Search results

Oh? And what do we call the creator? C'mon, show us your encyclopedic knowledge.

Well, "trapped" is a bit iffy.

I'll do some research. Thanks for the starting points.

I'm Shawnee. Try that shit on.

You think Jin's a Jew? Boy, that's the dumbest thing you've said, and that is pretty damn hard!

Well, tossing 'em off a short building lacks the same drama. . .

No, no, no, Torchy! In colloquial North American English, you should say "Oh, yeah? Oh, yeah? Well, I'm rubber and you're glue. Whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you!" I'm actually a bit surprised that the theology took this long to degrade to this point. . .

No, I was just stating my position clearly. And in case I haven't already made it clear, any Canadian government is far too invasive of private matters. But True Dope is a reliable indicator of "What's the dumbest thing the government could do right. . . this. . . moment?"

Down here, we'd call that a "ministerial change" (fancy word for "unimportant") and stick a whole bunch of 'em on the back of some innocuous piece of legislation that would sail through.

I'd still forbid it until adulthood, or one hell of a lot more research. Way easier and more comfortable to just sit in the echo chamber and listen to the echoes. I figure we're just a hop, skip, and jump from "The Liberals are forcibly mutilating kids and True Dope is personally handling the...

That was my question. I wondered if they would re-word the statute.

Agreed. Which does NOT mean I'll agree with you on whether a given event or practice "endangers" a child. But when the event or practice is a major change to the kid's biochem and/or anatomy absent a clear danger to the kid, the state has an interest that overrides that of the parents or the kid.

Thank you. Nice and specific. I might have some issues with some of the provisions, but it's a big improvement on "anything that pisses off the current government." Will they change the wording to "His Majesty" officially, or is it understood it applies to the monarch regardless and only said...

Hmm. . . should it worry me that I agree with Dix? Always said the difference between pre-pubescent boys and girls was pretty much academic. If they wanna dress or act like another gender, fine. Messing with their biochem is not a good idea. Without a better argument than what I've heard...

Yep, that'd apply to any religion. Even Buddhism, ironically. Well, except some of the old religions. They had no "Thou shalt not kill" BS. I believe their commandment was "If ya kill him, make sure to get his buddy, too."

Heck, I foresaw all the significant events of the past!

To be fair, Allah is no more responsible for that than the Christian god or Jesus is responsible for genocide, slavery, or child molestation.

Is there a specific definition of "treason" in Canadian law?

That's a tautology. "I could say fairies make the flowers grow. The existence of flowers does not prove the existence of fairies." --James P Hogan

I'm glad we have your extensive military experience to guide us.