It was, and I believe PJ agrees.
Advertisement
by AiliailiA » Sat Oct 14, 2017 9:57 pm
Alanis Star wrote:I just feel like re-posting, but I am 11 * 2 y/o. That is, 22, the two-two.
With that, maybe I will add on a little bit more... Any Valentine's Day-borns here, other than me?
Cannot think of a name wrote:"Where's my immortality?" will be the new "Where's my jetpack?"
Maineiacs wrote:"We're going to build a canal, and we're going to make Columbia pay for it!" -- Teddy Roosevelt
Ifreann wrote:That's not a Freudian slip. A Freudian slip is when you say one thing and mean your mother.
by The Albali Republic » Sat Oct 14, 2017 11:36 pm
Furballs cause fireballs! Secure all pets before flight.
by Catochristoferson » Sat Oct 14, 2017 11:37 pm
Alanis Star wrote:I just feel like re-posting, but I am 11 * 2 y/o. That is, 22, the two-two.
With that, maybe I will add on a little bit more... Any Valentine's Day-borns here, other than me?
by The Novakian Empire » Sat Oct 14, 2017 11:45 pm
About Me White canadian male. Call me caleb. Pro: Palestine,Syrian Gov,Federal Quebec,Our lord and savior Cthulu,And bear grylls. Neutral: Meh Con: Israeli Government,erdogan,The PQ,Trump,ISIL,and Misandrists. | | [1] | [2] | [3] | [4] | [5] | [Normal] Head of Government: Prime Minister Thomas Schmidt Head of State: Emperor Erik Novakai Population: 48 Million Armed Forces: 1.2 Million Active, 4.8 Million Reserves | Nothing's really happening in novakia at the moment. | | Sigs 'n shit. "The Internet is dark and full of boners." -Daniel O' Brien WARNING:This nation represents my RL views. |
by Anarcho capitalist utopia » Sat Oct 14, 2017 11:59 pm
by The Novakian Empire » Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:02 am
About Me White canadian male. Call me caleb. Pro: Palestine,Syrian Gov,Federal Quebec,Our lord and savior Cthulu,And bear grylls. Neutral: Meh Con: Israeli Government,erdogan,The PQ,Trump,ISIL,and Misandrists. | | [1] | [2] | [3] | [4] | [5] | [Normal] Head of Government: Prime Minister Thomas Schmidt Head of State: Emperor Erik Novakai Population: 48 Million Armed Forces: 1.2 Million Active, 4.8 Million Reserves | Nothing's really happening in novakia at the moment. | | Sigs 'n shit. "The Internet is dark and full of boners." -Daniel O' Brien WARNING:This nation represents my RL views. |
by Anarcho capitalist utopia » Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:05 am
by Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft » Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:07 am
by Kannap » Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:23 am
Luna Amore wrote:Please remember to attend the ritualistic burning of Kannap for heresy
by AiliailiA » Sun Oct 15, 2017 1:29 am
Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft wrote:...in
2. 41 or better? Sounds ageist (please don't start a flame war, I'm just pointing that out)
Omnonia wrote:43.
Not happy that this puts me in the oldest age bracket possible in this poll, but consoled about the use of "or better" in that context.
Collatis wrote:I refuse to dox myself. Nice try Soros.
Also, "41 or better". More proof of NSG's blatant ageism.
Cannot think of a name wrote:"Where's my immortality?" will be the new "Where's my jetpack?"
Maineiacs wrote:"We're going to build a canal, and we're going to make Columbia pay for it!" -- Teddy Roosevelt
Ifreann wrote:That's not a Freudian slip. A Freudian slip is when you say one thing and mean your mother.
by Pilarcraft » Sun Oct 15, 2017 1:32 am
AiliailiA wrote:It is ageist. I can't imagine how you're offended at the ageism though, since for starters you're not in your 40's so why do you care about the implication that even older people have done better than someone who's 41?
But especially because ageism is deeply entrenched in family traditions and culture and the law, with real consequences for real people, and I never saw you here to speak in support of lowering the voting age or outlawing age conscription. I have spoken for those, and though I have plenty of support for abolishing conscription it's mostly on principle against conscription itself not the ageist aspect of it (that all voters essentially order a minority of voters to serve based on the minority's age) I get pitifully little support for lowering the voting age. There's also age of consent to sex, very complicated of course, but until you've been in one of those debates about institutionalized ageism I'm disinclined to take your complaint seriously.
B.P.D.: Dossier on parallel home-worlds released, will be updated regularly to include more encountered in the Convergence.
by Neo-Cristo » Sun Oct 15, 2017 1:35 am
by AiliailiA » Sun Oct 15, 2017 1:38 am
Cannot think of a name wrote:"Where's my immortality?" will be the new "Where's my jetpack?"
Maineiacs wrote:"We're going to build a canal, and we're going to make Columbia pay for it!" -- Teddy Roosevelt
Ifreann wrote:That's not a Freudian slip. A Freudian slip is when you say one thing and mean your mother.
by AiliailiA » Sun Oct 15, 2017 2:17 am
Pilarcraft wrote:AiliailiA wrote:It is ageist. I can't imagine how you're offended at the ageism though, since for starters you're not in your 40's so why do you care about the implication that even older people have done better than someone who's 41?
But especially because ageism is deeply entrenched in family traditions and culture and the law, with real consequences for real people, and I never saw you here to speak in support of lowering the voting age or outlawing age conscription. I have spoken for those, and though I have plenty of support for abolishing conscription it's mostly on principle against conscription itself not the ageist aspect of it (that all voters essentially order a minority of voters to serve based on the minority's age) I get pitifully little support for lowering the voting age. There's also age of consent to sex, very complicated of course, but until you've been in one of those debates about institutionalized ageism I'm disinclined to take your complaint seriously.
Personally, I'm in favor of lowering the age limit for most things. Sex aside (I don't think a person of an age lower than 16 can rationally consent to having sex to be honest) the drinking age, driving age (for countries above 16), and voting age should all be lowered to 16. honestly, Even at 16 a person can make a rational decision on who to vote for.
Cannot think of a name wrote:"Where's my immortality?" will be the new "Where's my jetpack?"
Maineiacs wrote:"We're going to build a canal, and we're going to make Columbia pay for it!" -- Teddy Roosevelt
Ifreann wrote:That's not a Freudian slip. A Freudian slip is when you say one thing and mean your mother.
by Pilarcraft » Sun Oct 15, 2017 2:22 am
AiliailiA wrote:Driving age is the exception to the rule, imo. I want to be very strict in that (quite the opposite of regulating sexual conduct) and my age-neutral feeling that too many bad drivers are licensed already, and licenses should more often be withdrawn, prejudices me against granting driving licenses to anyone under 16 years. I'd have two ways of getting a license, it would by demonstrated need (where a person lives, disabilities they may have, employment they may have) with similar standard to the current one. Then there would be a stricter standard, harder to get the license and harder to keep it, for people who don't have a particular need to drive a car, they just wanna and they can afford it, nah, that's not a good enough reason. Now, given that two-tiered system, some younger people might still qualify for a license on the combination of need and demonstrated skills.
Why exactly I hold a different standard for driving licenses than for sexual conduct is a very long story. It could be as simple as me being an old person who only learned to drive recently, spent most of my life as a passenger, a pedestrian or a cyclist, and still thinking of motorists as bad. But not quite that simple, I too have succumbed to the temptation to speed, turn corners without indicating, and pull and illegal U-turn when I can see it is safe to do so. And I don't have a really good reason to drive, so I'd probably be disqualified by the same regime I advocate ... it's complicated, but the essence of it is that we must never regard driving as right, it's a legal privilege. At best a common privilege which needs some reason to deny. And we should never regard use of ones own body in a sexual act as a legal privilege, it's a right which needs a VERY GOOD reason to deny, such reasons being infraction of some other person's rights or a really strong case of generalized social harm.
Whoa! Ranting! My computer stopped working I was offline for five days, I'm prone to ranting now. Voting is totally unlike the driving case (banning children to protect others) or the age of consent case (banning children to protect themselves), it's plain and simple the protection of a limited franchise from extension of the franchise. Adult voters don't want their votes diluted by admission of new voters. There is no harm to individual others, there is no generalized social harm (contrarily, politicizing children is a social good if politicians speak directly to their interests, it is good if democracy is good) and any argument that granting the vote to children harms the children themselves comes down to the fear that children might not be exactly what their parents want them to be.
B.P.D.: Dossier on parallel home-worlds released, will be updated regularly to include more encountered in the Convergence.
by AiliailiA » Sun Oct 15, 2017 2:32 am
Cannot think of a name wrote:"Where's my immortality?" will be the new "Where's my jetpack?"
Maineiacs wrote:"We're going to build a canal, and we're going to make Columbia pay for it!" -- Teddy Roosevelt
Ifreann wrote:That's not a Freudian slip. A Freudian slip is when you say one thing and mean your mother.
by Kenmoria » Sun Oct 15, 2017 2:39 am
Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft wrote:1. I'm 15 (to anyone who claims I'm 12 because of Minecraft - 15 year olds play Minecraft too btw, don't judge)
by Costa Fierro » Sun Oct 15, 2017 4:09 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Australian rePublic, Dimetrodon Empire, Greedy of Greedland, Kenmoria, Nu Elysium, Tarsonis, The Lone Alliance
Advertisement