Aileron

I'm the only one who reads newspapers first? I just can't stand the stuff on TV. It is just getting stupider and stupider. Especially with the stories over what celebrities are doing with their lives. Who the F___ cares?!?

Keep Metal Gear in Metal Gear!

Well, the only thing you are clearly wrong about in that post is that there actually are arguements against gay marriage that aren't religious. I'd cite some examples, but the arguements barely hold water. (I didn't say they were GOOD arguements) The simplest good arguement consists of the fact that we don't have gay marriage currently, and that it is unwise to change society without reason. While this arguement is flawless, it can be taken down with a single logical arguement from the other camp. It seems to me that on the basic level, the two side have different opinions on what gays are. The pro gay marriage crowd views gays as a kind of race on its quest to recieve equality. The anti-gay marriage crowd views homosexuality as a psychological disease that was given a new status due to numbers.

It is a very controversial issue! Unless you are pig-headed enough to dismiss the other side when you don't have a complete arguement. I will admit that you almost have a complete arguement going for you, but there are still a few holes. Hence, I believe you, but want to apply some resistance to those areas. Until you fill in those holes, please be kind enough to restrain comments. The hole with homosexual couples has pretty much been filled in. Children in our society are raised in so many non-ideal environments that the suffering caused by being raised by gays is small. Now try this one...the arguement you present for why gays should be allowed to marry could easily be applied to Polygamy, Beastiality, some kind of Pedophile marriage, etc. Is there a clear and logical reason why gays should be allowed to marry and not these groups? Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't mind gays marrying. What I DO mind is society changing without a complete logical arguement.

The real reason I want this though is that you can include a player's ping into the calculations. That way, all my shots won't be 200 ms off because of my phone line.

*collects ashes in hand* *throws ahses into Naed's eyes* *smacks Naed on the head with a stick*

Not that you do not ask me. I am only taking this side as devil's advocate. The people may be equal, but the behavior is not the same. Women may be equal to men, but they shouldn't be allowed to go into the Men's bathroom. Its the same thing here.

I dunno if adding a calculated crosshair makes it that easy. If somebody is moving properly, a shot claculated by their velocity should miss 9/10. It would be those who constantly move in a straight line that would get hurt by this.

(OOC-I know I didn't state a rule on roleplaying somebody else's character, nor has anyone here been following it had it existed, but...) *pulls himself back together* *grabs Myst's time machine* *accelerates time until its winter* *plant dies* *grabs seed from plant* *glues seed on Myst's back* *accelerates time until spring* *a new plant grows out of Myst's back*

Have you even taken ANY macroeconomic class in your life? That statement will be in any textbook you can find on the subject. Why the heck do I have to prove basic facts of life to you?

The point was that its been proven that 50% of what defines a person's personality is caused by their environment. If the adopted parents are gay, the child will most likely grow up gay. Yes, maybe if you have the childhood of having the public school be nicer to you than your parents, it would define you more, but that's beside the point. I don't know why society has a problem with children growing up gay as opposed to growing up alcoholic or abusive, I'm just stating the facts.

You were raised by liberals. Did you come out conservative?

Note that the 1 in 10 statistic is probably the highest of a series of statistics. I know a few hundred people atleast and not one of them is gay. However, I will accept that statement. So, if homosexuality is acceptable and paedophilia is not because of number, then heterosexuality is morally better than homosexuality. If you pardon my going off topic to the gay marriage issue, that means that gays should not be given the right to marry because they are not on the same moral level as heterosexuals. The problem is that if you accept gay marriage, you can't really criticise ANY sexual lifestyle. If the only supposed ground for discriminating against gays were because they are a minority, then the same holds true for every other sexual lifestyle including paedophilia, because they are also a minority.

Monte, minimum wage increases lead to more unemployment (or less employment if the economy is REALLY good) in minimum wage positions. It is an economic law both proven by theorhetical methods and statistical methods from EVERY minimum wage increase. You are right however in that we don't need to help minimum wage jobs. I believe I beat you to that point though. First world countries cannot compete with third world countries in minimum wage jobs, and in order to build a strong middle class, one needs educated professional positions.

*gets a better idea* *throws grenade in shower with Naed* *locks door*

Societies' problem with gay adoption is obvious. While we view gays as equals, we really don't want to raise people gay. We view the individuals as equals, but not the behavior. That is the problem with both gay adoption and gay marriage, because they both cross the line between gay rights and homosexualism.

Ok, but what about the second question. Will there be a feature that calculates the lead required for a shot and displays it in a nice and easy manner?

cya

*quickly takes Plant into surgery* *puts Plant back together* *straps the corpse to some table attached to some lightning rods in Transylvania.* *waits for lightning to strike* *lightning strikes* ITS ALIVE!! ITS ALLIVE!! BWA HA HA HA HA!! *throws Plant in shower with Naed* *locks door*

Not really. Either way they are paying for the same number of hours. What I am talking about merely divides those hours amongst more people. It costs as much to get 4 people to work 6 hours as it does to get 3 people to work 8 hours. The losers here would actually be those who have jobs, but they would lose less than others would gain. Increasing minimum wage has its costs. If a company has to pay more per employee, they will have to hire less employees. $6.50 per hour is better than no job. Better income distribution is caused by schooling. The middle class is made up of educated people, not factory workers. What we really need is more secondary education and positions which require them. We shouldn't be worried about minimum wage - in a battle of unskilled labor, India will beat the US 9 out of 10. We need to worry about increasing the number and need of educated workers.

If only my weasel and I were playing yesterday...

*quickly ties rubber bungee to Plant* *Plant gets kicked as far as the bungee can stretch* *Plant is sent hurtling back to Earth as some really fast speed*

Would it be a good idea or bad idea to add aiming crosshairs? Also, you could add a calculated aiming crosshair that show the proper lead to targets.

*the Platypus bites Myst in the ankles* *chases after Myst* *knocks Myst down* *superglues Myst to the floor* *walks away*

The point is that it really is a promise Kerry can't make. The economy isn't controlled by the president, it's controlled by the free market. Unless Kerry has some kind of brilliant plan, he cannot create that number of jobs. Really, the economy was not hurt because of Bush, but rather economic factors that couldn't be helped. I do know two things the government can do: They can either make the workday 6 hours long or enforce the 8 hour workday better. American companies hire too few employees for themselves and make them work longer and harder. Suppose you have a company that requires 24 hours of total labor per day to get a certain task done. The traditional approach would be 24 hrs / 8 hr day = 3 employees. However, what companies are doing is hiring 2 people, and getting them to put in 4 hours of overtime. If we enforce the 8 hr day, the company will have to hire 3 people. If we reduce the workday to 6 hrs, companies should hire 4, but would hire 3. Both ways would create a boatload of new positions, especially in the positions which require an education to get. If a candidate says he will create more jobs, but doesn't say something along these lines, I wouldn't believe him.