Forum posts made by elitfromnorth

Topic A different baby box
Posted 04 Sep 2012 14:03

It's just like you to "snatch" attention at my expense, Elit! (shakes fist)

Then stop being a pussy and come at me!

Topic A different baby box
Posted 04 Sep 2012 13:53

Since we have a thread moderator who immediately went to naughtyland when seeing the thread about babyboxes (I'm not gonna say names, but she's a Lady and the unknown factor) I'll ask the following question:

What is your thoughts on vaginas? Good? Bad? Discuss!

Topic A question about flag burning.
Posted 04 Sep 2012 13:51

This should really be a no brainer. The flag is merely a symbol and although I will never condone flagburning other than for disposing the flag, but even if they're burning the flag it's a way of protesting. It's the ultimate way of saying "Fuck you" to an entire country and it's legal.

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
- Voltaire

This is the ultimate democracy and freedom of speech. You may talk shit about my country all you want, but I'm still willing to give my life for your right to say these things, because that's what democracy and freedom of speech is all about. Frankly to me, those more willing to save the flag than the person might as well set fire to the flag themselves, because sacrificing a life to show their ideology is pretty much the opposite of democracy...

Topic “Baby Boxes”…???
Posted 04 Sep 2012 13:26

There are plenty of alternative places to abandon an unwanted baby. Anyone who complains about the ease of abandoning them anonymously in a place where they will get care is just too damn fussy to take seriously. The idea of a right to know their parents' identity is a logical fallacy. Upon what right is it based?

I fuess the whole thing about knowing who your parents are is based on the human right about everyone having the right to an idedentity. Some people don't feel like they belong 100% to the family they're adopted into, even if they call them mom and dad and sisters and brothers. To some you don't belong unless you're blood. Some kids that are adopted here in Norway don't considered themselves Norwegian, they say they're Korean or Chinese or wherever they were born.

It's an emotion, thus you can't rationalise it. I don't blame an adoptive child wanting to know who his/her biological parents are, and I think that's probably something parents that adopt are aware of could happen.

Topic Full bore bullshit now in the GOP
Posted 04 Sep 2012 13:11

ok first off i can voice my opinion as a American i still have that right maybe not in 4 years if the devil in the white house has anything to say about it,but for right now.....i compare obama to hitler and stalin only because all 3 of them are shaddy and very scary remember monsters dont really look like monsters!!! i am from IL and that bastard in the white house has done nothing for are state he used his seat to run for pres. fuck IL and he did boy he did....i see him as self absorbed for some fucked up reson at the time the mayor of Chicago wanted him and his brain dead wife to tell the olympic comittee why the 2016 olympics should be in Chicago they both just talked about them selfs as if they were more important then what the mayor was trying to for KaleeMN fuck you cunt such a stupid little girl!! try reading into my commit here i'll spell it out for you seeing that your so fucking stupid....obama is a monster....BITCH!!!!!! as for you coopsruthie first off what a fucked up name....second if your going to say your straight then you dont go around eating pussy fucking loser!!!!!

I suggest you find a historybook that haven't been written by the all knowing Sarah Palin and Glenn Back so you have an idea of what Stalin and Hitler actually did, because right now it doesn't seem like you have a fucking clue about their political ideology since you're mentioning a democratic elected president with two guys who gave orders to start three of the worst mass murders in history. You might be a nice girl, but when you do that you just come off as someone who have no clue what they're talking about.

And you are right to voice your opinion, but it comes with restrictions, moral standards and on private websites like this; it's also up to what the site owner will allow. Your 1st ammendment and freedom of speech is worth fuck all in here.

So please, stop comparing Obama to the devil. I'm not saying it because I'm offended, I'm saying it because it makes you look like an idiot.

Topic Today in Pictures (post a picture representing your mood)
Posted 04 Sep 2012 10:00

Topic Kids today and society in general...your thoughts?
Posted 04 Sep 2012 08:26

Our lives are too good. Simple as that. Me as a kid have never experienced hunger or lack of clothes or housing. Yes, I have experienced a lack of money to do or buy whatever I want, we were never a rich family, but at least I had food, clothes and a roof over my head. I'm not gonna lie, because if I ever get kids I hope they will have it better and easier growing up than I did. Not that it was a problem filled life or anything, but like most it had it's bumps and potholes, but I think we all want our kids' journey to be as smooth as possible.

All that said, if I get kids I don't want to spoil them and have them walking around like obnoxious little brats that I see around too many places, with parents who doesn't seem to care that the kids are misbehaving. I fear that one day I will grab a kid that's not mine and tell him to behave, because there are parents that are shite and the kids need to be told off.

Topic “Baby Boxes”…???
Posted 04 Sep 2012 08:00

I can see the positive of women who don't want their baby(like prostitutes) actually having a place to go to for delivering their baby.

When it comes to the part of the woman's consent then I'd be willing to put money on that usually we're talking about prostitutes or other victims of human trafficking. The pimps and "owners" of these women have complete disregard for human lives and will kill one of "their" girls just to set an example and to keep the others in line. For them money is more important than a human life, and especially a prostitute's baby. After all, her taking care of the baby will take time away from her "street time". I doubt there are that many of them that will have a problem killing off a newborn, but maybe they use the babybox because that leaves no body and it won't make the prostitute go insane(which I wouldn't blame her for).

A child's first right is to live. Let's deal with the other rights once we're sure that the kid is alive.

Topic Full bore bullshit now in the GOP
Posted 03 Sep 2012 07:11

If everyone wants 4 more years under obama......then kiss America as we know it good-bye and say hello to stalin!!

Who knows. Maybe a good proper clearout of a lot of the politicians would be good for the political system. And it would create jobs for the people living in Dakota where the Gulag camps probably would be. Not to mention it would sort the housing problem considering you'd have tons of minimalistic appartment complexes built. So it's not all bad happy8

Topic Full bore bullshit now in the GOP
Posted 02 Sep 2012 17:22

I have a feeling that this will kill the republican party. Imagine if they just want to win the whole damn thing, then they have to have someone with an appeal to the swing voters, those that could vote either way, depending on the candidate. If they go for more moderate candidates then eventually you'll have conservatives like the tea party going "fuck it, this isn't worth it" and start their own party. It's how most parties are formed; a group that can't see eye to eye to the party leadership under any circumstances breaks out. Why should they continue to be there when the leadership just shuts them out and hopes that they'll vote republican.

Maybe the break up of the party won't happen, but you may end up having plenty of candidates that will push away the conservatives and have them vote someone else or not at all. No matter what happens, I believe one thing is certain; those who will profit from this is the democrats.

Topic We'll Miss You Mazza!!! Song Tributes to a Lush lady who loves her tunes
Posted 02 Sep 2012 13:41

You make sure to come back to us!

Topic should women be allowed to be topless in public?
Posted 02 Sep 2012 13:35

Thanks, but oddly enough these things never happen to me. So either I make my views clear enough, or people just don't care that much about what I have to say. Most likely it's the latter .dontknow

I'm gonna disagree with you and say it's most likely the former.

And people who try to victimise themselves when they're not a "victim" just looks plain stupid, kinda like girls who wear push up bras with massive cleavage and complain about men staring at their boobs. I'm also not participating in a witch hunt because I just ran out of torches and my pitchfork broke crybaby

And Warlock, the whole thing about a man being topless in your living room is pushing it, considering it states that we're talking in public. After all, once it's in your private property you could force people to wear burkas or have dudes wear skimpy thongs. Same way restaurants can send people away if they're not satisfied with what they wear.

So why should we allow this inequality where men can sit in a cafe shirtless but women can't? I can't see a good reason behind it.

Topic Happy Birthday, LadyX!
Posted 01 Sep 2012 13:20

Since She advised me to do it.

Topic Happy Birthday, LadyX!
Posted 01 Sep 2012 13:19

Happy Birthday occasion4

Topic should women be allowed to be topless in public?
Posted 01 Sep 2012 13:03

Oh, I see ..... YOU think it's ok to EDIT my words to your own opinion?? How dare you??

disgusting .....

A man that stoops to that immature level certainly shouldn't be a mod of any type. Right Farmer Phil???


Oh, so you do mind. Sorry. Will try to not make it happen again. Was only trying to make your view more clear for everyone Embarassed

Topic Full bore bullshit now in the GOP
Posted 01 Sep 2012 11:57

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and see if I understood this right:

You have three candidates, candidate A, B and C. Candidate A and B have the equal amount of delegates while candidate C has the amount of delegates that is required to win candidate A or B the nomination. The republican leadership wants candidate A to win, so with this new rule they have the right to remove all of candidate C's delegates to replace them with candidate A friendly delegates, ensuring that candidate A wins.

I'm just checking to see if I somehow get it before I go any further with my gutfeeling on this. If I'm wrong, can someone dumb it down to a foreigner who's not 100% into the American political system?

Topic should women be allowed to be topless in public?
Posted 01 Sep 2012 11:42

I realise that I now have lost the debate thus I will from now on try to belittle everyone of you by trying to make people think you're having a debate about something trivial

There, I fixed it for you. Hope you don't mind happy8

Topic his royal nudeness...dirty much privacy are we allowed?
Posted 01 Sep 2012 06:58

A couple of months ago a journalist in the third biggest newspaper in Norway wrote an article on the webnews about how she was shocked that one of the oil companies had hired a company to do a survey and see which journalists were most positive to their company. Basically they did this so that when they invited journalists for their press conference odds were better that they would get positive press. I couldn't help but comment. The media today is all about headlines, twisting words and doing what they can to make it a scandal. There are more serious stuff being published in childrens books than in the newspapers today. The journalists are whoring themselves out to sell more, not to enlighten. Taking pictures from a private party just shows once again what a bunch of useless whores the journalists are today. I have no respect for them left. This is why I prefer the national channel here that gets all it's money from the government and us taxpayers. At least in that house it's more about enlightening, and not so much about tabloid.

Topic should women be allowed to be topless in public?
Posted 01 Sep 2012 06:35

I stated I don't want to see rolls, and hanging breasts .... because I don't. Not all women look like Jessica Alba, or Racquel Welch. I also stated, there are some men who really should "keep their shirts on"! (Again, because some guys just aren't - insert someone who has a good body) It was quite in jest, but I meant it not just as funny but in all seriousness. And your comment of "should we just limit what people can do, simply because you might see something you consider to unattractive?" is a ridiculous question. Laws are put in affect usually for the well being of society. And then, to get into the legal aspect .... I think that many agree that the gender bending laws in some countries are archaic. I am fortunate to live in a country were gay marriages are legal ... and I also live in a country with freedom of self-expression and speech. I am blessed.

And, hooray for such an interesting topic of conversation. Over dinner tomorrow, I'll ask my guests their opinions! Please note ... Clothing is mandatory at my dinner table.


It still seems like you're using the "Some people don't have a good body, hence it shouldn't be allowed" as a valid reason for not allowing women to go topless. So if I read your post wrong then basically you're saying that it's for the good of society that ugly people keep their clothes on. So much for keeping shallowness out of the law.

And obviously you find the topic interesting enough to put in several posts here...

Topic Poker is not gambling
Posted 30 Aug 2012 09:59

I don't think anyone took away from Poker what is really about that game, however as different as it is, it is gambling. Maybe, when playing we are not gambling just with cards, but with our instincts and how good they are that day, how familiar we are with opponents, how well we can read them, but at the end of the road,we are gambling.

As I said, no one said that poker is just gambling with cards, whoever is familiar with the game is aware of it.

Poker isn't a game strictly based on chance, which is the definition of a gambling game; that it's only gamble. Strip away "cards" from that sentence and put in stocks/shares instead and suddenly you're pretty much describing Wall Street or Nikkei or any other stock market you wanna go to. If poker is gambling, so is buying and selling shares, goods, currencies and so forth, and then that should be illegal as well.

Just because you're putting your money on something doesn't make it gambling. When you buy a house, will you consider it gambling? The house may drop in value rapidly for a short period of time(something we've all seen). Putting money in your education could result in a backlash because suddenly there are no jobs for people in your field. And if gambling is per definition outlawed, then they better start building new prisons because they're gonna need it.

So if gambling is based on nothing but chance, then poker isn't gambling. If gambling only need to involve a little bit of a chance then living your life just became illegal.

Topic Meh
Posted 30 Aug 2012 03:58

I'd like to post a rant, but I'm too meh to do it. I'm too meh to go into the rage cage. Meh

Topic Poker is not gambling
Posted 30 Aug 2012 03:28

So if poker is strictly gambling, then there really shouldn't be anyone that's good at it. If poker is gambling then everyone knows that if I sit down with those that are ranked as the best poker players in the world I would have as big a chance as them to win, but who in here thinks that I have the slightest chance against them? It's simply because it's not all about chance. Sure, I have the same chance to get a royal flush as the best one, but the cards you get isn't even half of the game. If it was all down to chance then we should have blackjack tournaments and roulette tournaments and so forth.

So those of you who say poker is gambling on the same line as blackjack and roulette I ask you this; what is it that differs poker from blackjakc and roulette and the other casion games, since they have poker tournaments? Why are there no roulette tournaments?

Topic Phrase of the Day
Posted 29 Aug 2012 08:09

"Me? I'm just a nobody"

Because I wanna be in the shadows today

Topic I always wanted to be somebody.
Posted 29 Aug 2012 08:02

Me? I'm just a nobody

Topic Farting on the man of your dreams!
Posted 29 Aug 2012 07:55

The moral of the story is: You can let out the most horrendous farts, but if you have nice tits you'll get away with it

Topic Happy Birthday, Elitfromnorth!
Posted 27 Aug 2012 07:41

Thanks guys =)

I appreaciate it. Believe it or not, I actually do. So drinks are on me! Pour Wine

Topic Democracy Test
Posted 25 Aug 2012 07:58

Mankind's primary objective is self preservation, for themselves or their family should they have one. In some cases religious beliefs may trump that(as in some strictly religious people would rather die than breaking their religious laws), but then again this can also come down to self preservation in the after life, i.e. not going to hell.

I wouldn't go down that road unless every other option was depleted. I guess it would depend on who was there. If there's a bunch of cunts that I don't like then I'm off for hiding. If there's a bunch of friends with families of their own the decision becomes easier considering I'm single and all that. Technically, no one depends on me unlike if I had a kid. If I had a wife/girlfriend and kids that depended on me then things would have been a bit more different.

At least if there was a hot chick I'd ask her if I could get layed first....

Topic Teacher convicted of sex with 18yr old students
Posted 24 Aug 2012 16:54

It would give me great pleasure to join in the fight with you and go there and send her to jail, but

I respectfully disagree, interpretation of laws are not opinions.

No, you're right, not every 18yo is out of danger of being used and manipulated... But they are adult! you keep hammering on the word 'kids"

What if they were 19 or 20 or 21. They are still someone's children. Were is the line? The line is 18 so far and it should be 16, but thats on opinion.. mine.

The reason I use the word kid in this context is because they're still at high school. She may have started teaching them when they were 16, when in the eyes of the law they're kids. What if she puts thoughts in their mind then and this keeps rolling? Maybe she has been teaching them sex ed.(if they learn about that). Imagine the way she may appear to them, especially if some of the lads are virgins. Suddenly they see this authority figure that knows about sex and wham, at the age of 16 they get a crush on her which doesn't go away. That's abusing the authority she has.

We all know that when it comes to attraction it's not just necessarily good looks that is the only thing that lights your fire, especially when it's with someone you know. It can be trust, a close relationship built up over time and so much more, and she has gained those from her position as a teacher over a longer period of time from when they were young.

You can say "they're 18" all you like, but it's still against the law to fuck your pupils. You still risk jailtime if you do it. I for one am certain that if I ever have kids then I want to make sure that my kid won't be used as a tool to satisfy the teacher's sexual desires, it be consensual or not. Whether or not it's consensual is a ridicilous argument, because that's not the case here. Same as the judge shouldn't consider if they were 18 or not. What is the matter here is that the teacher builds a bond with the student that it is completely necessary to keep within bounds by the law.

I have experience with teaching children aged 13-16. I know how strong a bond you form with them even in a very short time. It's a whole lot easier than you think to see which one of them are the more insecure and would be more susceptible for a move than others. I doubt that changes over a period of two years. You learn to know these kids, and if you're good, they'll open up to you. You see them every day and you interact with them more that day than many of their parents. In the end they'll find it easier to talk to you than their parents, simply because you're an adult who knows them but you're not their parent. I know that if one of my colleagues ended up shagging a pupil then I'd volunteer to drive the teacher from the courthouse to jail. Because it is by far one of the greatest betrayls you can do as a teacher.

Topic Poker is not gambling
Posted 24 Aug 2012 09:20

If putting money on that your skills will be better than other people's skills then we're all gambling. Taking a degree in a market with tight job application; you're putting not just the schoolmoney but also years of your life that your skills in the subject is better than your fellow students.

Making a business; you're putting money on that you can provide a service that is more comptetative than other companies.

When a footballclub pays 25 million quid + wages then they're gambling on the fact that the skills they aquired will be enough for them win.

Gambling is chance, where you might as well flip a coin. There's no skill involved in blackjack(unless you count cards which is not considered legal by the casinos), roulette and so forth. The fucking lottery is gambling.

Poker is all about being able to read your opponents, calculating probability and fucking with their heads. There's a difference between that and rolling the dice.

Topic Florida passes bill requiring Welfare recipients to pass drug test to recieve funds.
Posted 24 Aug 2012 03:27

My view of this; pushing the expenses of the government over on the individuals in terms of crimerates going up. If anyone here have ever been addicted to something(cigarettes or anything like that) you know how difficult it is to quit. Add the fact that drugs causes you a greater craving then the removal of welfare isn't gonna make you quit. You'll just start doing other things to fuel your drug addiction, either through prostitution or other ways. Thinking that this is in any way the solution of the problem then you're narrowminded. This is gonna end up costing more than it saves.

And I consider the whole drugtesting at work a violation of privacy. What I do in my own spare time is nothing my boss should think about, as long as I function well at my job. What if a person goes to the Netherlands or somewhere else where it's legal to do a certain drug? Is that person to be punished for not doing anything illegal in my own sparetime. As long as I function at my job and I'm not under the influence at work I shouldn't be punished by any other than the law.