Gamers v. Congress

[AcolyteOfDeath]

Proof of the inexistance of a god who watches over Gamers. (http://money.cnn.com/2003/01/31/commentary/game_over/column_gaming/index.htm)

It seems to me that the government, for many long years (well, at least, in computer time) has been supporting the vocal oppression of a select minority in its population. The American populace perhaps supports the largest gamer populations in the world - both game creators and game players - whom are being targeted by their blatant stereotyping.

The gamer him/herself is an entirely different kind of person from the common strain. He/she displays entirely different behaviours and lifestyles. There exists an entire gaming culture which has sprung up around memorables such as Warcraft, Starcraft, Half-Life, Counterstrike, Diablo 2, Homeworld, and many others. Entire gaming clans, close knit communities and even - with the first generation of gamers aging - entire gaming families.

It is only too clear now to see that the gamer is an ethnic minority, and as such, must not be treated any differently. Gamers as a group are perhaps one of the few ethnic minorities that it is legal to oppress.

Demand equal rights for gamers!

[/satire]

[TwoToneSocks]

hummm.....i thought we already had equal rights; its just that no one seems to care.

[Paladin]

It's a simple matter of the fact that the youth is the one minority it's acceptable to put down (http://www.commoncouragepress.com/kidsandguns.pdf). As gaming becomes more and more mainstream among the adult population it will cease to be criticized because adults will have an interest in it. Until that time it is an easy target because using it as a scapegoat primarily affects the youth and the youth have no voice, and few defenders.

-Paladin

[Vaarok]

And when we do hit the point where we have a voice, we'll still be a minority, because witless people will still outnumber us. However, they will not be so inclined to be against us. So for once, apathy will be in our favor.

[Langy]

Most of the people I know at my school are getting damned close to voting age, as well as mainly being gamers and those people interested in these 'violent games.' I wouldn't be surprised if this bill IS passed, and then five years later someone else gets a ticket to capitol hill on a train marked 'FOR THE GAMERS!'

EDIT: Of course, then he'd repeal the bill and stop any other bill like this crud from passing. And then he'd become president, and it would be Gamer Heaven! Hoorah!;)

[Dan Van Crone]

"Mr. President."

"I told you to call me pr3z1d0r."

"Alright, Mr. pr3z1d0r. We have Yassar Arafat waiting on the phone for you."

"Tell him to hold. Just another 2,000XP and I can level up. Then I can summon SIX skeletons."

Some time ago a friend of mine and I were ruminating over some bourbons (as you do) when he said "Can you imagine what will happen when kids of this generation grow up and go into fields like politics? You'll have delegates on the floor of the UN saying stuff like "j00 c4n'7 fr4g m3 w1th j00r n3wkz! 1 h4v3 m4d sk1llz!"

And so they shall. :)

[Trinity]

Well, not likely to get impeached for playing a game as one would for playing an intern.

[Martian]

If that bill is accepted, I am going to laugh.

But I don't think it will be accepted if your congress is sensible: as explained in that article, it is not the best way to stop young kids from getting those games, because it will be totally unenforcable.

I like the idea of a special rack for mature-rated video games though.

[eadipus]

i don't see a problem with it. all it means is that instead of kids being able to buy games which have content that could be considered offensive there parents have to do it for them. here you can be fined for selling games to people who aren't old enough (i had to ID people) and i've never seen a problem with it. if anything it means that parents who don't know what kind of games there children are playing will, and they can make their own decisions about it (i've seen parents buying their 7 year old son GTA Vice City).

[Alliance]

DIE CONGRESS!

you do know that 99 persent of action games are 17+...

the gaming indtursty would die, and a underground indrusty for those kind's of games would rise, and btw, how manny sex games are there? i mean computer sex games, exept of bmx xxx?

[Paladin]

But I don't think it will be accepted if your congress is sensible
They're not.


I don't see a problem with it. all it means is that instead of kids being able to buy games which have content that could be considered offensive there parents have to do it for them.
I do. It's not the government's job to parent. It's not the store clerk's job to parent. If parents don't know what their kids are playing that is their failure, and they shouldn't be trying to offload their responsibilities onto the rest of society.

-Paladin

[Ressev]

Just a minor nit-pick:
Gamers as a group are perhaps one of the few ethnic minorities that it is legal to oppress.
It should be noted that to be a minority is ONE thing. To be an ethnic/racial minority and thus unable to change ones status is another thing completely. Gamers are not an ethnic minority but a minority and thus not entitled to percieved special privlages.

Anyways... back on topic: These are the kinds of Bills that raise your taxes and waste peoples valuable time. It would be simpler if morality were taught at home than legislate peoples choices in entertainment (really, if people don't want to buy it then the product dies). Here is my favorite quote from the article:
Which federal agency is going to enforce this law? Do we need or want the federal government to add a Department of Videogames? The FBI and CIA's time and resources are better spent on homeland security instead of enforcing this law.
- Eduardo
To True, to true.

[Kheturus]

Yeah, I hated the way I was discriminated against when I tried to buy alcohol when I was 16. This is the exact same problem. I also get discriminated agasint when I apply for Jobs. All these companies are saying, "You need a PhD to be a lead researcher." How much more discriminating can you get? And the way that police officers are allowed to carry weapons, while the rest of society is discriminated against. It's shameful.

So while I disagree with this bill, I also think that alcohol, firearms and drugs should be legalized so that we won't be disciminated there either.

[Paladin]

Heh, I guess you know where you stand in relation to someone when you actually agree with the substance of their obviously sarcastic post.

-Paladin

[Martian]

Paladin: I am afraid our definitions of 'sensible' differ so much, that your opinion on this doesn't mean much for me... but you could be right ;)

[AcolyteOfDeath]

You do know, Ressev, that my statement was intended to be satire?

[bitz]

ummm, first of all i thought it was already illegal for 17 or below to buy or rent m games.

secondly, i've yet to see crimes that were directly related to gta3 or other violent games. circumstance is their only weapon, logic is their weakness. so really, who cares what a bunch of angry old politicians have to say about gaming now.

[Higaran]

The real truth is that millions of people have computers and 90% of the owners don't know dog-shit how to use them. Ok, I'm a geek, and all of you that know what the hell l33t speak is are geeks too, don't be fooling your selves. The thing is that the 90% can barely play solitare on their computers, let alone install and figure out something like quake, or homeworld. I pray for the day that DVC talks about where people in the UN actually talk like that, then and only then, we might have a unified world because people will realze that the internet and computers have really brought us together, and that it won't matter what nationality you are because we will all realize we are all human, and that the only thing that matters is that I'm kicking your ass in HW2 or maybe HW4. Right now for the 90% that don't understand, the computer is just sort of a wall, they see one image of some one getting killed, and they are scared because of ignorance.

[Langy]

Hig - That's 90% of the older people. It's the complete reverse for (what I assume to be) our generation. We grew up with computers and games. It's almost impossible to not know anything about computers if you are a teenage guy nowadays. In forty, fifty, sixty years, we might actually get an all-gamer congress, because the non-gamer would be in such a minority that they wouldn't matter.

[Zeenith]

as far as my opion is that congress should back the hell away from computer games. and i agree with Higaren that 90% of people that have computers dont know jack §µit about it.

People are scared of what they dont know and/or dont understand so they say its evil and say it shouldn't be there.

but hell as i said before congress and people that dont understand computers and games should just back the hell away, for they know not what they do.

[Russian Ninja]

This reminds me of something really stupid a while ago.

Some time ago the Greek government tried to totally ban any-and-all electronic games of any kind. Computer, Gameboys, PS2's, Mobile Phone games, X-Boxes. All these were now illegal. People who owned internet cafes were fined and taken into custody. Apparently the whole thing was ment to "Crack down on Internet Gambling ". It was totally stupid. Eventually they had to scrap the law because most other European countries thought it was too drastic and had nothing to do with internet gambling.

Not to mention being incredibly stupid.

And this is almost just as stupid. As Higaran said, it is the parent's fault that they can't use a mouse the right way and don't know @%$! about games. There are plenty of sensible people, but there are also lots of idiots. There was this researcher,Lois Salisbury, who was in charge of investigating the steriotypes of women and generally trying to ferret something out to blame the game industry for. This came out of Australian PC Power Play btw, Issue 81, as part of an article on how people are trying to ban games.

Acording to this person, "54% of games surveyed contain female lead characters while 92% have male lead characters. These games which feature female characters tend to display women in an exaggerated and stereotypical manner, with 38% displaying significant body exposure and..." blah blah blah, you get the idea. "In addition, 38% of female game characters have large breasts and 46% had unusually small waists. Altogether 54% of the female game characters were depicted as fighting or being violent, while many exhibited stereotypical female behavior..."

There is all kinds of other BS that people try to blame on games. The fact is that anyone outside the gaming community have absolutely no idea what goes on inside the gaming community. I wouldn't be surprised if the American Congress passes this bill. The fact is that Games are being blamed because people don't have anything else to blame. I mean look at that quote. Researching if the female characters have large breasts and small waists? Haven't these people heard of advertising? Don't these people know that the movies are probably worse than games? Don't these people know that they should get a life?

You get the idea.

EDIT: That quote wasn't copywrited ok. Anyway There is plenty of other stuff like this.

[Bonnet]

Ack how stupid can congress get. dont they know the games are trainging thier next generation of soldiers for them? you have generals from cnc generals and youre men from games DFLW and battelfield 1942 (this is a joke). seriously though congress just seems to think that if you shoot somebody on a computer youre going to walk outside and do the same.

[Langy]

Umm.... 54% had female lead characters while 92% had male lead? Is that even possible? Well, I guess if they change their gender in the middle of the game...

[Russian Ninja]

You can have more than 1 lead character. A lead character has to be one which the storyline revolves around. So if the story revolves around a group of people, then you have a number of leads.

[Tygre]

§µit Stop it.

If they try to "protect" me from games I'm going to walk into Congress and start shooting people with a bazooka. I'd never get caught, either, because cops don't know how to go up stairs.

Seriously folks. A top-shelf policy as suggested and an optional "We card/Yuo n33d p4r3n7 premisoin" sort of thing for each store is the most I'll be content with being put into place. I don't even buy M-rated games that much (but I'll tell ya, if I had $250 I'd pick up an Xbox and DOAXBV right freaking now).

I have a dream...I'm watching volleyball. But whenever the gaming man tries to get ahead in a virtual world through violence and lewd acts, the PURITAN WHITE MAN keeps him down.

[Mac_Bug]

higaran that's possibly the most coherent thought I've gotten out of you yet, now I must tweak your software for better mileage

[Higaran]

Thank you mac, I know this because as I say I am a geek, one of my jobs a few years back when I was younger was selling PC's at BEST BUY, its a tech store basicaly, for those of you that never heard of it. 99% of the people I talked with didn't know krap even if it was like their second or third pc. Its sad really, but I digress, hell, I have to say that probably only really one guy that I meet really knew anything, and as talking to this guy he tells me he is A+, MS, and in the proccess of CISCO certification. No offense Mac, but anyone that choses their pc just because of the color of the case, or just because its a certin brand name should be shot in the head. I can't remember how many times I was asked how to do something trivial like how to install a program or where do I plug in my joystick, it drove me mad for the longest time.

{EDIT}

Yea sure I'd love for you to tweak my software.

[Paladin]

People should be required to build their own PCs. That way they might actually know something about how it works.

-Paladin

[Martian]

But there would be less noobs to kill, and less funny kids calling you a cheater when you kick their ass =[

[AcolyteOfDeath]

Yes, indeed. We must always have an ample supply of n00bs on which to feed. The future of the 1337 gaming world depends upon the oppression of the n00bie class.

[Vaarok]

Which is why this forum grew the IC appendages once the HWers began to thin out.

Sometimes I think extinction might've been preferable.

[General Nuke Em]

Congress won't pass this bill because the gaming industry will fight it like hell, and who does the gaming industry include? Microsoft (which has enough money to burn to get this beaten down). Now, that won't be the only reason, there are others (such as the fact that this bill is idiotic, educated voters would never go for it, etc).

[Alliance]

m$ can basicly bidd out any one, cash wize, they probly have a private army... :D

[ASnogard]

I really get annoyed when politicians stick their noses into the gaming scene.

My opinion they do this because

a) They r clueless about games and what they don't know they try get rid of rather than take the effort to learn

b) Catching brownie points with the populace , the state and the president

c) Got their butts kicked in a HW MP and sore losers :D

Serious though all this atempts to police the gaming scene is mere laziness of society , parents want the goverment to raise their kids rather than take the effort required, and certain politicians are more than happy to use this to further thier own careers.

[No Surrender]

I am deeply shocked that the thought to require parental permition to buy an M rated game. If the Game rating system is the same as the movie rateing system then I should be required to have a parent's permission to see Star Wars or Final Fantasy.

Heck, most of the time if a person gets even remotly hurt it's an M. Has congress ever try to ban movies or tv?

Plus, the banning of games would cause a major slowdown in the IT sector (y would u need a P4 3.5 to use microsoft word?) and the economy can't take that.

Anyway, I live in China so i can just hop out any bloody day i want and buy what ever the heck I want and no clerk is ever going to ask for my age. Hell, one of my friends bought a porn disk and they didn't eve care (he threw the disc away.)

[Commodore-SLS]

Youth should be discriminated against. 90% are so stupid I would not really qualify them as self-aware. As opposed to adults, who aren't normally that bright either. Humans disgust me.

[Agdune]

humans are creepy little monkey things. of course they're stupid ;)

[Paladin]

Bah. I already gave you the reason politicians are so anxious to get their claws into video games. You obviously did not read the essay. Click me and be enlightened (http://www.commoncouragepress.com/kidsandguns.pdf).

-Paladin

[Mac_Bug]

I don't see a problem with stopping 'kids' from playing violent video games. Quite obviously any 'responsible' parent is capable of taking their kid to the store and buying them games they want their kids to play.

[Russian Ninja]

Anyone outside the gaming community has absolutely no idea what goes on inside the gaming community. So what if some idiots can't distinguish between a game of CS and reality. The rest of us shouldn't suffer from their stupidity.

The government doesn't really care about policing computer laws. Burning CD's and DVD's is illegal, yet does the government take any steps to inforce this law?

[Mac_Bug]

so what if a few get killed in car accidents because of 'excessive speed'? the rest of us shouldn't suffer from their stupidity

[Paladin]

I don't see a problem with stopping 'kids' from playing violent video games. Quite obviously any 'responsible' parent is capable of taking their kid to the store and buying them games they want their kids to play.
Ah, but that's exactly the reason there should not be a law preventing it. The law shields the irresponsible from the consequences of their actions, takes the responsibility out of the hands of the people. It is the government saying "We understand that it's too great a responsibility for you to handle, raising your children. We will relieve you of that responsibility."

How are beneficial evolutionary factors to take effect if the people are allowed to take wrong action without facing the consequence of their actions?

-Paladin

[Mac_Bug]

By that logic there shouldn't be anything preventing children to watch NC17 movies, visit porn sites, rent adult videos, buy cigarettes, drink alcohol, drive cars, vote, or anything of that sort simply because their parents should be parents and TEACH THEIR KIDS NOT TO DO IT.

[Ressev]

Originally posted by AcolyteOfDeath
You do know, Ressev, that my statement was intended to be satire?

You're right!, sorry. :fallen:
I really don't know how I missed that. :(

[Ressev]

Yeah Hig, in 50 years gamers will be in Congress and want to settle political disputes via LAN Dathmatches on the Senate Floor.

Interesting idea actually...

[Tygre]

Bush's team of level 99 Pikachus defeats Sadaam's crappy ass team of poisonous...mutated...sand stuff...

[Vaarok]

Eellemmings vs Cobrascorps?

[Paladin]

By that logic there shouldn't be anything preventing children to watch NC17 movies, visit porn sites, rent adult videos, buy cigarettes, drink alcohol, drive cars, vote, or anything of that sort simply because their parents should be parents and TEACH THEIR KIDS NOT TO DO IT.
Exactly. It's no one else's job to raise your children.

[Mac_Bug]

It's really pointless to argue the topic with you then on that note. However, when a lot of people here say 'it's the parents' job', how far does their responsibility extend? It's also a parent's job to vote and decide the best environment for their children and the policies they entrust their kids to, and laws are also a tool in a parent's toolkit to help them do their job.

[Paladin]

No, they are not. It is cowardice to cede one's responsibilities to government. It speaks of weakness. "I do not wish to be bound to causality. I want to be able to do what I wish without accepting the natural consequences. I will therefore remove from myself all burdens of responsibility, the government should be responsible for me."

Such a population becomes dependant on government. Such a populace is at risk because it cannot fend for itself. This is unacceptable.

Order such as this reduces humans to automata. A person in such a state is no longer alive, he merely waits for death. Do you not understand that perfect order would halt evolution?

-Paladin

[Mac_Bug]

I don't understand the world you are living in, quite frankly reality says quite the opposite and will likely stay that way



riddle me this. Sure, you have control over your own offspring? But do you have control over the other children? What happens when your kids come back and say, mom, why can't we do this, the other kids all does it? What happens when other parents are irresponsible and the kids turn bad, and do things like shooting up the school with your kid in it?

Quite often these laws are established not in particular to control yourself - I highly doubt murderers got together to establish the punishment of death - but rather someone else.

Sure, you're not drinking and driving. Joe is, and he's driving down to your neighborhood now - in your lane.

How do you protect your children from things you don't want them to see? Lock them up in a bomb shelter?

[Ressev]

Exactly what Paladin says. The Founders of this Nation would be aghast if they saw the state of affairs. Government needed to be limited to ensure that people had as much a voice as possible - and ensure the Government could be changed if necessary. Nowadays the bureaucrats sit and run many things and suggest many more things while the Politicians change around them - the Bureaucrats have no connection or clue what their regulations, taxes, and rules do to the people. It would be nice if someone sometime fires them all and scraps the majority of duplicate and contradictory laws that hinder this society and slowly choke our freedoms... [/rant]

There need to be sensible laws. But that will take bold and sensible politicians, who usually have the sense to stay out of politics.

[Bonnet]

What happens when your kids come back and say, mom, why can't we do this You say because im the boss this is bad for you, and if you do it you WILL get punished. This worked for hundreds of years its only with the new wussy aproach to parenting that these problems have arose. The same with school shootings. In the 1920s the kids would have finished the fight in the backyard and gone home pissed but not likely to walk into a school with a gun.

[Paladin]

What happens when other parents are irresponsible and the kids turn bad, and do things like shooting up the school with your kid in it?
Their bad parenting lowers the potential for survival in their children and evolutionary factors remove their obviously damaged genetic material from the pool. As it should be.

-Paladin

[Mac_Bug]

Ressev, why don't you become a politician, and if the people are so pissed off, why are the politicians getting elected?

[Russian Ninja]

Paladin sounds like a dictator to me...

Anyway, it may be the parents fault, but they can't control every aspect of their kid's life and who would want that? On the other hand, they should at the very least try and have a look at what their son/daughter is doing.

[Paladin]

How am I a dictator if I say that people should be free? There is no freedom without responsibility.

-Paladin

[Russian Ninja]

I never said you ARE a dictator. I said you SOUND like one. I mean come on. With stuff like this...


Originally posted by Paladin

Their bad parenting lowers the potential for survival in their children and evolutionary factors remove their obviously damaged genetic material from the pool. As it should be.

-Paladin

...it sounds like you want to control everything.

Still, Whatever. Who cares.

[Paladin]

Actually I want to control nothing. What I said there was that nature should be allowed to take it's course without government intervention. That is anarchy, not dictatorship.

-Paladin

[Martian]

I find it disgusting how you missed the entire point of thousands of years of civilisation, Paladin.

[Paladin]

I haven't missed it, I revile it.

-Paladin

[Vaarok]

Seconded. That short diatribe about giving away responsibility was almost poetic, paladin.

Willfull disenfranchisment of oneself is basically an infantile demand that one wishes to become a dependent and atrophied lump utterly without voice. To quote Stan Lee: "With grave power comes great responsibility." You can not expect to be able to mold the first seventh of the life of an entire human being (or more) and yet accept no responsibility for their actions while they are your ward.

Hell, they have laws that penalize you for the behavior of your dog.

[Higaran]

Ok, yes paladin is right, if the government didn't intervene then these stupid kids would be killing them selves and helping to strenghten the gene pool. It is the parents responsibility to parent not the governments. Alot of you people don't realize but there are omish people out there they live on farms and they don't even have electricity, they live the same as their parents and their parents before them. Don't you think that those kids aren't asking why they cant have a tv or a radio. Their parents are saying no because i'm the parent, and theyve been doing that for hundreds of years. If a person can control their kid on their own, why shouldn't you be able to. Just like padalin says, there is no freedom without responsibility, how or why should a person be free if they cant even take control of their own child.

Mac it's not about controling your child, it's about teaching the child right from wrong and trusting that the child really understands this. Its one thing for the child to know what's right and whats wrong, but the child must understand the consaquences of the wrong, and how that will effect him. I'm not sure where this comes from, but i guess TV mostly tells people that they are all special and that its never their own fault.
The Stella Awards.
Time to fear living in America.


The Stella's are named after 81-year-old Stella Liebeck who spilled coffee on herself and successfully sued McDonald's. That case inspired the Stella Awards for the most frivolous lawsuits in the United States. The following are this year's top 7 candidates: .

7. Kathleen Robertson of Austin, Texas, was awarded $780,000 by a jury of her peers after breaking her ankle tripping over a toddler who was running inside a furniture store. The owners of the store were understandably surprised at the verdict, considering the misbehaved toddler was Ms. Robertson's son!

6. Carl Truman, a 19-year-old man from Los Angeles, won $74,000 and medical expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand with a Honda Accord. Mr. Truman apparently didn't notice there was someone at the wheel of the car when he was trying to steal his neighbor's hub caps.

5. Terrence Dickson of Bristol, Pennsylvania, was leaving a house he had just finished robbing by way of the garage. He was not able to get the garage door to go up since the automatic door opener was malfunctioning. He couldn't re-enter the house because the door connecting the house and garage locked when he pulled it shut. The family was on vacation, and Mr. Dickson found himself locked in the garage for eight days. He subsisted on a case of Pepsi he found, and a large bag of dry dog food. He sued the homeowner's insurance claiming the situation caused him undue mental anguish. The jury agreed to the tune of $500,000.

4. Jerry Williams of Little Rock, Arkansas, was awarded $14,500 and medical expenses after being bitten on the buttocks by his next door neighbor's beagle. The beagle was on a chain in its owner's fenced yard. The award was less than sought because the jury felt the dog might have been just a little provoked at the time by Mr. Williams who was shooting it repeatedly with a pellet gun.

3. Amber Carson of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, was awarded $113,500. A Philadelphia restaurant was ordered to pay after she slipped on a soft drink and broke her coccyx (tailbone). The beverage was on the floor because Ms. Carson had thrown it at her boyfriend 30 seconds earlier during an argument.

2. Kara Walton of Claymont, Delaware, successfully sued the owner of a night club in a neighboring city when she fell from the bathroom window to the floor and knocked out her two front teeth. This occurred while Ms. Walton was trying to sneak through the window in the ladies' room to avoid paying the $3.50 cover charge. She was awarded $12,000 and dental expenses.


1. Mr. Merv Grazinski of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma purchased a brand new 32-foot Winnebago motor home. On his first trip home, having driven onto the freeway, he set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the driver's seat to go into the back and make himself a cup of coffee. Not surprisingly, the R.V. left the freeway, crashed, and overturned. Mr. Grazinski sued Winnebago for not advising him in the owner's manual that he couldn't actually do this. The jury awarded him $1,750,000 plus a new motor home. The company actually changed their manuals on the basis of this new suit, just in case there were any other complete morons buying their recreational vehicles


Ok I pulled that off a website but it is all true, the sad thing is that everyone of these people should be shot for their stupidity, and half of them should have gone to jail. But lawyers have corrupted everyone into thinking that its ok to do what ever you want, and its never your fault, becuase most of the time they can find a way to blame it on someone else.

[Russian Ninja]

...

...

...

WTF

What kind of stupidity is that. Those cases are rediculous. Still, things like that happen. Watch one episode of Judge Judy and you'll see.

Only in America...

Edit: This post has gone way off topic...

[Kheturus]

Paladin, for a claimed relativist Buddhist (if there can be such a thing), you sure enjoy de-humanizing people.

[Paladin]

Not at all. I simply understand that civilization is dehumanizing. We strive for a social order which can only distance us from the creative force of entropy.

-Paladin

[Mac_Bug]

Here's a curve ball - should the Christian god be responsible for Christian sins?

[Paladin]

Does it matter?

-Paladin

[Mac_Bug]

Hey, always your parents' fault, right?

[Paladin]

Well, I meant that whether or not there is a God and whether or not he's responsible if there is does not seem relevant to day to day life. At least in my opinion.

OTOH, I suppose you could call him a deadbeat dad. Doesn't call, doesn't write, doesn't pay child support...

In all seriousness though, I never said that the child's actions are necessarily anyone's fault, the need to find fault is rather juvenile, to be honest. It speaks to a need to assuage one's own conscience by blaming others. It is an entirely counterproductive action that humans insist on engaging in whenever something goes wrong and it only uses energies which would be better spent fixing the problem.

Things go wrong. Things die. People die. That's just life. Attempting to impose an artificial order on the natural systems of life is folly. Order is a dangerous illusion. Chaos is holy.

-Paladin

[Ressev]

Originally posted by Mac_Bug
Ressev, why don't you become a politician, and if the people are so pissed off, why are the politicians getting elected?

You got me there Mac. I actually have thought about getting into politics but decided it would be better for my wife if I did not - the stress would not be good for her Schizo-Effective disorder.

Politicians get re-elected for a variety of reasons: the appearance that they are doing well. Fear that the other person might be worse. It could go on and on. We had a good representative in my area who was not wishy washy about his convictions of right and wrong. He was also balanced in that he respected the rule of law. Unfortunately he was beaten by a liar who thinks little of human life. Go figure.

Martian and Russian: it should be noted that it was Thousands of years of civilisation that brought forth the USA. It should also be noted that it is man's inability to be virtuous that has caused the USA to befome more Government-Centric.

Paladin - you a Libertarian? I would be surprised if you were not.

[Higaran]

Originally posted by Mac_Bug
Here's a curve ball - should the Christian god be responsible for Christian sins?

Ok, thats the biggest load of krap I've ever heard, god isn't nothing to do with the subject, I mean it does in how the parents teach their child, but it has nothing to do with whos responsibility something is. If a kid kills someone and he starts saying it was gods responsibiliy the kid will be sent to the nut house, because he has some major issues. Up the the 18th birthday the parent is responsible for the child, now the parent cant be with the child 24 hours a day, but they should theach the child right from wrong and the diffrence between fantasy and reality. If a parent can't do that then the parent really isn't doing their job and shouldn't be able to be a parnet.

[Mac_Bug]

Well, that's how the logic goes isn't it? I mean, if that kid shoot up his school, it's because of bad parenting, nevermind what society does to influence them, I mean, society influenced them in the negative way because that society had bad parents, I mean, those parents were bad because their parents never teached them right or wrong and how to be good parents, rince, repeat, lather, till the beginning of time.

Blame it on God... but hey, you can't blame it on God! Therefore, the guilt disappears magically!

[Ressev]

Actually Mac, God is not responsible for our sins because we rebelled against Him. The fact that He took it upon Himself to die for our sins to reconcile us to Him, still does not make Him responsible for us sinning.

Each and every individual is responsible for their own actions and thoughts. That parents today abdicate their authority to government and that government - because of silly interpretations of the laws of this country, can't teach children morality and that there are absolutes along with consequences does not excuse the child from being responsible for their own ill deeds.

The family - consisting of a Father and Mother are proven to be the most stable method to raise children and give them stability. Without stability they have a greater tendancy to buck social norms and even "shoot up his school". The family may not be perfect, but it IS more stable than a single parent house or non-parent house. That most children, during the critical first 5 years of their lives, spend time with "caregivers" and not with a mother or father, decreases their sense of stability and self-worth.

A parent cannot be responsible for the actions of their children, unless they directed their children to do those actions. But they are responsible for the lack of training they give their children. Corpral punishment should be used more and not talked down. Society needs to see the distinction between legitamate discipline and abuse.

Guilt is not a product of blaming it on God. So it cannot disapear magically unless you have no conscience (either by numbing or chemical instability). Guilt is the knowledge that you have done something you should not have done and that there may even be harsh consequences for the action.

So... the accusation of bad parenting is only accurate in the sense of the permissiveness of the parents and lack of discipline towards the children at a young and tender age. The parents are culpable only in the sense that they failed to instill self-discipline into their children by teaching them absolutes and consequences. Beyond that, the teenagers are solely responsible for their actions. By the way, I take the Jewish aproach that 12-13 is when a person is legally responible for their own actions. Before that their parents are their protectors from social retaliation.

On another note...am I rambling?...God clearly told Adam and Eve not to eat from that one tree. He also told them there would be consequences if they did: death. They ate; He withheld his full wrath against them and only kicked them out of the Garden; they eventually died after several centuries of a life of toil. We, in similar vein, continue to rebel and pay the consequences. We live so that we might be reconciled to Him before the Final Judgement.

[Genetic Bryy]

So, where does that lead the Amistad passengers?
They rebelled, and got their freedom.

We rebelled, and got America.

Children and adults shooting others at schools isn't rebellion, it isn't about bad parenting, it isn't about God's Plan, its about choice. Its about how they perceive things to be. It's about them, and how they see themselves, and how they think they need to handle the situation.
It does not matter if its a same-sex household, a dad-mom household, a single parent household, or a no parent household.
Its experience, choice, and reason.

At least, I think that's so.

[Ressev]

The Columbine boys were not being abused, wheras the Amistad rebels and Colonists were. I never said or meant the situations to be taken as the same or on equal footing, they are not. In a sense, the Columbine boys were rebelling, but for all the wrong reasons.

As for parenting, the majority of studies show that a two parent household with a male and female as the parents is the best for the development of a child. It is not always perfect, but overall it prepares the most stable adults.

That is from what I have read.

[Vaarok]

The columbine boys were the result of weak parents and a lack of common sense. The one kids' father bought him a glock because the kid was showing an interest in firearms (discovered during psychological evaluation), and the father wanted to pretty much bribe the kid into liking him.

[Paladin]

Well, that's how the logic goes isn't it? I mean, if that kid shoot up his school, it's because of bad parenting, nevermind what society does to influence them, I mean, society influenced them in the negative way because that society had bad parents, I mean, those parents were bad because their parents never teached them right or wrong and how to be good parents, rince, repeat, lather, till the beginning of time.

Blame it on God... but hey, you can't blame it on God! Therefore, the guilt disappears magically!
I have a revolutionary idea... How about we consider that it might be the kids' fault. They made the choice, end of story. Have you ever considered that the person ultimately responsible for any person's actions is that person and no one else?

And yes, I am politically a libertarian, but philosophically I'm an anarchist.

-Paladin

[Genetic Bryy]

Originally posted by Vaarok
The columbine boys were the result of weak parents and a lack of common sense. The one kids' father bought him a glock because the kid was showing an interest in firearms (discovered during psychological evaluation), and the father wanted to pretty much bribe the kid into liking him.

Yeah, I found this to be quite hilari-*******-ous.

Paladin wins the grand prize for logic.

[Ressev]

And he did it with fewer words than I. :D

There are a lot of areas politically that I lean heavily Libertarian.

Of course, one has to wonder why the dad felt he had to bribe the boy. Must have been a lack of attention to the child at younger ages, by then, the teen didn't care. I actually didn;t hear that about the dad, but it really does not surprise me.

[Genetic Bryy]

Oh, he knew that a lot of stuff was going on and he didn't both doing anything. Sounds like a total flake to me.

[Mac_Bug]

Hey, my goal was to get the parents off the hook, and I did, at least with some of you

[Paladin]

I never said the parents were to blame for their children's misdeeds. Blame is a fools game in a system in which no single person is ever solely at fault for a failure and there are natural evolutionary forces which handle failures anyway.

All I said was that it wasn't the job of the rest of society to raise other people's children. And I stand by that.

-Paladin