• Announcements

    • Harken Unto Ye

      Logging in   05/10/2017

      If you had an account and can't log in as of 5/9/17, this may be because of a change in logins with new forum software. You can log in using your publicly displayed name (not your username) or your email address and the password you used before.   If you have problems with this, please ask any of the mods or admins. 

All Activity

This stream auto-updates   

  1. Past hour
  2. Yeah, I became a minister through American Marriage Ministries to officiate Neb and Sylae's marriage and it was real simple and inexpensive. I think I had to send one letter to the governor's office and most of my expenses were a voluntary donation. And, I mean, technically and legally AMM is a religious organization, but it's clear that the actual purpose is to enable anyone who wants to officiate a marriage to do so. There are at least two large nationwide organizations that do this. Probably the intent of the law is to privilege religious officials, but in practice the definition of "religious official" is so arbitrarily large as to be pointless. Something something first amendment.
  3. Today
  4. So I took it upon myself to get ahead of myself and decided to e-mail our good friend, Mr. Jeff Vogel, basically bothering him and asking him how to 'Capture Soul' Erika, or why Prazac is such a [censored], and I asked him what was in the works after Avadon III wraps up, if they were REALLY remake-inceptioning Exile III: Ruined World. Good 'ol Jeffy simply said we hope to have it out next year, EARLY next year. So. Bottom line is I am excited af for this. Anyone else?
  5. i mean, i'd say having to become a judge counts as having a significantly less easy time of it
  6. The "than anyone else" part is a bit overbroad; judges and various other officials generally can officiate marriages as well. So there is a parallel, totally secular system.
  7. my understanding was that in most US states, ordained ministers of religion have a significantly easier time gaining legal authority to officiate marriages than anyone else, which i suppose is a relatively minor issue in the scheme of things but does seem a bit like giving special treatment to religion
  8. (Note: This game will probably be very difficult for anyone who doesn't know English very well. It's okay if you have trouble! Do the best you can, and feel free to ask me questions.) Common English compound words and simple phrases have been separated into their component words and then run through a thesaurus. The results were recombined... but they no longer make any sense! The following list is the result of this bizarre translation. Can you figure out what the original words were? You may have to think laterally, because the results were chosen based on what sounded good, rather than for accuracy. Here are some examples to get you started: a) Frog Bench = Toadstool b ) Chromosome Workshop = Geneforge (This is the only explicitly Spiderweb word; there are none in the list below) c) Negative Location = Nowhere Rules: The game is open from now until Tuesday, July 25. I don't have a set time, but expect it to be sometime in the afternoon for those of you in the US. So later if you're in Europe, or in the morning if you are in Australia. Submit your answers to me in a private message. DO NOT POST GUESSES IN THIS THREAD. You can make as many guesses as you want (although I would prefer lots of guesses in a single message, since that makes it easier for me to handle). A correct guess is worth one point, and I will reply to you in the private message your correct guesses and current score. You may use a thesaurus or any other resource you wish. You may ask questions or bounce ideas around in this thread or anywhere else, but please do not post or pass along the answers to anyone (although it's not like I can really enforce it). I will post the full list of answers and everyone's score in this thread once the game is done. If a translation is only answered correctly by one person, that person gets two bonus points. But this is meant to be fun, not a serious competition. Again, send guesses to me in PMs. NO POSTING GUESSES OR ANSWERS IN THIS THREAD. Thank you. 1. Firm Fedora 2. Indigo Chimes 3. Celebrity Minnow 4. Beige Choker 5. Kitty Crook 6. Total Thespian 7. Inferno Warrior 8. Marijuana Jumper 9. Lust Parrot 10. Arachnid Internet 11. Robert Feline 12. Donkey Wasabi 13. Contraband Yam 14. Footprint Guardian 15. Soil Baron 16. Depressed Io 17. Molar Select 18. Princess Glitch 19. Yaw Jacket 20. Endorse District 21. Nude Birthmark Defector 22. Navy Fruit 23. H2O Barn 24. Opalescent Route 25. Angry Stride 26. Oleo Glide 27. Stratosphere Scratcher 28. Dilute Autumn 29. All Stuff 30. Banister Boulevard 31. Ankle Sphere 32. Flame Mosquito 33. Jaundiced Windbreaker 34. Zealous Muskrat 35. Mug of Joseph 36. Egg Plucking 37. Chai Snuggle 38. Velvety Merchandise Bonus: Come up with the best mistranslation (at Dikiyoba's discretion) for "Nethergate".
  9. well, in fairness, the idea of poly marriage does raise legal questions that monogamous marriage (same-sex or otherwise) doesn't; having one spouse means there's one go-to person for any issue where the spouse gets the first bite at the apple, while with multiple spouses you need some kind of decision-making process to work out how they're prioritized. there's also the question of transitivity: if A marries B and B then marries C, what kind of legal relationship does that create between A and C, and how much input should A have in whether B and C's marriage can happen given that it may have financial and legal consequences for A on the otoh hand there are existing legal procedures that already handle similar questions. for example, many countries that accommodate spousal immigration already impose a lifetime limit on how many spouses you can bring over. and when it comes to inheritance or medical decision-making authority, the situation of someone with multiple spouses is arguably comparable to a person with no living spouse but multiple children, which we already manage to handle well enough most of the time. so it's certainly not impossible in principle to establish an equitable legal framework for it
  10. Other than adding a modifier to the term "marriage," is there any other separation that you would want? Because I don't really understand what you mean other than that we don't use separate words for the two concepts (except when we do).
  11. Sort of. I mean, you're right, those things are technically possible according to our laws, but in cultural terms they aren't possible. Most people treat civic and religious marriage is one synonymous entity, and the government makes no effort to suggest otherwise, even using the same term. ("Civic marriage" vs "religious marriage" is a very different story than "marriage" vs" marriage" is.) And where other terms have been used (e.g., civil unions) a very clear line has been drawn indicating that they are different from marriage.
  12. Alright, I sent them a report. Hopefully they can find a workaround.
  13. I agree that it is important, and I think that a review would have found it important and would have better articulated why the right of marriage should be extended. It hopefully would also have resulted in a national standard (in the US, there are differences at the state level) as to what age one has to be in order to be married. The other part of the question though is why is two the magic number for a secular legal contract? The question of what is the maximum number of people who could be married to each other would need to be part of any realistic study of the secular benefits of marriage.
  14. Yeah, not so much. The federal government sometimes prohibits discrimination in its own ranks more broadly than it prohibits in private employment (and occasionally vice-versa as well — it can exempt itself from federal antidiscrimination law). So no, there's never been an explicit general federal ban on employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, or discrimination in public accommodations, or (as far as I know) anything else. People have tried to pass a federal ban on employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, but the last few efforts have failed. Generally, blue states have such a law, so I suspect expect that it will pass at the federal level the next time that Democrats have unified control of the House, the Senate, and the Presidency. Not just possible — this is essentially the system that we already have.
  15. Yesterday
  16. Freedom of speech allows religions to have ceremonies for, and recognize, marriages that are not legally recognized or binding. This isn't just academic; this happens, although not all that often. So the distinction already can exist. Where the problem exists is significantly in trying to keep civil and religious marriage equatable even if they aren't necessarily equated. Whether that's a reasonable or good goal is, of course, a matter of dispute that often aligns with the social values liberal-conservative axis. —Alorael, who can see some tempers flaring a bit in this thread. Please remain polite. In particular, no demonizing people for political affiliation or painting with too broad a brush. Keep accusations of bigotry down and disagree with statements, not the fundamental nature and moral value of your interlocutors.
  17. This is true, but it can also be fulfilled by something other than marriage if legislation backs that up. It would be 100% possible to sever the civic and religious aspects of marriage, whether both are still called marriage or one is called something else. Civic marriages are available to everyone; religious marriages are at the discretion of a given religion, and can be aligned with civic marriages or not, again at that religion's discretion. This was always my preferred solution.
  18. GOG sometimes modifies their versions of games to run better on modern computers, so you might end up having to contact GOG's own support for this one.
  19. Almost every term could be applied to Donald Trump except possibly Mexican and drug runner. He's admitted to groping women and entering dressing rooms of beauty pageants with naked underage girls in them. His family claimed to be from Sweden instead of Germany.
  20. If the only argument you have is a silly semantics game about how "sure, it predominately effects Muslims, but it doesn't effect all Muslims so it's not a Muslim ban," then you might as well concede now. It may not impact every Muslim, but it impacts 13% of them, and it does so almost exclusively. That's what discrimination is. Dikiyoba.
  21. answer: it's actually pretty important for a government to have some formal definition of who counts as a member of your family for purposes like inheritance, immigration, and medical decision-making, and marriage is socially recognized as a way for two people to become part of the same family. the consequences of being legally recognized as family members add up to a big enough deal in everyday life that before same-sex marriage, there were a number of same-sex relationships where one partner resorted to adopting the other as their child because that was the only way for them to have a legally recognized family relationship. in some countries where same-sex marriage still isn't recognized, this still happens imo the "why does the government recognize marriage" position is one of those things that sounds good until you dig deeper into the practical implications of it
  22. I agree and I did not oppose federal recognition of same sex marriages, but lots of people from every side of the spectrum like, and believe, in slippery slope arguments. My position during the debate on recognition of same sex marriages was "why does the government recognize marriage at all? I would have loved for their to have been an answer to that question first, but since that was not going to happen, marriage equality was the right thing to do. You are the legal expert not me, so I had assumed that when President Clinton signed the executive order banning discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in federal government employment that it was part of a broader policy. I assume that I am wrong.
  23. Religious institutions are considered protected as one of the freedoms enshrined in our constitution. They should by treated differently because the power to tax (like many other government powers) is the power to destroy. The area subject to debate is when the church runs a commercial enterprise such as a day care or school. Everyone is allowed to be (and practically everyone is in one way shape or form) bigoted. Again, under our fundamental rights as Americans, we are allowed to be bigoted in our own personal lives. You have the right to choose not to associate with me because I am white, left handed, male, believe in Xenu, do not like ponies or any one of a thousand reasons (or for no reason at all). [please note that three of the five things listed at not actual characteristics of mine]. In general I believe that most forms of bigotry are morally wrong (including bigotry agains Muslims and LGBT individuals), but that does not take away my right to be bigoted. I do not have the right to be bigoted in my professional life (nor should I have that right). The nature of the employment that I have chosen puts me in (what I consider) the highest category of not allowed to be bigoted in my professional life. If I cannot carry out the duties of my employment without discriminating against people in any category protected by law I should resign. If I cannot carry out the duties of my employment without discriminating against people in a non-protected way (say because they like Shapers) I should really look at myself and figure out why I can't be nice to people. So, my religion gets to set whatever standards it wants for its members. That is religious freedom, free speech and free association. That does not mean that my religion gets to set standards for non-members. Tax dollars going to gay conversion camps is of course a stretch, but you can make the stretch. Realistically, I can make the same stretch to abortions after the first trimester where the life of the mother is not at risk, the mother was not raped and incest was not involved. Neither one of us is ever going to like all of the things our tax dollars are spent on.
  24. There's kind of a long way between recognizing same-sex marriages and enacting an antidiscrimination law stripping tax exempt status from nonprofits that discriminate in their services on the basis of sexual orientation. Heck, we don't even have a federal antidiscrimination law that expressly bars employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, and that's a lot less of a leap. So the slippery slope argument here, like most slippery slope arguments, seems grossly overwrought.
  25. http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/23/in-favor-of-niceness-community-and-civilization/
  26. I feel your pain I felt much the same when going through WtRM, after seeing Chessrook's vids. Some parts are not just silly, they are outright dumb. I guess this should make you feel good, no? Means you matured That's, at least, how I chose to deal with the swamp that is WtRM... But then I also decided to give it a huge overhaul which is in full swing now. I'll release some more info when doing so becomes relevant. And, perhaps, you wish to do the same to yours?
  27. why should we treat religious institutions any separately from their secular counterparts (non-profit org or business, depending on the church, i guess) in a secular government. also, saying "we should be allowed to be bigoted because we're religious" is silly. why does your religion get to impact someone else. because of tax exemptions for religious institutions, my tax dollars are effectively going towards gay conversion camps[citation needed]. not okay.
  28. 1. There already were religious denominations that did accept same sex marriages. By picking a definition of marriage that lined up with some religions, but not others, wasn't that exactly parallel to the "trampling on the rights" you're discussing? 2. Churches are treated differently under the law than commercial enterprises in many, many, many ways. A better comparison in most cases would be secular nonprofit organizations.
  1. Load more activity