kvnchrist

I agree. Do you think there should be screening for those who have emotional problems in school?

I wouldn't say "taught" is the right way to describe it. More that it is a learned behavior that is usually related to how a person defines a position of power. If they see power as being only by means of domineering over others, they are more likely to act in a similar way when they are put into a position of power, previously this would usually by means of physical force or presence. But with internet bullying, it has become more about effort, being sneaky, having access to unsupervised connections, and playing politics. How and where they learn this is often up to circumstance and is not easy to detect. But the interesting thing is that often people who were bullied end up being bullies themselves at a later point once the power has shifted (often middle management). At its core though it is all about using power over others and how that position is defined to them. It can be corrected if someone in their life can teach them other ways to use that power, but usually has to be from someone that that person will even listen to. Yeah, Thank you. I misused the word taught. I meant more along the lines of acquired experience. I am thinking that fear may be a component in the decision to act as a bully. A kind of a security blanket. The internet is a rather unique instrument that I think the lack of the social graces and the desire to be apart of some society makes a rather potent perfect storm with some people. I was told once that I could potentially become a bully, since I had a lot of insecurities and didn't really know how to deal with them. I finally decided that I actually liked who I was and found out that if I reached out then there would almost always be a open hand out there who was moe than willing to take mine in friendship. What I worry is that most of these who do violence to others, like these school shootings may just be who I would have become, if I chose another path.

Peoples feelings on imigration often depend on the scarcity of their own security and not that of the country. This is a fear mindset that is akin to starvation, It's surprizing that so many people who when there is an abundance, they claim the Government is at odds with them, but the minute that abundance is taken away, they cling to that same government for protection, just because a politician has spoken, yet another set of words they agree with. Where is all this talk about being self sufficiant The only ones that I have seen who are truly self sufficant are those who could walk for days across a desert and live in shacks harvesting fruits by hand in the hot sun. This is a pampered nation, full of people who think they are entitiled by virtue of where they fall out of their mother and then denounce federal programs they themselves call entitlements. Does it seem to you as crazy as it does to me. I think president Obama put a boot up the rear end of American prestige and the right doesn't like it because their lily white doll house they envision America as being has become a little bit soiled by the reality of today's reality.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYzgHzsGpAI

I've heard talk thatt most bullies are taught to be that way by those who have bullied them and I have also heard that they are born that way and it just is a personality quirk that makes them that way. Your thoughts.

What's more important Finding someone to give you their love or finding someone who will accept your love?

Please read rthe rules. Discussion of religion is banned here.

Thoughts please. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8giQwRqDEA

This is not religion. This is politicsas the vehicle and religion as the fuel. What they hate is several hundred years of interfereance from the West into their society and the dismissal of their rights as citizens of their country and their worls, so those of the west can be more comfortable being around them.

The only reason they would win is if we continue to fear death when they don't. the only way to equalize the scales is to resulve ourselves to being as selfless as they, but that requires entering into a realm that is baned to talk about here and I will not breach that rule. Beyond that, what can we do to protectourselves without relinquishing the freedoms we would deny to them to make our survival posible.?

i'm really getting tired of the rhetoric from both sides of the isle. i think both the left and the right are scared to death, more of the other making headway with the american public than anything to do with terrorist. with either f them bickering between each other, what can we do that actually would work, to save ourselves and our loved one's from being victimized by such thing/

I'm for him! http://1.t.imgbox.com/uhK3R9KV.jpg

The idea I'm getting at is these people are pushing themselves further away from society instead of toward it. Should people such as this get a mental exam before getting these proceedures? Are the cosmetic seurgeons taking advatage of these people?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance ref: Walzer, Michael, On Toleration, (New Haven: Yale University Press 1997) pp. 80-81 ISBN 0-300-07600-2 This entire idea has had me shaking my head everytime I think about it. referance Walzer, Michael, On Toleration, (New Haven: Yale University Press 1997) pp. 80-81 ISBN 0-300-07600-2

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/11935421/Whos-a-pretty-boy-then-Man-cuts-off-his-ears-to-look-like-a-parrot.html Why vis it that people are altering themselves so much these days ?

How does this some up your "entire idea"? Do you even have children? What? I think you drank too many roaring lions, is what I think. Everything you say cycles around to some perceived confrontation, some tribal rite of passage s*** or something... :wacko: This happens to be the only statement made so far by you that fits anywhere in this debate thread. We can thank the Victorian Age for the prudeness you so casually call demonizing sex. Let's go from there? Do I even have children......... I'll get back to you f*#@ing ass after I calm the f*#@ down, b&@*$.

Nope. experience is the best teacher and the lessons that stick are usual the ones taught through the same teacher. Maybe your learning by screwing up (no pun intended) is a lesson but using women as objects to teach people NOT to treat them as objects isn't a great argument and honestly I find it a bit offensive as a female. Since sexually transmitted disease usually has a time period that follows the actual act, I don't even see it as a valid experiment if I look beyond the repulsion I have for this idea. Young men (and women) think they are immortal and bad things won't happen to them and I doubt a delayed "lesson" would work. Unless you plan to immediately beat them with a newspaper on the *cough* nose I am afraid your "plan" holds little validity. I have seen some really scary things from the copyright department in some of my sociology classes of devices invented to protect women from the unwanted act that perhaps have a better chance. And I say that with a heavy dose of sarcasm. KV...I don't always see eye to eye with you, but typically your responses hold a measure of sympathy and empathy towards others that I have always respected. I find no redeeming quality in your posts here. I would have to say that you've missed the entire idea behind me posting this. I was taught not to smoke, not by having someone tell me how bad it was while they smoked like a chimney. I was taught not to smoke by the first person who caught me with a cigarette in my mouth. He set me down and he said I wasn't a man until I could smoke him under the table and I ended up smoking myself under the table. I got so sick, I couldn't set upright and ended up putting my head in the head. I never smoked a cigartte again, though I did fire up a joint or two, or six or a thousand. lol Teenagers want to experiment and with their hormones raging like a rhino, you will never talk to them enough to get them to respect anything beyond their experience has taught them to respect. Going to these places will embarrassed several straight out of the gate. The majority will, after a few goes at proving their masculinity will begin to see what sex for sexes sake brings you and the rest will never get it, no matter what. It also gives those who consider themselves to have no other option than force the option that society will never give them. Society has made things taboo that makes them enticing to the younger generation. Especially when 99% of the videos, the fashion and advertising industry sexualizes everything. Young people need to see first hand the pitfalls of objectifying people and I am positive that pushing them into this spectacle will bring up more discussion than anything seeing how timid most parents are when talking to their kids about this stuff. Their lack of stepping up gives their kids little option but to experiment on each other and you can see that in the rise of teenage mothers. This is not constructive. It's totally unacceptable and it ruins whole generations when it happens. Why do you think there are so many fights on the internet and on these sites? do you think 1/2 these roaring lions would dare say the things they do to each other on here if they were standing face to face? I'm not talking about anyone being afraid of anyone. It's the fight in the man that makes the fight in the first place, but here they don't look each other in the face. That's the key to being subjective, because you see the reactions and that personalizes things in a way that it's impossible for a feeling person to ignore. Society has demonized sex and the media has sensationalized it. What do you thing is more of an influence on the younger generation. A new music video or father Mc Donald. The information is set in bedrock of the upbringing of our youth, but the largest question, the only question that I think the youth of today are asking is WHY? I'm pretty sure that looking into the eyes of some of these ladies will personalizing them to these guys. These guys will begin to see these women as they do the women and the girls they know from school and from life. The sensationalizing of sex by the media will become as clearly fake as it is and these kids will see that. Maybe not right away but when they have pause to think about it.

So, does that imply that folks walking into small towns, in-game, and killing everyone in sight, would want to do THAT in reality?? Sorry, Logic fail. To imply that one type of 'bad' behavior should not be allowed, because 'folks will wanna do it in real life', but, *won't* do some 'other' bad behavior? That one defies explanation. OK, sorry I misread the content of the OP first post.

Nope. experience is the best teacher and the lessons that stick are usual the ones taught through the same teacher.

The worst discrimination in the world is that put on children to be ashamed of themselves and their bodies. I think nudity should be encouraged in an appropriate forum and experimentation within a controlled group. These groups should be for kids around the same age group and be monitored by the parents so that when these kids grow into young adults they could be more comfortable with each other. I think when the graduating class goes on their field trip the boys get bussed up to the nearest prostitute house and get 12 hours free to do what they want on the governments dime. After that they'd probably have to spend some time in the Shriner's burn unit, dipping their manhoods in Solarcaine, but they would have gotten out their curiosity and would have a fiery reminder not to use women for sex objects.

Sorry. Anyone that would want to see that stuff in virtual reality would want to see it in real life. Might even have fantasies about doing it themselves.

We also get into that familiar discussion about what is justice and what is revenge. A person who gets his hand cut off will go through life with a limited capacity to fend for him/herself., but one forced to work off their debte to the owner of the items that was taken would benefit both individuals. Also, I'd like to touch on another thing that came to mind when I was reading you guy's replies. It was about the mask and my understanding is that there really is a persona we carry deep inside us that is our inner child. Through the many years of our growth we have learned to wrap a coating of invulnerability around this inner child, so that we can protect that entity from cold and callous world around us. Each time we are hurt, for any reason, even if it is all in our minds we through up a new wall between us and them. Love is a thing were use that many times we really are not aware of that opens us up as carfully as we will allow it to reveal ourselves to the outter world. When I talk about love, I mean it in two distinct ways. There is the love of compassion that unfolds by seeing others as we do ourselves. I would use the example of seeing another go through a situation that we've gone through and we find understanding for the hurt that individual is feeling in our on memories of the hurt we felt. We have to be careful when relating to others becuse of our compassion, because some people can become addicted to being attended to, emotionally and will attempt to drain you, even up to the point of using guilt to shackle you to their neediness. The second form of love is that which reveals itself in many ways, but it is a love that melts away the coatings protecting your inner self , because that love is one that relates to your need and becomes a desire for release of that entity because it becomes imperative that the person you react to sees the person you are. In the first example of love, It is you that attempts to clean away the ugliness the world places on another, or at least lessens the impact of that ugliness on the individual. The second is geared toward clensing the toxins in your own soul by way of letting the object of your desire in through those barriers. This to me is the best description I can impart, right now of the difference between loving and being in love. Of course there is also the question of what is harder on the spirit who is without someone to love, wither is is the lack of having someone to show you love or the lack of someone there to accept the love you have. . Both I think will lead to despair or a sense of purpose beyond the norm that can and will lead to a martyr-like sense of selflessness that may be more destruction to the person, since they will devoid themselves of what they need themselves. I think the term is giving someone the shirt off your back. It might sound honorable, but in fact the less you are able to care for yourself, the less you can do for others.

I want to take a moment to answer this specific bit of the original post, due to have done this myself. I lied to family and friends for many years and it was a fight for acceptability and from fear of what would happen should I 'come out'. This is the case with many people, the fear of what could happen or will happen. Over time I'd say the majority of people come to terms with themselves and realise that hiding who they are is doing more damage to themselves than they need, so will overcome it. It takes time and the people who do this need to be supported. It's all about the fear of what is to come, which is turn becomes a way of making yourself 'normal' by societies standards. It took me a while to come out, and when I did, I lost a fair amount of my friends. However since then I have been happier than I have ever been, gained good friends, realised who wasn't and found who I really am. If you mean sexual orientation then you lost no friends. What walked out of your life was associates who were attracted to a lie. They too lied by calling themselves your friends. Friendship is an honor and those that aren't honored to know you aren't worth having around. . As for me, I'm honored to read your post. I'm proud that you can breath the fresh air of openness and can now wed who you wish in every state in the union. Have a wonderful day.

My friend, for all our vaulted arrogance and facade of sophistication, we are all just as primal as the questions I ask. All we need is for our supply and service systems to break down and we will be nothing more than caveman wielding sticks. We, as human beings are as domesticated as the animals we fence in for our food. Where will you buy the stick? :armscrossed: It is a euphemism for weaponry. Just ask yourself, the transportation of food and fuels were to suddenly vanish off the face of the world, would we be as pleasant to each other as our partisan bickering what we have determined we deserve will allow us to be even today? We are a pathetic race of beings that tought our vaulted sense of values, while we determine who is human enough to share in those values based solely on your own version of normalcy. Such idealist words when you look at a human being as an object, but add a Deity, so he can think himself better than others for being picked by that very deity and add property to covet and this so-called noble creature reverts back to the animal he is by nature.

Are personal judgements exclusive or inclusive when beauty is concerned? Can beauty or anything really, truly be fully understood or even acknowledged unless judgmentalism is curtailed?