> Gilligan wrote:

> so, i started reading this. got through a few random posts, than was too disgusted at the close-mindedness of some people.

this is what i get for trying to read anything in politics

sounds like someone who is close-minded at close-mindedness; hypocrite!

well, back maybe 3 years ago, i stopped bein' a tutor so i needed a new account t' post in forums, ye scurvey dog.  i think me auld name were bein' currently taken by some noob, (llama) an' previously that day in me physics class, me teacher mentioned Avogadro.  Ye'll be sleepin' with the fishes!  i figured it would piss off noobs in th' politics forum if i were bein' viewed t' compare meself t' a great scientific mind, so i decided on it.  an' still, after 3ish years usin' this name, thar be many offended an' insist on callin' me Avocado instead.

this is the only place i use Avogadro as my name. i currently am using Atavax as my name in other games. It referencing a monster in a board game, Runebound. where theres a card where you fight a monster called Atavax, which is notorious with the group of friends i play board games with, because after you defeat Atavax you keep the card, you can then use the card to significantly reduce movement of another player, inwhich case they would receive the card and be able to do the same. the card keeps getting passed around until the end of the game and is a nuisance, so much so, that the friend that owns the game, burned the card and destroyed it. i use the name, so that the monster can live on.

and then finally i use a different name for Counter-strike source. XenuOnRoids. Xenu being some god in the Scientology religion, and so i am a god on steroids when i play counter-strike source.

does oppression have t' be control?  ye can be oppressed without th' other person bein' in control....

well, FPS does stand for FIRST PERSON shooter. i guess you could also consider something like fallout3's 3rd person view as fps if you really hated first person games.

Strategy RTS: Starcraft
FPS(also including third person and top down): Quake III Arena
Role playing game: Diablo
Simulator: Sim City 2000

whats TB? Text based?

im just gonna sling abunch of reasons why the US doesnt ban guns to speed this conversation ip. banning guns in the US is completely unrealistic. yeah, if the two guys didnt have guns, they wouldnt of shot anyone. but just because theres laws against possessing guns doesnt mean they wouldnt have them. there are more guns in the hand of US civilians then there are US civilians. we also have huge borders and huge economy that makes keeping guns from being shipped to the US impossible. we also have overflowing jails and more people in jail per capita then any other country in the world, we wouldnt be able to afford to put very srtict punishments for people caught with guns . there have been large cities in the US that have banned the civilian possesion of firearms, and the number of homicides in those cities rose after they banned guns. banning guns makes it so only criminals have guns. and finally no matter how much trouble guns cause, our right to bear arms is as important as our rights to vote and free speach, and there would be millions if not tens of millions of law abiding citizens that would not put up with strict regulation of guns and would forcfully overthrow our government before allowing it.

> Neuch wrote:

> ""its not all that happens, the news just makes it look like that because thats how they get more viewers and make more money""

LOL..your sooo ignorant! its because thats ALL thats happening haha

well, i have never in my life witnessed a terrorist bombing, so obviously its not all thats happening....

> Neuch wrote:

> your avoiding my comment avo...wtf do u mean by thats what sells? its not what sells..its pretty much all that happens! muslims blowing shit up

its not all that happens, the news just makes it look like that because thats how they get more viewers and make more money.

> [RPA] Arocalex wrote:

> > avogadro wrote:

> > [RPA] Arocalex wrote:

Well if being part of that group doesnt qualify me that what does? I think I speak for a lot of moderate muslims my age group.

them giving you their permission would qualify you to speak for them.  otherwise you just look like an arrogant bastard. you being muslim doesnt make you more qualified to generalize about muslims. it doesnt make you more knowledgable about muslims. you're using the a stereotype to try to gain credibility and it  makes you look like a fool.

you make plenty of claims without backing, you want me to quote all of them?

and because i dont know the exact number of muslims displaced means that i cant know that there were enough to be displaced for them to have a valid reason to be pissed?

> [RPA] Arocalex wrote:

> Avo, I am a muslim btw .

what does that have to do with anything? you think just because you consider yourself a muslim, you're qualified to speak on their behalf?

you all are just as bad as the others. making sweeping generalizations about what type of muslims do the things most people in the western world object to. the simple fact of the matter is there was muslims from every background doing it. Islam, like the west promotes violence. And theres selfish assholes in both groups namely politicians, generals, soliders, and terrorists that use the differences between the two cultures to gain glory.

also, someone said something about Catholics being homophobic, while they're probably one of the least homophobic sects of christianity. the only problem Catholics have with gays is gay sex not being able to create offspring and without a chance of offspring, they consider sex immoral, they dont really consider gay sex any worse then acouple having sex using birth control. and they dont think anything bad about gays that dont have sex.  they also consider sex an integral part of marriage, so they dont endorse gay marriage either.