sexual_chocolate

Thanks all for the wonderful outpouring of love and support! My rope needs have at this moment been met. Sincerely, Sexual Chocolate

kaskade, did you used to post as "martlet"? Your tight perfunctory posting style reminds me of him.

I don't think I coud have descended further into that lower left corner than I did. Although many of the questions were awful....

Well I must say that's a beautiful rope, and a beautiful idea also, but no. What I'm looking for is someone's old retired beater rope that they wanna sell to me for cheaps. Ropes? Cheaps? Anyones? I am now an arborist, and need a rope for this type of work.

Need a used rope, any condition (not for climbing). Please pm.

Arafat was a unifying symbol for the Palestinian cause, much revered by his own people and giving them hope during difficult times. The Oslo Accords were not only Arafat's to accept or reject; to state this is to oversimplify. There were many who favored, many who rejected. *One* of the biggest issues with the accords was the cantonization of what would have been Palestine. Let's take an example: There are people on this board who have antipathy towards me (more when Trask etal were around). Would they have accepted a peace deal with me that would have allowed me to walk through their living-room and use their bathroom whenever I wanted? Of course not. Well the Oslo Accords allowed for many strategic parts of Palestininan territory to remain in Israeli control, with unfettered access. This was finally decided as unacceptable. I remember some other problems with it too. Remember that hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were displaced when Israel was created. These displaced are still displaced, and many remember their old homes. It's a difficult difficult situation, and the inflammatory responses by Sharon have not helped. My condolences go out to Arafat and his family.

Is killing a moral issue? We legislate against it (selectively, of course!). Stealing: A moral issue? Assault? (Sporadic) Protection of Old-growth? A moral issue? Abortion? Is not a fetus being killed? Why not legislate?

Do you have any mountain bikes for sale? Preferrably with a shock or something. I'm also looking for a new guitar and amp.

Your side is correct regarding....?

"Talking sense into these people". Not to these people, but hammering more opinions and assumptions about "your side" being correct.

I'm glad you've done your part in "talking sense into these people" (the "into" is very telling).

I don't know. I'm very poor at hypotheticals. A simple "I don't know" would have also sufficed.

How might you go about this?

I don't know. I'm very poor at hypotheticals.

I don't think any of our wars in the past 70 years has gone "well"; why should this one be any different? I suppose I should have added the second sentence above as a parenthetical addendum, so my meaning would have been more clear. So, for clarification, my response was aimed at your following quote: To which I should have replied with the following, sans addendum: Does this clarify?

Dude, there are troops right now kicking the shit out of civies cuz they are pissed. Another horror of war. Abu Gharib(sp?), anyone? Rape and torture are seemingly an inescapable part of war once emotions have been unchecked and normal legal and moral frameworks have been rent asunder (every war I'VE ever read about has this "hidden side"). So anyway, a partial response to your assertion about troop concern for civilian life. (This doesn't mean there aren't troops acting in ways deemed "honorable" according to customary morality.) And your former point: None of these are applicable to the Iraq situation.

Squid you are a funny guy and did you write that funny poem yourself cuz if you did then you have the honor of knowing that the Honorable Sexual Chocolate thinks you are even funnier than he did before. Yours Truly, Sexual Chocolate

Thanks for the specifics. I know this is just one example and there are many more, but sometimes if we don't clearly elucidate our objections with specific examples, much fogginess ensues!

Oh I don't think so kask. Too many right-wingers and Republicans have aired grievances for this to be simply partisan griping. The war is going horribly, as it was BEFORE it even started. As it would be if Kerry were prez, and the media would report it just the same (IMO).

And yet credit for these efforts is few and far between. Rather, the rhetoric is replete with hyperbole claiming the exact *opposite*. That's because war will always be an abomination, a ruthlessly destructive horror no matter how sophisticated its methodologies become. I think the evidence from Iraq supports this view quite clearly. With this being the case, coupled with the fact that this was an entirely illegal and immoral war to begin with (an unprovoked invasion of a foreign country!), you won't get me as a sympathizer for your "new and improved" war.

But spell out EXACTLY where his religion and politics mix, and then tell me how this is affecting you. As a side-note, one can be a secularist and still be against abortion. I'm not a Christian, but I have grave reservations about the practice and its wide-spread use. The head of NARAL a few years ago compared an abortion to popping a pimple, and this type of blase attitude kinda horrifies me, really. (But, would I overturn Roe v Wade? No, I think to do that would be worse than the current ailment.)

I tend to agree with kaskade that the visceral dismissal of "born-again christians" is counter-productive if our aim is to generate any kind of mutual understanding and empathy for differing view-points.

Oh and creativity, fun, play and all that stuff's pretty cool too! And kaskade, I appreciate your sincerety, and don't want to pigeon-hole you with over-reaching generalizations.

You can't make the fact that we have reflective awareness go away with the above argument. We DO have the ability to reflect and consider our actions and the consequences of our actions. (Is this ability simply an evolutionary development? I tend to think so, although this wouldn't preclude a supra-intelligent universe, or God, or whatever one wants to believe). I think empathy and understanding are also components of humanity (and other life-forms), to varying degrees, and again the source of these can be entirely evolutionary. This doesn't negate their validity, reality, or importance (why would these be any more important if they were divinely originated?). I think that the fact we have these capabilities opens up the door for us to relate to the world in a way that promotes harmony and peace (what we really want, no?). And because we have the reflective capacities that either evolution or God has given us, we can more honestly and accurately gauge the effect we are having on the world around us, and on ourselves. I think it kinda comes down to the kind of world we want (and I would argue that there are some similarities in that vision: peace, prosperity, ease, comfort, love, security, understanding, compassion).

How many vegan nutballs will mock a creationist while denying that human evolution has produced an omnivorous species with canine teeth. But that's just the tip of the iceberg... We are opportunistic protein feeders (if we need a scientific label) in evolutionary terms, but does the fact that we have canine teeth necessitate the continued eating of animals? Of course not. Vegans tend to live healthier lives than most, according to all info that I've seen. Once we outgrow the need for specific anatomical accoutrements, we naturally stop using them. The appendix is one example, along with the tail-bone, toe-nails, leg hair, our reflexive reptilian brain.... well, maybe not all of them!