesting having them awake the whole time, and dragging out the process depending on their sins. That is more inhumane than just killing them, that's [i]torturing them to death[/i]. Noone deserves that.[/font][/color][/size]