aramike

Jaguar, that's just plain wrong man. Those were minor justifications, not the catalyst of the war. Read this article for more info: http://encarta.msn.com/find/concise.asp?ti...7354&sid=28#s28 Read part 2: Causes of the Civil War.

Somehow, when we let him back in, I knew this day would come. *Sigh*

quote: OK, now I agree with the first part, but the slavery issue for the civil war is not correct. The civil war was fought on states rights, slavery was a very MINOR issue.That is incorrect. Slavery was the driving issue that plunged the states into war with each other. And it wasn't even the abolishing of current slavery laws that did it. The main cause was the debate between whether or not slavery should be permitted in western territories. States rights was an extension of this issue saying that the federal government cannot intervene with state slavery laws. The Confederates were, of course, quite wrong in that because slavery was a direct violation of the Constitution which is the ONLY thing that is supposed to limit state's rights.

I've played very few table top games, and was not impressed. For one thing, sorting through grossly over-complicated manuals while arguing over a trivial rule is absurdity at its finest. If one could make a game with simple rules where STRATEGY, not rules, are the most important feature of the game, then maybe it'd be fun. Computer gaming, on the other hand, can accomplish both tasks quite easily. For one thing (and the most important), once in the game the rules are the rules. They are not open to ridiculous interpretations. If I'm playing a game, I want to play a game -- not enter into a debate. Oh, and I have to agree with the earlier description of the "average gamer". I don't believe I've ran into one with good personal hygiene yet. Being a gamer should be a part of one's life, not one's life as a whole. Oh well, to each their own.

quote: There was supposed to be a "not" in there wasn't there?Uh, no. I believe it should remain an option. quote: Yup, signing up for it should remain mandatory. The military would still have right to refuse a candidate but also have the right to recall previous rejectees if things got really dire. Let's hope it doesn't get that way.Yeah, though I think you kind of miss my point...

quote: personally since this women will ONLY truly affect women i think all men should shut the hell up on this and sop trying to influence a women's decision.Are you KIDDING? *Looks over at daughter* Are you telling me that abortion only affects women? *Looks over at 13 month old daughter again* It saddens me to think that, just months before she was born, my daughter could LEGALLY be killed by her mother (although she would never do that, but that's beside the point).

quote: I can see the difference, I just don't think that the conditions of the conception are relevant to the future wellbeing of the mother and childSo you're saying the child has greater well-being by being dead than alive? quote: Hyperbole - gotta love it!Get used to it -- I'm good at that. quote: Examining your argument from another viewpoint, this hypothetical woman has proved to be irresponsible. Therefore make her keep the child because what society needs is a large number of irresponsible parents who don't want their children.So, then after birth a parent should be allowed to "abort" her child for well-being purposes as well... No dice.

quote: So you believe that she can have an abortion if her pregnancy meets your criteria for an unacceptable pregnancy, yet she is incapable of having her own opinion on what those criteria are?You mean, you DON'T see the difference in someone getting pregnant as a result of their OWN actions as opposed to being a result of something they could not control? Please, that is the most absurd thing I've ever read.

Geez, guys, I just have an HK 45 with 50 rounds laying around somewhere ready. More than adequate for anything I'd ever need... I have a few other weapons but those remain locked up unless I feel like shooting.

Oh, and by the way -- if France actually had a brain they'd realize that a disabled person could kill his or herself just as easily as not being born. Obviously it's just a ploy to get easy cash through the legal system.

Right to choose to be mothers? That's absurd. I'm sorry, but unless those women are in the extremely miniscule group of people that don't know that sex can impregnate, they've made the choice to "risk it". And they lost their gamble. Now, I do believe that abortion should be an option for victims of rape or if there is danger to the mother. Here's an article I wrote on the topic not too long ago: Abortion – Legalized Irresponsibility In this nation, there is only one law that allows harm to befall a human being. That is the law that protects the right to abort a child. Laws are supposed to protect people, especially the helpless (an unborn child). Who is the law protecting regarding abortion? The rights of people to be irresponsible? The pocketbooks of parents? If I picked up a gun, pointed it at someone, and it accidentally discharged injuring or killing that person, should I be held accountable even in light of the fact that it was an accident? Even though I was simply being irresponsible? Of course! Irresponsibility should not be protected nor encouraged. It should be scorned and left to its own devices. For it is from irresponsibility that responsibility is often formed. You screwed up. You had a child because you were sexually irresponsible. Now, you are legally responsible for that child and his/her well being. Either you learn to practice the necessary responsibility or you are in violation of child-protection laws and are punished accordingly. Yet, abortion is the opposite. You screwed up. You had a child because you were sexually irresponsible. Now, you are legally able to terminate your newfound responsibility and you are free to continue in your irresponsible habits. And it is being suggested that making abortion illegal is an irresponsible act? Then, I suppose, allowing irresponsibility to continue is a responsible act. Yes, a woman should have a right to choose. Yes, she has that right to choose without having the right to choose an abortion. Abstinence is, by far, the most effective method of birth control. And what about the child? The suggestion that an abortion may be the best option for the child is simply ludicrous. Sure, that child may be born into an unfriendly environment, but still, is killing it the solution? Don’t we have laws that actually punish people who try to escape their problems via death? We arrest and jail those who attempt to kill themselves. We have laws that protect those who want to die. We have laws that protect those who have murdered others. We have laws that protect those who would be murdered. Yet, for some reason, we have laws that allow a literal slaughter of children. Go on. You tell a 5-year-old child that, 5 ┬¢ years ago, it was totally legal to kill him or her. Yes, that child was not born yet. But that child was created. It makes me wonder how many innocent faces this world is missing due to our laws.

*Pops in briefly, with raised eyebrow at opportunity to IMPOSE opinion on others* I believe that mandatory military service (aka the draft) should be an option. HOWEVER, the only time I think that it should be actually employed is if the US homeland is actually threatened itself and manpower is required. I do NOT believe that people should be forced to fight wars of "interest" (ala Vietnam). I honor all of those who fought in Vietnam but hold great disdain for the leaders that sent them there. So, in summary, keep the Selective Service system, but only use it when our nation itself is in jeapardy.

Due to some personal issues, I'll be in and out for the next week or two. Gallion has Spectre Fleet in my absense. Thanks.

How 'bout a weeknight? Some of us go out on Saturday nights.

ROFLMAO!!! It's called trying to type too fast. When I type, common words are on autopilot, so sometimes "what" comes out as "was", etc. That happens more than you guys know (I catch most slips).

quote: Both.If the one in front of you want an elderly lady and the one behind you was dressed thug-like, I truly doubt you'd watch both.

...you start coming up with crazy lists about signs that you've been playing too much.

quote: I never saw a grant or scholarship for a "White" person. I'm sure the shit would hit the fan if there was one... because its "discrimination" at that point. I even applied for one of them (although my GPA wasnt exactly a shining example)... the councelor in the school did not believe I was serious until I showed her my passport.True 'dat, Tac. The NAACP is a PRIME example of racism. Just imagine the fallout if there were an association for the advancement of caucasion people. Legalized racism that is TRULEY racist. But racial profiling is wrong. Hmmm...

And don't forget to visit the Orion site ... QUICKLY. It's guaranteed to never be completed and to change often.

quote: Originally posted by Menchise: Since nobody has answered my question and other countdowns are starting to pop up (albeit, bogus countdowns ), the answer is: 37 days (Countdown to the end of the week). Heh, I don't think that anyone was inclined to research that one.

quote: Originally posted by Gretz13: Ok, and thanks a lot for the warm welcome! Well, perhaps we could get our own private mesage board on a different site or find a way to get this board password protected, hmm? [ 11-26-2001: Message edited by: Gretz13 ] I've responded to this in the thread in the main fleet forum. We already have a board for that. BUT, it may be easier just to put a password protection scheme on this one once it becomes necessary. For now, though, occassional bantor is alright. I'll just continue to threaten those who go too far out of line with the old airlock-heave (aka, the BAN ).

quote: Originally posted by Barron Morris: Hello...just got forum aproval...I have a question..I signed up in the fleet data base..several months ago as an explorer.(before I realized the limitations on assests ( mainly ships and fire power)....any way game should be here any day now...and I was wondering...is there any way to change your caste once your already in the dats base...I want to go military...either Insurgent..or ISS. Actually, don't send email to CAT (there's too much in that box already). Just tell me what race/caste you want to be and I'll go and change it.

quote: Originally posted by Charles Lindsey: The topics say "Reserved for use by" whichever fleet. Doesn't mean others can't read it. We decided long ago not to post tactics and stuff. It's good for morale to answer roll calls and other things though. However, we do have our own board. Aramike set it up. I thinks it's up to about twenty tumbleweeds now becasue it doesn't get used much. It's not really secret either. I really don't mind the occasional pop in. But then everyone starts popping in and that disrupts threads. So now we are back to square one so it's better not to do it. Yep! You can find that board using Gum's page on the main fleets page of this site. There's a private forum in there that's password-protected (oh man, I just realized that I've forgotten the password). In any case, I assume that once MP gets rolling, that place will be getting an awful lot of use (once I get those passwords, hehehe).

Heh, you're amongst friends here. Shohashi's a former Marine. I'm a former Marine. Gallion is former Army. Rattler, former Navy. Akira, former Air Force. Heck, maybe you should go Coast Guard so our cycle's complete. No, seriously, the Corps is a great place to go. Takes a lot of hard work to become a Marine, but it's worth it.

quote: Originally posted by Gretz13: hows this? (the name in the () is the ship type, right?) First off, welcome aboard. As for what you put in the parenthesis: Should be "Rinaal". The location of the station you're based at is what goes in there. For example, look at my sig. Spectre station is near Antis. Again, welcome to the Insurgency!