atinymonkey

The Fafalonian Empire, fun for all and also home to a great list of showtunes.

Yup. Those would be funnier. Damn google, failed me again.

ktenology - the science of killing or funny ones like OPPORTUNITY, n. A favorable occasion for grasping a disappointment.

Galactophagist - one who drinks milk. Gallophobia - Fear of the French

Who, where? What?

Feh, it's creating the interface that's tricky. The rest is childsplay.

Three dimensional binary code, trinary. It’s a hell of an idea, and it’s all mine. I might use a roving quark as the third, creating a time travelling code that knows what you going to programme before you do and writes it’s self. I have to create the motherboard in two states of existence, one in a parallel universe, to avoid the predetermination paradox. Obviously.

Methink's this should go to the Debatemobile.

I think it's been mentioned ad nausium, but it's one of the natural responses to overcrowding (in quite a few species to be honest). We don't have the resources to support the population increase. We. Just. Can't. Keep. Expanding. It's not a 'disease' if it enables to propagation of the SPECIES. That's a cure, and a cure is a good thing.

Because it has been acceptable for centuries, you just happen to be looking for evidence that might support your skewed viewpoints. As it's been pointed out over and over and over, almost every society found/finds it acceptable. The only people who really frowned on it were Victorians and Christian zealots, the Victorians are gone and Christianity changed it's mind. Take the Greeks, Alexander the Great, French society, all of Europe, the Roman empire, the Templer Knights and on and on through time. All exponents of the boy on boy or girl on girl. Personnel freedom is just that, freedom to do what you wish. You can't simply try and label people because they upset you, that really is your own problem. Just because you don't get invited to party's YT, dosen't mean they don't happen.

Pfff. I'm making less and less sense in posts because I'm skipping the proof reading. Sorry.

That was what I was alluding to. Hence the inclusion in the list.

Hurrah. We agree, you trust yourself with a gun because you don't trust anyone else. And they don't trust you either. Not a healthy reason to arm yourselves. That's paranoia. Hurrah hurrah, let the Police do their job. Then, nobody need shoot the neighbour. Yes, sorry, I chucked in the smile to diffuse it. It's a cultural reference to TV shows, if a good guy has a gun and is going to use it to shoot the bad guy someone will always say 'Put the gun down son, it's not worth it'.

Mmmm, the Pope, Mother Theresa, the spiffy Lord Jesus Christ, Socrates, Aristotle et al. All diseased malfunctioning individuals. Good logic. Send the whores to the Vatican, cure them all. Life affirming decisions mean anything anymore?

And if you though it was alright to shoot someone without fair trial, for simply being a perceived threat, you would be placed into the same asylum. Perception is subjective, and it's all too easy for an innocent to be harmed. The point being I don't know your mental balance, so I'm not going to feel comfortable knowing your armed with a lethal weapon. Ah, welcome to the rest of the world. It's nice out here, we let the police actually police the state and not Billy Bob and his 12 bore. It's called a system of justice, the one the US copied and really should bring into line with the modern world. Billy the Kid is dead and you killed the natives. Put the gun down son, it's not worth it

Cause did not precipitate effect. The idea of having separate states was the real issue, slavery was still supported in the North by some. Besides which, all this has nothing to do with the war of independence. Even less to do with the thread!

Well, speaking as one of the people you might decide to shoot in the face, I'd rather you didn't have a gun. You might mistake me for a badger, or something, and let fly. I'm sure having a gun makes you feel all in control and a big man, but it makes me nervous. It's not about you, it's about everyone. Do you trust everyone to carry a gun? Even the mentally unstable 'militia' types? Just for the record, you can prevent crime without inserting bullets into innocent people. Honest.

^^

Yes, otherwise the population increasing exponentially to the point of consuming all available resources can't be an option. Completely on track with that idea, what we need is to get everyone to breed more. Possible some sort of enforced population explosion, we could top it off by burning all the food supplies. Super fun. Stop the malfunction before it saves the human race from self destruction.

Oh, just go here and read about the myths:- http://library.thinkquest.org/J0112391/civil_war.htm

Dean, his name is easy to remember and has a snappy ring to it. If it's a 'he' that is, it could be an election of gofers to congress for all I know.

I'll go get the Mr Sheen then.

And tidy your desk up, you messy puppy.

Yes, that's true. But if you want to have the ability to fire ammunition into another persons face until it's a bloody pulp, you'll need to be slightly more sure of your convictions than you currently are. Why is it only Americans have this debate? Evey other sane country just banned the things. Unless your all planing to start dueling? Are you? Duels? 20 paces at dawn? Say that you are!!!!1

It was a cheap source of labour, so it made economic sense to retain it. You need all the labour you can get to build a country as large as America. The UK banned it, but of course the main motivation to enforce that onto America was to prevent the colonists from having too much opportunity for expansion and keep the need to rely on British support. That and it being an ungentlemanlike practice! The real Demosthenes had free time to pursue his oratory because Greek society had slaves to do all the menial work. The same was becoming true in America, development of a sociological elite with ideas of becoming a free state. Aty leat that how I was taught. We would need third party arbitration to get a clear picture!