i don't think intelligent people tend to have difficulty socializing with people of substantially lower IQ's. i think thats often an excuse anti-social people like Justinian, might use for why they are bad at socializing. "no one likes me, well, its because i'm smart". i think obsession can be detrimental to socializing though. and people that make large breakthroughs in an area and appear quite smart are often obsessed with the field.

> [TI] Lateralis wrote:

"You've used the word "lifestyle" in the context of homosexuality in this thread, as have others.  You even use it in your post!  But it isn't a lifestyle. "

its a simple concept lat. there is being gay and there is living the gay lifestyle. its a very, very simple concept. if you can't understand the difference, then you simply don't belong in this thread. i have tried to use lifestyle in my posts when talking about the gay lifestyle.

"It isn't about choice for me.  I've already explained in a previous post.  If you are unwilling to believe me because it shakes your world view from foundations to rafters than that is fine.  You are entitled to your opinions and to your own thoughts.  But might I suggest that as you aren't gay you know nothing about what it *is* like to be gay. "

so you are saying you have no control over your actions? thats the only way the gay lifestyle isn't a choice.  its simple, there is being gay. there is the attraction to people of the same sex. then there is acting on that attraction, dating other men, having sex with other men, and all of that is choice. the only part that isn't choice is basic attraction to other men.

"
Er, no?  Would YOU be perfectly happy to live your life with someone of the same sex?  Probably not.  I would not be happy with a woman. 

This really is my point.  Sorry if you missed it, whizzing as it did, a million miles over your head.  "

there are heterosexual males that chose to abstain from sex, typically religious folk and they live perfectly happy lives; are you claiming gay people have some type of super sex drive that makes it so they can't be happy unless they're fucking?

> EmperorHez wrote:

> avogadro- you comparison is flawed because- from 2001-2006 there were hardly any US or NATO casualties in Afghanistan. 600 deaths alone have happened since Obama came to office.

compare the number police officers in USA with number of US troops in A-stan. USA has something like 800k police officers total. number of US troops in A-stan = 80k.

also you are not taking into consideration the number of wounded and the serious nature of those wounds.

I dont know how many US police officers are wounded on duty. id bet a few thousand every year. but how many are blinded? have limbs blown off? have serious head injuries?

when a soldier dies. he is transported home and buried. total cost a few thousand dollars. when a soldier loses a limb, the monetary cost runs into the hundreds of thousands. medical treatment.

ever wondered why landmines only take off a soldiers leg? because a handicapped soldier costs far more resources to his nation than a dead one.

i was not arguing that its more dangerous to be a US police officer at Home. I was arguing that there are always going to be deaths to police. how far does it have to drop until its no longer a war?

in one year, the US lost 156 police officers on duty in the US and the average for US soldier deaths in afghanistan is 135ish a year. so right now, the US is losing more police officers at home then soldiers policing afghanistan. There will always be deaths, how few must there be before we are satisfied?

> [TI] ZoZferatu [Pw9] wrote:

> Granted!

But however, it still seems odd that 75% of all reconnoitered stargates seem to be located in very similar open fields bordered by pine forests

well, like 90% of the stargate locations are worlds with inferior technology. on earth, they used a crane to move the device, on other worlds they don't have such a thing. also, in other worlds the humans living on them typically view the the aliens as Gods, and might be forbidden to touch it, let alone move it.

the small populations could also be explained by the Aliens killing some of them... they would want to prevent an uprising like what happened on earth and cull the populations.

> Firewing wrote:

> US-Americans are always over reacting. They lack the coolness of a long history. Taxes to pay the british soldiers who protected them from the indian tribes and the french? Revolution! State rights in danger? Secession! A sank steam liner? Enter First Worldwar! The soviets take South Vietnam? the world will become red! WAR, war crimes and body counts! Saddam, always a good ally, takes tiny Kuwait. Invasion! 9/11? Terrorist hunting in afganistan and a war in iraq, war crimes and body counts (again)! Iran is scared by an US-presence in iraq, saudi-arabia and afganistan and builds nuclear weapons? War?!

Europeans are always under reacting. They Lack common sense. The Roman Empire fell? well we are just going to stew around and do nothing for a thousand years. Theres a massive disease sweeping the Land, what are we going to do? nothing, and hide in our houses, hopefully it will solve itself, loses 50% of population of continent.  The Americans are upset about taxes? lets ignore them, the problem will go away. Germany building up a huge military and breaking The Treaty of Versailles? do nothing.

hmmm, im american.... i dont think i did anything differently after 9/11, how did i overreact?

> East wrote:

> if being gay is a free choice and a mistake, then sometimes it's more important that society tolerates such mistakes by individuals than forcing them to correct it.

nowhere have i suggested that society force people from living a gay lifestyle. i am not suggesting governments shouldn't allow people to be or act gay, im saying governments shouldn't go out of their way to encourage gay lifestyles such as by legalizing gay marriage.

i do not dislike gays, goths, or vegans; you're a retard...

the simplest reason why gay lifestyle shouldn't be normal is if homosexuality was normal in a country, the country would die off in several generations. Do i dislike gays because of this fact? no. but i wouldn't want to see every other person gay for this reason, gay shouldn't be a norm.

> [TI] Lateralis wrote:

> Addendum to my previous post:  Homosexuality isn't a lifestyle, or lifestyle choice, any more than heterosexuality is.

no one has said homosexuality is a lifestyle or lifestyle choice. Humans have preferences. Some want Guys, Some want Girls, some want to wear black clothes, some want to have sex with little children. the desire, the attraction is what makes you homo, hetero, goth, or pedo. Can a homo not [bugger] other men? yes, can he [screw] women? yes. Can he marry a woman, have a family, and be perfectly happy without ever living out his desire to [roger] another guy? yes. Can a hetero not [intercourse with] women? yes. can he [sodomise] and marry another man (if gay marriage was legal), have a family (adoption), and be perfectly happy without ever living out his desire to [hump] a woman? yes. Can a Goth never wear any dark clothes and never die his hair a dark color? yes. Can he wear white, get married, have a family, and be perfectly happy, without ever acting on his desire to act Goth? yes. Can a pedophile never act on his desire to molest children, get married, have children, and be perfectly happy without ever living out his desire to [Mr. Rogers] child? yes.

Gay marriage not being legal isn't keeping people from being gay, its not oppressing people that are gay, its about the gay lifestyle; and the gay lifestyle is 100% choice.

> East wrote:

> you make a big assumption that all people who are repressing their feelings are "perfectly happy"... would you be "perfectly happy" if you were an ugly mofo that couldn't get a woman to bed?

everyone represses some of their feelings, repressing feelings isn't a cause for unhappiness. i don't punch every guy in the face that i want to; but that doesn't keep me from being happy. Controlling your feelings is part of being an adult; if you didn't control your feelings in this consumer society, you would be miserable because you can't afford a Ferrari and a mansion.

im pretty sure "it" is the lack of honest news coverage.... and i doubt there was ever truling honest news coverage ever, i think people are just becoming more demanding from news coverage.