Profile for Najosz Thjsza Kjras

Error message

Deprecated function: implode(): Passing glue string after array is deprecated. Swap the parameters in drupal_get_feeds() (line 394 of /var/www/pied-piper.ermarian.net/includes/common.inc).

Field	Value
Displayed name	Najosz Thjsza Kjras
Member number	6388
Title	Lifecrafter
Postcount	794
Homepage
Registered	Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00

Recent posts

Pages

Author	Recent posts
medieval times or modern times? in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Friday, February 24 2006 14:31 Profile #27 quote: Originally written by Student of Trinity: I also got a look at some medieval Japanese swords in the National Museum in Tokyo. By that time I had seen a lot of medieval European swords, and they looked dull-edged, dull-surfaced, and kind of uneven. The Japanese blades from the same era looked as though they could have come out of a factory today: sharp corners, sharp points, sharp edges, everything perfectly straight or smoothly curved, and the whole surface mirror-polished. To be fair, this is because iron was astoundingly scarce in Japan, so swordsmithing gravitated towards quality rather than quantity. The Japanese would be absolutely astounded to find iron and steel armor and weaponry on the hands of the lowliest soldier; it was the exclusive province of people who could afford them over there. Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Name in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Friday, February 24 2006 01:49 Profile #47 Euh. Si je vourrais vous faire confondés, je pourrais parler français an coda-suwixiu tu aixo-se por tie ganiha ou yiu konifunda, mais si je continue le jeu finira, alors. Not really. [ Friday, February 24, 2006 01:50: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
medieval times or modern times? in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Friday, February 24 2006 00:48 Profile #21 quote: Originally written by Kelandon: quote: Originally written by Belisarius: it wasn't until the Enlightenment that an independent cultural tradition began to develop. Which Enlightenment-era literary works do you find appealing? I find the French farce intriguing, along with a great body of the work in independent philosophy that emerged during that period (before the Enlightenment, respectable philosophy was basically ipsedixitism - whether the ipse doing the dixiting was Aristotle, the Bible, or a mix of the two). I enjoy the authorial interpretations of holy writ to have arisen from the period; I find their art pleasing, their music decreasingly unfortunate (the late Renaissance saw the rise of baroque, which I cannot abide by in any way - but it was at least something of an improvement; the classical period came within the Enlightenment and a lot of it is quite lovely). A great deal of the foundations of my views on political science and morality, and chances are yours as well, come out of the Enlightenment. The Romantic period was interesting as well, although there was an unfortunate trend to dump one raft of dull tribal myths for another (Zeus et al for Odin et al). If you're looking for specific literature? I haven't enjoyed a book written before 1860 - too much work involved to enjoy it in any way - but I have an intellectual appreciation for very little before the Enlightenment began. Shakespeare is a fairly rare exception; the first playwrights (besides Shakespeare, mind) whose works can evoke in me the emotion they attempt to without deep reflection - in other words, which don't require one to be steeped in a culture that no longer exists to make sense, and speak directly to the human condition - were those of 17th-century France. I'm afraid I don't have any names to plug, but that's because I barely qualify as literate. All I know is the broad strokes of what I like and what I don't, and that's what they are. Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
medieval times or modern times? in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Thursday, February 23 2006 21:58 Profile #17 quote: Originally written by Kelandon: The High Middle Ages and Late Middle Ages were probably more worthwhile, but right now, the Early Middle Ages in England are making me wretch. Oh, and I bet that Eastern Europe had some fun things going on with the Slavs (speaking Common Slavic) dealing with the Byzantines. I'd say European culture in general until about the late Enlightenment, late enough that Romantic trends are active, is absolutely unbearable. The 'classics' strike me as a set of tribal myths which were given an astounding level of pretention because a civilization that bought into them just happened to conquer a twentieth of the earth; that level of pretention bleeds over into the culture revisiting them almost exclusively for over a millenium, which I find unbearable. The Renaissance was a revival of something I found hideous; it wasn't until the Enlightenment that an independent cultural tradition began to develop. (The bits of stuff that did develop independently in the parts of Europe the Romans didn't lay their filthy fingers on are fairly dull, but they're on the same level as the Greek stuff, and most of it is at least vaguely novel.) And that was good, mostly because they had a slightly better understanding of the cosmos and human nature than 'God, or some number thereof, did it' to work with. That's my two cents, incoherent probably, but what can you do. As for which is more interesting: other than as an overly smug rebuke to an overly smug assertion in defense of an overly smug culture, I've got no particular affection for the Middle Ages. A damned filthy and dangerous time. Like now, only with the entire world only most of it. [ Thursday, February 23, 2006 22:00: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
The Conservative Shift in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Thursday, February 23 2006 00:56 Profile #36 quote: Originally written by Dikiyoba: Well, there were political machines and robber barons in the 1800's. Just as corrupt and bad for the general people, if not worse. Bah! You speak to an Irishman. Without those horrible, corrupt political machines, I'd still probably be speaking with an accent and swearing funny. Same goes for anyone whose family came here before 1940 or so, really. Political machinery and other kinds of corruption have been vital to integration of immigrants into America. Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
From the desk of Mitt Romney: in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Thursday, February 23 2006 00:52 Profile #29 quote: Originally written by Jumpin' Salmon: He would have looked better in an Aquaman costume. But Aquaman is a gimp -- oh. I suppose you're right. quote: As a fiscally conservative, socially liberal independent, I have found the slate of Democratic candidates to be an embarassment for the past 24 years. Prior to that I was not interested in politics. Perhaps lack of alternatives is what is pushing the electorate in the direction it is supposedly moving? I liked Clinton as a young man; before him I had not yet learned to tie my shoes. As what amounts to a left radical and an independent, I don't like the candidates either, but for what I expect to be the opposite reason - everyone's cutting taxes on someone and kowtowing to the right somehow. When I vote in November, it's gonna be for the Democrats - because I don't like the Nevada Republicans and unfortunately nobody else has a viable chance of winning. And unless something changes, In the primary, again unless something changes, I'd be campaigning for Kucinich and voting for Clinton, and the same pretty much goes for the general election. It's unpleasant, two-party politics, but what can you do. Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Describe in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Thursday, February 23 2006 00:34 Profile #12 Last thing you ate: Steak, medium well. Rice, lightly dressed with soy sauce. Microwaved prepackaged corn. Two bottles of unsweetened black tea and one bottle of sugar-free green tea, chilled. What you're wearing right now: Blue scrubs, extra large shirt, triple-extra-large pants. Baggy on both counts. Midnight blue boxer shorts. Ornate gold cross on gold chain. Haggard look. Describe the room you are in: Own room. Desk, too damaged to move, houses computer, crowded with bottles and other miscellaneous artifacts of daily living. Hanging ties and shirts on a rack to one side, broke-down bed on the other, abutting it a chest of drawers, opposite it a small bookshelf in poor repair, all enclosed by two National Geographic maps, a blue mortarboard cap, and a humorous poster on a white wall framing a large window over which the blinds are always drawn. Floor a marble tile, ruddy white. Single lightbulb on a three-lightbulbed lamp provides illumination. Books, papers, shoes, clothing, asthma medicine, childhood stuffed animals, gadgets scattered about. Entry controlled by a door, painted white. No lock. [ Thursday, February 23, 2006 00:36: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Eep! Christians! (Split from Christian Radio) in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Wednesday, February 22 2006 18:16 Profile #142 There is a procedure they perform in surgery which has an 80% mortality rate. That means that 8 out of every 10 people they perform it on will be dead within a few days. This is because it requires the surgeons to relocate half of the gastrointestinal tract - to outside the body, because there's not enough space within the abdominal cavity to go around and they have to reach the pancreas, which is readily the nastiest organ in the human body. It's soft and fragile, like a waterlogged, large-holed sponge. Mess with it wrong, and it will fall apart on you - spreading bile throughout the body and causing sepsis and almost certain death. They then have to remove the tip of the pancreas, stuff the intestines back in (very carefully, mind), and sew one of the larger incisions seen in regular procedures up as quickly as possible. Why do they do that? Because it is the only way to destroy a certain kind of pancreatic cancer which, upon discovery, is guaranteed to be fatal within months. And most people, faced with a 20% shot at living out the remainder of their natural lives in excellent health against an 80% chance of swift death or a 100% shot at living a couple dozen torturous weeks, will go with the former. ... Nowadays doctors view open-incision surgery with a sort of disaste. If it's possible to perform it with laproscopic equipment, they tend to; this involves sticking a few holes in the patient so as to accomodate a camera and miniscule operating equipment, filling the appropriate cavity with gas, and operating. They actually have a set now for heart surgery that beats in unison with the heart - so from the perspective of the physician, making and sewing incisions is as smooth on one of the more volatile of the body's organs as smooth as doing the same to an arm or leg. Laproscopy reduces time of operation dramatically, makes operating a lot cleaner and safer, and in many cases doesn't involve an incision at all. Which naturally means that some day there will someday, when the practice is more ubiquitous, be a tremendous community of frauds hawking books saying that it induces cancer and autism and the grippe and you can only trust a surgeon if he cuts you open and exposes massive areas of your body to infection, and millions of dollars made by 'traditional' surgeons at the cost of public sanitation and the health of their clients. ... I find arguing with someone who refuses to regard evidence unless it supports his side of the argument, as a result of either deliberate or ignorance-driven error, impossible. I share the above, and any further information or rebuttals on this topic, in the interests of entertaining and edifying this community with the facts of modern medicine at its respective best and worst. [ Wednesday, February 22, 2006 18:19: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
The Conservative Shift in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Wednesday, February 22 2006 17:43 Profile #18 quote: Originally written by Ash Lael: quote: Originally written by Belisarius: And some day you will realize just how little anyone cares about your whining about women being able to abort what they feel like and men being able to marry each other if they feel like it and school prayer being rightfully in the same boat as school paddling. If you want to make the world a better place, apply your religion to your everyday life, and in so doing convince the world of its righteousness. Stop trying to force it on everyone else when salesmanship fails you. Where the heck did this come from? I was looking at the "shift" (real or imagined, suit yourself) from an objective point of view, and in response I get a personal attack. That, my friend, is a staggering act of dickheadery. To be fair, I am a staggering dickhead. I was fairly tired and a little on the sick side when I wrote my original post; if you wish, disregard the end of the post, aimed at the right wing in general (also, I tend to feel that discussion of a conservative shift tends towards pointless gloating by conservatives - I've run into the same topic before and it comes out the same way, generally) and consider the rest of it as a whole. I have a very low opinon of the American conservative leadership right now; they hold basically the entire country in contempt (including their followers, who they think so little of that they have a thriving industry in opinion books devoted to lying to them) and consider everyone around them as basically pawns to further their own ends, which are usually schemes to gain as much filthy lucre as possible as quickly as possible. And that's more or less that. [ Wednesday, February 22, 2006 18:01: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
From the desk of Mitt Romney: in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Wednesday, February 22 2006 17:34 Profile #26 quote: Originally written by Kelandon: The mention of the Lord's Prayer made me do what I compulsively do now: look it up! I read it in English first, then in Latin, and then in Greek. It comes, after all, from Matthew (and also appears, in a slightly less developed form, in Luke). The English actually is a very good translation of the Latin, and the Latin is a pretty good translation of the Greek. There's some odd textual history with the last line, but other than that, I'm impressed with how well this one actually holds up. Other than that, I'm not touching this topic with a ten-foot pole at the moment. :P You know, Kelandon, you're an intelligent person and I suppose my expectations of you might be a tad on the high side but don't you get a little disappointed when Johnnyfeds contributes more meaningful information to a topic than you? quote: Originally written by Jumpin' Salmon: ... like Kerry ... O RLY [ Wednesday, February 22, 2006 17:37: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
diablo 2 in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Tuesday, February 21 2006 22:04 Profile #10 quote: Originally written by arghhhhhhhhh: quote: USE TOWN PORTAL THAT IS WHAT MY RIGHT BUTTON DOES i'm playing barbarian and i am level 24 also i was hoping you could tell me abou a good editor! Hmm, it's honestly been forever since I've used any. I'd have to Google it, same as you, I'm afraid. Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
The Conservative Shift in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Tuesday, February 21 2006 22:02 Profile #4 I have been denying and will continue to deny that there has been a rightward shift in America, the English world, or the West. The cause of the appearance of one lies within two factors: a. A lack of unity within the populace after the defeat of the last common enemy. The Soviet Union posed an immediate and credible threat to the life of every person in the West; the Islamist forces we are fighting now represent at most an abstract enemy in everyday life, superior only in tactics. They do not have the ability to scour us from the face of the earth all at once. As a consequence: the pretense of social unity having been disrupted, the extreme right is capable of acting in a more aggresive fashion without violating the rules of civil conduct in society. The lack of unity has allowed the center of discourse to drift rightwards, even if the participants in the discourse remain the same. And the modern conservative advocates a dizzying, contradictory, and factually bankrupt platform, asserting everything from the necessity of wars of imperial expansion to the immorality of destroying fetal tissue for any reason. A collection of lurid superstitions have risen up to fill the gap where once existed only the phrase 'God-damn communists!' We have the world, and we no longer know what to do with it, and while the left navel-gazes, the right tries to drag them kicking and screaming off a cliff. b. The increasing volume of the right. The simple fact is that the conservatives are louder right now; a random sampling of TV media would suggest, if the spin of news coverage and analysts can be considered representative, that an impossibly large percentage of the American populace holds a viewpoint at its leftmost center-right. The right wing has been spending a lot of real and intellectual capital being loud; note that liberals anywhere near as loud as their opposite numbers on the right enjoy a great deal more popular success - compare your Moores and your Clintons against your Savages and your Ginriches and see who has gotten farther and done more, and is ultimately more popular. The reason for the appearance of rightward shift, at least here, is that it has been hammered into us from 1994 that there has been a 'conservative revolution'. The lurid paranoia of our conservative Congress during the Clinton administration was a continuous embarassment to the American people, but the media coverage centered not on that embarassment but on righteous outrage against Bill Clinton for lying about blowjobs and wanting to raise taxes. The 2004 election, won by the narrowest margin of any sitting President in a war and continuing the trend of re-electing wartime Presidents, was called a victory for 'moral values' voters (to wit, too little of the electorate to secure a single electoral vote alone) and a 'mandate' for the right-wing forces that stole control of the country after the 2000 election to continue their irresponsible nonsense. The conservatives are loud, so they have been successful. Loud is good for you in terms of politics. But loud won't compensate for failure, and there is no other word to describe the policies of the right. They have been jumping with both feet into a war with the only culture more evangelical, tenacious, and bloodthirsty than our own. They have slashed the functions of government to the point that it barely fulfills the social contract any more. And as soon as the electorate realizes they are all bark and no bite, The Conservative Shift will be out on its ass where it belongs. And some day you will realize just how little anyone cares about your whining about women being able to abort what they feel like and men being able to marry each other if they feel like it and school prayer being rightfully in the same boat as school paddling. If you want to make the world a better place, apply your religion to your everyday life, and in so doing convince the world of its righteousness. Stop trying to force it on everyone else when salesmanship fails you. Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
diablo 2 in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Tuesday, February 21 2006 20:26 Profile #1 You should level up until you're powerful enough to take on Duriel. What class are you playing? A few of them have a lot more difficulties with him than others, in my experience. Oh, and one word of advice: USE TOWN PORTAL. The cold is too much of a tactical disadvantage to reasonably overcome, and there is next to no way to defeat Duriel in hand-to-hand combat at the appropriate level without having a few goes at it. And that is far easier if you are not dead in between goes. [ Tuesday, February 21, 2006 20:27: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Census of Spiderweb community in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Tuesday, February 21 2006 19:48 Profile #23 Age: Almost exactly 18.5 Sex: Male Gender: Male ... masculine ... whatever, I'm not a he-man but I'd be a worse woman Sexual orientation: Heterosexual and fairly vanilla Marital status: So very lonely Highest educational degree completed: High school City/metropolitan area where you live: Vegas Racial/ethnic origin: Irish, Lithuanian Jewish, mixed nuts Nationality: American First/primary language: English Religion: Secular, former Catholic, generalized westerner How long you've been a Spiderwebber: I am as old as the hills here Whether or not you're a septuagenarian eskimo: The evidence is against it I humbly submit: Political orientation: Far left, non-partisan An animal you fear: the hated horse Career ambitions: law, politics, journalism, literature SPECIAL PS: quote: Originally written by Nicothodes: Age:14 Gender:female Sexual orientation:not interested in that sort of thing TM! Get 'er before she spoils! [ Tuesday, February 21, 2006 20:02: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Eep! Christians! (Split from Christian Radio) in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Tuesday, February 21 2006 19:17 Profile #129 *Bruce Mitchell* quote: Originally written by Bruce Mitchell: For opposing views on vaccination see:- http://www.readersdigest.ca/mag/2000/05/living_vaccin.html The opposing camp has:- http://www.whale.to/v/phillips.html DISPELLING VACCINATION MYTHS: An Introduction to the Contradictions Between Medical Science and Immunization Policy by Rev. Alan Phillips, Director Citizens for Healthcare Freedom Personally, I'm with the anti-vaccination camp. From the FAQ: The documented long term adverse effects of vaccines include chronic immunological and neurological disorders such as autism And bingo! We have a quack. There is no credible link between autism and any vaccination. Vaccine ingredients include known toxicants and carcinogens such as thimersol (a mercury derivative Ah, here we go! Thimersol as a 'mercury derivative' is much like claiming beef contains cyanide. They're chemically different enough that the claim is meaningless. Anyone worth their salt in chemistry knows this. The question is whether this quack is ignorant or simply fraudulent... In addition, some vaccine mediums used in the production of vaccines contain human diploid cells originating from human aborted fetal tissue, a fact that might affect many people’s vaccination choices—if they only knew this was the case. And bingo again! We have a fraud. No aborted fetuses have ever been used in the production of any vaccine. To state that they have is a bald-faced and shameful lie intended to further a factually bankrupt agenda. Establishing that the FAQ you gave is fraudulent took me thirty seconds of searching, to wit: if I wanted to, I could spend days rebutting all of their nonsense and lies, but I don't, because I have better things to do. There are risks entailed in vaccination, but the risks do not involve autism, mercury, or fetuses. These are shameful flim-flam scare tactics promoted by 'alternative medicine' quacks who make millions off of suckers in search of an alternative to working, clinically tested drugs. They're also the Bible of anti-vaccination liars. I direct anyone in search of a direct rebuttal to this nonsense to The Millenium Project [sic], which offers a lot of specific cases of this kind of thing up for criticism and deserved ridicule. Almost all of their individual contentions rely on lies, half-truths, or misuse of statistics. Meanwhile, the medical establishment has more than a century of success, alongside with the eradication or near-eradication of many diseases (consider that your children are no longer at risk for smallpox or, realistically, polio) and the reduction of former mass-killers into feckless 'childhood diseases', under its belt. Please take this into account and reconsider your position on vaccination. quote: Neither of my children, who live in Africa, with poor sanitary conditions down the road, and polluted sea nearby, have been to the doctor for sickness. They are treated in line I guess with Synergy's world view. Homeopathic preparations of diseases have been used when any childhood diseases occurred. You know, when my children get sick, I plan to have them treated like the millions of other people whose lives have been improved by modern medicine rather than administer them placebos in the hope that the natural rate of attrition doesn't kick in. But hey, different strokes. quote: I'd like to make a big mention for the divine superjuice - breastmilk. Both were breastfed till at least three years old. I believe this makes for excellent immune systems, and natural immunization. Right, because feeding kids breast-milk is something completely novel. ... *Synergy* I like how Synergy completely ignores me and continues mumbling Christocentric new-age jargon unabated. ... *Myntmo* quote: Religious intolerance is rejecting what is false and proclaiming what is truth, through non-violence and benevolence, based on truth of empirical fact that is self revealing and evidential to all who listen.(deffinitions not from me but The Thorn) (Because I don't have all the time on earth to pick through your entire post, and I find this the most worth responding to) I think that proclaiming your religion the truth of empirical fact is the stupidest thing you could possibly do. There is nothing empirical about received understanding; emirically your faith is worthless. I'm not challenging its worthiness on its own terms, because let's be frank, its own terms are your received understanding. If you did not have, or consider yourself to have, a personal relationship with a higher power, there would be no convincing body of evidence for the assertion that a God or anything like a God exists. So the difference between the two is not that one is accepting empirical fact and refusing to compromise to it. The difference is that one accepts subjective truth as empirical fact and refuses to accept any competing subjective truth the same way, whereas one rejects, or at least treats as equal, all subjective truths. So I no sooner have to accept the Trobrianders' ridiculous aversion to sex within marriage than I have to accept your ridiculous aversion to sex outside of it. Isn't that lovely? Nobody's God has to be any bigger than anyone else's for society to function. And for the record, your God is so uncomfortably close to Stalin or any other murderous, realpolitik-obsessed dictator that I could never worship it even if my received understanding or empirical fact indicated it existed. It would not be worthy of my worship, and I would sooner spend eternity in Hell than abject myself to its tyranny in this world or the next. [ Tuesday, February 21, 2006 19:36: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Eep! Christians! (Split from Christian Radio) in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Tuesday, February 21 2006 01:49 Profile #111 Gentlemen, please. Let's not turn this into anything more personal than it needs to be. EDIT: quote: I spoke of the ideal attainable "perfect" health which I see as possible in the ultimate, not immediate sense.The reason it is relevant to this thread is because ultimately I believe that health comes through the kind of symbiotic relationship and well-being that exists only in spiritual health and connection. Because I operate on the belief in God and that nothing began as a corrupt or diseased thing, something changed. We changed. I don't think God got mad and put viruses into the world to which we were susceptible. I see that being susceptible to disease and death comes as a result of man having changed from a perfect, balanced, wholesome state. Right now, none of us can hope to enjoy a return to such a state. Big shifts take a long time to progress. We can each, if we hold a more personally powerful and accountable perspective like this, can do our bit to better our own quality of life and the genes and environment we pass on. So I wouldn't advise anyone to not use a condom or not wash their hands and so forth. And I didn't. But if you live an especially wholesome life, you will have a lot more leeway with what your immune system/body can withstand, endure, and resist. Apparently, before we did something to spoil ourselves, God really had it out for bacteria - legions of species rely on humans as hosts, and being unable to do anything about that must have really been Hell for them. And I have to be honest with you, 'wholesome' is a fairly ambiguous term. If you had been born in the Trobriand Islands, that would mean not having contact with females any more than is absolutely necessary to reproduce - their menstrual blood being a murderous sap on necessary masculine energy - and supplying teenage boys with semen that they would grow into strong and potent men. And what makes that worldview wrong and yours right is what, exactly? Certainly I doubt you'd find someone who has boys engage in oral sex with him and finds it incumbent to flee into the woods and lacerate his nostrils with reeds after any given attempt to impregnate his wife wholesome. But certainly he wouldn't find someone who has regular genital-genital contact with his wife without particular ceremony or fear, who shares his side of the house with her, and who denies his essence to growing men in dire need of it wholesome, either. (And before you ask, I'm not making any of this up.) Which of those unwholesomes is it that caused us to grow succeptible to disease? My nagging secular instinct is that disease succeptibility is a vital part of life for mammals - without certain bacterial colonizations which are too benign to count as diseases (and yet operate in much the same way) we would be unable to digest many foods or regulate certain processes and would probably die horribly - rather than a consequence of a fairly imprecise and contradictory idea of indecency. And ultimately, if you still earnestly believe that disease succeptibility is a factor of wholesome living, I point you to the Christian Scientists, who have a fairly high mortality rate, especially by curable diseases, compared to the general population. Pefectly wholesome people... who apparently catch infections as well as anyone else, and die of it a lot easier to boot. [ Tuesday, February 21, 2006 02:06: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Teddy Ballgame in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Saturday, February 18 2006 16:53 Profile #12 quote: Originally written by Jumpin' Salmon: All the info was gathered from wikipedia, my mostest favoritest place to get useless information. Aside from World War 2, when he was a marine fighter pilot, he played 21 seasons in the majors, all with the Red Sox, and his lifetime average was .344 (2,292 games and 7,706 at bats). His career was cut short by the Korean War, when he re-entered the service to shoot more stuff. And, if you harvest Wikipedia for information on the right day, he liked anal sex with Hitler. [ Saturday, February 18, 2006 16:53: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
In the topic of strange spirits... in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Friday, February 17 2006 19:57 Profile #35 quote: Originally written by Synergy: Ad-vice. :P ... Is this to become another name your "..." thread? ... I return the query, since you asked, but I will volunteer: I eat rather ridiculously healthily most of the time, but I have a weakness for good ice cream, especially when stressed or depressed. I like port wine, martinis, and anything that tastes sweet/half good promising a significant kick, though I quite infrequently drink. I have a fierce libido, but I don't file that under vice in and of itself. My biggest all around rush in life is really meaningful and intimate conversation, quite plainly. Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
SupaNik, will you be my valentine? in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Wednesday, February 15 2006 19:10 Profile #117 I had sushi with a young lady and wound up with the worst headache in my life, and I'm now zonked out on painkillers. Such is life. Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Hanged? in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Wednesday, February 15 2006 18:49 Profile #53 A few things: quote: Originally written by Dintiradan: Anyway, I think we all need to be reminded of the idea of Realpolitik. The United States may have invaded Iraq because of the cited ultimatum. They also did so to gain a second foothold in the Middle East. Not that I disagree the need for the war, just the reasons that were cited (having a strong hand in the turbulent Middle East and stopping the Kurdish genocide are good reasons; WMDs are not only a bad reason, but also hypocritical). Realpolitik is a terrible and inhumane political concept which serves only those interested in power for its own sake. It has no place in a democratic society, which must act on its ideals. quote: Originally written by ef: If an unmarried woman can fight off her attacker, she will only come free, if she can prove that he wanted to rape her. Otherwise, death by stoning. If she comes free, honour killings are reported, because she has shamed her family. A married woman will be considered an adulteress in any case, death by stoning. Should a woman accidentily kill her attacker, she is charged with murder in any case, death by hanging. Well, it's not your gender that's being made to pay, young Jumpin'. That may explain your generosity. Sorry, but I feel hurt. In a way you wouldn't if a man were the victim? Now that's chauvinism; at least he seems to be concerned with the woman as a human being, not because he has some kind of self-centered connection with her. quote: Originally written by ef: I don't think companies could make a difference, even if they cared. Islamic law is based on the Quran. It is therefore somewhat open to interpretation, but not much. An eye for an eye is the basic rule and that is unchangeable. Balderdash. Mohammed preaches mercy and tolerance as well, it's just that, like the parts of the Old Testament and New Testament portraying God as merciful were ignored for a millenium, political forces find those parts of the Qu'ran untenable. quote: There is a fundamental difference between the Quran and the Old and New Testament of the Bible. Judaism and Christianity both differentiate between the message and the messenger, who is not seen as perfect and sacrosanct. Prophets and apostles tell us of God's/Jesus' teachings, and how they do that is seen as related to their own cultural background and time. So there's space to adapt their teachings to changing times. More balderdash, unwashed islamophobia typical of the grotesque, paranoid bigotry now ubiquitous in Europe. Prophets are viewed with extreme relevance in Christianity and Judaism, to the point of being nearly gods themselves. Criticism of them is taken very poorly on a historical level; the only reason it happened at all is that there happened to be an atheism fad in the 17th and 18th centuries. quote: This is different in Islam. The Quran is understood as the direct teaching of God via the archangel Gabriel, who makes Muhammad aware of God's wishes for men and of God's law. That makes it an absolute message, infinite, unchangeable. There's not much space for interpretation. Also, as the Quran is younger than the Bible, it is seen as the final version of God's will. Islam has no trouble accepting the Bible, as we would accept the first edition of a book and then the second edited one. After that comes the third and final publication, and that covers all aspects of life, mundane and spiritual, private and public. Changes to Islam, if at all possible, can only come from within, through its own scholars and clergy, through its own people. Fundamentalist Christians - and orthodox Jews - believe the Bible is a perscription for mortal law passed down directly through Moses and the Prophets in the case of the Old Testament, and passed down directly through the Apostles in the case of the New Testament, and is too infinite and unchangeable. You are comparing a liberal and recent strain of Christianity to a reactionary and ancient strain of Islam, and that is both astoundingly unfair and completely bloody typical of a Europe that is no longer interested in any voices but its own. quote: Originally written by Student of Trinity: Problem is that economic leverage is limited. Sanctions took decades to effect change in South Africa, and: I bet sanctions were only part of the cause of change; Iran sells mostly oil, which is a tough commodity to boycott; otherwise Iran's trade is mostly buying, and money is even tougher to boycott; and apartheid wasn't (quite?) a religion. Historically, I think the only sanctions that have had serious teeth have either quickly led to war, or had harsh effects on citizens that were comparable to those of war. It used to be that the United States could drop a big hammer by refusing to export oil to rogue nations. Those were the days, perhaps; then again, that was what provoked Pearl Harbor. Incompletely correct. Unfortunately, what one must remember about sanctions is that they only work under certain circumstances. They worked against apartheid because blacks were already separate from the South African consumer economy; in Iraq, they only succeeded in killing Iraqi children. (And the disgusting part is that the strongest voices against sanctions now were the ones whose preferred solution was immediate invasion.) In all cases except those where one group is radically and unconditionally excluded from society - a status Iranian women do not exist in to the extent South African blacks did - the overall effect of sanctions tends to be punishing an oppressor by wounding his victims, and thereby somewhat nonsensical. Agreed, at least, re. Pearl Harbor. quote: Originally written by Dintiradan: By ef: quote: There is a fundamental difference between the Quran and the Old and New Testament of the Bible. Judaism and Christianity both differentiate between the message and the messenger, who is not seen as perfect and sacrosanct. Prophets and apostles tell us of God's/Jesus' teachings, and how they do that is seen as related to their own cultural background and time. So there's space to adapt their teachings to changing times. Not all Christians think that the Bible should be evaluated based on time. The authors of the Bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit, and thus the words are timeless. Granted, Christians no longer have to follow the Levitical law, but that is because Christ fulfilled it (for more on this topic, read the Gospel according to Matthew and the letter to the Hebrews). The belief that Christ fulfilled the Mosaic covenant is more than a little lame, and fairly shaky when you consider most of those who believe this also, conveniently enough, consider certain parts of Leviticus (no homosexuality, for instance, and no non-vaginal sex) sinful anyway. quote: (Sorry for the rant. After months in a sterile university environment, I need some theological release) And on the topic of sanctions: these rarely work on an authoritarian country. The leaders simply take more resources from the populace, and incite anger against the countries responsible for the sanction. Has it occurred to you that when a foreign country is responsible for you being unable to eat, you probably don't need your leader's prodding to get angry at that country? quote: Originally written by Desert Pl@h: quote: Originally written by Dintiradan: Perhaps it's just me, but I don't associate economic policy with foreign affairs. ? Anyway, it's too bad the Kurdish genocide was over slowed or done for the most part by the time Bushie got around to his whole presidency thing. You know, to be fair, there's no clear evidence Bush gave a crap one way or another about the Kurds, any more than he did about the Darfur blacks. He only started saber-rattling towards Iraq once 9/11 gave him a pretense to act bellicose, and his saber-rattling mostly related to Iraq's preposterously fabricated WMD capacities. The Kurdish question was a secondary or tertiary matters as causa belli go. quote: Originally written by Prometheus: [quote=Dintiradan] The authors of the Bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit, and thus the words are timeless. I am inspired by the Holy Spirit to pee all over you. Now you come up with a decent counter-argument before I give you a golden shower. No, really.[/QB][/quote]Well, he meant that the words are inspired by the Holy Spirit, but this is a fair argument against the divine intuition that is all too popular with the idiot American evangelical nowadays. quote: Originally written by Ephesos: quote: Originally written by Thuryl: What, you'd rather the Kurdish genocide had continued for longer so that the US could have somehow made it worse? Ah, that looks so much better. Typical underinformed little-Englander knee-jerk anti-Americanism. The Kurds are the only ethnic group that profited from the US invasion; everyone else has been suffering in some degree or another. If we had stopped at the borders of Kurdistan, we truly would have been welcomed as liberators. [ Wednesday, February 15, 2006 18:51: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Hanged? in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Monday, February 13 2006 15:22 Profile #16 quote: Originally written by Arancaytar the Grey: quote: I assume that Islam stresses great respect for women. Possibly in a similar way that Christianity does. And in a half millenium cooler heads will probably talk them down to denying abortion, limiting access to contraceptives, and sabotaging equal-rights amendments. quote: Originally written by DanielJacksonMPC: quote: Originally written by Jumpin' Salmon: If we feel the right to apply our (Western) morals and laws to their society, how are they no less proper to demand the same of our society? They're not, and that's the point. I'm all for respecting other cultures. But there's a point where it's just wrong no matter what. And this kind of thing is wrong. I'm proud of being a part of Western civilization, and I'm not gonna cower by saying "Well we should just respect how they see it." No. Because that's denying how you've been raised and who you are. And this is wrong, most assuredly. There is no justice in this. But we can't do anything about it either, which is a downright shame. I do love a good paean to moralism. Consider trying to marry a member of a different race and being told this; feels a little less right, doesn't it? The answer here isn't "Well, we're right and they're wrong", because the question isn't "Who's right, Christianity or Islam?" Boil it down to that question and you'll get the wrong answer every time. The question is "What's the problem here?" The answer to that? They're killing people, for one, and killing people is wrong. (The moral clarity opposition to the death penalty offers is refreshing - you should try it sometime.) For another, they're legally denying the humanity of human beings by refusing equal protection under the law. Then the other question is "What is to be done?" And, well, that one's a tad trickier. [ Monday, February 13, 2006 15:27: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
SupaNik, will you be my valentine? in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Sunday, February 12 2006 18:10 Profile #26 I'll level with you, Creator. I've been through three women in the last half year and I don't think I understand them at all. The last one I ended up falling head over heels for and she's still sort of a friend, but it's all cold and mean and Valentine's Day is two days away and I just want someone to love. So: would you ask Thuryl to be my valentine? Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
THE ABOMINABLE PHOTO THREAD REVOLUTIONS in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Sunday, February 12 2006 14:17 Profile #227 quote: Originally written by E.D.F: Hey TM, why don't you do us all a favor and leave. Before the audience gets pissed off. quote: Originally written by Lady Davida: TM, wouldn't that make you, like, 1/4 emo? I mean, I've seen a few large emo kids in my life, but none extremely so... Quoted for emphasis. [ Sunday, February 12, 2006 14:21: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
THE ABOMINABLE PHOTO THREAD REVOLUTIONS in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Sunday, February 12 2006 09:56 Profile #208 Everyone hates a gimmick. Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Those cartoons... in General
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Saturday, February 11 2006 22:24 Profile #14 quote: Originally written by Lenar Labs: quote: Originally written by Desert Pl@h: Clashing ideologies? The only clashes I see are between the "liberal" west and the "conservative" west and the middle east/SEast asia with all of the West. "Conservatives" actually can hold similar values to the mid east, other than the fact that they believe that America is better than everybody and that they hate Islam in any form. Sad fact, that. Clashing ideals, huh? The ideal thing about ideals is that ideally, everyone sees ideals your way... The way I interpret Desert Pl@h's post is thus... So you have Western Liberals , who want everything to be dramatically changed so that everything is totally equal and communal and everyone has the same single right: to not offend other people. Nothing else is allowed. Some people will kill others to prevent violence. You have the Western Conservatives , who would prefer if we all lived in the southern states under whoever the Republican Candidate for that term happens to be (because the Republicans know better than the people, obviously), and spoke in King James English. These people would probably insist on going around in loincloths to simulate the Garden of Eden, but for the fact that ankles and shoulders are too scandalous to be seen. A few of these types will burn crosses. Then, you have the Arab types represented in this quote. First are the minority of Liberal Muslims , who live to serve Allah by being an example in the world and being a wonderful influence in politics. Granted, there are a few issues of religious purgings (uh... Jihads) of Christians, Atheists, and Jews (the Liberal Muslims seem to get along very well with the East Asian peoples), but for the most part, all they want is to be left alone and control their own people. And then, the ever-popular Conservative Muslims who believe that everything but conservative Islam is a scourge upon creation, and must eventually be either converted or purged. These people think that Americans are the greatest threat towards proper order, followed in a close second by the Jews, and any sympathizers with the first two to be number three. Conservative Muslim tend to keep some traditions of times around the founding of the religion, when a certain guy named Mohammed was trying to defend his nation. To the radical conservatives, terrorist attacks are merely defensive strikes to keep corruption away from the Muslim people. I tried to offend everyone equally, if you didn't get the picture. Ideally, the Western Liberals want the world to be equal. Then, the world will be at peace. Ideally, the Western Conservatives want all of the traditions to be held forever. Then, the world will be at peace. Ideally, Islam's goal is to convert or kill the whole world; Or, at least, conservative Islam thinks that way. Then the world will be at peace. Which I think is kinda wierd, in that there's a protective clause in the Koran that protects Jews and Christians from the punishment against infidels because they are both, I believe the term is, "Peoples of the Book", or something along that measure... (someone please correct me if otherwise) I personally don't like Islam. I don't hate it, either, I just think that it has several fundemental flaws and loopholes as a religion that have brought about the chaos we experience in the Middle East today. I don't think that wiping out all of the Arabs is the answer, either, though I do feel a mild bit of animousity toward them for blaming all of their "corruptive" problems on us. (Jeez... it's physics, let alone social dynamics... anything that is exposed to anything else will undoubtedly be changed in some way, shape, or form) In regards to my previous post, I had no idea that the publishing of these cartoons was determinatively for instigation. In that respect... public media is made for instigation, but outright disrespect is irresponsible, even if it gets the results it wants. There are ways to get the same results without getting people killed in the process. -------------------- The Silent Assassin has prematurely returned from his stealth mission against the French to keep me from embarassing myself further. Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00

Pages