Yantelope V2

Kids are "fringe benefits"?

From a biblical perspective it's considered a perversion. Most Christians I know consider it akin to struggling with alcoholism or pornography addiction. It's not something you want to be addicted to, you feel helpless against it and it's something you're very prone too. It's something that you have to actively overcome. I'll prep for the incoming firestorm now.

See, i never understood gay Christians. I mean, sure, one is free to believe in whatever he/she wants to, but how can one believe in something that explicitly says you're a curse on this world, a mistake and what not? The Bible doesn't call homosexuals "mistakes". It's just classified as a sin just like any other sin.

Obejectification of women is prevelant in almost any culture it's just not quite such a charicature as it is in Japnese culture with anime and the like.

I've filmed probably over 100 weddings and I've never actually heard a preacher do that part.

I don't know why NFS is so hard to understand. The game is only good when cops are involved. Half the fun of NFS is busting racers. NFS 3 HP, NFS Most Wanted and NFS HP are the best games. Why does EA keep trying to change the winning formula?

@dukeofpwn how many religious bigots have you personally been insulted or threatened by?

I think it's a misconception that independants are generally intellectuals with a moderate stance directly center. My personal experience is they're more impulse buyers who go after what strikes their fancy in the checkout aisle.

Well, there's plenty in the republican party who think that this election should be a slam dunk for a strong republican candidate and are currently lamenting the two frontrunners Romney and Gengrich.

This made me think about who buys games for $60. I personally get 95% of my games for $20 or less. I only get a very few games which won't drop in price like COD for $60. I think most everyone I know who gets games for $60 are people who do the gamestop trade in and play their games and sell them back quickly. I wonder if the % of people who buy and collect games (don't sell them back) at $60 is tiny. If they kill used game sales I wonder if that will vastly shrink the sales of games at the $60 price point and the whole "no more used games" strategy will end in a wash in terms of developer revenue. Just a thought.

I should have done this. I never got around to playing my copy. I bought it before I realized I don't like JRPGs anymore.

Well, if it makes you feel better there are plenty of conservatives who hate the birther movement.

So has anyone played this? Is it any good? If I hated FFXIII would I like this? Also, I'm not sure if this is going to be a limited release kind of thing where I'll need to buy it new or risk prices actually going up. How is the availability in the EU?

I agree. Also, it's strange that people call the Republican party racist when as I recall it's primarily been the democratic party that was opposed to integration and if you really want to go back, abolition. It was also Democrats who passed the minimum wage not as a law to protect the poor but as a law to keep contractors from hiring black workers for cheaper labor than white workers in a move they thought sure would help keep jobs white. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_Republican_Party#1964-72

Well, there are some of the same rules in america although they usually don't have to do with hate speech. You can't yell "fire!" in a crowded theater for no reason to start a panic which could lead to people getting hurt or killed and claim it's free speech. You also can't phone in death threats to people and such. It's usually not race related though as far as I know. There are some hate crime laws but I'm not an expert in what makes a crime a "hate crime".

West and Zampella might agree with that part.

Wow, maybe we need a sweedish politics thread... A statment assumed by your belief in evolutionary theory.

You can't separate religion from government entirely any more than you can take the heart from a man. The ideas of separation of church and state were about the government endorsing a religion or giving preferance to a religion. People must be free to believe what they want and the government should not be pressuring them one way or another. However, what you believe to be morally right or wrong will always be intangled in religion and since laws are based on morality then you can never fully separate them. You make a statement "women should be able to do what they will with the fetus growing inside them, and that to say otherwise is incredibly unfair and disrespectful to women everywhere" which is wholly based on your morality which is based on your worldview. This is hardly different than someone who makes a moral statment based on his religious worldview perhaps unless you're going to say that an moral opinion based on science is somehow more vaild. Also, is this true? "In Sweden, expressing a moral objection to homosexuality is illegal, even on religious grounds, even in church, and a pastor minded to cite the more robust verses of Leviticus would risk four years in jail."

Prometheus does look awesome. I can't wait to see it.

It's pretty easy when baking. Just use the markers on the sticks of butter (usually in tablespoons or 1/2 cups) or just use a measuring cup if it's soft margarine. Easy.

Also, if you wanted some info on the above ad: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/hoekstra-super-bowl-ad-raises-racial-sensitivity-questions-with-language-references-to-china/2012/02/05/gIQAabZNsQ_story.html

Some interesting notes from that Gallup link. Seems like most of the respondents who are infavor of abortion in certain circumstances are making that statement on the bases of the life of the mother. it seems 80% of people want to make it legal to have an abortion to save a woman's life or to protect her health. If you look at the data for "woman's mental health" the number drops sharply to 60%. I found that interesting. It's also about 50/50 split on abortions if the baby may be physically or mentally impared. and as far as one thing I've heard from several of you guys so far, "family cannot afford to raise the child" that only has about 35% support. Anyway, seems those "certain circumstances" are mostly when the life of physical wellbeing of the mother is in danger and to a lesser extent the "psychological" wellbeing of the mother.

He didn't point out flaws in my data. It's not my data. He clearly didn't read the methodology or even bother to look at any other numbers in the write ups. He took a value out of context to be argumentative in order to backup someone else's completely erroneous statement.

Well at least according to Charity navigator PP is actually worse then Komen when it comes to administration fees. http://www.charityna...mary&orgid=4509 http://www.charityna...mary&orgid=4338 Check it again. Planned Parenthood: Administrative Costs 9.6% ($7,688,063) Komen: Administrative Costs 11.8% ($37,629,831) So perhaps you looked at those backwards. Interestingly, Komen appears to be running a deficit while PP has a decent excess. Maybe something to do with spending thirty seven and a half million on clerk work...? If you'd bother to check the methodology you'd notice that they scale it based on the type of charity work because some charity requires more administration than others. http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=48 Seriously, are you just trying to be argumentative?