2016 US Election


Off-Topic Discussions

151 to 200 of 7,079 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Conservative Anklebiter wrote:
More like it's easy to derail a thread.
Hold on, everyone - we need to have a fifty-post discussion about this. Right here, right now.
About Ice cream and why air conditioning is no longer a luxury item in this age of heat death?
Substantive issues right there, yessirree. :)

Well one of them is certainly when you're AC is shot, your Mom won't hire anyone until Monday and she's like "It's a luxury item!"

(Yes I realize it's not 90 degrees out and I'm in the basement. I still don't want to sweat while I eat upstairs...)

*stops mid-bite of a Siracha covered pizza*

Wait, what?

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Conservative Anklebiter wrote:
More like it's easy to derail a thread.
Hold on, everyone - we need to have a fifty-post discussion about this. Right here, right now.
About Ice cream and why air conditioning is no longer a luxury item in this age of heat death?

Yeah, air-conditioning is a necessity here in Phoenix. Surface of the sun and all that.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Conservative Anklebiter wrote:
More like it's easy to derail a thread.
Hold on, everyone - we need to have a fifty-post discussion about this. Right here, right now.
About Ice cream and why air conditioning is no longer a luxury item in this age of heat death?
Yeah, air-conditioning is a necessity here in Phoenix. Surface of the sun and all that.

Tri, yeah but unfortunately my mom and I live in Morgantown, WV which while not as hot as the Southwest or even the Southeast of the United States, doesn't make it much better when it's at 40%-60% humidity.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
Being re-married, a divorcee, a widower or never been married at all has nothing to do with X. It is Joe Puke's marital status, plain and simple.
Except when X is "this ruins the sanctity of marriage" and Joe Puke's marital status is ALSO an example of ruining the sanctity of marriage.

Divorce only does so for certain spiritual belief systems the last I heard.

What has happened for some bizarre reason is that "traditional marriage between man and woman" has had "unless they are divorced, in which case they are hypocritical scumbags" appended to it.

Given how that additional language is decidedly NOT in the GOP platform, who declared that they are hypocrites just from the basis of their marital status?


Rysky wrote:
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Conservative Anklebiter wrote:
More like it's easy to derail a thread.
Hold on, everyone - we need to have a fifty-post discussion about this. Right here, right now.
About Ice cream and why air conditioning is no longer a luxury item in this age of heat death?
Substantive issues right there, yessirree. :)

Well one of them is certainly when you're AC is shot, your Mom won't hire anyone until Monday and she's like "It's a luxury item!"

(Yes I realize it's not 90 degrees out and I'm in the basement. I still don't want to sweat while I eat upstairs...)

*stops mid-bite of a Siracha covered pizza*

Wait, what?

Rysky,

Our central unit (which is both furnace and AC so call it an HVAC for now) is out. First noticed that last night it wasn't blowing cold air so much as just air. We turned it off for about an hour. Still nothing. I went outside to the outside unit. Fan wasn't going. We had cleared it off because of weeds a few hours before. It was night time, and thus not as huge an issue. HOWEVER My mom refused to try to see if someone OTHER than our regular AC/Plumber guy would be able to come out on a Saturday due to the fear of being paying extra for a service call/time and half etc. I keep telling her it's not something you can ignore, especially at age 70. But she's convinced we can survive. I'm less sure. But since I don't pay the bills (much less have a job and my own place), my vote doesn't count.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Remove the external panel on the outside unit and gently remove grass and junk from the interior. Then check to see if there is a big block of ice anywhere on the outside or inside. Assuming you don't, try firing it up again.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Turin the Mad wrote:
Divorce only does so for certain spiritual belief systems the last I heard.

Never said otherwise. My statement was a conditional, sorry if I didn't spell that out enough.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Turin,

Did all that. Didn't see any ice. The fan just wouldn't go. But I suppose I might try IF only to see if the heat fixed it or not...

Before it was just blowing air...so not sure turning it back on will fix it.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

At least yours was blowing air. Came home from Avenue Q and found no air movement in the house. That was a fun couple nights.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah that would suck more Tri.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

But yeah, how about that election?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Turin the Mad wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
Being re-married, a divorcee, a widower or never been married at all has nothing to do with X. It is Joe Puke's marital status, plain and simple.
Except when X is "this ruins the sanctity of marriage" and Joe Puke's marital status is ALSO an example of ruining the sanctity of marriage.

Divorce only does so for certain spiritual belief systems the last I heard.

What has happened for some bizarre reason is that "traditional marriage between man and woman" has had "unless they are divorced, in which case they are hypocritical scumbags" appended to it.

Given how that additional language is decidedly NOT in the GOP platform, who declared that they are hypocrites just from the basis of their marital status?

Because modern no-fault divorce is in no way traditional. Unless your "tradition" starts in the mid-70s. The point is that we've quite casually and recently changed marriage from the "traditional" "til death do you part" to something that includes pre-nup lawyers and quickie divorces.

Those changes, which were quite controversial in their time, now really are part of the traditional marriage. Which also no longer includes the wife being the husband's property (coverture).
But that just means that these people claiming "traditional marriage" don't even know or consider how drastically their definition of traditional has already changed.

Spoiler:
The change in coverture is probably the biggest change relative to same sex marriage. Before that the concept wouldn't even have made sense. There was no equal partnership. You would have needed to define one of the same-sex partners as "husband" and the other as "wife" because those were legally different roles.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
Divorce only does so for certain spiritual belief systems the last I heard.
Never said otherwise. My statement was a conditional, sorry if I didn't spell that out enough.

No worries. :)

I take great issue with whomever has dovetailed marital status with whatever stance on marriage Joejanebobbiesue Puke takes. To me, they're not even remotely related to each other other than by fabrication.

The 'sanctity of marriage' has nothing to with divorce unless someone personally adheres to such a belief. Even then, such persons get divorced too, just not quite as often. It happens. 'tis far better to end a toxic relationship that to soldier on in the face of unnecessary misery for both partners and any children that they are responsible for.

Coming from a 'separated family' and knowing plenty of people that are divorcees that have re-married et al of assorted persuasions, this correlation stinks of [redacted].

I dare someone to tell my WW2 vet neighbor that his remarrying after being a widower violated the sanctity of either marriage. He'd probably verbally dismember them on the spot for such temerity. And I'd laugh and laugh and laugh, then help him shovel off the metaphorical carrion staining his front porch. He's old school, he sees marriage as 'traditional', but he sure doesn't see his life has having violated a thing.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Conservative Anklebiter wrote:
More like it's easy to derail a thread.
Hold on, everyone - we need to have a fifty-post discussion about this. Right here, right now.
About Ice cream and why air conditioning is no longer a luxury item in this age of heat death?
Substantive issues right there, yessirree. :)

Well one of them is certainly when you're AC is shot, your Mom won't hire anyone until Monday and she's like "It's a luxury item!"

(Yes I realize it's not 90 degrees out and I'm in the basement. I still don't want to sweat while I eat upstairs...)

*stops mid-bite of a Siracha covered pizza*

Wait, what?

Rysky,

Our central unit (which is both furnace and AC so call it an HVAC for now) is out. First noticed that last night it wasn't blowing cold air so much as just air. We turned it off for about an hour. Still nothing. I went outside to the outside unit. Fan wasn't going. We had cleared it off because of weeds a few hours before. It was night time, and thus not as huge an issue. HOWEVER My mom refused to try to see if someone OTHER than our regular AC/Plumber guy would be able to come out on a Saturday due to the fear of being paying extra for a service call/time and half etc. I keep telling her it's not something you can ignore, especially at age 70. But she's convinced we can survive. I'm less sure. But since I don't pay the bills (much less have a job and my own place), my vote doesn't count.

Oh, Okies.

I was mainly calling to the not wanting to sweat while eating in my usual non-sequitur sense :3

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Turin the Mad wrote:
I take great issue with whomever has dovetailed marital status with whatever stance on marriage Joejanebobbiesue Puke takes. To me, they're not even remotely related to each other other than by fabrication.

Usually it's because some puke is saying same-sex marriage ruins the sanctity of marriage while also being part of a religious denomination that holds divorce in contempt.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dictionary wrote:

Traditional (adj.)

New, novel; evolving or adjusting to societal norms.

As you can see, the Republican approach to marriage is completely in line with the dictionary definition of traditional. Look, this quote says Dictionary on it and everything.

Sorry if you disagree, but those are the facts, and you can't argue with facts. And these are facts. We have the best facts.


thejeff wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
Being re-married, a divorcee, a widower or never been married at all has nothing to do with X. It is Joe Puke's marital status, plain and simple.
Except when X is "this ruins the sanctity of marriage" and Joe Puke's marital status is ALSO an example of ruining the sanctity of marriage.

Divorce only does so for certain spiritual belief systems the last I heard.

What has happened for some bizarre reason is that "traditional marriage between man and woman" has had "unless they are divorced, in which case they are hypocritical scumbags" appended to it.

Given how that additional language is decidedly NOT in the GOP platform, who declared that they are hypocrites just from the basis of their marital status?

Because modern no-fault divorce is in no way traditional. Unless your "tradition" starts in the mid-70s. The point is that we've quite casually and recently changed marriage from the "traditional" "til death do you part" to something that includes pre-nup lawyers and quickie divorces.

Those changes, which were quite controversial in their time, now really are part of the traditional marriage. Which also no longer includes the wife being the husband's property (coverture).
But that just means that these people claiming "traditional marriage" don't even know or consider how drastically their definition of traditional has already changed.

** spoiler omitted **

Pretty cool information there, thejeff, thanks!

I did review the GOP plank on the subject, and unless my memory is utterly failing me it does not harken to wives being their husband's property and so forth.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
I take great issue with whomever has dovetailed marital status with whatever stance on marriage Joejanebobbiesue Puke takes. To me, they're not even remotely related to each other other than by fabrication.
Usually it's because some puke is saying same-sex marriage ruins the sanctity of marriage while also being part of a religious denomination that holds divorce in contempt.

That explains things. :)


Thomas Seitz wrote:

Turin,

Did all that. Didn't see any ice. The fan just wouldn't go. But I suppose I might try IF only to see if the heat fixed it or not...

Before it was just blowing air...so not sure turning it back on will fix it.

Checked the main system as well I assume? We have a dehumidifier, and when it gets all gross it borks things to a fair thee well until we fix it.

The thermostat crapped out on our system, hopefully yours is just that!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Turin the Mad wrote:


I take great issue with whomever has dovetailed marital status with whatever stance on marriage Joejanebobbiesue Puke takes. To me, they're not even remotely related to each other other than by fabrication.

The 'sanctity of marriage' has nothing to with divorce unless someone personally adheres to such a belief. Even then, such persons get divorced too, just not quite as often. It happens. 'tis far better to end a toxic relationship that to soldier on in the face of unnecessary misery for both partners and any children that they are responsible for.

Coming from a 'separated family' and knowing plenty of people that are divorcees that have re-married et al of assorted persuasions, this correlation stinks of [redacted].

I dare someone to tell my WW2 vet neighbor that his remarrying after being a widower violated the sanctity of either marriage. He'd probably verbally dismember them on the spot for such temerity. And I'd laugh and laugh and laugh, then help him shovel off the metaphorical carrion staining his front porch. He's old school, he sees marriage as 'traditional', but he sure doesn't see his life has having violated a thing.

Coming at if from the opposite perspective, If Bob believes remarriage violates the sanctity of marriage and tells your neighbor that, how is that any different from Carol telling the newly married gay couple on the other side of the street that they do?

If it's all up to the individual's belief system, how can you ever complain? The people using "traditional marriage" as a weapon against laws allowing same-sex marriage are not just talking personal beliefs. They're making a claim about what traditional marriage really is and that the law should back their interpretation. Since they're doing so, it's reasonable to talk about what traditional marriage really has been.

Don't get me wrong, I've got nothing against divorce and remarriage. It's sometimes, sadly, the best option. But then again, I'm not much on the sanctity of marriage either.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I've got nothing against divorce and remarriage. It's sometimes, sadly, the best option. But then again, I'm not much on the sanctity of marriage either.

I consider it a legal contract. So, no more sacred than my mortgage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Conservative Anklebiter wrote:
More like it's easy to derail a thread.
Hold on, everyone - we need to have a fifty-post discussion about this. Right here, right now.
About Ice cream and why air conditioning is no longer a luxury item in this age of heat death?
Substantive issues right there, yessirree. :)

Well one of them is certainly when you're AC is shot, your Mom won't hire anyone until Monday and she's like "It's a luxury item!"

(Yes I realize it's not 90 degrees out and I'm in the basement. I still don't want to sweat while I eat upstairs...)

*stops mid-bite of a Siracha covered pizza*

Wait, what?

Rysky,

Our central unit (which is both furnace and AC so call it an HVAC for now) is out. First noticed that last night it wasn't blowing cold air so much as just air. We turned it off for about an hour. Still nothing. I went outside to the outside unit. Fan wasn't going. We had cleared it off because of weeds a few hours before. It was night time, and thus not as huge an issue. HOWEVER My mom refused to try to see if someone OTHER than our regular AC/Plumber guy would be able to come out on a Saturday due to the fear of being paying extra for a service call/time and half etc. I keep telling her it's not something you can ignore, especially at age 70. But she's convinced we can survive. I'm less sure. But since I don't pay the bills (much less have a job and my own place), my vote doesn't count.

Oh, Okies.

I was mainly calling to the not wanting to sweat while eating in my usual non-sequitur sense :3

I'm always happy to explain things to you, Rysky. Even when it's not the best weather in my home.

Toz,

I'm pretty done with elections for now.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Turin the Mad wrote:

Pretty cool information there, thejeff, thanks!

I did review the GOP plank on the subject, and unless my memory is utterly failing me it does not harken to wives being their husband's property and so forth.

No. It doesn't. That's because they've changed their definition of marriage and are now convinced their new definition is the way it's always been. Sociologically a common thing among conservative groups - much resistance to change, but once it happens they forget the opposition and strongly resist changes from the new normal.

Silver Crusade

I don't think gay marriage is going to be a deciding factor this year for the vast majority of voters. Pobably jobs and real employment, and national security.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ajaxis wrote:
I don't think gay marriage is going to be a deciding factor this year for the vast majority of voters. Pobably jobs and real employment, and national security.

At the very least, those still focused on same sex marriage aren't swing voters. They're already committed to a side.

Shadow Lodge

Thomas Seitz wrote:

Toz,

I'm pretty done with elections for now.

I was going to say elections are like death and taxes, but with Trump on the table I'm not so sure.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm hoping that we do see more people vote this year, maybe get to 60% turnout. Or maybe our current candidates will make less people come to the polls.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

With [insert candidate of choice here] on the table, if [candidate] wins because people couldn't be bothered to vote ... well ...

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

People motivated by distaste for the other side may result in increased turnout. People with distaste for both may lead to lower turnout (or less likely - increased 3rd party turnout).
People actually excited by their candidate may lead to . . . I'm not sure, I don't anybody actually excited for either candidate. Everybody I know on both sides is voting for the lesser evil.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I have all kinds of offensive views on voting I can share:

  • Voter Turnout: If you don't vote, you deserve what you get. There are few things in our political system that offend me more than the smug, self-righteous people who declare, "Well, *I* didn't like the candidates the major parties put forward this year, so *I* didn't vote. But our government sucks because..."
    If you didn't vote, you gotta shut up. In our system, voting for a third-party candidate is your way of saying, "I'm here, but I hate the candidates you gave me."
  • Term Limits: Let's absolutely guarantee that career politicians who have learned to work the system, to work across party aisles, and who have a vested interest in staying in office aren't allowed to stay there. Has anyone else noticed that Congress' approval ratings have plummeted as term limits have come into effect for more and more states? Give me a corrupt lifelong politician who knows how to work across the aisles ("Slick" Willie Brown, anyone?) over politicians of either stripe whose sole concern is, "Can I get re-elected ONCE and then leave?" Watching the sheer negative impact term limits have had on our Congressional approval ratings and efficacy should be a HUGE argument for getting them repealed. Unfortunately, the general hoi polloi look at their horrific performance and ineffectiveness and think, "Thank goodness for term limits! Otherwise we'd keep re-electing this moron for another 50 years!"
    If *you* keep re-electing that moron, it ain't term limits that are the problem, brother. It's the mirror.
  • "My family has voted xxx for 3 generations, so I'm going to vote xxx!"!
    Such a family should have its voting rights revoked for an equal number of years. If you're unwilling to spend 6 hours evaluating the candidates and thinking for yourself, I have to admit, I'd love to see you in group #1. As long as you don't whine about the results...

  • Ajaxis wrote:

    People motivated by distaste for the other side may result in increased turnout. People with distaste for both may lead to lower turnout (or less likely - increased 3rd party turnout).

    People actually excited by their candidate may lead to . . . I'm not sure, I don't anybody actually excited for either candidate. Everybody I know on both sides is voting for the lesser evil.

    That's just not true. Whatever it looks like in your circles. Or largely in mine, for that matter.

    They both won primaries. They both have actual support. We've had several people on this very thread actually supporting Clinton. I'm one of them - voted for Bernie, happily supporting Hillary. Her support is particulary strong among both minorities and women.
    Trump has people excited about him too. I think they're crazy, but he's got them.
    Honestly both candidates are so polarizing, we may see increased turnout from both angles - people desperate to vote against one and people excited to vote for one.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Turin the Mad wrote:

    I take great issue with whomever has dovetailed marital status with whatever stance on marriage Joejanebobbiesue Puke takes.

    That would be the GOP.

    Defending Marriage Against
    an Activist Judiciary

    Traditional marriage and family, based on
    marriage between one man and one woman,
    is the foundation for a free society and has for
    millennia been entrusted with rearing children
    and instilling cultural values.

    Not one man, one woman, one woman, and one woman.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    NobodysHome wrote:

    I have all kinds of offensive views on voting I can share:

  • Voter Turnout: If you don't vote, you deserve what you get. There are few things in our political system that offend me more than the smug, self-righteous people who declare, "Well, *I* didn't like the candidates the major parties put forward this year, so *I* didn't vote. But our government sucks because..."
    If you didn't vote, you gotta shut up. In our system, voting for a third-party candidate is your way of saying, "I'm here, but I hate the candidates you gave me."
  • Term Limits: Let's absolutely guarantee that career politicians who have learned to work the system, to work across party aisles, and who have a vested interest in staying in office aren't allowed to stay there. Has anyone else noticed that Congress' approval ratings have plummeted as term limits have come into effect for more and more states? Give me a corrupt lifelong politician who knows how to work across the aisles ("Slick" Willie Brown, anyone?) over politicians of either stripe whose sole concern is, "Can I get re-elected ONCE and then leave?" Watching the sheer negative impact term limits have had on our Congressional approval ratings and efficacy should be a HUGE argument for getting them repealed. Unfortunately, the general hoi polloi look at their horrific performance and ineffectiveness and think, "Thank goodness for term limits! Otherwise we'd keep re-electing this moron for another 50 years!"
    If *you* keep re-electing that moron, it ain't term limits that are the problem, brother. It's the mirror.
  • "My family has voted xxx for 3 generations, so I'm going to vote xxx!"!
    Such a family should have its voting rights revoked for an equal number of years. If you're unwilling to spend 6 hours evaluating the candidates and thinking for yourself, I have to admit, I'd love to see you in group #1. As long as you don't whine about the results...

  • 2) Agree on term limits, but I don't think there actually are any for Congress - even enacted on a state level. What states do you think have them?

    Some state legislatures do, I believe. And executive positions often do.

    3) There are certainly reasons to stick with one party long term. There are fundamental distinctions between the parties than can easily trump individual candidates. I don't think I've ever voted for a Republican, even back when they were saner, though I've flirted with third parties in the past.
    But over a generational time scale? The parties have shifted drastically over that period. I suspect my grandparents voted Republican, at least when they were young - and I probably would have done the same back then. But that was before the Realignment following the Civil Rights movement.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    BigNorseWolf wrote:
    Turin the Mad wrote:

    I take great issue with whomever has dovetailed marital status with whatever stance on marriage Joejanebobbiesue Puke takes.

    That would be the GOP.

    Defending Marriage Against
    an Activist Judiciary

    Traditional marriage and family, based on
    marriage between one man and one woman,
    is the foundation for a free society and has for
    millennia been entrusted with rearing children
    and instilling cultural values.

    Not one man, one woman, one woman, and one woman.

    Or one man, one woman, and someone else they keep on the side....


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    One man, one woman. The Ex-wife. A mistress who might become the next trophy wife.

    Honestly, it's a pretty traditional approach. Rich powerful men traditionally have multiple wives. In some cultures they marry them all at the same time, in others they have to divorce one before marrying the next.


    5 people marked this as a favorite.
    thejeff wrote:

    One man, one woman. The Ex-wife. A mistress who might become the next trophy wife.

    Honestly, it's a pretty traditional approach. Rich powerful men traditionally have multiple wives. In some cultures they marry them all at the same time, in others they have to divorce one before marrying the next.

    No no no i'm only for the parts of traditional marriage that aren't personally inconvenient to me.


    TOZ wrote:
    Thomas Seitz wrote:

    Toz,

    I'm pretty done with elections for now.

    I was going to say elections are like death and taxes, but with Trump on the table I'm not so sure.

    I've met Death. He's a much nicer guy that people give him credit for. Probably because he started looking like Julian Richings.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Arguably a must read discussing an apparently large chunk of the Trump campaign's 'primary supporters'.


    3 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
    Thomas Seitz wrote:
    I've met Death. He's a much nicer guy that people give him credit for.

    Did he really TALK IN ALL CAPS?


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    No he gave that up to Terry Pratchett after he crossed over Crystal.
    Figured the man needed to be heard more.


    Death "bignorsewolf, this is your li.. why are you not paying attention?

    BNW "Eh. reruns. Fourth time i've seen this.


    Something like that Hatti. :)

    Liberty's Edge

    Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

    That's a good link, Turin. I agree that the upswell of Trump is not primarily because of racism or xenophobia, but because people no longer have decent jobs because of globalization. That's a common problem everywhere in the developed world and it's arguably the biggest challenge of our time.


    3 people marked this as a favorite.

    So, apparently Jill Stein sees autism as a "public health calamity".

    A candidate who spouts Autism Speaks b$+*#$$+ like that? Yeah, not even remotely tempted by her as a candidate. If I am to be called a public health calamity, it will be for my contributions to society, and not for how I was born! Who's with me?!


    Well Autism is a problem for many people KC.

    I'm not saying I agree with Jill Stein but at least she's willing to admit there's a problem.

    Also at least she hasn't mocked people for their disability.


    4 people marked this as a favorite.

    I mean, there's a problem, sure. A big part of that problem is Autism Speaks, and people who follow the Autism Speaks line of reasoning, "speaking" on our behalf to seek a "cure".

    Autism is not a public health calamity. It's something we need to adjust our society and schools to. It is not something we need to seek a cure for. It is neither a disease nor a mental illness (not that mental illness doesn't have its own awful stigmas attached). I ain't broken. Don't gotta be fixed.

    And I'm really, really tired of people "at least"ing Trump. Cruz, Stein, Clinton—Trump should never be used as a point of comparison to anyone you're trying to sell as reasonable.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Mmm okay! :)

    Well I certainly don't think you're broken. But I know plenty of people on the spectrum that feel that way. Perhaps, as you suggested, we need to get people to adjust their thinking about what it means to be on the spectrum. The same way we have for Down Syndrome.


    4 people marked this as a favorite.

    I really don't mean to imply that my experience of autism is the Only Real Experience. Hell, I'm aware that I probably have a milder case than most (Asperger's itself is a milder syndrome, as autistic syndromes go). But I cannot stand neurotypicals trying to tell us how to feel about it. It's an incredibly patronizing way of treating us like invalids. "I speak for the trees autistics, for they have no tongues!"


    Well I don't speak for them either being on the spectrum. I just speak for the guy named Thomas Blaine Seitz some times known across the net as Nighttfall.

    But you are right, not all of us are the same. We don't all have the same needs. But it still something we can connect on in terms of we understand the world...differently the rest of the neurotypicals.


    Better, even. We should rise up and take over. For their own good, like in that episode of Star Trek.

    151 to 200 of 7,079 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / 2016 US Election All Messageboards