Steele Johnson wrote on Sep 28, 2018, 16:06:
The first one was so annoying. I’m definitely not a fan of die restart, die restart, die restart until-you-find-the-querky-trick-to-complete-each-part-of-the-level type game.

Cutter wrote on Feb 15, 2018, 10:46:

HoSpanky wrote on Feb 15, 2018, 10:31:

Cutter wrote on Feb 15, 2018, 10:07:


Once again we see why reproduction needs to be a state sanctioned event.

Right? I mean, autisic kids are difficult to deal with, and I think some parents are desperate to have normal kids. They’d do...anything. I don’t think I could deal with it. I’d resent that kid and likely end up being cruel to it.

You can't fix stupid.

Jivaro wrote on Feb 15, 2018, 17:50:
Will somebody think of the children?!

Sepharo wrote on Jan 15, 2018, 17:42:

BobBob wrote on Jan 15, 2018, 17:33:

Sepharo wrote on Jan 15, 2018, 17:30:

BobBob wrote on Jan 15, 2018, 17:17:
My question abridged: Is it possible to have a 'peaceful protest or march' without threats of violence?

Yes.

How?

You did not address the underlying philosophical question.

I guess I'm missing the underlying philosophical question. It looked to me like you were asking if a 'peaceable protest or march' was possible without violence. It definitely is. What am I missing?

Are you asking if the source of the threatened violence is important? Yes, if the protesters are threatening the violence, well then it's not constitutionally protected... But if the protesters are being threatened with violence for protesting, if the state does not protect them from that violence, their civil rights have been violated.

Bill Borre wrote on Aug 30, 2017, 20:38:

They should call it "Griefer's Paradise."

It amazes me this stuff finds an audience. They'd have to pay me to subject myself to that.