PhoenixFlame512 Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 i think so too, that way there is no miss understanding. i mean havent you heard a child go "ewww, kissing!" and then once you learn why, beyond school reproductive teachings, you say, hey, not too bad. Yes, if education in this country were better, then people would understand the truths of things and the movie producers could be a lot more relaxed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awesomegamer Posted April 24, 2005 Author Share Posted April 24, 2005 younger age teachings? more truthful teachings? understanging of the "pleasurable feeling" that kids dont understand why [bleeped!]? this would probably help. but kids would have [bleeped!] and rape younger trying to see what it feels like. thats why mankind can , excuse me but, (another word for owner, or leader, begins with "M") + (another word for the worm on a hook when you go fishing, begins with "B") *wink* *wink* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixFlame512 Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 younger age teachings? more truthful teachings? understanging of the "pleasurable feeling" that kids dont understand why [bleeped!]? this would probably help. but kids would have [bleeped!] and rape younger trying to see what it feels like. thats why mankind can , excuse me but, (another word for owner, or leader, begins with "M") + (another word for the worm on a hook when you go fishing, begins with "B") *wink* *wink* Well, the best way is a "hands on" experience. Then they can experience it for themselves. If contraception was promoted more, then there wouldn't be all this fuss about promiscuous [bleeped!]. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awesomegamer Posted April 24, 2005 Author Share Posted April 24, 2005 yes, exactly, its good we use all these metaphors icase anyone here still doest know. (hands on, thats a good one ) thats how about 99% (percentage generated by what i think to be very likely) of people find out what it feels like. I think vergin isnt just [bleeped!], but once you break that knowlege barrier. no i havent had [bleeped!], but i know what it feels like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixFlame512 Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 yes, exactly, its good we use all these metaphors icase anyone here still doest know. (hands on, thats a good one ) thats how about 99% (percentage generated by what i think to be very likely) of people find out what it feels like. I think vergin isnt just [bleeped!], but once you break that knowlege barrier. no i havent had [bleeped!], but i know what it feels like. I always hear people being against "underage" [bleeped!], or even [bleeped!] in all cases. But, I mean, what is wrong with [bleeped!]? There is nothing bad about it! And what is it with underage?! People should be able to decide when they want to have [bleeped!] for themselves! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awesomegamer Posted April 24, 2005 Author Share Posted April 24, 2005 there are health problems. health wise, a 13 year old girl could concieve a child. but she may be too small at this age. i think they should lower it to atleast 16. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixFlame512 Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 there are health problems. health wise, a 13 year old girl could concieve a child. but she may be too small at this age. i think they should lower it to atleast 16. I think the minimum should be 13 or so actually. At that age, most people are big enough to have a baby fit through their cervixes. It'd obviously be really painful, but possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korps Commander Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 But those mothers will be too busy with friends, school, etc, to take care of a baby. It is definitely better to set the minimum age at 19 or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myscrnnm Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 as the US department of radio and tv stuff says, if they pay for it, they must want to watch it. Thats why HBO can't be free, or they'd loose their most viewed shows. But it's also because HBO makes most of its shows by itself and it is also commercial-free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majazac Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 no. I'm against all kinds of censore... Maybe cuz my country already have been thorugh a dictatorship... It's not good at all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixFlame512 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 no. I'm against all kinds of censore... Maybe cuz my country already have been thorugh a dictatorship... It's not good at all Hmm, it depends on what kind of censoring though. I mean, there is censoring of government stuff, and then there is the censoring of like violence, [bleeped!], drugs, humour, et cetera. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majazac Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 Even violence cesure should be forbidden. We have the right to know. If we don't want to see is just switch channels Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myscrnnm Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 Even violence cesure should be forbidden. We have the right to know. If we don't want to see is just switch channels I agree with u totally on that. I mean, we need 2 know of violence and how violent it is. If one day we experience the type of violence that is censored on television, we will need 2 b prepared. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korps Commander Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 We still won't be prepared. In most movies, a person being shot looks like there is a small squirt of blood coming out of his head or whatever. In real life, a shot to the head looks far more gruesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myscrnnm Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 We still won't be prepared. In most movies, a person being shot looks like there is a small squirt of blood coming out of his head or whatever. In real life, a shot to the head looks far more gruesome. Well, it depends on what kind of weapon you're using. if it is a Smith & Wesson Model 500 Magnum, your head would literally explode. If it was a Walther P99 handgun, there would b no more than a small puncture. And then there r the crossbows, I mean, there r ones with different types of arrows, as with guns as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.