Pinkie-Dawn

Thank you! The past three years here have been great.

Thanks, PD!

yeah, I've been on and off randomly. For 2 of those years, I never even visited. But with all the cool rom hacking breakthroughs, I'm on frequently in the hopes of creating my own.

Thanks dude! :D
8 years is really something, huh? xD

When you asked if Esper is the final boss in Final Fantasy XII, the answer is no. In Final Fantasy XII, Esper is the term used for a Summoned Monster.

Thanks!

Wow those are really good.

At least Iris was made more tomboyish in nature, with the vine swinging and training those strong Pokemon while having cute ones at the same time. I actually like her design, which makes me feel sad for all the hate she gets.

That would be very funny to witness. I feel like anime Serena's redesign was to make her and game Serena so drastically different from each other.

Yeah, it's just so terrible that Serena is only meant to do things that are most associated with females such as being into fashion and the fact Showcases are treated like those performances with Japanese idol girls. Writers are handling her terribly if they are making her a girly-girl stereotype, even when many had a fear the haircut would be turning her into a tomboy.

Serebii user Platinum fan. brought this up, and it was worth mentioning it to you. It appears the anime heavily discriminates genders when it comes to main cast by restricting the goals they can persuade. Basically, battling in their universe is a male-only thing leaving the female leads (barring Misty and Iris) to have to pursue Contests or Contest-like goals.

So yeah, if the playable female character in 7th Gen joins Ash in the next anime saga, she'll get restricted to a non-battling goal that's targeted towards girls again. Anime why you pick on genders so much? It really loves to claim females suck at battling or something.

Thanks Pinkie :D

idk why you'd ask me in the first place, though. I don't recall ever making any mention of being a fan of the Lego series. :P

I don't really play the Lego series.

Probably next to Erica and Jake, I might just be the second oldest here on PC. XD It's actually kind of amazing I've been here that long. Thank you though~ ^_____^

Oh, I was uninformed about that .-.

Here, send this to him.

"The Senior Supreme Court Justice was even against it, but it was a 5-4 railroaded through. The Government has no right to railroad anything like that; just another peg closer to Communism. I don't look it through the intelligent, idiots that lie to their students in college. Stalin and Lenin both did the same things."

-Legalized Gay Marriage

The Court does have the ability to judge constitutionality of state government's law. Your friend is conflating "government". State government created law which restricted freedom without providing a compelling argument. The Court demonstrated that state government had caused harm to an individuals civil liberty, and thereby restricted the state government's ability to create laws arbitrarily. If anything, the Court restricted government, both state and federal government from creating law which impedes upon a civil liberty since it provides no compelling reasons. If anything restrictions on freedom was decreased, which is more akin to libertarian ideals.

Further, the Court has been doing this for over a century...this is nothing new.


-Socialize the Medicare System
Concepts of capitalism and the invisible hand as conceived by the father of capitalism, Adam Smith, are misinterpreted terms. The core tenant of capitalism is to regulate the economy in order to create conditions that are "free" and "fair". Naturally, without law and intervention, markets are fraudulent and chaos ensues. Capitalism is NOT an endorsement to allow private interest free reign to do as they please at the expense of all individuals and freedoms. Private industries with unfair advantages, had corrupted market conditions, and caused consumers huge financial burdens which are not akin to a competitive and fair market. As a result, the President formed legislation to remedy the unfair market conditions, increase in healthcare costs, increased number of uninsured individuals, and further, the huge burden to taxpayers by having to support the uninsured individuals (unless allow them to just die). Since, the costs of medical care are inflated by large and monopolized companies, and the unpaid medical bills cannot be collected if individual are unable to make payments, the market conditions were not akin to capitalism. It takes away consumer freedom, and causes issues which limit choices of individuals involving their own life. That is very much against individuals' freedom.

Now, does the legislation truly remedy the issue???? I am not sure, I am quite skeptical actually, but the rationale does not necessarily violate fair market principles of capitalism or constitutionality.



I don't hate Gay People. I just don't accept their culture and how radicals thrust it down those who don't accept it.
How is allowing gay people to marry forcing him to accept culture? What is gay culture? Has he experienced it? If not, why does he claim not to accept it? I am assuming he is forming beliefs about "culture" based on sterotypes and generalizations. Further, if there are cultural difference between himself and gay persons, why does that matter if he is a staunch believer in liberality. I thought he was against the government regulating culture and beliefs? He is for the government forcing traditional beliefs onto the legal rights of gays, but against authoritarian government making choices involving individual's personal choices??? That's a huge contradiction.

But did you know the Nazi SS were all Gay? They were, Hitler knew this as well. Surprise. They weren't anti-gay at all. They were anti-anything not pure.
Where is the evidence? This is dumb, tbh. Really...dumb. Are you sure this guy is not joking, if not, he is really misinformed.


Overall, your friend is clearly a conservative authoritarian, and opposed to libertarianism. Meaning, that government should conform to traditional values, and repress the rights of individual if they are not in alignment with these values and punish individuals if they violate traditional values. He is for government forcing ideals upon its citizens as long as they are ideas which conform to modern conservative ideology. He is against capitalism, and rather, supports unrestricted market conditions and practices. This is akin to anarchy, which is odd since that is in opposition to his cultural conservative authoritarianism. Again, there are no shortages of contradictions in his beliefs and understandings of politics/government/philosophy.

What, why?

Wow, ok.

I think it was 15 days you've played it.