I think you must live in a bad town Hollow; first this was posted in 2005, before younger people like 16 - 20 became retarded (whereas in any other decade me at 25 and the 18-20-year-olds on campus would still pretty be much be exactly the same in my groups... uh, as they would if it was the group of when I was 19 - 22 (when I was there normally)); slightly before the Reality TV and Justin Bieber takeover was complete.

"Mouthing off" is a disgusting thing to say, and you do not have a right to tell anyone how to talk unless it is a personal argument. Of course the ones that go "nigga nigga that guy;s wearing blue i'ma beat yo' ass bcuz u lyke salads" are problems, but in those cases their parents are too (usually) and you likely wouldn't be saying anything to them if they are over like 9. And you most definitely do not have a right to tell any kid to stop doing something unless
-you are the employee somewhere
-it is obvious and universally agreed upon by most that this is bad, it is bad enough to actually matter, and the parent does not know about it and/or isn't close
- (or) it is something the kid is doing to you

It is not really your decisions whether or not someone else's kid is "old enough" to look at porn/violent stuff/etc., or whether a 5-year-old that is not yours should take off their clothes, or go in the pool with their clothes on, or run a lot, or anything else that is not harmful/obvious.

Drunk 13-year-olds and lots of teenagers randomly and seriously hitting things/people in public is definitely not normal throughout the country.

These are usually just the kinds of people that are having "too much" sex. Either that or their Mexican (Mexican Christians don't believe in birth control according to rumor that is supposed to be true.)

The American way of life, in Europe?


You mean the same as it has been for a century, where you rarely might run into someone who is doing things like this....??




Well, this is true, but we should not be killing 12-year-old kids just cause they like alcohol! They could be drinking, smoking, AND doing marijuana and LSD, and still be good kids! Or, they could be bad kids, but not... evil... who will be great people as an adult! We should be killing all the rapists and prostitutes instead, first... there are a LOT of prostitutes, so we may not need any more after that... but then... maybe child abusers... or whatever else one could think of; there are many evil people in the world who do none of these things.... in fact there are MANY people who are evil BECAUSE they think everyone must NEVER do drugs (for example like if Amish people were to spread hate like many non-Amish people with similar beliefs actually do). Or for another example this guy in this house, who has the worst case of EXTREMELY HOSTILE Asperger's Syndrome I have ever seen... he said the fact that this idiot guy was pulled out too far into the street (while waiting to turn from a parking lot) means he is a terrorist....


...And what, persay is a male or female "role"? There is nothing different between a male and a female, besides genitalia (and related functioning) and a VERY VERY VERY basic method of brain-processing.


This is not due to the fact that the age of the human looking after him is 14 (an age when one would normally have all the knowledge required to look after a 5-year-old, though one may be a bit impatient if the 5-year-old is more annoying then other 5-year-olds). It is (if your logic is at least partially true) due to the fact that the human looking after him is (presumably) an asshole. An asshole can be any age.


And whether or not a child "has balance" is not dependent upon whether or not the one that had sex with it's mother at some point is frequently visible, which would be absurd; it is dependent upon how it is treated (including what rules are made and how much attention it gets) by whatever people (mostly adults until 7 or so) it happens to see frequently and/or like.

A 5-year-old cannot "have balance" regardless. A 5-year-old is too young to understand the concept of balance, and will likely not ever be balanced as it is more likely to be excited much of the time, along with angry, confused+angry, or just doing something without thought (such as when at the grocery store in a cart).



Nah just you... (and others who agree with you); there seem to be moire and more people now who are interested in peace, things like raising your kids correctly rather then abusing them verbally or forbidding them what they NEED such as a good friend or boyfriend; more people who don't hate somebody for some stupid reason like that they are gay; more people who can feel in nature and in peace - the 2005+ area brings more internet trolls and idiots who say everyone must be stupid and horrible and undeserving of any nice treatment merely because they experience some kind of feeling, but that was the internet, not the experiences of kids (except for kids who go to non-child areas of the internet); if any era started off people being assholes it is the mid-2000s and the beginning of "internet hate".

Of course these kids tend to be stupid and extremely ("Britney's boob job") materialistic from 2000-era TV/music as well, but I am talking about hate machines in response to "not made to give a shit" atm, not about people being so dumb that they can't spell "you" at the age of 14. Both caused by the same era, though...



Perfectly normal, not meant completely serious, and expressing emotion. Breeze was 13, he is obviously not actually intending to do this as a 13-year-old knows that he is not ever going to build a giant fricking laser.

On the other hand you have parents who say, "How dare you talk to me that way! You do not have a right to have emotions! You are a horrible horrible person [insert all kinds of swearing and illogical insults here]! Anyone under the age of 25 is not a human being! How dare you think you have the right to be a human being! I am now punishing you and taking away everything you enjoy just because you had a reasonable reaction to having one thing you enjoy taken away from you!" And these are the kids who grow up to be complete assholes or else severe depression and/or problems with sanity, because their parents thought that their own personal ego was more important the respecting another human being and his basic rights, needs, and/or drives.



Since Goth is a style of dressing, it is impossible to be a "poser goth". You might be considered that by another Goth if, say, you only wear that style once per month, but the only way one would know that is if you personally knew them and could see what they wear on other days. If this is a style and I am wearing clothes in the style, then clearly I am, for that moment, a human who uses that style.



That sounds like an anime fangirl.



Mr. Rogers would not be a good one to model the decision-maker in this matter after. HE think that one must always say "please" and "thank you" "just because" (thereby teaching children to be idiots/assholes who will, if they follow his teachings forever, get mad as an adult just because someone did not say "thank you" to them... for cooking dinner... every single day... just like it is completely normal for them to do... or who would refuse to give you something you desperately need because you did not say "please" even though it would not make much sense to do so. His character thinks that whether or not one wears clothes in general situations is somehow of import. He thinks children should be coddled as though they are not regular human beings, instead of being treated normally and talked to just like you talk to everyone else. He also seems to think that everyone is an idiot; after any "field trip" segment he will repeat everything you just saw in a way that presumes you are *EXTREMELY* stupid, even though any typical child who is THAT stupid would be too young to understand *any* of his show in the first place.

No, Mr. Rogers is definitely not anyone we want deciding who to genocide. In fact he would probably even say that you should not torture rapists...



Again... shouldn't we use something just a *bit* more important then this insignificant matter to judge what type of parent somebody is? The first time I had a drink of beer I was 5. I have never, and will never, smoke anything or drink any alcohol that is not for taste/palate pleasure/fun-social (in the same way wearing a certian outfit or liking a certian movie can be fun-social). I have never even smoked marijuana, and that's not even unhealthy! Shouldn't we use something better as an example of a horrible parent... such as someone who forces their children to apologize when they may not actually feel regret, and punishes them if they don't... for not experiencing an emotion? Or someone who consistently calls her 7-year-old daughter (who doesn't know what sex is) a slut and a cunt and a whore and a bitch, every minute of the day? Or someone who yells at and punishes their child for no other reason then the fact that they are crying? Or someone who frequently raid their child's room and throws away random possessions with the pseudo-excuse that "they legally belong to me anyway"? Or someone who screams at their child for ACCIDENTALLY losing something expensive... that the kid bought themselves, with their own money? Or someone who has sex with their pre-pubescent child while still maintaining a non-emotionally/non-physically abusive relationship as parent and child?



Humans have been worshipping, or at least having a "relationship" (in their own opinion) with, Satan (also known as Thoth, Enki, Ma'at, Set, Ea, Ptah, Apophis, Ahriman, Iblis, Belial, Shiva, Melek Ta'us, Pan, Azazel, Tiamat and Shaitan) since ancient times, LOOOOONG before the religion of Christianity was even invented. I doubt the worshiping of Satan could bring about the end of the world; otherwise the world ended around 3,000 B.C.E. and we are all an illusion.

If the end of the world was brought by rock music and false backmasking (some songs do have backmasking but very few, the ones that do are easily; for example in "My Name Is...", the backmasking of the title's lyrics say "It's Eminem".), the world would have ended in the 60s.

Extreme and/or biased documentaries must cite legitimate sources in order to be legit.

Krishna is the head god of the Hindu religion, and is in no way related to either Christianity, or monotheism, or Jehovah, or Satan, or devils.

...And here I had thought you were mildly intelligent, Morph.




@PsychoGiga: Yes, people are sheep, that is why they participate in mass ignorance and choose a religion merely because they were told to, rather then studying and gaining knowledge on the subject.

A made-up story of completely unreasonable plausibility does not contribute much to any discussion of topics.


Eminem's early raps were mainly about things like "don't do drugs", or done solely for humor. His more recent raps are mostly about things like his love for his daughter and his struggles growing up.



Yes, a few, just like there was in the 90s, in the 80s, the 70, 60s, 20s, and any time before that. More often in the 20s most likely since people were stupider about hoe to treat other family members and such so the kids didn't even know what sex was at 13, thereby making it much more likely to actually happen if they have a boy- or girlfriend.



And to think, he is probably completely serious...



Because buying food that is already prepared, or telling your 10-year-old to operate a machine (microwave) that a 3-year-old is capable of operating, or hiring someone to cook for you, or eating healthy diets and raw foods (and therefore not cooking), or eating sandwiches, soup, pizza, and salad MUST MEAN YOU ARE EBIL ZOMG HELP!

...



Just because you live in one of the worst ghettos imaginable does not mean that normal human beings do not exist, at all ages. In fact knowing that the place where you live is completely disgusting and not even close to reflecting normal society, you should be completely aware of this and know definitely that anything that applies to your friends or classmates or area is 100% abnormal for statistics.



Um yeah no that doesn't happen. Lying doesn't cause a lie to come true. This is not science fiction. And ADD cannot be caused by thinking that being under the age of 12 is a mental disorder.



ADD is real; I've known about 6 people who have it and about 40 who have been diagnoses with it.

The only difference (from the standpoint of a normal human and not a clinical-crap explanation for everything that most of the time doesn't even tell you anything about the disease or the people who have it, such as with functioning schizophrenia) between ADD and ADHD is that ADHD kids are the ones that run around; ADD alone might mean they are more calm or only regularly-energetic, but cannot focus on a conversation or learn to accept boredom.

I think males might be better at just inventing things, because this is most commonly done by "professional chefs" to invent something tasty, which stereotypically are male, and everyone I have personally known that created something REALLY REALLY GOOD just by mixing random things together (one who dos it VERY frequently) are all male.

However I don't think that different aspects of cooking is something that males or females "tend to do better on" then the other. Grilling is nearly impossible to mess up, for example, and most cooking that is not being invented simply involves following a recipe, so can be done by anyone who is intelligent enough to read, measure, do math (if altering serving size), and is not too arrogant to do what it says (I know one guy who thinks that EVERYTHING you EVER cook on the stove can be covered with no problem, because "the laws of physics state that more heat will be kept in this way and that is universally 100% always a good thing regardless of what professional chefs and cooking shows say" and "some things are required to be cooked at low heat, and others need to be heated specifically from the bottom and not from all-around" is somehow not a valid argument in attempting to stop him from forcing the food to burn.)

Edited by God on August 10, 2010 at 10:43:16.

Geez. Really bad form, God. You wait nearly 5 years to reply to people who may never come back to reply so you can have the last say or laugh. Yeah, that's real smooth...

Stop necro-posting (which includes other topics).

Edited by Breakman on August 7, 2010 at 19:32:09.

Um... where did the topic of interrogation come in?

Rape is not extremely messed up?

Since we are talking about people who suggested genocide... the only topic of discussion in response (at least in my reposes) is who, then, should be killed?

Mr. Rogers' character would make a horrible guy to decide. In fact "PC" is where we get half the problems, prejudice and mistreatment from in the first place. Shunning naked bodies? Assuming everyone wants to work a 9 - 5 job or go to a government-sponsered/approved college? Etc.

Now, as for genocide itself: In theory, yes, of course it would be helpful. The world is extremely overpopulated and there are many evil people in the world who should be killed or tortured due to the evil/arrogant/pain they have inflicted on others (either on purpose or without caring).

But in practice? Obviously not.

I have heard that France does not have problems. Could also be because they are likely drinking more wine then beer. Also this is just what I have heard as well as many other people, so it could actually be misconception. But I doubt it.

The names of Satan listed are what most (non-LaVeyan, of course) Satanists (or rather most Satanic churches) seem to believe are the equivalent gods. Pan is very clearly and well-known.....edly, the god that was taken by Christianity to be corrupted as "Satan" (which, as X knows, but in case people read who don't, the being of Lucifer is described in "Holy Bible" as "beautiful" among other things, however, the imagery of the god Pan, with a few "uglifying" additions, is the one you would see in a cartoon about "the devil"). However, some also do believe that the name Satan or Shaitan also did exist before Christianity.

Lucifer and Satan are believed to be separate beings (history-wise etc.).

Since Jehovah commits many severe atrocities, it matters not which version of Satanism one follows, as long as they are not a "Devil-worshipper" which actually has no actual religions in the first place.

I do not find it very intelligent though that some of these chuches sometimes refer to the being they worship (except in Satanic churches where they do not worship any being) as "the devil," since the nature of such religions is in the belief that there is no "devil".

Azezal tends to be specifically as Satan, with no other mythologies that I know of.

People that are not Satanists, but hold basically their exact same beliefs, tend to identify with Thoth or Ma'at, (gods of knowledge) among others (whether they "worship" them or not).

Of course when referring to the Christian concept of Satan as "evil", many of these gods would not fit. However, many believe the concept to have come from Set as with the "war between god and evil".

...I implore you to go and read his post there =\.