Gwazi Magnum

Modern Feminism

Jorick said
That's actually not true, just something someone thought was right and put out on the internet as a fact without doing their research. Pusillanimous comes directly from Latin, a mix of pusillis (very weak or little) and animus (spirit or courage). Pussy seems to be derived either from Germanic languages in which "puss" and similar words refer to cats (with the insulting meaning starting as a comparison to negative traits of cats), or from the Old Norse word "puss" that meant pocket or pouch and was later taken to refer to female genitalia (with the insulting meaning starting as literally calling someone a vagina). It's unclear which of these roots it came from, might've been both coming together from different sources, but there seems to be no linkage between pusillanimous and pussy.Etymology is funny like that, you can get similar sounding words with similar meanings from entirely separate sources.

God Dammit Language! :P

Okay, no trolling in this thread.

natsumehack said
So pretty much off topic?

Off Topic stays civil for the most part.
It's normally when people from spam come in with the pre-made assumption that OT is a place of trouble makers that such trolling arguments start to really happen.]

Edit: I'll grant it was worse on the old Guild. But since the site switch it mostly just seemed to be the level headed and mature members that stuck around in OT.

Okay, no trolling in this thread.

natsumehack said
None of those are troll topics.

Not in itself, but if you debate any of them in a place where not everyone is able to remain calm, respectful and open-minded then the trolls will come.

Westboro wants us to protest at Phelp's funeral

So... Leader for all these years, and now the Church won't even have a funeral for a man that led them for years?
Bunch of ungratefully cowardly pussy self-centered hateful backstabbing hypocritical bastards.

Okay, no trolling in this thread.

RELIGION, ABORTION, FEMINISM, POLITICS, XBOX VS PLAYSTATION!

There... Have fun tearing each others throats out. :P

Facebook buys the Oculus for $2 billion.

Primordial Soup (The Forum Game - Level 1: The Soup]

Voted on the poll

BlitheCrescent said
You watch Dr. Who, don't you?Anyway, eat the blobs, stay away from the big thing

Why no... What could ever make you think that? :P

Suicide, Tragic or Selfish?

Gat said
Mate I'm starting to wonder if you're even reading the posts you're replying to, because you're latching on to tangents that only you have ever mentioned in the thread and running with them as if they were the entire reason for other peoples posts, when really they don't actually relate except to maybe 2 words taken out of context.

[2]

Your Political Ideology

ShonHarris said Suddenly, laws effect a community more directly, one person is a much more significant figure, and should an agreement not be followed the entire community is apt to notice and hold each other accountable. I do not distrust larger governments, I just think that making a law that sweeps a million people spread across hundreds of miles of land seems a bit strange when it comes to topics like smoking pot or marriage equality. Bigger topics like managing pollution and distancing ourselves from non-renewable resources are issues that support everyone and effects everyone, a bit more applicable to a larger government. What do you all think?

Pot and Marriage though have no logical reason behind being illegal. Everything that does support it being illegal is based on falsified scientific studies, homophobia, or lack of education when it comes to drugs/plants. So I'm not sure if those are good examples to be using in this case, mainly cause I'm a bit lost in the point you're trying to make. Cause with those examples it looks like you're saying Silly Laws VS Logical Laws, but I can tell from your general post that's probably not what you're trying to say with that.

In general though if I am getting your general message right, I think Governments should be more focused on country-wide, global issues that effect society as a whole rather than judging/controlling the people they are meant to serve and look out for.

Your Political Ideology

Goldmarble said
And...I disagree with you. I don't believe in a nanny state. I don't believe in trying to protect everything from the smallest of chances, if it involves giving up freedom. If 20 people in a year die, and 100 get injured, because of our current example; human body flying out of a car, strikes them....you know what? That is no reason to make a . Shit happens.Secondly, is if you want to make it law because that corpse might cause injury in the extremely unlikely scenario, then we might as well ban roof-racks for cars because you can stow a couple hundred pounds up there and it can fly off in an accident and cause further harm, just the same as an ejected corpse, right?Now, again: Even if it was legal to drive a seatbelt, I still use one. It's my choice, my prerogative.

Its a seatbelt. Its not a huge declaration of freedom or anything that poses any benefit for ignoring. When you put others in danger for the sake of feeling free thats when you're being selfish.