SG Broadband Community. Everything you'd like to know about Cable Modems, DSL, Satellite, Networking, Security, Wireless, Routers and more.
https://speedguide.net/forums/
full out sex is NOt acceptable, however there is nothing wrong mild nudity. "kids" see more then that on the streets these days.Brent wrote:but imagine what young kids see on TV over there
More sex. Less violence.Brent wrote:but imagine what young kids see on TV over there
cyberskye wrote:More sex. Less violence.
I lived in Iwakuni for 3 years and they do have some cool gadgets, but the first thing I saw was a kid wearing a Michael Jordan jersey and Air Nike shoes. They love western stuff too. Went to Disney Tokyo and they are freaks for Mickey Mouse!Jin wrote:I'm going to say almost everything the Japaneses have. Their cars, toys, electronics, and whatever else that I find cool over there! I WANT my Nissan Skylines, Toyota Supras, Integra/Civic Type R, STi's, Evo's, and Silvias (Not 240s). I don't care about USDM, I want JDM.
I cant believe I forgot the GT-R, one of the best cars ever createdJin wrote:I'm going to say almost everything the Japaneses have. Their cars, toys, electronics, and whatever else that I find cool over there! I WANT my Nissan Skylines, Toyota Supras, Integra/Civic Type R, STi's, Evo's, and Silvias (Not 240s). I don't care about USDM, I want JDM.
Whats the big deal? Kids suck on their moms nipples til they're like 3 or 4, how is it going to scar them if they see one on tv a few years later?Brent wrote:some people actually have morals, especially with kids
i can't believe you all want your young kids to see nudity
disgraceful IMO
one more indication that the world is going down the tubes
Now, speaking of rape, do you know what I wonder? I wonder is there more rape at the equator or the north pole? These are the kind of things I think about when I'm sitting home alone and the power goes out.jayyy wrote:Whats the big deal? Kids suck on their moms nipples til they're like 3 or 4, how is it going to scar them if they see one on tv a few years later?
Sweden's supposed to be this sex-crazed hell, but they have about a quarter as many teen pregancies and probably a lower divorce rate and fewer broken homes and fewer single-parent families (N.A is nuts, like a 50% divorce rate. That has to be one of the highest in the world).
If sex or no sex on tv makes all that much difference, how do you explain that?
Youre reasoning scares me.jayyy wrote:Whats the big deal? Kids suck on their moms nipples til they're like 3 or 4, how is it going to scar them if they see one on tv a few years later?
Sweden's supposed to be this sex-crazed hell, but they have about a quarter as many teen pregancies and probably a lower divorce rate and fewer broken homes and fewer single-parent families (N.A is nuts, like a 50% divorce rate. That has to be one of the highest in the world).
If sex or no sex on tv makes all that much difference, how do you explain that?
Burke wrote:Now, speaking of rape, do you know what I wonder? I wonder is there more rape at the equator or the north pole? These are the kind of things I think about when I'm sitting home alone and the power goes out.
I wonder is there more rape at the equator or the north pole. I mean per capita, I know the populations are different. Most people think it's the equator, I think it's the north pole. People think it's the equator because it's hot down there, they don't wear a lot of clothing, guys can see women's tits, they get horny and there's a lot of ****ing going on. That's exactly why there's less rape at the equator. Because there's a lot of ****ing going on.
You can tell there's a lot of ****ing at the equator, take a look at the population figures. Billions of people live near the equator. How many Eskimos do we have? Thirty? Thirty five?
No one's getting laid at the north pole, it's too ****ing cold. Guys say to their wives, "hey tonight honey, huh, tonight, huh?"
"Are you crazy? The wind chill factor is three hundred below."
These guys are deprived. They're horny. They're pent up. Every now and then...p-pmm...they bust out, they got to rape somebody.
Brent wrote:Youre reasoning scares me.
Brent wrote:Youre reasoning scares me.
Brent wrote:Where have morals gone?
So trueYARDofSTUF wrote:Well when did anyone get their morals from TV? Morals are taught in the home, bad parents = bad morals.
YARDofSTUF wrote:Well when did anyone get their morals from TV? Morals are taught in the home, bad parents = bad morals.
Burke wrote:I know that seeing Dennis Franz's ass on TV made me kill a few hookers.
jayyy wrote:Whats the big deal? Kids suck on their moms nipples til they're like 3 or 4, how is it going to scar them if they see one on tv a few years later?
3 or 4 ?!?!?!?!??!?? jeez I hope not! my kids both stopped breast feeding by 6 months!
jayyy wrote:Damn, what kind of stuff do you think about when you're sitting home alone with the power on?
Better ask George Carlin, he's the person who said that.jayyy wrote:Damn, what kind of stuff do you think about when you're sitting home alone with the power on?
jayyy wrote:haha, I think its just reasoning that scares you, period
You've gotta find better lines to steal!Burke wrote:Better ask George Carlin, he's the person who said that.
Dan wrote:
a 4 year old ? LOL
John wrote:Good points
How about a middle ground, like charging a daily tax to drive in a highly populated area (like Londons 8 pound/day congestion fee)
Dont we already do that? We are charged here in New York for the weight of the vehicle for registration every year. I gotta pay over 90.00 a year.Bouncer wrote:Sorry, got away from the subject for a little while.
Not a bad idea, but personally, I'd like to see people charged on the weight of the vehicle. That is what does the damage, and it is fairer to motorcycle owners and environmentally conscious car owners. In that scenario, a Porsche owner would pay less tax than a H2 owner. Which is fair. The Porsche driver is doing less damage. A Prius driver would pay less than either, and a Honda rider would pay the least.
Regards,
-Bouncer-
Brent wrote:some people actually have morals, especially with kids
i can't believe you all want your young kids to see nudity
disgraceful IMO
one more indication that the world is going down the tubes
How does it compare with this schedule of fees?thepieman wrote:Dont we already do that? We are charged here in New York for the weight of the vehicle for registration every year. I gotta pay over 90.00 a year.
Pie
Thats just nuts! especially in a place where its pretty much necessary to have a car.
Bouncer wrote:I'm sorry, do you not recall the entire United States Congress reconvening and the President of the United States flying back to Washington DC to pass a law that ONLY the religious people wanted?
Does the name "Terry Schiavo" ring any bells? Remember that?
The problem isn't that we aren't religious enough. The problem is we're letting public policy be guided by simplistic moral views without any thought to the consequences.
This is how people end up forcing a woman to carry a baby to term only to kill it because she can't afford it's medical care. In case you hadn't noticed, we're almost at that point. And that is squarly the fault of the GodSquad/Bushies.
Regards,
-Bouncer-
We wear clothes for a reason.Bouncer wrote:You do realize you were born naked, and that you bathe in the nude? Nudity is not in and of itself an issue, unless you make it one. This country has a puritanical streak for some odd reason. So we get embarrassed and flustered about being naked or seeing others naked. But that IS the way we came into this world. It IS as natural a thing as can be. It IS how God made us.
So are you then saying Gods work is disgraceful? How can that be?
Regards,
-Bouncer-
Out of curiosity, what would that be?Brent wrote:We wear clothes for a reason.
It's illegal to be nude in public for a reason.