Political discussion thread

[Mod Blackbolt]

I agree with both Snow and Shade on the government trying to ban the selling of used goods without copy right permissions.

Also Peta (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) is an animal rights group which has sturred up a lot of controversy over their actions

www.peta.org/ <----- Though everything on here i would take with a grain of salt towards PETA's ethics.

www.petakillsanimals.com/ <----- This is more of an accurate site (you sure won't get this info on PETA's site, or anything that puts them in something other then positive light. I found their ;Holocaust on your plate' campaign to be particularily disgusting.)

[Shadowstalker]

Can you just give me a brief summary on both? I don't want to read the entire site.

[Snowfeather]

basically the nazi's of the animal world

[Mod Blackbolt]

I second that explanation.

[piplup10036]

I also second (Or would I say third) that explanation

[Shadowstalker]

How do you know that both sides aren't exaggerating?

[Snowfeather]

Do you mean over comparing them? Both sides killed the innocent, had horrible leaders and the innocent didn't do anything to deserve it

now thinking about it I usually don't talk like this

[Hallow]

Ah, PETA. Also known as "the dumb idiots who decided to mess with the Pokemon fandom", which is never a good thing period.

[piplup10036]

Ah so PETA rustled your jimmies with that pokemon thing Hallow?

[Hallow]

Feb 19, 2013 19:17:37 GMT -5 piplup10036 said:

Ah so PETA rustled your jimmies with that pokemon thing Hallow?

Not necessarily, no.
It's just considering how huge the Pokemon fandom is, and add that to all the former Pokemon fans who played it during their childhood.
Now that there is bigger than the Nazi empire.

[Snowfeather]

Feb 19, 2013 19:09:21 GMT -5 Hallow said:

Ah, PETA. Also known as "the dumb idiots who decided to mess with the Pokemon fandom", which is never a good thing period.

Both comments.Exactly.Hands down couldn't of said it better.

Alright I got a question (The next one I have might be intense)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(back in the first post)

If Prince William and Princess Kate have twins (one a boy one a girl) who will take the throne?

newsfeed.time.com/2013/01/24/royal-succession-rules-could-soon-change/

“With monarchy, you should agree the rules and stick to them,” writes Charles Moore in the Daily Telegraph. “Not for nothing is the original act of 1701 called the Act of Settlement. It doesn’t much matter what the rules are – elective, first-born, male line only, religious choice, lottery – but they must be settled.”

Male line only? I don't like that,who says a girl can't take the throne? It should be the one that has/is

• 1.Good decision maker on behalf of his people to keep them safe.
  
• 2. Honesty
  
• 3. Compassion
  
• 4. Law maker (Reasonable/fair laws)
  
• 5. Knowledgeable (Lead by example)
  
• 6. Effective communicator
  

Shouldn't matter on the gender it's who deserves it and can make the best of it.If the first born was everything bad and the second good you shouldn't go with the first know matter what the law says.

Anyone else?

[Mod Blackbolt]

First one to be born should get the throne, personally however (perhaps not ethical) i prefer Agnatic-Cognatic Primogeniture (Male children have precident however Female heirs can inheirit as well.)

[Snowfeather]

What if the first born is a person full of hatred? and the second good? The first wouldn't deserve it really.

I think they should have some sort of test

[Mod Blackbolt]

Would be easier to change the law to Ultimogeniture (youngest becomes heir) in that case. However you have to remember they cannot go changing the laws easily.

1st: The whole commonwealth has to accept the new laws so that the rulers are not different (would be first time in history if it happens), the commonwealth is made up of several countries from the former British Empire including Australia, Canada, India, UK, and Bangladesh (total of 54 independant states).

2nd: If they are grooming the first born for 12 years and then decide the second born is a better heir when they inheirit chances are they will not be as well accustomed to running a monarchy and it could cause trouble.

3rd: Popularity plays a big factor in the monarchy and royal family, even if the first heir is evil he could still be more popular and so passing him over could cause a potential succession crisis.

[Hallow]

I'm personally for the "first come, first serve" rule, but I believe that female human beings shouldn't just be rejected of the throne like that. What if both twins were girls? Would they just boot both of them from the title of queen or what's going on here?

I also believe that rulers should have all of the qualities mentioned above, therefore, a test and roughly 12 years of age doesn't seem like a bad idea.

whoo wordy Hallow

[Snowfeather]

"I believe that female human beings shouldn't just be rejected of the throne like that. What if both twins were girls? Would they just boot both of them from the title of queen or what's going on here?"

mmmhm.Girls aren't useless.Hate it (and mean deeply) when people think that,I really want to know why they made that rule in the first place.Do they think we can't handle it or something?

12 might be a little to young though.....maybe 15 or 16

will be added to in the morning have to go,I few a few more paras

[Mod Blackbolt]

Missed my point, 12 years of grooming lost could potentially have a terrible effect, especially if he is passed over.

People wher sexist in the middle ages which is why the law came about.

[Snowfeather]

(hang on before I type anything on your 3 points,what do you mean by 12 years of grooming lost? when one of the twins die (the good guessing) and the (possibly) bad has to take over,or just one dying?)

I know the law must be hard to change but this is a new age A lot of things have changed (And thank god less sexist people,or I wouldn't really be the way I am) I mean it will take a while but it could be changed (and should be if you asked me)

(once I get the rest of what you said I'll add more)

[Mod Blackbolt]

They are prepping the heir for the throne, if the heir who has been groomed (prepped) for 12 years is suddenly overlooked the other one will possibly not be ready. Also the queen is 86, who knows how long she will last, her current heir is 64 and then William is 30. The law could potentially take ages to pass so perhaps by the time all of them pass the commonwealth is divided into to heirs because the rest had failed to change the laws, William will likely be in charge within the next 30 years but who knows how long he will last (the queens predecessors did not fair to well in terms of how long they reigned.). So lets just hope it is a boy for simplicity sake (these things will be sorted out eventually but being under a time constraint even though it could be quite a lenghy one is not ideal).

Another point i should mention is that the women usually take the last name of their husband, this would end the house of windsors reign over the commonwealth and is also not ideal (the current queen narrowly escaped that however the naming is quite complicated now, those of the official line and heirs to the throne of england and the commonwealth have the last name Windsor however the queens second, third and fourth born children have the name Windsor-Mountbatten (because charles duke of edinborough's last name is Mountbatten), however those who are more distantly related to the queen (such as descendants of Queen Victoria) have the last name Saxe-Cobourg and Gotha, or those on Victoria's side of the family have the last name Hanover. (Saxe-Cobourg and Gotha was the last name of her Victoria's husband Albert, and the house of Windsor (formerly known as Saxe-Cobourg and Gotha (until world war 1 when they changed their name because of anti german movements in England) is directly descended from them (i think Queen Elizabeth II is the great-granddaughter of Victoria.)

[Snowfeather]

Feb 20, 2013 20:06:19 GMT -5 Mod Blackbolt said:

They are prepping the heir for the throne, if the heir who has been groomed (prepped) for 12 years is suddenly overlooked the other one will possibly not be ready. Also the queen is 86, who knows how long she will last, her current heir is 64 and then William is 30. The law could potentially take ages to pass so perhaps by the time all of them pass the commonwealth is divided into to heirs because the rest had failed to change the laws, William will likely be in charge within the next 30 years but who knows how long he will last (the queens predecessors did not fair to well in terms of how long they reigned.). So lets just hope it is a boy for simplicity sake (these things will be sorted out eventually but being under a time constraint even though it could be quite a lenghy one is not ideal).

Another point i should mention is that the women usually take the last name of their husband, this would end the house of windsors reign over the commonwealth and is also not ideal (the current queen narrowly escaped that however the naming is quite complicated now, those of the official line and heirs to the throne of england and the commonwealth have the last name Windsor however the queens second, third and fourth born children have the name Windsor-Mountbatten (because charles duke of edinborough's last name is Mountbatten), however those who are more distantly related to the queen (such as descendants of Queen Victoria) have the last name Saxe-Cobourg and Gotha, or those on Victoria's side of the family have the last name Hanover. (Saxe-Cobourg and Gotha was the last name of her Victoria's husband Albert, and the house of Windsor (formerly known as Saxe-Cobourg and Gotha (until world war 1 when they changed their name because of anti german movements in England) is directly descended from them (i think Queen Elizabeth II is the great-granddaughter of Victoria.)

(One thing more about peta,my teacher told us this in class (Which I have no clue how to went to animal adaptations to that) She has a friend who's husband was baby sitting their kid and they had a pit bull and while the husband wasn't looking the baby was swatting at the dog and pulling it's tail.The dog snapped at the kid's face and held on (The baby's only 2 or 3 and you know that those kind of dogs have strong jaws and never let go) And the dad finally noticed and tried to pry the dog off but it wouldn't let go.He got one of his guns and shot it.(and he loved that dog) Later Peta (she didn't tell how they found out) Tried to sue them for killing the dog when the baby litterally almost died.Which side should really win in court? thoughts?)

It probably won't happen like that,If your good then most of the time you'll stay good (unless you had something really bad happen in your life which really tends to change you,and I can understand that) And it doesn't matter to much to me the gender (as long as they turn out well like their parents and learn well even though something can happen William will make a great king (from what I've heard) The queen yes may not have the longest time but she has great heirs.

(When a few more post go by (maybe like 2) then I'll add the next question,and the next really makes me upset.)