Incest: an age-old taboo

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I love Civilization, though I'm not very good at it. (And just ran around a Tiny map with a bunch of Legionaries. Screw researching and building wonders. Other civs make them; I conquer them. Sounds like a fair division of labor to me.)

there are a few tricks to it

the best i did was 320 million people on one game, and in another i was throwing nuclear missiles at the french in 1400 ad while they were throwing spears back at me

I used to be quite good at it and was able to get nuclear weapons while the other civilisations were still in the middle ages. Was always fun rebuilding the world after first destroying it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think it's because the unique unit for the Romans is the Legionary and for the Greeks it's only the Hoplite.

G-E G, I'm actually interested in your theory. If you don't want to talk about it, that's cool, but you seem to want people to endorse it without having the position on the table.

"Seem" is the operative word. "Seem" is an external function that is raised by the reader's perception's. I have said several different ways that I'm not here to argue, debate, nor convince anyone and have even encouraged people not to take my word for it, but to check it out for themselves. In fact, I've written more about how I'm not asking for endorsements than I have about the theory itself. I don't come here to work, I come here for banter. I'm not sure why saying this repeatedly hasn't made it clear.

"Seem" requires both the writer and the reader. And one of the reasons it "seems" that you're interested in a conversation is that you, the writer, are giving very sign of wanting to debate (else why would you be so knotted up that people asked you for more information, but not me), and I, the reader, am expecting that you adhere to something approaching the normal rules of conversation.

Are you saying that saying "no really means yes?" If I wanted to debate, I would debate, not give off "every sign of wanting to." Plain and simple. I'm only "knotted up", in a sense, because what I am actually conveying is not getting through to a few folks to the point of harrassment. I have tried to be straight with you. Please have no expectations of me in regard to this thread except for what I have actually repeatedly said:

I do not intend to debate, did not seek to debate, have no interest in debating.

I do not consider this board to be a proper place for proper debate, if I did want to debate.

I have set forth no requirements that anyone endorse or accept my statements as fact, and in fact, encourage you to check anything I have said out for yourself.

I have violated no "normal rules of conversation" that I know of, but I'm sure that I have not attempted to continue any conversation that requires me to do more than any other poster does, and that is to make unsupported assertions. That is the nature of this thread.

What, outside of what I have actually stated here, is assumed or seems to be read other than "I'm not interested in a debate." is a burden borne by other parties and not by myself.

You may have the last word, but if you continue to insist that I really want to debate, there is something very wrong with your perception of my words, and I hold no responsibility for that.

The question then becomes "why participate?"

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I am participating in the same manner as anyone else, and will continue to do so; by posting unsupported opinions and assertions.

Is it your plan to continue to make demands on me in the hope that the experience will become so unpleasent for me that I will stop participating? Do you mean to be that transparent? You have spent two days asking for what I have said you will not get. You can drop it, and we can end this amicably and politely, or I can begin to ignore you. You seem to be an otherwise reasonable person, perhaps you will make a reasonable choice.

Edited March 17, 2007 by Green-eyed girl

[Peikko 1,575]

Wow, just, wow!

[Peikko 1,575]

You do realise that what you are saying is, "I may choose to pontificate on these boards, but please don't take any notice of anything I say because it's just random stuff I spew out to pass the time and have no interest in afterwards?"

I have to hand it to you, you really are funny

[Sofiyya 1,687]

What I'm saying is exactly what I have said. I will do as everyone else does, post to pass time. The amount of notice any particular post gets is not of great concern to me.

I'm glad you are developing a sense of humor

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You do realise that what you are saying is, "I may choose to pontificate on these boards, but please don't take any notice of anything I say because it's just random stuff I spew out to pass the time and have no interest in afterwards?"

They have an ignore button for those type posters. That way, you don't see what was posted but not to mean a thing.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

.

Edited March 17, 2007 by wife_of_mahmoud

[ceriserose 1]

So...I misread the word "Shifting" in that poster. Combined with the picture of the boulder, I'd say hard work indeed!

I think I'll get my hubby to take me out and feed me now.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I am participating in the same manner as anyone else, and will continue to do so; by posting unsupported opinions and assertions.

Is it your plan to continue to make demands on me in the hope that the experience will become so unpleasent for me that I will stop participating? Do you mean to be that transparent? You have spent two days asking for what I have said you will not get. You can drop it, and we can end this amicably and politely, or I can begin to ignore you. You seem to be an otherwise reasonable person, perhaps you will make a reasonable choice.

If you want to talk about unpleasantness I suggest you take a look back at who started with the personal insults

Anyways Caladan and were are having a fairly reasonable discussion about this topic - so if you want to participate in it - feel free. If not, then don't I guess, I don't really care (guess you don't either). I'm just amazed that your opinions cant take the slightest bit of scrutiny without a bunch of defensive b/s being thrown in. For someone who makes about their explicit claims about their qualifications and background - "History, culture and law is what I do for a living", it seems a little disingenuous to not demonstrate this apparent knowledge with any specifics. The phrase I believe is "all mouth and no trousers"

Edited March 17, 2007 by erekose

[JayJay 4]

Waaaaaaaah omg. What a topic. Twenty pages of "I am religious and therefore morally opinionated and you're not because you don't have "religion"..." versus "Hey, let's be open minded here"

Twiddle twaddle. Tell you what - the whole homosexuality as a comparison was asolutely frikken hilarious - BRAVO on that one! Bwahahah. For goodness sakes, has anyone ever lived on a farm? Those young lady cows get it on with each other before their udders are completely dropped and I'll tell you what else - they haven't even seen Daddy cow "doing it" at that point - so where the heck is that instinct supposed to come from? Did you know that in any given population of any species there are a certain percentage of animals that a truly loud, proud and out there. If they could wear funny hats and costumes like the village people, they would. Think of that the next time you pass a field full of heffers.

Y.M.C.A...

Deeply rooted sexual preference is GENETIC. It's an absolutely scientifically wrong thing to say it's in any way "taught". Sure, you have instances of child molestation where the victim is very sexually confused after that for a good while, but if you think someone could come along and take your developing teen off into the "scene" and "turn them gay" you're just 100% misled. I have a whole ton of gay and lesbian friends and my brother (who I love and who is probably one of the most brilliant people I know) is going through gender-reassignment and is excited and proud of that. He likes girls, by the way. How's that for a curveball?

There are also certain types of animals who can switch sexes. Ooh. Now what?

I have absolute respect for evey religion out there - no problems at all. HOWEVER I do have a huge problem when someone starts coming at ya and quoting the bible in "ye olde English" or whatever other book written 400 years after the death of Christ and telling me it's "in the bible" and therefore "morally wrong". Poppycock - I know what's "morally wrong", thank you very much, and no one throwing quotes from one part of an ancient (and often very wise) book that are diametrically opposite to quotes taken from another part of the same book that they have strategically not quoted can tell me my "morality" is stunted. Peh - the whole concept just irks me right out of my tree. I'd be a heck of a lot more impressed in the long run if people could start quoting holy books in their original language prior to selective translation - i.e. do you speak Ancient Hebrew (nope, not Latin. The bible wasn't written in Latin.)? How about including the testaments that were deliberately omitted from the final version because they didn't fit in with the image the church wanted to portray? Or the words that just "didn't quite make it" through the translation process?

Man, Jesus would weep. All he ever wanted was peace on earth and goodwill to all mankind. Didn't he just teach not to judge unless you wanted judging in return? Nope, I don't speak Ancient Hebrew either but it would seem a sensible concept to me. As far as I can ascertain, Jesus was simply telling us all to get along. And help one another regardless of our differences. The matter of homosexuality was as a greater part of a set of rules designed to prevent the spread of disease and increase childbirth rates in Jerusalem and other places 2000 years ago or so, since they wouldn't have had access to fully comprehensive health insurance, a local ER, an OBGYN or a GUM clinic. Think of the infant mortality rate. Must have been rough living in those days, 'specially without epidurals. It was either a swift blow to the head or smoking copious amouts of weed during childbirth that would help with the pain. What's your view on drugs? What's the bible's view on drugs, eh?

(Though interestingly, later on, the church did introduce "anti-hell" insurance, where one would contribute a certain percentage of one's annual household income often in "tithe" form to avoid the prospect of going to hell. VERY morally right and completely religious, don't you think?)

As for brothers and sisters - well, as long as the German couple don't turn into rabid werewolves at midnight on any given day and start breaking into people's houses and tearing them limb from limb, I'm not worried. I'm not going to marry my brother, either. There are moral guidelines to be considered when looking at any relationship and every one is going to be different. Live and let live. When there's a problem, intervene (eg. as was previously mentioned, an adult-child "relationship" in any context is going to mess up the child's head enormously and should therefore not take place).

*goes off to make a cup of tea*

[JayJay 4]

Oh and...SNAP. The above references to historical matters can all be supported. I could go a lot further down that particular garden path, too.

*goes back to take the teabag out of the tea*

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I am participating in the same manner as anyone else, and will continue to do so; by posting unsupported opinions and assertions.

Is it your plan to continue to make demands on me in the hope that the experience will become so unpleasent for me that I will stop participating? Do you mean to be that transparent? You have spent two days asking for what I have said you will not get. You can drop it, and we can end this amicably and politely, or I can begin to ignore you. You seem to be an otherwise reasonable person, perhaps you will make a reasonable choice.

If you want to talk about unpleasantness I suggest you take a look back at who started with the personal insults

Anyways Caladan and were are having a fairly reasonable discussion about this topic - so if you want to participate in it - feel free. If not, then don't I guess, I don't really care (guess you don't either). I'm just amazed that your opinions cant take the slightest bit of scrutiny without a bunch of defensive b/s being thrown in. For someone who makes about their explicit claims about their qualifications and background - "History, culture and law is what I do for a living", it seems a little disingenuous to not demonstrate this apparent knowledge with any specifics. The phrase I believe is "all mouth and no trousers"

People make unsubstantiated statements and opinions here every day, all day (this thread is full of them) and are not stalked for hours and days about providing proof for them. My opinions can take plenty of scrutiny, when I care to support them. There is nothing defensive about my responses; I suggested that if you want to know about the ideas I raised, you can look them up. Nothing disingenuous about that. I was simply being polite to respond at all.

Since you simply cannot take NO for an answer without characterizing my limits as defensive and insulting, I can see that I will not be able to engage you any longer. I have certain qualifications and expertise that I don't give away for free. If you would like to set up an arrangement to pay me for more than I have offered, then, perhaps, I will be disposed to engage in more scholarly approach to OT topics. Otherwise, you get what you get, and it's your waste of time to continue to b!tch about it.

Edited March 17, 2007 by Green-eyed girl

[mawilson 2,133]

I am participating in the same manner as anyone else, and will continue to do so; by posting unsupported opinions and assertions.

How very Socratic and academic of you.