Boba Fett

[quote name='Citrus][SIZE=1']What's your opinion on pornography? I would really like to know.[/SIZE][/quote] [color=green]We have a free market economy, so people should be able to sell what belongs to them. If you don't like it you can, as you did, look away.[/color]

[quote name='Drix D'Zanth'] Marriage doesn?t grant any citizens special rights or privileges, or favor citizens once acquired.[/quote] [color=green]Really?[/color] [quote name='Drix D'Zanth']The government is represented by her people, and as a member of that representative body (tiny fraction as it may be) I am obligated to voice my ethical opinion.[/quote] [color=green]I?m not sure how discrimination is ethical.[/color] [quote name='Drix D'Zanth']I?m not denying anybody the right to go out and find a member of the opposite sex and get married, homosexual or not.[/quote] [color=green]Oh, but I thought...[/color] [quote name='Drix'] So, I?ll tell you why this topic is important to myself: someone opposed to both homosexuality, homosexual marriage, and in favor of homosexual couples adopting.[/quote] [color=green]Oh, but then you clarify by saying...[/color] [quote name='Drix']Gay couples can get married in certain religious establishments and churches.[/quote] [color=green]So what you?re saying is that homosexuals can go pretend to get married, and that should be enough? It seems to me like you should be more opposed to religious gay marriage, being that religion is the basis for your opposition, than governmental recognition of union.[/color] [quote name='Drix D'Zanth] Besides, if they wish to get married in their private lives (as far as a cultural marriage or religious marriage is concerned) outside the [b]public[/b'] (key word! key word!) arena; who am I to deny that?[/quote] [color=green]Why don?t those heterosexuals keep their marriage out of the public arena? We can just let them get married in their private lives, too.[/color]

[quote name='Drix D'Zanth] Most importantly, it will be regarded as a [i]good[/i'] thing. I simply don?t see it as a good thing.[/quote] [color=green]Why not? I?ve read all these religious arguements on the topic, but I think Alex addresses this well when he says.[/color] [quote name='Brasil'] I think it's worth nothing that most (if not all) scripture found in the Bible has a cultural foundation in the time period.[/quote] [color=green]We must recognize that times have changed and hope we can shed the prejudices we?ve carried for so many years.[/color] [quote name='Drix D'Zanth'] I tolerate homosexuality, I endure homosexuality, and I recognize that it?s a part of our society. I do not consider a homosexual any more ?inferior? to a heterosexual (did you even read my post?).[/quote] [color=green]An inferior is one we say is, ?A person lower in rank, status, or accomplishment than another.? What else could you possibly be implying when you deny someone marriage, a right you afford everyone else?[/color] [quote name='Drix D'Zanth] I?m not [b]denying[/b] homosexuals marriage... They simply do not meet the prerequisites that I recognize classify what a marriage [i]is[/i'].[/quote] [color=green]That?s well and good for you to do. But this is a government matter. A government shouldn?t be in the business of deciding what a marriage is. If two people want to join in union, a government should treat them like any other two people who want to be together. If a government doesn?t do that, it is discriminating. I?m not saying people shouldn?t voice their opinions in regard to government, but rather that they should recognize that religion and government serve different purposes and must act accordingly.[/color] [quote name='Drix']These laws are codified on the principle that there is a ?right? way to do certain things and a ?wrong? way. It is wrong for a thirteen year old to drive, or a nineteen year old to drink alcohol. Those are privileges one must earn.[/quote] [color=green]If laws are based in morality... I?m not sure I follow how it?s morally wrong for a 19 year old to drink or a 13 year old to drive. I drink. Am I immoral? And we earn these privileges, by aging? A ludicrous and wildly inaccurate test at best. How are homosexuals to ?earn? this right?[/color] [quote name='Drix'] Even though I disagree with the idea of gay marriage, I do not regard any homosexual as less than myself.[/quote] [color=green]Can you marry? Can a homosexual marry? And there?s no disparity there? Marriage, once administered by a government, becomes service that must be provided equally to all. Don?t discriminate by gender. It?s wrong.[/color]

[QUOTE=Drix D'Zanth]The legalization of homosexual marriage will affect the future in three big ways: 1) It will affect how it is viewed from a historical standpoint and taught to my children.[/QUOTE] [color=green] Any cultural change effects history and all of them are recorded in textbooks. The end of slavery in the United States, passage and repeal of prohibition, de-legalization of narcotics and the success of the civil rights movement are all social upheavels that are recorded in history textbooks. Are all right? You be the judge. There are still people on both sides of every issue. The recording of legalization of gay marriage, should that come to pass, isn?t relevant.[/color] [quote name='Drix D'Zanth']Gay marriage will be taught as the second civil rights movement in the United States if it is unanimously supported and allowed. If I teach my kids my moral standpoint that homosexuality is an immoral behavior, they will be condemned as bigots and homophobes.[/quote] [color=green]Gay marriage [i]is[/i] the second civil rights movement in the United States. The U.S. is discriminating against a group of people because of their gender. A bigot is, ?One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.? If you teach your kids that homosexuality is immoral, [i]your children will be bigots[/i]. Just as my children would be bigots if I were to tell them that anyone without blond hair and blue eyes was inferior. You would be teaching intolerance, Drix.[/color] [quote name='Drix D'Zanth']I do not think this movement resembles the first civil rights movement at all because of one fundamental principle: gay marriage opposes religion?s involvement in politics while the first civil rights movement embraced Christianity as its deal-breaker. The entire case for Rev. King?s consolidation of equal rights was based on biblical principles and he had a perfectly legitimate case! Unfortunately, this cannot be used to support gay marriage because it is biblically wrong.[/quote] [color=green]America is a democracy, not a theocracy. Church and state both exist in our country ? each in a separate sphere. Just because the civil rights movement used biblical principles doesn?t make it right. Lack of mainstream religious backing for gay marriage doesn?t make it wrong. Equality is the core principle of a democratic society. We are all equal; one person, one vote. Every person is entitled to the same liberties ? and when those liberties are denied because of prejudice, that is a violation of civil rights. By allowing some people to marry and denying that privilege to others, [b]you are designating homosexuals second-class citizens.[/b][/color]

[color=green]Those Teletubbies. I always knew they were created by evil liberals to corrupt our children and turn them into drug-using homosexual degenerates. Just like those satanic Harry Potter novels and those falafels they sell at that Middle Eastern food store. I heard those turn you into a terrorist.[/color]

[quote name='Boo][size=1][i]They will get them one way or another[/i]. Those are only the real criminals. Not the fellows who are just pissed at someone and shoot them. "You stole my Pokemon card ;_;" [highlight]Bang.[/highlight'] [/size][/quote] [color=green]This is why we have background checks and only sell guns to adults of legal age. No system is perfect, and you will always have tragic situations like the one mentioned above. You shouldn't take a steak away from a man because a baby can't chew it. I'd feel a lot safer with everyone armed than just criminals.[/color]

[QUOTE=Boo][size=1]Now to get on the subject. Firearms are lame. I can not make up a single reason to have one, but to use it as selfdefense against someone with a firearm. Which is not necessary if they are not allowed XD [/size][/QUOTE] [color=green]Exactly! ... because once all the law abiding citizens hand over their guns to the government, only the criminals will have them! We'll all be safer. A criminal would be much less likely to break into a house, attempt murder or mug you if he knew that you could be carrying a concealed firearm. You will never remove all the firearms from a society - the criminals will always get them. The best we can do is level the playing field.[/color]

[quote name='omgmangaw00t']Seriously, if you're a woman trapped in a man's body, I don't care what you do...JUST DON'T DO IT AROUND ME, and don't even try to make people think you've always biologically been a woman. It's unethical.[/quote] [color=green]Sounds like you do care, as you wouldn't want such a person around you. I think that mindset falls somewhere between denial and intolerance, personally. Gender is in your head, sex is in your pants. They don't always match. If changing someone's gender will make them happy, I don't see why anyone would be against that. It's not as if this person is forcing you to do the same, and this behavior isn't harmful to you in any way. If you can't accept people for who they are, at least be tolerant of those different from you.[/color]

[quote name='Avenged666fold']I would nuke the nazi bastards so my country would be safe and theirs would be screwed. Alright!!!![/quote] [color=green]Me too. No nation building, no drawn out occupation and no more regional issues for another few hundred years. Of course, if the area in question has a valuable natural resource (oil, diamonds, poppies, etc.) firebombing might be a better choice. Remember Dresden?[/color]

[color=green]I'm game - and I'll go first.[/color]

[color=green]While I like the idea of having knight/padawan teams posting more or less concurrently, it appears this suggestion is slowing the plot development (with regard to posting in general) considerably. Currently we are "waiting" for Mr. Jones or Gavin to post following Jokopoko and Yoda. No rush, criticism or other negative feeling implied above. Further, as my padawan (Brasil) hasn't posted his sign up, I'm not sure I could follow this advisement if I wanted to. In short, just how strictly should we be adhering to this advisement?[/color]

[QUOTE=Corey][size=1]I think I speak for all the Star Wars fans on here that a junkie SW fan is the best kind. ^_^[/size][/QUOTE] [color=green]Agreed. On your banner, avatar and username, I have the following dime store psychology to offer: I see someone who's not afraid to be who they are, and isn't apt to get dragged along behind the latest trend unless that phenomenon is a worthwhile one. I think strength may be implied there as well. The act of artistic creation seems to be a priority in your life, both viewing other's contributions and focusing on your own endeavors. I see you as a distinct individual in everything you do.[/color]

[color=green][u]Character Overview[/u] [b]Name:[/b] Irik Nar [b]Age:[/b] 24 [b]Species:[/b] Rodian [b]Gender:[/b] Male. [b]Appearance:[/b] His skin like a watermelon ? dark green with an assortment of lighter streaks ? Irik?s mottled complexion isn?t the only was he stands out from his peers. With big antennae and larger, oval ears he is easy to spot in a crowd. Unlike the flowing and distinctive robes of a Jedi knight, Irik dresses in the clothes of a commoner. He is most often seen sporting faded pants with a utility belt and a comfortable nerf-hide jacket. [b]Personality:[/b] Even in the cloistered, aloof bubble that is the Jedi Temple, the mindless savagery of the Rodian species was well known. Although Irik feels the same primal drives, his training as a Jedi has led him to suppress them. Timid and unsure of himself, Irik has been unable to harness his inner feelings constructively as many Jedi do ? Mace Windu in has adoption of Vaapad, for example. Instead, Irik has become a dedicated pacifist. His lightsaber, although it has seen combat, has never killed another being; he will not even deflect a blaster bolt back at an opponent. Creative problem-solving has been his answer to this self-imposed handicap, which continually confounds his opponents and infuriates those assigned him as a sparring partner. [b]General Overview:[/b] Irik knows nothing of his parents, and like many Jedi his earliest memories are of the temple?s nursery. A bright child, Irik learned to speak quickly and never tired of asking ?Why?,? to his caretakers. Weeks before his third year, Irik was one of only two children that survived the crash of a large hovertaxi into one of the temple?s towers. The trauma of the accident, where seven younglings perished, affected Irik deeply despite the best efforts of the temple?s healers. He didn?t talk for six years. It was during this silence that Irik spent almost all his free time in the temple?s archives, where he spent much of his time reading classical literature and following galactic politics on the holonet. This has given him a great deal of knowledge about ? and opinion on ? galactic politics. After he did, finally, speak again, Irik made up for lost time. He never misses a chance to ask a tough question or offer a dissenting opinion on conventional wisdom. Sparring is a favorite activity of Irik?s, and his choice of form III fits well with his personality. Physically fit, mentally sharp and patient as a granite slug digesting its food, Irik will duel for hours without pause. Not wishing, even in practice, to deal a ?killing? blow, he will instead point out to his opponent their mistake (often sparking another, and another). Irik?s Jedi Knight trial was one of the more controversial in recent memory. Assigned to break a glitterstem ring in the Corporate Sector, Irik successfully infiltrated the network and was able to destroy a freighter full of the addicting spice. His plan hit an unexpected snag: the penalty for spice trafficking in the sector is death. As a pacifist, he could not in good conscience turn the half-dozen prisoners he?d taken over to the CSA. Instead he dropped them off on an uninhabited world with the full supplies of the consular vessel he?d been assigned. After ensuring the planet was safe, Irik returned to Coruscant. ... a week later than expected and missing thousands of credits worth of Republic supplies. Not to mention an infuriated delegation from the Corporate Sector demanding to know what happened to the missing smugglers. After much deliberation, the council decided to grant Irik the title of Knight. Other haven?t been so forgiving. Blacklisted diplomatically, Irik has become a follower of the living force and travels wherever it leads him. [u]Jedi Overview[/u] [b]Lightsaber Appearance:[/b] Irik?s lightsaber is constructed in accordance with his view of it ? as a tool. Light, with variable blade length and circumference, this saber is a versatile tool that can be used a weapon. The hilt is made of an ultra-light durasteel alloy and is coated with a vulcanized rubber grip that allows the wielder to retain his grip even during the longest of battles. It is a dull gray in color. Small recessed dials and buttons control the saber?s functions. [b]Lightsaber Type:[/b] Irik?s lightsaber is of standard design [b]Lightsaber Crystals/Color:[/b] The blade of Irik?s lightsaber is a soft yellow, almost white. It is provided by a synthetic crystal. [b]Lightsaber Combat Style:[/b] Style III [b]Favored Force Powers:[/b] Irik favors force persuade and force push. He practices a wide array of force endurance and healing techniques, most notably force-trace for healing. [b]View of the Force:[/b] Irik considers the force to be, just as it is was first related to him ? an all encompassing energy field. Sentient beings, he believes, have divided it ? like themselves ? into the camps of good and evil. He has not used a ?dark? force power, although he has used mind tricks for less altruistic purposes (?This meal is on the house.?).[/color]

[quote name='Mnemolth']Actually no. This is why people are so skeptical of its reliability. But it works out quite well. Wikipedia may lock pages but it is very, very rare. Right now, I'm able to edit the Intelligent Design article.[/quote] [color=green]My mistake. The Bush article is locked, and will likely remain so. On the subject of locked pages on a wiki... this should be done more often, especially on higher traffic sites like Wikipedia that take the bulk of abuse. I have a question though - it may just be me, but has anyone actually seen a relatively major page vandalized?[/color]

[QUOTE=r2vq]I would have assumed that locking any such entries would defeat the entire purpose of wikipedia. -Arvi[/QUOTE] [color=green]Wikipedia exists to provide accurate information. If a page is being vandalized to the point where it's no longer useful, locking the page is necessary. Locked articles are crucial to the entire purpose of Wikipedia - dissemination of accurate information.[/color]

[quote name='Mnemolth']If you don't believe me I suggest you look up ANY entry that is controversial/popular. George Bush, Intelligent Design, Evolution, Albert Einstein, etc. Go into that entry and try to sneak some blatantly bais or false information in. Go on. Edit it. And then wait, and come back the next day, and see if your edit survived. I'm willing to bet your entry would have been obliterated.[/quote] [color=green]I'm willing to bet those entries are locked due to their controversial natures.[/color]

[color=green]Mr. Seigenthaler should look up "Open Source," before he gets his panties in a bunch.[/color]

[color=green]Obviously, this is a very personal choice for a guy to make... as to whether or not he minds a guy hitting on him. Personally, I'd take it as a complement. This has happened to me a few times, and I just quietly thank the person for their attention before mentioning I'm not interested. I do the same for a girl I'm not attracted to. Be careful though, I'm sure you know that many guys might have a very visceral or even violent reaction to something of that nature.[/color]

[color=green]Panic! At the Disco is one of my favorite bands. [i]A Fever You Can't Sweat Out[/i] is a great album, which is saying a great deal for such a new band. Correct me if i'm wrong, but I believe this is their first album. In any event, their sound is real fresh and a nice break from a lot of "Alt Rock" - to use an iTunes label - especially with regard to "Emo." Whatever that really is... My favorite track would have to be either [i]The Only Difference Between Martyrdom and Suicide is the Press Coverage[/i] or [i]But It's Better When We Do[/i].[/color]

[COLOR=DarkGreen]This might be oversimplifying the matter... but the constitution is a four page document. A reasonably intelligent person can figure it out in a day or so, tops. I'd be more concerned that Bush is picking someone so close to him. Or that Bush is picking a judge at all. His appointments have been lacking quite a bit, to say the least.[/COLOR]

[color=green]Illegal acquisition of other people's intellectual property (downloading music/movies/copyrighted text) without proper payment is wrong any way you look at it. Stricter measures need to be created, and enforced on a broad scale, to protect the people who create the content - because without that protection there will be no incentive to produce new material. This result hurts everyone, honest and otherwise. In the short term, prices for movie tickets, CDs and other pirated media will rise as producers attempt to compensate for their losses, in the same manner as a store raising prices to cover shoplifting. It'll be interesting to see how, if at all, goverments crack down on decentralized networks. Unlike Napster and its clones, you can't just shut down a few servers - every user on the network has to be stopped.[/color]

[quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1']Even though cyber-sex doesn't actually count as cheating, because there's not physical intercourse it does break the spirit of the rule because you are engaging in a sexual act with another person.[/SIZE][/quote] [color=green]Cheating isn't constrained by physical actions. You can cheat on your girlfriend without any sexual act whatsoever, by giving yourself emotionally to another person. This certainly counts as infidelity. Cyber sex is like most other internet activities: a waste of time for those with nothing better to do.[/color]

I work in New London and live less than 10 minutes from Fort Trumbull, where the city is planning on evicting homeowners to use the property for commerical use. The reasoning behind this decision is that the city, which is in debt, seeks more businesses to raise tax revenue - and the land in question is very close to a pre-existing business park (which will likely be expanded over the homes of Ms. Kelo and the other residents). But, there is a bill currently in the state legislature that'd prevent this from happening. Should it pass, no city in CT - including New London - would be able to take land for private "[i]public use[/i]."

[color=green]I'm working three days a week and interning another three, so my free time isn't exactly copious. I guess I just get into a routine and stick with it, and make sure to get all my work done at work, so when I get home goofing off isnt a problem.[/color]

[color=green]Currently I'm listening to OAR's [i]Hangover[/i], trying to decide whether or not I want to upload it to iTunes or just delete it (along with a great deal more "acquired" music). I use a plugin called [URL=http://www.audioscrobbler.com/user/twistedsunshine]AudioScrobbler[/URL] to record what I'm listening to - and it's pretty nifty, recording all kinds of data.[/color]