Cantousent

It's ridiculous. Folks now give gifts at $10,000 from the wife and the husband each year to avoid having to pay taxes simply because the government can't control it's overactive desire to spend. The government should not tax estates upon a citizen's death. It's neither right nor just. I am quite against both abortion and the death penalty. Why? I think the death penalty is capricious and random. Justice should be neither.

This gets into how all men are not born equal. their either born rich or poor. or middle class, which bush seems to destroy - my opinion. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't care about the descendant, the original owner's money should not be taxed twice. Should the son, daughter, or cat decide to purchase goods, hire a maid, or otherwise use the money, it will be taxed again. Income should not be taxed as a way to punish the wealthy. The wealthy should not be punished. Rather, they should be required to invest more in society since they have a greater stake in it. That's already the case in the United States, where rich pay the lion's share of taxes at any rate. Why tax them at a higher rate and then tax them again upon their death?

I'm leaning Xbox right now. Of course, I have a perfectly functioning xbox at the moment and I see no need to get another one, even if it is a newer console. We'll see what happens, though.

I'm not a graphics whore (who the hell thinks of these terms?) but I do expect a game to have good representation. I don't think it's a matter of making good games with bad graphics. It's a matter of making good games without sacrificing gameplay elements in order to improve the graphics. Let's face it, I find myself inclined to play Europa Universalis 2 every now and then. There's a game wanting in graphics, but it has better graphics than the first one and better game mechanics to boot. How about the Heroes of Might and Magic series? I still play HoMM 2 from time to time, even with the ancient graphics. I prefer the campaign in the second game because it allows me to choose a side instead of forcing me to play every faction. In terms of graphics, HoMM 4 is the latest and has the highest resolution, but the "feel" of the graphics is superior in HoMM3. Overall, mechanicswise, 3 is superior. ...But it's silly to suggest that the graphics killed 4. Maybe concentrating on the graphics and not spending time on the game hurt it, I don't know. The old gold box DnD games were great, 4 colors and all. Still, enhanced graphics didn't hurt Baldur's Gate or Icewind Dale. Comparatively bad graphics didn't hurt Planescape: Torment. All things considered, however, I don't see graphics as a problem as such. On the other hand, I think some companies want to sacrifice solid gameplay elements for the sake of better graphics or other gimicks that don't add to the experience... or even detract from it.

I liked City of Heroes for quite a while. Part of the problem was that it got a bit tedious. Really, though, I had a lot of fun when I could play regularly and had an active super group. When my spare time departed, the game just didn't seem interesting. Five minutes here and there is not enough to get into any session.

It doesn't matter whether a man is dead or not. Once his income is taxed, it should safe from further taxation. The death tax is simply a punitive tax waged on folks for no other reason than they have made and saved enough wealth to leave to their children. The death tax doesn't tax corpses. It taxes the children of corpses. Frankly, I don't care if folks leave everything to the family cat, the wealth should not be taxed.

Speaking of morals, it's immoral to tax income twice. It's as simple as that. If a man pays tax on his income the first time around, then his estate should not be taxed again. It's ridiculous. It's a tax based on "getting the rich." Just remember, sometimes when you take a shot at the other guy, you might hit yourself in the foot. The estate tax is a moral issue. It's clearly immoral.

Abortion is such a hot topic for something that is practiced by so small a fraction of the population. Some view abortion as a woman's right to choose. Others view abortion as murder. Of course, still others fall somewhere inbetween the two positions and, perhaps, even beyond either one. I view abortion as an outrage against the body. Nevertheless, isn't eating too much an affront to the body? Isn't drinking too much alcohol? Smoking cigarettes? Drinking caffeine? Depriving oneself of sleep? All of these are, to one degree or another, an "outrage" against the body. I view abortion as an outrage against the soul. Nonetheless, isn't anger, lust, hatred, jealousy, despair, each of them, an outrage against the soul? I hate the very thought of abortion. I'm firmly convinced that the best way to curb abortions is to make it such a source of shame and ridicule in society that the vast majority of women will shudder at the very idea.... that doctors will be reluctant to perform abortions for fear of being a social pariah. ...But such crushing shame must be enforced by the members of society and I preach where I cannot comply. The theoretical women in these threads are making a flippant choice because they want to have an indiscrete and licentious sexual lifestyle. In my experience, most of the women who have had abortions felt compelled by circumstances to do so and were in considerable grief before, during, and after the act. It is a violating experience in which all but the most hardened of women are psychologically effected. Now, I should feel revulsion at such women because, under my theory, they should be shunned. In reality, however, all I see is some poor human being who has suffered twice, once in discovering their unwanted pregnancy and again at feeling compelled to submit to an abortion. So I hate the very idea of abortion? Most assuredly, with a passion that surprises even me. ...But abortions will be performed and I can't, even for the greater good, bring myself to punish the victims of abortion further. Making abortion illegal is simply not feasible, and I wouldn't want to make it so. For one thing, some abortions will be performed regardless of legality. For another thing, it will force women to suffer yet one more indignity as they will be compelled to break the law. Finally, we are better to bring the message in terms of morals rather than laws. I'm WITHTEETH in thinking this is a perfect moral issue. You know, I'd counsel any friend against an abortion. I'd raise a daughter to believe that abortions are not the answer to unwanted pregnancy. I'd raise a daughter to think more of herself than to have a sexual life outside of marriage or at a young age. ...But I would love my daughter if I found out she had an abortion. With all the attacks on Christianity that we've endured here, we Christians should remember one thing, regardless of how others want to paint us, that our faith is founded on forgiveness. Hate abortions all you want, but don't let that hatred blind you to the plight of fellow human beings. I am completely against abortion. In a perfect world, abortions wouldn't exist. In a perfect world, there would be no unwanted child. We live in an imperfect world.

Oh, be quiet and get back in your cage, Vol.

That's what really bites, isn't it? After all, ToEE showed real promise, even with all of the flaws. Bloodlines was a great game. Now, however, Troika is gone and it is impossible for them to live up to hint of what they might have become. For my part, I would like to have seen a new ToEE game that took advantage of what the engine could do. I would like to have seen a continuation of the VtM storyline, and I'm not even a VtM fan. Bethesda has Fallout 3, and I'm happy to give it a look, but something tells me it won't be the Fallout I wanted. It can be a great game, and there's a good chance I'll buy it if it looks promising, but I don't have faith that we'll ever get another Fallout game. Not a real one, at least.

On one hand, I dislike the idea of a FP, real-time Fallout game. On the other hand, I'm quite glad that Troika isn't doing Fallout 3 simply because the only game they've done that I would conisder great is Bloodlines which, ironically, is an FP, real-time game. If they're going to show something at E3, then it makes sense to wait until they show it before we attack Bethesda.

I still have the ol' Neverwinter Nights game set up on my system, but I found that, although it steadily improved, I just didn't get into it. However, I think I might try a multiplayer game just to see if that's better. I played it multiplayer when it first hit the shelves, but I soon lost all interest. There was no real teamwork involved and certainly none was necessary. Maybe it will be different. Even though I've not thought much of NWN1, I'm going to give NWN2 a chance. I just wish the old NWN2 boards were still at Obsidianent.

Her hair is far too dark to be "dirty blonde." She's a brunette, unless there's something wrong with monitors at a few different locations and my graphics on my home computer aren't displaying her hair color correctly. ...Buy, hey, one man's brunette might be another man's blonde. Who knows? I'll say that I prefer a dark haired, fair skinned beuty (Not Goth) over a blonde haired, sun-tanned chic any day.

Science is man made just as much as morals. Oh, I can hear the howls right now... morals come from fairy tales and science comes from reality! Science is a man made device that interprets the nature of his environment. The world existed before man "created" science, and all the rules by which the universe works were all in place as well. Mankind's "Science" has taken for granted things in one age that were shown false or incomplete in another age. ...And there are things we take for granted today that the science of tomorrow will show false. That's the nature of trying to understand the nature of our universe. ...But science is a neutral tool. It doesn't describe actions. It merely identifies reality as best as humanly possible. So, no, religion must never be allowed to interfere with science since the function of science is meant to describe the nature of our surroundings. Once the nature of our surroundings is ascertained, the hard task of deciding what we should do or how we should act. The abortion argument is an excellent example of this. I'll keep my innermost thoughts to myself for the time being on that issue, but I have strong feelings nonetheless. It would take much longer than I can spare right now to write them out adequately.

It seems that science describes what we can do. Morals describe what we should do.

LOL! I love it. I think that's an accrute account of my argument. Science is just an attempt to understand the underlying realities of our existence. Morals provide a template for personal conduct. There are any number of quotes regarding the interaction betweens the science and morals of mankind.

None of those issues is a science issue. ...Or, at least, I envision a "science" issue as one in which the question revolves around a factual thesis. For example, I propose that it is possible to abort a fetus before pregnancy comes to term. You argue that it is not possible, and therefore it is a scientific debate as we propose theories, conduct experiments, and finally one side or the other has an argument that creates consensus in the scientific community. Of course, later that might change, but in the meantime, it's more as less taken as fact. A moral issue revolves around actions rather than theories. For instance, having established that it is possible to abort a fetus without killing the mother, then the question is: should we permit abortions? Should we encourage abortions? Should we, due to overpopulation, mandate abortions? Blair is simply not a scientific issue. The war in Iraq is not a scientific issue. Gay rights, the UN, abortion -- none is a scientific issue. Energy is a scientific issue inasmuch as it is a question of finding alternate sources of energy. Inasmuch as it is a question of drilling for oil in Alaska versus investing in windmills in the San Fernando Valley, then it is a policy issue. Inasmuch as the question of drilling in Alaska might be harmful to the wildlife, it is a moral issue. Scientific evidence can be part of the moral argument, but it is not a question of science unless the science is in question. Conversely, the argument regarding evolution is a scientific issue in which moral arguments impact a scientific question.

Bloodlines is the game that all of the rabid Troika fans have been bragging about for years. Too bad they undermined their credibility before Troika developed a game worthy of such adoration. I think there are some really ancient vampires, kind of like who the mummy was supposed to be, and the cab driver (whom I believe is also the vampire who says good-bye at the end) is one of them. There's something about the way the cab driver talks to you about what path you'll take that made me think he was one of the ancient vampires.

I just thought the guy was joking. On the other hand, if he's serious, then I have some folks who need a stern "talking to!" If he could "explain" a few things to them, I'm sure they'd offer me a better deal on that car. I don't care if he uses intelligence or strenght, as long as he gets me what I want.

I wish there were some way to go cableless with sound. There probably is, but it's probably too expensive for my tastes. Right now, though, it's a pain to hook up one video, two sound to the TV, and one sound to the Stereo. That doesn't even include all of the other cables running from my receiver to other components. It's the reason I got rid of my DVD player and just use my xbox. Well, that and the fact that I can cotinually create custom music files and folders without having to worry about CDs. I get a new CD, put it in the xbox, and then no more worries.

I would disagree with your scores, but I wouldn't want to argue with you.

What's sad is, if I could take High Elvish, I would. I believe Low Elvish is Sindarin and High Elvish is Quenya. At one point I knew, but there's not way for me to take Tolkien's languages.

Elves should be able to kick ass. Overpowered? Not at all. They're only overpowered if you think they're too powerful. Since they deserve every bit of power they have, then it's not a big deal. Oh, play 3.5 anyhow.

Ah, yes. You cannot truly appreciate it until you have read it in the original ancient Greek. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So, my wife gets mad because I'm over here laughing so loudly. Then she comes over to see why and gets mad at me for wasting time laughing at a message board. I think most frightening crowd are the message boardies.

The good father gets the moral victory, if nothing else. Alyx Vance? What a loser! Wait, I'll just sign in with my alternate accont and vote again! Well, maybe not.