FreakyLocz14

How long did it take you for you not to show any sign of personal emotion or bias?

Quite a nice post in the NCLB thread, by the way.

But how?

You know, I was taking a shower earlier today (It's where I do a lot of my eureka moment thinking!) and thinking about some things. One of the things that popped into my head was our conversation (I promise I don't think about you in the shower!).

I was like "You know, that's kind of genius of her to do. Separating her emotions so efficiently as she does. I wonder how she does it." I tried to think back to a post you made where you seemed at all offended about something said against your argument, and I realized that there weren't any! There aren't many people I know of that frequent OC who don't have any obvious "I'm offended!" posts and I think it's really interesting how you manage to do that. It's mighty useful!

So, how do you manage to do that? Separating your emotions completely from the argument. I would think that you got insulted at least once during your time here at an argument, but you don't show it at all. A lot of people have a problem with controlling or understanding their emotions enough to be able to stop themselves from reacting rashly, but you don't seem to have that problem at all.

Try to use it just as that. A resort. But make it a last resort. If you really want to be in a thread, and you feel someone is starting to debate your opinions (many of the time, threads posted in OC are discussions turned debates; they aren't made to be debates), then you can go into legal arguments. Until then, focus on your own beliefs and opinions. That's what people want to hear from you, after all! Not all the legal stuff, but how you feel and where you stand in your opinion.

Well, I personally believe that the only way to understand someone and what they do is by talking to them. I had a picture of you in one way, and you helped me see a little bit more of the picture by talking to me about why you post the way you post. I could have complained about it all I'd like, but that wouldn't solve anything. I think a lot of people here should be more confrontational about the issues they have with another member, instead of turning to their friends and complaining and reinforcing negative emotions and misconceptions. I try my best to be as non-judgmental as I can be. Mostly everything I say to someone is observational.

I can respect that instead of getting too personal with debates, which tends to lead to a lot of frustration at opposing parties, you go into lawyer-mode. As someone who was interested at one point or another to studying law, it does seem very smart of you - even on a Pokémon forum.

Why don't, in the future, instead of focusing all of your posts on the law-side of things and why something may or may not be against the constitution, thus unlawful or inconvenient, post your personal belief and view on the matter, and gently ease into the political side of the discussion? That way people get the sense that the topic actually matters to you as a person, and touches you in some way.

I think the issues between you two will iron out on themselves if you both take the time to learn the opposing side and talk to eachother. I mean, I came to you today because I was really getting pissed off with -- not what, but how -- you were posting what you were posting in the recent threads I've been in, and all of the threads that I've seen you post in. I think the only thing you need to really realize is that, a lot of the time, people are just posting their belief on a matter. They're not really saying this or that should happen. But I don't think you choose to get people angry, that's just what happens as a result of your matter-of-fact posting.

This is a Pokémon forum. Forget the Pokémon part, this is a forum - where people are supposed to express their beliefs. You're not in the court of law, you're at your computer. I think I speak for a lot of people in saying that threads aren't based on making proper decisions. They're for discussing and reflecting on your personal emotions and opinions on the matter.

Though, I can't deny with what Mr. X said below. While I don't agree with you in most of your posts, you do back them up as much as you can. And I suppose getting the opposing side flustered in what you say is kind of the point of a debate.

But wouldn't you rather avoid a suicide in the first place? A wrongful death suit isn't going to bring the victim back and isn't really going to help their loved ones emotionally. It makes most sense to prevent that tragedy from happening at all than to settle it in court after it's happened. To think that's okay seems really insulting to the victim and his/her loved ones.

And if I wasn't pretty sure that you forgot to add a not to your sentence, i'd recommend that you do it on a VM wall that gets a bit more traffic.

Ja, had this happened about a week earlier i'd have had a couple screen's that show one of his disreguards for some rules. The computer that they were on died though.

Da.

While I might not agree with some your specifc views, I do like the fact that you back them up.

IMO, Livewire doesn't like either of our views on certian subjects and just deletes them out of spite.

Although I do admit that the post of mine that was deleted on the suicide topic was a bit to harsh.

Things can be done about it, but things aren't done about it. And that's the problem. Most schools turn the blind eye, and give them a slap on the wrist at most, which doesn't fix anything. Kids are scared to inform their teachers of the things that go on behind their backs of fear of an altercation or of the teacher not doing anything. I do agree that prosecuting school children in federal court is extreme, but I don't think that's what she's really looking to do. Just establish some sort of formal punishment for the consequence of their hurtful actions.

So you don't believe that bullying is right, but you don't think anything should be done about it?

So does discrimination, which is hurtful to people. Do you agree in people just having to deal with it and suck it up when they're bullied because of their race, gender, orientation, etc., or do you think that that's wrong?

I'm not asking you to do that, no, and I'm not insinuating that one can't support LGBT people while being conservative. That'd be mighty rude of me, not to mention counter-productive.

I've asked a few other people this, just to make sure I had some ground to stand on, and they all agree that instead of stating your opinion, you just seem to just say this is how it is. But maybe that is your opinion. A lot of your posts seem to just come from an essay you write for a class in law school. I don't really know how to explain it. There isn't any personalization in them. They're robotic-like.

If I didn't know you supported LGBT people and their rights, your post in that one thread about the suicide doesn't even show that. You didn't share any sympathy or anything for the situation, which is what I find frustrating. It's like your posts don't even come from a person, even though you are one.

It's not really about that. I do find that frustrating, though, but that's because you're so active in the LGBT group and I don't understand how you're really ignoring that.

It's just that all of your posts are always so cut and paste. They always seem to follow the same format. You post in a thread, quoting the constitution, and claiming why anything against it is automatically wrong because the constitution is the governing document in our country. Then the rest of your posts in the thread are just reiterations of your first post, mixed with links to court cases and the like. It just seems so robotic and automatic. Like you may not have views of your own. Morals and value don't seem to matter in your posts and they all show very little emotion in what you have to say, which is kind of unnatural.

I don't really see what you have against being progressive, though. Do you have something against change?

You are so hard to deal with in threads sometimes. It's always the same with you, isn't it? Come into a thread, quote the Constitution, and then spend the rest of the time arguing why progressive thoughts and opposing views go against what the Constitution says. I hold absolutely nothing against you or any negative opinions or anything like that, but that is something that bothers a lot of people around here and I get the feeling that that's a major issue between you and <you know who / person we talked about in PM>.

It just offers very little insight or discussion and people just get the opinion of you being an overzealous fundamentalist. It makes me just sit there and as myself if you get a kick out of being small minded. Because you offer very little room for discussion or progression. I realize you're a conservative, and that affects a lot of your views, but most of what you do just seems like a robot. It's like you only offer words of the laws and don't bother to post your own opinions.

This isn't me trying to start something. I'm just coming to you because I'm not interested in talking behind your back and complaining about your medieval natures (which I described above).

Third party governor didn't work out so well due to the Legislature being dominated by Democrats and Republicans, but at least it got a message across about partisan bickering temporarily. We've never had a third party US Senator to my knowledge, but a third party candidate did garner 15% of the vote in the 2008 Senate election (I actually had voted for this third party candidate). I do believe that the most recent third party senator in Congress was from New Hampshire or Vermont.

EDIT: I guess we did, but it was only for two months in 2002 as he was filling in for the late Senator Paul Wellstone, who died in a plane crash in northern Minnesota in October 2002.

Thanks! That makes sense. :)

I've seen the quote in your sig before, but I feel like I'm missing something. :/ What's the joke?

Well, she's only been in office since 2007. The area is a wealthy conservative suburban area presently, and has gradually been leaning more toward the conservative candidate as it's gotten wealthier and more suburbanized.