(no subject)
So the conservatives want to raise the legal age for sex from 14 to 16. I guess its more for appearences than anything. I don't know about the rest of you, but I find the idea of the cops busting two 13 year-olds for having sex because they aren't 14 really amusing. Or 15 year-olds for that matter. Can anyone tell me if the minimum age to legally have sex is actually enforced by means other than mother nature?
Oh well, let them posture all they want.
In other news, I've been accepted to Loyalist college. This could unfortunatly mean moving out into the big scary world sooner rather than later. I wanna stay at home and leech off my parents for the rest of my life, but I can't (or can I? What is their limit anyway?).
I was reading the paper this morning and came across a letter in the Citizen that was talking about a newspaper in Prince Edward Island that had reprinted the cartoons. You know the ones I mean. The author was commending them on taking a stand for free speach and not being intimidated by the rioting Muslim groups.
Last I heard, free speach included the right to keep your mouth shut when you don't have something important to say. If we don't publish cartoons which we KNOW will offend others, we're automatically doing it out of fear instead of respect, and aren't fully exercising our right to free speech.
Perhaps if I mailed the man a photoshopped picture depicting his mother/spouse/daughter as a crack-addict whore he wouldn't say anything because, hey, I just want to show I love free speech/freedom of the press and am not afraid of him.
Is my analogy faulty? Facts wrong? Maybe. I'm too tired to care. My shoulder hurts, and I know I won't get a full nights rest for at least a few days because of it.
One of the UN High Commissioner's offices issued a statement saying that they were distressed by the cartoons. But they were equally distressed by the violence and deaths seen in the middle east.
That editorial guy in the Citizen made a good point when he emphasised the "equally" part. Ie, the UN is saying that the violence is bad, but no worse than the cartoons (in a manner of speaking). A little desensatized to violence perhaps? Perhaps. Perhaps the quote was out of context.
Again, I'm not being picky and double checking the letters page.
What was the cartoonist trying to accomplish anyway? Did his reasons extent beyond his commission fee?
On another note, how many of the rioters also belive that the fake cartoons the Muslim fanatics are circulating are real? I'm interested in the number. Speaking of numbers, how bloody was Africa before the Europeans came anyway? Did the white people screw everything up, or were they always like that? Not that we're not good at killing each other too.
Now my shoulder really hurts.
And another thing!
Why do the Jehova's Witnesses have such a bad rap? I've talked to them at length three or four times now, and they're really quite nice. They don't even try to convert me. And, they say that people of other faiths can get be in God's good grances. That's a major plus in my book.
And they have an answer for the "Where do souls come from" question. A good one I might add. Well, good if you believe in a soul. But then, their answer sort of takes the "faith" aspect out of that.
And anyone who goes door to door on a cold winter day trying to show people a path that they believe will lead people to a full and happy life is alright in my opinion.
Oh well, let them posture all they want.
In other news, I've been accepted to Loyalist college. This could unfortunatly mean moving out into the big scary world sooner rather than later. I wanna stay at home and leech off my parents for the rest of my life, but I can't (or can I? What is their limit anyway?).
I was reading the paper this morning and came across a letter in the Citizen that was talking about a newspaper in Prince Edward Island that had reprinted the cartoons. You know the ones I mean. The author was commending them on taking a stand for free speach and not being intimidated by the rioting Muslim groups.
Last I heard, free speach included the right to keep your mouth shut when you don't have something important to say. If we don't publish cartoons which we KNOW will offend others, we're automatically doing it out of fear instead of respect, and aren't fully exercising our right to free speech.
Perhaps if I mailed the man a photoshopped picture depicting his mother/spouse/daughter as a crack-addict whore he wouldn't say anything because, hey, I just want to show I love free speech/freedom of the press and am not afraid of him.
Is my analogy faulty? Facts wrong? Maybe. I'm too tired to care. My shoulder hurts, and I know I won't get a full nights rest for at least a few days because of it.
One of the UN High Commissioner's offices issued a statement saying that they were distressed by the cartoons. But they were equally distressed by the violence and deaths seen in the middle east.
That editorial guy in the Citizen made a good point when he emphasised the "equally" part. Ie, the UN is saying that the violence is bad, but no worse than the cartoons (in a manner of speaking). A little desensatized to violence perhaps? Perhaps. Perhaps the quote was out of context.
Again, I'm not being picky and double checking the letters page.
What was the cartoonist trying to accomplish anyway? Did his reasons extent beyond his commission fee?
On another note, how many of the rioters also belive that the fake cartoons the Muslim fanatics are circulating are real? I'm interested in the number. Speaking of numbers, how bloody was Africa before the Europeans came anyway? Did the white people screw everything up, or were they always like that? Not that we're not good at killing each other too.
Now my shoulder really hurts.
And another thing!
Why do the Jehova's Witnesses have such a bad rap? I've talked to them at length three or four times now, and they're really quite nice. They don't even try to convert me. And, they say that people of other faiths can get be in God's good grances. That's a major plus in my book.
And they have an answer for the "Where do souls come from" question. A good one I might add. Well, good if you believe in a soul. But then, their answer sort of takes the "faith" aspect out of that.
And anyone who goes door to door on a cold winter day trying to show people a path that they believe will lead people to a full and happy life is alright in my opinion.