Kent

Well, actually L.A. Rod, I believe that your thinking of the law that makes it illegal to sue someone if they try to help you when you are the victim of a crime... like doing cpr and then the victim not living, the family cant sue that "good samaritan." I also want to mention that I dont really think too highly of those of you that would take the same course of action as these cowards. I dont ask that you get down, and perform some sort of medical procedure to save this mans life... I merely ask that people would atleast call the police after seeing it. I mean, there were people at the gas station, not just one guy, so atleast one of them could have called the police. According to the news and the police, no one called the cops for a half hour. A half hour, hell, you could run for your life until you were completly out of breath and it still wouldnt take you a half hour before you felt safe. If your in shape you can run maybe more than 4 miles in half hour. I think that would put you out of harms way by a long shot. And for tn, Foxnews got their hands on the footage from the gas station... I couldnt tell you how.

Actually your right, and I think that is all the more reason to lose faith in the average D.C. citizen. I guess those people are in a hurry all the time or something. No, they are just scumbags that dont care about there fellow man the way people on the otaku would.

I actually very much respect Lady Macaiodh for her post on this... I feel just about the same, only put a little bit more crazy gun totting, meat eating, crazy man on it and you end up with something close to my opinion... jk.lol.

I just saw the most disturbing thing Ive seen in the last couple of hours.(thats pretty bad with all the news I watch) It was a video from the gas station where one of the "sniper" victims was shot. It showed a man pumping his gas... the victim and this man were both in the video footage... The victim was shot and the man a few feet away looked over, watched the man fall from the gun shot wound, and then looked away, finished pumping his gas, and then drove away. The police didnt recieve a call until half an hour after the shooting occured. I can say that seeing this footage made me disgusted. I sure hope that if I'm ever shot I will get help from the people around me. Maybe I just hope for the better side of man to come out, but after seeing this, I dont know if I will ever see it.

I feel for you... I know how it is to have that nagging dad that always manages to tell you just how unhappy they are with you. I want to say, they do care... and your not a bad person or a failure. You need to stick this out, but try and take things a little bit slower. All of the stuff your talking about can create major stress and when that gets to you things only get worse. I hope you can get through this and remember to listen to all the supportive voices in this that have replied... just dont let the harsher voices get to you.

Im in Louisiana, mandeville to be exact. Its about a half hour away from New Orleans. Although, I just moved here from Virginia, which is where I grew up. I know there are quite a few people on here from the New Orleans area. So everyone from my area go ahead and speak up.

That looks good, but I gotta be honest... I have no clue about what this game is. It looks damn cool and the pictures they used manage to express the feel and look of the game quite well, but it might be a while before america sees it, if we even do.

cyko is right, he wouldnt be alive after a.d. with your logic. If you go look it up in a dictionary, which I just did to see if my suspicions were right, it means, year of our lord. Think about this, Jesus was allegedly born, and then a.d. starts. The year of our lord is the year of his birth. And actually mitch is right about the phalanx. Created by phillip of macedonia, The phalanx was a spear formation (defensive or offensive) that stacked men offset so that each spear could go through the space between the two men in front of him. The space was designed to be wide enough for this to work with 3 lines of men using extremly long spears. -I -I -I --I -I -I ---I -I -I The "I" represents the spear, and the "-" represents the man holding it. That is the general pattern of the formation and it worked well for its time since no one had thought of something like it yet. (although it seems simple to the modern mind)

Well you guys have said alot since I left. I will pick up at this point and not bring up the old stuff. I believe that this thread has now come to the point that most thread come to when cloricus becomes involved... Right now it seems that there are two partys in this thread. Both parties are arguing, but one is arguing for the sake of playing devils advocate and the other is arguing for the beliefs they hold. When an argument comes to this, there is no point in continuing. Playing devils advocate is merely perpetuating an argument for the sake of insulting and inflaming the other parties involved in the discussion. There is no question to me that at this point it has become obvious that the majority of members of the boards who are participating in this disscusion support the pleas of the homosexual community. I would like to personally say that I still have "hang ups" about the angle of approach homosexuals take towards their end goals. I have been brought to believe by my exposure to the homosexual population of the United States that the end goals for homosexuals are tolerance and equal rights. I believe the pursuit of equal rights is a worthy one that deserves all of the politically active voices it can muster up. Gay marriage and adoption are issues that can be taken up with the government and addressed politically. However, tolerance is slightly different. Tolerance, or a lack there of, is a matter of hate. People who hate homosexuals have no tolerance and therefore, if the end goal is tolerance, you must address hate and not politics. Forcing people to do anything only creates more opposition. So I believe that the political goals of the homosexual population are being approached in an acceptable way. However, I believe the cultural goals of the homosexual population are being pursued in a manner that, more often than not, ends up alienating heterosexuals such as myself. I believe in "live and let live" but that means you have got to have tolerance for me, just the same as I do for you.

I still see nothing from you (tn) in form of addressing people like myself. I support the idea of being left alone in your sexual prefference. nothing more, nothing less. I dont care if your gay or whatever... but I cant stand the fact that it is constantly a war with straights and the bottomline is a comparison to one of the most brutal times in the history of america. I hate to say it, but no one has you chains and I dont think you should compare the "relative compassion for homosexuals" to the "compassion for slaves" shown in 1810. (there was no compasion at all for them. So the slave issue shouldnt be brought up) I believe that simply addressing the people who do not approve of homosexuality by getting upset again and then addressing your comments about a stereotypical straight male by saying "those who know me..." is wrong. If I said a generalized comment about gay men it would not be forgiven. period. I can not expect you to understand, because you have been the victim of "anti-gay" sentiment. But I on the other hand have fallen victim to a sterotyping that will never be addressed because I fall into an even smaller minority than you. I am the voicless, pacifist male in this scenerio... you are the openly gay male... we both get "crap" from the oppisite party, but you will always have that fact recognized, while I will always have it ignored or written off because of the actions of others.

Here's my side. I support tn's side of things, but I also find it horribly offensive that tn used plurality in his insults towards straight indivuals. I wish it didnt have to be done because of a couple of reasons, but mostly because it gives support to my earlier comments that homosexual men often insult and discriminate men like myself based on stereotypes of other straight males. I wonder about what kind of patience this shows... I mean, can you really ask for tolerance when you respond to one individual out of several on the boards with this sort of hatful commentary. Now of course there was hate on the other end, but thats how it always works. In Americas situation today, people hate us for reasons that can barely be expressed in words, yet people all over the country ask the government to not take aggressive actions against the terrorist who want to take lives. Then... there is a war between ideologies. "Gay and straight" people fight it out constantly and tolerance of homosexuals is the end goal for some. But while that may be the situation, there are people who turn to stereotypes of straight people, they resort to the very same hateful comments that their oppisites use. How can I have respect for the homosexual population when the only representation I ever get is that of people who treat me like I have done something wrong? "Im tired of hearing this non-sense from you little bastards." That is not a comment directed at a single individual you disagree with. Instead, that shows me that no matter what side of the argument anyone is on, they can always act just as bad as the other side. How can I show tolerance to people who will not give tolerance to me? This is the very same sort of situation I find myself in when it comes to dealing with hostile elements towards the u.s.a. Constantly I am asked not to support war, yet the other side pursues nothing besides full war itself. The same happens here... I am asked to tolerate and accept homosexual behavior, (which I have always done) yet while I do that, I am treated as if I am a hostile element towards the "homosexual cause." Im sure you didnt mean these generalized comments towards people such as myself, but when you generalize, that is what happens.

Wow, the cat and mouse... Thats quite the analogy. I dont really know what to say about Kim Jong Il's comments. Personally, I think its the typical rhetoric. But hey, there are alot of people out there that wanna go to war with korea instead of iraq, so maybe kim will get his chance to put his money where his mouth is. I gotta ask though, what about this makes you think of hitler?

I wondered if anyone noticed the titles of the shows are at times, the names of songs from the past. Examples... "sympathy for the devil" -rolling stones "my funny valentine" - ? but its from the 30s Those are the only two I know of off the top of my head, but I would like to know if any of you know of any others. So what do you guys think?

No forcing, just allowing them to decide if they want to take advantage of this oppurtuninty. Unfortunatly, as long as certain areas are creating a more than hospitable atmosphere, the homeless will stay where they are. Oddly, that means most of the homeless are gonna be no where near me since I live in dumpwater, louisiana. But thanks for recognizing the idea as being an alright one. Plus, I still think that if we can find jobs and homes for paroled criminals, we can do the same for the homeless. Its just another example of misdirected energy.

I just started thinking about this... The idea of the natural abilities of gokou in comparison to vegeta. I think it was in the majin vegeta saga where vegeta said that he could never keep up with gokou because of gokous natural talent and abilities. It was around the same time he explain his endless training and the above realization, which all led him to the "dark" and becoming the majin vegeta we saw. What I am thinking about now is how gokou actually might not have had the natural abilities. This is what I mean... We dont get to see much of vegetas youth besides the occasional flash back in which the little bratty prince is doing his thing and is constantly being told of his great saiyan blood. Vegeta was an "A" class saiyan for the most part. Gokou on the other hand was a little old chesse ball, run of the muck, weakling amongst saiyans... hence his journey to earth. Heres the thing, while vegeta was living it up as a prince on his own planet with his father the king, he did nothing for all we know. (sure he coulda done something) But for the most part he wasnt driven to become stronger until freeza got ahold of him. Then there is gokou... Training everyday pushing himself to the extreme constantly. Ever since he was tiny the kid was constantly training with his grandpa (allegedly although I dont think we get to see that in db), training with korin, roshi and kami. Just about every oppenent he could get to he fought in pursuit of becoming stronger and a better fighter. He was always at it and never gave up. So, Im thinking that maybe vegeta really is the one with the greater natural talent and gokou just had to work his *** off to get what he got. What do you guys think? Was gokou always the low class saiyan that worked his way up while vegeta was born a powerful saiyan? Or was gokou an underestimated saiyan with the power others could only dream of, while vegeta was just another saiyan of royal blood? Im not sure, but I think gokou worked for it and vegeta had it from the get go. Seems to me vegeta just didnt want it as bad as gokou. But then again, once vegeta met gokou they both increased their powers at just about an even rate.

Actually crazy white boy, those are the definitions, hence you can have any opinion about the social and cultural implications of those words meanings, but you can not change the actual meanings. The dictionary I used was a "random house websters dictionary" so its not the best. That is why I went to "marrian websters dictionary." The real deal. The true websters defines prejudice in a similar manner as well as discrimination. Discrimination- The act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually. Prejudice- A preconcieved judgment or opinion. 2) an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before suffiecent knowledge. Those are qouted from the world renowned Marrian websters dictionary. They are also the most applicable, since there are several definitions listed. I do understand your point about prejudice in the general sense, as applied to ...say... my name on the boards. Heres the thing, I never said that there are certain people who cant be prejudice nor did I give the usual circumstances in which the term prejudice applies. (both of those you did) Infact if you look at what I said and what you said, you merely explained it in your own words with an added contextual refference so others could understand your point. With all that said... nothing I said was out of place. I merely gave definitions of the words and explained that it is possible for an individual to live life with out prejudice. However, even with those points made, I think it is of even greater importance that I stress to you how different the context of your example of prejudice and my example were... I made a refference to prejudice applying to race, creed, color, sexual orientation, nationality and so on... You made a reference to the most basic of possible prejudices... My name for example. You claim that you were prejudiced to believe I am a dbz fan whose favorite charactor is gotenks, well indeed that was prejudice. You made an assumption without proper knowledge of the situation. Had you looked into it, you would seen the play on words since my name in real life is Kent. This means that what you did, was indeed the most basic form of prejudice, but it in no way contradicted my definition, nor did it imply that I have taken part in any sort of prejudice. Plus, if we use such general standards of what these words mean, then there would be nothing to seperate prejudice from logical induction/deduction, which could also easily be what you did in respect towards my board name. This is actually interesting to me, because take this example... Say that you like chocolate icecream more than vanilla. Would that make you prejudiced to vanillia? Well the answer lies in the individuals background. If they have tasted vanillia before and dont like it based on that... then they are not prejudiced. But if they dont like it, even without having tasted it before... then that person is prejudiced. Do you see what I mean in that example. So the question is... Do we take the loose definitions and apply them in the most general terms possible to achieve an end goal that implies all people are prejudiced? Or do we apply some sort of discretion which would allow us to only apply these terms in this specific debate to the ideas of discriminating a person or group based on any number of things like their sex, sexuality or race? I leave this to you all, but I tell you this... the definitions are not my opinion, they are actual definitions. Heck you guys have dictionaries and understand how to use them. You also know why there are multiple definitions to each word. But I do want to stress that everything cwb said was right on. He said everything I said but for some reason it comes across to me that cwb is trying to disagree with me some how.

Actually Dues ex machina... I wanted to come back and make the quick comment that I appreciate your opinion about "trying our best is the most we can ask for" but I actually really do feel that my comment should stand as it was said. See. Prejudice- an unfavorable opinion formed before hand without knowledge or thought. Discrimination- to make a distinction based on prejudice. With those definitions laid out, I want to say that it is very possible for all of us to live our lives without ever discriminating or showing prejudice to anyone. I believe that there is a major difference between getting mad or disliking someone... and being prejudiced or discriminatory. So once again, with those facts in mind, I believe my original comment stands. Of course, then again, if you take my opinions of those I dislike and try to use them as a form of prejudice you have to also take into account that most of the opinions that I (as well as many on the boards) have made, were based on the actions or opinions of the "disliked" parties. Hence, the negative opinions are informed and not based on anything in the form of prejudice or ignorance. I also wanna stress the point that never showing prejudice or discrimination does not at all make anyone perfect. I am far, far, far, from perfect... I just happen to not have the prejudice thing working against me. So remember, prejudice is based on having a negative opinion of something without any basis for that opinion. Not simply having a negative opinion.

That is some crazy stuff. I dont really think of it as an act of god, but I know you didnt literally mean that. I do think its awesome to see stuff like that happens. Its worth nothing else to see stuff that. I hope your lucky enough have stuff like that more often. I havent seen snow in my area ever. I moved from Va. to La. and havent seen snow since. Plus, Im a cold weather person... so I am really incomplete down here in the humid swamp. Loved the pictures and love the weather, appreciate it while you have it.

Assimilation is becoming part of something. I believe the goal of "gays" is to become an accepted part of American culture. Once we are all accepted civil rights will not be a problem. I want to mention for the masses that you (james) and I have contacted each other via IM and worked out all misconceptions. I wanted to post for the masses in this reply that I, as a white straight male who has never discriminated or prejudiced anyone, noticed the mistreatment I have recieved the same way anyone who has not lied, notices it when they are called a liar. My plea in my above post was for homosexuals to go about their pursuit for civil rights in a more effective way. Not for them to let go of their ideologies and become part of a larger culture. I believe that a large sum of us feel the same way... let anyone live the way they wish. Some of us disagree about that, but in the end, there is no way to stop a person from living as they wish. So I ask to all who are homosexual, not to change your life style, but to change your angle of approach towards your end goal. I can say first hand that it would persuade me more to support the political and cultural desires of homosexuals if "gays" would respect me as I have respected them.

I just wanna stress again that I also have no hate for anyone... no matter what the situation... well maybe some of the ignoramus fools that speak of politics in an uninformed way. Anyway, my point is that I have never hated on any gays or minorities, but my whole life I have had those same people stereotype me and treat me as a racist or a "homophob." I just cant stand when people get on my case for things I never did. (that hasnt happend on the boards in this thread) I just think its best to leave sexuality alone when it comes to showing other people. I mean, leave it in the bed room for god's sake. I am more tired of gay pride rallies than I am kkk rallies because I dont have a reason to hate any one who is gay, where as when I see the kkk it gives me hours of heated debate. All I could suggest is that if people of homosexual preferrence want to begin the assymilation process, I would personally start by dropping all the damn attention seeking rallies, protest and hate for people like me who are constantly stereotyped. Keep in mind that I also dislike just about every protest I see simply because I dislike loud mouths. (thats who I see at rallies) I have already made my opinions on the "cliches" of two women and one man clear, so thats no longer an issue for me. But I did notice the comments about the idea of what is natural... That is sorta a thing of personal opinion if you ask me. I think just about everything is natural because nothing in the world is not of this earth. I mean, even street lights were natural elements at some time. So take that as you will.

In my imagination I always have that perfect girl friend. You know, the girl behind me in my math class. Green eyes, curly blonde hair, much too hot for me... and today I got to talk to her. Infact, I walked by an elevator she had just got into and right as the doors closed, I jumped in. It was heaven, and I didnt have to use my imagination. Of course, how I see my self up there (in my head) well think of a real world mix of gokou and spike. (yea, right, like thats at all anything like me) But in any case, Ive learned now that no matter what I think of myself, I am best off not thinking about it and just being myself. I also have learned that I am best off staying out of my little world when Im in school. (great way to fail out) So to wrap up... I think of myself as a great guy, I think of a beautiful girl there with me, and I think of my family and friends when that same girls rips out my heart.

Thanks again for that summary. I will be looking forward to seeing them for myself simply because there are emotions displayed by the charactors that take an amazing writer to express. Im sure that hill scene you mention has a great meaning in the show, just the same as the humor that no one can really describe. Thanks again, And remember, anyone whose trying to be the big talkin otaku better cough up some long term romance spoilers... please. Oh crap, Ill just settle for any sort of romance spoilers I havent caught yet. Hence, anything cn hasnt showed. Thanks again, -kent

Actually lalaith, that welfare is for us to decide about where it goes. (in the true essence of our government) Unfortunatly presidents over the past 30 years have been playing with it to do things that are just rediculus. Plus due to certain presidents, that welfare is being sent only to certain types of people... oh say... unwed mothers. So being married screws you out of welfare as well as many other beneficial programs that can supply everything from buisness start up capital to payments for college educations. I believe the people have the right to vote and elect leaders that will represent the way we want the money to be used. (of course that is one big load of idealistic democratic crap, so its not gonna happen any time soon. But atleast the idea is there.) My point in all of this is that, we have the power in our system to voice our opinions and hopfully we can make a difference in the way money for help is spent. I also wanna support Jenni on the points made in the above post. I have literally been in line behind people trying to use food stamps to buy beer... when it didnt work out because that is not allowed, they used their own normal money. I dont wanna tell people how to live or spend their money... hell, I drink all the time (infact, far too much) but when your down on your luck to the point of needing food stamps, you need to get your priorities together and not waste your money on beer. That is why we need to help the unfortunate help themselves, not just throw them hand outs. Hand outs will only help until they run out. But teaching someone how to take care of themself and manage their life in a more orginized manner... that could make all the difference. Things like not just living off of welfare, but using it until you get back on your feet. Just the same with shelters, those need to places that provide a steady and secure enviroment for an individual to get on their feet, get one single suit, and showers/food until they can get that job they need. Not just release them after every night and allow them to do anything in the streets while we all hope for the best about what they are doing with that freedom they have inbetween visits to the shelter for food and showers. If we can take care of criminals in jail, we can figure out a way to provide for these innocents who deserve more. Problem is... like I said before, you cant force anyone to help themselves or to work. Although forcing someone to work is a better place to go with our efforts instead of the current system. Another question: do you keep sinking money into something that doesnt work hoping to fix it, or do you cut your losses and start over? If your a buisness major that is an easy one, for the rest of us, its just a simple matter of common sense. I will let you guys decide what to make of the options Ive laid out, but I like this sort of discussion more than arguing over who is taking jobs and who is getting the shaft. I must say though, my uncle jack owns a construction company and employs all sorts of imigrants. He says they work hard and are always willing to work more because they know that he is gonna have a pay check for them, garunteed. Maybe we should let the imigrants have their jobs and try to find some jobs for the homeless. Shoot, I just had an idea. Why dont we try to spread out the homeless population into areas that are all over instead of leaving them clumped up in certain areas. We have areas like new york where the homeless wonder the subway aimlessly begging and we have areas like san fransisco where the homeless flock to because of the unimaginable benefits provided to them simply for being homeless. If we could get them on their feet for a week at these shelters in the major cities, then move them into less populated areas, we could easily use the same effort we use for paroled criminals and set up these people with some sort of job. Just an idea.

I like that idea syk, I still havent had my question answered... What happens to the wolf demon and the situation with kagome being kidnapped? I also want to know about what happens in the long run with inu yasha and kagome? (you know, romance and all that) So if a couple of you know it alls could give up the goods, I would greatly appreciate it. thanks Oh yea, this is the 1201 post for me... its been a long time since the first one...1200 to be exact.

I wanted to mention on a side note that christians do believe in two different types or categories of sins... venial sins and cardinal sins. The venial sins are less important things and cardinal sins are those mortal sins that "will send you to hell" or something like that. I believe it comes from dante when he went to write the inferno and he had to come up with a distiction between sins like theft and murder. Just thought you guys would like to hear that. Any way, I wanna say that the only prejudice I have seen first hand was from a homosexual in my direction because of the assumption that I was a stereotypical male who hated anything that wasnt exactly like myself... I dont hold that against anyone though because that is just a stupid thing to do. I have seen plenty of prejudice towards "gays" on a national or international level, but that is what anyone who keeps up with the news or any sort of "socially aware" media. I also most of all wanna say its pretty rude to consider someone "too damn arrogant for their own good" simply because they openly admit that the idea of 2 women together is a cliche (which it is) and that the idea has no more effect on said persons sexual erousal than a single girl.