Access Denied

You do not have permissions to access this page.

Latest Posts Comments Articles
    • Well done, feminism. Now men are afraid to help wo... (Last post by Jamie Stick)
    • Quote: What I was pointing out is that feminism doesn't help men. I talk about male victims of rape and already it's the patriarchy's fault. That is what victim blaming is. Nope. Blaming patriarchy isn't blaming the individual man who was raped for being raped nor is it even blaming men in general, but rather societal bias. Yes, that societal bias is patriarchal, but that's not the same logically or linguistically as blaming the victim.
    • Guns in America (Last post by Star Forge)
    • Quote: Ok Jamie I am literally done with you because you refuse any facts put forward. You asked me how I got that firearms are less then 1% of all deaths. I proved my point with facts from the FBI and CDC. Then you spout something about how this doesnt prove my point. The numbers DO NOT LIE. Firearms are responsible for less then 1% of all deaths in the US while fast food and a lazy life are responsible fore 23%. So sitting on your couch with a big mac is more likely to kill you then a person owning a gun. It is down right laughable that you in one breath claim that "Oh I dont own guns and nothing happened to me so you dont need them" then in the next say how bad they are and thus we need to ban them. It doesnt work both ways. You refuse all reason and fact and thus this conversation is over unless you want to actually do anything other then emotionalist burden shifting. You demand proof from others but offer nothing but stories and fear based foolishness yourself. Non sequitur. TROLOLOLOLO Just kidding. You pretty much summed it up. This thread reminded me to buy an NRA membership this morning.
    • On War & Religion (Last post by OB1Shinobi)
    • Quote: Quote: Also, the assertion that any life has inherent value is false by necessity, since "inherent value" is already something internally inconsistent. Value is an outcome of putting value upon things. It cannot be inherent by definition. Nor does a majority of largely popular religions in our day, and by that I mean religions with any global influence of note, teach that life has inherent value. The value of life they teach is often only as far reaching as the religion's tribe and doesn't extend even as far as to all mankind, and it is also, in most cases, contingent upon either ourselves, a cosmic impersonal justice and morality system, or a countable set of deities. Value and inherency are two incompatible things. 1- i think i elaborated on this in my response but i wanted to add - did you really not understand the basic point i was expressing? i mean, i do respect that it is important to be as precise with our language as possible, but if we are communicating in a friendly and mutually uplifting way, do you really have to pick every damn thing apart to nth degree? its very frustrating discussing topics with you because we get sidetracked on minutia for no better reason than that you find an opportunity to be critical and wont let it pass but maybe that is only my impression and not your intent? 2 - EVERY religion teaches that there is a higher order of existence and that we are a part of that order - that we have a place and a purpose within it - THIS IS OUR VALUE and this is what religion does ---- so you arent going to explain why it is wrong to burn down villages? and your response to that is "NO YOU DO IT!" ? well i think i will say that numerous religion systems have explained this far better than i could do what is this time you speak of "long before religion existed"? i am talking about RELIGION - the phenomena of religion itself and not just some particular religion, such as taoism or jediism im not sure that we can speak of a time "before religion came along" ? my understanding is that the best of our modern thinking has determined that religion existed as far back as human beings can be said to be HUMAN BEINGS in the modern sense
    • Justice in the Force (Last post by den385)
    • And so it is... Force is not a skirt for a coward but a flag for the brave. Today I decided that I'll rather die than complain and drown in self-pity again. Maybe, my genes will never allow me to recover from depression fully. Maybe, I can rewrite my faulty genome. Whatever the obstacles, I'll rather die fighting, like a Jedi, than surrender. " Once more into the fray... Into the last good fight I'll ever know... Live and die on this day... Live and die on this day... " Hah. Life always finds a way to make me stronger.
    • Avatar Discussion (Episode 1, TLA) (Last post by steamboat28)
    • As someone who doesn't currently feel comfortable either in this Temple or in my own head, I'm relatively certain these kinds of discussions about this franchise would be a really good way for me to check in here once in a while. I need to watch this series again anyhow.
    • Your Inner Council: What is it and how to develop ... (Last post by Loudzoo)
    • This is a great thread - and I like your list! Here are my current 7, in no particular order: George Fox - for original thought and steadfastness in the face of oppression Obi Wan Kenobi - just because . . . Bjorn Lomborg - for effective environmentalism, no matter how unfashionable ( Lao Tzu - for wisdom Thomas Young - the definitive polymath provides inspiration that everything is interesting Valentino Rossi - for bravery, technical acumen, persistence and sense of humour Edgar Mitchell - for pursuing his interests and beliefs in the face of opposition (
    • SW Force Awakens books (Last post by Br. John)
    • I have this one. Aftermath: Star Wars: Journey to The Force Awakens It starts immediately with the end of Return of the Jedi but only covers a short time period - not near the thirty years that have passed. I understand that time period (between VI and VII) will be filled in with more books. There's going to be a single episode comic that tells why C3PO Spoiler: has one red arm now. [attachment]
    • Rants far and wide (Last post by Connor L.)
    • I'm working so hard with so little result... This is slow. Slow is a good teacher, though... I must remember that.
    • From time to time a poem (Last post by elizabeth)
    • If you cut enough times with words do you imagine I will feel your pain? Will the guilt for being a cause of your turmoil close the distance between us? Will it change how I feel? Give me a new perspective? No. It raises defenses and rages, burns out all that was ever there. It furthers the distance until I no longer see. Clouds the reality Destroy everything and when its spent nothing has changed. Except.. Except I no longer wish to try, I have no empathy because, my love Words are hollow and meaningless and like the weapons you choose to wield them as, Sadness and love are passing storms and they destroy not build.
    • UN says Afghan hospital bombing may be war crime (Last post by Avalonslight)
    • One article I read suggested that the location in question was being used by the Taliban as a sort of staging ground / home base / etc for the region, with it being Afghani officials being the ones to say that. [ source ] So let's say that the airstrikes were based on that information. It wouldn't be the first time the Taliban has used an otherwise normally "don't strike" building as a base of operations. They've used mosques and other religious buildings, schools, hospitals, etc in the past. They'll very likely use such "no strike list" buildings in the future. What I want to know is if this is a war crime, then why isn't someone investigating the Russian military for their sudden escalation and airstrikes against Syrian land targets? Is it because they're reportedly just against terrorist training camps? Because if that's the case, then people should be aware that there are just as many civilian and non-combatant individuals in those locations as there were in that Afghani hospital, in the form of hostages, sex slaves, women, children, infants, and the elderly.... What if ISIS were using a hospital as a base, and then Russia conducted an airstrike against that hospital? Would there be the same outrage? Collateral damage, which is the term you're looking for here, happens in every conflict. Innocents are killed; buildings are struck that shouldn't have been struck. And it sucks! The problem is, whatever justification the US military used to decide that an airstrike was the best way to deal with the reported threat, will very likely remain classified past any investigation the Pentagon or UN or NATO or whatever organization you want to name happens to conduct. What information did US officials use? Afghani intelligence? Our own boots on the ground? Local reports? Satellite imagery? What if the information regarding the Taliban being there was wrong? What if it was right? When does the military have the obligation to stand back and allow known militant groups to use what is supposed to a safe haven as a base of operations for spreading their terror and discord? When should they step in? How should they step in? Should they have sent a special forces team in instead of dropping a bomb? Should they have tried to draw these supposed militants out onto the streets? Or should they have ignored it and just let things go as they were supposedly going? When do you decide the pros outweigh the cons? Because quite frankly, I'm not certain anyone is ever going to be able to fully, ethically/morally decide "yes it's ok to strike this location" or "no it's not ok to strike this location", in any form... be it on the ground or from the air. Because there's always going to be some kind of civilian casualty... And to clarify, I am neither condoning nor condemning the actions that were taken... Because honestly, I don't have the intel to understand the reasoning behind it. I'm just presenting a bare basic example of the many levels of consideration that had to be made in order for a strike to even be ordered in the first place.
    • The Imperishable Gem (Last post by Competent)
    • "After I'm dead I'd rather have people ask why I have no monument than why I have one." - Cato The Elder
    • The nature of entertainment media (Last post by Star Forge)
    • Quote: Quote: I used to be a metalhead. I still listen to a lot of metal, I just don't identify with the subculture. I was really into black metal, but I got tired of it after I became a Christian, because I didn't feel like listening to a genre that is at least 75% dedicated to bashing Christianity. I don't like the metal culture, either. It advocates a self-destructive lifestyle. I know what you mean, part of my problem was that I wanted to belong to a community, I like a lot of metal, and so tried to fit into the subculture, as it's supposedly the place for the misfits. But while I love some metal, the culture is simply not who I am. This is one reason I puled away from the music for a while: I had completely oversaturated myself to the point of spiritual exhaustion. I do like me some indie pop and folk music, yknow? Quote: As for the video games: I don't mean to be pushy or preachy, but I have nothing good to say about them. I decided at the beginning of my adult life to live without video games, TV, and films, and it's one of the best decisions I've ever made. My advice to you would be to throw out all your games, but I can understand if you see that as unreasonable. To tell the truth, in the past I have done exactly that, thrown out all my games. Unfortunately with nothing to fall back on it left a vacuum in my life and never lasted for long. I don't see anything inherently wrong with the medium, or film for that matter; just as with music, one needs to simply be selective. I like films and games that show me life from a perspective I might not ordinarily have, to help me gain a better insight of universal truths. Believe it or not, there are more games out there with deep philosophical, emotional, and moral themes than you might imagine. ;) Philo Farnsworth, the dude who invented TV, always thought that his invention was at best useless and at worst harmful. When he saw the moon landing, he was relieved, as he felt that his invention was validated, and had been used as a force for good, at least in that one instance. That being said, there is one singular game that I have concluded is video gaming's "moon landing." Otherwise, I have a uniformly negative view on gaming (though I despise film the most). I won't name it publicly here. I am writing a longass treatise on the game currently. It is a project I have been planning for since 2009. I may or may not make it available here once it is done.

There are 781 visitors, 14 guests and 59 members online (3  in chat): Garm, Sirius, Br. John, Sarus, Grom Fett, Alethea Thompson, steamboat28, Jestor, Jedi_Roz, ren, Joe, Desolous, Star Forge, Proteus, Luthien, Alexandre Orion, Joey, Metsu Desal, Whyte Horse, Kamizu, Edan, Avalonslight, tzb, Jamie Stick, Calanon, Cabur Senaar, Cristris_Jons, Goken, Aqua, Slebo, ThorlakurThor, den385, MrBruno, Loudzoo, PowderCat, Tellahane, Corsair Gorscue, Jamho Thaber, TheToonMerc, Mikhael, Jeriko, Korwin Nightshade, SilentTiger32, BeeGeeMan, Morkhen, Tymmy, Ellipses, jonathangomez549, mikul, Billy_Magruder, obiwankenokie, Ke JinnDakken, Doogle, WBStookey, Ousan Ka, Jack.Troutman, MadHatter, Raven Crest, Freerangegeek, Gibby9001.

Follow Us