Aceflyer

I wouldn't characterize myself as a proponent of incest, by any means, but why do you think it is such a taboo in the developed world these days? After all, in (not so distant) history, incest was commonplace, accepted, and sometimes even expected and encouraged. Discuss away!

Agreed with NBV. The whole abortion argument is really about which point in a pregnancy a sentient life begins at. As NBV has said, some people believe that a sentient life begins the moment you have a fertilized egg. Some believe that said sentient life begins the moment the embryo begins exhibiting some predefined level of neural activity. Some believe that said sentient life begins the moment the embryo becomes capable of survival outside the womb. Others yet believe that said sentient life begins only when the baby is born at the end of the pregnancy. That aside you have a whole other argument, sentient life aside, about whether the mother can do whatever she wants to do with her pregnancy (since "it's her body") until the moment the baby is born. Most people, including most conservatives, believe that at least in some situations (such as in rape or incest, or in cases where the mother's life is in danger from the pregnancy), the mother can do whatever she wants to do. The decision whether to abstain from vaginal intercourse is completely unrelated to the above.

Poor Mr. Seaton. Poor Mrs. Seaton. I'll note though that Suicide has left out the fact that in this case, this was a 61-year-old married gentleman, hardly young or a virgin.

Vista steps put up on website.

No, however, I would like the exact steps for Windows XP as well.

I'll add this to the FAQ page.

I've never gotten such a feeling before when eating an apple. Aceflyer

What is it with Vereinsgesetz 2002's popularity?

Coming from you, I'll take that as a compliment. -A

I believe he meant just what he said: "significant other," whether said significant other be male or female.

Aye, PoLiX.

I agree with Samapico. I do not see how introducing Austrian paperwork and/or Austrian laws would help this game or its community.

Except that I wasn't being an !@#$%^&* at all, and you needed to misquote me and take a sentence fragment out of context in order to make it appear (falsely) that I was being an !@#$%^&*.

Key words bolded. Contrary to what you did, I did not change what Palin stated at all in my argument, nor did I selectively cut out part of a sentence she said and attempt to p!@#$%^&* off said part as a full sentence.

I'll leave SeVeR to reply to the brunt of Doc's post, but I wanted to address his so-called jibe at me (yes Doc, I heart you too): Doc, that jibe is rich, especially coming after all your rhetoric about not taking things out of context. Here's what I actually wrote, complete with context: Clearly I was merely stating that I agreed with SeVeR's post, and that I felt that his interpretation (which also happened to be the same as my interpretation) seemed to be the most logical one. Doc's out-of-context quote - which discards a parenthesis and was cut out from my actual sentence - was purposely used to attempt to finger me as being egotistical and narcissistic.

Why would the opinion of someone who's personally been there be more valid than mine - or anyone else's - when it comes to whether the Iraq war was warranted or not? As for the rest, I agree with SeVeR's last post in this thread. Palin could have been clearer, but SeVeR's (and my) interpretation of her words seems to be the most logical interpretation.

Meaning isn't changed. Palin first asked people to "pray for" U.S. troops who are "striving to do what is right." (Incidentally, it should be obvious to most people that the Iraq war is far from being something that is right - in fact, it's something that is very wrong.) Palin then goes on to clearly state that "our leaders," namely the Bush Administration, are sending said U.S. troops to Iraq "on a task that is from God." Finally, Palin concludes by elaborating on the red sentence by specifying what, specifically, people should make sure they're praying for. This does not affect the green sentence at all.

What you just witnessed was yet another (failed) attempt by Lynx to appear witty...

All the rationalization in the world doesn't change the fact that what Palin said was not simply a prayer asking God for guidance. Rather, Palin first asked people to "pray for" U.S. troops who are "striving to do what is right." (Incidentally, it should be obvious to most people that the Iraq war is far from being something that is right - in fact, it's something that is very wrong.) Palin then goes on to clearly state that "our leaders," namely the Bush Administration, are sending said U.S. troops to Iraq "on a task that is from God." Palin was not simply asking God for guidance, as Obama was. Rather, Palin was clearly saying that the Bush Administration sent U.S. troops to war on a task that was from God. What troubles me is this: how does Palin know that the Iraq war was, in fact, a task that was from God? She wasn't merely asking people to pray that the Iraq war was a task that was from God. She was explicitly stating that the Iraq war is, in fact, a task that is from God, no further questions needed.

Sorry to hear it is, in fact, dead. However, not "everything else in this !@#$%^&* game" has been "killed off due to politics," contrary to your !@#$%^&*ertion.

What an answer. She needs to provide more straight talk.

He got fired from Chaos? What'd he do?

I agree. The problem with gitmo is that too many innocent people were caught up in it, and locked up there without due process of law, for years.

In my humble opinion, this thread has served its purpose and can be closed. It's getting further and further off-topic. -Aceflyer