CrimsonWeltall

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 05:39 PM) The gang analogy fails. You're talking about a police response to crimes that have already happened, as opposed to a blanket denial of rights based on a criteria. The analogy is fine. The point is you can single out an area for focus even if it doesn't knock out every instance of a problem. QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 05:39 PM) As for consenting adults, being consenting and being adult are the basis for all legal transactions. It's more of a necessity of functioning rather than a value judgment. And prohibiting close incestuous marriages recognizes that necessity and seeks to maintain it.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 05:09 PM) My point is that the "close family members" prohibition is a lazy way to get at the real problem, which is adult/child influences that may or may not be familial. It's not lazy. It's effective. If there's 10 gang members in a house and another 10 gang members scattered in unknown houses throughout the city, then having the police raid that particular house is smart. Raiding every house in the city is not practical. QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 05:09 PM) My personal opinion is that marriage should be eliminated. Allow consenting adults to "consumate" whatever relationships they want through legal paperwork. Why only consenting adults? That's a restriction (two, actually), and if the state can have that restriction, it can have every restriction, right?

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 04:53 PM) There are plenty of non-traditional households where children are interacting with lots of people who aren't parents or siblings. There are some, sure. But unless you want to prevent anyone from marrying, there's no reasonable way to prohibit or discourage that. There is for close family members. QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 04:53 PM) I support consistency. Either states have the rights to make restrictions or they don't. So if the state has any power at all, it has unlimited power? Does this apply to any other area of law? I'd also like your personal opinion of what restrictions, if any, you support.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 03:42 PM) Can't non-siblings/parents, who might be close friends of the family, also easily groom children for abuse? No. Older siblings and parents live with them and are sources of authority. QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 03:42 PM) I'm just saying that once you remove one restriction on marriage, it's very hard legally to justify the rest of them. That's not true. When we dumped anti-miscegenation laws, we didn't have to get rid of age restrictions. We recognized that one restriction was stupid, while the other was important. QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 03:42 PM) States either have the right to make restrictions or they don't. So you would support a state restriction marriage based on race or religion?

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 03:24 PM) You can find lots of hetero- and homo-sexual marriages where there are tons of questions about how much consent is really there. That argument wouldn't hold up in court when trying to defend polygamy or incest. It wouldn't hold up in court that older siblings and parents can easily groom children for abuse? Since you don't think the consent issue is significant, should I assume you are in favor of removing any restrictions on close-family incestual marriages?

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jun 2, 2014 -> 05:48 PM) They didnt hit on the fact that the They will. They did show

White Out $2 Stockton $3 West $4 Bird $2 Dirk $4 Bill Wennington

They should just dump every award other than valedictorian. The award ceremony can be exclusive to the valedictorian and the principal alone. This will result in great honor, as the unwashed masses are undeserving of looking upon the image of The One.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 22, 2014 -> 09:41 PM) So not any part of you took honors courses or did well in school or went to college, etc in order to have someone look at you and be proud and/or impressed with your achievements? Getting such recognition was a tiny bonus compared to the actual benefits of doing well in school. I understand you were using hyperbole when you said '99%', but to me it was probably like 0.5%. It's not like A Honor Roll turns you into the cool kid in junior high and high school.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 22, 2014 -> 07:49 PM) What, why? Should we get rid of college degrees too? Just let people go to class for 4 years and learn stuff? College degrees are proof that you learned things. An awards ceremony is just an ego-stroke. That shouldn't be "99%" of the reason kids work hard in school.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 22, 2014 -> 07:39 PM) When their reason for dong this is "exclusion" of others, what other possible explanation is there? It can be too "exclusive" by separating those kids' particular achievements from other kids' achievements. It doesn't mean complaints were about sad pandas. QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 22, 2014 -> 07:39 PM) Edit: and I never said they weren't going to be recognized. What I said was they weren't going to be recognized separately, as they were before. Again, i'm not sure how you don't see the difference there. Individually and separately are different things. The new ceremony would still have recognized them individually. Is Sally Jones getting less recognition when her name is announced as being on the Honor Roll in front of the entire school than when her name is announced during a ceremony that only 50 kids are invited to? I'd argue she's getting more recognition.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 22, 2014 -> 07:29 PM) No, my interpretation was they were getting rid of a separate event traditionally dedicated to honors students, designed to recognize those students individually for their achievements. They did this because they felt a separate event was too "exclusive" to the morons in the school (aw, we made them feel sad, that's a no no) There you go again adding in your own interpretation. Nothing in there says the problem with the event being exclusion was making people feel badly. It's not possible they want awards ceremonies to include the entire school or for teams to be recognized at the same event as individuals? QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 22, 2014 -> 07:29 PM) , so they decided to merge that awards night with other "team-based" achievement awards. The particulars about the awards night doesn't really matter They seemed to matter when you were pretending that individuals weren't going to be recognized. QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 22, 2014 -> 07:29 PM) - they've still taken away that separate honors night from kids that deserved the honors. One kid was quoted as saying she thought that was BS because she worked hard specifically to be honored separately. Do you mean the daughter of the "looking for something librul to be outraged at" conservative dad? QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 22, 2014 -> 07:29 PM) It's always good when morons in charge of our kids are rightly called out for their moronic decisions. It just so happens in this case, the thought process was very much the liberal p**** fantasy that everyone not only needs to be treated equally, but that the results of everything in life should be equal too. Ah, now you have telepathy too.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 22, 2014 -> 07:34 PM) It's the exact same as the track scenario. You're just making things up. You don't even know how the new ceremony was going to work because they didn't specify. My interpretation was that they were going to gather everyone and then celebrate both individual and team-based awards. Your interpretation is that they're not going to celebrate any individuals and just act like everyone is super A+ clap your hands happy friends time. QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 22, 2014 -> 07:34 PM) Technically they're still getting the award, but the recognition of the achievement, which is 99% of the reason you work hard to obtain it, was being taken away from them. You think Olympic athletes would want the medal ceremonies to take place all at once, at the closing ceremonies, when everyone else gets a medal? No, you want recognition for working your ass off. You want the spotlight for that 15 seconds. If the recognition was equivalent, then why wouldn't athletes want to get it at the closing ceremonies in front of everyone rather than in front of the 80 people sitting in the stands for Skeleton? QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 22, 2014 -> 07:34 PM) BTW, I just read that the school has changed it's mind thanks to the public backlash. Good decision. Yup, always good when oversensitive conservatives create a backlash over a letter that was just vague enough for them to insert their "liberals are p*****s" fantasies into.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 22, 2014 -> 05:33 PM) But they're losing the distinction. How do you not get that? Instead of being praised and applauded for being good students, they get roped in with the other morons so the morons don't feel bad. How are they losing distinction? They still get their names announced and get the award, correct? My high school did the NHS + Salutatorian + Valedictorian stuff during graduation, in front of everyone. They didn't have a separate Honors Night. QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 22, 2014 -> 05:33 PM) It's like having a track meet and instead of giving the winners of the events 5 seconds of recognition during a medals ceremony, they just wait and hand out medals to everyone, including participation medals, at the same time. It's moronic. Doesn't seem anything like that to me.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ May 21, 2014 -> 01:12 AM) yeah, but they doing in it smaller more private groups, so as not to hurt the feelings of the D students. Sounds to me like the opposite. Those individual awards were being given out during a private awards night. Now they're being given out during a more general awards ceremony that includes school and team awards. They'll be presented in front of MORE people.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ May 20, 2014 -> 09:41 PM) yeah, can't reward exceptionalism or anything. That would hurt someone's FEELINGS. Can't do that, because they are all just such special kids. Just another step down the participation trophy road... They are rewarding exceptionalism. It's not like they got rid of the awards.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ May 12, 2014 -> 07:30 PM) Does he put up somebody to fight and does that person then fight Jamie? Cersei is the "prosecutor" and gets to choose a champion for her side. Then Tyrion needs to find someone who is willing to champion him. Jaime could potentially wind up on either side.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 1, 2014 -> 02:52 PM) In other words: "lower my taxes, i'm tired of giving the government more money" is not going to work on anyone, but "lower taxes on sale of X good which will allow me to create 1,000 jobs" will. Correction: In other words: "lower my taxes, i'm tired of giving the government more money" is not going to work on anyone, but "lower my taxes, i'll fund your campaign" will.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 30, 2014 -> 03:14 PM) Apparently part of the problem in this one was in the first step, the "5 ambien to knock them out" step. Well if the actually killing step were something quick, and not some "chemical that slowly turns your bodily functions off", then there wouldn't be an issue of step 1 needing to last a long time.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 30, 2014 -> 02:43 PM) So...Oklahoma killed a man last night in a way that makes Thomas Edison's elephant electrocution look humane. Why is it so difficult to knock someone off in a reasonably quick and painless way? These supposedly humane methods like gas chambers and lethal injection seem needlessly complicated and prone to being botched. How about like 5 ambien to knock them out and then a bullet to the brain/decapitation while they're asleep?

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Apr 29, 2014 -> 03:15 PM) Im glad I am waiting out reading the books. I want to read to fill in the blanks, but at the same time I dont want the disappointment you guys are feeling by not seeing certain things play out the way you expected I'm a book reader, and I'm not disappointed at all. I think books 4 and 5 had a terrible pace to them and the show looks to improve upon that. The show has positive changes in content (like Arya and Tywin's conversations) and is starting to present content NOT in the books, like the stuff with the Others at the end of the last episode. Reading the books enhances the experience, IMO, because you get so much more background information and historical details.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 21, 2014 -> 05:08 PM) I always got the sense that this was all based on what southerners thought, and that when Jon was captured we got the "other side" to the story, i.e., they weren't/aren't as bad as people think they are. No doubt there's plenty of stereotyping, but it's not just a few bad apples.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 21, 2014 -> 04:46 PM) I never got the sense they were as blood thirsty as they're made out to be in the show. Yes, they're a little rough, and they rape/pillage in villages south of the wall, but I dunno, that always seemed to me to be a small portion of the group, not the general population that Mance is leading. They're all pretty lawless and fight a lot. That's why it's considered such a miracle that Mance was able to unite any of them. The Thenns are one of the MORE civilized groups up there.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Apr 21, 2014 -> 02:29 PM) Biggest issue I had was with Jamie and Cersei's "scene". Agreed. Very bad change.

Oberyn seems spot-on to what I had envisioned.