446 réponses à ce sujet

[Aradace]

Sphynx118 wrote...

Aradace wrote...

I've been called a "witch" and even a "Warlock" lol...Ive never claimed such titles but if that is what best describes my "beliefs" then so be it

I bet you read Malleus Maleficarum at night too

Suprisingly, no, I dont .  I rarely read at all (other than what Im doing right now that is lol.).  Not because I dont enjoy reading (because I do) but because there are very few books out there that meet my criteria of being read.  That criteria is very simple: It has to grip me from beginning to end.  I recently read a trilogy of books by Brent Weeks (believe that was his name) called "Night Angel".  Excellent read from start to finish.  Never a dull moment in those books

[Pinkflamingo22]

I know why they didn't put it in!



Miranda is NOT a lesbian!



I'm all for a human lesbian romance scene however, having characters with sexual orientations, that depend solely on what type of character you play as is shallow and dumb. Stop whining about the fact the only "lesbian" romance is with Asari. I'm sure they won't disappiont in ME3, however don't try to make the game and story less than fantastic by suggesting such shallow and selfish changes to a near PERFECT story of character development.

[tmp7704]

Ailith430 wrote...

Like I said earlier, pick three words to describe a particular character's personality, and "straight" or "gay" would never be among them, because a persons sexuality isnto a character trait.

If you had to picl three words to describe yourself as a person, would you include your sexual preference? No, because it's not what defines you.

It will depend largely on the context, actually. With heterosexuality being the widely spread default people rarely feel the need to clarify this point outright. But consider number of people who do feel the need to specify their ******- or bisexuality from the onset -- apparently they do consider it important enough aspect of what kind of person they are.

Also, if you're limited just to three words then you're hardly going to describe yourself as an actual individual rather than just generic collection of three traits. For example, it's unlikely you'll choose to mention whether you're a cat person or a dog person. And yet people with preference towards either can have quite different mindsets and value different traits, making them very different individuals. This applies to other aspects of our personalities, like taste in music, our preference (or distaste) for danger, whether we're reckless or planning, lazy or not, optimists or pessimists, atheists or not and many, many other factors. But you wouldn't claim that none of these things describe you as a character in some way, would you?

Modifié par tmp7704, 19 février 2010 - 10:19 .

[Sphynx118]

Aradace wrote...

Sphynx118 wrote...

Aradace wrote...

I've been called a "witch" and even a "Warlock" lol...Ive never claimed such titles but if that is what best describes my "beliefs" then so be it

I bet you read Malleus Maleficarum at night too

Suprisingly, no, I dont .  I rarely read at all (other than what Im doing right now that is lol.).  Not because I dont enjoy reading (because I do) but because there are very few books out there that meet my criteria of being read.  That criteria is very simple: It has to grip me from beginning to end.  I recently read a trilogy of books by Brent Weeks (believe that was his name) called "Night Angel".  Excellent read from start to finish.  Never a dull moment in those books

Have heard alot about them perhaps they are worth checking out

[newcomplex]

Mister_Tez wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Just to play Devil's Advocate here...

Luviticus 18:22

 22 " 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.

Any Christian or Jew should rightfully be against it.  Just sayin'.

Note:  I personally don't care either way, and I find religion to be pure hypocrasy in the first place, but let's not get into that.

...Of course they shouldn't pick & choose which bits of Leviticus etc. to follow...

http://www.snopes.co...ion/drlaura.asp

Actually the bible says lesbians are ok, and its ok to be gay, and attracted to men, as long as you don't **** them in the butt.    Its ok to kiss them though.    Just going by what the bible says, no relavence to my opinion..

The bible says sodomy is bad.    Sodomy=Anal penetration.    Lesbian sex=No anal penetration.    The concept of "Homosexuality" and "gay" did not exist prior to the 1600.    Not just the word, the entire concept.    Before then, there were men that practiced propery sexual conduct, men that practiced sinful sexual conduct, faithful women, and ****s.

Everyone fell neatly into those four categories.     F/F relationship isn't considered sex by the bible.   

Modifié par newcomplex, 19 février 2010 - 10:22 .

[Aradace]

Sphynx118 wrote...

Aradace wrote...

Sphynx118 wrote...

Aradace wrote...

I've been called a "witch" and even a "Warlock" lol...Ive never claimed such titles but if that is what best describes my "beliefs" then so be it

I bet you read Malleus Maleficarum at night too

Suprisingly, no, I dont .  I rarely read at all (other than what Im doing right now that is lol.).  Not because I dont enjoy reading (because I do) but because there are very few books out there that meet my criteria of being read.  That criteria is very simple: It has to grip me from beginning to end.  I recently read a trilogy of books by Brent Weeks (believe that was his name) called "Night Angel".  Excellent read from start to finish.  Never a dull moment in those books

Have heard alot about them perhaps they are worth checking out

Lots of violence...lots of sex...If you are offended by either might not be a good idea lol...On that note, both are done very tastefully

Modifié par Aradace, 19 février 2010 - 10:22 .

[Yeled]

The Angry One wrote...

ALERT ALERT ALERT

Social Darwinist content of topic reaching critical mass, possibility of Godwin's Law being invoked approaching 100%.

I had the same thought!!!

[Nissun]

Women aren't considered in the bible. In general.



What a stupid thread. Can the after-ending cuddling scenes be modded with any characters? I've seen one with Jacob and Grunt xD. I'd love to see one with maleShep and Legion, or Tali and Legion just for fun xD.

[Valmy]

newcomplex wrote...
F/F relationship isn't considered sex by the bible.   

It's true and I always found that rather humorous.

[newcomplex]

:ph34r:EDIT:[Inappropriate spam image removed.]

Do I win a prize or something?  

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 19 février 2010 - 11:14 .

[cerberus1701]

Hmmm...I'm not even remotely offended by that.

[Valmy]

Nissun wrote...
What a stupid thread.

You just have to laugh after awhile.

[newcomplex]

Nissun wrote...

Women aren't considered in the bible. In general.

What a stupid thread. Can the after-ending cuddling scenes be modded with any characters? I've seen one with Jacob and Grunt xD. I'd love to see one with maleShep and Legion, or Tali and Legion just for fun xD.

wat?   Their considered from a mans perspective, its heavily sexist, but they are addressed lol.    

[Aradace]

Nissun wrote...

Women aren't considered in the bible. In general.

What a stupid thread. Can the after-ending cuddling scenes be modded with any characters? I've seen one with Jacob and Grunt xD. I'd love to see one with maleShep and Legion, or Tali and Legion just for fun xD.

By doing one with Tali and Legion, you would open up a worm hole in the space-time continuom and emplode the entire ME galaxy  lol

[Ailith Tycane]

newcomplex wrote...
Actually the bible says lesbians are ok, and its ok to be gay, and attracted to men, as long as you don't **** them in the butt.    Its ok to kiss them though.    Just going by what the bible says, no relavence to my opinion..

The bible says sodomy is bad.    Sodomy=Anal penetration.    Lesbian sex=No anal penetration.    The concept of "Homosexuality" and "gay" did not exist prior to the 1600.    Not just the word, the entire concept.    Before then, there were men that practiced propery sexual conduct, men that practiced sinful sexual conduct, faithful women, and ****s.

Everyone fell neatly into those four categories.     F/F relationship isn't considered sex by the bible.   

The bible also only says male masturbation is wrong, and saying nothing about female masturbation, lol.

Lots of "plot holes" if you will

[Alexandus]

Sphynx118 wrote...

Aradace wrote...

Sphynx118 wrote...

Aradace wrote...

I've been called a "witch" and even a "Warlock" lol...Ive never claimed such titles but if that is what best describes my "beliefs" then so be it

I bet you read Malleus Maleficarum at night too

Suprisingly, no, I dont .  I rarely read at all (other than what Im doing right now that is lol.).  Not because I dont enjoy reading (because I do) but because there are very few books out there that meet my criteria of being read.  That criteria is very simple: It has to grip me from beginning to end.  I recently read a trilogy of books by Brent Weeks (believe that was his name) called "Night Angel".  Excellent read from start to finish.  Never a dull moment in those books

Have heard alot about them perhaps they are worth checking out

I would heartily recommend, for recreational reading:
-The Dune books
-The Darth Bane series
-The Codex Alera (Picture Avatar the last airbender if it was about roman society)
-The Dresden Files (Harry Potter * 10000 awesome points)
-"Then there were none" by Agatha Christie.

"Words are the means to meaning, and through them, the eununciation of truth" -V  from "V for Vendetta"

[Maria Caliban]

newcomplex wrote...

If your an atheist, the natural order has no relevance.

That's incorrect. Atheists do not believe in the divine. Being an atheist has no bearing on whether you believe in a natural order, or if you believe a natural order has relevance.

I know several atheists who are involved in the green movement, and attempt to minimize their impact on the planet and that of other human beings. They see a large number of human activities as having a negatively affecting the natural order, which is something relevant to them.

Then again, most atheists I know don’t consider same-sex attraction unnatural or against the natural order.

[Sphynx118]

Ailith430 wrote...

newcomplex wrote...
Actually the bible says lesbians are ok, and its ok to be gay, and attracted to men, as long as you don't **** them in the butt.    Its ok to kiss them though.    Just going by what the bible says, no relavence to my opinion..

The bible says sodomy is bad.    Sodomy=Anal penetration.    Lesbian sex=No anal penetration.    The concept of "Homosexuality" and "gay" did not exist prior to the 1600.    Not just the word, the entire concept.    Before then, there were men that practiced propery sexual conduct, men that practiced sinful sexual conduct, faithful women, and ****s.

Everyone fell neatly into those four categories.     F/F relationship isn't considered sex by the bible.   

The bible also only says male masturbation is wrong, and saying nothing about female masturbation, lol.

Lots of "plot holes" if you will

Clearly the bible was written by women!

[Valmy]

Ailith430 wrote...
The bible also only says male masturbation is wrong, and saying nothing about female masturbation, lol.

Lots of "plot holes" if you will

If it weren't for all the stuff about how you have to shut up and do what we say I would say you got off easy.

[Aradace]

newcomplex wrote...

:ph34r:EDIT: [Inapprorpiate spam image removed.]

Do I win a prize or something?  

Remember children, when drawing our swatztikahs (hope I spelled that somewhere in the ballpark correctly lol), we make the "hooks" go to the right, not the left.  (sorry, little Robin Williams there lol)

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 19 février 2010 - 11:15 .

[newcomplex]

Ailith430 wrote...

newcomplex wrote...
Actually the bible says lesbians are ok, and its ok to be gay, and attracted to men, as long as you don't **** them in the butt.    Its ok to kiss them though.    Just going by what the bible says, no relavence to my opinion..

The bible says sodomy is bad.    Sodomy=Anal penetration.    Lesbian sex=No anal penetration.    The concept of "Homosexuality" and "gay" did not exist prior to the 1600.    Not just the word, the entire concept.    Before then, there were men that practiced propery sexual conduct, men that practiced sinful sexual conduct, faithful women, and ****s.

Everyone fell neatly into those four categories.     F/F relationship isn't considered sex by the bible.   

The bible also only says male masturbation is wrong, and saying nothing about female masturbation, lol.

Lots of "plot holes" if you will

Man, the dudes who read it didn't do so well on their sex ed classes huh?

[The Angry One]

Sphynx118 wrote...

Clearly the bible was written by women!

Nah it was written by men who had clearly been rejected by every woman they ever met.

[newcomplex]

Aradace wrote...
Remember children, when drawing our swatztikahs (hope I spelled that somewhere in the ballpark correctly lol), we make the "hooks" go to the right, not the left.  (sorry, little Robin Williams there lol)

wat r u talking about

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika

The Angry One wrote...

Sphynx118 wrote...

Clearly
the bible was written by women!

Nah it was written by
men who had clearly been rejected by every woman they ever met.

Nah,it was written by men whos only interaction with women was when the women in question was laying as a immobile receptacle for semen.   

Modifié par newcomplex, 19 février 2010 - 10:29 .

[Sphynx118]

The Angry One wrote...

Sphynx118 wrote...

Clearly the bible was written by women!

Nah it was written by men who had clearly been rejected by every woman they ever met.

It was written by Sovereign and Udina?

[Jarcander]

Ah religion, you old ****got. I wonder what Christianity would've been like if the people writing it had been gay, like totally with robes in all the colours of the rainbow? I bet the crusade would've been a lot funnier at least.