BriannaElisabeth

I'm a huge science fiction and fantasy fan, and here's my take on it: Science fiction and fantasy are, essentially, the same genre. They both create a world that has rules different from ours. These rules govern how magic works for Fantasy, and how 'Science' works in Scifi. The reader should suspend their disbelief for the initial set up of the rules, as long as they agree with each other and make sense within the context of the book. The most important thing in both Scifi and Fantasy is that the reader does not question the rules, and that the author never breaks them. You don't question why Magic works in Harry Potter - it just does, because those are the rules. But if, halfway through the series, J.K. Rowling decided that Magic worked differently, it would invalidate the previous books to an extent. Once the author breaks their own rules, the book is appropriately subject to questioning and readers looking for faults. In short, I find it ridiculous to question why things are the way they are in a science fiction, as long as there are solid rules.

But what happens when your freedom of speech is used to advocate the removal of others' rights? Politicians sure seem to get away with it. To be completely serious, freedom of speech is all about being able to say what you want, when you want. As long as you are not physically removing someone else's rights, or doing something criminal like inciting violence (another topic entirely) a person should be able to express their opinions without fear of punishment - be it from the government or from the population. Just like it's not fair for, say, Christian groups to advocate mass boycotts of a gay author's film, it isn't fair to advocate mass boycotts of Card's film for talking about his unfortunate opinion.

Punishing private citizens for utilizing their freedom of speech will not end hate, but speech.

The universe is huge. Like, hundreds of billions of galaxies, each containing hundreds of billions of stars. So, it's highly likely that the kind of life we're used to exists. But we're also pretty narrow in what we consider 'life.' We tend to think Carbon-based cells, but seeing as carbon is a (relatively) uncommon atom in the universe as a whole, and under different circumstances, cells might not be the base-unit of life on another planet. So it's even more likely that life exists in other forms. We will probably never make contact, and we will probably never be officially aware of the existence of Aliens, but it's actually more far-fetched to think that we're alone in the vast cosmos.

Josh900: Isn't the problem that your co-worker attacked you? I know that I would be disturbed by an attempt to injure my person, regardless of if the attacked thought I way gay. Tidus44: Perhaps I should have made myself more clear. I am of course allowing for traditional murder classifications based on the circumstances. I.E., Pre-meditated vs. Heat of Passion. Motive can, of course, be taken into account in a murder case. I simply feel that EXTRA punishments should not be added if the victim was being targeted based on race. As for your first example, soldiers killing enemy combatants are not subject to traditional homicide laws. The soldier's killings are not quite relevant. However, I will take a look at Group A's murders. If given roughly the same circumstances, (method, planning, mental status, etc.) Group A's murder of, let's say, 50 people for hateful reasons is no worse than a murder of a different 50 people for non-hateful reasons. Both parties took 50 lives, and Group A should not receive extra punishment. To your second example, as I stated above, circumstances are still taken into account. The attacker should be charged with whatever crime he has actually committed. He should NOT be given extra jail time simply because I am of a different religion. The real crime is that he attempted to rape and murder me, not that he disliked my appearance or perceived lack of chastity (I actually am chaste, just for the record). To address your bringing up freedom of speech, although Hate Speech is an entirely different argument, you are completely allowed to say what you like to me, at me, or about me given it is not libel, slander, inciting violence etc.. I am a huge fan of free speech, and I actually approve of this. Feel free to exercise your freedoms as you like, as long as they don't infringe upon mine. And for your final argument, as I said I should have been more clear in my opening post. I am of course allowing for the current laws regarding violent crimes. Circumstances can, and should, be taken into account during a murder trial. A person who kills in self defense will get less (if they get anything) than a person who murders for the sake of murder. I am saying that Hate Crime Laws, which add extra on top of existing sentences if the crime can be proven to be bias-motivated, are not appropriate in this day and age. To set forth my own example: Man A is a homophobe who sees a gay couple walking down the street. He decides that he is going to follow them home, and shoots them both dead on their front lawn. He is quickly apprehended by the authorities. Man B is simply a bad person who sees a straight couple walking down the street. He decides that he is going to follow them home, and shoots them both dead on their front lawn. He is quickly apprehended by the authorities. Under current laws, Man A would receive a larger sentence than Man B. Why? They committed almost the same crime. The current legal system, with hate crime laws in place, treat people as more or less valuable based on things like sexuality. The victims of Man A are not more valuable than the victims of Man B. Both men took 2 human lives in a very similar fashion, and the sentencing should reflect that. I uphold the idea that treating people as different based on things like religion, sex, race, orientation, whathaveyou, is basically inviting discrimination to take a seat and get comfortable in our society, when it was about ready to leave the party.

Hi all! I have been having conversations with my peers and family recently, and am interested in seeing how others feel about the topic of Hate crime laws. I will pre-emptively define a hate crime as bias-motivated violence. Assault, injury, or murder on the basis of race, sex, sexual orientation, nationality, and/or religion. I will also define hate crime laws as laws that enhance the penalties of violent crimes if it can be shown that the violence was bias-motivated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime My question to the forum is: Do you think hate crime laws are appropriate? I personally do not like hate crime laws on principle. I feel that murder is murder, and the person's skin color or sexual orientation is not relevant. Classifying some violent crimes as "worse" than others because of the victim's religion or nationality only serves to further discrimintation by continuing to treat people as different from each other for superficial reasons. I realize the laws had value at certain points in history, but since human kind is quickly moving on from discrimination, our laws should reflect that. I say let's stop treating people as different from each other for stupid reasons like sex and race. Hate crime laws perpetuate discrimination, and should be done-away with. What do you say?

This might help with NPCs interacting with the environment: (I'm going to post all the links, just so you have everything) http://www.creationkit.com/Category:Packages http://www.creationkit.com/Category:Package_Templates#Procedure_Parameter_Types http://www.creationkit.com/Sandbox_(Procedure) The first is basic packages, which are how you control an NPC's behavior. The second is templates for packages. And the third is Sandbox procedure, which helps make the NPC seem alive, by giving them times that they need to eat and sleep. There are other procedures, but I though Sandbox was the most relevant to what you're wanting to do. I hope that's not too general. Or you could duplicate an actor and change their name and appearance, see if that works. Also, make sure your navmesh and markers are configured properly. And do a few idle markers scattered about, so they have different places to stand. I hope this is a little helpful at least! I'm making a big player house, too, so I know how much of a hassle it can be.

While I find Card's opinions repulsive, I don't think that advocating a boycott is the way to go. Hollywood is a 99.99% LGBTQ friendly industry, and the director and actors (who will make much more from the movie than Card is going to) have stated clearly that they don't share his position. http://www.csmonitor.com/Books/chapter-and-verse/2013/0722/Ender-s-Game-director-and-star-discuss-the-proposed-boycott-of-the-film. The novel and the film are also completely separate from the issue. I've read the book a few times, and I've never come across a single homophobic or anti-gay message. He is a professional, and an artist, and he knows better than to turn his work into a pamphlet for his craziness. In principle, I also don't feel it's fair to try to shut up public figures by threatening them. They have a right to their opinion, just as much as the rest of us. He can be as wrong as he damn well pleases, and shouldn't have to fear economic instability and public outcries because he holds an unpopular opinion. Not to mention that you'd be hard pressed to find a classic or famous author with whom your beliefs lined up perfectly. Charles Dickens is considered by most analysts to have been a racist, however he wrote wonderful books that are appreciated by most people - despite his unfortunate opinions. In the end, Orson Scott Card is a talented author who's on the wrong side of history. But don't let his messed up thinking prevent you from enjoying a work of art. If you're against his views, there are better ways to spend your time. He is not the only one who's anti-equality. Boycott the film if it suits you, but if you're dying to see it - most of the money is going to the producers anyway.

This video covers a portal gun mod. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebaJ_zu2dug And here's the link for the download. http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles... It's probably the closest you're going to get. Although I'm pretty sure it's not lore friendly :P

If you feel comfortable enough to go into the creation kit and do it yourself, it's actually pretty simple. Open the creation kit, and go to 'file', then 'data'. Double click on both Skyrim.esm and Update.esm. Click 'yes to all' for any warnings that come up. It can take a while for everything to load, since these are the master files. Then you'll need to click on the '*All' button in the objects window, and search for the NPC in the 'filter' bar at the top of the window. All of the other categories should be minimized for this to work right. If the NPC is there, double click their name. The icon should look like a little person with a bag over their head. Once the editor screen is open, just unclick the box that says 'protected' After that, make sure to go to 'file' and then 'save.' Name your new plugin whatever you want, and you're done. Easy as that! I hope that solves everything for you, and if you already knew how to use the creation kit sorry for the extra steps (Just wanted to make sure you had everything you needed.)

Hi! I am attempting to make a building using the Sovngarde kit, which has those big windows (Which I like). Right now when I look out the windows when I test the cell in-game, it is just blank. How do I make it look like there is something beyond the windows? I have though about just placing the whole thing in an outdoor cell, but I really want it to be a separate cell, and I'm worried about transferring over an entire building. I also know what I want is possible, since the actual Sovngarde does it. I am a novice modder, so if you could walk me through any solution that would be wonderful. Thanks to anyone who replies!