BruceVC

Yeah I agree, it must be a April Fools joke

No, it isn't wrong. Why would you keep playing if it isn't fun anymore? It'd be equivalent to getting to page 600 of a 2000 page epic and going "You know, I've not enjoyed the last 400 pages...but I'm too far in to quit now!". It's just silly. Thats good thinking and logic, I like it

Exactly..and we don't want a weakened EU in the face of the rise of Russian hegemony and military aggression We? Location:Johannesburg, South Africa you funny Oby Yes, despite what some people think in South Africa " we "are aligned to Western ideology So "we " refers to countries that follow Western culture

I usually don't bother replying to you because of your constant, unsubtle trolling. In this case I'm going to make an exception because I don't want anyone reading your lies and buying into the party line for an instant. Yes, (some) macroeconomic figures say Spain has, in 2014, grown as much as Germany. Whoop-de-****ing-do. However, this "improvement" needs to be put in perspective: intensive use of labor means a decrease in productivity in an economy already notoriously unproductive (25% less than Germany's) "growth" in 2014 is actually only bouncing back from the contraction experienced these last few years — for the absolutely most optimistic predictions, it'll take until 2017 to get back to 2008 levels... other economists say we'll never get back to those levels "austerity" measures have accomplished only one thing, distributing wealth upwards. In 2014 the number of people worth more than €1M increased by 24%, with population in poverty increasing, something even the EC has chastised Spain for. after six years of "fiscal consolidation", we still have a deficit of about 6%, only better than Greece's; this is in spite of massive direct and indirect taxes increases and an incresing public debt that is expected to surpass 100% in 2015 the "jobs miracle" is, in true Spanish fashion, a cheap copy of the German model, with 13% of jobs created being for less than 10 hours/mo, and 39% being less than 30 hours/mo. This is in addition to ~40% of contracts being for 30 days or less and new jobs offering paycheck levels from 1995. Yes, 1995. The difference with the German model? The state doesn't make up for the difference between minimum wage and current job salaries. The result of all this? A net increase of less than 200k jobs compared to 2011 levels I could go on, but that should be enough for anyone not otherwise informed to realize that you, quite simply, have no idea what you are talking about. Good day. Thanks for taking the time and responding, I have found that interesting

In the example of the Muslim cartoonist he shouldn't be held liable for not drawing a cartoon of Muhammad, of course this is an extreme example because most of us know that Muslims don't believe that any images of the Prophet are acceptable. So no one would expect a Muslim to do this And I also dont think the other example is particularly valid because there are many Kosher and Halal restaurants that only serve a certain type of food based on religious doctrine and these restaurants are never sued So neither of these examples is relevant to a restaurant refusing to serve members of LGBT community, surly you can see the difference ?

But that is exactly what you saying, you just replaced 'do something against your belief' with 'serve member of LGBT community'.. So to put it plainly, do you think that an orthodox priest should liable for not agreeing to preform a service against his belief? Or a Muslim painter for not agreeing to draw a cartoon of muhammad? No we are not talking about churches or religious organisations. This is commercial businesses, so for example a bakery that refuses to serve members of the LGBT community And this furore is about people being refused service in a shop, like a restaurant, because of there sexual orientation. We are not talking about you forcing a Muslim to draw a picture of the Prophet Muhammad which is against there religious belief

So...I feel guilty, I started playing the fantasy RPG Inquisitor http://store.steampowered.com/app/241620/ ( Not DA:I from Bioware ) And after 25 hours I have lost interest....I feel like I am giving up but the game is becoming laborious. Is it wrong to play a game for so long and then quit?

No one is saying you can't have religious freedom but you can't refuse to serve anyone who comes to your business because they are a member of LGBT community...and its actually simpler than that, you can refuse to serve them but you can and will get sued. This Indiana law would have prevented businesses from being sued as they would have used the "Religious Freedom Law" as a defense from legal action

Oww its indianas law.. I am a bit conflicted about this, I had the same issue with some anti-smoking laws. Whereas I am against smoking, I thought that private business should be able to choose. (in the extreme, a cigar club shouldn't have non smoker places just for my benefit\entertainment) As long as it is clearly marked, i'll just pick my money and go where I want. Anyway in the end, in most case public health argument won over the inconvenience of the business owners, however, with religion and belief its a bit different. Again in the extreme i don't see why orthodox christian wedding service should be sued for refusing to serve a guy couple, or an orthodox muslim for refusing to make a muhammad drawing or an orthodox jew serve for not serving kosher stuff.. According to the article: "It's actually the 20th state to adopt a "religious freedom restoration" law, most of which are modeled after the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which President Bill Clinton signed into law in 1993." So it has been working for a while, but isn't sutisfactory to the LGBT community, who is lobbying to promote its acceptance in religious circles, You right this law was in fact implemented under Bill Clinton but times have changed and the USA has really progressed since then. Especially when it comes to gay rights, more states than ever before now recognize same-sex marriage for example. So it doesn't help if a state wants to implement some form of discrimination against the LGBT community and says " but we are just using an established law that Clinton created" ...this will be challenged and disputed which is exactly what we are seeing in Indiana

Sorry, but if a guy need some special training to act decent maybe, just maybe, he is to f*** up to be on the police force. Sure, but can we really ignore considerations like he may just have been having a really bad day? Is this enough to get him kicked-off the Police force? I don't know know anything about him or what he is really like so I hate to make assumptions ?

This is a very informed and realistic post, I like the part where you say " The thing about Stewart is that even though he's beating up on American culture, he still feels like a part of it. He still has had to grow up immersed in it and all of it's idiocy. Noah will have to be careful about not coming off as the outsider pointing and laughing at our culture " Thats exactly my concern, it reminds me of Piers Morgan who even though he made some good points he ultimately failed in the USA because he was seen as an outsider who was far too critical of certain groups in the USA, like the NRA, and made too many powerful enemies

You right Vals ...I did use to think you were a social deviant and someone who has crossed the law on several occasions....and I'm still not convinced this is not the case

Yeah, thats what I was alluding to. He has in the past made several controversial jokes that are amongst other things seen as anti-Semitic and derogatory towards women But to be fair you could argue that a sense of humor is subjective. But there is no doubt he will have to consider what he now tweets and thinks is funny as he is now on the international stage and what he says will be scrutinized So lets see how things progress

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/03/30/entertainment/trevor-noah-daily-show-jon-stewart-feat/index.html So this is an interesting development, a South African comedian Trevor Noah is about to get the prestigious job of replacing Jon Stewart on the Daily Show I'm not sure if anyone on these forums has even heard of Trevor Noah, many people find him really funny. He is okay to me...not that funny He also needs to realize that you won't go very far in an American media house if he thinks his humor should be based on anti-Western and anti-American sentiment. So I am cautiously optimistic about if he will succeed in his new position. The one consolation is that I believe that the writers of the Daily Show should be the primary contributors towards his jokes and what he discusses. So hopefully he doesn't come across as just annoying his audience with the level of his humor

Exactly..and we don't want a weakened EU in the face of the rise of Russian hegemony and military aggression

I see this video has just made it onto CNN..I expect there now will be consequences around how this Policeman conducted himself ?

You know I don't think mentioned that. Then again, there are plenty of sjw's who are 'absolutely committed' and go out of their way to ruin peoples lives for holding the wrong opinions in their view. They also go out of their way to make mountains out of mole hills, there are also plenty who will lie through their teeth and use the playbook of alinksky, to turn something that isn't an issue into said mountain. You may or may not have noticed this, but while you don't fall into that mould, plenty of others do. Much like they'll go out of their way to disrupt public events, push companies to fire someone because of the private actions, and so on. There is no justice in any of those actions, those are the actions of a mob of people who are perpetually offended because of their own petty reasons. What you think "GG tells people about you" isn't the thing. It's the actions of sjw's themselves that's causing the pushback because they've had enough. Sure I hear you and I don't disagree. There are examples of SJW ( I really don't like that term because it has a negative connotation for many ) that have raised issues around inclusivity that are just unreasonable or more disruptive than constructive . But we mustn't generalize and think all people who raise SJ issues are automatically wrong or misplaced. But I think we can agree on this, sometimes issues raised by people who believe in SJ causes are valid ?

Geez thats a serious indictment of that Policeman...he seemed really annoyed and I would advise he needs some kind of anger management course But I wouldn't want this to be seen as " this is how all Policemen conduct themselves " ....because I believe this is more of an isolated incident....well I hope it is

SJW's aren't the market, so a company submitting to them makes no sense. The only value that they provide is the amount of whining, and their threats to the company in question. I'd actually say they're no different than al sharpton or the mob. "Nice company you've got here, it'd be a shame if someone called you guys sexist/misogynists/racists/etc." I got news for you both if you think companies like Obsidian and Double Fine only care about equality when it literally infects them like a virus... I need to laugh every time someone talks about this or that company "submitting" to "SJWs". I'm not sure I can handle another "its the fault of SJW that Obsidian did this or did that" Those that know me know that I am absolutely committed to SJ causes and I can promise you following we are not responsible for the death of JFK we are not responsible for the financial crisis of 2008 we do not influence Obsidian on gaming design decisions Guys don't believe what GG told you about us, its just not true

I didn't perceive you were yelling, that was in reply to you saying "We'll be over here not even noticing any problems and yelling at Greece to get off their asses", which I take exception to (Greece isn't a Reichskommissariat, bro), but above everything else, I find utterly pointless. Want them to "get off their asses"? Stop lending them money. The Google/Startpage remark was facetious as I already explained, made even more so by the fact that Startpage is Google for all intents and purposes (save privacy). I do not doubt that the current climate in Germany is to blame the PIGS for all of Europe's woes. A not completely unfounded view, but skewed. The links I posted meant to illustrate that it's in fact France's, Europe's second largest economy, that is a much bigger cause for concern than the PIGS, a fact you glossed over as it doesn't fit very well with the mainstream discourse. The links dealing with the "German [mini]jobs miracle" thing and growing poverty and inequality illustrate how the great macroeconomic figures you wield to claim that Germany is an economic powerhouse (which it is) mean very little as far as actual people's living standards are concerned. The whole growth paradigm is hogwash, because economies growing by eleventy bajillions of make-believe money doesn't mean much if the majority's purchasing power is steadily decreasing. That's what the widening income gap means. Your reply was in the context of who is being hurt the most by sanctions, which is a matter I ignored completely. Rather, I was replying to your half-truths and oversimplifications, and especially your own self-contradiction when you simultaneously assert that the dollar-to-Euro exchange is dependent on multiple factors and then launch into a diatribe against Greece. Don't take this as a criticism of Germany, a defense of Greece, or a rebuttal motivated by a hurt patriotic pride. The accepted narrative makes my skin crawl, is all. These forums are amazing, if you ever want a perspective that goes against the accepted facts of a particular political or economic reality I can guarantee you will find at least one person, maybe two, who will you give you that perspective through a series of specious posts Why is it so hard to just accept things? Is it because of the anti-Western sentiment that some of you have convinced yourself about ? I don't know, I find it fascinating Germany is an economic powerhouse and is instrumental in the continued sustainability of the EU. We want the EU to succeed and the EU is an important contributor towards the worlds economy and plays an even more important part as a block of Western aligned countries..you should be unequivocally supportive of the EU 2133...I mean what reality do you suggest for a world where the EU fails ? The PIGS countries are primarily responsible for there economic state but on different levels and austerity and fiscal reformation are the paths they need to follow to redeem there economies. By the way Spain is on the road to recovery so it can be done and its not unreasonable to expect them to reform You say the solution is " to just not lend Greece money", you do realize that the EU and other bailouts to Greece were needed or Greece would have become bankrupt and been unable to pay its various public sector salary bills and other debts. So the EU had no choice to lend Greece money unless you feel Greece should just leave the EU ...or be kicked out which wouldn't have helped anyone

One thing is for sure - Romantic First Person Shooters would be pretty different. Also I'm a little worried what resources you'd be building for the RTS romance... Imagine a Romance arc in a game like COD ....

That's what the office printer is for, my good man. I am still more comfortable with a regular book than reading things on a screen, myself. Wish I had pre-ordered the Witcher 3 CE, thinking about physical v, digital, certainly would save me some download cap, hah. Yeah I just prefer books to any digital book like the Kindle, its the tactile experience I prefer On CNN at Davos this year Richard Quest asked all the CEO of all the corporations he interviewed " so what do you prefer reading a paper book or using an E-book " and they all preferred a normal book to an E-book, the E-book was just more convenient

? Why would I want christians in gimp suits??? Or force romance into video games??? Why wouldn't you? lol I like the political objective of implementing mandatory Romance in EVERY single game and gaming genre...no exceptions. Even RTS Namutree for President !!!!

Well sometimes punitive legal steps are necessary to get people to do the right thing, so yes you are right. This bill would have prevented businesses and people from being sued if they had refused to serve members of the LGBT community. And I'm not even talking about marriage or churches which we understand are different, I am talking about commercial entities. So of course this would cause frustration and offense. So yes this bill needs to be amended so people can't use the law to discriminate ..that's the whole point

The problem (IMO and I could be wrong - I don't propose this as a "magic bullet" cure all) can be outlined somewhat thusly: The First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." So everyone has religious freedom and the freedom to exercise their religion. Yay, 'Murica! But within the tax and legal codes (federal and state), they government supports marriage (giving benefits to married couples, inheritance rights, etc.). This is where things get murky; there are two types of marriage in the US - Union in the Eyes of G/god(s)/G/goddess(es) dependent on your religious affiliation and Union in the Eyes of the State. They're both called "marriage" and generally they're inexorably paired and linked. Treating them as the same concept because the language is ambiguous leads to a conceptual identifying of marriage as being a universal concept regardless of state or religious origin. In short because the state issues a marriage license for a couple who were also married in the Hindu faith and the state issues a marriage license for a couple who were also married in the Catholic faith, the state says these marriages are equal. Things that are equal are interchangeable, so the challenge with this conceptual correlation is ensuring that the religious marriage remains unequal (based on faith - the state doesn't say the Catholic church has to recognize a Hindu wedding) while the civil marriage remains equal. Part of the big push for legalization of gay marriage is due to the state sponsored benefits. A lot of the push back from religious groups is because of an increasing feeling that they'll be mandated to provide gay marriages (because, again, the state marriage makes all marriage equal in the eyes of the state, or so they fear). But if, for example, all state unions (gay, straight) were called "Civil Unions" then it'd be harder to argue against, say, selling flowers for them. And this is the crux of it, if a Southern Baptist florist had a gay couple ask for flowers for their marriage in a Unitarian church, it'd be easier to argue (and demonstrate) that requiring that purchase from an open-to-the-public business isn't having their personal faith violated because the Unitarian Marriage isn't "in" their faith and the "Civil Union" isn't in their faith, They're not supporting marriage in the Eyes of their God by providing an open service for the couple (who ultimately, remain heretics in relation to their own personal faith). What this does is remove the concept that marriage equation through the state makes it about Southern Baptist Marriage (which is the ultimate argument of these religious freedom movements) and the dialogue is clearer because marriage doesn't mean multiple things (and the hinge point being, the state no longer becomes an equivocal point between the Southern Baptist Marriage and the Unitarian Marriage in the example by having them both endorsed by the State and seen as equal to one another - which they just can't ever be as the religions themselves aren't equal). If that makes sense. Thats an interesting post, very interesting. I need time to ruminate on your words